as» . ml!muuxglgulululmumsmzuujugn 7 LIB. R A Y This is to certify that the thesis entitled RESIDENCE REQUIREMENTS IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION presented by Roy Jon Simon has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degree in Administration and Higher Education (PM aw Major professor Date January 31, 1979 0-7639 ovum! FINES ARE 25¢ PER DAY ‘ mm mm '\ Return to book drop to remove a this checkout from your record. MIKE C) Copyright by Roy Jon Simon 1979 RESIDENCE REQUIREMENTS IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION By Roy Jon Simon A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Higher Education 1979 ABSTRACT RESIDENCE REQUIREMENTS IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION By Roy Jon Simon The purpose of this study was to describe the present status of residence requirements for the D.B.A., Ed.D., and Ph.D. at a selected group of institutions in the United States. In addition, the study identified the various rationales for residence requirements and the variations in the interpretation of residence requirements in doctoral education. The standards in doctoral education which relate to the purposes of residence requirements were examined for implications about the nature of residence requirements and such standards. Information for this study was collected by contacting the deans of the graduate programs which offer the D.B.A., Ed.D., or Ph.D. The criteria for selection of the graduate institutions were such that both non-traditional and traditional programs were selected to insure that the total range of residence requirements were included in this study. The information obtained included literature that specified residence requirements and variations for meeting the requirement within colleges and departments of the institution. Other statements concerning the rationale for, the interpretation of, and viewpoints on residence requirements were gathered from committees and university ' and graduate program administrators. The major findings of this study are summarized as follows: 1. the majority of doctoral programs for the Ed.D., D.B.A., and Ph.D. require a residence of at least one year, Roy Jon Simon the institutions which require less than one year of residence are with a few exceptions non-traditional programs, with only two exceptions time in residence is required in conjunction with a specific number of credits, points, or units to be attained during the time period, there is no clear differentiation by most institutions between residence on a campus and the completion of a particular amount of credits on campus in either a contiguous or summative manner. Policy questions which may be considered as a result of this study include: I. Is the requirement for residence really causing the student to have an "immersion into the life of a scholar“ or is it just a regulation requiring registration and payment for a prescribed amount of credits, points, or units for a brief time period? Should the responsibility for ensuring that the espoused benefits of a residence requirement are realized be placed with the respective college or department and therefore alter the need for enforce- ment of a requirement at the university graduate school level? Should the residence requirement focus upon course activity or research activity? If the institution will enforce a residence require- ment based on consideration of the preceding questions, should a specific statement on employment by the student be made which coincides with the residence requirement? This study is dedicated to my family with recognition of their continuing support and assistance 11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Sincere appreciation is expressed to my guidance committee who are very special faculty members and provided for me the timely assistance which every doctoral candidate would like to have available. Special recognition must be given to Dr. Paul L. Dressel without whose patience, academic and personal support this student's candidacy for the doctorate would not have become a reality. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Chapter 1. RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY .................................. 1 2. A HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE RESIDENCE REQUIREMENT IN DOCTORAL STUDY ........................................... 13 3. DESIGN OF THE STUDY ...................................... 27 4. RESULTS OF THE STUDY ..................................... 32 5. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS FOR THE STUDY ................... 41 Appendix A. INSTITUTIONS IN THE STUDY .................. . ............. A1 8. SUMMARY OF SURVEY OF RESIDENCE REQUIREMENTS IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION SECTION 1 ................................................ Bl SECTION 2 ................................................ BIZ SECTION 3 ................................................ 820 SECTION 4 ................................ . ............... 828 SECTION 5 ................................................ B34 SECTION 6 .................................. .. ............ B41 LIST OF REFERENCES ........................ ...................... 49 iv CHAPTER I RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY Introduction The demand for more accountability, the surplus of Ph.D.‘s in the labor force, and the emergence of non-traditional degree programs have contributed to the critical review of graduate education in the 1970's. The particular focus in this review has been the standards and requirements for doctoral education. The debate over standards in graduate education began with the establishment of Johns Hopkins University and has been a continuing part of American higher education. Brubacher and Rudy (1968) documented some of the history of standards in graduate education. They indicated that candidates for the doctoral degree had varying aims and abilities and that graduate schools had varying standards during the late l800‘s. Beginning in 1893, a number of graduate students clubs, anxious to protect the meaning of their degrees, carried on a campaign for the establishment of a higher and more uniform standard in the awarding of Ph.D.‘s. “The doctors degree," they said, "ought to stand all the world over, as it does in Europe, for research . . . . We ask that the Doctor’s degree be given only to persons competent to advance knowledge in some department and trained as resident graduates in some university of high rank." As a result of this agitation, the Association of American Universities was established in l900, and this organization proceeded to define certain minimum standards of high quality with respect to academic residence, examinations, and dissertation, to which all accredited institutions had to conform in awarding the Ph.D. (p. 195) Although the structure of graduate education seems to have Changed very little, the debate over standards for graduate educa- tion, particularly at the doctoral level, has continued until the present. Concerning the challenges to graduate schools, Heiss (T970) posited that: Tradition sits securely in the chairs of most graduate departments. Efforts to bring about fundamental changes in the Ph.D. program have usually been aborted by the specter of "lower- ing the standards," graduate schools continue to find security and comfort in models imported nearly a century ago from Europe--the birthplace of formal university education. The fact that the model is no longer viable--even in Europe-- makes such academics uneasy, but few have been made uneasy enough to mount a full scale campaign for basic Change. (p. 4) The Commission on Non-Traditional Study (Gould, Chairman, l973) suggested that the changes in education should be considered with awareness of the effects on standards. Education to match our needs--as individuals and as a society-~that is everyone's goal. We should work toward it enthusiastically, with a sense of commitment and with confidence that there are good and valid ways to achieve it, ways that do not lessen quality even when they are different from traditional standards. (p. xix) The balance between standards in graduate education and reform in requirements for graduate education necessary to meet the needs of a Changing society is currently a paramount concern for graduate institutions. The call for reform in higher education has continued at length with proposals now being made which go to the very heart of the system of higher education and ask for radical changes in its structure and processes. In an address to the l97O Columbia University charter day dinner, President William J. MCGill said, "Reform in large institutions is possible only when people are running scared. Believe me, we in higher education are very nervous, and thus the next decade is likely to produce reorganization, curriculum reform, redefinition of professional life, and a variety of other innovations unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Our survival depends upon it." McGill is right. There was never a more propitious time than the present for reform and renewal in higher education. (Smith, Editor, 1971, p. 66) Certainly the review of residence requirements is an integral part of the reform in higher education. The nation now has a system of campuses that are within commuting distance of a large percentage of the entire population. Thus, when considering reform in higher education, it is important to examine the questions of how we define and whether we should require residency. Smith (l97l) points out that "Moreover, we create a false antithesis when we put the needs of the individual in opposition to the needs of the institution, but we have often made this dangerous antithesis. We assume that if one is helped, the other is hurt." (p. 67) The review of the state of residence requirements in doctoral education will contribute to the background about the relative merits of competency programs and the credentialing society, external degree programs, and structured and non-structured learning contexts. The number of part-time students in higher education has increased at a rate which is greater than that of full-time students. The Committee of the Part-Time Graduate Student (Council of Graduate Schools, 1977) produced the following information: Over 60 percent of graduate students in the U.S. attend part-time. Part-time students comprise the majority in all types of graduate schools . . . 60.4 percent in private doctorate-granting schools . . . 51.6 percent in public doctorate- granting schools. The proportion of part-time graduate students has been growing steadily since at least 197T. It will probably continue to increase for the next five years, since 70 percent of respond- ing institutions reported actively seeking part-time students, 80 percent believe part- time programs are important in meeting present institutional goals, and 87 percent believe such programs will be very important in five years. (Summary) In addition, the Committee recommended that A study should also be made of those institutions with different residence requirements for part- time graduate students, and of those which have changed all residence requirements in ways pro- moting part-time study, to learn the nature of the differences and the experience these institutions have had with the new requirement. (p. 12) The above data on the part-time graduate student does not present the total authentic picture that few graduate students are actually full-time students. Full-time enrollment is usually equated to eight or ten hours at the doctoral level but degree requirements assume enrollment for fifteen hours per quarter. Many of the students who are Classified as full-time enrolled students have some type of graduate assistantship which really invalidates full-time enrollment as: 1) A teaching assistantship yields a stipend and the task is unrelated to the research Ph.D. or 2) A research assistantship may be half or three-quarter time employment and provide a stipend while many students are able to extract a dissertation from it. Besides recognizing the knowledge gained outside the classroom, many adult-oriented programs are designed to accommodate the mature life-style of their students. Classes and seminars given during the evenings and on weekends have become more widely available. Many institutions have also adopted flexible policies regarding the con- centration and distribution requirements of degree programs, the time limit in which programs must be completed, and the residence require- ments for degree completion. "More courses and seminars are now being offered at off-campus locations, sometimes greatly distant from the home campus, as well as through independent study. As a result, many of today's students are Spending less time on-campus than their predecessors." (Gordon and Schub, Editors, 1976) Recommendations are being developed about the credentialing society that also affect residence requirements. The Commission on Non-Traditional Study suggested that Many kinds of program options or diverse and flexible arrangements for study should be available to each student. In contrast, the rigidities of time, space, and academic credentialing have worked directly, though often covertly, to foster elitism in higher education. (Gould, Chairman, 1973, pp. 28, 50) Residence requirements contribute to the elitism since they require students to forego income to pursue a degree program. Competency programs in higher education involve a model in which what constitutes an educated person is used to prepare a set of competencies that student must satisfy prior to graduation. "Where, how, or when the student achieves the competence is ideally of no consequence." (Trivett, 1975, p. 1) Thus, residence requirements are inconsistent with the philosophy of competency education. In addition, external degree programs exist in such diverse geographical locations as the British Open