at: ““53 3w. IL> ,3 . $1 PC. 11",)4'": ‘ y‘.’ d | a - ' ' . \ ‘r-Ivl'v :3: P7"i.‘:“ (2.1:: .'W m $533. f.‘ 0". ‘ [V'v . v. ."I w n‘ \, N‘nu '1 ., ."u‘f Inj'ufiln. V ,.:’;I;“' It‘ll .V‘ II :' '- II‘I:"I ‘- ”I'LJ "/c' Y'Ar‘éru . “‘1" I |' (If. ‘I':‘V "l‘ '33‘11‘ \ “LIE. w -..__ . I‘m-l I"; 'fififififi?‘ ‘ 'L-Vl‘ AA..." - F127}. - a}. A . ‘I’I‘Rr. ”31W éw‘. ' h'.‘ ’.... Ii:- .. :5:- . f. l L '.f H ("I o-:—;-". 'J 5I‘WO‘P ’73.» . ' ‘V- v mat”. .‘.— '1‘ 'V _.1.;- (31% m. ..m& 1 J r. A ‘ _..1 “ .131: ._ . ‘ - J... J" j- «finftc' lKu‘. ”h a" ' , ".'.\‘ 3:31“ ' “‘4 " t"-"'F I. 5 . "Q ‘. W'\ '.'I "3&5”; f.‘ .2 ':‘|(::-: W.” J . figs. . {33%| ‘ 1* I I}, 333:?" I . “a", K ‘ 1"1" “‘5” l ' :A ‘I' \3' 111‘ |. 1‘\' '\‘ an: A" ‘3‘." 5“. h &}1<'(.At .J§.'.3"érhv‘\kn . 1.1;? .MwwfiYb‘MvV”“4"§§ . :%:r§1{43'fif{ilv '51.. N f 2" ‘\§.~AJ5 3‘" w J; ”4-. ”.u‘Lu 'v (‘15.; ' :A “3‘1“ 5‘23”"); 52"“ * 7! “n“- A" 1": I - r" W 31in? 21?. p :3}? (4.... .... "~“l$ . — . ~' ( \"l‘Al :JV'Q' 6’ s SL’W| ,“'11v': AW , ' 13%".1 33' \gwég? ...,. -‘-"~ .23.:5 ._ ‘3“7‘93‘: . ‘4»- ‘llzl , 1"!!! .V~|\\~“JI ‘: q)“. I ' .L'q|‘ I‘ “"K.‘ 'l‘. 3.3;]: :cfiv. ‘31'15' J‘ -;1' fi.\<}.¢.fi' ’M '3?ng 3' #51,“ 6%. (.533. . W“ ' w v. :'\~ 1‘1.".~¢.‘.;.~.;.(;' 3;», E3; '1 y" "W‘- '\ 3‘2 '2?- IV ',. .n -:‘:Vo'u fig, Ml? K“ ‘:V'.':} 'F‘ H 3“:- I II ' mu 3" Raw-11.4.}: v: .53.: r "ii“ "I v- I. ".‘v“‘ ‘ ' ”1'4”? :-,..- '. \ “g.:5.vb m1."'-f"' 4.53:5“ "47‘.“ -‘ n \1 21.1.1. . ’33.. ‘\'..ll.\-*‘. rfi"""*'~6*‘r"s i - .‘\ | |.1"' 1 W' ' 'Il .'u 'l» . '.?‘.3III:":'.‘ “Ilia": AI;.“:I):L1 ":33: 35th ' . h" 1 9.. w: .‘r l .l . V. r“. If__t' .119 ‘ :yf'll’II-‘ 111‘)", “@112: 33.3. 13%;”; \‘ 7 I 15“.»? ’21; " " Fa . HI. .. .4 1. livftul ‘3". [.y‘dg‘l} “in: ‘ V‘h ~ Inky-on) 1 £13 ('4 PR1“, nK .. k Nm'u'hul F..‘»“ .A “H'I‘ fill. ' § C) “J llllllllllllllllllllllllllllll,llllllllllllllll 3129300086833 LIBRARY Michigan Stat: University This is to certify that the thesis entitled LEARNERS' PERCEPTIONS 0F LEARNING IN A MULTI-CULTURAL EDUCATIONAL SITUATION IN INDIA presented by Narendra John has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. Secondary Education and Curriculum wood Major professor Date aLLZM/ / ‘77? degree in W Epigb as fl/fl 7 H l ”(”1991 ‘ (0% N ”1‘10““ W 232%; g 3172 LEARNERS' PERCEPTIONS OF LEARNING IN A MULTI-CULTURAL EDUCATIONAL SITUATION IN INDIA By Narendra John 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 I978 ABSTRACT LEARNERS' PERCEPTIONS OF LEARNING IN A MULTI-CULTURAL EDUCATIONAL SITUATION IN INDIA by Narendra John The study was conducted in Union Biblical Seminary, Yavatmal Maharashtra, India. The purpose of the research was to describe the perceptions students of UBS have regarding learning. Forty-five students were selected from the student population, representing Tamilnadu (TN), Maharashtra (MA), North Eastern States (NE) of India (15 students per region). The sample was identified after a pilot project which suggested there might be significant differences among these three groups of students. The research design included interviews around two questions which were asked with the help of seven photographs of learning situations. The first question was, "Is learning taking place in this photograph?" The second question elicited elaboration and rationale for the previous responses, i.e., "Why do you say that learning is/isn't occuring?" What do you see in the photograph that prompts you to say what you say?" Demographic information included name, age, years of formal schooling, years of experience on the field, years of experience in the Seminary, etc.. The data were gathered in India during 1977, and were brought to U.S.A. in January Narendra John 1978. A content analysis procedure was constructed to analyze the data. The categorization system used included these categories: Focus of the content, Content of the citation, Perceived aspect of learning, Factors that describe teacher-student relationship and Environmental factors pertaining to Environment focus. Under each there were subcategories. All the statements made by the respondents for four key photographs were analyzed. The responses were categorized and quantified. Per- centages were taken and bar graphs were plotted to show the differences for each category on the three different variables, i.e., geographical (cultural) background, years of formal schooling, and years of experience. The analysis showed that there are differences among those three variables. The findings were reported in terms of which group showed what kinds of categories of responses most and least. The perceptions were described and description put in the form of comparison across geographical (cultural) background, years of formal schooling, and years of experience. A pattern emerged from the comparisons. Hypotheses were derived from analyses of the descriptive data. The major findings were in the areas of (l) classroom instruction; (2) individual study; and (3) practical learning. ' In the area of classroom instruction, students from TN perceived orderliness in the classroom as important for effective learning more than students from MA and NE. The same was true of those who have had more than 16+ years of formal schooling. Students who have had more years of experience (5+ years) perceived interactional informal Narendra John situations for effective learning over those who have had no experience or some experience on the field. In the area of individual study, students from MA perceive individual study as effective learning more than students from TN and NE. The same was true of those who have had 13-15 years of formal schooling and also of those who have had 2-4 years of practical experience on the field. In the area of practical learning, NE students perceive practical work as effective learning more than students from TN and MA. Practical work was also seen as more effective by those who have had more experience on the field and also by those who have had more schooling. Other findings included differences in perception about individual attention and interactional learning. Recommendations were made for further research, including extension of the study with a modified instrument, testing of the hypotheses under more controlled conditions and exploring the ways that perceptions are related to cognitive styles. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am thankful to all who supported and specially assisted in this Research project. First, my grateful thanks to the administration and members of both the General Missionary Board and the World Fellowship of the Free Methodist Church for the scholarship. In this regard, special thanks to the Board of the Bishops of Free Methodist Church, to Dr. and Mrs. C. D. Kirkpatrick (General Missionary Secretary) and to his good offices, for their concern and support. My thanks to Russ Reid, of Russ Reid Associates, Womens Missionary Society of First Free Methodist Church (from the estate of Mrs. Grace Marston), Mrs. Dana Davis (Seattle, Washington), to the Free Methodist Publishing House, Winona Lake, and to the John Wesley Seminary Foundation. I am greatly thankful, to Rev. and Mrs. Eugene Stewart for not only the financial support from their personal funds but for their concern experessed in their many untiring trips toward raising other support too . I am particularly thankful to each of my advisors, Dr. Joe Levine, Dr. George Barnett, Dr. Larry Schiamberg and to Dr. Ted Ward. All of them have given of their valuable time and expertise. Dr. Levine's special contribution in the area of critical evaluation of the findings; Dr. Barnett's, in the area of sharpening my philosophical insights; Dr. Schiamberg's, in my understanding human development perspective ii of the thesis; my chief Advisor, dissertation Director, Dr. Ward, for his constant, excellent guidance and for having enormously added to my understanding of human potential. He has given his precious time to edit the manuscript for which I am grateful. I remain in appreciation of Dr. Ted Ward and Mrs. Margaret Ward, for their unique service and ministry. I am thankful to Dr. Athyal, (Principal), Administration, Faculty, Staff and students of Union Biblical Seminary. Specially to Dr. Athyal, for his constant advise, support and encouragement. Particularly thankful to the students of Maharashtra, Tamilnadu and North Eastern States, who gave so freely and willingly much of the input for my thesis. My gratitudes to Rev. and Mrs. Gordan Bell, Dr. and Mrs. Kline, Rev. Samudre, Dr. Anna Nixon and to the India Free Methodist Con- ference and Church for their valuable share of support and encouragement. A special word of thanks to Donna Lee Elliston for typing the manuscript at such a short notice. Thanks to Geneva Speas, and to my colleagues, Jim Plueddemann, Bob Drovdahl, Cathy Wilson, Francis O'Gorman, Dorothy Tweddell, Eddie Elliston, Rodney McKean, Cathy Stonehouse and Sam Rowen-for helping me to see the implications of my research clearly. Special word of thanks to Dr. Donald Joy and Mrs. Robbie Joy from Asbury Theological SEminary, for giving me a positive self image. My gratitudes to my loving, Godly parents; to my mother-in-law for her constant encouragement; to my loving and caring wife Jaya; to my darling daughter Stuti who let me study although the weather outside was spring and that she wanted me to take her out to play; and above all to my God. iii Chapter TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM, Introduction, Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research Questions , , , , , , , . . . . . . . Importance of the Study , , , , , . . . . . . . Assumptions Definitions , , , Limitations of the Study Overview, THE CONTEXT OF THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION IN INDIA , Education in India, , Theological Education Summary REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE, , , , . . . . ExpectationS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Perception. . . . . . . . . . Cultural Influence .on Pedagogical Expectations. McKean Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RESEARCH METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . Description of Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . Research Design . . . . . . . Sample. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Content Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Categorization System . . . . . . . . Reliability Testing . . . . . . . Training Program for the Judges . . . . . . Categorization and Quantification of Categories Grouping of Data for Analysis . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . iv . 14 , 14 . 16 21 , 23 . 23 25 . 28 . 29 . 3O . 31 . 31 31 32 . 33 . 38 . 40 . 41 . 44 . 44 . 45 . 46 Chapter Page 5 FINDINGS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Comparison Across Geographical (Cultural) Background (Responses to Photograph 1) , , , , , , , . , , , . , . 51 Focus of the Content, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . , 51 Content of the Citation , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 51 Respondents Perception of Learning, , , , , , . , , , 56 Factors that Describe Teacher and Student Relationship, , . . . , . . . , . . 