SYSTEM VARlABLES AND: EDUCATIONAL
muovmwmass m THAI GOVERNMENT
SECONDARY SCHOOLS

Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNiVERSITY
F. FLOYD SHOEMAKER

1971 '

 

LIBR AR Y ‘
Michigan State
,‘University

  

“Hf-.5.“

 
     

“MINIMAL L)

00

NANAIAAA

93

This is to certifg that the

thesis entitled

SYSTEM VARIABLES AND EDUCATIONAL INNOVATIVENESS
IN THAI GOVERNMENT SECONDARY SCHOOLS

presented by

F. Floyd Shoemaker

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph.D. degree in Communication

5««‘% fiw

)or p110 esmr "

Date April 15. 1971

0-169

l
{ARV Bleéflg
W

 

 

ABSTRACT

SYSTEM VARIABLES AND EDUCATIONAL INNOVATIVENESS
IN THAI GOVERNMENT SECONDARY SCHOOLS

By

F. Floyd Shoemaker

The present study focused upon the simultaneous analysis of individ-
2§l_and system variables to explain variance in individual innovativeness.
Individual variables measured included communication, social and psycho-
logical behavior of Thai teachers and principals in government-sponsored
secondary schools. System variables analyzed were aggregate measures of
individual variables for each of the 28 schools in the sample.

Data utilized in the study were one portion of the comprehensive
Thailand Educational Diffusion Project conducted by the Institute for
International Studies in Education and the Department of Communication,
Michigan State University, and Sponsored by the U.S. Agency for Interna-
tional Development and the Inter-University Research Program in Institution-
Building.

Ten innovations selected for inclusion in the investigation included
school libraries, parent-teacher associations, Peace Corps volunteers,
departmental organization, guidance counseling, class discussion methods,
objective testing, audio-visual aids, coeducation, and vocational educa-
tion. The four dependent variables were school awareness of the innova-
tions, the school's attitudinal acceptance of innovations, school innova-

tiveness, and individual teacher innovativeness.

F. Shoemaker

Sixteen theoretic hypotheses, which predicted directional relation-
ships, were tested in the data analysis. When zero-order and multiple
correlations were tested for significance at the 5 percent level of
confidence, it was found that four of the hypotheses were statistically
significant.

The study indicated that the perceived psychological distance
between principal and teacher, the amount of role performance feedback
from principal to teacher, and the role satisfaction of principal and
teacher were factors which contributed to the attitudinal acceptance

of innovations and change by Thai government-Sponsored secondary schools.

SYSTEM VARIABLES AND EDUCATIONAL INNOVATIVENESS
IN THAI GOVERNMENT SECONDARY SCHOOLS

(I. By

I J

mi’
FC’Floyd Shoemaker

A THESIS

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Communication

1971

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author expresses his sincere appreciation to the chairman of
his doctoral committee, Dr. Everett M. Rogers, for his assistance,
friendship, and support throughout the development of the present
dissertation and during the writer's entire graduate program. Without
his friendly encouragement after the author left the Michigan State
University campus to return to teaching, this study would not have
been completed. Personal thanks is extended to the other members of
the author's doctoral committee: Dr. Eugene Jacobson of Psychology,
and Drs. Hideya Kumata, Randall Harrison, and Lawrence Sarbaugh of the
Department of Communication. Their wise and kindly counsel are
reflected throughout the pages of the dissertation.

Other persons who assisted the author, both directly and indirectly,
during the course of the study which resulted in the present disserta-
tion, include Richard Joyce, Nan Lin and Donald Schwartz, all of whom
contributed to the Thailand Diffusion Project in some way, and Frederic
J. Mortimore who carried out the field research.

My family, which expanded by one during the course of the disserta-
tion, were understanding of the Saturdays, Sundays, and nights when the
writer was locked up in his study and "could not be disturbed" with
children's questions. My wife, Connie, provided constant energy and
support for the project and assumed reSponsibility for guiding family

affairs in the absence of a full-time husband.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF TABLES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 v 1

LIST OF FIGIJRES. o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o oVii

CHAPTER Page

I INTRODUCTION 0 O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O 1
Types of Innovation-Decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

The Setting of the Present Study. . . . . . . . . . 7

Phase One Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Phase Two Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Phase Three Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Criteria for Selection of Innovations . . . . . . . . 10

Description of Innovations Selected . . . . . . . . . 13

Definition of Concepts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Objectives of the Present Study . . . . . . . . . . . 22

II A THEORETIC RATIONALE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Review of Literature on System Effects. . . . . . . . 25
A Typological Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
System Effects in Diffusion Research. . . . . . . . . 28
System Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Theoretic Rationale for System Effects. . . . . . . . 34
Criteria for Selection of Variables . . . . . . . . . 36

Dependent Variables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Independent Variables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

CHAPTER

III

IV

Background of the Thailand Diffusion Project.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .

Sampling Procedures

Instrument Construction . . .
Independent Variables.
Dependent Variables. .

Deriving Concentration Ratios

Methods of Determining System Effects

Analyzing Data to Test Hypotheses .

FINDINGS .

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Theoretic

Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis

Hypothesis

One. .
Two. . .
Three. .
Four .
Five .
Six. .
Seven.
Eight. .
Nine . .
Ten. .
Eleven .

TWelve .

Thirteen .

Fourteen

Fifteen.

Sixteen.

iv

Page

. 45

. 45

48
51
52
54
57
6O

61

64

65

69

7O

7O

71

72

73

74

76

77

77

78

79

79

8O

. 81

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

CHAPTER Page
V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Recommendations for Future Research . . . . . . . . . 92

Implications for Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

APPENDIX A: Survey Instrument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .103

TABLE

l-III

2-III

l—IV

LIST OF TABLES

Classification of the Innovations
Studied in Thailand. . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total and Regional Figures
for Sample Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Predicted Relationships between
Independent and Dependent Variables. . . . . . .

Correlation between Independent and
Dependent Variables of Empirical Hypotheses. . .

vi

Page

. 12

50

FIGURE

l-III

Z-III

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

An Illustration of the Lorenz Curve
Indicating Concentration of Sociometric
Opinion Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illustration of a Communication Network
as Represented by a Sociogram, a Binary
Matrix (AE and its Corresponding Squared
Matrix (A )

vii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The behavior of people in organizations is still

the behavior of individuals, but it has a different
set of determinants than behavior outside organiza-
tional roles. Modifications in organizational
behavior must be brought about in a different manner.
Daniel Katz and Robert L. Kahn, 1966, p. 391.

Diffusion research, defined as the study of the process by which an
innovation Spreads among members of a social system (Rogers and Shoemaker,
1971), originated in the United States in the late 1930's when rural
sociologists began asking farmers to recall how they learned about and
adopted new agricultural ideas. These early investigations were largely
Sponsored by the sources of innovation, such as the state and federal
extension services, so that change agents, i.e., county extension agents,
could Speed up the diffusion and adoption of new ideas like hybrid seeds,
improved weed Sprays, and new tillage practices.

This beginning left an indelible mark on the approaches, concepts,
methods, and assumptions of diffusion research more than 30 years, and
1,700 investigations, later. These "biases" inherited from research
ancestors are often inappropriate to research today. The most important
biases which diffusion researchers adopted from their historical past,

include:

(1) A research focus upon the receivers, rather than the
seekers, of innovation.

2
(2) Sponsorship by the sources of innovations, rather
than by individuals seeking solutions to their

problems.

(3) Data gathered from individuals as the sole unit
of response.

The bias for intra-personal variables largely excluded from investi—
gation social—structural or system variables. Diffusion researchers
implicitly assumed that because individuals were the unit of response,
that they also had to be the unit of analysis.

All but a handful of the more than 178 studies of diffusion of
innovations in U.S. educational institutions utilize the individual as
the unit of analysis; these 178 studies commonly analyze data from a
single source, the school superintendent or chief administrative officer
(Carlson, 1965). Such research on organization-to-organization diffu-
sion provides important findings, but only on the nature of the trans-
mission of new ideas from one social system to another, rather than on

the process which takes place within the social system.

By ignoring within-organization diffusion, social scientists have

 

distorted the reality of how most innovations reach their ultimate
adopters. Also, they have missed the opportunity to study change in
a social—Structural framework of high theoretic relevance.

How decisions to adopt or reject new ideas are made by organiza-
tional members can provide valuable insight into the influence of author-

ity and of social structures on individual decisions. When studying

 

*Notable exceptions to source-Sponsored diffusion research are the
investigations of the late Professor Paul Mort, of Columbia Univer-
sity Teachers College, who focused upon between-organization innova-
tion diffusion. Mort's studies were financed by public schools.

3
authority decisions*, social scientists should be interested in indepen-
dent variables other than those commonly measured in educational diffu-
sion studies. They should begin to study the interrelationships of
interpersonal variables, including:

(1) Patterns of communication and decision-making

(2) Self-perceptions of members

(3) Status homophily

(4) Opinion leadership concentration

(5) Psychological distance from superiors

(6) Etc.

The research reported here, on the diffusion of educational innova-
tions within and among the secondary schools of Thailand, is one of the
first educational diffusion studies to attempt to measure the effects of
the social structure of a system or organization upon the behavior of
members within that system. The present study goes beyond the analysis
of individual characteristics and measures characteristics of the social
system (i.e., the school) in which the individuals (who are teachers
whose behavior this research seeks to explain, work.

Hypotheses tested in the present study involve two units of analysis:
(1) the individual teacher reSpondent, and (2) the school or social sys-
tem. In both cases the unit of reSponse is the individual teacher or
the principal of the school. Individual responses are aggregated to

produce school-level indices.

 

*

Authority decisions are those forced upon an individual by a person in
a superordinate position, such as a principal in a school system forcing
an educational innovation on a teacher.

Types of Innovation-Decisions

Nearly all studies of the diffusion of innovation completed to the
present, have focused upon voluntary (or Optional) decisions by one, or
many individuals, to begin using a new idea. Few studies have been made
of change involving group decisions; largely ignored in U.S. research,
as well as in investigations outside the U.S., are innovation-decisions
by collectivities, by directive from authorities, or adoption by coercion.

Most diffusion studies have been concerned with individual adoption
of innovations because the investigations were largely done by rural
sociologists whose central concern was the transmission of farm innova-
tions from agricultural scientists to individual farmers. In a typical
diffusion study, the dependent variable was knowledge about the innova-

tion or the innovativeness of an individual.

 

Diffusion research tended to concentrate almost exclusively on the
individual as the unit of analysis because the innovations of interest
to investigators were those new ideas most appropriate for individual
adoption and use. Thus, anthropologists investigated the diffusion of
steel axes among Stone—age Australians (Sharp, 1952); medical sociolo-
gists traced the adoption of a new wonder drug among Illinois doctors
(Katz and Menzel, 1954; Coleman, and others, 1957), and rural sociolo-
gists mapped the adoption of hybrid seed corn among Iowa farmers (Ryan
and Gross, 1943).

The relationship between the social system, and the decision to
adopt or reject an innovation, can be described by the following typology
of innovation-decisions.

1. Optional decisions-~are those innovation-decisions which are

 

made by individuals regardless of the decisions made by other

5
members of their social system. However, every individual
decision is generally influenced by the norms of the social
system and the pressures of the group to which that individ-
ual belongs or aSpires to belong. For example, the decision
of a college student to Stop wearing glasses and to begin
wearing contact lenses, an Iowa farmer's decision to plant
hybrid seed corn rather than an Open-pollinated variety,
and a wife's adoption of birth control pills, are all optional
decisions because they can be carried out regardless of the
decisions or attitudes of others, provided that the innova-
tions have been invented and are generally available.

Contingent decisions--are those decisions made by individuals,

 

but only after the social system has made a prior innovation-
decision. The individual is permitted to adopt or not adopt
the social system's new ideas, as he chooses. In Thai govern-
ment secondary schools a teacher's use of audio-visual aids

in his classroom is a contingent decision. A teacher can
only use audio—visual aids if the school has previously pro-
vided such aids for teachers' use. The teacher's decision

to adopt and use audio—visual aids is thus contingent upon

the decision of the school principal to provide such aids.

Collective decisions—-are those decisions about which individ-

 

ual members of the social system agree by consensus. All
persons must conform to the decision of the social system,
once it is made. Most decisions of a representative govern—
ment are of this type. For example, once a city council

decides to fluoridate a city's drinking water, the individual

6
citizen has little practical choice but to adopt fluoridated
water, or to seek a new consensus decision by the collectivity.

Authority decisions--are those decisions forced upon an

 

individual by someone in a superordinate power position,
such as a supervisor in an organization. The individual's
attitude toward the innovation is not the prime force in
his adoption or rejection; he is told of, and expected to
comply with, the innovation-decision of his superior in the

organization.

In summary, four types of innovation-decisions can be categorized

by the degree to which the individual has some influence in the decision:

A.

Individual has a decreasing degree of influence in the
innovation—decision.

1. Optional decisions

2. Contingent decisions

3. Collective decisions

Individual has no influence in the innovation-decision.

1. Authority decisions

One source of resistance to organizational innovation is the prevail-

ing system of hierarchical levels. The decision-making unit of the orga-

nization is the upper level of executives, but the implementing or adop-

tion unit usually is the lower—level employee. Even if the employee

initiates some new idea, via a communication channel Such as the company

suggestion box, he cannot implement that idea until it has been sanctioned

at higher levels of the hierarchy.

The two types of units involved in authority innovation-decisions

can be categorized as:

7

1. Decision unit--which is the individual, group, or other unit
that has authority in the organization to determine whether
the employee will adopt or reject the innovation.

2. Adoption unit--which is an individual, group, or other unit
that functionally adopts an innovation and implements the
decision of a superordinate authority.

Innovations can be adopted most quickly by authority decisions in
which subordinates of the organization have no voice. One reason why
public schools often lag behind industrial organizations in adOpting
change is that many educational innovations are collective or contingent
rather than authority decisions. Although the rate of innovation adop-
tion may be faster in a more autocratic organization, there may be a
less favorable attitude toward change among its members, more discon-
tinuance or partial adOption, and more circumvention of the decision to
adopt in such an organization. Where compliance is dependent upon public
surveillance, change may not persist when the surveillance is removed
(Kelman, 1961). Involvement and participation in the planning, collec-
tion, and interpretation of information initiates powerful forces for

individual change (Mann, 1957).

The Setting of the Present Study

The present dissertation is based upon the analysis of data from
one portion of a larger, more comprehensive educational diffusion
project conducted by the Institute for International Studies in Educa-
tion and the Department of Communication, both of Michigan State
University, and sponsored by the U.S. Agency for International Develop-

ment of Washington, D.C., and the Inter-University Research Program in

8
Institution-Building, headquartered at the University of Pittsburgh.
The IURP Consortium, financed by the Ford Foundation and U.S. AID, is
concerned with studying the process of institution-building in develop-
ing countries.

The diffusion project study was designed to investigate the spread
of educational innovations, and their adoption or rejection, in Thai
government-sponsored secondary schools. Specifically, an effort was
made:

1. To determine how decisions about the use of new educational

ideas are made by a centralized educational organization,
such as the Thai Ministry of Education, which has been
heavily influenced by U.S. educational practice. This
includes determination, in-so—far as possible, of the origin
of educational innovations in Thailand, their sponsorship
and entry into the social system, and their evaluation and
eventual recommendation to government-Sponsored secondary
schools.

2. To determine the variables related to knowledge of innovations,
favorable attitudes toward innovations, and innovativeness of
three hierarchical levels of the Thai educational bureaucracy,
the teachers, principals, and changwad educational officers of
the school structure.

3. To determine how educational innovations spread to teachers,
principals, and changgads, through the hierarchical structure
of the Thai Ministry of Education.

Phase One Research

The Thailand diffusion study was conducted in three phases: Phase
One was a pilot study of innovation diffusion in three Michigan public
high schools. Experience gained in the pilot study contributed to instru-
ment-construction and data-analysis techniques in the Phase Two research.
The results of the pilot research are reported in Lin and others (1966).

Purpose of the pilot study was to examine the factors, or indica-

tors, associated with various degrees of individual innovativeness

9
within an organization, such as a public high school. Teachers were
the unit of analysis.

The study tested the paradigm of innovation diffusion within an
institutional setting and suggested two new dependent variables in
studies of organizational diffusion: (1) the individual's innovation
internalization (the degree of attitudinal acceptance of an innovation),
and (2) the individual's change orientation (self—perceived willingness

to adopt new ideas).

Phase Two Research

In Phase Two of the Thailand Project, Frederic J. Mortimore, then of
the Institute for International Studies in Education at Michigan State
University, spent six months in Thailand collecting data from 629 secon-
dary school teachers, 38 secondary school principals, and 66 changwad
education officers, the Thai equivalent of the educational supervisor
within the Thai Ministry of Education.

In Mortimore's study (1968), the unit of analysis was the individual
teacher. The purposes of the Phase Two investigation were:

1. To determine how decisions to adopt or reject new educational

practices in Thai secondary schools are made by officials of

the Ministry of Education.

2. To determine how educational innovations are diffused to Thai
secondary schools.

3. To determine the degree of perceived beneficiality of innova-
tions adopted by Thai teachers.

4. To delineate personal, interpersonal, and perceptual variables
which contribute to the change orientation of Thai teachers.

5. To formulate strategies for bringing about desirable change in
Thailand's secondary education system.

10

‘ghgge Three Resegggh

The present dissertation represents the third and final phase of
the Thailand Educational Diffusion Project. It utilizes data from the
Phase Two study, but also includes data from Thai principals and aggre—
gate school data. The present research is designed to overcome one
"egregious shortcoming" (Rogers and others, 1969, p. 175) of the earlier
Thailand research, the failure to include system variables in the data-
analysis procedures. The inclusion of social system variables in the
present analysis may enhance the many low correlations discovered in the
Phase Two study, where total variance explained ranged from .70 percent
for the contribution of "age" in explaining variance in adoption, to a
high of 5.65 percent of the variance in awareness scores contributed by

years of teaching experience.

Criteria for Selection of Innovations

In the present investigation, ten educational innovations were

selected for study according to the following criteria:

1. At least half of the innovations studied should reflect system
(Ministry) and school (Principal) adoption decisions, which
would require compliance by the subordinate units (schools) or
individuals (teachers) within the system. Six of the innova-
tions chosen represented authority decisions.

2. Some of the innovations adapted by subordinates should require
prior adaption by a superordinate individual (Principal) or
agency (Ministry) before the individual (teacher) could choose ‘

to adopt or reject the innovation. These are innovations

ll
requiring contingent decisions by teachers, after the social
system has already adopted. Two of the innovations selected
were of this type.

3. The adoption of certain innovations by the school as a decision
unit should require, as a condition of individual teacher adop-
tion, expenditure of non-appropriated school funds. Five of
the innovations represented this type.

4. The adoption of certain innovations by individual teachers
Should require that they learn to manipulate mechanical devices.
Three of the innovations selected represented this type.

5. The adoption of certain innovations should represent a marked
departure from "traditional" or pre-World War II educational
practices. Five of the innovations chosen were of this type.

6. Certain innovations should have been known in Thailand for at
least a decade (before 1955) prior to the start of the Study.
Five innovations selected were of this type.

7. Some of the innovations should have been introduced in Thailand
since 1955. Three innovations chosen were of this type.

Using these criteria, a four-man panel of education and communica-
tion researchers identified ten educational innovations for study as
described in Table l-I (Rogers and others, 1969, pp. 38-39). Follow-
ing is a description of each of these innovations together with (l)
the approximate year of introduction in Thailand, (2) the means by
which the innovation was introduced into the educational system, (3)
the channels used to diffuse the innovation, and (4) comments on how
eaCh innovation was employed in schools visited by the Project research

staff.

mmmH macaw vmosvouunfi coaum>oaaH
mmma muowmn nan .HH pmz wanes mocwm vaunvouuafi coaum>o=aH

mofluomum HNGOHunmuu aonu ousuumqov wumuovoa muaomwuamu coaumow<
zum>

H
mm

oumafivuoumasm ma coaumovm Howua nuance» uon wmou uwnomwu Hmsvfi>fluafl z: coaunop<

Hmsvw>wwcfi
we we

nanomou Hmsvfi>fivcfi mp wocmfladaoo maflufisuuu coamflowv ucoamwmama Hoonom no amummm
nonomou Hmsvfi>fivcw ha wocmfiaaaoo mcfiufisvou sOHwHoow uaoeuwmama Hoonum no Emumkm

 

nz<AH<mH zH QMHQDHm mZOHH<>OZZH mmH ho onH<UHhHmm<Ao

HIH mqm<9

13

Description of Innovations Selected

I. Class Discussion Method of Instruction: This innovation is

 

defined as the encouragement by teachers of student participation in
class in a two-way exchange of information on subject matter, for the
purpose of developing among students (1) analytical thought, (2)5problem-
solving ability, (3) students' ability to express themselves clearly and
concisely.

Because of continental European influence, the Thai educational
system traditiohally has relied almost exclusively upon the lecture as
the means of instruction, requiring students to keep notes on lectures
and to commit this information to memory for verbatim recitation.
Factors which help to account for this reliance upon lectures and
memorization include (1) school graduation, university entrance, and
civil service examinations which are largely tests of the individual's
rote memory, (2) a general shortage of printed textbooks, (3) a lack
of preparation of government secondary school teachers, half of whom
are not qualified to teach their courses, by Ministry of Education
standards, and (4) a Thai cultural norm of deference of pupils to their
teachers, which makes it difficult for Thai teachers to accept a chal-
lenge to their authority by students.

First use of class discussion in Thai schools was sometime shortly
after World War II. The method of introduction into the system was the
return of Thai educators from the United States, where they observed
class discussion in use. Another possible channel was the establishment
of a College of Education at Prasarn Mitr in 1954, patterned on an Ameri—
can model. Faculty members, who largely were drawn from Indiana Univer-

sity in the United States, used class discussion extensively.

14

Although 62 percent of the teachers of sample schools said that
they used classroom discussion, its use was observed infrequently by
researchers who visited the schools. For the most part, the instruc—
tional method most observed by researchers was lecture with "choral
reSponse" and individual recitation. Only 13 percent of sample teachers
attended Prasarn Mitr College of Education where they might have had an
opportunity to observe classroom discussion. This suggests that the
classroom discussion technique is probably used only Sparingly, but by
a high percentage of Thai teachers.

2. Use of Objective Tests: This innovation is defined as use of

 

those tests which utilize questions requiring predetermined, forced or
multiple-choice, responses. Such examinations are used in the U.S. to
replace essay questions, because of a purported advantage of widely
sampling the total range of subject matter and the greater objectivity
in scoring.

The innovation was introduced into Thai schools by UNESCO Special—
ists who worked with Cha Choengsao Pilot Project schools in 1950-51.

Two Thai educators closely associated with objective testing, Dr. Paiboon
Ratanamangala and Dr. Chawan Paratagul, both received their graduate
degrees in the United States. Dr. H. C. Burrow, a UNESCO Specialist in
English language instruction, also was influential in diffusing informa~
tion about objective tests in Thailand.

3. Use of School Library as a Teaching-Language Resource: This
innovation is defined as a teacher requirement that students read assign-
ments from books in the school library.

The first secondary school library was established in 1907 at King's

College, Palace School for children of the Royal Family. In 1952, the

15
Ministry adopted a policy that all government secondary schools should
establish a library. Rejabapit School in Bangkok was the first govern—
ment secondary school of Thailand to require regular use of the library
by its students.

In 1956, the Ministry's Department of Secondary Education appointed
a library supervisor who had just returned from the United States with
a masters degree in library science. That same year the Thai Ministry
of Education and U.S. AID initiated the General Education Development
(GED) program, a ten-year project to improve education in the provinces.

The Library Association of Thailand, a voluntary association, has
promoted improvement of government school libraries since 1955. The
Association publishes a bi-monthly Library Bulletin, Sponsors an annual
meeting for librarians from throughout the kingdom, encourages Associa-
tion chapters at the changgad level, Sponsors a traveling book display,
and offers (in cooperation with the Ministry of Education) a nine day
inservice training program in library work for government school teachers.

However, government schools do not receive Ministry funds for the
purchase of library books, so schools must rely upon gifts and Special
library fees collected from Students. Lack of Ministry appropriation
is also responsible for the fact that few secondary schools hire full-
time librarians. Teachers are appointed to supervise the library on a
part-time or overload basis.

Among schools visited, the libraries varied widely. In smaller,
rural schools, the library frequently consisted of popular magazines
and a few books piled in one corner of a classroom. In larger schools,
books were neatly filed on shelves, and classified by subject matter.

Whether large or small, most school libraries were little used. Many

l-‘m
Dan 3.“ .— AL- _ I . I .
. I

16
librarians appeared to prefer that books remain shelved rather than
encouraging their circulation.

4. Use of Audio-ViSual Aids: The innovation is defined as the
use of taped and recorded materials, moving pictures, slides, and film
strips, to distinguish them from those audio-visual aids, such as maps,
charts, globes, and printed pictures, which have been used in Thai
schools for many years.

