A COMPARiSON OF THE. EFFECTIVENESS OF TWO METHODS OF SETTiNG IN SLEEVES IN TWO. TEACHING SéTUATMNS Thesis for the Degree of M. A, MlCHiGAN STATE, UNIVERSITY LOUISE ELIZABETH STARR 1967 ' ‘ ' "whuflftht _.§‘ - ,, THESE . k ”334.3? Michigan State University THEE [ I‘m-s . LL‘U—fi 7?. .- ABSTRACT A COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TWO METHODS OF SETTING IN SLEEVES IN TWO TEACHING SITUATIONS by Louise Elizabeth Starr The study was undertaken to compare two methods of setting in sleeves as taught to the 110 students in TRA 152, Principles of Clothing Construction, at Michigan State Uni- versity during the Winter quarter of 1967. The two methods were: Method I using hand basting and Method II using machine basting to secure the sleeves in the armscye of ' the bodice before permanent stitching. The students under both methods were again divided into two groups: one group received assistance in laboratory and workroom, and the other group was requested not to ask for extra help after the demonstration. The students were told that the sleeves in their projects would not be included in their final course grade. Demonstrations, using samples to illustrate the process of setting in sleeves, were given in each of the laboratory sections of TRA 152. At the time of the demon- stration the students were given a sheet of instructions for setting in a sleeve to refer to when setting in the sleeves in their class project garments. The dependent variables of the study were the sleeve grade, test grade and total grade for each of the students Louise Elizabeth Starr in the sample. The total grade was obtained by adding the sleeve grade and the test grade. The students set in sleeves in their class project garments and were graded by the re- searcher and two graduate assistants. Ten questions con- cerning set—in sleeves were included in the TRA 152 final examination. Other background information obtained for the stu- dents in the sample included their previous clothing con-' struction experience, and their grade point averages. Statistical analyses were computed to determine (1) whether the method of setting in a sleeve with the use of hand basting (Method I) would result in a better final' product than the method using machine basting (Method II), (2) if the students who received no extra help could per- form as well as those who did receive extra help, (3) if Method I or Method II resulted in better understanding On; the students' part as measured by test scores, (4) if the students' previous clothing construction experience was related to their ability to set in a sleeve, and (5) if the students' grade point averages were related to their ability to set in a sleeve. The statistical computations used were Least Squares, t-test, and Chi-Square. Basic statistics obtained included means, standard deviations, and ranges. In all of the analyses there was no significant difference in grades between those taught by Method I and ‘i‘HE‘ Louise Elizabeth Starr those taught by Method II; and between those who received help and those who received no help. The previous clothing construction experience was significantly related to the students' sleeve grades. There was a definite difference in sleeve grades and total grades between those who were beginners and those who had some previous clothing construc- tion experience. The variable of grade point average was highly related to the students' grades on the process of E setting in sleeves. The results of the study suggest that it does not matter which method of setting in a sleeve is taught or whether the students receive help or not. In all caSes the students' previous clothing construction experience and their grade point averages were most related to their sleeve grades, test grades and total grades. Of the two, grade point averages were highly correlated to the grades on the process of setting in sleeves. A COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TWO METHODS OF SETTING IN SLEEVES IN TWO TEACHING SITUATIONS BY Louise Elizabeth Starr A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Textiles, Clothing and Related Arts 1967 1. M! N“. c/S’O f‘ ‘esl ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my sincere appreciation to Dr. Anna Creekmore for her thoughtful guidance in direct- ing this research project, to Dr. Mary Gephart for her val- uable advice in the formulation and carrying out of the study, to Dr. Elinor Nugent for her inspiration, and to Dr. Frances Magrabi for her help in interpreting the sta- tistical data. I am also grateful to the TRA 152 Labora— tory instructors, Mrs. Isabelle Lott, Mrs. Barbara Amundsen, Mrs. Stephanie Winkler, Dr. Anna Creekmore, Mrs. Sue Hundley, and Mrs. Mary Jane Young, for their cooperation and help; and to the students in TRA 152 who made the project possible. I am indebted to Mrs. Sue Hundley and Mrs. Mary Klaasen for their assistance in grading. ii V’H E5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF PROBLEM . . . . 1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Tentative Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Limitations of the Research . . . . . . . . 6 II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Clothing Construction . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Demonstration Method of Teaching. . . . . . 10 Programmed Instruction. . . . . . . . . . . l4 Self—Instruction Laboratories . . . . . . . 16 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 III C METHODOLOGY 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 18 Population. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Selection of Methods. . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Experimental Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . 20 Demonstration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Grading of Sleeves. . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Written Examination . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Total Grade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Background Information. . . . . . . . . . . 23 Experience Questionnaires . . . . . . . . 23 Grade Point Average . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Statistical Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . 24 IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION. . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Description of Subjects . . . . . . . . . . 27 Analysis of Results . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Clothing Construction Experience Related to Sleeve Grades, Test Grades and Total Grades. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Grade Point Average Related to Sleeve Grades, Test Grades, and Total Grades . 34 Instructor Presenting the Demonstration Related to Sleeve Grades, Test Grades, and Total Grades. . . . . . . . . . . . 36 iii “PH Es Chapter Page Differences in Sleeve Grades, Test Grades, and Total Grades Related to the Method Used for Setting in Sleeves. 37 Differences in Sleeve Grades, Test Grades, and Total Grades Related to the Factor of Help or No Help . . . . . 40 V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Recommendations for Further Study . . . . . 52 BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 S3 APPENDICES. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 55 iv Table LIST OF TABLES The relationship between the frequency distri- bution for the students' previous experience and their GPA 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O The significance of the relationship between the mean sleeve grades, test grades, total grades and experience and grade point average . The significance of the relationship between sleeve grade, test grade, and total grade and each of the independent variables (method, help, instructor, experience and GPA) with the effect of the other variables eliminated. . The amount of the sum of the squared deviations from the mean of the students' grades accounted for by the independent variables-~method taught, help or no help, instructor, experience and GPA The total grades received by the beginners and the students with experience. . . . . . . . . . Sleeve grades of the students receiving the demonstration from the researcher and those receiving the demonstration from their labora- tory instructor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The sleeve grades for the students in Method I and for the students in Method II, and the numbers of students in each level of sleeve grade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The test grades for the students in Method I and for the students in Method II, and the numbers of students in each level of test grade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The total grades for the students in Method I and for the students in Method II, and the numbers of students in each level of total grade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 30 31 32 34 35 36 37 38 39 Table 10. ll. 12. Page The significance of the difference between Method I and Method II for sleeve grade, test grade, and total grade. . . . . . . . . . 39 The sleeve grades for the students receiving help and for the students receiving no help, and the number of students in each level of sleeve grade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 The significance of the difference between mean grades for the students who received help and those who did not receive help under Method I and Method II . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 vi ’HES CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF PROBLEM American colleges and universities have grown rapidly in recent years and are continuing to grow. With the in- crease in student population and the lagging increase in qualified teachers, new methods of teaching large groups must be developed. "The task before the schools today is so broad in scope and so complicated in character that edu- cation must utilize every tested and approved method known."1 Home Economics is also facing this task, particularly in the basic courses such as clothing construction. To help solve the problem investigation is being made into the pos- sibility of self-instruction laboratories. Self-instruction laboratories may be equipped with a variety of audiovisual materials including slide projec- tors, rear projection units, tape recorders, and printed material. The self-instruction laboratory allows students to study detailed processes and techniques at close range and at the student's own speed. The Human Physiology Department at Michigan State University has had a self-instruction laboratory for the 1James S. Kinder, Audio Visual Procedures in Teach- ing (New York: American Book Co., 1950), p. g, beginning course since 1965. The staff working with this course have found that by using the self-instruction lab- oratory as a preparation for the student's experiments the time needed for conducting an experiment has been cut in half. A self-instruction laboratory in clothing conStruc- tion has been suggested as one solution to the problems encountered by the staff in TRA 152, Principles of Clothing Construction, a beginning course in clothing at Michigan State University. A Bruner states that an understanding of fundamental principles leads to the most adequate transfer of knowledge.2 One of the principles of clothing construction as taught in the beginning course at Michigan State University is that "when concentric circles or arcs of different radii are used in clothing construction, certain adjustments in the circumference are necessary."3 This principle can be illustrated by setting in a sleeve. "There are several features of a garment which, when well done, add to its professional appearance. None is more important than the setting in of a sleeve."4 The 2Jerome Bruner, The Process of Education (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1963), p. 25. 3Department of Textiles, Clothing and Related Arts, College of Home Economics, Michigan State University, Prin- ciples of Clothing Construction (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University Mimeograph Services, 1966), p. 11. 