56 Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus StatemenCS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Comparison Across Geographical (Cultural) Background (Responses to Photograph 4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Focus of the Content. . . . . . . . . . . . .i. . . . . 57 Content of the Citation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Respondents Perception of Learning. . . . . . . . . 61 Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Comparison Across Geographical (Cultural) Background (Responses to Photograph 5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Focus of the Content. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Content of the Citation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Respondents Perception of Learning. . . . . . . . . . 66 Factors that Describe Teacher and Student Relationship. . . . . . . . 67 Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Comparison Across Geographical (Cultural) Background (Responses to Photograph 7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Focus of the Content. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Content of the Citation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Respondents Perception of Learning. . . . . . . . . . 71 Factors that Describe Teacher and Student Relationship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Comparison Across Geographical (Cultural) Background. . . 73 Some Important Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Comparison Across Years of Formal Schooling: (Responses to Photograph 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Chapter Focus of the Content, . . . . , . . , . . . Content of the Citation . . . . . . . . Respondents Perception of Learning, Factors that Describe Teacher and Student Relationship. . . . . . . . . . . . Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison Across Years of Formal Schooling: (Responses to Photograph 4) . . . . . . . Focus of the Content. . . . . . . . . . Content of the Citation . . . . . . . . Respondents Perception of Learning. . . . Factors that Describe Teacher and Student Relationship. . . . . . . . . . Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison Across Years of Formal Schooling: (Responses to Photograph 5) . . . , , Focus of the Content. . . . . . . . . . . . . Content of the Citation . . . . . . . . . . . Respondents Perception of Learning. . . Factors that Describe Teacher and Student Relationship. . . . . . . . . . Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison Across Years of Formal Schooling: (Reaponses to Photograph 7) . . . . . . . . Focus of the Content. . . . . . . . . . . . Content of the Citation . . . . . . . . . . Respondents Perception of Learning. . . . . . Factors that Describe Teacher and Student Relationship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . Years of Formal Schooling . . . . . . Some Important Findings . . . . Comparison Across Years of Practical Experience (Responses to Photograph 1) . . . . . . . Focus of the Content. . . . . . . Content of the Citation . . . . . . . Respondents Perception of Learning. . vi Page 75 76 79 79 8O 81 81 82 86 87 88 89 89 89 92 ' 94 94 94 94 95 98 98 99 99 99 101 101 101 105 Chapter Page 5 Factors that Describe Teacher and Student Relationship....................106 Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment FOCUSStatementscocooo..........o.107 Comparison Across Years of Practical Experience (Responses to Photograph 4) - - - - - - - - - - - - ° 107 Focus of the Content. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Content of the Citation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Respondents Perception of Learning. . . . . . . . . . 112 Factors that Describe Teacher and Student Relationship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 Comparison Across Years of Practical Experience (Responses to Photograph 5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Focus of the Content. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Content of the Citation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Respondents Perception of Learning. . . . . . . . . 118 Factors that Describe Teacher and Student Relationship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ll8 Comparison Across Years of Practical Experience (Responses to Photograph 7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 Focus of the Content. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 Content of the Citation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 Respondents Perception of Learning. . . . . . . . . . 123 Factors that Describe Teacher and Student Relationship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Years of Practical Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Some Important Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 6 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . 127 Geographical (Cultural) Background. . . . . . . . . . . 127 Hypotheses Generated in this Study. . . . . . . - . . 127 Years of Formal Schooling - . . - . . - . - . . - . - . 129 Hypotheses Generated in this Study- . . . - . - - - - 129 vii Chapter 6 Years of Practical Experience, Hypotheses Generated in This Study , Recommendations. Recommendations for Further Research . EPILOGUE Sojourn of the Researcher, In Teaching, APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E APPENDIX F APPENDIX G APPENDIX H APPENDIX I APPENDIX J APPENDIX K APPENDIX L BIBLIOGRAPHY IDENTIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS SEVEN PHOTOGRAPHS QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE SHEET. IDENTIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS Geographical Cultural Background. Years of Formal Schooling , TESTING . EXAMPLE OF RESPONSES. viii RULES FoR CATEGORIZATIONS , IDENTIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS Years of Practical Experience , EXAMPLE OF CATEGORIES GIVEN, PURPOSE OF THE CONTENT ANALYSIS , QUESTIONNAIRE FOR DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION RESPONSES IN THE CONTEXT FOR RELIABILITY INSTRUMENT FOR TESTING INTER-RATER RELIABILITY Page . 130 130 _ 131 134 137 137 140 142 143 145 146 147 148 149 154 161 163 164 165 168 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 4.1 ABSTRACT OF DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS ON ALL RESPONDENTS. . . . 34 4.2 DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS ON THE RESPONDENTS Tamilnadu State of India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 4.3 DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS ON THE RESPONDENTS Maharashtra State of India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 4.4 DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS ON THE RESPONDENTS North Eastern States of India. . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 4.5 DISTRIBUTION OF YES/NO RESPONSES FOR THE SEVEN PHOTOGRAPHS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 4.6 STATEMENT SHOWING BREAKDOWN OF QUANTIFIED CATEGORIES FOR A HYPOTHETICAL INDIVIDUAL RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE. . 47 4.7 STATEMENT SHOWING THE BREAKDOWN OF PERCENTAGES BY GROUPS FOR EACH CATEGORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Figure 3.1 4.1 5.1 5.2 UIUIU'IUI \IO‘UID 5.15 5.16 5.17 LIST OF FIGURES Network of Expectations . Categorization System . . , Comparing Geographical Background Distribution of Responses to Photograph 1: Comparing Geographical Background and Focus of the Content. . . Observability of the Learning Behavior of the. Student/Teacher . . . . . Focus of the Observable Behavior of the Student/Teacher . . . . . . . . . . . Social Characteristics of Learning Behavior. Kind of Observable Learning Behavior . Kind of Unobservable Learning Behavior . Respondents Perception of Learning . Distribution of Responses to Photograph 4: Comparing Geographical Background and Focus of the Content . . . . . . Observability of the Learning Behavior of the Student/Teacher . . Focus of the Observable Behavior of the Student/Teacher . . . . . Social Characteristics of Learning Behavior. Kind of Observable Learning Behavior . Kind of Unobservable Learning Behavior . Respondents Perception of Learning . . Distribution of Responses to Photograph 5: Comparing Geographical Background and Focus of the Content Observability of the Learning Behavior of the Student/Teacher . . . . . . Focus of the Observable Behavior of the Student/Teacher- Page 26 42 51 52 53 54 55 55 56 57 58 59 6O 61 61 62 63 64 64 5.38 5.39 5.40 Social Characteristics of Learning Behavior. Kind of Observable Learning Behavior . Kind of Unobservable Learning Behavior . Respondents Perception of Learning . Distribution of Responses to Photograph 7: Comparing Geographical Background and Focus of the Content . . . . Observability of the Learning Behavior of the Student/Teacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Focus of the Observable Behavior of the Student/Teacher . . . . . . . . . . . . Social Characteristics of Learning Behavior. . . . Kind of Observable Learning Behavior . . . . . . . . Kind of Unobservable Learning Behavior . Respondents Perception of Learning . Comparing Years of Formal Schooling Distribution of Responses to Photograph 1: Comparing Years of Formal Schooling and Focus of the Content. . . . . . . Observability of the Learning Behavior of the Student/Teacher . . . . Focus of the Observable Behavior of the Student/Teacher . . . Social Characteristics of Learning Behavior Kind of Observable Learning Behavior . Kind of Unobservable Learning Behavior . Respondents Perception of Learning - - . - - - . . Factors that Describe Teacher/Student Relationship . Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus Statements- - - - - . - - - . . & Distribution of Responses to Photograph 4: Comparing Years of Formal Schooling and Focus of the Content. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Observability of the Learning Behavior of the Student/Teacher - - - - - - - - . . Focus of the Observable Behavior of the Student/Teacher - - - - . . Social Characteristics of Learning Behavior - Kind of Observable Learning Behavior . - . - . . . . Kind of Unobservable Learning Behavior - . - . . - . Respondents Perception of Learning - - - . - . - . - Factors that Describe Teacher/Student Relationship - Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus Statements- - . . - - . - . - - - . xi Page 65 66 66 67 68 69 70 70 71 72 72 75 76 77 78 78 79 80 81 81 82 83 84 85 85 86 87 87 88 Social Characteristics of Learning Behavior. Kind of Observable Learning Behavior . Kind of Unobservable Learning Behavior . Respondents Perception of Learning . Factors that Describe Teacher/Student Relationship . Environmental Factors Pertaining to Environment Focus Statements. Distribution of Responses to Photograph 5: Comparing Years of Practical Experience and Focus of the Content. . . . . Observability of the Learning Behavior of the Student/Teacher . . . . . Focus of the Observable Behavior of the Student/Teacher . . . . . . Social Characteristics of Learning Behavior. Kind of Observable Learning Behavior . Kind of Unobservable Learning Behavior . Respondents Perception of Learning . Distribution of Responses of Photograph 7: Comparing Years of Practical Experience and Focus of the Content. . . . . Observability of the Learning Behavior of the Student/Teacher . . Focus of the Observable Behavior of the Student/Teacher . . Social Characteristics of Learning Behavior. Kind of Observable Learning Behavior . Kind of Unobservable Learning Behavior . Respondents Perception of Learning . xiii Page . 