The audio-visual aids studied were first used on a large scale in
UNESCO-Sponsored adult education programs begun in 1950 at Cha-Choengsao.
Many school teachers from throughout Thailand observed the experiment and
widely diffused the innovation. Prasarn Mitr College of Education in
Bangkok maintains an audio-visual training center, and offers a course
for prospective teachers.

Most of the films, film strips, slides, tapes and records used in
Thai schools are provided by the U.S. Information Service, private
foreign firms, or foreign consulates, since the Ministry does not pro-
duce such materials or provide money or equipment necessary for the use
of audio—visual aids.

5. Coeducational Schools: The innovation is defined as the mixing
of boys and girls in classes in one school. Prior to World War 1, many
elementary and secondary schools were coeducational, but because of
British influence, a preference developed in the 1920's for separate
secondary schools.

At the behest of Dr. Willis Porter, professor at Indiana University,
the Ministry of Education reconsidered its position on separate secon-
dary schools and decided in 1950 that all secondary schools in amphur

capitals would be coeducational. Financial considerations and a

l7

shortage of teachers played a significant role in the decision. The
first coeducational teacher-training institution in Thailand was opened
at Chiengmai in 1950.

In all coeducational secondary schools of the sample, boys and
girls were seated separately, though in the same classroom, and sexes
were segregated in most extra-curricular activities. However, many
schools reported as separate schools by the Ministry are actually
coeducational because boys of many provincial capitals who wish to
enroll in arts courses attend schools officially designated as "girls"
schools, while girls wishing to enroll in science frequently attend
schools designated as "boys" schools.

6. Use of Peace Corps Volunteers: The decision to request American

 

Peace Corps volunteers for use in Thai schools was made in 1961, and the
first volunteers arrived in 1962. Many more schools request Peace Corps
volunteers than can be provided by the U.S.

Peace Corps volunteers experience a wide range of problems in Thai
schools. Many reported that they felt they could be used more effec-
tively, but nearly all expressed enjoyment in their work.

7. Guidance Counseling: The innovation is defined as the provi-

 

sion for vocational or career guidance in the school. Guidance counsel-
ing was first introduced in Thai schools in 1958.

The first inservice teacher training programs devoted to vocational
guidance were sponsored by the Ministry's Supervisory Division in June
of 1966. However, both Prasarn Mitr College of Education and Chula-
longkorn University have offered per-service elective courses in guid-

ance counseling for several years.

18

One of the prime problems for guidance counselors is gaining ade-
quate knowledge of the Chinese business community of Thailand, since
the Chinese have a near monopoly on commerce.

Field observations tended to indicate that vocational guidance
counselors lack the necessary training and information to adequately
perform their task. Although 11 of the sample school principals said
their school offered vocational counseling, only two counselors had
special training in the area; one had enrolled in two counseling courses
at Prasarn Mitr College of Education and the other had attended a ten
day inservice training institute on vocational guidance.

8. Vocational Education: The innovation is defined as the provi—
Sion by the school of vocational or pre—vocational crafts and/or skills
designed to prepare students for employment in a specific vocation.

Apparently a wideSpread feeling exists among Thai parents and stu-
dents that vocational education is an inherently inferior type of educa-
tion. Educational officials have done little to overcome this stereotype,
except in those instances where foreign grants were available to finance
vocational programs.

The first postwar effort to develop vocational education at the

secondary level was launched in 1950 with funds provided by UNESCO.
In 1957, another experimental pre-vocational program was launched in
government secondary schools. Designated as "General Education Develop—
ment," the project was sponsored jointly by the U.S. Agency for Inter-
national Development and the Thai Ministry of Education. A third large
and well financed vocational program was recently launched with UNICEF
Support.

Field observations indicated that vocational teachers generally

disdain handling tools and equipment, being extremely conscious of

I a H‘s—m. Qua-.1 .._._ .
a

l

19
their status as "educated men." Therefore, students are not taught hgw_
to use equipment, but rather are taught abggt the use of equipment.
However, instruction in domestic arts for the girls appears to be better
organized and staffed. Cooking and sewing classes appear to be well
taught by female teachers who apparently do not find work in the kitchen
beneath their dignity.

9. Parent-Teacher Associations: The parent-teacher association was
introduced to Thailand by a Ministry of Education official who visited
the U.S. in 1955. In 1957, a P.T.A. was established at Satri Wittaya,
and continues to function. Since 1960, principals from schools in
Bangkok and 20 different provinces have visited Satri Wittaya to observe
and discuss the P.T.A. in operation. However, there is no national
P.T.A. organization in Thailand, and the Ministry has not shown interest
in forming a nationwide federation of the organizations.

10. Departmentalization of Government Secondary Schools: The
Ministry of Education recommends that any school with more than 18
teachers and/or any school employing more than three teachers to teach
one subject should departmentalize by subject matter. Courses in
educational administration at Prasarn Mitr College of Education give
considerable attention to the innovation, as do numerous articles in
professional education journals of Thailand. However, discussions with
sample school principals indicated little interest in the innovation,
except among principals supervising schools with 20 or more teachers.

The remainder of this chapter is devoted to a definition of the
concepts utilized throughout the dissertation and to a presentation

of the objectives of the study described here.

.r .‘uh
A .F’T"'~“"7“-.'\..,. ' "~ ‘

20

Definition of Concepts

1. Teacher Innovativeness: defined as the degree to which an

 

individual is relatively earlier in adopting new ideas than other
members of his social system (Rogers, 1962, p. 20).
2. School Innovativeness: defined as the degree to which a school
is relatively earlier in adopting new ideas than other schools of the 3
social system. i

3. Social System: defined as a "collectivity of individuals, or

 

units, who are functionally differentiated and engaged in collective E
problem-solving with respect to a common goal" (Rogers with Shoemaker,
1971, p. 39). The members, or units, of a social system may be teachers
within a school or a school within an educational system. The common
objective or goal binds the social system together.
4. System Effects: defined as the influences of a system's social
structure on the behavior of members or units within the social system
(Rogers with Shoemaker, 1971). System effects are sometimes referred
to as "compositional effects," "contextual effects," or "structural
effects."

5. ‘Cosmgpgliteness: defined as the "degree to which an individ-

 

ual's orientation is external to a particular social system" (Rogers,
1962, p. 183).

6. Mass Media Exposure: defined as the receipt of messages trans-
ferred via channels such as newspapers, magazines, film, radio, and
television, which enable a source of one or a few individuals to reach
an audience of many (Rogers with Shoemaker, 1971).

7. Innovation: defined as "an idea, practice, or object perceived

as new by an individual" (Regers with Shoemaker, 1971).

21

8. Attitudinal Acceptance of an Innovation: defined as the
"extent to which a teacher perceives an innovation as relevant and
valuable to his role performance in the school" (Linn and others,
1966, p. 60).

9. School Awareness: defined as first exposure to new ideas, but

 

lacking complete information necessary to the utilization of that idea
(Rogers with Shoemaker, 1971). E
10. Opinion Leadership: defined as the "ability to informally
influence other individual's attitudes or behavior in a desired way
with relative frequency" (Rogers with Shoemaker, 1971). ;
11. Opinion Leadership Concentration: defined as the degree to L
which personal influence is vested in one or a few persons rather than
being diffused throughout the social system (Guimaré‘és, 1970).
12. Decision-making: defined as "the process by which an individual
evaluates the meaning and consequences of several courses of action or
cxuaoses desirable alternatives" (Rogers with Shoemaker, 1971).
13. Rglgg: defined as standardized patterns of behavior required
0f £311 persons playing a part in a given functional relationship (Katz
and Kahn, 1966).
14. Feedback: defined as information from the receiver transmitted
back to the source about the changed condition of the receiver (Westley
and MacLean, 1957).
15. Psychological Distance: defined as the individual's percep-
tions of the extent of "inequality" existing between himself and his
Superior (Mulder, 1960).
16. Role Satisfaction: defined as the "extent to which an individ-
ual is satisfied with his work and his working environment" (Lin and

others, 1966, p. 18).

22

17. Participation in Decision-Making: defined as the "extent to
which an individual perceives himself to be taking part in relevant
decision-making activities" (Lin and others, 1966, p. l9).

18. Role Performance Feedback: defined as the "extent to which
an individual's superior indicates how he is performing his duties as
a teacher" (Lin and others, 1966, p. 19).

19. Oggmunication Integration: defined as the degree to which
individuals of the social system interact directly on a face-to-face

basis rather than through liason persons (Guimariés, 1970).

Objectives of the Present Study

One of the objectives of the present investigation is to determine
the variables related to school innovativeness, school attitudinal accep—
tance of innovations, time of school awareness, and teacher innovative-
11888 of government sponsored secondary schools of Thailand. A second

*
(ibjective is to test for the existence of system effects in a cultural

Sietting divergent from that of the United States where most previous

Iaducational diffusion research has been carried out. Characteristics of

El formal organization, in this instance a Thai secondary school, are used

to predict innovativeness of individual members of that social system.
Previous diffusion studies, reviewed in Chapter II of the present

dissertation, tend to indicate that some characteristics of the social

System have an affect on the individual's innovativeness within that

social system; however, such studies generally do not indicate how

much influence a particular system exerts.

*System effects are also referred to as "Structural effects" by Blau

(1957), and "compositional effects" by Davis and others (1961) and
by Qadir (1966).

23

All human behavior can be measured at two levels: the individual
and the social system level. Change which occurs at the individual
level is frequently labeled adoption, modernization, acculturation,
learning, or socialization. Measurement of individual behavior is the
micro-analytic approach to change analysis (Rogers with Shoemaker, 1971).

Change also occurs at the social system level, where it is referred
to as development, specialization, integration, or adaptation. The macro-
analytic approach utilizes the social system as the unit of analysis
(Rogers with Shoemaker, 1971).

Both types of change are closely interrelated. For example, if a
school is regarded as a social system, as it is in the present study,

then the school system's adoption of a library may lead to individual
teacher decisions to alter their teaching behavior by making student
.assignments in books from the new library. Similarly, the aggregation
(bf many individual changes produces a system-wide alteration.

Most educational diffusion research has treated teachers as if they
(iid.not work in schools, and as if the school system did not have an
ihnportant affect on each teacher's diffusion behavior. It is important,
tlowever, to note that all diffusion occurs within a social system and
th-'.-‘I.t::the social system affects an innovation's diffusion pattern.

To the extent that individuals within a social system are func-
tionally differentiated, structure exists within that system. Social

Structure develops through the arrangement of positions in a social
System. A formal organization, such as a secondary school in Thailand,
has a highly developed social structure, consisting of superordinate-
subordinate positions, giving those of higher-ranked status the authority

to issue orders to those of lesser rank. Even informal groupings have

.{1

It“.--
‘1 .5-1 ..

24

some level of structure inherent in the interpersonal relationships of
the members. This structure determines who interacts with whom, and
under what circumstances this interaction will take place. Both formal
and informal social structures have an affect on human behavior, and
on the responses that individuals make to communication stimuli.

A basic hypothesis underlies the present study:

The properties of a system exert influence over an
individual member's behavior.

This hypothesis is predicated upon an examination of organizational
literature which documents the effect of social structures on changes in
human behavior. The influence of group pressure is demonstrated in the
research of Lewin (1947), Coch and French (1948 and 1961), Pelz (1956),
Vroom (1960), Seashore and Bowers (1963), and Maier and Hoffman (1961),
among others .

Given this basic hypothesis concerning the behavior of individuals
in (Jrganizations, a main thesis can be advanced that:

More variance in individual behavior can be
explained by utilizing both individual and
system variables than by using individual

variables alone.

This thesis will be tested in the present study.

_; “mm—.-——._ ., . .
I .

CHAPTER II

A THEORETIC RATIONALE

The three-fold purpose of the present chapter is to briefly review
the literature on system effects in general beginning with Durkheim's
research at the turn of the twentieth century and continuing to the
present, and to focus Specifically upon diffusion studies which include
system effects in the analysis. Also, Chapter II establishes a crite-
ria for the selection of variables for inclusion in the present study
and sets forth a theoretic rationale for each proposed relationship of

independent and dependent variable.

Review of Literature on System Effects

It is important that diffusion researchers remember that most
iluiividuals work within organizational settings, such as schools,
hc”Spitals, prisons, and business firms, which have an impact upon
thOSe individuals' behavior as regards the adeption or rejection of
ne‘w’ideas. Perhaps the most obvious reason for scientific interest
in social structural, or system, variables, is that these variables
have an important influence upon individual behavior, either limiting
or reinforcing that behavior with respect to certain decisions.

It is with his fellow teachers that most Thai teachers interact

concerning educational innovations (Mortimore, 1968). Thus, the
characteristics and attitudes of colleagues should have an important

25

a“

26
effect upon the knowledge of, attitudes toward, and adoption of, new
ideas by the individual teacher.

Though diffusion researchers discovered the importance of social

structural variables only recently, the concept of "system effects"
can be traced beyond the 20th century. One of the earliest mentions
of the concept is in a sociological study by Durkheim (1897), who
discovered that suicide rates varied widely among various religious
bodies, but that suicide rates for members of a religion were much
lower when the individuals of that religion were a minority within
the society.

Groves and Ogburn (1928) found that the marriage rates of men and
Isomen varied in opposite direction to the sex ratio of the communities
:in which the subjects lived. Paris and Dunham (1939), in their study
caf the ecological distribution of home addresses of psychotics in
(Hiicago, discovered that psychosis rates were higher for Negroes living
111 white areas and whites living in Negro areas, than for the same races
“Olen living in areas where they made up the majority of the population.

Stouffer and others (1949), studying attitudes of U.S. soldiers
(hiring World War II, found that an individual's attitude toward promo-
t10nwas influenced by the general rate of promotion of the unit in
which he served. Promotion was valued more highly in those units where
group promotion rates were low, and less highly in units where promo-
tion rates were high. Promoted soldiers were less critical of the
military promotion system than non-promoted soldiers, but criticism
was greater among both promoted and non-promoted soldiers in those

units with high rates of promotion.

r...~.‘

117:“

27

Mbre recent studies which have demonstrated system effects include:

1. Berelson and others (1954) showed the effects of community
composition in party affiliation, upon individual voting behavior.

2. Lipset and others (1956) found system effects in their study
of political voting preferences in a U.S. labor union.

3. Blau (1960) observed that values in work groups (in a public
assistance agency) had effects upon the conduct of individuals within
the group. In some cases the group's values and the individual's
orientation had similar, but independent, effects on the conduct of
the individual; in other cases, they had opposite effects; and in still
others, the effects of the individual's orientation were contingent
upon the prevalence of this orientation in the group to which he belonged.

4. Reiss and Rhodes (1961) discovered that community or neighbor-

liood norms on juvenile delinquency had an influence on the probabilities
cxf a.youth, living within that community, becoming delinquent.

5. Davis and others (1961) encountered system effects in their

3 tudy of the Great Books reading program.

A Typological Classification

Several units may form the basis of analysis in studies of the
diffusion of innovation. As Chapter I attempts to point out, in most
of the diffusion research completed to date, the unit of reSponse and
tt1‘3- unit of analysis have been one and the same, the individual. How-

eVQr, the simplified typological classification presented below illus-

trates that there are several other possible types of analyses:

Independent Variable

Individual System
Individual Type I Type II
System Type III Type IV

 

 

Dependent Variable

 

 

 

 

28

Most past diffusion research has been of the Type I study which
focuses upon individual characteristics of the receiver, and the effects
of these characteristics upon the receiver's individual decision to
adopt or reject an innovation. For instance, the relatively earlier
adopters of a social system in the United States have generally been.
found to be better educated, to be younger in age, to have a higher
social status, to operate a more specialized farm, to have more wealth,
and to exhibit a different type of mental ability than later adopters
(Rogers, 1962, pp. 171-178). Socioeconomic, demographic, and socio-

psychological variables have previously been most commonly utilized

imnmaa... -. 4..

as independent variables in explaining individual innovativeness.
However, individuals involved in innovation decision-making do not
(exist in isolation, particularly if they are employed in a complex
cxrganization. They are surrounded by a myriad of influences ranging
from the norms of the social system to the cosmopoliteness, mass media
eeaclaosure, and educational level of others in the same social system.
The present study seeks to explain an additional amount of variance
in individual innovativeness by taking into account system variables.
HEVIDOtheseS proposed at the end of the present chapter are of both Type
'I][; Eind Type III analyses, predicting individual influences upon the
ZLIIIIIJVStiveneSS of a social system and social system influences upon the

1"Tuftovativeness of individuals.

System Effects in Diffusion Research

Recently, diffusion researchers have suggested that system effects
'naif be of importance in explaining individual behavior in the adoption

of Iinnovations. For example:

29

1. In a large-scale analysis of the diffusion of educational
innovations to 629 teachers in Thai government secondary schools,
Mortimore (1968) found low correlations, most of which were not signi-
ficantly different from zero, between 51 independent variables and three
dependent variables: awareness, adoption, and perceived beneficiality
of innovations. The investigator hypothesized that these low correla—
tions resulted largely from the fact that system variables were neglected
in the study. The 51 independent variables, drawn mainly from experience
in U.S. educational diffusion Studies, measured important individual

characteristics and attitudes, but did not measure school effects on

 

individual teacher behavior. .

2. Davis (1968) explored the relationships between individual
nuadernizing characteristics of 1,142 Nigerian farmers, the correspond-
1118 system characteristics of each of the 18 villages where the respon-

ciernts lived, and individual innovativeness. Of primary concern to the

:iraxrestigator was the interaction between two levels of modernizing
c2tneiracteristics in explaining greater amounts of variance in individual
level variables and system level variables into account in a multiple
correlation analysis, that the amount of variance explained increased
from that of individual variables alone.

3. Saxena (1968) tested the existence of system effects in peasant
‘"i~]~JLage settings to demonstrate the influence that the system exerted
"1’C>tl individual innovativeness. The social systems studied were eight
It"(lien villages from which 680 Indian farmers were drawn at random for

c"Drilparison on the basis of their adoption of ten agricultural innova-
t1Otis. Farmers high on both individual and system variables such as
Crfikiit orientation, social participation, etc., were found to be high

01'! innovativeness .

30

4. Qadir's (1966) analysis of data from 600 villagers in 26
Philippine neighborhoods revealed that system variables, such as mean
neighborhood education and mean neighborhood mass media exposure, were
about as important in predicting individual innovativeness as were
individual variables, like mass media exposure, education, etc. Opera-
tionalizing innovativeness as "the adoption of modern practices," he
concluded that in modern systems with a social climate favorable to
change, even individuals lacking much education, mass media exposure,

or modern orientation, acted in an innovative manner. This conclusion

suggests that in many settings, system effects (such as system norms,
composite educational level of peers, etc.) may be better predictors
c)f individual innovativeness than individual characteristics.
5. Coughenour (1966), in an intensive study of the normative struc-
tnare of seven farming localities in Western Kentucky, explained varia-
tion in the rate of adoption of innovations. Data were obtained by a
Survey of beef cattle, hog, and tobacco farmers among the seven locality
groups in commercial farming areas. The mean group adoption scores
indicated an uneven response of localities to innovations. Four inde-
pendent variables, mean gross income, prevalence of commercial farming
Eitititudes, social status level, and integration of communication based
(>11 technological competence, made the greatest contribution to explain-
:1Jng variance in locality adoption scores.
6. In a similar study, Coughenour (1964) analyzed data on the
diffusion of five farm practices in 12 Kentucky localities. He found
that rate of adoption of the five innovations was related to socio-

economic and attitudinal resources of each locality and to the nature

of social relationships with information sources and media contacts.

31

7. Flinn (1963 and 1970) Studied the influence of community norms
in predicting agricultural innovativeness. He defined community norms
as patterns of behavior in a social system with both objective and
subjective qualities which can be inferred from overt actions and
verbal reSponses. The researcher found that community norms on innova-
tiveness, as inferred from overt actions, accounted for more variation
in farmer innovativeness than did any of the other variables studied.
Five variables pooled explained only 64.1 percent of the variance in
innovativeness; community norms alone accounted for 20 percent of that
variance. Regardless of their own attitudes, farmers of communities in
which innovators were viewed most favorably were more apt to be innova-
tive than farmers of communities in which innovators were viewed less
favorably.

8. Because of a low prediction level in a study of innovativeness
among Ohio truck farmers, Rogers and Burdge (1961) included a community
variable, "norms on innovativeness," in a reanalysis of their data.

The investigators found that the prediction of innovativeness of the
truck farmers improved because of inclusion of a social system variable.
9. In his study of 47 Wisconsin townships, van den Ban (1960)

classified townships into categories according to the average adeption

score of the farmers studied. The investigator observed a Significant

difference among the four categories in the proportion of high adopters,

after controlling for the effects of such variables as 4-H Club member-

ship, Size of farm, and net worth. Van den Ban then did case studies

of two separate townships, one modern and one traditional, and concluded:
Differences in the adoption of new farm prac-

tices between the townships studied can be only
partly explained by differences in individual

IUI.

. ‘
‘ ".
any

anti

p.
5-11

110

32
characteristics or by values directly affect-
ing farming. Differences in social Structure
seem to be more important.

10. Duncan and Kreitlow (1954) matched and compared 19 pairs of
rural neighborhoods on the adoption of 30 school practices, using an
index of 25 farming practices and four measures of organizational partic-
ipation. The investigators used the neighborhood as the unit of analysis
and the mean score of ten reSpondents in each neighborhood as the accep-
tance level for the entire neighborhood. They found that heterogeneous
neighborhoods were consistently more favorable toward a majority of the
innovations, thus indicating the influence of both social structure and
norms.

ll. Marsh and Coleman (1954) discovered that both socioeconomic
characteristics of farmers and their neighborhood of residence were
significantly correlated with the individual farmer's innovativeness
score. Even when the socioeconomic characteristics of farmers were
held constant, the differences in individual innovativeness attributable
to differences in neighborhoods still existed.

Summing up his review of the literature on the influence of system
effects in the diffusion research tradition, Davis (1968) draws three
important generalizations:

1. Although a handful of relatively recent diffusion

studies have mentioned system effects as part of
an overall research design, few have focused on
system effects as the central problem of research.

2. Mbst diffusion research investigates the influence

of personal characteristics of a large number of

individuals upon the dependent variable, innovative-
ness. But typically, diffusion researchers have paid
little attention to the socio-cultural and communica-

tion environment of the individual studied.

3. If the influence of system effects is considered in
the analysis of diffusion data, usually only one

33
system, a single village, community, or school is
analyzed for its influence upon the dependent
variable. Few studies include a sufficiently large
number of communities or organizations to permit

testing of hypotheses about social system character-
istics with any degree of rigor.

Systems Analysis

Systems analysis, defined as the investigation of the network of
interrelationships among the social, cultural, psychological, and
communication variables of a given social system (Davis, 1968, p. 19),
is well suited to the study of the diffusion of innovations because of
the emphasis which such analysis places upon the complex functional
interrelationships among the units of an organization, culture, or
social system. It is possible (using modern computer technologY) to
explore the total network of interrelationships among variables of a
given social system, whether a secondary school or a peasant village.

The primary focus of the present investigation is the innovativeness
of individual teachers and schools, and the correlates of innovativeness
useful in predicting the adoption or rejection of new educational ideas.
The present study is designed to test selected hypotheses regarding
socio-cultural and communication variables at both the individual and
the system level, and their relationship to the dependent variable.

The present research, therefore, departs from traditional system
analysis techniques as in engineering or physics, and utilizes selected
system variables to explain more variance in the dependent variable than
can be explained by attitudinal or behavioral variables alone.

The important characteristic of system analysis utilized in the
present study is the collection of data from several levels within the

total social system, from subsystems composing the social system, so

34
analysis can be made of their function within the system under study,

in order to predict changes in human behavior.

Theoretic Rationale for System Effects

In considering the effects of system variables in the present analy-
sis, the important question is: "In what ways do the system variables
affect the individual teachers' decisions to adopt or not adopt innova-
tions?" Several possible answers exist:

1. First, there is a possibility that differences among the
schools sampled in the present study are random differences which
could be expected on the basis of chance alone. This would mean
that variance in the system variables from school to school is the
expression of the normal distribution of such variables, and has no
systematic relationship to the dependent variable. In such instance,
the investigator would expect to find differences regarding system
variables from school to school, but these differences would not be
significantly correlated, i.e., would not covary concommitantly beyond
chance expectations, with differences in innovativeness in the various
schools. Such a situation could be expressed by a general hypothesis:

H - The characteristics of the social system
of the schools are not related to the
innovativeness of teachers of these schools.

2. A second possibility is that differences in the adoption of
innovations by individual teachers are associated with variance in a
Single independent variable among the schools. For example, suppose
innovativeness varies beyond chance expectation from school to school.

If the presence of a single variable (e.g., teachers' educational level)

also varies from school to school, it could be hypothesized that

35
different levels of education among the school faculty explain the
different adoption rates. However, because of the complexity of the
total social system of a school, it is not realistic to assume that
variance in a dependent variable such as system innovativeness can be
explained by one independent variable. The same argument holds true
for individual teacher innovativeness.

