lflllllll 1an ul mm L“! In mu m w. m w. IHIJL Ill) a ’ 93 0215 49 Michigan Scam ‘ l ! PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or betore date due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE ll Kn, . I i J ll H I MSU to An Affirmative Mend Opportunity Institution W 335,. ”8-9.1 ABSTRACT FAMILY STUDIES PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AT THE COLLEGE LEVEL: A DELPHI STUDY by Wanda Young The purposes of this study were (1) to identify objectives and course groupings, for a program in family studies at the college level, (2) to determine appropriate content topics for family studies in formal, non-formal, and informal learning systems, (3) to con- tribute to the theory of Delphi method by comparing panels that have hierarchical, heterogeneous, and homogeneous sections, within specialist and generalist groups. A fifteen member advisory committee evaluated the objective and pilot tested the questionnaire completed by 104 persons in six Delphi panels. The response to the three round study was 89.4%, 82.7%, and 89.4%. The interval between rounds was 24 and 26 days. The 123 items in the round one questionnaire were derived from the review of literature. Panelists suggestions were added in round two and infor- mation and evaluation items in round three. A four-point Likert-type scale was used as a metric. Statistics reported to panelists were median and interquartile range. Round three data were submitted to principal factor analysis with varimax rotation, two-way analysis of variance and Newman-Keul one-way analysis of variance. The Uhl formula was used to test convergence to consensus . II lit .1: III. II III in!!! I]: I I (l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Wanda Young The results of the study indicated: Delphi method was suitable for the development of a program in family studies at the college level, in the population of this study. The program in family studies would provide the graduate an understanding of human development, communication, and integra- tive processes to help individuals and families improve the management of food, shelter, textiles, and human relationships. Informal, formal, and non-formal learning systems were preferred for content topics related to family studies, in that order. The belief that home economics has a wider meaning than food preparation and clothing and a knowledge of families most influenced panelists in their decision. The belief that home economics and family studies have the same meaning was slightly higher than the belief that sociology and family studies mean the same. Convergence to consensus on objectives and formal content topics was complete by round two and on informal content tOpics by round three. There was incomplete convergence on the items: chemistry; family goals and objectives, growth and awareness, death and dying, censorship, and hobbies. There were sufficient differences in the panels to warrant continued research on specialist and generalist groups with hierarchical, heterogeneous, and homogeneous sections. I‘ljl Illl' IIII ‘l[[ FAMILY STUDIES PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AT THE COLLEGE LEVEL: A DELPHI STUDY By Wanda Ena Young A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Family Ecology 1977 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to thank the members of her guidance come mittee, Dr. Norma Bobbitt, chairman of the committee, Dr. Richard Gardner, Dr. Jane Oyer, and Dr. Beaérice Paolucci for their help and suggestions. The support of the Saskatchewan School Trustees Association and the understanding of the administration, faculty, and staff of the University of Saskatchewan were greatly appreciated. The cOOperation of the participating panelists and advisory committee members was gratefully recognized. The writer wishes to thank the Canadian Home Economics Assoc- iation for the Silver Jubilee Scholarship which assisted her in the graduate studies. | ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Chapter Page 1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l SELECTED GROUPS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 DEFINITION OF TERMS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 RESEARCH QUESTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lO LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 THE DELPHI METHOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 The History, Purposes, and Philosophy of the Delphi Method . . . .O. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 The Process of the Delphi Method . . . . . . . . . . l6 Selection of the Panel of Experts. . . . . . . . . 17 Format of the Initial Round. . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Format of Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Number of Rounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Interval Between Rounds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Advantages of Delphi Method of Forecasting . . . . . 24 Disadvantages of the Delphi Method of Forecasting. . 25 iii iv Chapter Page Research Components. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Variables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Statistical Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 SASKATCHEWAN REPORTS ON FAMILY STUDIES, 1973 TO 1975 . . . . 29 An Analysis of the Report of the Minister's Advisory Committee on Family Life Education. . . . . . . 29 Formal Learning Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Non-Formal Learning Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 An Analysis of Report of the Family Planning Advisory Committee to the Committee of Ministers on Family Planning, 1975 O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O 36 An Analysis of a Report on the Role of the College of Home Economics at the University of Saskatchewan . . . . 38 Needs for a Program in Family Studies. . . . . . . . . 4O Purpose of a Program in Family Studies . . . . . .'. . 41 Possible Titles for a Program in Family Studies. . . . 41 Course Groupings for a Program in Family Studies . . . 41 Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 THE FUTURE AND FAMILY STUDIES PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT. . . . . . 44 CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 3. PROCEDURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 SELECTION OF PARTICIPANTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Members of the Advisory Committee. . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Selection of Delphi Panelists. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 DEVELOPMENT OF QUESTIONNAIRES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Round One Delphi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Chapter Changes in Round Two Questionnaire . Changes in Round Three Questionnaire TREATMENT OF DATA. . . . . . . . . Round One Delphi . . . . . . . . Changes in Data Treatment for Round Two Delphi Changes in Data Treatment for Round Three Delphi Mailing to Advisory Committee. . 4. ANALYSIS OF DATA . . . . . . . . . . DESCRIPTION OF PANELISTS . . . . . RESULTS OF ROUND ONE AND ROUND TWO EXPLANATION OF CODING. . . . . . . EXAMINATION OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS. Suitability of Delphi Method . . Question 1 . . . . . . . . . . Question l.l . . . . . . . . . Differences Between Groups and Sections of the Delphi Panel . . . . . . . . Question 2 . . . . . . . . . . Question 2.1 . . . . . . . . . Question 2.2 . . . . . . . . . Convergence to Consensus . . . . Question 3 . . . . . . . . . . Question 3.1 . . . . . . . . . Question 3.2 . . . . . . . . . Experiment to Test Convergence to Consensus. Page 54 56 57 57 59 59 63 64 64 65 72 73 73 73 76 79 79 82 84 88 89 89 92 96 vi Chapter Rating of Formal, Non—Formal, and Informal Learning Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . Question 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EVALUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evaluation of Delphi Method. . . . . . . Time to Answer . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Influence on Decision. . . . . . . . . . A Delphi Panel as an Advisory Committee. Evaluation by Advisory Committee . . . . . Suggestions for implementation . . . . . Recommended changes for the models . . Advantages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Disadvantages. . . . . . . . . . . . 5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS . . . . . . SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IMLICATIONS O O O O O C O O C O O O O C Family Studies Program Development at the College Level. 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Implementation of a Program in Family Studies in Formal, Non-Formal, and Informal Systems . Delphi Methodology . . . . . . . . . . Further Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 98 98 101 101 101 101 103 104 106 107 109 109 110 110 111 111 113 115 116 121 123 123 Chapter APPENDIX A: APPENDIX B: APPENDIX C: APPENDIX D: APPENDIX E: APPENDIX E: APPENDIX G: BIBLIOGRAPHY vii Lists of Sources. . . . . . . . . . Invitations and Reply Sheet . . . . Round One Cover Letter. . . . . . . Round Two Cover Letter, Appendix. . Round Three Cover Letter, Questionnaire, and Interaction . . . . . . . . . . Advisory Committee Letter and Questionnaire Tables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GENERAL REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 125 134 136 137 146 173 176 202 210 4A. 4B. 4C. 8A. 8B. 80. 10. 11. LIST OF TABLES Page Usefulness of Feedback in Round Two . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Response to Delphi Questionnaires . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Summary of Data Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Summary of Consensus, Rounds One and Two, Part One: Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Summary of Consensus, Rounds One and Two, Part Two: Course Groupings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Summary of Consensus, Rounds One and Two, Part Three: Content Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Summary of Varimax Solution for Objectives. . . . . . . . 74 Rank Order, According to Means, of Items Not Appearing in any Factor for Objectives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Summary of Varimax Solution for Course Groupings. . . . 77 Summary of Significant Differences, According to Panel Structure, Two-Way Analysis of Variance, Part One: Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Summary of Significant Differences, According to Panel Structure, Two—Way Analysis of Variance, Part Two: Course Groupings . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Summary of Significant Differences, According to Panel Structure, Two-Way Analysis of Variance, Part Three: Content Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Significant Differences of Groups and Sections with Rounds as Repeated Measures, on Communication Items . . . 97 Priority Ranking of Content Topics in Formal, Non-Formal, and Informal Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Time Required to Answer Questionnaires. . . . . . . . . . 102 viii Table 12. 13. 14. 15. l6. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. ix Comments Supplies by Panelists. . . . . . . . . . . . Evaluation of Delphi Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rank Order of Influences on Decision. . . . . . . . . . Evaluation of Objectives and Course Groupings by Advisory Committee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Advisory Committee Forecast of Probable Implementation Of Program. 0 O O C O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O I O 0 Sources for Delphi Panelists. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sources for Items in Round One Questionnaire. . . . . . Demographic Description of Panelists. . . . . . . . . . Percentage of Demographic Variables Within Six Sections Of Panelists. O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Relationship of Occupation to Formal, Non-Formal, and Informal Systems, Self Description by Panelists . . . . Confidence in Ability to Rate Objectives, Course Groupings, and Content Topics of Panelists. . . . . . . Contribution of Panelists in Face to Face Discussion, Self Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Means for Rounds One, Two, and Three. . . . . . . . . . Analysis of Variance for Round Three: Specialist and Generalist Groups, with Hierarchical, Heterogeneous, and Homogeneous Sections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One—Way Analysis of Variance of Item Scores Classified on the Basis of Groups and Sections of Panelists with Newman-Keuls Comparison among Ordered Means . . . . . . Convergence to Consensus, According to Uhl Formula. . . Labels Used in Tables to Summarize Items. . . . . . . Page 102 103 105 108 108 125 127 176 177 178 178 179 180 185 190 195 199 Figure 1. LIST OF FIGURES Convergence to Consensus, Part 1: Objectives. . . . . Convergence to Consensus, Part 2: Course Groupings. . Convergence to Consensus, Part 3: Content Topics; Formal O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Convergence to Consensus, Part 3: Content Topics; Non-Formal O O I O O O I O O O O I O O O O O I O O O 0 Convergence to Consensus, Part 3 Content Topics; Informal O O O O O I O O O I C O O O I O O O O O O O O A Model of Objectives for a Program of Family Studies in a College of Home Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . A Model of Course Groupings in a Four Year Program in Family Studies in a College of Home Economics. . . . . Page 90 91 93 94 95 118 119 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This study was concerned with the future of a College of Home Economics. To adapt to change in the province of Saskatchewan, a program in family studies was recommended by a committee that reviewed the role of the College of Home Economics. To help man have a better knowledge of things to come in a period of rapid change, scientists developed a field of study entitled futures research or futuribles.l One method of futures research, in use to determine the possibility and probability of needs achievement, was the Delphi method of forecasting. Early leadership in this methodology was credited to Olaf Helmer, who used specialist and generalist panels. In 1975, Helmer documented research needs for futures research. One of the questions related to the Delphi method was of concern in this study. "How does a hierarchical panel of experts compare with a homogeneous panel?"2 Social organizations were classified as homogeneous, hierarchi- cal, and heterogeneous by Maruyama.3 Maruyama explained that homogenistic lBertrand de Jouvenal, Art of Conjecture, New York: Basic Books, 1967, p. VIII. 2Olaf Helmer, "An Agenda for Futures Research", Futures, 7 (February 1975), p.6. 3Magarah Maruyama, "Cultural, Social and Psychological Considerations in the Planning of Public Works", Technological Fore- casting and Social Change, 5 (1973), p. 140. 1 thinking had one right way.1 Such thinking may occur in the mother in the home, the informal learning situation of this study. A hierarchy was characterised by a leadership structure, theory centered with class- ificational thinking, stated Maruyama.2 This described the formal learning system used in this study. When diversification, networks, and complexity were found the situation was heterogenistic, according to Maruyama,3 a situation which will increase in the future.4 This situation was applicable to the non-formal learning system used in this study. Maruyama illustrated homogeneity, hierarchy, and heterogeneity in an analogy using the development of society in North America. The pioneer established a farm on the plains (homogeneous). As more farms were established small communities were built which required rules and government (hierarchy). As population increased, roles were differen- tiated and the community grew to a large city or megalopolis (hetero- geneous). This analogy related to Daniel Bell's classification of society as pre-industrial, featuring extractive industries in a lifestyle 1Idem, "Paradigms and Communication", Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 6 (1974), p. 19. 2Ibid., p. 17. 3Ibid., p. 21. 4Ibid., p. 12. 5Idem, "The Second Cybernetics: Deviation Amplifying Mutual Cause Processes", American Scientist, 51 (1963), p. 166. shaped in a game with nature; industrial society, which produced goods through the use of energy and machines; and post-industrial society, which is a service society provided information by the professional.1 This study was concerned with an addition to Delphi methodology that may in future assist the people of Saskatchewan adjust from the agrarian family life style to family life in post-industrial society. Therefore, a heterogeneous panel of experts was included in this study. Report of the Minister's Advisory Committee on Family Life Education, 1974 recorded finding a concern among citizens of Saskatchewan for "family life education" and "life education". Recommendations were listed regarding teacher training programs in family life education. One specific recommendation "for persons wishing to major in family life education, that beyond the (introductory) course offered by the College and Faculty of Education advanced courses be offered through the Colleges of Home Economics, Physical Education, Education and Arts and Science in Saskatoon and the Faculty of Education, Faculty of Arts and Scieace and the School of Social Work in Regina." Another publication, A Report on the Role of the Collegg of Home Economics, 1975, included a recommendation for a "new specialized program under some such title as Family Studies".3 lDaniel Bell, "The Coming of the Post-Industrial Society" Educational Forum, XL, 4 (May 1976), p. 576. 2Saskatchewan Department of Education, Report of Minister's Advisory Committee on Family Life Education, 1974, p. 29. 