110 . 111 . 111 . 112 113 . 114 . 115 . 115 . 116 . 117 . 117 . 118 . 119 120 120 121 122 122 123 124 Chapter 1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Introduction Schools can be viewed as an arena for cross-cultural conflict between representatives of different cultural systems (King, 1968; Walcott, 1968; wax et al., 1964). Indeed there is an acute need to promote the development of culturally sensitive school curriculums in the developing countries in order to reduce the dysfunctional educa- tional outcomes which often occur when two cultures meet in an educational setting (Rosenfeld, 1971). The teaching profession has long championed the ideal of providing instruction which is sensitive to individual differences. Psychological and sociological approaches to the study of education have alerted educators to the role psychological and sociological differences play in learning, but the role of cultural endowments as they relate to learning have received less attention. This study attempts to further understanding of learning in cross-cultural settings. When education is defined as cultural transmission, implying equal interest in all parties involved in educational systems and transactions, as well as in the social context within which learning takes place, the cultural dimension of a curriculum gains considerable 2 significance. The educator needs to question whether the cultural assumptions upon which the teaching methods and curriculum are based are consistent with the realities of a student's cultural experiences. In developing countries where national policies stress modernization and nation building, and the schools themselves are often fashioned along the lines of a dominant culture or group, the student from a cultural sub-group often has difficulties in school. The problems are most acute in situations where minority ethnic groups confront schools directed by agencies remote from their influence and experience. If the cultural characteristics of a student are ignored and not utilized to improve teaching, such schooling may actually subvert its own formal objectives (Singleton, 1971). This study is undertaken in a multi-cultural situation to further the understanding of a learner's perceptions in regard to learning. The "what" of the perceptions of students regarding learning is reported descriptively. Ward and his associates built upon the concept of ethnopedagogy as developed by Burger (1971) and have suggested the importance of "pedagogical expectations".1 1It is currently not in fashion with some people to use the word "pedagogy' and its derivatives when discussing adult education. Malcolm Knowles has promoted the use of the word "andragogy" for referring to helping adults learn. Knowles' argument rests upon the Greek words from which the word "pedagogy" is based. It is claimed that the word in Greek refers to the instruction of children. However, as used in English, the word "pedagogy" has not had such an exclusive meaning. Thus, it has been used widely in the field of education to refer to the instructional context and issues related to the context. It is with the intention of using the word "pedagogy" in its generalized meaning that Burger used the word in "ethnopedagogy", and it is with the same intention that it is used here to refer to expectations adults have about the instructional context (Ward, Herzog, et al., 1974). 3 One of the ethnopedagogical issues Ward identified is the learner's "acceptance and expectations of instructional procedures" (1973). He explains this by saying: The most concrete evidence of the imposition of culture on the learning potentialities of people is their expectations of what constitutes a valid learning eXperience. What is accepted as a valid learning experience in one culture may be rejected in another. The wisdom of the elders, trans- mitted as legends and proverbs, may be profoundly respected as a learning experience or totally rejected as having no place in an educational system. A person may be culturally conditioned to accept the pedantic ways of the lecturing teacher in a formal classroom as a valid learning experience, tending to make him suspicious of discussion groups or instructional motion pictures (Ward, 1973, pp. 2-3). McKean in his thesis (1977) points out that although the purpose of self-directed learning is liberation for adults for maximizing their full potential, it does not always yield positive results. According to him, there is "potential discrepancy between activities of self-directed learning and pedagogical expectations" (Abstract of Thesis). He shows in his study that in order for learning to be meaningful for adults, their expectations regarding learning have to be met. Students need to recognize learning activities provided by teachers as those which are meaningful to them. Therefore, this study has been undertaken in order to further understanding of the learner's perceptions in regard to learning in a multi-cultural situation. Purpose It is the purpose of this study, first of all, to describe the perceptions of learning for the students of Union Biblical Seminary, Yavatmal, India. These students come from Tamilnadu, Maharashtra, The North Eastern States (Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, 4 Mizoram, Nagaland States), and many other states of India. Some also come from other countries of Asia and Africa. This study considers the student population from three different geographical (sub-cultural) groups, i.e., Tamilnadu (TN), Maharashtra (MA) and the North Eastern States of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland (referred to hereafter as NE). Included in the study is the development of an instrument to categorize and quantify the descriptions. Secondly, it is the purpose of this study to generate hypotheses relating to learning perceptions of learners in multi-cultural situations. The first purpose is served by interviewing students from the three areas of India who are studying at Union Biblical Seminary, Yavatmal, India. The purpose of the interview is to get at their perceptions regarding learning. A categorization system is developed to analyze the content of interviews. The quantification of the data is done in terms of one unit for each category used in the responses of the respondents. The second purpose is served by the following: 1. Describing the characteristics of these students in terms of specified categories of perceptions of learning across: a. Different states represented, b. Years of formal schooling, c. Years of practical experience, 2. By suggesting what the description means in terms of possible causation for the profile that emerges. These hypotheses are suggested as the basis for further research. Research Questions The inquiry in this study will be focused on the following research questions regarding perceptions of learning: 1. When exposed to similar stimulus pictures of learning situations, what do the respondents see regarding learning and what does it mean to them? 2. Are there differences in their perceptions attributable to: a. Different geographical (subcultural) background? b. Extent of (Years in) formal schooling? c. Extent of (Years of) practical experience? 3. What kinds of differences exist in their perceptions and what implications do these have for pedagogy in general and for a multicultural situation like Union Biblical Seminary in particular? Importance of the Study Knowles, one of the major voices in adult self-directed learning, says, "Inherent in the concept of adult education is the process of liberation." He says further that we should define our aim as helping individuals to liberate themselves from whatever shackles and deficiencies prevent them from fulfilling themselves . . . . This conception of the common aim of adult education as being liberal--in the sense of liberating-~provides a meaningful context for all types of learning activities . . . . To the extent that any learning activity-~whether vocation or humanist--leaves an adult with as much or more dependency upon external direction, to that extent it is failing to contribute to the inherent aim of adult education (1958, pp. 85, 86). Kidd speaks about learning involving the active role of the learner and freeing a person from limitations. He draws a parallel with medicine: 6 Yet the most profound fact about the living body is that it is health seeking--that its forces reach out toward health and healing. The art of medicine is not so much doing things to the body but inhibiting destructive influences and enabling the body to achieve healing. It seems to be very much the same with learning. Human beings seem to seek after learning; learning seems to be a condition of a healthy organism (1959, p. 16) In his book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire is concerned about an approach to education that will liberate people from oppression. He speaks vehementaly against the "banking concept of education," in which it is the task of a "banker-educator" to release knowledge into the mind of the student, and through the acquisition of this knowledge, the student learns. There are some presuppositions behind this kind of thinking: first, that knowledge is static and thus must be passed on from one generation to another generation; second, that education is transmission of knowledge; and third, that when knowledge is passed on, it automatically produces learning in the students. There seems to be inadequate comprehending of learning and education in these assumptions. As against this concept, Freire speaks about "praxis" which means that people learn about the world through acting upon the world. There is a transaction between the learner and the environment; as a result there is liberation which causes development of the total person. In this transaction the learner is important. The learner may have transaction with teacher. He may have transaction with the subject-matter of life experiences—-confronting situations and making decisions. Thus the learner experiences life and reality as it is. He evaluates and reevaluates priorities in the light of these experiences. He begins to develop. This change is not in isolation. It is in the 7 context of societal relationships. It is not merely intellectual response. The articulation of responses is in terms of the total development that is taking place. This is active learning as Freire emphasizes it when he says: I cannot think for others or without others, nor can others think for me. Even if the people's thinking is superstitious or naive, it is only as they rethink their assumptions in action that they can change. Producing and acting upon their own ideas--not consuming those of others--must constitute