«“zzw- ety-"t-v; \t“ T." ' . '. -.-15~5«‘ fmg‘m . ".21 - ‘gfi in» . .- Rf: .gxfég‘? ‘2 H Liv". ‘ {:3 a; 931‘ ‘ .' ". . u..”\,\)\Q.V{ $7; \§‘§~(‘S‘$i}3{ Q33; {it-git ;‘»‘$¥6\“-‘v" 7. ‘ “Wu”! \\ ..’- -. 5» ‘-‘ ‘ ,- #:“i‘ -r\\\" tf‘. :z'v-;'§§‘L “‘32) “ ”\VR & _ .‘ v? rigj“..3 z" ‘_' ‘ .,1 ' ("1" W- . -.. jg;- ~. '5...” ‘1‘ V . "’55 ._ . ~ ‘ ,_, ‘ . . u. ‘21”; ‘fi , _ «1.. ;. . . . "hear . . - "“ a. - 1%; mfifi W ‘ dam-4 €353.) ‘ $5- ‘. ’ 9'. W\ X‘ ‘ .- r “x "4' ‘A '9' _' "V “ : fi: \, \ ‘E‘gfikzflffiii‘izgzg x'.-“.-.'7';- . .; ‘ . , .' v“ . - - ‘. ' v3 - - ¥ . ‘ _ _ 7 \ n aunt"; a?" ‘ “L . . Skx'cfil Rh ‘ vl—h‘ afi'q‘3hvk.‘ 1_ . ’ 1‘ w ‘- 'vfiaxrkc‘ji ‘f' ‘C. n y ' .33. .3.;~--:.~=u ‘ ~. :3 \ ”35$“ %‘2‘ui-E§§‘“ ’, 3 , . J . V3P::3&1\ >4: .- J‘ i‘ , $33??? 0%»(Iv‘)$£§fl§ :~ .' 3“ if: \z;::" ‘ 4., «3. .-:"~\?‘ ‘3‘»39 - 5;) . 3: an -. My}; 5231‘9' . ’v; 63"!" ‘." *1} .94 .3. "'v .. 33:2 .- x3, 4}..- 3.” .L:I:I-L‘xr:,‘:§ 3‘" ? r' .‘h . 23,, . 5 «xi ‘v"-' ”‘W ‘ g'g-Ksi’ {H ":35 “:7? gum?) .(Q-Qs >§é§fi .33“. »;§-n<'§."’.‘ . '. " “j 2",} lg}; I, f’fvzf ’ \{filfigf- a? ‘ If“ IV,IJ~’/Sfa will 7 , f]! I'M/I T'l;m 4/ i/(. . 14'2“ I,” ' 1/33)?“ I" '5 2; " A n ' up ' - . $343,111" .172»! 1.11;.”60'f41/fiah < I I. "*7 5" 'I‘l'w’ ’3'" $1,?!) ' H nnc fly; ’:' {3/ ' '.'-. '3.’ 3."! I 1 .-. “:I'f ' . "’{-V".‘$ .L" I)”, "u r. uj'h‘qfl/ljjfmy . (figs; 5.5g, 4/. A7,? a» IE'JJIJa? ”4"," . .1‘: I ~.o-.r.a‘1..<.a. UH...) hawk/llama ' WJLJ4’3': ”"-‘r-‘-' 'l 20 0 % 2%, 7 LIBRARY Michigan State University This is to certify that the dissertation entitled AN INVESTIGATION OF LEARNERS' VIEWS ON SUNDAY SCHOOL CURRICULUM MATERIAL AND LEARNING PROCEDURES IN KOREA presented by -.~ - ‘ Soyon Lee has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degreem Teacher Education m #_ wcam Major professor Date February 19, 1988 MS U i: an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0- 12771 ffi”! ” -i¢** ‘Lkflg U L ”}J ;P 2 5 f}; '\\ 1293 .1 ‘. a i MSU LIBRARIES I— WWI RETURNING MATERIALS: Piece in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped beiow. 316’ '. 1995' .. I t . t. at '2 z .‘ , AN INVESTIGATION OF LEARNERS’ VIEWS ON SUNDAY SCHOOL CURRICULUM MATERIAL AND LEARNING PROCEDURES IN KOREA By Soyon Lee A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Teacher Education 1988 ABSTRACT AN INVESTIGATION OF LEARNERS’ VIEWS ON SUNDAY SCHOOL CURRICULUM MATERIAL AND LEARNING PROCEDURES IN KOREA By Soyon Lee The purposes of this exploratory research were to investigate students’ views on the Sunday School curriculum in the Korean Evangelical Church (KEC) and to confirm the generalizability of the findings to other denominations as well as to the KEC in Korea. Data were collected in two phases. In the first phase open- ended interviews were conducted with 23 high school students in KEC. Based on the findings from the interviews, a questionnaire, using a Likert-scale opinion form, was designed to confirm the generalizability of the findings in the KEC to other denominations. Conclusions reached are: l. Students view the present content of the Sunday School lesson as meaningful. 2. Students wish to have the content of the Sunday School lesson include the exploring of background information, basic knowledge about the Bible, and relevant life issues. 3. Students desire somewhat content with systematic (sequen- tial) Bible study. Soyon Lee 4. Students prefer learning procedures with active interaction among fellow students and with the teacher. 5. Students prefer learning procedures with teachers’ using appropriate illustrations and emphasizing the points clearly. 6. Some student responses were different, based on their church denomination. Copyright by SOYON LEE l988 To God, Who made it possible to keep my promise to Him by providing the right people at the right corner where I faced my shortcomings; and to my parents and American parents (Dr. and Mrs. Donald Joy), who have faithfully supported me with love and prayer. W ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The completion of this dissertation was possible with the help of many people. I wish to express my deepest appreciation to my committee members: Dr. Ward, who challenged me for academic and mental growth; Dr. Blackman, who provided valuable guidance and tireless input with patience and a warm heart; Dr. Bell, who provided good suggestions; and Dr. Schiambeng, for being my supportive committee member. I also wish to express my gratitude to Geneva Speas for arranging time schedules. I am also very grateful to those who helped me financially: Dr. Elmer Kilbourne, who helped me start this program; Professor Kap Hee Lee, who helped me to continue; and Reverend Sung Chul Hong. I also deeply appreciate Professor Carol Mitchell, who gave me financial support in finishing this program. I wish to express sincere thanks to Seoul Theological Seminary for giving me a generous leave of absence. I also thank those who were involved with the interview and questionnaire phases of the study. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ....................... LIST OF FIGURES ....................... Chapter I. THE PROBLEM ..................... Statement of the Problem ............. Background of the Problem in Research ....... Background of Transitional Values of Adolescents . The Purposes of the Study ............. Research Questions ................ Definition of Terms ................ Importance of the Study .............. Assumptions .................... Delimitation of the Study ............. Limitations and Generalizability of the Study Findings ................. Overview of the Procedure ............. II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION . . . Learners’ Needs in Relation to Curriculum LORD ommuwmmw—o -‘ —l —1 Development ................... Learners’ Needs in Relation to Instructional Procedures ................... Review of Denominational Sunday School Curriculum Development ................... Korean Presbyterian Church ........... Presbyterian Church (Hapdong) .......... Presbyterian Church (Tonghap) .......... Korean Methodist Church ............. Korean Evangelical Church ............ Teachers’ Views on the Content of the Sunday School Lesson Textbook ............. Some Examples of Similar Research Methods ..... Summary ...................... vii PROCEDURES AND FINDINGS FOR THE INTERVIEH PHASE . . . Overview of Methodology .............. Research Questions ................ Development of Interview Questions ........ Rationale for Using Open-Ended Interviews . . . . Guidelines for Interview Question Construction Interview Protocols .............. : Sampling Procedure Content Concerns ................ Preference of Learning Procedures ......... Summary of Findings for Interviews ........ Students’ Opinions on the Present Content . . . . Students’ Opinions on the Desirable Content . . Students’ Opinions on the Preferred Learning Procedures .................. PROCEDURE AND FINDINGS FOR THE QUESTIONNAIRE PHASE . . Research Questions ................ Composition of the Sample ............. Sampling Procedure ................ Questionnaire Development ............. Rationale for Using the Likert Scale ...... Rationale for DevelOping Three Items for Each Factor .................... Item Content of the Questionnaire ........ Students’ Opinions on the Present Content . . . . Students’ Opinions on the Desirable Content . . . Students’ Opinions on the Preferred Learning Procedure .............. Guidelines for Item Construction ........ Demographic Items ................. Validity of the Items ............... Item Distribution of Factors ........... Pilot Study for the Questionnaire Development . . . Data Collection .................. Data-Analysis Procedure .............. Findings ..................... Present Content ................. Desired Content ................. Preferred Learning Procedures .......... Differences Observed Among the Independent Variables and the Dependent Variables ..... viii Interview Procedure ................ Language and Translation ............. Data Collection .................. Data-Analysis Procedure .............. Data Analysis and Findings ............ Page Summary of Significant Findings ......... 74 Summary of Significant Differences Observed Among the Independent Variables ........ 75 VI. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 76 Summary ...................... 76 Content Concerns ................ 76 Preferred Learning Procedures .......... 79 Summary on the Independent Variables ....... 79 Conclusions .................... 80 Implications of the Research ........... 8l Recommendations for Further Research ....... 83 Reflections .................... 84 APPENDICES A. INTERVIEW PROTOCOLS ................. 86 8. ITEM VALIDITY TEST ................. 88 C. FIRST PILOT STUDY .................. 92 D. SECOND PILOT STUDY ................. 100 E. MAIN QUESTIONNAIRE ................. 108 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................ 117 ix Table 3.1 LIST OF TABLES Students’ Opinions About the Content of the Present Sunday School Lesson ................ Students’ Opinions About the Desirable Content of the Sunday School Lesson .............. Students’ Opinions About the Preferred Learning Procedures ..................... Mean Scores on the Category of flat Meaningful Mean Scores on the Category of Meaningful ...... Mean Scores on the Category of Cnntant Applicable Mean Scores on the Category of Antiya_1n1ana§11nn Mean Scores on the Category of leaghgra’ Claanly W l ................ Differences Between the Independent Variables and the Desired Content ................ Differences Between the Independent Variables and the Preferred Learning Procedures ......... Differences Between the Independent Variables and the Present Content ................ Page 34 36 39 56 58 6O 62 64 66 68 71 73 Figure 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 4.] LIST OF FIGURES Classification of Categories From Responses for Interview Question 2 of Research Question 1: What Kind of Content Do You Think Would Make the Sunday School Lesson Better? ......... Classification of Some Categories From Some Responses for Interview Question 3 of Research Question 2: What Preference Have You for the Way in Which the Sunday School Lesson Is Presented? .................... Classification of Some Factors From Students’ Responses for Interview Question 2 of Research Question 1: What Kind of Content Do You Think Would Make the Sunday School Lesson Better? . . . . Responses of Students in Condensed Phrases to Interview Question 2 of Research Question l: What Kind of Content Do You Think Would Make the Sunday School Lesson Better? ......... Abstraction of Themes From Condensed Phrases of Students’ Responses to Interview Question 2 of Research Question l: What Kind of Content Do You Think Would Make the Sunday School Lesson Better? ...................... Categories and Factors Discovered in the Interview Phase .................. xi Page 28 29 3O 31 32 54 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Scholars in Christian education in Korea have identified the importance of the connection between learners’ lives and the curriculum. Kim (1969), Hyun (1983), and Kim (1983) in the conclu- sion of their theses and Eun (1980) in his book asserted the impor- tance of the relationship between the learners’ lives and the curriculum. Ihi spite of these assertions, it appears that little attention has been given to the learners’ needs in life in the cur- riculum of Christian education. ta ment of Pr The problem in the curriculum of Christian education in Korea is the lack of connection between the curriculum and the learners. According to Eun’s assertion, the curriculum materials and the instruction of the curriculum materials may not relate to the learners’ needs in life. Eun (l980) pointed out this problem of irrelevance in the curriculum: First, the Bible and the curriculum materials based on the Bible do not give meaning to the learners. Second, the message from the Bible is not related to the life nor does it bring about changes in the learners. Third, the Christian Education program in the church cannot give any desirable solution or answer to their struggle in search of meaning in life, especially for those 14-18 years old. (pp. 12-13.) Eun’s article was not based on research but was written as a commentary on an article from the August 1967 issue of Cnrjatianity Lnday: "Is Sunday School Lost?” However, Eun (1975) saw this problem in church education as one that is widespread in Korean churches: Since most of the Sunday School lesson books have been focused on content delivery not related to learners’ questions in life a new experimental curriculum design is needed to make up the weakness. (p. 6) Based on this, Eun and other Methodist seminary professors conducted an experiment concerning the design of Sunday School curriculum, attempting to compensate for the weakness of the Sunday School lessons and make them better able to relate to the learners’ needs in life. However, in the report of this experiment, how they tried to make the Sunday School lesson better able to relate to the learners’ life was not specifically identified (Eun, 1975). Instead, the process of the effort to design better Sunday School curriculum through the involvement of seminary professors was emphasized. Unruh (1975) said that adults selected curriculum content from disciplines in accordance with adults’ Judgment. She asserted that the involvement of learners is a precondition in responsive curriculum development. Taba (1962) said that in order to know learners’ particular meaning they bring to school, knowledge of their particular approach to learning tasks and the expectations they have of themselves and of others is necessary to develop effective curriculum. To address problems of irrelevancy in Christian education curriculum in Korea, according to Taba and Unruh, learning how learners view the Sunday School curriculum in light of their needs is the first step required to develop a responsive curriculum design and curriculum presentation to learners. ro P Research on the text analysis of the Sunday School lesson book has been conducted by graduate school students (Choe, 1969; Kim, 1969; Kim, 1983; Hyun, 1983). Choe (1969) analyzed the concept of content of the Uniform Sunday School lesson book1 for primary school children (lst to 3rd grade) by analyzing the degree of difficulty in reference to the vocabulary used in their textbooks at school. He said that its conceptual level and vocabulary are much more difficult than the textbooks used at school. Eungon Kim (1969) examined the Uniform Sunday School lesson book for middle and high school students in light of the arrangement of the books in the Bible, national and church occasions, and the arrangement of subjects of God, church, the Bible, and neighbors. He suggested the necessity of the publication of the Sunday School lesson book materials for high school students in Korea designed by professionals in Christian education. 1Every other season or every other year for six years the Old and New Testament were taught alternatively, thus teaching the whole Bible over a period of six years. Chulhan Kim (1983) analyzed the graded Sunday School lesson 2 books in light of the purposes of' Sunday School lessons, the learning process, and the arrangement of the Old and the New Testaments based on Wyckoff’s theory.3 He suggested the Sunday School lesson book must reflect the present learners’ needs and concerns. Byung Joon Hyun (1983) examined the graded Sunday School lesson book in light of selection of educational purposes, selection of learning experiences, organization of learning experiences, and evaluation of learning experiences, based on Tyler’s theory.4 He suggested that the Sunday School lesson book provide more learning experience which students could then perform and incorporate in their lives. The evaluation of learning experiences of those Sunday School lesson books is not concrete or scientific. In the conclusion of their theses, Kim (1969), Hyun (1983), and Kim (1983) suggested the importance of considering the learners’ life in the Christian education curriculum. Kim (1969) said that Christian education is required to relate the Bible to life rather than to transmit only the knowledge and the content of the Bible. Hyun (1983) said that a curriculum related to 2To be suitable for learners of all ages, it was divided into grades or ages. 3The context, scope, purpose, process, and organizing principles are the designing principles. 4Educational purposes, selection of learning principles, organization of learning experiences, and evaluation of learning experiences are the curriculum design principles. life is urgently needed. Kim (1983) said that the Christian education curriculum must reflect learners’ needs and concerns. Bagkgrnund of Transitional Valuas nf Adnlaacents The necessity for studying the background of transitional values of adolescents in Korea has arisen because of the different background the adolescents experience from the background of the older: generation, who are the figures in charge of curriculum development and curriculum presentation. Today’s adolescents in Korea are thrust into political and cultural situations that are in vast variance with the older generations. They are questioning values that the older generations had accepted. During the past 50 years in Korean history, there were times of Japanese colonization (1910-1945), independence from Japanese colonization in 1945, the Korean War in 1950, the April Students’ Revolution in 1960, and the May Coup D’Etat in 1961. Korean persons aged 50 and older experienced their adolescence during the period of the Japanese colonization. Those aged 40 to 50 experienced their adolescence during the period of the confusion after independence from Japanese colonization, of the Korean War, the April Students’ Revolution, and the May Coup D’Etat. Korean persons aged 30 to 40 experienced their adolescence during the period of the beginning of industrialization and urbanization. Those aged 20 and below experienced their adolescence during the period of urbanization and industrialization (WW. 1983)- In the educational system during this past ten years, dramatic changes have been made. Since 1974 in the educational system the intensive examination for entering top high schools has been discontinued (Knnaan_nnnla§nanna, 1986). In other words, there is no longer a distinction among high schools with regard to academic expectations. Since 1982, middle and high school students are allowed to choose their clothing and hairstyle, rather than needing to wear school uniforms and to have a regulated hair style, as it had been under the influence of Japan (W, 1982). Due to these different backgrounds, adolescents in Korea have different values in comparison to the older generations. The older generations are oriented to authoritarianism, collective values, and material success. The adolescents value dialogue, individualism, and equality (Koraan Soaiety and Adolescent Gnidange, 1983). Further, due to abundance of material resources, material success is not that urgent to the adolescents. The values in the older generations are abstinence, patience, and frugality. The values in the adolescents are wit, honor, and flexible adaptability (Koraan Adolasgange, 1986). MW This descriptive exploratory research had two purposes. First, the purpose of this research was to investigate students’ views on the content of the Sunday School lesson and on the learning procedure used during the Sunday School lessons in Korean Evangelical Churches (KEC). As a second step, the researcher sought to determine the generalizability of the KEC study findings to other denominations as well as to the KEC in Korea. rc t The research questions were designed to inquire into the attitudes and experiences of students attending churches in Korea. Research Question 1: What W for the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? Research Question 2: What preference of [gaming nnngadnras during the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? Definition of Tarms Ina Kora_n .Evangeliaal Churnn (KEC) is a Wesleyan church denomination, an independent Korean denomination founded by two Koreans, Sang Joon Kim and Bin Chung, in 1907 (Lee, 1970). Stngants are high school students from the first year to senior attending churches. Snnday Sauna) Iassnn is a class conducted by teachers with denominationally published Sunday School lesson books as a textbook in church on Sunday. Snnnay Scnnol lassnn bank is a curriculum material for Bible study, usually published by each denomination for high school' students. Chgrnh aducatinn means in the context of this study the Sunday School lesson in Protestant church school. Contant refers to all the content students learn through the Sunday School lesson. Laanning_nnggagnna§ include all the processes and interpersonal relationships associated with the methods used in the Sunday School. Inansjtjgnal valnas means values that are in the process of transition. Importanga gf tna Study The importance of this study lies in its attempt to discover students’ views on the curriculum of Korean churches. This study will provide implications for improving the church curriculum in Korea. It is of particular value to curriculum designers, directors of Christian education, teachers of high school students, and Christian educators in Korean churches. It should be useful in generating guidelines for future curriculum development. mum As this research was based on self—report, the following assumptions were made: 1. Learners’ perceptions. provide an important insight into qualitative issues in curriculum for church education. 