3. A third possibility, which is the problem of central concern
in the present study, is the situation in which a number of individual
variables and a number of system variables operate to explain the
variance in the dependent variable. Individual teacher A, working in
social system 2, would have some score on the dependent variable X,
and by its interaction with the mean level for independent variable K
throughout his social system. Individual teacher A would have individ-
ual scores for every independent variable considered, and the social
system would have a mean level for every independent variable included.
Thus, individual independent variables and system independent variables
,(aggregated individual variables) act independently and jointly to
influence the dependent variable for teacher A in the social system.
The entire social system's position on the dependent variable is repre-
sented by some measure of central tendency (such as the mean) for every
individual included in the sample. Thus, hypotheses tested in the
present research involve two units of analysis: (1) the individual
teacher respondent, and (2) the school. In both cases the unit of
reSponse is the individual teacher or principal. Teachers' reSponseS

are aggregated to produce school-level indices.

vl

n“.-

”J

!

u. -
- Fl

36

Criteria for Selection of Variables

Variables selected for inclusion in the hypotheses tested in this
research were determined on the basis of the following criteria:

1. Generalizations drawn from previous diffusion research, con-
ducted both in the United States and in other countries. However,
educational diffusion studies in less developed countries are extremely
limited, so diffusion studies conducted in other settings were reviewed.
Several educational diffusion studies in developing nations were stimu-
lated by the Thailand Diffusion Project, including: (1) an investiga-
tion of educational diffusion among 300 teachers in 30 South India
schools by Shaline Bhogle, Ph.D. candidate at Osmania University,
Hyderabad, India, and (2) a study among 200 teachers in Six pilot
schools in Pakistan by Anwar K. Kahn (1968) of the Institute of Inter-
national Studies in Education at Michigan State University.

2. Earlier analyses of similar data from the Thailand Diffusion
Project by project colleagues (Lin, 1966; Lin and others, 1966; Mortimore,
1968; and Rogers and others, 1969).

3. Intuitive and theoretic reasoning. As indicated earlier, very
little diffusion research had dealt with the influence of system vari—
ables on innovativeness, particularly teacher innovativeness. Previous
investigations, therefore, provided only limited empirical Support in

the selection of variables to be included in the data analysis.

Dependent Variables
1. Time of School Awareness: is one of four dependent variables
used in the present study. Research tends to suggest that innovation

awareness precedes adoption (Rogers with Shoemaker, 1971) and represents

37
the beginning of a sequence of activities. Lin (1966) found that aware-
ness was positively correlated with nine independent variables and
negatively correlated with two.

2. School Attitudinal Acceptance of Innovation: is the extent to
which teachers "perceived the innovation as relevant and valuable to
their role performance" (Lin and others, 1966, p. 60). In the Michigan
Pilot Study, Lin (1966) discovered that 20 variables were positively
correlated with attitudinal acceptance of innovation, as compared to 11
variables which were significantly correlated with innovation awareness.

3. School Innovativeness: is determined on the basis of time of

 

adoption of school innovations. The conventional definition of this
dependent variable is "the degree to which a social system is relatively
earlier in adopting new ideas than other units of the social system."

4. Teacher Innovativeness: is defined as "the degree to which an
individual is relatively earlier in adopting new ideas than other members

of his social system" (Rogers, 1962, p. 20).

Independent Variables

The following is a list of the independent variables included in
the data analysis. Each independent variable precedes the hypotheses
stating the predicted relationships of independent and dependent vari-
able.

1. Perceived Psycholqgical Distance from Principal: While the
Thai culture and bureaucratic subculture are generally resistant to
change, there is a high value placed upon personalism and status as
a guide to individual behavior. It is expected that principals of
government sponsored secondary Schools would be generally accepting

of innovations supported by the Ministry of Education and the Changwad

Educa
that

of it

founc

9951

up

of

(D

38
Education Officers reSponsible for supervising secondary schools, and
that teachers who interact with the principal would be more accepting
of innovations supported by him. The Michigan Pilot Study generally
found that the more prediSposed teachers were to accepting change in
U.S. schools, the more likely they were to feel personally close to the
principal and to believe that most other teachers in the school also
felt close to the principal (Lin and others, 1966, p. 2). Perceived
psychological distance between teacher and principal is therefore
expected to be negatively related to teachers' attitudinal acceptance
of innovations, and to school innovativeness.
THl: Perceived psychological distance between teachers
and principal is negatively_related to the school's
attitudinal acceptance of innovation.
THZ: Perceived psychological distance between teachers
andgprincipal is negativelygrelated to school

innovativeness.

2. Role Satisfaction: A high level of role satisfaction is

 

expected to lead to security in the position, more interaction with
other teachers who also are satisfied with their jobs, and less resis-
tance to or distrust of change. Therefore, role satisfaction is pre-
dicted to be positively related to the school's attitudinal acceptance
of innovation, and to school innovativeness.
TH3: Employee role satisfaction is_positive1y related
to the school's attitudinal acceptance of innova-

3.1.92-

TH4: Employee role satisfaction isgpositively related
to school innovativeness.

3. Participation in Decision-Makipg: Innovations are adopted most

 

quickly by authority decisions in which subordinates of the organization
have no voice, as indicated in Chapter I in the discussion of types of

innovative decisions. If the principal can adopt the innovation without

39
consulting the teaching faculty, the change can be accomplished much
faster than if he has to talk with every member of the organization
before adopting some new idea. It is predicted, therefore, that school
innovativeness is negatively related to teachers' participation in
decision-making. However, research beginning with Lewin (1947) and
stretching through Koch and French (1948), Morse and Reimer (1956),
Hoffman and Maier (1959), Vroom (1960) and Lin (1966) tends to indicate
that an individual's attitude toward change is positively related to the
degree of his participation in decision-making in bringing about that
change. Participation in decision—making is expected to be positively
related to the school's attitudinal acceptance of innovation.*
THS: Emplpyees'pparticipetion in decision-makingiis
positively related to the school's attitudinal
acceptance of innovation.

Employees' participation in decision-making is
negatively related to school innovativeness.

4. Performance Feedback: A close relationship between teacher and
principal will lessen potential resistance to change suggested by the
principal. Frequent discussions between the teacher and principal concern-
ing teaching performance will increase the principal's credibility and
decrease resistance to change which he initiates. Awareness of innova-

tions and a general prediSposition to accept change were positively

 

*The logical contradiction which seems to be raised by the two theoretic
hypotheses, can be explained in this way. Attitudinal acceptance of
innovation and school innovativeness are predicted to be positively
related; participation and attitudinal acceptance are also predicted to
be positively related. How then, if two sides of the triangle are
positively related, can there be a negative relationship between partic-
ipation and innovativeness, the third side? This can only happen if the
magnitude of the positive relationships of the other sides of the tri-
angle are less than unity. Such a prediction is made in the present
study.

40
related to teacher performance feedback in the Michigan Pilot Study
(Lin and others, 1966, pp. 1-2).
TH7: Frequency_of role performance feedback to
empleyees isppositively related to the school's
attitudinal acceptance of innovations.
TH8: Fregueney of role_performance feedback to
employees isgpositively related to school
innovativeness.

5. Opinion Leadership: Opinion leaders earn and maintain their
influence in the social system by their technical competence their
social accessibility to others, and their conformity to the norms of
the social system (Rogers with Shoemaker, 1971). Research tends to
indicate that when social system norms are modern and favorable to
new ideas, opinion leaders of that social system are quite innovative.
However, when the social system norms are traditional and less recep-
tive to change, the opinion leaders reflect this norm in their behavior
(van den Ban, 1960). When the social system is innovative, it is more
open to new ideas and social change and thus the opinion leaders, con-

forming to social norms, are expected to be more innovative.

: (Opinion leaders are more innovative in innovative
schools than in non-innovative schools.

In innovative social systems there is more contact with the outside
world of new people and new ideas and thus there is more pressure upon
the members of that social system to be externally oriented in their
perspectives. Therefore, it is expected that opinion leaders of innova-
tive social systems will be more cosmopolite and have a broader know-
ledge of world affairs.

THlO: Opinion leaders are more cosmqpolite in

innovative schools than in non-innovative
schools.

41

Because the innovative system is more open and has more contact with
the external world, there also is more exposure to the mass media, a
prime vehicle of new ideas. To maintain their influence and technical
competence, and therefore, their status in the social system, it is
expected that Opinion leaders of innovative systems will be more
exposed to the mass media.

THll: Opinion leaders are more exposed to the mass

media in innovative schools than in non-
innovative schools.

 

6. Opinion Leadership Concentration: In those social systems

 

where opinion leadership is concentrated, a few influentials supply
ideas and information to many others. In more traditional social
systems, such as Thailand, it is expected that opinion leaders are
polymorphic, i.e., a single leader is sought for information and advice
about a variety of topics. In more modern social systems, such as the
United States, Opinion leadership is more monomorphic; that is, a
leader is sought for only one type of information and advice, and

other leaders are sought for other tOpics (Rogers and van Es, 1964).
Therefore, in the traditional social system of Thailand, with an
authoritarian orientation, it is expected that opinion leadership
concentration is positively related to the school's attitudinal accep-
tance Of innovations, and to school innovativeness. This prediction
assumes that government sponsored secondary schools of Thailand which
are more accepting of innovation are more innovative because the poly-
morphic Opinion leaders are themselves more innovative and more favor-
able to new ideas, and that those schools where Opinion leadership is
most concentrated there is the most attitudinal acceptance and the most

innovativeness.

42

Opiniopfileadership concentration is positively,
related to the school's attitudinal acceptance
of innovations.

TH
12

THl : Opinion leadership concentration is positively
3 related to school innovativeness.

 

7. Communication Integration: Defined as the degree to which
individuals of the social system interact on a face-to-face basis, in
person or through liason persons, which is expected to have an effect
upon the awareness of individuals of proposed innovations which might
be beneficial to the social system. In a social system in which there
is high communication integration, every teacher speaks or interacts
with every other teacher and there are no isolates in the social system.
The interaction of teacher with teacher in a highly integrated social
system is expected to create an earlier awareness of ideas than the
limited interaction of teachers in a less integrated social system.
Where there is no communication integration in a social system, all
the individuals are isolates and no one talks to anyone else; there
is no exchange of information and Opinion within such a system. Such
isolation is an effective barrier to the creation of early awareness
of new ideas, because a message which enters the social system is not
passed from individual to individual through informal interaction,
but is held by a single individual.

TH14: Communication integration is positively related
to early school awareness of innovations.

8. Teacher Mass Media Exposure: Previous diffusion studies indi-
cate that the mass media of communication, a prime source in creating
awareness of new ideas, is a crucial factor in promoting innovativeness
(Lerner, 1958; Deutschmann and Fals Borda, 1962; and Frey, 1963).

Rogers and von Es (1964) found that mass media exposure was highly

43

correlated with peasant farmers' innovativeness in Colombia, explain—
ing 67 percent of the variance in innovativeness in one village.
Exposure to one channel of mass media is positively related to expo-
sure to other channels in a "centripetal effect" (Rogers with Shoemaker,
1971). Thai teachers are expected to have the literacy level, as a
condition of their job, that permits them to expose to print mass media
as well as electronic media. A common consequence of this exposure to
"a world and peOples beyond their experience" is increased innovative-
ness (Powdermaker, 1962). If a teacher works in a school system where
other teachers are exposed to the mass media, this system effect will
be a stimulus to his exposure and his innovativeness.

THIS: School mass media exposure has a system effect

on teacher innovativeness,pwhen the effects of

individual teacher mass media exposure are
removed from the system effect.

9.. Teacher CosmOpoliteness: In U.S. Studies, Ryan and Gross
(1943) found that hybrid seed corn innovators traveled more often to
Des Moines than did later adopters of the new product. Menzel and
Katz (1955) found that innovative medical doctors made more trips to
out-of-town professional meetings than did non—innovators. Goldsen
and Ralis (1957) found that Thailand farm innovators were more likely
to visit Bangkok than later adOpters. Of 73 studies in the Diffusion
Documents Center at Michigan State University which deal with the
relationship between cosmopoliteness and innovativeness, nearly 81
percent report a positive relationship (Rogers and Stanfield, 1966,

p. 26). It is expected that Thai teachers' interaction with the larger
society will create an awareness of new ideas and break down the individ-

ual isolation of a traditional system.

16'

44

School cosmopoliteness has a system effect
on teacher innovativeness, when the effects
Of individual teacher cosmopoliteness are
removed from the system effect.

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The purpose of the present chapter is to give the historical back-
ground Of the Thailand Diffusion Project, to discuss the construction of
the survey instrument, to operationalize the independent and dependent
variables included in the research, and finally to describe the data

analysis techniques.

Background of the Thailand Diffusion Project

As indicated in Chapter II, the present study is based on an analysis
of a portion Of the data gathered in the Thailand Educational Diffusion
Project conducted by the Institute for International Studies in Education,
and the Department of Communication, Michigan State University, and jointly
Sponsored by the United States Agency for International DevelOpment and
the Inter-University Research Program in Institution Building of the
University of Pittsburgh.

The research project was initiated in 1964, under the guidance of
the Research Advisory Committee of the Thailand Educational Planning
Project at Michigan State University, a group which was part of an educa-
tional advisory project in Thailand, conducted by the M.S.U. Institute
for International Studies in Education.

The study was designed to provide information on the problems associ-

ated with the introduction of educational innovations into the government

45

PP

n.‘

46
Sponsored secondary schools of Thailand for (1) Thai Ministry Of Education
Officials, (2) foreign educational advisors, (3) the U.S. Agency for Inter-
national Development, and (4) the M.S.U. Advisory Group composed of profes—
sors at Michigan State University serving as consultants to the Thai Minis-
try Of Education.
*

The general objective of the Thailand Educational Diffusion Project
was to determine how educational innovations are diffused to, and adOpted
or rejected by, personnel in Thai government secondary schools. Specif-
ically, the research was designed:

1. To determine how decisions about the use of new educational
ideas are made by a bureaucratic educational organization,
like the Thai Ministry of Education.

2. To determine the individual characteristics of organizational
members as correlated with knowledge of innovations, favorable
attitudes toward innovations (perceived beneficiality), and
innovativeness.

3. To determine how educational innovations spread to teachers
through the hierarchical Structure of the Thai Ministry Of
Education.

In September, 1965, a grant was received from the Inter-University

Research Program in Institution Building, and a research staff was selected

to design the Project. The first step was a pilot study in three Michigan

high schools during 1965 and 1966. Schedule modification, i.e., flexible

 

scheduling of class size, of length of class, and of the number and spac-
ing of classes, was the educational innovation studied in the pilot project.
The four dependent variables measured in the pilot study were time of aware—
ness of innovation, time of adOption of innovation, innovation internaliza-
tion, and self-perceived change orientation. The unit of response and

analysis was the individual teacher. A large number of demographic,

 

*For additional details of the research methodology used in the Thailand
Project, see Rogers and Others (1969) and Mortimore (1968).

des

'
Ga:

I
‘7'?
all

be:

uni

261'

47
perceptual, personality, and institutional variables were selected for
correlation with the four dependent variables.

The preliminary investigation in Michigan contributed to the research
design by making it possible to pretest instruments and by suggesting
data-analysis techniques. The pilot Study showed that individual innova—
tiveness was not a meaningful concept for authority innovation-decisions,
because teachers were the implementing rather than the decision-making
unit. To overcome this problem in the Thailand study, ten innovations
were selected, representing both individual-choice and authority adoption
decisions.

The second phase of the Project involved the collection of data from
629 teachers in Thai academic secondary schools. The instruments used
were self-administered, pre-coded survey questionnaires which contained
scales drawn from the Michigan study, as modified by a pretest with 61
Thai teachers employed in two government secondary Schools in Bangkok who
were not included in the final sample.

In this second phase of research, an attempt was made to test 150
hypotheses predicting directional relationships between 50 independent
and three dependent variables (Mortimore, 1968, p. 116). The three depen-
dent variables measured were time of awareness, time of adoption, and
perceived beneficiality of the ten innovations.

When significant zero-order correlations were submitted to a least-
Square multiple regression analysis, it was found that four variables
contributed 12.4 percent of the total variance in awareness, that three
variables contributed 6.35 percent of the variance in adoption, and six
variables contributed 11.18 percent of the variance in perceived benefi-

ciality of the innovations studied.

48

Directors of the Project suggested that the low correlations, which
generally had been higher in U.S. studies, might be partly explained by
the fact that the research did not implicitly consider "system effects
on teachers' behavior regarding innovation" (Rogers and others, 1969,

p. 175).

The present study, which represents Phase Three of the Thailand
Project, is an attempt to increase the amount of variance explained in
the dependent variables by incorporating social structural variables in
the analysis. In the present study, the unit of analysis is Ogth_the
individual teacher and the school.

The research reported here conceptualizes a teacher's innovative
behavior as explained by two types of variables: (1) the individual's
personality characteristics; his communication behavior; and his attitudes;
and (2) the make-up and norms of his school, the social structure within
which he reacts. The first class of variables are individual, while the
second are social structural. Both will be used to predict dependent
variables at the individual level. Also, individual variables will be
aggregated and standardized to predict dependent variables at the system

level.

Sampling Procedures

The original sample of 38 academic secondary schools of Thailand was
selected on a random, stratified, and proportional basis, using the five
geographic regions of Thailand and proportionate samples of schools within
each of those regions. The unit of random selection was the school; all
teachers and the principal present in the schools at the time Of the survey

were administered questionnaires. To Obtain a stratified and proportional

49
sample of teachers used in Phase Two, a random selection of schools was
made within each of the five geographic regions, but only to that point
where the number of teachers in sample schools reflected the prOportion
of teachers employed by all government secondary schools of that region.

The 38 schools of the sample, which represented 8.6 percent of all
such schools in Thailand, employed 732 teachers or 8.3 percent of all
teachers in government Sponsored secondary schools. According to govern-
ment figures, the 38 sample schools enrolled 8.5 percent of the total
students of all schools. Because of the absence of some teachers during
the time questionnaires were administered, only 629 teachers completed
usable instruments, a response rate of 85.93 percent of the total sample.

For purposes of the present study, the random sample of 38 schools
was reduced to 28, by deleting from the sample those schools in which
eight or fewer teachers reSponded to the questionnaire. This deletion
was made to eliminate from the sample those schools in which variance
would be restricted by the very small teaching faculty, and because of
the consequent homogenity of variance on individual and dependent vari-
ables which would be present. The extent to which sample schools are
representative of the universe of Thai academic Secondary schools, in
terms of geographic location, number of teachers employed, and enroll-
ment, may be determined from Table l-III.

By reducing the sample from 38 to 28 schools with nine or more
reSpondents each, the total sample of teachers is reduced from 629 to
585, or a net loss of 42 teachers (an average of 4.2 teachers per school
dropped). While this reduces the sample of schools by 26 percent, it
decreases the total number of reSpondents by less than 7 percent. How-
ever, the smaller n of 28 schools severely restricts the measurable

variance of the sample.

50

TABLE l-III

TOTAL AND REGIONAL FIGURES FOR SAMPLE SCHOOLS

Total Figures for Sample Schools for Geographic Areas

 

Number Percent Number Percent
Geographic of of of of
Area Schools Sample Teachers Sample
Bangkok-Thonburi 5 17.86 201 34.36
Central Thailand 11 39.29 156 26.67
Northeastern Thailand 5 17.86 79 ' 13.50
Northern Thailand 4 14.29 76 12.99
Southern Thailand ._; 10.71 73 12.48
Totals 28 100.00% 585 100.00%

Total Figures for Sample Schools for Educational Regions

 

 

 

 

 

 

Number Percent Number Percent
Educational of of of of
Region Schools Sample Teachers Sample
Bangkok-Thonburi 5 17.86 201 34.36
Central Thailand
Region I l 12
Region V 2 40
Region VI 4 51
Region XII _J§ _;g;
Totals 11 39.29 156 26.67
Northeastern Thailand
Region IX 1 10
Region X 3 60
Region XI l. _2_
Totals 5 17.86 79 13.50
NOrthern Thailand
Region VII 1 34
Region VIII _3_ 32
Totals 4 14.29 76 12.99

Southern Thailand

Region II 0 0
Region III 2 51
Region IV _i .22
Totals 3 10.71 73 12.48

51

Instrument Construction

Because a secondary purpose of the Thailand research was to test the
cross-cultural validity of hypotheses generated by diffusion studies in
the United States, many scale items and direct questions were similar to
those which have been employed in previous U.S. research. The midpoint,

' was eliminated from

or indeterminate response of "don't know" or "unsure,'
some scale reSponse categories because previous experience in Thailand
indicated that on forced—choice items, reSpondents frequently elected
indefinite or neutral responses where the option was offered. However,

the "I don't know" response was used in those scale items where logic
dictated.

The Project directors also decided to use closed-ended reSponse
categories wherever possible because of the lack of trained coders in
Thailand and because of the desire to reduce respondent time in complet-
ing an instrument of 58 pages and 214 items. The entire instrument
appears in the Appendix.

Instruments were translated into the national language by two profes-
sional translators of the U.S.-AID office in Bangkok and an official of
the Thai Educational Planning Office. Each of the translators worked inde-
pendently, translating questionnaire items from English into the Thai
language. All three translations were then submitted to the Thai Direc-
tor of the Educational Planning Office for review. He acted as arbitrator
in choosing the Thai interpretation in those instances where the three
translations did not agree.

Interview schedules were translated into the Thai language and then

pretested on 61 teachers in two government academic secondary schools in

Bangkok who were not in the study sample.

52
Based upon an analysis of the Michigan Pilot Study, the Bangkok pre-
test, and the final sample data, 20 scales and scale items were used in
the correlational analysis in Phase Two.* The following scale items rele-
vant to the present study were selected for inclusion in Phase Three

research.

Independent Variables
1. Mass Media Exposure Scale: Thai principals, teachers, and ggspgr
Egg_education officers were asked if they had read a newspaper, listened to
a radio, watched television, read from a book, or read a magazine within
the past seven days.** Exposure scores for the five different mass media
were summed to provide an index of mass media exposure for each respondent.
2. Perceived Participation in School Decision-Makigg: Two items,
based upon Fleishman's scale (1955), were used in various forms to measure
(a) the teacher's perception of other teachers' participation with the
principal in schOol decision-making, and (b) the principal's perception of
his participation in decision—making with the changyad education officer
who supervised the school. Typical items in the Scale include:
The principal of this school usually doesn't explain
his decisions to the other teachers even when these
decisions affect them.
The principal of this school frequently makes decisions
which affect the other teachers without consulting them
first.

Response categories on a six-point scale ranged from "I agree very much"

to "I disagree very much."

 

*
For a complete listing of all scale items used in the study, see Rogers

and others (1969).

** When this same question is used in U.S. research, mass media exposure
is based upon an individual's exposure in the preceding 24 hours,
because of the greater abundance of mass media and the Opportunity
for more frequent exposure.

53

3. Perceived Psychological Distance Between Teachers and Principal:
Items in the Perceived Psychological Distance scale were taken from Fleish-
man's Scale (1955) as revised in the Michigan pilot study. The sum of the
items was used as an index of the psychological distance between the
teachers and their principal. Similar items were used to measure the
principal's perceptions of the psychological distance be maintained from
his teaching faculty. Some typical items include:

The Principal of this school is usually very kind and
understanding when he talks to the other teachers.

The Principal of this school is usually very friendly
and the other teachers can discuss their problems with
him.

The Principal of this school associates with the other
teachers even when there is no Official business involved.

Again, response categories ranged across a six point scale from "agree
very much" to "disagree very much."

4. Performance Feedback from Principal to Teacher: Two items from
the Michigan pilot study were reworded and reSponse categories reduced
from five to four. Items were used to measure the teacher's perceptions
of performance feedback from the principal to other teachers in his school
and the principal's perceptions of performance feedback to his teachers.
Typical items in the scale include:

The Principal of this school gives the other
teachers encouragement in their work.

I try to give my teachers suggestions to help
them to improve their teaching performance.

5. Teacher Role Satisfaction: Two of four items used in the Michi-
gan Pilot Study were included on the Thai questionnaire. The two items
of the teachers' self-perceived role satisfaction are:

Generally speaking, I don't like being a teacher.

I like my teaching job in this school.

54
6. Opigiop Leadership: In the teacher questionnaire, one scale
item was used to measure Opinion leadership. The question asked teachers
to "list the names of the three teachers in this school from whom you
most frequently ask advice when you have problems related to teaching."

7. Opinion Leadership Concentration: This measure was computed

 

from the nominations received by teachers who were named as those from
whom advice was most frequently sought on problems related to teaching.

8. Cosmqpoliteness: Because of the limited Opportunities for travel

 

of Thai teachers, the project staff decided to measure the cosmopoliteness
dimension by measuring the reSpondents' knowledge of other countries, as
one possible index of their external orientation outside their own culture.
Accordingly, teacher reSpondents were asked to identify Rhodesia, U Thant,
and the Prime Minister of India.

9. Communication Integration: This measure was computed based upon

 

the level of interrelatedness of sociometric interactions of teachers who

were sought for advice on problems related to teaching. The communication

Integration Index was constructed through matrix multiplication by computer.
Table 2-III indicates the independent and dependent variables mea-

sured and the predicted direction of relationship.