that process (Freire, 1970, p. 100). It is in this respect, then, that a develOping country like India, through her education policies, should emphasize the role of the learner and the great potential of the learner. Educational processes can guide persons towards development and eventually guide the country towards development. Such education is the crying need of hour. The purpose of this kind of learning is development. When this theme is contextualized for the third world countries, it implies liberating the common person for his/her full potential. Education cannot remain strictly in the area of intellectual excellence (although it is important part of human life and existence). Piaget (1970) has shown that a person matures or develops through stages; maturation is a process of transaction between the live organism and the environment. And the process has to do with the human whole. In order to understand development as a result of educational process, integration of knowledge (learning) for total development is an important concept. In the consultation called by Dag Hammarskjold Foundation, in April, 1975, the "right to learn" was discussed as an international issue. Basic to the concept of development in education was the concept 8 of learning. A distinction was drawn between integration of knowledge and acquisition of knowledge. The latter suffers from four weaknesses according to Ward (1975). First, if learning is acquisition of know- ledge then it is limited by time and place. Defining the objectives of this kind of an acquisition are Specific to situations and places. They cannot be universal. This results in amassing knowledge without its application to day-today life. We run the risk of passing on irrelevant knowledge. Second, this concept of acquisition is, according to ward, "an imperialistic task". One person or organization decides who is to pass on what to whom. Both the content of knowledge and the process of communicating knowledge have to originate from the giver. The one who receives becomes dependent on the giver and the giver begins to control. Third, learning becomes a thin; static in nature; "subject to restrictions of supply and demand", and again subject to dependency and control of the giver. Fourth "an acquisitive view plays into the ancient fallacy of learning being concerned with knowledge," as if, knowledge and real life are two distinct realities. This view is at the grass.roots of platonic philosophy. Plato in his Republic speaks about the real world "here and now" being at best a replica of an ideal world. Only a select band of people who are "philosopher kings" can attain it. These have gone through education of the state. They have climbed the ladder after various stages in education and having been censored at various times. They are the ones who have a glimpse of the Truth, because they have the discipline, integrity and character. In other words, different gradations of people are assumed. In order to understand whether this kind of an arbitrary decision can be made, it is important to know whether there is such a thing as different 9 classes of people, and whether there is one right way to classify people. But society is more complex; answering these questions would be an impossibility. A fruitful way to understand and approach the questions would be to understand what it means that everyone has "a right to learn." One of the recommendations of the Dag Hammarskjold Foundation consultation was to establish a commission on basic learning for the purposes of identifying the specific areas of learning which relate to development. Some suggested areas were the following: 1. Basic learning attributes of man: What is it in human beings that contributes to meaningful learning? 2. What kinds of experiences are positively related to meaningful learning? 3. What are some of the threats to meaningful learning? 4. If there are threats, what can be done to reduce those threats? In order to do the above we need to at least know what is meaningful learning for the learner. What are some of the definitions of learning in the minds of the learner? What is it that they are expecting when they are learning? These are some of the questions which this study will try to answer. Assumptions Made In This Study Regarding Pedagggy are the Following: 1. Within a culture, concepts of learning and concepts of teaching arise from the same sources. 2. In a culture under multi-cultural impact, concepts of learning and concepts of teaching may be arising from various and potentially conflicting sources. 10 3. In order to plan, develop and maintain effective formal and non-formal education, it is important to know the nature, the source and the conflicts among the various concepts of learning and teaching. 4. Teaching may not necessarily produce learning because of the differences in perceiving the task of teaching and learning. In order to bridge the gap between teaching and learning, it is im- portant to understand learners' expectations regarding learning. This insight will improve pedagogy in so far as communication is concerned. Definitions Ethnopedagogy. Ethnopedagogy is the name given to cultural aspects of teaching and learning. Burger explains in his manual (1971) how cultural traits can help us to understand meaningful learning experiences for the learner and teacher. He has developed the concept of ethnopedagogy teaching methods which will take into consideration cultural differences between learners, or between teachers and learners. Perception. Perception is a word used to define how a person sees the world. This seeing of the world or world-view is formed as a person grows, through many transactions with the world. Everybody may see the same things in the same way or different ways depending upon their experiences in life up to that point in time. The primary assumption of the perceptionist is that behavior is a function of perception. A person behaves in ways which are consistent with his view of his world. That is, as he "sees" so does he behave (Learning More about Learning, p. 55). Learning. The definition of learning is to be in terms of development of the individual. Rogers in Freedom to Learn emphasizes 11 the fact that for a person to learn, he needs to be involved in the process. His involvement has to be total. "It has a quality of personal involvement-the whole person in both his feelings and cognitive aSpects being in the event" (1969, p. 5). Even though there are compelling forces from outside, from within there is a drive to understand those forces and make meaning out of. This changes one's behavior, attitudes, even the personality. The learner evaluates himself/herself to see whether ignorance in that area still exists or that he/she has been enlightened in that area. What has been learned takes on meaning from inside. For Dewey, learning is being able to solve problems by intelligent inquiry. This inquiry is not merely intellectual. It is experimental inquiry. It is integration of the result of empirical inquiry into experience and life such that growing takes place. Dewey says Learning is, then, problem solving or intelligent action in which a person continually evaluates his experience in the light of its foreseen and experienced consequences. The greater the foresight in terms of multiple anticipated consequences, the greater the accumulated experiences or "learning." But learning in this sense is not simply an acquisition or achievement but a moment of experience out of which emerges redefined purposes, new evaluations and action in the service of continued growth. (Quoting from Theories of Learning and Instruction, 1964, p. 13) Limitations of the Study The major limitation of the study is the basic premise of the concept of perception. This premise states that there is correspondence between the way people are and the way they are believed to be by others. Debate on this basic premise continues. But for this study this basic premise has been taken for granted, which means that when respondents speak, they are speaking about their perceptions. The second premise 12 about perception which has been faulted is in regards to methodology used to inquire into the basic premise. In this study, open ended questions are used to get at the perceptions of students. This kind of methodology is suggested since this allows for free and open ex- pression by the respondent (Asch, 1946; Kelly, 1950). There are other limitations of the study largely because of its exploratory nature. First, since the sample is limited to the Union Biblical Seminary's students from Tamilnadu, Maharashtra, and North Eastern States of India, the findings are not necessarily generalizable; second, the study does not identify cause and effect relationships; it is a descriptive study, exploratory in nature. The study is intending to get at learners' perceptions and expectations regarding learning. It will only compare the several groups of learners and their perceptions and expectations about learning; third, the study uses an instrument and analysis system which is particularly designed for this study. As the instrument continues to be used, it will be refined and one can have more confidence in its findings. At this stage, it can only help to discover trends and to suggest possible relationships. Overview In the first chapter the purpose and importance of the study was discussed. Research questions and limitations of the study were also specified. A basic design to get at the question was also identified. Chapter 2 presents the background material for the study. The background described includes Indian education, theological education, and ministry orientation of Union Biblical Seminary's educational COHC ern . 