" 'Jiw Bflégfi

o5“

 

OVERDUE FINES:

25¢ per day per item
RETURNING LIBRARY MATERIALS:
Place in book netum to remvc
charge from circulation record

 

 

A COMPARISON OF PARTICIPATORY-BASED AND
LECTURE-BASED APPROACHES TO SHORT-
TERM TRAINING FOR COMMUNITY
EDUCATION FIELDWORKERS

IN INDONESIA

BY

Soemardi Hadisoebroto

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Secondary Education and Curriculum

1980

ABSTRACT
A COMPARISON OF PARTICIPATORY-BASED AND
LECTURE-BASED APPROACHES TO SHORT-
TERM TRAINING FOR COMMUNITY

EDUCATION FIELDWORKERS
IN INDONESIA

BY

Soemardi Hadisoebroto

This study attempted to determine whether signifi-
cant differences exist between a participatory-based and a
lecture-based approach to short-term training. Also it
attempted to examine whether or not short-term training is
effective in terms of increasing competencies in cognitive
skills and job performance of the participants. Forty-five
community education fieldworkers, referred to as peniliks,
of West Java province, Indonesia, were randomly sampled to
participate in this study. These forty-five peniliks were
further randomized into three different treatment groups
of fifteen people. These three groups were a participatory
group, a lecture group and a control group. A one week
training session was the major treatment of this study.
The participatory group received training using a
‘participatory—based approach or method, the lecture group

received training using a lecture-based approach or method,

Soemardi Hadisoebroto

while the control group received no training and served as
a control group in this study. The data were collected
from three different sources. First, participants' scores
on cognitive skills were derived from a cognitive test
which was administered three times during the study, i.e.,
prior to treatment (training), immediately after the treat-
ment and six months after the completion of the treatment.
Second, participants' scores on self-reported performance
of their job were derived from a self-disclosure type of
test which was administered two times during the study,
i.e., prior to the treatment and six months after the com—
pletion of the treatment. Third, scores on the partici-
pants' job performance in terms of the perception of their
supervisors were derived from interviews of their super-
visors. The interviews were conducted two times during the
study, i.e., prior to the treatment and six months after
the completion of the treatment.

Information on self-reported performance of the job
was organized into five categories. These five categories
are: (1) performance as an organizer; (2) as a consultant;
(3) as an enabler; (4) as a facilitator, and-(5) as a planner.

The data revealed by the three different sources
were subjected to Analysis of Variance and a Multiple Range
Test by the Tukey-HSD Procedure to see the difference
between means. Results indicated that both approaches,
participatory-based and lecture-based approaches to train-

ing, were equally significantly effective in terms of

Soemardi Hadisoebroto

increasing the cognitive skills of the participants. Small
differences that supported the participatory-based approach
were not found to be significant and could have been caused
by chance. In terms of the retention rate of the partici-
pants or the long-term effect on the knowledge, understand-
ing and skills derived from the training, the results indi-
cated that both approaches were equally significantly
effective. In terms of increasing the self-reported per—
formance of the job of the participants, the results indi-
cated that the participatory-based approach to training was
significantly more effective than the lecture-based approach
to training. However, supervisors' ratings of job perform-
ance of the participants failed to differentiate between

the three experimental groups.?§Data from a feedback form
used at the conclusion of the two training sessions indi-
cated a strong preference by the participants in favor of
the participatory-based approach to training over the lecture-
based approach to training.

The study concluded that so far as achievement and
retention are concerned in conducting training for the
peniliks, both approaches could serve equally well. How—
ever, when job performance is the concern, the participatory-
based approach is more effective than the lecture-based
approach. Other implications of this study are: (1) using
a pretest-posttest experimental design in the area of
nonformal education can be extremely useful in examining

different aspects of teaching/learning, (2) the findings

Soemardi Hadisoebroto

can create a strong base for the Community Education
Directorate in developing further training programs for

the peniliks.

To
the people who need help

to help themselves

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This brief acknowledgment cannot adequately express
my gratitude to those who have made this study possible.

I am eSpecially indebted to my doctoral adviser,
Dr. S. Joseph Levine, who has given so freely of himself in
directing this dissertation and who has been a constant
source of inSpiration during the period of my graduate
studies at Michigan State University. He sacrificed most
of his time for helping me to get my dissertation done. I
am deeply grateful to Dr. William J. Kimball, Dr. David K.
Heenan and Dr. Kenneth L. Neff for their ideas, comments,
suggestions and for serving as my guidance committee. I
also thank Dr. Frank A. Fear and Dr. Carroll H. Wamhoff
who, toqether with Dr. William J. Kimball, have given their

valuable time for serving as my comprehensive examination

committee for cognate area. I am also grateful to Ms. Necia
Black and Ms. Boomreang of the Research Consultant Office who
have given their valuable time to help me in designing the

computer programmings for the analyses of the data.

My special thanks goes to Dr. Setijadi of the Office
of Educational and Cultural Research and Development,

Ministry of Education and Culture of Indonesia, for the

iii

opportunity given to me to study abroad, and for his endless

encouragement and help. To Mr. Soemitro and all the staff

of the Pusat Inotek of the same office, Dr. Moegiadi and Mr.
Soegiarto I am very grateful for their help and suggestions.

My deep appreciation goes to Mr. Anwas Iskandar, the
Director of Pemnas (Community Education) and his staff, Mr.
M. Rubai, Head of the Penmas Office, provincial level in
Bandung, and his staff for allowing me to use the peniliks
(community education field-workers) in West Java Province
as the subject of the study. To Mr. Zainudin Arief who has
helped me and served as a co-instructor in conducting the
training, to Mr. Dadan Suwandana and Mr. Maman Chasman who
helped me in the field data collection, goes my special
gratitude.

To all the peniliks who participated in the study,
goes my special thanks and appreciation for their willing-
ness to spare their time and for their c00peration. Without
their participation this study would not have been mate-

rialized.

Ms. Fayann Lippincott deserves my special gratitude
for her willingness to type my dissertation.
I thank all my friends and colleagues for their
ideas: suggestions and comments. To all scholars and writers

whose ideas and inputs are apparent in citations or biblio-

grath of this dissertation, goes my Special thanks.

iv

In this Opportunity I also wish to express my
gratitude to US-AID and ONESCO and the staff for their help
to make my graduate study possible and complete.

Finally, I wish to extend my highest gratitude and
appreciation to my wife, Setyasih Soeparti, and to all my
four daughters and a son. Without their patience, under-
standing and endless encouragement, this study would not

have been carried out to completion.

East Lansing, May, 1980.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (viii
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x
CHAPTER
I. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY AND STATEMENT
OF THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Community Education and Community
Development in Indonesia . . . . . . . 1
//Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . 9
Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . . . . ll
’ Basic Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Research Questions and Hypotheses . . . 14
Limitations and Importance of the
Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . 22
II. SURVEY OF RELATED LITERATURE . . . . . . . . 28
Community Development . . . . . . . . . 28
People's Participation as a Basis
for Community Development . . . . . . 34
The Role of the Fieldworker in
Community Development . . . . . . . . 41
The Function of Training . . . . . . . . 47
Relative Effectiveness of Participatory-
based and Lecture-based Approaches
to Training 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 56
III. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Setting of the Study . . . . . . . . . . 70
Random Sampling . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Sampling Procedures . . . . . . . . . . 75
Research Procedures and Design . . . . 76
Dependent and Independent Variables . . 88
Some Problems on Validity . . . . . . . 92

vi

CHAPTER

IV.

APPENDIC

APPENDIX

A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.

BIBLIOGR

ANALYSES OF DATA . . . . . . . . . . .

Description of the Training . . . .
Statistical Analyses of the Data . .
Summary of the Findings . . . . .

Feedback from the Participants on the

Training 0 D O I O O O O O O C O 0
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION . . . . .

Conclusions and Implications . . . .
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . .
Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . .

ES 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O 0

Cognitive Test . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Self-Disclosure Type of Test . . . . . .
A Guide for Interviewing the Supervisors
Feedback Format for the Training . . . .
The Training Schedule . . . . . . . . .
Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

APHY O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O 0

vii

Page
96

96
103
146

148
158

159
167
170

173

173
196
221
229
232
244

268

Table

LIST OF TABLES

Names of the Districts and Municipalities
in West Java Province, the Number of
Subdistricts in Each and the Number of
Subdistricts Assigned to Each of the
Treatment Groups for the Study . . . .

Names of the Districts Included in the
Sample and the Names of Subdistricts
Selected for the Study . . . . .

Allocation of Time of the Training
Session According to the Category of
the Learning Modes, by Different
Treatment Groups . . . . . . . . .

The Regression Coefficient (the Constant
B) of Each Dependent Variable with Its
Related Independent Variable . . . .

ANOVA for Cognitive Skills When Measured
Immediately Following Short-Term
Training, By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . .

The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test on
Cognitive Skills, By Groups (Alpha =
005) o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0

ANOVA on Cognitive Skills When Measured
Six Months Following Short-Term
Training, By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . .

The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test on
Cognitive Skills When Measured Six
Months Following Short-Term Training,
By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . . . . . . .

ANOVA for Self-Reported Performance as an
Organizer, By Groups (Alpha = .05) . .

The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test for

Self-Reported Performance as Organizer,
By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . . . . . .

viii

Page

77

78

101

107

109

110

114

115

119

120

Table Page

4.9. ANOVA for Self-Reported Performance as a
Consultant, By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . . . 123

4.10. The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test for
Self-Reported Performance as
Consultant, By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . . . 124

4.11. ANOVA for Self-Reported Performance as
an Enabler, By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . . . 126

4.12. The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test for
Self-Reported Performance as Enabler,
By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . . . . . . . . . 127

4.13. ANOVA for Self-Reported Performance as
a Facilitator, By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . 130

4.14. The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test for
Self-Reported Performance as Facili-
tator, By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . . . . . 131

4.15. ANOVA for Self-Reported Performance as a
Planner, By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . . . . 133

4.16. The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test for
Self-Reported Performance as Planner,
By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . . . . . . . . . 134

4.17. ANOVA for Total Self-Reported Performance
By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . . . . . . . . . 138

4.18. The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test for
Total Self-Reported Performance, By
Groups (Alpha = .05) . . . . . . . . . . . 139

4.19. ANOVA for Supervisors' Perception on the
Participants' Ability to Perform Their
Job, By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . . . . . . 144

4.20. The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test for
Supervisors' Perception of the Par-
ticipants' Ability to Perform Their

A Job, By Groups (Alpha = .05) . . . . . . . 145

4.21. Feedback from the Participants on the
Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Map of West Java Province . . . . . . .
Map of Indonesia . . . . . . . . . . .
Main Design of the Research Study . . .

Proportion of the Learning Modes of the
Participants When Category I and
Category II Were Added Together as
Nonparticipatory Learning Activities

The Effects of Short-Term Training on
Achievement and Retention of the
Cognitive Skills of the Participants,
By Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Effects of Short-Term Training on
the Self-Reported Performance of the
Participants as an Organizer, By
Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Effects of Short-Term Training on
Self-Reported Performance of the
Participants as Consultant, By Groups

The Effects of Short-Term Training on
the Self-Reported Performance of the
Participants as an Enabler, By Groups

The Effects of Short-Term Training on
the Self-Reported Performance of the
Participants as a Facilitator, By
Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Effects of Short-Term Training on
the Self-Reported Performance of the
Participants as a Planner, By Groups

The Effects of Short-Term Training on
the Total Self-Reported Performance
of the Participants, By Groups . . .

Page

73
74

89

104

112

121

124

128

131

135

140

Figure Page
4.9. The Effects of Short-Term Training on the
Ability of the Participants to Perform
Their Job in Terms of the Perception
of Their Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
4.10. The Three Main Findings of the Study . . . . . 147

4.11. Findings Associated with the Five Role
Performance Variables . . . . . . . . . .'. . 149

xi

CHAPTER I

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY AND

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Community Education and Community
Development in Indonesia

Indonesia is a developing country. It is an agri-
cultural country in which approximately 80 percent of its
population live in rural areas under subsistence agricul-
ture (Central Bureau of Statistics, Indonesia, 1971). As
is the case with many other developing nations in the world,
Indonesia shares many common economic and social features
and faces some common problems. Vaizey (1962, pp. 51-69)
identifies as significant such common characteristics as
low per capita income, overpopulation in relation to
employment opportunities, heavy reliance on agriculture
carried on by backward techniques, and shortage of foreign
exchange with which to acquire capital equipment. Among
their fellow citizens rural communities are, in many
respects, deprived more than those of urban societies.

In developing countries per capita income is
generally very low. In Indonesia, it is estimated that

the per capita GNP is around $220 per annum in the year

1976 (World Bank, Indonesia, 1977, p. 2). Realizing the
inequality of income distribution between people living in
the rural and urban areas, it is easily understood that

for the majority of people in rural areas their average
income is estimated to be even far less than $100 per annum.
For comparison it can be noted what Holdcroft (1976, p. 3)
has argued that about one-half of the world's population
neither contribute to nor benefit from the economic growth
jprocess and about one billion, or a quarter of the planet's
population, subsist on less than $75 per year in abject
poverty.

These two problems, poverty and equalizing educa-
tional opportunities for the whole nation, are major prob-
lems that the country has been confronting ever since the
first day of its independence in 1945. These two problems
are, in fact, interrelated one with the other in so complex
a manner that it is difficult to separate the cause from
the effect. In studies done by Harbison and Myers (1964) ,
high positive correlations were found between the enroll-
ment ratios at all levels of education and GNP per capita.

Realizing the complexity of the problems that the
country has to face, the government has decided to gear
every development effort to attack these two major prob- /
lems. It was first stated in the First Five Year Develop- E
ment Plan (1969-1974), and very strongly stated in the E
Second Five Year Development Plan (1974-1979), that the

main objective of national development is to raise the

standard of living of the Indonesian population (The
Government of Indonesia, Five Year Plan, 1974).

One implication of this objective is to increase
employment opportunities to achieve a more equitable dis- )
tribution of income, especially that of the rural popula— ;
tion.

Notwithstanding the general strategy of national
development, the Ministry of Interior has outlined its
Inajor development policy as that of improving rural village
life to reach a stable self-help level. It was identified
that among the approximate 66,000 villages in the country
there were only 1,745 villages, or less than 3 percent,
‘which had already achieved a "self-help" level, or
swasembada level. Of the rest, there were 38,800, or about
59 percent, which had the potential for development. This
middle level with a potential for development is called the
swakarya level. The lowest level of development is called
the swadaya level, which comprises more than 25,000 vil-
lages, or about 38 percent (Colletta, Nat J., 1975, p. 11).

The general objective of rural or community development

’ _-..
M— "'

is to move the eggdaya (low level) and swakarya (middle
level) villages to reach the swasembada level of develop-
ment. In the meantime, the swasembada villages are con-
stantly motivated using various kinds of incentives to main-

tain their status or even to further develop their potenti-

alities.

Administratively, village or community development
is under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Interior.
However, ". . . joint efforts among ministries and other
community groups is needed," as Romli Suparman (1979, p. 4)
pointed out, "to achieve the objective." He continued:
"The most important thing, however, is the participation

(of the villagers themselves. Without their awareness, ;

. .1, _ u-

-.,,

Inotivation, and willingness to participate, any self-help /
development program is doomed to failure." 1

To increase the peOple's awareness, motivation and
willingness to participate in development is, in a sense,
the problem of providing education for the people. The
question is then one of what type(s) of education are best
suited to the conditions of the people--the majority of
‘whom are rural people?

As it has been realized, in many instances the prob-
lems of developing rural communities are not so much con-
cerned with the lack of natural or human resources as they

H-.¢.>

kngw:how and organizational capabilities of the people to

mobilize and more efficiently utilize the available

resources. Curle pointed out that the basic reason that

 

the economies of these countries are underdeveloped is that
these are underdeveloped societies; that is, societies
which for a variety of reasons fail to make adequate use

of their human resources (1963).

Indonesia has realized that fact. It has also
been aware of the type(s) of problems that it has con-
fronted. It was, therefore, decided in the First, in the
Second and in the Third Five Year DevelOpment plan that
one of the main strategies of country development is to
,develop human potentialities through education.

In terms of economic growth, as the World Bank
reported, between 1969 and 1976 the economy has grown at
about 7 percent per annum. Average GNP per capita
increased by 17 percent in real terms between 1970 and
1975 and reached about US $220.00 in 1976 (World Bank:
Indonesia, 1977, p. 2). Another thought implied in the
Five Year Plan was the fact that it would be almostimpos-
sible to raise the living standards of the bulk of the
unemployed and underemployed by creating new jobs alone in
the modern sector or in agriculture, especially in Java.
Rather, it would be necessary to expand opportunities for
self-employment to supplement farm incomes. The impact of
this on education is the growing recognition of the non-
formal education function for the improvement of rural com-
munities and urban underprivileged. Ngnformal education
focusing on $Kill training related to cottage industries,
home crafts, primary processing of agricultural produce and
other nonfarm rural endeavors can be the vehicle for pro-
viding such Opportunities.

But the problem is not that simple. It is further

complicated by the fact that most of the rural population

6

~ :2
3C.

and urban underprivileged are illiterate. Thirtyéfive out

M .7.
mug—“w”

<>f every 100 adults in the country, men and women, aged
eeighteen years and above are illiterate. This 35 percent
c>f the adult population comprises around 23 million people
(‘Norld Bank, 1977; estimation based on 1775 statistical

(Seata). Among the 22.3 million primary school age popula-

1:;ion, from seven to twelve years of age, 3.3 million were

jfcaund not to be enrolled in schools in 1975; and among the
].£3-4 million in the secondary school age group, from thir-
teen to eighteen years of age, 14.0 million were found not
t:c> be enrolled in any secondary school system (Government
estimate, 1975) .
Putting these two types of data together, the
rlumber of ypuths, between seven and eighteen years of age,
Viho were not enrolled in any type of schooling and the
rlumber of adult population, eighteen years and older, who
‘Vere illiterate, yields the number of more than 40 million
Itndonesian people who need basic education or literacy
‘training (the total population was estimated at 135
Inillion in 1975). Four out of five of those 40 million
ipeople live in rural areas, and many in situations beyond
the direct reach of the central government and its programs
due to the uniqueness of topography, communication, trans-
portation and poorly functioning of infra structure.
It is the growing conviction in the country that

unless some basic education or literacy training is pro-

vided for this populace, their participation in development

‘will not be effective and efficient.

80, basic education

(Jr literacy training has become a national movement and is

:ruow considered as a basis for national development. Since
most of the population are not being reached by formal

ssc:hooling, in other words the formal school system does

:rlcat fit their conditions and needs, nonformal education or
community education specifical 1y ,

is seen as a hope for the
future.
In the organization setup of the Ministry of Educa-

t:ch>n and Culture one directorate is assigned to develop and
C>I>eerate through the community education channel to provide
€3<311cational opportunities to the more deprived population.
111:3 responsibility extends from planning, through organiz-

lilag, implementing and coordinating to supervising community

EEducation activities throughout the country. This director-

Ei'te is popularly called the Directorate of Community Educa-

tLion or Direktorat Pendidikan Masyarakat, which is usually
abbreviated to Penmas.

Undoubtedly Penmas is facing a large task. To

<Zarry out this job, though quite challenging, the Penmas

(airectorate is supported by Penmas offices at the pro-

‘Vincial level, at the district level and at the subdistrict
level. The actual Penmas fieldworkers are those who work

at the subdistrict level and are referred to as penilik

Penmas or just penilik. Each subdistrict is assigned one

penilik who is responsible for carrying out community edu-

cation for the people in the subdistrict area. In the

country there are 3,323 subdistricts which encompass 60,645
villages. The number of villages in each subdistrict is
not the same. They range from eight to twenty-two villages
per subdistrict. The number of people in each village is,
again, not the same. It depends on the population density
of the area. In Java, where the density is quite high,
most of the villages have populations of more than 10,000
people. Some of these include more than 25,000 people.
Penmas' capacity in terms of total staff is now at
6,500 which includes 2,500 professional or technical staff
(World Bank: Indonesia, 1977, p. 7). One will easily
notice that even with all of this technical staff, from the
central office in Jakarta down to the subdistrict level
penilik, there is not sufficient staff to meet the number
of penilik needed for assignment to all subdistricts.
Penmas has been struggling very hard to build its
internal capacities to handle the big job it is facing.
Many foreign donor agencies have offered their help. Some
are in the form of grants and some are in the form of loans.
One large project has now been working with Penmas since
1977. This is a World Bank loan project where the total
project cost is estimated at a little bit more than US $33
million for six years' duration. The foreign exchange
component alone, that which does not include the Government
of Indonesia's monetary commitment, represents 45 percent

of the total project cost.

This World Bank project was designed primarily to
strengthen the capacity of Penmas to provide effective non-
formal education programs to the people. More specifically,
"The project is designed to help overcome existing problems
in administration, training, materials development, evalua-
tion and budgeting in seven provinces comprising the major-
ity of the population. The project will:

(a) strengthen the management and supervision capa-
bilities of Penmas through reorganization;

(b) establish a system of regular in-service training
for Penmas staff;

(c) create institutions to develop, produce and dis-
tribute improved learning materials;

(d) provide a source for direct and flexible funding
of village-level learning activities by establish-
ing local learning funds; and

(e) introduce continuous evaluation of Penmas programs"

(World Bank: Indonesia, 1977, p. 12).

Statement of the Problem

 

For more than a decade sharp critiques have been
launched against the effectiveness of using merely a lecture

method or approach in teaching and-learning situations in

‘\’_._s. 7*

schools. Some research and development efforts have been
done in the field of formal education in Indonesia.
In the meantime, the problem in nonformal education

is no less serious. Compared to what has been done in

10

formal education, not much effort has been exerted in non-
formal education which, for Indonesia, is considered a new
area in the total framework of providing education for the

people. In the area of training, for example, there is a

 

concern for increasing the competences, knowledge and
skills of staff employees for management and organization
development, yet the lecture method is still commonly prac-
ticed in the country.

On the other side it is agreed by those who are
involved in staff training design and in management organi-
zation development that some alternative approaches may be
tried and developed in a more systematic way. The problem
is where and how to begin. In this field, however, most of
what is done is carried out in a haphazard way and on an ad
hoc basis. There are more "trial-and-error" efforts to
find out which approach is best fitted to the demands of
organization management than more solid research efforts.

In the meantime another problem has also developed
which needs more consideration. In many cases the budget
for staff training is limited and time is pressing to keep
pace with the advancement of science and technology in
modern society.

Many supervisors, employers or management developers
now plan to have their staff employees trained or totally
retrained to be able to better perform their job in light

of the ever increasing complexity of problems they face due

11

to the advancement of modern science and technology. Penmas
is one substantial example for this issue.

Under the World Bank project Penmas has now planned
to provide some 2,150 of its fieldworkers (the peniliks)
with training and retraining (World Bank, 1977, p. 16). In
the meantime some 1,800 new technical staff will be recruited
during the life of the project (1977-1982) who, of course,
also need training and retraining to better deal with their
new job (World Bank, 1977, p. 7). So, training for the
Penmas fieldworkers, especially within the period of 1977-
1982, is considered as an ordinary sort of activity by those
who are involved, in one way or another, with nonformal
education activities in the country.

Effectively dealing with this type of massive pro-
ject of training in a cost and time efficient manner is
vitally important. In other words, to reduce cost per head
trained of the staff employees, thereby reducing length of
time used for training, is considered a large challenge.

These two problems, developing a more solid research
based alternative approach to staff training and reducing
the cost and time for the implementation of the training,

are major problems that are dealt with by this study.

Purpose of the Study

 

There are two concerns that this study attempts to

deal with. The first concern is to test whether an alter-
M

M

native approach to training is more effective than the

12

lecture method or approach which is commonly used in train-
ing in Indonesia. More specifically, this study addresses

itself to the examination and comparison of effectiveness

,..—-r"’

' I
\»\-1’\-4~ L ‘.-- ' A

of the participatory-based approach and the lecture-based

approach to training. The second concern of this study is
/
to test whether or not short-term training is adequate for '

_. ,_.___._ _-.
u
I

increasing desired competencies of the participants.
Examinations are based on the analyses of the achievement i
and retention of cognitive skills or information of the 1
participants, and also on their self-reported performance
in accomplishing their job in the field.

Built into the design of the study is the appropri-
ate selection of a location for conducting the research.
The fact that this study was conducted in Indonesia can be
potentially important. Potential Indonesian acceptance of
the findings of a study of this nature can be improved due
to the in-country location. There can often be a general
negative feeling towards the importation to Indonesia of
findings from studies conducted in other countries. This
does not mean to suggest that the findings from studies
done outside of Indonesia are not appropriate for Indonesia.
It only suggests that acceptance of the findings may be
increased when the studies are done in the country.

Other potential benefits of this study could be:
Eiggt, using a pretest-posttest experimental design in the
area of nonformal education introduces a model for a

research procedure that can be used in Indonesia to validate

13

other techniques or approaches used in nonformal education;

and second, the results of this study could provide Penmas

with a more solid research based approach to training.

Basic Assumptions

 

Some basic assumptions were developed for the study

to provide a common ground. These assumptions are:

1.

It is assumed that local community participation
in, and commitment to, development of their com-
munity is basic to making the community development
process self-sufficient and self-sustaining.

It is assumed that to make community development
activities self-sufficient and self-sustaining,
internal leadership capacities of the local commun-
ity must be stimulated and developed rather than
maintaining outside leadership assistance as it has
been commonly practiced.

It is assumed that the most effective way to develop
and increase the internal leadership capacities of
the local community is by directly involving mem-
bers of the community in the development process
from the very initial stages of goal setting, prob-
lem identification, program planning and continuing
on through implementation.

It is assumed that the penilik, due to the nature
of his job (i.e., educating the community people,

developing and increasing their awareness and their

14

competences in dealing with their own problems,
needs and development) can play a very important
role in developing and increasing the internal
leadership capacities of the local community.

It is assumed that the knowledge base of the penilik
and also his capability to perform his job can be
developed and increased through training.

It is assumed that short-term training can be

effective if it uses an appropriate approach.

Researchgguestions and Hypotheses

 

Research Questions

 

There are six basic research questions that this

study attempts to answer. These are:

1.

Can short-term training have an immediate effect

on the participants in terms of the increase in
their cognitive skills? (Achievement)

Will two different approaches for short-term train-
ing have different immediate effects on the par-
ticipants in terms of the increase in their coq-
nitive skills? (Achievement)

Can short-term training have a long term effect on
the participants in terms of retaining the cognitive
skills derived from the training? (Retention)

Will two different approaches for short-term train-

ing have different long term effects on the

15

participants in terms of retaining the cognitive
skills derived from the training? (Retention)

5. Can short-term training have a long term effect
on the participants in terms of the job-performance
of the participants? (Performance)

6. Will two different approaches for short-term train-
ing have different long-term effects on the partici-
pants in terms of the job performance of the par-

ticipants? (Performance)

Research Hypotheses

 

There are eighteen research hypotheses that this
study attempts to examine. These are:

Hypothesis #1. Short~term training is effective in

 

increasing the cognitive skills
(achievement) of the participants
(Research Question #1).

Hypothesis #2. A participatory-based approach to

 

training is more effective in increas-
ing cognitive Skills (achievement)

than a lecture-based approach to train-
ing (Research Question #2).

Hypothesis #3. Short-term training has a long-term

 

effect on the participants in terms of
their cognitive skills (retention)

(Research Question #3).

Hypothesis #4.

 

Hypothesis #5.

 

Hypothesis #6.

Hypothesis #7.

Hypothesis #8.

16

A participatory-based approach to train-
ing will have a more positive effect
on retention of cognitive skills than
a lecture-based approach to training
(Research Question #4).

Short-term training is effective in
increasing the self-reported perform-
ance (performance) of the participants
in organizing community people for
learning activities (Research Question
#5).

A participatory-based approach to
training is more effective in increas-
ing self-reported performance of the
participants in organizing community
people for learning activities than

a lecture-based approach to training
(Research Question #6).

Short-term training is effective in
increasing the self-reported perform-
ance of the participants in providing
consultations with local community
people (Research Question #5).

A participatory-based approach to
training is more effective in increas-
ing self-reported performance of the

participants in providing consultations

Hypothesis #9.

 

Hypothesis #10.

Hypothesis #11.

Hypothesis #12.

17

with local community people than a
lecture-based approach to training
(Research Question #6).

Short-term training is effective in
increasing the self-reported perform-
ance of the participants in promoting
internal leadership capacities of the
local peOple (Research Question #5).

A participitory-based approach to
training is more effective in increas-
ing self-reported performance of the
participants in promoting the internal
leadership capacities of the local
people than a lecture-based approach

to training (Research Question #6).

LShort-term training is effective in

increasing the self-reported perform-
ance of the participants in providing
learning equipment and facilities for
the local people (Research Question #5).
A participatory-based approach to train-
ing is more effective in increasing
self-reported performance of the par-
ticipants in providing learning equip-
ment and facilities for the local

people than a lecture-based approach to

training (Research Question #6).

Hypothesis #13.

 

Hypothesis #14.

 

Hypothesis #15.

 

Hypothesis #16.

Hypothesis #17.

18

Short-term training is effective in
increasing the self-reported perform-
ance of the participants in forward
planning (Research Question #5).

A participatory-based approach to train-
ing is more effective in increasing
self-reported performance of the par-
ticipants in forward planning for learn-
ing activities than a lecture-based
approach to training (Research Question
#6).

Short-term training is effective in
increasing the total self-reported
performance of the participants
(Research Question #5).

A participatory-based approach to train-
ing is more effective in increasing the
total self-reported performance of the
participants than a lecture-based
approach to training (Research Question
#6).

In terms of supervisor perception,
short-term training is effective in
increasing the ability of the partici-
pants to perform their jobs (Research

Question #5).

19

Hypothesis #18. In terms of supervisor perception, a
participatory-based approach to training
is more effective in increasing the
ability of the participants to perform
their job than a lecture-based approach

to training (Research Question #6).

Limitations and Importance of the Study

 

In this section both limitations and importance

of the study will be discussed.

Limitations of the Study

First, it has been realized that training is only
one among many devices to improve the job performance of
staff employees. Other devices are, for example, the
availability of funds for more effectively running programs;
reinforcement by supervisors or other authorities; recog-
nition of the success of staff through the supervisor;
feedback and evaluation used in the management of develop-
ment activities; and other similar things.

Second, the sample of the study was limited to one
province in Indonesia. It could be expected that a differ-
ence might exist between the condition of the province where
the study was conducted and the others. However, it is not
feasible for a single researcher to sample all possible
populations for a study of this nature.

Third, it is difficult to completely separate the

approach used in the training from the personality of the

20

.instructors who performed the training. Some general pre-
<:autions were made, however, through the use of highly
specified training procedures so as to limit as far as pos—
sible the personal biases of the instructors.

Fourth, due to the lack of ready made or standard
instruments for this type of study, all instruments needed
were prepared specifically for the study. This presents

questions regarding the validity of the instrumentation.

Importance of the Study

In the total framework of community deve10pment the
penilik holds a very frontier role. His job is concerned
exclusively with educational activities in the field. As
an implementer and as a change agent in the field of educa-
tion his success will inevitably affect_community develop-
ment itself as one of the basic strategies of the govern-
ment's total development plan. It is, therefore, realized
that increasing the competence of the penilik for perform-
ing his job better is part and parcel of the total package
of national development.

'-

This study deals with increasing the competence of “5~h
the penilik through a short-term training program. Two
different types of approach are compared in terms of their
effectiveness; one is a participatory-based approach and the
other is a lecture-based approach to training. The results

of this study can assist in providing direction and create

a basis for future development of training programs for

21

the peniliks. It is hoped that the findings of this study
ovill assist decision makers in this field in evaluating
1:heir work and in developing new strategies for their staff
'training activities. This is one of the key aspects as to
xvhy this study is considered important. The side effect of
this type of study can go beyond the boundaries of educa-
tional field workers and embrace other program areas which
can use the same type of activities related to efforts in
community development. For instance, community health pro—
grams, agriculture extension service, manpower training
programs, family planning and family life education could
all benefit in terms of further development of their train-
ing programs.