Dependepp;Variables

1. Time Of Awareness of Innovations: Awareness time was measured
as reSpondents' recall of the number of years ago they had first heard
about each of the ten innovations. Scores on awareness time of all ten
innovations were summed and standardized. Consequently, a high aware-
ness score represents a tendency for that individual to be relatively
earlier than others of his social system in becoming aware of new ideas.
For teachers, all inter-item correlations were positive, ranging from

.10 to .47.

55

mmmCOuHHoaonoo Hoocom

 

+ Aco>oamm uoowmm Hmacw>wchv mmooo>aum>occH uOcomOH
+ Apo>oaom uoowmm Hmsvfi>apoHv mmoom>wum>occH Hocomma muamoaxm mace: mum: Hoocom waxy
+ mmoooum3¢ Hoocom cowumuwouoH SOHuOOfioaaaoo «Hwy
+ mmoco>aum>ocoH Hoocom soaumuucmocou awcmuowmmq aowcHao name
+ SOHum>oocH wo oocmuaooo< Hmcwvsuauu< m.aoocom coaumuucooooo awcmumvmoa coonao NHmH
+ Ammmoo>fium>ooaH

Hoocom co pmaaouuoouv mmoom>fium>oaoH umcomoy aficmumpmmq oofiofiao Haze
+ Ammooo>aum>oocH

Hoocum co woaaouucoov mmoom>fium>oocH pocomoa aflcmumwmmq ooHcHao oamy
+ Ammocm>wum>occH

Hoocom so wmaaoquOUV mmooo>aum>ocoH pocomOH cacmumpmoq SOfiofiao amp
+ mmOcO>Hum>ocoH Hoocom xomcpmmm cosmeuomuom OHOM me
+ coaum>occH mo moomuaooo< Hmofiwoufiuu< m.Hoocom somcwmom moomauomumm maom Rwy
I mmocm>wum>oooH Hoocom woaxmaudowmwoon ca coaumawowuumm owe
+ coHum>oooH mo Oocmuaooo< HOGHOSOHOO< m.Hoocom weaxmalooamwomn SH oowumaHOHuumm map
+ mmocm>wum>oocH Hoocom coauomwmwumm OHom «my
+ coaum>oooH mo Oocmuamoo< HOCHOSOfluu< m.Hoocom oowuommmaumm OHom mma
a mmmom>fium>oosH Hoocom moomumfim Hmowwoaosommm vo>aooumm NmH
I coaum>oocH mo oocmuaooo< HmcflOSOHuu< m.Hoocom moomumwa HOOfiwOHocozmm pm>woouom HmH

owcmSOfiumHom oacmfium> acouowmon macmfium> oompoomwccH .oz mammnuomww
uOuOHvOum

mmqm<Hm<> Hzmozmmmn 924 BZMQZMMMQZH ZMHZHmm mMHmwonH<Amm QMHUHQmmm

HHHIN made

56

2. School's Attitudinal Acceptance of Innovation: Teachers' atti-
tudinal acceptance of all ten innovations was aggregated and Standardized
and a school acceptance score determined based upon the mean scores of
teachers within that school.

3. School Innovativeness: The index which was used to measure
school innovativeness was the principal's report of the times of school
adoption of eight collective innovations (including school adoption of
libraries). In each instance, the principal was asked about how many
years ago his school first used each of the eight innovations. The time
of school adOption of the innovations was summed and standardized to
provide a general measure of school adoption of all eight innovations.
The earlier each school was in adoption of the innovations, in relation
to the other schools in the sample, the more innovative that particular
school was under the definition Specified in Chapter I.

4. Teacher Innovativeness: Since early adoption serves as a valid
index of teacher innovativeness only for those three innovations which
the individual teacher could decide to adopt or reject (objective tests,
library assignments, and discussion techniques), times of adoption were
summed for the three individual choice innovations and a mean determined
as a general measure of teacher innovativeness.

A high score on the innovativeness index reflects teacher innovative-
ness. However, since some of the respondents entered the teaching profes-
sion five years or less before the survey, they did not have a fair and
equal chance to be among the innovative teachers unless all teachers'
scores were standardized on the basis of number of years taught in that
particular school. Accordingly, the teachers' scores were adjusted for

the length of their teaching experience.

57
Deriving Concentration Ratios

The Opinion Leadership Concentration Ratio and the Communication
Integration Ratio were both determined by data from questions which asked
teachers to list the names of three teachers in the school from whom they
most frequently asked advice when they had problems related to teaching.
The advantages of such a sociogram is that it maps relationships among
individuals in the social system (school) under study. However, a socio-
gram is limited in utility to descriptive statements and visual observa-
tions.

Theoretic hypotheses 12 and 13 of the present study predict a posi-
tive relationship between the Opinion leadership concentration of a social
system and the attitudinal acceptance of innovations and the innovativeness
of that social system. To test the predicted relationships, a Gini ratio
was used to determine opinion leadership concentration of a particular
school (See Figure 1-III).

Opinion leadership concentration is measured by plotting the cumula-
tive percentage distribution of sociometric choices against the cumulative
percentage distribution of individuals in the social system. A Lorenz
Curve is plotted by rank-ordering all individuals of the social system
according to the percentage of sociometric choices that each individual
receives.

In Figure l-III, the cumulative percentage distributiod of sociometric
choices received is plotted along the ordinate, and the cumulative percent-
age distribution of individuals is shown on the abscissa. Both axes of
the Lorenz Curve are expressed in terms of cumulative percentage distribu-

tions ranging from 0 to 100. The straight line rising from the origin

in Figure l-III indicates the line of perfect equality of distribution

58

100

 

80

60
50

40 pg

20

 

 

 

 

0 20 4O 60 80 100 l

Cumulative percent of members

FIGURE l-III: An Illustration of the Lorenz Curve Indicating
Concentration of Sociometric Opinion Leadership

of sociometric choices among all members of the social system. The area
between the Lorenz Curve and the line of perfect equality represents the
degree of opinion leadership concentration (Gini ratio) in a social system.
The ratio of the area between the Lorenz Curve and the line of perfect
equality, to the total area of the triangle formed by the two axes and the
line of perfect equality, is the Gini ratio of concentration. The Gini
ratio indicates for each individual of the pOpulation the difference
between where he actually is on the Lorenz Curve and where he would be
expected to be in the case of equal distribution of sociometric choices
among all members of the social system. The more the Lorenz Curve deviates
from the line of equality, the greater is the opinion leadership concentra-

tion (Ouimaraés, 1970).

59

The communication integration index of theoretic hypothesis 14, also
utilizes the matrix multiplication approach to identify formally-defined
structures within a communication network, including direct and indirect
relationships. According to Guimargés (1970), matrix multiplication, a
computer program, consists of raising the original binary (0-1) matrix
to n-powers to determine n-chains of communication among network members.

As illustrated by Guimafaés (1970, p. 44), consider a hypothetical
network of four persons (a, b, c and d), whose relationships can be
plotted both in a sociogram and in a binary matrix, as shown in Figure
2-III. If the assumption is made that the sociogram and its correspond-
ing binary matrix A represent the communication patterns in the network,
it is possible to see in matrix A who communicates with whom by reading
across the rows (a communicates with b and d in row 1). By visual inspec-
tion, it becomes evident that direct, one-step connections exist among

network members.

 

a h

l" 10'

d c
a b c d a b c d
a’0101' tat-11117
b 0 0 1 l b l 2 0 l

A. .AZ:
00101 cllll
d_IIOOJ dt0112.

 

 

 

 

FIGURE 2-III: Illustration of a Communication Network as
Represented by a Sociogram, a Binary Matrix (A)
and its Corresponding Squared Matrix (A2 )

117m?) “2...”.1 .. ., ..._ .

60
The squared matrix A2 shows indirect, two-step connections among
network members. For example, the squared matrix A2 indicates that cell
"ac" has a value of 1, while in the original binary matrix A, this cell
has a value of O. This means that "a" communicates with another person
who communicates with "c." By cubing matrix A and then reversing the
matrix, Guimafaés (1970) arrives at a value which is the communication

integration index of a network of individuals. The higher the index, F

the more individuals interact and the more integrated is the social

‘1‘

*5-...

system.

Q arm )1".- _

Methods of Determining System Effects

I. Jar... a

More than half a century ago, Durkheim (1897) focused scientific
attention upon the study of system effects by demonstrating a method of
isolating and measuring such effects. Durkheim (1897, pp. 37-38) observed:

On the pretext of giving the science [sociological
method] a more solid foundation by establishing it

upon the psychological constitution of the individual,
it is thus robbed of the only object proper to it.

It is not realized that there can be no sociology
unless societies exist, and that societies cannot
exist if there are only individuals.

The Durkheimian method of isolating system effects is to ascertain
the relationship between the distribution of a given independent variable
in a social system and a dependent variable of that same social system,
while holding the independent variable constant for individuals of the
social system. If a system effect is found, it provides evidence that
differences in the system variable are reSponsible for the variation in

the dependent variable, since individual differences on the independent

variable are controlled and are not allowed to vary.

61
Another social scientist (Blau, 1957 and 1960), who also urged the
simultaneous consideration of individual and system effects, characterized
individuals in terms of their individual scores on variable Z, and their
systemic score on variable ng. The strategy used included three steps:
1. An empirical measure Z is obtained on some individual
characteristic of members of a social system.
2. Individual scores on Z are combined, or aggregated,
into one index, ng, for each social system.
3. A relationship is determined between the system attri—
bute, ng, and some dependent variable, W, while
holding the individual variable 2 constant. Thus, the
effect of ng on W is a system effect, with the effect

of the individual level of the independent variable, Z,

removed.

Analyzing Data to Test Hypotheses

Statistical methods utilized in the analysis of data in the present

study include:
1. Zero-order correlation

2. Multiple correlation
3. Clique analysis to determine opinion leadership

concentration
4. Network analysis to determine communication
integration
First, zero-order Pearson Product moment correlations were computed
between the four dependent variables and the eleven independent variables
with the school as the unit of analysis. With a sample n of 28, correla—

tion coefficients are significant at the 5 percent confidence level when

their values reach 1 .37. In all cases, if the value of r reaches

lmw—m-____ *1. . .
I . A .

62

1.37, it can be concluded with a fairly high degree of confidence that
the correlation coefficient is significantly different from zero and
therefore represents a real, non-chance, relationship between the inde-
pendent and the dependent variable.

To test for the significance of system effects upon the behavior of
Thai teachers, a matrix of high and low innovative schools was constructed
using a median Split on school innovativeness to distribute teachers into E

high and low innovative Schools. Zero—order Pearsonian correlations were

6"-

computed between the independent variable (Opinion leadership) and the

dependent variables (teacher cosmOpoliteness, mass media exposure, and

Ih—ffi i; .

innovativeness) for both high and low innovative schools. TO test for

the Significance of social system effects, the two zero—order Pearsonian
correlations were compared to determine if the obtained r's were signifi-
cantly different from each other at the 5 percent confidence level. To
determine the significance of the difference between two r's, both are
transformed into 2's and the standard error Of the difference between the
two z's is determined; if the 2's are significantly different, the two r's
are significantly different, indicating the presence of system effects
(McNemar, 1962, p. 139).

To test for the system effect of the school's mass media exposure
and cosmopoliteness upon the behavior of individual teachers within each
school, multiple correlations were computed among school mass media
exposure, teacher mass media exposure, and teacher innovativeness and
among school cosmOpoliteness, teacher cosmopoliteness, and teacher innova—
tiveness for each of 585 teachers in the sample schools. The two multi-
ple correlations were then compared with zero-order Pearsonian correlations
‘between teacher innovativeness and both teacher mass media exposure and

teacher cosmopoliteness, to determine if the multiple correlations were

63

significantly different from the zero-order correlations, indicating the
presence of a system effect. Again, both r's were transformed into 2's
and the Standard error of the difference between the two z's was deter-
mined. If the two z's are significantly different from each other, then
the two correlations are significantly different at the 5 percent confi-
dence level. The difference between the multiple correlation and the
zero-order correlation, if significant, indicates the presence of system

effects upon teacher innovativeness.

Emu—m.” ~1—

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS
As stated earlier, four dependent variables selected for inclusion I
in the present data analysis are (1) time of school awareness, (2) atti- '
tudinal acceptance of innovation by the school, (3) school innovativeness, 5*
and (4) teacher innovativeness. To determine time of school awareness, i
the number of years ago that the teachers of each school had first heard i

of an innovation was summed across the ten innovations and a mean score
was derived. The mean of the aggregate respondents' scores becomes
time of school awareness. The attitudinal acceptance of innovation by
the school was determined on the basis of teachers' responses of "gener-
ally favorable" or "generally unfavorable" toward each of the ten innova-
tions. Again, responses were summed and a mean score derived for each
School; this mean score becomes the measure of school attitudinal accep-
tance of innovation.
School innovativeness was determined on the basis of the time of
the first school use of eight non-teacher choice innovations, such as
c
0e(ill-cation, school departmentalization, Peace Corps volunteers. A
Sc
1100 1's innovativeness score is the mean of the total aggregate score
0n
t: line of adoption of each innovation. Teacher innovativeness serves
as
an index of teacher adoption of three individual choice innovations
(°b :5
ective tests, library assignments, and discussion techniques).
Tittle
a of adoption were summed and a mean determined as the general
the
E‘S‘Lnre of teacher innovativeness.

64

‘ _

 

65
Theoretic Hypothesis One

The first theoretic hypotheses tested in this study predicts a
directional relationship between some attribute of the individual
teacher and the school in which that teacher is employed. In each such
instance, the school is the unit of analysis, although the unit of
response is the individual teacher or principal.

The first theoretic hypothesis predicts a negative relationship
between perceived psychological distance between teachers and principal
and the school's attitudinal acceptance of innovation and school inno-
vativeness. The hypothesis says that teachers who perceive themselves
to be psychologically close to the principal are more likely to assume
the values of the principal, which in the case of Ministry of Education
Supported innovations, is likely to be favorable toward the innovations.

EHla: Perceived psycholqgical distance between teachers
and principal is negatively related to the school's
attitudinal acceptance of innovations.

Table l-IV reports the zero-order Pearsonian product-moment correla-
txion coefficients Obtained from the analysis of the data. As indicated,
1:11e: zero-order correlation between principals' and teachers' perceived

I>£337chological distance from each other and the school's attitudinal
£1<2<2eptance of innovations is -.17. Using the school as the unit of
analysis, the n is 28. Correlation coefficients are significant at
the 5 percent confidence level when their values reach $.37 with an n
of 28.

The correlation between perceived psychological distance between

ltleaéiszhers and principal and school's attitudinal acceptance of innovations
:1‘53 Ilegative, as predicted in empirical hypothesis 1a, but it is not

£3’jLingificantly different from zero. Thus, EH is not supported.

1a

D :.'..‘.-'u_;flmau ._.. .. _x.~..
| - O O

66

It... v.1. fit ..

.. tyinIAJHE ...:. v?

mcfixmsucOHmHumn

 

emuuoaasm uoz moo.u mmoem>fium>o=cH Hoocom ea coaumaHOfiuumm momm
soaum>oooH mo OOGMuQOOO< wowxmalcowmfioon
vauuoamsm uoz ea. Hmowvsuwuu< m.Hoonom aw coaumaHOHuumm cmmm
soaum>oooH mo moomuaooo< wsaxmBISOHmHOOQ
wouuoaasm uoz No. Hmowvsuwuu< m.Hoonom ca coaumafioauumm mmmm
emuuoacsm mm. mmooo>aum>ocaH Hoocom cowuommmwumm OHom cqmm
wouuoamsm uoz mo.l mmooo>fium>oscH Hoonom coauommmwumm OHom mqmm
sowum>oooH mo mocmuaooo<
wouuoaaom uoz «a. Hmcwmsufiuu< m.Hoonom cowuommmfiumm OHom cmmm
sowum>ocoH mo mocmuaooom m
wouuoamom uoz no. Hmcfipsufiuu< m.Hoocom coauummmwumm OHom mmm
mocmumfla
vouuoaasm uoz OH. mmwom>fium>ocoH Hoocom HOOflwOHocoxmm vo>fioouom cmmm
museumwo
cmuuomasm uoz moo. mmmcm>wum>oscH Hoonom HmOfiwoaocommm cm>HOoumm mmmm
coaum>osoH mo mosmuamoo< Ooomumfin
cmuuoaeom oq.t HmsHvSOfiuu< m.Hoonom HmOAwOHOcozmm pm>woouom Lama
COHum>ossH mo moomuamoo< Ooomumfla
emuuoaaom uoz BH.I Hmofipouwuu< m.Hoocom HOOHwOHocoxmm OO>HOOHOA mama
sofimsaocou uasmom macmfium> oanmfium> .oz mwmocuomww
Hmoaumaumum uoopomaoa ucowsonmvoH HOOfiuHasm

mummmhomwm qmuHmHmzm ho mmqm<Hm<>
Hzmmzmmmn nz< HZMQZMAMQZH zmmzfimm ZOHH<ANMMOU

>HIH m4m<H

67

 

m

wouuoamSm uoz mH.I mmmomum3< Hoonom cowumuwouoH cowumowaoaaou «Hum
sowumuusooooo mma

vouuoaasm uoz on. mmmco>fium>oaaH Hoonom afinmuocmmq SOfloHao mm
sowum>oooH mo woomuaooo< coaumpuoooaoo mNH

vmuuoaasm uoz om. HOGHOSuHuum m.Hoocom afinmuovmoq aofisflao mm
Ammoom>fium>ocsH Hoocom so vOHHouucoov «Ha

wouuoaasm uoz we. .no. mmosm>fium>ocoH monomOH aficmuoumoq GOfioHao mm
Ammmom>wum>ocaH Hoocom co vmaaouuGOUV OCH

wouuoaasm uoz ma. .em. mmooo>wum>oosH umcomms cacmuopmog coaswmo mm
Ammocm>fium>oocH Hoonom co woaaouucoov mm

wmuuoaaom uoz mo. .Ho. mmoom>wum>ooaH Hocommh cflnmuowmoq coasfiao mm

mmuuoaosm uoz Ha. mmoco>wum>oscH Hoocom xomcpmom ooomauomumm OHom cmmm
m

wOuuommsm mm. mwmoo>fium>osoH Hoocom xomccoom mocmauowuom OHom mmm
cofium>oocH mo moamuaooo< cm

wouuoaasm uoz om. Hmsfipsufiuu< m.Hoocom xomccoom mommauomumm maom mm
coaum>oocH mo moomuaooo< mm

emuuoamsm mm. HmofiOSuHuu< m.Hoocom xomcpoom Duncanomuom anm mm
wcaxmaIcOHmHoma no

pounoaasm uoz 50.: mmmoo>fium>ossH Hoocom a“ cowumnfiOfiuumm mm

oOHmoaoaoo madmom macmfium> macmfium> .oz mHmOcuoahm
Hmowumflumum unopsoaon ucmvooamvcH Hmoauaaam

A.v.ueouv >HuH mamas

68

 

Acm>oamm uommwm Heapfi>wchv mca

 

coupomasm ooz No.l .No. mmooo>fium>oooH nonomoa mmocoufiaomoamoo Hoonum mm
Aam>oame Sauces Hmaaa>aaeHv «ma
mwuuoacom uoz «H. .ea. mmmco>fium>oosH nonomma mpomoaxm mfipmz mmmz Hoocom mm
sowmsaocoo uaamom OHcmHum> manmwum> .oz mwmocuomww
Hmowumwumum acovsoama ucovsoaovoH HOOfiuaaam

A.a.ueoUV >HnH mamas

69

EH : Perceivedgpsycholqgical distance between
1b principal and his teaching faculty is
negatively related to the school's atti-
tudinal acceptance of innovation.

 

 

The perception of psychological distance between principal and the
members of his teaching staff is correlated —.46 with the school's
attitudinal acceptance of innovation, which is in the predicted direc-
tion and Significantly different from zero at the 5 percent confidence
level. Therefore, EHlb is supported. F“

Empirical hypothesis la is not supported at the .05 level, but EHlb

is supported. Under the decision rule to be utilized in this study (a

theoretic hypothesis is supported if one of two empirical hypotheses is

'IP—F—

. _ ‘rfilfl’ {is are; -15.? --..
‘ _ l
I

supported), theoretic hypothesis number one is supported.

Theoretic Hypothesis Two

Theoretic hypothesis number two predicts that perceived psychological
distance between the teachers and the principal is negatively related to
school innovativeness. It is expected that a close relationship with a
school principal who is attempting to implement Ministry of Education
directives to adopt certain innovations is likely to result in more
innovative teachers and thus a more innovative school.

EHZa: Perceivedjpsychological distance between
teachers and principal is negatively
related to school innovativeness.

The correlation between perceived psychological distance between
teachers and principal and the dependent variable school innovativeness
is .005, less than the predicted level of significance and not in the
predicted direction. The correlation tends to indicate there is no

relationship between the psychological distance between the principal

and his faculty and the innovativeness of the school.

. .,v|¢.n.... .tl.’ [Flu-I 1‘

. was...

70
The correlation between the school principal's perceptions of the
psychological distance between himself and his teachers is .10. Again,
the relationship is in the wrong direction and it does not reach signifi-
cance at the .05 level. Empirical hypothesis 2b is not supported. There-

fore, theoretic hypothesis number two is not supported.

Theoretic Hypothesis Three

The third theoretic hypothesis predicts that a high level of role
satisfaction leads to high morale, job security, and less distrust of

change which threatens those individuals who have low job satisfaction.

IWmm_z.§ ._ .
' h L

Teachers' role satisfaction is_positively
related to the school's attitudinal accep-
tance of innovation.

EH33:
The correlation between teachers' role satisfaction and the school's

attitudinal acceptance of innovation is +.07. The predicted relationship

is not supported by the analysis, for while the value obtained is posi-

tive, as predicted, the value did not reach the magnitude (+.37) at

which it would be significant at the 5 percent level of confidence.

Principal's role satisfaction isgpositively

related to the school's attitudinal accepé
tance of innovations.

EH3b:
This correlation is +.14, which again is in the predicted direction,
but is not significant at the .05 level. Therefore neither EH3a or EHBb

is supported and theoretic hypothesis number three is not supported.

Theoretic Hypothesis Four

This hypothesis says, in essence, that teachers' role satisfaction
will be positively related to the innovativeness of the school in which

they work.

71

EH4 : Teachers' role satisfagtion is positively
a related to school innovativeness.

As shown in Table l-IV, the correlation between teachers' role satisfac-
tion and school innovativeness is -.03, much below the predicted level
of +.37. Thus, empirical hypothesis 4a is not supported.

EH4b: Principal's role satisfaction isjpositiveiy
related to school innovativeness.

The correlation between the principal's role satisfaction and the
innovativeness of the school in which he is employed is +.37 which is
significant at the .05 level of confidence. Therefore, empirical hypothesis
4b is supported.

Empirical hypothesis 4a is not supported; the correlation between
teachers' role satisfaction and the school's innovativeness is not signi-
ficantly different from zero. However, empirical hypothesis 4b is
supported; therefore, the theoretic hypothesis of a positive relation-
ship between teachers' and principals' role satisfaction and school innova-
tiveness is supported because one of the two theoretic hypotheses was

supported.

Theoretic Hypothesis Five

The fifth theoretic hypothesis predicts a positive relationship
between teachers' and principals' participation in decision-making'
and the school's attitudinal acceptance of innovation, because it is
expected that individuals' participation in decision-making to adopt
change increases their satisfaction with that change.

EH : Teachers' participation in decision-makipg

53 is positively related toythe schoqlfs attif
tudinal acceptance of inpovatigp.

E
I

72

The correlation of +.02 does not support the predicted relationship
and it is concluded that the correlation is not significantly different
from zero. Empirical hypothesis 5a is not supported.

EHSb: Principal's participation in decisionvmakipg
with the Changwad education officer supervigr
ipg_his school is positively relateg;to the
school's attitudinal acceptance of innovstigp,

This empirical hypothesis predicts that the principal's attitude
toward prOposed change in his school will be more favorable if he is
consulted by the changyad education officer before the change is imposed.
If the principal is more favorable to the change, his influence should
help persuade the teachers to be more favorable toward the change.

The correlation shown in Table 1-IV, between the principal's partici-
pation in decision-making and the school's attitudinal acceptance of
innovation is +.14, which is in the predicted direction, but not signifi-
cant at the 5 percent level of confidence.

Neither of the empirical hypotheses is supported, and therefore,
theoretic hypothesis five of the relationship between teachers' and

principals' participation in decision-making and the school's attitudinal

acceptance of innovation is not supported.

*
Theoretic Hypothesis Six

Theoretic hypothesis Six predicts a negative relationship between
teachers' and principals' participation in decision—making to bring
about change and school innovativeness, because authority decisions made
by one person without consultation with employees, can be accomplished

more quickly than consensus decisions in which all must agree.

 

*The logical contradiction which seems to be raised by theoretic
hypotheses five and six is explained in the footnote on page 39.

73
EH6a: Teachers' participation in decision-making
is negativeiyjrelated to the school's
innovativeness.
The correlation between the two variables is -.005, which is in the
predicted direction, but is not Significantly different from zero. There-

fore, empirical hypothesis 6a is not supported.