2. All expressions of opinion about the Sunday School curricu- lum can be reviewed primarily as a substantive critique of the cur- riculum. elimi atio ud The scope of the study was limited in the following ways. First, the churches from which the samples were drawn used the Sunday School lesson book published by their denominations and had teachers to teach the Sunday School class. Second, these churches were located in Seoul for convenience of time, cost, and energy. Third, for the interview phase the samples were drawn from Korean Evangelical Churches. Fourth, for the questionnaire phase the samples were drawn from churches of other denominations as well as Korean Evangelical Churches. Linitatinns and Ganeraljzability of tha Stndy Findings The generalizability of the study is limited as follows. For the interview phase, the findings represent only the three churches involved. The data for the interview phase may be influenced by researcher bias. Translation from Korean to English involved decisions about the most appropriate equivalent words. Therefore, it may also reflect researcher bias. For the questionnaire phase the findings can be generalized to churches in Korea that have similar or comparable settings. r i w dur The research was divided into two procedural phases: the open- ended interview phase to discover students’ views on the Sunday School lesson curriculum in Korean Evangelical Churches, and the questionnaire phase to confirm the validity of the ffindings. In 10 the interview phase a sample of 23 high school students was drawn from a limited number of Korean Evangelical Churches. In the questionnaire phase a sample of 1,035 high school students was drawn from other denominations as well as from Korean Evangelical Churches. The data of the interview phase were collected through cassette tape recordings. The data of the questionnaire phase were collected by the researcher and students. ‘The data-analysis procedure of the interview phase began with data reduction, selected verbatim illustrations, and data display in the form of tabulations. The data-analysis procedure of the questionnaires was done by measures of variability, chi-square test, contingency coefficients, and significance of difference. CHAPTER 11 REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION Chapter II is organized into three parts. The first part reviews literature concerning learners’ needs in relation to curriculum content and in relation to instructional procedure. 'The second part is made up of the review of denominational Sunday School curriculum development from five different denominations of the Protestant Church in Korea and the review of teachers’ views on the content of the Sunday School lesson textbook gained through interviews. The third part consists of the review of some examples of similar research methods. rner ’ n io ri v Curriculum scholars, especially humanistic curriculum professionals, along with Christian education curriculum scholars, have emphasized the importance of considering learners’ needs in curriculum content. McNeil (1981) classified the major categories of conceptions of curriculum: the humanistic curriculum, the social reconstructionist. curriculum, ‘technology and the curriculum, and the academic subject curriculum. The humanistic curriculum serves the individual who pursues self-actualizing needs. The curriculum, ll 12 as a liberating process toward self-actualizing, should provide expe- riences to satisfy individual needs. Zais (l976) also said that a sound basis for curriculum content selection should consider learners’ states of knowledge and the continuity of learners’ experience. He noted that the content must have a relationship to some questions with which the learner is concerned. In church education curriculum, LeBar (l969) also asserted that the first step in the educational process is to discern needs felt by learners because these needs are God’s equipment for dealing with human nature. In the book The thrcn’a Edugational Ministry; A Curriculun Plan (1965), it was said that the content of the curriculum must be designed to meet and to interact between the Gospel and the lifelong persistent concern of learners. This book also said that God calls man in his human situation. Further, the content must be pertinent to the persistent issues of man’s life because then a learner accepts such content as his own life problems. Colson and Rigdon (1969) also agreed that the content of the curriculum should meet learners’ persistent life needs in order to be true learning. They said that true Christian learning takes place when the eternal reality of the gospel interacts with a persistent life need of the learner. Goldman (1978) pointed out that a weakness in Christian education is the failure to consider learners’ development in the content of Christian education. He said that the characteristics of l3 adolescents’ logic and abstract thinking capacity' are not fully considered in the content of Christian education. This brings built-in rejection of religion so that they refuse religion, even unconsciously, as not relevant to their life. He recommended that the Bible be taught selectively so as to be comparable to the ideas used in the experience of adolescents. Havighurst (l948) said that teaching-learning is very effective when the teaching is in accordance with developmental tasks of adolescents, that is, when they are ready to learn the task in their development. 'Thus, considering learners’ needs in curriculum content is very important. -. ,- ’ -1. , -- . ., . 1 _ '. . pr. -,, - Researchers and educators have pointed out the importance of considering learners’ needs for effective instruction. Brophy (l982) asserted the importance of teachers over the curriculum materials in teaching. He discussed the importance of teachers’ knowledge about learners’ needs in relation to time constraints, and making decisions about how to teach the content successfully. Teachers must learn to meet learners’ needs in their selection, adaptation, and use of materials as tools for teaching the learners. O’Brien (1981) mentioned that some teachers neglect learners’ needs in instruction by following the textbook closely with regard to content selection and sequencing and by requiring them to reproduce the language of the textbooks. Dewey (l902) asserted the need for flexibility of subject matter when considering the l4 learners’ needs. He said that all school subjects are instruments to serve the needs of growth and self-realization, which is also a goal, as well as knowledge and information acquisition. Dewey (I938) divided school education into two categories: miseducative experience and educative experience. When the educa- tion does not consider learners’ interests and capacities, miseducative experience is the outcome. On the other hand, when education starts where learners are in reference to interests and capacities, educative experience results in growth of the learner. LeBar (1969) pointed out the importance of atmosphere in Bible instruction. She said that only in a warm, accepting atmosphere does a person feel free to be his/her real self. She further said that human relations with respect, recognizing differences in people and situation, are required. Thus, the instruction considering learners’ needs brings effective and optimum learning. R v' w f . in n c W The following section is based on interviews with persons from each denominational Sunday School responsible for curriculum development for high school students. The general history of each Sunday School lesson and the development process are reviewed. Wasatch In 1978 the plan for the denominational Sunday School curriculum for high school students was made. In 1979 the denomi- national Sunday School lesson book was published monthly. It was 15 distributed to 13 churches as an experiment. At the end of 1981 the Sunday School lesson book for high school students was disseminated to all the churches in the denomination. The themes of the Sunday School lesson were determined to be God, the Church, and the world in light of Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit. The cycle is a three-year period. According to guidelines of denominational theology, a seminary professor in Christian education, along with a denominational representative from their curriculum writers, selected the Scripture verses, the units of the lessons, and the titles for the Sunday School lesson book. Then, five writers who were specialists in Christian education and in theology discussed how to write the lessons. A seminary professor in Christian education then edited the compilation. Several national occasions were referred to in the content of the Sunday School lesson. They were Children’s Sunday, Parents’ Sunday, and Independence Day. r b ian h rch a d n In 1964 the first Sunday School lesson book for high school students was published. In 1973 the second six-year-cycle course was published. It included a study of God, the Bible, and the Church. Until 1986 these cycles were repeated. In 1987 another edition of the Sunday School lesson book focused on God’s promise and life. The themes are Bible, Church, and life. Seminary professors, along *with the chairperson of the education department of the l6 headquarters, selected the units, titles, and the Scripture verses. A seminary professor recommended a writer whose major was in Christian education. It took eight months to finish writing one year’s Sunday School lesson book. Feedback through questionnaires from teachers about merits and demerits of the Sunday School lesson book was used to revise the book for the next year. The church calendar and the national occasions were not referred to in the content of the Sunday School lesson. In March 1987, the new Sunday School lesson began in accordance with the general education calendar. Pr 5 t ri r T h In 1970 at the denominational general assembly meeting a new three-year-cycle curriculum for high school students was planned. In 1972 the Sunday School lesson book for high school students was published. In 1980 the Sunday School lesson book for high school students was revised by adding ”life" into the themes of the Bible, the Church, and life. The curriculum comittee, consisting of a pastor, a seminary professor, and staff, selected the units, the titles, and the Scripture verses. One unit was written by two or three persons together over a period of six months. The writers were pastors and seminary professors. National occasions were not referred to in the content of the Sunday School lesson. However, the church calendar was referred to slightly in the content of the Sunday School lesson book. Easter and Christmas were included. 17 K M thodi ch The Sunday School lesson book for high school students was published in 1980 as a three-year cycle. The first year was focused on God and the world. The second year was focused on God and the Church. The third year was focused on the Church and the world. Seminary professors selected the units, the titles, and the Scripture verses. The curriculum committee, consisting of pastors and elders, discussed the stream of the Sunday School lesson. The curriculum committee recommended writers who were good at writing and who knew theology. The writers were elders and pastors. The writing took six months. The Church calendar was referred to, but national occasions were not in the content of the Sunday School lesson. Korean Evangelical Church In 1983 the Sunday School lesson for high school students was published. The theme for a five-year cycle was the Mature Christian and the World. The themes were chosen to teach what the message of the Bible was and how it related to life in the world of high school students in Korean Evangelical Churches. The curriculum committee consisted of two pastors, one seminary professor in Christian education, and the chairman of the education department in head- quarters. They selected the units, the titles, the Scripture verses, and the general trend of the lessons. Writers with formal education in the Bible were reconInended. After writing, the cur- riculum committee made revisions in accordance with the decisions of 18 the curriculum committee. Church calendar and national occasions were not referred to in the content of the Sunday School lesson. e er ’ V ew h nt n e ho l T 0 Eleven teachers of the high school groups from three different Korean Evangelical Churches were asked their opinions of the content of the Sunday School lesson textbook published by the Korean Evangelical Church. They indicated that the content was not related to the learners’ real life. Two teachers commented that the content was useful to transmit knowledge about the Bible and Christianity, but not to transform their faith. They agreed that the content was dogmatic, shallow, and abstract. Five teachers said that the abstract vocabulary and content were hardly understood even by teachers. Sometimes they taught materials to learners without understanding it fully themselves. Two teachers mentioned that content development was not logical. Further, the objectives for a lesson and the content of a lesson were not seen to be logically related. In addition, the objectives were seen as too abstract and too broad to achieve. Two teachers said that they shared their personal faith to relate the content to learners’ lives. Nine teachers recomended that the topic and the content of lessons should be related to learners’ lives. Two teachers remarked that they wished the content was more responsive to learners’ capacity to understand. 19 e E am f Sim'l e e ho The research methods of Javalera (1983), Issler (1984), and Andrews (1986) were similar to this research method in terms of the instrument used and in data analysis. Javalera used a questionnaire with Likert-scale items to identify some of the training needs and interests of church workers and to get some general background information about them. Interview protocols of structured questions were used to get the reactions of key decision makers in each church. In testing the validity of the instrument, a panel of five specialists was used. For data analysis, a chi-square test with contingency coefficient and analysis of variance was used. Issler (1984) used an open-ended interview to describe the educational emphasis placed on the moral development of ministerial students in the curriculum of Protestant seminaries. For data analysis, data reduction identifying the basic unit of analysis and data display with thematic clusters of response units was used. Furthermore, statistical treatments of chi-square and Fisher’s exact test, Yule’s Q, and Goodman and Kruskal’s lambda were used. Andrews (1986) used semi-structured interviews to understand how seminary students view the role of the pastor-as-leader and to determine if seminaries and/or culture have distinct roles in the formation of those images. A questionnaire using Likert scales to test generalizations made from the interviews was also used. FOr the interview data analysis, data reduction was done during the interview by transcribing each key word, phrase, or sentence. For 20 the questionnaire data analysis, t-test, analysis of variance, chi- square, correlations, and linear regression were conducted. 5115136421 The related literature included a review of learners’ needs in relation to curriculum development, instructional procedures, and some examples of similar research methods. Further, interviews provided information about the denominational curriculum development and teachers’ view of content of the Sunday School lesson book in Korean Evangelical Churches. The related literature supported that considering learners’ needs is important both in curriculum development and in instructional procedure. Interviews revealed, however, that the present Sunday School lesson curriculum material tends not to take into account learners’ needs. CHAPTER III PROCEDURES AND FINDINGS FOR THE INTERVIEW PHASE The purpose of the research was to investigate the content concerns of the students of church-based Christian education and to learn about the preferred learning procedures of the students for the Sunday School lesson in Korea. The open-ended interview phase and questionnaire phase were used to answer the two research questions. The interview phase is dealt with in this chapter. The interview phase was intended to investigate curriculum and procedure of the Sunday School learning experience from the perspectives of students. strvifl of Methodologx This study was conducted at three different Korean Evangelical Churches in Seoul, Korea. Twenty-three high school students were the subjects of this study. Data were obtained by researcher interviews. The interviews were conducted as open-ended questions, and each interview took about 30 minutes. The data were analyzed by data reduction of key themes and displayed by tables of comments. 8W Two research questions guided this investigation: Research Qnastjgn 1: What W for the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? 21 22 se r u ion : What preference of ignxning_nnngagnnas during the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? e t f r w The interview was conducted with 23 high school students from three different Korean Evangelical Churches to answer the two research questions. The earlier interview questions tended to be broad to be exploratory about the impressions and the reactions of students to the Sunday School lesson with the idea of determining common major themes and apparent strong contrasts. (See Appendix A.) As the interview progressed, a developing framework emerged, which permitted the researcher to ask more questions to focus on that framework. (See Appendix A.) Ratignale for Using Open-Ended Interview; As little research has been done on students’ feedback in the Sunday School context, qualitative research using open-ended interview questions was needed. Qualitative research is a good tool for preliminary inquiry into such phenomena; it is "an investigative process to make gradual sense of a social phenomenon” (Miles & Huberman, 1984, p. 37). Further, an open-ended interview lends itself’ well to exploratory studies: '[An] open-ended question allows the interview ‘full scope and solicits his opinion/viewy thoughts/feelings" (Benjamin, 1969, p. 64). 