University, the New York State Board of Regents, and the Extended University of the University of California. According to Houle (1974), most policy makers and educators in institutions of higher learning have been aware for some years that the patterns of the past could not continue into the future unchanged. Thus, residence requirements are usually matters of local academic decision. If a college wished, either independently or as a part of a consortium, to enter into an arrangement in which minimum attendance was not required of an external student, little other than making up the deficit in its tuition fees (presumably by other systems of equivalency payments) would stop it from doing so. If this action violated the rules of an accrediting association, leniency probably could be secured for a limited period because of the experimental nature of the program. (Houle, 1974, p. 163) The material outlined in the above paragraphs considers a reversal of one of the long established standards of American graduate education--residency. Currently, with competency educa- tion, external degrees, and other models of graduate education, there exists a great disparity in the definition of residence requirements for graduate education. No definitive, descriptive study has been published in this subject area in order to shed additional light on the relative merits of residence requirements in graduate education. The only brief investigation (Mayshark, 1973) which approaches the topic of this study concerns itself solely with graduate programs in the discipline of education and concludes that the new direction or trend is toward less residency requirements or toward no residency requirements. According to Mayshark (1973), the reason for this trend appears to relate to the maturity of the graduate student today and the large number of individuals who have full-time, career-oriented employment and desire to complete a grad- uate program simultaneously. The study outlines two factors which work against full residence--no work (or even half-time work) policies: 1) the economic demands that prevail and seen to increase as the standard of living rises, and 2) the professional pressures for further education. A panel discussion on the re-examination of residency require- ments at the 12th Annual Meeting of the Council of Graduate Schools (Noonan, 1972) concluded with a consensus that all graduate schools should rethink their notions regarding residence credits. Indeed, there are many contemporary issues related to the merit of accepting or deleting residence requirements for graduate education. Two of these issues are l) the question of access for minorities, females, and part-time students to higher education and 2) a closely related issue--lifelong education. Has graduate and particularly doctoral education been guilty of that form of ethnocentrism which states, "We will accept anybody who will become like us?" These groups of potential doctoral students may be characterized as having a wider diversity of life-styles than the traditional homogenous group of graduate students. One premise is that if diversity of life-styles are fully recognized in institutional policy and organization adapted accordingly, higher education as a whole could benefit greatly. Thus, when considering the prevailing rules and attitudes related to residency requirements, the concept of lifelong learning in higher education must be evaluated. The nation has embarked on an effort at more widespread, if not universal, higher education. These efforts extend upward from efforts to enlarge educational opportunity at the undergraduate level to efforts to expand the periods and patterns of matriculation. The technologies of closed circuit television lectures, college courses at home, etc. are now being extended to graduate schools. A general question is why graduate schools should insist upon precedence to accumulated requirements when possible revisions would open opportun- ities to members of society heretofore denied access to advanced study. A study of residency requirements must consider the balancing of possible weaknesses inherent in having a large proportion of part- time and external students against the underlying principle that universities serve society and provide educational opportunity to all under conditions which permit them to take advantage of it. Vermilye, Editor, (1974) speaks of the Change in life pattern of college students: College students can now vote, and they have their right of legal contract in 43 of 50 states. And increasingly they leave college early or enroll in only part-time study, trying to break out of the so-called preadult stage of learning which seems to them a time of endless incubation. Incidentally, it is a startling and signifi- cant fact that this year over 55 percent of all those enrolled in post-secondary education are part-time students. (p. 6) Shulman (1975) offers a good summary of the premise of lifelong learn- ing. She refers to lifelong learning as a public strategy by which adults can obtain educational experiences throughout their lives on either a full or part-time basis. The learning experiences sought need not be related to career objectives, but can satisfy any educational need. Although governmental support would be necessary to implement this concept, a lifelong learning system would allow the free play of competing institutions in programs to meet adult needs. Moreover, it would not necessarily affect the traditional post-secondary educational system for 18 to 22 year olds. (p. 25) Yet, it would appear that residence requirements may reduce rather than expand lifelong education opportunities as well as access for minorities, women or part-time students to higher education. The residence requirement requires full-time commitment to education that runs counter to the philosophy of lifelong learning and expanded access to higher education. Much of the material in this chapter has dealt with contemporary issues related to the residence requirements focusing upon the enrich- ment of the student's intellectual development and the expedition of the student's progress toward the degree. These issues have been reviewed based on the assumption that the residence requirement should be evaluated in terms of its contribution to the well-being of the student. However, one additional issue which possibly is often over- looked and is, perhaps, more controversial should be considered. The issue is best summarized by Alpert (1970). He indicated that it is not so much that the doctoral student needs the institution as the institution needs the doctoral student because graduate students play a vital role in the intellectual life of the academic community. Alpert further indicated that: We generally talk about education, even at the graduate level, as if whatever we do is done from the point of view of the graduate student. (p. 7) . the concept that the doctoral student brings as much to the campus as he takes away. Indeed, without doctoral candidates an institution might 10 be a center of teaching but it is far less likely to be a center of advanced learning. Graduate students learn quite a bit from their professors but they typically learn much more from their fellow students. Furthermore, professors typically learn as much from their graduate students as they teach them . . . . So quite apart from the economic function of graduate students, indispensable in many universities, for example in the teaching of undergraduates or in providing professors with professional research assistants, graduate students play a vital role at the center of the university's intellectual life. (pp. 8-9) Thus, the elimination of residence requirements could seriously affect the quality of graduate education and the campus climate while provid- ing more access to education beyond the bachelor's degree. Purpose of the Study Given the questions which remain about the current status of residence requirements in graduate education and the rationale support- ing their existence, the purpose of this study was to describe the present residence requirements for the Ph.D., Ed.D., and D.B.A. at a selected group of graduate institutions in the United States. In addition, the study sought to identify the various rationales for residence requirements and the variations in the interpretation of residence requirements in doctoral education. Questions which guided the development of the study included: 1. What is the range of differences in the existence of residence requirements at selected graduate institutions? 2. What are the intended implications for standards in doctoral education presented by these selected institutions? 3. How has the rationale for residence requirements evolved? What has been the impact on quality? 11 4. Is there an emerging agreement about the nature and purpose of residence requirements and about the Circumstances under which traditional resi- dence requirements may be waived without jeopar- dizing quality? Overview of the Dissertation Chapter I presented a rationale for the study of residence require- ments in doctoral education. Chapter II presents a review of the literature about graduate education with special emphasis on the development of residence requirements. Chapter III describes the population of the study, the nature of the data, the specific research questions, and the analysis model. In Chapter IV are presented the results of the review of residence requirements for doctoral education at the selected institutions. Chapter V presents a summary of the findings of the study as well as the conclusions and suggested areas for further research. 12 References Alpert, Daniel. Relevance Lf the Residence Reguirements. Washington, D. C: Council of Graduate Schools in the United States, 1970. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 047 611) Brubacher, John S., & Rudy, Willis. Higher Education ig_Transition. New York: Harper and Row, 1968. Commission on Non- Traditional Study, Samuel B. Gould, Chairman. Diversity‘gyD esign. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 197 73 Committee of the Part-Time Graduate Student. Final Report-~1977. Washington, D.C.: Council of Graduate Schools in the United States, 1977. Gordon, Linda W., & Schub, Judy H. (Eds.) Qg.Campus/Off-Campus Degree Prggrams for Part-Time Students. Washington, D.CL: National University Extension Association, 1976. Heiss, Ann M. Challenges to Graduate Schools. San Francisco: Jossey- -Bass Publishers, 1970. Houle, Cyril 0. The External Degree. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1970. Mayshark, Cyrus. The Residengy Requirement for Graduate Programs in Education. Unpublished Paper, School of Education-- University of Texas at El Paso, 1973. Re— examination of the Residency Requirement. Proceedings Lf the Twelfth Annual Meeting Lf the Council Lf Graduate Schools in the United States, 1972, November 29- December 1. (New Orleans.) Schulman, Carol Herrnstadt. Premises for a Learning Society. ERIC/Higher Education Research Report No.8. Washington, D.C. American Association of Higher Education, 1975. Smith, G. Kerry (Ed.) New Teaching New Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1971. Trivett, David A. Competency Programs in Higher Education. ERIC/ Higher Education Research Report No. 7. Washington, D. C. American Association for Higher Education, 1975. Vermilye, Dyckman W. (Ed. ) Lifelong Learners--A New Clientele for Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass Publishers, 1974. CHAPTER 2 A HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE RESIDENCE REQUIREMENT IN DOCTORAL STUDY The residence requirement for the doctoral degree is very closely related to the initiation of doctoral study in the United States. According to Parsons and Platt (1973), There were two precursors of the current graduate school: 1) the various academies in European countries which, however, were relatively weak on the training side and 2) the institutions which grew up in the nineteenth century especially in the German universities, centering about a pro- fessor, who at the same time held the Lehrauftrag and directorship of a research institute. (p. 110) Although the concept of the Ph.D. was introduced into the United States early in the nineteenth century by Americans who had studied in Germany and had returned to teaching posts in our major eastern universities, much debate and controversy about graduate education occurred during the first 50 to 60 years of that century. Storr (1973) provides the following historical notes: During the half-century that preceded Yale's awarding of the first Ph.D. degree in 1861, several unsuccessful attempts were made to establish a national university with uniform standards. (p. xv) The deterioration of the Master's Degree removed old incentives for advanced study, and the Ph.D. had yet to be introduced into the system. Any American desiring this mark of learning or the systematic study with which it was associated was obligated to expatriot himself temporarily. p. 2 13 14 Early in 1830 the New Yark American printed a letter attacking the Spirit of the age and citing the Yale Report of 1828 as a warning against the actual injury which would result from the establishment of a university. (p. 33) In 1856 the Silliman Professor of Natural History, James 0. Dana, put aside the reserve of the older generation to ask the Yale alumni: ”why not have here, THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY! . . . not til then, can we hope to prevent our youth seeking in the atmosphere of Germany the knowledge for which they yearn." (p. 57) The challenge was not immediately accepted. However, in four years doctoral training had its beginning at Yale, which offered the Ph.D. in 1860 and a year later awarded three doctoral degrees in American History. The student who did remain in this country could, after 1860, receive his doctorate. Under this program, about two years were devoted to study of two distinct departments of