3University of Saskatchewan, A Report on the Role of the College of Home Economics at the University of Saskatchewan, 1975, p. 33. These reports showed the need for development of a program in family studies at the University of Saskatchewan. Two questions were derived: What are objectives for a program in family studies in Saskatchewan? What are the course groupings and disciplines for a program in family studies? These were questions for which opinions obtained through consultation with experts, a feature of a Delphi study were useful. Recommendations for content components were listed.1 Programs in family studies in Saskatchewan might be provided in the formal learning system, from kindergarten to grade twelve, in community colleges, and universities. Graduates from a university program in family studies might work as consultants and program coordinators in diverse non-formal learning systems. Parents provided family studies in the home, an informal learning situation. A final question was formulated: What content is appropriate for family studies in formal, non-formal, and informal learning systems in Saskatchewan? 1Saskatchewan Department of Education, Report on the Minister's Advisory Committee on Family Life Education, Chapter V, pp. 24-29. In summary, the purposes of this study were: 1. To assist in the implementation of a program in family studies at the University of Saskatchewan. 1.1 by identifying objectives for a program in family studies. 1.2 by identifying course groupings and disciplines for a program in family studies. 1.3 by determining appropriate content for formal, non-formal, and informal learning situations in Saskatchewan. 2. To contribute to the theory of the Delphi method by comparing panels of experts that are hierarchical, homogeneous, and hetero- geneous; specialist and generalist. SELECTED GROUPS Factors influencing the selection of Delphi panels and the advisory committee used in this study included the traditional selection of experts in Delphi studies, the relationship of the experts to the learning situation, and the needs in Saskatchewan. Early Delphi studies, conducted by Olaf Helmer, used special- ists to provide substantive information and generalists to clarify needs by stating preferences.1 The substantive background for this study was family studies in home economics. It followed that specialists were defined as university graduates in home economics or family studies. Generalists included university graduates who work in or with families, but have professional training other than home economics. lOlaf Helmer, Social Technology, New York: Basic Books 1966, p. 11. Within the specialist and generalist categories, some panelists worked in the hierarchy of the formal learning system. Specialist experts from outside Saskatchewan were invited to provide input about family studies programs in effect. Deans, directors, department heads, faculty members, and extension workers were invited to participate. From Saskatchewan, there were College of Home Economics faculty, extension workers, and home economics high school teachers, including those who taught the family life program for high school. The corresponding hierarchical sub-group within the generalist group was drawn from superintendents, principals, and teachers from both public and separate high schools and elementary schools. University faculty were in the advisory committee which examined the framework of objectives developed by the panelists. Those who serve families as consultants, who educate outside the formal institutions formed the heterogeneous group. The specialists included consumer consultants, free lance home economists, dietitions, and those in diverse occupations and businesses. The generalists included those who counsel families in finance, religion, social work, clinics, legal matters, recreation, and those who work with families through service and health care associations. This was the service group described by Daniel Bell, which forms the heterogeneous network of Maruyama, referred to earlier. The homogeneous groups in the study fulfilled the following recommendation: "steps be taken to involve members of local communities, both rural and urban, in curriculum planning, especially in the area of family life education". University of Saskatchewan married female alumnae were invited to participate. The specialists were from the College of Home Economics alumnae. Graduates from other colleges were in the generalist group. Persons invited to participate in the advisory committee were from the University of Saskatchewan, the commissions, and committees in Saskatchewan that prepared reports reviewed for this study. The purposes of the advisory committee were (1) to assist in the development of the study, and (2) to evaluate the framework of objectives. DEFINITION OF TERMS The operational terms were listed and clarified for their usage in this study. Terms defined in feedback to the panelists are in round two and round three Interaction in the Appendix. Calendar listed information, such as: programs and course descriptions for a college or university. The purpose was similar to that for university catalogue used in the United States. Consensus was the degree of within group agreement.2 Over fifty percent was considered achievement of consensus. It was measured lSaskatchewan Department of Education, Rgport of the Minister's Advisory Committee on Family Life Education, p. 30. 2Peter George Gazzola, "Effect of Delphi Technique on Group Consensus", Dissertation Abstracts, 31A—5072 September - October, 1971. by the semi-interquartile range. A range of 0.45 or less indicated more than 50% of the panelists were less than one interval apart. Content topics were the subjects or concepts dealt with in an area of study. Convergence was the movement of group thinking toward consensus. Course Groupings were a series of like units of instruction. Delphi Method was a set of procedures to elicit and refine the opinion of a group of people.1 Delphi Panel was a group of persons selected to provide opinion on a topic of interest. Experts were persons invited to form a Delphi panel. They were classified as specialist and generalist groups, in this study. Specialist was a person who provided substantive information. Generalist was a person who lacked specialized information about the topic of concern, but clarified concepts and needs and evaluated for preferences.2 Family was the unit recognized as family for statistical pur- poses: husband and wife, with or without children, or a parent and child or children living together in the same dwelling; the family of orientation, of procreation or choice; a unit where feelings of kinship and responsibility take priority over other relationships.3 lR. Weatherman and K. Swenson "Delphi Technique" in Futurism in Education, eds. Stephen Hencley and James R. Yates, Berkeley, California: McCutchan Publishing Corporation, 1974, p. 97. 2Olaf Helmer, Social Technology, p. 11. 3Saskatchewan Department of Health, Report of Family Planning Committee to the Committee of Ministers on Family Planning, 1975, p. 32. Learning system was the development of knowledge, skills, mind, and character in an arrangement to form a unified whole. In this study three systems were of concern. Formal system was a system offering an established cur- ricula in a designated physical space, such as a school building. Informal system was learning that occurred within the bound- aries of the home and family environment. Non-formal system was learning that does not occur, in the institutions of the formal system, nor in the home.1 Objectives were accurate descriptions of the outcomes of education,2 the goals to be met by the program. Opinion was the judgement of a panelist on a matter in which advice was sought. Panel Structure was the composition of the group of panelists in the three Delphi sections. Hierarchical section was a group of panelists arranged in order of rank. 1The definitions for formal, informal, and non-formal learning systems were adapted from Norma Bobbitt and Beatrice Paolucci, "Home as a Learning Center", Michigan State University, 1975, pp. 171-172. 2R. Davis, L. Alexander, and S. Yelon, "LearningiSystems Design, New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1974. 10 Heterogeneous section was a group of panelists composed of unlike, miscellaneous parts. Homogeneous section was a group of panelists composed of parts with similar functions. Panelist was the term used throughout the study to describe respondents to the Delphi questionnaires. To simplify discussion of data the groups and sections were referred to by number until the final summary, as follows: Section 1 was specialist hierarchical. Section 2 was specialist heterogeneous. Section 3 was specialist homogeneous. Section 4 was generalist hierarchical. Section 5 was generalist heterogeneous. Section 6 was generalist homogeneous. Program was the development of a list of course groupings and content topics which have relevance to student attainment of academic objectives or goals. RESEARCH QUESTIONS The purposes of this study related to the substantive content of a program in family studies and to Delphi methodology. Specific research questions used were: Question 1: is the Delphi method suitable to determine objectives, for a program in family studies, in a college of home economics? Question 1.1: Is the Delphi method suitable to determine course groupings, for a program in family studies, in a college of home economics? 11 Question 2: Are there significant differences among the means of the ratings by specialist and generalist groups, on objectives for a program in family studies, when the scores are classified on the basis of hierarchical, heterogeneous, and homogeneous sections? Question 2.1: Are there significant differences among the means of the ratings by specialist and generalist groups, on course groupings for a program in family studies, when the scores are classified on the basis of hierarchical, heterogeneous, and homogeneous sections? Question 2.2: Are there significant differences among the means of the ratings by specialist and generalist groups, on content topics for a program in family studies, when the scores are Classified on the basis of hierarchical, heterogeneous, and homogeneous sections? Qgestion 3: What degree of consensus, about objectives for a program in family studies, is achieved by specialist and generalist groups, in hierarchical, heterogeneous, and homogeneous sections, across three rounds? Question 3.1: What degree of consensus, about course groupé ings in a program in family studies, is achieved by specialist and generalist groups, in hierarchical, heterogeneous, and homogeneous sections, across three rounds? Question 3.2: What degree of consensus, about content topics for a program in family studies, is achieved by specialist and general- ist groups, in hierarchical, heterogeneous, and homogeneous sections, across three rounds? 12 Question 4: What is the rating for importance of content topics in a program of family studies, in a formal, non-formal, and informal learning systems? LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY Limitations of the study were related to the population of the study and to the methodology and procedures. The population of the study was limited, geographically, to Saskatchewan. If the population was considered as the profession of home economics, with interests in family studies, the generalization was to Canada. Academically, the population was limited to persons with a high school certificate and a baccalaureate degree or additional training. The Delphi methodology was in a developing stage. Each iteration was built on the input of response from the preceeding round. This limited pre-testing the instrument. The method used opinion, which permitted various interpretations. A further limitation resulted from the number of missing cases in the study. Subjects found the questionnaire long. Part three was complex and had as many as seven missing cases for some items. Some subjects did not mark the section of items added in round two and three from suggestions from participants. The Xerox 1230 machine was sensitive only to heavy pencil marks. The sheets were remarked and rerun before use in statistical calculations. CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE The review of literature for this study dealt with that aspect of futures research entitled the Delphi method, a methodology in which concepts from a number of experts were aggregated. In addition, an analysis of the reports about family studies published in Saskatchewan from 1973 to 1975 was included. Finally, there was a section about the future and programs in family studies. THE DELPHI METHOD Weatherman and Swenson interpreted the Delphi method of forecast- ing as a set of procedures to elicit and refine the opinion of a group of people.1 The present review considered: (1) the history, pur- poses, and philosophy of the Delphi method, (2) the process of the Delphi method, including modifications, such as: the selection of the panel of experts, the format of the response, the number of rounds, and the interval between rounds, (3) advantages of the Delphi method, (4) disadvantages of the Delphi method, and (5) research components. The History, Purposes, and Philosgphy of the Delphi Method The Delphi method of forecasting developed from operations research of World War II. Olaf Helmer, a major writer and researcher lWeatherman and Swenson, "Delphi Technique", p. 97. 13 14 in the Delphi methodology, used the opinions of international experts to predict changes needed for the survival of man, permitting the experts to revise their predictions in three iterations.1 Baier and Rescher analyzed values in today's society.2 In 1973, the American Home Economics Association involved members in a Delphi study of "The Future of Home Economics",3 which provided discussion material for the Eleventh Lake Placid Conference. Educators find Delphi studies useful to determine educational goals and strategies to implement the goals, for example, the Skyline Wide Educational Planning Project in Dallas.4 The Delphi technique was used as a pedagogical tool by Waldron, Weaver, and Young.5 O'Connell sub- mitted a self-explanatory manual to a Delphi panel for evaluation.6 1Olaf Helmer, Analysis of the Future; The Delphi Method, Santa Monica, California: Rand Corporation, March 1967, pp. 7-36. 2Kurt Baier and Nicholas Rescher, Values and the Future, New York: Free Press, 1969. 3Jeanette Lee, "The Future of Home Economics: A Delphi Study", Journal of Home Economics, 65 (October 1973), pp.23-27. 4Skyline Wide Educational Plan (SWEP) Planning Prgject, (Bethseda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 109 759; ED 109 760; ED 109 761, (1974)). 5James Shear Waldron, "An Investigation into Relationships Among Conceptual Level, Time Delay of Information Feedback and Perfor- mance in the Delphi Process", (Dissertation Abstracts 31A: 5862, May 1971); Timothy Weaver, "The Delphi Forecasting Method (Phi Delta Kappan LII, January 1971: pp. 267-271); Wanda Young, "The Role of Home Economics Professional Associations in Family Planning: A Delphi Study" (1974, typewritten). 6John Howard O'Connell, "Delphi Assistance to Administration: Development and Testing of an Aid to Educational Decision-making", Dissertation Abstracts 36A: 649, August 1975. 15 Administrators analyzed cost-benefits in education by the Delphi method, using such tools as those from the National Center for Higher Education Management Systems and Program Planning and Budgeting Systems.1 To Helmer, the Delphi purposes were philosophical, in that Delphi increases man's understanding of issues and technology; pragmatic, in that future needs can be determined; and methodological because Delphi is a new way to make decisions and develop strategies.2 Linstone and Turoff; Mitroff and Blankenship; Mitroff and Turoff analyzed the Delphi process using philosophical theories as criteria. The writer summarized these articles, noting that the Leibniz- ian theories contribute to Delphi studies that were formal, mathematical, and logical. If the Delphi coordinator gathered data based on exper— iences and the consensus of experts, the study was Lockean in nature. If a multi—model was built from abstract, formal theory and data, integrated from many disciplines, the study was Kantian. The thinking of Hegel contributed to a Delphi study that was dialectical, featuring debate and conflict. When the designer was part of the system and truth was pragmatic, related to the goals of the study, the scientific-ethical 1John Michael Rosich, "Assignment of Group Value Judgements of Educational Outputs Using Delphi Procedures", (Dissertation Abstracts 35A: 7691, 11-12, 1975); Claude Richard Snell, "Community Based Goals of Education by Use of Delphi Technique" (Dissertation Abstracts 35A: 2612, November 1974). 2Olaf Helmer, "New Developments in Early Forecasting of Public Problems: A New Intellectual Climate" (Santa Monica: Rand Corporation, 1967) P-3576, p. 1. 16 integrative ideas of Singer and Churchman have been used.1 These writers considered Delphi to be a method for structuring a group communication process to the effective solution of a complex problem.2 Next the communication process of Delphi was considered. The Process of the Delphi Method The intricacies of the Delphi method were described by Helmer.3 The writer summarized the process to include: (1) Selecting a panel of experts. (2) Independent questioning of the experts. (3) Feeding information about the responses back to the respondents. (4) Inviting the responding experts to revise predictions or to give reasons for not so doing. (5) Repeating to a total of four rounds. lHarold Linstone and Murray Turoff (eds.), The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications, (Reading, Mass.: Addison Wesley Publishing Company 1975, pp. 20-37); Ian Mitroff and Vaughan Blankenship, "On the Methodology of the Holistic Experiment: An Approach to Conceptualization of Large Scale Social Experiments", (Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 4, 1973, p. 346); Ian Mitroff and Murray Turoff, "Technological Forecasting and Assessment: Science and/or Methodology?", (Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 5, 1973, pp. 117-128). 2Linston and Turoff, The Delphi Method, p. 3. 3Helmer, Social Technology, pp. 9-107. 