13 Chapter 3 deals with the research literature which helps in understanding the main intention of the study. The literature focuses on expectation, perception and cultural influences on learning expectations. Chapter 4 describes the research methodology. The sample, background of the school from which the sample is taken and the research procedure are discussed in detail. Included in Chapter 4, are the following: Field procedures, data collection, development of analysis procedures, concerns for reliability and validity, and finally statistical procedures to analyze the data. The findings of the study are presented in Chapter 5. The analysis of the data is reported. Specific relationships are discussed along with their statistical significance. Descriptive statistics are reported. Chapter 6 presents conclusions and implications. The findings on learners' perceptions and expectations show an area of research which csn hypothesize relationships; also suggestions are made for education- al practices based on the findings. As a whole, the study is focussed on learners' percptions regarding learning. It attempts to discover some of the sources of expectations regarding learning. These efforts are intended to help develop further pedagogical insight in a multi-cultural situation. Chapter 2 THE CONTEXT OF THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION IN INDIA In this chapter, a number of factors that affect theological education in India are described. Included in this is Indian education, theological education and its ministry orientation, the history and multi-cultural nature of Union Biblical Seminary, Yavatmal. Education in India Education is a major concern of India. Literacy has been the principle focus of this concern. The Literacy rate rose from 16.6% to 29.45% between 1951 to 1971; children going to school between ages 6-11 years has risen from 33% to 86% during the same period. Students going to school rose from 23.5 million to 85.8 million (Igdig, 1976). From these figures, it is clear that the Government of India has been doing a great deal in the area of education since independence in 1947. There have been many prOblems in education; the Government has determined a number of changes that need to be brought about. A commission was appointed in 1964, under the chairmanship of D. C. Kothari to look into new ways of dealing with situations confronting education in the country. The Kothari commission recommended the schooling pattern of 10 + 2 + 3 for a college degree. Some of the salient features of the recommendations are the following: 14 15 1. free and compulsory education up to the age of 14, 2. improved status, enrolments and education of teachers, 3. three language formula and development of regional languages, 4. equalization of education of science and research, 5. development of education for agriculture and industry, 6. improvement in quality and production of inexpensive text books, and 7. investment of 6% of national income in education (Bhatnagar, 1967). Teacher training and the production of teachers is given high priority. There is so much thrust on teaching that sometimes student gets lost out in the process. There is danger of seeing development entirely as producing graduates. The crucial problem, though, is if development is to mean total development of the individual, learning, in terms of maximizing human potential, has to take place. There has been an awareness that students who come from different cultural perspectives bring different kinds of potential into learning situations. Zakir Hussain recognizes this when he says: The educational institutions have to correct their one sided intellectuality and devote themselves more consciously and systematically to the exercise and nature of social urges inherent in the young (Hussain, 1965, p. 17). Indian education has always stood for values education. Indian educators like the late President Radhakrishnan have been emphasizing this dimension. Radhakrishnan speaking to Brembeck (1962), referred " . we must to values dimension in Indian education. In his words, now recover the universals in our past and the great truths which permeate the great traditions of all religions whether Hinduism, Mohamadanism, Buddhism or Christianity." The values dimension has to l6 somehow blend with the trend towards modernization and urbanization and there have been efforts made to understand education's role to bring about this blend. Gore, Desai, Chitnis write: Education in modern societies is an important agency for communication the values of the society to the younger generation. This it does through the direct process of classroom instruction as also by equipping the individual with the skills of reading and writing facilitate communi- cation of values in larger society as well. Education, especially higher education, is also expected to serve as the agency for promotion and development of new knowledge. New knowledge, whether it relates to physical and tech- nological subjects or to the human behavioral subjects-always raises questions about older assumptions on which older practices were based. To the extent that this is true, education becomes the initiator of change. It no longer serves as an inert medium, but develops its own dynamic. This provides the third point of articulation between educational goals and cultural values (1967, p. 336). We can therefore say that the educational thinking is forging ahead to bring about change in many areas. Another aspect of the struggle in Indian education has been to find out what is meaningful to India. This is a problem of context- ualiztion of education. If education is relevant it can thrive in the context. That is the test of education. Theological Education Theological education.has been going through problems as well. Some of these problems are similar to educational problems in general. But some others are different because of specific nature of education. One of the problems we want to consider here is related to culture. Theological education in Asia has always been multi-cultural because of the nature of the Church. Western influence in writings, in teaching, in establishing churches and in liturgy have brought about a multi-cultural Christianity. The present debate in theological 17 education in Asia is contextualization. The content of theological education is being made more Indian; it is being reconstructed to take better account of the Indian context. Pedagogy also must be considered in Asian context; methodology and the view of teaching and learning will also have to be contextualized. Theological education (Theo. Ed.) has been content oriented primarily because of emphasis on revelationary aspect of the content. Special revelation which is recorded in the Bible which is inspired by God has a central place in theology (at least in orthodox and evangelical theology if not in liberal theology). There is historical and archeo- logical critical literature that is growing to bring objectivity to this revelation. But still process of communication of this revelation has been proclamatory which means one way monologue. This has been trans— ferred in teaching with the result that the theological teaching has been monologic instead of dialogic. Proclamation has to go hand in hand with the dialogic and apologetic teaching. Theological education has to recover the process of communication aspect of the content. The content of theology and the methodologies of theological education must be made relevant to situations in which Indians live. Christianity has to be communicated to people of particular world-view, mindset (cognitive style) and from a perceptual point of view so that theology will become spring-board for action. Content is important for curriculum but if content becomes the exclusive concern of the curriculum, development of the individual can be hampered. Lee (1975) suggests that there has to be an "integra- list" approach for pedagogy in theological institutions. By integralist approach he means that both content and the process of communication 18 have to so blend that in both the planned curriculum and the hidden curriculum, teaching will yield valuable learning. The "hidden curriculum" is as important as the planned curriculum because actions speak louder than what is taught in the class. Stewart (1974) developed the concept of values development education which emphasizes the role of a teacher as a developer. The teacher is not only a messenger but a message. Jesus, speaking about ministry, told his disciples to do as he had done, e.g., washing the disciples' feet (John 13). The model of ministry is passed on to students from the expectations teachers have about their students. If church is a body of people to carry out the ministry of the concern and servanthood, theological colleges have to start this orientation in their curriculum before it can become a reality in churches. One of the first things theological colleges can do is to become ministry oriented toward the students. The kind of ministry teachers have towards their students will determine the kind of practices that the students-becoming-ministers will adopt for themselves. The concern, then, is for the students; but far too often, students do not fit into existing patterns of school structure. Brembeck and Hill speak to this issue: ~ How often the author has heard a teacher state that what made teaching a rewarding profession were those few students who responded and did well; one must just "put up with others as best as you can." How many of "those few students" did well because their subcultures were more in congruence with the stereotyped subculture and that the context and techniques of the system were designed to serve? What social problems were intensified and what human resources were lost because neither the sub-culture or teacher nor the institutional sub-culture of the education system could do no more than "put up with" others? (1973, p. 142). 19 Another concern that is there is because of strong authority relationship of 9252 (meaning teacher) and students. For a seminary situation where the teacher is still an authority figure, it is important to understand how the image of teacher and his/her expecta- tions about students can affect the attitude towards education and the ultimate values of the students. Within the value orientation of a theological seminary within Indian society, there are important questions, such as what do teachers who are authority figures see as appropriate for education, what kind of pedagogy brings out creativity, liberates students from fear of authority figures and puts both teacher and student into an interacting relationships to explore new fields for development? According to Benne (1970) there is need for "anthropogogical authority," which is a sharing growing concept. This cannot be done without understanding what learning is and how learning is perceived by both teacher and student in the context of total development of a person. Its multi-cultural nature. UBS in India is strategically located and uniquely prepared for its vital role in developing the Church of Jesus Christ in Asia. Within a four-thousand mile radius lies half the population of the world. During its twenty-five years, UBS has seen some 800 students go out into that vast sea of Asian need and take their places in leadership among the varied nations and churches. Indian students come from various walks of life: from a Christian culture dating their ancestry back to Thomas the disciple of Jesus (There is historical evidence that one of the disciples of Jesus Christ visited India in obedience to the command to "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel" (Mt. 28). He was a martyr as a result of his 20 ministry. The church in the southern part of India still continues to grow. The Christian tradition goes back to the first century and therefore there is really no grounds to claim that Christianity is a western religion. In other parts of India where there was strong mission work because of missionaires from the west, the church became a dependent community for their financial support and liturgy on the west and really lost contact with the mainline stream of people. The present endeavour of the church is to go back to realize the origins in the east and this is bringing back life in the church.); from animistic tribes less than thirty years removed from head-hunting practices; from poverty-stricken and low-caste Hindu villages as well as from teaming, sweating cities; from the vast fields of the Sikhs' rich Punjab plains; from Hindu, Moslem, Buddhist, Jain background, some from the simplest homes, and others from among the most highly educated and influential. Students of other countries also come from Japan, Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Sikkim, Bangladesh, Nepal; also from Africa: Burundi, Ruanda, Kenya and Tanzania; once in a while, even from Germany, U.S.A., Canada and England. Last year 33 different Protestant Church_affiliations were represented in the student body. The faculty and staff also come from a wide spectrum, representing 13 different churches and 7 different countries. Saphir Athyal of Kerala has just begun his third three-year term as Principal, and now more than half the teaching and administrative staff on the job and in training are Indian. 