learning in the Department of Philosophy and the Arts. Persons not holding a degree which documented a command of Greek and Latin were required to pass an examination in those languages or in subjects not included in the advanced course which the faculty was willing to accept as an equivalent. Candidates for the degree were also required to pass a final examination and to present a thesis proving the high attainment in their studies. According to Spurr (1970), The 1860 decision of Yale to offer the doctorate was specifically designed "to enable us to retain in this country many young men, and especially students of science, who now resort to German universities for advantages of study no greater than we are able to afford.” The requirements were at least two years of study on campus past the bachelor's degree, a satisfactory final exam- ination, and a thesis giving evidence of high attainment. (p. 118) 15 "Residence“ was presumably implied in the two-year study requirement. With the founding of Johns Hopkins University in 1876, graduate education was organized as a separate school. This establishment was followed soon by Clark University and Catholic University in 1889 and the University of Chicago in 1890. Also in 1890 Harvard established its graduate school, an action which was followed closely by such state universities as Michigan, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Kansas. The degree requirements for these programs were similar to Yale's earlier program--two years of post-baccalaureate study, an examination, and a thesis. In 1881, the average period of study for many of these programs increased to three years. By 1896 enough institutions were granting doctoral degrees to prompt the creation of a federation of graduate clubs which held a convention in that year and made recommen- dations for uniformity of degree requirements. At its 1896 convention, it recommended that the minimum requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree should be 1) the previous obtainment of a bachelor's degree or equivalent, 2) the completion of at least two years of resident graduate study, one year of which should be on the campus of the institution conferring the degree, 3) an adequate examination, and 4) a thesis embodying the results of the original research, bearing the written acceptance of the professor or department in charge. (Spurr, 1970, pp. 118-119) This appears to be the first time a residence requirement as such was specifically identified as a degree requirement. During this period, the residence requirement implied that the entire period of formal study was on-campus, and part-time or off-campus graduate study was not contemplated as an ingredient in a doctoral program. Spurr (1970) cites a survey of doctoral requirements for 1899. 16 The survey indicated that while seven universities (Brown, Bryn Mawr, George Washington, Minnesota, Missouri, Vanderbilt, and Yale) required two years of residence, Chicago required one and a half, and 13 other institutions (including California, Columbia, Cornell, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Stanford, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Princeton, and Wisconsin) required only one year of residence. By 1908, the National Association of State Universities formed a committee which recommended that the period of post-graduate study for the degree on Doctor of Philosophy be at least three years, one of which should be in residence at the degree granting institution. This did not seem to imply an acceptance of off-campus experiences as credit toward the Ph.D. Rather all formal course work was assumed to be in residence at some graduate institution. However, standardization was not so easily achieved. The American Association of Universities was sufficiently concerned about the variety of graduate requirements to suggest a uniform prescription of one year's bgng_jjgg_graduate study for the Master's degree, but the minimum one year residence requirement could be met by five six-week summer sessions! This was a period in which the residence requirements for doctoral study varied from one to two years while simultaneously the norm was summarized as three years "full and continuous residence" beyond the baccalaureate. Some definitions of requirements took into account the prolonged period of study arising from part-time course work and the prorated period of work on a dissertation by enumerating a Ptotal lapsed time" of no more than seven or eight years beyond the commencement of graduate study as an acceptable duration of doctoral work. 17 During the early 1900's, the nature of residence was not often considered. However, in 1919, a Committee on Requirements for the Ph.D. Degree of the American Association of University Professors raised a series of questions with regard to residence: 1) Should work in summer schools be recognized? 2) Should work at other institutions be recognized? and 3) Should work in government bureaus or similar institutions be accepted as equivalent to university residence? (AAUP Bulletin, 1919) The committee concluded that they could answer yes to all of the above questions given a proviso that conditions in government and other agencies should be "substan- tially equivalent" to those prevailing in organized university course work. The committee expressed the view that such off-campus activ- ities would have to be discounted and limited to some extent. They offered no guidelines for evaluating such off-campus experiences. In 1953 the issues of off-campus and part-time study were again described in a statement from the Committee on Policies in Graduate Education of the Association of Graduate Schools. This committee suggested that implicit in the residence requirement was the belief that a sound graduate program required faculty and facilities which could only be provided on a university campus. Therefore, off-campus education could not serve the same purpose. (Journal of Proceedings and Addresses, 1953) A year later the same committee reported to the annual conference of the Association of Graduate Schools that the residence requirement constituted one of the principal marks of differentiation between graduate and undergraduate education, but it had trouble explaining the meaning of residence as indicated in the following: 18 Residence is an intangible measure, often difficult to define. In essence, it provides an opportunity for students to associate freely with mature scholars who will give them such aid and direction as they may need. (Journal of Proceedings and Addresses, 1954, p. 81) . Additional quandary in the meaning of residence was illustrated as the committee reported as the common practice in 1954 one year of residence for the Master's degree and three for the doctorate, with fractions of the requirement to be considered met when the student was employed on the campus as an instructor or as an assistant. Seemingly, it was evident that at this time residence no longer implied merely full-time attention to courses of study. The committee was concerned primarily with part-time study and off- Campus instruction. In the committee's view, neither comprised the kind of "residency" which it considered basic to the integrity of graduate education. In 1955 the Association of Graduate Schools focused its attention on the continued ambiguity of the term "residence." Additional reference was made to the teaching assistant on the campus versus graduate students similarly gainfully employed but off-campus. Was the former deriving a benefit by his constant contact with other students and faculty which the latter missed? Evidently, residence by this interpretation involved a presence on the campus but not necessarily involvement in graduate course work (Journal of Proceedings and Addresses, 1955). At this 1955 conference the graduate deans were concerned with campus experience rather than with campus course work. The part-time Ph.D. student 19 was the object of considerable critical comments in terms of not being a full member of the university. The Committee on Policies in Graduate Education at the same meeting expressed its disapproval of Ph.D. degrees awarded on the basis of mere accumulation of credit hours by part-time study. Thus, there were many complications surrounding the concept of residence. The committee's preference was for "a rule of continuous residence“ requiring that the student should make graduate study his primary commitment. They felt that this was a resonable demand to make at least for one continuous year. The response of the deans in attendance at the above 1955 conference was quite varied. Some insisted that all of the student's time in pursuit of the Ph.D. degree, including the period devoted to writing the thesis, should be in residence. One of the deans suggested that a teaching assistant taking a part-time course load for four to five years could fulfill the requirement of one year's continuous residence. Some of the deans were willing to accept a one-year residence for the M.A. as fulfilling the requirement for the doctorate, while others thought a second year Should be required for the Ph.D. degree. Others held the opinion that the residence year could only be served in the last year of the doctoral program, while some feared that in this case, the year would be devoted to writing the dissertation and the spirit of the residence year would thus be violated. No clarity was provided as to whether the residence year should be used for course work, research, or writing a dissertation. (Journal of Proceedings and Addresses, 1955) 20 A 1956 report of the committee disclosed that two-thirds of the major Ph.D. degree-granting institutions required a three-year pro- gram, with a minimum of one year at the degree-granting university. However, the definition of residence was still very perplexing and ranged from "one full session without interruption or outside employment" to "three consecutive quarters of full registration." An extensive critical review of graduate education occurred in the 1960's and was initiated by Berelson. His study was con- cerned with issues of the foreign language requirement, the nature of the dissertation, and the protracted time over which the pursuit of the degree was extended by many students. During this decade, residence as such was not a serious concern in critical studies of graduate education. The need during this time period was for more Ph.D.‘s to staff the expanding colleges and the new institutions being created and also to provide the services demanded by the new technologies. The central problem appeared to be the extended time period over which the degree was being pursued. A corresponding concern was the large dropout rate amongst those embarking on doctoral study. The rise in dropouts and the increasingly lengthy delay in completing degree requirements was attributed to the demand for extensive dissertations. By necessity, many doctoral students utilized part-time employment to maintain themselves while they wrote long dissertations. Major recommendations stemming from the studies of this decade were to "tighten" and shorten the doctoral program, modify the foreign language requirements and reduce the size of the dissertation. (Spurr, 1970) Also, an increasing expression of concern about whether the traditional research Ph.D. adequately prepared 21 students for college teaching was apparent at this time. Residence related to the part-time doctoral student was not dis- cussed. At this time the criticisms of part-time education endorsed the idea that graduate education was most appropriately and expedi- tiously pursued when the student devoted full-time to his academic work and was present on the campus without the distractions of gainful employment. The Association of Graduate Schools continued to make the residence requirement of particular concern at the annual meetings. The 1963 conference criticized programs which permitted the award of a Ph.D. based largely on the part-time accumulation of course credits and insisted that full-time study in residence, perferably of two years duration, was essential for a successful Ph.D. program: so that, during the period, the student may devote his full attention to his advanced study and research and may work in close and often informal collaboration with the graduate faculty professors, with other grad- uate students in the program, and with distinguished visiting scholars. (Journal of Proceedings and Addresses, 1963, p. 22) Interest in residence requirements in the 1970's has risen by virtue of the reasons discussed in Chapter 1. Continuing debates over the danger of traditional graduate programs isolating students from rather than preparing them for, active roles in society material- ized during the first half of the decade. This debate was accentuated by the changing technological, theoretical, and societal conditions which narrow the distance between the university and the public world and broaden the study of graduate education to include the community outside the campus. Mayhew and Ford (1974) indicate a comparable trend in the direction of work experiences in graduate 22 programs, particularly in new fields of doctoral study. In these programs, it appears that Clinical experiences and field work are regarded as of more central importance than the traditional campus curricula. This study also indicated that the principal current reforms in graduate education involve shortening the time span over which the Ph.D. is pursued and eliminating the part-time student from doctoral programs. The 1970 meetings of the Council of Graduate Schools recognizes the tendency in both undergraduate and Master's programs to substi- tute off-campus experiences for traditional course work taken in residence. While rejecting any abandonment of residence requirements for the doctorate, this conference placed residence in a different light. Alpert (1970) postulated that the purpose of the requirement was not to bring the doctoral student