17 (6) Analyzing each round using the median and interquartile range. Recent studies have modified the Delphi methodology summarized above. The subject has been reviewed by Weatherman and Swenson, and Linstone and Murray.1 The present writer reviewed ninety-one doctoral dissertation abstracts listed in Dissertation Abstracts International to April 1976, inclusive. Modifications, of the process to be considered next, were classified as: (1) Selection of the panel of experts. (2) Format of the initial round. (3) Format of the response. (4) Number of rounds. (5) Interval between rounds. Selection of the Panel of Expgrts Helmer and Rescher listed criteria for the use of experts in prediction as: level of knowledge of the person about the topic; and degree of reliability, determined by the relative frequency of accurate predictions already made by the person.2 Helmer identified two kinds of experts: the specialist and the generalist. The specialist provided information which will be freer from misinterpretation if a model is provided. The generalist was able to formulate problems; to structure 1Weatherman and Swenson, "Delphi Technique"; Linstone and Turoff, The Delphi Method. 2Olaf Helmet and Nicholas Rescher, "On the Epistemology of the Exact Sciences", Management Science 6 (October 1959), p. 43. 18 models, and to give preference evaluation.1 Lillyquist used sex dyads as a variable, and found the female sample achieved consensus about decisions in the face to face situation of discussion; the male sample performed better in the Delphi method.2 Burks compared arrival at consensus by pro- fessionals, and non-professionals, finding non-professionals achieved majority consensus on the first round, professionals on the second round.3 Crowley selected a panel of student medical technologists and found a lack of understanding of the median and interquartile range lHelmer, Social Technology, p. 11. 2Michael Jerome Lillyquist, "Performance of Span and Delphi Methods in Human Dyads", Dissertation Abstracts 36A: 1510, September 1975. 3Jayne Burress Burks, "A Study of the Application of Delphi Technique to the Future of Social Institution", (Ph. D. Dissertation, St. Louis University) 1974. 19 information feedback.l Holt recommended including potential users in planning. Davis supported this in his experiment that included citizens to determine land use.2 Medgrave and Ducanis found person- ality characteristics of panel members affected the tendency to change.3 Welty found experts relevant in educational forecasting, which was a cost sensitive, value laden topic affecting the future of participants.4 Helmer discussed research needs related to the Delphi method. If a multidisciplinary issue was considered, should the panel be homogeneous or hierarchical? He questioned the panel size, speculating that three persons may be preferred to a dozen.5 Weatherman and Swenson reported most panels have under fifty members. lJudith Ann Crowley, "A Curriculum in Medical Technology Based on the Perception of Practitioners and Students: A Modification of Delphi Technique", Dissertation Abstracts 35A: 2713, September, 1975. 2James Holt, "Involving the Users in School Planning" (School Review 82, August 1974); Joseph Miro Davis, "Land Use Forecasting: A Delphi Approach", Dissertation Abstracts 36A: 2972, November 1975. 3Norman Medgrave and Alex Ducanis, Educational Planning 3 (Winter 1973). 4G. Welty, "Some Problems in Selecting Delphi Experts for Educational Planning and Forecasting Exercises", California Journal of Education Research, 24, (1973): p. 133. 5Helmer, "An Agenda for Futures Research", p. 6. 6Weatherman and Swenson, "Delphi Technique", p. 103. 20 In summary, the characteristics of the panel of experts should be matched to the nature and purposes of the Delphi study. Format of the Initial Round The Helmer study utilized questions for the initial round.l Weatherman and Swenson observed that the initial round was usually a needs assessment about an issue of concern. W. A. Jones supported this observation.2 Cyphert and Gant and Uhl, recorded the use of open-ended questions.3 Propositions, statements, and lists derived from a review of literature were used by Curran, and Raimon.4 Stewart derived statements of the role of dental colleges from a review of 1Helmer, Social Technology, p. 16. 2Weatherman and Swenson, "Delphi Technique", p. 98; Wayne Albert Jones, "An Analysis of Special Education Needs Assessment Using Delphi Methods", (Dissertation Abstracts 34A: 4039 January 1975). 3Frederick Cyphert and Walter Cant, "The Delphi Technique: A Case Study" (Phi Delta Kappan LII, January 1971, pp. 272-273); Norman Uhl, "Encouraging Consensus of Opinion Through Use of Delphi Technique in Process of Identifying Institutional Goals" (Bethseda, Md. ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 048 713, 1970). 4Mary Virginia Curran, "Use of Delphi to Determine Priority of Needs for Changes in College Student Environment" (Dissertation Abstracts 33A: 4870 March 1973); Melwyn Lewis Raimon, "Identification and Hierarchical Classification of Competencies and Objectives of Student Teaching in Music Through a Partial Delphi Survey" (Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Conneticut) 1975. 21 literature and consultation with an advisory committee. To summarize, the initial round was usually a questionnaire, but experimentation with other techniques occured. Format of Response The format of the response depends upon the format of the question and the nature of the study. Delphi is useful to obtain preferential rating as in the American Home Economics Association study, which used a rating from 9, indicating full support, to 0 indi- cating no support for the concept.2 Many studies have used a Likert- type response varying from four criteria to seven. Rumble found the Q sort rating scale acceptable in his comparative study with the Likert scale. However, the response to Q sort was only 52%, but the response to the Likert questionnaire was 63% complete.3 lArthur Van Stewart, "A Delphi Analysis of Intramural Practice Programs in American Dental Schools", Dissertation Abstracts 34A: 6420, March - April, 1974. 2 - . Lee, "Future of home Economics". 3Frank Eakes Rumble, "A Comparison of Likert and Q Sort Rating Scales in Delphi Technique", Dissertation Abstracts 36A: 653, July — August, 1975. 22 In addition to open ended questions, preferential rating Likert— type and Q sort response were used. Number of Rounds Helmer designed a four round sequence of questionnaires.1 The writer found that in the forty—nine doctoral dissertations reporting the number of rounds, there were eleven using a four round sequence, thirty- four using three rounds, and four using two rounds. Cyphert and Gant found that change in consensus occurred by round three. Clark and Coutts, Gazzola and Uhl supported this.2 Sweigert and Schabaker tested the convergence to consensus with a split sample and found greater convergence occurred in round two than in later rounds.3 Four research studies reported the use of only two rounds: the Sweigert—Schabaker study, Lee, Brooks, and Gordon.4 In summary, the majority of studies modified the number of rounds to three. lHelmer, Social Technology. 2Cyphert and Gant, "Delphi Technique"; S. C. T. Clark and H. T. Coutts, "The Future of Teacher Education", (Journal of Teacher Education, 22, Winter 1971, pp. 508-516); Gazzola, "Effect on Planning"; Uhl, "Consensus Delphi Identifying Goals". 3Ray Sweigert and William Schabaker, "Delphi Technique: How Well Does It Work in Setting Educational Goals?", (Bethseda, Md., ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 091 415, 1974). 4Ibid., "Delphi Technique"; Lee, "Future of Home Economics"; Walter Brooks, "Nor Cal Research Group Vocational Education Study", (Bethseda, Md., ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 069 276, 1972); Theodore Gordon, The Future, (New York, St. Martin's Press, 1965). 23 Interval Between Rounds Another procedual question was related to the length of time between rounds. Helmer used two months between rounds for an inter— national study, but recommended that the time be shortened.1 The spread was from five weeks for a four round study in a local area, conducted by Gazzola and Griffiths, to four months for four rounds reported by Carey.2 H. W. Jones and Lee reported difficulty main— taining the time schedule.3 Rickman preferred the telephone follow up to a postcard follow up.4 Faherty used personal delivery and had a 99.9% return.5 It was advantageous to plan to prevent time delay. 1Helmer, Social Technology, p. 90. 2Gazzola, Effect on Planning; Edwin Herschel Griffiths, "The applicability of Delphi Technique as a Method of Establishing Educa- tional Goals", (Dissertation Abstracts 34A: 2963, November — December, 1973); Dennis Michael Carey, Assessment of Future In-Service Training. "Needs of School Principals in Massachusetts Delphi Study", (Disser- tation Abstracts 33A: 4712, March 1973). 3Homer William Jones, "An Investigation of Effects of Feedback on Variability and Control Tendency of Group Opinion While Employing Delphi Technique", (Dissertation Abstracts 34A: 2361, November - December 1973); Lee, "Future of Home Economics". 4Linda Wickin Rickman, "Consensus Formation on Educational Changes Using Modified Delphi Technique", Dissertation Abstracts 35A: 4094, January 1975. 5James Gregory Faherty III, "A Value Assessment of Long Term Future by Selected Groups in a School District Using Focus Delphi Technique", Dissertation Abstracts 36A: 1206, September - October, 1975. 24 Advantages of Delphi Method of Forecasting The original purpose of the Delphi method was to predict the future. Helmer found that through anonymity psychological factors, such as, the expression of opinion by a dominant person and the "bandwagon" effect were avoided. Haydon supported this, stating that the appeal of a Delphi study was to logic rather than to authority.1 Baier and Rescher found Delphi to be systematic and rational.2 Enzer found Delphi method improved communication; especially across status lines, stated Curran.3 Perceptual communication barriers were reported reduced in the Davis Study.4 Griffiths observed improved community to school communication.5 The early studies, dealing with social issues, noted that it was less costly to conduct a Delphi study, than to assemble experts from around the world.6 Johnston avoided time-consuming committee meetings and rigid schedules by using the Delphi method.7 1Helmer, Social Technology, p. 16; Brownlee Haydon, "The Year 2000, (Santa Monica, Rand Corporation, P-3571, 1967, p. 8). 2Kurt Baier and Nicholas Rescher, Values and the Future, New York, Free Press, 1969, p. 5. 3Selwyn Enzer, "Delphi and Cross Impact Techniques" in F. Tugwell (ed.), Search for Alternative Futures (Cambridge Mass., Winthrop 1973); Curran, "Priority Changes in College Environment". 4Davis, "Land Use Forecasting". 5Griffiths, "Delphi Establishing Goals". 6Helmer, Social Technology, p. 84. 7D. F. Johnston, "Social Indicators and Social Forecasting", in S. Popper, Imaging Alternative Futures. 25 Weatherman and Swenson observed that Delphi was considered an interesting task by panel members. Carey supported this, attributing the interest to information feedback.l Disadvantages of the Delphi Method of Forecasting Some limitations have been found with the panels. Enzer noted that participants did not describe research findings, nor give proprie- tary information, because anonymity prevented recognition.2 Bernstein and Weaver suspected distortion due to the selection of participants.3 Researchers such as Malone stated that consensus may be con— trived.4 Womble described Delphi as a "conformity movement"5, and requested respect for those who differ. Baier and Rescher found framing the questions a limitation.6 Helmer noted that precise questions require legal-type phrases which lWeatherman and Swenson, "Delphi Technique"; Carey, "Assess- ment of In-Service Training". 2Enzer, "Delphi and Cross Impact Techniques", p. 154. 3G. Bernstein, "A Fifteen Year Forecast of Information Pro- cessing Technology", (Washington, D.C., Naval Supply System Command, U. S. Government Printing Office, 1969); T. Weaver, "An Exploration into the Relationships between Conceptual Level and Forecasting Future Events" (Ph.D. Dissertation, Syracuse University, 1969), quoted in Weatherman and Swenson, "Delphi Technique", p. 111. 4William F. P. Malone, "A Study of Delphi Technique as an Instrument for Establishing Curriculum Revision Criterion in Dental Schools", Dissertation Abstracts 34A: 3032, November — December, 1973. 5Dale Womble, "Reactions from Delphi Study", Journal of Home Economics, 66 (January 1974), p. 2. 6Baier and Rescher, Values and the Future, p. 8. 26 are cumbersome.l Welty thought that experimenter bias occured when openended questions were converted to codable form.2 Clinch questioned the degree of objectivity in Delphi studies.3 Lipsitz ascribes dif— ficulty in interpretation to the narrative nature of the topic. Malone supported this, noting semantic difficulty in communication.4 In addition to disadvantages and disagreements put forth under earlier headings, Cyphert and Gant observed that the Delphi method can be used to mold opinion and to collect it.5 Welty found that the Delphi instrument resisted manipulation.6 Lipsitz declared that Delphi method was not a change agent. 1Helmer, Social Technology, p. 90. 2 Welty, "Problems Selecting Experts". 3Robert Clinch, "A Delphi Method for Establishing a Social Work Curriculum: An Exploratory Study", (Ph. D. Dissertation, Syracuse University) 1974. 4Alvin Herbert Lipsitz, "Delphi as an Intervention Technique in Developing a Plan of Change for a Student Affairs Office at Ohio State University" (Dissertation Abstracts 33A: 4125, January - February, 1973); Malone, "Curriculum Revision Criterion". 5Cyphert and Gant, "Delphi Technique". 6Welty, "Problems Selecting Experts". 7Lipsitz, "Delphi as Intervention". 27 It was evident that Delphi method was controversial, that there was opportunity for further research. Research Compgnents In addition to the method and modifications discussed above, and definition of terms discussed in the introduction, observations about variables and statistical analyses were considered. Variables Weatherman and Swenson identified procedural variables for a Delphi study as (1) item (this is related to the topic of study), (2) interval between rounds, (3) method of reporting, (4) number of rounds, (5) interrelationship between events. Welty described the selection of experts as a structural variable.2 Statistical Analysis Helmer used the median and upper and lower quartile for each round to show the amount of dissensus.3 The review of literature indicated an increasing use of other statistical processes. lWeatherman and Swenson, "Delphi Technique", pp. 107-111. 2Welty, "Problems Selecting Experts". 3Helmer, Social Technology, p. 49. 28 Since World War II research in the future has increased, as shown by the formation of the World Futures Society, which publishes The Futurist; the establishment of the Institute for the Future, the Mankind 2000 offices in Europe, and the Club of Rome; and the publication of the research journal Futures. Next some recommendations for the future of family life education in the province of Saskatchewan were considered. 29 SASKATCHEWAN REPORTS ON FAMILY STUDIES, 1973 TO 1975 Concern for the institution of the family in Saskatchewan was recorded in two committee reports filed with government departments, in a local inquiry, in the annual reports of Family Life Saskatchewan, and in a report on the role of the College of Home Economics. An Analysis of the Report of the Minister's Advisory Committee on Family Life Education The Saskatchewan Minister of Education ordered establishment of an Advisory Committee on Family Life Education on 15 October 1973. The terms of reference for this advisory committee were: to make recommendations concerning family life education in the school and community, to examine present curricula in the formal school system, to recommend content for family life curricula, and to suggest where to locate family life education in the school program. Direct con- tributions from community organizations, and indirect programs which strengthen the family were to be studied.1 The final report of the Advisory Committee on Family Life Education was filed on 14 November 1974. In addition to attending regular meetings with guest speakers, the ten committee members, later expanded to twelve, reviewed the literature of family life education, conducted thirty-two hearings at which more than two hundred briefs and letters were presented, and visited sixteen schools in Saskatchewan. 1Saskatchewan Department of Education, Report on Family Life Education, pp. i-ii. 30 The report made reference to the Citizens School Inquiryl held in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan in January and February 1973, in which a need was expressed for increased family life education in elementary and secondary schools. The recommendations of the Minister's Advisory Committee on Family Life Learning were set out in the present review according to recommendations for formal and non-formal learning systems. There were no recommendations for informal learning systems. Formal Learning Systems In Saskatchewan, the formal learning system included Kinder— garten, Division I (Formerly grades 1, 2, and 3), Division II (formerly grades 4, 5, and 6), Division III (formerly grades 7, 8, and 9), and Division IV (formerly grades 10, 11, and 12).2 There were two public universities offering baccalaureate degrees, graduate work, and extension classes.3 Other formal institutions included eleven community colleges, three institutes of applied arts and science", and some private insti- tutions. 1Saskatoon, Citizen's School Inquiry Committee Report, 1973, p. 20. 2Saskatchewan Legislature, Statutes 1964, March, Ch. 19, An Act to Amend the School Act. 3Saskatchewan Legislature, Statutes 1974, May, Ch. 18, An Act Respecting the Universities Commission, sec. 2(b). 4Department of Continuing Education, Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ended 30 June 1975, p. l. 31 Recommendations were made for family life education from Kindergarten through Division IVl; for teacher training, by the addition of a compulsory introductory class for elementary and high school teachers; and for university education.2 Seventy per cent of the briefs supported key recommendation five3, which suggested that family life content be integrated into existing subjects in Division I, II, and III, and be taught as a separate, compulsory half class in Division IV. Content areas should center on: the family type and life cycle; values; goals and objectives of families; homemaking; maturation and relationships; developing skills in decision making; conflict resolution; coping; and communication. These areas were suggested: as components for the compulsory half class in Division IV, as individual mini-courses combined to meet individual interests, and as the base for a teacher training program. Recommendations for content areas in an introductory course for all elementary and secondary teachers included: values, goals and objectives of families, communication skills, interpersonal relationships, lSaskatchewan Department of Education, Report on Family Life Education, Chapter IV, pp. 14-23. 