23 finidelinas fnr Intarvian Qnastinn anstnngtinn Because the relationship between the interviewee and the inter- viewer is important, the questions needed to be minimally threatening (Rossi, 1983). The first question used was a general question about students’ concerns: ”It is said that high school days are important in life. What do you want to get through your high school days?" To find out about the phenomena, the interview questions consisted of asking broad questions on students’ views on content and on the learning procedure in relation to their needs and their feelings on the lessons. 'n) be more exploratory, the sequence of the questions and the direction of probing used were flexible: The more exploratory the purpose, the greater the need for flexibility in determining the wording of questions, the sequence of questions, and the direction and amount of probing used. (Gordon, 1980, p. 62) In other words, in the interview flexibility was applied and the sequence of questions reversed when necessary. intarviaw Pngtggnls The interview questions regarding the content and learning procedure of the Sunday School lesson for Research Questions l and 2 were elicited from the interview questions. For Research Question 1: 1. What do you think about the content of Sunday School les- sons you have learned during this year? 24 2. What kind of content do you think would make the Sunday School lesson better? For Research Question 2: What preference have you for the way in which the Sunday School lesson is presented? W In qualitative research the samples of subjects tend to be drawn for representation. In small studies this means that random selection is often unwise (Miles & Huberman, 1984). The three Korean Evangelical Churches in which the data were gathered were intentionally selected on the basis of the following criteria. First, churches needed to be using Korean Evangelical Church Sunday School lesson books. Second, churches needed to have teachers for high school student groups. Some churches do not have teachers but have an internship pastor such as a seminary student or recent seminary graduate who takes care of the whole high school student group. Some churches do not have a Sunday School lesson hour. The three churches in Seoul chosen using the preceding criteria were established churches of more than 1,000 members, each with a history of 30 years or more in Korean Evangelical Churches. After selecting those three churches in Seoul, the researcher called the youth minister in charge to get permission for an interview one or two weeks before the interview could be conducted. On the pre-arranged Sunday morning, the researcher was introduced during the service and asked for students’ cooperation for the 25 interviews. Before the Sunday School lesson began, right after the worship, the researcher asked a teacher in charge of all student affairs to select four students. Two visits were made to each of the three churches. In all, 23 students were the subjects. intarviaw Pnngaguna After four students. were identified and introduced to the researcher, she made appointments to meet with them individually in a room near the worshipping place right after the Sunday School lesson. Because in Korea high school students have a heavy school schedule, the time after the Sunday School lesson was the best available time to interview them. To prevent reflecting only the Sunday School lesson on that day, the researcher probed; e.g., "Then, what do you think about the content you’ve learned during the past year?" In meeting with each one, the researcher explained the purpose of the interview, the reason for using the tape recorder, and the importance of their frank, personal responses to the interview questions. Each interview usually took 30 to 40 minutes to complete. After the interview, the researcher thanked the student for his or her cooperation. Languaga and Tnanslatign The language used in both the interview and the questionnaire was Korean because the subjects of this research were all Koreans living in Korea. The interview protocol and the questionnaire were designed in Korean. Both data reduction and data display were 26 conducted in Korean in the interview phase. Data analysis for the questionnaire phase was also done in Korean. Translating the Korean materials into English was done with the assistance of an American. In the Korean language, one can answer a question without using subjects such as "I" or "the Sunday School lesson.” In translating Korean into English, the implied subjects were added to the transcripts. all t n During the interviews, the responses were recorded onto a cassette tape. Later, they were transcribed into Korean and, after analysis, examples were translated into English. Interviews were conducted from the beginning of September 1985 to the end of January 1986. t - i P d r Data reduction and data display were fulfilled. Data reduction is a process of selecting, focusing, simplify- ing, abstracting and transforming the "raw data." . . . Data display includes many types of matrices, groups, networks, and charts. All are designed to assemble organized information in an immediately accessible compact form, so that the analyst can see what is happening. (Miles & Huberman, 1984, p. 21) Data reduction was done by excerpting the expressions of key themes and stating the essence of the responses. Data display was in the form of tables of coments. Interview questions fitting the two research questions were identified from the interview transcriptions in Korean (see interview questions, pp. 23-24). 27 In data analysis, two steps of process were needed: (a) eliciting the emerging categories and (b) finding factors under each category. As this was an inductive analysis, the themes, patterns, and categories of analysis were not established before the data collection (Patton, 1980). To get a holistic conception of the content of the interview transcription was the first step in finding emerging categories. Reading through the actual notes page by page provided the researcher with a more holistic conception of the content of the field notes (Erickson, 1985). From this holistic review, the themes emerged. ‘Those themes were identified as categories. After naming the categories, a list of all the responses from the interviews was made and categorized (Figure 3.1). The responses were simplified to focus on the content; main ideas were condensed, and tangential remarks were omitted (Figure 3.1). Some substantive remarks were not classifiable by an initial classification system. For example, the responses for Interview Question 3 were classified into two categories: student-centered learning procedures and teacher- centered learning procedures. For this classification, some items were judged to be neither a student-centered learning procedure nor a teacher-centered learning procedure. Some items were categorized into "unclassified.” A new category system to include those unclassified responses was required: ”The task of pattern analysis is to discover: and test those linkages. which make the largest possible number of connections to items of data in the corpus“ 28 (Erickson, 1985, p. 131). The new categories that emerged were inclusive of both classified and unclassified responses: learning procedure of active interaction and that of teachers’ clearly focused presentation (Figure 3.2). A. CQNTENT AEELICABLE IQ LIEE --concrete and realistic content suitable for our age --comfort and peace --related to life (issues on friendship) --suggestion in life/daily life --mental growth and growth as a member of a society --related to schooling --relationship of the world and the Christian —-future course --how to live as a Christian --Jesus’ sufferings --development of exploring content --help in difficulties --self-abstinence: values --solution of difficulties QONTENT QF BIBLE SIBB! --systematic and consistent Bible study --basic knowledge about the Bible Figure 3.1. Classification of categories from responses for Interview Question 2 of Research Question 1: What kind of content do you think would make the Sunday School lesson better? 29 A. AQTIVE INTERACTION --discuss: to know each other --discussion --we debate --dialogue to approach everyday --talk together and participate together 8. T A H R’ CL ARLY F US PR NT I N --teacher applied to life --teacher presented interestingly and easily Figure 3.2. Classification of some categories from some responses for Interview Question 3 of Research Question 2: What preference have you for the way in which the Sunday School lesson is presented? Identifying factors within each of the categories was the next step. In finding factors, the researcher used the list of responses under each major category to classify these responses according to similarity of content. For example, Figure 3.3 shows the factors for the category of Cnntant_Annliganla_tg_L1fa. Some of the factors were easy to name because the themes of the responses were clear. Then, the responses under those factors were listed together. As with naming categories, some factors identified were not mutually exclusive. For example, Figure 3.3 shows the factors of Interview Question 3 of Research Question l. The factors Content helpful to their social needs and Content helpful to their way of Christian living were not mutually exclusive. For example, a student answered the desirable content as dealing with friendship and relationship with the opposite sex. This can be categorized to 30 both factors: Content helpful to their social needs and Content helpful to their way of Christian living. 0 T N PP T E A. XP OR G BA KGR UND OF NT NT --instead of fact, why they behaved that way --exploring development of content 8. CONTENT DEALING WITH THEIR SQCIAL NEEDS --related to life (friendship/issue on opposite sex) --opposite sex C. ONT NT HE PF TO W F H TIAN N --concrete and realistic --suitable for our age --relationship of the world and Christian --how to live as a Christian ~-future course D. CONT NT OF I L --systematic Bible study --basic knowledge about the Bible --systematic, consistent Bible study Figure 3.3. Classification of some factors from students’ responses for Interview Question 2 of Research Question I: What kind of content do you think would make the Sunday School lesson better? 31 The classification of the factors needed to be mutually exclusive according to Mendenhall et al. (1974). Those responses for Interview Question 1 of Research Question 1 were listed again as condensed phrases (Figure 3.4). Then those responses were transformed into four abstract themes, which are shown in Figure 3.5. These can be put together into one factor, Contant Qaaling with lev nt i ue . In any table, there may be more citations than students (n - 23) because some students offered more than one idea. --concrete and realistic content suitable for our age --comfort and peace --related to life (issues on friendship and opposite sex) --related to schooling --suggestion in life/daily life --mental growth and growth as a member of society --relationship of the world and the Christian --Jesus’ suffering --how to live as a Christian --self—abstinence: values --solution to difficulties Figure 3.4. Responses of students in condensed phrases to Interview Question 2 of Research Question 1: What kind of content do you think would make the Sunday School lesson better? 32 1. Issues on friendship Friendship between same gender and opposite sex 2. Values Self-abstinence Relationship of the world and the Christian 3. Future course of life 4. Related to schooling Comfort and peace Figure 3.5. Abstraction of themes from condensed phrases of students’ responses to Interview Question 2 of Research Question 1: What kind of content do you think would make the Sunday School lesson better? For example, the response from one student was as follows: "to discuss about the Bible and to wish to ask questions about difficult vocabulary and to ask something we do not not understand." This response can be broken into two factors: "to discuss about the Bible" and ”to wish to ask questions about difficult vocabulary and to ask something we do not understand." The first is an example of the factor, "Learning procedure of active interaction among students." The second is an example of the factor, "Learning procedure of active interaction with teacher." WW9; The data were presented by tables of factors and categories for students’ responses of the present Sunday School lesson, desirable 33 content of Sunday School lesson, and preferred learning procedures during the Sunday School lesson. Qontent Cpngerns The focus was on students’ opinions on the content of the present Sunday School and on the desired content of the Sunday School lesson. Research Question 1: What egntent cpncenns for the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? Interview Queetign 1: What do you think about the content of the Sunday School lessons you have learned this year? Interview Queatipn 2: What kind of content do you think would make the Sunday School lessons better? Stude’i'n bo h nnfherenSd Sehool lessona. Twenty-one opinions were collected from student subjects. The data were divided into two categories. Under each category, two factors were identified. The number in the parentheses beside each factor indicates the total number of student responses (See Table 3.1). The 2l comments were divided into two categories: an fu and [int Meaningful. Fifteen coments indicated that the present content of the Sunday School lesson was mm. Eight cements were jlpp Muen Bepetitign pf Well-Knpwn Cpntent. Seven comments were Cpntent Not Applieaple tn Life. In the category of Beaujoatul. six comments showed mum. Three comments showed Neu Knpwlegge. Three comments showed Cpntent Applicable tn Life. 34 Table 3.1.--Students’ opinions about the content of the present Sunday School lesson. NOT AN N Too c ‘ o W - n (total citations - 8) I know most of the content. I’ve heard of the content so much . . . feel the Sunday School lesson is very formal. . . . It does not have meaning to me. I think 1 am hearing over again what I already know well. It is so trite that I think so often the same story is told again and is repeated. I have scarcely thought of the content . . . I’ve heard it so often. I do not listen to the content as I know it so well. I feel the well-known facts are repeated every year. Why is it repeated so often? Qpntent Apt Applieable tp Life (total citations = 7) Not concrete, not realistic . . . feel ambiguous . . . not related to what I need . . . too much content-oriented. I wish the content could be related to my life. I don’t think it helps me although we learn about Jesus’ deeds . . . rather prefer to talk with the teacher about daily life. Too strict because the content from the Bible has some sense of rigidity. Is difficult. The conclusion is very simple without exploring. It does not help me as it does not have any direct connection to life. 35 Table 3.l.--Continued. MEANINGFBL N w ow d (total citations - 3) It is good . . .I am learning to be Jesus’ disciple . . . I am learning something new. When we first began to learn the history of Christianity at first, it was difficult and unfamiliar. But I think this kind of special knowledge is necessary. Like the present content . . . teaches me about the Bible little by little . . . learn something new every Sunday. Qontent Applieable tn Lite (total citations - 3) The content of the lesson is helpful when I argue with my friends, "Ah! I must not argue with friends . . . must be patient." Because the teacher always applied the content to Christian life. It is good . . . the teacher always gives testimony after the Sunday School lesson. Felt difficult and unfamiliar . . . the knowledge was helpful to witness Jesus to others. nt ’ o in'on bout sir bl ont n f th unda Schpnl lessen. Thirty classifiable comments were collected from 23 student subjects. The data were divided into two categories. Under each category two factors were identified. The number in parentheses beside each factor shows the total number of students’ responses (see Table 3.2). 36 Table 3.2.--Students’ opinions about the desirable content of the Sunday School lesson. QQNIENI AEPLIQABLE IQ LIEE Esplgring Backgrnund pf tontent (total citations - 6) Jesus’ love and relationship with us so that we can witness Jesus, serve Him, and praise Him. The content dealing with why they should live that way . . . why they get to that situation and how God helped them do that and so on . . the content how we can reflect and use it in our life is important. Wish the content to be deeper. As we hear stories about God and Jesus, tell us clearly what we are expected to learn from them. Rather than stories about what Luther and Calvin did, prefer to learn why they behaved that way. Rather than simple conclusions, I wish to explore more the ”whys" and "hows." gpntent Dealing with Relevant Life Issues (total citations - 16) Concrete and realistic content . . . tell us how we can develop our faith suitable for our age. Wish the content could be related to my life such as friends, to social life, the relationship between opposite sex in the Bible, and knowledge about church life. Teaching to learn God and suggestions for direction in life dealing with daily life. As teachers have lived longer than we have, I’d rather listen to their experiences. The relationship between the world and the Christian difficulties we face in the world. Content helpful to our knowledge to live as his disciples. Jesus’ sufferings from the New Testament . . . problems we are facing . . . for example, issues relating to the opposite sex. 37 Table 3.2.--Continued. What Christians should keep, such as self-restraint and abstinence, as our values are unsettled. Suggesting solutions when we are troubled; this kind of special knowledge is helpful when we hate others. Content which gives me comfort and peace when we study . . . content dealing with school. Dealing with mental growth as a Christian and growing as a member in the society. Jesus’ sufferings--agonies in Mt. Gethsemane which is helpful to my agony and conflict. Content to suggest how to behave and practice as a Christian. Concrete knowledge helpful to life. What to do when I face trials. 0 TENT F HE S UDY Systematie Bible Study (total citations - 3). Out of fragmentary Bible story, I wish the content to be consistent and systematic such as from Genesis to Exodus in the Old and the New Testament. Systematic and detailed Bible study with continuity. Bible knowledge helpful to faith. a ic w t 1 (total citations - 5). Discussion about the Scripture verses we do not know. I learn little by little about the Bible. As a new Christian, the content dealing with what the Bible is, such as how many books in the Old and the New Testament. The present content . . . learn new knowledge about the Bible little by little. As I know nothing about Christian truth, I want to know basic Bible content such as why we were born and how we should live. 38 The 30 comments were categorized into gentent Appligaple to Life and W. Twenty-two coments were t A l . Six comments showed Explnning BaeRgrpund pf tnntent was desired. Sixteen comments were gentent Dealing with Relevant Life Issues. In the category of Spntent of the Bible Study, eight comments were included. Three comments were Systematic Biple Study. Five comments were Basie Knowledge Apput the Biple. r f r n f earn“ P c r These data were analyzed according to the students’ preference of learning procedures. Research Questipn 2: What preference of learning prosedures are students bringing to church education? Interview Question 3: What kinds of presentation of the Sunday School lesson capture your interest? ud- t ’ .. l'oi 1,. 1° ~ -f- -- -. . .r. -«u -s. Twenty-nine comments were collected from 23 subjects. The data were divided into two categories. Under each category two factors were found. The number in parentheses beside each factor indicates the total number of students’ comments (see Table 3.3). The 29 comments were categorized into learning procedures of W and Wm. Nineteen comments concerned Aetiye__1ntenaet1nn. Thirteen comments were Aet1ye_Inteyattipn_Ampng_Students. Six comments were Attiye W. In the category of M23111 fetused_£nesentat1gn, ten comments were included. Four comments 39 were use of Apprppriate Illustnatipn. Six comments were Emphasis on Infprmation. Table 3.3.