into contact with professors-- the traditional view--or to enable him to profit from the academic resources of the university but rather to allow the university to benefit from the on-campus presence of the doctoral student. Alpert (1970) describes the benefit of the doctoral student to the university in a four-fold manner: 1) they help to create new knowledge by Challenging the traditional assumptions and values of the faculty; 2) they play a creative role in the learning process as teachers of undergraduates; 3) they serve as influential models in socializing undergraduates who empathize more readily with their graduate teaching assistants than with older faculty; and 4) they force the university to make its academic programs more applicable to contemporary social requirements by their demands for relevance. (pp. 71-77) If the residence requirement is to be justified on the basis of the above view, the connection between residence requirements and on-campus 23 course work will have to be reconsidered. A minimum of one-year resi- dence requirement will not serve the purpose of enabling the graduate student to become a vital part of the university community. If technological advances make it possible for traditional courses to be completed at other locations, the campus as the most effective locus of graduate study will lose some of its justifications. If societal needs demand a narrowing of the gap between campus and community, a residence requirement which reinforces the graduate students' separa- tion from the community seems outside the spirit of education, especially if interdisciplinary problem oriented graduate work is expanded. European practices in relation to residence requirements for the doctorate have long been based solely upon a major thesis or dissertation. According to Spurr (1970) the Doctor of Philosophy at Oxford and Sussex has required full-time research activity in residence leading to the dissertation. This results in the degree being earned more quickly (three to four years total time) than in the American counterpart. However, the feeling is growing that the straight research doctorate may constitute unnecessary over- specialization. Innovations and changes in Europe may be considered in common with the range of practices in the United States for doctoral study although various countries have very different intellectual and social statuses, functions, and requirements for the degree. According to Spurr (1970), At Aston and two other technological universities, the "sandwich" principle is applied to the Ph.D. 24 level with post-graduate students alternating study on-campus with research in an industrial laboratory . . . . On a more restrained note, Cambridge has reduced the residence requirement for post-graduate students from six to three terms (two years to one), thus making it possible for a doctoral student to spend as much as two years in a nearby governmental research labora- tory working on his dissertation as long as he lives within ten miles of the university. (p. 172) Knowles (1977) adds additional information on doctoral study in Ihg Encyclopedia of Higher Education. At the University of London advanced doctoral students may work on their doctoral dissertations while employed at non-university laboratories. Also, in the United Kingdom the Ph.D. is granted to persons several years after under- graduate or pre-doctoral graduation in recognition of distinguished public work. In Germany and Norway students who have started to work on their dissertations receive virtually no supervision. While in Denmark the doctorate is not awarded for course work but for completion of a scholarly dissertation defended publicly and presumed to be a genuine contribution to knowledge. Certainly the literature suggests the needs for a broad recon- sideration of the nature and purpose of residence as a traditional degree requirement. The ambiguity of the nature of "residency" is perhaps best illustrated by the imprecision with which the require- ment is stated as the mandate of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools in its current statement of standards for the doctoral. degree: A program leading to a doctoral degree normally is the equivalent of three years full-time grad- uate study including . . . a period of residency after admission to a doctoral program specified by the institution, the major portion of which is devoted to the academic program. (p. 28) 25 Thus, looking at a full century of historical information after the initiation of formal graduate education in the United States, clarifying the philosophical assumptions underlining the residence requirement for the doctorate and defining the nature of the requirement with some precision remains a challenging task. 26 References Alpert, Daniel. Relevance 9: the Residence Requirement. Washington, D.C.: Council of Graduate Schools in the United States, 1970. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 047 611) Berelson, Bernard. Graduate Education jn_the United States. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1960. Journal 9: Proceedings and Addresses of the Association of Graduate Schools in the Association of American Universities. Fifth Annual Conference, 1953; Sixth Annual Conference, 1954; Seventh Annual Conference, 1955. Knowles, Asa S. (Ed.) Encyclgpedia 9: Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1977. Mayhew, Lewis 8., & Ford, Patrick J. Reform in Graduate and Professional Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1974. Parsons, Talcott, & Platt, Gerald M. The American University. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973. Report of Committee 0 on Requirements for the Ph.D. Degree. A.A.U.P. Bulletin, V, January-February 1919. Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. Standards of th§_ College Delegate Assembly. Atlanta, Georgia, December 2, 1970. Spurr, Steven. Academic Degree Structures: Innovative Approaches. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1970. Storr, Richard J. The Beginningg: the Future. New York: McGraw- Hill Book Company, 1973. CHAPTER 3 DESIGN OF THE STUDY The literature cited in Chapter 2 provided the basis for the initial research focus for this study by tracing the historical pattern of residence requirements in doctoral education. Through the review of information requested from each institution, the current status of residence requirements was identified. Specifi- cally, the responses to questions about the following characteristics of residence requirements will be documented: 1. the various rationales for residence requirements in doctoral education, 2. variations in interpretations of the definition of residence requirements in doctoral education, 3. present residence requirements for the Ph.D., Ed.D., and D.B.A. in the selected graduate universities in this study. The above research concerns will be addressed by exploration of the following queries both on an individual and on a collective basis for the programs in the study: A. Specifications of the Residence Requirements 1. What is the total time required? 2. Is this time requirement to be contiguous or summative? 3. May the requirement be met on a part-time or a full-time basis? 27 28 What is the definition of full-time for the requirement? 00 teaching and research figure in this definition of full-time? Are assistant- ships required? How do summer sessions relate to the definition? Is any type of employment from part to full-time allowed? What differences exist in the above specifica- tions among the Ph.D., Ed.D., and the D.B.A.? 8. Provisions for Modifications or Waiver of the Residence Requirement 1. Who has the authority to make such adjustments or waivers? What is the normal extent of the adjustment or waiver provided? What is the frequency of adjustments or waivers allowed? Historical Development of the Residence Requirement and the Rationale for the Requirement 1. 2. What was the historical evolution of the requirement? What is the rationale for having the residence requirement? What are the possible implications for standards in higher education? Is the rationale for the requirement related to student interaction with faculty, student interaction with other students, the necessity for a concen- trated period of study, the close proximity of facilities such as libraries or laboratories, the formation of scholarly habits, or other specific priorities of the particular program or institution? 0. Enforcement of the Residence Requirement 1. What is actually enforced relative to the residence requirement? Does the enforcement depend on collec- tion of full-time fees, a minimum credit or course load for each semester or quarter, accumulation of a minimum number of credits during a specified period of time, full-time presence on a campus possibly including an assistantship or fellowship, or other explicit requirements of the program and/ or institution? 29 Who enforces the residence requirement? (For example, the advisor or committee chairperson, the Registrar, the Graduate Dean, or other appropriate person desig- nated by the program and/or institution.) E. Historical Stability of the Residence Requirement and Present View of Potential Changes to the Requirement 1. 2. How stable has the residence requirement been over time? How can the present view of change for the requirement be categorized? Would the institution and/or program changes be congruent with: a. a conservative view that maintenance of strict rules for the residence requirement will insure high standards, b. a flexible outlook which would allow the control of residence requirements by the department or doctoral committee or possibly maintenance of central control of the requirement with allowance for adaptations or waivers, or c. elimination of the residence requirement with emphasis placed on product rather than process? For programs and/or institutions in which the evidence indicates a shift of views about residence requirements, the reasons for the shift are documented by using quotations from the participants in the survey of the programs as well as written statements about the programs. Some of the reasons for the shift in views about residence requirements that were investigated include the lack of stipends for doctoral students, the maturity of the present cadre of doctoral candidates, competition among graduate programs, and various concerns that are program specific. F. Variations in the Residence Requirement for Various Degrees and Institutions 1. Can differences in the residence requirements among the three degree types (Ph.D., Ed.D., D.B.A.) be identified? 3O 2. To what extent do the non-traditional institutions attempt to claim residency requirement equivalence by occasional and short-term contracts or inter- actions? Information for this study was collected by contacting the deans of the graduate programs which offer the Ph.D., Ed.D., or D.B.A. within the institutions that were chosen as the study population. Information requested from each program and/or institution included: 1. Copies of any graduate program literature that specified residence requirements or which indi- cated the various ways in which the requirements may be met, or which provided comments about the possibility that the residence requirements may be waived, 2. Materials which indicated the existence of and authorization for variations in the interpretation of the residence requirements among colleges and departments within the institution, 3. Statements prepared by committees, graduate program administrators, or others which offer the rationale for existing residence requirements, 4. The deans' of the graduate programs individual viewpoints on residence requirements and any dis- cussions or thinking occurring at the selected institutions concerning the modification of the residence requirements as related by the deans. The graduate institutions were selected on the basis of a combination of four criteria: 1) excellence as indicated by ratings of departments in the Roose and Andersen report on the quality of graduate education, 2) amount of research support as measured by the number of federal dollars for the institutions, 3) size of the graduate program as measured by the number of graduate students, and 4) special program characteristics. The last criterion was included to insure that the total range of residence requirements would be included in the study. By using this criterion some of the newer, 31 non-traditional, unique graduate programs that are now part of American higher education were reviewed. The graduate institutions selected as the study population are listed in Appendix A. Since the study is descriptive in nature, the primary task in the analysis phase was to organize the information from each program and/or institution in a consistent manner. To facilitate the review of the material provided by each respondent, a form was designed which highlighted the information needed to address the research questions by categorizing the data for these questions and by identify- ing the pertinent quotations. Aggregates by type of degree and across programs including frequency and percentage distributions are the basis for documenting the current status of residence requirements in graduate education and for developing the trend data that generate the conclusions of the study. Inferential statistical techniques were not appropriate because of the nature of the data and the type of research questions addressed in the study. In Chapter 4 the review of the residence requirements based on the information from the study population will be presented. The discussion will focus on the processes and products related to the residence requirements and it will be organized around the research questions identified in this chapter. In Chapter 5 the summary of the findings of the study, the conclusions, and the recommendations for further research will be presented. CHAPTER 4 RESULTS OF THE STUDY The study was conducted by contacting the deans of 