2Ibid., Chapter V, pp. 24-29. 31bid., pp. 15 and 30. 4 Ibid., pp. 16-23. 32 civil rights, censorship, contemporary society, and growth in the life cycle.1 In-service programs for teachers were recommended, with pro- vision of bursaries for those who attend.2 The recommendation to involve rural and urban community members in curriculum planning3 gave support to the use of a Delphi study to determine opinion. Consideration was given to a name other than Family Life Education. Suggestions included Life Education, Education for Living or Life Issues.4 A final suggestion for formal education was that consultative services should be provided by the Department of Education.5 Twenty-one per cent of the briefs were concerned with the community and family life education in the institutional environment. Recommendations were made for evening sessions and workshops, to familiarize the community with the family life education programs for schools. Such adult sessions might assist in evaluating the Division I to IV family life program and provide follow through for Division IV graduates.6 It was observed that the community recreation boards, the 1Ibid., pp. 25-29. 2Ibid., p. 29. 3Ibid., pp. 10 and 30. 4Ibid., p. 18. 51bid., p. 29. 6Ibid., pp. 2—3. 33 Lighted School House Program, and community colleges might organize such programs. Components for adult education programs listed in the Report of Minister's Advisory Committee on Family Living Education included: living with stress, parent education, stages in growth from birth to old age, how to teach sex education to children, interpersonal relations, values clarification, decision-making, conflict resolution, hobbies, and communication skills.2 Non—Formal Learning Systems Family Life Saskatchewan was the outcome of a parent education workshop in 1972.3 This group gave support to services for families. The Minister's Advisory Committee on Family Life Education recommended that the work of this volunteer group be expanded by incorporation, and provision of funds for staffing. Such functions as: research develop- ment, needs assessment, evaluation of pending legislation, promotion of conferences, and use of speakers, resources, and coordination of marriage preparation courses were listed.4 lIbid., p. 13. 21bid., p. 12. 3Family Life Saskatchewan, Annual Report of the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1973. 4Saskatchewan Department of Education, Report on Family Life Education, pp. 8-9. 34 A model for family life education developed by Family Life Saskatchewan proposed three levels of learning: Level 1: The Individual and the Family Content recommended is communication skills, retirement preparation, parenting skills, child development, marriage preparation, nutrition, and sexuality. Level 2: The Family and Society Concepts included are budgeting, con sumer education, leadership skills, and community support groups. Level 3: Society and the Family Recommended content is social change alternative life styles, values, and community planning.1 1This is a summary by the writer from Family Life Saskatchewan, Annual Report 1973. 35 This section of the review of literature is summarized by key resolutions quoted from the Report of the Minister's Advisory Committee on Family Life Education, 1974. The recommendations included: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) A comprehensive family life education program be initiated in Saskatchewan communities and schools. Family Life Saskatchewan be incorporated; its role be expanded; finances to expand its role and provide for some staffing to be provided by the Government of Saskatchewan. As quickly as possible, steps be taken to involve members of local communities, both rural and urban, in curriculum planning, especially in the area of family life education. More family life education offerings be made through Community Colleges, the Extension Division of the Universities and church and community groups. A family life education program be developed for Saskatchewan schools which would be integrated with existing subjects for Kindergarten and Divisions I, II, and III, and be a separate subject area for Division IV. A teacher training program in family life education be launched. Adequate family life education consultative services be piovided through the Department of Education. The Minister's Committee on Family Life met three times with the Family Planning Advisory Committee.2 The report of this committee to the Committee of Ministers on Family Planning was considered next. lSaskatchewan Department of Education, Rgport on Family Life Education, p. 30. 2Saskatchewan Department of Health, Report of the Family PlanningyAdvisory Committee to the Committee of Ministers on Family Planning, April 1975, p. 8. 36 An Analysis of Report of the Family Planning Advisory Committee to the Committee of Ministers on Familnylanning, 1975 The terms of reference for the Family Planning Advisory Committee did not refer to education. However, the Minister of Education was a member of the Committee of Ministers to whom the Family Planning Advisory Committee reported. Other ministers in the committee were Ministers of Health, Social Service, Culture and Youth, and Northern Saskatchewan. The Family Planning Advisory Committee included nurses, television managers, ministers, social workers, educators, doctors, representatives from the Family Planning Association of Saskatchewan, the Indian Women's Association, and Native Women's Association. Because family planning was "an integral part of family life"1, the committee made seven recommendations concerning education in family life as follows: 8. That the teaching of family life education as an integral part of the basic kindergarten through grade 12 curriculum be promoted, assisted and encouraged by the Department of Education. 9. That preparation should start at once to educate the community about the family life education program and to explain the purpose and content of the curriculum prior to its implementation. 10. That the curriculum for family life education include the following topics: a. Families b. Communication c. Sexuality as part of growth and development d. Achieving responsible adulthood and maturity e. Family planning and the care of children f. The middle-aged and the elderly g. Death and dying lSaskatchewan Department of Health, Report of the Family Planning Advisory Committee to the Committee of Ministers on Family Planning, April 1975, p. 8. 37 11. That this curriculum be taught by discussion, not emphasizing the personal values of the teacher, but rather recognizing the values of individuals and the ethical implications of the subject matter. 12. That the Department of Education develop course content and teaching aids in the subject of family life education and encourage their use. 13. That the Department of Education assist in the preparation of teachers by providing in—service education and teachers' institutes on the subject of family life education. 14. That family life education opportunities be expanded in the community. Community Colleges should be encouraged and assistfd, if necessary to make such classes available. Under the heading Professional Education2 recommendations were made for training professionals involved in counselling and for educa- tors. The use of media to provide information was encouraged.3 The Department of Health staff, which includes nutritionists, should be made available for community programs in sex education and to provide counsel— ling.4 Recommendation 435 referred to provision of economic counselling for families and individuals who requested such service. Research in the lIbid., pp. 13-14, recommendation numbers are the numbers used in the report. 21bid., p. 14. 31bid., p. 16. 4Ibid., p. 19. 51bid., p. 23. 38 training of professionals and in evaluation of programs in family plan- ning should be supported.1 In addition to the recommendations the report included a his- tory of family planning in Canada and in Saskatchewan, a statement of the philosophy of the Family Planning Advisory Committee on family plan- ning and sexuality, and a report of the work of the committee.2 The committee held twenty meetings, reviewed twenty-seven briefs and letters, and commissioned the Research and Planning Staff of the Department of Health to conduct a telephone survey of the general population on knowledge about family planning and attitudes towards it. A second study surveyed physicians' practices in family planning. From these studies, and throughout the deliberations, there was indicated both need for, and support for, family life education. A Report on the Role of the College of Home Economics at the Universipy of Saskatchewan listed guidelines for future activities of the College of Home Economics. Those related to family life education are considered. An Analysis of a Report on the Role of the College of Home Economics at the University of Saskatchewan Five purposes were stated in the terms of reference for the Role Study Committee in A Report of the Role of the College of Home Economics at the University of Saskatchewan (1975) as follows: lIbid., p. 27. 2Ibid., pp. 3-9. 39 1. To define the role of the College of Home Economics in meeting the needs of the pro- vince of Saskatchewan in the next decade as it relates to undergraduate education, graduate education and research, extension and community service. 2. To establish enrollment projections for the next decade and give the basis for the pro- jection. 3. To examine the curriculum and programs as they relate to objectives and resources, and to other academic units on campus. 4. To study the relationship of the College to other groups on campus, in particular the Colleges of Arts and Science, Education, Agriculture, Medicine, and the Extension Division. 5. To consider the utilization of the present resources of the College including budget and to cost any new proposals. The purpose of the present review was to excerpt from A Report of the Role of the College of Home Economics at the University of Saskatchewan (1975) those recommendations relating to development of a program in family studies. These suggestions were classified as to: need for a program in family studies, purpose of a program in family studies, possible titles for a program in family studies, course groupings, and research. 1Committee to Consider the Role of the College of Home Economics, A Report on the Role of the College of Home Economics at the University of Saskatchewan, May 1975, p. ii. 40 Needs for a Program in Family Studies In a content analysis of the forty seven briefs and letters submitted to the Role Study Committee of the College of Home Economics, University of Saskatchewan, the writer found thirteen references to the need for a program in family studies.1 The needs included counselling for rural families, families of the lower economic group on welfare, and ethnic families. Reference was made to the need, for home economists special- izing in work with families, to be familiar with the legislation in the Family Services Actz, which regulated care of children and adoption prac- tices; the report of the Saskatchewan Legal Aid Committee3, which recome mended establishment of a legal aid scheme to be carried out by workers, including para-professional personnel", knowledgeable in such areas as: housing, finance, and nutrition; and with the projects of the Law Reform Commission of Saskatchewan, which have stressed research for needed reform in matrimonial property laws, family laws, personal property security laws, and consumer credit law. lWanda Young, "A Content Analysis of a Report on the Role of the College of Home Economics at the University of Saskatchewan", Un- published paper, 1975. 2Saskatchewan Legislature, Statutes, April 1973, Ch. 38, An Act Respecting Family Services. 3Saskatchewan Legal Aid Committee, Report of the Saskatchewan Legal Aid Committee, March 1973. 4 Ibid., p. 5. 5Law Reform Commission of Saskatchewan, Annual Report, 1975. 41 Purpose of a Program in Family Studies From the submissions and discussions the Role Study Committee of the College of Home Economics at the University of Saskatchewan con- cluded that a new area of specialization should be initiated with the purpose of approaching the study of home economics from the social science and psychological perspective. Possible Titles for a Prqgram in Family Studies In addition to the title "Family Studies", which was given preference, the following titles were suggested: Family Living, Human Environment, Human Resources, and Man's Environmentl. Family Studies was the title used in the universities in the adjoining provinces. Course Groupings for a Program in Family Studies A Report on the Role of the College of Home Economics at the University of Saskatchewan, 1975 included a statement that admission standards to the Family Studies program reduce emphasis on science requirements. The suggested requirements for the degree included the basic freshman and sophomore years and specialized classes in psychology, sociology, and family relationships.2 A content analysis of the briefs and letters submitted to the Role Study Committee at the College of Home Economics, University of Saskatchewan, included a recommendation for a multidisciplinary study, including classes: home economics, social work, law, psychology, sociology, economics, physiology, religion, anthropology, 1Report of Role, p. 16. 21bid., p. 16. 42 philoSOphy, medicine, child development, retirement preparation, non- traditional families, women's studies, and societal issues.1 Research One of the submissions to the Role Study Committee pointed out, "There are many unanswered questions in fields pertaining to life in Saskatchewan".2 The Role Study Committee of the College of Home Economics at the University of Saskatchewan noted that home economics is concerned with the multi-faceted aspects of family life. Consequently, the College of Home Economics should accept the responsibility of research into family problems in Saskatchewan.3 The present review concluded with those recommendations listed in the summary of A Report on the Role of the College of Home Economics at the University of Saskatchewan that related to a program in family studies. Facilities, Budget and Staffing #2. Since it is expected that some six to eight classes in the Family Studies Program will be added new to the College curriculum, three additional faculty members competent in this field, should eventually be added to the College faculty. One of these should be appointed in 1976-1977 to facilitate the planning, preparation and counselling of students prior to the program getting under way. The other appointments could be made when circumstances seemed to warrant it. lYoung, Content Analysis. 2Report of Role, p. 22. 3Ibid., p. 23. 43 Undergraduate Teaching #9. There should be a new specialized program under some such name as "Family Studies". Three new faculty appointments in this area should eventually be sought. One should be made in 1976/77; the other two as programs seem to warrant it. #10. Differentiation between "General Program" and "Family Studies" program should take place in years 3 and 4. #11. All first year students should take common programs of four half classes in home economics. These classes should represent major divisions of the discipline. #13. Science requirements and science admission standards presently asked for should be retained for students proposing to take General Program, Dietetics and Nutrition Program, Food Science Program, but they should not necessarily apply to students proposing to take the Family Studies Program. #25. The extension program of the College should be directed essentially "at professionals in the field" not at the public at large. #27. The College should seek to continue and increase its participation in interdisciplinary programs. Conclusion From the discussion of the Report of the Minister's Advisory Committee on Family Life Education, 1974 and A Report on the Role of the College of Home Economics at the University of Saskatchewan, l21§ concepts were drawn for objectives, course groupings and content topics which were tested by a Delphi panel for consensus of opinion. In the future, the University of Saskatchewan may initiate such a program. Next, writings on a future for family studies programs were considered. 1Report of Role, p. 33. 44 THE FUTURE AND FAMILY STUDIES PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT This section considered writings about the future of the family and the future of education. Thought was given to the integration of family studies content into curriculum development. Nash and Ducharmel reviewed writers such as Riesman, Heilbroner, and Bell who forecasted change to a post-industrial society. Nash and Ducharme postulated that an educator in post-industrial society needed to be a human service specialist with knowledge from several human ser- vice areas now seen as distinct, with political sense, and committed to use resources to solve society's problems. Daniel Bell2 stated that in post-industrial society more of the life span would be spent in organizations that educate in non—formal style, rather than in tradi- tional formal learning. Articles reviewed by Mary Rainey3, indicated that non-formal education is a useful way to update professionals, and prepare persons for a second career, added Mathies.4 1Robert J. Nash, Edward R. Ducharme, "A Future Perspective on Preparing Educators for the Human Service Society", Teachers College Record 77 (May 1976), pp. 441-472. 2Daniel Bell, "The Coming of the Post-Industrial Society", Educational Forum XL (May 1976), pp. 575-579. 3Mary C. Rainey, "Non-formal Education: Definitions and Distinctions", Interaction ECO VI (Winter 1976), pp. 1-3. 4Lorraine Mathies, "Citings on the Educational Horizon", Educational Forum 54 (Fall 1975), pp. 67-68. 