Another key important aspect of this study is that
information provided by this study not only examines dif-
ferent approaches used in training that might have different
effects on the knowledge and understanding of the trainees,
but also whether or not the different approaches to training
will have different long-term effects in terms of the
trainees' job performance in the field.

Viewed from the government's development plan, this
study is urgent in the sense that the Government of Indo-
nesia is continually increasing her reliance on the role
of education in general and nonformal education in partic-
ular as an effective mechanism for developing human poten-
tialities. For community education authorities within the

Ministry of Education and Culture this study is even more

22

urgent due to the fact that work has already begun on the
World Bank project to further develop the effectiveness of
the Penmas technical field staff.

Another point of importance is the research process
pursued in this study. A pretest-posttest experimental
design for comparing two different types of approach is an
innovative device in the field of nonformal education for
Indonesia. The design of the study has created an experi-
mental model for examining and comparing training effective-
ness which can be utilized and further developed in other
situations/problem areas.

These two points: (1) assisting the decision makers
in the field of nonformal education in evaluating their work
and in developing new strategies for their staff training
activities; and (2) creating a replicable experimental model
for examining and comparing relative effectiveness of two
different approaches to training, are the main reasons under-
lying the importance of the study. It is hoped that this
study can serve to stimulate other similar studies to
further examine the developmental needs of nonformal educa-

tion in Indonesia.

Definition of Terms

 

Following is a list of terms and phrases which are
frequently used in the description of this study. The
definitions for each term and phrase are therefore provided

as a common ground of understanding.

23

Participatory-based approach

The term, as it is used in this study, includes any
learning activity where the students are involved actively
either in the planning process of a learning program he
himself will be conducting and/or in the implementation of
the program itself during the learning session.

Included in this term are those activities such as:
participation in program planning (McLoughlin, 1971), some
combinations of social interaction (David C. Dietrick, 1960)
covering the recitation of question-answer technique, the
quiz section, the lecture quiz (vs. straight lecture), dis-
cussion method, buzz session, group centered discussion,
and discussion groups with participatory leadership.

This term also includes teaching-learning activ-
ities such as role-playing (H. R. Mills, 1977; Paul
Bergevin gt _l., 1966), simulators (H. R. Mills, 1977),
and field trips (Bergevin, 1966).

In general it can be stated that a participatory-
based approach to teaching-learning situations stresses the
activities on the part Of the students who learn by the
help and direction Of the teacher. In other words, this is
a student-centered approach as Opposed to a teacher-

centerer approach.

LEQture-based approach
The lecture-based approach includes primarily those

teaching-learning activities where the students are receiving

24

(mostly passively) what the teacher or trainer is lecturing
or presenting during the learning session. It also includes
a small amount of other learning activities as unstructured
question and answer sessions, unstructured small group dis-
cussion and small group working teams. This type of
approach is a typical approach to teaching-learning activ—
ities in Indonesia and is commonly practiced.

The term lecture as proposed by Richard Hill (1960),
H. R. Mills (1977) and Barton Morgan gt 31. (1960), or
speech as proposed by Paul Bergevin gt 31. (1966) is a major
part Of the lecture-based approach.

In general, it can be stated that the lecture-based
approach to teaching-learning situations stresses the
activities on the part Of the teacher or the trainer with

little or no participation on the part of the participants.

Community

According to Melvin (Ernest E. Melvin, 1975, p. 53)
a community might be conceived of as a group Of people hav-
‘ing basic interest in common and having a relatively per—
Inanent association with a particular place or geographical
Eirea. In this study the term community is defined as a
‘group of people in a certain locality who share among them
*Dommon values and norms, working together in an organized
‘way to resolve their own problems and needs to further

develop their own well-being.

25

Community development

Community development as used in this study refers
to a process by which the efforts of the people themselves
are united with those of governmental authorities to
improve the economic, social and cultural conditions of
the communities, to integrate these communities into the
life Of the nation, and to enable them to contribute fully

to national progress.l

Community education

Community education in Indonesia is basically non-
formal education, that is, education which is pursued out-
side the formal school system, where the main concern is
with the process of increasing peOple's knowledge, under-
standing, skills and competences in dealing with their
problems and needs.

The educational activities that community education
encompasses range from learning basic literacy skills for
children who are not enrolled in schools and adults through
skill training courses, to learning activities in relation
'to family welfare education, family planning programs and
(community organizations for adults and Older people in the

community.

k

1See also definition by United Nations, Adminis-
trative Committee on Coordination: Twentieth Report of the
Administrative Committee on Coordination to the Economic
and Social Council, Annex III, #E/2931, 1956; in Lee Cary,
1975, p. 20.

26

Penilik

This Indonesian word is used to label a community
education field worker who works at the subdistrict level.
The penilik is the implementer of the community education
programs. In accomplishing the nationwide mission Of pro-
viding nonformal education for the community, the penilik

holds a frontier post.

Penmas
Penmas is an acronym for Pendidikan Masyarakat.
It literally means Community Education. It is popularly

used to refer to the Directorate of Community Education.

Cognitive skills

 

It is defined as to include those objectives which
deal with the recall or recognition of knowledge and the
development of intellectual abilities and skills

(Benjamin Bloom, eg., 1977, p. 7).

Cognitive test

 

This is a type Of test designed to detect the
level Of coqnitive skills of the training participants

(e.g., the peniliks).

Self-disclosure type of test

This is an instrument designed to disclose the
peniliks' job performance as reported by themselves. In
this study five areas were identified to categorize the

performance of the peniliks in the field. These include

27

the roles Of the penilik as organizer, consultant, enabler,

facilitator and planner.

Achievement

 

It describes the change in scores on a cognitive
test from the pretest (administered immediately prior to
training) to the posttest I (administered immediately

following training).

Retention

 

It describes the stability of scores on a cognitive
test from the posttest I (administered immediately following
training) to the posttest II (administered six months after

the completion Of the training).

Performance

 

It describes specific activities of the partici-

pants in terms of their self-reporting of their activities.

CHAPTER II

SURVEY OF RELATED LITERATURE

This survey Of related literature will focus on five
major topics which include Community Development, People's
Participation as a Basis for Development, the Role of the
Fieldworker for Community DevelOpment, the Function of
Training and the Relative Effectiveness Of Participatory-
based and Lecture-based Approaches to Training. Each topic
in this chapter is designed to build on each preceding
topic and to narrow in on the specific concern of the
study--the relative effectiveness and efficiency Of two

different training techniques.

Community Development

 

In many developing countries community development
is carried out as a government program. The major declared
purpose of these programs almost invariably has been to
increase the life standard of the people, primarily the
rural poor and the urban underprivileged, to provide educa-
tional Opportunities for those who for a variety of reasons
are not able to benefit from formal schooling, to provide

other social services like health care and to provide

28

29

equitable opportunities for employment through training.
Some Of these programs have been quite successful, but some
have not. Vykuntapathy (1965) in his study of the commun-
ity development program in India concluded hat the "com-
munity development program has awakened the village people
from mental inertia and indifference."

In his study on community development in Northeast
Thailand, Frederick Baker (1973) concluded that many com-
munity development programs have led to aroused interest
among villagers. He also found five main factors which
contribute to change. These factors are information input,
cooperation, government support, individual initiative and
media input. Miniclier (1961, pp. 72-73) argued that com-
munity development is not a method of doing economic devel-
Opment on the cheap and success cannot be measured by add-
ing up the material projects completed. The chief end of
successful community develOpment is not wells, roads, school
buildings and new crops. It is stable self-reliant com-
munities with an assured sense of social and political
responsibility.

In terms of what factors are likely the most domi-
nant to the success of a program, Melvin (1975, p. 56) gave
a positive answer when saying that the more peOple through-
out the community that become involved in the community
development process from the very initial stages Of goal

setting and problem identification through to the

30

implementation, the more likely community development is to
succeed.
Batten (Batten and Batten, 1975, pp. 5-16) in The

Non-Directive Approach in Group and Community Work differ-

 

entiated the nondirective approach from the directive
approach to community development. The directive approach,
as the name implies, Batten argued, means that the agency
which adopts it decides, more or less specifically, what-
ever it thinks people need or ought to value or ought to do
for their own good, and sometimes even how they ought to
behave. These decisions become the agency's betterment
goals Egg people. It is the essence Of this approach that
the agency and its workers think, decide, plan, organize,
administer, and provide £9; people. Always the main initi-
ative, and the final say, remains with them. On the other
hand, Batten continued his argument, in the nondirective
approach the worker does not attempt to decide £9; people
or persuade them to accept any of his own specific conclu-
sions about what is good for them. He tries to get them to
decide for themselves what their needs are; what, if any-
thing, they are willing to do to meet them; and how they
can best organize, plan and act to carry their project
through. Thus he aims at stimulating a process of self-
determination and self-help, and he values it for all the
potential learning experiences which participation in this

process provides.

31

There are many potential advantages that the non-
directive approach has and the directive approach has not.
There are four that Batten has pointed out, i.e., (1) it
enables the local community people to accomplish more with
their limited resources; (2) it helps to develop people,
not only because it enables people to meet more Of their
own needs for themselves, but also because in the process
Of doing so they can increase their status and feeling of
self-respect; (3) it helps the emergence of a "we-feeling"
rather than "I" and "they." It is the change of attitude
towards others, which may result from a project, which con-
stitutes the core of all true community development. For
the Indonesian nation this kind of feeling has been highly
valued and has been an integral part of the Indonesian
culture and way of life of the people for centuries. The
fourth point (4) is that it provides many opportunities Of
educating and influencing people. It aims to educate them
partly by asking questions intended to help them to think
more systematically and relevantly than they otherwise
would, and partly by providing any relevant information they
need and would otherwise lack.

Developing a community is analogous with educating
an individual child. The ultimate goal Of educating a child
is to help him to reach his maturity on a self-help basis
and to help him to be able to self-support his life in the
society. The ultimate goal of developing a community is to

help it to reach the stage of self-determination and

32

self-help, and self-support for future development. As

Holdcroft (1976, p. 5) discussed in Rural Development Today

 

that community develOpment is a process by which the major-
ity of the rural peOple is assisted in solving their prob-
lems, and hence improve their level Of living on a self-
sustaining basis.

The Dependency-Liberation theory as it was discussed

 

by Thomas LeBelle (in Richard Niehoff, Ed., 1977, p. 216)
confirmed this strategy. The key idea of the dependency-
liberation theory is, using education in general and non-
formal education in particular, to enable the individual,
or the people, to overcome domination and vulnerability.

It does not necessarily measure outcomes in terms Of income
or material benefits gained but instead by the process which
takes place. Liberation is concerned with a more equitable
distribution of decision making power leading to control
over the change process rather than adjustment to it, as
Goulet (1971, pp. 6-10) pointed out.

To help the peOple to liberate them from their
dependency means to develop their own potentialities to
be able to resolve their own problems and to fulfill their
own needs.

As it is well noted, community develOpment as it is
discussed in this study is more concerned with the process
rather than with the product. And as far as the process is
concerned, education, in this case nonformal education, can

play a very important role.

33

Richard Poston (1958) in Report of the Division of

 

Community Development defined community development as an

 

organized educational process which deals comprehensively
with the community in its entirety, and with all Of the
various functions Of community life as an integrated whole.
It is clear from this definition that the Objective Of
community development is to help evolve through a process
Of organized study, planning and action, development Of
human beings as individuals and as productive members of
their community. Mezirow (1960) looked at the community
development process as a planned and organized effort to
assist individuals to acquire attitudes, skills, and con-
cepts required for their democratic participation in the
effective solution of as wide as possible a range of com-
munity problems in an order of priority determined by their
increasing levels of competence. It is quite interesting
to see what the United Nations thinks about community
development. It views community development as the process
by which the efforts of the people themselves are united
with those of governmental authorities to improve the eco-
nomic, social and cultural conditions of communities, to
integrate these communities into the life of the nation, and
to enable them to contribute fully to national progress

(Lee Cary, 1975, p. 20).

34

Summary

Even though there is a close relationship between
process and product in community development it has been,
however, the basic strategy of most community developers,
most of the governments Of the developing countries and
most of the national as well as international organizations
like the United Nations, to view community development as
more concerned with process than with product. The main
Objective for community development should not be in giving
finished products to the people but rather in building their
competencies, understanding and technical skills to be self-
sufficient in dealing with their needs and problems.

A The following section will discuss the importance
of local people's participation in developing the community
in which they live. As Cary (1975, p. 144) stressed, the
concept that is basic to the community development process
is participation by the people of the community in the pro-
cess.

People's Participation as a Basis for
Community Development

 

 

For the last two decades the participation Of local
people has been an issue in relation to community develop-
ment. Some writers agree that local participation is basic
for community development. Jean and Edgar Cahn (in Spiegel,
1968, p. 5) in their analysis entitled Citizen Participation
reassert the importance of participatory action as an essen-

tial component of the faith we profess in the dignity and

35

worth Of the individual, as a mobilizer of the energies and
resources of the poor, as a source of insight, knowledge,
and experience in social programming. Peter Marris and
Martin Rein (Spiegel, 1968, p. 6) posit citizen partici-
pation as a counter-vailing force necessary to protect
social and welfare programs against the encroachment Of
institutional self-interest.

Cary (1975, p. 147) discussed that participation
should mean not merely quantitative but also qualitative
measures. "Clearly," he said, "there is much more to
participation than simply belonging." Murray G. Ross (in
Cary, 1975, pp. 146-147) offered some suggestions with
respect to this aspect of participation. First, and most
fundamental, is a breadth of knowledge and a broad back-
ground that allows one to identify priorities and sees
issues in context. "There is no substitute for informed
citizens," he said. Secondly, is the ability to learn
about problems to reach a decision. This precondition
includes the ability to utilize resources effectively.
Thirdly, is the ability to act effectively. Ross concluded
that among these three, however, the first is the most basic
to effective participation.

Besides those who agree that local participation
is basic for the success Of community development programs,
there are some scholars who are skeptical about this. One
of their basic arguments is that "participation" is a

biased term and subjective. Another argument is that as

36

long as the majority of rural people are still illiterate
and poor, it will not make any difference as to the degree
of success Of the programs whether or not these people are
involved in the process of program planning and decision-
making. Roberta Sigel (in Spiegel, 1968, p. 8) in Citizens
Committee: Advice vs. Consent stated that the bulk Of mem-
bers on citizen committees must have discernible skills,
and that while the poor can be mobilized for action and
implementation, their role in the process of translating
general goals into programatic detail is limited. In 99m-

munity Status and a Dimension of Local Decision Making

 

Rosenthal and Crain (1967, #32) hypothesized that there is
a direct correlation between socio-economic status and the
level of day-to-day citizen participation in community
decision making. Roger Starr (in Spiegel, 1968, p. 8)
found that citizen participation can plainly be a hindrance
to attaining the goals of public programs. William Korn-
hauser in Power and Participation in the Local Community
(see Spiegel, 1968, p. 8) stated his argument in somewhat
different ways. Although he did not Oppose citizen par-
ticipation per se, he pointed out some weaknesses and sug-
gested that democracy does not necessarily imply continuous
participation in community affairs, that low-income people
have fewer attachments to the community, hence fewer organi-
zational ties and ultimately less incentive to support the
rules according to which community affairs are generally

conducted.

37

Considering the controversial issue as to the mean-
ing Of local participation to the process of community
development, Hans Spiegel (1968, p. 4) wrote in his article

entitled Citizen Participation in Urban Development, that

 

"a scientific approach to citizen participation is extremely
difficult, suffused as it is with normative judgments,
value-laden preconceptions, lack of Objective criteria and
standards Of measurement, and a host of differentiated per-
spectives from which anyone can draw just about whatever
meanings his predialections desire." He continued when
saying that "if one concludes, for example, that citizen
participation is, by nature, good and desirable, then nearly
every instance of it demonstrates a modicum of value,
regardless Of how much rationalization is accommodated in
the process; conversely, if one has reservations about the
efficacy of the process, it is not at all difficult to
uncover situations which substitute such doubts."

Anderson (Robert Anderson, 1970, #2, p. 80) came
to a similar conclusion and said that "participation" is
like the word "cooperation”; it is neither good nor bad.
He also concludes that the higher the socio-economic status
of the population, the greater their level of participation
in associations and in community decision-making.

On the other side, Edmund M. Burke (see Kramer and
Specht, 1975, p. 196) strongly supports the idea of involv-
ing local people in decision-making and in the process of

community development. He touched the issue in a more

38

fundamental way when saying "citizen participation is part
Of our democratic heritage, Often proclaimed as a means to
perfect the democratic process. Stated most simply, it
views the citizen as the ultimate voice in community
decision-making. Citizens should share in decisions affect-
ing their destinies. Anything less is a betrayal of our
democratic tradition."

He further argued that "local people participation"
or "citizen participation" can be used aS'a basis for vari-
ous strategies in relation to community development. He
identified five strategies merited from "citizen partici-
pation," e.g., education-therapy, behavioral change, staff
supplement, cooperation and community power (IpiQ., p. 197).

Khinduka in his article entitled Community Develop-

 

 

mgpt: Potentials and Limitations (see Kramer and Specht,
1975, p. 175) stressed the importance of the educative
aspect of local participation in community development. He
said, "Community develOpment includes a composite Of pro-
cess and program objectives. As a process, it aims to edu-
cate and motivate people for self-help; to develop respon-
sible local leadership; . . . to introduce and strengthen
democracy at the grassroots level through the creation and/
or revitalization of institutions designed to serve as
instruments of local participation. . . ."

"Basic to community development process is partici-
pation by the peOple of the community in the process," Cary

(Lee Cary, 1975, p. 144) argued. The emphasis, however,

39

does not deny the importance of individual effort nor does
it preclude other approaches to the solution of community
problems and the bringing about Of community change. The
three value assumptions presented here are: (1) people of
the community should actively participate in community
change; (2) participation should be as inclusive as pos-
sible; and (3) participation should be through democratic
organizations. He added, three necessary conditions for
participation must be present if these value assumptions
are to be realized: (a) freedom to participate--autonomy;
(b) ability to participate; and (c) willingness to partici-
pate.

In talking about aspects Of participation, Stuart
Chapin (in Cary, 1975, p. 147) developed a scale of five
continuum which started with "membership" and included from
low to high, "attendance at meetings," "financial contribu-
tion," "membership on committees" and "positions of leader-
ship."

In his study done in Indonesia, Nat J. Colletta
(1976, p. 36) found out that the crucial task Of developing
the community is how tO mobilize and manage community learn-
ing resources into a prototype Community Learning System
which connects community articulated learning needs to
community-based learning resources in a comprehensive, inte-
grated community education network. He added that an acute
understanding and articulation Of local needs and conditions

must be directly linked to this management-resource-learning

40

system. This necessitates community participation in
unveiling needs, conditions, and resources, and in planning

meaningful ongoing develOpment activities.

Summary

Besides those who support the importance Of people’s
participation for community development, there are some who
are skeptical about it. Their arguments are based on the
fact that the lower the level of education and socio-
economic status of the people the less contribution they
can give to the process Of development of their community.
This is especially true when community development is

merely meant as carrying out a specific program for com-

 

munity development. But in this argument something vitally
important has been forgotten; i.e., the educative aspect

of the process of development (Burke, 1975; Khinduka, 1975;
Cary, 1975). In other words, in the short run the involve-
ment of the people in the process Of community development
may be seen as a hindrance (Rosenthal and Crain, 1967;
Starr, 1968) to completing the program as scheduled. In
the long run, however, it could be a vital investment in
terms of increasing the competences, self-confidence and
internal leadership capacity Of the local people to achieve
a self-help and a self-determination level Of development
for their own community. The section that follows will

discuss the roles of the community fieldworkers in dealing

41

with his job to achieve the development goal Of the com-
munity.
The Role of the Fieldworker in
Community Development

Edwards and Jones (1976, p. 15) in Community and

 

Community Development pointed out that the social struc-
ture of a community consists of three types Of units; i.e.,
individual persons; informal groups, such as friendship
and other spontaneous groups; and formal groups, such as
schools, churches, businesses, labor unions, and social
welfare agencies. These three types Of units are patterned
into the subsystems of family, economy, government, reli-
gion, education and social welfare.

Community Education, as one subsystem Of a commu-
nity, has a specific role in dealing with community devel—

Opment. Due to the fact that its main j b is concerned

with increasing people's awareness of their own strengths

and weaknesses, changing their attitudes and behaviors in
relation to their present condition and the ideal future Of
their community, and developing their understanding,_knowl-
edge and competences necessary for development, community
educationholds a catalytic role for community development.
As a catalyst for community development, this role
of community education will penetrate and influence the
work of other community development agencies in the field.

In other words, the education function in community deyel-

M.

 

M“ m ,- _.,,fi_,,,

opment does not necessarily limit its effect only to the

42

people but extends it to affect other community development
agents as well. It means that education and training pro-
grams tO increase the job performance of community develop—
ment agents in general are always considered important.
While education as a function penetrates the working mecha-
nism of all community development agents, community educa-
tion as an agent shares similar characteristics with other
community development agents in the field.

Different scholars seem to define characteristics
of the role Of community development agent differently.
While defining the role of community development agent is
an important issue, this in itself is not by any means
simple. Edwards and Jones (1976, p. 271) mention three
main characteristics for the role Of community development

agent. These are as enabler, consultant and advocate.

 

As an enabler, the agent concentrates his expertise
on helping the people of a community become collectively
"do-it-yourself" experts on dealing with community change.
As a consultant, the agent brings to the community action
his expertise in identifying community needs, diagnosing
the underlying conditions that give rise to the needs, and
interpreting in understandable terms alternative courses
of action that can be taken to get the needs met. Though
not responsible for making decisions on goals and proce-
dures, the agent as consultant may be expected to provide
recommendations to the persons who are the decision makers.

As an advocate, the agent's expertise in organizing people

43

to achieve specific goals of a community action effort is
aligned with some cause in which he is a partisan partici—
pant.

The roles of the community development agent are
typically generalist in nature. At the present time the
position of the community development agent is found most
widely in developing countries which have what is called
national community development programs or simply a national
development plan. "In communities Of such countries," as
Edwards and Jones (1976, p. 229) point out, "the agent has
the role of 'opening the eyes' of the indigenous residents
to the way of life characteristic Of communities that have
moved further toward modernization." They further argue
that "he," meaning the agent, "also has the linked roles
Of trying to get the national program adopted in the com-
munity while seeing to it that the Objectives and procedures
advocated by that program are adapted to the needs and value
system of the community and are realistic in terms of the
resources that are available."

Somewhat different from Edwards and Jones, Robert
Morris (see Cary, 1975, pp. 179-185) mentions four charac-

teristics in terms Of the roles of the agent. These include

 

 

enabler, consultant, advocate and planner. He describes
clearly the enabler role when saying:

He is that worker who is in immediate and continuous
communication with the individuals of a neighborhood, {
area, or region. He it is who maintains the essential '
link between the external world of ideas, values, and
resources and the internal situation that is subject

44

to change. He it is who is most sensitive to the pull
Of tradition, to the values inherent in the society,
and to their revered and painful evolution over the
centuries in some symbolic relationship to the environ-
ment. He it is who is sensitive to the particular
character of wants and desires expressed by the individ-
uals.

This agent may identify completely with society and
grOpe for those means by which he can stimulate the
people to take the steps necessary to achieve that
which they desire.

As to the consultant role of the community develop-
ment agent, Morris describes: "He is the advisor or con-
sultant and is usually responsible to an external employer."
He then continues by saying: "The advisor or consultant
necessarily requires some knowledge Of the local culture
as well as of the external culture and acts as a bridge
between the two."

By contrast with both the enabler role and the con-
sultant role, the advocate is committed to the aspirations
and desires of the local people in the effort Of developing
the area where he is working. He said, "he has identified
himself with their needs and wants, regardless of the
extent of 'mix' between his own perceptions and those Of
the native population. His main function is to press the
views of local needs upon the external agency in order to
secure a response--favorable and helpful, if possible."

The final characteristic of the community develop-

‘___,,,_ r_illlll.- 111-11..Hl
ment agept role he describes is that of planner. "The

planner usually functions at the external agent level," he

said, "but is responsible for designing the details of any

45

program that seeks to alter a local situation, whether that
locality be defined as a neighborhood of a city, a town,
a region, or a nation. True, he is concerned with procuring
some sounding Of local wants and needs and local attitudes.
However, his main concern is to fit local needs into some
kinds of national or external agency plan. In this sense,
the development planner is usually a combination Of tech-
nician and advocate, in the sense that those local elements
which he identifies as being relevant need to be ranked in
relation to other demands on the nation's resources" (Ipid.,
p. 182).

Though not completely similar, Irving Spergel (1974,
p. 59) also has four characteristics in defining the role
of the community development agent. These four character-

istics include the roles of enabler, advocate, organizer

 

and develOper. He says: "The role Of the enabler derives

 

from the social service tradition. Such a worker," he con-
tinues, "usually a professional, is expected to guide,
advise, and assist representatives of community groups,
often representing the dominant interests Of the community,
to work together to solve varioUs agency and community prob-
1ems. In this process the group, and theoretically the
community itself, is expected to achieve a higher level of
moral or value integration."

In the advocate role he argued that ". . . the
worker directly represents or persuades other members of

professional and elite groups to represent the interest

46

of an estranged, deviant, or less powerful and usually less
articulate sector of the population" (Spergel, 1974, p. 60).
He continues by saying that "He," meaning the community
agent, "is more interested in innovation and plans for
effective services, usually through the medium of demon-
stration programs than in traditional services" (Ipid.,

p. 60).

"As an organizer," Spergel (Ipid., p. 61) further
argued, "he usually has strong ideological commitments and
is concerned with the general change Of a social system.
While as a developer, his major aim is to nurture and
develop the integrity Of the community's pattern of adapting

to social conditions."

Summary

Though not using exactly the same terms to describe
the roles Of a community development agent, many scholars
seem to agree as to what characteristics need to be met by
an agent in carrying out his task. These characteristics
include that Of enabler, consultant, advocate, planner,
organizer or developer. A combination of some of these
characteristics might be appropriate for one type Of com-
munity, while another combination might fit another condi-
tion. Generally, community education agents have the same

characteristics as community development agents.

47

The next section reviews literature concerned with
the function of training for the agent so that he might be

better able to carry out his job responsibilities.

The Function of Training

 

Within these last two decades training has become
more and more important in the framework Of human resource
development. The advancement of science and technology has
demanded that knowledge, skills and competencies should
constantly be developed through education and training.
This demand for continuing education and training for the
staff member, employee or worker, is felt as an urgent need
by almost every sector of management in the community,
whether it is a government institution, social institution
or private industry.
It is interesting to note here Havelock's explana-
tion for the need for training in the area Of resource
utilization.
We live in an age of expanding resources and expanding
awareness of problem. However, it is also widely
believed that we are entering a period of crisis in
which resource capabilities will reach their limit
while demands on resources continue to escalate.
Regardless of the dimensions of this crisis, there
is some consensus on the need to close the gap between
available resources (knowledge, technology, products,
services, facilities, etc.) and known human problems
and needs (Havelock and Havelock, 1975, p. 1).

He further says:
Both the problem and the Opportunity are before us. On
the other hand, there is rising tide of needs and
expectations, proclaimed by many as an impending series

of crisis. On the other hand, in this century there
has been a fantastic acceleration on knowledge building,

 

48

and in the growth Of technological know-how. The ques-
tion Of the use of these capabilities to meet the ris-
ing tide of need therefore becomes ever more insistent
(gpgg., 1975, pp. 1-2).

When Havelock insisted the application of training
to close the knowledge gap, Blakely criticized it by saying,
"Although training has been conducted since the days of the
Pharaohs, there has been little advance in scientific devel-
Opment" (Edward J. Blakely, 1972, p. 32). In the meantime
he also admitted that training is complex. "Presently," he
said, "most large industries, government, the military and
business have established in-service training departments.
Training has become increasingly complex in the past decade"
(Blakely, 1972, p. 32).

Most people agree that to lessen the gap between
the existing knowledge, skills and competencies and the
ever advancing field of science and technology, training
and education must be considered as an urgent need Of a
modern society.

"With regard tO education," Rosemary Springborn,

(1977' p. 22) says, "we must recognize that our advancing /!

.4
up

technology will require most workers to Obtain additional
training throughout their careers. In some instances, com- \
plete retraining for new occupations may be necessary." ?
She continues, "The rate Of technological change has accel-
erated beyond our expectations, creating a concomitantly

rising need for constant and continual adjustment and

adaptability on the part of employees and organizations

 

 

49

alike. The organization that trains its workers now is
safeguarding its position today. The organization that

also educates them is preparing for its place in the iden-
'tifiable tomorrow" (Emphasis added; Springborn, 1977, p. 22).

"Education and training," she adds, "is seen by
Inanagement in more and more instances as an investment in
human capita-~an instrument for profit, growth, and cor-
porate vitality--rather than as an onerous cost" (gpgg.,

p. 22).

Benjamin Tregoe (1975, p. 21), analyzing the situ-
ation that every one Of us is facing right now, regardless
of what type and kind of management we are responsible for,
stated that we are in trouble. ."We are living in a time
of such rapid change," he said. "I think change is upend-
ing most professions, the training and development profes-
sion along with them" (IRES-r p. 21).

On the question of what the implications of this
would be for training professionals, he answered: "I am
focusing on the need to continuously update the knowledge
a person has. I think the whole notion Of continuing educa-
tion has got to take on some real meaning. Up until now it
has been something people talked about, a phrase. But I
don't think people have taken it seriously enough. Continu-
ing education has always been the low-status operation in a
university-~it's been night schools, it's been something

less important than day-time activities--and far less

 

50

prestigious. It seems to me that's going to have to change.
People will have to continue learning" (Ibid., p. 21).

While many people believe that staff training and
education are not wasted investments in terms Of organiza—
tion and management development, what has been done in the
field has not been promising. This idea was supported by
Nammacher in his analysis Of US industrial plants manage-
ment development from the early 603 through 1977.

In 1960, a Plant Engineering Magazine survey revealed
that the number-one problem facing the plant engineer
was finding and training maintenance craftsmen. A

1968 US Office of Education Study, which verified those
findings, showed that 80% Of US industrial plants were
experiencing a maintenance employee shortage. That
same year, Plant Engineering did a follow-up survey
which showed the situation had deteriorated. While

97% of the respondents recognize the need for main-
tenance training, less than half (43.7%) were doing
anything about it (Thomas J. Nammacher, pd., 1977, p. 7).

He continued by saying, "Today, nine years later,
the statistics have not improved. Still less than half
the US industrial plants do any training; and only 8.6%
train maintenance craftsmen on a formal basis."

In spite of the fact that what has been done in the
field of staff training and education needs to be improved,
quantitatively as well as qualitatively, the importance of
the training function for management and organization
development is getting more and more recognition from the
community. As Craig mentioned, ". . . organization manage-
ment, in both public and private sectors, has come to have

greater and greater expectations for the training and devel-

Opment function" (Robert L. Craig, 1976, p. xiii).

 

51

In the area Of community development this phenom-
enon is even more substantial. John S. Bottum pt 31.
pointed out in their report,

Communities' needs and demands for people trained in
community develOpment are growing rapidly. As society
becomes more complex, sound community decision making
becomes more difficult and requires professional
assistance to augment public and private efforts. The
consequences of various courses of action are becoming
more intricately intertwined and far reaching.

Because of the complexities of modern society, it is
becoming increasingly difficult to Obtain adequate
information and to maintain effective decision making
structures. The desire for decentralization of deci-
sion making-~that is, letting local people decide their
future--augments the demand for professional community
development workers (John S. Bottum pt 31., in A Task-
Force Report, 1975, p. 4).

Gessaman points out, "Agency field personnel have
key roles that they can perform in support of local commu-
nity development activities:

1. They can provide extra skills, knowledge, and

 

 

resources that may make possible local community

 

development efforts;

2. Delivery of agency prpgrams may provide an impor-

 

tant component of resources needed to achieve

local goals" (Paul Gessaman, 1978, p. 8).
And in fact, ”The primary rationale for community develop-
ment training is recognition Of the importance to commu-
nities Of these key roles of agency field personnel"
(Gessaman, 1978, p. 8).