50 graduate programs which offer the Ph.D., Ed.D., or D.B.A. as listed in Appendix A. Information was returned by 47 of the 50 institutions selected for the study which yielded a return rate of 94 percent. The type of specific information requested from each institution was documented in Chapter 3. This information was collected in order to investigate: 1. present residence requirements for the Ph.D., Ed.D. and D.B.A. in selected graduate universities, 2. variations in the interpretation of the definition of residence requirements in doctoral education, 3. the various rationales for residence requirements in doctoral education. The results of particular queries for each of the research concerns as outlined in Chapter 3 will be summarized in the balance of this chapter. Information for individual programs and institutions is contained in detail in Appendix B. The total time required in residence by the majority of the institutions is one year. The institutions requiring more than one year in residence often permit meeting the requirement with time in residence at another institution or time in residence at the Master's level for part of the requirement. However, the substitutions indi- cated above usually result in a requirement of time at the 32 33 degree-granting institution of at least one year in residence. Approximately 20 percent of the institutions surveyed require less than one year in residence. These institutions which require less than one year of residence are basically institutions which could be classified as non-traditional programs with the following excep- tions: 1. one Ed.D. degree requiring one eight-week summer session, 2. one Ph.D. program which allows accumulation of credit units at various locations within the state, 3. two Ed.D. degree programs which only require summative accumulation of 30 and 90 credits respectively, 4. one D.B.A. program with no residence requirement. The time required in residence is usually accompanied by a specified number of points, credits, units, or courses which must be attained during the specified time period. Two exceptions to the preceding specifications include one institution which requires nine full-time quarters of tuition payments on a summative basis, and one institution which requires the judgment of the student's advisory committee for the amount of residence credit attained for the semester based upon intellectual growth of the student. The time requirement is almost equally split between contiguous and summative accumulation of the various points, credits, units, or courses to be achieved during the time period. Slightly less than one-half of the institutions require full- time scholarly work for the period of residence. The definition of what is a full-time basis of study includes a range of the following 34 enumerations: four half-courses per term, six to nine quarter credit hours, nine to thirteen semester credit hours, or three to five courses per semester. Many of the institutions which permit part- time study to meet the residence requirement simultaneously impose a total time limit for attainment of the degree or specify various progress benchmarks during matriculation which must be attained with— in a maximum amount of time. The most prevalent definition of full- time study is either a minimum of nine to twelve credits per semester or a minimum of nine credits per quarter. The mode of the requirement for part-time study when part-time is allowed is in the range of four to six units, hours, 0 credits which may be either based upon a quarter or semester system. Thus, the majority of the institutions do not differentiate between the residence requirement and the comple— tion of a particular amount of credits on campus in either a contiguous or summative fashion. Close to 40 percent of the programs allow research activity to count toward the residence requirement. In a small number of cases where research is counted toward the requirement, the total length of time in residence required is lengthened while the minimum amount of credits required per term or semester is reduced. In one partic- ular case, two terms of doctoral research are required in addition to the prescribed residence requirement. Several of the programs which count research toward the residence requirement allow research for the dissertation to count as part of the requirement. The vast majority of the programs surveyed allow summer sessions to apply to the residence requirement. Most of the non-traditional programs require some type of summer activity in residence if only 35 for a short period on a one time only basis. Some of the more traditional programs which allow part-time study during the residency specify that summer sessions may not be the sole contributing term for the requirement. Assistantships are not required by any of the institutions. The student may have a graduate teaching or research assistantship and still meet the residence requirement. However, some of the programs alter the residence requirement when a student has an assistantship. Usually the change in the requirement lengthens the total time required in residence, while specifying the minimum and maximum number of credits which may be carried for a term or semester. Employment is allowed up to a full-time basis by about 50 percent of the programs surveyed. Some of these programs qualify this flexi- bility by maximum time limits for obtaining the degree, discouragement of full-time employment, requirement of special approval for full- time work, or other constraints which make the feasibility of full- time employment questionable. A few programs specify the employment to be only teaching or research at the institution. Non-traditional programs seem typically to expect and/or require employment on a full-time basis as an integral part of the educational experience. Twenty percent of the programs have no specific policy on employment which in effect would leave this decision up to the student vis-a-vis the requirements of scholarly effort necessary to obtain the degree. Differences found between the Ph.D., D.B.A., and Ed.D. degrees in the specifications for the residence requirement considered up to this point in this chapter are almost nonexistent. Only two of the programs contacted reported any difference in the requirement 36 specifications between the Ph.D., D.B.A., and Ed.D. In one instance, the institution required four semesters beyond the Master's degree for the Ed.D. as opposed to only two semesters beyond the Master's degree for the D.B.A., and six semesters beyond the baccalaureate degree for the Ph.D. The second institution required six terms beyond the baccalaureate degree for the Ph.D., the accumulation of 90 credits only for the Ed.D., while having no residence requirement for the D.B.A. Many of the programs either had no written policy on waivers for the residence requirement or did not report such when questioned during the correspondence for this study. Of those institutions which did report on a waiver requirement, approximately one-third indicated that they did not allow any waivers for the residence requirement. The majority of the institutions which did allow for some type of waiver required review and permission from the Dean of the Graduate School, the Graduate Council, or some committee related to graduate study. The frequency of waivers allowed by these insti- tutions was normally described as infrequent to rare or very rare. When waivers were allowed, the recurring form of the adjustment or waiver was to approve residence from other institutions to be accepted as part of the requirement for residence at the institution which is granting the doctorate to the student. The evolution of and rationale for the requirements with pos- sible implications for standards in higher education as reported by the programs surveyed is included in detail in Appendix B-- Table 3. Many of the institutions support their rationale for having a residence requirement by citing the value of direct 37 interaction and close association by the student with the faculty as scholars and with their fellow students as peers. The academic environment with the proximity of a library and other facilities as well as the opportunity for a period of total immersion into the life of a scholar are mentioned as further consideration of the usefulness of a residence requirement. Attendance at colloquia and seminars as well as the provision of time for development of research capability are given proper continuity by mandatory residency accord- ing to the responding programs. The non-traditional programs which require little or no residency indicate that they can provide doctoral education in a different manner while maintaining a high level of quality control. Therefore, these non-traditional programs expect the student to remain employed and simultaneously to be able to perform in-depth research and self- Study. Non-traditional programs claim not to be concerned with the student's geographical location while engaged in scholarly work. The key issue is quality of work which these non-traditional programs attempt to insure through various forms of competency review and examination. The historical evolution of residence requirements at individual institutions received very little attention in the responses from the programs surveyed. Most institutions indicated little change of the requirement and could only recall that the rationale originally was to assure that students had sufficient exposure to the academic, scholarly life although one institution implied the original intent was to guarantee a minimum amount of revenue. The rationale for having residence requirements is best summarized for the programs 38 surveyed, exclusive of the non-traditional programs, by one of the traditional institutions as follows: The rationale is that the requirement allows for a period of full-time reading, reflection, study, and research, with- out the distractions of outside employment responsibilities, which is considered necessary to give the student continuity in this research and to fulfill the spirit and special de- mands of a doctoral degree program. Also, the requirement allows for the opportunities to attend seminars and colloquia in the student's own field and related fields, to consult regularly with professors and colleagues, and generally to participate in the scholarly and research life of the University which represent a part of the student's total educational experience of equal importance to the formal course credits earned. The requirements for residency as stated in Appendix B are enforced at minimum level by all institutions. Some of the programs allow for departments to establish additional requirements which are more demanding than the minimum institutional requirements. However, in all cases the minimum institutional requirements must be met as enforced by the Graduate School, Graduate Council, Academic Senate, or Dean of the Graduate Program. As stated previously, the majority of institutions enforce some form of a minimum credit or course load to be carried for a specified amount of contiguous or summative terms or semesters. In the few cases outlined in Appendix 8, the requirement is based on payment of fees which necessitates additional input to enforcement by the Registrar. In actuality, the enforcement of all residence requirements emanates from some division of the Graduate School, Graduate Council, or Academic Senate at most insti- tutions by the review of the student's compliance with all requirements prior to the process of certification for the granting of the doctoral degree. 39 Forty percent of the programs surveyed offered substantive comments on the stability of the residence requirement at their respective institutions as well as their view of the potential for Changes to the requirement. The programs which responded to the above show about two-thirds of the programs indicating a disposition to maintain and support the present requirements which are for these institutions classified as relatively strict and conservative. Indeed, some of these programs are considering tightening the resi- dence requirements. The balance of the institutions responding to this area of the residence requirement include a group of non- traditional and traditional programs. The non-traditional programs have eliminated residence requirements in the conventional sense and attempt to provide graduate education without tight and rigid structures and claim to place their emphasis on product rather than process. The traditional programs which could be Classified as flexible in their outlook for change in the residence requirement voiced concern about the following areas related to the residence requirements which could cause a shift in view and change of the requirement: 1. discrimination against women and minorities, 2. incompatibility of the requirement with the need for employment by students, 3. off-campus programs are often incongruent with residence requirements, 4. non-traditional approaches to higher education which maintain quality but allow for flexibility in structure. Overall, there is little difference in the residence requirements among the three degree types (Ph.D., Ed.D., D.B.A.). The major 40 differences in the residence requirements occur between the tradi- tional and non-traditional programs. A discussion of the extent of the non-traditional institutions claim to residence requirement equivalence will be included in Chapter 5 along with the summary of findings for this study. Furthermore, Chapter 5 will examine the conclusions from this study as well as the suggested areas for further research. CHAPTER 5 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS FOR THE STUDY The study was designed to research residence requirements in doctoral education. This was done by consideration of: l. 2. the history of residence requirements, the rationale for residence requirements in doctoral education, variations in interpretations and definitions of residence requirements at doctoral level institu- tions, a survey of present residence requirements for the Ed.D., D.B.A.,and Ph.D. at selected graduate universities in the United States. Information was obtained for the study by contacting the deans of the graduate programs at the institutions Chosen as the study population. These institutions were Chosen using particular criteria for selection as described in Chapter 3. The research concerns of the study were addressed by a series of queries which also are out- lined in detail in Chapter 3. The findings of this study may be summarized as follows: 1. the majority of doctoral programs for the Ed.D., D.B.A., and Ph.D. require a residence of at least one year, the institutions which require less than one year of residence are with a few exceptions non-traditional programs, with only two exceptions time in residence is required in conjunction with a specific number of credits, points, or units to be attained during the time period, 41 10. ll. 12. 