4The Iowa State Home Economics Association, Unit Method of Sewing (Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, W9) p. 126. technique of setting in a sleeve not only adds or detracts from the professional appearance of a garment but it is also a process which must be executed with care. Therefore, the researcher has chosen the technique of setting in a sleeve for further investigation. In order for the students to understand how to set in a sleeve the method by which they are taught should be one which is comprehensible to the students, is a valid and accepted method for performing the task, and leads to the best possible results on the students' part. There is a need for studying the effectiveness of various methods of clothing construction in order that a specific method may be established and recorded on slides or films for self-instruction laboratories. A need also exists to determine if a self-instruction laboratory will be effective in teaching some aspects of clothing construc— tion before more effort is put forth in this direction. A demonstration of setting in sleeves could be used in place of a programmed demonstration on slides. By giv- ing extra help in laboratory and workroom to half of the students and not giving extra help to the other half of the students, the results will represent the difference between a self-instruction laboratory and a conventional laboratory. The following objectives have been formulated for the current study. A statistical analysis of the results will be based on the objectives. 1. To ascertain which of two variations for setting in sleeves is most readily under- stood by the students as determined by written test scores. 2. To determine which of two variations for setting in sleeves will result in the better final product. 3. To determine if the students' previous experience is related to their ability to set in a sleeve. 4. To determine if the students' grade point averages are related to their ability to set in a sleeve. 5. To determine if students receiving no assistance in laboratory and workroom can perform as well as those receiving assistance. 6. To determine if there is a difference in sleeve grades of those receiving the dem- onstration from the researcher and those receiving the demonstration from the lab- oratory instructor. Definitions Self-instruction laboratory—-a laboratory equipped with tape recorders, projectors or any devices whereby the student may learn a process or technique with a minimum of teacher assistance. Set-in sleeve--a sleeve constructed as a separate unit and set into or attached to the armscye of the bodice of a garment. Ease lines--one or more rows of stitching (6 stitches per inch) used to work in excess fabric when stitching a slightly longer piece of fabric to a shorter length of fabric without having gathers or tucks. Assistance--any help a teacher would normally give to a student in an ordinary laboratory class. Sleeve grade--the grade each student received on the 10. ll. set-in sleeves in her class project garment. The grades ranged from O to 23, with 23 being the highest possible grade. Test grade—-the grade each student received on the 10 questions concerning set-in sleeves which were used as a part of the TRA 152 final examination. The grades ranged from O to 10, with 10 being the highest possible grade. Total grade-—the grade obtained by adding the sleeve grade and the test grade for each student together. The total grades ranged from 0 to 33, with 33 being the highest possible grade. Laboratory--the laboratory section of TRA 152. Each . student is assigned to a laboratory section which meets two hours a week. Workroom--during the times when there are no classes in the laboratory the room is open for students to work. An instructor is assigned to give help to stu- dents during these designated workroom periods. Method I--a method of setting in a sleeve using hand basting (see Appendix B). Method II--a method of setting in a sleeve using ma— chine basting (see Appendix B). Assumptions The laboratory demonstration given is comparable to a demonstration presented by slides in a self-instruc- tion laboratory. The students will follow the method for setting in a sleeve that they were taught. The students who were requested not to ask for extra help will cooperate. The written questions test the students' knowledge of the process of setting in a sleeve. The students answered the questions on the experience questionnaire correctly. Tentative Hypotheses l. The method of setting in a sleeve using hand basting (Method I) will result in a better final product than the method of setting in a sleeve using machine basting (Method II). 2. Students who were not allowed to receive additional assistance in workroom and lab- oratory will perform as well as those who received assistance. Limitations of the Research The demonstration was given seven different times, at various times of the day. The way the demonstration was presented or the receptivity of the students could have been affected by the time of the day, the day of the week, or any distracting factors that might have been present. The population selected included all of the students in TRA 152 during the winter quarter of 1967 and there- fore cannot be said to represent any other class or group of students. The experience questionnaires were answered by the stu— dents about themselves and could have been subject to bias. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE The literature reviewed covers pertinent studies in clothing construction, studies concerned with the dem- onstration method of teaching, programmed instruction, and the use of the self—instruction laboratories. Clothing Construction A great deal of research has been done in the area of clothing construction. Most of the research, however, has been concerned with the teaching of clothing construc- tion, and the clothing construction practices of different groups of people. Senecal did a comparative study between different methods of clothing construction as taught to two groups of women. She compared the traditional method and the Bishop method, but was concerned mainly with the women's reaction and opinions and not the results of their construc- tion projects or their understanding. She did find that the garments constructed by the traditional method had a higher standard of quality than those constructed by the Bishop method.5 5Evelyn Carlson Senecal, "A Comparison of Clothing Construction Methods," unpublished Master's Problem, Mich- igan State University, 1960, p. 6. In a study of construction processes Smith compared pin basting and thread basting (hand basting). The results of this study can be directly related to a comparison of hand basting and machine basting since in both pin basting and machine basting, the machine stitching is done after pinning the sleeve into the armscye and must be concerned ' with removing the pins or stitching over the pins with the‘ sewing machine. In the study by Smith six different sample processes were constructed. The outcome pointed to the fact that "when set-in sleeves were stitched in without being thread basted (hand basted), several examples of armhole puckers developed and the stitching lines were irregular."6 The results also showed that the final machine stitching was more easily accomplished when thread basting had been done. In all construction processes thread basting produced su- perior results.7 Henkel and Seronsy conducted a study to determine if there was any correlation between a student's previous experience and her grade in a beginning clothing construc- tion course. The results of the study indicated that ex- perience ”has no relation to the course grades, and that 6Margaret Smith, "A Comparison of Pin and Thread Basting in Clothing Construction," Journal of Home Economics, 49 (1), January, 1957, p. 40. 7Ibid. 50 percent of the time, chance alone would produce a value this high (t-value of 0.54).»8 Henkel and Seronsy concluded that "experience and formal courses at a level below col- lege standing are not enough to assure satisfactory achieve- ment in an introductory course at the college level."9 However, Wright and Henkel, in a study of college freshmen at Purdue University, found that the grade in a clothing construction course was definitely related to the amount and type of previous experience of the student. Types of previous experience considered were home sewing, high school clothing construction courses, and 4-H sewing. Achievement in the college course included achievement on both a written test and actual clothing construction. The study suggested that the amount rather than the type of previous experience was most closely related to the student's achievement.lo On the basis of the research done in the area of clothing construction the assumption might be that, in set- ting in a sleeve, hand basting will produce the best results. There is disagreement among the studies comparing the pre- vious clothing construction experience of students with 8Jean Henkel and Louise Baird Seronsy, "First Course in Clothing and Textiles," Journal of Home Economics, 43 (3), March, 1951, p. 196. 9Ibid. loJanet Smith Wright and Jean Henkel, "Achievement in Clothing Construction," Journal of Home Economics, 43 (8), October, 1951, p. 627. 10 their grades in a beginning college course. The results suggest, however, that if experience has an effect, it is the amount of experience rather than the kind. Demonstration Method of Teaching With the rapid growth in the number of students attending college it has become necessary to devise new methods of teaching large numbers of students. The begin- ning course in clothing construction at Michigan State Uni- versity, Principles of Clothing Construction (TRA 152), is constantly facing the problem of larger enrollment. In the past the course was taught in small sections using a lecture—demonstration technique. This was effective as long as the sections remained small. The demonstration method has been recognized as an effective method of teaching clothing construction. Educators have long realized the value of this technique. Showing how something is done often leads to more effective learning than using writ- ten or verbal instructions which are sometimes vague and often subject to misinterpretation. In addition to providing concise information, demon- stration is a means of exemplifying high standards for the process being presented.11 However, the demonstration method is no longer adequate for large section classes. In clothing classes, a teacher must demonstrate to a large group processes involving detailed work, llHazel M. Hatcher and Mildred E. Andrews, The Teach- ing of Home Egonomics (New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1963), p. 117. 11 and often this can be properly seen only by those who are very close, so that the demonstration has to be repeated over and over again.12 Stam studied the effectiveness of using the over- head projector in teaching clothing construction. She found that "seeing the presentation was the most often mentioned advantage of the overhead projector."13 McCrady and Tomljonovich conducted an experiment in teaching clothing construction to a large section (250) of homemakers. The women were taught by demonstration only. All of their construction was done at home with no help from the instructor. Questionnaires and observation gave evidence that clothing construction can be effectively taught to a large group by a demonstration and without a supervised laboratory.l4 McCrady and Tomljonovich also found that in order for the demonstration to furnish sufficient instruction, it had to be well planned to give the same meaning to each student. In this way each student could execute the steps without individual help.ls 12Evelyn A. Mansfield, Clothing Construction (Bos- ton: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1953), p. v. 13Judy Stam, "An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Overhead Projector in Teaching Clothing Construction,” unpublished Master's Thesis, Michigan State University, 1964, p. 56. 