In concern with some difficulties that a teacher
might have in teaching skills for the community education

agents, Luke and Ulmer give their comments:

 

 

52

Perhaps two areas where teachers have the greatest
difficulty in extending their range Of teaching skills
are: (1) helping create meaningful experiences through
which the student may develop insights and awareness--
as differentiated from acquiring facts--and (2) in pro-
viding students frequent Opportunities for practice
(Robert A. Luke and Curtis Ulmer, 1971, p. 19).

It has also been a significant phenomenon within
these last few years that people have been more and more
concerned with the technical questions of conducting the
training rather than with the policy question of whether
or not training is important. In other words, people do
not primarily focus on questions such as why should training
be conducted or is training functional to developing organi-
zation management, rather, people are pursuing answers to
technical questions such as what should be taught in train-
ing, and how it should be taught.

Regarding what should be taught in training, Broad-
well gives his warning when saying, "One thing we've learned
through organizational development is that not everything
that employees are doing incorrectly can be eliminated by
training (Martin M. Broadwell, 1975, p. 8).

He continues:

The basic question is "How to determine the training
needs?" In other words, "What can a supervisor do to
see whether an employee really needs training and how
can he determine exactly what the training need is?"
First, we must reCOgnize that training is needed when
an employee can't do ayjob, can't do it well enough or
is doing it wrong. These three training needs situ-
ations are the only real justification for spending

training dollars. Any other are hard to justify
when the boss asks ”Why training?”

 

The performance on the job becomes the only criterion for
determining whether or not the employee needs training.
The superVisor compares the standard with the employee's

53

performance. Any deficiency indicates an area where
training can help (1975, p. 8).

When asked whether a "standard" is the same thing
as a "job description," his answer was quite positive.

No. A job description or a procedure manual tells us
specifically what an employee is supposed to do and how
and when he or she is supposed to do it. By a "stan-
dard" we mean not only what job and how it is done, but
how well, how often, how much, how many. We add a
quality feature to the measurement.

Any good trainer will want to know that his trainees'
supervisors have looked at the employees' work in
light Of quality and quantity, not just procedures
(1975, p. 8).

Much of the staff training that has been done in
the field has been to fulfill an administrative requirement
only and not to seriously produce improved performance.
This critique was launched by Rummler when saying: ". . . ,
you must view the training function not as a keeper of the
corporate 'school house' but as 'performance improver.‘
This means changing the mission of the training function
from 'number of employees trained' or 'training program
produced' to 'organization performance improved.‘ Naturally,
this will lead to a difference in how management evaluates
the training function" (Geary A. Rummler, 1977, p. 50).

Under the current mission of "employees trained," evalu-
ation of the training function is somewhat variant of
"heads trained per training budget dollar." This, of
course, emphasizes the volume of training conducted,
not the value. Under the prOposed mission of "organi-
zation performance improved," the evaluation will
necessarily have to be a variant of "bottom line con-
tribution per training-budget dollar." This will cor-
rectly emphasize the worth of the training, not the
amount.

Obviously, such a change in mission and evaluation of

the training function will produce changes in how the
training function Operates (Rummler, 1977, p. 50).

54

At the conclusion Of his comments he added that
it was a promising phenomenon in these last five years that
many training professionals have been moving in this direc-
tion.

Looking further along with what should be empha-
sized in staff training, the problems are Of no less
crucial. Benjamin Tregoe goes into further detail in pur-

suing this issue.

Along with increased emphasis on continuous updating,
I think, there is going to have to be more focus on
the process Of learning and not quite as much focus
on the content Of subject matter.

That is because we see that while the problems of
organizations are going to change with the times, the
process for solving these problems are more likely to
have a stable life. They don't go out of date so
quickly (Benjamin B. Tregoe, 1975, p. 21).

On the question of how to define the "process" of
training for management-supervisory levels, he explains:

It involves two very fundamental things. First is
information. NO matter how you look at an organiza-
tion, information is the basic raw material that makes
it work. SO process in management and supervisory
development involves how you work with information,
how you organize it, how you set priorities, how you
recognize problems and analyze them and how you use
information to come to conclusions.

He then continues:

The other crucial aspect of process training at the
management level, I would say, is the question Of how
people can work effectively together. An organization
is not one person solving problems and making deci-
sions. Training people to work effectively tOgether
involves work in interpersonal and intergroup rela-
tions, questions of feedback between people--those
kinds Of things (Benjamin B. Tregoe, 1975, p. 22).

 

55

Summary

Along with the advancement Of science and tech-
nology, the function Of training for management and organi-
zation development has become more and more important in
modern society. The main function of training is to reduce
the gap between the existing knowledge, skills and com-
petences and the ever advancing field Of science and tech-
nology. But in spite Of the growing recognition of the
importance of training, what has been done in the field
has not been very promising.

It has also been a significant phenomenon within
the last few years that people have been more and more con-
cerned with the technical questions of conducting training
rather than with the more basic policy question of whether
or not training is important.

In terms Of what should be emphasized in staff
training, some writers agree that prOcess rather than 993-
tgpt is more important. This is due to the concept that
the mastery of process has a more stable life and does not
go out of date as quickly as the mastery of content or
£22232-

The next section reviews literature dealing with
the question Of what type Of approach is likely to be more
Effective for training. In other words, what type of
training is most likely to better equip the community
development agent in performing his or her roles. More

Specifically, this section will discuss the relative

 

56

effectiveness of two types Of approaches, i.e., the
participatory-based or the student-centered approach and
the lecture-based or the teacher-centered approach to
training.

Relative Effectiveness of Participatory-

based and Lecture-based Approaches
to Training

 

In reviewing the literature concerned with the
relative effectiveness of "participatory-based" and
"lecture-based" approaches to training, two major diffi-
culties arose. The first Of these difficulties results
from a lack of agreement in the definition Of what is a
participatory-based approach. Different writers or experi-
menters seem to like to use different terms. Some use such
terms as "Student-centered approach" (vs. Instructor-
centered approach--F. J. DiVesta, 1954); "Participative
Action Groups" (Gibb and Gibb, 1952); "Group-centered"

(vs. Teacher-centered--Haigh, 1956); "Participatory-
Leadership" (vs. Supervisory-Leadership--M. G. Preston,
1956); or merely "Discussion" (vs. Lecture) as proposed by
Richard Hill (1960) and also William Hill (1969) to denote
more or less the same meaning of the term.

"The most notable Of these divergent discussion
procedures," or perhaps participatory-based teaching-
learning procedures as David C. Dietrick pointed out, "are:
(a) the recitation or question and answer technique,

(b) the quiz section, (c) the lecture-quiz (vs. straight

 

 

57

lecture), (d) the reading-quiz method, (3) buzz sessions,
(f) seminars, (g) group-centered and leader-centered dis-
cussion groups, (h) discussion-groups with 'participatory'
and 'supervisory' leadership, (i) 'permissively' and
'directly' led discussion groups, (j) collections of per-
sons who actually work as individuals, and (k) the 'true'
discussion method" (Richard Hill, 1960, p. 90).

In contrast to these diversities and inconsistencies
in using the term "participatory-based" approach or "dis-
cussion" method, the literature seems to reflect a general
consensus regarding the definition of the lecture method
or approach. As Stoval pointed out when saying: "About all
that can be said is that the experimenters appear to have
conceived the lecture to be a more or less continuous oral
presentation of information and ideas by the teacher with
little or no active participation by the members of the
class" (Richard Hill, 1960, pp. 91-92).

The second difficulty encountered in reviewing the
related literature arises from difference of criteria used
in evaluating the effectiveness of the methods. Richard
Hill (1960, p. 5) in his study comparing the relative
effectiveness of "Lecture" and "Discussion" methods
stressed that evaluation of the results should focus on
three general classes of behavioral development or change.
These include:

1. Development of mental abilities or skills;

58

2. Changes in values, interests or attitudes; and
3. Increased knowledge.

McLoughlin (1971, p. 30) in his study of participa-
tion Of the adult learner in program planning focused on
two variables to measure the effectiveness of the treatment.
These two variables are change in attitudes and increase in
achievement.

William Hill (1969) in his study on learning through
discussion underlined three variables as a focus Of com-
parison. These are performance, enthusiasm for learning
and personality development. Three factors were also used
by Daniel Solomon pt_gl. (1963) as a focus Of measurement,
though these three lie in somewhat different areas than
those proposed by Richard Hill and William F. Hill previ-
ously mentioned. These three factors used by Solomon
include comprehension, general understanding and learning of
facts.

Other writers or researchers still claim different
categories of variables as a focus of comparison. William J.
Cole (1977), for example, proposed that achievement, reten-
tion and attitude be the variables used as a comparison of
the relative effectiveness of adult student perticipation;
while Bergevin, Boyd, Dobbs and Douglas would stress knowl-
edge, skills and retention rate as points of comparison
(William J. Cole, 1977, p. 77).

While on the one hand divergent ideas as to the

criteria of evaluation for relative effectiveness of the

59

"participatory-based" method are still continuing, on the
other hand the results of research studies in the field
are also confusing.

It is quite interesting to note what Richard Hill
(1960, p. 84) had concluded in his study cited earlier:

While many of the findings presented in the preceding
chapters of this report require additional substanti-
ation before they can be used as a basis for adminis-
trative action, the research as a whole gives little
comfort or support to those with strong convictions
about the superiority of either the discussion or
lecture method of teaching. The overall impression
that one Obtains from these results is that the
methods investigated are about equally the same.

On the other side, however, he admitted that indi-
vidual differences might exist as to how much one could
gain when a certain kind of method is used. He declared:
"It may be that certain individuals derive more benefit
from one method than from the other. On this issue, the
present research sheds little light, for this was not the
central problem of our investigation. A detailed study of
the relationship between method-effectiveness and person-
ality factors may be in order, and would be required if
answers are sought to questions about who benefits most
from what type of educational format" (Richard Hill, 1960,
p. 85).

Two suggestions were made by Hill which are impor-
tant to note here for further study. One is a question of
recruitment of the training participant and the other is a

question of the objective of the training. In other words,

effectiveness of the educational format used in training

60

to a certain extent depends on who was recruited for the
training and what types of objectives the training was
attempting to achieve.

David Dietrick who made thorough comparisons of
several studies of this nature gave very important remarks
on the results of those studies in terms of three cate-
gories of criteria, i.e., acquisition of information, the
retention of information and changing of attitudes (Richard
Hill, 1960, pp. 92-95).

As to the acquisition of information he said:

Most of the creditable research has employed the amount
of information acquired as the criterion of relative
effectiveness. The majority of these studies find that
the lecture and discussion methods, including modified
forms of the "true" discussion method outlined above,
are equally effective in terms of information acquired.
In general, studies comparing teacher-centered with
group-centered classes also have found no significant
differences between these two approaches.

About the retention of information he commented:

This variable has received little attention in studies
comparing the relative effectiveness of teaching
methods. The few studies comparing lecture and dis-
cussion methods which have included this variable,
however, reflect the general disagreement extant in
the research on the acquisition of information.

He continued further that some studies found that
knowledge acquired in discussion classes was retained to
a greater degree than that gained from lectures without
discussion.

As to the changing of attitudes as a criterion to

measure effectiveness of methods, he said that:

61

A number of studies have established clearly that both
lecture and discussion methods are capable of affect-
ing changes in attitudes. Comparative studies of the
relative efficacy of these methods, however, are
neither abundant nor entirely consistent in their
implication. Those dealing with attitude change are
less convincing than those dealing with informational
variables. The methodology and measurement techniques
used in attitude change studies are frequently subject
to serious question. With these qualifications in
mind, it appears that discussion methods are superior
to lecture methods as a means of changing attitudes
and behavior.

Instead of using acquisition of information, reten-
tion and changing of attitudes as criteria for measuring
relative effectiveness of participation vs. non-
participation approaches used in training, Solomon pt_al,
(1963), in their study on teaching styles and learning
preferred to use comprehension, general understanding and
learning of facts as criteria. Notwithstanding the earlier
suggestions they made, they added that:

Student involvement is most suited for gaining com-
prehension and general understanding; while lecturing
clearly is the most efficient way to promote the
learning of facts (Solomon pt gl., 1963, p. 62).

It is interesting to note here that in a number of
previous studies investigating the relationship of lectur-
ing and learning of factual material, they found that posi-
tive relationships between these two did exist but were
limited to only factual information and not for more com-
plex learning. By the end of their analyses on this issue
they concluded that:

. . . the evidence shows a slight tendency for lectur-
ing to be related to the attainment of factual infor-

mation, but not more complex learning (Solomon pt 31.,
1963, PP. 62-63).

62

Different with other researchers McLoughlin, in his
«3,. e" "-'“'- '7 ,. ,.
study on participation of the adult learner in program

planning, focused on dual criteria, achievement and atti-

tude,as criteria for measuring method effectiveness.
x_There are two conclusions that he suggested when he said:
,Eirét, adults who participate in program planning
appear to have more positive attitudes about their
educational experience than those who do not. Second,
no evidence was found to support the notion that
participation in program planning affects achievement
(McLoughlin, 1971, p. 30).
This finding supports what was suggested by Richard
Hill and also Dietrick (Richard Hill, 1960), and seems to
be consistent with the general trend of the research results

of the study on participative vs. nonparticipative teaching

methods. McLoughlin further suggested that:
fly
5 it],

wBasedon this study, differences in achievement scores \

cannot be accounted for by knowledge of participants'
involvement in deciding what and how they will learn.

NO evidence was found to support the notion that sharing
the decision on course content and design at the cost

of increasing the complexity of the educator's task
will produce a measurable increase in achievement

(1971, p. 34).

While on the one hand both methods, participative
vs. nonparticipative, were equally effective in terms of
increasing achievement of the training participants, on the
other hand the impact of participation in program planning
on attitude scores was more marked. As McLoughlin pointed

this out when saying:

Significant differences in attitude were found in favor 1.

of groups that had the opportunity to share in the
decision on course content and design (1971, p. 34).

‘.
\
\

j

k

I

63

He himself was somewhat surprised with the finding
since both groups, experimental as well as control, received
’ \N‘l’...1

exactly the same methods of teaching during the training *

sessions. He said:
Most of the teaching methods used in both phases
permitted considerable4participation during the
instructional periods, i.e., during discussions,
small group work exercises, simulation games, and
case studies (emphasis added).
However, these opportunities to participate exten- ‘ V‘
sively during the instructional periods did not
mask the attitude change resulting from the oppor-
tunities to participate during the course planning }
sessions. This fact suggests that the impact of I
participation in program planning on attitude
change may be quite powerful (1971, p. 34).

It might be correct to conclude that the influence
of themethods used during the instructional periods on the
attitude change did not surpass the influence of the previ-
ous conditions experienced by the participants prior to
training (in this case opportunities to participate during
the course of planning sessions). But, on the other hand,
these same methods of teaching used during the training
sessions could also be assumed as the very reason why a
significant difference did not occur in terms of achieve-
ment increase of the participants. It could be further
argued if, and only if, the methods used during the train-
ing sessions differed from one group to another, the
results on the achievement of the participants could pos-
sibly differ significantly. If this was the case, the

final conclusion would be that the opportunities to partici-

pate extensively during the course planning sessions,

64

prior to training, did not mask the increase of achievement
of the training participants resulting from the opportuni-
ties to participate during the instructional periods. But
this is an experimental question which calls for further
verification.

A similar study to that done by McLoughlin was also
conducted by William J. Cole and Conrad J. Glass (1977)

entitled The Effect of Adult Student Participation in Pro-

 

gram Planning on Achievement, Retention and Attitude. They 1

stated that the purpose of this study was to investigate
the influence of adult student participation in program
planning on student achievement, retention and attitude.
They came to markedly different conclusions than did
McLoughlin when they said:

First, adult student participation in program planning
appears to affect positively student achievement;

second, no evidence was found to support the prediction:

that participation in classroom planning positively
influences retention of information; and third, given
a situation where prior attitudes are not firmly fixed,

I
)

'a‘nt-m-bn- -“' " '

participating in program planning may have considerable ;

impact on attitudes of adult students (1977, p. 75).

Another source of support for this study, as Cole
(1977) indicated, ". . . is the personal testimony of prac-
ticing adult educators. The literature abounds with repu-
table professionals such as Bergevin (1967), Boyd (1969),
Dobbs (1967), Douglas (1970), and Knowles (1970) who advo-
cate the importance of involving adult learners in the
planning process. VIf participants are successful in \

incorporating into their learning activities goals and

65

experiences which they feel are beneficial, then in all
likelihood they will be more desirous of achieving these
goals. The knowledge and skills will be more appropriate 7
to their needs; hence, the learners will tend to retain and?
apply the new learnings more readily than if the content
and skills are viewed as irrelevant (Cole, 1977, p. 77).

It should be emphasized, however, that the views
cited above of adult educators are mostly opinions based
essentially on intuition and experience rather than
research findings.

Still other comments of this nature were coming 5
from H. R. Mills (1977) who said:

Methods of measuring training effectiveness are admit-

tedly not very satisfactory and the human relations
problem remains.

The truth is that each method of instruction or mode
of learning is effective within certain limits, and
each has its own strength and weaknesses.

B‘s-av“ "“

He continued:

Lectures have several advantages, one instructor can
handle a large class of a hundred or more, he can cover E
a great deal of ground in his own way, no equipment ?
need be used, and a lecture well prepared can be
repeated without any great effort on the part of the
lecturer by way of further preparation (1977, p. 155).

And further:

The main disadvantage is that knowledge gained by pas-
sive listening to a factual lecture, without some
participation by the class, is not readily assimilated,
and saturation sets in very quickly. The lecture
offers no scope for class participation and is there-
fore of little use in the training of men in skills.
The advantages benefit the instructor, the disadvan-
tages penalize the class (1977, p. 156).

r'1
.
v

66

Finally he concluded:
The least effective medium is one which uses only

words--without the support of things to see or do.
Skills cannot be taught by lecturing (1977, p. 157).

Summary

Three areas can be identified where researchers
and experimenters are not in agreement in terms of this
study. First, there is a lack of agreement in the defi-
nition used to connote more or less the same meaning of a
"participatory-based" approach to training. Different
writers or experimenters seem to have preference for dif-
ferent terms according to their own background, rationale
and taste. Second, there is a diversity in identifying
what criteria will be used as a basis of measuring the
results of a particular treatment. For instance Richard ' [»
gill focused on three general classes of behavioral devel-
opment or change as measurement criteria that include (1)
development of mental abilities or skills; (2) changes in
values, interests or attitudes, and (3) increased knowl-

edge. McLoughlin preferred to use two variables as criteria

 

of measurement which included (1) change in attitudes, and

(2) increase in achievement. William Hill proposed three

 

other variables as a focus of comparison. These are

(1) performance; (2) enthusiasm for learning; and (3) per-
sonality development. Solomon also describes three vari-
ables for comparing the results of the treatment. These

are (1) comprehension; (2) general understanding; and

67

(3) learning of facts. Still other writers claim different
categories of variables as a focus of comparison. William

leg, for example, proposes that (l) achievement, (2) reten-
tion and (3) attitude be the variables used as a comparison;

while Bergevin, Boyd, Dobbs and Douglas would stress

 

 

(1) knowledge, (2) retention and (3) skills as points of
comparison.

While the divergence of ideas as to the criteria of
evaluation for relative effectiveness of the treatment is
continuing, the results of research studies in the field
are similarly divergent. This is the third area which can
be identified where researchers or experimenters are not
in agreement.

David Dietrick, from his thorough comparisons of

 

several studies of this nature, concludes the results in

terms of three categories of criteria. First, in terms of

4...“. .
mM-w

information acquired, both methods are equally effective.
Second, in terms of retention of knowledge acquired, dis-
cussion classes did better. Third, in terms of changing
attitudes, it seems that discussion methods are superior
to lecture methods.

Solomon et al., in their study, concluded that stu-
dent involvement is most suited for gaining comprehension
and general understanding, while lecturing is the most

efficient way to promote the learning of facts.

There are two conclusions derived by McLoughlin's \
a
study. First, adults who participate in program planning E

68

appear to have more positive attitudes about their educa-
tional experience than those who do not. Second, no evi-T
dence was found to support the notion that participation 4
in program planning affects achievement.
£913 and glass in their study came to somewhat dif-
ferent conclusions with those done by McLoughlin, Solomon,
Dietrick or Hill, when they said that:
first, student participation positively affects student
achievement;
second, no evidence was found that participation influ-
ences retention;
third, participation may have considerable impact on
attitudes.
From his study flillé concluded that each method of
instruction or mode of learning is effective within certain
limits and each has its own strength and weaknesses. But

__,—--A

he added that skills cannot be taught by lecturing.

‘- .~—~—-—om-_-

CHAPTER III

DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

This chapter is organized in a series of separate
sections. The first section, Setting of the Study, dis-
cusses the location of the study, administration by the
local government in relation to the central government and
background information about the pOpulation from which the
sample was drawn. The second section, Random Sampling,
discusses the reasons why randomization of sample was used
and considered appropriate for this study. The third,sec-
tion, Sampling Procedures, discusses the size of the sample,
how the sample was drawn and the grouping within the sample
that was assigned. Research Procedures and Design, as the
fourth section of this chapter, discusses the major design
of the study, when the study was conducted and when and in
what ways the data were collected. Dependent and Indepen-
dent Variables, which makes up the fifth section in this
chapter, discusses the types of variables measured in this
study to yield quantifiable data and what types of treat-

ments were implemented. The last section, Some Problems

on Validity, describes the strengths and weaknesses of the

69

70

study due to the nature of the study and the ways in which

it was designed and conducted.

Setting of the Study

 

Since the study involved fieldworkers from Penmas
it was important, before its implementation, to receive
approval from the Penmas Directorate. A number of conver—
sations were held by the researcher with the Director of
Penmas to get his confirmation as to the location of the
study, when the study would be conducted and also the
approximate number of peniliks who would be involved in the
study. Probably the most important aspect of these conver-
sations was to get his understanding as to the design and
the expected results of the study.

In the structural organization of the Ministry of
Education in Indonesia the Directorate of Community Educa-
tion or Penmas works under the Directorate General for Out
of School Education, Youth and Sports, within the Ministry
of Education and Culture. Since the administration is
centralized, the Directorate of Community Education is
responsible for all community education activities through—
out the country. To carry out its job, however, extension
offices of Community Education are located in each province
under the coordination of the Provincial Representative
Office of Education and Culture. It was also important,

therefore, for the purpose of this study, to get approval

‘

v”

71

and understanding from the Community Education Office at the
provincial level where the study would be carried out.
Through a series of discussions with the Director
of Penmas it was learned that several provinces were avail-
able as potential locations for the study. The available
provinces were those that were not being utilized as test
sites for the World Bank project. In order not to interfere
with the Penmas training scheme under the World Bank pro-
ject, West Java province was chosen as the location for the
study. Another important factor which was also taken into
consideration in the selection of this province was that
the researcher lived in West Java. Hence, using the West
Java province as the location of the study would consider-
ably reduce the time and cost of the work and increase the
efficiency.
The selection of West Java was also agreeable to
the Director of Penmas. A list of all community education
fieldworkers or peniliks in West Java province was then
made available to the researcher as a basis of selection
of subjects for the study.

(a

/ There were altogether three hundred and ninety

I“ 1.}. 13”.)“ f L4. .311.“ +f’h\\,‘\{ 3. “fl «-8.
peniZiks in West Java province who were considered as the
sample frame or population for the study. West Java is
one among the twenty-seven provinces in Indonesia. How-

ever, due to the density of the pOpulation 0n Java island

in general, the population in West Java alone consists of

72

more than one-sixth (around 17.5 percent) of the more than
130 million people in Indonesia.

In the province of West Java there are a total of
twenty kabupatens (comparable to district) and four munic-
ipalities as shown in the map on page 73 (Figure 3.1).
Jakarta and its Special Region was excluded from the study,
since this special region for the national capital city
is administered as a separate region and is not a part of
West Java province. Within these districts and municipal-
ities there are 390 kecamatans or subdistricts where there
is a penilik assigned and responsible for community educa-
tion in the subdistrict.

The subjects selected for the study represent six-
teen of the twenty-four districts and municipalities in the

West Java province.

Random Sampling

 

For the purpose of this study randomization was
used as a procedure in drawing the sample from its popula-
tion. Random sampling was considered appropriate to use
in this study for two major reasons. 933, recruitment of
peniliks is done through an administrative process where
defined criteria must be met. So, those who are appointed
as peniliks are considered to be at the same level of com-
petence regardless of their differences in age, years of
experience as a government employee and years of formal

education. Two, the geographic location and type of

    

\

 

      

 

., //

”Q a
7K’09—If I. ’ é
a». m.» r w :/
:§§§§ ‘:::;;;::::::::=:::::
Q§§§ “\ v—————“"————-——fl’
q )
\\\\>. _ fa,
\\\\ f “"'
(’0
A "'3
O I ‘\ O
I a u 3.3 C
\ C) ‘. .3 w m 3
- ’ ~ 3 3'0 3
l ‘4‘ to ”C m
2 ‘i ‘-- 3 8 m>~ x
“4; “Kw-4 'H
on 06H H
+3 in“! M
HU Hon. 0.
m m w mwa-H
U: “30 U
HVQ 'HvQ'l-C 'H
0.6 (Lu : c
: tux tax a a
£10- 0-1: a:
8 o o [2

of District
the Sample of the Study

9 .45 / ’/ i%\
m

UUUUUU

>«
u
w-l
U
.-I
II!
u
-.-c
Q-
«U
U
H
In
C
O
«4
u
en
2

Figure 3.1.-Map of West Java Province.

74

.nwumcovcH mo music.~.n muamwm

 

aumvcaom .mmwuuzsoo I:

  

.aosum wnu no mafia.
mongooum 95h. umwx I

 

I

0
.Av .H :9“
?\ x ’
.0:

a
$
b
+
4r? $.11. Y
x, *
S v n .brxan

nwumcovcH a

minoim

42(J_<tp

 

‘&

 

 

75

community in which a penilik was appointed to work in was
considered at random, in the sense that one was not con-
sidered better than the others. It is admitted, however,
that differences might exist between the big city and the
medium or small city situations. These differences, how-
ever, have their own advantages and disadvantages which are
hard to control in a study of this nature. For instance,
communication in big cities is relatively more simple and
does not create as large a problem for a penilik to move
about in carrying out his job. But life in a big city is
more complex, and the people are relatively more individ-
ualistic in living their life. This can potentially create
some difficulties for a penilik in performing his job. On
the other hand, communication in small cities is relatively
more difficult which also creates a problem for a penilik
in performing his job. But the life of the people in small
cities is relatively more simple which can assist the

penilik in working closely with them.

SamplingAgrocedures

 

Forty-five out of the 390 peniliks were drawn ran-
domly as subjects for the study. Again, these forty-five
peniliks were randomly assigned to three different treat-
ment groups. The first group of fifteen peniliks was I
assigned as group A to receive training using a
participatory-based approach; the second group of fifteen

peniliks was assigned as group B to receive training using

76

a lecture-based approach; while the third group of fifteen
peniliks was assigned as group C to receive no training and
to serve as a control group in the study.

Table 3.1 shows the names of the twenty-four dis-
tricts and municipalities in West Java province, the
number of subdistricts in each and the number of subdis-
tricts assigned to each of the treatment groups for the
study. A list showing the names of the districts included
in the sample, and the names of the subdistricts selected
for the study is shown in Table 3.2.

The randomization of the sample was done by using
slips of paper each of which contained the name of one of
the subdistricts in West Java. One at a time the slips
were drawn and sequentially assigned to each of the three
treatment groups. This drawing of slips of paper for
assignment was repeated until the total number of fifteen

subjects for each group was completed.

Research Procedures and Design

 

The "pretest-posttest control group" is used as the
major design of the study. Issues which this section dis-
cusses include treatment, pretesting and posttesting as the
major data collection procedures and interviews to get other

data supporting the major data elicited by the tests.

Treatment
Two short-term training sessions, each of one week

duration, were carried out for the two different

Table 3.l.--Names of the Districts and Municipalities in
the Number of Subdistricts

West Java Province,

77

in Each and the Number of Subdistricts Assigned
to Each of the Treatment Groups for the Study.

 

Number of

Number Included in

 

 

Mugizigaiity Subgigzzgcts Diggzrzzflpigefiiment

in West Java District/ Groups
Prov1nce Municipality N n n n u u "
umber A B C
1. Serang 26 - - - —
2. Pandeglang 16 - - - -
3. Lebak 15 - - - -
4. Tangerang l7 1 - 1 -
5. Bogor (Munic) 5 2 - - 2
6. Bogor (Distr) 24 - - — -
7. Sukabumi (Munic) 2 l - - 1
8. Sukabumi (Distr) 21 2 - 2 -
9. Bekasi 13 1 - l -
10. Karawang 12 1 - l -
11. Purwakarta 7 3 1 - 2
12. Cianjur l7 4 2 2 -
13. Bandung (Distr) 29 7 3 - 4
14. Bandung (Munic) 16 4 2 - 2
15. Subang ll 3 1 2 -
16. Indramayu 17 - - - -
17. Sumedang 14 4 2 - 2
18. Garut 23 6 2 2 2
19. Majalengka l7 - - - -
20. Tasikmalaya 25 2 - 2 -
21. Cirebon (Munic) 4 2 2 - -
22. Cirebon (Distr) 21 - - - -
23. Kuningan l4 2 - 2 -
24. Ciamis 24 - - - -
Total 390 45 15 15 15

 

78

 

“same conmuwu .m
mum»: Conwufiu .H .oflcozv conmuflo .m
Hanoawumo .N
cmomcmuma .H omumHm .H muumxm3uom .b
mcmcmmso .N doom Honcmflo .N
monocoxmcoumz .H mcmncmuflu .H nonCMHU .o
mconmcmHmz .m mcomouma .N muomcoomx .N
oumnwo .H muox usumw .H cmocmnEHq .H usumw .m
mmemEHU .m soumxwo .m
mconxmocmm .H Hummmconcms .H wcmowesm .v
Humnflsmx .m
magnum .H Goodman .H mamasm .m
amomoflu .m mcoocoomanx .N
>MHMQHU .xnm .H mcwmcswnfio .H Acacsz. masocwm .m
cmwcma Hsmfifio .w
unmansumm .m mcmwuom .m
monumamomm .m oumnnwom .N
“mummflu .H xmxmmocmm .H .Humfloc masocmm .H
:0: 8m: 3‘:

 

mmoouw ucmEumwue

sandmafloficnz\uofluumno

 

.mnsum may you wmuomamm muonuumnu

unsm mo mmsmz man can madamm man an cmcsaocH muofiuumfla may no mmsmzuu.~.m manna

79

 

umumm Homom .m
was»: uomom .H

.uam hasnmxsm .H

xmmsmxfio .H
ammxmm .H
mcmummcme .H

mowmoomx .N
msEflHHU .H

mmvmmnu .N
momsma .H

ummmflo .N
msuooflu .H

mcm3mumx
wwmxmm

ocmummcma

cmmcflcax

mamamfimeMB

ADHcoSV uomom

.uumagv Hesnmxsm

Aoflcszc Hasnmxnm

.ma
.mH

.vH

.MH

.NH

.HH

.oa

 

.- U:

3m:

3‘ a.

 

mmsouo ucwEumouB

xuflammflowcsz\uofluuwflo

 

.omscflucoonu.m.m magma

80

experimental groups--group A and group B. In these two
training sessions exactly the same texts were used. The
topics of the texts were around issues and problems related
to day-to-day's work of community education fieldworkers
in carrying out their job. Eight topics were chosen and
sanctioned by the Director of Penmas to be used in the
training. These eight topics included: (1) What is Commu-
nity Development?; (2) The Importance of the Local Needs;
(3) Strategies for Understanding Local Needs; (4) Drawing
Workable Conclusions About Community Developmental Needs;
(5) Identifying the Available Resources; (6) Prioritizing
Needs and Resources into a Workable Plan; (7) Facilitating
the Learning Process; and (8) Evaluating Community Educa-
tion Programs. 7

In performing the training, to reduce the research-
er's bias, another trainer was hired as a cotrainer to
conduct the training sessions together with the researcher.
This cotrainer was an experienced teacher with experience'
working as a lecturer in the Institute of Teacher Training
in Bandung. At the time when he was hired as a cotrainer
for the study he was a staff member of the Center for
Training and Community Learning Activities of Penmas. The
cotrainer was fully briefed by the researcher regarding the
nature of the study, strategies for conducting the training
and the texts and other materials that were to be used.