13. 42 there is no clear differentiation by most institutions between residence on a campus and the completion of a particular amount of credits on campus in either a contiguous or summative manner, close to 40 percent of the programs specifically allow research activity to count toward the require— ment and most institutions would not distinguish between research credits and credits earned as part of the residence requirement, most institutions allow summer sessions to apply to the residence requirement and most non-traditional programs require some type of summer activity as a part of or total contribution to their claim to a residence requirement, ' assistantships (teaching or research) are not required by any of the institutions surveyed although a student may have an assistantship and still meet the requirement which may be altered in time and in the minimum and maximum credits specified per term or semester, the majority of the programs either have no policy on employment for doctoral candidates or allow full-time employment with some qualifications to this apparent total flexibility for the student, there exists little if any difference in residence requirements for the Ed.D., D.B.A., and Ph.D., the institutions which reported on a policy for waiver of the residence requirement indicated that the frequency of such a waiver is seldom to very rare with the most prevalent allowance for approval of residence at another institution, many traditional institutions support their rationale for the requirement by pointing out the value of student interaction with faculty and their fellow students as well as the total participation in the life of a scholar for a period of time, non-traditional programs while making some claims to requiring residency for the most part focus upon maintaining a high level of quality control and yet offering doctoral education in a different manner with little or no actual residency required, there exists little historical record at individual institutions as to the evolution of their residence requirements, 43 14. those programs which presented their views of the possibility of Changes to the present requirement showed little disposition to alter their current requirement with some concern expressed about the need for employment by students, discrimination against minorities and women, and the use of off- campus programs. The following paragraphs will address implications and conclusions drawn from this study. The majority of the institutions are apparently fairly content with their present residence requirements although the issue surfaces from time to time in some committee of the respective graduate programs. The traditional programs support the use of the residence requirement as a period of total immersion into the life of a scholar without dis- tractions from the outside world. The non-traditional programs claim that the geographical location of the student is not important and quality work may be insured by various forms of review and examination of the doctoral student. The traditional programs feel that the residence requirement provides a time for the development of research capability and interaction with the academic environment while the non- traditional programs propose that ongoing employment activity provides an integral portion of the student's total education. In actuality, most institutions' requirements for residence may be met with only the accumulation of credits or courses on campus over time in doctoral programs almost equally split between requiring residence of consec- utive versus summative terms or semesters. In the aggregate, 70 percent of the traditional programs are established such that full-time employ- ment would be feasible although somewhat discouraged in a few particular C6565. 44 Non-traditional programs require a maximum full-time residence commitment of eight weeks attendance at a particular location during the summer which is not necessarily on campus because most of these programs have no campus in the ordinary sense and expect full-time employment of the student outside of this session and various ”week- end” or "one week" seminars. Therefore, residence requirements are in existence in order to provide for students an opportunity to enhance their educational experience through some type of sustained interaction with the academic environment. In truth, the residence requirement offers a greater opportunity for the benefits previously stated in this chapter through sustained completion of courses and credits for that time period than no requirement at all. However, the residence requirement must be complemented by individual student initiative in order to bring the espoused benefits to fruition. In other words, the student could in most cases attend the required class contact hours or complete the necessary residency with registra- tion for research credits and meet the minimum residence regulation without any total “immersion" into the life of a scholar. The relationship between the residence requirement and employment by the student is a critical issue. Many institutions do not present any definitive policy in the area of employment although some tradi- tional programs attempt to discourage full-time employment while most non-traditional expect and encourage such full-time employment. How- ever, some of the programs which attempt to discourage employment voiced concern over access to doctoral education by minorities and women by virtue of such policies on employment for doctoral students. 45 These same programs do allow assistantships (teaching or research) but the time necessary to complete the doctorate may be extended by virtue of the student having an assistantship. Thus, it appears that the institutions recognize that patterns of the past concerning employment of the doctoral student may not continue into the future unchanged. The economic demands that prevail upon students as well as the maturity of the movement toward diverse program options for doctoral education related directly to full-time, career-oriented employment may bring forth further consideration of the residence requirement. The advent of lifelong education with wider access to graduate education and expanded opportunities for minorities, women, and part-time students may be considered as running counter to residence requirements which require a full-time commitment to higher education. The philosophical differences between strict traditional programs and non-traditional programs will continue to be discussed with some consequence for the evolvement of policies on employment which coexist with residence requirements. The general Characterization of overall satisfaction with the present status of residence requirements for doctoral education by the institutions surveyed regarding the Ed.D., D.B.A., and Ph.D. may be attributed to several factors. The credits, courses, points, or units which must be earned per term or semester although defined as full time actually in most cases equates to eight to ten hours of doctoral level enrollment as contrasted with undergraduate require- ments which specify an enrollment of fifteen hours or more as full- time enrollment. Therefore, the residence requirement does not for 46 the most part require "full-time" enrollment in the most rigorous sense. Many students are able to obtain an assistantship which yields a stipend for a task unrelated to their degree or a task which may even be very congruent with their research from which they will extract a dissertation. In either case, employment is convenient for the student and also may assist with the output related to a dissertation. At the same time, many institutions allow research credits to count as part or all of the residence requirement. Thus, the traditional programs do not indicate in most cases any great differentiation between earning of credits on campus and residence on a campus for a particular length of time. The traditional programs do not allow a waiver of the residence requirement with any considerable frequency because of a general opinion that the residence requirement is not excessively difficult to meet and could be made a little more stringent in some cases. The non-traditional programs assert that a brief residence require- ment (which is a maximum of eight weeks at any of these institutions) is a progressive step toward equal access for all to doctoral education. The non-traditional programs claim to support the development of competency based education through the extension of the concept of external degree programs to doctoral education and an operational look at structured versus non-structured learning contexts at the doctoral level. At the same time, these non-traditional programs assert that standards of quality can be maintained for doctoral education while using an alternative method of geographical location and attendance pattern for qualified, fully employed students. This 47 remains dubious since a lucid evaluation of the effects of various types of residence requirements on standards of quality in doctoral education was not found in any of the literature or in information from the survey of graduate institutions for this study. Policy questions which may be considered as a result of this study include: 1. Is the requirement for residence really causing the student to have an "immersion into the life of a scholar" or is it just a regulation requiring registration and payment for a prescribed amount of credits, points, or units for a brief time period? 2. Should the responsibility for ensuring that the espoused benefits of a residence requirement are realized be placed with the respective college or department and therefore alter the need for enforce- ment of a requirement at the university graduate school level? 3. Should the residence requirement focus upon course activity or research activity? 4. If the institution will enforce a residence require— ment based on consideration of the preceding questions, should a specific statement on employment by the student be made which coincides with the residence requirement? Although much concern has been devoted to the issues summarized in this study as crucial to the future development of graduate educa- tion in particular at the doctoral level, certain areas deserve further research in the maintenance of and consideration of Change for residence requirements. The areas of further research related to residence requirements which are suggested on the basis of audit performed for this study are as follows: 1. examination of the balance between the maintaining of standards for doctoral education and the reform of requirements for doctoral education necessary to meet the needs of a changing society, 48 additional review of the effect of requirements for doctoral education such as residence on the presenta- tion of competency programs and output of such programs related to the credentialing society, further consideration of requirements for graduate programs and the modus operandi of external degree programs, structured and non-structured learning texts, and the condition of the part-time student in doctoral education, requirements in doctoral education relating to continued expanded access to graduate education for minorities and women, evaluation of the effects of various types of residence requirements on standards of quality in doctoral education, examination of the differences in the nature of the requirement between the research Ph.D. and practitioner degrees for various disciplines. APPENDICES APPENDIX A APPENDIX A INSTITUTIONS IN THE STUDY Arizona, University of Brigham Young University California Institute of Technology California, University of, Berkeley California, University of, Davis California, University of, Los Angeles California, University of, San Diego California, University of, San Francisco Catholic University of America Chicago, University of Colorado, University of Columbia University Cornell University Duke University Fielding Institute Florida, University of Georgia, University of Harvard University Heed University Highland University Illinois, University of A1 APPENDIX A INSTITUTIONS IN THE STUDY Indiana University Iowa, University of Johns Hopkins University Massachusetts Institute of Technology Michigan State University Michigan, University of Minnesota, University of New York University Nevada, University of North Carolina, University of Northwestern University Nova University Ohio State University Pennsylvania State University Pennsylvania, University of Pittsburgh, University of Princeton University Purdue University Stanford University Southern California, University of Tennessee, University of Texas Tech University Union Graduate School--Union for Experimenting Colleges and Universities Utah, University of Vanderbilt University A2 APPENDIX A INSTITUTIONS IN THE STUDY Walden University Washington, University of Wisconsin, University of Yale University A3 APPENDIX B mmmcaou mum: Hm -umcm we mpwc: mcmpcmzc e mw mew“ vmzoppm oweoumom xmpmxcmm .eo -pcma Eaewcmz m? coca?