--Students’ opinions about the preferred learning procedures. E RNI PRO T NT Active Interaptipn Among Students (total citations - 13) Discussion . . . express my opinion as well as learn about how others think. Discussion method. When we talk together and participate together. When we discuss together. When we discuss, we can know other’s thoughts and we can express what we think. Discussion to be able to express what we think. When we discuss. When we debate on Sunday about what we studied. Discussion in a family atmosphere. In a way of dialogue. We take turns talking as we discuss stories. To discuss about the Bible. In a way of dialogue to approach everybody. WWW (total citations - 6) When the teacher asks us questions to reflect on our own ideas after thinking for a while. When the teacher asks us a question to let us think. 40 Table 3.3.--Continued. When we share testimony together with the teacher. When we can express our own feelings rather than answering according to the content. To wish to ask difficult vocabulary and to ask something we do not understand. Teacher’s attitude rather than telling us "that’s not right" please, accept our thoughts, and saying it is not reasonable to think that way . . . suggest some solution in faith as Christian. EARN NG ROC UR F T A R’ R v pR ENT use_oi_Aneronriate_lllustration (total citations a 4) When the teacher expresses some episodes of difficulties in living rather than telling us the Bible strictly. When the teacher applies the content to Christian life. When the teacher relates the content to life. Episodes (examples) to touch us and to be useful to us so that we can accept in our heart who Jesus is, what He did. Emphasis on Informatign (total citations - 6) Teacher drew a conclusion. When a teacher who can talk interestingly, presents it interestingly and is easy to understand. Teacher could make the points clearly . . . tell us what we’re expected to learn. To teach one word to remain in the heart so that we can think continually. We need some professional who can answer our doubts. Concrete explanation to have our faith grow. 41 mmar of Findin r view The following summary shows the results for each research question through the interviews. Research Question 1: What epntent_tpneenns for Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? t de ’ n Students’ opinions showed more responses in the category of Not Meaningful (15) than that of Meaningtul (6). Students’ opinions showed more responses in the factor of leg Mush Repetition of Well- Rnown Qpntent (8) from the category of Meaningful than that of Men Mngwledge (3) from the category of Meaningful. Students’ opinions showed more responses in the factor of Qpntent Met Applisaple tn Lite (7) from the category of Mpt_Meaningtul than that of Qpntent Applieable tn Life (3) from the category of Meaningful. In summary, students’ opinions on the present content showed more responses in the category of Mgt_Meaningiul. Students’ Qpinipns pn Ih3_D§§i£Ahl§_£QnIenL Students’ opinions showed more responses in the category of Qpntent Applisaple tp Life (22) than that of tnntent_pf_Biple_Study (8). Referring to the category of Qpntent Applieable to Life, students’ opinions showed more responses in the factor of Sapient Qealing uitn Relevant Life Issues (16) than that of Esplpninq BaeRgnpund_pf_Qpntent (6). Referring to the category of Qpntent_nf Biple_Study, students’ opinions showed more responses in the factor of Bas1s_Knonledgs_about_tbe_fiihle (5) than that of Sistematis_fiible 42 Study (3). In summary, students’ responses on the desirable content showed that students desired Qpntent Qealing uitn Releyant Life Issues. WW. Mn wledge About the Bible. and MW in that order. Rese rc e ' : What preference of learning prgeedures for the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? Students’ Qpinipns an the r er e e rni r ce r 5 Students’ opinions showed more responses in the category of Aetive Intenactipn (19) than that of .IQQQDQLS’ Clearly Focused Eyesentatipn (10). Referring to the category of Aetiye_intenaetign, students’ opinions showed more responses in the factor of AeLive Interaetipn Among Students (13) than that of Aetive Intenactinn Mith leaenen (6). Referring to the category of leachers’ Qlearly Foeused Presentation, students’ opinions showed more responses in the factor of Emphasis on Infomatipn (6) than that of Use at Appropriate Illustratipn (4). In summary, students’ responses on the preferred learning procedures showed that they preferred Aetive Intenaetion Ampng Students, Aetive Interactipn Ritn leather, £nphasis_gn lntpnnatipn, and Use at Appnppniate Illustratipn, in that order. CHAPTER IV PROCEDURE AND FINDINGS FOR THE QUESTIONNAIRE PHASE The purposes of the study were to investigate students’ views on the Sunday School lesson in Korean Evangelical Church (KEC) and to confirm the findings in other denominations as well as in KEC. The interview phase involved a limited sample. Generalizability was thus an issue, requiring a larger sample to be surveyed. To confirm the validity of the evidence found through the interviews, a questionnaire in the form of a series of Likert scale opinion items was used. Chapter IV deals with the research procedure, methodol- ogy, and analysis of the findings of the second phase of the study, the questionnaire. W The study was designed to answer two questions regarding high school students attending church Sunday School. 1. What spntent sgneerns for the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? 2. What preference of W during the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? 43 44 E .!. E I! S 1 The samples for the questionnaire were drawn from 45 different churches of five different denominations in nine districts of Seoul. Thus, the number of persons was larger than that of the interview phase. In addition, rather than being drawn from only one denomina— tion, students from five denominations responded to the question- naire. The five Protestant denominations were Presbyterian Church (Hapdong) (Presbyterian [H] denomination), Presbyterian Church (Tonghap) (Presbyterian [T] denomination), Korean Presbyterian Church (Presbyterian [K] denomination), Korean Evangelical Church (Evangelical denomination), and Korean Methodist Church (Methodist denomination). For each denomination the samples and the percentage the samples represent of the population were as follows: Denomination Population Sample Samples as percentage of population Presbyterian (H) 900 244 26.89 Presbyterian (T) 982 216 22.00 Presbyterian (K) 347 138 39.77 Evangelical 690 236 33.90 Methodist 580 201 34.48 Total 3,499 1,035 29.44 W To identify all the possible churches of the population samples, a 1987 directory of the Protestant churches in Korea was 45 used. To draw churches from five different denominations from 9 out of 17 districts in Seoul, 45 churches were randomly selected. According to the criteria, churches that used their own denominational Sunday School lesson were identified by telephone. From each district five different denominational churches were selected randomly. After selecting churches, each church was called to ask permission to administer the questionnaire. .After getting permission, the researcher and students who had been trained to administer the questionnaire visited those churches to administer the questionnaire. A letter expressed the purpose and the reason of the research to teachers in charge of the high school student group, with 30 questionnaires assigned to each church. In the letter, teachers were requested to select equal numbers of female and male students and to randomly select students in different grade levels. Teachers randomly chose the classes1 to do the questionnaire so that they could answer the questionnaires during the Sunday School lesson hour. This reduced the sampling bias in that not just volunteers were included. In churches that did not use all the 30 questionnaires, the remainder were returned. W The questionnaire was developed to confirm the validity of the findings from the interviews. Twelve factors under six categories emerged from the analysis of the interviews. For each factor, three 1Each class was said to have a representative distribution of students who attended church regularly and occasionally. 46 items were developed for the questionnaire. A 36-item questionnaire was thus composed. a i i k l The purpose of the questionnaire phase was to confirm the validity of the findings. The items were designed to elicit Likert scale responses. Following are the major advantages of the Likert scale: The Likert scale provides more precise information about the respondents’ degree of agreement or disagreement, and respondents usually prefer this to a simple agree/disagree score" (Blalock, 1968, p. 141). Further, "the subtler and deeper ramifications of an attitude can be explored” (Blalock, 1968, p. 141). The Likert scale used in this study had five points. While several different wordings were used, the connotation of each in Korean was: strongly agree, agree, slightly agree, disagree, and strongly disagree. The items were such that a higher score on the scale represented a favorable attitude, and a lower score meant a less favorable attitude. For example, a score of 5 (strongly agree) meant a more favorable attitude than did a score of 4 (agree) or 3 (slightly agree). ti f v lo Itens fun Eaen Factpn Three items were used for each factor to increase the reliability of the factor score value. “Quite often, you will want to ask several questions that have the same set of answer categories. This is typically the case whenever the Likert response categories are used” (Babbie, 1979, p. 321). Furthermore, the three 47 items can be used to provide some control against the rival hypotheses resulting from inquiry based ("1 self-report. "Although as a rule self-report can be obtained easily and economically, people often bias the information they offer about themselves" (Borg & Gall, 1983, p. 465). Item Qpntent pf the Questipnnaine In writing the items of the questionnaire, one factor in each category was the focus or concept behind three items. Eight factors from four categories of two interview questions constituted the item content for Research Question 1. Four factors from two categories of one interview question constituted the item content for Research Question 2. Research Question 1: What epntent concerns for the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? udent ’ ini ns t e Here, students’ responses were categorized into two categories, Mot Meaningful and Meaningful. Under the Mnt_Meaningful category, two factors, lop Much Repetitipn pf Mell-Knpyn Qpntent and Qpntent Mgt_Applieaple_tp_Life, were the content of items. Two factors, Men mum and MW. under the category of Meaningful were the content of items. Factor 1: Too Much Repetition of Well-Known Content Factor 2: Content Not Applicable to Life Factor 3: New Knowledge Factor 4: Content Applicable to Life 48 Studen ’ ' io on he Desirable Bentent Students’ responses were categorized into two categories, Bpntent Applieable tn Life and Bontent of Bible Study. Two factors, Exploring Backgrnund pf Buntent and Bontent Qealing uitn Releyant Life Issues, under the category of Bpntent_Applieaple_tp_Life were the content of items. Two factors, Systematis Bible Study and Basin Knowledge About the Bible, under the category of Bpntent pf Bible Study were the content of items. Factor 5: Exploring Background of Content Factor 6: Content Dealing with Relevant Life issues Factor 7: Systematic (Sequential) Bible Study Factor 8: Basic Knowledge About the Bible Research Question 2: What preference of learning prpeedures during the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? Students’ Qpinipns an the Preferred Learning Prpeedure Students’ responses were categorized into two categories, A_t_1_e_I__e.r:as_t_o_c 'v nt i n and Wynn. Under Aetiye Interaetion, two factors, r wi leaener and Aetiye_interaetipn_Ampng_Students, were the content of items. Under leaeners’ Blearly Epcused Rresentatipn, two factors, WW and mm. were the content of items. 49 Factor 9: Active Interaction Among Students Factor 10: Active Interaction With Teachers Factor 11: Use of Appropriate Illustration Factor 12: Emphasis on Information ' el'n s r r i In writing items, the statements must be clear, simple, concise, and straightforward (Likert, 1932). Ambiguous or vague words must be avoided because one may agree with one part but may disagree with other parts. Furthermore, the statements should be colloquial and familiar. However, the statements should not make the purpose of the inquiry obvious (Blalock, I968). To prevent respondents from misreading the items and providing wrong answers, statements are given different orientations (Babbie, 1983). As attitude statements, the items are related to feelings, hopes, wishes, hates, fears, and happiness (Blalock, 1968). Neutral statements do not work well in the Likert scale (Moser, 1958). As is the nature of an attitude test, each statement should allow the respondent to take his or her stand between two clearly opposed alternatives (Likert, 1932). The number of positively and negatively worded items must be roughly equal so that respondents consider them carefully (Moser, 1958). W Four demographic items were identified to examine relationships within the data: denomination, gender, grade level of students, and years of church attendance. 50 W The items were constructed based on the findings of students’ responses in Korean. The 36 items were submitted to a panel of three persons to discuss the validity of the items. The three members of the panel were as follows: a seminary professor in Christian education who had been involved in curriculum development of the Sunday School lesson for more than 20 years; a youth pastor who had worked for the high school students in KEC fur ten years; and a youth pastor who had worked with the high school students for eight years in KEC and at the time of the study worked for the education department in the headquarters of KEC. They were asked to check the items according to three judgments: "not relevant,” ”not clear," and "relevant and clear." The criterion for the validity of each item was the total agreement of the panel on an item as "relevant and clear." When one of them checked an item as "not clear" or "not relevant," the item was revised. The item was then reviewed again by the panel. The 36 items finally used were all thus approved as ”relevant and clear“ by the three panel members. tr i After the validity test, the three items of one factor were interspersed regularly at every twelfth interval. For example, Items 1, l3, and 25 were the three items asking the same concept for Factor 1. 51 P' t h s i n ' v m To make a questionnaire that comunicated with students in their language and to determine if the statements were clearly understood as the researcher intended, two pilot studies were conducted. In the pilot study, spaces were provided at the end of the questionnaire so that students could write their comments about the items on the questionnaire. Two pilot studies were conducted with 30 high school students each. After ‘the first. pilot study, the five scales were revised because 7 out of 30 students said that the wording of the five scales was too uniform. The expressions for the five scales used in all the statements of the items were: (I) absolutely true, (2) true, (3) I don’t know, (4) not true, and (5) absolutely not true. In Korean, these expressions carried the same connotation as strongly agree, agree, undecided, disagree, and strongly disagree. Due to the responses in the first pilot study, those expressions were revised for the second pilot study. They were (I) absolutely true, (2) true, (3) I don’t know, (4) not true, and (5) absolutely not true for the items about the present content. However, the expressions for the items asking about the desirable content and the preferred learning procedure were revised to the following: (1) always necessary, (2) necessary, (3) undecided, (4) not necessary, and (5) never necessary. After the second pilot study, 6 out of the 30 students said that the expression "1 don’t know" (undecided) was not good to express their opinions. Instead, they suggested revising it into 52 another expression. Considering these responses from the second pilot study, the expressions were revised again. The expressions for the scales were revised to the following: (1) always true, (2) usually true, (3) sometimes true, (4) almost never true, and (5) never true for the items asking about the present content. The expressions for the scales asking about the desirable content and the preferred learning procedures were revised to the following: (1) always necessary, (2) frequently necessary, (3) sometimes necessary, (4) almost never necessary, and (5) never necessary. Two students said that Item 22 was not clear. The researcher added the implied subject ”students" to make the meaning more clear. In Item 9 the implied subject, ”the Sunday School lesson,” was also added. After ‘those 'revisions, the pilot study for the instrument development was finished. W The researcher used trained seminary students to help in collecting data. She explained to them the purpose of the study and the procedure tot deliver the questionnaire. In l2 out of 45 churches, 30 questionnaire were collected; in 16, 24 to 28 question- naires were collected; and in 17, 22 to 10 questionnaires were col- lected. W The questionnaire data were analyzed through frequency distributions of all the responses on 12 factors and the 53 significance level by chi-square test between each factor and the independent variables. The four independent variables that were tested for possible relationship were denomination, gender, grade level of students, and years of church attendance. Cross-tabulation was chosen as a method of data display to show the independent and dependent variables. Chi-square test was used to test for significance of differ- ences because the form of frequency in these data was in the form of category variables. Contingency coefficients are useful when the sample is large and when the chi-square test is available. After chi-square was calculated, the degrees of freedom were calculated. To determine whether a particular chi-square value had reached the level of significance, the chi-square table was used and the cut-off point for assigned significance was .l0 (Borg & Gall, l983). To discuss the generalizability of the findings, the measures of variability, mean and standard deviation, especially mean scores, were used. Findings The findings were analyzed for the two research questions. The responses of the students for each factor were calculated, and the mean was found. Accordingly, the average of responses was used to discuss whether the students’ responses in the questionnaire phase confirmed the findings of the interview phase. The categories and the factors found in the interview phase to be discussed here are presented in Figure 4.1. 54 .mmcga 3mm>gmucw mzu cw :omumsgoecu co mwmmcasm mcowumgpmsppu mumvgaocga< eo mm: Locummh saw: coppumcmucm m>wwu< mucousum acos< cowpomcmpch m>wpo< m_nam 8:» ozon< amuapzocg usmam scapm apnea atomsmSJAm mmzmmH mew; o=a>mpmm not: m=__awo “caocoo pcwucoo mo ucaocmxumm mcmcopaxm «can as mpnaompaa< pcmocoo «mumpzocx 3oz «to; o» apnauwpaa< 3oz scmocoo ucmpcoo czocx -Fpmz to cowpmumaam 58:2 cop ”NF m moo LCD q- .0 (V) N O. F umcm>oomwu mgouume use mmwgommumuuu.ppe mgsmvm goaumd Lagoon genome Lopes; Louomd Lagoon cope»; Louumd couumn Loaded genome Louown copumpcmmmga ummsuod apcmmpu .mcmnumm» copuumgmucm m>muu< 33m 8 z .5 9:. .6 23:8 8.: 8. «38.. 32 3.528 ermcmcmmz szmcwcmoz goz mmmzamooma 92H nzm 05.0 00.0 0m.0 00.0 50.0 00.0 00.0 00.— 05.0 —0.0 00 50.0 00.0 n5.N —5.N mm.~ N0.N 00.~ 00.0 0m.~ 00.N z 5N 5N mp 0N mN 00 0N mp 00 0N z ~5.0 05.0 05.0 00.0 e0.0 55.0 50.0 05.0 00.0 05.0 00 M5.~ 55.0 «0.0 05.~ pm.N MN.M 05.0 0—.n 0N.n cm.n 2 ~05 5N5 v0 005 mvp ~05 app 00 005 new 2 Loccou 00.0 05.0 00.0 M5.0 05.0 05.0 00.0 05.0 05.0 50.0 00 mm.~ 55.N 05.0 00.~ 00.0 55.0 05.0 ~—.m 05.0 No.0 2 50 mp— 05 0—— 00 00 cup n5 ppp 00 2 05.0 05.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 05.0 p5.0 nm.0 00.0 «5.0 00 00.N 05.0 M5.N 00.0 mm.