Besides the use of identical printed materials for

both training sessions, the allocation of time for each was

81

also the same. The primary difference that existed was the
way in which the information was delivered to the training
participants. In the participatory-based approach discus-
sions among the participants themselves either in small
groups or in large groups were very common features during
the training characterizing a freedom to express ideas and
thoughts. Lecturing was minimized in this first approach,
and two-way discussions between the presenters and the
participants were encouraged. Other participatory activ-
ities such as role playing, simulation, group project,
field observation, field practice and mutual planning were
also used as media to transfer the knowledge and skills
presented in the printed materials.

The lecture-based approach was quite different.
In this approach lecturing was the main vehicle for trans-
fering knowledge and skills. One-way communication was pro-
moted through lecturing with the training participants
listening. Question and answer opportunities occurred only
as demanded by the participants. V

To avoid contact between the participants of the
two different training sessions, the training sessions were
conducted on different dates and in different locations.
The participatory-based training for group A was conducted
from May 19 through May 24, 1979, at the Center for Train-
ing and Community Learning Activities in Lembang. This is
a small Center, in collaboration with Penmas, working under

the jurisdiction of the Directorate General for Out of

82

School Education, Youth and Sports. This Center is respon-
sible for running in-service training programs for all staff
members working under the DC of Out of School Education,
Youth and Sports.

The Center was selected for a training site due to
the availability of rooms for conducting meetings and dis-
cussions during the training, the availability of rooms for
accommodating the participants, a cafeteria, and the fact
that the Center is not very far from the researcher's home
in Bandung.

The second training session, the lecture-based
training for group B, was held from June 3 through June 8,
1979, at the Center for Inservice Training for Primary School
Teachers in Bandung. The reason for using this Center for
conducting the second training was, again, the availability
of rooms when they were needed since the Lembang Center was
not available at the time when the second training was to
be held. In this Center, rooms for conducting meetings and
discussions were also available, including rooms for
accommodation of the participants during the training and
a cafeteria. In general, both Centers were quite similar
in their physical appearance and in the learning facilities
they could provide.

The nine days after the first training was completed
and prior to the beginning of the second training was used
by the researcher and the cotrainer to make further prepara-

tions for the second training.

83

During the actual training periods, contact between
trainers and participants beyond the daily training hours
was minimized as far as possible. This precaution was made
to reduce uncontrolled factors influencing the results of
the treatment.

During the training all printed materials which
were prepared in advance, were distributed one night before
the day they were scheduled to be used. This allowed the
participants to have time to review the information.

While group A and group B received one week of
training, group C received no treatment and continued their

normal work routine.

Pretesting and Posttesting

 

Two types of tests were administered for this study.

Jr" , ’
The first one was a cognitive type of test and the second

one was a self-disclosure type of test. Both types of test
were administered prior to the training as pretests and

after the training as posttests.

Cognitive Type of Test

This test was administered three times during the
study. The first test was administered prior to the imple-
mentation of the training; the second test was administered
immediately after the training as a posttest I, and the
third test was administered six months after the completion

of the training as a posttest II. The cognitive type of

84

test was concerned with the knowledge and understanding of
the individual penilik participating in the study (Appendix

A).

Self-disclosure Type of Test

In principle, the self-disclosure type of test was
a self-reporting test where the pghfifks were asked to
report by themselves what job related activities they had
done in the field within the last six months, what activ-
ities at that moment were still going on in the field and
what activities were planned to be carried out in the next
six months. The data from the self-disclosure test would
have nothing to do with the administrative sanctioning of
their work.

This type of test was administered two times during
the study. The first test was administered prior to the
implementation of the training as a pretest, and the second
test was administered six months after the completion of
the training as a posttest. Both pre- and posttests used
the same test instruments. The self-disclosure type of test
was concerned with the actual on-the-job performance of the

individual penilik participating in the study (Appendix B).

The Pretest.--In administering the pretests for

 

both types, group C, the control group, which did not
receive any training, was also brought together to complete

the tests. This strategy was taken to make sure that all

85

three groups completed the pretests before any training
had started.

Group A and C were called upon first at the Center
for Training and Community Learning Activities in Lembang
one day before the day the training for group A was started.
Group B was called upon to complete the pretests one day
before the actual training for them was started.

Before starting on the pretests all peniliks were
told that a series of activities would follow for about six
months after the training was completed. These activities
would have nothing to do with the administrative regula-
tions of their work, and also would have nothing to do with
their career planning. The only concern of the trainers
was in trying to develop an effective and efficient way
for delivering training for peniliks. Whatever the results
of the tests or the training would be, they would provide a
solid foundation for the development of future training pro-
grams. For completing each of the two types of test a two

hour time period was provided.

The Posttest.--For the cognitive type of test the

 

posttest was administered two times during the study. The
first posttest, the posttest I, was administered for group
A and B immediately after the completion of each of the
trainings. The test instruments used in this posttest were
the same with those used in the pretest. This posttest I

was administered to measure any immediate effects of the

86

training on the cognitive skills of the participants.

Group C, the control group which did not receive any train—
ing, was also posttested to see if there was any effect on
their cognitive skills due to the experience of the comple-
tion of the pretest. But since group C did not attend any
training session, this posttest I for group C had to be
administered in the field. For this purpose two research
assistants were hired to help the researcher to accomplish
the posttest I for the group C. One was a graduate student
of the Institute of Teacher Training in Bandung, and the
other one was a technical staff member of the Regional Com-
munity Education Office.

_ After both training sessions were completed, a six
mogth period was provided to allow the participants to
resume their job in the field and to allow time for them to
practice the knowledge and skills received from the train-
ing. At this time, posttest II of the cognitive type
together with the posttest of the self-disclosure type were
administered.

The posttest II of the cognitive type was adminis-
tered to measure to what degree the knowledge and under-
standing achieved during the training was retained after
the six month period of time. The posttest of the self-
disclosure type of test was administered to see whether
any effects occurred regarding the self-reported perform-
ance of the job of the peniliks due to the training they

had completed.

87

As was done with the pretest of both types and the
posttest I of the cognitive type, the instruments used in
the posttest II of the cognitive type and the posttest of
the self-disclosure type were exactly the same. However,
different with the administration of the pretests and part
of the posttest I of the cognitive type, the administration
of the posttest II of the cognitive type and the posttest
of the self-disclosure type was completed individually in
the field for all forty-five peniliks participating in the
study. A longer time period was needed, therefore, to
accomplish both posttests since the examiners had to actu-
ally visit all of the forty-five peniliks in the field. It
took a total of nineteen days from November 17 through
December 5, 1979. Four people were involved in this activ-
ity, including the researcher himself, the coinstructor of
the training and the two other research assistants mentioned

earlier.

Interviews

 

Besides the major data collected through the test-
ing of the participants of the study, other data were also
collected from those who were not directly involved with
the study, but whose job was seen as quite relevant to the
job of the peniliks. These were the peniliks' immediate
supervisors. The supervisor operates at the district or
municipality level and supervises all of the peniliks who

work within his area.

88

Data from the supervisors were collected by way of
interview which was done twice during the study. The first
interview was conducted prior to the implementation of the
penilik training, and the second interview was conducted
six months later at the same time as the administration of
posttest II of the cognitive type and the posttest of the
self-disclosure type for the peniliks.

A11 sixteen supervisors of the peniliks used in the
study were interviewed to get their ideas about the job
performance of their peniliks who were involved in the
study. The results of the first and the second interviews
were compared to see if any changes occurred in the job
performance of the peniliks in terms of supervisor percep-
tion, due to the effect of training. The interview guides
for the supervisors can be found in Appendix C.

Figure 3.3 shows the design of the study in terms

of when the different types of data were collected.

Dependent and Independent Variables

 

The three major dependent variables that this study

A ,

examined were achievement, retention and performance.

 

 

 

Achievement level was measured using a cognitive type of
test which was administered prior to training as the pre-
test and immediately after training as the posttest I. The
peniliks' knowledge and understanding of problem areas of
their job, their ability to find ways for solving critical

problems they encountered, and analyzing situations to

89

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Grou Pre- Treat- Post- Field Practice Post-
p test ment test I (6 months) test II
Exp. A 01 X1 01 01
02 02
Exp. B 01 X2 01 01
02 02
Cntr. C 01 01 01
02 02
3‘39“" SI SI
Visors
NOTES: (1) 01 -- Cognitive type of test;
(2) 02 -- Self-disclosure type of test;
(3) SI -- Supervisor interviews;
(4) X1 -- Participatory-based training;
(5) x2 -- Lecture-based training.

Figure 3.3.--Main Design

of the Research Study.

90

apply the most effective strategies for efficiently accom-
plishing their job, were the factors which were measured by
this cognitive type of test. Scores elicited by the cog-
nitive posttest I were compared across the experimental
groups to see any achievement increase due to the different
approaches used in the training.

Retention level was measured using the same cog-
nitive test. It was administered as posttest II six months
after training. Scores elicited by this posttest II were
compared across the experimental groups to see how much
information was retained in terms of the different
approaches used in the training.

Performance level was measured using a self-
disclosure type of test which was administered prior to
training and six months after the completion of the train-
ing. Factors included in the performance which were
measured by the self-disclosure type of test were grouped
into five categories according to the roles that the
peniliks were supposed to perform in relation to their job
in the field. These five categories include: (1) the role
of the penilik as an organizer; (2) the role of the penilik
as a consultant; (3) the role of the peniZik as an enabler;
(4) the role of the penilik as a facilitator, and (5) the
role of the penilik as a planner.

The level of performance as an organizer was based
on the penilik's self—reported activities in organizing

learning groups of the people in the community, in

91

stimulating the people for further learning and in conduct-
ing group learning activities. The level of performance

as a consultant was based on the penilik's self-reported
activities in resolving community problems, in giving advice
to the people on how to identify their own developmental
needs, and in consulting with the peOple on how to utilize
the available resources to meet their own needs. The level
of performance as an enabler was based on the penilik's
self-reported activities in promoting the internal leader-
ship capacities within local learning groups and in promot-
ing the self-help capacities of the local people to achieve
a self-determination level of development of their own
community. The level of performance as a facilitator was
based on the penilik's self-reported activities in pro-
viding equipment and other educational facilities for learn-
ing. The level of performance as a planner was based on
the penilik's self-reported activities in planning ahead
what he will be doing for further development of the com-
munity. Scores on the penilik's performance in terms of
these five roles were compared across the experimental
groups to see the performance increase which might be due
to the different approaches used in the training.

Besides these primary dependent variables (achieve-
ment, retention and performance), another dependent vari-
able was also tested by this study. This was the penilik's
job performance in termsof his supervisor's perception.

Factors which contributed to the penilik's job performance

92

were initiative, ability to communicate with people, ability
to organize learning groups, ability to motivate discussion
in learning group activities and general ability in perform-
ing his job. Data for this dependent variable were col-
lected through interviews with the supervisors of the forty-
five peniliks participating in the study. The interview
was conducted twice during the study: first, prior to the
training, and second, six months after the completion of
the training. Scores elicited by these interviews were com-
pared across the experimental groups to see if there was
some increase in the penilik's job performance as it was
seen from his supervisor‘s perception.

Having some other dependent variables controlled,
such as age, level of education, work experience, amount
of salaries received, and characteristics of the communities
where they were working, the different approaches used in
the training were the independent variables that this study
was interested in examining. There were two different
training approaches which were used as treatment for three
different experimental groups. Group A received training
using a participatory-based approach, group B received train-
ing using a lecture-based approach and group C received no

training and served as a control group in this study.

Some Problems on Validity
Efforts were made and precautionary steps were taken

to prevent biases and other factors likely to affect the

93

validity of the study. As it is with other social studies,
especially those involving human behavior, however, uncon-
trolled factors can affect and jeopardize the validity of
the study. Some problems on validity as discussed by
Campbell and Stanley were the main reference in analyzing
the situation of the study (Donald T. Campbell and Julian C.

Stanley, 1966, pp. 5-6):

 

Factors Jeopardizing Ways Used to Control Them:
Validity:
1. History By using random sample pro-

cedures and random assign-
ments the individual differ-
ences of the participants of
the study (educational back-
grounds, work experience,

sex, age, place of work, etc.)
were controlled.

2. Maturation One of the reasons in using
the control group in this
study was to control the
effect of maturation of the
experimental groups due to
compounded experience over
time.

3. Testing The fact that testing pro-
cedures were administered in
the same ways to all three
groups in the study, experi-
mental as well as control,
was designed to eliminate the
possibility that testing would
only affect the experimental
group.

Factors Jeopardizing

Validity:

94

Ways Used to Control Them:

 

4.

5.

6.

Instrumentation

Selection effect

Mortality

Testing instruments as well
as printed materials were all
prepared in written form.
This was designed to control
the researcher's biases.

It was felt, however, that a
mere glance of eyes or moving
parts of the body differently
during the treatment (the
training) on the parts of the
researchers (instructors)
might be enough to affect the
results of learning on the
part of the participants.
This is one of the inherent
problems when dealing with
social studies and human
behavior.

Randomization procedures in
selecting the samples were
used to control the personal
biases of the researcher over
the participants of the study.
Secondly, the researcher did
not know anything about the
personal backgrounds of the
participants before they came
to the training session.

This could be controlled com-
pletely, since all partici-
pants in the study, the
peniliks, are government
employees, and government's
approval of the study demanded
their participation.

Factors Jeopardizing

Validity:

95

Ways Used to Control Them:

 

7.

8.

Reactive arrangement

Interaction effect

Until the end of the study,
and most probably up to the
present time when the report
of the study was prepared,
the participants of the study
never realized the idea or
the nature of the study.

They never were told to which
type of group they were
assigned. They only knew
that there were some other
groups involved in the same
study. Not realizing accu-
rately what position they had
in the study might help to
reduce to a minimum their
reactive arrangement which
might jeopardize the validity
of the study.

The Indonesian setting would
greatly limit if not elimi-
nate this factor. The day-to-
day work of the penilik was
itself enough to prevent him
from having contact with other
peniliks who live and work in
other areas some miles away
from his own. The other fac-
tors would be communication
problems, transportation and
money which are all extremely
limited for a great deal of
the Indonesian population.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSES OF THE DATA

In this chapter four sections will be presented.
These four sections include: Description of the Training,
Statistical Analyses of the Data, Summary of the Findings,
and Feedback from the Participants on the Training.

The first section, Description of the Training,
discusses how the different training approaches were imple-
mented in two different experimental groups during the
training, the major categories of the learning modes and
the allocation of time. Section two, Statistical Analyses
of the Data, displays and analyzes the data using standard
procedures of statistical analysis. Section three, Summary
of the Findings, summarizes the findings as those resulted I
from the analyses of the data. Section four discusses feed-
back from the participants on the training and their ideas
and comments to improve another training session of the

same kind.

Description of the Training
Training is the major treatment used in this study.

The amount of time allocated for the training for both

96

97

experimental groups was exactly the same. The total time
consumed for the teaching-learning activities during the
training sessions amounted to 1,530 minutes or 25.5 hours.
This does not include the time used for administering the
pretests and posttests which totaled four hours for each
type of test. It also does not include the one hour needed
for completing the feedback form which asked for the
participants' reactions at the conclusion of the training
program. All activities, both instructional and data
gathering, comprised six full working days.

The types of learning activities used during the
training sessions can be characterized in terms of five
major categories each of which differs in terms of struc-
ture and the amount of action demanded of the participant.
These five major categories are as follows:

I. Lecture/speech or presentation
by the lecturer

 

 

This is a type of teaching-learning activity where
the teacher(s) is presenting something orally to the par-
ticipants who are passively receiving (listening to) the
information. As a general rule there is no interaction
between the teacher(s) and the participants during the lec-
turing. The participants were often told at the outset
that time would be provided at the conclusion of the lec-
ture to ask questions or to make comments. This was con-

ducted as a large group activity.

98

II. Qpestion and answer
(unstructured)

 

This type of activity can be carried out in a small
as well as in a large group. The typical characteristic of
this activity is that it is unstructured. In the large
group situation this activity usually directly follows the
lecture session where the participants are free to ask ques-
tions or make comments about the topic just presented.

In some cases participants are broken down into
small groups of three to five people to freely discuss among
themselves questions raised by themselves on the topic
just presented by the lecturer or on issues just raised in
the large group discussion. However, for this type of
activity there are no guidelines or directions provided by
the lecturer. Also, there is no follow-up to this activity.
If the participants are asked to produce something as a
result of their discussion there is no feedback provided.

III. Classroom exercise and
discussion

 

This type of activity can be carried out in small
as well as in large groups. The main characteristic of the
classroom exercise is that there is no follow-up activity
or application of the exercise. For instance, the exercise
may focus on how to conduct an interview with village people
to identify their problems and needs or how to make obser-

vations about the village life.

99

In some cases participants are broken down into
small groups of three to five people to discuss among them-
selves the preparation of guidelines for fieldwork. The
important aspect of this type of activity is that they will
not go out to the field to do the real fieldwork. The
participants were made aware from the outset that what they
were going to do was just as an exercise.

IV. Group project, field trip

and discussion with
assignment

 

 

Different than the exercise activities, this type
of activity has the participants doing real things. Activ-
ities in this category are primarily small group activities.

As a group project the participants work together
to finish a certain project which the members of the group
can actually use. For instance, they could develop an
interview guide that could later be used in real fieldwork.
The difference between a group project and a classroom exer—
cise is that in developing a project the group received
guidelines before the small groups were initiated. And
also, the results of the group project sessions would be
sanctioned by the large group meeting and the instructor(s).

In field trip activities the participants went out
in teams or small groups to actually work with the people
in the community, whether they were doing interviewing,
observations or having informal discussions with the

people.

100

Discussion with assignment characterizes activities
that belonged to this category because they were structured.
The assignments were formulated by and during the large

group sessions, together with the instructor(s).

V. Role-play

 

This is structured activity. Three to five people
were assigned to do the role-play. Each one of the small
group members received a short written instruction telling
him exactly what he should be doing during the role-play.
The rest of the group watched. They were told, however,
before the role-play began that they should carefully and
critically observe what would be going on in the role-play.
Later on they would be able to raise questions or comments
on anything concerned with the role-play.

If more than one role-play was to be conducted, the
general rule was that different participants were assigned
to the different role-plays.

Table 4.1 shows how the total time of the training
session was allocated in terms of these five categories.

In the percentage column is shown the proportion of the
time allocated for each category to the total length of time
used during the training.

The table shows that for group B, the lecture group,
almost half of the time during the training session was

primarily used for lectures (49 percent). While for group

101

Table 4.1.--Allocation of Time of the Training Session
According to the Category of the Learning
Modes, by Different Treatment Groups.

 

 

 

 

Participatory Lecture
Category of the group: group:
Learning Modes
. % of . % of
Minutes Total Minutes Total
I. Lecture/speech or
presentation by the
lecturer: 240 16 750 49
II. Unstructured question
and answer: 180 12 420 27
III. Classroom exercise
and discussion: 420 27 240 16
IV. Group project, field
trip and discussion
with assignment: 525 34 120 8
V. Role-play: 165 ll 0 0

Total: 1530 100% 1530 100%

 

 

102

.Aq the participatory group, the corresponding activities
<:onsumed only 16 percent of the total time.

For category II activities, unstructured question
and answer, group B consumed as much as 27 percent of the
total time, where group A consumed only 12 percent of the
time. It is admitted, however, that in these activities
there is interaction among the group members and there are
some kinds of participation by the members in the learning
activities. But it is assumed that this type of interac-
tion and participation was not high. This is due to the
fact that participants were told in advance that the outputs
of this type of activity would not be sanctioned. The con-
cept of sanctioning is an important motivator in the Indo-
nesian context.

Working with the assumption that category II activ-
ities were nonparticipatory in nature, then category II and
category I could be added together. For group B the figure
comprises 76 percent as compared to only 28 percent for
group A. In other words, more than three-fourths of the
‘whole time during the training was used by group B for
learning activities where the members did not fully and
actively participate in the learning process. While for
group A this type of activity consumed only a bit more than
a quarter (28 percent) of the total time.

As has been described, the last three categories
insure high interaction among the members of the group and

full and active participation by the members in the learning

103

.activities. If these three categories are added together
‘the percentage figures yielded are 24 percent for group B
sand 72 percent for group A. These figures suggest that
(during the training session less than a quarter (24 percent)
<>f the whole time was used by group B for active partici-
jpation by the members in the learning activities. On the
<3ther hand, this same type of activity, for group A, con-
sumed almost three-quarters of the total time (72 percent)
of the learning activities.

Figure 4.1 shows the proportion of the learning

Inodes of the participants in pictorial fashion.

Statistical Analyses of the Data

.Assumptions for the Analysis
of Variance

The data collected in this study were mainly anal-
jyzed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) to see the dif-
ference between means across the experimental groups as
affected by the treatment. Using ANOVA as the method of
analysis implies the validity of the three basic assumptions

held for this study which include normally distributed

 

population, homogeneity of the variance of the groups under
study and independent observation of each group in the
study or individuals within each group (William L. Hays,

1973, p. 467).

104

(

 

--participatory-learning activities;

,<::::>--nonparticipatory-learning activities.

Figure 4.l.--Proportion of the Learning Modes of the
Participants When Category I and Category
II Were Added-Together as Nonparticipatory
Learning Activities.

105

Normally distributed population
The knowledge, understanding as well as the per-
formance level of the peniliks are assumed to be

normally distributed throughout the province.

Homogeneity of the variance of the groups under study
The sample was drawn randomly from the normally
distributed population. The assignment for each
experimental group and the assignment of each
individual observation into each group were also
drawn randomly. The variance of the peniliks for
each experimental group is, therefore, assumed to
be the same.

Independent observation

 

Selection of the samples comprising the experi-
mental groups as well as the assignment of groups
and of individuals into the groups were random.

This gives a basis to assume that each group as

 

well as each observation within each group is

 

independent. It bears a consequence that the

 

errors associated with any pair of observations

are assumed to be independent.

As was described in the design of the study, pre-
tests were administered before treatment was applied for
all variables in the study, i.e., the cognitive skills, the
self-reported performance and the perception of the super-

visors of the participants' job performance. The results

106

of the pretest were mainly used to see whether the results
of the posttests of related variables increased due to the
treatment, decreased or were unaffected. The pretest scores,
however, could not be used as covariates to adjust the post-
test scores (analysis of covariance) since the value of 8
(beta) as the regression coefficient or the slope of regres-
sion of each dependent variable with related independent
variable (for all variables and across the experimental

groups) were not homogeneous. Table 4.2 shows the value of

 

the constant 8 of each dependent variable with its inde-
pendent variable across the experimental groups. These
data support the use of the analysis of variance procedure

rather than the analysis of covariance procedure.

The Effects of the Treatment

A central concern in the evaluation of any educa-
tional experience is the amount of learning that takes place.
In the present study attention was directed toward ascer-
taining the extent to which participants increased their
cognitive skills, retained the knowledge derived from the
training and increased their level of performance on their
job in the field. Each of these dependent variables will
be considered. Another area that will be examined will be
the effect of the training of the participants on the per-

ception of their supervisors.

107

Table 4.2.--The Regression Coefficient (the Constant B) of
Each Dependent Variable with Its Related Inde-
pendent Variable.

 

Dependent with

 

 

Experimental Experimental Control
Independent
Variable Group A Group B Group C
C2 with Cl .549 .755 .465
C3 with Cl .832 .636 .227
P1 with 81 .401 -.166 .481
P2 with 82 .435 -.041 .090
P3 with S3 .600 .006 -.204
P4 with S4 .423 .409 -.019
P5 with SS .333 .265 -.062
12 with 11 .679 .657 1.031
Notes: Cl -- Pretest Cognitive Total;
C2 -- Posttest I Cognitive Total;
C3 -- Posttest II Cognitive Total;
81 -- Pre-Organizer; P1 -- Post-Organizer;
82 -- Pre-Consultant; P2 -- Post-Consultant;
83 -- Pre-Enabler; P3 -- Post-Enabler;
S4 -- Pre-Facilitator; P4 -- Post-Facilitator;
SS -- Pre-Planner; P5 -- Post-Planner;
Tl -- Pre-Total Performance;
T2 -- Post-Total Performance;
11 -- Dre-Interview of the Supervisor;
12 -- Post-Interview of the Supervisor.

108

A. The Effect of Short-Term
Training on Cognitive
Skills
As described in the previous chapter the hypotheses
were stated in a directional form. These hypotheses were
treated here as the alternative hypotheses with appropriate
null hypotheses developed for the purpose of the statistical

analysis. Two hypotheses were tested to see the effects of

treatment on cognitive skills.

Null Hypothesis (Ho) #1

 

There will be no significant increase in the cog-
nitive skills of the participants immediately

following short-term training.

Null Hypothesis #2

 

Cognitive skills will not be affected by different
training approaches when examined immediately
following short-term training.

As indicated in Table 4.3, a significant difference
exists between the means of the cognitive scores of the
three different experimental groups at greater than the .05
level of confidence (.0005). The Eta value (.30), however,
indicates that the correlation is not high. In other words,
as indicated by the value of Multiple R2, only about 9.3
percent of the variance can be accounted for by the treat-
ment. Further analysis using the Tukey-HSD (Honestly
Significant Difference) procedure, i.e., the Multiple Range

Test, for the .05 level of confidence indicates that the

109

 

 

 

 

mac. n mm mHmHuHsz h~.mv ov.me ma 6 muons

om. n mum mm.mm om.mm ma m macho

mm.ao o¢.~m ma < doouo

H unmanned umwumum z muommumo

cmmz \manmwnm>

HHHa.Hmmv we Hmuoe

Humm.mn ooom.ooam mv canvas

mooo. vmvm.m mmmm.mmw HHHH.Hmma m cmw3uwm
wuwafinmnoum m ofiumm m mmnmocm cams mmumoqm mo 85m .m.o mouoom

 

.Amo. u mcmadv mmsouu wm .mcwcwmua EH09
quonm mcfisoaaom mawumflomfieH omuommoz cos: maawxw m>wuwcmoo How ¢>oz<lu.m.¢ mange

110

means difference between group A and group B is not sig-
nificant since both means are within the same subset.

This is shown in Table 4.4. The means of group A and of
group B are within the homogeneous subset, where the means
of the first and the last groups differ by less than the
critical value for a subset of that size. Group C, on the
other hand, lies in a different subset than group A and
group B. This indicates that the means difference between
group A and group C and between group B and group C are
significant at the .05 level.

Table 4.4.--The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test on Cognitive
Skills, By Groups (Alpha = .05).

 

 

 

Subset 1
Group mean: Group C
49.2667
Subset 2
Group mean: Group B Group A
59.9333 61.9333
Ranges for the .05 level: 3.43 3.43

The ranges above are tabular values. The value actually
compared with Mean (J) - Mean (I) is . . . .
6.1342 * range * sqrt(1/N(I) + l/N(J)).

 

The results of this Multiple Range Analysis leads
to two major conclusions. One, that short-term training
is effective in terms of increasing the cognitive skills of

the participants regardless of what approach is used in the

lll

training; and two, that there is no significant difference
in the cognitive skills of the participants due to the dif-
ferent approaches used in the training. Though the par-
ticipatory group shows a somewhat higher achievement level
than the lecture group, this difference may be due to
chance. These findings suggest that the null hypothesis #1
is rejected. The probability is less than 5 percent that
the differences were due to chance. The null hypothesis
#2, however, could not be rejected on the basis that the
difference is less than the critical value for a subset

of that size. The data also show that there was a slight
increase in the cognitive skills of group C, the control
group. This increase is assumed to be due to a maturity
effect, since group C did not receive any training.

When each group is examined independently in terms
of cognitive skill change from pretest to posttest I, not
assuming equality on the pretest, a partial rejection of
null hypothesis #1 is found and a complete rejection of
null hypothesis #2 is found. As is shown in Figure 4.2,
group A (participatory group) shows a significant increase
in cognitive skills and group B (lecture group) and group

C (control group) show no significant increase.

112

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posttest I Posttest II
Training
Pretest A. (4)-3’) __ n 41C“ .80)
\, '—* If )6:
1:5 $ 51,, (‘0. 33.)
Busn-a)
(33.50); 5 fl 5 K S
(:2. «0) A S
——-x
l_._ g C' 90. $3
(48- V6) C —— c. (3441.23) 2 L J
- one week-——9 e————— six months ———9

 

Notes: s = significant
ns = not significant

Figure 4.2.--The Effects of Short-Term Training on Achieve-

ment and Retention of the Cognitive Skills of
the Participants, By Groups.

B. The Long-Term Effects of
Short-Term Training
(Retention)
For the purpose of statistical analysis the follow-
ing null hypotheses were developed on the basis of the

rival hypotheses (alternative hypotheses) mentioned earlier.

Null Hypothesis #3
Short-term training has no long-term effect on the
participants in terms of their cognitive skills

derived from the training (retention).

Null Hypothesis #4
Cognitive skills will not be affected by different
training approaches when examined six months follow—

ing short-term training (retention).

113

The analysis of variance and the Tukey-HSD multiple
range test were used to test these hypotheses. As Table
4.5 reveals, the difference in the mean scores of the post-
test II (retention) among the three experimental groups was
highly significant (.0002). This means that there is a
significant effect of short-term training on retention of
the knowledge derived from the training beyond the 5 percent
level of confidence. All three groups under study show a
slight increase in the scores on posttest II as compared
with the scores on posttest I. Since all three groups have
approximately the same proportion of increase, these
increases on the posttest II scores can be explained as a
maturity effect due to the elapsed time. Further analysis
using the multiple range test indicates that the difference
between group A and group B is not significant since both
are in the same subset. Group C is in a different subset.
This implies that the difference between group B and
group C and the difference between group A and group C are
significant.

The results of the analyses suggest that short-term
training affects retention significantly at greater than
the 5 percent level of confidence. In other words, after a
six month period, there is still seen a significant increase
in cognitive skills for those groups that received train-
ing. This further implies that the null hypothesis #3 is
rejected with a high level of confidence. The probability

is less than 5 percent that the differences were due to

114

 

 

 

 

can. u mm manages: mm.om b~.ms ms 0 msouw

mm. H mum mh.ow mm.mm mH m moouw

om.~m ma.Hm ma a macho

HH umwuumom H umouumom z whomoumo

cam: \msnmnum>

mnhm.vmmm vv Hmuoe

Hmmm.am homo.ammm Nv canufiz

mooo. mmme.oa mmmm.mvo Haam.mmma m cmw3umm
xuwaflnmnoum m oflumm m mmumoqm cows mmumovm mo sum .m.o mousom

 

Sumeuuuonm mcfl3oHHom mnucoz

.Amo. u man<. mmsouw hm .mcwcwmua

xam amusmmmz cos: mHHme w>nUHcmoo co <>ozauu.m.v magma

115

chance. The Eta value (.33), however, is not high which
indicates that only about 11 percent of the variance can be
accounted for by the treatment.

The different approaches used in the training, how-
ever, did not seem to affect retention differently. In
other words, in relation to retention both approaches are
equally effective. This is shown in Table 4.6 where the
differences between group B and group C and the differences
between group A and group C both are significant, while
the difference between group B and group A is not signifi-
cant. This explanation leads to the conclusion that the
null hypothesis #4 is not rejected. The difference between
group B and group A is, therefore, due to chance.

Table 4.6.--The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test on Cognitive

Skills When Measured Six Months Following
Short-Term Training, By Groups (Alpha = .05).

 

 

 

Subset 1
Group mean: Group C
50.5333
Subset 2
Group mean: Group B Group A
60.7333 62.8000
Ranges for the .05 level: 3.43 3.43

The ranges above are tabular values. The value actually
compared with Mean(J) - Mean(I) is . . . .
5.5539 * Range * Sqrt(1/N(I) + l/N(J)).