45 Tyler, Small, the editor of Education, Yule, and Goldberg1 identified a need for the university, media, businesses, churches, and other agencies to cooperate in offering more people new chances to learn. Silverman studied editors and education journals as creators of the future. He noted a concern about"education for living"2 which includes values education, consumer education, career education, and aesthetic education throughout life. Reviews of literature on the future of the family were made by Burks, Oberto, Weisberg, and the Wall Street Journa13. In summary, the family was assured, but in a smaller, less permanent form, more vulnerable to change. Gunter and Moore4 forecasted that the family will change its functions for leisure, life style, and socialization. lRalph Tyler, "Reconstructing the Total Educational Environ- ment", Phi Delta Kappan 57 (September 1975), pp. 12-13; James Small, "Senate Report on the Future of the Extension Function: A Reaction:, New Trial 30 (April 1975), pp. 3-4; Editor "The Open University System", Education (May 1976), pp. l-VIII; Jamie B. Yule "Expanding Our Concept of Home Economics Education", Journal of Home Economics 67 (May 1975), pp. 23-25; Ruth L. Goldberg, Sidney Goldberg "The Role of the Learning Center on Family Functioning in Social Work Education", Family Coordinator 24 (July 1975), pp. 293-295. 2Robert J. Silverman "The Education Editor as Futurist", Teachers College Record 77 (May 1976), pp. 480. 3Jayne B. Burks "A Study of the Application of Delphi Tech- niques to the Future of a Social Institution", Ph.d., Saint Louis Univer- sity, 1973; Angelino Oberto "Montana Home Economics Teachers Perceptions of Selected Societal Trends, Implications for Development of Family Life Curricula", Ph.D., Michigan State University, 1973; Kelly D. Weis "Alternative Family Structure and the Law", Family Coordinator 24 (October 1975), pp. 549-559; The Wall Street Journal LVI (March 18, 1976). 4B. G. Gunter, Harvey A. Moore "Youth, Leisure and Post- Industrial Society; Implications for the Family", Family Coordinator 24 46 Novak challenged those who believe societal trends are detri- mental to the family to consider the advantages of the family insti— tution: the family is the main developer of morals; the family provides love, discipline, and laughter, assisting its members to accept reality; the family nourishes trust and develops creativity and psychic energy.1 In Canada, a concern for the family and the law, the family and society, and the family and change appeared in the popular press. These concerns were a part of the work of the Vanier Institute of the Family, which reported two conferences on the family and society, the family and the future. In the Alberta conference3, papers forecasted that society will continue to depend upon the family to reproduce and to equip its members to serve society. Participants at a workshop in Ontario4 criticized the structured system of society in Canada and pinpointed issues that require study, as: work, leisure, roles of men and women, communication, and the development of social, economic, and political policy that is supportive rather than destructive. 1Michael Novak "The Family Out of Favor", Harpers 252 (April 1976), pp. 37-46. 2Erna Paris "Marriage Reform", Chatelaine 49 (June, July 1976); Paul Novak "Till Divorce Do Us Part", Macleans 89 (April 19, 1976), ppe 26-31e 3Editor Transition 6 (March-April 1976), p. 2. 4 Ibid., (June-July 1976), p. 2. 47 Leland Axelson, Baird, and Keenan and Kerckhoff wrote about background courses and content topics recommended for family studies,l supporting those course groupings and content topics recommended in the reports from studies made in Saskatchewan. The National Council on Family Relations suggested the following criteria for teacher preparation of family life educators: the family; family interaction; marriage preparation; human development from birth to senescence; biological sciences (nutrition, physiology, reproduction); sexuality; management of family resources; group processes; methods and materials in family life education; practice teaching in family life education; field experience; individual and family counselling; research methods; survey of basic laws; and community development.2 Cromwell and Thomas pointed out a lack of definition of the parameters of family life education. They defined family life education as "Family life education promotes the delivery, coordination, and integration of family development resources to the individual family unit in order to improve family life."3 1Leland Axelson "Promise or Illusion: The Future of Family Studies", Family Coordinator 24 (January 1975), pp. 3-6; Joan Baird, Dorothy Keenan, Family Life Education Re-examined: Applications for Teachers, American Home Economics Association, 1971; Richard Kerckhoff, Terry Hancock "The Family Life Educator of the Future", Family Coordina- per 20 (October 1971), pp. 315-324. 2Committee on Educational Standards and Certification for Family Life Education "Family Life and Sex Education: Proposed Criteria in Teaching Education", Family Coordinator 19 (April 1970), pp. 183-186. 3Ronald Cromwell, Vicky Thomas "Developing Resources for Family Potential: A Family Action Model", Family Coordinator 25 (January 1976), p. 15. 48 This definition does answer some of the questions that Babin delineated as the concern of curriculum, not only what should be experienced but why, when, where, and how.1 Curriculum research was reviewed by Short and Fogarty.2 Short noted that the Delphi method can be used to determine values and goal preferences,3 in curriculum development. Rowse, Howes, and Gustafson decried the traditional method for development of higher education curriculum built upon strengths of the faculty with units added when resources permit. A better approach was to study the needs of the system by defining the role and then to modify it to suit the students and resources. A pilot study based on literature or on an opinion questionnaire (as in the Delphi method) to identify knowledge, attitude, and skill requirements; refined by discussion with individual faculty experts; which included preparation of the student; 4 and was terminated by an evaluation, was recommended. Page, Jarjoura, and 1Patrick Babin "New Expectations", Curriculum Connections (Summer 1976), pp. 2-3. 2Edmund Short "Knowledge Production and Utilization in Curriculum: A Special Case of the General Phenomenon", Review of Educational Research 43 (Summer 1973), pp. 237-303; James S. Fogarty "The Tyler Rationale: Support and Criticisms", Educational Technolqu XVI (March 1976), pp. 28-32. 3 Short, Knowledge in Curriculum, p. 262. 4Glenwood Rowse, Nancy Howes, and David Gustafson "Role Based Curriculum Development in Higher Education", Educational Technology XV (July 1975), pp. 13-23. 49 Konapka described a method by which operations research could be used to determine values and costs to evaluate curriculum content.1 Conclusion Authors in the literature reviewed supported the continued existence of the family and the need, in Saskatchewan, to provide opportunities to learn about the family, and how to work with individuals in the family. The Delphi method, originally used to forecast is increasingly used to resolve conflicting opinion and to determine policy in complex situations, such as family studies program development. 1Ellis B. Page, David Jarjoura, and Charles D. Konapka "Curriculum Design Through Operations Research", American Educational Research Journal 13 (Winter 1976), pp. 31-49. CHAPTER 3 PROCEDURES The procedures in this study were discussed in three areas: (1) selection of participants, considering the members of the advisory committee and the Delphi panelists, (2) development of questionnaires, and (3) treatment of data. The last two areas included discussions of the first Delphi round, changes made in rounds two and three, and the mailing to the advisory committee. SELECTION OF PARTICIPANTS Members of the Advisory Committee The purposes of the advisory committee were: to assist with the development of the study, and to evaluate the objectives. Invitations on College of Home Economics letterhead, were sent to twenty-one persons who were or had been part of the administration of the University of Saskatchewan and the College of Home Economics; who had experience developing curricula at university or high school level and implementing curricula, with special interest in family studies; who were members of one of the three committees who prepared the reports from Saskatchewan included in the review of literature; who had experience with Delphi methodology. Fifteen agreed to participate. Selection of Delphi Panelists This Delphi study utilized a specialist group and a generalist group. The population for the specialist group was persons graduating in 50 51 home economics and/or family studies, working in formal, non-formal or informal learning situations in Canada. Eighty-eight percent of the specialists, who completed three rounds were from Saskatchewan. The population for the generalist group was persons with pro- fessional training who worked with families in formal, non-formal, and in- formal learning systems. Within the specialist and generalist groups were three sections: hierarchical, heterogeneous, and homogeneous. Panelists in the hierarchical section worked in an institution of the formal learning system; panelists in the heterogeneous section educated as consultants; and panelists in the homogeneous section were married or retired, educating in the home. Lists for 1975-76 were obtained from: Board of Education For Saskatoon Catholic Schools; Board of Education of Saskatoon School District No. 13; Canadian Home Economics Association; Canadian University Teachers of Home Economics; College of Home Economics at University of Saskatchewan staff list; Credit Grantor's Association; Department of Social Services (Saskatoon Region); Department of Youth and Culture (Saskatoon Region); Saskatoon Council of Churches; Saskatoon Public Library; Saskatchewan Department of Education lists of superintendents, teachers of family life and schools teaching home economics; Saskatchewan Home Economics Association; Saskatchewan Home Economics Teachers Association from the Saskatchewan Teachers Federation; University of Saskatchewan Alumnae office, for female graduates, married, and resident in Saskatchewan; and the yellow pages of telephone directories for Moose Jaw, Prince Albert, Regina, and Saskatoon using the headings for architects, associations, churches, clubs, day nurseries, financing, investments, lawyers, physicians, 52 and social service organizations. Long lists were reduced by taking the tenth name on each page or every twentieth name. The lists were cross checked for duplication. Random selection was made from the lists using a table of random digits.l Table 17 in appendix A, shows the source for each section of the Delphi panel. An attempt was made to include senior university students in family studies program but the request for names came too late in the academic year. The generalist section might include other professionals such as public health nurses, dentists, and media workers. An invitation on College of Home Economics letterhead, a response sheet and a stamped return envelope were mailed to 144 persons on 28 April 1976. A sample of the mailing is in appendix B. One hundred and nineteen response sheets were returned. Fifteen were negative. Eleven of the affirmative replies were received after round one was closed, set- ting the sample at 104. DEVELOPMENT OF QUESTIONNAIRES Round One Delphi Items for the round one Delphi questionnaire were from a review of literature, the method used by Raimon2 and others. In addition to the 1Gene V. Glass, Julian C. Stanley, Statistical Methods in Education and Psychology, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall Inc., 1970, pp. 510-512. 2Raimon, "Identification of Objectives". 53 literature reviewed in chapter 2, calendars from Canadian universities and catalogues from universities in the United States that border western Canada provided items. Table 18, in appendix A, shows the source of items used in the round one questionnaire. In the three part questionnaire panelists were asked to react to 18 objectives, 33 course groupings, and 24 content topics in each of formal, non-formal, and informal learning systems, for a four year program in family studies in a college of home economics. There were a total of 126 items including three demographic items. A four point rating scale was used in the questionnaire. The categories used for evaluating the importance of objectives, course groupings, and content topics for a program in family studies were: very important, important, slightly important, and unimportant. In the tabulation of date, a numerical value of 4 was assigned to very important; with equal intervals to 3, for important; to 2, for slightly important, and to 1, for unimportant. The use of this Likert-type scale, permitted the assumption that the data may be treated as interval data, and statistical assumptions appropriate to such data could be made. This procedure is based on the Raimon study.1 The questionnaire was pre-tested by two members of the advisory committee, for meaningfulness to residents of Saskatchewan; and for clarity, as determined by length of statements, format, phrasing of items, ambiguity of thought, and repetition of items. Two objectives were deleted and some phrases were reworded. lIbid, p. 28. 54 The revised questionnaire was reproduced. Two copies were mailed on 5 May 1976, with a stamped return envelope and a covering letter requesting rating of the item and the addition of objective course groupings, and content topics, to one hundred and thirty-four names on the invitation mailing list, unless a negative reply had already been sent. Panelists were asked to mark both copies, retain one, and return the other. A copy of the round one instrument may be obtained from the author. At the end of one week, 21 telephone calls were made to those who had not yet responded. On 17 May 1976, 93 responses were taken to SASKCOMP, at the University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon. Changes in Round Two Questionnaire The data analyzed from round one Delphi questionnaire were re- ported to the Delphi panelists numerically and visually. The numerical report column included the median and below it the third quartile and first quartile, for each item. Numbers were rounded to one decimal point to conserve space. The visual scale included a verbal description of the ranking: very important, important, slightly important, and unimportant in the heading; with the value 4 assigned to very important, three dots to represent the quarter intervals to the value 3 for important, to 2 for slightly important, and l for unimportant. Below the scale, brackets were placed at the closest quarter to indicate the third to first quartile, enclosing M to signify the median. The visual scale was less accurate than the numerical report column. Because the part three page was 55 crowded the numerical report column was placed in appendix C of the letter. Panelists were asked which report they used. The results appear in table 1. TABLE l.--Usefulness of Feedback in Round Two Description of Feedback % Interaction 84.9 Definitions 83.7 Both numerical & visual 50.0 Rank order 40.7 Visual, on scale report 25.6 Numerical report 12.8 Relative frequency (percent) SPSS Verbal data from round one Delphi questionnaire were sorted and reported in the appendices to the round two letter, and as additional items in the questionnaire. The appendices included: section A, of definitions requested and supplied by the panelists; section B, of questions and comments entitled "Interaction"; and section C "Statistical Report". Thirteen objectives were added at the end of part 1, eight course groupings were added at the end of part 2, and nine content topics at the end of part 3. Six demographic and evaluation items were placed at the beginning, to make a total of 175 items. One empty page was supplied at the end of the questionnaire for comments. 56 After pre-testing, as in round one, two objectives were deleted and the format of the appendices was changed to conserve space. Part one was rechecked by one member of the advisory committee. Duplication was similar to round one, except that pink bond was used for the questionnaire and white bond for the appendices. The mail- ing was similar to round one, and went to the 104 persons who had returned affirmative response sheets, on 29 May 1976. A copy of the round two covering letter, and appendices is in appendix D. Round three instrument, in appendix E, included all items in round one and two instruments. At the end of one week, 21 telephone calls were made to panel- ists who had not yet responded. On 11 June 1976, 86 responses were taken to Computer Services at the University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon. Chagges in Round Three Questionnaire The data analyzed from the round two questionnaire were reported in a numerical report column which included the median, for each item, rounded to one decimal point, and a verbal statement describing the value and the rank according to the mean. The rank for part three was placed in the Interaction section to prevent crowding. Consensus was signified by the letter C. No additional items were added to parts 1, 2, or 3. Forty seven information and evaluation items brought the total to 222 items for round three. Evaluation items were rated, using rating scales designed by Turoff.1 No provision was made for written responses by the panelists. lMurray Turoff, "The Policy Delphi" in Linstone, Turoff, The Delphi Method, pp. 90-92. 57 Verbal data from round two were sorted and reported in a three part Interaction section including an explanation from the Delphi co- ordinator and comments from Delphi panelists. Only comments for items with no consensus were reported. For part three, if consensus was reached in two of the three sections, the item was not included in'Interaction. After two rounds of pretesting, similar to round one, rewording was done in the Information and Evaluation, and Interaction sections. Duplication was similar to round one with the questionnaire printed on yellow bond and Interaction on white bond. One copy of the questionnaire, the covering letter, the Interaction section, and a stamped return envel- Ope were mailed on 23 June 1976 to 104 persons. A copy of the third round package is in appendix E. At the end of one week 26 phone calls were made to participants who had not yet responded. On 3 August 1976, 93 responses were taken to Computer Services at the University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon. Table 2, shows the number of questionnaires sent and returned across all mail- ings. The total percentages were 89.4%, 82.6%, and 89.4% for the three rounds. TREATMENT OF DATA Round One Delphi Data derived from the round one Delphi questionnaire were key- punched onto data processing cards by SASKCOMP operators. A programmer from the academic applications group of Computer Services, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon assisted with the statistical tests. 