~ mm.n m~.m 00.n 0N.m m~.n 2 NM 00 0— 0m 00 NM 50 m— 00 00 2 05.0 N5.0 v5.0 «5.0 ~5.0 00.0 55.0 05.0 05.0 n5.0 00 6a 8.~ 3.~ a; 88 :5 as 3..” 2.... 8..” : Hwnwnawwawm 50 55 05 mm 50 00 05 p5 00 50 2 00.0 00.0 05.0 m5.0 00.0 00.0 M5.0 05.0 05.0 50.0 00 p5.~ 55.~ 55.N m0.~ 00.N v~.m 05.0 c0.~ 0—.m 0—.n z 05 50— N0 N0 00 00 00' mm 00 50 2 00.0 55.0 M5.0 05.0 00.0 50.0 «5.0 05.0 05.0 05.0 00 v0.~ c5.~ 05.~ 05.N no.0 0N.m 55.0 05.0 —~.m pN.m z comuacmeocoo 005 QMN 5MP m—N New 00w mmm 0MP QPN ~v~ z c: E 3 c: C c: -mew . wmwa> covcou newton cwpcou uwmww 1 wmwo> cm_cou cowwou cupcou apnowga> : z w” u -anmmcm -aammta uxnmoga cu : VF u -xamoug -anmocm -aamusa acoucmauo=_ ouwo cu mpnmumpna< uoz acmucou ucoucou czocxuppm: we cowu,uoq~¢ coax ooh .pauocpcaoz go: we auomouuu as» ea museum coax--.—.e «pack 57 QateM—Meanjngful. In this category, two factors, My annledge, and gentent Applicable to Life, were included. The average responses of the students with the four independent variables were varied in the five denominations. In Factor 3, Men Mngnledge, the average responses of the students in the four denominations showed lower levels of ”agree" ranges (M - 3.62, 3.54, 3.61, 3.50) except one denomination, the Presbyterian (K) denomination showing upper level of ”slightly agree" range (M - 3.45) (Table 4.2). Note, however, the numeric values are not great even though the categories are different. In Factor 4, Bentent Applieaple to Life, the average responses of the students showed upper level of "slightly agree" ranges in the five denominations (M - 3.47, 3.40, 3.20, 3.36, 3.24) (Table 4.2). Thus, students saw that the content was usually Meaningful for Factor 3 except in one denomination, while they tended to see that the content was sometimes Meaningful for Factor 4. Students’ responses in the four denominations on Factor 3, MeLannledge, showed that they usually agreed that the content had Men_annledge, while in the Presbyterian (K) denomination they tended to agree that the content sometimes had Men Knowledge. Students’ responses in the five denominations on Factor 4, tpntent_Applieaple_tn_Life, showed that they tended to see that the content was sometimes applicable to life. Therefore, the average responses of the students appeared to confirm that the present content was sometimes and usually Meaningful for Factor 3 and sometimes Meaningful for Factor 4. 5E! 95.9 95.9 55.9 95.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 95.9 95.9 99 59.9 99.9 99.9 59.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 9 99. 99. .9. 99. 99. 99. 99. .9. 99. 99. 9 95.9 99.9 99.9 95.9 59.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 55.9 99 9999999999 9..9 99.9 9..9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .5.9 99.9 9 999999 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 z .9 9999. 95.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 95.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 59.9 99.9 99 9..9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 59.9 95.9 99.9 a 99 99 9. 99 99 99 59 9. 99 99 2 99.9 .5.9 95.9 95.9 95.9 99.9 .5.9 55.9 59.9 95.9 99 .9.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 95.9 9 99. 99. 99 99. 99. 99. 99. 99 99. 99. z .9.9 95.9 95.9 95.9 55.9 59.9 99.9 59.9 95.9 99.9 99 999999 9..9 99.9 9..9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 59.9 .9.9 x 99 9.. 95 9.. 99 99 ... 95 9.. 99 9 99.9 99.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 59.9 99.9 99.. .9.9 95.9 99 .9.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 59.9 99.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 x 99 59 9. 99 59 99 99 9. 99 59 2 55.9 99.9 95.9 99.9 95.9 99.9 95.9 99.9 95.9 55.9 99 9..9 59.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 59.9 59.9 x ”WHMM9WW9WM 99 95 .5 99 99 99 95 .5 99 59 2 99.9 .9.9 95.9 95.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 95.9 95.9 99 59.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 x 95 .9. 99 99 99 99 99 99 .9 99 2 95.9 95.9 95.9 95.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 59.9 95.9 95.9 99 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 59.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 : 99.999.99999 999 999 99. 9.9 999 999 999 99. 9.9 999 z 9. .9. .9. .9. 5.. .9. 99. .99 9M 99. .99 1 1 weou c9959» c99cuu 1 1 c9999u copgmu :99Luu vogue: 9.um=9>u 1>amoca 1999959 1999999 995992 9.9m:9>m 19999.9 19999.9 1xa9ocq ucwwummmw9_ 9999 99 9.99u9—99< 9:99:99 mmcmpzocx zmz .Paumcwcmo: 9o agomouou ecu co mmgoum cooz11.~.e upnmh 59 sir on nt Two categories, Bpntent_Applieaple_tn_Life and Qpntent pf the Bible Study, were included. t or : n i bl f . In this category, two factors, Explpring BacRgrpund pf gentent, and Qpntent Qealing with Relevant Life Issues, were included. The average responses of the students on Factor 5, Explpring BaeRgrpund of Cpntent, in the five denominations showed upper level of "agree" ranges (M = 4.42, 4.37, 4.18, 4.25, 4.26), while those of the students on Factor: 6, tontent Qealing with Relevant Life Issues, showed lower level of "agree" levels (M 9 3.64, 3.60, 3.54) and upper level of ”slightly agree" ranges (M - 3.38, 3.46) (Table 4.3). Thus, students’ responses in the five denominations on Factor 5 showed that they desired frequently that the content include appropriate background material. Students’ responses in the five denominations on Factor 6 showed that some differences were present from each denomination in the average responses of the students. In the Presbyterian (H) denomination, the Presbyterian (T) denomination, and the Methodist denomination, students’ responses on Factor 6 showed that they desired frequently the content to include relevant life issues, while in the Presbyterian (K) denomination and the Evangelical denomination students’ responses on Factor 6 showed that they tended to desire the content sometimes to include relevant life issues. Therefore the average responses of students appeared to confirm that Buntent Applieaple tp Life is 6C! 95.9 99.9 95.9 95.9 99.9 95.9 95.9 95.9 59.9 99.9 99 99.9 59.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 : 99. 99. 99 99. 59. 99. 99. 99. 99. 99. 2 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 95.9 99 99:99:99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 9..9 99.9 99.9 a 99.999 99 99 99 99 99 99 .9 99 99 99 z 99 9:99. 99.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99 .9.9 99.9 9..9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 x 99 99 9. 99 99 99 99 9. 99 99 2 95.9 99.9 .5.9 .9.9 99.9 95.9 95.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 99 .9.9 59.9 99.9 99.9 59.9 99.9 99.9 ...9 59.9 99.9 x 99. 99. 99 99. 59. 99. 99. 99 99. 59. 9 95.9 95.9 95.9 95.9 99.9 95.9 .5.9 95.9 .5.9 99.9 99 .99999 99.9 99.9 59.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 x 59 9.. 95 ... 99 99 9.. 95 ... 59 2 99.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 59.9 59.9 99.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 99 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 x .9 99 9. 99 99 99 59 9. 99 99 9 95.9 95.9 95.9 95.9 .9.9 .5.9 99.9 99.9 59.9 99.9 99 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 : mwnwnawwawu 99 95 99 99 59 99 55 95 99 99 2 95.9 99.9 55.9 99.9 95.9 95.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 9..9 9..9 99.9 99.9 99.9 x 99 .9. 99 99 .9 99 .9. 99 99 .9 9 95.9 95.9 95.9 99.9 59.9 95.9 95.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 99 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 9..9 59.9 99.9 : 99.999.99999 99. 999 99. 5.9 999 999 999 59. 9.9 999 z 590 590 5:. 5x0 590 5:0 999 pau :9 999 pug 1 1 .59» :owgmu :995ou 1 1 :99999 :999ou cawcou vogue: 9.omcm>u 19:99.9 19:99.9 19:99.9 vogue: 9.09:9>u 1999999 19:99:; 19:90.9 «cwwmmmmwn~ 993995 99.9 9:9>u.m¢ :99: ocmpowo 9:99:99 u:ou:ou 9o eczoemxuam 9:..opnxu .9999 cu v.99u9—99< 9:99:9u mo 9:ommuau on» :o 9ocoU9 :99211.m.e 99:9» 61 frequently necessary for Factor 5 and sometimes necessary in the two denominations and frequently necessary in the three denominations for Factor 6. o : n t le d . In this category, two factors, m ' ' ib , and Bastannledge abput the Bible, were included. The average responses of the students on Factor 7, Systematie Bible Study, showed upper level and lower level of ”slightly agree" ranges in general in the four denominations (M - 3.40, 2.90, 3.34, 3.38) except in the one denomination, the Presbyterian (H) denomination, showing lower level of "agree" range (M - 3.52) (Table 4.4). Note, however, that the numeric values were not great even though the categories were different. The average responses of the students on Factor 8, Basis Knpwledge abput the Bible, showed middle level of “agree" ranges in the five denominations (M - 4.15, 4.08, 3.72, 3.93, 4.03) (Table 4.4). Thus, students’ responses on Factor 7 in the five denominations showed that some differences were present from each denomination in the average responses of the students. In the Presbyterian (H) denomination, students’ responses on Factor 7 showed that they desired Systematie_Bible_Study frequently. In the Presbyterian (T) denomination, the Presbyterian (K) denomination, the Evangelical denomination, and the Methodist denomination, students’ responses on Factor 7 showed that they tended to desire Systematie_Bible_Study sometimes. Students’ responses on Factor 8 in the five denominations showed that they frequently desired BasiLKnanedge 62I 99.9 95.9 99.9 .5.9 99.9 .9.. 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.. 99 99.9 99.9 95.9 59.9 9..9 99.9 99.9 99.9 59.9 .9.9 z 99. 99. 99. 99. 99. 99. 99. 99 99. 99. 2 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.. 59.9 99.9 99 99:99:99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 59.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 x 99.999 99 99 99 99 99 99 .9 99 99 99 z .9 9.99. 99.9 .5.9 99.9 95.9 99.9 99.. 95.9 99.9 59.9 99.9 99 99.9 9..9 99.9 99.9 9..9 .9.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 95.9 x 99 99 9. 99 99 99 99 9. 99 99 2 99.9 95.9 95.9 95.9 99.9 59.9 59.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99 99.9 99.9 99.9 9..9 9..9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 x 99. .9. 99 99. 99. .9. .9. 99 99. 59. z 99 99.9 99.9 59.9 95.9 99.9 99.. 99.9 99.. 99.9 99.. 99 .99: 9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 9..9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 a 99 9.. 95 9.. 99 99 9.. 95 9.. 99 2 99.9 99.9 99.9 55.9 95.9 9... 99.. 99.9 59.9 59.9 99 .9.9 .9.9 99.9 9..9 59.9 9..9 99.9 59.9 99.9 99.9 x 99 59 9. 99 59 99 59 9. 99 99 2 99.9 95.9 99.9 95.9 95.9 .9.. 99.9 .9.. 99.9 99.. 99 ...9 99.9 95.9 9..9 ...9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 : ”WNMN9WW9WM 99 95 .5 99 59 99 95 95 99. 99 2 99.9 95.9 95.9 95.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.. 99.9 99.9 99 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 x 99 99. .9 99 99 99 .9. 99 99 .9 2 99.9 95.9 99.9 95.9 .9.9 .9.. 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99 99.9 99.9 95.9 99.9 9..9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 : 99.999.99999 .99 999 59. 9.9 999 999 999 99. 9.9 999 z 1 1 :99.ou :99.ou :99.mu 1 1 :99.ou :99.mu :99.99 a 99.9 909992 9pmmca>m 1999o.9 19999.9 19999.. 99999: wpom:o>m 19999.. 19999.9 1999u.a 9:9wm999999 9.9.9 999 99999 9999.2999 9.999 99999 9.9.9 5.9.9999999. 9.99999999 .99399 9.99m 90 acmucou .9 9.999999 999 :o 99.999 :9mz11.e.9 9.99» 63 bout i e. Therefore, the average responses of students appear to confirm that they desired Content of the Bible Study for Factor 7 frequently in the Presbyterian (H) denomination and sometimes in the other four denominations. The average responses of students appear to confirm that the category of Bible Study for Factor 8 was seen as frequently necessary. Preferred Learning Eroeedgres Two categories were included: Active Interaction and Ieeenensl Cl ar c d Pre ' n. Qeteggry: Active_lgteteetien. In this category, two factors, Active Intereetien Among Stgdents and Aetjye Intereetien with Teachers, were included. The average responses of the students with the four independent variables in the five denominations showed "agree" ranges with several "strongly agree" ranges in this category. The average responses of the students for Factor 9, Aggie Intereetjgg Among Stggente, showed middle level of "agree” ranges (M - 4.06, 3.88, 3.95, 3.90, 3.92), while those of the students for Factor 10, Aetjve Interaetjgn with [eeehe:, showed upper level of "agree" ranges (M - 4.46, 4.31, 4.26, 4.31, 4.34) (Table 4.5). Thus, students’ responses in the five denominations on Factor 9 showed that they frequently preferred the learning procedures with active interaction among students. Students’ responses in the five denominations on Factor 10 showed that they frequently preferred the learning procedures with active interaction with teacher. 64 90.0 00.0 ...0 00.0 90.0 00.0 .0.0 00.0 00.0 .0. 00 00.9 00.9 .0.0 00.9 09.9 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 90.0 2 09. e0. 00 00. 00. 09. 00. 00 00. 00. 2 00.0 09.0 00.0 00.0 09.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 .0.0 00.0 00 999909999< 00.9 0..9 00.9 00.9 09.9 90.9 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.9 x 09.300 00 0c 00 00 00 00 09 00 00 00 z .o 9.990 00.0 00.0 00.0 09.0 00.0 00.. 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00 0..v 00.9 00.9 00.9 .9.9 09.0 90.0 00.0 00.0 .0.0 x 00 00 0. 00 00 00 00 0. 00 00 2 00.0 00.0 .0.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 09.0 00.0 00.0 ...0 00 00.9 00.9 0..v 00.9 .0.9 00.0 00.0 00.9 09.0 90.9 2 .0. 00. v0 00. 0c. 00. 00. 00 90. 09. 2 .90990 90.0 00.0 .0.0 09.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 90.0 00.0 00.0 00 09.9 00.9 00.9 00.9 00.9 90.9 00.9 00.0 00.9 00.9 t 00 0.. 00 0.. 00 00 0.. 0. ... 00 2 00.0 09.0 00.. .0.0 .0.0 00.0 ...0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00 00.9 00.9 0..9 0..e .0.9 00.9 90.9 00.9 00.0 0..9 z 00 .0 0. 00 .0 00 00 0. 00 .0 z 90H0 00H0 00H0 00H0 ¢0H0 00H0 v0H0 00H0 00H0 00H0 00 99:90:90 .9 00 e 09 e 00 e we 9 09 c 00 9 00 0 0. v 00 0 00 v z .9>90 909.0 00 .0 00 00 00 00 0. .9 00 .0 2 00.0 00.0 99.0 09.0 00.0 .0.0 09.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00 00.9 00.0 0..v .0.e 09.9 99.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.9 x 00 00. .0 00 00 00 .0. 00 00 .0 2 00.0 00.0 09.0 09.0 00.0 00.0 .9.0 00.0 00.0 99.0 00 90.9 .0.9 00.9 .0.9 09.9 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.9 2 09.999.50990 000 900 00. 0.0 090 000 000 00. 0.0 .90 z 00 E 00 c: E 00 99. .99 :9..9u :9..99 :9..9u 99. . .99. :9..99 :9..99 =9..9u 9 1 1 . . . 1 1 . . .09..9> 09099: ..90:9>0 10099.9 10099.0 10099.9 000.9: ..90:9>0 10099.9 10099.0 10099.9 9090099909. .90999. 09.2 99.999.999. 9>..9< 99:90:90 0coe< 99.999.999. 9>..u< .co.uum.9uc. 9>.99< .9 0.909999 90. :9 99.999 099:11.0.v 9.09. 65 Therefore, the average responses of students appear to confirm that the preferred learning procedure was Active Interaction. t or: T hers’ learl us d P s ta '0 . In this category. two factors. WW and 011205.19 gn__ln£grmatign, were included. The average responses of the students with the four independent variables in the five denominations for Factor 11, use_gf_App:gpriatg_111ustratjon, showed middle level of "agree" ranges (M - 4.17, 3.97, 3.90, 3.97, 4.06), while those of the students with the four independent variables in the four denomination showed upper level of "agree" ranges and lower level of "strongly agree” range (M - 4.50, 4.39, 4.33, 4.31) except in the Presbyterian (K) denomination, showing middle level of ”agree ranges (M - 4.07) (Table 4.6). Thus, students’ responses in the five denominations on Factor 11 showed that they usually preferred the learning procedures using appropriate illustrations. Students’ responses 'hi the five denominations on Factor 12 showed that they usually preferred the learning procedures emphasizing the points clearly. Therefore, the average responses of students appear to confirm that the preferred learning procedure was frequently W W. 665 9..9 9..9 99.9 9..9 99.9 ...9 9..9 99.9 ...9 99.9 99 99.9 99.9 9..9 .9.9 .9.9 .9.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 ...9 x 99. 99. 99 99. 99. 99. 99. 99. 99. 99. 2 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 9..9 ...9 .9.9 99 99:99:99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 ...9 .9.9 99.9 .9.9 a 99.999 9. .9 9. 99 99 9. .9 .9 99 99 z .9 9.99. 99.9 9..9 .9.9 .9.9 .9.9 099.9 99.9 9..9 99.9 99.9 99 ...9 99.9 ...9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 x 9. 99 9. 99 9. 99 9. 9. 9. 9. 2 99.9 9..9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 9..9 .9.9 99.9 .9.9 99 ...9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 9..9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 a .9. 9.. 99 99. 99. 99. 9.. 99 99. 99. 2 99.9 ...9 99.9 9..9 9..9 9..9 ...9 ...9 9..9 .9.9 99 .99999 99.9 99.9 ...9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 9..9 : .9 9.. 9. ... 99 99 9.. 9. ... 99 z 9..9 ...9 99.9 99.9 ...9 99.9 ...9 .9.9 .9.9 99.9 99 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 ...9 z 99 .9 9. 99 .9 99 .9 9. 9. .9 2 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 ...9 9..9 9..9 99.9 99.9 99 9 99.9 .9.9 ...9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 2 flWHMN=WW9W9 99 9. 9. 99 .9 99 9. .. 99 .9 z .9.9 ...9 9..9 .9.9 9..9 .9.9 9..9 9..9 9..9 99.9 99 99.9 9..9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 9 9. 99. 99 .9 99 99 .9. .9 99 99 z 9..9 ...9 99.9 ...9 99.9 9..9 9..9 9..9 ...9 99.9 99 99.9 .9.9 .9.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 .9.9 99.9 .9.9 ...9 z 99.999.99999 99. 99. 99. 9.9 .99 .9. 99. 99. 9.. 99. z .9. ... .1. .9. ... .9. 99. .99 :9..99 99..99 99..99 99. .99 :9..99 99..99 99..99 1990992 1..9099>0 100w9.9 100w9.9 100w9.9 199099: 1..9099>0 100w9.9 10099.9 100w9.9 9cwwmwmmmou 999995.999. 99 9.990950 99.99.999... 9999.99.999 .9 990 .99.99.99=... 9999999 0..99.0 .9.90999. 99 0.909999 909 99 99.999 999211.0.9 9.09. 67 iffer es 0 v on he e en nt ri b n Dependent Varjebles The level of significance observed between the independent variables and the dependent variables, 12 factors, on the basis of chi-square value is presented here for the two research questions. Research Question 1: what centent cencerne for the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? content cencenns. Significant differences between students’ concerns on the content of the Sunday School lesson and the independent variables are presented on the present content and the desired content. 1. Present content. Significant differences among the inde- pendent variables and the present content are presented here. Denomination. Significant, differences were present between denominations and Ccntent Not Appliceble tn Ljfe (p - 0.0739) in the category of Net Meanjngfnl and flew—Kngfledge (p - 0.0526) and gentent Applicable In Life (p - 0.0226) in the category of fleening; :n1_ (Table 4.7). Thus, students’ responses were significantly different in each denomination for Factors 2, 3, and 4 on the present content. Grade level of students. In the Presbyterian (K) denomination (p - 0.050), the Evangelical denomination (p - 0.0693), and the Methodist denomination (p - 0.0164), the significant differences on 1nn_Mncn_3enec1c1nn_c£_fle11;§ncnn_§cncent were present (Table 4.7). In the Presbyterian (K) denomination (p - 0.0063), the significant difference was present on (leg Knewledge (Table 4.7). Thus, 6&3 .99—99999: 9 m ..99..9999>u . v .99. 999.999999.9 - n .9». 99..999999.9 - ~ .92. 999.999999.9 . 99 9..99.9 9999.9 9 .9999... 99999.9 9999.9 9 99.99.99 9 99999.9 9999.9 9 999.9.99 9..99.9 9999.9 9 99999.99 9 999. .9.99.9 9.99.9 9 99999.9. 99999.9 9999.9 9 99.99.99 9 -nuwwuu 9.99.9 9999.9 9 99999.9 .9.99.9 899.9 9 9.999.99 9 .99.;9. 99999.9 9999.9 9 .9999.9. 99999.9 9999.9 9 99.99.99 . 9.999.9 9999.9 9 99999.9. 9999..9 9999.9 9 .9999.9 99999.9 9999.9 9 .9.99.9. 9 9 9 999999 9 99999.9 9..9.9 9 .9.99.9. 99999.9 9999.9 9 99999.9. 999.9.9 ..99.9 9 9999... . 99999.9 99.9.9 9 9999..9. 9 ..999.9 9999.9 9 999.9.9. 9 99999999 99999.9 9999.9 9 9.999..9 999.9.9 9999.9 9 99999 .9 9 .9 .9.9. 999.9 9 . 9999.9 9999.9 9. 