“ m>wu8553m c-1mcmmx m xpwmcm>wcs .m?:cowwpmu .o.;g muauwumcw on» am one pmmmp xcoz vmucm>um umIImmcmmc eo wows: om mummczmp can» cmzme we: Tacoma ccoamn 40 sec: m.Eme umcwzcmc memo» uwsmcmom amopoccomh mcouumewuup~=u mswauppau mzozmwucou mmcngImEcmu m we muapwpmcm mwccoLPqu .o.;a cmcwsmm .<.z .<.z .<.z cos—=3 xmmzum 33.33:: 9.2; 523.5 .96.”. pwumco mamzumcm we muwc: m--EaE uwcwzcmc Ices weepIPFam mewu-_fizu m>wu8252m mcwummEmm N we zuwmcm>wcn .mconc< .o.;¢ FZUZNmHzoum wom2OA4< m>Hhm>m=m no >mwc= owpogamu .o.;a ummmcaoucm coucmzc Ho: m_ we_u cog mews: -ucma mumzoppm oomwocmcm cam .wo e eo E=s_c_z m? cmsuwm m>wmeE=m mcmucwzc o auwmcm>wca .mwccoeppmu .o.;a caucus: cog wave: nozoppm mzozmwucoo we ommwo com .mo m mw Esswcwz m? gmzuwm umse mcmpcmzc m mcmpcmzc o xpmmcm>wc2 .mwccoewpmu .o.;m mmmcaoo mum: -umcm eo wave: . mao:m_u:oo ma .a.uu c m_ os_u umchpm “was mcmucmac m mwpmmc< mo; .eo use -ucma E=s_:wz m? cmsuwm ligamx ucoomm mcmpcmzc m Auwmcm>wc2 .mwccoempmu .n.;a hszmmH20mm Nomzoo4< m>Hpm>m2m no >m_:: an m .mmcmmo umzop_m m>wp=ommcoo on m.cwummz ecoxmn .<.z mw cmcuwm gmze m wsu mo N mcwgmmEmm e xuwmcm>wca .onmcopou .o.um mwcmmo m.cmummz cam» _ cw sage memo umzopym umccmm on umze -mmEmm N zpco .<.z mm cmgpmm mcmpmmsmm N .o.;a mm osmm we auwmcm>wc= .oemco—ou .<.m.o onmcopou mo mmcmmu m.co~w umzoppm xuwmcm>wca um -zumn ecoxmn .<.z mm cmsuwu e--m>_quE:m mcmummEmm o No xuwmco>_:: .oumcopou .o.;m coucmac coucmza can momcsou Lug mmmczoo m cg peace umcwzumc miumcmucmzc m_ oequFpsu mewuuppsu mzoamwpcou m--cmma P eo xuwmcm>wca .ommowgu .o.;a HzmzmmHzomm Nomzo;4< N>Hhm>m2m mo >m<222m m xHozmaa< em .<.z .<.z .<.z one: so mpuuw4 mpzuwpmcH mcwu_mwm .a.:a m.cmumme Tumoailcmmx ovemumum P cam» uwsmumum ”mummczmpmuomn .o.uu con maven om umumcmwmmc 1pmo811mcmm> new we mewpippzm mswu-_P:m mzozmwpcou qumcmoo N xuwmcm>wcz oxao .o.;a mocmEcoe -gma mo Pm>mp memo o—nmuamuom -mmemm N we» mzoamwucoo on Ppmccou as e cm as xnaum com umgwscwc owns —_mccou “mop mg“ eo N mewuu__=m mequF—am pm mcwpmosmm N -lmcmumemm o Nuwmcm>wca Fchcou .o.;a cmzoppo ms_p-_P=c mew»-utaa we Egon xcm use umuoma m_pe:Fou cw mmmczoo m -xm «EWHIFFzm m>wumesam pm N--m5cwu e xuwmcm>wc= mwne=pou .o.;a pzmzumazomm NQN3044< N>Hem>m2m no >mwcz woo: .o.;a Eco» Lon mmmczou reps; v mpmscm nocwzcwc mewpuppzu oswunppzm m>wp8253m muse» N xuwmcw>mcz ucm>cmz .o.;m muwumcu .o.uu m mpmaom ucm mswuuppam mewuu—_:m msosmwucou mcmacmzc m No Au?mcm>w:: .mwmcomm .o.;m mcmmx cacao—mu N cw umcwzcmc uspwz mcmpcmac we?» Page“ cw umzoppm o c_ mczo; topmowucw m< we_u-ucma m>wumEE:m smegmac Nm eo xuvmcm>wcz .muwcoFN .o.;m pzmszmzomm NON3044< N>Hhm>m2m no >m5 “we on pmse pcmemcwzcmc one mczo; m umcwzcmc .mcao; cmummsmm m? mewpuppsm mswunppzm m>wmeE:m eN umcww cmuw< eo xuwmcm>wcs .mon .o.;g .a.um mczo; m cmcwscmc use mw mewpu—Fau .oEwu-__=u msoammucou mcmumwsmm N zuwmcm>wca mcmwccH .o.;m mcowumqu maowcm> cw we ucms_9occm -umgo mocmvwmmc maozcwpcoo umzo__m cow uw>oca cwmucwms umzz mswutpcma msozmwacoo law wave: mp 4o awwmcm>wca .mwo:w~_m .o.;a cowm memo» -mmm gossam P cmvcmpmu m we nmzo__m numucmEmcwacmc we?» Eaewxmz ma_u-ucma .<.z owwwowqm oz xuwmcm>wca ecu—sum: .o.um HZNZNNHzcmm NQNZO44< N>Hhu>m=m no >mwp8253m mcmpmmsmm N we xuwmcm>mcz .mum>mz .o.nw Pmuop cw vm>mwnom on nozoppm , “was mpcwog Nm ms_u-ucma m>_umEE:m com» P xnwmcm>wca xco> 3oz .o.;a mcaog e we Ecoplepm; co nose—Pm meson ovumco mesa; awnmco m mappiucma m>wumesam m we magma N we Ngmmcm>wc2 .cmmwcowz .o.;a mow .<.m.o mu_umgo Ivoco m ummmp zuwm .o.vu 0 mp Esswcwz mewusucma maozmwpcou um eo magma m 1cm>wca mompm cmmwcomz .o.;a xmopoczum» eo .<.z .<.z m>wumEESm memo» N muzuwumcH muumngummmmz .o.;a .<.z wewui-zm msoamwpcou Lam» _ xuwmcm>wca mcwxqo: wagon .o.ca hZNZNNHaoum Nom2o44< N>Hpm>m=m mo >m<222m m x~azmmm< socmmmwc co .mchommp mm .auzom Fo conman mcpcoe qumcm>ch -Eoo «EFFIFFzm mEFquFam maoamecou m11cmm> F mpmum chm>Fxmccm¢ .o.;a mcao; qumcu mcopcmac oF mF EachFE mzoszucoo maoszucoo mEFusFFzm roe meFFIFqu mcmucwac m mczo; me Fuchm>Fca muogm oFgo .o.;a mg¢EE=m N .o.um .<.z .<.z m>Fumsazm Fo comm xmmz F Fuchm>Fc2 m>oz .o.;a FchLo mumzumcm Fo mcha a co nwchcmc maoamFucoo mEFFIFF2F miumEFplFFzm mEFFIFFsu Tumcwwcmac m mcmucmzc m zuFmLm>ch :cmum825ucoz .o.ca mczog o mF meson FFFum EachFE a mo 85F» -TmcmummEmm mummcsmF -FFae mmcFacmc N saga egos -moomn ucoxmn Fe qum .o.um mcmumwsmm N toe mEFpupcma mzoszpcou mcmummsmm N 1cm>Fca .mcFFocmu :acoz .o.;a FZNZNNFDONN NQN3044< N>FFm>m2m no >mFcz :oumochm .o.ga umzoFFm cho mpFumco Fo .<.z mF LozuFu m>FumEE:m om mmezszoo< qumcm>Fcz .gmcaamqum .o.um Fo .<.z .<.z .<.z mcoz zmecm>Fcz .cmcanmqua .<.m.o maFumco NF mszcm umchcmc monogamFmoomn Fo meFu-FF=u msFa-FF=L a>_oase=m ecoxua warm“ 8 NuFmLacha .emasamupFa .o.;a mch: mmcaoo e umcFacmc mo .o.um mF mnguFFsm mEFFIFqu mzosmFucou magma muucmmz F qumco>Fcz .mF:m>Fxmccma .o.;a muFumcu om Fmpou anmeoa Fmecm>Fcz op mEFplucmm mEFuuucma m>Fumss=m muFumco om mampm chm>Fxmccmm .o.um FzmzmmFsomm NcmzoA4< m>FFm>m=m no >mF== ucm mommFFou mcF szcoFFoo Fo upcwchman com :oFcn .<.z .<.z m>FFmEE:m mxmmz m op e IIFoogum mumzumcu :oFcn .o.;a .<.m.c umcFacmc Fo .o.um .<.z mEFFIFqu mzoszucou mcmucmsc m Nuchm>Fca .mwmmmccmF .o.;a qucmsxma coFF muses mucmszma coFquu IFau co ummmnv lama :oFFqu Home op umzoFFm mcmucmsc .o.nm cog: commm mF cmguFm m>FFmEE=m mEFFIFF3F m qumcm>Fcz ecomcmum .o.;a LmummEmm com» com mpFumco F cmsu ages on 2 £88 :3 8.5 9: 8.5-:5 mEFququ Inostuucma FF mzoszucou FF Lama F ngmcm>ch manta; .o.;¢ hzu2mmF20mm Nam3044< N>FF<223m No muzmomeN zoFFzFFszF mumwmo mom mFmm>a3m no >mFumessm mssmx m prmsm>Fs2 mFmF .o.ss mqumso soummsmm sostcms mo a mo EsstFz meFFIFFsu msosmFFsou sum» F qumsm>Fs2 .sFmsoosz .a.ss mEFuIFF3F use m>szumm meFu m>FuMEE:m Isoo ms “was -FFsF mFmacm com» F on Foe musmFms sum» FilsoumsF smusmsc xsm soF smsFacms ms» mmsoame Isms: as msmw» mo sF mquosu m oEFuuFFsm -sou mF ssmx F N--mssox m xaFmsm>Fs2 .soumstmmz .o.ss FFso susos F .<.z soF mEFuuFFsm msoamesou spsos F prmsm>Fs= smssz .o.ss emstcas .o.em .<.z mEFuuFFsm mzosmFusou msmusmsc m we ngmsm>Fs3 .ssu: .o.ss Fzmzmanomm Nomzoss< m>FFm>m3m no >mmzosuuumusmoue ueessou mmFmos< moo .Fo use someem seesaw xmszN oz on xee soseemez prmsm>Fso .ersoFFFeo .o.ss uwpssoo Ammesmo .Fo mu> oz on zee sosemmmz zFFmsm>Fso .ersoFFFeo .o.ss sexeu mse mqus oF FF uszoo zee suseemms zooFossomF me> oz --sess=m use mchss eo auseFemcs eFELoeFFee .o.ss umsFaces F .<.z .<.z qumsm>Fso os=o> EesoFso .o.um “Fumso meesueso Fo mqua esoe so o Fo mseummemm e mF EsstFE mm> oz emeo mFsu sF--me> Fe zuFmsm>Fso .esoNFs< .o.ss NoNFsuoo< NommFoomm NFzmszFoouz zoFeoFFszF mmzomo mzomemm sHIszm>m2m no >aFso eFossFoo .o.ss .o.um .<.o.o mm> oz .<.z Fo zuFmso>Fso .ouesoFoo .o.ss uoussoo mm> oz mo zee soseomom Fo zuFmso>Fso .ooeoFso .o.ss .o.um uowssoo eoFsoE< use mo> oz we see susemmem to NoFmsmsts uFFoseeo .e.ss souseso oFesloso op Fesoo mF msomeom w so uousaoo oomFosecm sem .Fo o coo mstz Nulmm> oz oo xee soseomom zuFmso>Fso .ersoFFFeo .o.ss umossoo oomFo sem .Fo mm> oz mo zee suseomoz zoFmso>Fso .erLoFFFeo .o.ss NomFsmoo< Nommooomm NFZNZNNFooNN zoFFthszF mmzomo mzomeum onszm>mom no >zFso owe: .o.za mo> oz oz zoFmso>F:o usessez .o.za .o.eo use moz oz oz to zoFmso>F=o .eFosooo .o.za uopsooo mo xee soseomos mo» oz oomeFssoo zon to zoomsosFoo .eessoFs .o.za moz .<.z .<.z moooFomso ocFo_o_u .o.za .o.oo use oz oz oz zoFmsosto mooo .o.za mo» oz .z.z zoFmso>Fso Foessoo .o.za NooFaooos Noosooooz onozozooooz zooFoFoszo oozooo ozoommom aoszzszommz ozszoF zozzoo onoo zozzomoz zo\oz< ozeom>m=m no >m<22=m m xFozmoo< mFm zooFoszooF Fo mmz oz zes soseomom ouspFumsF muuomozoemmez .o.zo mo» oz .<.z zoFmso>Fso mchooz mozoo .o.za uFos mF Eesooso Fesopoou op osF ToooFsosoo oFsm -useummee ustu -oso FF msoos o mo EostFE squ msmpmosom m mF asoEmLFooos mmz .so>o3oz1-oz soseomos11mm> Fo zuFmso>Fso .ezoF .o.so .o.um use oz oz oz zmeso>Fso eseFusH .o.ss mmz oz .<.z Fo zmeso>Fso .mFosFFFF .o.so moz oz .<.z zoFmse>Foo oseroFI .o.oo NomFomoo< NoNNFoomz NFZNZNNFoomz zoFFoHFszF mmzouo mzomeNm onszm>mom no >zFoo ooeom ono .o.za .o.oo moz oz .<.z zoFmso>Fso e>oz .o.za moF oz oz zoFmsm>on esoomozzosoz .o.za zoFm .o.eo we» oz oz -Lo>Fso .eoFFoseo zosoz .o.za mo> oz oz Lo zoFmsmsto .eee>oz .o.eo mo» oz oz zoFmLa>Feo ego» 3oz .o.za mo» oz moF to zoomso>Fso .seonon .o.za .<.o.o .o.oo moz oz oz zoFmsmsFoo eoeom :eonon .o.za oooFaoooz ooozooooz onzooooooz zooFoFoszo oozooo ozoommom aoszzm>m=m no >mFso woesoa .o.za mm> 02 32:00 cugmmmwm huFme>wF5 :oumucto 5.2m $0 mmz oz musooo zoseomom qumso>Fso .sosoomupFo .o.um “F0 moz oz .<.z zoFmse>Fso .zosoomooFs .<.o.o mosooo soseomos Fo mo» oz soFoeosemmFo zoFmso>Foo .zocoomooFs .o.za moses eo zoFm .o.oo oz -oseoou meow sou oz Iso>Fso .ere>Fzmssos .o.so zoFmse>F=o .o.eo moz oz moF moaom erestmozoa .o.za oooFaooos ooomooooz onozozooooz zooFoFoszo oooooo mzoommom azszzszzmmz ozzzoF zozzom onoo zozsomoz zo\oz< zoFFm>mom no >m oz musooo soceomoz zoFmso>Fso .sooostmez .o.so muz oz .<.z zuFmso>Fso s.ouFez .o.so .o.um moF oz .<.z eo zoFmsosto .zeoo .o.zo moFuFmso>Fso use moooFFoo sF eFoooFFoo ooeFoos -usoEFsooxm soF soFso mmz oz zes soseomoz TIFoozom opeoueso soFso .o.zs .<.m.o Fo .o.um .<.z oz .<.z zuFmso>Fso .oommossoF .o.so NoNFoNoo< Noszoomz NFzNzNzFoomm zoFFoeFszF mmzomo mzomemm onmezu>mom mo >mFso oFez .o.so msoomoeom osFuooFsusoo AFooe Fo oFom me uosnummz oz mes soseomoz Ameso>Fso .sFmsoosz .o.zs NomFomoo< Noszoomz NFzmzNzFoomz zoFeoeFesz mmzomo mzomemm onszm>¢=m no >z<222m m xFozmoo< oosossoooo woes < usoooostF >so> .<.z Fe>osooe mosFFoou zFomeFueopm FFosooo ouesom oFEoueo< as» Fo soFueoueso so ooquesoo an uouooooe mo zee msoFu IsuFumsF sosoo EosF oosouFmom zuoum opeoueso so oouuFEEoo .<.z FFosooo oueoueso omm uses IzoFoEo uFEFF uFooz oFEFF oEFo EosteE so>ozosuummz oz mm> zuFmso>Fso ms» oe soseomos so ostoeou sF sto onoxsom .Fo zoFmso>Fso .ersoFFFeo zooFossooF Fo opopFomsH ersoFFFeo zucho>Fso ossoz EesoFsm Fo zmeso>Fso .eso~Fs< .o.zo .o.:o .o.um .o.zo mmm>F<3 room no >uzmoommu oz< hzmhxm N>FFmozFo< h<13 >m Nom3o44< mm>F<3 Hzooz< oz< omzozo< qu2>ooa2m zththhsz mmmomo zoFFu>z=m no >mFso .ooeoFso .o.so .o.um eoFsoE< use .<.z .<.z mmz Fo zuFmso>Fso oFFospeo .o.so muesom oFEoueo< use FFosooo oomFosesu sem .Fo uso>o oses zso> < ooeoueso mmmz mmz zoFmso>Fso .ersoFFFeo .o.so oooFo sem .Fo .<.z .<.z muz zmeso>Fso .ersoFFFeo .o.so cosm_>_o FeEFooo oueoueso umsouFmsoo mF osu mo seoo mosouFmos mseoz .o.um ooeFoomm< esp m-m me uooesoooso moFoos< moo .Fo use usoooosm poz on uosouFmsoo pos pooiumuz zuFmso>Fso .ersoFFFeo .o.so mmu>F<3 NFFFmozFo< onoz< zoFFoHFszH mmzomo zoom to FF<3 Fzmz>ooszN zoFFm>z=m no >mFso equoFo .o.ss .<.z .<.z msFo-FF=e--mo> ooooFomoo ocFe_eFu .o.za .o.um use .<.z .<.z oFoFmeoF poz zmeso>Fso ozoo .o.so Foosom ooeoueso Fo moooFEEoo Fe>osooe usoooosm poz Fesosoo zouumuz FeFooom squ szo onmso>Fso FFossoo .o.so oFoFmeoF .<.z .<.z aos osoezoFoEm zuFmso>Fso eFosoFoo .o.so .o.um .<.m.o .<.z .<.z mmz Fo zuFmso>Fso .ouesoFoo .o.so mzm>F<3 NFFHmozFo< onoz< zoFFoHFszF mmzomo zoom mo FF<3 FzmzzooszN zthm>m=m no >mu< .o.uo tooFumsF sosuo eosF psososeooo use moFuoso Fo seemsesF sosF--mo> moz zoFmso>Fso eseFusH .o.so mooFFoo szoooseuFoEFm oueoueso es» Fo osoeFFosso FesoFmeooo seoo zo11mo> sFeosFeeinmoz Fo zuFmso>Fso .mFosFFFH .o.so .<.z .<.z oEFouFFoeiumoz zoFmso>Fso useron .o.uo .<.m.o .o.uo .<.z .<.z moz zoFmsm>Fso uooz .o.zs .<.z .<.z .<.z zoFmso>Fso use>sez .o.ss .o.uo use .<.z .<.z .<.z to zoomsa>F=o .eFosoao .o.za mzo>o<3 NFFHzozFo< onoz< zoFFozoesz oozooo zoom zo FF<3 HzoZzoosZN zthu>zom no >z<22om m xFozmoo< «No .<.z .<.z moz Fo zoFmso>Fso .eue>oz .o.uo somsoo .<.z msm>Fe3 oz so musoooulamoz zoFmso>Fso xsoz zoz .o.ss zosoooosw oEom squ Foosom maesooso soF Foozom ooeoueso Fo useoo osFo moeoeeso zo wee: o>Foouoxo zo--mo> -FFoe oo oo--mo> eo zoFmsm>F=o .eeonoLz .o.za Eesooso FeouF> .<.m.o Fo>oF m.sopmes e soF FFosooo -FusF so usooou .o.uo moo oe meow moeoeeso zo--mo> oFooz osoose--mo> zoFmsasto moeom seonon .o.za soFoooFumsF sosuose we zooFoszooF eo FesoFmeooo zoo: soFuimmz .<.z moooFumsF monomosoemmez .o.so .<.z .<.z .<.z zoFmso>Fso mstooz mssoo .o.zo .<.z soFmF>oco oz moz Fo zuFmso>Fso .ezoF .o.zo mzo>F<3 NFFozozFo< onoz< zoom zo Fooos2o zoFHm>mom no >z zoFmLmsto .zosoomooFs .o.za oFoonFFu oo 3.53 Fo zuFm .o.uo .<.z .<.z poo uozoFF< Iso>Fso .ere>Fzmssoo .o.ss Foozom ope: Tueso Fo seoo .o.um--mo> zoFmso>Fso .o.um osmoooLFsF on msoFooooxo .o.souuoz ooeom ere>Fzmssoo .o.so .<.z .<.z mo» zoFmso>Fso ooepm ono .o.so .o.uo .<.z .<.z mo> zmeso>Fso e>oz .o.so someFEsoo zon .<.z oz oEFuuoseo sto zoFmso>Fso ssoumozsosoz .o.zo Fo zuFm .o.uo .<.z .<.z mo> nso>Fso .esFFoseo susoz .o.so mzo>F<3 NzFonzeo< . onoz< zoFFthhsz oozooo zoom no FF<3 on2>ooo2o zoFHm>mom no >zFso .seuo .o.zs moFoFmso>Fso use moooFFoo osF Tosostooxo sow soFso .<.z .<.z moz uuFoozom oueoueso soFso .o.zs .<.m.o Fo .o.um .<.z .<.z .<.z zoFmsm>Fso .oommossoF .o.ss .o.uo .<.z mso>Fez oz moz zoFmso>Fso usomseom .o.so .<.z .<.z .<.z zuFmso>Fso mousse .o.so .<.z msm>Fe3 oz .<.z zoFmso>Fso soooosto .o.ss mzo>F<3 NFFozozFos onoz< zoFFoFFszF oozooo zoom no eo<3 onZFoos2m zoFHu>zom no >aoso Fo Foosom oueoueso to omooFssoo mNm Leo» oso sow sto oosooo zounmo> .<.z zuFmso>Fso oFe> .o.so seoz ousouFmos ms» soF oeFo eFezuoso oo .<.z oz o: sto ooou-mo> Fo zmeso>Fso .sFmsoosz .o.zo Fo zFoses zso> zFoses zso> .