58 N0.0w 00 00.00 00 00.00 00 00H 00H Hmpoa 00.00 0 00.0k a 00.00 0 0H 00 mpopppwoaom 00.00 0 00.H0 0 00.00 0H NH «0 mpoppmwopmppm 00.00H m 00.00H m 00.00 N m 0 OHHonpmo 00.00 H 00.00 H 00.00H N N 0 suppcpapHm 00.0k m 00.00H q 00.00H 0 0 0 Hoonom anm 00.00 N 00.00H m 00.00 N m 0 meaHpaHum 00.00H 0 00.00 m 00.00H 0 0 0 muam0apuaHpmppm mm.~0 «H 00.00 «H 0~.00 0H NH 0N HappppmHm N0.0H on 00.00 0N ~0.00 mm 00 00 umHHpupppo H0.00 00 00.00H NN 00.00 Hm NN mm mpomapwoeom 00.00H 0N 00.00 0H 00.00 0H 0N mm mpopcpwopmumm 00.00H 0 00.0H m 00.0k m 0 0 mpHeopoum 050: .pmnpmpe 00.00H 0 00.00H 0 00.00H 0 0 0 pmHH HHHapm .pmnuppe 00.00H 0 00.0k m 00.05 m 0 0 :OHmppuxm 00.00H 0 00.00 N 00.00H 0 0 0 HpapmupH .spprpm 00.00H m 00.00H m 00.00H m m 0 prpppxp .spprmm 00.00H 0 00.00H 0 00.0H m 0 0 00000 00.00H mm H0.N0 0H 00.00 0N 0N Hm spoumppHm 00.00 00 Hm.00 00 Hm.N0 00 00 ma umHHpHupam N .02 N .02 N .02 mvcsom aoHumuH>cH mounH masom 039 vcsom moo wsdom use wwHHmZ coHuafiuomon moufimacofiumoso HSQHOQ ou mndommmMIl.N mqm4e 59 The University of Alberta computer package was used to determine the median, first and third quartiles, and semi—interquartile range for 123 items. The median and third to first quartile were rounded to one decimal point and reported to the panelists in the round two question- naire. The mean, variance, and standard deviation were determined using the SPSS package. The means appear in table 24. Changes in Data Treatment for Round Two Delphi To save time, round two data were transcribed for processing by the Xerox machine, reread for accuracy, and translated by the Saskatche- wan Conversion 1230 program onto data processing cards. The sense sheets were repencilled and rerun to check for missing cases. The 169 items in parts 1, 2, and 3 were analyzed as in round one to determine the median, first and third quartiles, and semi-interquartile range which was used to determine consensus. If the semi-interquartile range was less than 0.45 this indicated that more than 50% of the sub- jects were within one interval and that consensus was achieved.1 The median and consensus are reported in the round three questionnaire in appendix E. Changes in Data Treatment for Round Three Delphi The data derived from the round three Delphi questionnaire were prepared for analysis as in round one and two. The University of Alberta analysis for median and semi-interquartile range was not required. lGazzola, "Effect of Delphi on Consensus". 60 A summary of the statistical procedures used and the purposes for the analysis is in table 3. The 0.05 level of significance was used throughout, "a level at which the data gives gppn_evidence that the true contrast is not zero".1 Frequencies were obtained to determine percentages for demographic and evaluation data. Factor analysis was used to determine the models of objectives and course groupings, using data from round three Delphi questionnaire. "In factor analysis the original set of variables are reduced to a small- er number of variables called factors."2 In this study the principal factors were rotated by the varimax criterion "to determine interdependen- cies and to discover structure among the interdependencies".3 All factors greater than 0.400 were considered for interpretation.4 Six factors were requested for part 1: objectives on the first trial. Inspection showed two factors had only two loadings near 0.400. Four factors were then requested. One factor was difficult to interpret. The final request was for three factors. The analysis of part 2: course groupings commenced with a request for twelve factors. One factor had no significant loadings. Five factors had only two significant loadings. The next trial was for six factors. This run was used for interpretation. 1D. R. Cox, Planning of Experiments, New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1958, p. 159. 2George A. Ferguson, Statistical Analysis for Psychology and' Education, Third Edition, New York, McGraw Hill Book Company, 1971, p. 404. 31bid, p. 404. 4Ibid, p. 425. 61 TABLE 3.--Summary of Data Analysis Purpose(s) of Analysis Data Used Statistical Routine Feedback to panelist to encourage consensus To determine rank order of item To determine percentage of demographic data To determine framework of objectives To determine framework of course groupings To determine differences of groups and sections To determine convergence to consensus To determine rank order of part 3 Round 1 and 2 Ques- tionnaire, parts 1, 2, & 3 Round 2 Questionnaire, parts 1, 2, & 3 Round 1 Questionnaire, items 131 to 133 Round 2 Questionnaire, items 177 to 183 Round 3 Questionnaire, items 177 to 233 Round 3 Questionnaire, part 1 Round 3 Questionnaire, part 2 Round 3 Questionnaire, parts 1, 2, & 3 Rounds 1, 2, & 3 Ques- tionnaire, common items in parts 1, 2, & 3 Items 115, 206, 304 Round 3 Questionnaire part 3 Median, first and third quartile, semi-interquar- tile range Mean Frequency Factor analysis for 6, 4, and 3 fac- tors Factor analysis for 12, 6, and 3 fac- tors Two-way analysis of variance Newman-Keuls one- way analysis of variance Uhl formula 2 x 3 x 3 ANOVA Mean 62 Two-way analysis of variance was used to determine significant differences among the means of specialist and generalist groups, in hierarchical, heterogeneous, and homogeneous sections. Newman-Keuls one-way analysis of variance was used to determine the specific groups among which differences occured. Both analyses of variance were run item by item on data derived from the round three questionnaire. The results of the Newman-Keuls one-way analysis were inspected for patterns. The assumptions of analysis of variance were met by using random sampling within sets and by use of a good metric scale.1 In this study, sampling was done, using a table of random digits,2 on lists from organ- izations appropriate to the group or section. The Newman-Keuls method for comparing means of groups and sections was selected because it is neither extremely conservative nor liberal.3 Means for all items from rounds one and two were used to deter- mine rank order for feedback to the panelists in ensuing questionnaires. Means for items on round three, parts 1 and 2 were rank ordered to amend the factor analysis. Items in part 3: content topics were ranked to determine priorities of formal, non-formal, and informal learning systems. 1Stephen Isaac, William Michael, Handbook for Research and Evaluation, San Diego, Robert R. Knapp, 1971, p. 141. 2Glass, Stanley, Statistical Methods in Education and Psychology, pp. 510-512. 3Ferguson, Statistical Analysis, p. 274. 63 The Uhl formula was used to determine convergence to consensus. This procedure included determining the absolute sum of the distance of each panelist's mean from the mean of all panelists, divided by the mean of all, for each item. One item from each part was selected for a 2 x 3 x 3 analysis of variance, considering the rounds as repeated measures. Equal cells were necessary. Random procedure from the Scientific Subroutine was used to generate random numbers to select seven panelists in each of the special- ist and generalist groups and hierarchical, heterogeneous, and homogeneous sections. The three-way ANOVA procedure in the University of Alberta computer package was used with items 115, 206, and 304. These were selected as they are all concerned with communications, and 206 and 304 had appeared with significant differences in prior tests. Mailing to Advisory Committee A statement of the model of objectives and course groupings, and a one page opinionnaire asking for the possible and probable dates of implementation for the program in family studies at the University of Saskatchewan was mailed on 7 August 1976. COpies of the mailing are in appendix F. The data from this mailing are reported in the next chapter. 1Norman P. Uhl, "Convergence Through Delphi", ED049713. CHAPTER 4 ANALYSIS OF DATA The purposes of this study related to objectives, course groupings, and content topics for a program in family studies in a college of home economics and to Delphi methodology. This chapter was concerned with a description of panelists, and analysis of data. The data findings were presented as follows: results of round one and round two; explanation of coding; examination of research questions: suitability of Delphi method, differences between groups and sections of the Delphi panel, convergence to consensus, and rat- ing of content topics for formal, non-formal, and informal learning systems. Evaluation of the Delphi method and evaluation of the objec- tives and course groupings, concluded the chapter. DESCRIPTION OF PANELISTS Participating in the study were 93 home economists, family studies professionals, and other professionals who worked with fam— ilies in formal, non-formal, and informal learning systems. De- scriptive data derived from the information and evaluation section of the round three Delphi questionnaire were shown in tables in appendix G. Demographic description of the panelists was in table 19. The percentage of these demographic variables: academic level, age, sex, marital status, and number of children within the six sections was reported in table 20. The relationship of the occupation of the 64 65 panelists to formal, non-formal, and informal learning systems was re- ported in table 21. The confidence of the panelist to rate the items of this study was delineated in table 22. Delphi method had been compared with decisions achieved in face to face discussion.l Panelists in this study were asked to describe their contribution in face to face discussion. The results are in table 23. RESULTS OF ROUND ONE AND ROUND TWO This study used traditional Delphi statistics for feedback. Helmer used the median and interquartile range to report statistics to his panelists.2 Consensus was achieved when the semi-interquartile range was less than 0.45, indicating that more than 50% of the panel- ists were within one interval.3 A summary of those items in which consensus was achieved in rounds one and two appears in table 4. Inspection of table 4 shows that in round one consensus was achieved in a total of 11 items. The consensus about course groupings was entirely in applied areas, with none in pure disciplines. Reasons for this preference could be the topic of further study. lLillyquist, Performance in Human Dyads. 2Helmer, Social Technology, p. 16. 3Gazzola, Effect of Delphi on Consensus, abstract. 66 TABLE 4A.--Summary of Consensus, Rounds One and Two Part One: Objectives Description Round One Round Two Semi- Semi- Interquartile Interquartile Range Range To identify and improve con- ... 0.34 ditions contributing to man's health and physiological development To identify and improve con- ... 0.38 ditions contributing to man's immediate environment To comprehend social change ... 0.40 To focus on the family as a ... 0.44 social unit and on family mem- bers as consumers of goods and service To be responsible for supportive ... 0.33 care of individuals at different stages in the family life cycle To provide training to work with 0.42 ... children and families to contri— bute to the individual becoming a fulfilled and productive mem- ber of society To identify and improve conditions ... 0.33 contributing to man's psycholo- gical and social development To be able to apply, in a ... 0.36 creative manner, the scientific method to problems of community living To know the physical and biolo- ... 0.32 gical needs of family members in their various home settings whether actual or of the sub- stitute institutional type l—‘ CD Total Items with Consensus 67 TABLE 4B.--Summary of Consensus, Round One and Two Part Two: Course Groupings Description Round One Round Two Semi-Interquartile Semi-Interquartile Range Range Anthropology . 0.44 Chemistry .. 0.36 Child Development 0.31 0.33 Communications 0.31 .. Community Development . 0.33 Consumer Studies . 0.35 Design ... 0.36 Economics .. 0.34 Environmental Ecology ... 0.42 Family Development 0.32 0.32 Family Management 0.32 . Family Finance 0.38 0.44 Housing . 0.34 Medicine .. 0.44 Philosophy . . 0.35 Psychology . 0.34 Religion .. 0.36 Retirement Preparation . 0.36 Sociology .. 0,44 TABLE 4B.--Continued 68 Description Round One Round Two Semi-Interquartile Semi-Interquartile Range Range Societal Issues .. 0.35 Statistics . 0.42 Textiles . 0.41 Women's Studies ... 0.43 Total Items with Consensus 5 21 TABLE 4C.--Summary of Consensus, Round One and Two, Part Three: 69 Content Topics Description Round One Round Two Semi-Interquartile Semi-Interquartile Range Range F N I F N I Care of Children 0.39 0.39 0.43 ... Censorship .. .. . . 0.36 0.36 0.39 Civil Rights ... . ... 0.37 0.34 0.44 Communication Skills 0.31 .. .. 0.32 ... ... Conflict Revolution . ... 0.36 0.36 .. Contemporary Society .. . .. 0.33 0.43 .. Coping ... . ... 0.36 0.38 ... Death and Dying .. . .. .. .. 0.36 Decision Making . . .. . . .. 0.32 ... Family Goals & .. . 0.43 0.38 .. .. Objectives Family Life Cycle ... .. ... 0.30 0.39 0.40 Family Planning .. . .. 0.37 0.38 . Gerontology . .. .. 0.34 0.39 0.39 Growth & Self ... . .. 0.36 0.36 . Awareness Hobbies ... .. .. ... .. 0.33 Interpersonal . . 0.32 . .. Relationships Living With Stress 0.37 . . . . ... TABLE 4C.-~Continued 70 Description Round One Round Two Semi-Interquartile Semi-Interquartile Range Range F N I F N I Maturation .. 0.35 ... 0.35 Parent Education Sexuality Teaching Children About Sex Values Community Support Groups Total Items with Consensus 0.38 0.39 ... 0.39 0.44 ... . 0.34 .. . . 0.29 . .. .. . .. .. 0.44 . . l O 4 16 14 7 Key F formal N non-formal I informal 71 In round two, consensus was achieved in a total of 69 items. After feedback, consensus was lost for: the objective, to provide training to work with children and families to contribute to the individual becoming a fulfilled and productive member of society; the course groupings: communications and family management; and content topics in informal learning systems: care of children, family goals and objective, interpersonal relationships, and values. The means, standard deviations, and variance were calculated for round one and round two. A table of means is in table 24. To assist panelists make decisions in the two later rounds items were rank ordered according to means. This report was reported in the instrument as shown in appendix E. 72 EXPLANATION OF CODING Throughout the analysis of data and in tables in Chapter 4 and the appendices a three digit number identified each item. The first digit identified the part of the instrument and the two latter digits identified the item number within the part. Items are listed in the round three instrument in appendix B. Part 1: objectives had 18 original items, coded from 101 to 118. Eleven objectives suggested by panelists were coded from 119 to 129. Part 2: course groupings had 33 original items, coded from 201 to 233. Eight course groupings suggested by panelists were coded from 234 to 241. Part 3: content topics had 24 original items, coded from 301 to 324 for formal, from 401 to 424 for non-formal, and from 501 to 524 for informal systems. Nine content topics suggested by panelists were coded from 325 to 333, 425 to 433, and 525 to 533 for formal, non— formal, and informal systems, respectively. Table 28 listed the code, labels, and abbreviations associated with each item. 73 EXAMINATION OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS This section was concerned with analysis of data about the fol- lowing research questions: suitability of Delphi method, differences between groups and sections of the Delphi panel, convergence to consen- sus, and rating of content topics for formal, non-formal, and informal systems. Suitability of Delphi Method Question 1: Is the Delphi method suitable to determine objec- tives for a program in family studies, in a college of home economics? The data derived from round three Delphi questionnaire, for part 1: objectives were submitted to factor analysis using the Statis- tical Package For the Social Sciences. From the 29 items, three princi- pal factors, accounting for 32.53% of the variance were extracted. After varimax rotation to determine relationships, item loadings greater than 0.400 were considered meaningful. The varimax solution for objectives was summarized in table 5. Inspection of table 5, suggested that the first principal factor was human development, with nine primary loadings and one negative loading. These items were interpreted as follows: the graduate in lFerguson, Statistical Procedures, p. 424. 74 TABLE 5.