99.9..99 99.9..9 9999.9 9. 9992.99 9999.9 99.9.9 9. 999...99 -...fiwnm. 9 ...99.9 .9 99 9 ...99.9 .9 99 9 ...99.9 .9 9. 9 ...99.9 .9 99 9999999 ..9> -999999 .9999. 9..9 99 999999—99< 9999999 999993992 :92 9..9 99 999999999< 9oz 999999u 9999999 9:99.-..9: .9 99.9.9999. 9999 99. .9999999 99999.9 999 999 99999..9> 9999999999— 999 9993999 99999.9.99o-u.~.9 9.99» 69 students’ responses were significantly different in grade level of students for Factors 1 and 3 on the present content. Gender. In the Presbyterian (H) denomination (p - 0.0211) and the Methodist denomination (p = 0.062), a significant difference was present on Too M Re e t f H l- w t and teptept_flpt Appljceble tp Life in the Methodist denomination (p - 0.0354) (Table 4.7). In the Methodist denomination a significant difference was present on flew Knpwlegge (p - 0.0908) (Table 4.7). In the Presbyterian (H) denomination (p 9 0.0113) and the Methodist denomination (p = 0.0309), a significant difference was present on gontent Applicable tp Life (Table 4.7). Thus, students’ responses were significantly different in gender for Factors 1, 2, 3, and 4 on the present content. Years of church attendance. In the five denominations significant differences were present on leg Much Repetitipn pf Eel!- Known Content (p = 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0008, 0.0000, 0.0000) (Table 4.7). In four denominations (p = 0.0800, 0.0976, 0.0000, 0.0666), the Presbyterian (H) denomination, the Presbyterian (K) denomination, the Evangelical denomination, and the Methodist denomination, significant differences were present on New Kppwledge (Table 4.7). In the Presbyterian (T) denomination, a significant difference was present on W (p - 0.0000) (Table 4.7). Thus, students’ responses were significantly different in years of church attendance for Factors 1, 3, and 4 on the present content. 70 2. Desired Content. Significant differences that were revealed between the independent variables and the dependent variables are presented here according to the independent variables. Denomination. Significant differences were present between denominations and Explpripg Beckgrognd pf teptept (p 9 0.0696) and Cpptent Beeling with Relevent Ljfe Ieeuee (p - 0.0380) in the category of gontent Applieeble tp Life (Table 4.8). Significant differences were present between denominations and Bystematic Bible SM (p = 0.000) and Basic Knowledge About the Bible (p - 0.0005) in the category of Content of Bible §tudy (Table 4.8). Thus, students’ responses were significantly different in denominations for Factors 5, 6, 7, and 8 on the desired content. Years of church attendance. In the Presbyterian (H) denomina- tion (p = 0.0537) and the Methodist denomination (p - 0.0624), a significant difference was present on Explptjpg Beekgrpund pf Content. In the Presbyterian (K) denomination (p 9 0.0344), a significant difference was present on Basie Kppwledge Appgt the Bible (Table 4.8). Thus, students’ responses were significantly different in years of church attendance for Factors 5 and 8 on the desired content. 7’1 .99.99399: u m ..99..9mc9>m u 9 ..x. 99.999999999 . n .... 99.999999999 - ~ ..2. 99.999999999 - .9 9 C 00:9 n O‘COuu4 99.999 999.99» 9 . .99.9.9 9999.9 9 9.99..9 9 .999..9 ..99.9 9 999...9 99999.9 9999.9 9 99999.99 9 n 999999 999.9.9 99.9.9 9 .9999.9. 9 .99.9.9 9999.9 9 99999... . 99999.9 9999.9 9 99999.9. 9 9.999.9 99.9.9 9 99999.9. 999.9.9 9999.9 9 99.99... 9 99:99:9m 9.999.9 .9.9.9 9 99999... 99999.9 9999.9 9 99999.9. 9 .9.9.9. 99999 999.9.9 9999.9 9 999.9.9. 9 . 0 .9999.9 9999.9 9. 999.9.99 .9999.9 9999.9 9. 92.999 9999.9 9999.9 9. 99999.99 RE...“ 9 ...99.9 .9 99 9 ..99.9 .9 99 9 ...99.9 .9 99 9 ...99.9 .9 99 999.999 ...9 999999.999... 992999. 99:99:9m ..29999 .999:. 939953.... co 9.99.35 999.99o.na< .o 99: :9.: ca.uuogo9c. 9>v9u< acoa< no.9u9999c. 9>.9u< .9993999099 mc.c.99. 99.99.999 9:9 9:9 99.99.99> 9999:9999c. 999 9993999 9999999...a--.m.9 9.99. 72 Research Question 2: What preference of W during the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? 3. Preferred learning procedures. Significant differences that were revealed between the independent variables and the dependent variables are presented here according to the independent variables. Denomination. Significant. differences were present between denominations and Aetive Iptereetion Ampng Students (p - 0.0609) in the category of Aetiye Intepeetipp and flee pf Apprpppiete Illustretion (p - 0.0425) and Emphasis pp Ipfppmetipp (p - 0.0002) in the category of leeehem’ Qleerly Eptgeed Preeentetipn (Table 4.9). Thus, students’ responses were significantly different in denominations for Factors 9, 11, and 12 for the preferred learning procedures. Grade level of students. In the Presbyterian (K) denomination (p - 0.0833), a significant difference was present on Aetige Intepeetipn Ampng §tgdent§ (Table 4.9). In the Presbyterian (T) denomination (p - 0.0942), the Presbyterian (K) denomination (p - 0.0707), and the Evangelical denomination (p - 0.0654), a .significant difference was present on Aetive Intepeetipp pith Ieeehep (Table 4.9). In the Methodist denomination (p - 0.0244), a significant difference was present on nee__e£__Apppppptete m (Table 4.9).. In the Evangelical denomination (p - 0.0195), a significant difference was present on Empneeie_ep 713 .um.uocuuz u m .pau.—ooco>u - c .Axv :u_guuxamuuu u n .A». cn—Louaamusa - ~ ..zv cu.uuu»amuum . pa nwmwn.o vomo.c o o~o—o.u— e-n~.o vwoo.o o o——oa.—— oco—~.u unmo.o o covon.~— Nm'm '- cue. -uc~uu< gusagu ~o «gnu» Nl’i'flfl p Loucou NM.“ macovaum uo—o>oa ovogu Nmma—.° mooo.o up p-oc.—v n-—~.o occo.o up n—mmv.mv vmoo—.c oomo.c w— vmmwn.m~ evsnp.o omoo.o mp nnono.m— co.aoc -.socoo u .¥.=m.m &u x o .».=a.m .v x N u .‘.=o.m .u ~x u .‘_=m_m .9 Nu o_a_m ogu uaon< umvopxocx u.maa avaam u~a_m u_u~euuuam m~:mm~ «v.4 aca>w—~¢ gu.: o=_.~oa unuucou acoucou we vcaoguxuua oc.Lo—oxu aco_uoc n—Eocoo .La> .novc~ .ucoucou vog.uau on» use mopaovga> ucovcoaovc. can coozuoa «oucogo‘u.auu.o.o o—nuh 74 lnfinnnatinn (Table 4.9). _Thus, students’ responses were significantly different in grade level of students for Factors 9,‘ 10, 11, and 12 on the preferred learning procedures. Gender. In the Presbyterian (T) denomination (p - 0.0150) and the Evangelical denomination (p - 0.0004), a significant difference was present on AgL1xe_1nterastien_Ameng_§uudents (Table 4.9)- In the Evangelical denomination (p - 0.0277), a significant difference was present on Activa Intaractinn njtn [aagnan (Table 4.9). In the Presbyterian (H) denomination (p - 0.0240) and the Methodist denomination (p - 0.0454), a significant difference was present on Emphaais on Information (Table 4.9). Thus, students’ responses were significantly different in gender for Factors 9, 10, and 12 on the preferred learning procedures. §nnnary 9f Significant findings The questionnaire phase confirmed the generalizability of the findings of the interview phase with the scale of sometimes favorable to usually or frequently favorable. 1. The responses of the questionnaire phase confirmed that the two categories of preferred learning procedures, A;;1ya_1ntanantinn and IaannanaL_Q1aanly_£nnn§an_£naaantatinn, were desired by students. 2. The responses of the questionnaire phase confirmed that the present content was sometimes WW content and Q9ntent_unt_Annlieable_to_L1£e from the category of Net uaaningfnl, while the responses of the questionnaire phase confirmed that the present content was sometimes or usually Nan_£nnnladga and 75 sometimes gnntent Annligabla to Ljfa from the category of M- 3. The responses of the questionnaire phase confirmed that the desired content was frequently Ennlnrjng fiankgrnnnd nf antant and Basic Knnwledga About the Bibla. The responses of the questionnaire phase confirmed that the desired content was frequently and sometimes Content Qaaling_nith Relevant Ljfa Issnas. Summary nf §ignifigant Differennaa Obs v Amon endent ri le The significant differences observed among the independent variables and the dependent variables are summarized here. The independent variable of denomination was a very important independent variable on the present content, the desired content, and the preferred learning procedures. The rest of the independent variables were revealed as important according to the different dependent variables, categories, and factors. 0n the present content, the independent variable of years of church attendance was revealed as important. 0n the preferred learning procedures, the independent variables of grade level of students and gender were revealed as important. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 'The purpose of the research was to investigate students’ perspectives on the content and the learning procedures of the Sunday School lesson. The second step was to confirm the generalizability of findings in other denominations as well as in the Korean Evangelical Church (KEC). The inquiry for the research questions was made to ask students’ concerns on the content of the Sunday School lesson and students’ preference of the learning procedures during the Sunday School lesson with the two research questions. Summary of the major findings for the two research questions, conclusions, and recommendation are reported in Chapter VI. mm r The generalizability of the findings from the interview phase and the questionnaire phase are sUmmarized here. Research Question ll: What W for the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? C t o For the first research question students’ content concerns were identified: how students thought about the present content of 76 77 the Sunday School lesson and what students wished to learn from the content of the Sunday School lesson. Eresent ennt nt. In the interview phase, students’ responses on the present content were divided into two categories, e i ul and Not Meaningful. Under the category of Met Meaningful, two factors, lpo Much Bepetjtjpn pf Hell-anwn tnntent and tnntent_Mnt Applieable tn Life, were included. In the questionnaire phase students’ responses confirmed that Too Much Repetition of Well-Knpwn Content is sometimes true. (The expressions "sometimes true," "usually true," and so on, are quoted from the questionnaire.) In the questionnaire phase, students’ responses confirmed that gentent Met Appljeaple tp Life is sometimes true. Thus, the questionnaire phase confirmed that the category of Not Meaningful is sometimes true. Under the category of Meaningful, two factors, Mew Knowledge and Qpntent Applieable tn Ljfe, were included. In the questionnaire phase, students’ responses in the four denominations except in the Presbyterian (K) denomination confirmed that the present content is sometimes lMen__anu1egge, In the questionnaire phase, students’ responses confirmed that the present content sometimes has tnntent Appljeaple tp Life. Thus, the questionnaire phase confirmed that the category of Meanjngflll is sometimes and usually true for Factor 3, while it confirmed the category of Meaningful for Factor 4 is sometimes true. Qeetnen_epntent. In the interview phase, students’ responses on the desired content were identified into two categories, tnntent 78 Applieable to Life and Cpntent pf Bible Study. Under the category of tentent Applieable tn Life, two factors, r r of Qpntent and Spntent Dealing with Relevant Life laeuee, were included. In the questionnaire phase, students’ responses confirmed that Explpning Saekgrpund pf Qpntent is usually necessary. Students’ responses in the Presbyterian (H) denomination, the Presbyterian (T) denomination, and the Methodist denomination confirmed that the Content Qealing nitn Relevant Life Issue; is usually necessary, while those in the Presbyterian (K) denomination and the Evangelical denomination confirmed that Sentent Dealing nitb Relevant Life leeuee is sometimes necessary. Thus, the questionnaire phase confirmed that the category of gentent Applieable to Life is sometimes and frequently necessary. Under the category of gentent bf Bible Stugly, two factors, Systematic Bible Study and Raeie Rnbnledge About tne Bible, were included. In the questionnaire phase, students’ responses in the four denominations except in the Presbyterian (H) denomination confirmed that Systenatie Bible Study is sometimes necessary, while those in the Presbyterian (H) denomination confirmed that Syetenatie Bible_Stuny is frequently necessary. In the questionnaire phase, students’ responses confirmed that Raaie_Rnnnlenge_Abbut_tne_Sib1e is frequently necessary. Thus, the questionnaire phase confirmed that the category of tnntent pf Bible Stugy is sometimes and usually necessary. 79 Research Question 2: Hhat preference of the learning pnggedunes during the Sunday School lesson are students bringing to church education? Preferr earnin Pr c d r s In the interview phase, students’ responses on the preferred learning procedures were identified in two categories, Aetiye Interaction and Teacners’ Clearly Focused Rresentation. Under the category of“ Antive Interaetipn, two factors, c v t’ n Among Students and Aetive Interactign witb Teaeher, were included. In the questionnaire phase, students’ responses confirmed that Aetive Interaetion Ampng Students and Aetive Intenactign with Teaeher are frequently necessary. Thus, the questionnaire phase confirmed that the category of Aetiye Intenaetign is frequently necessary. Under the category of leathers’ gleanly Epeused Enesentation two factors, Mse_gt_Appngpniate_111ustnatign and Emphasis pn Infonnatign, were included. In the questionnaire phase, students’ responses confirmed that Use pf Appngpniate Illustnatipn and Emphasis gn Informatign are frequently necessary. Sunnany en the Independent Maniables The independent variables that showed significant differences prominently are summarized here. 1. The independent variable of denomination was the most important variable on the present content, desired content, and the preferred learning procedures. Students’ views on the present 80 content, the desired content, and preferred learning procedures were different according to denomination. 2. The independent variable of years of church attendance was significant on the students’ feedback for the present content. Students’ views on the present content were different according to the years of church attendance. W 1. Students tended to feel that the present content was Mean; ingful. They responded more strongly that the Sunday School lesson taught them new facts about faith (e.g., "I learn something new about the faith every Sunday”) than that the content of the Sunday School lesson was the content they knew well (e.g., "I think I am hearing over again what I already know well"). Students tended to feel somewhat more strongly that the present content was helpful to their daily lives (e.g., "The knowledge was helpful to witness Jesus to others") than that it was not helpful to their daily lives (e.g., "Not concrete, not realistic, not related to what I need"). 2. Students desired somewhat more strongly that in learning the events in the Bible they should learn not only the event itself but the background of the Bible (e.g., 'th they got to that situa- tion and how God helped them”) than that the content should deal with the issues of their problems (e.g., “The content to suggest how to behave and practice as a Christian"). 3. Students desired somewhat more strongly that the Sunday School lesson should teach them the basic material about the Bible 81 (e.g., “How many books are in the Bible") than that the content of the Sunday School lesson should avoid fragmentary Bible study here and there (e.g., "To learn the Bible consistently and syste- matically, such as Genesis to Exodus in the Old Testament") except in one denomination, the Presbyterian (H) denomination. They desired to study the Bible sequentially. 4. Students much preferred that teachers respect their opin- ions (e.g., "Accept our thoughts and not say, ’That is not reasonable to think that way’") and let them express their opinions freely (e.g., "When the teachers ask us questions to let us think for a while and then express our own thoughts”). They also preferred the Sunday School lesson to be conducted as discussion with friends (e.g., ”When we discuss, we can know others and we can express what we think"). Students preferred the teachers to relate the .Sunday' School lesson to life by using appropriate examples (e.g., "When the teacher applied the content to Christian life"). They also preferred the teachers to make it clear what they should learn (e.g., “The teacher could make the points clearly . . . tell us what we’re expected to learn"). Wasatch The findings of the research have implications for people involved in denominational curriculum development, directors of Christian education, and teachers of high school students in church. These individuals need to consider the students’ desires so that the curriculum is responsive to learners’ needs in life. 82 l. The curriculum workers need to consider including back- ground material as part of the content in teaching what the Bible is all about. They also need to consider relevant life issues as part of the content. The curriculum workers in the Presbyterian (H) denomination need to consider the content to have systematic (sequential) Bible study. 2. The curriculum ‘workers need to consider the teaching- learning procedure so as to have active involvement with teachers and among fellow students. In other words, they need to write the lesson development so that teachers can give students freedom to talk freely with teachers and fellow students. However, they need to write the lessons to make clear what students are expected to learn. 3a In addition, to achieve changes in teaching-learning procedures, the curriculum workers and directors of Christian education need to use teachers’ training to improve teachers’ instructional procedures. 4. The curriculum workers need to develop different approaches in dealing with content to avoid students’ responses saying the well-known content is repeated. 5. Teachers need to plan the teaching-learning procedures to permit students to talk freely with teachers and with fellow students. In addition, teachers need to plan the curriculum presentation to make it clear what they want students to learn and to use appropriate illustrations to relate to the content. 83 WHOM for PW Several recommendations for further research are presented as a result of the research. Students’ opinions on the preferred learning procedures were revealed as very active ”agree" responses through the research. Further research to investigate teachers’ opinions on the teaching-learning procedures is recommended. 1. What do the teachers think about the teaching-learning pro- cedures during the Sunday School lesson? 2. What preference of the teaching-learning procedures during the Sunday School lesson do the teachers have? Students’ opinions on the content concerns expressed their evaluations of the present content and desires for the content of the Sunday School lessons. Further research on curriculum workers’ view on the present content and the desired content of the Sunday School lesson is recommended. 