21 "UBS family," for that is how the students and staff consider themselves, seek to be a caring and sharing community. Their motto, "Speaking the truth in love" (Ephesians 4:15), is constantly tested as they face and wrestle with cultural and personality differences. The challenge is to keep in harmony the diversity of persons and the unity of purpose, both faculty and students have much to learn from one another and a long way to go together in achieving the high calling they have been given (adapted from Nixon, 1978). Hopefully this study will in some ways help understand the importance of student's place in learning. The best we can do at present for theological education is to make it serve the purpose of development of the person. The study is undertaken to find out some of the ways and thoughts of the students who come to us from different geographical regions and see whether we meet their expectations re- garding learning. What are some of the elements in their thinking which need reinforcement? What are some of the inadequate perceptions which need change in order for better transfer of learning to take place? Are the teachers really able to see the students as they should be seen? Are they using the rich resource present in the students themselves? These are some of the questions in the mind of the re- searcher. He is seeking a responsible basis for recommendations about effective pedagogy for the theological school within the particular multi-cultural situation that faces India. Summary In this chapter the background for the study was reviewed. The background centered around the context of theological education in 22 India. Concern for contextualization of pedagogy was also shared. Background, history and the multi-cultural nature of UBS was described. Chapter 3 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE In this chapter, the research literature is examined. Special attention is given to the research on expectations, perception and ethnopedagogy. Burger (1968) suggests that looking at learning attributes might help us to distinguish cultures. Each culture teaches not only habits, of speaking and seeing, but even attitude towards learning. Such as, whether learning is valuable and what types of learning (e.g., from memory, from books, from experience) are de- sirable (1968, p.61). Ward (1973) suggests that students coming from different cultural backgrounds might see learning from different perceptions. Expectations Expectations about others does have consequences, Libow (1967), Merton (1957), Krishna (1971) claims validity to Thomas' theorem which states, "If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences (p. 1104)." The land mark study in the area of expectation was that of \/ Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968). The study was conducted in Oak Elemen- tary School, in South San Francisco, during May, 1964. Students from grade 1-6 were administered the Test of General Ability (TOGA), but their teachers were told that it was the "Harvard test of inflated 23 24 acquisition." (There is no such thing.) This name was given to impress teachers. Teachers were told that the experiment would identify "spurters" and predict their high achievement in the subsequent years. TOGA is a non-language group intelligence test, which provides verbal ability and reasoning sub-scores as well as a total I.Q. score. This test was administered because it was unfamiliar to the teachers and because it offered three forms, for grades K-2, 2-4, 4-6. All of similar style and content. In fall, 1964 a randomly chosen 20% of the students were designated as "spurter". Each of the 18 teachers received one to nine names of "spurters", who would be in their classes. TOGA was again administered in January 1965, and May 1965, and May 1966. The study concluded that "change in teacher expectation can lead to improved intellectual performance" (p. 182). The study has come under attack for several reasons. According to Elashoff and Snow (1971) there was statistical inaccuracy in reporting. The conclusions were inflated, the labels were prejudicial, the design was inadequate, the sampling plan was not spelled out in detail, and experiment was carried on under false pretence. Their judgment was that research was miscommunicated. There have been other-studies done to replicate the experiment in many different situations. It has been generally confirmed that there is such a thing as self-fulfilling prophecy. Now the question y// is not whether "there are expectancy effect..." (Baker and Crist, 1971, p. 64), the question is how expectancy effects Operate. There have been many studies which show that teacher expectation about the student does have consequences upon student image and his perceptions about learning. One of the major factors in the students' 25 minds is the expectations of teacher about them. Finn (1972) has developed a model to show how sources of expectations impinge upon the student and the direction in which they operate (Figure 3.1). This model suggests that especially in a learning situation where teachers and students interact the students' perceptions are influenced by many factors, one of them is expectations of teacher. Perggption There is a substantial tradition of research in the area of perceptions of learners. The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development has published papers and reports in Learning Mbre About Learning (1959) showing the various areas in perceptions of students which need exploration. According to Bills (1959), beliefs, values, needs, attitudes, self experience, threats all go into forming the perceptions of students regarding learning. The teacher needs to be aware of the student in all these areas in order to teach effectively. "To teach a person we must understand. This is most easily accomplished by trying to see him and his world as he sees them" (p. 63). Do teachers have different expectations about the student achievement? Is it because of cultural traits or teachers perception about student ability? These were some of Finn's questions (1972). As a result of his experiment, Finn came to the conclusion that teachers' expectations of students' ability to perform did influence students' grades. "The factor found the most influential in shaping these evaluations is the perceived ability level of the pupil" (p. 407). Block, in Mastery Learning (1972), comes to the conclusion that if the concept of mastery learning is popularized (i.e., everybody can 26 Cultural Traditions and Demands Perceived Characteristics of Individual (Age, race, sex, abilities, prior achievement) Expectations Expectations ‘Expectations Expectations of of of of peers parents teachers others Self Expectation Self Direct Concept 'Influence Outcome Behavior (achievement) Figure 3.1 NETWORK OF EXPECTATIONS (This is a modification of similar diagrams in Finn (1970) and Breland (1970) 27 master anything), 95% can achieve the target in learning. Black's conclusion is similar to Finn's. The teacher is one of the most important factors in raising or lowering the level of achievement in students. I The question raised earlier in Chapter 1 under limitations of the study, regarding veridicality of implicit theories is important one at least on one count i.e. methodology. The other count which is a more basic one is that of how do you know that what students have said is their EEEA perception. No claim is made in the thesis that it is real one. It is taken for granted with all the limitations. This is a major limitation of the study. The basic premise in this study states that these are perceptions of 45 respondents. Regarding the methodological issue, Asch's study (1946) could not have come to the conclusion that he did if he were not to bias the subjects regarding warm-cold concepts as central characteristics. Kelly (1950) in his follow up study gave more freedom to his subjects by asking the subjects to write free descriptions about the personality characteristics. Between 1954-57,.such emmanent social psychologists as Allport, Bruner, Hastorf and Taiguri all published persuasive arguments that the study of person perception and impression forumlation would be greatly enriched by the study of how people spontaneously categorize others. The essence of their arguments is the notion that, in order to "understand" // another, we need to know how that person perceives and p/ interprets the world (Jones, 1977, p. 33). /, The research literature in the area of expectation and perception is brought up-to-date by Russell A. Jones in Self Fulfilling Prophecies. 28 In order to give maximum freedom of expression and minimum hindrance to speak about what the respondent really feels about perception, it is necessary not to impose our value system upon him/her. Cultural Influence on Pedagogical Expectation Cohen (1968) worked with children and she found that children who grow up in relational social environments cannot fit into analytical schooling approaches. It is not because of "cultural deprivation" nor because of "cultural differences", but more likely it is a matter of "cultural conflict”. Cawley, Miller and Milligan (1976), building upon Cohen's findings, looked into relational and analytic cognitive styles. Their definitions of "relational" and "analytic" were in correspondence with Witkin's "global" and "articulate". Their study /. used the Witkin instrument, thus their definition of the global / cognitive style is one in which a person sees total situation with all its relational factors whereas in the articulate cognitive style is a person analyzing each part after first seperating or detaching the perceived parts of a situation. Ward (1972) and Hovey (1971) looked at cognitive styles of adult learners in Africa as it related to Witkin's description of global and articulate. Hovey identified the characteristics of fourteen African cultures that are related to cognitive styles. Ward suggests "people differ along ethnic and sub-cultural lines-whardly in the old sense /// of inherent superiority and inferiority--but nevertheless in very real ways." (p. 10). Plueddemann (1978) looks at cognitive styles in the pastors and church leaders of the Hausa people in Nigeria. He suggests that 29 Western curricular material, written from analytical cognitive styles, nmay have hampered growth and development in the people who have relational cognitive styles of solving problems. This has ramifications for UBS curriculum since it is a place where both relational and articulate cognitive styles are interacting all the time. McKean Study In the spring of 1977, 225 adults from various adult education programs insouthern Michigan were studied to find out their expectations of learning for various instructional settings. They responded to photograph and tape recording representations of nine instructional activities, by answering the question, "Do you think these people are learning something important?" The answers were recorded on a five-point Likert scale. Each of the nine picutres in the instrument represented a combination of one of the three levels of formality (low, medium, high) and one of the three types of learning experience (input, self awareness, sharing). The study showed that there are two major effects. The respondents considered low and medium formality settings more valid than high formality setting. Also, the respondents considered sharing and self awareness experiences more valid than input experience. And interaction between amount of formal schooling and expectations about level of formality was found. Those who have had more years of formal schooling preferred less formal situations for learning. The present study is similar to McKean study in several respects: Both studies used pictures. The primary question asked was a similar type. The responses in McKean study were recorded in Likert type scale. 