EH6b: The principal'sgparticipation in decision-
making with the changwad education officer
supervising his school is negatively related
to school innovativeness.

The correlation of the principal's participation in decision-making
and School innovativeness is -.07 which is in the predicted direction,
but is not significantly different from zero. Therefore, empirical
hypothesis 6b is not Supported.

Empirical hypotheses 6a and 6b are not supported and therefore

theoretic hypothesis six is not supported.

Theoretic Hypothesis Seven

The seventh theoretic hypothesis predicts that frequent performance
feedback from superior to employees is positively related to the school's

attitudinal acceptance of innovation.

EH : Frequency of role performance feedback from
7a principal to teachers is positively related
to the school's attitudinal acceptance of
innovation.

The correlation between the two variables is +.37, which is signifi-

cantly different from zero in the direction predicted. Therefore, the

conclusion is that empirical hypothesis 7a is supported.

Principal'sgperceived frequency of
performance feedback from self to
faculty is positively related to the
school's attitudinal acceptance of
innovation.

EH :
7b

74
The correlation between the two variables is +.20, which is in
the predicted direction, but is not significantly different from zero.
Empirical hypothesis 7b is not supported.
Theoretic hypothesis seven is supported; both empirical hypotheses
were in the direction predicted and one of the two empirical hypotheses

was supported.

Theoretic Hypothesis Eight

This theoretic hypothesis eight predicts that the frequency of
role performance feedback from superiors to employees is positively
related to school innovativeness.
EH8 : Frequency of role performance feedback
a from principal to teachers is positively
related to school innovativeness.
The correlation between the two variables, frequency of role perfor-
mance feedback from principal to teachers and school innovativeness is
+.37 which is in the direction predicted and significantly different from
zero at the .05 level of confidence. Empirical hypothesis 8a is supported.
EHBb: Principal'sjperceived freguency of role
performance feedback from self to teachers
is positiveiy related to school innovative-
IEEEI-
In this instance the correlation of the two variables is +.ll, which
is in the predicted direction, but is not significantly different from
zero at .05 level of confidence. Empirical hypothesis 8b is not supported.
Based upon the support for empirical hypothesis 8a and the fact that
both of the correlations are positive as predicted, theoretic hypothesis
eight is supported.

The following three hypotheses predict a system effect upon the

behavior of individuals within a particular social system. All three

El

75
hypotheses are predicated upon a testable assumption that the norms,
social statuses, hierarchy, etc. of a social system can act as barrier
or facilitator of change. To test this assumption, a median split was
made of teachers in high and low innovative schools on the basis of
time of adoption of three individual choice innovations: objective
tests, class discussion techniques, and use of library for class assign-
ments.

Using teachers as the unit of analysis, a correlation matrix was
computed for separate high and low innovative schools on four teacher
variables: (1) cosmopoliteness, (2) innovativeness, (3) mass media
exposure, and (4) Opinion leadership. Opinion leadership is the inde-
pendent variable in each hypothesis. To determine opinion leaders in
the high and low innovative schools, choices received by each teacher
reSpondent to question 29 of the survey instrument were computed by
the clique program. Question 29 asked reSpondents to list the names
of the three teachers in the school from whom they most frequently
asked advice when they had problems related to teaching.

To test for the presence of system effects upon the behavior of
Opinion leaders in the high and low innovative schools, it was necessary
to test the significance of the difference between two zero-order
correlations, between the independent and dependent variable in both
the high innovative and low innovative schools. If the correlations
are significantly different from each other, then it is possible to say

that the social system had some effect upon the individuals.

76
Theoretic Hypothesis Nine

Theoretic hypothesis nine says, in effect, that Opinion leaders will
be more innovative in innovative school systems because the opinion
leaders tend to reflect the social system norms in their desire to earn
and maintain their influence. Opinion leaders maintain their status by~
their technical competence, social accessibility, and conformity to the
norms of the social system.

EH : Teacher opinion leaders are more innovative

9a in high innovative than in low innovative
schools.

The correlation between opinion leadership and teacher innovativeness
in low innovative schools is +.Ol, while the correlation between Opinion
leadership and teacher innovativeness in high innovative schools is +.O9.
To determine the significance of the difference between the two correla-
tions, both r's are transformed into 2's and the standard error of the
difference between the two z's is calculated. If the two z's are signifi—
cantly different from each other, the conclusion can be made that the two
r's are significantly different.

In the empirical hypothesis 9a cited above, the difference between
the two z's is .08, and the standard error of the difference is 1.0,
which is less than 1.64, the value necessary to reach significance in
the t distribution with a one tailed test and an n greater than 120.
Therefore, the conclusion is that empirical hypothesis 9a is not supported,

and the theoretic hypothesis is not supported.

77
Theoretic Hypothesis Ten

This theoretic hypothesis predicts that opinion leaders are more
cosmOpolite in innovative schools than in non-innovative schools because
of the openness of the social system in the innovative schools.

EH : Teacher Opinion leaders are more cosmopolite

103 in high innovative schools than in low innova-
tive schools.

 

The zero-order correlation between Opinion leadership and cosmOpo-
liteness in low innovative schools is +.24 while the correlation of the
same two variables in high innovative schools is +.l3. The difference
between the two r's is not significant at the .05 confidence level. As
a matter of fact, the analysis not only fails to support the hypothesis,
but suggests that Opinion leaders are more cosmopolite in low innovative
schools, based upon the zero-order Pearsonian correlations.

Empirical hypothesis 103 is not supported and theoretic hypothesis

ten is not supported at the .05 confidence level.

Theoretic Hypothesis Eleven

Innovative social systems are expected to be more open and have
greater contact with the external world of ideas than less innovative
systems. Therefore, theoretic hypothesis ten predicts that Opinion
leaders will be more exposed to the mass media in innovative than in
non-innovative schools.

EH11 : Teacher Opinion leaders are more exposed
a to the mass media in high innovative than
in low innovative schools.

The zero-order correlation between opinion leadership and mass media

exposure in low innovative schools is +.07. The correlation between

78
opinion leadership and mass media exposure in high innovative schools is
+.06. The two r's are not significantly different at the .05 percent
confidence level as predicted.
Empirical hypothesis 11a is not supported and, therefore, theoretic

hypothesis eleven is not supported.

Theoretic Hypothesis TWelve

This theoretic hypothesis predicts that Opinion leadership concentra-
tion is positively related to a school's attitudinal acceptance of innova-
tions because the concentration of leadership in the hands of a few is a
powerful instrument for or against change. It is expected that where the
Opinion leadership is most concentrated, that the principal could have
the most influence in persuading these few persons to adopt change.
Principals are expected to be pro change, because the innovations are
supported by the Ministry of Education, and to adopt the change reflects
well upon the principal.

EH : Opinion leadership concentration is

123 positively related to the school's
attitudinal acceptance of innovation.

 

 

 

The zero-order correlation between Opinion leadership concentration
and attitudinal acceptance of innovation by the school is -.23, which
not only is not significant at the .05 percent confidence level, but is
in the reverse direction. The analysis tends to suggest that Opinion
leadership concentration is inversely related to a school's attitudinal
acceptance of innovation: the more diffuse the leadership, the more
accepting of innovation is the school. The relationship is not signifi-

cantly different from zero to permit Such a prediction, however.

79
Empirical hypothesis 123 is not supported and, therefore, theoretic

hypothesis twelve is not supported.

Theoretic Hypothesis Thirteen

Theoretic hypothesis thirteen says that there is a positive relation-
ship between Opinion leadership concentration in a school and that school's
innovativeness because the concentration of Opinion leadership places
power in a few hands where pro change principals could influence the few
to adopt innovation.

EHl3a: Opinion leadership concentration is
positively related to school innova-
21131282.-

The correlation between the two variables, opinion leadership concen-
tration and school innovativeness, is +.26, which is not significantly
different from zero at the .05 level of confidence. Therefore, the
empirical hypothesis cannot be supported and the theoretic hypothesis is

not supported. The relationship is in the right direction, but it did

not reach the predicted magnitude of .37.

Theoretic Hypothesis Fourteen

The fourteenth theoretic hypothesis predicts a positive relation-
ship between communication integration in a school and school awareness
of innovations, based upon the notion that in a more integrated system
more teachers communicate directly with each other and, therefore, the
Spread of new ideas through the system will be more rapid than in less
integrated social systems.

EH : Communication integration isgpositively

143 related to early school awareness of
innovation.

 

80

The correlation between the two variables communication integration
and school awareness is -.15, which is not significant at the .05 percent
level of confidence. The relationship is not in the predicted direction,
which suggests that communication integration somehow acts to impede the
creation of awareness of innovations among Thai teachers. However, the
relationship is not significant, so such a statement is not valid.

The final two theoretic hypotheses test for system effects upon
teacher innovativeness. In each instance, it is predicted that an attri-
bute of the system has an influence upon the behavior of teachers working
within that social system. Thus, the teacher is the unit of analysis
and the significance of any relationship is tested by determining if
there is a significant difference between two r's, one of which is a
multiple correlation and the other a zero-order correlation. If there
is a significant difference between the two correlations, then it can be

concluded that the effect is attributable to the social system.

Theoretic Hypothesis Fifteen

The fifteenth theoretic hypothesis tested in the present Study

predicts that the school's mass media exposure has an effect upon

teacher innovativeness, when the influence of the teacher's mass media
score is removed from the school score. This prediction is based upon

an assumption that when most persons of a social system are exposed to

the mass media that this exposure is a powerful stimulus upon the individ-
ual to expose to the mass media and thus come into contact with new ideas,
some of which he will adopt. Mass media exposure creates awareness of

new ideas and awareness is expected to lead to adoption.

81
EH15 : School mass media exposure has a positive
a relationship with teacher innovativeness,
when the effect of the individual's mass
media exposure score is removed from the
school score.

The multiple correlation among teacher innovativeness, teacher mass
media exposure and school mass media exposure is +.14, while the zero-
order correlation between teacher mass media exposure and teacher innova-
tiveness is also +.14. This indicates that school mass media exposure
contributes nothing to the variance in teacher innovativeness, because
the difference between the two correlations is not significant. There-

fore, empirical hypothesis 15a is not supported, and theoretic hypothesis

fifteen is not supported by the analysis of data.

Theoretic Hypothesis Sixteen

The final theoretic hypothesis, number sixteen, predicts that school
cosmopoliteness has a system effect upon the innovativeness of individual
teachers working within the school. This prediction is predicated upon
the notion that interaction with the external world creates an awareness
of new ideas and the urge to adopt.

EH16 : School cosmOpoliteness has a positive
a relationshipjwith teacher innovative-
ness when the influence of the individ-

ual teacher's cosmopoliteness score is
removed from the school score.

The multiple correlation among teacher innovativeness, teacher
cosmopoliteness, and school cosmopoliteness is .02, while the zero-
order correlation between teacher innovativeness and teacher cosmOpo—
liteness is a -.02. Since the difference between the multiple correla-
tion and the zero-order correlation is not significant at the .05

percent confidence level, the empirical hypothesis is not supported.

82
Therefore, the theoretic hypothesis is not supported; school cosmOpo—
liteness does not have a system effect upon the behavior of individual

teachers as regards their adOption of new ideas.

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Summary I

The study described in this dissertation is based upon an analysis
0 f data from one portion of the comprehensive Thailand Educational Diffu-
3 ion Project conducted by the Institute for International Studies in
Education and the Department of Communication, Michigan State University,
and Sponsored by the U.S. Agency for International Development and the
Inter-University Research Program in Institution-Building.

The Thailand project was designed to investigate the spread of
educational innovations and their adOption or rejection by Thai govern-
ment Sponsored secondary schools. The study described in the present
dissertation represents the third and final phase of the Thailand pro-

j ect. One of its intended purposes was to attempt to overcome an
important shortcoming of the main study (the failure to include system
variables in the data-analysis) by going beyond the analysis of individ-
ual characteristics and measuring characteristics of the social system
in which the individuals work. Hypotheses tested involved two units of
W: (1) the individual teachers employed in a sample of Thai
Seczc>‘l:1dary schools, and (2) the school (or social system). In both

1113 tances, the unit of reSponse was the individual teacher or principal
of the school. Individual responses were aggregated to provide school-

1evel or social system indices where such indices were necessary.

83

84
Most previous studies of the diffusion of innovation have focused
asttention upon individual decisions by one, or many, respondents to
aidopt a new idea. In the typical diffusion study, the dependent vari-
able was awareness Of the innovation or the innovativeness of the individ-
ual reSpondent. However, this bias for intra-personal variables in
diffusion research largely excluded from scientific investigation those
social structural or system variables which also are believed to influence
the Spread of new ideas. Diffusion researchers implicitly assumed that
b ecause individuals were the unit of response, that they also had to be
the unit of analysis.

A central thesis advanced in the present research is that more
variance in individual behavior can be explained by utilizing both
individual and social system variables than by using individual vari-
ab les alone.

A 58 page survey instrument, developed in a pilot test in Michigan
and field—tested in Thailand, assessed demographic, institutional, general
and professional communication behavior, perceptions of innovations, and
Psychological and personality characteristics of Thai teachers and prin-
C:l'—F>als. The ten innovations selected for inclusion in the investigation
inc luded school libraries, parent teacher associations, peace corps
volunteers, departmental organization, guidance counseling, class discus-
sion methods, Objective tests, audio-visual aids, coeducation, and
vocational education. The four dependent variables were school aware-
ness of innovations, the school's attitudinal acceptance of an innovation,
tea~Q11er innovativeness and school innovativeness. Individual teacher
E"cot‘es were aggregated and a mean determined to arrive at a school score

on the three dependent variables which were school measures.

85
Drawing upon generalizations formulated in diffusion research con-
ciucted in the United States, and particularly the Michigan pilot study,
16 theoretic hypotheses were established and tested in the data analysis.
The 16 hypotheses predicted directional relationships among the indepen-
dent variables and the four dependent variables. When zero-order and
multiple correlations were tested for significance at the 5 percent
level of confidence, it was found that four of the theoretic hypotheses
were supported by the data. However, even though four of the correla-
tions were statistically significant, none of the correlations was of
sufficient magnitude to have much predictive value or social significance.
Most of the zero-order correlations were of the magnitude of .20 to .35,
which was less than the i. .37 necessary for statistical significance at
the 5 percent confidence level. The unit of analysis in 11 of the zero-
order correlations was the School itself, and thus the sample was small
(n =- 28), which restricted the variance. Both zero-order and multiple
correlations were used to test for system effects upon the individual
teachers. In the five theoretic hypotheses which predicted social system
effects, the teacher was the unit of analysis and the sample n was 585.
When the Pearsonian correlations produced by data analysis were
tes ted for significance, it was found that four of the zero-order correla-
tions were significantly different from zero. In each of the supported
hyPO theses, the school was the unit of analysis. Significance tests
11"(iii—(:ated that the perceived psychological distance between principal
and teachers was inversely related to the school's attitudinal acceptance
of innovations.
It was also demonstrated that the principal's role satisfaction

was directly related to the innovativeness of the school in which he

86
was employed. The more satisfied the principal was with his work and
with the working environment, the more innovations the school adopted
and thus the more innovative it was.

Another real, non-chance relationship was found between the frequency
of role performance feedback from the principal to teachers and the
school's attitudinal acceptance of innovations. The more information the
teachers received from the principal indicating how they were performing
t111eir duties, the higher was their attitudinal acceptance of innovations
in that particular school.

Finally, it was demonstrated that role performance feedback from
principal to teachers was an important factor in determining school
innovativeness. The more feedback the teachers received from the
principal about the way in which they were doing their job, the more
innovations were adopted by thewschool.

In summary, the present study tended to indicate that perceived
psychological distance between superior and subordinate, amount of role
performance feedback from superior to subordinate, and role satisfaction
of teachers and principal, are factors which contribute to the attitu-
d inal acceptance of innovations and change by Thai schools and the
reJ.ative earliness of the school's adoption of njew ideas.

The analysis of data also indicated that/rhle satisfaction of
teaehers and principal, participation in decision-making and opinion
leadership concentration were not related to the attitudinal accep-
t"Ella-Ce of innovations by the government sponsored secondary schools of
T1"El-:lland. Also,':here was no relationship between the communication

integration of the social system and the early awareness of educational

innovations. In other words, satisfaction with their work and working

87
environment, the perceived opportunity to take part in relevant decision-
making, and the degree to which personal influence was vested in a few

individuals rather than in many individuals of the school, did not

zippear to influence the extent to which Thai teachers perceived innova-

tions as relevant and valuable to their role performance. The inter-

connectedness of the communication system of each school appeared to
have no influence upon the early creation of awareness of new ideas.
SimilarlyZ/perceived psychological distance between teachers and
the principal, and the teachers' participation in decision—making
appeared to have no influence upon the degree to which Thai secondary

s chools were relatively earlier in adOpting new ideas than other

3 chools of the same social system.

None of the five theoretic hypotheses predicting system effects was

S upported by the data. The degree to which individual teachers were

relatively earlier in adOpting new ideas than others of the social system

was not influenced by characteristics of the schools in which the teachers

worked.

Conclusions

Several factors may have contributed to the failure of the present

Study to predict a greater amount of variance. Research completed in

de"e2l.oping countries generally shows that the social system is an impor—
tant influence upon the behavior of individuals; however, the research

deg Cribed here cannot support the contention of the influence of system

effects in Thailand schools. In the following pages, possible factors

co‘I‘ltributing to the failure to predict are discussed.

88

l. Equivalence of Meanings: It is possible that the survey instru-

ment, which contained questions formulated largely from U.S. research,
did not accurately tap the variables which were supposed to be measured.
In other words, the questionnaire may not have been measuring the Thai
‘equivalent of the U.S. variable because of differences in the Thai

(:ulture and the problem of attaining cross-cultural equivalence.

2. Translation of Instrument: Three Thai nationals worked indepen-

<flently to translate the survey questions into the Thai language, but

there were instances where the three translators did not agree and a

ssubjective judgment was made on the translation to use. Therefore,

tflme instrument may not have been a good translation of the items.

3. Measurement Error: The Bangkok pretest, discussed earlier, was

:iJatended to provide a method for eliminating "poor" scale items, but
because of delays in (l) coding pretest instruments, (2) delivery of
«c:<3de sheets from Bangkok to Michigan State University for analysis, and
(:13) obtaining inter-item correlations from Michigan State University,
.Eile.scale items on the pretest were included in the final instrument.

49L few items were later dropped from scales in the computation of correla-
tions because of low inter-item correlations computed from test--pretest

data. However, it is possible that the scale items did a poor job of

measuring the variables.

4. Insensitivity of Measures: Another possible explanation of

f"'=i:I..2lure to predict, lies in the insensitivity of the dependent variable

Ineéisures. In particular, the scale items used to measure attitudinal

Et<1<2eptance of innovations tended to produce little variance across

t3<3£achers. Most teachers reSponded either "very beneficial" or "somewhat

t"313eficial," when asked to state their attitudes toward each of the

89

innovations, making the items dichotomous, in effect, rather than contin—

uous scales. If the reSponses are not distributed across the scale, but

rather are homogenous, no variance is measured and the predicted covari-

ance of variables is not evident. The insensitivity of measures and the

ihomogenity of the sample response may be the key factors in the low
correlations produced in the present study.
There is the possibility

5. The Wrong Variables were Measured:

that the wrong variables were measured, because the research was con-

«ducted in a culture different from the researcher's own. Variables

IJtilized in the present study were those variables which predicted vari-

zance in diffusion studies completed in the United States, in a culture

‘DVith different norms and values than those of the Thais. Additional

(alrperience with other cultures may reduce some of the cultural "blindness"
o f U.S . researchers .

6. Response Validity: Thai informants suggested that the researcher
:sslnould be extremely cautious in relying solely on questionnaire responses.
Tlflne affable Thais candidly admit that their fellow countrymen can be

<:511aracterized as "acquiescent," "untrustworthy," or "unpredictable."

IE’Iuillips (1965, p. 164) encountered the same reaction among his Thai

:1;11EOrmants. He quotes one as saying:

We [Thai] people have many minds, different
hearts. Whatever others say, we can't be
sure whether it is true or not.

In his daily behavior, the Thai seems to be more concerned with the
form, than the content, of his discussions; there appears to be a national
e3<pectation that the listener will discount the statement as exaggerated

Eiticyway, leaving no reason for a person to edit his own statements for

ac curacy.

90
Given the national character of the Thais, perhaps future researchers
vvould do well to use other types of measurement than the survey instru-
rnents which rely on verbal reSponse and pencil and paper measurements.
(Zertainly, if questionnaires are used for research purposes in Thailand,
tflie results should be tempered by participant observations.
7. §ggtheast Asia Courtesy Bias: Thais exhibit, along with others
:i_r1 Southeast Asia, another trait which compounds the problems of the
ssanrvey researcher: a "courtesy bias" or desire to please other individ-
uals, particularly if others can be pleased at no expense. Therefore,
{Iftlais will respond in the manner which they believe will satisfy the
:zrweasearcher, even if the response is not a true reflection of their own
at: titudes or values. Such a "reSponse set" may have been responsible
:i?¢:>rr the homogeneity demonstrated on many of the questions in the survey
instrument.
8. Limited Variance in the Thai Culture of Dimensions Measured
215:). the Study: It is also possible that limited variance exists in the
Thai culture on the dimensions measured in the research described in
the present dissertation. The Thai culture and bureaucratic subculture
Eilfwez generally resistant to change and innovation (Mortimore, 1968, p. 29).
Efficiency, productivity, and rationality are not accorded the importance
in Thai culture that they are given in Western culture. Innovation is
not highly relevant in a bureaucratic system which tends to value the
ID‘JJC‘EEaucracy for itself rather than for its production (Siffin, 1966).
1UE1¢3, authority which gives order and purpose to bureaucratic action in
'rl‘iiditland is not the legal-rational authority of the Weberian model
(:c’nmnnon to Western culture. Because the bureaucracy pervades all levels
of life, including the life of the teacher, Thais tend to exhibit more

hoIllcagenity of action and thought than do Westerners.

91

9. Influence of Civil Service Rank: The cultural bias of the
researcher resulted in a lack of concern for certain variables which
may have an important influence upon the adOption of educational innova—
tions in Thailand. An important independent variable which was over-
looked in this study was the influence of civil service rank upon the
behavior of teachers and principals in the government sponsored secon-
dary schools. The lack of concern for this variable resulted from the
author's experience with a culture in which teachers do not hold a civil
service rank. However, in a formal system in which bureaucracy is valued
for its own sake, rather than for its efficiency, such a variable as
civil service rank might have a profound influence upon the behavior of
individuals. Future studies in Thailand no doubt should attempt to
incorporate this variable in the research design.

10. Upward Flow of Innovations: It was assumed that there would be
a downward flow of new ideas from top executives in the Ministry of Educa-
tion, through regional education officers and Changwad education officials,
to school principals and teachers. Many of the questions in the survey
instrument were predicated upon such a downward flow of information.
However, in reality there was much upward flow of information and ideas
about innovations from teachers, to principals, and in turn to the
Changwad Education Officers. This flow stemmed from the fact that most
of the ten educational innovations included in the study entered the
Thai culture from external sources, largely the United States.

The innovations were largely diffused throughout the schools by
Ministry and teacher training institute officials who were sent to the
United States for graduate training. Professors in the teacher train-

ing colleges had direct, personal contact with future teachers. Not

92
only did the professors describe the innovations they had seen in the
U.S., but also they actually demonstrated them to their students.

Thus, newly trained school teachers entered the Thai secondary
schools with a knowledge of the innovations which was superior to that
of the older teachers or even the school principal.

The Changwad education officers were unimportant as a diffusion
channel, although the organization chart shows the C.E.0.'s performing
an information function in diffusing new ideas. Thus, too much reli-
ance upon the "supposed method" in which the system worked led the
research astray.

Despite the shortcomings elaborated above, the present research has
contributed to a better understanding of the methods by which educational
innovations enter the government Sponsored secondary schools of Thailand
and are adopted and used by them. The present study indicates that
perceived psychological distance from superiors, role satisfaction, and
role performance feedback are important factors in teachers' and princi-

pals' attitudes toward and adOption of innovations.

Recommendations for Future Research

The present study, as was mentioned in Chapter I, is novel because
it is one of the first studies of educational diffusion attempted out-
side the boundaries of the continental U.S. As a pioneer, the method-
ological experiences described here may be useful to future researchers
as a guide to "what to do" or "not do" when studying the Thai culture.

The conceptual framework of the present investigation relied upon
previous conceptualizations and research generalizations from 1,700 U.S.

diffusion studies. This heavy reliance upon Western research introduced

93
a cultural bias into what was considered important and how it was mea-
sured. The study design not only commited "sins of commission," but
also "sins of omission" by ignoring variables that are important influ-
ences upon Thai education. As indicated, the independent variable
"Civil Service rank" was totally ignored in the study. The omission is
understandable because the federal government does not operate U.S.
schools and hence teachers are not required to have a Civil Service rank
in the researcher's own culture.