14Christine McCrady and Maloa Tomljonovich, "The Challenge of New Methods in Clothing Construction,“ Journal of Home Economics, 57 (1), January, 1965, p. 63. lslbid. 12 In many colleges and universities instruction by television is being used to relieve the problem of the large groups of students and the shortage of teachers. Television instruction is very much like the demonstration technique except that it is not live. Close up views can be used so that the students can often see better than in a live demonstration. The studies completed to this date do not seem to agree as to the effectiveness of television instruc- tion as compared to the conventional classroom instruction. Of 26 studies conducted in the area of television instruction 20 indicated “somewhat more effective transmis- sion of content in the conventional classes than in those taught by television."16 McDaniel and Feliatreau conducted an experiment with two sections of a beginning education course. One section was taught by television and the other by the con- ventional lecture method. "The evidence suggests that the T.V. group profited as much from the course as did the live group. However, there is strong evidence . . . that stu- dents did not like television as a method of presentation and that their level of acceptance of this method of in- struction is low."17 16Ernest McDaniel and William K. Feliatreau, ”A Comparison of TV and Conventional Instruction as Determin- ants of Attitude Change," The Journal of Educational Research, 58 (7), March, 1965, p. 293. l7Ibid., p. 297. 13 In 1962 Schram surveyed 300 projects that were be- ing done on the use of television instruction. He found -"no significant difference in the results between television instruction and the standard instruction."18 In a study done by Meacham clothing construction was taught to two groups of students at Ohio State Univer4 sity by two different methods. One group was taught by a television lecture and the other group by a face to face lecture. The results showed no significant difference be- tween the two groups in both an objective test and a per- formance test. In general, the student reaction was favor— able. The two main objections were that the pace was too fast and that they could not ask questions.19 The previous research concerned with the demonstra- tion method of teaching points to the conclusion that a demonstration is an effective method of teaching a process or technique. Students learn best when they can perceive the process visually. The face to face demonstration is no longer adequate for teaching large numbers of students. Television demonstrations have proved effective for large classes because the camera can get close-up views of the process so that all students can see. The previous studies 18Walter Wittich, "What ETV Research Has Taught,“ Nation's Schools, 76 (4), October, 1965, p. 47. 19Esther Meacham, "Television in the Clothing Class- room," Journal of Home Economics, 56 (2), February, 1964, p. 91. 14 also suggest that if a demonstration is well planned stu- dents should be able to learn a process without any further assistance from an instructor. Programmed Instruction Programmed instruction is the most recent develop- ment in the field of education. Generally programmed in- struction includes any instructional aid in which the en— tire process to be learned is organized in a step by step plan and put in the form of a chart, book, or teaching machine of some kind. The student moves through the pro-' gram in small steps. In most cases each step is built on the previous one and the student is to complete each step before moving on to the next. Shoffner and Clawson conducted a study in which high school students in clothing construction were taught by two different methods. Half of the students were taught by the use of programmed tests in a self—instruction lab— oratory. The other half were taught by a teacher using standard methods of instruction. Achievement was measured by grades on a written test and grades on blouses constructed as class projects. The results showed that the achievement of those taught by programmed instruction was far superior to those taught by the teacher. There were also fewer ob- viously poor blouses in the group taught by programmed in- struction.20 20Sarah M. Shoffner and Barbara Clawson, “Sewing 15 Goldberg and others did a study comparing programmed and conventional instruction methods of teaching a business course. Achievement tests after the completion of the course showed no significant difference in the mean scores of the groups. "The advantages of programmed learning were most evident at the completion of the course in helping the slower (as defined by lower mental ability and mathematical compe- tence) learners to obtain a direct familiarity with the course material."21 In the Goldberg study programmed learning also re- sulted in a considerable saving of time in the learning process. An unstructured discussion following the course resulted in the conclusion that “certain personality vari- ables, such as dependency and sociability may be closely related to which of the teaching methods is most efficient for different individuals."22 The literatUre reviewed in the area of programmed instruction suggests several important ideas. One is that the student's acceptance of programmed instruction and his ability to learn from it are highly dependent on personal attitudes. As with the conventional methods of teaching Step-by-Step with Programmed Instruction," What's New in Home Economics, 31 (3), March, 1967, p. 32. 21Myles Goldberg, Robert Dawson, and Richard Barrett, "A Comparison of Programmed and Conventional Instruction Methods,“ Journal of Applied Psychology, 48 (2), 1964, p. 113. 221bid., p. 114. 16 some students will learn best by one method while others will learn best by other methods. Self-Instruction Laboratories Another method of teaching large numbers of students is the self—instruction laboratory. Self-instruction lab- oratories are of benefit in any class where students must learn certain basic principles or basic techniques. The student has the opportunity to see in detail and at close range the process which he must learn. He may also see the process as often as necessary. Due to a shortage of teachers, Rensselaer Polytech- nic Institute began a program in 1956 to make full use of audiovisual materials and self-instruction laboratories. After four years the project confirmed the hypothesis that no real difference in student accomplishment would be found between those taught by the experimental methods and those taught by the standard methods.23 There is still a need for more research in the area of self-instruction laboratories, and their effectiveness. The only study quoted at the present time suggests that self-instruction laboratories are an effective method of teaching, especially in the area of basic understandings and skills. 23"New Building on Campus” (pamphlet), Educational Facilities Laboratories, Inc., New York, 1963, p. 2. 17 Conclusion The literature reviewed suggests several possible outcomes for the present research. First, it indicates that the method of setting in a sleeve with the use of hand basting will be superior to that using machine basting. Second, the amount of previous experience of the student will have a slight effect on her ability to set in a sleeve. And third, if the demonstration were well prepared and well presented, it appears that the students should be able to effectively set in a sleeve with no further assistance from an instructor. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY The chapter on methodology will include the steps used in the research process. The areas that will be cov- ered are the population, the selection of the methods to be demonstrated, the experimental procedure, background information and the statistical analysis. Population The study was primarily concerned with the teach- ing of setting a sleeve in a bodice to a large section class in beginning clothing construction. For this reason the population was made up of all of the students who were en- rolled in TRA 152 during the winter quarter of 1967. There were 121 girls in the class at the beginning of the study; however, during the term 11 girls withdrew or failed to complete the course, leaving a population of 110. The study will therefore deal only with the data collected for the 110 students who completed the course. Numbers were assigned to each girl in each labora? tory section and to each laboratory section as a whole. The breakdown of the population into categories of treat- ment was made on the basis of a table of random numbers.24 24Allen L. Bernstein, A Handbook of Statistics 18 19 First each laboratory section was divided into two groups; one group received a demonstration of Method I while the other group received a demonstration of Method II. Each of these groups was again divided into two sub-groups. Under both Method I and Method II half of the students were allowed to receive extra help after the demonstration, if they wished, while the other half was requested not to ask for extra help. The students were told that the grade on the set-in sleeves in their garments would not affect their final grade. In four sections the researcher demonstrated Method I and the laboratory instructor demonstrated Method II and in three the laboratory instructor demonstrated Method I and the researcher demonstrated Method II. The methods to be demonstrated by the researcher and the laboratory instructor in a particular section were randomly assigned. Selection of Methods After studying several of the accepted methods for setting in sleeves, the researcher selected two variations which were believed valid for teaching beginning students. The two methods were not taken directly from any of the authorities reviewed but rather were a combination of many variations which the researcher selected as best for the purpose. The two variations were labeled Method I and Solutions for the Behavioral Science (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965), p. 143. 20 Method II. Written copies of the two methods were presented to the TRA 152 course committee for their suggestions and approval. Experimental Procedure Demonstration Scripts, giving the exact words the researcher would use in presenting the demonstration, were prepared for both methods (Appendix A). The laboratory instructors were given the scripts to familiarize them with the presentation given by the researcher. Each laboratory instructor, however, was to give the demonstration in her own words. Instruction sheets, describing the process of set- ting in a sleeve, were prepared to give to the students at the time of the demonstration (Appendix B). The instruc- tions were written in outline form and were accompanied by diagrams illustrating some of the steps of setting in a sleeve. Both the script and the instruction sheets were approved by the TRA 152 committee. Demonstrations often include the use of samples illustrating the processes to be taught. Illustrative ma- terials showing the various steps in the process helped the demonstration to more closely represent a slide demon? stration in a self-instruction laboratory. Five steps, illustrating the technique of setting in a sleeve, were selected as sufficient. They were as follows: 1. a flat sleeve piece with ease lines 21 2. a sleeve with the underarm seam stitched and finished and a bodice to be used to show the insertion of the sleeve into the armscye of the bodice and the pinning to- gether at the four matching points 3. a sleeve pinned into a bodice armscye il- lustrating the distribution of ease and the placement of pins with basting done 4. a sleeve machine stitched into the bodice armscye 5. a completed sleeve with seams finished—- used to illustrate pressing The illustrative materials used to show the steps in the demonstration served a double purpose. Slides were made from pictures of the samples, to be used by TRA 152 classes. For this reason fabric and thread were selected to create the best illustrations when the slides were pro- jected in the classroom. Three colors of cotton fabric were selected (medium blue, aqua, and pink). The thread that was used was one shade darker than the fabric so that the stitching line would show up in the slides. Sleeves were constructed in each fabric. Pictures were taken, and slides made of each sleeve against a white background and a black background. One sleeve (aqua against a black background) could be seen most clearly in the slides. The samples for the demonstration were then made in the chosen fabric. Two sets of samples were constructed-- one illustrating each of the two methods demonstrated (Ap- pendix C). 