--Summary of Varimax Solution for Objectives Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Health 0.64 Societal Structures 0.77 Apply theory 0.57 Creativity 0.58 Management 0.72 Courses 0.57 Operations 0.58 Communicate 0.71 Innovation 0.53 Resource use 0.58 Environment -0.56 Legal 0.47 Care 0.58 Science -0.51 Physical 0.46 Values 0.52 Change -0.44 Media 0.41 Disciplines -0.50 Decision 0.46 Social 0.45 Pre-school 0.42 Factors greater than 0.40 were significant Factors were rounded to two decimal points from five Labels identified in table 29 family studies would be able to identify conditions, and assist the individual, in the family, to improve conditions for human development in the following areas: health, creativity and aesthetic appreciation, utilization of goods and services, business operations, care require— ments of different age groups, moral values, decisions about resources, and social development; all this to understand the pre-school child, and later stages of the life cycle. If knowledge from the various disciplines contributing to an understanding of family was not inte- grated the human development objective would not be satisfactorily met. 75 Inspection of table 5, suggested the second principal factor was communication. There were three primary loadings and three negative loadings in this factor. These items were interpreted to focus on understanding of communication between individuals in the family, at all levels of society, and communication between the family and other societal structures, to help the family and individual carry out responsibilities and obtain rights, with emphasis on the ability to communicate about management of food, shelter, textiles, and human relationships. Unless communication stressed environmental conditions, and an awareness of social change, and was based upon a background of natural and social science the graduates' role would not be satis- factorily achieved. The third principal factor, was identified as integrative pro- cesses. There were six primary loadings in this factor. These items were interpreted as follows: the graduate in family studies would be able to translate scientific knowledge into action, to integrate learnings from one course to another, to think critically about change and the diffusion of ideas, to study the legal process for implica- tions to improve family life, to consider how to make an institutional setting, and a home, meet the needs of family members, and to integrate knowledge about the family for presentation on media and in the press. Seven items not appearing in any factor were placed in rank order, according to means, as shown in table 6, and examined for any clusters. Although five items ranked high, they duplicated items already loaded in the factors, and were disregarded to meet the cri- terion of simplicity, which was used, with the criterion meaningful, to decide between six factor, four factor, and three factor analyses. 76 TABLE 6.--Rank Order, According to Means, of Items not Appearing in any Factor for Objectives Objective Mean (Scale of 4) Children 3.717 Consumer 3.043 Professions 2.968 Interdisciplinary 2.915 Apply science 2.882 General 2.204 Intercultural 2.194 Summary of question 1: The Delphi method was suitable to deter- mine three major objectives for a program in family studies, at the college level, for the population of this study. These three objectives were human development, communication, and integrative processes. Question 1.1: Was the Delphi method suitable to determine course groupings for a program in family studies, in a college of home economics? The data derived from round three for course groupings were submitted to factor analysis and varimax rotation. The summary of the varimax solution for forty-one items in part 2: course groupings is in table 7. Six factors were considered meaningful, accounting for 50.93% of the variance. Inspection of table 7, suggested that the first principal faetor for course groupings was a core of natural sciences and human- ities. Primary loadings were obtained for items as follows: biology, 77 0>Hm aoum mucfioa Hmaaomv o3u ou umvcsou mums muouumm unmoamaawam mums 00.0 amnu Hummeuw muouomm xmoaoom 00.0 amucoaaouH>cm 50.0 aspoEOHHem ucoEQoHe>mn Nm.0 amass H0.0 mwoaonommm 00.0 ousuanoauw< H0.0: monowoom H0.0 304 mm.0 waHOHmzcm maoHumHem mooa>umm Nq.0 HmaoaumduwucH nm.0 uaoacuo>ou H0.0 wchsom 0m.0 0:0HumOHasano mm.0 :onHHmm moammH unmEQoHo>e0 no.0 voom mq.0 HmHoom 00.0 xuoz HmHuom No.0: wOHBOGOOm ~m.0 0HH£0 0m.0 mOmenm mwavaum moamsum uaoaaoam>m0 00.0 p.0paoz 00.0- ppappcou H0.0 maHHprapoo 00.0 prnpoHo 0H.0 sHHapm 00.0 anprm ooamfium mocmcfim 0m.0 oawuavmz mm.0 xwoaoaounuq< no.0 nousaaoo mn.0 cmema 00.0 hawamm 00.0 zuumHEmno uaoamoae>o0 noaafiamm ucoaowmcmz ucoamwmsmz H0.0 muaaaaaoo «0.0 Hmaowuacmuulsoz 00.0 voom 00.0 mOHHuer 00.0 mawamm 00.0 AwOHon 0 wouomm m Houuwm q Houomm m Houoem N nouumm H nouomm waaasouu emusoo you coausaom xmafium> up suaaapmuu.k 0H0oum ou uuoamm: oucouoe mo mufimum>acp HHH HoumaHvuooo mHHamm mum :.ucmw< owcmzo mm Houmosvm emaq xaHEmm may: .m .m .awawooo oaa 0H0 3 3.80:. 00 338500 00H < anco00< unommm Hmsaa< 003msoumxmmm mqu 0HHEmm 00H Houmcwwuooo mafiamm ma .Hmwucouom >Hflamm How moousomwm wafimoam>oa: .A .> .mmsonH m.m .m .HHmsaouo 00H 0H0 3 00320: 00 33.8300 00H mm mummumm :.uo>mm mo use mafiamm USE: Homnowz .xm>oz moa mm wmcfismeImm cofiumosvm mmaq haflamm cmaoox .Q ”0 .0uHmm 00H mommawvuoou hafiamm HON :.cou0HHso co mucoummcoo mmsom mufiaz use: mumnumm .uwawamzu moa 00 3 030:0 up 333300 00H m :mHmou Hmucoauumamaz muoxmo suuoz mo hufimum>fiap Hoa mwmm annacowumm\xoom Hosun< aouH mm>HuUOmno "H uumm oufimccowummoo mac @0300 CH mEouH How muonsomll.wa mamficb NON Houmafivuooo NHHEmm moa :.Houmo:0m xmm < mo cofiumummoum: Hmmnofiz .muouumu HON mwmm HmonOHHmm\xoom nonus< BouH mwafiasouu wmusoo "N mumm wedafiuaooll.NN mqmHaD wHH HHH mmmmmwmw HpHmpppHpa 0H0mp0 HHH unmam>ao>aH 0N mamwnum co msoom "cowumosvm owHH NHHEmm mmmcHM .ammuu 0HH mmN Houmcfiwuooo >HNSmm :.uouamu waficumog mo oaom: .m wumnwaoo m.q .m .wuonwaou mHH mommaflwuooo wafiamm :.mamuwoum aofiwcmuxm swsousa Nmm moaafiamm mxmvoH mo maoanoum wcfiuoozz .0 .m .umHmmHm «Ha owmm HmOHonuom\xoom uo£u=< amuH wosawuaoo “a unmm 0mppHpaoouu.0H 00000 129 moHanoom maom mo Hmau000 :.%Hfiamm moo 0:0 0am mwmfiuumz mo unmauumamm .m .> .<: .2 .> .0000 NHN H.H00 mmmmmmmm. 00000H0 mo 00H000>H00 0H0 000 00H0H00000 =.0HHa00 000 00 000000 000: H.000 .0 .00000 0H0 mommafiwuooo hHHamm :.mmw0:um mma zafiamm mo ucmucoo mom mamamwmamz 080m: .> .0 .00800550 0HN HoumCHvuooo.NHHamm Nmm :.coHumoNH00< unmaaoam>mm zafiamm: azam>m .HH0>:0 MAN N :umo>oum ou unoamm: oucouoH mo mufimum>HcD NHN 000 mmwmmamm. 003000000000 mo 00H000>H00 HHN 00 00H00 0H00000< 00H000 00 000000>H00 0H0 H.Hm0 umvamamu wuumnam mo mufimum>wcn 00N N :umo>oum ou uuommm: oudouoH mo muflmum>fiam moN HOumaawuooo mafiawm :.a0Humoswm umsome How mflumufiuu wcofiumamm mwa ammoaoum "coaumosmm xmm 0cm mmaq 0HHEmm: xafiamm co Hausdou Hmcofiumz NON 000 mmmmmmmm. 003000000000 00 00H000>H00 000 0H0 mmmmmmmm 0000H000 00 000000>H00 000 mwmm Hmofimofiumm\xoom nonus< EmuH woncfiuaou "N uumm muscNDGOUII.mH mqmmH 130 H00 zHfiamm 0:0 mwmfluumz mo Hmausoh .Hmfiuoufivm wmuwaumu .xOHumwoum 0NN ¢ x00c000< uuomwm Hmsaa< :03mnuumxmmm meA >HHSmm NNN Houmcfivuooo hHHBmm :.mmfiwsum mawamm m mo 005050 039 "sonDHHH no omfiaoum: wnmamq .aomme< 0NN Houmafivuoou mafiamm :.aoHumonvm omwg haflamm NMN pom mumnomme mo wawaflmua cam aofiuomaom: .m .2 .GHHnom mNN mMN umwcmamo cmBmsoumxmmm mo >uwmuo>0¢b 0NN 0N vmcfiemxolmm cowumoswm wwwq haflamm .0 .amammM “.0 .00000 MNN 00000000000 zafiamm m0H :.uoumo:0m xmm 0 mo :oHumumamum: H003002 .muouumo NNN 0H0 00000H00 00000000 00 00H000>H00 H00 Houmcwwuooo zafiamm .3 .9 .0000000 mam :.mu:u=m mnu mo Houmoscm mmaq hawamm 0:8: ”.9 .m .mmonxoumm 0NN 00¢ hafiamm 0:0 mwmfiuumz mo H0CH500 .Hmwuouavm wmumaumo .xOHumvoum maN mommafiwuoou 000800 :.mmH0:um maafimm m 00 eunuch 0:9 “conDHHH no 0008000: vcmamq .comme< wHN mwmm Hmuwwofiumm\xoom uo£u0< amuH woaafiuaoo “N unmm 0000H0000--.0H 00000 131 cmBmsuumxmmm ca OH :OHumusmm mMflg hHHEmm new maOfiumoHHmaH .2 .xscomHM «om mm ... .anH mom wmuufiaaoo mm “mumficfiz on anomam cOHumoowm mafia %Hfiamm mom ON mmmmmm. >na=uaH m.awNHuHo Hon mwmm HMUHvOfiumm\xoom Mogus< amuH muamoa uamucoo um uumm vmscaucooll.mm mqmfiap NmN m :umo>oum ou uuommm: oucouOH mo mufimum>HCD HmN mmuufiaaoo mm “mumfiaflz ou uuomum aOflumoscm mMHg hflfiamm 0mm noumafiwuooo hafiewm :.a0Humo:wm mMHA >Hwamm mmm pom mumnomme mo mafiawmue van aOHuomHmm: .m .z .afiasom mNN mwmm Hmofiwowumm\xoom nonud¢ awww vmaaaucoo "N uumm umaafiucou--.wa mgmHm>m .HHm>:Q Ham mmuufiaaou ma “mumfiafiz ou uummum aOfiumosum mwfiq hafiamm can Houmcfivuooo hafiemm :.a0Humuswm mwfiq me AHHEmm stOMSH :uHmmm Hmuamz waHuoBoum: .h .xofi3susom “.0 .aooam mom «H umumficfiz Ou uuomwm mmuufiafioo mafiadmam xawamm mom nonmafiwuooo hafiamm qqm :.mamuwoum mmwa hafiamm mo unmaaoam>wnz .m .GH>mA mom mm ... .anH com mmuufiaaou NH “mumfiafiz ou “Momma cOHumosmm «mag >Hfiamm mom mwmm HmoHuOHum@\xoom nonu=< amuH cmsafiucoo "m unmm wmsafiuaounu.wfl mqmmam>aom “Hm om uuomwm hufisvaH m.amNHuHo cam mwmm HmonOHumm\xoom nonus< amuH wmscaucoo "m uumm Umdcfiudooll.wa mqm APPENDIX D ROUND TWO COVER LETTER, AND APPENDIX A copy of the questionnaire may be obtained by writing the author 137 .r-‘i k :' 5” O ' :2. “a”. .’_r” J, 5 r NJ n.” mavffi “0,77". UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN {@33er fir.- ~ :5. "(X .5 . >‘ - . :, ‘ -::(.‘.'PI.\,11I' )LLEGE OF HOME ECONOMICS SASKATOON, CANADA S7N 0W0 Feedback from Round One of "our" Delphi study on Family Studies is enclosed. Thank you very much for your comments and early replies. To meet the schedule it is necessary for me to have returns within a week after I have mailed them. New Features Additional objectives, course groupings and content topics supplied by the panelists are listed at the end of each part. Please evaluate them with the original items. Statistics are reported in two ways: (1) There is a Report column in which each cell has two levels. The top level number is the Median which is the score that divides the ranked scores in half or the midpoint. The bottom level numbers show the Interquartile Range (03—01) which is the distance between the point on the scale below which 25% of the scores lie and the point above which 25% of the scores lie or the middle 50%. (2) There is a visual report in which the symbol M for Median is placed in the scale. Note that numbers have been added to the scale. Brackets only are placed in the bottom of each cell to show the Interquartile Range. You will superimpose your judgement by placing an (X) over these markings. Here is an example. OBJECTIVES REPORT SCALE Median V.l. I. S.l. U. (la-Q] , . ,4. . ,3. , .2, , ,1 33. Art 2.0 . . .4. . .3. . .2. . .1 2.7-1.3 ( M I My mark for Art in Round One was in the V.I. column. This is outside the interquartile range. I decide to move and place the Round Two (X) in the S.l. column or I decide to remain outside the interquartile range and place my Round Two (X) in the V.l. column indicating under 33. Art that I think an understanding of art will provide a communication like with clients. Attached to this letter are three appendices. (1) Appendix A is in two parts. Definitions requested by panelists are in the first part. Definitions supplied by panelists are in the second part. (2) In Appendix B, entitled “Interaction" there is a section of discussion questions from panelists and a section of comments. These are arranged with general statements first, followed by statements specific to Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3. (3) Appendix C includes a statistical report to supplement the statistics reported in the instrument. For Part 1 and Part 2 there is a rank order determined from the means. The items placed first are those most panelists considered very important. Those most panelists considered unimportant are placed last. For Part 3 there is a report of the Median and Interquartile Range for each of the education systems. There is not sufficient space in the instrument for this report. If you wish to respond to any item please use the sheet of paper at the end of the instrument, clearly marking the part and the item you are challenging. 138 Procedures Please check your copy of Round One to determine the relationship of your judgement to the group judgement. If you do not have a copy of Round One, please call me collect at (306) 242-6554 for the information. In Round Two please mark new items and original items maintaining your position or moving inside the interquartile range. If you decide to remain outside the interquartile range (in the top or bottom 25%) please indicate your reason in the space below the item. Please note that Parts 1 and 2 are addressed specifically to objectives and course groupings (or disciplines—not individual classes) for a program in family studies in a college of home economics, which is part of the formal education system. Part 3 is general, referring not only to the formal education system, but also to the non-formal system in the community and the informal system in the home. Part 3 considers lifelong learning for any individual. In part 3 you are answering the question ”How important is this content item for this particular education system, dealing with each item for the formal, non-formal and informal systems in turn? Inside the cover there is an information section and extra space. When you are marking the instrument could you please use large, firm strokes with a dark pen. Please sign the cover sheet. Round Two instrument is longer as you are now beginning to interact. Thank you for the time that you have devoted to this study. I hope you will continue to support the project by taking part in the interaction and by returning Round Two, by return mail, in the envelope provided. The final round should come to you in about two weeks if Round Two returns are prompt. Swarm, Z Wanda Young 139 Appendix A Definitions Requested By Panelists Biology is a branch of knowledge that deals with living organisms (plants and animals) and vital processes (origin, develOpment, structure and function). (adapted from Webster International) Censorship is acting to determine policy which examines communication materials to remove objectionable parts. (adapted from American Heritage) Coping is a process in which problems and difficulties are faced, encountered and expedited or overcome. (adapted from Webster) Decision is the act of settling or terminating a process in order to end uncertainty or contention. It is done by making a choice or judgement. (adapted from Webster) Delphi Method is ”a set of procedures to elicit and refine the opinion of a group of people about a complex problem." (Weatherspoon and Swenson, 1974.) Early Delphi studies went four rounds or more, starting with a question and a blank page. To eliminate one round this study used a structured Round One. Early studies dealt with probable, possible, preferable forecasts for long term projects. This study deals with a short term project and the preferable rating. Design is a study in which the mind conceives, creates, plans or calculates in a conscious attempt to change man and his environment to improve the quality of life or serve a predetermined end. (adapted from Churchman and Webster) Family Life Cycle is a developmental theory of family used by researchers such as the Duvalls, Rodgers, Hill and Hansen. The family life cycle variable identifies changes that result from pro- gression through a series of stages. Duvall includes family stages as follows: beginning families; child bearing; preschool children; public school children; teenage children; launching; pre-retire« ment; aging. Homemaking is the art of preparing an environment for a family. It includes such functions as protection from the elements; provision of nourishment, and meeting social needs of individual members. More than a century ago homemaking was learned by modelling the parents. When women began to work in industry, elementary and secondary schools introduced courses in homemaking and the university included programs to train the teachers. Middle Age is the “period when the children leave home and the breadwinners leave their jobs." (Neugarten, 1968) Parent Education is "a phase of adult education dealing with child care and the improvement of family living." (Good-Dictionary of Education Terms) Professional is ”one who has acquired a learned skill and conforms to the ethical standards of the profession in which the skill is practiced." (Good) Religion is the study “of man’s encounter with that which is viewed as divine or as ultimate reality” (Good). “The study of institutionalized expressions of sacred beliefs, Observances and social practices found within a given cultural context." (Webster) Sexuality is a study of attitudes toward sexual behavior determined by the interaction of personality and sex, based on concepts from biochemistry, physiology and psychology. Social Work is “programs and procedures for the improvement of societal conditions affecting the individual or family unit, including both case work and group process." (Good) Societal Issues or social issues is a study of problems and events that affect living in a society with c00perative, interdependent relationships. Women's Studies is "an academic discipline that incorporates courses about women either separately" (ERIC) or as a compensatory supplement to the male based curriculum. TOpics such as function of women, status of women, history of women, women writers are included. (adapted from Howe) Ill-O Definitions Supplied By Panelists Communications Communication is the process. (V.|.) Communications are the messages. (|.) Communications is interpersonal interaction. English or French This means the language necessary for effective communication. Gerontology is the study of aging. Homemaking is problem solving, decision making, thinking critically and creatively. It is not sweeping the corners at 7 a.m. Maturation is related to development of teenagers. Sexuality helps one to understand the Opposite sex and the concept of equality. Social Work means case work and by-laws. 1141 APPENDIX B: INTERACTION Questions Raised By Panelists 1 . What is the meaning of family studies? 2. How does a program in family studies differ from home economics? 3. How would a program in family studies differ from the program for social work, sociology and psychology? . What are the job opportunities for a graduate from four years in family studies? . How can values be taught in the formal education system? . Whose values will be taught? ummh . How much study is required in the various courses? Comments Supplied by Panelists The number in brackets refer to the item on the Round One instrument. e.g. (#4) in 11 below refers to item 4, part 1. General Comments 8. Experts in a narrow or special field can be frightening people. 9. The graduates from a program in family studies should have low income people in the target group. Part 1: Objectives 10. These objectives seem out of date. 11. These objectives seem too broad. (#4, 8, 13, 15, 17) 12. These objectives seem vague. (#9, 16) 13. Other agencies and professions have mandates in the territory of some of these objectives. (#1, 2, 6, 7, 12, 14) 14. As written, these objectives imply expertise beyond the role of the home economist. (#1, 10) 15. The following comments refer to specific objectives. Only the original number from Part 1 is used. (#2) The stress level in families is directly related to economic conditions in the environment. (#2) A farm family sets goals and budgets within the projections for grain sales. (#5) There has been too much emphasis on families as consumers. (#6) Persons entering a program in family studies should have enough aesthetic appreciation to encourage the quality of creativity in the client family. (#8) This item is a factor in dissatisfaction, self destruction and low productivity in Canada. (#13) General education should be a part of all education to the end of high school and throughout life, informally and non- -fo.rmally (#13 and 17) These objectives may be by- -products of other objectives. (#14) Home economists should only know where to send clients for such help. (#17) These areas should be distributed over all four years. (#17) Some colleges of home economics have competed with science degrees. 