 

116

Figure 4.2 graphically demonstrates how short-term
training affects achievement and retention in terms of the
cognitive skills of the participants.

C. The Effects of Short-Term
Training on Self-Reported
Performance

Five roles were identified as areas of performance
of the penilik for carrying out his job. These five areas
of performance include the roles of the penilik as g£g_-

nizer, as consultant, as enabler, as facilitator and as

 

 

planner. Combining these five areas of performance com-

prises the general performance or the total performance of

 

the penilik in carrying out his job. The data made avail-
able by the present study were analyzed according to these
five areas of performance and also for the total perform-
ance of the peniZik.

Data on performance were elicited by a Self-
Disclosure Type of Test as shown in Appendix B. There were
pine questions in this test which provided the data for
analysis in this study. The other questions provided infor-
mation primarily related to the background of each indi-
vidual participant which might be important for further in-
depth study (i.e., name, age, sex, education, training
experience, work experience, etc.).

The information provided by these nine questions
were categorized in terms of the five areas of performance

as follows:

117

organizer role comprises questions #11, #16, #17
and #18;

consultant role comprises questions #14 and #15;
enabler role comprises question #12;

facilitator role comprises question #13; and
planner role comprises question #20.

For the purpose of statistical analysis, null

hypotheses were developed on the basis of the rival

hypotheses described earlier. The analysis of the data

is presented along with the appropriate null hypothesis for

each of the peniliks' roles.

l. Organizer Role.

 

Null Hypothesis #5

 

Short-term training will have no significant effect
on the self-reported performance of the participants
in organizing community peOple for learning activ-

ities.

Null Hypothesis #6

Self-reported performance in organizing community
people for learning activities will not be
affected by different approaches used in short-
term training.

The results of the statistical analyses show that

there was an increase in the self-reported performance of

the participants in organizing community people for

118

learning activities among the experimental groups. This
increase was highly significant beyond the 5 percent level
of confidence (.0007). The analysis suggests that this
difference was due to the previous short-term training
received by the participants. The Eta value (.29) is not
high, however, which indicates that only about 8.6 percent
of the difference could be accounted for by the previous
treatment. The analysis is shown in Table 4.7.

The original test scores, Table 4.7, indicate a
number of things. One, group C, the control group, shows
a decrease from 51.86 on the pretest to 37.73 on the post-
test. There was not enough evidence, however, to indicate
what might have caused the decrease. For instance, there
might have been changes in the work situation during the
last six months, the government policy on education in
general or financial factors. Whatever it was, it is
assumed that those kinds of situations would be shared by
all education field workers in West Java province. This
assumption was supported by the fact that even though group
B. the lecture group, received intensive training for one
week, the training did not greatly affect their posttest
Scores (from 53.13 on the pretest to 53.40 on the posttest).
iFurther, regardless of what external situations might have
<Dccurred, group A, the participatory group, did show a
great deal of change. This was clearly indicated by the
ifact that the mean for group A was 52.06 on the pretest and

lincreased to 67.80 on the posttest. However, analysis using

119

 

 

 

 

 

mmo. u mm mamauasz mn.nm om.am ma u msouo

mm. u mum oe.mm ma.mm ma m msouo

om.hw oo.mm ma m moouo

uwmuumom umwumum z anommumu

cam: \waanum>

mnnm.mmomm «v Hmuoe

mmmm.bmm mmmm.mm~ma mg cfinuflz

nooo. momn.m ~m~o.~mmm vvwo.¢mho N cmm3umm

muflaflnmnoum m oflumm m mmumoqm cow: mmumoqm mo 85m .m.© mouoom
.Amo.

n mamadv manouw >m .Hmuflcmmuo cm mm mosmfiuowumm Umunommmlwamm Mom <>Oz<ll.n.v manna.

120

the Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test reveals that the differ-
ence between group A and group B was not significant at the
5 percent level of confidence. The difference between group
B and group C was also not significant, while the differ-
ence between group A and group C was significant. This is

shown in Table 4.8.

Table 4.8.--The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test for Self-
Reported Performance as Organizer, By Groups
(Alpha = .05).

 

 

 

Subset 1
Group mean: Group C Group B
37.7333 53.4000
Subset 2
Group mean: Group B Group A
53.4000 67.8000
Ranges for the .05 level: 3.43 3.43

The ranges above are tabular values. The value actually
compared with Mean(J) - Mean(I) is . . . .
13.9168 * Range * Sqrt(l/N(I) + l/N(J)).

The results of these statistical analyses suggest
(1) that the null hypothesis #5 is rejected, in the sense
that short-term training does create a significant increase
in the self-reported performance of the penilik in organiz-
iJng community people for learning activities if the
Participatory-based approach rather than the lecture-based
approach was used in the training; and (2) that the null

1‘IYpothesis #6 is not rejected since the different approaches

121

used in the training did not have a significantly differ-
ent effect on the organizer-role performance. Figure 4.3
graphically demonstrates these findings and provides further

clarity to the analyses.

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest
IT A (‘?.80) °
'15 (
B L53.Q0) S
LS3J3) 5 il/
($1.05) fi It “5 (
(SL3§>C’k—*
fiai C‘L37‘73)

e—————-six months-——————+

 

 

Notes: 5 = significant
ns = not significant

Figure 4.3.--The Effects of Short-Term Training on the

Self-Reported Performance of the Participants
as an Organizer, By Groups.

2. Consultant Role.

 

Null Hypothesis #7

 

Short-term training will have no significant effect
on the self-reported performance of the partici-
pants in providing consultations with local commu-

nity people to overcome their problems.

Null Hypothesis #8
Self-reported performance in providing consulta-
tions with local community people to overcome their
problems will not be affected by different

approaches used in short-term training.

122

The results of the analysis of variance, as shown
in Table 4.9, indicate that differences between mean scores
among the three groups under study were not significant
(.4787). This suggests that self-reported performance in
providing consultations with local community people is not
affected by the short-term training. Further analysis
using the Multiple Range Test, the Tukey-HSD procedure, as
shown in Table 4.10, confirmed that differences between
means of the three groups under study were due to chance
and not affected by the difference of the approaches used.
As the table shows, all three groups were in the same sub-
set. The results of these statistical analyses suggest
that both null hypotheses, Ho #7 and Ho #8, were not
rejected at alpha = .05.

Figure 4.4 graphically demonstrates these findings.

3. Enabler Role.

 

Null Hypothesis #9

 

Short-term training will have no significant effect
on the self-reported performance of the participant
in promoting internal leadership capacities of the

local people.

Null Hypothesis #10
Self-reported performance in promoting leadership
capacities of the local people will not be affected

by different approaches used in short-term training.

123

 

 

 

 

 

Hoo. H mm ov.m mm.HH ma 0 moouw

mo. n mum oo.oa mv.ma ma m macaw

sw.~a mH.m ma a macho

ummuumom ummumum z anommumu

com: \manmwum>

mnhm.mno~ we Hmuoe

va>.nv mmmm.ooo~ Ne canvas

hmhv. hmvh. mmmm.mm vevm.ah N cmwzumm

muHHHnmnoum m oflumm m mmumsqm cmwz mommsvm mo 85m .m.c condom
.Amo.

u man<v masouw hm .ucwuaomcoo m mm mocmEHOMHmm nwuuommMIMHmm How fl>02<ll.m.v mHQmE

124

Table 4.10.--The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test for Self-
Reported Performance as Consultant, By Groups
(Alpha = .05).

 

 

Subset 1

Group mean: Group C Group B Group A
9.4000 10.6000 12.4667

Ranges for the .05 level: 3.43 3.43

The ranges above are tabular values. The value actually
compared with Mean(J) — Mean(I) is . . . .
4.8880 * Range * Sqrt(l/N(I) + l/N(J)).

 

Pretest Posttest

#01449)
“NW *-— %(
01.“) c «k / WIBUWGOJ hs

C 5) A A/ “‘4 C‘t-HO)
6!.) r

six months

\I

 

(

 

 

Note: ns = not significant

Figure 4.4.--The Effects of Short—Term Training on Self-
Reported Performance of the Participants as
Consultant, By Groups.

125

The results of the analysis of variance to test the
difference between means of the posttest scores of the
three groups under study are presented in Table 4.11. The
information revealed by this analysis indicates that a
significant difference exists between means of posttest
scores of the three groups under study. The significant
level is greater than 5 percent (.0114) which indicates
that the probability of the difference among the means
tested to be a chance is less than 5 percent.

The Eta value (.19) is, however, not high which
indicates that only about 3.9 percent of the variances were
accounted for by the treatment.

Information revealed by the Tukey-HSD Multiple
Range Test for the .05 level, as shown in Table 4.12,
indicates that a significant difference between means
exists between group A and group B, but it does not exist
between group A and group C and also does not exist between
group B and group C. This finding is not very common in
experimental studies, where one of the treatment groups (in
this case, group B) shows a decrease in the posttest as com-
Pared with the pretest score, while the control group
(group C) remains constant.1 The reason why group B
<3ecreased on the posttest as compared to the pretest score

is something which is hard to explain due to the

\¥

1As a matter of fact, group C also shows a decrease,
lfrom 8.13 on the pretest to 8.00 on the posttest. But since
‘the decrease is very small (.13), it can be considered neg-
ligible.

126

 

 

 

 

 

mmo. u mm maasuasz oo.m ms.m ma o msouw

as. u mum mn.m mn.h ms m muono

mn.a mh.n ma a macho

ummuumom ummumum z suommumo

cam: \manmaum>

mhhm.mmm as Hmuoa

ammo.ms Room.kom we unsung

vHHo. msmm.s ommm.oo Haan.o~a N ammsumm

mufiafinwnoum m Owumm m mongovm cum: mmumovm m0 Sam .m.o mousom
.Amo.

u mamafiv mdoouw mm .Hmanmcm cm mm mocmEHOwumm pmuuomwmlwawm How ¢>OZ<II.HH.V mange

127

Table 4.12.--The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test for Self-
Reported Performance as Enabler, By Groups
(Alpha = .05).

 

 

 

Subset 1
Group mean: Group B Group C
5.7333 8.0000
Subset 2
Group mean: Group C Group A
8.0000 9.7333
Ranges for the .05 level: 3.43 3.43

The ranges above are tabular values. The value actually
compared with Mean(J) - Mean(I) is . . . .
2.4589 * Range * Sqrt(l/N(I) + l/N(J)).

 

uncontrolled factors which might have affected the treatment
groups during the six month period following the treatment
(short-term training). However, while group B has
decreased, group A shows a considerable increase on the
posttest as compared to the pretest score. This supports
the hypothesis that the participatory-based approach to
short-term training is more effective than the lecture-
based approach to short-term training for self-reported
performance as an enabler.

The results of the statistical analyses suggest
that the null hypothesis #9 cannot be rejected since
neither approach is significantly different than the con-

trol group mean for self-reported performance as an enabler.

128

There is a strong basis for rejecting the null
hypothesis #10 at greater than the 5 percent level of
confidence (.0114). This suggests that the different
approaches used in the short-term training had different
effects in promoting the internal leadership capacities
of the local people. The findings favor the participatory—
based approach over the lecture-based approach to training.
The probability is less than 5 percent that the difference
was due to chance.

Figure 4.5 graphically demonstrates these findings.

Pretest Posttest

I». an»
(3.1%) C Jr //5(

/ ”C ($.00) S
L113) ‘25 7“
H5 (.933)

e—————— six months -———————>

 

 

Notes: 3 = significant
ns = not significant

Figure 4.5.--The Effects of Short-Term Training on the Self-

Reported Performance of the Participants as an
Enabler, By Groups. '

4. Facilitator Role.

Null Hypothesis #11
Short-term training will have no significant effect

on the self-reported performance of the participants

129

in providing learning equipment and facilities for

the local people.

Null Hypothesis #12

 

Self-reported performance in providing learning
equipment and facilities for the local people will
not be affected by different approaches used in
short-term training.

The results of the analysis of variance to test
the difference between means of the posttest scores of the
three groups under study are presented in Table 4.13. The
information revealed by this analysis indicates that the
differences between means of the three groups under study
were not significant. This suggests that null hypothesis
#11 was not rejected. In other words, the probability that
the differences between the mean scores of the three experi-
mental groups were due to chance is very high (91.90 per-
cent).

The Eta value (.004) was also very small, which
indicates that far less than 1 percent (R2 = .000016) of the
variances were accounted for by the treatment.

Further analysis using the Tukey-HSD Multiple Range
Test confirms that differences between means of the three
groups under study were due to chance since the three means
were in the same subset. This suggests that null hypothesis
#12 was also not rejected. In other words, the different

approaches used in the short-term training did not have a

130

 

waoooo. H m m5. om.H ma U QDOHU

 

 

 

 

N
eoo. u mum om. mp. ma m ozone
mm. mm. ma 4 msouo
ummuumom umwumum z huommumo
cmwz \OHQMflHm>
ooom.mm ee Hmooa
meme. hemo.mm me cacuwz
omam. memo. memo. mmma. m smmzumm
muflawnmnoum m owumm h mmumovm cmwz mmumsqm no How .m.o mouoom
.Amo.

u unmadv masouw mm .mowwuflaflomm 6 mm mocmEHomem omuuommmamawm mom <>OZ¢II.MH.e magma

131

different effect in terms of the self-reported performance
in providing learning equipment and facilities for the

local people. In this respect both approaches were equally

not effective.

Table 4.14.-~The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test for Self-
Reported Performance as Facilitator, By Groups.

 

 

Subset 1

Group mean: Group C Group B Group A
.7333 .8000 .8667

Ranges for the .05 level: 3.43 3.43

The ranges above are tabular values. The value actually
compared with Mean(J) - Mean(I) is . . .

.6274 * Range * Sqrt(l/N(I) + l/N(J)).

 

Figure 4.6 graphically demonstrates these findings.

Pretest Posttest

Lqujd I
\ #’ch,g'?)

used *r—fi \ ":SIwL.ro))ohg

c-m’ #7 Nag: ms)

 

e——————-six months -

 

 

Note: ns = not significant

Figure 4.6.--The Effects of Short-Term Training on the Self-
Reported Performance of the Participants as a
Facilitator, By Groups.‘

132

5. Planner Role.

 

Null Hypothesis #13

 

Short-term training will have no sigificant effect
on the self-reported performance of the partici-

pant in forward planning for his job.

Null Hypothesis #14

 

Self-reported performance in forward planning will
not be affected by different approaches used in
short-term training.

Analysis of variance was used to test the differ-
ence between means of the three groups under study. The
information resulting from this analysis can be found in
Table 4.15.

The information reveals that a significant differ-
ence exists between means of the posttest scores of the
three groups at greater than the 5 percent confidence level
(.0077). In other words, the probability that the differ-
ence was due to chance was less than 5 percent. The Eta
value (.21) was not high which indicates that only around
4.3 percent of the variance was accounted for by the treat-
‘ment. Further analysis using the Tukey-HSD procedure to
test the multiple comparisons in the analysis of variance
revealed that significant differences exist between the
means of group A and group B and between the means of group
A and group C, but not between the means of group B and

group C. This information is shown in Table 4.16.

133

 

 

 

 

 

meo. u mm me.m me.m ma 0 muons

Hm. n mum mm.m mm.n ma m maouo

mH.mH mm.m mm a msouo

ummuumom ammumum z muowmumo

manm.emma ee Hmuoe

oamm.m~ ooom.>a~a we assume

shoe. omae.m mmmm.mms mnnm.nflm m cmmzumm

MuHHflnmnoum m owumm m mmumsqm :mmz mmumovm mo Sam .m.© mouoom
.imo.

u mamaév mucosa mm .uwccmam m mm mocmEHOHHmm omuuommmnmamm Hem <>OZ¢nu.mH.e wanna

134

Table 4.16.--The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test for Self-
Reported Performance as Planner, By Groups
(Alpha = .05).

 

 

 

Subset 1
Group mean: Group C Group B
9.4667 9.5333
Subset 2
Group mean: Group A
15.1333
Ranges for the .05 level: 3.43 3.43

The ranges above are tabular values. The value actually
compared with Mean(J) - Mean(I) is . . . .
3.8066 * Range * Sqrt(l/N(I) + 1/N(J)).

 

As shown in the Table 4.16, the means of group B
and group C are both in the same subset (subset 1), while
group A is in different subset (subset 2).

The results of these statistical analyses suggest
two things. 92;, that the null hypothesis #13 is rejected
on the ground that short-term training did make a signifi-
cant difference on the means of the self-reported perform-
ance planner scores if a participatory-based approach to
training is used. Twp, that the null hypothesis #14 is also
rejected at greater than the 5 percent level of confidence.
This supports the participatory-based approach as being
more effective than the lecture-based approach in short-
term training in terms of increasing the self-reported

performance of the participant in planning ahead. The

135

probability that the difference between the two means was
due to chance is less than 5 percent (.0077). Figure 4.7

graphically demonstrates these findings.

Pretest Posttest

IAUSJB)

‘11

q.(.e)A .. was»
( M, c (ems)

(q‘q‘) c ‘i/

(1.31) 5 *

 

\r

<L______ six months

 

 

Notes: 5 = significant
ns = not significant

Figure 4.7.--The Effects of Short-Term Training on the Self-

Reported Performance of the Participants as a

Planner, By Groups.

As shown in the figure (Figure 4.7) control group
C functioned appropriately with both the pretest and post-
test scores exactly the same. The lecture group (group B)
did increase its posttest score slightly. This increase,
however, was not significant as compared with the increaSe
achieved by the participatory group (group A).
The Effects of Short-Term Training on the

Total Self-Reported Performance of
the Participants

 

 

It was felt that by bringing together the scores of

the five variables which have just been discussed (organizer,

136

consultant, enabler, facilitator and planner) it would be
helpful in seeing the general trend of the participants'
self-reported performance. Especially, in terms of the
effect of short-term training using two different approaches.
As the results of the previous analyses suggest,
the effect of short-term training and the effect of the
different approaches used in the training were different
for different variables. These differences could be parti-
ally attributed to uncontrolled factors which is one of the
major weaknesses when dealing with social and human behav-
iors in an experimental context. As it was built in the
design of this study, a six month practice period was pro-
vided for the training participants after the completion of
the training to allow them to apply the knowledge and skills
that they received from the training. During this six
month period there was no other treatment, and there was no
form of control assumed by this study. It is highly proba-
ble that during that time some outside and uncontrolled
factors came to influence the individual observations under
the study. But in spite of the fact of the differences that
occurred, and in spite of the fact that some uncontrolled
factors may have influenced the results of the study, the
researcher was eager to see the effects of short-term train-
ing and the effects of the different approaches on the
general performance (total performance) of the penilik in

carrying out his job in the field. For the purpose of

137

statistical analysis, the null hypotheses were develOped on

the basis of the rival hypotheses described earlier.

Null Hypothesis #15

 

Short-term training will have no significant effect
on the total self-reported performance of the par-

ticipants.

Null Hypothesis #16

 

Total self-reported performance will not be
affected by the different approaches used in
short-term training.

To test the difference between means of the three
groups under study, the analysis of variance was used. The
information revealed by this analysis is shown in Table
4.17. Information resulting from this analysis reveals that
a significant difference exists between the means of the
posttest scores among the three groups under study beyond
the 5 percent level of confidence (.0002). In other words,
the probability that the difference was due to chance was
less than 5 percent, or even far less than 1 percent.

As is shown in Table 4.17, the probability of the
difference being not a true difference is 2 out of 10,000
(.0002). This is unquestionably very significant. The
Eta value was also considerably high (.33), which indicates
that about 11 percent of the variance can be accounted for

by the previous treatment.

 

 

138

 

 

mm.mm ma 0 moouu

no.om mm m maouo

mm.ooa mm a maouo

ummuumom umwumum z anommumu

\manmuum>

eeew.mmomm ee Hmuoa

ooom.amo ooow.maam~ Ne :flcuw3

mmoe.oH mmmo.onem eeeo.oem~a N smm3umm

wuwaflnmnoum m oflumm m mwumsqm com: mwumoqm mo 85m .m.o mousom

 

mammac mmsouo mm mocmEHOMHmm omuuomwmnmmmm Hmuoe now <>ozann.hs.e manna

139

Further analysis by the Tukey-HSD procedure to test
the multiple comparisons in the analysis of variance indi-
cates that significant differences exist between the means
of group A and group B and between the means of group A
and group C, but not between the means of group B and group
C. This information can be seen in Table 4.18, where the
means of group B and group C were both in the same subset
(subset 1), while the mean of group A was in a different
subset (subset 2).

Table 4.18.--The Tukey-HSD Multiple Range Test for Total
Self-Reported Performance, By Groups (Alpha =

 

 

 

.05).

Subset 1
Group mean: Group C Group B

65.3333 80.0667
Subset 2
Group mean: Group A

106.3333
Ranges for the .05 level: 3.43 3.43

The ranges above are tabular values. The value actually
compared with Mean(J) - Mean(I) is . . . .
17.6324 * Range * Sqrt(l/N(I) + 1/N(J)).

 

There are two things suggested by the results of
these statistical analyses. Qpe, that the null hypothesis
#15 is rejected. The short-term training did cause a sig-
nificant increase in the job performance of the partici-

pant. However, since the difference between means of group

140

B and group C is not significant (Tukey-HSD Multiple Range
Test), the short-term training caused a significant increase
only when the participatory-based approach was used. Two,
that the null hypothesis #16 is again rejected beyond the

5 percent level of confidence showing that the participatory-
based approach is more effective than the lecture-based
approach for short-term training in terms of increasing the
total self-reported performance of the participants. The
probability that the difference between means of both treat-
ment groups was not a true difference is less than 5 percent
(.0002). A

Figure 4.8 graphically demonstrates these findings.

 

 

Pretest Posttest
A
)g («06.35)
S
(gt-‘40) B a) S
(31-396. “ u 9 050.03)
n
Lawn-«M + s (
kc.QbSJ4)
Q——————— six months -—-————9
Notes: 3 = significant

ns not significant

Figure 4.8.--The Effects of Short-Term Training on the Total
Self-Reported Performance of the Participants,
By Groups.

141

As Figure 4.8 indicates, both group B (lecture
group) and group C (control group) show a decrease in the
posttest as compared with their scores on the pretest. The
posttest was administered six months after the time the
pretest was taken. It is quite probable that during that
period some uncontrolled factors came to influence the
observations under study. It is assumed, however, that the
uncontrolled factors also came to influence group A as
well. In spite of the fact that some factors might have
had a negative influence, group A still indicates a large
increase on the posttest as compared with the pretest scores.
The results of the analyses strongly suggest that the
participatory-based approach is far more effective than the
lecture-based approach in terms of increasing the total
self-reported performance of the participants. Also, short-
term training is seen as effective only when the
participatory-based approach rather than the lecture-based
approach is used.

D. The Effects of Short-Term
Training on the Performance
of the Participants in
Terms of the Perception
of Their Supervisors

What is discussed in this section is something
‘Which is not necessarily directly related to the outcomes
of the treatment yet is important to examine. This section
'examines what other people (the penilik's supervisor) per-

<:eive regarding the effects of the training on their

142

subordinates. It should be noted that in this study the
supervisors were purposefully not provided with a clear
picture of what the study was attempting. The supervisors
only knew that some of their peniliks were called upon to
participate in a special program.

The data analyzed in this regard were revealed
through interviews with each supervisor who had one or more
peniliks participating in the study. The Interview Guides
that were used are shown in Appendix C. Not all of the
information revealed by the interviews were, however, anal—
yzed, since the validity of their responses were quite
questionable. After some scrutinizing of the data it was
decided that only information concerned with the supervisors'
perception were analyzed. This type of information included
questions #11, #15, #16, #18 and #20 of the Interview Guide.

For the purpose of the statistical analysis null
hypotheses were developed on the basis of the rival hypoth-

eses described earlier.

Null Hypothesis #17

 

Short-term training will have no significant effect
on the ability of the participants to perform their

job in terms of the perception of their supervisors.

Null Hypothesis #18
The perception of the supervisors regarding the

ability of the participants to perform their job

143

will not be affected by the different approaches

used in the short-term training.

Analysis of variance was used to test the differ-
ence between the mean scores of the supervisors' perception
of the participants' ability to perform their job. The
information resulting from the analysis of variance is
shown in Table 4.19.

The information resulting from the analysis of
variance reveals that the difference between the mean
scores of the supervisors' perception among the three
groups under study was not significant. The Eta and the
Multiple R2 values were also very small. Further analysis
using the Tukey-HSD procedure to test the multiple compari-
sons of the difference between means also revealed that all
three groups were in the same subset. This means that the
difference between the mean scores of the supervisors' per-
ception among the three groups under study was not signifi-
cant. The information revealed by the Tukey—HSD analysis
can be seen in Table 4.20.

The results of the statistical analyses suggest that
both null hypotheses, Ho #17 and Ho #18, are not rejected.
In other words, the supervisors' perception of the peniliks'
ability to perform their job was not affected by the short-
term training. Further, the different approaches used in
the training did not have an effect on the supervisors'
perception on the peniZiks' ability to perform their job.

Figure 4.9 graphically demonstrates these findings. As it

144

 

 

 

 

 

mooooo. u Nm mn.ma no.ma ma 0 moouo

mmoo. n mum se.mH ne.- ma m msouo

oo.ma mm.ma me a msouo

ummuumom ummumum z muommumo

com: \mHQMflHm>

ooom.omN ee Hmuoe

eme.m homN.mMN Ne canvas

mmmm. eheo. hme. mmmm. N cwmsumm

mafiaanmnoum m oflumm m mwumoqm com: mmumoqm mo 85m .m.o mouoom
.Amo. u mcda<v mdoouu mm .non Hausa Show

loom ou wuwawod .mucmmfiofluumm on» no cofludmouwm .muomfi>uomom How <>Oz<ul.ma.e mange

145

Table 4.20.--The Tukey'HSD Multiple Range Test for Super-
visors' Perception of the Participants'
Ability to Perform Their Job, By Groups
(Alpha = .05).

 

 

Subset 1

Group mean: Group B Group A Group C
13.4667 13.6000 13.7333

Ranges for the .05 level: 3.43 3.43

The ranges above are tabular values. The value actually
compared with Mean(J) - Mean(I) is . . .
1.6771 * Range * Sqrt(l/N(I) + 1/N(J)).

 

Pretest Posttest

A“: a. L‘3‘7'3)
a——flA‘J3JQ)

(‘3-33JA .(t___ ’hS
Liz-m!” 1‘
éF—————— six months ———————>

 

 

Note: ns = not significant

Figure 4.9.--The Effects of Short-Term Training on the
Ability of the Participants to Perform Their
Job in Terms of the Perception of Their
Supervisors.

146

can be seen from Figure 4.9 the supervisors' responses
between the pre-interviews and the post-interviews were

only slightly different. One possibility of this nondiffer-
ence could be that the supervisors do not receive informa-
tion regarding their subordinates that would be appropriate
for the questions asked in the interviews. Or, the infor-
mation they receive is not accurate. Obviously, a number
of social, cultural or political explanations could also

be offered as a basis for this finding.

Summary of the Findings

Short-term training was the major treatment in this
study. Two different approaches were used for this treat-
ment and their comparative effectiveness was tested in terms
of the participants' achievement in cognitive skills, reten-
tion and job performance. The two approaches were a
participatory-based approach and a lecture-based approach to
training. The findings of the study can be summarized as
follows:

(1) regardless of the approach used, short-term train-
ing is effective in increasing the cognitive skills
of the participants;

(2) regardless of the approach used, short-term training
is effective for retaining the cognitive skills
derived from the training;

(3) there are a significantly greater number of self-

reported activities during the six months following

147

training by the participants of the participatory-
based approach than the participants of the lecture-
based approach.

Figure 4.10 presents these three main findings of

 

 

 

 

 

the study.
Independent . .

Variable Short term Training
Dependent Participatorygbased Leczureggafied
Variable pproac ppr C

Achievement effective effective
Retention effective effective
Performance effective not effective

 

 

 

Figure 4.10.--The Three Main Findings of the Study.

In this study the performance variable was further
broken down into five categories of role performance.
These included the organizer-role performance, consultant-
role performance, enabler-role performance, facilitator-
role performance and planner-role performance variable.
The following statements summarize the findings regarding
these five variables:

(a) For improving the organizer-role performance, short-
term training is effective pply if the participatory-

based approach to training is used. The

148

participatory-based approach is not significantly
more effective than the lecture-based approach.

(b) For improving the consultant-role performance and
the facilitator-role performance, short-term train-
ing is not effective. The participatory-based
approach is not significantly more effective than
the lecture-based approach.

(c) For improving the enabler-role performance, short—
term training is not effective. The participatory-
based approach is significantly more effective than
the lecture-based approach.

(d) For improving the planner-role performance, short-
term training is effective oply if the participatory-
based approach to training is used. The
participatory-based approach is significantly more
effective than the lecture-based approach.

Figure 4.11 shows these findings.

Feedback from the Participants
on the Training

 

In addition to the main data collected through vari-
ous procedures (i.e., testing for cognitive skills, self-
reporting by completing a self-disclosure type of test for
field performance and interviews of the penilik's super-
visors), subjective feedback on the training was also col-
lected. Participants were asked about their impressions

of the training, their observations and their personal‘

149

 

 

 

 

 

Category of Is Short-Term Is Participatory-

Role Performance Training Effective? based Approach
More Effective?

Organizer-role Yes* No
Consultant-role No No
Enabler-role No Yes
Facilitator-role No No
Planner-role Yes* Yes

 

 

 

*If the short-term training uses a participatory-
based approach.

Figure 4.11.--Findings Associated with the Five Role
Performance Variables.

judgment as to whether the training they have completed

was interesting, useful and helpful for them.

This section discusses this feedback from the par-
ticipants at the conclusion of the training session. The
first part of this section deals with a closed feedback
format that consisted of a check list where their responses
were fixed according to predesigned questions or statements.
In this format the participants were asked to check one
point on a five point scale. The highest was a double-plus
sign and the lowest was a double-minus sign. The second
part of this section deals with an open format where the
participants were free to give their comments, judgments or

observations on the training they had just completed.

150

A copy of the feedback format is found in

Appendix D.

(1) Closed Feedback

 

In this part of the feedback form comments of the
participants are guided by questions or statements covering
four variables which, presumably, have direct impact on
the process of learning. These four variables include the
materials or text for the training, the system of delivery
used in the training, the teaching-learning situation and
general impressions.

Table 4.21 indicates what the two groups,
participatory group A and lecture group B, favored in rela-
tion to the specific questions or statements. Since there
were no dropouts during the training and everyone responded
to each item, the number of responses for each group for
each specific question or statement were constant at fif-
teen.

As shown in the table their responses can be sum-
marized as the following:

1. About the materials for the training, the table
indicates that twenty-seven out of forty-five
participants (60 percent) for group A felt very
positively. The corresponding figures for group
B are thirteen out of forty-five (28 percent).

However, it should be noted that no participant

151

Table 4.21.-~Feedback from the Participants on the Training.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

+ + i = Total
A. ABOUT THE MATERIALS FOR
THE TRAINING
1. Were the materials for the
training worth to learn to 10 5 - - 15
increase knowledge and
understanding of the 6 9 - - 15
penilik in relation to
his job?
2. Were the materials learned ll 4 - — 15
helpful to a penilik in
performing his job? 5 9 1 - 15
3. Was the sequence of the
materials good so that 6 9 - - 15
the relationship of one
topic to another was 2 9 4 - 15
clear and easy to learn?
Sub-total: 27 18 - - 45
13 27 5 - 45
B. ABOUT THE SYSTEM OF
DELIVERY USED IN THE
TRAINING
1. Was the system of delivery 11 4 - - 15
used in the training
interesting? 3 10 2 - 15
2. Was the lecture or the 5 10 - - 15
presentation of the
materials clear? 3 10 2 - 15
3. Were the practical exer-
cises experienced during 10 5 - - 15
the training adequate to
improve the penilik's job 4 8 3 - 15

performance in the field?

152

Table 4.21.--Continued.