<.z zoFmso>Fso .sooostmez .o.so mzm>o<3 NzFFmozFo< onoz< zooFoFHszF oomooo zoom zo Fo<3 ozozzooozo zoFFm>zom no >m e use zuesoFF me zoom .mooF>som sosuo so zoFstosoz =zoFooeF son me FFoz me mosouoom sooo son meouF osFosesoxo Fo omoosoo oso soF FoFoFoz= zzqu=EEoo mooseo Feooo esp Fo ooFFFE oFEoueoe ms» ston oFomeoo me oEFo sons me usoom op zumeoooz= =.qusoo sFeosoo e sow psouoom ms» squ ooeosoo Fesomsmo osF>es pooson oosoou Fesoooou e uouseze so on Ems» usoesooos op osFFFFz oos ose .Fesosoo sF .mpsoe loseoou .mF osouoom e oseFFFFso so oFoeooquzoss 3oz souoes oz: =.zpFooeF use musouoom 3oFFoF sFosu spoo son omosoosF Fo uFoFe sooes sFoso Fo moooome mooFse> mmoumFu op moFquoosoooo o>es use osoEsosF>so oFsoueoe osFoeFoeFum e eo oFsmsoo esp o>Fooos mosouoom peso osomsF o» mF usoeosFooos oosouFmos osFumFxo esp so» oFesoFoes osF= :.msooo sFosp squ soFuoesoosF ooosFu oso use mseFosom uosmFFoeomo son soFoeFoomme omoFo sooossp usouoom use so uosFeo oo oo mooFe> oeoso ose ososo stsp o3: Fo zoFmso>Fso .ooeoFso oomFosesz sem so zuFmso>Fso .ersoFFFeo moFoos< moo so zoFmso>Fso .ersoFFFeo zoFoxsom Fo zoFmso>Fso .ersoFFFeo Fo zuFmso>Fso .esoNFs< .o.so .o.so .o.um use .o.zo .o.so .o.:m zoFFm zththhsz mmmomo zoFFu>zom so >m<222m m xFozmoo< on =.Fososoo zuFFeoo Fo Fo>oF soFs e ostFeosFes use museuseom oEem oso ostoFFoe osou mF sossee psosoeFFu e sF soseomozz .FFoz me zosoumes quFeo ose moooso oFsoesoooo sow zsusooo esp mmosoe msesFEom use moosmxsoz .uosFooos oos mF mFso .so>o 13oz .zosouFmos Fo exam: moss» op ozo soF eseosem eosem sF xFFeomo ose ozoF>os ooesosoo =.osououm ms» Fo muoos ostseoF soo: uomeo mF zosouFmoz= .Eosu sF msoFoestexm mmeo use meose FFFxm use ooquzoss o>Fozo sF zosooooeoo ooFo>ou mosouoom .uessoe FesoFuFueso ms» seso zez ososos -oFu e sF soFueoouo Fo>oF Fesoooou ouF>oso on mF oFesoFuez opooFumso osFuFon .o.ss .usoom zFFeoFssooo .o.um use zFFeoFooFouosooe .xFFeoFoososu mF «esp zoFFFoeoeo use soseomos oo usoEooFo>ou esp soF ouF>oso op mF oFesoFuez zoFmso>Fso osoo .o.so .opo .eFoooFFoo we moseusooue me FFoz me mosououm ooeoueso sosuo Eoss ostseoF so onsoosoooo son oEFo Fo qusos uooFEFF e omeoF we soF osouopm e Fo owFF FFoF esp ousF soFmsosEF Feooo so mosoFsooxo ms» mF oFesoFuez zuFmso>Fso FFossoo .o.so .o.uo .<.m.o zFFeoFsoomFs mooseso oz mo zoFmso>Fso .ouesoFoo .o.ss zoFFw zthm>zom no >mo .mooEeo eseoso oso we ones» on Feooo es ooze moFoFFFoeo .osou mF oF ososz uos .osou ssoz eo zpFFeoo esp mF oommF mos ose .uFuoso oosouFmos soe uo>osooe sooo o>es momsooo mooseoueeo ooF so>o =.oosouFmos sF msoomoEomz seso sosues zuFuoso oosouFmos= soon uomes mF usoeosFoooz .moFseusooo mpF uousooxo zFoseoF -FFsoFm o>es zosu poo .uosousese sooo oos mes oFuoso oosouFmom Fo zmeso>Fso .mFosFFFF .o.so .Eesooso FesoFuFuesu e Fo mosFesomsoo oooson zuoomIFFom use soseomos sooouIsF sow 3oFFe uFoosm ouesouoou e ostseo Fo mmoooso oFEesau osF .usoeosFooos oosouFmos mooseouso uousouxo FFFFFoF oo moon sFosu osFoFFFsoem poosqu opesoooou e oomsoo oo osoFs oso o>es uFoosm oosoou m.soumez uosseo se squ msooeoouo FesomeoFoso FFe peso mF mFesoFoez zuFmso>Fso useron .o.uo .msesooso uosoaoosum AFsoFs use FesoFoFueso osoe xs uo>oFsoe me zoosoFoFFoso use zosoooosooz .<.o.o moouoso oo mooF>som osoooom o>Fmsopxo son mmoooso msomeFEue .o.um ooFsom e so moFFos =Eesooso oosoou Fessooxo quFFuos= mFsF zuFmso>Fso uooz .o.so zoFFm zoFHm>zom no >mos so psooEe Eoessss e oopseseoo op use apFooes op osomooxo psoFoFssom ues mpsouopm pesp osomme op me: AFFesFoFso oFesonez .osFFomsooo o>Fpoosso use .mpsouopm sospo ssz mosesosopss .EoFooFssou so zposse> .mons nFsoes op mmmuoe .suseomos use .muospoE .mooosssoop sF ostFesp o>FmsopsF .zpFooes ssz mosesosopsF o>smsopss mFeooo oFesonem .Eesooso osp op sospooFspsoo psouopm use .mommoooso Fepsos so soneFoEFpm Eesooso onsospoe se sos sonoosFu .moooeoFFoo sppz opesou use poepsoo .mospssopsoooo FeopooFFopsF use FesopFoo .monF -Fsoes op mmoooe .msooeos zpFooes ssz poepsoo mFeooo oFesonez .sospoprmsF use psouopm use sosoeop use psmu nope sooxpoo sospoesopss sesos psepsooss osp so psoEooquzossoe Fosomoosoo use Fessos ms psoEossooos mosouFmoz .psepsooes mF psouopm use seFosom soozpos ossmsospeFos osouoptoso mF oFesonem opsmso>Fso e>oz .o.so zpsmsm>sso xso> 3oz .o.so so sosmsesszo .oeoszusz .o.za spsmsm>sso mpepm seoszosz .o.sa zpsmso>Fso msssooz mssoo .o.so zthdooom zmzon zF mozm zththhsz umzomo zthm>zom so >mes mpsouopm me soseomos Fo>oF Fesopoou spsz Feou use mosousmos mooseu zsposoF uFo>e op musopss Eeso -oso osp .ososososs .someFEue sos uossooos ms m.sopmez osp usozoo ssoz opeoueso so msoos sopmoEom oF use oosoou m.sopmez e .omF< .someFsue sos psoeossooos e we uFoFs Fesosmmososo quFFe se so sospeoouo ss oosossooxo Fesosmmososo mseo» mossp so soEFsFE e mosssoos sossz Eesooso FesonFuesp-sos e ms msss .msesooso Fesopoou Fesospso>soo osos sF opeos -onseo op oFoeso ose osz msomsoo op uoposspmos use msosmmFEu< .psoeossooos uomeososs mssp pooooe pos zFoesoso uFooz zpFooes osp sooospFe msonepsommFu so xpsFeoo osp o>osoEF uFooz mseoa ozp so psosossooos e pesp ms soFFom .psoEsosF>so steFosom mooseo esp sF sosmsoees so see» oso sooossp oosoFFooxo steFosom ooesoooso op ms oFesonem .xuopm uopespsoosoo so pooosoo sosmsoEEF FFos osp ms oFesonez zpsmso>sso souFez .o.ss mospsmso>sso use moooFFoo osspsoessooxo sos soFso anoosom opeoueso sosso .o.so zpsmso>sso mousos .o.ss mpsm .o.uo 1Lw>wca mumum mwcm>~8mccma .Q.na spsmso>sso eoepm oszo .o.zs zoFHm zththhsz mwzomo zoFHw>mom so >m<22om m xFozmoo< mmm .uosseo mpsuoso omsooo Fessos osp op mosepsooss Feooo so mosossooxo Fesospeoouo Fepop m.psouopm msp so pseo e psomosoos sossz Apsmso>sso esp so osFF soseomos use steFosom osp sF opeosospseo op zFFesosoo use .moooeoFFoo use msommos -oso spsz steFooos pFomsoo op .muFoFs uopeFos use uFmFs szo m.psou=pm osp sF esoooFFoo use msesFEom usoppe op mospssopsoooo osp sos mzoFFe psosossooos osp .omF< .Eesooso oosoou .o.ss e so museeou FeFooom use psssom osp FFFsFos op use soseomos mssp so zpsosspsoo psouopm osp o>Fo op zsemmooos uosousmsoo ms sossz .mospFFFoFmsoomos psoszoFoEo ouFmpoo so msospoespmsu osp poospsz .soseomos use .auopm .sospooFsos .osFueos oerIFFos so qusoo e sos mzoFFe psoEossooos osp pesp ms oFesones oss so zpsmso>sso .ssmsoomsz .o.so zoFHm zththhsz mmzomo zoFsu>mom so >zsso .ersosFFeo .o.so oooso sem .FFosooo opeoueso esp so uoososso mpsosossooos EoEFst .so zpsmso>sso .esssosFFeo .o.ss .o.uo .opesom oFEoueo< osp moFoos< moo use so soFmF>Fo moFoos< moo osp as uoososso possessooos sossssz .so zpsmso>sso .esssosFFeo .o.so zoFossom .opesom oFEoueo< ouszopepm esp so uoososso mpsosossooos Eoesssz .so zpsmso>sso .esssosFFeo .o.ss .zuopm sooFossoos opesueso so ooppsesoo esp so uoososso mpsoeossooos Eoesssz so opoprmsF esssosFFeo .o.ss .uossooos sospepsommsu use sonessEexo Feso use sopstz .mopepm uopsso esp poosooossp msoneooF pe sem» Foosom esp osssou msesseom ossso>o moFo mooseo1so sosmmom seesaw somzupsoso oso zpsmso>sso osoo> Eesossm .o.uo .mpsoEosFooos Eoessss osp sesp Fose szsooooss useo o>Fposspmos use ossuseEou osos on see soFsz moFoFFoo use mpsosossooos szo sFosp smFFoepmo see mpsoEpseooo .FFosooo opeoueso osp so uoososso ose mpsoEossooos sosssss oss so zpsmso>sso .esoNFs< .o.ss NHZNZNzFoomz NIH mmozosz oz: oz< hzmzszoomz zoFHthHsz mmmomo mozmomez mzh cs m>Fsoo<=so< mF hm>zom so >zFpoooxo esp so uoososso uopepm me mpsosossooos Eoesssz .uopepm me mpsoeossooos Eoesssz .momsooo Fessos sF sosep msoos pos .szsousooousF ssoz op zpFFFoe use spzoso FeopooFFopss mooostsoo so ossseos soneEsossF sospo use msop -oospmss m.psouopm soss mpsooos so uomes mo FFesm psosoouon mFss .sopmoEom osp sos oosoou usezop psuoso oosousmos so psooEe osp seoo op mpsooos ooppsssoo zsoms>ue m.psouopm .psoezoFoEo so psoose soo: uomeo psuoso mosousmos Ferseo sos uosmFFoepmo ose mosFFousoo .soseomos steFosom sos so .msesssom sF soneoFon -seo sos .sosposspmsu spsz uopoFoEoo ssoz omsooo sos uosseo so see mosousmoz .oosousmos opopspmsoo pos moou ooseusoppe osoz .uosFFpoo me psoEosFoooz .uoososso ose mpsoEosFooos Eoessse spsz psoEFFosso mooosspsoo I NFZNZNmFoomm wzh mmozouzm oz: oz< PZNZNzFoomm mozmomem mzs op m>FsooFso erEoFoo so zmeso>Fso .ouesoFoo so zpsmso>sso .ouesoFoo so zpsmso>sso .ooeosso eossos< so spsmse>sso usFospeo zththhsz .o.so .o.um use .<.m.o .o.ss .o.so .o.um use .o.so muzomo zoFsm>zom so >zFso .msosFFFF .o.ss .useron pe someom seesaw oso zpsmso>sso useron .o.uo .<.o.o .o.uo .uopepm me mpsoeossoooz zpsmso>sso uooz .o.ss .uopepm me mpsosossoooz zpsmso>sso use>sez .o.ss .o.uo use .uopepm me mpsosossoooz so zpsmso>sso .esosooo .o.ss .mpsospseoou sos zsosopoe meow spsz uopepm m< so zpsmso>sso .equoFs .o.ss .mpsoeossooos oFsFooom oz opopspmso osFuFon .o.ss .o.uo use .uopepm me uoososso mpsoEosFoooz zpsmso>sso osoo .o.so .mpsoEossooos mosousmos Eoessse spsz Esss ms Foosom opeoueso esp so ooppsseoo Fesosoo zpsmso>sso FFossoo .o.so NFZNZNNHoooz ozF moomoozo oz: oz< sZNZNmFoooz zoFsostsz oozooo mozmomez mzh oh m>Fsoom>zom so >msso .eue>oz .o.uo .ssoz omsooo so mpssos Nm so.soessse e so sospoFoEoo sospes poo .uosFooos pos ms oosomoso Feosmzss zpsmso>sso sso> 3oz .o.ss .zpFFFoFons so Feou peoso e ssz uopepm me mpsoeossoooz so zpsmso>sso .seoFson .o.so .<.o.o .o.uo .uopepm me mpsosossoooz zpsmso>sso opepm seossosz .o.so zooFossoos so .uopepm me mpsosossoooz opopspmsF mppomosoemmez .o.so .uopepm me mpsosossoooz zpsmso>sso msssooz mssoo .o.so .uopepm me mpsoEosFoooz so zpsmso>sso .ezoF .o.ss .o.uo use .msospoooxo 3os spsz uopepm me mpsososFoooz zpsmso>sso eseFuso .o.ss stNZNNFoooz ozF moozoszm oz: oz< szoszFooom onFostmzH oozooo mozmoFmoz ozs oF N>Fsoom>zom so >zFusF esp so uopepm me mpsosossooom so opsmso>sso .sosoomppso .o.ss .o.um so use .Foosom opeoueso so uoososso uopepm me mpsosossoooz zmeso>Fso .esse>Fzmssos .o.so .o.uo zpsmso>sso use .Foosom opeoueso so uoososso ose mpsoeossoooz opepm esse>Fzmssos .o.so .soneoouo sF stFeE meesp pe uouso>e oosososue poFspm spsz uopepm me mpsoeossoooz zmeso>Fso opepm oFso .o.ss .o.uo .msmosp soseomos use .sexo smppssz o>FmsososoEoo .Fessopes omsooo use .ssoz so sospesFoEoo spsz oosousmos so see» op oues ms EFeFo zpsmso>sso e>oz .o.so .Fo>oF ueoF oesooo musssplozp pe msopseoo oonooomsoo o>Fs op psoszoFoEo sos soneoFsFuoE psoFFm spsz uopepm me mpsosossooom zpsmso>sso ssopmozspsoz .o.so .o.uo so use .FFosooo opeoueso so umososso uopepm me mpsosossoooz zmeso>Fso .esFFoseo spsoz .o.so stNZMzFoooz ozs moozoozo ozz oz< szo2omoooom zoosostsz mozomo mozmomez mzh oh m>Fsoou>mom so >me op oFoe sooo pos mes use msommososo mFs spsz poepsoo sF sesp mmoF psoom mes poes ss osz poo msoneFooos soo so soppoF osp quFFs mes osz oso sesp soppoo mpsmEossooos oosousmos osp quFFsFos :FFeussoomoFFso mes mpsoeossooos soppoF Feopoe osp pee pos mes use psepmsmme soseomos so opeoueso osspnpseo e sooo mes os sooosp so>o mooseo esp so oEFp FFos mseo: Fesm>om musoom osz psouopm e .oFoEexo se m< .soseomoz use mosuopm mpeoueso sos soFFooseso mos> osp so ooFsso osp soss uopsom .<.o.o -oso me: zFFeoFsoomoFFso uossssopou mo uFoosm mpsoEosFooos osp .o.uo pesp 3oF> osp .so>o3oz .uopepm me uousosso ose mpsoeossoooz so :meso>Fso .oommossoF .o.ss .o.uo .sosmsoso opeoueso osp so seoo use so uoososso ms psoezeo sospsop sooo uomeo psoeossooos EoEFst :meso>Fso usossepm .o.ss _.Foosom opeoueso osp so uopepm me mpsoeossooos Eoesssz opsmso>sso oousoo .o.so .Eesooso oosoou esp so FFe sos sFeEos mpsouopm pmos .so>o3os .uoososso psoEossooos Eoesssz :psmso>sso sopoossss .o.ss NFZNZNNFoooz ozs moozoszm oz: oz< szozozFoooz zoFsostsz oomooo wozmomez mz» oh m>Fsoom>mom so >zFso oFe> .o.so .Foosom opeoueso esp so uopepm me uoososso ms psoeossoooz so zpsmso>sso .ssmsooms: .o.so .Foosom opeoueso osp so uoososso ose uopepm me mpsoeossooos FF< so zpsmso>sso .soposssme: .o.so .psosooFo>mu use moseusoo sospepsommsu sos sospeooF zse pe masop soseomos o>smmoooom spsz mosspsoo use someom ousousmos sosEom spsos oso e spsz ssooo mpsouopm FF< :meso>Fso souFe: .o.ss stoZozooooz ozs moozozzo oz: oz< szoZozFooom zoFsostmzo oozooo mozqummz oz» oh m>Fhoom>zom so >msso FFossoo .o.ss .<.m.o .o.uo .msospeosssuos sos uoos os mom so spsmso>sso .ouesoFoo .o.ss .ooseso so sospeosuss oz so :psmso>sso .ooeosso .o.ss .oosoou esp so ostsossoo use :oeususeo op psosoose>ue soozpoo omoeFo pmoe msopseoo mossp so Eosssse e .xosousmos sF msopseoo uossooos me osp so pesp .psosoososso oomsosesz sem so psoeossooos sopsosp op poooxo uommoomsu msospeosssuos oz .so spsmso>sso .esssosFFeo .o.so .mseo: Feso>om zooFossoos pxos osp ss uosousmsoo oo FFsz msospeosssuoe s.se pesp poooo so opoprmsF ersosFFeo .o.so .mpsos Tossooos psomoso so psoooom ss pmesueopm mseoooe FFosooo opeoueso :psmso>sso .eso~ss< .o.so szoZNNHooom ozs os mooz szomozs zoFsostmzo oozooo oz< FZNZNmFoomm mozmomez mzs so >hFoFmm>zom so >mo psoEosFooos Fessosss sFepos uFoo: .psuoso mosmusmos mooseousso sos uoomms mo op ms museusepm spFFeoo Eoessse so psosopepm e oFFsz psosossooos esp so mosseusooo osp uousopxo woes mooseso .mosopoospm usoss use psosp poospsz soneoouo opeoueso so Eopmsm e ouF>oso op ouee ose mooseso .ooseEsossoo Fesosmmososo use sso: ossoueoe ossquosF oosossooxo ossF mstso m.psouopm osp so sospeoFe>o sos psooom mo see psuoso ossoueo< .psoesoFoso oEFpIFFos spsz oFoneoeoo ms Eesooso .someFEue op soFso ooseEsossoo sso: Fosmmoooom so mseos Feso>om o>es pmoe mpsouopm .sosmsosooom spFooes omoFo spsz mooseo sso suopm psousooouss spsz uopessopFe msesseom o>smsopss so oosousmos so mpsuoso sN op ouee ms eFeFo smeso>Fso opepm seossosz spsmso>sso mssxooz mssoo so spsmsoosso .msosFFFF spsmso>sso uooz .o.so HzmzmmFoomz mzh oh mmoz hzmmuzo oz< Hzm2szoomm mozmomez mzh so skFoFmu>zom so >mFso .oommossos .o.ss .Eosp ossoseso op so>so sooo mes sospesousmsoo smesoosso .o.uo moossom os pesp poms op smeo use oFoEFm om ose mpsosossooom opepm esse>Fsmssos .o.ss .spFFFoFons opeoooue mo>so sossz ooepm sonepsommsu osssou pee oo seo psoEosFooos me moseso so sosmmoomsu oz spsmso>sso opepm oFso .o.so so sme .psoEosFooos ssFuoE op sospsmoomsu mepFo Iso>sso .esFFoseo spsoz .o.ss .o>Fposspmos sFouso pos ms pswEossooos psomoso esp me uopeosospse moseso oz smeso>Fso ssos 3oz .o.ss V .mseos sos pxos osp sF FFe>oso see moseso so mosos oospoe osp use psoeossooos osp sos Fespsommo ms spFFFoFons .ososososs .oFoooo uosoFoEo sFFos sos me FFe: me sospeoouo sososs op mosoeosooe Fesospsuespusos sos uommosoxo ssoosoo spsmso>sso .seossosz .o.ss szNZozFoooz ozs os mooz szomozs zoFsosossz oozooo oz< Hzm2mmFoomm mozmomez mzs so ssFoFmzom so >zspuoooo use mooFe> osspooeoo umNFsoooos psoeossooos esp so sospesousmsoo psoooz so spsmso>sso .sFmsoomF: .o.so .soneNFseosoos opoFQEoo e sos me FFoz me ossm mospsmso>sso use moooFFoo -soosooos ss uooeFo sonopspmsF osp o>es op sme spFooes use osspsosssooxm sos sosso mpsouopm opeoueso me sospmooo ss ms sospopspmss so spFFFoepm -IFoosom opeoueso sosso .o.so szozmzooooz ozs os mooz onmozs zoososossz oozooo oz< szmzmmFoomz mozmomez mzh so sFFoFmm>zom so >z