Despite the lack of system effects demonstrated in the present
research, other studies conducted in developing countries have shown
that system effects should be taken into account when measuring individ-
ual innovativeness. Davis (1968) and Saxena (1968), both of whom inves-
tigated the influence of system effects in less developed countries,
found that system effects were significantly correlated with peasant
farmers' innovativeness.

One of the most important system variables which should be included
in future diffusion research is social system norms. Norms establish
the pattern for behavior of members of the social system. Van den Ban
(1960) found that some norms are progressive and encourage change, while
others are traditional and discourage change. Failure to include Thai
social system norms was perhaps the greatest shortcoming of the present
research.

Perhaps the most crucial question which can be answered by future
educational diffusion research is: What improvement in educational
productivity or increments in learning might be contributed by each
prOposed innovation? U.S. education seems to have an inherent bias

for "change" regardless of the consequences; many innovations adopted

94
by U.S. schools have contributed little to efficiency or productivity
in education. Researchers need to focus their attention upon the
consequences of change, not just the adOption of another technique or
new idea.

Previous diffusion research has been severely limited by an adop-
tion model which assumed that the decision to adopt an innovation was
‘the end of the process. As a point in fact, the adoption model did not
make provision for the rejection of a new idea (Rogers with Shoemaker,
1971). Such weaknesses in conceptual framework need to be eliminated
in future research; models must incorporate rejection of innovation as
well as the consequences of change.

Educational diffusion could benefit from convergence with organiza-
tional research which has long been concerned with such dependent vari-
ables as employee morale, efficiency, production, etc. Such variables
might prove to be meaningful indicators of the consequences of change
in education, if the variables could be translated into educational
components.

Finally, diffusion research in developing countries might benefit
from a more intensive study of a cross section of the population. Such
a study could possibly utilize the case study approach and personal
observations rather than survey techniques. The investigators could
thus build a theoretical framework upon which to plan more comprehensive
studies. The present study suffered perhaps from an overly ambitious

design which attempted to encompass too much of an unfamiliar culture.

95
Implications for Action

Until the results of a research project are diffused and adopted
the cost of the study is an unrealized investment of economic and human
resources. Therefore, the following recommendations for educational
change in Thailand build upon the insights offered by the present inves—
tigation.

l. The Thai Ministry of Education need not be greatly concerned
over the assignment of teachers to new schools because the school
environment appears to have limited influence upon the teachers' atti-
tudes toward new ideas or their willingness to adOpt change. More .
important are the characteristics of the school principal and whether
or not he provides adequate role performance feedback and support for
his teaching staff.

2. The Ministry of Education must provide funds to the schools
for the purchase of library books, audio-visual materials, etc., if
the schools are to adopt such innovations on a large scale. The
limited acceptance of such items at present is a consequence of the
Ministry's failure to apprOpriate money for this purpose.

3. Attention should be paid to the selection of the school princi-
pal since he appears to be an important factor in the teacher's atti-
tudinal acceptance of innovations, and the school's adoption of innova-
tions. The best principals and teachers should be assigned to those
schools which most resist change, which have the least contact with
modern ideas, and which are most remote from the capital. However,
the reverse is commonly practiced-~the best principals are sent to the

most modern schools in the capital where the teachers have frequent

96
exposure to new ideas and least need the support and encouragement of
the principal in adOpting change.

4. Inservice training seminars for principals should stress the
desirability of role performance feedback from principal to teacher,
increasing teacher participation in decision-making, and reducing the
psychological distance between the principal and his teaching faculty.

5. Attention should be focused upon the way in which schools use
educational innovations, rather than upon the rapid adoption of prOposed
ideas. Though Thai schools reported adopting many of the ten innova—
tions utilized in the present study, few of the schools used school
libraries, vocational education, or counseling, for instance, in the
manner intended by the Ministry of Education.

6. Desired educational innovations should be adapted to the Thai
culture to achieve compatability with the norms, values, and social
setting of Southeast Asia. Western influence upon Thai government
schools has been significant, as indicated by the innovations studied
in the present research. However, the Thai's have a history of "selec-
tive adaptation" of foreign ideas. As contrasted with Western norms,
the Thai's do not value innovation and change highly. The common man
is aware of his country's historical traditions, and he finds much that
he wants to preserve; indeed, there is much which should be preserved.

Agencies responsible for diffusing innovation to Thai secondary
schools should take pains to assess the compatability of the innovation
with cultural norms and values and should adequately package the inno-
vation to satisfy the needs of principals and teachers.

The future will witness an increasing rate of educational change

in developing countries like Thailand. Ministry officials will need

97
to consider each proposed new idea in terms of one of four possible
responses: (1) ignore the idea as meaningless to Thai culture, (2)
reject the idea as not desirable to Thailand and incompatible with
the country's norms, (3) adopt the idea for limited or widespread use,
and (4) adapt the idea to fit the conditions of Thai schools. If the
educational innovation is adOpted or adapted, then a carefully conceived

plan must be developed to successfully diffuse the desired innovation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Berelson, Bernard R., and others (1954), Voting: A Study_of Opinion Forma—
tion in Presidential Campaigns, Chicago, Illinois: University
of Chicago Press.

 

 

Blau, Peter M. (1957), "Formal Organization: Dimensions of Analysis,"
American Journal of Sociology, 63: 63-64.

 

(1960), "Structural Effects," American Sociological Review,
25: 178-193.

 

Carlson, Richard O. (1965), Adoption of Educational Innovations, Eugene,
Oregon: Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Adminis-
tration, University of Oregon.

 

Coch, Lester, and J. R. P. French, Jr. (1948), "Overcoming Resistance to
Change," Human Relations, 1: 512-532.

 

Coleman, James, and others (1957), "The Diffusion of an Innovation,"
Sociometpy, 20: 253-270.

 

Coughenour, C. Milton (1966), "Group Factors and the Adoption of Agricul-
tural Innovations in Seven Commerical Farming Localities,"
Paper presented at the Rural Sociological Society, Miami Beach,
Florida.

(1964), "The Rate of Technological Diffusion among Locality
Groups," American Journal of Sociology, 69: 325-339.

Davis, Burl Edward (1968), System Variables and Agricultural Innovative-
ness in Eastern Nigeria, Ph.D. Thesis, Michigan State University,
East Lansing, Michigan.

Davis, James A., and others (1961), "A Technique for Analyzing the Effects

of Group Composition," American Sociological Review, 26: 215-
225.

Deutschmann, Paul J., and Orlando Fals Borda (1962), Communication and
Adoption Patterns in an Andean Village, San Jose, Costa Rica:
Programma Interamericano de Information Popular.

Duncan, James A., and Burton W. Kreitlow (1954), "Selected Cultural
Characteristics and the Acceptance of Educational Programs
and Practices," Rural Sociology, 19: 349-357.

 

98.

99

Durkheim, Emile (1897), Suicide (Translated by James A. Spaulding and
George Simpson, 1951), Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press.

Faris, R. E. L., and H. W. Dunham (1939), Mental Disorders in Urban
Areas, Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press,
pp. 101-123.

 

Fliegel, Frederick C. (1957), "Farm Income and Adeption of Farm Practices,‘
Rural Sociology, 22: 159-162.

 

Flinn, William L. (1970), "Influence of Community Values on Innovative-
ness," American Journal of Sociology, 75: 983-991.

 

(1963), "Community Norms in Predicting Innovativeness," Paper
presented at the Rural Sociological Society meeting, August
24-26, Northridge, California.

Fleishman, E., E. Harris, and H. Buitt (1955), Leadership_and Supervision
in Industgy: An Evaluation of a Supervisory Training Program,
Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Bureau of Educational
Research.

 

 

French, J. R. P., Jr., and others (1961), "An Experiment on Participation
in a Norwegian Factory," Human Relations, 13: 3-19.

 

Frey, Frederick W. (1963), "Surveying Peasant Attitudes in Turkey," Public
Opinion Quarterly, 27: 335-355.

 

Goldsen, Rose K., and Max Ralis (1957), Factors Related to Acogptance of
Innovations in Bang_Chan, Thailand, Ithaca, New York: Cornell
University, Southeast Asia Program Data Paper No. 25.

Groves, E. R., and W. F. Ogburn (1928), American Marriage and Family
Relationships, New York: Henry Holt.

 

GuimarSés, Lytton, L. (1970), Network Analysis: An Approach to the
Study_of Communication Systems, Project on the Diffusion of
Innovations in Rural Societies, Technical Report 12, Depart-
ment of Communication, Michigan State University, East Lansing,
Michigan.

 

Hoffman, R. L., and N. R. F. Maier (1959), "The Use of Group Decision to
Solve a Problem of Fairness," Personnel Psychology, 12: 545-
559.

Katz, Elihu, and Herbert Menzel (1954), On the Flow of Scientific Infor-
mation in the Medical Profession, New York: Columbia University
Bureau of Applied Social Research.

 

Katz, Daniel, and Robert L. Kahn (1966), The Social Psychology of Organi—
zations, New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Kelman, Herbert C. (1961), "Processes of Opinion Change," Public Opinion
Quarterly, 25: 57-78.

100

Khan, Anwar K. (1968), "Adoption and Internalization of Educational
Innovation among Teachers in the Pilot Secondary Schools of
West Pakistan," Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, Michigan.

Lerner, Daniel (1958), The Passing of Traditional Society: Moderniziog
the Middle East, Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press of Glencoe.

 

 

Lewin, Kurt (1947), "Group Decision and Social Change," in E. E. Maccoby
and others (eds.), Readings in Social Psychology, Rev. Ed. 1958,
New York: Holt, Winston and Rinehart.

 

Lin, Nan (1966), "Innovation Internalization in a Formal Organization,"
Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Communication, Michi-
gan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.

, and others (1966), The Diffusion of an Innovation in Three
Michigan High Schools: Institution Buildingythroogh Chapge,
East Lansing, Michigan: Institute for International Studies
in Education and Department of Communication.

 

Lipset, S. M., and others (1956), Union Democrapy, Glencoe, Illinois:
The Free Press of Glencoe.

 

Maier, N. R. F., and L. R. Homann (1961), "Overcoming Superior—Subordinate
Communication Problems in Management," in N. R. F. Maier, L. R.
Hoggman, J. G. Hooven, and W. H. Read (eds.), Sopervisor-
Subordinate Communication in Managgment, New York: American
Management Association Research Study No. 52.

Mann, F. C. (1957), "Studying and Creating Change: A Means to Understand-
ing Social Organization," Research in Industrial Human Relations,
Industrial Relations Association, 17: 146-147.

 

Marsh, C. Paul, and A. L. Coleman (1954), "The Relationship of Neighbor-
hood of Residence to Adoption of Recommended Farm Practices,"
Rural Sociology, 19: 385-390.

Menzel, Herbert, and Elihu Katz (1955), "Social Relations and Innovation
in the Medical Profession: The Epidemiology of a New Drug,"
Public Opinion Quarterly, 19: 337-352.

Morse, Nancy C., and E. Reimer (1956), "The Experimental Change of a
Mahor Organizational Variable," Journal of Abnormal Social
Psychology, 52: 120-129.

Mort, Paul R., and Francis G. Cornell (1938), Adaptability of Public
School Systems, New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers
College, Columbia University.

 

Mortimore, Frederic J. (1968), "Diffusion of Educational Innovations in
the Government Secondary Schools of Thailand," Ph.D. Thesis,
Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.

101

Mulder, Mauk (1960), "The Power Variable in Communication Experiments,"
Human Relations, 13: 241-256.

Pelz, Donald C. (1956), "Some Social Factors Related to Performance in
a Research Organization," Administrative Scienco_Quarteriy,
1: 310-325.

Powdermaker, Hortense (1962), Coppertown: Changing Africa, New York:
Harper and Row.

Qadir, Syed Abdul (1966), "Adoption of Technological Change in the Rural
Philippines: An Analysis of Compositional Effects," Ph.D.
Thesis, Ithaca, New York, Cornell University.

Reiss, Albert J., and Albert L. Rhodes (1961), "Delinquency and Social
Class Structure," American Sociological Review, 24: 720-732.

Rogers, Everett M., and Rabel J. Burdge (1961), Community Norms, Opinion
Leadership, and Innovativeness among Truck Growers, Wooster,
Ohio: The Agricultural Experiment State Research Bulletin No.
912.

(1962), Diffusion of Innovations, New York: The Free Press of
Glencoe.

, and Johannes C. van Es (1964), Opinion Leadership in Tradi-
tional and Modern Colombian Peasant Communities, Diffusion
of Innovations Report No. 2, Department of Communication,
Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.

, and David Stanfield (1966), "Adoption and Diffusion of New
Products: Emerging Generalizations and Hypotheses," Depart-
ment of Communication, Michigan State University, Mimeographed.

, and others (1969), Diffusion of Innovations: Educational

Change in Thai Government Secondary Schools, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, Michigan: Institute for Interna-
tional Studies in Education and Department of Communication.

with F. Floyd Shoemaker (1971), Communication of Innovation:
A Cross-Cultural Approach, New York: The Free Press of Glencoe.

Ryan, Bryce, and Neal C. Gross (1943), "The Diffusion of Hybrid Seed Corn
in Two Iowa Communities," Rural Sociology, 8: 15-24.

Saxena, Anant (1968), "System Effects on Innovativeness among Indian
Farmers," Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Communica-
tion, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.

Seashore, Stanley E., and D. G. Bowers (1963), Changing the Structuring
and Functioning of an Organization, Monograph No. 33, Ann
Arbor, Michigan: Survey Research Center.

102

Sharp, Lauriston (1952), "Steel Axes for Stone Age Australians," in
Edward H. Spicer (ed.), Human Problems in Technological
Change, New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Siffin, William J. (1966), The Thai Bureaucracy: Institutional Change
and Development, Honolulu: East-West Center.

 

Stouffer, S. A., and others (1949), Studies in Social Psychology_in World
War II, Vol. 1, The American Soldier During Army Life, Princeton,
New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Van den Ban, Anne Willem (1960), "Locality Group Differences in the

AdOption of New Farm Practices," Rural Sociology, 25: 308-
320.

Vroom, V. (1960), Some Personality Determinants of the Effects of
Participstion, Englewood, Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-
Hall.

 

Westley, Bruce H., and Malcolm S. MacLean, Jr., (1957), "A Conceptual
Model for Communications Research," Journalism Quarterl ,
34: 31—38.

 

APPENDIX

103

APPENDIX A
Teachergguestionnaire Instrument

The United Nations Educational, Social and Cultural Organiza-
thmn<UNESCO)has designated1960-1970 "The Decade of Development."
During this ten-year period all nations--rich and poor, developed
and underdeveloped--have been urged to cooperate with one another to
combat those universal enemies 0f.éll mankind--disease, hunger, and
ignorance. But this is to be a creative war, not a destructive war;
this is to be a war,.no£ of man against man or nation against nation,
but of man united, of nations united, striving to increase the welfare
of.gll mankind everywhere.

If disease, hunger and ignorance are to be eliminated as major
sources of human unhappiness, however, education must be improved-—
and this improved education must be made available to all the world's
people. Illiteracy must be abolished and new skills must be provided
so that people everywhere can improve their standard of living. The
research project in which you are about to participate may, with your
c00peration, help not only the pe0ple of Thailand but also those people
of other lands who desire, as do the citizens of Thailand, a better
life for themselves...and their children...and their children's chil-
dren. Research projects similar to this one are being conducted in
Brazil, Nigeria, India and the United States of America. The knowledge

obtained from this study will be combined with the knowledge gained in

104

in these other countries and in this way all countries can benefit; this
study is truly an international undertaking.

If this study is to prove fruitful those who answer this question-
naire must do so with complete candor; they must tell us what they really
believe. We do not ask you to place your name on this questionnaire be-
cause we do not wish to knownyho has answered; we wish only to determine
what a large number of people think.

We realize that this is a long questionnaire and one that is diffi-
cult to answer. But if you answer this questionnaire well, you will have
the satisfaction of knowing that you have personally contributed to an

important international study.

105

Teachgrigpestionnaire Instrument

IN THE FOLLOWING SEQUENCE OF QUESTIONS, PLEASE CIRCLE THE NUMBER
PRECEDING THE CORRECT ANSWER AND, WHERE REQUESTED, WRITE IN THE
INFORMATION WHICH WE HAVE ASKED YOU TO PROVIDE.

Example:

Within the last 7 days I have been to the movies.

1. 7 times 5. 3 times
2. 6 times 6. 2 times
3. 5 times 7. 1 time
4. 4 times 8. Not at all

1. Within the last 7 days I have read one or more newspapers on .

1 7 days 5. 3 days
2. 6 days 6. 2 days
3. 5 days 7. 1 day

4 4 days 8. 0 days

2. Within the last 7 days I have listened to the radio once or more

on
1. 7 days 5. 3 days
2. 6 days 6. 2 days
3. 5 days 7. 1 day
4. 4 days 8. 0 days

3. Within the last 7 days I have listened to the Ministry of Edu-
cation Radio Station (Vithayu Suksa) once or more on .

l. 7 days 5. 3 days
2. 6 days 6. 2 days
3. 5 days 7. 1 day
4. 4 days 8. 0 days

106

Do you own a radio?

0. No 1. Yes

Within the last 7 days I have watched television once or more on..

1. 7 days 5. 3 days
2. 6 days 6. 2 days
3. 5 days 7. 1 day
4. 4 days 8. 0 days

Is there a television receiver in the house where you live?
0. No 1. Yes

Within the last 7 days I have read from one or more books on.

1. 7 days 5 3 days
2. 6 days 6. 2 days
3. 5 days 7 1 day
6. 4 days 8 0 days

Within the last 7 days I have read from "general interest"
magazines (such as Siam Rath Weekiy or Pimp Ihsi Weekly) on.

1. 7 days 5. 3 days
2. 6 days 6. 2 days
3. 5 days 7. 1 day
4. 4 days 8. 0 days

Please circle the number preceding the names of those profes-
sional journals listed below from which you have read within
the last 30 days.

Secondary School Journal
Wittayasarn

Wittayscharn

Juntr Kasem

Miterru

Educational Center
Mathematics

Science

. Vocational School Journal
Educational Radio

WOQNO‘U‘J-‘WNI—i

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

15.

107

For how many years have you been a teacher?

1. Less than 2 years 5. 12-14 years
2. 2-5 years 6. 15-17 years
3. 6-8 years 7. 18-20 years
4. 9-11 years 8. More than 20 years

For how many years have you been a teacher in this school?

1. Less than 2 years 5. 12-14 years
2. 2-5 years 6. 15-17 years
3. 6-8 years 7. 18-20 years
4. 9-11 years 8. More than 20 years

In how many other Thai government secondary schools have you
taught?

0. None

1. One 5 Five

2. Two 6 Six

3. Three 7. Seven

4. Four 8 Eight or more

Have you ever taught in a private secondary school?
0. No 1. Yes
Did you attend a Thai college or university?

0. No
1 Yes

Which one

Chulalongkorn University

Prasarn Mitr College of Education
Pratumwan College of Education
Bangsan College of Education
Silpakorn University

Kasetsart University

Thammasat University

CDVO‘U‘I-PWN

Did you attend a foreign college or university?

00. No 01. Yes
Please list below the foreign colleges or universities attended,
Institution Location

 

 

 

 

 

 

108 '

16. Please indicate the highest educational level you have completed.

1.
2.
3

4.

5.
6.

High school certificate (Maw Saw 5).

Secondary school teachers certificate (2 years of college)
Secondary school teachers certificate plus

additional courses

College diploma (Bachelors Degree)

College degree (Master's Degree)

Doctor's Degree (Ph. D.)

17. How many courses in physical and/or biological sciences did you
complete in your college and university training?

O‘Ul-waH

None

1-3 courses

4-6 courses

7-10 courses

11-15 courses

16 or more courses

18. Have you ever traveled outside of Thailand?

0.
1.

5.

No

Yes
Please list below the countries you have visited and
the purpose of your visits.

Country Visited Purpose of Your Visits
(Tourist, study, etc.)

 

 

 

19. Do you know the name of the Director-General, Department of Secon-
dary Education?

0.
1.

No
Yes
His name is .
. Mr. Sanan Sumitr
Kriang Tamsakul
Bhunthin Attagara
Charoon Vongsayanha
Bhongs Sakdi Varasundharosoth

109

20. Do you know the name of the Director-General, Department
of Educational Techniques?

0.
1

No
Yes
His name is . .
2. Mr.”Sanan“Sumitr
3. Mr. Kriang Iamsakul
4. Mr. Bhunthin Attagara
5. Mr. Charoon Vongsayanha
6. Mr. Bhonga Sakdi Varasundharosoth

21. Rhodesia is.

1. A city 2. A country
in
3 North America
4. Australia
5. Africa
6 Middle East
7. Latin America
8. I don't know
22. Do you know who is the present Prime Minister of India?
0. No
1. Yes
The Prime Minister's name is.
2. Mr. Nehru
3. Mr. Shastri
4. Mrs. Gandhi
5. Mr. Menon
6. Mr. Dessi

23. Who is U Thant?

UIJ-‘UNH

Prime Minister_of Communist China

U. N. Ambassador from South Viet Nam
Foreign Minister of Japan

Secretary General of the United Nations
I don't know

24. Within the past year have you attended any meetings of govern-
ment secondary school teachers held in other Changwads?

0.
1.

No

Yes

1-2 times

3-4 times

5-6 times

7-8 times

9-10 times

11-12 times

13 or more times

mVO‘UIJ-‘UN

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

110

Within the past year have you attended any meetings of govern-
ment secondary school teachers held in Bangkok?

0. No
1. Yes
About how many times?
2. 1-2 times
3. 3-4 times
4. 5-6 times
5. 7-8 times
6. 9-10 times
7. 11-12 times
8. 13 or more times

How many of your five best friends are also teachers?

None of my five best friends are also teachers.
One of my five best friends is also a teacher.
. Two of my five best friends are also teachers.
Three of my five best friends are also teachers.
Four of my five best friends are also teachers.
All five of my best friends are also teachers.

 

O‘U'IJ-‘UJNH

Please list below the names of the three teachers in this school
whom you most respect_§s good teschers.

 

Please list below the names of the three teachers in this school
whose opinions on new educational practices are usually most
valuable to you.

1.

 

2.

3.

 

Please list below the names of the three teachers in this
school from whom you most frequently ask advice when you have
problems related to teaching.

 

30.

31.

32.

33.

111

Please list below the names of the three teachers in this
school who are, in your opinion, most active in community
affairs (affairs outside the school).

1.

 

2.

 

3.

 

Please list below the names of the three teachers in this
school who are, in your opinion, most willing to use new
educational practices.

 

 

How, in general, would you characterize your attitude to
adoption of new educational practices?

1. I usually have a very favorable attitude to adoption
of new educational practices.

2. I usually have a cautious but somewhat favorable atti-
tude to adoption of new educational practices.

3. I usually have a somewhat unfavorable attitude to
adaption of new educational practices.

4. I usually have a very unfavorable attitude to adoption
of new educational practices.

How, in general, would you characterize the attitude of your
school principal to adoption of new educational practices?

1. I think my principal usually has a very favorable
attitude to adoption of new educational practices.

2. I think my principal usually has a cautious but some-
what favorable attitude to adoption of new educational
practices.

3. I think my principal usually has a somewhat unfavorable
attitude to adoption of new educational practices.

4. I think my principal usually has a very unfavorable
attitude to adoption of new educational practices.

112

34. How, in general, would you characterize the attitude of your
fellow teachers in this school to adoption of new educational
practices?

1. I think they usually have a very favorable attitude to
adoption of new educational practices.

2. I think they usually have a cautioUS'but;somewhat
favorable attitude to adoption of new educational practices.

3. I think they usually have a somewhat unfavorable attitude
to adoption of new educational practices.

4. I think they usually have a very unfavorable attitude to
adoption of new educational practices.

35. How, in general, would you characterize the attitude of your
Amphur Education Officer to adoption of new educational practices?

1. I think he usually has a very favorable attitude to
adoption of new educational practices.

2. I think he usually has a cautious but somewhat favorable
attitude to adoption of new educational practices.

3. I think he usually has a somewhat unfavorable attitude to
adoption of new educational practices.

4. I think he usually has a very unfavorable attitude
to adaption of new educational practices.

36. How, in general, would you characterize the attitude of your"

Changwad Education Officer to adoption of new educational prac-
tices?

l. I think he usually has a very favorable attitude to
adaption of new educational practices.

2. I think he usually has a cautious but somewhat favorable
attitude to adoption of new educational practices.

3. I think he usually has a somewhat unfavorable attitude
to adaption of new educational practices.

4. I think he usually has a very unfavorable attitude to
adaption of new educational practices.

37. How, in general, would you characterize the attitude of the Under-
Secretary of State for Education to the adoption of new educational
practices?

1. I think he usually has a very favorable attitude to adoption
of new educational practices.

2. I think he usually has a cautious but i somewhat unfavorable
attitude to adoption of new educational practices.

3. I think he usually has a somewhat unfavorable attitude
to adoption of new educational practices.

4. I think he usually has a very unfavorable attitude to adop-
tion of new educational practices.

113

38. Listed below are several categories of people who have some inter-
est in how well you teach. The opinion that some of these people
have about your ability is probably very important to you while
the opinion that others have of your ability is probably less
important to you. Please rank these people in the order of im-
portance which you attach to their Opinion of your teaching
ability. (1 - most important; 2 - second most important; . . .