22 During the designated laboratory time the set-in sleeve demonstrations were given in all of the TRA 152 lab- oratory sections. Two demonstrations were given simultane- ously in each laboratory. The instructor assigned to the class demonstrated one method to half of the class and the researcher demonstrated the other method to the other half of the class. Grading of Sleeves A grade sheet for set-in sleeves was devised by the researcher (Appendix D) and approved by the TRA 152 course committee. It contained five categories to be checked. Under each category there were numbers from 5 to l, 5 being the highest grade and 1 being the lowest. Ten garments containing set-in sleeves were col— lected from the TRA department and from friends. The sam- ples ranged in grade from A to F as determined by the re- searcher and her advisor. The graduate assistants were asked to grade each of the ten sleeves to acquaint them with the points to be considered and the use of the grade sheet. Two of the graduate assistants were asked to assist in grading the sleeves in the garments constructed by the students in TRA 152. After the garments had been completed, the two graduate assistants and the researcher each graded all of the sleeves using the prepared grade sheet. An average of the three grades were used as the final sleeve grade 23 for each garment. Written Examination Twenty multiple choice questions on set-in sleeves were written by the researcher. Of these the TRA 152 course committee selected ten which they judged to be the best questions, and included them as a part of the final exam- ination for the course (Appendix E). After the final examination had been graded as a whole, the ten questions on set-in sleeves were scored sep- arately. Each student was given a score between 0 and 10 representing her understanding of the process of setting in a sleeve. Total Grade The total grade for each student was obtained by adding the test grade and the sleeve grade. Background Information In order to analyze the results of the research certain background information was obtained for each stu- dent in the sample. The data collected were the students' previous clothing construction experience and the students' grade point averages (GPA). Experience Questionnaires All of the students had been asked earlier in the quarter to fill out and turn in the Experience Questionnaires 24 on pages 1 and 2 of the TRA 152 manual, Principles of Cloth- ing Construction (Appendix F). These questionnaires were collected and rated on a scale from 0 to 4 as follows: 0--beginner, no experience l—-constructed a few garments with no formal train- ing 2--constructed a few garments with one year of training in school or 4-H 3--constructed a lot of garments with no training or constructed a few garments with two years of training in school or 4-H 4--constructed a lot of garments with at least two years of training in school or 4-H Grade Point Average The all university accumulative grade point average for each student in the sample was obtained from the office of the Dean of the college in which she was enrolled. The range of the grade point average was from 4.00 to 0, with 4.00 being an A average. Statistical Analysis The purpose of the statistical analysis of the data for the current study is to determine (1) whether the stu- dents being taught Method I or those being taught Method II received better grades on the written examination and on the set-in sleeves in their prdjects; (2) whether those allowed to receive extra help received better grades than those who were not allowed to receive extra help; (3) whether method taught, extra help, person giving the demonstration, 25 previous experience or grade point average influenced the sleeve grades and the test grades, and if so which factors had the most influence on the grades. Three types of statistical analysis were chosen-- Least Squares, t tests and Chi squares. The Least Squares gave the relationship between each of the dependent vari— ables (sleeve grades, test grades, and total grades) and each of the independent variables (method taught, help or no help, person giving the demonstration, experience, and grade point average). By the use of the Least Squares it was possible to determine which of the independent variables most affected the dependent variables. The t test showadthe significance of the difference between the mean scores for those receiving the demonstra- tion of Method I and those receiving the demonstration of Method II, and between those who were allowed to receive extra help and those who were not allowed to receive extra help in Method I and Method II. Chi square statistics were computed between the frequencies of grade point average and clothing construc- tion experience; the frequencies of students' total grades for those with experience and for the beginners; and the frequency distribution of sleeve grades under each level of GPA for Method I and Method II. Other statistical data obtained included the mean scores and standard deviations for the students being taught 26 Method I and those being taught Method II; and the mean scores and the standard deviations for the students receiv- ing extra help and those receiving no extra help. Descrip- tive charts were devised to illustrate the sleeve grades of the students in Method I and the students in Method II, the test grades of the students in the two methods, the total grades of the students in the two methods, and the previous experience of the students in each of the two methods. CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Throughout the study the researcher had attempted to determine the comparative effectiveness of two methods for setting in sleeves as taught to beginning students in clothing construction, and the comparative effectiveness of two different teaching situations. The results were based on an analysis of the set-in sleeve grades, written test grades, and total grades received by the students in the beginning clothing construction course. The ensuing chapter will include a description of the subjects, the results of the analysis of data, and conclusions concern- ing the findings. Description of Subjects The population for the study included 110 students enrolled in TRA 152, Principles of Clothing Construction, during the winter quarter of 1967. Ninety per cent of the students were enrolled in the College of Home Economics while the other 10 per cent were from various other depart- ments throughout the university, including education, art, and University College. The all university grade point average was obtained for each student in the population. The grade point averages 27 28 (GPA) ranged from .86 to 3.67 (on a 4.0 scale), with the mean being 2.37. The population was divided into seven categories of grade point average, arbitrarily chosen by the researcher. In the following list the number after each category is the number of students whose GPA falls within that range. GPA Number of Students 3.50 -- 4.00 l 3.00 -- 3.49 16 2.50 -- 2.99 23 2.00 -— 2.49 48 1.50 -- 1.99 18 1.00 -- 1.49 2 .50 -- .99 1 TRA 152 is a beginning course in clothing construc- tion; however, the students who take the course vary greatly in their previous clothing construction experience. Each student was given an experience rating from 0 to 4 based on the questions given on the Experience Questionnaire found on pages 1 and 2 of the TRA 152 Manual. The population fell into groups according to their previous clothing con- struction experience as shown in the following list. Experience Number of Students 4 (very experienced) 20 3 (fairly experienced) 32 2 (some experience) 24 29 1 (little experience) 17 0 (beginner) 17 Total 110 The study involved four different treatments. They were (1) setting in sleeves by Method I without instructor assistance, (2) setting in sleeves by Method I with instruc- tor assistance as needed, (3) setting in sleeves by Method II without instructor assistance, and (4) setting in sleeves by Method II with instructor assistance as needed. The subjects were assigned to the different cate- gories of treatment on the basis of a table of random num- bers. The following list gives the numbers of students in each of the four divisions given below. Help No Help Total METHOD I 33 27 60 METHOD II 26 24 50 Total 59 51 110 The Chi square statistic was computed between the frequencies of grade point average and clothing construc- tion experience to determine if there was a significant relationship between the two factors. The resulting sta- tistic was significant at the .01 level; however, the re- lationship was inverse. The students with no experience tended to have higher grade point averages and those with more experience had lower grade point averages. 30 Table l.--The relationship between the frequency distribu- tion for the students' previous experience and. their GPA Experience Rating ggg o 1 a 2 3 a 4* 3.00 -- 4.00 6 6 6 2.50 -- 2.99 3 11 9 2.00 -— 2.49 7 16 25 .50 -- 1.99 1 8 12 Chi-square 8.969 Probability g .05 Analysis of Results The data were analyzed in relation to the objectives formulated at the beginning of the study. The dependent variables analyzed were the grade each student received I on the set-in sleeves in her class project garment (desig- nated as sleeve grade), the grade each received on the ques- tions concerning set-in sleeves on the final examination (designated as test grade), and the total grade obtained by adding the sleeve grade and the test grade together (designated as total grade). These variables were analyzed in relation to the independent variables which included the method by which the students were taught, whether they received help or not, who they received the demonstration from, their previous clothing construction experience, and their all university grade point average. 31 Clothing Construction Experience Related to Sleeve Grades, Test Gradesygand Total’Grades One of the objectives of the study was to determine whether the students' previous clothing construction expe- rience was related to their ability to set in a sleeve. Table 2 gives the simple correlations which show the relationship between previous experience and each of the three grades obtained for each student. The correla- tion between experience and total grade was significant at the .05 level. Table 2.--The significance of the relationship between the mean sleeve grades, test grades, total grades and experience and grade point averages Experience GPA Sleeve grade .138 . .324“ Test grade .175 .184 Total grade .233‘ .243‘ ’Significant at the .05 level “Significant at the .01 level This statistic supports the findings of Wright and Henkel who concluded that the previous clothing construc- tion experience of students was definitely related to the grades they received in a beginning clothing construction 25 course on the college level. The partial correlations in Table 2 show the 25Wright and Henkel, op. cit. 32 relationship between sleeve grade, test grade, and total grade (the sum of the sleeve grade and test grade) and each of the independent variables, with the effects of the other independent variables eliminated. The resulting statistics for the partial correlations between experience and grades are not significant. Table 3.