 

 

 

 

 

+ —
+ + i — Total
4. Were the examples used
during the training 7 8 - — 15
relevant to the actual
setting and therefore 1 9 5 - 15
made learning earier?
Sub-total: 33 27 - - 60
ll 37 12 - 60
C. ABOUT THE TEACHING-
LEARNING SITUATION
DURING THE TRAINING
1. Was the teaching-learning 9 6 — - 15
situation lively to stimu-
late learning activities 5 9 1 — 15
during the training?
2. Were the trainers sensi-
tive enough and respon-
sive to any ideas 12 2 l - 15
exposed during the train-
ing so that problems 4 8 3 - 15
that were raised got
their fair consideration?
3. Were the attitudes of the
trainers quite open to 14 l - - 15
make the participants
free to talk and to 3 10 2 - 15
express their ideas?
4. Was the learning situa- 10 4 1 - 15
tion favorable for
developing new innova- 4 8 3 - 15
tive ideas?
5. Was the teaching-
learning situation 10 5 - - 15
flexible (not rigid) to
accommodate variability 3 ll 1 - 15

of ideas?

153

Table 4.21.--Continued.

 

 

 

 

 

+
+ + i - Total
6. Did the sphere of the
discussions (large group
as well as small group) 7 6 2 - 15
held during the training
give enough opportunity l4 1 - - 15
for the participants
to express their ideas?
Sub-total: 62 24 4 - 90
33 47 10 - 90
D. GENERAL IMPRESSIONS
ABOUT THE TRAINING
1. In general, what do you
think about the training
just completed in terms
of achieving its intended
objectives, i.e., to 7 7 l - 15
increase understanding,
knowledge as well as tech- 3 ll 1 - 15
nical skills of the
penilik in performing his
job in the field? Was it
or was it not successful?
2. If this kind of training 13 2 - - 15
is repeated again next ,
time, are you interested 14 l - - 15
in participating?
Sub-total: 20 9 l - 30
17 12 1 - 30
GRAND TOTAL: 142 78 5 - 225
74 123 28 - 225

 

154

indicated any negative feeling about the learning
materials.

About the system of delivery used in the training,
the figures indicate that more than half of the
participants of group A (55 percent) favored very
much the system used in the training, while for
group B only eleven out of sixty (18 percent) indi-
cated their favor in concern with the delivery sys-
tem used in the training.

In spite of the fact that group B provided an unex-
pected response to the last question on the section
about the teaching-learning situation during the
training (C-6), the subtotal of this section indi—
cates that group A very much favored their train-
ing approach (sixty-two out of ninety, or 69 per-
cent), while group B did not as greatly favor

their approach (only thirty-three out of ninety,

or 37 percent).

On the question of whether or not the training just
completed was successful in terms of achieving its
intended objectives (question #1, section D), seven
out of fifteen of group A (47 percent) agreed that
the training just completed was quite successful,
while in group B only three out of fifteen (20 per-
cent) confirmed the idea. But when they were asked
whether or not they would be interested in partici-

pating in the same kind of training in the future,

155

both groups positively answered that they were very

much interested in participating (thirteen out of

fifteen for group A, or 87 percent, and fourteen out
of fifteen for group B, or 93 percent).

As a summary, the grand total of Table 4.21 shows
that 142 out of 225 for group A (63 percent) very much
favored the method or approach they had experienced during
the training as compared with only 74 out of 225 (33 per—
cent) for group B who favored the method or approach they

themselves had experienced during the training.

(2) Open Feedback

 

All fifteen members of participatory group A pro-
vided additional comments, while for lecture group B only
thirteen did. Some of their comments were quite relevant to
the topic being discussed, while some others were not.

Both, the relevant and the not relevant comments, are dis—
cussed. However, there was no way to compare between their
comments since there was no standard or criterion previously
developed to frame their comments. From their comments one
could learn a lot to improve the next training session to

be better suited to the aspirations of the participants.

Translated freely, their comments are as follows:
One from group A wrote:

The materials and the methods used in the training are
both valuable and helpful to the penilik to perform
his job in the field. It is therefore suggested that

this kind of training should be available to all
peniliks in the country.

156

Two participants from group A commented:

The approach used in the training is quite interesting.
It is new experience for me. If there is any other
training of this kind in the next time I will be quite
willing to participate.

Some of the participants said that one week training
was too short as compared with the amount of materials
covered during the training. Further, they suggested that
in the future training of the same sort expanding the time
to at least ten to fifteen days should be considered (four
participants from group A and five participants from group
B).

Some gave the following comments:

From my experience with this training I am convinced
that penilik will learn a lot and benefit much from
this kind of training. I therefore propose that this
kind of training could be repeated again and again

in the time to come (three participants from group A
and two participants from group B).

Some other comments are:

I would think that some kind of follow-up action should
be considered for this training, such as developing
some Consultative Bureaus for community education
which are capable of understanding the aspirations of
and giving some technical assistance needed to the
peniliks in performing their job in the field (two
participants from group B).

If this kind of training could be carried out in a
longer period of time I would propose that materials
for the training could include more on program develop-
ment for community education, evaluation procedures
including develOping criteria for success for nonformal
education programs in general (two people from group B).

Two participants from group A proposed that more
intensive practical exercises should be further considered

in the next training, while one other participant

157

recommended that developing some other innovative delivery
systems was to be considered.
Four participants from group A proposed the
following:
It is important to consider giving a kind of certifi-
cate for those who have completed the training. This
is a kind of credit for the peniliks concerned.
Other comments which are not quite relevant to the topic
of discussion are here included, e.g.:

1. Budget for the training should be increased.

2. This kind of training seminar should be mobile
from one place to another.

3. Activities should also be conducted at night time.

4. The texts for the training should be bound and not
in the form of loose papers, and were distributed
to the participants before they were called upon
for the training.

5. The complete schedule of the training should be
given to the participants before the training
began.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

The discussion in this chapter will be focused on

three topics. These are Conclusions and Implications,

 

Recommendations and Concluding Remarks. In the first topic,

 

 

Conclusions and Implications, the discussion will be focused

 

on the major findings of the study as revealed by the sta-
tistical analyses discussed in Chapter IV, and the implica-
tions of those findings in terms of their practical conse-

quences. The second topic, Recommendations, will discuss

 

how to bring the findings of the study into application;
especially those applications which relate generally to
developing nonformal education in Indonesia and more spe-
cifically the development of community education. In the

third topic, Concluding Remarks, some future possibilities

 

will be considered regarding other ideas and/or the con-
ducting of other studies based on what was learned from
this study. Strengths and weaknesses of the present study

will be taken into consideration.

158

159

Conclusions and Implications

Two concerns that this study attempted to deal with
were (1) comparing the relative effectiveness of the
participatory-based approach and the lecture-based approach
to short-term training for community education fieldworkers--
peniliks, and (2) testing whether or not short-term train-
ing is adequate for achieving the desired results, i.e.,
increase in achievement of cognitive skills, retention and
increase in field performance.

The following conclusions are drawn from the

results of the data analyses presented in Chapter IV.

1. Both approaches to short-term training, the
participatory-based approach and the lecture-
based approach, are effective in increasing the

cognitive skill level of the participants.

Discussion and Implication

This conclusion seems to agree with the findings of
some other studies of this nature (Richard Hill, 1960;
David Dietrick, in Richard Hill, 1960; McLoughlin, 1971).
It should be noted, however, that in terms of the increase
in scores the participatory group gained a larger increase
than the lecture group. Figure 4.2 shows that the lecture
group increased its mean achievement score from 55.60 on the
pretest to 59.93 on the posttest I. This means that the
lecture group gained 4.33 points. The participatory group,

on the other hand, increased its mean achievement score

160

from 52.40 on the pretest to 61.93 on the posttest I with

a gain of 9.53 points. Comparing the gains of these two
experimental groups (the participatory group A and the
lecture group B) it was found that the difference between
the posttest I and the pretest was significant for partici-
patory group A, but not significant for lecture group B.
This further supports the use of a participatory-based
approach to training.

The implication is that both approaches could be
used equally well as far as the increase of the achievement
level in cognitive skills is concerned. However, where a
choice is possible, the participatory-based approach is
favorable to the lecture-based approach. Also, a one week
training session is indeed adequate to increase the achieve-

ment level of the participants.

2. In terms of the retention rate of the participants,
both approaches used in short-term training are

equally effective.

Discussion and Implication

 

Different than what Cole and Glass (1977) found out
in their study on The Effect of Adult Student Participation

in Proggam Planning on Achievement, Retention and Attitude,

 

the conclusion of this study suggests that both approaches
could have a positive effect on retention. This conclusion
seems to confirm the ideas expressed by Bergevin (1967),

Boyd (1969) and Dobbs (1967) when saying that "The

161

knowledge and skills will be more appropriate to their needs;
hence, the learners will tend to retain and apply the new
learnings more readily than if the content and skills are
viewed as irrelevant" (William J. Cole, 1977, p. 77).

The higher score achieved by the participatory
group on posttest II as compared with the score achieved by
the lecture group can only be attributed to chance.

The implication of this conclusion would, again, be
that both approaches are equally effective in terms of
retention of the knowledge and understanding derived from
the short-term training. If everything else could be held
constant, however, the participatory-based approach to short-
term training should receive a higher priority than the

lecture-based approach when training sessions are planned.

3. The participatory-based approach to short-term
training is significantly more effective than the
lecture-based approach in terms of increasing the
performance level of the training participants--

the peniliks.

Discussion and Implication

 

The differences between the participatory group
and the lecture group 32g between the participatory group
and the control group both are significant beyond the 5
percent level of confidence (see Figure 4.8). This provides

an extra comfort to those with strong convictions about the

162

superiority of the participatory-based approach over the
lecture-based approach for short-term training.

There are some variances, however, in terms of the
increase of the role performance variables as they were
affected by the different approaches used in the short-term
training. In the present study, five categories of role
performance were develOped. These include the organizer-
role performance, consultant-role performance, enabler-
role performance, facilitator-role performance and planner-
role performance.

Looking at the increase of each of these five cate-
gories of role performance as they were affected by the
different approaches used in the short-term training, the
results of the analyses can be summarized as follows:

(a) For the organizer-role performance variable, the
participatory-based approach to training has a
significant effect, while the lecture-based approach
has not. The difference between the participatory-
based approach and the lecture-based approach, how-
ever, is not significant (see Figure 4.3).

(b) For the consultant-role performance variable and the
facilitator-role performance variable, both
approaches, participatory-based and lecture-based,
are not effective (Figure 4.4 and Figure 4.6).

(c) For the enabler-role performance variable both
approaches used in short-term training are not

effective. However, the difference between the

163

participatory-based approach and the lecture-based

approach is significant.

(d) For the planner-role performance variable, the
participatory-based approach to short-term train-
ing is significantly effective. The lecture-based
approach is not effective. The difference between
the participatory group and the lecture group is
significant at higher than the 5 percent level of
confidence (see Figure 4.7).

While two out of five of the role performance vari-
ables (the organizer-role performance and the planner-role
performance variables) were significantly affected by the
short-term training and two out of five of the role perform-
ance variables (the enabler-role performance and the
planner-role performance variables) were significantly
affected by the different approaches used in the training,
two role performance variables (the consultant-role per-
formance and the facilitator-role performance variables)
were not affected by both either short-term training or the
different approaches that were used. The primary reasons
considered relate to the social and cultural backgrounds of
the people and of the community where the study was carried
out.

About the Consultant—role
Performance Variable

 

 

The effectiveness of the performance of this type of

role does not merely depend on the capacity of the penilik,

164

but also on the awareness of the people in the community
for utilizing one of the available community resources (in
this case the expertise of the penilik). Even though a
penilik is quite skillful in providing advice or consulta-
tions to the people in how to resolve their problems, he
will not have many things to do or to say if nobody comes
to him to ask for help. In the Indonesian culture the vil-
lage people in many cases are reluctant to come to the
government agents and ask for help. They still have an
image that the government agents are, in fact, different
from their own standard of life. This background seems to
be a reason why only a few activities of this nature were
reported by the peniliks when they completed the self-
disclosure type of test. Hence, the competencies as a con-
sultant were not affected by the training.

About the Facilitator-role
Performance Variable

 

 

It seems that providing learning equipment and other
educational facilities for the community people, like vil-
lage libraries, sports facilities, etc., is not something
which merely deals with individual competencies, but deals
with something beyond the individual capacities of the
agents (the penilik). It is more related to the avail-L
ability of funds, sites, buildings and government policies
rather than on the individual capacities of the peniliks
in handling their job. This could be a strong reason why

the competencies of the facilitator-role performance was

165

not greatly affected by the training and also by the dif-
ferent approaches used in the training. In other words,
talking about providing learning equipment and other educa-
tional facilities seems to be different than talking about
individual competencies of the penilik.

About the Organizer-roley the

Enabler-role and the Planner-
role Performance Variables

 

 

 

The three performance roles which were strongly
affected by either the short-term training or the different
approaches used in the training were the organizer-role,
the enabler-role and the planner-role. These three roles
were, in fact, those which to be effectively carried out
demand a high degree of participation by the penilik with
members of the local community. The results of the study
seem to suggest that when competences of promoting commu-
nity participation in learning activities are the main con-
cern, then a participatory-based approach to training is

favored.

4. In terms of the perception of the supervisors,
both approaches, the participatory-based and the
lecture-based approaches, used in short-term

training were equal. Both are not effective.

Discussion and Implication

 

There are two ways to look at this issue. One,

either the information disclosed by the peniliks or

166

information revealed by the supervisors at the interview
were not true; or two, there was misinformation between the
peniliks and the supervisors.

Based on the experience of the study that provided
close contact with the peniliks during the training and also
through talking with the supervisors during the interviews,
the researcher had an impression that supports the validity
of the second possibility, i.e., that some level of mis-
information exists between the peniliks on the one hand,
and the supervisors on the other. There are a number of
field activities that were disclosed by the test which are
not in the records of the supervisors' offices. It seems
that the monitoring systems in the office of the supervisors
are still minimal. This is probably due to the large job
load whereby one supergvisor cannot possibly supervise so
many peniliks in an adequate fashion.1 This is further con-
founded because the peniliks are spread over wide areas
where communication is still a big problem.

The implication of this conclusion is that the data
from the interviews of the supervisors can be used only as
supporting information to the primary data revealed by the

peniliks.

 

1The proportion of supervisors to peniliks is
24:390 = 1:16. Besides community education agents or
peniliks, one supervisor also supervises field agents for
sports and field agents for cultural activities.

167

5. In general, the participatory-based approach used
in short-term training is more desirable to the

participants than the lecture-based approach.

Discussion and Implication

Feedback on the training given by the participants
indicates that in almost every aspect of the training the
participatory group responded more positively than the
lecture group. There were four aspects disclosed by the
feedback form which includes the materials for the train-
ing, the system of delivery, the teaching-learning situa-
tion and general impressions of the participants. The
feedback suggests that the participatory-based approach
used in short-term training is better suited to the desires
and aspirations of the participants--the penilik, and is

preferred over the lecture-based approach.

Recommendations

 

Two concerns will be considered in this section.
One is the concern for developing nonformal education in
Indonesia; and two is the concern for best utilizing the
findings of this study for developing training programs for
the penilik.
(l) The Concern for Developing

Nonformal Education in
Indonesia

 

Using a pretest-posttest experimental design in the

area of nonformal education in Indonesia is a new and

168

innovative device. In this case, it is not only the find-
ings that matter but also the procedure for getting the
findings. Also, different than other previous studies in
comparing the different methods or approaches used in train-
ing, the present study introduced field performance as one
of the dependent variables to be measured (see Richard Hill,
1960; McLoughlin, 1971; Solomon, 1963; William Cole, 1977;
Bergevin, 1967; Boyd, 1969; Dobbs, 1967).

A new type of test instrument was also introduced.
This test was called a "self-disclosure type of test" which
is, in principle, a self-reporting device whereby the par-
ticipants report or disclose the activities they have con—
ducted, are conducting or are planning to conduct within a
certain period of time in the future. This type of test
relates especially to the field performance variables.

This type of test instrument was quite effective in disclos-
ing a great deal of valuable information concerned with the
field performance of the participants. While some defects
could be found easily in this new type of test, since this
is not a standardized test, applicability to other areas

of nonformal education in Indonesia could be recommended
with some adjustments and modifications.

It is also recommended that, in spite of the fact
that some of the results of this study need to be substanti-
ated, the design of this study is in itself something which
could be further developed and applied in other aspects of

nonformal education in Indonesia.

169

(2) The Concern of How to Best
Utilize the Findings of
This Study for Developing
Training Programs for
PeniZiks

 

 

 

 

The primary concern of conducting training for staff
employees is either to maintain or to increase the quality
of their job performance. This is also the case with train-
ing for the penilik. The results of the present study
indicate that, as far as job performance is concerned, a
high preference was given to the participatory-based
approach rather than to the lecture-based approach to train-
ing.

From the analyses of the data it was learned, how-
ever, that two out of five role performances of the penilik
were not affected by the approach used in the training. It
was also learned that, by looking at the issue more deeply
using other variables for further consideration the two
role performances were, in fact, those which were not pri-
marily determined by the individual competencies. Hence,
instead of minimizing the validity of the findings this
fact provides further support. In other words, where train-
ing is concerned with maintaining or increasing the quality
of job performance and where job performance is only a
function of the individual performer, then the
participatory-based approach to training is even more
highly favored than the lecture-based approach.

It is admitted that science and technology is devel-

oping over time. What is considered new for today will be

170

considered old by tomorrow. This is also true with the
training materials used in this study. It is therefore
suggested that when applying the findings of this study,
adjustment and modification of the training materials should
always be considered necessary.

The allocation of time during the training sessions
should not be considered rigid. It should be flexible to
accommodate necessary modifications. It is not the number
of minuts that counts but the value of how the time is
spent.

Also, the kinds and number of learning activities
implemented in this study should not be considered as rigid.
Adjustment and modification should also be possible when
the situation demands. Included in the term of "situation"
are the training objectives, the conditions of the sites
and the conditions of the trainees.

In general, while on the one hand the use of the
participatory-based approach in the training for the
penilik is recommended, on the other hand it is also recom—
mended that adjustment and modification of the training
materials should always be made whenever necessary. In
other words, the findings recommend more regarding the

process than the content of the process.

Concluding Remarks

 

While some aspects of the findings are quite promis-

ing the researcher has to admit, however, that some

171

discrepancies exist in this study which, hopefully, will
be overcome in other future studies of this nature.

First, the sampling procedures. In this study, group

 

assignment was done prior to the implication of the pretest.
By so doing, the variability of means and the heterogeneity
of variances between groups existed. Based on this experi-
ence it is suggested, if this kind of study will be repeated,
that pretesting be administered prior to the group assign-
ment. Group assignment could then be done based on the
results of the pretest to establish homogeneity for means
and variances between groups. This design will, presum-
ably, produce stronger findings.

Consideration should also be given to the question
of stratification of the sample. Though the randomization
used in this study yielded an uneven distribution across
experimental groups on the basis of municipality versus
nonmunicipality (location of penilik) it is not known whe-
ther this caused an effect. Further research should care-
fully examine other factors (age, education, location,
experience, etc.) and their potential effects on a study
such as this.

Second, the site of the study. The present study

 

 

was conducted in West Java province. West Java province

is one of the most developed provinces of Indonesia. The
applicability of the findings to other areas/provinces
where the conditions are quite different is therefore ques-

tionnable. Some other studies of this nature conducted

172

in communities with different backgrounds and conditions
are recommended.

Third, validation of the test instruments. The
test instruments used in the present study were developed
by the researcher himself. To increase precision of the
results these instruments need to be further developed and
validated before they are used for other studies. In fact,
the validation of the test instruments is in itself a

research study. The researcher is anxious to see this.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

COGNITIVE TEST

APPENDIX A

COGNITIVE TEST

Instruction of how to do the test:

 

Please read carefully before you start.

There are two types of questions: one, is objective
type; and two, is essay type question.

For the objective type of test what you should do is
just circle one of the four Options which, according
to your judgment, is the most appropriate answer for
the respective question.

Instead of a pen use a pencil to make it easier for

you to erase when you want to change your answer. But
erase carefully and completely if you do need to change
your answer.

Do not spend too much time on one question.

Give a concise answer for each question of the essay
type. Remember that you are not going to write a paper.

For completing both the objective and the essay type of
test TWO HOURS will be provided. Adjust the time for
yourself for finishing the objective type in about 60%
of the allocated time.

 

Good luck, and now you may start.

173

A.

l.

174

OBJECTIVE TYPE

 

The important key characteristic(s)
of a community is (are):

a.

b.
c.
d.

People who live together in a
given geographic area.

Shared values among the people.
Interaction among the people.
All of those mentioned above.

The reason why different persons
may have different perceptions
about community is:

That every person knows quite
well about the community

where he lives.

That they have different back-
grounds.

That they do not quite under-
stand what is the meaning of
"community."

That they are not all government
agents.

Every community is undergoing change
over time, because:

A community is always an open
community.

In this 20th century there is no
traditional community anymore.
There is no one community could
resist from its contact with
other communities.

All of the above mentioned is
true.

Comparison between community develop-
ment and community change:

a.
b.

C.

d.

Both are the same.

Community develOpment means more
than just community change.
Community development is less
than community change.

Community development is not com-
parable to community change.

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

5.

175

A community change agent is:

a. A government employee who is
responsible for community
development.

b. A volunteer who is concerned with

community development.

c. An informal leader from within or

without the community.
d. All the above mentioned is
possible.

Community development is:

a. Always cross-sectoral development.

b. Social development.
c. Economic development.
d. Physical development.

A community is called having reached
the swasembada level of development
whenever:

a. All people in the community are
already literate.

b. The community is rich in resources.

c. The community is already able to
fulfill their own needs.

d. None of those mentioned above is
true.

In order for the work of the change
agent to be effective and efficient
he should:

a. Be able to understand the
aspiration of the people.

b. Understand that every need is to
be fulfilled.

c. Be able to follow his instruc-
tions.

d. Be able to relate his job with
the general goal of community
development.

 

Do not write
in this column:

10.

11.

12.

The speed of change in traditional

societies is:

a. Slower than in modern societies.

b. Just the same as in modern
societies.

c. Faster than in modern societies.

d. Not comparable to modern
societies.

The swasembada level of develOpment

implies:

a. That community is capable of
identifying the resource gap in
relation to particular community
needs.

b. That the people are capable of
effective utilization of either
internal or external resources.

c. That the community has "bargain-
ing" power for pulling in the
needed resources from outside
the community.

d. All of those mentioned above.

One of the important factors influ-

encing community change is:

a. The availability of manpower
supplies in the community to
make the change.

b. The people are civic minded.

c. The people are intelligent.

d. Maintaining open contact with
other communities.

Why should the penilik understand

the local needs?

a. Because they are important.

b. Because from understanding the
local needs they can understand
the people.

c. Because needs should be fulfilled.

d. Because it could be the basis for

176

program development.

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

13.

14.

15.

16.

177

Do not write
in this column:

 

What is the difference between needs
and wants?

a. Both are the same.

b. Needs are for adults whereas wants
are for children.

c. Needs are more thoughtful whereas
wants are more spontaneous.

d. All above mentioned are not true.

Understanding the local needs and
problems is important for the
peniliks, because:

a. Every locality has its own unique
needs and problems.

b. Those are the peniliks main task.
c. Those are the major entry points
to make the teaching-learning

activities start.
d. Those are the goals of any devel-
Opment program.

The role of a penilik as it is com—
pared with the role of a teacher is
that:

a. Both are the same, since both are
dealing with teaching profession.

b. Both are different, since a penilik
deals mostly with adult people,
whereas a teacher deals mostly
with younger children.

c. Both are not comparable.

d. The role of a penilik is harder
than the role of a teacher.

Basically nonformal education is:

a. Different with formal school
system.

b. The same with formal school system.

c. Not comparable to the formal
school system.

d. More simple than formal school
system.

 

17.

18.

19.

20.

178

Basically the adult learners have:

a. The same characteristics with
those of child learners.

b. Different characteristics with
those of child learners.

c. More complex characteristics
than those of child learners.

d. Less adequate characteristics
than those of child learners.

Every mature individual has a unique
self-concept which:

a Is good for his career.

b. Is relatively more simple than
those of small children.

c. Is difficult to understand.

d. Differs from person to person.

The adult learner will be more
motivated to learn if he could
see that what he learns:

a. Fits to solving his problems
and to fulfilling his needs.

b. Is more simple than what he
thought.

c. Is more complex than what he
thought.

d. Is important.

People will participate more fully in
the implementation of a program if
they know that the program is:

a. A government program.

b. Concerned with community
development.

c. Organized around the peeple's
needs and problems.

d. Good for their health.

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

179

Do not write
in this column:

 

21.

22.

23.

The job of penilik in particular
and the community development
agent in general should be:

a.

b.

d.

Reactive to the people's needs
and problems.

Proactive to link in one way or
another the needs of the people
with the developmental needs of
the community.

Active in dealing with the
instruction from the central
government.

Easy enough to handle.

Since individual's expectations of
the community and his experiences
differ from one person to another,
it follows that:

a.

b.

d.

It is quite difficult to talk
with them.

Programs of activities should be
in variance to fit in those
individual's expectations and
experiences.

Programs of activities should be
prioritized in such a way to
accommodate some commonalities
among them.

The job of the penilik becomes
even more difficult.

For a new penilik who has just been
appointed by the government for a
certain area, the first thing to

do is:

To make a very detailed plan in
concern with community development.

b. To go to the central government to
ask for a budget.

c. To ask the supervisor what kind of
job he should be doing.

d. To learn about the local conditions

and to meet the community people he
is serving.

 

24.

180

If the people's needs do not conform
with the needs of the community agent,
than:

a. The people should abandon their
favor and follow whatever the
agent brings to them.

b. Alternative ways should be devel-
oped to release the conflict.

c. The people should be trained to
be able to understand the aspira-
tions of the community agent.

d. None of those three mentioned
above is true.

Questions 25 through 32 are related to the
following statement:

be used to identify local needs and problems.

There are some techniques which could

Each of those techniques has its own advan-
tages and disadvantages. Those techniques
include: interview, questionnaire, informal
group discussion and observation.

25.

26.

Interview is a technique where infor-
mation is gathered through:

a. Questioning/answering.

b. Learning what has actually happened
in the community.

c. Direct contact between the infor-
mation collector and the informa-
tion resource.

d. Believing in whatever the peOple
give to the information collector.

Perceptiveness is very important if for
the information collected one is using
a (an) technique:

 

a. Interview.

b. Questionnaire.

c. Informal group discussion.
d. Observation.

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

27.

28.

29.

30.

181

The difference between questionnaire
and interview technique is that in
using the questionnaire technique
the list of questions which needs

to be answered:

a. Is prepared before the activity
has been started.

b. Is presented to the person who
is going to answer the question.

c. Can be sent to the person who is
going to answer the questions by
mail.

d. Is developed in such a way that
all people will not have any
difficulty to complete.

In a questionnaire one question is
formulated as the following: In
your opinion what is the most
important community problem to be
resolved as soon as possible?

According to its type this question
is said to be:

a. Simple.
b. Open.

c. Closed.
d. Complete.

The most subjective technique among
those four mentioned above is:

a. Interview.

b. Questionnaire.

c. Informal group discussion.
d. Observation.

One problem in sampling is a decision
on the size of sample to be drawn
from its population. In most cases
when fund is limited a tech-
nique can cover a relatively bigger
sample than the other three:

a. Interview.

b. Questionnaire.

c. Informal group discussion.
d. Observation.

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

182

Do not write
in this column:

 

31. One of the disadvantages of the
questionnaire technique as com-
pared with interview technique
is that:

a. There is no way for the researcher
to further clarify the crucial
issue.

b. The questions are closed.

c. In questionnaires the questions to
be answered must be formulated
clearly.

d. Questionnaire is more subjective
than interview.

32. To get good and accurate results from
interview:

a. The interviewer should have enough
time to do the job.

b. The interview guides should be
well prepared.

0. The interviewees should have been
well trained.

d. The interviewers should be univer-
sity graduates.

 

Leadership is a very important factor int
accomplishing any community development pro-
gram. Leadership may come from formal or
from informal authorities.

33. When leadership comes from formal
authorities it is called:

a. Formal leadership.

b. Informal leadership.

c. Authoritative leadership.
d. Democratic leadership.

Questions 34 through 40 are related to the
following statement:

There are some approaches which could
be used to identify leadership in a com-
munity. These could include: positional
approach, decision making approach, repu-
tational approach and social participation
approach.

 

34.

35.

36.

37.

183

When identification of leadership is
done through identifying the formal
power in the community, the approach
is called:

a. Positional approach.

b. Decision making approach.

c. Reputational approach.

d. Social participation approach.

On the contrary, when the identifi-
cation of leadership is done through
identifying informal organizations
where a person is participating
voluntarily, the approach is called:

a. Positional approach.

b. Decision making approach.

c. Reputational approach.

d. Social participation approach.

When leadership is derived from
reputation a person has gained, it
is called:

a. Formal leadership.

b. Informal leadership.

c. Authoritative leadership.
d. Democratic leadership.

If you are to identify leadership in
your own community using the posi-
tional approach, the first thing you
should do is:

a. Interviewing formal authorities.

b. Interviewing people or villagers
whom they respect most.

c. Calling a meeting with the vil-
lagers to discuss who would be
the community leaders.

d. Identifying all formal positions
in the community.

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

38.

39.

40.

184

If you are to identify leadership in
your own community using the reputa-
tional approach, the first thing you
should do is:

a. Interviewing people in formal
authorities.

b. Interviewing people or villagers
whom they respect most.

c. Calling a meeting with the
villagers to discuss who would
be the community leaders.

d. Identifying all formal posi-
tions in the community.

Identifying formal leaders is a
relatively more simple endeavor than
identifying informal leaders,
because:

a. All formal leaders are government
employees.
b. Informal leaders are persons

coming from outside the community.

c. Formal leaders can be identified
through their formal position in
the community.

d. All the three mentioned above are
true.

Several techniques can be used to
identify leadership, such as: inter-
view, questionnaire, informal group
discussion and observation. But in
most cases observation is the most
fitting instrument if used in the:

a. Positional approach.

b. Reputational approach.

c. Decision making approach.

d. Social participation approach.

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

41.

42.

43.

44.

185

Drawing a conclusion of needs to be
fulfilled is not a simple job,
because:

a. Not all needs expressed by the
people are real developmental
needs.

b. All people's needs are false.

c. The government development
plan is also to be carried out.

d. The people's needs are compli-
cated.

The most serious problem which some-
times hinders the implementation of
the program is:

a. The availability of a good plan.

b. The availability of a good con-
sultant.

c. That most of the village people
are still low educated.

d. None of those mentioned above is
true.

The ideal situation is when the needs
expressed by the people could:

a. Be fulfilled immediately.

b. Match with the development plan.

c. Be delayed until money is avail-
able.

d. Be discussed at length prior to
their implementation.

To facilitate the realization of the
regional development program a system
called "UDKP" has been developed.
This UDKP is coordinated by:

a. The camat.

b- The bupati.

c. The village head.

d. The head of the education regional
office.

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

45.

46.

47.

186

If the people's needs have already
been identified, the next thing
to do is:

a. To check with the authorities in
the province whether these needs
are important.

b. To check with the village head
whether or not he agrees with
these identified needs.

0. To check with other development
agents in the area to see if
the needs expressed by the
people are congruent with the
developmental needs of the
government plan.

d. To check with the central
authorities whether or not the
government agrees that these
needs should be fulfilled.

If you are given a list of tentative
programs by the camat which will be
carried out in your region, what
person or group of persons should
you consult first to check the
priority of the list?

a. Authorities in central government.

b. Authorities in provincial level.

c. Authorities in kabupaten level.

d. The local people and their
functional leaders.

If the priority of the people's needs
has been checked with those it is
concerned, the next step to do would
be:

a. To ask the central government for
detailed instructions of how to
implement the program(s).

b. To identify the available local
resources to make the implemen-
tation of the programs possible.

c. To ask the bupati if he has other
alternatives.

d. To wait until the more detailed
plan has been worked out by
experts.

Do not write
in this column:

 

48.

49.

50.

51.