3. what content concerns do the curriculum workers have? The investigation of the independent variables was broad because this was exploratory research. Further research to explain the characteristics of the independent variables is recommended to break down: under the denomination, the grade level of students is included; under the grade level of students, gender is included; and under gender, years of church attendance is included. This research was exploratory research in which the chi-square test was used to find the possible relationships in the independent variables. In further research to explain the more specific 84 relationships in the independent variables, covariance test with post-hoc is recommended. f t n In the validity test of the questionnaire from a seminary professor, she asked the researcher to give her the results of the study. Another panel member showed interest and expectation, saying this study would be a good resource for denominational curriculum improvement. In two pilot studies for the questionnaire development, students’ responses on the items of the questionnaire were very supportive. They were pleased with the kind of questionnaire. To quote some of their responses: "You took a complete grasp of the problems of the Sunday School lesson." "Please, help us by making a good Sunday School lesson.” "I really think you knew all the problems we have in our Sunday School lesson." ”I hope my responding to this questionnaire will help in improving the Sunday School lesson.” The researcher did not get any negative responses on the questionnaire items from students. In visiting churches to do pilot studies and to administer the questionnaire, the researcher had opportunities to listen to teachers’ informal feedback on the Sunday School curriculum material and their difficulties in teaching the material. They took initiative in talking to the researcher after learning that she was studying about students’ views on the Sunday School lesson. They said that the Sunday School curriculum material needed to be 85 improved in consideration of teachers’ and students’ understanding. Some teachers asked the researcher if they could get the questionnaire so that they could administer it to all of their students. Some teachers read through the responses of students from their churches. In interviewing the persons responsible for development of the denominational Sunday School lesson book, they were very cooperative with the study, saying they hoped they could get some helpful resources. Teachers and curriculum workers wanted to obtain the results of the research so as to improve their Sunday School lesson. All of these responses seem to emphasize the urgency of the research. The research results will be a possible help as the people quoted above reexamine the content and the learning procedures used in the Sunday School lesson. Even the researcher herself feels motivated to do further research based on this study. APPENDICES APPENDIX A INTERVIEW PROTOCOLS 86 Eanlien Interview It is said that school days are important. Hhat do you want to get through high school days? How long have you attended this high school group in church? What do you want to get through this high school group in church? You have Sunday School lesson every Sunday, right? I heard that the Sunday School lesson book from our denomination was used in your church. What do you think about the present content of the Sunday School lesson? What kind of content do you think would make the Sunday School lesson better? How could the Sunday School lesson be presented when you are satisfied? 87 a nterview You have Sunday School lesson every Sunday,right? Could you please tell me what you feel during the Sunday school lesson? What do you think about the present content of the Sunday School lesson you have learned during this year? What kind of content do you think would make the Sunday School lesson better? What kind of presentation of the Sunday School lesson captures your interest? Could you tell me if you can remember some content of Sunday School lessons in which you were interested? APPENDIX B ITEM VALIDITY TEST 88 Greetings in the name of the Lord! The questionnaire items were designed to investigate learners’ (high school students’) perspectives on the Sunday School lesson. Three items were made for each factor. Please evaluate the items according to the three scales if the items were constructed right for each factor: I. Not clear 2. Not appropriate 3. Clear and appropriate Thank you. 89 ue i nn i em I. Students’ Renspectives gn tbe Enesent Sgntent (What students find now) (Research Question I) A. Category: Not Meaningful 1. Factor: "Too much repetition of well-known content" a. The content of the Sunday School lesson is the content I know well. b. The study on the Sunday School lessons deals with the content I’ve heard since I was young. c. There is not any unfamiliar content presented in the Sunday School lessons. 2. Factor: "Content not applicable to life" a. The Sunday School lesson is not helpful to my daily life. b. The content of the Sunday School lesson is only the stories about Israelites in the Old Testament c. The Sunday School lesson is not related to my social life. B. Category: Meaningful l. Factor: "New knowledge" a. I learn about something new I did not know before through the Sunday School lesson. b. I learn about the Bible I did not know before. c. The Sunday School lesson teaches me new facts about faith. 2. Factor: "Content applicable to life" a. The content of the Sunday School lesson is help- ful to my difficulties in life. b. The content of the Sunday School lesson is related to my daily life. c. The Sunday School lesson teaches me how to live in this world as a Christian student. II. Students’ Rerspeetives pn Desirable tentent (What students want) (Research Question I) A. Category: Content Applicable to Life l. Factor: ”Exploring background of content" a. The Sunday School lesson must teach us the reason why God loves us as well as the fact that God loves us. 90 In learning the events in the Bible, we should learn the reasons for the events. The Sunday School lesson should not present just the event. 2. Factor: "Content dealing with relevant life issues" a. b. C. The Sunday School lesson should deal with the issues of my agonies. The Sunday School lesson should help me to decide my future. The Sunday School lesson should help me to solve difficult problems. B. Category: Content of Bible Study 1. Factor: "Systematic (sequential) Bible study" a. b. C. We should study the Bible from Genesis continually through the Sunday School lesson. The content of the Sunday School lesson should avoid fragmentary Bible study here and there. The content of the Sunday School lesson should be the Bible study to teach the beginning of and the end of the Bible systematically. 2. Factor: "Basic knowledge about the Bible" a. b. C. The Sunday School lesson should introduce what the Bible is all about. The Sunday School lesson should teach us the basic materials in the Bible. We should discuss and learn the meaning of the Scripture verses we do not know through the Sunday School lesson. 111. Students’ Perspeetives pn Preferred Learning Proeedure (What students like) (Research Question 2) A. Category: Learning Procedure of Active Interaction 1. Factor: ”Active interaction among students” a. b. C. The Sunday School lesson should be conducted as discussion with friends. The Sunday School lesson should be discussed based on students’ preparation and presentation in turn. The Sunday School lesson should be conducted by dialogue. 2. Factor: "Active interaction with teachers" a. b. c. Teachers should ask questions to which we can express our own ideas. Teachers should listen to and respect our opinions. We should be able to ask questions freely during the Sunday School lesson. 91 B. Category: Teachers’ Clearly Focused Presentation 1. Factor: "Use of appropriate illustration" a. b. C. Teachers should use episodes to touch our hearts. Teachers should relate the Sunday School lesson to life through the use of examples. Teachers should use examples to help us under- stand easily. 2. Factor: "Emphasis on points clearly" a. b. C. Teachers should emphasize the most important points. Teachers should make it clear what we should learn. Teachers should explain the content clearly. APPENDIX C FIRST PILOT STUDY 92 Dear Sir, Greetings! The questionnaire items were constructed to investigate your (high school students’) perspectives on the Sunday School lesson. Please read the items and answer your opinion to each item as follows: Example: 1. I know the content of Sunday School lesson so well. ____ 1. Very true ___ 2. True ___ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. Not true ___ 5. Never true Please write your comment about the questionnaire in the space at the end of this questionnaire. Thank you so much. Soyon Lee Christian Education Department Seoul Theological Seminary 93 Denomination —l O Presbyterian Church (Hapdong) 2. Presbyterian Church (Tonghap) ____ 3. Korean Presbyterian Church ____ 4. Korean Evangelical Church ____ 5. Korean Methodist Church ____ Gender 1. Male 2. Female Grade level of students 1. First year 2. Second year 3. Third year Years of church attendance l. Less than one year 2. More than one year to less than three years 3. More than three years 94 The content of the Sunday School lesson is the content I know well. ___ l. absolutely true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know ____ 4. not true 5. absolutely not true The content of the Sunday School lesson is only the stories about Israelites in the Old Testament. absolutely not true ___ l. absolutely true ___ 2. true ___, 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true 5. _4 he Sunday School lesson teaches me new facts about faith. ___ l. absolutely true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true 5. absolutely not true The content of the Sunday School lesson is related to my daily life. ___. l. absolutely true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true ___ 5. absolutely not true The Sunday School lesson should not present just the event. ___, I. absolutely true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true 5. absolutely not true The Sunday School lesson should deal with the issues of my agonies. ___, I. absolutely true ___ 2. true ____ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true 5. absolutely not true 9. TO. ll. 12. 95 We should study the Bible from Genesis continually through the Sunday School lesson. The m-DWNH absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true Sunday School lesson should teach us the basic materials in the Bible. Muth-fl absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true The Sunday School lesson should be discussed based on students’ preparation and presentation in turn. ___ l. absolutely true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true ___ 5. absolutely not true Teachers should ask questions to which we can express our own ideas. ___ I. absolutely true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know ____ 4. not true ___ 5. absolutely not true Teachers Teachers mth—a m-wa-fl should use examples to help us understand easily. absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true should make it clear what we should learn. absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 96 The study on the Sunday School lessons deals with the content I’ve heard since I was young. _g he (”#de absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true Sunday School lesson is not helpful to my daily life. U'l-FWNH absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true I learn about something new I did not know before through the Sunday School lessons. unsung—a absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true Sunday School lesson teaches me how to live in this absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true In learning the events in the Bible, we should learn the reasons for the events. _q he 01-5de absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true Sunday School lesson should help me to decide my future. maroon—o absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 97 The content of the Sunday School lesson should be the Bible study to teach the beginning of and the end of the Bible systematically. ___ I. absolutely true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true ___ 5. absolutely not true The Old Sunday School lesson should teach us what books are in the Testament and in the New Testament. U'I&WN-‘ absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true Sunday School lesson should be conducted by dialogue. absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true should use episodes to touch our hearts. absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true should emphasize the most important points. absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 98 There is not any unfamiliar content presented in the Sunday School lessons. .___ l. absolutely true _ 2 . true ___ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true 5. absolutely not true The Sunday School lesson is not related to my social life. ___ l. absolutely true ___ 2. true ____ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true 5. absolutely not true I learn about the Bible I did not know before. .___ I. absolutely true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know ____ 4. not true 5. absolutely not true The content of the Sunday School lesson is helpful to my daily life. ___ l absolutely true _ 2 . true .___ 3. I don’t know ____ 4. not true 5 absolutely not true The Sunday School lesson must teach us the reason why God loves us as well as the fact that God loves us. ___ I absolutely true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know _ 4 . not true 5 absolutely not true The Sunday School lesson should help me to solve difficult problems. ____ l absolutely true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true ___ 5 absolutely not true 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 99 The content of the Sunday School lesson should avoid fragmentary Bible study here and there. The all The Teachers 1. absolutely true 2. true 3. I don’t know 4. not true 5. absolutely not true Sunday School lesson should introduce what the Bible is about. l. absolutely true 2. true 3. I don’t know 4. not true 5. absolutely not true Sunday School lesson should be conducted as discussion with friends. (fl-hWN-fl UI-hWNd absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true should listen to and respect our opinions. absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true Teachers should relate the Sunday School lesson to life through the use of example. Teachers 01-5de 01-5de absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true should explain the content clearly. absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true APPENDIX D SECOND PILOT STUDY 100 Dear Sir, Greetings! The questionnaire items were constructed to investigate your (high school students’) perspectives on the Sunday School lesson. Please read the items and answer your opinion to each item as follows: Example: I. I know the content of Sunday School lesson so well. ___ l. very true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true ___ 5. never true Please write your comment about the questionnaire in the space at the end of this questionnaire. Thank you so much. Soyon Lee Christian Education Department Seoul Theological Seminary IOI Denomination l. Presbyterian Church (Hapdong) 2. Presbyterian Church (Tonghap) ____ 3. Korean Presbyterian Church ____ 4. Korean Evangelical Church ____ 5. Korean Methodist Church ____ Gender l. Male 2. Female Grade level of students l. First year 2. Second year 3. Third year Years of church attendance 1. Less than one year 2. More than one year to less than three years 3. More than three years 102 The content of the Sunday School lesson is the content I know well. ___ I. absolutely true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true 5. absolutely not true The content of the Sunday School lesson is only the stories about Israelites in the Old Testament. ___ l. absolutely true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true ___ 5. absolutely not true The Sunday School lesson teaches me new facts about faith. ___ l. absolutely true ___ 2. true ___ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true ___ 5. absolutely not true The content of the Sunday School lesson is related to my daily life. ___ l. absolutely true _ 2 . true ____ 3. I don’t know ___ 4. not true ___ 5. absolutely not true The Sunday School lesson should not present just the event. always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary Mwad The Sunday School lesson should deal with the issues of my agonies. always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary macaw—- 103 7. We should study the Bible from Genesis continually through the Sunday School lesson. always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary (”#WN-fl 8. The Sunday School lesson should teach us the basic materials in the Bible. always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary 03-9de 9. The Sunday School lesson should be discussed based on students’ preparation and presentation in turn. always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary U1-§WN—l l0. Teachers should ask questions to which we can express our own ideas. l always necessary 2. necessary 3. undecided 4. not necessary 5 never necessary ll. Teachers should use examples to help us understand easily. l always necessary 2. necessary 3. undecided 4. not necessary 5 never necessary l2. Teachers should make it clear what we should learn. I always necessary 2. necessary 3. undecided 4. not necessary 5 never necessary 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. l8. 104 The study on the Sunday School lessons deals with the content I’ve heard since I was young. _1 he MhWN—i absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true Sunday School lesson is not helpful to my daily life. 01¢de absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true I learn about something new I did not know before through the Sunday School lessons. 01%de absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true Sunday School lesson teaches me how to live in this absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true In learning the events in the Bible, we should learn the reasons for the events. ...] he 0"de always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary Sunday School lesson should help me to decide my future. 0"-de always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 105 The content of the Sunday School lesson should be the Bible study to teach the beginning of and the end of the Bible systematically. ___ I. always necessary ___ 2. necessary .___ 3. undecided ___ 4. not necessary ___ 5. never necessary The Old _1 he Sunday School lesson should teach us what books are in the Testament and in the New Testament. mth-J always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary Sunday School lesson should be conducted by dialogue. m-th-d always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary We should be able to ask questions freely during the Sunday School lesson. Teachers Teachers WhWN-J 01¢de 01%de always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary should use episodes to touch our hearts. always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary should emphasize the most important points. always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 106 There is not any unfamiliar content presented in the Sunday School lessons. .4 he thNd absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true Sunday School lesson is not related to my social life. (fichWN-l absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true I learn about the Bible I did not know before. 