--The significance of the relationship between sleeve grade, test grade, and total grade and each of the independent variables (method, help, instructor, experience, and grade point average) with the effect of the other variables eliminated Sleeve grade Test grade Total grade Method -.07 .07 .04 Help .13 .01 .20 Instructor .07 -.27 .04 Experience .19 .24 .27 GPA .35“ .26 .30 "Significant at the .01 level Computations were made to determine the sum of the variation from the mean squared which was accounted for by all of the independent variables (R2). The portion of that variation which is caused by each of the independent vari- ables can be seen in Table 4. In all three grades it was found that the percentage of the variation from the mean grades which could be attributed to the effect of each of the independent variables was small (less than 20%) and that the major portion of the variation was caused by 33 chance alone. Of the 19 per cent of the variation in total grade caused by the independent variables more than one-third (7%) was caused by the students' previous experience. The results of the simple correlations pointed to the fact that there was a significant relationship between the students' previous clothing construction experience and their total grades on set-in sleeves. In order to better understand the relationship between grades and previous experience the mean grades were calculated for the sleeve grades and total grades under all five levels of experience. The levels of experience were determined by the researcher on the basis of the amount of previous experience the students had, and included high school cloth— ing construction, 4—H and home sewing. The mean total grades for the students were as follows: Experience Mean total grades 4 (very experienced) 24.2 3 (fairly experienced) 24.1 2 (some experience) 24.3 1 (little experience) 24.6 0 (beginner) 21.7 Under the category of total grades the largest dif- ference in mean grades was found between the students who were beginners and those who had some experience, while the groups who had different amounts of experience did not 34 Table 4.—-The amount of the sum of the squared deviations from the mean of the students' grades accounted for by the independent variables--method taught, help or no help, instructor, experience and GPA Sleeve grade Test grade Total grade R .17 .15 .19 Portion of the R2 accounted for by the independent variables Method .00 .00 .01 Help .02 .Ol .04 Instructor .01 .06 .01 Experience .03 .04 .07 GPA .12 .05 .08 vary a great deal in the mean grades. Chi-square statis— tics were computed between the total grades for those stu- dents who had some experience (previous clothing construc- tion experience rating of l to 4) and those who had no ex— perience (previous clothing construction experience rating of 0). The resulting figure (shown in Table 5) was signif- icant at the .01 level, indicating that there was a signif- icant difference in the total grades between those students who had some clothing construction experience and those who had none. Grade Point Avepggg Related to Sleeve Grades, Test GradesJ and Total Grades The second objective was to determine whether the students' grade point averages were related to their ability 35 Table 5.—-The total grades received by the beginners and the students with experience Total grades Students with experience Beginners 25—31 (high) 40 2 22-24 (medium) 35 5 16-21 (low) 18 10 Chi-square = 12.830 Probability E .01 to learn the process of setting in a sleeve. The simple correlations shown in Table 2, page 31, give the relation- ship between the students' grade point averages (GPA) and their sleeve grades, test grades, and total grades. The correlation between GPA and total grades was significant at the .05 level, and the correlation between GPA and sleeve grades was significant at the .01 level. The partial correlations given in Table 2, page 31, show that GPA was significantly related to the sleeve grade at the .01 level, indicating a definite relationship between the grades the students obtained on set-in sleeves and their grade point averages. 0f the 17% variation from the mean sleeve grade accounted for by the independent variables (Table 3) 12%, or more than two-thirds was caused by the students' GPA. And in the total grades one-half of the 19% variation from the mean caused by the variables was the effect of the GPA. The results suggested that the students' grade point 36 averages had the greatest effect on the grades that they received in both their understanding of the process of set- ting in a sleeve and their practical performance of the task. Instructor Presenting the Demonstration Related to Sleeve Grades, Test Grades, and Total Grades Another objective of the study was to determine if there was a difference in sleeve grades for the students receiving the demonstration from the researcher and those receiving the demonstration from the laboratory instructor. The mean of the grades of the students receiving the demonstration from the researcher was compared with the mean of the grades of those receiving the demonstration from the laboratory instructors were computed and the results are shown in Table 6. The difference between the means was not large enough to show a significant difference between the two groups. Table 6.—-Sleeve grades of the students receiving the dem- onstration from the researcher and those receiving the demonstration from their laboratory instructor No. of students re- No. of students receiv- ceiving demonstration ing demonstration from Sleeve grades from the researcher lab. instructor 21-23 (high) 4 1 18-20 13 11 15-17 (medium) 21 25 12-14 15 12 9-11 (low) 4 4 Mean grade 16.0 15.9 37 Difference in Sleeve Grades, Test Grades, and Total Grades Related to the Method Used for Setting in Sleeves Two tentative hypotheses were formulated at the beginning of the study. The first was as follows: The method of setting in a sleeve using hand bast- ing (Method I) will result in a better final prod- uct than the method of setting in a sleeve using machine basting (Method II). Tables 7, 8, and 9 show the sleeve grades, test grades, and total grades for the students in Method I and Method II. The mean grades for the students in Method I and Method II were not different enough to suggest any sig- nificant difference between the two methods. Table 7.--The sleeve grades for the students in Method I and for the students in Method II, and the num- bers of students in each level of sleeve grade Number of Students Number of Students Sleeve Grade in Method I in Method II 21-23 (high) 3 2 18-20 16 8 15-17 (medium) 25 20 12-14 13 16 9-11 (low) 3 4 Mean Grade 16.3 15.6 Standard Deviation 2.5 2.8 Range 9.3 - 21.3 10.0 - 22.3 The partial correlations given in Table 3, page 32, show no significant difference in the grades received by 38 the students setting in sleeves by Method I and those using Method II. Table 8.——The test grades for the students in Method I and for the students in Method II, and the numbers of students in each level of test grade Number of Students Number of Students Test Scores in Method I in Method II 10 9 5 9 l9 l7 8 17 9 7 8 10 6 4 6 5 2 3 4 l - Mean score 8.18 7.92 Standard Deviation 1.9 1.4 Range 4-10 5-10 The percentages of the variation from the mean for the sleeve grade, test grade and total grades accounted for by the independent variables were 17%, 15%, and 19%, as shown in Table 4. For all three grades the amount of that percentage which was due to the different method used to set in the sleeves was less than 1%. Therefore, very little of the variation from the mean grades was caused by the difference between Method I and Method II. T-statistics were also calculated to determine the 39 Table 9.--The total grades for the students in Method I and for the students in Method II, and the num- bers of students in each level of total grade Number of Students Number of Students Total Grade in Method I in Method II 31-33 (high) 0 1 28-30 9 6 25—27 21 6 22-24 (medium) 19 22 19-21 6 13 16—18 (low) 5 3 Mean 24.3 23.6 Standard Deviation 4.4 3.5 Range 16.3-30 16-3l.3 difference between the mean grades in Method I and Method II. None of the t values were significant (Table 10). Table 10.--The significance of the difference between Method I and Method II for sleeve grade, test grade, and total grade ~ L Independent Variable t value Sleeve grade 1.37 Test grade 1.35 Total grade .64 The results of the current study disagree with the 26 findings of Smith who concluded that in the process of 26Smith, op. cit. 40 setting in a sleeve hand basting resulted in a superior product than machine stitching without hand basting. Because there seemed to be no significant differ— ence between the two methods when the population was taken as a whole and because the grade point average was highly correlated with the students' grades the researcher decided to divide the population into levels of grade point average and to compute Chi square statistics for the two methods and the sleeve grades under each level of GPA. Thus under each GPA level it could be determined whether Method I or Method II resulted in better sleeve grades. The range of grade point averages was divided into three groups as fol- lows: high (2.5 and over), medium (2.0 to 2.5), and low (below 2.0). In all three categories the Chi-square sta- tistic was not significant. It can therefore be assumed that there was no significant relationship between the method by which the students were taught and the grades they received on the set-in sleeves in their class project garments. Differences in Sleeve Grades, Test Grades, and Total Grades Related to the Factor of Help or No Help The second hypothesis of the current study was: Students who were not allowed to receive additional assistance in workroom and laboratory will perform as well as those who received assistance. Table 11 gives the number of students and the grades for thoSe receiving extra help, and the number of students 41 and the grades for those receiving no extra help. Table ll.--The sleeve grades for the students receiving help and for the students receiving no help, and the number of students in each level of sleeve grade Students receiving Students receiving Sleeve Grade help no help 21-23 (high) 3 2 18-20 ll 13 15-17 (medium) 23 22 12-14 16 13 9-11 (low) 6 2 Mean 23.1 23.6 Table 12 gives the t values for the significance of difference between the mean grades for those receiving help and those receiving no help under both Method I and Method II. Table 12.--The significance of the difference between mean grades for the students who received help and those who did not receive help under Method I and Method II Method I Method II Help - No Help Help - No Help Independent Variable t value t value Sleeve grade .09 .34 Test grade .19 .64 Total grade 1.35 .23 42 As shown in Table 3, page 32, the partial correla- tions between sleeve grade, test grade and total grade and the factor of help or no help were not significant. This points to the fact that there was no real difference in the performance between the students who were allowed to receive help and those who were not allowed to receive help. In the sum of the variation from the mean grades the variable of help or no help accounted for a very small percentage of the total variation (Table 4, page 34). Thus the study is in agreement with several previ- ous studies which found that students could perform well in self-instruction laboratories or without the aid of an instructor if the program or demonstration had been well prepared. Shoffner27 and McCrady and Tomlijonovich28 also concluded that students could effectively learn the tech- niques of clothing construction with a demonstration or programmed instruction and without the help of a laboratory instructor. The present study was concerned with the student's ability to set in a sleeve. In order to better understand the problems that the students had each instructor was asked to keep track of the kinds of questions asked by the stu- dents who were allowed to have assistance in the laboratory 27Shoffner, op. cit. 28McCrady and Tomlijonovich, op. cit. 43 and workroom. Most of the instructors reported that there were very few questions asked about the setting in of sleeves. Of the questions asked the majority were concerned with the distribution of ease. Some students simply asked if the ease in their sleeves was distributed correctly. Others asked about the location of the ease across the sleeve cap. A few students asked how to reduce the excess ease in the sleeve cap. A few asked where to begin and end the row of permanent stitching. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Colleges and universities throughout the country are growing rapidly and will continue to grow. The in- crease in student enrollment is being felt especially in the basic courses and required courses. The beginning clothing construction course at Michigan State University, Principles of Clothing Construction, has changed in recent years from small sections where one teacher was concerned with lecture, demonstrations and laboratory, to a large lecture meeting two hours a week and many small laboratory sections meeting two hours a week. It is now necessary to have several instructors to handle the laboratory sec- tions. Educational institutions everywhere have made many changes in instructional methods during the past decade. The emphasis is shifting toward the use of more and better audiovisual aids in the learning process. The purpose of such materials is not to replace the instructors, but to enable them to reach more students more efficiently, and have free time in which to give individual help to students. Some of the instructional aids in use at the present time include projectors for slides and films, television, over- head projectors, opaque projectors, tape recorders, and 44 45 a wide variety of charts. A whole new concept in audiovisual instruction has been introduced in the form of self-instruc- tion laboratories. A self-instruction laboratory may in- clude a wide variety of equipment ranging from projectors, tape recorders, and teaching machines to charts, models and programmed charts. Several departments at Michigan State University have made use of self-instruction laboratories and have found them beneficial to both teachers and students. In such a laboratory the student can work at his own speed, and can return to the materials as often as he needs. The self-instruction laboratory is especially useful in teach— ing basic processes or techniques which can be illustrated in an organized step by step manner. The instructors concerned with the basic clothing construction course at Michigan State University have been interested in employing the self-instruction laboratory to aid the students in learning some of the basic tech- niques and to free some of the teachers for more individ- ual help where it is needed. Before more work was done in this direction it was necessary to determine if such a program would work in clothing construction and, if so, what methods would be acceptable to record on slides or films for use in the laboratories. The technique of setting in a sleeve was chosen for further study. After reviewing the methods of several 46 authorities in clothing construction two variations of set- ting in a sleeve were decided upon. The two variations were not taken directly from any of the authorities, but were a combination of techniques that were acceptable to. the researcher and to the committee in charge of the course (TRA 152 course committee). The two variations were labeled Method I and Method II. The population used for the study included all of the students enrolled in TRA 152 during the winter quarter of 1967. There were 121 students at the beginning of the term; however, the population used in the study included only the 110 students who dompleted the course. The stu— dents were divided into two groups; one group received the demonstrations of Method I and the other group received the demonstrations of Method II. In order to more nearly represent a programmed pre- sentation the researcher prepared a demonstration for each method with a script and a set of samples to illustrate the process. Two demonstrations were given in each labora— tory section with the researcher demonstrating one method to half the class and the laboratory instructor demonstrat- ing the other method to the other half of the class. In- struction sheets including diagrams were given to the stu- dents to refer to when setting in the sleeves in their class project garments. The researcher was also interested in determining 47 whether the self-instruction laboratory alone would be suf- ficient to teach the process of setting in a sleeve. Under both Method I and Method II the students were again divided into two groups. One group (the control group) was allowed to ask the instructor for help when it was needed, as the students might in an ordinary laboratory situation. The other group (the experimental group) was asked not to seek assistance from an instructor, but to perform the task on their own. It was believed that this would more nearly simulate a self-instruction laboratory with no teacher as- sistance. The students were told that the sleeve grades would not affect their final grade in the course. All of the students were required to set in sleeves in their class project garments. At the end of the term two graduate assistants and the researcher each graded the sleeves in all of the garments using a score sheet devel- oped by the researcher. An average of the three ratings was used as the final set-in sleeve grade. The researcher also wrote ten questions on the process of setting in a sleeve to be used as a part of the TRA 152 final examination. The grade on the sleeves and the grade on the test questions were combined to deter- mine the total grade for the set-in sleeves for each student. The students' clothing construction experience and the grade point averages were collected to check for inter- vening factors. The experience rating was obtained from 48 an experience questionnaire in the TRA 152 manual. The grade point average was obtained from the college in which the students were enrolled. Through the analysis of the data the researcher hoped to determine (1) which of two variations for setting in a sleeve would result in a better final product; (2) which of two variations of setting in a sleeve was most easily understood by students; (3) if students who did not receive additional assistance in the laboratory and work- room would perform as well as those who did receive assist- ance; (4) whether the instructor from whom the students received the demonstration was related to the grades the students received; (5) if students' previous clothing con- struction experience was related to their ability to set. in a sleeve; (6) if students' grade point average was re- lated to their ability to set in a sleeve. The data for the current study were analyzed in several ways to determine the meaningful relationships present. The statistical computations resulted in means, standard deviations, simple correlations, partial correla- tions, t-tests, and chi-squares. The simple correlations between experience and total grade was significant at the .05 level. The amount of the variation from the mean indicated that the students' previous experience accounted for a small portion of the sum of the variations from the mean of the sleeve grade, 49 test grade, and total grade. The greatest difference in mean sleeve grades was found between the students who had some clothing construc- tion experience (an experience rating of l to 4) and those who were beginners (an experience rating of 0). The mean sleeve grade for the students with some clothing construc— tion experience was 16.2, and the mean sleeve grade for those with no experience was 14.8. The mean total grade for the students with experience was 24.4 and for the bee ginners was 21.7. I All of the analyses showed a high correlation be- tween the students' GPA and their grades on the process of setting in a sleeve. 'The simple correlations between GPA and sleeve grades waxesignificant at the .01 level, and those between GPA and total grades were significant at the .05 level. The first hypothesis was that the method of setting in sleeves using hand basting would result in a better final product than the method of setting in a sleeve using machine basting. In order to test the first hypothesis t-tests were computed between Method I and Method II. The t values obtained were not significant for any of the dependent vari- ables, indicating that the method by which the students were taught is not related to the grades received. Lists were compiled of the sleeve grades, test grades and total grades for the students under Method I and Method II. In 50 comparing the mean grades of the two methods there was no real difference between them. Since it was determined that grade point average (GPA) was related to the sleeve grades received by the stu- dents, the researcher divided the students into three levels of GPA to determine if, under these divisions, one method would result in better grades than the other. The three levels of GPA were 2.5 to 4.0, 2.0 to 2.5, and below 2.0. Chi square statistics computed on the frequencies of the. students whose grades were in each of the three categories under Method I and Method II were not significant. The second hypothesis was that students who were not allowed to receive extra help in laboratory and work- room would perform as well as those who were allowed to receive assistance. The second hypothesis was tested by computing the significance of difference between the means of the grades of the students receiving help and those re- ceiving no help with Method I and on the grades of the stu- dents receiving help and those receiving no help with Method II. In all comparisons made the t-values were not signif- icant and therefore no real difference occurred. The results of the current study led to the con- clusions that it did not make any difference which method for setting in a sleeve was taught or whether the students were allowed to have assistance from a laboratory instructor or not. Similarly, it did not matter who instructed them 51 in the process of setting in a sleeve. The two variables which did affect the students' ability to set in a sleeve and their understanding of the process were their previous clothing construction experience and their grade point averages. Grouping college girls with all levels of clothing construction experience into one course does not seem to be the best way to meet the needs of the students. The current study points to the fact that college students with no clothing construction experience need more instruction and supervision in order to gain an understanding of the basic principles and tech- niques involved. Of all the variables compared the GPA had the great- est effect on the grades for the process of setting in sleeves. The relationship between GPA and grades suggests that students who do well in all subjects in college will also learn the process of setting in a sleeve better than those who do not do well in other college courses. Thisl might imply that the slower learners, or students with low GPA's, need more help than they are receiving in the begin- ning course in clothing construction. The findings of the study support the idea that a self-instruction laboratory would benefit students in a beginning clothing construction course. Students would then be able to move at their own speed in learning some of the basic techniques and could refer to the programs as often as they needed. 52 Recommendations for Further Study Set up a small self-instruction laboratory for learning one or two techniques of clothing construction and test the results against the results of a conventional lab- oratory. I Compare different types of instructional media to de- termine the best type of program for clothing construc- tion. Compare two or more methods of construction for other techniques or processes. Investigate other techniques of clothing construction which could successfully be put on slides for use in a self-instruction laboratory. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Bernstein, Allen L. A Handbook of Statistics Solutions for the Behavioral Science. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965. Bruner, Jerome. The Process of Education. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1963. Hatcher, Hazel M., and Andrews, Mildred E. The Teachipg, of Home Economics. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1963, 117. The Iowa State Home Economics Association. Unit Method of Sewing. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1959. Kinder, James S. Audio Visual Procedures in Teachigg. New York: American Book Co., 1950. Mansfield, Evelyn A. Clothing Construction. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1953. Articles Goldberg, Myles, Dawson, Robert, and Barrett, Richard. "A Comparison of Programmed and Conventional In- struction Methods," Journal of Applied Psycholpgy (4), 1964, 111-13. Henkel, Jean, and Seronsy, Louise Baird. "First Course in Clothing and Textiles,“ Journal of Home Econom- ics, XLIII (March, 1951), 195-97. McCrady, Christine, and Tomljonovich, Maloa. "The Challenge of New Methods in Clothing Construction," Journal of Home Economics, LVII (January, 1965), 63. McDaniel, Ernest, and Feliatreau, William K. "A Compari- son of TV and Conventional Instruction as Deter- minants of Attitude Change,” The Joupnal of Edu- cational Research, LVIII (March, 1965), 292, 295. 53 54 Meacham, Esther. "Television in the Clothing Classroom,” Journal of Home Economics, LVI (February, 1964), 89-92 0 Shoffner, Sarah M., and Clawson, Barbara. “Sewing Step- by-Step with Programmed Instruction,” What's New in Home Economics, XXXI (March, 1967), 29-32. Smith, Margaret. "A Comparison of Pin and Thread Basting in Clothing Construction," Journal of Home Econom- ics, January, 1957, 38-40. Wittich, Walter. "What ETV Research Has Taught," Nation's Schools, LXXVI (October, 1965), 47-48. Wright, Janet Smith, and Henkel, Jean. "Achievement in Clothing Construction," Journal of Home Economics, XLIII (October, 1951), 626-28. Other Sources Department of Textiles, Clothing and Related Arts, College of Home Economics, Michigan State University. Principles of Clothing Construction. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University Mimeograph Services, 1966. "New Buildings on Campus" (pamphlet). New York: Educa—_ tional Facilities Laboratories, Inc., 1963. Sepecal, Evelyn Chalson. "A Comparison of Clothing Con-. struction Methods," unpublished Master's Problem, Michigan State University, 1960. Stam, Judy. "An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Overhead Projector in Teaching Clothing Construc- tion," unpublished Master's Thesis, Michigan State University, 1964. APPENDICES EXAMPLE I APPENDIX A METHOD I DEMONSTRATION Ease in a sleeve is provided so that the garment fits well over the body curve or bulge at the point where the shoulder and upper arm meet. The most effective way to distribute the ease correctly and in the proper position is to use ease lines. Ease lines are two rows of stitching using 6 to 8 stitches per inch on the machine. The rows are placed on the sleeve cap and extend from the notches on one side to the notches on the other side across the top of the sleeve. The first ease line is placed less than 1/16" (the width of a thread) from the seam line toward the seam allowance. The second line is placed 1/4" (or the width of the wide side of the presser foot) inside the first line within the seam allowance. For both ease lines begin stitching at the same point and stitch in the same direction. Stop stitch— ing at the same point. The underarm seam of the sleeve is stitched, finished and pressed open. 56 EXAMPLE II slip sleeve into bodice and pin at shoulder and under- arm, place few pins 57 The sleeves have approximately one inch of ease across the cap. Before beginning to join the sleeve to the bodice about 1/2” of ease on each side of the sleeve cap should be pulled up. Pull on the bobbin threads. Pull on both bobbin threads at the same time. Work smoothly, trying not to break the threads. If the thread breaks it must be replaced. To insert the sleeve into the bodice the bodice is turned wrong side out and the sleeve is turned right side out. The lower edge of the sleeve is slipped through the bodice armscye. The sleeve is pinned to the bodice at the shoulder and underarm seams. Pins are placed through the seam line of the sleeve and matched to the seam line of the bodice and brought up through the seam allowance. Only a few threads are taken with the pin. Pin heads are pointing down into the sleeve. Check to see that each pin is properly placed in the seam line before going on to the next. After shoulder points are matched, pins are placed 1/2" on either side of the shoulder seam to keep this section flat. The amount on top that is to be kept flat is partly 58 dependent on the style of the garment and the figure of the wearer (a small thin shoulder might not need quite 1" left without ease). The notches of the sleeve and bodice are matched and pinned together. The garment is held between the fingers: at the shoulder and the notches and pulled gently to check the fit by analyzing the tight- ness of easing against the bodice armscye. If the sleeve side is tighter than the bodice side too much ease has been pulled up. The sleeve side should be eased to the bodice; the bodice is never eased to the sleeve. If the fit is correct the sleeve will seem slight- ly looser than the bodice. The ease is then distributed evenly. Most of the ease will be in an area approximately 2" on either side of the flat top section (this depends on the figure—-a thin shoulder would need the ease closer to the top). Pins are then placed between the original pins. Pin as before--through the seam line and up into the seam allowance. When finished the pins should be approximately 1/2“ apart. When one side is completely pinned the garment should be turned to the right side to check EXAMPLE III demo. few stitches of hand bast- ing 59 the distribution of ease. The other half is then pinned in the same manner as the first half. Hand baste directly on the seam line. Stitches should be 1/8“ long. Baste from the sleeve side, making sure not to baste in any tucks or gathers. Check frequently on the bodice side to see if basting makes a smooth curve. Remove pins. Try on the sleeve to see that it fits. Check that the grain line hangs correctly (crosswise threads should be parallel to the floor). Check that the ease is in the proper place (over the shoulder bulge). If the ease is too low it will look as if it is drawn or puckered at the middle of the sleeve cap in the front or back of the arm. Stitch on the machine directly on the seam line, using 12 to 15 stitches per inch. Stitch with the sleeve side up. Begin stitch- ing at the notches. Stitch toward the under- arm seam and around to the starting point. Gradually slant stitching line toward seam allowance. Continue stitching to the notches on the other side, forming a double row of stitches. EXAMPLE IV EXAMPLE V show press- ing 60 The stitching line should be a smooth even curve with no tucks stitched in. Remove the basting threads by clipping several times and pulling out a small section of thread at a time. A proper seam finish for a sleeve would) be one that is flat and does not add bulk. Trimming, pinking or trimming and overcasting are recommended, depending on the way the in- dividual fabric will ravel. Trim or pink the seam allowance to 1/2". If it is a fabric that will ravel badly trim the seam allowances to 1/2" and overcast. Hand overcasting is recommended. When pinking or trimming each seam allow- ance should be done separately. Cut with smooth even strokes, making one unbroken line. When hand overcasting both seam allowances can be overcast together. The stitches should be 1/4" apart and the stitch should extend 1/4" into the seam allowance. Leave the stitches loose enough so that the seam allow- ances can slip back and forth slightly. Press from the wrong side. Press the en- tire seam without direction. Then press the top of the sleeve cap over a ham, with the 61 seam allowances toward the sleeve. Press only on the seam and not at the edge of the seam allowances (this might cause a scar on the right side). Do not press a crease down the outer edge of the sleeve. Do not press any puckers into the sleeve. Do not press any puckers into the sleeve cap. EXAMPLE I METHOD II DEMONSTRATION Ease in a sleeve is provided so that the garment fits well over the body curve or bulge at the point where the shoulder and upper arm meet. The most effective way to distribute the ease correctly and in the proper position is to use ease lines. Ease lines are two rows of stitching using 6 to 8 stitches per inch on the machine. The rows are placed on the sleeve cap and extend from the notches on one side to the notches on the other side across the top of the sleeve. The first ease line is placed less than 1/16" (the width of a thread) from the seam line toward the seam allowances. The second line is placed 1/4" (the width of the wide side of the presser foot) inside the first line within the seam allowance. For both ease lines begin stitching at the same point and stitch in the same direction. Stop stitching at the same point. The underarm seam of the sleeve is stitched, finished and pressed open. The sleeves have approximately 1" of ease across the cap. Before beginning to join the sleeve to the bodice about 1/2" of ease on 62 EXAMPLE II Slip sleeve into bodice and pin points place few pins 63 each side of the sleeve cap should be pulled up. Pull on the bobbin threads. Pull on both bobbin threads at the same time. Work smoothly, trying not to break the threads. If the thread breaks it must be replaced. To insert the sleeve into the bodice the bodice is turned wrong side out and the sleeve is turned right side out. The lower edge of the sleeve is slipped through the bodice arm- scye. The sleeve is pinned to the bodice at the shoulder seam and underarm seam. Pins are placed through the seam line of the sleeve and matched to the seam line of the bodice, then brought up through the bodice and sleeve. Take only a few threads with the pin. Pin heads will be on the seam allowance side. Check to see if each pin is properly placed before placing the next. After shoulder points are matched pins are placed 1/2” on either side of the shoulder seam to keep this section flat. The amount on top that is to be kept flat is partly de- pendent on the style of the garment and the figure of the wearer (a small thin shoulder might not need quite 1“ left without ease). 64 The notches of the sleeve and bodice are matched and pinned together. The garment is held between the fingers at the shoulder and the notches and pulled gently to check the fit by analyzing the tight- ness of easing against the bodice armscye. If the sleeve side is tighter than the bodice side too much ease has been pulled up. The sleeve side should be eased to the bodice; the bodice is never eased to the sleeve. If the fit is correct the sleeve will seem slight- ly looser than the bodice. The ease is then distributed evenly. Most of the ease will be in an area approximately 2" on either side of the flat section on top (this depends on the figure--a thin shoulder would need the ease closer to the top). Continue pinning between original pins. Pin with the heads up toward the seam allow? ances. When finished the pins should be about 1/2“ apart. Pin one side completely, then pin the other side. Check the distribution of ease. Machine baste, using 6 stitches per inch. Stitch with the sleeve side up, beginning and ending at the underarm seam. The basting line EXAMPLE III 65 will be just inside the seam line (toward the seam allowance) by about the width of one thread. Machine basting may be done over the pins or not. When stitching over pins stitch very slowly. Stitching rapidly could cause a pin or the needle to break and fly up. If pins are removed as the stitching is done they should not be removed until they are almost immedié ately in front of the presser foot. Removing pins too early allows the fabric to slip out of place. Try on the garment to see that the sleeves fit. Check the grain line (crosswise threads should be parallel to the floor). Check that the ease is in the proper place (over the shoulder bulge). If the ease is too low it will look as if it is drawn or puckered at the middle of the sleeve in front or back. Stitch on the machine directly on the seam line, using 12 to 15 stitches per inch. Stitch with the sleeve side up. Begin stitching at the notches. Stitch toward the underarm seam and around to starting point. Gradually slant the stitching line toward the seam allowance. Continue stitching to the notches on the other side, forming a double row of stitches under EXAMPLE IV EXAMPLE V Show press- ing 66 the arm. The stitching line should be a smooth even curve with no tucks stitched in. A proper seam finish for a sleeve would be one that is flat and does not add bulk. Trimming, pinking or trimming and overcasting A are recommended, depending on the way the in- dividual fabric will ravel. Trim or pink the seam allowances to 1/2". If it is a fabric that will ravel badly trim the seam allowances to 1/2" and overcast. Hand overcasting is recommended. When pinking or trimming each seam allow- ance should be done separately. Cut with smooth even strokes, making one unbroken line. When hand overcasting both seam allowances can be overcast together. The stitches should be 1/4" apart and the stitch should extend 1/4" into the seam allowance. Leave the stitches loose enough so that the seam allowances can slip back and forth slightly. Press from the wrong side. Press the en— tire seam without direction. Then press the top of the sleeve cap over a ham, with the seam allowances toward the sleeve cap. Press only on the seam and not at the edge of the 67 seam allowances (this might cause a scar on the right side). Do not press a crease down the outer edge of the sleeve. Do not press any puckers into the sleeve. APPENDIX B METHOD I SET-IN SLEEVES A. Ease lines 1. 