187

Do not write

in this column:
Resources should not necessarily be
financial, but they could also be:

a. Learning materials and people's

motivation.

b. People's motivation and under-
standing.

c. People's motivation and human
resources.

d. Learning materials and human
resources.

Financial resources could come from:

a. Central government.

b. Regional or local government.

c. Donations from private agencies
or individual persons.

d. Either one or some combinations
of the three mentioned above.

Expertise or human resources could be
found either:

a. Outside or inside the community.

b. From central or local government.

c. From groups or individual members
of the community.

d. One or some combinations of those
mentioned above.

It is the task of the penilik to effec-
tively and efficiently utilize the
available resources to fulfill the felt
needs of the local people, because in
many of the cases resources are:

a. Available only outside the com-
munity.

b. Available only within the com-
munity.

c. Limited.

d. Not so good.

 

52.

53.

54.

The

188

prioritized community needs are

said to be ready to carry out
whenever:

a.

b.

The local authorities have con-
firmed them.

Functional leaders have agreed
upon them.

Financial, learning materials as
well as human resources are
available.

All of those factors mentioned
above are available.

job of penilik is best defined as:

To facilitate the learning
activities among the people

he serves.

To carry out whatever instruction
he gets from his authorities.

To find some money or funding to
run the activities the people
have proposed.

None of those mentioned above.

a consultant the penilik needs:

To deliver any instructions he
gets from his authorities to the
people he is serving.

To force the people to do what-
ever they have been instructed

to do.

To provide recommendations and/or
advice to the people in the com-
munity who are the decision makers.
To let the people in the com-
munity do whatever they want to do.

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

55.

56.

57.

189

Whatever systems the penilik uses in
carrying out his job the objective
remains that by the end of the pro-
cess the learners should be able to:

a.
b.
C.

Read and write.

Master some technical skills.
Help themselves in solving their
problems and in fulfilling their
needs.

All of those mentioned above are
not true.

One of the main tasks of the internal
facilitator (Pamong beZajar) in learn-
ing group activities is:

d.

To teach the group to read and
write.

To stimulate learning activities
where the members of the group
could learn from each other.

On behalf of the group, to do the
job as they were assigned to do
by the penilik.

None of those mentioned above is
true.

Program evaluation is one integral
part of planning, and it is developed:

Prior to the implementation of the
program.

During the implementation of the
program.

After the program has been com-
pleted.

Any time whenever the planner is
pleased to do.

Do not write
in this column:

 

58.

59.

60.

190

For program evaluation to be effici-
ently carried out:

a.

The objectives of the program
should be clearly defined and the
criteria should be quantitatively
measurable.

The objectives should be developed
from the government development
plan.

The criteria should be derived from
the government development plan.
It depends on the planner which he
wants to choose.

Evaluating the program could be done:

Whenever the project is finished.
Any time during the implementa-
tion period of the project.

Both during the implementation
period and also by the end of the
project.

It depends on the implementer and
also the planner when they want to
do the evaluation.

Doing an evaluation is:

a.

b.

The same thing with checking on
the spot.

Controlling the implementation of
a program.

Writing a final report for a pro-
gram which has just been completed.
Comparing between "WHAT IS" and
"WHAT SHOULD BE."

Do not write
in this column:

 

191

ESSAYyQUESTIONS

 

Using your own words elaborate further the following
statement in somewhat detailed explanations:

"In Nonformal Education in general and in
Community Education in particular learning
is not for the sake of learning, but learn-
ing is to gain something useful for life."

"A good and workable plan of community develOpment is
not only that which is based on the most popular needs
expressed by the community people, but ideally those
which are also supported by the available resources."

Explain further what this means.

To facilitate the learning process among the people
in the community the penilik should promote the
emergence of internal facilitators (Pamong belajar)
in every learning group the people and he himself as
a consultant have created.

Why?

A community education program, say, literacy activities,
is going to be carried out in your area. One of the
objectives is formulated as to increase the literacy
capacity of the local people. If you are assigned to
do an evaluation for this program, what kinds of

steps are you going to take to complete your task.
Please be specific; for instance:

Step one:

 

Step two:

 

Step three:

 

Etc.

192

Cognitive Test

 

A. Objective Test: Answers key.

 

 

l --- d 16 --- a 31
2 --- b 17 --- b 32
3 --- c 18 --- d 33
4 --- b 19 --- a 34
5 --- d 20 --- c 35
6 --- a 21 --- b 36
7 --- c. 22 --- c 37
8 -—- d 23 --- d 38
9 --- a 24 --- b 39
10 --- d 25 --- c 40
ll --- d 26 --- d 41
12 --- d 27 --- c 42
13 --- c 28 --- b 43
14 --- c 29 --- d 44
15 -—- b 30 ——- b 45

Q: Q: 00‘ Do

U’QaU‘

0

 

Question 1:

 

Answer:

(1)
(2)
(3)

(4)
(5)

Question 2:

 

Answer:

(1)
(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

193

Concepts to be Included in the Answers

of the Essay Type of Cognitive Test

 

Using your own words elaborate further the
following sentence in somewhat detailed explana-
tion: ;

"In NFE in general and in community education
in particular learning is not for the sake of
learning, but learning is to gain something
useful for life."

Learning in NFE is practical.

It relates to life's problems and needs.

The learners are mostly adults who have immedi-
ate problems to be solved and needs to be
fulfilled. And most of those problems and
needs are related to the social and economic
problems of the adults.

Learning in NFE is not for pleasure or for
killing time.

It is therefore designed that learning in NFE
is tailor-made to fit the individual's expec-
tations and experiences.

"A good and workable plan is not only that which
is based on the most popular needs expressed

by the people, but ideally those which are also
supported by the available resources.”

Explain further what this means?

A plan to fulfill needs which is not based on
available resources is theoretical.

If this plan is also based on the available
resources, it could be a long enduring and a
self—sufficient plan.

The plan will not only solve the problems and
fulfill the needs but also will utilize the
community resources for the benefit of the
people.

The realization of the plan will not be expen-
sive since the community does not need to invite
outside resources.

It saves time since it can be realized soon
without any unreasonable delay due to the
readily available resources (funds, expertise
and also material resources).

Question 3:

 

194

To facilitate the learning process among the
people the community education worker should
promote the emergence of voluntary facili-
tators in every learning group that the people
and he himself as a consultant have created.
Why?

Answer: Because:

(1)
(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Question 4:

 

It will develop activities on a self-sufficient
basis;

It reduces local dependency on outside exper-
tise which, in turn, becomes a ground stone
for developing the swasembada condition;

It will help to develop a sense of responsi-
bility among the people themselves on matters
concerned with their own problems;

It will help to develOp managerial skills of
the people which, in fact, is one of the main
objectives of community education;

It will help to develop the hidden capacity
among the people themselves, since the maZu
persons could act more freely and openly when-
ever the leader of the group is a person who
also comes from their side.

A community education program, say literacy,
is going to be implemented in your area. One
of the objectives is formulated as to increase
the literacy capacity of the local people.

If you are assigned to do an evaluation for
this program what kind of steps need to be
taken to complete your task?

Please be specific, for instance:

Step one:

 

Step two:

 

Step three:

 

Etc.

Answer: Steps could include:

(1)

(2)

To formulate the objective(s) in more specific
terms, such as what level of literacy is going
to be achieved (third grade, fifth grade or
sixth grade, or else?).

To gather data on the population before the
implementation of the program.

195

(3) To develop criteria for measurement in terms of
subject matter areas, such as: reading, writing,
math, skills and others.

(4) To develop the plan of action: Where (in terms
of locality), when and how to do an evaluation,
the sampling procedures, etc.

(5) To do an evaluation: collecting and analyzing
the data and draw conclusions from them.

APPENDIX B

SELF-DISCLOSURE TYPE OF TEST

APPENDIX B

SELF-DISCLOSURE TYPE OF TEST

Please read carefully:

 

We are trying to learn more from your experience as
a penilik who works directly with people in the community.
We would, therefore, like to get information from you as
much as you can give to us.

Whatever information you give to us will not affect
your job and/or your career, since nobody else except the
researcher of this study will have access to it. Also,
there will be no administrative relationship of any kind
between the information you give to us and the work of
either the local, regional or central office in Jakarta.

 

Your information could be an invaluable base for
developing short-term training program for the peniliks
in the future. Your cooperation will, therefore, be very
much appreciated.

TWO HOUR TIME will be provided to complete this
test. If you have any problem in completing this test,
please do not hesitate to come to us.

Thank you.

196

197

Please Complete the Following Information as Best You Can.

Please Do as Directed:

 

 

Fill in and/or check the box
you think is appropriate

 

Do not write
in this column:

 

1. Name:

 

2. Address:

 

 

 

3. Age by last birthday: yrs.

 

4. Sex: Male [:]
Female D
5. Education: (check one to indicate the
level of formal education
you have completed)
Primary Education [:]
Junior Secondary [:|
Senior Secondary [:3
Bachaloriate degree [:3

Master degree [:I

 

198

Do not write
in this column:

6. In-service training: (Fill in with the
type or topic and
duration of the
training(s) you
have had since you
were recruited as
community educa-
tion staff)

(1) Training on:

 

 

offered in: 19
duration: days, or
months

(2) Training on:

 

 

offered in: 19
duration: days, or
months

(3) Training on:

 

 

offered in: 19
duration: days, or

months

(Additional Sheet if Necessary)

7. If you have never had in-service
training of any kind since you have
been working with the Community
Education office you should check
here:

 

C]

199

Attending workshops/seminars/confer-
ences or group discussions among

the community education workers in
relation with job-performance:

(1) Activity attended: workshOp [:3

(2)

The topic was:

seminar [:1

conference )3

other [:3

 

 

Offered in: 19

Duration:

days

 

Activity attended:

The topic was:

workshop [:l
seminar E]

conference [3

other C]

 

 

Offered in: 19

Duration:

days

 

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

200

Do not write
in this column:

 

(3) Activity attended: workshop [:]
seminar [3

conference[:]

other C]

The topic was:

 

 

Offered in: 19

Duration: days

 

(Additional Sheet if Necessary)

Work Experience:

 

(number of years you have been working
with the Office of Community Education)

9. The total number of years you have been
working with the Office of Community
Education:

years

 

10. The total number of years you have been
working as the community education
field worker:

 

years

 

THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION that you are going to
tell us is related to your job performance in the field.
Please tell us the type and number of activities and the
nature of each activity that you have done or completed,
those which are still underway and also those which you
plan to do.

ACTIVITIES that you are going to describe should
relate, in one way or another, to the learning activities
of the people in the community. And for the sake of con-
venience we will group them into eight categories as
follows:

201

Category A Activity

Stimulating and/or facilitating learning activ—
ities such as organizing learning groups for youth
and adult members of the community, facilitating
group discussions among themselves, facilitating
learning groups for certain topics such as studying
the Koran or other community issues such as waste
disposal, irrigation, cooperatives, etc.

Category B Activity

 

Stimulating and/or facilitating the emergence of
voluntary internal facilitators (pamong belajar) within
learning groups who, from then on, would become
internal leaders and internal consultants to get the
group activities going and develOping.

Category C Activity

Providing and/or developing facilities or units of
equipment for learning activities such as village
libraries, sports and/or cultural activities, reading
materials such as magazines and newspapers, etc.

Category D Activity

Providing consultations needed by the people, find-
ing out ways for helping the people solve their prob-
lems, giving information as necessary or providing
access for people to find information from other units
or agencies (referral function), etc.

Categoty E Activity

Giving suggestions to people in order for them to
learn more through various ways not specified above
such as organizing workshops or seminars among com-
munity members either done individually or in collabo-
ration with other community development agents.

Category F Activity

Increasing people's knowledge and understanding
which include courses in basic literacy skills, courses
in general knowledge of citizenship education, courses
which relate to family life welfare programs, family
life education, nutrition, sanitation, etc.

202

Categotny Activity

 

Increasing technical skills related to specific
type of competences such as home economics, gardening,
child raising or other kinds of courses or activities
which include domestic animal husbandry, woodwork,
bamboo-work, arts, sports, dancing, etc. Activities
belonging to this category are not primarily for
employment purposes, but rather for hobbies or
secondary business.

Category H Activity

 

Increasing technical skills related to job
opportunities or employment. These kinds of activ-
ities might be done in collaboration with other units
or agencies such as Manpower, Home Industries,
Agriculture, Health, and others.

NOW THINK for a moment about the kinds of activ-
ities that you have done, completed or initiated within
THE LAST SIX MONTHS. And then please complete the infor-
mation below using categories A through H for your refer-
ence.

 

For your convenience, preceding each form is
repeated the description of the related category.

NOTES: Not Every Form is Necessary to be Completed
If, in Fact, No Activity is Going on or Has
Been Carried Out.

Do not write
in this column:

 

11. Category A Activity

 

Stimulating and/or facilitating learn-
ing activities such as organizing
learning groups for youth and adult
members of the community, facilitating
group discussion among themselves,
facilitating learning groups for cer-
tain topics such as studying the Koran
or other community issues such as waste
disposal, irrigation, cooperatives,
etc.

Information to be completed would
include:

 

203

Activity #1

 

(a) Topic:

 

(b) Frequency within six months:

(0)

(d)

times
(How many times this specific
activity has been repeated within
the last six months)

 

Average number of people involved
in each activity:

 

Recurrent: yes C]; no D
(Will this specific type of
activity be repeated over and
over again in the next six
months)

Activity #2

 

(a)
(b)

(C)

(d)

Topic:

 

Frequency within six months:

times

 

Average number of people involved
in each activity:

 

Recurrent: yes C); no [:l

Activity #3

 

(a)
(b)

(c)

((1)

Topic:

 

Frequency within six months:

times

 

Average number of people involved
in each activity:

 

Recurrent: yes [:I; no [:I

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

204

NOTES:

12.

(1) Use additional sheet if necessary.

(2) If the specific types of activ-
ities have been done collabora-
tively with other units/agencies
or voluntary organizations,
please mention all of them rang-
ing from the highest to the low-
est degree of their involvement
according to your own judgment,
starting with the initiator of
the activity. Do not forget to
mention your own unit/agency:

(i)

 

 

(ii)

 

(iii)

 

(iv)

 

etc.

Category B Activity

 

Stimulating and/or facilitating the
emergence of voluntary internal
facilitators (pamong belajar) within
learning groups who, from then on,
would become internal leaders and
internal consultants to get the
group activities going and develop-
ing.

Information to be completed would
include:

(a) Number of learning groups which
already have their own internal
facilitators during the last
six months:

 

Do not write
'n this column:

 

 

13.

205

(b) Average number of people (includ-
ing the internal facilitators)
involved in each learning group:

people.

 

(c) Average length of time each
activity is going on:

days/weeks

 

Category C Activity

 

Providing and/or developing facilities
or units of equipment for learning
activities such as village libraries,
sports and/or cultural facilities,
reading materials such as magazines
and newspapers, etc.

Information to be completed would
include:

Activity #1

 

(a) Topic/Unit:

 

(b) The date when it was initiated:

 

Activity #2

 

(a) Topic/Unit:

 

(b) The date when it was initiated:

 

Activity #3

 

(a) Topic/Unit:

 

(b) The date when it was initiated:

 

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

206

NOTES:

l4.

(1) Use additional sheet if necessary.

(2) Units/agencies or voluntary orga-
nizations which were also involved
in this type of activity ranging
from the highest to the lowest
degree of involvement according to
your own judgment, starting with
the initiator of the activities.
Do not forget to mention your own
unit/agency:

(i)

 

(ii)

 

(iii)

 

(iV)

 

etc.

Category D Activity

Providing consultations as needed by
the peOple, finding out ways for
helping the people solve their prob-
lems, giving information as necessary
or providing access for people to find
information as necessary or providing
access for people to find information
from other units or agencies (referral
function), etc.

Information to be completed would
include:

Activity #1

 

(a) Consultation/helping people/
giving information on:

 

 

 

Do not write
in this column:

(b)

(C)

207

Number of times this specific
type of activity occurred
within the last six months:

times

 

Average number of people
involved in each activity:

people

 

Activity #2

 

(a)

(b)

' (c)

Consultation/helping people/
giving information on:

Do not write
’n this column:

 

 

 

Number of times this specific
type of activity occurred
within the last six months:

times

 

Average number of people
involved in each activity:

people

 

Activity #3

 

(a)

(b)

(C)

Consultation/helping peOple/
giving information on:

 

 

Number of times this specific
type of activity occurred
within the last six months:

times

 

Average number of people
involved in each activity:

people

 

 

208

NOTES:

15.

(1) Use additional sheet if necessary.

(2) If these specific activities have
been done collaboratively with
other units/agencies or voluntary
organizations, please mention all
of them ranging from the highest
to the lowest degree of involve-
ment according to your own judg-
ment, starting from the initiator
of the activity. Do not forget to
mention your own unit/agency:

(i)

 

(ii)

 

(iii)

 

(iv)

 

etc.

Category E Activity

Giving suggestions to people in order
for them to learn more through vari-
ous ways not specified above such as
organizing workshops or seminars
among community members either indi-
vidually or in collaboration with
other community development agents.

Information to be completed would
include:

Activity #1

(a) Suggestion on:

 

 

(b) How many times this specific type
of activity occurred within the
last six months:

times

 

Do not write
in this column:

 

209

(c) Average number of people
involved in each activity:

people

 

Activity #2

 

(a) Suggestion on:

 

 

(b) How many times this specific type
of activity occurred within the
last six months:

times

 

(c) Average number of people
involved in each activity:

people

 

Activity #3

 

(a) Suggestion on:

 

 

(b) How many times this specific type
of activity occurred within the
last six months:

times

 

(c) Average number of people
involved in each activity:

people

 

NOTES:

(1) Use additional sheet if necessary.

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

l6.

(2)

210

13f these specific activities have
been done collaboratively with
other units/agencies or voluntary
organizations, please mention all
c>f them ranging from the highest
to the lowest degree of their
involvement according to your
own judgment, starting from the
initiator of the activity. Do

not forget to mention your own
unit/agency:

(i)

 

(ii)

 

(iii)

 

(iV)

 

Etc.

Category F Activity

Increasing people's knowledge and
understanding which includes courses
in basic literacy skills, courses in
general knowledge of citizenship
education, courses which relate to
family life welfare programs, family

life education, nutrition, sanita-
tion, etc.

Information to be completed would
include:

Activity # l

(a) Topic:

 

(b) How many times this specific type

of activity occurred within the
last six months:

times

 

(c) Average number of people involved
in each activity:

 

people

 

Do not write
in this column:

211

(d) Recurrent: yes C]; no D

(Will this specific type of
activity be repeated over
and over again in the next
six months)

Activity #2

(a)
(b)

(C)

(d)

Topic:

 

How many times this specific type
of activity occurred within the
last six months:

times

 

Average number of people involved
in each activity:

people

 

Recurrent: yes C]; no I:

ActiVity #3

(a)
(b)

(C)

(d)
NOTES:

(1)

Topic:

 

How many times this specific type
of activity occurred within the
last six months:

times

 

Average number of peOple involved
in each activity:

people

 

Recurrent: yes [3; no C]

Use additional sheet if necessary.

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

17.

212

(2) Units/agencies or voluntary
organizations which were also
involved in this type of
activity ranging from the high-
est to the lowest degree of their
involvement according to your own
judgment, starting with the
initiator of the activity. Do
not forget to mention your own
unit/agency:

(i)

 

 

(ii)

 

(iii)

 

(iV)

 

Etc.

Category G Activity

Increasing technical skills related to
specific types of competences such as
home economics, gardening, child
raising or other kinds of courses or
activities which include domestic
animal husbandry, woodwork, bamboo-
work, arts, sports, dancing, etc.
Activities belonging to this category
are not primarily for employment pur-
poses, but rather for hobbies or
secondary business.

Information to be completed would
include:

Activityy#l

(a) Topic:

 

(b) How many times this Specific type
of activity occurred within the
last six months:

times

 

 

Do not write
in this column:

213

(0) Average number of people involved

in each activity:

people

 

(d) Recurrent: yes [3; no [3

Activity #2

(a)
(b)

(C)

((3)

Topic:

 

How many times this specific type
of activity occurred within the
last six months:

times

 

Average number of people involved
in each activity:

people

 

Recurrent: yes C]; no E]

Activity #3

(a)
(b)

(C)

(6)
NOTES:

(1)

Topic:

 

How many times this specific type
of activity occurred within the
last six months:

times

 

Average number of people involved
in each activity:

people

 

Recurrent: yes [:j; no C]

Use additional sheet if necessary.

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

18.

214

(2) Units/agencies or voluntary
organizations which were also
involved in this type of
activity ranging from the
highest to the lowest degree
of their involvement according
to your own judgment, starting
with the initiator of the
activity. Do not forget to
mention your own unit/agency:

 

(i)

 

(ii)

 

(iii)

 

(iv)

 

Etc.

Category H Activity

Increasing technical skills related
to job opportunities or employment.
These kinds of activities might be
done in collaboration with other
units or agencies such as those
Manpower, Home Industries, Agri-
culture, Health, and others.

Information to be completed would
include:

Activity #1

(a) Topic:

 

(b) How many times this specific type
of activity occurred within the
last six months:

times

 

(c) Average number of people involved
in each activity:

people

 

(d) Recurrent: yes 1:]; no [:1

 

Do not write
in this column:

215

Activity #2

 

(a)
(b)

(C)

(d)

Topic:

 

How many times this specific type
of activity occurred within the
last six months:

times

 

Average number of people involved
in each activity:

people

 

Recurrent: yes [3; no [3

Activity #3

 

(a)
(b)

(C)

(d)
NOTES:

(1)

(2)

 

Topic:

 

How many times this specific type
of activity occurred within the
last six months:

times

 

Average number of peOple involved
in each activity:

people

 

Recurrent: yes [3; no [:I

Use additional sheet if necessary.

Units/agencies or voluntary organi-
zations which were also involved

in this type of activity ranging
from the highest to the lowest
degree of their involvement accord-
ing to your own judgment, starting
with the initiator of the activity.
Do not forget to mention your own
unit/agency:

 

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

216

(i)

 

(ii)

 

(iii)

 

(iV)

 

Etc.

NOW REVIEW ONCE AGAIN ALL ACTIVITIES
which you have already put under #11
(Category A) through #18 (Category H).
Inducate which of those activities are at
the moment still going on or are still being
implemented. Refer to their titles under
each category.

19. Enumerate all activities which are at
this moment still going on or are
being implemented according to the
categories:

Under Category A Activity:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Etc.

 

 

 

 

Under Category B Activity:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Etc.

 

 

 

 

 

Do not write
'n this column:

217

Under Category C Activity:

 

(l)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Etc.

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

 

 

 

Under Category D Activity:

 

(l)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Etc.

 

 

 

 

Under Category E Activity:

 

(l)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Etc.

 

 

 

 

Under Category F Activity:

(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Etc.

 

 

 

 

 

218

Under Category G Activity:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Etc.

 

 

 

 

Under Category H Activity:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

 

 

 

 

Etc.

NOTES: Use additional sheet if
necessary.

AS A PENILIK PLEASE TAKE A LITTLE
TIME to think by yourself about what kinds
of activities you are going to carry out
in the next six months. But please be
honest. You do not have to feel com-
pulsive about completing every category
of activities (from A through H) if, in
fact, no activity or program is planned
to be carried out.

20. Please write down only the titles of
every activity or program under each
category (from A through H) which
you are going to carry out in thg
next six months.

 

 

Do not write
in this column:

219

Under Category A Activity:

 

(1)

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

(2)

 

(3)

 

(4)

 

Etc.

Under Category B Activity:

 

(1)

 

(2)

 

(3)

 

(4)

 

Etc.

Under Category C Activity:

 

(1)

 

(2)

 

(3)

 

(4)

 

Etc.

Under Category D Activity:
(1)

 

(2)

 

(3)

 

(4)

 

Etc.

 

220

Do not write
in this column:

 

Under Category B Activity:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

 

 

 

 

Etc.

Under Category F Activity:

 

(l)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Etc.

 

 

 

 

Under Category G Activity:

 

(l)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Etc.

 

 

 

 

Under Category H Activity:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Etc.

 

 

 

 

 

NOTES: Use additional sheet if
necessary.

APPENDIX C

A GUIDE FOR INTERVIEWING THE SUPERVISORS

APPENDIX C

A GUIDE FOR INTERVIEWING THE SUPERVISORS

Introduction

 

To better understand the nature of the job perform-
ance of those peniliks who participated in the training
program your additional information about them is extremely
helpful.

The information which you are going to give us in
this interview is completely confidential. No one will
have access to your answers except the researchers of this
study. There is no relationship between the information
you give us and the administrative workings either of your
regional office at the provincial level or your central
office in Jakarta. After the data have been completely
coded, your answer sheets will be thoroughly abandoned.

 

Please help us by giving information as completely
as you can. You do not need to respond to any question
that you feel is irrelevant. But please be sure that any
information you give to us is supported by objective
judgments.

Your cooperation is very much appreciated.

Thank you.

221

 

222

Please Complete the Following Information as Best You Can.

 

Please Do as Directed:

 

 

Fill in and/or check the box

you think is appropriate

 

1. Name:

 

2. Address:

 

 

 

3. Age by last birthday:
4 . Sex: Male [:1

Female [3

yrs.

5. Education: (check one to indicate
the level of formal edu-
cation completed)

Primary Education E]

Junior Secondary [:1

Senior Secondary E]

Bachaloriate degree E]

Master degree

6. In-service training:

1:]

(Fill in with type
or topic and dura-
tion of the train-
ing(s) you ever
had since you were
recruited as a
staff member of
the Community Edu-
cation Office)

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

ADDITIONAL SHEET IF NECESSARY

7.

(1) Training on:

223

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

offered in: 19____
duration: days, or
months
(2) Training on:
offered in: l9____
duration: days, or
months
(3) Training on:
offered in: 19____
duration: days, or
months
Etc.

If you have never joined the in-service

training of any kind ever since you
worked with the Office of Community

Education, in considering your recent

position, you should check here:

Do not write
in this column:

 

224

Attending workshops/seminars/con-
ferences or group discussions
among the community education
workers or on behalf of the Com-
munity Education Office attending
workshOps/seminarsIconferences
held by other unit(s) discussing
about community development issues:

(1) Activity attended: workshop

DUDE]

 

 

seminar
conference
other

The tOpic was:

Offered in: 19____

Duration: days

 

(2) Activity attended: workshop
seminar
conference
other

The topic was:

DUDE]

 

 

Offered in: 19

Duration: days

 

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

225

 

 

(3) Activity attended: workshop [:l
seminar E]
conference [:1
other [:I

The topic was:
Offered in: 19____
Duration: days

 

Etc.

ADDITIONAL SHEET IF NECESSARY.

10.

Work Experience:

(Number of years you have been working
with the Office of Community Education)

The total number of years you have been
working with the Office of Community
Education, whether you had been working
with the central, provincial or either
regional Office of Community Education:

years

 

The total number of years you have been
in the recent position (as community
education supervisor or education
supervisor at regional level):

years

 

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

226

NOW THINK FOR A MOMENT about your subordinates' job
performance. Think specifically about their initiative,
eagerness to follow through activities having been initi-
ated, ability to communicate with villagers/people, ability
to organize learning groups, ability to stimulate group
discussions among villagers, ability to facilitate the
emergence of voluntary-internal facilitators in learning
groups' activities and finally their overall performance
in doing their job.

PLEASE complete the following information according
to your objective judgment.

Do not write
in this column:

11. According to your perception how
would you rank your subordinate's
initiative: (Please check one)

Low High

[:3 CI) [I] [I] [I]

12. According to your best estimate or
records that you have how many pro-
grams of activity that your sub-
ordinate has initiated within the
last six months:

 

(fill in with figure)

13. How many of those initiated have
been completed within the last
six months:

 

(£111 in with figure)

14. According to your records how
many activities that your sub-
ordinate plans to be implemented
in the next six months:

 

(fill in with figure)

 

15.

16.

17.

18.

227

According to your observation how
would you rank your subordinate's
ability to communicate with
villagers/people in performing his/
her job? (Please check one)

Low High

C) E) BBC]

According to your observation how
would you rank your subordinate's
ability to organize learning groups
among the villagers/people he/she
serves? (Please check one)

Low High

C] C) D DC)

According to your record how many
learning groups have been created
or developed within the last six
months? (Not necessarily that all
those learning groups are now
still in operation/active. But
be sure that you just mention the
figure of the learning groups
that have been or had been in
active use within the last six
month period)

 

(use your best estimate)

According to your perception how would
you rank your subordinate's ability to
stimulate group discussions among the
community people to make the learning
groups active by themselves? (Please
check one)

Low High

[:1 C) E] C] E]

Do not write
in this column:

 

 

19.

20.

228

Do not write

in this column:
According to your observation as well
as your record how many voluntary-
internal facilitators or informal
group facilitators have been growing
(or had been growing) within the last
six months? This informal group
facilitator emerges voluntarily or
informally in each learning group from
its members who, by then, will facili-
tate group activities even without the
presence of the community education
worker. It is not necessarily that
once this informal group facilitator
emerges he/she will hold the position
continuously in every group activity.
Instead, it is most likely that in
each group activity a new informal
group facilitator will emerge, since
everyone has his own expertise which
differs one from the other.

 

(use your best estimate)

Finally, as an overall rating how would
you rank your subordinate's general
performance in accomplishing his/her
job? (Please check one)

Low High

C) [:1 C] Cl (:1

APPENDIX D

FEEDBACK FORMAT FOR THE TRAINING

APPENDIX D

FEEDBACK FORMAT FOR THE TRAINING

Your observations, impressions and comments on the training

just completed are very important and would be very helpful

to improve the next training of the same sort and character.

Please, therefore, complete the following information

according to your own judgments.

NOTES: ( )

means

means

means

means

means

very good or super;
just good;

average;

not so good;

bad or the least.

A. About the Materials for the Training

1. Were the materials for the training
worthwhile to learn to increase
knowledge and understanding of the
penilik in relation to his job?

229

Just circle one:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

230

Were the materials learned helpful to
a penilik in performing his job?

Was the sequence of the materials
good so that the relationship of one
topic to another was clear and easy
to learn?

About the System of Delivernysed
in the Training

 

 

Was the system of delivery used in the
training interesting?

Was the lecture or the presentation
of the materials clear?

Were the practical exercises experi-
enced during the training adequate
to improve the penilik's job per-
formance in the field?

Were the examples used during the
training relevant to the actual
setting and therefore made learning
easier?

About the TeachingeLearning
Situation During the Training

 

Was the teaching-learning situation
lively to stimulate learning
activities during the training?

Were the trainers sensitive enough
and responsive to any ideas
exposed during the training so
that problems that were raised got
their fair consideration?

Were the attitudes of the trainers
quite open to make the participants
free to talk and to express their
ideas?

Just circle one:

 

 

 

 

 

+
+ + 1
a b c
a b c
a b c
a b c
a b c
a b c
a b c
a b c
a b c

 

 

 

 

231

Just circle one:

+

+ - =
+ + -

 

4. Was the learning situation favorable
for developing new and innovative
ideas? a b c d e

5. Was the teaching-learning situation
flexible (not rigid) to accommodate
variability of ideas? a b c d e

6. Did the sphere of the discussions
(large group as well as small group)
held during the training give enough
opportunity for the participants to
express their ideas? a b c d e

D. General Impressions about the Training

 

1. In general, what do you think about
the training just completed in terms
of achieving its intended objectives,
i.e., to increase understanding,
knowledge as well as technical skills
of the penilik in performing his job
in the field? Was it or was it not
successful? a b c d e

2. If this kind of training is repeated
again next time, are you interested
in participating? a b c d e

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E. Some Additional Comments

 

If there is any other additional comments that you want
to give to improve this kind of training in the future,
would you kindly write them in the space available below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note: Additional sheet if necessary.