30 The major difference was in the interviewing method. In the McKean study no inquiry was made into what lay behind the subjects' responses. The present study focuses on the meanings of the responses. Expectations about learning are assumed to be based on perceptions. The perceptions are discussed. Summary In this chapter related research in the areas of expectation, perception and cultural influence on pedagogical expectation was reviewed. The McKean study is reported in particular since the present research is an extension of McKean's investigation. Chapter 4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY In this chapter, the methodology of the research is described. The research design, including variables and research questions, are stated. The instrumentation and procedures used for data colleétion are explained. The categorization system developed for content analysis the reliability testing of the instrument, the training program for the judges and the application of the categorization system to the actual analysis are described. Description of Methodology The research is a descriptive study which identifies the learners' perceptions of 'learning' in terms of the focus of the content, the apparent perceived aspect of learning, the relationship between teacher and student, and the environmental factors. In order to describe the differences among the three geographic (ethnic and cul- tural) groups, the study compared them according to these categories. Research Design The research is a 'one-shot case study' (Campbell and Stanley, 1963). The instrument was administered only one time to each of the subjects (45 subjects from three different geographical areas studying at Union Biblical Seminary, Yavatmal, Maharashtra, India). 31 32 Seven stimulus pictures of learning situations were presented in an Open-ended interview. The responses to the four pictures which proved to be most discriminating were analyzed in detail. Concent analysis procedures were used. The criteria by which the respondents perceived learning were identified. A questionnaire was also used in order to collect demographic information from the respondents (see Appendix C). Demographic information included the area representation of the re- spondents, years of formal schooling, years of practical experience in life and years of seminary training. Sample The study involved a select sample of students from UBS, Yavatmal. 15 students from each of the three geographical regions of India, viz., Tamilnadu State, which is in the South; Maharashtra State, which is in the center; and a set of states which are in the North-East (Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland States). Students of these states speak different native languages and represent different cultural groups. Compared to Tamilnadu State (TN) and Maharashtra State (MA) which are plains, the North-East States (NE) are tribal and hilly. TN students come from city (urban) backgrounds and most of them come fromTChristian backgrounds. MA students come from rural and semi-urban backgrounds. They come from Christian and Hindu backgrounds. Students from NE come from rural hilly backgrounds. Most of them also have gone to colleges in cities which are well developed and have Christian backgrounds. They originally come from tribal backgrounds. Most of the subjects speak English and they all belong to protestant Christian faith (although they come from different 33 denominations of evangelical churches). There were five who had to be interviewed in Marathi and interviews translated into English. The sample was identified after a pilot project which showed that there might exist some differences among these three groups. The interviews were conducted and the data were collected by the researcher in the months between July to November, 1977. The age of the subjects ranged from 18 years to 38 years. The average amount of formal schooling was 14.7 years. Only one out of 45 had 8 years of schooling before coming to seminary. All the rest had 10 or more years of schooling. Only 4 out of the 45 were female; 8 of the males were married. Although not documented, about half of the sample came from higher middle class and the rest from the poor class. Average years of practical experience was 3 years and average exposure to seminary training was 2 years (see Table 4.1 for Abstract of Demographic details. For Demographic details on respondents from TN, see Table 4.2; respondents from MA, see Table 4.3; respondents from NE, see Table 4.4). All subjects were volunteers enlisted by the researcher from among the student body of UBS in 1977-78. Instrumentation Interviews. The instrumentation consisted of seven seperate 8%" x 11" photographs (Appendix B), each followed by two questions: 1. Is learning taking place in this picture (Yes/Nolany other response)? 2. Why do you say so? (In other words, what are your thoughts re- garding learning as it comes to your mind when you are exposed to this picture?) (For Questionnaire Response sheet see Appendix A and for Example of Responses see Appendix G.) 34 'Table 4.1 ABSTRACT OF DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS ON ALL RESPONDENTS TN MA NE Total Average Mean Age 387 343 419 1149 25.533 Mean 25.8 22 8 27 9 Years of Schooling 229 195 238 662 14.711 Mean 15.26 13.0 15.8 Years of Seminary 30 27 34 91 2.022 Mean 2.0 1.8 2.2 Years of Experience 43 49 50 142 3.155 Mean 2.86 3.26 3.33 TN: Tamilnadu MA: Maharashtra NE: North Eastern State 35 Table 4.2 DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS ON THE RESPONDENTS Tamilnadu State of India TAMILNADU: sugge“ Age Ynglgoin $3333 rigging: on (TN) ' the Field 501 28 10+5 2 6 504 23 10+6 l 1 505 30 10+6 2 8 508 23 lO+5 3 1 514 26 lO+5 2 l 519 27 10+7 2 3 520 22 lO+6 l l 522 20 lO+2 l 5 523 28 lO+5 l 3 528 30 lO+5 l 6 532 25 lO+6 2 O 534 26 lO+7 3 O 535 23 lO+7 1 l 536 21 . 10+5 1 1 537 35 lO+2 7 6 Total: 387 150+79 30 43 I.Q.-L; """ ‘ ’ ’ ’ ””” d """"""""" Mean: 25.8 10+5.26 2 2.86 36 Table 4.3 DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS ON THE RESPONDENTS Maharashtra State of India MAHARASHTRA' Subject A Years in Years in Years in ' No. ge School Seminary Experience on (MA) the Field 502 24 10+2 4 0 506 31 8+0 1 13 509 23 10+5 ‘ 3 1 511 29 10+7 l 5 512 35 10+5 2 15 513 27 10+5 1 3 515 21 10+5 l 2 516 21 10+O l 1 517 23 10+2 2 4 124 20 10+2 l l 525 22 10+4 2 0 526 21 10+2 2 0 531 24 10+2 4 l 538 18 10+l 1 0 542 25 10+5 l 3 Total 343 138+47 27 49 Avéng; """"""""""""""""""" Mean: 22.8 10+3 1.8 3.26 37 Table 4.4 DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS ON THE RESPONDENTS North Eastern States of India NORTH EAST° SUbject A Years in Years in E YeaFS in ° No. ge School Seminary Xperlence on (NE) the Field 503 27 10+6 2 2 507 28 10+7 2 0 510 35 10+6 1 l 518 21 10+4 1 4 521 38 10+6 3 6 527 24 10+7 2 0 529 28 10+7 2 3 530 31 10+5 5 5 533 25 10+6 3 0 539 31 10+4 2 10 540 23 10+6 2 4 541 31 10+7 3 4 543 27 10+5 3 1 544 25 10+5 1 2 545 25 10+7 2 6 Total: 419 150+88 34 50 Average 27.9 10+5.8 2.2 3.33 Mean: 38 Permission to interview students of UBS was granted by the administration prior to interviewing schedule. Students selected from the three different geographical locations were informed about the procedure and purpose of the interview. After their consent, interviews were conducted. Each subject was brought into a room where the tape recorder was already set up and the photographs were shown to them one at a time. After showing each photograph, the first question was asked. After showing all the seven photographs and recording the responses, the same photographs were shown in the same order and, at this time, the second question was asked about each photograph. The responses were recorded. Then the respondent filled in demographic information which called for the details about his/her background. This was repeated with each of the 45 respondents. The interview typically lasted between 30 to 45 minutes. Transcription of Interviews. All the interviews were transcribed in English. Five interviews which were in Marathi were first translated into oral English by the researcher and then transcribed. Content Analysis It was necessary to analyze the content of the transcribed interviews since the purpose of the study was to get at the perceptions of the respondents regarding learning. Four photographs were selected out of the seven originally used (see Table 4.5). Photographs #1 and #4 showed similar classroom situations, a group situation with teacher(s) present, yet the responses were quite different for these photographs. Photographs #5 and #7 were both single-student situations; the re- sponses were quite similar although the situations were quite different 39 Table 4.5 DISTRIBUTION OF YES/NO RESPONSES FOR THE SEVEN PHOTOGRAPHS Photograph Numbers: 1* 2 3 4* 5** 6 7** Responses: Yes learning 12_ 38 34 44_ .41 38 '32 No learning _14 3 5 .9 4_ 5 .4 Other responses .12 4 6 _1 _Q 2 .2 Total Responses: 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 * Similar photographs: Photographs #1 and #4, but responses are different **Simi1ar photographs: Photographs #5 and #7, but responses are similar 40 in terms of the actual situation (reading versus fishing). The remaining photographs #2, #3, #5 were not used because there was not enough discrimination in responses. The purpose of the content analysis is to identify factors relating to learning of which the respondent is conscious at the time he/she makes the judgement about the stimulus photograph. According to the principles of content analysis, a categorization system was developed. Principles of Content Analysis. According to Isaac and Michael (1971), three common errors are made in doing content analysis. First, one tends to base the analysis on easily