11 - least important)

School Students

Minister of Education
Changwad Governor

Parents of students

School principal

School teachers

Amphur Education Officer
Changwad Education Officer
Nai Amphur

Minister of Interior
Under-Secretary of State for Education

 

39. Please circle the number preceding those topics in the following
list which you have discussed with other teachers during the last
six months.

O‘U'IJ-‘UJNH

8.

9.
X.

Y.

Teaching handicrafts in Thai Government Secondary Schools

Improvement and use of the school library.

Co-education in Thai government secondary schools

New textbooks

Use of objective testing techniques

Use of audio-visual aids in teaching (film projectors,
films, slide projectors, slides, tape recorders, maps,
pictures, flannel boards, etc.)

Use of American Peace Corps Volunteers as teachers in

Thai government secondary schools.

Formation of Parent-Teacher Associations in Thai

government secondary schools

Guidance counseling in Thai government secondary schools

Organization of government secondary schools into

departments

Class discussion method of instruction

40. During the past six months have you told someone in this school
about any of the new educational practices listed in question 39?

O. No 1. Yes

41.

42.

43.

44.

45.

114

Compared with the other teachers in this school, do you think
you are (l) more, or (2) less likely to be asked for your
opinion about the new educational practices listed in question 39?

l. I think I am more likely to be asked for my
opinion about new educational practices than are
most of the other teachers in this school.

2. I think I am less likely to be asked for my
Opinion about new educational practices than
are most of the other teachers in this school.

Do you have the feeling that you are generally regarded by the
other teachers in this school as a good source of information
about new educational practices--such as those listed in
question 39?

0. No 1. Yes

When you and your fellow teachers in this school discuss new
educational practices, which do you most frequently do?

1. I usually listen while others talk.
2. I usually talk while others listen.
3. I usually talk and listen aboutuequally.

Have you heard that American Peace Corps Volunteers are now
teaching in some Thai government secondary schools?

0. No
1. Yes
About how many years ago did you first hear that
American Peace Corps Vblunteers were being used
as teachers in Thai government secondary schoOls?
Less than 1 year ago
. 1 or 2 years ago
3 or 4 years ago
5 or 6 years ago
7 or 8 years ago
9 or 10 years ago
More than 10 years ago.

mVO\U1->UJN

What is your opinion about the use of the American Peace Corps
Volunteers as teachers in Thai government secondary schools?

I believe that the use of American Peace Corps Volunteers

as teachers in government secondary schools is, on the whole,
1. very beneficial

. somewhat beneficial

not very beneficial

not at all beneficial

J-‘UDN

115

46. Is an American Peace Corps Volunteer teaching in this school now?

0. No
X. I don't know
1. Yes

About howwmany years ago did an American Peace Corps Volun-
teer first teach in this school?

Less than 1 year ago

1 or 2 years ago

3 or 4 years ago

5 or 6 years ago

7 or 8 years ago

9 or 10 years ago

. More than 10 years ago

mNO‘U'lJ-‘WN

47. Have you heard that some Thai government secondary schools now
teach handicrafts to their students?

0. No

1 Yes
About how many years ago did you first hear that some
Thai government secondary schools were teaching handi-
crafts?

Less than 1 year ago

. l or 2 years ago

. 3 or 4 years ago

. 5 or 6 years ago

. 7 or 8 years ago

. 9 or 10 years ago

. Mere than 10 years ago

mNChUl-L‘UN

48. What is your opinion about the teaching of handicrafts in Thai
government secondary schools?

I believe the teaching of handicrafts in government
secondary schools is .

very beneficial

somewhat beneficial

not very beneficial

not at all beneficial

L‘U’NH

116

49. Does this school now teach handicrafts to its students?

No

I don't know.

Yes

About how many years ago did this school first
teach handicrafts?
ss than 1 years ago
or 2 years ago

or 4 years ago

or 6 years ago

or 8 years ago

or 10 years ago

More than 10 years ago

I-INO

(DVChUi-DUJN
\OVUIUJHS‘

50. Have you heard that some Thai government secondary schools have
now formed Parent-Teacher Associations?

0. No
1 Yes

About how many years ago did you first hear that
some Thai government secondary schools had formed
Parent-Teacher Associations?

88 than 1 year ago

or 2 years ago

or 4 years ago

or 6 years ago

or 8 years ago

or 10 years ago

More than 10 years ago

mVO‘U‘bUJN
\DNUIUl-‘S'

51. What is your opinion about the formation of Parent-Teacher As-
sociations in Thai government secondary schools?

I believe that Parent-Teacher Associations are...
1. very beneficial

2. isomewhat beneficial
3. not very beneficial
4. not at all beneficial

117

52, Does this school now have a Parent-Teacher Association?

0. No
X. I don't know
1 Yes
About how many years ago did this school first
have a Parent-Teacher Association?
Less than 1 year ago
1 or 2 years ago
3 or 4 years ago
5 or 6 years ago
7 or 8 years ago
9 or 10 years ago
More than 10 years ago

oouoxmhwto

53. Have you heard that some Thai government secondary schools now
provide guidance counseling for their students?
. NO
1. Yes
About how many years ago did you first hear that
some Thai government secondary schools were
providing guidance counseling?
Less than 1 year ago
or 2 years ago
or 4 years ago
or 6 years ago
or 8 years ago
or 10 years ago
More than 10 years ago

(DVO‘U'I-l-‘LJN
\ONU'IUJH

54. What is your Opinion about the provision of guidance counsel-
ing in Thai government secondary schools?

I believe that provision of guidance counseling in
Thai government secondary schools is .

1. Very beneficial

2. Somewhat beneficial

3. Not very beneficial

4. Not at all beneficial

118

55. Does this school now provide guidance counseling for its students?

0. No

X. I don't know

1 Yes
About how many years ago did this school first
provide guidance counseling for its students?

Less than 1 year ago

or 2 years ago

or 4 years ago

or 6 years ago

or 8 years ago

or 10 years ago

. More than 10 years ago

oowo‘mbww
\ONUIUOH

56. Have you heard that some Thai government secondary schools are now
organized into departments? (departments Of science, department
of social studies, etc.)

0. No

1 Yes
About how many years ago did you first hear that
some Thai government secondary schools were or-
ganized into departments?

Less than 1 year ago

or 2 years ago

or 4 years ago

or 6 years ago

or 8 years ago

or 10 years ago

. More than 10 years ago

(DNChU'l-I-‘WN
\DVUIUDH

57. What is your Opinion about the organization of Thai government
secondary schools into departments?

I believe that organization of Thai government secon-
dary schools into departments is .

1. Very beneficial

2. Somewhat beneficial

3. Not very beneficial

4. Not at all beneficial

119

58. Is this school now organized into departments?

0. NO

X. I don't know

1 Yes

About how many years ago was this school first
organized into departments?
38 than 1 year ago

or 2 years ago

or 4 years ago

or 6 years ago

or 8 years ago

or 10 years ago

More than 10 years ago

oouoxmbum
outflow-IS.

59. Have you heard that some teachers in Thai government secon-
dary schools now use slide projectors and slides to aid them
in teaching their students?

0. No
1 Yes

.About how'many years ago did you first hear that
some Thai government secondary school teachers were
using slide projectors?

83 than 1 year ago

or 2 years ago

or 4 years ago

or 6 years ago

or 8 years ago

or 10 years ago

More than 10 years ago

oouoxuabuno
mummy-1|;

60. What is your Opinion about the use Of slide projectors and slides
as teaching aids in Thai government secondary schools?

I believe that the use Of slide projectors and slides
as teaching aids is . .

1. Very beneficial

2. Somewhat beneficial

3. Not very beneficial

4. Not at all beneficial

120

61. Does this school now have a slide projector which you could use
in your teaching?

0. NO
X. I don't know
1. Yes

About how many years ago did this school first
acquire a slide projector which you could use
in your teaching?

Less than 1 year ago

1 or 2 years ago

3 or 4 years ago

5 or 6 years ago

7 or 8 years ago

9 or 10 years ago

MOre than 10 years ago

(DNO‘UTJ-‘UJN

62. Have you heard that some Thai government secondary school
teachers now use objective tests?

0. NO

1 Yes
About how many years ago did you first hear that
some Thai government secondary school teachers were
using Objective tests?

Less than 1 year ago

or 2 years ago

or 4 years ago

or 6 years ago

or 8 years ago

or 10 years ago

MOre than 10 years ago

mNO‘Ul-L‘UN
\ONUIUJH

63. What is your Opinion about the use of Objective tests in Thai
government secondary schools?

I believe that objective tests are.
1. Very beneficial

2. Somewhat beneficial

3 Not very beneficial

4 Not at all beneficial

121

64. Do you now use Objective tests in the courses you teach?

No

Yes

About how many years ago did you first use Objec-
tive tests in the courses you teach?
ss than 1 year ago

or 2 years ago

or 4 years ago

or 6 years ago

or 8 years ago

or 10 years ago

More than 10 years ago

\DNUIUI-‘S'

65. Have you heard that some Thai government secondary school
teachers now use the class discussion method of instruction?

0.
l

QVOU§UN

No

Yes

About how many years ago did you first hear that
some Thai government secondary school teachers were
using the class discussion method of instruction?
83 than 1 year ago

or 2 years ago

or 4 years ago

or 6 years ago

or 8 years ago

or 10 years ago

Mere than 10 years ago

\DNU‘IUDHS'

66. What is your opinion about use of the class discussion method
of instruction in Thai government secondary schools?

I believe that the class discussion method of instruc-

tion is;. .
1. Very beneficial
2. Somewhat beneficial
3. Not very beneficial
4. Not at all beneficial

122

67. DO you now use the class discussion method of instruction
in the courses you teach?

O. NO

1. Yes
About how many years ago did you first use the
class discussion method of instruction?

Less than 1 year ago

1 or 2 years ago

3 or 4 years ago

5 or 6 years ago

7 or 8 years ago

9 or 10 years ago

More than 10 years ago

IMPORTANT

THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE DESIGNED TO DETERMINE YOUR ATTITUDE TO THE
VALUE OF ASSIGNING OUTSIDE READING TO THAI GOVERNMENT SECONDARY SCHOOL
STUDENTS. PLEASE READ EACH STATEMENT 0R QUESTION CAREFULLY BEFORE
GIVING YOUR RESPONSE. PLEASE ANSWER EVERY QUESTION.

FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY, ASSIGNMENT OF READING IN LIBRARY BOOKS
MEANS THAT THE TEACHER REQUIRES THAI SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS TO
READ FROM BOOKS OTHER THAN THE REGULAR TEXTBOOKS USED IN THE COURSE.
SUCH READING ASSIGNMENTS WOULD BE CONSIDERED SUPPLEMENTAL. THE BOOKS
FROM WHICH READING IS ASSIGNED MAY BE KEPT EITHER IN THE CLASSROOM OR
IN A SCHOOL LIBRARY ROOM.

68. Have you heard that some teachers in Thai government secondary
schools now require that their students read assignments in library

books?
0. No
1. Yes

About how many years ago did you first hear that some
teachers in Thai government secondary schools were re-
quiring their students to read from library books?

2. Less than 1 year ago 5. 5 or 6 years ago
3. l or 2 years ago 6. 7 or 8 years ago
4. 3 or 4 years ago 7. 9 or 10 years ago
8. More than 10 years ago

123

69. What is your opinion about the idea that students in Thai govern—
ment secondary schools should be required to read library books?

I believe that this requirement is educationally .
1. Very beneficial
2. Somewhat beneficial
3. Not very beneficial
4. Not at all beneficial

70. DO you now require that your students read assignments in library
books?

NO

Yes
About how many years ago did you first require that
your students read assignments in library books?

Less than 1 year ago

or 2 years ago

or 4 years ago

or 6 years ago

or 8 years ago

or 10 years ago

Mere than 10 years ago

l-‘O

ocuoxmbun
\DVUIUJH

71. Does this school now have books which are of use to the students
in the courses you teach?

O. NO

X. I don't know

1 Yes
About how many library books does this school‘ngg
have which would be Of use to the students in the
courses you teach?

Less than five books

6 to 10 books

11 to 15 books

16 to 20 books

21 to 25 books

26 to 30 books

MOre than 30 books.

mVO‘U'I-L‘UJN

124

72. Does this school now have a separate room (library) in which
books are kept?

O.
X.
1

mVO‘U‘J-‘UJM

No

I don't know

Yes

About how many years ago did this school first
set aside a room to be used as a library?

Le
l or
3 or
5 or
7 or
9

than 1 year ago

2 years ago

4 years ago

6 years ago

8 years ago

10 years ago

than 10 years ago

73. Does this school now have a person trained in library work
to supervise the school library?

0.
X.
1

CDNGUIJ-‘LDN

No

I don't know

Yes

About how many years ago did this school first ac-
quire the services of a trained librarian?

5

or
or
or
or
or
More

\DNU’IWH

74. I first learned
schools require

only one)
1.
2.
3.

r<><u>o>xioxuaa~

from
from

than 1 year ago

2 years ago

4 years ago

6 years ago

8 years ago

10 years ago

than 10 years ago.

that some teachers in Thai government secondary
that their students read library books (choose

one of my college instructors
a teacher in a government secondary school

from the Principal of a government secondary school
where I taught

at a conference

from an Amphur Education Officer

from
from
from
from
from

a Changwad Education Officer

a MuniStry of Education publication
a Ministry of Education directive

a school supervisor (inspector)

a college textbook

while studying abroad

125

75. How, in general, would you characterize the attitudes of your
fellow teachers in this school to assignment of reading in
library books?

I
1
2.
3.
4
5

think their attitude, in general, is.

Very favorable

Slightly favorable

Slightly unfavorable

Very unfavorable

I don't know what their attitude is.

76. How, in general, would you characterize the attitude of your
school principal to assignment of reading in library books?

I
l
2.
3.
4
5

think my principal's attitude is.

Very favorable

Slightly favorable

Slightly unfavorable

Very unfavorable

I don't know what the attitude of my principal is.

77. How, in general, would you characterize the attitude of your
Changwad Education Officer to the assignment of reading
in library books?

I
l
2.
3.
4
5

think his attitude is.

Very favorable

Slightly favorable

Slightly unfavorable

Very unfatorable

I don't know what his attitude is.

78. How, in general, would you characterize the attitudes of your
students to the assignment of reading in library books?

I
1
2.
3.
4
5

think their attitude in general is .

Very favorable

Slightly favorable

Slightly unfavorable

Very favorable

I don't know what their attitude is.

79.

80.

81.

82.

83.

126

How, in general, would you characterize the attitude of your
Amphur Education Officer to the assignment of reading in li-
brary books?

I think his attitude is .

1. Very favorable

2. Slightly favorable

3 Slightly unfavorable

4 Very unfavorable

5 I don't know what his attitude is.

How, in general, would you characterize the attitudes of
Ministry of Education officials to assignment of reading
in library books?

I think their attitude, in general, is.
1 Very favorable

2. Slightly favorable

3. Slightly unfavorable

4 Very unfavorable

5 I don't know what their attitude is.

How, in general, would you characterize the attitudes Of Thai
government secondary school supervisors to assignment of reading
in library books?

I think their attitude, in general, is .
1 Very favorable

2. Slightly favorable

3. Slightly unfavorable

4 Very unfavorable

5 I don't know what their attitude is.

About how many times within the past three months have you dis-
cussed the assignment Of reading in library books with your
school principal?

1 7 or 8 times
2. 5 or 6 times
3. 3 or 4 times
4 l or 2 times
5 Not at all.

About how many times within the past three months have you dis-
cussed the assignment Of reading in library books with your fellow
teachers in this school?

1. 7 or 8 times 4. l or 2 times
2. 5 or 6 times 5. None
3. 3 or 4 times

84.

85.

86.

87.

88.

127

About how many times within the past three months have you dis-
cussed the assignment Of reading in library books with your
Changwad Education Officer?

7 or 8 times
5 or 6 times
3 or 4 times
1 or 2 times
None

U'IJ-‘UJNH

About how many times within the past three months have you dis-
cussed the assignment Of reading in library books with a
library supervisor?

l. 7 or 8 times
2. 5 or 6 times
3. 3 or 4 times
4. 1 or 2 times
5. None

The attitudes of my students to assignment Of reading in library
books should influence my decision to make such assignments?

I agree strongly
I agree slightly
I disagree slightly
I disagree strongly.

waI-i

The attitudes of my fellow teachers in this school to assignment
of reading in library books should influence my decision to
make such assignments.

l. I agree strongly
2. I agree slightly
3. I disagree slightly
4. I disagree strongly.

The attitude of my school principal to assignment of reading
in library books should influence my decision to make such as-
signments.

I agree strongly.
I agree slightly
I disagree slightly
I disagree strongly.

4‘me

89.

90.

91.

92.

128

The attitude of my Changwad Education Officer to assignment of
reading in library books should influence my decision to make
such assignments.

I agree strongly
I agree slightly
I disagree slightly
I disagree strongly.

war-i

The attitudes of Ministry of Education officials to assignment
of reading in library books should influence my decision to
make such assignments.

I agree strongly
I agree slightly
I disagree slightly
I disagree strongly.

PWNH

In the preceding five questions you have been asked to express
your Opinion about what people in the Thai educational system

should be involved in deciding whether or not government secondary

school students will be required to read assignments in library
books. As some of these people may favor assignment Of reading
in library books while others Oppose such assignments, we would
now like you to indicate which group (or individual) should have
the power to make a final decision on whether or not Thai govern-
ment secondary school students will be required to read assign-
ments in library books. Please circle the number preceding that
group (or individual) which you feel should have some power to
make the final decision.

1. Students

2. Teachers

3. School principals

4. Amphur Education Officers

5. Changwad Education Officers

6. Director-General Of the Department of Secondary
Education '

7. Under-Secretary of State for Education

8. Minister of Education

Teachers in Thai government secondary schools who assign reading
in library books must conduct their classes differently than do
teachers who do not assign such reading.

I agree strongly
I agree slightly
I disagree slightly
I disagree strongly.

«l-‘UNH

93.

94.

129

Students in Thai government secondary schools who are required
to read assignments in library books usually Obtain higher scores
on tests than do students who do not read library books.

bump—l

I agree strongly
I agree slightly
I disagree slightly
I disagree strongly.

Please circle the number preceding those items listed below
which you considerer to be disadvantages of assigning reading
in library books.

1.

Thai government secondary school students do not

read well enough to derive great benefit from read-
ing assignments in library books.

Time spent in reading from library books would be
better spent devoted to classroom lectures and exer-
cises.

The reading of library books does not serve to
improve the test scores of Thai government secondary
school students.

Many Thai government secondary school teachers do not
know how to assign and supervise reading in library
books so that students will derive benefit therefrom.
Many Thai government secondary school teachers find
themselves incapable of incorporating outside reading
into their classroom work.

The libraries of many Thai government secondary schools
contain an insufficient selection and number of books
to render reading assignments in library books meaning-
ful.

The lack of trained librarians in Thai government
secondary schools serves to reduce the effectiveness
of library facilities to the point where such as-
signments are meaningless.

95.

96.

97.

130

Please circle the number preceding those items listed below
which you consider to be advantages of assigning reading in
library books.

1.

Students in Thai government secondary schools fre-
quently learn more as a result of reading library
books than they do if such reading assignments are
not made.

Thai government secondary school students who read
assignments in library books obtain higher scores
on examinations than do those students who do not
read such assignments.

Assignment of reading in library books serves to im-
prove the Thai government secondary school students'
reading skill and reading comprehension.

Thai government secondary school students who are
assigned reading in library books Obtain a deeper
understanding of the subject matter than do those
who must rely for knowledge on lectures and text-
books only.

The breadth of knowledge possessed by Thai govern-

ment secondary school students who regularly read
library books is greater than that of students who
do not read library books regularly. .

Reading the biographies of famous figures in Thai
history provides Thai government secondary school
students with models which they then emulate.

After weighing all the advantages and disadvantages of assigning
reading in library books, what is your conclusion?

1.

2.

I prefer that Thai government secondary school stu-
dents read assignments in library books.

I prefer that Thai government secondary school stu-
dentsigo go; read assignments in library books.

Have you heard that the Ministry of Education is now encouraging
all government secondary schools to establish libraries?

0.
l.

mNO‘U‘Iwa

No

Yes

About how many years ago did you first hear that the
Ministry of Education was encouraging all government
secondary schools to establish libraries?

Less than 1 year ago

or 2 years ago

or 4 years ago

or 6 years ago

or 8 years ago

or 10 years ago

More than 10 years ago.

\ONU‘Iwr-l

131

IMPORTANT

THE FOLLOWING 23 ITEMS ARE DESIGNED TO DETERMINE YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARD
THE VALUE OF THAI GOVERNMENT CO-EDUCATIONAL SECONDARY SCHOOLS. PLEASE
READ EACH STATEMENT CAREFULLY BEFORE GIVING YOUR RESPONSE. PLEASE
ANSWER EVERY QUESTION.

FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY, CO-EDUCATION MEANS THAT BOTH BOYS AND
GIRLS GO TO SCHOOL IN THE SAME BUILDING, ATTEND CLASSES TOGETHER, AND
ARE TAUGHT BY THE SAME TEACHERS.

98. Have you heard that some Thai government secondary schools
are now coeducational (enroll and teach both boys and girls
in the same school)?

0. No
1 Yes

About how many years ago did you first learn
that some Thai government secondary schools
were coeducational?

Less than 1 year ago

or 2 years ago

or 4 years ago

or 6 years ago

or 8 years ago

or 10 years ago

More than 10 years ago.

oouoxmbwm
\ONU‘ILJH

99. What is your Opinion about coeducation in Thai government
secondary schools?

I believe that coeducation in Thai government secon-
dary schools is, educationally,

1. Very beneficial

2. Somewhat beneficial

3. Not very beneficial

4. Not at all beneficial.

132

100. Is this school now organized on a coeducational basis?

0. No
Yes

H

About how many years ago was this school first
organized on a coeducational basis?

2. Less than 1 year ago
3. l or 2 years ago
4. 3 or 4 years ago
5. 5 or 6 years ago
6. 7 or 8 years ago
7. 9 or 10 years ago
8. More than 10 years ago
101. I first learned that some Thai government secondary schools
were organized on a coeducational basis....(choose only one)
1. From one Of my college instructors
2. From a teacher in a government secondary school
3. From the principal of a government secondary school

where I taught

At a
From
From
From
From
From
From

~<><u>o:\JO\UI¢~

conference

an Amphur Education Officer

a Changwad Education Officer

a Ministry of Education publication
a Ministry of Education directive

a school supervisor (inspector)

a college textbook

While studying abroad

102. How, in general, do you think your school principal would feel
about converting all separate boys and girls government secon-
dary schools to coeducational schools?

I think his attitude would be .

U14-‘UNH

Very favorable

Slightly favorable

Slightly unfavorable

Very unfavorable

I can't imagine what his' attitude might be.

103.

104.

105.

106.

133

How, in general, do you think your fellow teachers in this
school would feel about converting all separate boys and girls
government secondary schools to coeducational schools?

I think their attitude in general would be .
1. Very favorable
2 Slightly favorable
3. Slightly unfavorable
4; Very unfavorable
5 I can't imagine what their attitudes might be.

How, in general, do you think your students would feel about
converting all separate boys and girls government secondary
schools to coeducational schools?

I think their attitude in general would be .
1. Very favorable
2. Slightly favorable
3. Slightly unfavorable
4. Very unfavorable
5. I can't imagine what their attitudes might be.

How, in general, do you think your Amphur Education Officer
would feel about converting all separate boys and girls govern-
ment secondary schools to coeducational schools?

I think his attitude would be.
1. Very favorable
2 Slightly favorable
3. Slightly unfavorable
4. Very unfavorable
5 I can't imagine what his attitude might be.

How, in general, do you think your Changwad Education Officer
would feel about converting all separate boys and girls govern-
ment secondary schools to coeducational schools?

I think his attitude would be .
1. Very favorable
2 Slightly favorable
3. Slightly unfavorable
4. Very unfavorable
5 I can't imagine what his attitude might be.

107.

108.

109.

110.

111.

134

How, in general, do you think Ministry of Education Officials
would feel about converting all separate boys and girls govern-
ment secondary schools to coeducational schools?

I think their attitudes in general would be .
1. Very favorable
2 Slightly favorable
3. Slightly unfavorable
4. Very unfavorable
5 I can't imagine what their attitudes might be.

About how many times within the past three months have you
discussed coeducation with your school principal?

I. 7 or 8 times
2. 5 or 6 times
3. 3 or 4 times
4. l or 2 times
5. None

About how many times within the past three months have you
discussed coeducation with your fellow teachers in this school?

7 or 8 times
5 or 6 times
3 or 4 times
1 or 2 times

UbLANi-J

The attitude of students to attending coeducational govern-
ment secondary schools should influence the decision of
whether or not to convert‘sil separate boys and girls govern-
ment secondary schools to coeducational schools.