APPENDIX E

THE TRAINING SCHEDULE

APPENDIX E

THE TRAINING SCHEDULE

Group A: Participatory Group

 

First Day

 

Pre~testing

 

1. Cognitive test

2. Self-disclosure type of test

Training Session

 

Topic 1: Conceptual Framework of Community
Development

 

 

What is Community Development?
1. Short lecture about the topic
2. Unstructured question and answer
3. Small group discussion (structured) on
questions presented in the self-checking

test

Sub-total (the first day)

Second Day

 

4. Large group discussion (structured) as
the conclusion from what has been dis-
cussed in the small groups

232

Minutes

120

120

30
30

30
330

30

233

Topic 2: The Importance of the Local Needs

The position of understanding local
needs in relation to the conceptual
framework of community development.

Short lecture about the tOpic
Unstructured question and answer
Role-playing

A small group of three was assigned
voluntarily to do the role-play.
While each of the small groups was
doing the play, the rest were watch-
ing. However, they were told that
they should observe carefully and
critically, since afterwards time
would be provided for them to give
their ideas and comments.

Large group discussion to discuss
the role-plays just conducted.

Topic 3: Strategies for Understanding

10.

ll.

12.

Local Needs

 

In this session different strat-
egies for understanding the local
needs were discussed.

Short lecture about the topic
Unstructured question and answer
Role-playing.

Two small groups of three were assigned
voluntarily to the plays to simulate
discussions held wi h the community
people and with the community leaders
in the effort of understanding the
local needs.

Large group discussion to discuss the
role-plays just conducted.

Minutes

30

30

45

30

20

40

30

13.

234

Small group activities/exercise

The whole group was divided into four
small groups, each to discuss one
among the four strategies discussed
in the lecture, i.e., interview tech-
nique, questionnaire, informal group
discussion and observation.

Sub-total (the second day)

Third Day

 

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

Topic 4: Drawing Workable Conclusions About

19.

Large group session to discuss the
results of the small group activ-
ities.

Group project

To prepare interview guides for con-
ducting needs assessment.

Large group discussion to sanction
the interview guides resulting from
the small group project.

Conducting the actual needs assessment

using interview strategy. The group

was divided into small groups of three.

Each group did their interviewing
independently.

Return to the class to discuss the
results.

Community Development Needs

The importance of understanding the

community leaders, formal and
informal, were discussed. Four

approaches could be used to identify
community leaders, i.e., positional

approach, reputational approach,

decision making approach and social

participation approach.

Short lecture about the topic

Minutes

45

 

330

30

45

20

120

30

30

235

 

20. Unstructured question and answer
21. Small group discussions with assignment
Discussion about the approaches for
identifying community leadership
Sub-total (the third day)
Fourth Day
22. Large group session to discuss the

results of the small group meetings

Topic 5: Identifying the Available Resources

23.
24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

Different community has different
resources available. The important
thing is how to identify those
available resources and to pull them

together to meet the community needs.

Short lecture

Unstructured question and answer
Role-playing.

The role-play was about talking with
community people to discuss community

resources available for development.

Large group discussion about the role-
play just conducted.

Group project

Developing a guideline to do the field-
work for identifying community resources.

Large group session to sanction the
results of the group project.

Field-work conducting the resource
assessment

Sub-total (the fourth day)

Minutes

20

45

 

340

20

30

20

4O

20

60

30

120
340

236

 

 

 

 

Minutes
Fifth Day
30. Large group session to discuss the
results of the field work. 30
Topic 6: Prioritizing Needs and Resources
Into Workable Plans
How to draw a workable plan from the
identifiable needs and resources.
31. Short lecture 30
32. Unstructured question and answer 20
33. Small group exercises
Given the hypothetical data on community
needs and resources, the small groups
exercised to draw a workable plan on
community education activities. 30
34. Large group session to discuss the
results from small group exercises. 30
35. Small group session to accommodate com-
ments from the large group session. 30
Topic 7: Facilitating the Learning Process
The main objectives of community
education and the major roles of
the penilik were discussed.
36. Short lecture 30
37. Unstructured question and answer 20
38. Role-play
Simulating the roles performed by the
penilik. 40

39. Large group discussion to discuss the
role-play just conducted. 30

237

 

 

 

Minutes
Topic 8: Evaluating Community Education Program
Developing criteria for evaluation
and planning for an evaluation of a
community education program.
40. Short lecture 30
Sub—total (the fifth day) 320
Sixth Day
41. Unstructured question and answer 20
42. Small group exercises developing an
evaluation program for community
education. 30
43. Large group session to discuss the
results of the small group exercises. 3O
44. Small group session 20
45. Large group session for conclusion 10
Post-testing
1. Cognitive test 120
2. Filling out the Feedback Form 60
Sub-total (the sixth day) 290
GRAND TOTAL: 1950
For Testing 420
For Training Session 1530

 

 

 

 

 

238

Group B: Lecture Group

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes
First Day
Pre-testing
1. Cognitive test 120
2. Self—disclosure type of test 120
Training Session
Topic 1: Conceptual Framework of Community
Development
What is Community Development?
1. Lecture about the topic 60
2. Unstructured question and answer 30
Sub-total (the first day) 330
Second Day
3. Small group discussions. Participants
were broken down into small groups of
three to five to discuss among them-
selves problems raised in the large
group session. No feedback was pro-
vided. 30
4. Large group discussion
Unstructured question and answer on
problems resulting from the small
group sessions. 30
Topic 2: The Importance of the Local Needs
The position of understanding local
needs in relation to the conceptual
framework of community development.
5. Lecture about the topic 60

6. Unstructured question and answer 30

239

Small group exercises

To develop guidelines for identifying
local community needs.

Large group session

To discuss the results from the small
group exercises.

Guest lecture

From Community Education Office.

Topic 3: Strategies for UnderstandingtLocal

 

Needs

In this session different strategies
for understanding the local needs
were discussed.

 

10. Lecture about the topic
Sub-total (the second day)
Third Day

11. Unstructured question and answer

12. Guest lecture from the Community
Education Office

13. Small group project
Developing strategies for identifying
the local needs.

14. Large group session to discuss the

results of small group project.

Minutes

30

30

60

6O

 

330

30

60

45

30

240

Topic 4: Drawing_Workable Conclusions About
Community Development Needs

The importance of understanding the
community leaders, formal and
informal, were discussed. Four
approaches could be used to identify
community leaders, i.e., positional
approach, reputational approach,
decision making approach and social
participation approach.

15. Lecture about the topic

16. Unstructured question and answer

17. Small group discussion/exercise
How to draw a workable conclusion
from the hypothetical data on the
community development needs.

18. Large group session

To report the results from the small
group exercise.

Sub-total (the third day)

Fourth Day

 

19. Small group session

To discuss the comments from the large
group session.

20. Large group session

Conclusion about Topic 4.

Topic 5: Identifying the Available Resources

 

Different communities have different
resources available. The important
thing is how to identify those avail-
able resources and to pull them
together to meet the community needs.

We

60

30

45

30

 

330

30

20

21.
22.

23.

241

Lecture about the topic
Unstructured question and answer
Guest lecture

From Community Leaders.

Topic 6: Prioritizing Needs and Resources

 

Into Workable Plans

 

How to draw a workable plan from the
identifiable needs and resources.

 

24. Lecture about the topic
25. Unstructured question and answer
26. Small group exercise
Sub-total (the fourth day)
Fifth Day
27. Large group discussion
Sanctioning
28. Small group session
To discuss comments raised by large
group discussion.
29. Large group session

Conclusion

Topic 7: Facilitating the Learning Process

30.
31.

The main objectives of community

education and the major roles of

the penilik were discussed.
Lecture about the topic

Unstructured question and answer

Minutes

60

30

60

60
30

30

 

330

45

30

15

60
30

242

32. Small group exercises
Topic: Roles of the peniZik.
33. Large group discussion as the conclusion

of Topic 7.

Topic 8: Evaluating Community Education
Program

 

Developing criteria for evaluation
and planning for an evaluation of
a community education program.

34. Lecture about the topic

35. Unstructured question and answer

Sub-total (the fifth day)

Sixth Day

 

36. Small group session/exercise
Planning an evaluation program.
37. Large group session

Discussion about the results from the
small group exercise.

38. Back to small group session to accommo-
date the comments from the large group
session.

39. Large group session

Conclusion

Post-testing
1. Cognitive test
2. Filling out the Feedback Form

Sub-total (the sixth day)

Minutes

45

30

60
30

 

345

45

30

20

10

120
60
285

243

 

 

Minutes
GRAND TOTAL: 1950
For Testing 420

For Training Session 1530

 

APPENDIX F

TABLES

APPENDIX F

TABLES

Table I-A.--Scores on Cognitive Test for Different Groups--
Group A: Participatory Group.

 

Training

 

Participant Pre-test POSt’te3t I POSt'teSt II
1 52 51 61
2 59 71 68
3 42 55 6O
4 45 52 52
5 53 62 64
6 51 53 58
7 49 59 62
8 44 70 61
9 56 67 73
10 61 66 73
11 54 64 53
12 57 68 74
13 58 62 67
14 54 58 62
15 51 51 54
’Total 786 929 942
Average 52.40 61.93 62.80

 

244

245

Table I-B.--Scores on Cognitive Test for Different Groups--
Group B: Lecture Group.

 

Training

 

Participant Pre-test POSt‘teSt I Post-test II

1 69 68 65

2 60 76 81

3 59 55 64

4 49 56 55

5 55 61 58

6 50 52 56

7 53 47 56

8 49 58 57

9 51 65 56
10 76 75 69
11 53 45 59
12 51 63 70
13 58 59 55
14 57 69 66
15 44 50 44
Total 834 899 911

Average 55.60 59.93 60.73

 

246

Table I-C.--Scores on Cognitive Test for Different Groups--
Group C: Control Group.

 

Training

 

Participant Pre-test Post-test I Post-test II

1 44 51 52

2 49 41 55

3 48 64 52

4 60 46 53

5 53 49 45

6 56 53 45

7 49 60 50

8 41 39 34

9 39 33 39
10 47 30 55
ll 51 57 53
12 44 62 64
13 48 53 61
14 54 52 48
15 44 49 52
Total 727 739 758

Average 48.46 49.27 50.53

 

247

Table II—A.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of Penilik as Organizer--Group A:
Participatory Group.

 

 

pgiiigiggnt Pre'teSt Post-test

1 16 54

2 60 79

3 49 92

4 84 73

5 78 90

6 87 97

7 44 49

8 24 60

9 87 55
10 46 75
ll 34 84
12 35 51
13 73 60
14 53 65
15 6 28
Total 781 1017

Average 52.06 67.80

 

248

Table II-B.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of PeniZik as Organizer--Group B: Lecture

 

 

Group.
Pziiigiggnt Pre‘test Post-test

l 86 43

2 37 83

3 60 7

4 15 90

5 7 50

6 42 78

7 86 64

8 33 18

9 48 64
10 S6 44
ll 99 41
12 12 64
13 96 59
14 23 48
15 97 48
Total 797 801

Average 53.13 53.40

—

249

Table II-C.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of Penilik as Organizer--Group G: Control

 

 

Group.
£31313?“ Pre‘test ”was“

1 34 19

2 96 86

3 66 49

4 43 29

5 22 24

6 25 38

7 72 35

8 39 48

9 48 39
10 51 26
11 94 42
12 61 53
13 61 25
14 20 20
15 45 33
Total 778 565

Average 51.86 37.73

 

250

Table III-A.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of Penilik as Consultant--Group A:
Participatory Group.

 

Training

 

Participant Pre-test Post-test

1 7 16

2 4 7

3 14 14

4 9 12

5 7 9

6 16 21

7 20 3

8 0 14

9 9 7
10 2 0
11 14 15
12 12 32
13 8 12
14 5 14
15 10 6
Total 137 187

Average 9.13 12.47

 

251

Table III-B.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of Penilik as Consultant--Group B:
Lecture Group.

 

Training

 

Participant Pre-test Post-test

1 7 7

2 49 12

3 0 6

4 3 16

5 8 17

6 7 1

7 12 13

8 31 9

9 0 14
10 14 17
11 24 12
12 24 0
13 5 16
14 9 6
15 9 13
Total 202 159

Average 13.46 10.60

 

252

Table III-C.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of Penilik as Consultant-~Group G:
Control Group.

 

 

Pgiiigiggnt Pre'tGSt Post-test

l 5 0

2 24 14

3 25 8

4 6 10

5 4 0

6 13 12

7 6 3o

8 24 5

9 4 7
10 4 9
11 9 11
12 g 3
13 20 6
14 6 6
15 16 19
Total 175 141

Average 11.66 9.40

 

253

Table IV-A.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of Penilik as Enabler--Group A: Partici-
patory Group.

 

 

Pgiiigiggnt Pre'tGSt Post-test

l 5 12

2 8 4

3 9 9

4 10 12

5 10 15

6 5 5

7 10 10

8 10 6

9 12 20
10 8 7
ll 3 14
12 11 ll
13 3 7
14 8 10
15 4 4
Total 116 146

Average 7.73 9.73

 

254

Table IV-B.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of Penilik as Enabler--Group B: Lecture

 

 

Group.
Pgiiigiggnt Pre‘test Post-test

1 2 4

2 23 ll

3 0 5

4 3 5

5 2 12
6 6 5

7 3 7

8 5 2

9 3 8
10 5 8
ll 5 2
12 20 5
13 24 2
14 7 6
15 2 4
Total 116 86

Average 7.73 5.73

 

255

Table IV-C.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of Penilik as Enabler--Group G: Control

 

 

Group.
2:32:23... Pre‘test ”St‘te“

l 3 10

2 5 5

3 1o 10

4 4 11

5 5 9

6 3 10

7 3 10

8 20 7

9 5 12
10 12 5
11 7 10
12 6 4
13 8 6
14 6 6
15 15 5
Total 122 120

Average 8.13 8.00

 

256

Table V-A.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of Penilik as Facilitator--Group A:
Participatory Group.

 

 

pgiiigiggnt Pre’teSt Post-test
l 1 1
2 1 0
3 1 l
4 1 1
5 o 1
6 1 1
7 1 0
8 1 2
9 0 0
10 1 0
ll 1 0
12 1 3
l3 1 3
l4 1 0
15 l 0
Total 13 13

Average .87 .87

 

257

Table V—B.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of Penilik as Facilitator—-Group B:
Lecture Group.

 

 

£21331: Pre’teSt ”was”:
1 0 °
2 1 0
3 1 0
4 1 2
5 1 1
6 0 1
7 1 2
8 0 1
9 1 2
10 1 0
11 1 1
12 0 0
13 1 1
14 1 1
15 1 0
Total 11 12

Average .73 .80

 

258

Table V-C.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of Penilik as Facilitator-~Group G:
Control Group.

 

Training

 

Participant Pre-test Post—test

1 0 1

2 l 2

3 1 1

4 1 2

5 0 0

6 2 1

7 2 0

8 1 1

9 1 0
10 2 0
11 3 l
12 2 0
13 1 0
14 0 0
15 1 2
Total 18 11

Average 1.20 .73

 

259

Table VI-A.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of PeniZik as Planner—~Group A: Partici-
patory Group.

 

Training

 

Participant Pre-test Post-test

1 19 18

2 8 14

3 14 17

4 11 11

5 5 15

6 18 17

7 6 23

8 10 21

9 6 12
10 8 13
11 17 17
12 8 20
13 5 3
14 5 15
15 5 11
Total 145 227

Average 9.66 15.13

 

260

Table VI-B.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of Penilik as Planner--Group B: Lecture

 

 

Group.

1 7 7
2 14 10
3 6 1
4 9 l7
5 15 10
6 0 4
7 o 13
8 3 9
9 10 16
10 20 14
11 0 3
12 10 o
13 3 11
14 9 18
15 4 5
Total 110 143

Average 7.33 9.53

261

Table VI—C.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Role of Penilik as Planner--Group C: Control

 

 

Group.
Pgiiigiggnt Pre’tGSt Post-test

l 9 7

2 0 21

3 4 12

4 4 9

5 15 ll

6 9 0

7 13 6

8 5 6

9 6 3
10 20 19
ll 6 13
12 13 6
13 15 11
14 15 5
15 3 13
Total 142 142

Average 9.46 9.46

262

Table VII-A.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Total Performance Scores of the Roles of the
Penilik--Group A: Participatory Group.

 

Training

 

Participant Pre-test Post-test

1 48 101

2 81 104

3 87 138

4 115 114

5 100 130

6 127 141

7 81 90

8 45 103

9 114 94
10 65 95
11 69 130
12 67 117
13 95 85
114 72 104
15 26 49
Total 1192 1595

Average 79.46 106.33

 

263

Table VII-B.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Total Performance Scores of the Roles of the
PeniZik--Group B: Lecture Group.

 

 

Pgiiigiggnt Pre‘test Post-test

l 102 61

2 124 116

3 67 19

4 31 130

5 33 90

6 55 39

7 107 99

8 73 39

9 62 104
10 96 83
11 129 64
12 66 69
13 129 89
14 49 79
15 113 70
Total 1236 1201

Average 82.40 80.06

 

264

Table VII-C.--Scores from Self-Disclosure Type of Test: The
Total Performance Scores of the Roles of the
Penilik--Group G: Control Group.

 

 

Pgiiigiggnt Pre‘teSt Post-test
1 56 37
2 126 128
3 106 30
4 58 61
5 46 44
6 52 61
7 101 31
3 89 68
9 64 61
10 89 59
11 119 77
12 91 66
13 105 43
14 47 37
15 86 72
Total 1235 980

Average 82.33 65.33

 

265

Table VIII-A.--Scores from the Interviews of the Supervisors:
The Supervisor's Perception on the Penilik's
Performance-~Group A: Participatory Group.

 

Training

 

Participant Pre—interview Post-interview

1 14 15

2 11 13

3 ll 15

4 15 13

5 15 14

6 9 8

7 15 15

8 ll 10

9 15 13
10 15 15
ll 13 15
12 15 15
13 11 13
14 15 15
15 15 15
Total 200 204

Average 13.33 13.60

 

266

Table VIII-B.--Scores from the Interviews of the Supervisors:
The Supervisor's Perception on the Penilik's
Performance--Group B: Lecture Group.

 

Training

 

Participant Pre-interview Post-interview

l 15 15

2 14 15

3 6 10

4 14 15

5 10 9

6 12 14

7 14 10

8 14 15

9 14 15
10 13 15
ll 9 ll
12 13 14
13 14 15
14 13 15
15 12 14
Total 187 202

Average 12.47 13.47

 

267

Table VIII-C.--Scores from the Interviews of the Supervisors:
The Supervisor's Perception on the Penilik's
Performance--Group C: Control Group.

 

Training

 

Participant Pre-interview Post-interview

1 13 14

2 ll 14

3 14 15

4 10 5

5 13 15

6 ll 10

7 14 15

8 14 15

9 15 14
10 15 15
ll 15 15
12 14 15
13 14 15
14 13 15
15 10 14
Total 196 206

Average 13.07 13.73

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alford, Harold J. Continuing Education in Action, Resi-
dential Centers for Lifelong Learning. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1968.

 

Allred, Wallace E. A Comparison of Student Teaching Per-
formance of Students Who Have Taught as Teams and
Students Who Have Taugtt Singly. Doctoral Dis-
sertation, University of Utah, 1971.

 

 

 

Anderson, Robert. "Our Educational Model of Participation
Examined." Journal of Community Development
Society 1(2), 1970.

Arnstein, Sherry R. "A Ladder of Citizen Participation."
Journal of the American Institute of Planners
(JAIP) 35, 1969.

 

Axinn, George H. New Strategies for Rural Development.
Rural Life Associates, Michigan, USA, 1978.

 

Baker, Frederick J. Community Development in Northeast
Thailand! A Descriptive Study of Radio Station 909,
Sakon Nakorn, as an Educational Vehicle for Change.
Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University,
1973.

 

 

 

Batten, T. R., and Batten, Madge. The Non-Directive
Approach in Group and Community Work. London:
Oxford University Press, 1975.

 

 

Bergevin, Paul A. Philosophy fetiAdult Education. New
York: Seabury Press, 1967.

 

Bergevin, Paul, and McKinley, John. Participation Training
for Adult Education. St. Louis, Missouri: The
Bethany Press, 1967.

 

 

Bergevin, Paul et 31. Adult Education Procedures, A Hand-
book of Tested Patterns for Effective PartiCipa-
tion, A Crossroad Book. New York: The Seabury
Press, 1966.

 

 

 

268

269

Blakely, Edward J. Toward a Theory of Training People for
the War and Poverty. New York: Vantage Press,
1972.

 

Bloom, Benjamin 8., pg. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives,
The Classification of Educational Goals, Handbook I.
Longman, New York: Cognitive Domain, 1977.

 

Bottum, John S. et 31. Community Development Conceptsy
Curriculum Training Needs. A Taskforce Report to
The Extension Community on Organization and Policy.
Washington, D.C.: National Association of State
Universities and Landgrant Colleges, 1975.

 

 

Boyd, R. D. "New Design for Adult Education." Doctoral
Programs in Adult Education 19, 1969.

 

Brembeck, Cole 5., and Thomson, Timothy J. New Strategies
for Educational Development, The Cross-Cultural
Search for Nonformal Alternatives. Lexington:
Lexington Books, DC Heath and Co., 1974.

 

Broadwell, Martin M. "Determining Training Needs."
Training, The Magazine of Human Resources Develgp-
ment 12(11), November 1975.

Campbell, Donald T., and Stanley, Julian C. Experimental
and Qpasi Etperimental Designs for Research.
Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing Company,
1966.

 

Cantwell, Zita M., and Doyle, Hortens A. Instructional
Technology: An Annotated Bibliography. Metuchen,
New Jersey: The Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1974.

 

Cary, Lee J., 29. Community Development as a Process.
Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1975.

 

Central Bureau of Statistics. The Government of Indonesia:
Statistical Pocketbook of Indonesia 1971. Jakarta,
Indonesia, 1971.

Cole, William J., and Glass, Conrad J. "The Effect of
Adult Student Participation in Program Planning on
Achievement, Retention and Attitude." Adult Educa-
tiopy A Journal of Research and Theoty 27(2), 1977.

 

 

Colletta, Nat J. "Participatory Research or Participation
Put-On, Reflection on the Research Phase of an
Indonesian Experiment in Non-Formal Education."
Convergence 9(3), State University College at
Buffalo, New York, 1976.

 

270

Colletta, Nat J. Out of School Education in Indonesia: An
Overview. Office of Educational Research and Devel-
opment, The Ministry of Education and Culture,
Jakarta, Indonesia, 1975.

Coombs, Philip H. New Paths to Learning, for Rural Children
and Youth! Non-Formal Education for Rural Develop-
ment. International Council for Educational Devel-
opment, USA, 1973.

 

 

Cornwell, J. B. "How to Stimulate--and Manage--Participa-
tion in the Classroom." Trainingy The Magazine of
Human Resources Development 16(5), May 1979.

 

Cotton, Webster E. On Behalf of Adult Education, A Histori-
cal Examination of the Supporting Literature.
Center for the Study of Liberal Education for Adults,
Boston University, 1968.

 

 

Cox, Fred M. at al., eds. Tactics and Technigues of Commu-
nitnyractice. Itasca, Illinois: Peacock Pub-
lishers, Inc., 1978.

 

 

Cox, Fred M. et 21., eds. Strategies of Community Organi-
zation, A Book of Readings. Itasca, Illinois:
Peacock Publishers, Inc., 1978.

 

 

Craig, Robert L., 39. Training and Development Handbook,
A Guide to Human Resource Develgpment. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1976.

 

Crain, Robert, and Rosenthal, Donald. "Community'Status and
A Dimension of Local Decision Making." American
Sociology Review, #32, 1967.

 

Curle, Adam. Educational Strategy for Develpping Societies.
Tavistock, 1963.

 

Davis, Larry Nolan. Planning, Conducting and Evaluating
Workshops, A Practitioner's Guide to Adult Educa-
tion. Learning Concepts, Texas, 6th Printing, 1978.

 

 

Dobbs, R. "With Justice in Curriculum for All." Adult
Leadership, #16, 1967. ‘

 

Downie, N. M., and Heath, R. W. Basic Statistical Methods.
New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1965.

Ebel, Robert L., 29. Encyclopedia of Educational Research,
4th Edition. A Project of the American Educational
Research Association. London: The McMillan Co.,
Collier-McMillan Limited, 1969.

 

271

Edwards, Allen D., and Jones, Dorothy G. Community and
Community Development. The Hague: Mouton and Co.,
1976.

 

 

Edwards, Allen L. Experimental Design in Psychological
Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,

 

Fantini, Mario D. "Community Participation, Many Faces,
Many Directions." Educational Leadershipi Journal
of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development, NEA 29(8), 1972.

 

 

Gessaman, Paul H. Community Development: An Intensive
Training Manual. North Central Regional Center
for Rural Development, Iowa State University, Ames,
Iowa, 1978, Unit I.

 

 

Good, Carter V., 3g. Dictionary of Education. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1973.

 

Government of Indonesia. The Second Five Year Development
Plan (PELITA II), 1974/1975 - 1978/1979. Jakarta,
1974, Part III.

 

Goulet, Denis. "DevelOpment or Liberation." International
Development Review XIII(3), 1971.

 

 

Grandstaff, Marvin. Alternatives in Education: A Summary
View of Research and Analysis on the Concept of
Non-Formal Education, Program of Studies in NFE.
Institute of International Studies in Education,
College of Education, M80, 1974.

 

 

Hall, Budd. "Adult Education and Rural Development." Adult
Education, A Journal of Research and Theory 25(4),
1975.

Harbison, Frederick H., and Myers, Charles A. Education,
Manpower and Economic Growth. McGraw-Hill, 1964.

 

 

Havelock, Ronald G., and Havelock, Mary C. Training for
Change Agents, A Guide to the Design of Training
Progtams in Education and Other Fields. Ann Arbor,
Michigan: Institute for Social Research, 1975.

 

 

Hays, William L. Statistics for the Social Sciences. New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1973.

 

Higgins, Benjamin and Jean. Indonesia, The Crisis of the
Millstones. Princeton, New Jersey: D. Van Nostrand
Company, Inc., 1963.

 

 

272

Hill, Ida S., and Hill, William F. Learning and Teaching
Through Discussion. Center for the Study of Liberal
Education for Adults, 1958.

 

 

Hill, William F. Learning Through Discussion. Beverly
Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1969.

 

Hill, Richard J. A Comparative Study of Lecture and Dis-
cussion Methods. White Plains, New York: The Fund
for Adult Education, 1960.

 

Holdcroft, Lane E. Rural Development Today, A Practical
Perspective. Department of Agricultural Economics,
MSU, 1976.

 

Iversen, Gudmund R., and Norpoth, Helmut. Anaiysis of
Variance. Series: Quantitative Applications in
the Social Sciences. Beverly Hills, London: Sage
Publications, 1976.

 

Johnson, Richard B. "Organization and Management of Train-
ing. In Craig, Training and Development Handbook,
A Guide of Human Resource Development. McGraw-
Hill, 1976.

Kidd, Roby, pg. Convergence, An International Journal of
Adult Education 2(1), 1969.

 

Knowles, Malcolm S. The Modern Practice of Adult Education.
New York: Association Press, 1970.

Koneya, Mele. "Toward an Essential Definition of Community
Development." Journal of Community Development
Society 6(1), 1975.

Kramer and Specht. Readings in Community Organization
Practice. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice
Hall, Inc. ’ 1975. '

LaBelle, Thomas. "Liberation, Development, and Rural
Non-Formal Education. In Richard Niehoff, 29.,
Non-Formal Education and the Rura11Poor. Report
on Conference and Workshop, MSU, 1977.

Lippitt, Ronald. "Training for Participation." Adult
Leadership Journal 14(2), June 1965.

Lorge, Irving pt 31. Adult Education, Theory and Method,
Psychology of Adults. Washington: Adult Education
Association of the USA, 1963.

273

Luke, Robert A., and Ulmer, Curtis. How To Train Teachers
to Train Adults. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-
Hall Adult Education Series, Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
1971.

 

McFarland, Andrew S. Power and Leadership in Pluralist
Systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1969.

McLoughlin, D. "Participation of the Adult Learner in Pro-
gram Planning." Adult Education, A Journal of
Research and Theory 22(1), 1971.

 

Melvin, Ernest E. "The Community in Concept and in Devel-
Opment." Adult Leadership Journal 24(2), October

 

1975.
Mezirow, J. D. "Community Development as an Educational
Process." International Review of Community

 

Development, #5, 1960.

 

Mills, H. R. Teaching and Training, A Handbook for Instruc—
tors. New York: A Halsted Press Book, John Wiley
and Sons, 1977.

Miniclier, Louis M. Communitprevelopment in the World
Today. Excerpted from an address presented at the
National Meeting of the Brazilian Rural Social
Service, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, November 1961.

Ministry of Education and Culture, The Government of Indo-
nesia. Coordinating Body for Non-Formal Education.
Jakarta, Indonesia, 1975.

Morgan, Barton; Holmes, Glen; and Bundy, Clarence. Methods
in Adult Education. Danville, Illinois: The Inter-
state Printers and Publishers, Inc., 1960.

Nammacher, Thomas J., 29. Training, The Magazine of Human
Resource Development 15(5), May 1978.

 

Nie, Norman H. et 31. SPSS: Statistical Package for the
Social Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill Book
Company, 1975.

 

Niehoff, Richard, 29. Non-Formal Education and the Rural
Poor. Report on Conference and Workshop, MSU,
Program of Study in NFE, 1977.

 

Nyerere, Julius. Development Dialogue. Swedish Inter—
national Development Authority (SIDA), Opening
Address to the Dag Hammarskjold Seminar: Education
and Liberation, Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania, 1974.

274

Poston, Richard W. Report of the Division of Community
Development. Annual Meeting of National University
Extension Association, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1958.

 

 

Rossi, Peter H., and Biddle, Bruce J. The New Media and
Education. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company,
1966.

 

 

Rummler, Geary A. "You Need Performance, Not Just Training."
Training, The Magazine of Human Resources Develop-
ment 14(10), October 1977.

Solomon, Daniel; Bezdek, W. E.; and Rosenberg, L. Teaching
Styles and Learning. Research Reports, Center for
the Study of Liberal Education for Adults, Chicago,
Illinois, 1963.

 

Spergel, Irving A. Community Problem Solving: The Delin-
gpency Example. Chicago: The University of Chicago
Press, 1974.

 

Spiegel, Hans B. C. Citizen Participation in Urban Devel-
Opment, Vol. I: Concepts and Issues. NTL Institute
for Applied Behavioral Science, 1968.

Springborn, Rosemary. "Technical and Skills Training: We
Need to Do Much More." Training, The Magazine of
Human Resources Development 14(10), October 1977.

 

Steel, Robert G. D., and Torrie, James H. Principles and
Procedures of Statistics. New York: McGraw—Hill
Book Company, 1960.

 

Suparman, Romli. Selected Variables Involved in Assessing
Community Needs in Two West Java Villages. Doctoral
Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1979.

 

Tough, Allen. The Adult's Learning Projects, A Fresh
Approach to Theory and Practice in Adult Learning.
Research in Education Series #1, The Ontario
Institute for Studies in Education, Ontario, Canada,
1975.

Tregoe, Benjamin B. "Management Development: Where Are We
Headed?" Training, The Magazine of Human Resources
Development 12(11), November 1975.

 

Vaizey, John. Some of the Main Issues in the Strategy of
Educational Supply. In Policy Conference on Economic
Growth and Investment in Education, Washington,
October 16-20, 1961, Vol. 3, Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development, 1962, pp. 51-
69.

 

275

Vykuntapathi, Thota. A Study of the Community Development
in India. Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1965.

Ward, Ted W., and Herzog, William A., Jr. Effective Learn-
ing in Non-Formal Education. Abridged Edition,
Michigan State University, 1977.

Wildt, Albert R., and Athola, Olli T. Analysis of
Covariance. Series: Quantitative Applications in
the Social Sciences. Beverly Hills, London: Sage
Publications, 1978.

 

World Bank. Indonesia, Appraisal of Non-Formal Education
Project, #1606b-IND., August 19, 1977.

Zemke, Ron. "Behavior Modeling: Using the 'Monkey See,
Monkey Do' Principle in Training." Training, The
Magazine of Human Resources Development 15(6), June
1978.

HICH

11111711111»

IES

 

-_—__d_
— - - .V - - - -_