available content. This may not be a representative sample of all the content related to research objectives. This error was avoided in the study by analyzing all the statements respondents made. Moreover, these statements were taken in the context for the analysis so that meaning . was better represented (see Appendix H for example of Responses in the context). Secondly, the researcher may fail to determine the relia- bility of the content analysis procedures. This error was avoided by developing a procedure that had high inter—rater reliability. A detailed statement on this is given under Reliability Testing. Third the research may use categories which are not sufficiently specific and comprehensive. All possible precautions are taken to solve this; many tentative categories were tried, looking at various problems posed by each, reworking the best systems and combining the best features. Categorization System Any categorization system should take into consideration the comprehensiveness of categories; at the same time, it should be flexible 41 enought to allow for all the responses given. After testing several systems a final system was developed (see Figure 4.1). The responses were analyzed in respect to the categories of content. The categories provided for identifying the responses and for quantifying them. Both identification and quantification are essential for meaningful description of responses. The categorization system was arbitrary in that it was specific to the responses given by the respondents in this study. The following are presuppositions for the categories developed: 1. Exposure to the instrument (i.e., exposure to the photographs and asking of questions: Is learning taking place in this photograph? and Why do you say it?) have elicited the responses. 2. It is assumed that mental processing has taken place in the respondent, differentiated for each photograph. 3. It is assumed that perception is a product of the development process and that in responding to the photographs, the respon- dents are reconstructing their own experience and explaining the learning situation in terms of past experiences. 4. Respondents are perceiving learning situations from their individual perspectives. Reliability Testing Reliability testing was an important part of this study since the major part of the data analysis was the content analysis. Sampling of the Re3ponses for Testing_by Judges. On an average, four responses (four statements) were given by each respondent (45 respondents) for each of the four photographs (photographs #1, #4, 42 Plaza 4.1. Daacriptmatthaman: 2345 Iatarnca aada to phyalcal acclvlcyl physical paacura of aubjact aactar Iatarnca aada to 6 7 6. mm 7. mm ochata 1min; m: Iataraaca an“ to practical laarung Mat-lea Illa to lua-ralacad hatch. MO! was W Imam: mm mm manna WOO? man: rmrmm . mum ”WNW TOW W FOCUS" 11 m P Q I s ‘1' V w I Y 2 Saul-3t P. Phyflcal 5.. luau-actual mutant-datum.- Taachar Q. Natal '1'. m: a. Paul (mu) m I. unusual Liar-alum: . flatlbla T.I.aaa£oraalhat matlamlbla 2.1:..an Willey of Focua of tha Social characte- uad of obaarvabla and at Ma chalaaniagba- Obaarvablaba- laticaotlaatuag 1mm lacuna Watt!» Watch bahavur 8 9 10 12 1.3 14 8. Spaclflc ratar- l2..la£arnca “a to aaca .‘O to usual invalu- daflnlca lacuna; am: with lacuna actually sauna l3, Mar-lea ma to placa incaractuaal 9. Spacfllc ratat- laatun; aca aada to 14. late-ma aada co parlpharal aapacu lax-us; In at laarua; dalmatian can- ln. Spacltic ratat- uca aada ca lacuna. 1a datmcuaal can: 43 #5, #7). It was important to test all the responses for each of the photographs. Responses were selected on a rotation basis for the respondents who were randomly assigned. The first response was taken was taken from photograph #1 for reSpondent 501; the second response was taken from photograph #4 for respondent 502; the third response was taken from photograph #5 for respondent 503; the fourth response was taken from photograph #7 for respondent 504. If there were not that many responses in that particular photograph for that particular respondent, the nearest to that number of responses was taken. 20 responses (statements) were selected for testing by three judges who made independent decisions about the categories to be assigned to each (see Appendix H). The categorizations made by the three judges were compared with the categorizations made by the researcher. Rationale For the Training Program For the Judges. Inter-rater reliability is an important concern for this kind of a descriptive study. Berelson (1952) claims, No single answer can be given about the reliability of the content because of its varied nature. Procedures which prove reliable in one set of circumstances will not necessarily be reliable under all circumstances because of the several factors which affect the reliability of analysis (1953, p. 136). According to Berelson l) reliability increases with the precision of rules of analysis, definition of terms and illustrations for those definitions (see Appendix K for Rules); 2) increased reliability is dependent upon a sufficiently large unit for the content; 3) if the coders have training they can do a more accurate job of categorizing; and 4) if the categorization system is complex there will be confusion that will reduce the reliability. 44 Training Program for the Judges It was felt necessary to set up a training program for the three judges since categories had to be explained. So in addition to giving them the written explanation about the purpose of the content analysis (see Appendix I) and examples of how the researcher had made categorizations (see Appendix J), the judges were given time to ask questions regarding the categories and the procedure. After the questions were discussed, the judges independently went ahead with the categorization of the 20 statements. After the judges did the categorization, there was time given for them to explain the problems they faced during the actual categorization. Report of the Reliability Testing. There was unanimity among the judges regarding the researcher's categories in the first section of the categorization system, i.e., focus of the content. The judges discovered that the other categories were not clear. Subsequently, the rest of the categories (excluding the first) were reworded in form of questions (see Appendix L). The same judges were asked to categorize the same 20 statements using this revised system. This time there was 74% agreement on all items in all categories. Categorization and Quantification of Categories All the responses for all the photographs (photographs #1, #4, #5, #7) for all the 45 respondents were categorized. These categories were then quantified in terms of one unit for each category for each photograph. This means that the respondent gets a one unit count for each category used in his/her response for each photograph. 45 The schedule of rating is as follows: I + II + III = 1 unit A + B = 1 unit 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 = 1 unit 6 + 7 = 1 unit 8 + 9 + 10 = 1 unit 12 + 13 + 14 = 1 unit P+Q+R =lunit S + T = 1 unit V + W + X + Y + Z = 1 unit For example if a respondent 501 has used two statements to describe photograph #1, the following categories were assigned to these statements: Photograph #1, statement 1: I, A, 6, 9, P Photograph #1, statement 2: II, B, 12, Q He gets 0.50 for I; 0.50 for II; 0.50 for A; 0.50 for B; 1.00 for 6; 1.00 for 9; 1.00 for 12; 0.50 for P; 0.50 for Q. This procedure allows the examination of all statements provided by each respondent for each photograph and generates a unit score representing the respondent's total response to the photograph. Group1ng_pf Data for Analysis The data is grouped under three major independent variables vis. comparison across Geographical (cultural) Background, Comparison Across Years of Formal Schooling, Comparison Across Years of Practical Experience. Under each independent variable there are three sub- groupings which are the following: 46 Comparison Across Geographical (Cultural) Background Tamilnadu State (TN) Maharashtra State (MA) North Eastern States (NE) (For details see Appendix D) Comparison Across Years of Formal Schooling 10-12 years (Group I) 13-15 years (Group II) 16+ years (Group III) (For details see Appendix E) Cqmparison Across Years of Practical Experience 0-1 year (Group A) 2-4 years (Group B) 5+ years (Group C) For details see Appendix F) An example of a breakdown of quantified categories for a hypothetical individual respondent's statement is shown in Table 4.6. The breakdown of percentages by groups for each category is shown in Table 4.7. For the purposes of analysis, percentage for each group for individual categories were plotted in the form of bar graphs. Bar graphs for each category then become the basis for comparing each group regarding the description of perceptions about learning in Chapter 5. Summary In this chapter the research design, a "one shot case study," was explained. Photographic stimuli and open ended questions were used for interviews with 45 respondents from three different geo- graphical (cultural) backgrounds. The questions elicited information .N..~ GHQNH 5.“ mm fiQMOOH mucmsmumum 05H. .mwmhamcm ram :ofiumofiMHucmsc pow uao vmxuos mama N can once mums Amanmfium> some now gummy mucmfimumum NH nose 7 A. "moanmfium> mmuzu mums muo:u can ”moanmwum> way On mafiwuooom comma :mnu ma usovcoammu comm you ucsoo use o o o c o o o o H o o o o o o m. a o o o o o H o H m. o m. as samnw . 'OUOSAH N w x 3 > e m m o m «a me we ca a m A e m e m N a a < HHH HH H Hom * mwzommmm m.HZmnzommmm AHGZH A w H N u b m o u m 0 Ho HM Hw H» w o w m H < S x & N ,b n. nu ,0 AU .5.5 .U ,0 .3 1. Q. 14 .5 .5 no 7. Q. a. nu #6an mon 6 O O 4 O 22 .5 6 3 8 8 3 7 4 l 3 7 8 O . 7. 7. . nu nu . . . . . . . nu no no no no no afloat H" 9 0 9 38 l 7 0 4 2 0 2 l 3 7. .5 l l 1. nu nu .1 .1 1. .1 1. ||||| r I I I I I I I I I I fil I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I T I I I I I I I I e. a. a. yawn en w. an wk w. an wk wk an w. an 9m W. .o o. .9 .4 ,b R.15 a. “U .U R. 7. o. ,0 .2 .4 .8 R. 7. Q. o. no 0. . .5 .4 .2,0 .1 0. no 1. 7. 1. 1. 7. mm no no n. n. no n. Honmw mod 0 l 4 2 06 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5 8 0 0 Onocc HH" 0 9 4 .5 38 8 0 O O 0 .5 .5 O 4 7. O O . nu . . . . no no . nu . nu . nu nu nu nu nu . 15 .0 .l ,O .3.4 .1 7. no 7. a. no 1. 7. no 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. IIIIII T I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4r I I I I I I I I Wm W. Va an 7.7. Wm Wm Wu w. an Wm an Wm an Wm 7m 7m 7. no 7/ .3 .l 1.0. R. n. no no nu .3 .l .U .2 .5 A. R. 9. no no no no no nu nu nu o. .5 .4 .3.4 .1 m“ R. 1. R. 1. 1. 7. 1. .5 .5 . 0 2 6 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1.. 903.1. men 0 l 8 9 3 7 O 8 7 .5 O O O. 3 6 QHOCU HHH. . O O . . . 0 O . 0 . 0 . . 0 O 0 O O O O H“ .b .4 1.<. nu Q. R. nu a. .5 7. 7. RV nu I I I I I I IIIIIII I I I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I A IIIIIIIII wk 7. en yawn Wm Wm an an q. wn Wk 7. mm m. 0 O 0 6 I4 I46 9 0 0 0 0 I... 8 8 .1. 0 9 9 6 6 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 m” .5 .4 .2.0 ”w ,b 7. 7. 7. 1. 7. 5.03—9.40 =U