1. I agree strongly
2. I agree slightly
3. I disagree slightly
4. I disagree strongly.

The attitudes of Thai teachers to teaching in coeducational
government secondary schools should influence the decision of
whether or not to convertIELl separate boys and girls govern-
ment secondary schools to coeducational schools.

1. I agree strongly '

2. I agree slightly

3. I disagree slightly

4. I disagree strongly.

112.

113.

114.

115.

135

The attitudes of Thai secondary school principals to coeducational
government secondary schools should influence the decision of
whether or not to convert‘sli separate boys and girls government
secondary schools to coeducational schools.

I agree strongly
I agree slightly
I disagree slightly
I disagree strongly.

wai-J

The attitudes of Changwad Education Officers to coeducational
government secondary schools should influence the decision of
whether or not to convert‘sii separate boys and girls govern-
ment secondary schools to coeducational schools.

1. I agree strongly
2. I agree slightly
3. I disagree slightly
4. I disagree strongly.

The attitudes of Ministry of Education Officials to coeducational
government secondary schools should influence the decision of
whether or not to convert all separate boys and girls govern-
ment secondary schools to coeducational schools.

1. I agree strongly
2. I agree slightly
3. I disagree slightly
4. I disagree strongly.

In the preceding five questions you have been asked to express
your opinion about which people in the Thai educational system
should be involved in deciding whether or “Ot.éll separate boys
and girls government secondary schools should be converted to co-
educational schools. As some of these people may favor convert-
ing all separate boys and girls government secondary schools to
coeducational schools and some of them Oppose this idea, we would
now like you to indicate which group (or individual) should have
the power to make a final decision on this matter. Please circle
the number preceding that group (or individual) which you feel
should have power to make the final decision.

1. Students 5. Changwad Education Officers

2. Teachers 6. Director-General of the Department

3, School principals 0f secondary Educatior

4. Amphur Education 7. Under-Secretary of State for
Officers Education

8. Minister of Education

116.

117.

118.

136

Teachers who teach in coreducationai government secondary
schools must conduct their classes differently than do those
who work in either separate boys or girls schools.

1. I agree strongly
2. I agree slightly
3. I disagree slightly
4. I disagree strongly.

Students who attend coeducational government secondary schools
usually Obtain higher scores on tests than do students who at-
tend separate schools for boys or girls.

1. I agree strongly
2. I agree slightly
3. I disagree slightly
4. I disagree strongly.

Please circle the number preceding those items below which you
believe to be disadvantages of coeducation in Thai government
secondary schools.

1. Attending coeducational government secondary
schools encourages immoral behavior among Thai

students.
2. Thai government secondary school students do not
learn as well when boys and girls attend

'classes.together..

3. Discipline is more difficult to maintain in Thai
government coeducational secondary schools than
in separate schools for boys and girls.

4. Coeducation is not the traditional form of
secondary education in Thailand.

5. Students who attend coeducational government secon-
dary schools do not express themselves freely be-
cause Of the fear of shame.

6. Thai boys and girls do not mature at the same rate,
so although students may be of equal age the girls
will be more emotionally mature than the boys in
government coeducational secondary schools.

7. Improper forms Of address and speech are learned
when Thai boys and girls attend classes together in
government coeducational secondary schools.

137

119. Please circle the numbers preceding those items below which
you believe to be advantages of coeducation in Thai government
secondary schools.

1.

A system of coeducational secondary schools is
cheaper to build and maintain rather than a system
of separate schools for boys and girls.

Thai boys and girls learn better to adjust to the
Opposite sex in coeducational secondary schools.
Thai boys and girls try harder to learn in the
presence of the opposite sex in coeducational
secondary schools.

Sex education is made easier in coeducational secon-
dary schools.

Thai boys and girls prefer coeducational secondary
schools to separate schools for boys and girls-
Competition for good grades makes both boys and
girls study harder in coeducational secondary schools.

120. After weighing all the advantages and disadvantages Of coeducation
in Thai government secondary schools, what is your conclusion?

I feel that'sil Thai government secondary schools
should be organized on a coeducational basis.

I feel thatigii Thai government secondary schools
should be organized on the basis of separate schools
for boys and girls. ,

I feel that.gi; Thai government secondary schools
should be organized on a coeducational basis for
students in grades M.S.l-M.S.3 only.

I feel thatigii Thai government secondary schools
should be organized on a coeducational basis for
students in grades M.S.4-M.S.5 oniy.

I feel that the Thai government should continue the
present practice Of organizing some government secon-
dary schools on a coeducational basis while maintaining
others as separate schools for boys and girls.

138

IMPORTANT

LISTED BELOW ARE SOME STATEMENTS PEOPLE HAVE GIVEN AS THEIR OPINION

ON SEVERAL TOPICS. YOU MAY FIND YOURSELF AGREEING STRONGLY WITH SOME
OF THE STATEMENTS...DISAGREEING JUST AS STRONGLY WITH OTHERS. WHETHER
YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH ANY STATEMENT, YOU CAN BE SURE THAT MANY
OTHER PEOPLE FEEL THE SAME AS YOU DO.

121. In this complicated world of ours the only way we can know
what's going on is to rely on leaders or experts who can be

trusted.
l. I agree very much.
2. I agree on the whole.
3. I agree a little.
4. I disagree a little.
5. I disagree on the whole
6. I disagree very much.

122. My blood boils whenever a person stubbornly refuses to admit
he's wrong.

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

ombwmt—a
HHHHHI—l

123. There are two kinds of people in this world: those who are for
the truth and those who are against the truth.

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

omwar-I
HHHHHI—I

124.

125.

126.

127.

128.

Nest people

\

O‘M-PDJNH
HHHHHH

139

just don't know what's good for them.

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

To compromise with our political Opponents is dangerous
because it usually leads to the betrayal of our own side.

Omwar-t
HHHHHH

It is Often

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

desirable to reserve judgment about what's going

on until one has had a chance to hear the opinions of those
one respects.

omwao-I
HI-IHHHH

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

The present is all too Often full of unhappiness. It is
only the future that counts.

Owwar—A
I-IHI-II—IHH

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

Of all the different philosophies which ex:ist in this world
there is probably one only which is correct.

HHHHHH

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

129.

130.

131.

132.

133.

The highest

140

form of government is a democracy, and the

highest form of democracy is a government run by those who
are most intelligent.

O‘m-wav—h
HHHHHH

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

The main thing in life is for a person to want to do some-
thing important.

1. I
2. I
3. I
4. I
5. I
6. I
I'd like it

to solve my

owwar—i
HHHHHH

Mbst of the

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree 3 little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

if I could find someone who would tell me how
personal problems.

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

ideas which get printed nowadays aren't worth the

paper they are printed on.

Omwav—I
HHHHHI—l

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

Man on his own is a helpless and miserable creature.

owwa—t
HHHHHH

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

134.

135.

136.

137.

138.

141

It is only when a person devotes himself to an ideal or cause
that life becomes meaningful.

O‘U‘IJ-‘UJNH
HHHHHH

Most people

O‘U'IJ-‘UDNH
HHHHI-IH

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

just don't give a "damn" for others.

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

The United States and Russia have just about nothing in common.

I
I

I
I
I

O‘UI-wat-d

agree very much.
agree on the whole.

I agree a little.

disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

In a discussion I often find it necessary to repeat myself
several times to make sure I am being understood.

O‘UIJ-‘UONH
HHHHHH

While I don'

ambition is

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

t like to admit this even to myself, my secret
to become a great man, like Einstein, or Beethoven,

or Shakespeare.

O‘UIJ-‘UJNH
HHHHHH

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

142

139. Even though freedom of speech for all groups is a worth-
while goal, it is unfortunately necessary to restrict the
freedom of certain political groups.

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘UI-l-‘WNt-l
HHHHHH

140. It is better to be a dead hero than to be a live coward.

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘U‘IJ-‘UJNH
HHHHHH

141. When I have a problem I like to think it through myself
first without help from others.

agree very much.

agree on the whole.

agree a little.

disagree a little.

disagree on the whole

disagree very much.

O‘U‘IJ-‘WNt-l
HHHHHH

142. Everybody is responsible for his own life and no one else
can live life for him, so I make my own decisions and judgments.

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘U‘J-‘DJNH
HHHHHH

143. I go ahead and do things which I believe are right regardless
of what other people think.

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

C‘U‘DWNH
HHHHHH

143

W

FOLLOWING ARE A SERIES OF NINE STATEMENTS DESCRIBING How YOUR SCHOOL
PRINCIPAL MAY BEHAVE TowARD THE OTHER TEACHERS IN THIS SCHOOL. PLEASE
READ EACH STATEMENT CAREFULLY AND THEN SELECT THE SEE. ALTERNATIVE
WHICH BEST SUMMARIZES THE EXTENT OF YOUR AGREEMENT OR DISACREEMENT
WITH THE STATEMENT.

144. "The principal of this school usually doesn't explain his
decisions to the other teachers even when these decisions
affect them."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘M-PUJNH
HHHHHH

145. "The principal of this school frequently makes decisions
which affect the other teachers without consulting them
first."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘U1-§UNl-‘
HHHHHH

146. "The principal of this school is usually very kind and
understanding when he talks to the other teachers."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘kflJ-‘MNH
HHHHHH

147. "The principal of this school is usually friendly and the
other teachers can discuss their problems with him."

1. I agree very much. 4. I disagree a little.
2. I agree on the whole. 5. I disagree on the whole.
3. I agree a little. 6. I disagree very much.

148.

149.

150.

151.

152.

144

"The principal of this school wants the other teachers
to consider him their very good friend."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘U‘wat-i
HHHHHH

"The principal of this school associates with the other
teachers even when there is no official business involved."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘LfiJ-‘LAJNH
HHHHHH

"The principal makes the other teachers feel relaxed when
he talks to them."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

ombuNt-I
HHHHHH

"The principal of this school gives the other teachers en-
couragement in their work. ."

1. Very frequently.

2. Quite frequently

3. Quite infrequently.
4. Never.

"The principal of this school offers the other teachers sug-
gestions to help them improve their teaching performance."

Very frequently
Quite frequently
Quite infrequently
Never.

bWNH

145

w

FOLLOWING ARE A SERIES OF NINE STATEMENTS WHICH.MAX DESCRIBE HOW
YOUR SCHOOL PRINCIPAL BEHAVES TOWARD YOU. PLEASE READ EACH STATE-
MENT CAREFULLY AND THEN SELECT THE ONE ALTERNATIVE WHICH BEST
SUMMARIZES THE EXTENT OF YOUR AGREEMENT OR DISACREEMENT WITH THE
STATEMENT.

153. "My principal usually doesn't explain his decisions to me even
when these decisions affect me."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

OmwaH
HHHHHH

154. "My school principal frequently makes decisions which affect
me without consulting me first."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘U‘bWNr-J
HHHHHH

155. "My school principal is usually very kind and understanding
when he talks to me."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘UIJ-‘LANH
HHHHHH

156. "My school principal is friendly to me and I can discuss
my problems with him.”

1. I agree very much. 4. I disagree a little.
2. I agree on the whole. 5. I disagree on the whole.
3. I agree a little. 6. I disagree very much.

146

157. "My school principal likes me to consider him my very
good friend."

1. I agree very much.
2. I agree on the whole.
3. I agree a little.
4. I disagree a little.
5. I disagree on the whole.
6. I disagree very much.
158. "My school principal associates with me even when there is

no official business involved."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.‘
disagree very much.

O‘U'IJ-‘b-JNH
HHHHHH

159. "My school principal makes me feel relaxed when I talk to him."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

Chm-bump:
HHHHHH

160. "My school principal gives me encouragement in my work. ."

Very frequently

Quite frequently

Quite infrequently.

Never

161. "My school principal offers suggestions to help me improve
my teaching performance.

human—i

Very frequently.
Quite frequently.
Quite infrequently.
Never

4‘me

147

IMPORTANT

FOLLOWING ARE A SERIES OF FOUR STATEMENTS WHICH THE PRINCIPAL OF

A THAI GOVERNMENT SECONDARY SCHOOL MIGHT MAKE. PLEASE READ EACH

STATEMENT CAREFULLY AND THEN SELECT THE'QNE ALTERNATIVE WHICH YOU
THINK YOUR SCHOOL PRINCIPAL WOULD CHOOSE AS BEST SUMMARIZING THE

EXTENT OF HIS (OR HER) AGREEMENT OR DISACREEMENT WITH THE STATE-

MENT. PLEASE ANSWER AS YOU THINK YOUR PRINCIPAL WOULD ANSWER:

162. "Personally, I feel I can adjust to changes easily." My
principal would . .

agree very much

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole
disagree very much.

O‘U‘J-‘LDNI—i

163. "Most changes introduced into the Thai government secondary
schools within the last ten years have contributed very little
to improving education in our schools."

My principal would .

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

amnion.—

164. "If we wish to maintain a healthy, stable educational system
in Thailand we must keep it the way it is and resist the
temptation to change." My principal would .

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘U‘IJ-‘ri—I

148

165. "I really believe we could do a much better job, or at least
do just as well if things didn't change so much in our schools."
My principal would.

. agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.

. disagree a little

disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘U’IJ-‘WNH

IMPORTANT

{1‘
v
L
1%
PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING FIVE QUESTIONS ON THE BASIS OF HOW YOU E
THINK YOUR PRINCIPAL FEELS ABOUT YOU. ,

166. How do you think your school principal would rate your
over-all teaching ability?

Outstanding

. Among the best
Very godd

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest

\lO‘Ul-L‘LDNH

167. How do you think your principal would rate your ability
to get along with students?

Outstanding

Among the best
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest.

VO‘tn-l-‘ri-fi

149

168. How do you think your principal would rate your ability to
enrich instruction (go beyond the textbook)?

. Outstanding

Among the best
'Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest.

\IO‘UI-L‘wNp-a

169. How do you think your principal would rate your methods fig
of teaching?

Outstanding

Among the best
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest

3
~ Q
‘2’
E.
1‘
z
t

\IO‘U'J-‘wN—I

 

170. How do you think your principal would rate your methods of
classroom discipline?

Outstanding

Among the best
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest

\lO‘U‘J-‘LQNH

_ — - - — - '- f-J '— - U — _ -' -‘ — - - - - a. - - - - — .V '- - - '- - ‘ - -

150

IMPORT

PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING FIVE QUESTIONS ON THE BASIS OF HOW
YOU THINK YOUR TEACHING COLLEAGUES FEEL ABOUT YOU.

171. How do you think your teaching colleagues in this school
would rate your over-all teaching ability?

Outstanding

Among the beat
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest

\JO‘MJ-‘UNH

172. How do you think your teaching colleagues would rate your
ability to get along with students.

Outstanding

Among the best
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest.

\IO‘UIvDUNI-i

173. How do you think your teaching colleagues would rate your
ability to enrich instruction (go beyond the textbooks)?

Outstanding

Among the best
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest

\JO‘U‘l-L‘UNH

174. How do you think your teaching colleagues would rate your
methods of teaching?

1. Outstanding 4. Above average
2. Among the best 5. Among the best
3. Very good 6. Below average

7. Among the poorest.

151

175. How do you think your teaching colleagues would rate your
methods of classroom discipline?

Outstanding

Among the best
Very good

Above average
About average

. Below average
Among the poorest.

\lO‘U'IkLONH

IMPORTANT

PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING FIVE QUESTIONS ON THE BASIS OF HOW YOU
THINK.YOUR STUDENTS FEEL ABOUT YOU.

176. How do you think your students would rate your over-all
teaching ability?

Outstanding

Among the best
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest

\IO‘UIJ-‘wNH

177. How do you think your students would rate your ability to
get along with them?

Outstanding

Among the best
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average

. Among the poorest

\JO‘U’l-L‘UNH

 

152

178. How do you think your students would rate your ability to
enrich instruction (go beyond the textbook)?

\lO‘U‘J-‘UJNH

Oustanding

Among the best
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest.

179. How do you think your students would rate your methods of

teachihg?

\IO‘U‘L‘WNl—i

Outstanding

Among the best
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest.

180. How do you think your students would rate your methods of
classroom discipline?

\Jo‘mwaH

Outstanding,
Among the best
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest.

 

153

IMPORTANT

PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING FIVE QUESTIONS ON THE BASIS OF HOW
YOU JUDGE YOUR OWN COMPETENCE.

181. Comparing
how would

\lO‘U‘J-‘UNH

182. Comparing
how would

\IO‘U’lDb-JNH

183. Comparing
how would

yourself with your fellow teachers in this school,
you rate your over-all teaching ability?

Outstanding 53
Among the best \”
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest.

‘Fwnf-Lm ban-1.. u- 1 'b'-

yourself with your fellow teachers in this school,
you rate your ability to get along with students?

Outstanding

Among the best
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest

yourself with your fellow teachers in this school,
you rate your ability to enrich instruction (go

beyond the textbook)?

uomwar-I

Outstanding

Among the best
Very good

Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest.

154

184. Comparing yourself with your fellow teachers in this school,
how would you rate your methods of teaching?

1. Outstanding

2. Among the best
3. Very good

4. Above average
5 About average

6 Below average

7 Among the poorest.

185. Comparing yourself with your fellow teachers in this school, B
how would you rate your methods of classroom discipline? {E

Outstanding
Among the best
Very good
Above average
About average
Below average
Among the poorest. ;f

M: V-.-

\iO‘U‘lJ-‘UDNH

 

IMPORTANT

FOLLOWING ARE A SERIES OF NINETEEN STATEMENTS WHICH MAY DESCRIBE HOW
YOU FEEL ABOUT DEALING WITH YOUR SEVERAL PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL
MATTERS. PLEASE CIRCLE THE NUMBER PRECEDING THE RESPONSE WHICH BEST
SUMMARIZES THE EXTENT OF YOUR AGREEMENT OR DISACREEMENT WITH THE '
STATEMENT. PLEASE ANSWER EACH QUESTION.

186. "If the School Principal wants to get things done he should go
ahead with what he thinks will benefit the school without asking
the teachers."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘U'I-l-‘LDNH
HHHHHH

187.

188.

189.

190.

155

”It really isn't the job of teachers to take part in any
decision-making discussions regarding school matters."

agree very much

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

omwav-i
HHHHHH

"If we want to maintain a healthy and stable educational
system in Thailand we must keep it the way it is and resist
the temptation to change." "

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

ombwnrd
HHHHHH

"Most changes introduced into the Thai government secondary
schools within the last ten years have contributed very little
to improving education in our schools."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

omwar—I
HHHHHH

"I really believe that we Thai government secondary school
teachers could have done a much better job, or at least done
just as well, if things had not been changed so much in our
schools."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘U‘IDUNH
HHHI—IHH

 

156

191. "I think the teachers in this school get along with one an-
other better than those in other Thai government secondary
schools in this Changwad."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘U’IbUDNI-J
HHHHHH

192. "I think the teachers in this school help one another more
than do teachers in other government secondary schools in
this Changwad . "

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

 

O‘knvl-‘UNH
HHHHHI—I

193. "I feel I get along well with my teaching colleagues in
this school."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘kflJ-‘UJNH
HHHHHH

194. "I don't feel secure and relaxed as a teacher in this school."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘U‘bWNt-i
HHHHHH

195. "I feel at home in this school and nothing makes me nervous or
uneasy."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

omwar-I
HHHHHH

196.

197.

198.

199.

200.

157

"I feel that I am really a part of this school."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

Gmwar-I
HI-IHHHH

"Generally speaking, I don't like being a teacher."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘UI.§UJNI-'
HHHHHH

"I like my teaching job in this school."

I agree very much.

I agree on the whole.

I agree a little.

I disagree a little.

I disagree on the whole.
I disagree very much.

omwap—l
O I O. C 0

"If given an opportunity to do the same kind of teaching at
the same pay in another Thai government secondary school, I
would teach in the other school."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘Ln-l—‘th-i
HHHHHH

"Personally, I feel I can adjust to changes easily."

agree very much.

agree on the whole.
agree a little.
disagree a little.
disagree on the whole.
disagree very much.

O‘UlJ-‘UNH
HHHHHH

‘na-
\ I ' ‘ .a'
mt .

mum. a .
1‘ 1W?»

201.

202.

203.

204.

158 "

"Compared with most other teachers in this school, I
talk with my teaching colleagues about non-academic
school activities. . ."

much more frequently than the others.
somewhat more frequently than the others.
just about as often as the others.
somewhat less frequently than the others.
much less frequently than the others.

UtJ-‘th-d

"Compared with most other teachers in this school, my school
principal talks to me about my classroom work . . ." Pg

much more frequently than with the others.
somewhat more frequently than with the others. .
just about as often as with the others. E
somewhat less frequently than with the others.
much less frequently than with the others.

Ln-l-‘wNI-l

"Compared with most other teachers in this school, my prin-
cipal talks to me about discipline problems. . ."

 

1. much more frequently than with the others.

2. somewhat more frequently than with the others.
3. just about as often as with the others.

4. somewhat less frequently than with the others.
5. much less frequently than with the others.

"Compared with most other teachers in this school, my prin-
cipal talks to me about the problems of teaching. . ."

much more frequently than with the others.
somewhat more frequently than with the others.
just about as often as with the others.
somewhat less frequently than with the others.
much less frequently than with the others.

uwar-t

159

w

THE REMAINING QUESTIONS ASK YOU TO PROVIDE SOME PERSONAL INFORMATION.
LET US REMIND YOU AGAIN THAT YOUR NAME WILL NOT APPEAR ON THIS QUES-
TIONNAIRE: LO 9_N_E_ WILL KNOW WHO FILLED IT OUT. WE WOULDN'T ASK YOU TO
GIVE SUCH PERSONAL INFORMATION IF IT WEREN'T ESSENTIAL TO THE SUCCESS
OF THIS RESEARCH PROJECT.

 

205. For how many years of your life have you lived in a town or E:
city of more than 10,000 population? l

l. lessthan 5 years. i
2. 5-10 years.
3. 11-15 years.
4. 16520 years.
5. 21-25 years.
6. 26-30 years. 3‘
7. More than 30 years.

206. For how many years of your life have you lived in a town or

city of less than 10,000 population?

. 26-00 years.
Mbre than 30 years.

1. Less than 5 years.
2. 5—10 years.

3. 11-15 years.

4. 16-20 years

5. 21-25 years.

6

7.

207. What is your father's occupation?

Farmer

Professional man (doctor, dentist, lawyer)
Business man

Unskilled, semiskilled or skiller laborer

Civil government official

Member of the Army, Navy or Air Force
Professional educator (college) or school teacher.

NGU‘IDWNH

160

208. Please circle the number preceding the highest level of
formal education attained by your father.

wow-bump-

No formal education

1-3 years of schooling

4-7 years of schooling

8-10 years of schooling

11-12 years of schooling

Some university or college education
College graduate.

209. Please circle the number preceding the highest level of
formal education attained by your mother.

\IO‘UIJ-‘UJNH

No formal education.

1-3 years of schooling.

4-7 years of schooling

8-10 years of schooling

11-12 years of schooling

Some university or college education
College graduate.

210. What was your government salary last month?

211. Do you own land, own a business, or have any other outside

P<><HDGD\JO\UI$‘UJBDP‘

B 750 or less.

. B 751-900

B 901-1,200
B 1,201-1,500

source of income besides your government salary?

0.

H

\lO‘U‘l-I-‘LAN

No

Yes

How much was your outside income last year?
Less than 3 1,000

1,000-3,000

3,001-5,000

5,001-7,000

7,001-10,000

10,001 or above

 

 

161

212. SEX
1. Male
2. Female
213. .A_G_E_
l. ;20:24 6. 45-49
2. 25-29 7. 50-54
3. 30-34 8. 55-59
4. 35-39 9. 60 or above
5 . 40-44 m

214. Please circle the numbers preceding the subjects which you
now teach.

 

1. Thai language 10. Chemistry
2. English language 11. Biology
3. Civics and Ethics 12. Arithmetic
4. Geography 13. Algebra 1
5. History 14. Trigonometry “'
6. General Science 15. Statistics
7. Mechanics 16. French
8. Heat, Light & Sound 17. German
9. Electricity & Magnetism
(Physics).

WE WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS OUR SINCERE APPRECIATION FOR YOUR COOPERA-
TION IN HELPING US WITH THIS VERY IMPORTANT RESEARCH STUDY. WE HAVE
GREAT HOPE THAT THIS STUDY, TOGETHER WITH OTHERS OF A SIMILAR NATURE
BEING CONDUCTED THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, WILL HELP TO IMPROVE EDUCATION
IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES. THE RESULTS OF THIS STUDY WILL BE VALID
ONLY IF YOU HAVE ANSWERED EVERY QUESTION. IF YOU FAILED TO ANSWER
.A QUESTION, PERHAPS YOU WOULD GO BACK AND DO SO NOW. YOU MAY WRITE
ANY COMMENTS WHICH YOU HAVE ABOUT THIS QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE BACK OF
THIS PAGE; THEY WILL BE APPRECIATED.

11.! , . . R
. . 0.. - infirm...»
m