6-8 stitches per inch 2. first line the width of one thread from the seam line into seam allowance 3. second line 1/4" (or the width of the wide side of the presser foot) from first line into seam allowance 4. from notches to notches (begin and end stitching at same place, stitch both rows in same direc- tion) 5. leave thread ends long at beginning and end of ease lines B. Sleeve unit 1. stitch underarm seam of sleeve 2. finish seam and press open C. Ease l. pull up approximately 1/2" of ease on each side of sleeve cap 2. adjust ease between notches and top of sleeve D. Insert sleeve into bodice l. bodice wrong side out, sleeve right side out 2. pin together at shoulder and underarm seams matching seam lines 3. place pins directly through seam line of bodice and sleeve and up through seam allow- ance 68 E. F. G. H. I. 69 4. pick up only 1/8" (or few threads) of both fabrics with pin 5. test for tightness of ease line against bodice Distribute ease 1. leave approximately 1" across top of shoulder with little if any ease 2. distribute ease evenly (most of ease will be approximately 2" on either side of 1" straight grain area at top 3. wrap thread ends of easing stitches around pins Pin 1. place pins perpendicular to seam line with points up toward seam allowance in manner described in D3 2. when finished pins should be approximately 1/2" apart ' 3. pin one half of sleeve first, then pin second half (check ease distri- bution from outside) Hand baste l. on seam line 2. stitches 1/8" apart 3. check line of basting as you go Remove pins Try on garment to check fit, ease, and grain of sleeves Machine stitch 1. 12 to 15 stitches per inch 2. sleeve side up 3. directly on seam line 4. begin stitching at notches, stitch toward underarm and around to starting 70 point, gradually slant out, forming a second row of stitching next to the first between notches in underarm area K. Remove basting 1. clip and remove small section at a time L. Finish seam l. finished to 1/2" wide 2. pink, trim, overcast a. hand overcast both seam allowances together b. pink or trim in smooth strokes, making one un- broken line M. Press 1. over ham or end of sleeve board 2. from wrong side 3. first press entire sleeve without direc- tion, then press top of sleeve with seam allow- ances toward sleeve 4. do not press crease in outer edge of sleeve or puckers in sleeve cap ---I ’l I METHOD II SET-IN SLEEVES A. Ease lines 1. 6 to 8 stitches per inch 2. first line the width of one thread from the seam line into seam allowance 3. second line 1/4“ (or the width of the wide side of the presser foot) from first line into seam allowance 4. from notches to notches (begin and end stitching at same place, stitch both rows in same direc- tion) 5. leave thread ends long at beginning and end of ease lines B. Sleeve unit 1. stitch underarm seam of sleeve 2. finish seam and press open C. Ease l. pull up approximately 1/2" of ease on each side of sleeve cap 2. adjust ease between notches and top of sleeve D. Insert sleeve into bodice 1. bodice wrong side out, sleeve right side out 2. pin together at shoulder and underarm seams, matching seam lines 3. place pins directly through seam line of sleeve and bodice and up through bodice and sleeve (pin heads point- ing up toward seam al- lowances) 4. pick up only 1/8" (or few threads) of both fabrics with pin 5. test for tightness of ease line against bodice 71 E. F. 72 Distribute ease 1. leave approximately 1" across top of shoulder with little if any ease 2. distribute ease evenly (most of ease will be approximately 2" on either side of 1" straight grain area at top) 3. wrap thread ends of eas- ing stitches around pins Pin 1. place pins perpendicular to seam line with heads toward seam allowance in manner described in D3 2. when finished pins should be approximately 1/2" apart 3. pin one half of sleeve first, then pin second half (check ease distri- bution from outside) Machine baste l. 6 stitches per inch 2. sleeve side up 3. stitch the width of one thread from the seam line toward seam allow— ance 4. may or may not stitch over pins Remove pins if not already done Try on garment to check fit, ease, and grain of sleeve Machine stitch l. 12 to 15 stitches per inch 2. sleeve side up 3. directly on seam line 4. begin stitching at notches, stitch toward underarm and around to starting point, gradually slant out, forming a second row of stitching next to first between notches in underarm area 73 K. Finish seam l. finish to 1/2" wide 2. pink, trim, overcast a. hand overcast both seam allowances together b. pink or trim in smooth strokes, making one un- broken line L. Press 1. over ham or end of sleeve board 2. from wrong side 3. first press entire sleeve without direc- tion, then press top of sleeve with both seam allowances toward sleeve 4. do not press crease in outer edge of sleeve or puckers in sleeve cap APPENDIX C 74 75 76 77 _._._V -‘,\—. ”MM ‘-,~ I." . . I'll, |.‘ I'll 78 79 80 3*“ «o'— 81 mnoxusa 0E0» hauuonnou 0Com UOC no .UHn mmo snuemnnu mnonumm no nnoxusm 36m “sod can no nooasorn moon than now umon Cuufium mo mo Couv ommm nouso CH ommmnu uOC CmHCHm Comm numCma no Comeou moquoEUUmaa m cone =N\n monun guano nuns no oueoon>o loonao mConz CH nomC omEEHnn Inoasmmnnfi meow mnonum unmflonun ammo ruse Commend manned mQHHU 0C spas mCHH oo>nsu Camnm omwsmmonu 00» mo mUCmoH>m mucosa snuuom avenue J Inma on no: >65 mo CumCmH UCm as unmfimnum hauuonnou pop COHmCon puonnou mnmnuom Mam: nosoa Isuoxo uOC use AmCHH no nxusu 0C o>omam onmzon owns CmHCHm mo #30 morouwum m>ooam 00Cmsoaam Boom Boom noonnou some manna mo mam: no» mo mam: node: :N\H Inwasmmnnw Hanan nm>o omusnnnumflo e mmoo nmuCo now: ooEEHnu 03» no 0C0 runs MHCm>o mudsv 90C CH omoonu 0C mQHHU 0C o>nzu Cm>m CDOOEm :H do» no mmmm 0C. mm ucoamnum Eonnon CH nnmnuom o>omam onmsou no mxusu 0C commune non CH Coauumm mUUCosoHHm Ewen UHanm do» umam mo CH commune mno on Canaan Cuuaum moan nonuam Co m Ixusa 0C .omom nouzo CH ommmnu 0C .CuOOEm CmHCwm Boom :N\H on omEEHnu mQHHU 0C mo CumCmH oCm COHmCou poonnou .o>nnu Co>o CHOOEm :N .xonamo oouou 10H ammo mo ance :H do» um whom 0C mmmmm .Uom .qu mmHZHh 24mm QZHA OZHZUBHBm memz ZHmmqm ZHIBmm mom Emmmm mooC3 >no> nonCou no as ooxHC no noon no nConH CH Csoo no a: snoop oonnnnm CHonm omHanonU o>oon on oomoo oUHoon CH nonuanm mnoCnom oco mxusn Q: ooCUCzQ .oon: IQHnano hanoom umoo nonso CH omoonu CH Commend meSn oonnCo Eonm Commonm COHnuonHo mCons CH commons NHnuonnou ocoo nOC CmHCHm A:V\H OH :©H\mv sonnoC oon ooEEHnn no HHo no ooEEHnn nOC mQHHU oEOm Cuanm no CnmCoH no COHm ICon noonnOUCH oCHH h>o3 noHCmonnH nonCou no saneonnm do ooHHSQ no goon no nConm CH Csoo no a: %H uneonno omnnneu CHonm onHzmmonU CH conuanm mnoCnom no mxusn oonCQHnn InHo HHos nOC oCo noHsmonnH- 1'14 APPENDIX E TEST QUESTIONS The analysis of the test questions contains two statistics. These are listed after each question. The first, the index of difficulty (designated as Diff.), is the percentage of the total group marking a wrong answer on that particular item. The second statistic, the index of discrimination (designated as Disc.), is the difference between the percentage of the upper group marking the right answer and the percentage of the lower group marking the right answer. The upper and lower groups each contain 27% of the total group. 1. The purpose of trying on the garment with the sleeve basted in is to check the l. smoothness of the stitching line 2. distribution of the ease and the grainlines 3. position of the bodice shoulder seam 4. width of the sleeve (Diff. 14, Disc. 30) 2. In setting in a sleeve, work 1. with the bodice wrong side out and the sleeve right side out, pinning and basting from the bodice side 2. with the bodice wrong side out and the sleeve right side out, pinning and basting from the ' sleeve side 3. with both the sleeve and the bodice right side out, pinning the sleeve to the bodice from the right side 4. none of the above (Diff. 29, Disc. 44) 83 84 The armscye seam of a cotton dress with set-in sleeves is pressed 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. (Diff. toward the sleeve away from the sleeve open with one seam allowance toward the sleeve and one toward the bodice flat together without direction toward the sleeve at the top and without direc- tion in the underarm area 52, Disc. 53) The seam allowance of the armscye seam is trimmed to l. 2. 3. 4. 5. (Diff. 1/8" 1/4" 1/200 5/8" 1" 30, Disc. 60) A plain sleeve ordinarily has how much ease? l. 2. 3. 4. (Diff. Proper 1. 2. 3. 4. (Diff. 3/4" 1" to 1 1/2" 2 1/2" to 3" 1/2" to l" 21, Disc. 20) seam finishes for an armscye seam are turned and stitched, zig-zagged, pinked trimmed, pinked, overcast bound, trimmed overcast, trimmed, turned and stitched 8, Disc. 27) Taking a small amount of fabric directly on the seam line with the pin 1. 2. 3. 4. (Diff. makes it easier to stitch over the pins is neater than pinning large areas of fabric forms a guide line for stitching holds the two seam lines together to prevent slippage 19, Disc. 40) lo. 85 When stitching in a set—in sleeve machine stitch with the l. bodice side up toward the 2. sleeve side up toward the 3. either the bodice or the the presser foot (Diff. 10, Disc. 27) In pinning in a sleeve, pins are l. perpendicular to the seam allowance 2. parallel to the seam line seam line 3. parallel to the seam line ance 4. perpendicular to the seam the seam line (Diff. 9, Disc. 14) presser foot presser foot sleeve side up toward placed line and in the seam and directly on the and in the seam allow- line and directly on The correct position of the grain lines in a sleeve is 1. 2. (Diff. 10, Disc. 14) 3. 4. APPENDIX F STUDENT EXPERIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE Number of semesters of senior high school clothing construc- tion you have had. Number of 4-H clothing construction projects you have com- pleted. Do you usually make your own clothes? How many garments have you made during the past year? Do you usually need advice and assistance from a teacher or more experienced person in order to complete a sewing project? Yes No Sometimes Have you had experience with: fitting a pattern altering a pattern plaids or napped fabrics set-in sleeves waistline seams applied collars slide fasteners bound buttonholes interfacings facings 86 87 On the basis of your previous experience and present feel- ing of confidence about your sewing abilities, would you rate yourself as: very experienced fairly experienced fairly inexperienced a beginner