01-5de absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true The content of the Sunday School lesson is helpful to my daily life. absolutely true true I don’t know not true absolutely not true The Sunday School lesson must teach us the reason why God loves us as well as the fact that God loves us. m-Dde o o o o 0 always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary The Sunday School lesson should help me to solve difficult problems. U'l-th-l o o o o 0 always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 107 The content of the Sunday School lesson should avoid fragmentary Bible study here and there. m—l —'3' am 01.5de always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary Sgnday School lesson should introduce what the Bible is a out. thN-J always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary should listen to and respect our opinions. always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary Teachers should relate the Sunday School lesson to life through the use of example. Teachers thN—l 01-5de always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary should explain the content clearly. always necessary necessary undecided not necessary never necessary APPENDIX E MAIN QUESTIONNAIRE 108 Dear Sir, Greetings in the name of the Lord! My name is Soyon Lee, and I teach Christian education at Seoul Theological Seminary. I am investigating ”perspectives of high school students on the Sunday School lesson" for my dissertation. The questionnaire was designed to investigate high school students’ perspectives on the content and the learning procedure for the Sunday School lesson belonging to five denominations (Korean Presbyterian, Presbyterian [Tonghap], Presbyterian [Hapdong]. Korean Methodist, and Korean Evangelical). Thirty questionnaires are enclosed. Please select students randomly with even numbers of school year and of gender to answer the questionnaire. The findings will be helpful not only to me but later to denominational curriculum development and instruction as well. Thank you so much. Soyon Lee Christian Education Department Seoul Theological Seminary 109 Greetings! The questionnaire items were constructed to investigate your (high school students’) perspectives on the Sunday School lesson. Please read the items and answer your opinion to each item as follows: Example: l. I know the content of the Sunday School lesson so well. ____ 1. always true ___ 2. usually true ___ 3. sometimes true ___ 4. almost never true ___ 5. never true Your honest and frank response to the questions will be helpful not only to me personally, but also to your juniors. Thank you so much. Soyon Lee Christian Education Department Seoul Theological Seminary 110 Denomination l. Presbyterian Church (Hapdong) ____ 2. Presbyterian Church (Tonghap) .____ 3. Korean Presbyterian Church ____ 4. Korean Evangelical Church _____ 5. Korean Methodist Church ____ Gender 1. Male 2. Female Grade level of students I. First year 2. Second year 3. Third year Years of church attendance 1. Less than one year 2. More than one year to less than three years 3. More than three years 111 The content of the Sunday School lesson is the content I know well. .___ l. always true ___ 2. usually true ___ 3. sometimes true ____ 4. almost never true ___ 5. never true The content of the Sunday School lesson is only the stories about Israelites in the Old Testament. .... he MhWN-I‘ always true usually true sometimes true almost never true never true Sunday School lesson teaches me new facts about faith. 01%de always true usually true sometimes true almost never true never true The content of the Sunday School lesson is related to my daily life. 411-5de always true usually true sometimes true almost never true never true Sunday School lesson should not present just the event. macaw—o always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary The Sunday School lesson should deal with the issues of my always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary 112 7. We should study the Bible from Genesis continually through the Sunday School lesson. always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary (”-5de 8. The Sunday School lesson should teach us the basic materials in the Bible. always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary (”#WN-J 9. The Sunday School lesson should be discussed based on students’ preparation and presentation in turn. ____ 1. always necessary ___ 2. frequently necessary ___ 3. sometimes necessary ____ 4. almost never necessary ___ 5. never necessary lO. Teachers should ask questions to which we can express our own ideas. ___ 1. always necessary ___ 2. frequently necessary I___ 3. sometimes necessary ___ 4. almost never necessary ___ 5. never necessary ll. Teachers should use examples to help us understand easily. always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary 01-5de l2. Teachers should make it clear what we should learn. always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary (”-9de 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 113 The study on the Sunday School lessons deals with the content I’ve heard since I was young. _4 he 01¢de a o o o 0 always true usually true sometimes true almost never true never true Sunday School lesson is not helpful to my daily life. (”#de always true usually true sometimes true almost never true never true I learn about something new I did not know before through the Sunday School lessons. macaw—- always true usually true sometimes true almost never true never true The Sunday School lesson teaches me how to live in this world as a Christian student. ”1&de always true usually true sometimes true almost never true never true In learning the events in the Bible, we should learn the reasons for the events. _a he (”-5de always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary Sunday School lesson should help me to decide my future. 011-de always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 114 The content of the Sunday School lesson should be the Bible study to teach the beginning of and the end of the Bible systematically. ___ I. always necessary ___ 2. frequently necessary ____ 3. sometimes necessary ___ 4. almost never necessary ___ 5. never necessary The Sunday School lesson should teach us what books are in the Old Testament and in the New Testament. 01-9de always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary Sunday School lesson should be conducted by dialogue. O‘CAPN-I' always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary should use episodes to touch our hearts. always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary should emphasize the most important points. always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 115 There is not any unfamiliar content presented in the Sunday School lessons. always true usually true sometimes true almost never true never true Ui-hUN-i .... he Sunday School lesson is not related to my social life. always true usually true sometimes true almost never true never true mth-J u—a _.a earn about the Bible I did not know before. always true usually true sometimes true almost never true never true m-th-J lllll The content of the Sunday School lesson is helpful to my daily life. always true usually true sometimes true almost never true never true (”#de The Sunday School lesson must teach us the reason why God loves us as well as the fact that God loves us. always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary 01¢de The Sunday School lesson should help me to solve difficult 1 always necessary 2. frequently necessary 3. sometimes necessary 4 almost never necessary 5 never necessary 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 116 The content of the Sunday School lesson should avoid fragmentary Bible study here and there. The all l. always necessary 2. frequently necessary 3. sometimes necessary 4. almost never necessary 5. never necessary Sunday School lesson should introduce what the Bible is about. l. always necessary 2. frequently necessary 3. sometimes necessary 4. almost never necessary 5. never necessary The Sunday School lesson should be conducted as discussion with friends. Teachers madam-=- U'l-DWN-J always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary should listen to and respect our opinions. always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary Teachers should relate the Sunday School lesson to life through the use of example. (”#WN-i always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary should explain the content clearly. always necessary frequently necessary sometimes necessary almost never necessary never necessary BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Adler, H. L., & Roessler, E. B. (1977). ntro u i o r b bil- it n a i i . San Francisco: W. H. Freeman & Co. Ames, R., & Ames, C. (I984). Student mptivation: Vol. l. Researeh pn motivatipn in educatipn. .New York: Academic Press. Andrews, L. A. (1985). Images pf the pastpr-as-leader of North . American-born and foreign-born students in three seminaries. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University. Atwater, E. (l983). Adolescence. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall. Ausubel, D. P. (l963). The psycholpgy of meaningful verbal learn- ing. New York: Grune & Stratton. Ausubel, D. P., & Robinson, F. G. (1969). Sebool learning: An introduct o to duc i nal l . New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Babbie, E. (1979). h r ° f i r . Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Bailey, K. D. (1978). ethods ia . New York: Free Press. Bain, R. (1930). Theory and measurement of attitudes and opinions. Psyehglggieal Bulletin, 21, 357-379. Beals, J. D. (1977). An analysis of developmental and theological considerations in the Aldersgate graded curriculum (Doctoral dissertation, University of Notre Dame, l977). Qissertatipn Abstraets Internatipnal, SS, l3l7A. Bellack, A. A., et al. (l977). i u d at Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Benjamin, A. (l969). Ihe nelping interview. Boston: Houghton- Mifflin. 117 118 Blalock, H. M., Jr. (1982). teneeptualization and measurement in tbe_sgeia1_seienees. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Blalock, H. M., Jr., a Blalock, A. (I968). Methodglpgy in social researen. New York: McGraw-Hill. Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1982). Qualitative researeh for eduea- ion: An tr h ds. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Bolts, T. W. (1976). The experience of American Catholics and their church: A curriculum unit for high school students (Doctoral dissertation, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1976). ' r i n Abstraets International, 31, 2091A. Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1983). Edueatipnal researeh: An intrpduetign (4th ed.). New York: Longman. Bradburn, N. M., & Sudman, S. (1979). m v' ' v' w m and guestipnnaire design. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Bradley, R. C. (1974). m vin in i x ri ed teachers. Texas: The University Press. Brophy, J. E., & Everston, C. M. (1976). arn'n m chin : A develppmental perspeetive. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Cay, D. F. (1966). urri m: e n arni . Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill. Cha, K. S. (1985, May). Project on adolescents’ problems and reso- lution. Mey_£dueatipn, pp. 28-35. Choe, S. (l969). Evaluation of Sunday Senppl lesson bopR for ehildren in Kprea. Unpublished master’s thesis, Yonsei University. Chung. C. S. (1979). Ibe2Lx_2i_Cbn1st1an_educatien_cunrisulum. Seoul: General Assembly of Presbyterian Church in Korea. Th h ’ 'o 1 ° n. (1965). St. Louis, MO: Bethany Press. Coleman, J. S. (1961). Adeleseent_spe1ety. New York: Free Press of Glencoe. Colsen. H. P., & Rogdon. R. M. (1969). understanding_xeur_cburcb;s gurrieulun. Nashville, TN: Broadman Press. Conner, R. F. (Ed.). (l98l). th valuat'on 119 researgh. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Cornett, J. D., a Beckner, W. (1975). Intrpduetpry statisties for tbe_benayigra1_seienees. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill. Dandapani, S. (1971). netbgds. Delhi: The Scholars Foundation. Dewey. J. (1902). Ibe_sb11d_and_tbe_currisulum. Chicagoz University of Chicago Press. Dewey, J. (1957). Experienee_and_edueat1gn. New York: Macmillan. Dillamn, D. A. (1978). ai rv . New York: John Wiley & Sons. i ec or f K r an Prot tan h h . (1987). Seoul: Christian Life Corporation. Doll, R. C. (1978). m r ' proeess (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Dyer, J. R. (1979). d in v a i i n researcb. ~ Edgan, K. (1983). £dueatign_and_psyebnlpgy. New York: Columbia University. Edwards, A. L. (1957). i i n. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. nd Edwards, A. L., & Kenney, K. C. (1946). A comparison of the Thurstone and Likert techniques of attitude scale construction. J2urnal_e£_Aenlied_Esxcbelegx. 39. 72-83. Eggen, P. D. (1979). Strategies for teaeners. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Erickson, F. (1985). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M- c. Nittreck (Ed ). flandbeek_e£_researcb_on_teasbing- New York: Macmillan. Eun. C. K. (1975). Be22rt_9n_ea2eLiment_e£_ebursb_edusation. Seoul: Methodist Seminary Christian Education Research Center. Eun, C. K. (1980). ° edugatipn. Seoul: Han Kook Sun Kyo Yun Koo Won. Fear, R. A. (1973). £ya1uat1pn_1ntery1eu (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. 120 Ferguson, L. W. (1941). A study of the Likert technique of atti- tude scale construction. Journal pf Sgeial Psyebplogy, IS, 51- 57. Fisher, E. J. (1976). n e l i th tm n f ws ,no ., 1 l - r-I iom n - he i - '. '1 - ... - . ua im e . New York: New York University. Fitz-Gibbon, C. T., a Morris, L. L. (1978). 1 statistigs. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Fitz-Gibbon, C. T., & Morris, L. L. (1978). Men tp design a prbgram evaluatign. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Flanders, N. A. (1970). Analyzing teaching behavjpr. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Flavel, J. H. (1977). Adoleseence: Cpgnitive deyelppment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Fleming, M., & Levie, W. H. (1973). Instruetipnal message design. New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications. Giroux, H. A., Penna, A. N., & Pinar, W. F. (1981). ri nd instruetipn. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). lhe disegvery pf grpunded theory: Strategies for oualitative_researen. New York: Aldine. Goetz, J. P., 8 Le Compte, M. D. (1984). £tbnggrapby_and_guali; t d n r . Orlando, FL: Academic Press. Guess, J. R., a Purpel, D. E. (Eds.). (1978). -§urrjeulum; An intrgduetign to the field. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Guttman, L. (1944). A basis for scaling qualitative data. WW. 9. 139-150. Hass. G. (1987). MW Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Havighurst, R. (1948). mental as an . New York: Longmans, Green. Havighurst. R. (1953). Won. New York: Longmans, Green. 121 Hoffman, M. I. (1980). Moral development in adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.). MW- New York: John Wiley a Sons. Holsti, O. R. (1969). o t n c’ ' and humanities. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Howell, D. C. (1985). m v' ral sniennes. Boston, MA: Duxbury Press. Hyun. B. J. (1983). MW e ’ r 1 . Unpublished master’s thesis, Yonsei University. Issac, 5., a Michael, W. B. (1982). MandbnnR_in_researnn_and evaluatinn (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: EDITS Publishers. Issler, J. K. (1984). Moral deyelnpment as a enmpnnent nf the edunatinn nf Prntestant ministers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University. Jaccard. J. (1983). W Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Javalera, E. R. (1983). lraining for voluntary npnfprmal edunatnrs: Need r s rces n feasibili . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University. Kim, C. H. (1983). lext analysis nf Sunday Sennol lesson in terms ur i l m eor 0. am be 1 cko . Unpublished master’s thesis, Yonsei University. Kim, E. G. (1969). ese rc un Sun s n or m'd 1 nd h' h 5 ho t n ' r . Unpublished master’s thesis, Yonsei University. Rnrean_adn1esnenee. (1982). Seoul: Prime Minister’s Office. K a n . (1984). Seoul: Prime Minister’s Office. r an . (1985). Seoul: Prime Minister’s Office. Knrean_adn1esnenne. (1986). Seoul: Prime Minister’s Office. 0 ean oci t n l c i nc . (1983). Seoul: Korea Youth Association. Krippendorf, K. (1984). tnntent_analysis: An intrnduntinn tn its metnndningy. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. 122 Leadelle, P., Schmitz, C. D... & Boatright, B. (1986). The effects of halo and leniency on cooperating teacher reports using Likert-type rating scale. Jnurnal nf Edunatinnal Researen, 19, 151-154. Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arehives nf Rsynholngy, no. 140, pp. 5-55. LeBar, L. E. (1968). Ennus on penple in enurnb educatinn. Old Tappan: Flemming H. Revell. Lee, C. Y. (1970). h f r . Seoul: Korea Holiness Church Publishing House. Lee, J. M. (1973). Ibeeflow,of religinus instructinn: A snnial science apprnaeh. Mishawaka, IN: Religious Education Press. Lemon, N. (1973). nd th ir r m n . New York: Halsted Press. Lundberg, G. A. (1929). Snnial researnh: A study in methnds nf gathering data. New York: Longmans, Green. Maanen, J. V. (Ed.). (1984). i ' m 1 . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Martuza, V. R. (1977). i n rm-ref n ri - r ferenc me urem n in c i n. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Matthews, C. O. (1929). The effect of the order on an interest questionnaire. Jnurnal nf Edueatinnal Rsynhnlngy, 29, 128-134. McNeil, J. D. (1981). r ' m° o e (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Little, Brown. Mendenhall, W., Ott, L., & Larson, R. F. (1974). Statistins; A W. Boston. MA: Duxbury Press. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). n W. Beverly Hills. CA: Sage Publications. Miller, D. C. (1983). measurement New York: Longman. Moser, C. A., & Kalton, G. (1972). Suryey_metnnds_in_snnia1 inyestigatinn. New York: Basic Books. O’Brien, L. M. (1981). antrasting apprnannes tn nurrinulum materiais_deye1npment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Delaware. 123 Odum, H. W., & Jocher, K. (1929). n r n ' l rch. New York: Henry Holt. Oppenheim, A. N. (1966). e measurement New York: Basic Books. Patton, M. Q. (1980). 1 iv v lu o . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Payne, S. L. (1979). Ine_art_ni_asRing_guestinns. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Phillips, 8. S. (1966). Sncial researeh: Strategy and tactins. New York: Macmillan. Pinar, W. (1975). gurriculum thenriaing: lhe recnnneptualists. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Pratt,D. (1980). turrinulum: Design and develnpment. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich. Raths, J. (1967). The inductive process: Implication for research reporting. Edunatinnal Leadership, RA, 357-363. Richards, L. (1972). inuth ministry. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. Richards, S. A. (1965). t v' win : f d t'o s. New York: 'Basic Books. Richmond, W. K. (1971). [be school currinulum. London: Methuen. Rogers, C. R. (1969). Freedom tn learn. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill. Rossi, P. M., Wright, J. D., & Anderson, A. B. (1983). MandbnnR_nf s rv re r . New York: Academic Press. Santrock, J. W. (1981). n ° An . Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown. Schuman, H. (1981). Questions and answers in attitude surveys. New York: Academic Press. Schwartz, H., & Jacobs, J. (1979). Qualitatiye_snniningy. New York: Free Press. Spradeley, J. P. (1979). ]he ethnngraphie interyiew. New York: Holt, Rinehart a Winston. 124 Stewart, C. J., 8 Cash, W. B. (1974). n w' ° i and_prantines. Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown. Stratemeyer, F. B., Forkner, H. L., & McKin, M. G. (1947). Devel- 'n r ' m i . New York: Columbia University. . Strommen, M. (1963). £rniiies_niinnurnb_ynutn. St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House. Summers, G. F. (Ed.). (1970). Attitude_measurement. Chicago: Rand McNally. Taba, H. (1962). i lum evelo m t: ti New York: Harcourt, Brace a World. Taylor, P. H., & Richards, C. M. (1979). An intrnduntion tn nur- rinulum_studies. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press. Thurstone, L. L. (1929). Theory of attitude measurement. Rsynho- logical Review, 35, 222-241. Tuckman, B. W. (1972). gnndueting edunational resea eh. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich. Tyler, R. W. (1949). asic inci les of c rri um instr Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Unruh, G. G. (1975). Respnnsive currinulum development; lbenry and antion. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Webster, C. M. (1975). anards a nngnitiye deyelnpmental apprnanh in religinus edunatjon. Toronto: University of Toronto. Wiles, J. (1979). rric um d ve m nt: A i o ra Columbus, OH: C. E. Merrill. Young, P. V., & Schmid, C. F. (1966). ie ' and researnh. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Zais. R. S. (l976). W. New York: Crowell. luck, I. (1974). Inutn_and_tbe_nburnb. Chicago: Moody Press. HICHIGRN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES ll!llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllHllHl 31293006777142