16. 142 The following objectives require editing or clarification as suggested. (#1, 3, 10) Replace the word “improve" with confirm or add to. Add “and refine what people already know". Insert ”certain" before conditions (#4) I understand “to provide insight into factors. affecting social change". (#5) I would separate this objective (a) To focus on the family as a social unit. (b) To focus on family members as consumers of goods and services. (#7) I suggest replacing the word “responsible” with knowledge about or sensitive to. Replace the words "supportive care”. (#8) This objective may include counselling training. (#11) add, to ”solution" of problems. (#13) Add "and professional preparation". (#14) This could be rewritten in terms of outcomes for students. (#15) To communicate could be interpreted as interpersonal or through media and print. Part 2: Course Groupings 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. To avoid being too restrictive, students should be permitted a certain number of electives. All course groupings are necessary. Those marked S.l. should be prerequisites from high school. Some courses are required as prerequisites for others. (#3 chemistry for both #21 nutrition and #32 textiles) Much time is wasted on theory for theory’s sake, not meeting the real need of application of knowledge. To develop the moral fibre of the individual each course should stress high ideals, goals and principles. Home economics cannot cover everything. The social work profession should cover #28, 29, 30 and 31. Combine: #5 clothing and #32 textiles. #16 food preparation and #21 nutrition. #15 family finance and #14 family management. The following statements refer to specific course groupings. Only the original number from Part 1 is used. (#1) This could include both social and physical anthropology. (#3) Chemistry will help one to understand physiology, nutrition and drug problems. (#5) Clothing should be studied from the psychological viewpoint. (#8) If Consumer Studies read Family Resources it would be more specific. (#10) A concept of economics beyond that of home is needed. (#11) English and French are important because of the bilingual situation in Canada. (#11) The course should be useful in actual life. (#14) I would delete the word ”family” to read Management. (#17) It is difficult for an individual counsellor to have much control of choice, costs and standards of housing. (#19) Medicine could include genetics. 143 (#26) Religion should be a comparative study. (#28) Help pepple to think and to prepare for marriage. (#31) Include statistics only for those going into research. (IE/331A separate course in women's studies may lead to more dissention between the sexes. (H27) Move retirement preparation to part 3 with gerontology. (#34) Because students are far removed from an agricultural environment stress worldwide forces (climatic, technical, economic) which affect food production. (#41) Consider the effect of power between nations. Part 3; Content Topics 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Social and psychological professional consultations are significant in non-formal education systems. Most learning occurs in informal situations. E.g. The child’s first introduction to family studies is in informal systems. Formal, non-formal and informal overlap. The method of critical analysis should be used in all systems. Combine: #7 coping under #5 conflict resolution. #22 sexuality, #20 middle age, #19 maturation, #13 gerontology under #11 family life cycle. #12 family planning under #10 family goals and objectives. The following statements refer to specific content tOpics. Only the original number from Part 3 is used. (#3) This could read human rights rather than civil rights. (#5) This could read conflict management rather than conflict resolution. (#12) Family planning is important because the world is over-populated. (#14) Growth and self awareness could include parapsychology and ESP. (#22) Much of the sexuality expressed in magazines, television and radio is "cheap garbage". (#24) Formal training at university is too late for a study of values. (#24) Values should be taught in the home (informal) but if the home fails then the formal and non-formal systems must take over. 144 APPENDIX C: STATISTICAL REPORT Rank Order According To Means Report For Part 3 Median Part 1: Part 2: 03-01 Objectives Course Groupings Formal Non-formal Informal 8 6 1. 3.4 1.3.0 1.3.8 1 2 4 3.9-2.7 3.7-2.3 4.1-3.4 1 5 13 16 14) 2. 2.0 2. 2.3 2. 2.5 5 15 2.7-1.4 3.0-1.5 3.3-1.7 1 O 21 1 8 3. 2.9 3. 3.0 3. 3.0 3 25 3.5-2.2 3.5-2.3 3.5-2.2 4 7 18 17 4. 3.9 4. 3.6 4. 3.7 7 30 4.1-3.6 4.0-2.9 4.1-3.2 1 1 10 9 29 5.3.3 5. 3.2 5. 3.7 6 12 3.9-2.6 3.9-2.6 4.0-3.0 2 27 17 16 6.3.0 6.3.0 6 2.9 14 18 3.5-2.6 3.5-2.3 3.5-2.1 13 28 20 7.3.2 7. 3.1 7. 3.6 2 3.8-2.5 3.7-2.4 4.1-3.0 5 33 8. 2.6 8. 2.9 8. 3.3 23 3.4-1.9 3.5-2.0 3.9-2.7 1 11 9.3.7 9. 3.3 9. 3.7 32 4.03.0 3.9-2.7 4.1-3. 1 26 9 10.3.3 10. 2.7 10. 3.8 22 3.9-2.6 3.3-1.8 4.1-3.3 3 31 11.3.2 11.2.3 11.2.9 19 3.7-2.7 3.0-1.5 3.5-2.2 24 12.3.5 12. 3.3 12.3.7 4.0-2.7 3.9-2.6 4.1-3.0 13.3.0 13. 3.0 13. 2.9 3.6-2.5 3.5-2.1 3.6-2.1 14. 3.6 14. 3.3 14. 3.8 4.02.9 3.9-2.5 4.1-3.2 15.2.1 15.3.0 15.3.3 2.9-1 5 3.6-2.3 3.9-2.7 16. 2.7 16. 2.7 16.3.6 3.3-1 9 3.3-1.9 4.0—2.9 11+ 5 Report For Part 3 Median 03-01 Formal 17. 3.7 4.03.0 18. 3.5 4.02.8 19. $1—n .N G) 20. . 21. . cow £900 to o .N 0: 22. N—s N O) 23. ‘1... N 01 24. aw 99 we 9w ww we —I\I N to Non-formal 17. 3.6 4.02.8 18. 3.4 4.02.5 19. 2.8 3.4-1.9 20. 2.8 3.4-2.0 21. 3.3 3.9-2.6 22. 2.9 3.4-2.3 23. 2.9 3.5-2.0 24. 3.4 4.02.7 Informal 17. 3.8 4.2-3.5 18. 3.6 4.02.9 19. 3.3 3.9-2.7 20. 2.7 3.4-2.2 21. 3.4 4.02.5 22. 3.4 4.02.7 23. 3.8 4.03.3 24. 3.9 4.1-3.6 APPENDIX E ROUND THREE COVER LETTER, QUESTIONNAIRE, AND INTERACTION UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN 1‘ W93”! '3‘, ANA A OF HOME ECONOMICS SASKATOON. C D S7N OWO Thank you very much for the patience and thought that :you have devoted to the Delphi study.My purpose is to achieve (sonsensus about objectives, course groupings and content topics :for a four year program in family studies. as a major in a college of'home economics. This is the final round. Please consider coming to the number closest to the median ( midpoint) on each item or confirm your opinion.No verbal response is required. No copies need be made. At the end of the questionnaire are several pages of items that will supply information and give you the Opportunity to evaluate the Delphi method.Please complete these. The interaction section from Round Two is enclosed at the back. for your interest.There were 750 comments.To save space and your time, only those items on which consensus has not yet been achieved are reported. Round Two was long, representing the equivalent of ten to twélve hours of committee work for each participant. When the study is complete an abstract of findings will be sent to each participant.This is scheduled for the fall of 1976. To maintain the schedule it would assist me to have you return Round Three, in the enveIOpe provided. preferably by return mail. or by June 30. Thank you again for the support you are giving. Have a happy summer. Sincerely, Phone: (306) 242-6554 wanda /Youn;?ét:::;7 146 147 Participants Signature . Number Date: Please make firm strokes with a dark pen or pencil. Round Three, Delphi-Family Studies Wanda Young , June 23, I976 1118 Round Three Part I: Objectives For A Program In Family Studies In A College Of Home Economics Feedback from Round Two is indicated as Follows:f Following the item, a (C) indicates that consensus has been reached. Consensus is agreement of more than fifty percent of the panelists. The rank is based on the mean, which is the average of all scores. Part I has 29 possible ranks . The median represents the midpoint of the scores. The verbal report is based upon the key V.|. = very important = 4 I. = important = 3 S.I. = slightly important = 2 U . = unimportant = I Please consider marking the number closest to the median . If you decide not to join consensus, please mark your opinion. Please superimpose the mark (X) directly on the number in the scale at the right of the Page. An OBJECTIVE is defined as an accurate description of an outcome of education. OBJECTIVES REPORT SCALE Rank Median V.|. I. S.|. U. 29 Verbal I. To identify and improve conditions contributing to man's health and 6 3.I 4 3 2 I physiological development. (C) important 2. To have insight into business and 25 2.3 4 3 2 I marketing operations. slightly important 3. To identify and improve conditions contributing to man's immediate 7 3.2 4 3 2 I environment (C) important 4. To comprehend social change. (C) 9 3.I 4 3 2 I important 5 . To focus on the family as a social unit and on family members as consumers of 5 3.2 4 3 2 l goods and services. (C) important 149 Round Three Part I: Page 2 Key: V.l . = very important = 4 l. -= important = 3 S.I . = slightly important == 2 U. = unimportant = I OBJECTIVES REPORT Rank Median U. 29 Verbal 6. To encourage the development of 23 2.4 I I aesthetic appreciation and creative slightly ability . imporlant 7. To be responsible for supportive care of individuals at different stages in l3 2.96 I the family life cycle. (C) important 8. To provide training to work with children and families to contribute 2 3.6 l to the individual becoming a ful- very filled and productive member of important society . 9. To provide an interdisciplinary study of the historical, contemporary and I7 2.8 l emerging family forms through formal important coursework and interaction with indi- viduals and families. l0. To identify and improve conditions con- 8 3.I l tributing to man's psychological and important social development. (C) II . To be able to apply, in a creative l5 2.9 I manner, the scientific method to important problems of community living . (C) l2. To help people in all strata of society in the management of their lives with l 3.7 I respect to food, clothing, shelter and very human relationships. imporlant l3. To provide a geneial education. . 28 2.2 I slightly imporlant l4. To provide liaison between consumers 27 2.2 I and producers of goods and services slightly utilized by individuals and families. important 150 Round Three Part I: Page 3 Key: V.I. = very important = 4 l. = important = 3 S.I. = slightly important = 2 U . = unimportant = I OBJECTIVES REPORT SCALE Rank Median V.I. I. S.I. U. 29 Verbal l5. To communicate with skill with 3 3.6 4 3 2 I families at all levels of society. very imporlant l6. To focus on decision making and organizational processes related to 4 3.3 4 3 2 l development and use of family important resources. l7. To provide a sound background in 24 2.4 4 3 2 l natural and social sciences. slightly important l8. To know the physical and biological needs of family members in their II 2.9 4 3 2 I various home settings whether actual imporlant or of the substitute institutional type. (C) ADDITIONAL OBJECTIVES SUPPLIED BY PANELISTS l9. To be able to integrate scientific know- ledge from the various disciplines which l0 3.0 4 3 2 I contribute to an understanding of family important and individual life. 20. To be able to integrate material with- l4 2.9 4 3 2 I in the curriculum from one course to imporlant another. 2|. To be able to translate scientific findings into policy for work with l6 2.9 4 3 2 l government and power groups and for important programmatic statements to effect social change. 22. To act as a liaison and resource person between the individual, the l2 3.02 4 3 2 I family, the community and the imporlant various professions. (C) 151 Round Three Part I: Page 4 Key: V.I. = very important = 4 l. = important == 3 S.I. = slightly important = 2 U. = unimportant = l OBJECTIVES REPORT SCALE Rank Median V.I. I. S.I. U. 29 Verbal 23. To provide training for presentation 20 2.6 t 4 3 2 l of materials for press, media and other important forms of communication . 24. To comprehend and advance inter- 2l 2.4 4 3 2 I cultural relations between slightly individuals . important 25. To study the processes by which laws I9 2.7 4 3 2 I can be improved to better family life. important 26. To emphasize moral values. 26 2.3 4 3 2 I slightly important 27. To assist families to adjust to, con- l7 2.9 4 3 2 I tribute to, and obtain maximum important benefits from existing structures. 28. To influence innovation-decisions by 29 l.9 4 3 2 l securing the adoption of new ideas slightly or by slowing down the diffusion and important adoption of ideas. 29. To focus on preschool child develop- 22 2.4 4 3 2 I ment in a modern society. slightly important Round Three Part 2: COURSE GROUPINGS FOR A PROGRAM IN FAMILY STUDIES AT A COLLEGE OF'FIUME‘ECUNUMILS 152 Feedback from Round Two is indicated as follows: Following the item, a (C) indicates that consensus has been reached. Consensus is the agreement of more than fifty percent of the panelists . The rank is based on the mean, which is the average of the scores. Part 2 has 4| possible ranks. The verbal report is based upon the key V.I. = very important I. = imporlant S.I. = slightly important U. = unimportant II II II II -r\>w.t> Please consider marking the number closest to the median. If you decide not to join consensus, please mark your opinion . Please superimpose the mark (X) directly on the number in the scale at the right. COURSE GROUPIN GS are a series of like units of instructions and disciplines. COURSE GROUPINGS REPORT SCALE Rank Median V.I. l. S.I. U. 4| Verbal I. Anthropology (C) 30 2.2 4 3 2 I slightly important 2. Biology 24 2.4 4 3 2 l - slightly important 3. Chemistry (C) 35 2.02 4 3 2 I slightly important 4. Child Development (C) 2 3.8 4 3 2 I very important 5. Clothing 25 2.3 4 3 2 l slightly important 6. Communications 3 3.8 4 3 2 I very important 7. Community Development (C) 9 3.I 4 3 2 l ' important 8. Consumer Studies (C) 7 3.I 4 3 2 I important 153 Round Three Part 2: Page 2 Key: V.I. - very important = 4 l. = important = 3 S.I. = slightly important= 2 U. = unimportant = l COURSE GROUPINGS REPORT SCALE Rank Median V.I. l. S.I. U. 4| Verbal 9. Design (C) 29 2.l 4 3 2 | slightly imporlant l0. Economics (C) I3 2.9 4 3 2 l important ll . English or French 28 2.2 4 3 2 l slightly important l2. Environmental Ecology (C) l4 2.9 4 3 2 I important l3. Family Development (C) | 3.9 4 3 2 I very important l4. Family Management 4 3.8 4 3 2 I very important l5. Family Finance (C) 5 3.8 4 3 2 I very important I6. Food Preparation I5 2.9 4 3 2 l important l7. Housing (C) II 3.02 4 3 2 I important 18. Law l9 2.8 4 3 2 l important l9. Medicine (C) 38 l.8 4 3 2 I - slightly important 20. Non-traditional Families 23 2.5 4 3 2 I important 2|. Nutrition 6 3.6 4 3 2 I very important 22. Philosophy (C) 34 2.02 4 3 2 I slightly important 15‘t Round Three Part 2: Page 3 Key: V.I. =very important = 4 l. = important = 3 S.I. =slightly important = 2 U. =unimportant = l COURSE GROUPINGS REPORT SCALE Rank Median V.I. I. S.I. U. 4| Verbal 23. Physiology 27 2.3 . 4 3 2 I slightly important 24. Physics 4l l.4 4 3 2 l unimportant 25. Psychology (C) l0 3.I 4 3 2 I important 26. Religion (C) 32 2.I 4 3 2 l slightly important 27. Retirement Preparation (C) I7 2.9 4 3 2 I important 28. Social Work 22 2.7 4 3 2 I important 29. Sociology (C) l6 2.9 4 3 2 I important 30. Societal Issues (C) l2 2.9 4 3 2 I important 3|. Statistics (C) 37 I.9 4 3 2 1 Slightly important 32. Textiles (C) 3| 2.l 4 3 2 I slightly important 33. Women's Studies (C) 33 2.0 4 3 2 I slightly important ADDITIONAL COURSE GROUPINGS SUPPLIES BY PANELISTS 34. Agriculture 39 l.7 4 3 2 l slightly important 35. Computer Science 40 L6 4 3 2 I slightly important 155 Round Three Part 2: Page 3 Key: V.I. = very important = 4 l. = important = 3 S.I. = slightly important = 2 U. = unimportant = I COURSE GROUPINGS REPOQT SCALE Rank Median V.I. l. S.I. U. 4| Verbal 36. Counselling (Methods of Therapy) 2| 2.7 4 3 2 l important 37. Food Management (Purchase, safety) I7 2.8 4 3 2 l important 38. Futuristics(chonge and innovation) 26 2.3 4 3 2 l slightly important 39. Government and Community Service 20 2.7 4 3 2 l important 40. Human Development (adolescent, 8 3.2 4 3 2 I aged) important 4|. lntemational Relations, including 36 I.9 4 3 2 l history slightly important 156 Round Three Port 3: CONTENT TOPICS FOR LEARNINGS IN FAMILY STUDIES IN FORMAL NON-FORMAL AND INFORWL EDUCAIION SYSTEMS Feedback from Round Two is indicated as follows: A (C) placed below the figure for the median indicates that consensus has been reached. Consensus is the agreement of more than fifty percent of the panelists. The median, in the M column, represents the midpoint of the scores. The rank report is in the Interaction section on page 9 . Please consider marking the number closest to the median. If you decide not to join consensus, please mark your opinion . Please superimpose the mark (X) directly on the number in the scale. The definitions for this area are: A FORMAL education system offers an established curriculum in a designated physical space . A NON-FORMAL system is Ieaming that does not occur in the institutions of the formal system, nor in the home. An INFORMAL system is Ieaming that occurs within the boundaries of the home and family environment. Content Topics are defined as what is dealt with in an area of study, such as a course grouping or discipline. Key: V.I. =very important = 4 . = important = 3 S.I. =slightly important = 2 U. =unimporfant = l CONTENT TOPICS FORMAL NON-FORMAL INFORMAL M SCA LE M SCA LE M SCA LE I. Care ofChildren 3.2 4 3 2 I 2.9 4 3 2 I 3.6 4 3 2 l ( ) (C) 2. Censorship l.8 4 3 2 l I.9 4 3 2 l 2.I 4 3 2 l (C) (C) (C) 3. Civil Rights 2.9 4 3 2 I 2.9 4 3 2 l 2.8 4 3 2 I (C) (C) (C) 4. Communication Skills 3.9 4 3 2 l 3.3 4 3 2 l 3.7 4 3 2 l (C) 5. Conflict Resolution 3.0 4 3 2 l 2.9 4 3 2 I 3.4 4 3 2 I ( ) ' (C) Round Three 157 Part 3: Page 2 Key: V.I. = very important = 4 I. = important = 3 S.I. = slightly important = 2 U. = unimportant = I CONTENT TOPICS FORMAL NON-FORMAL INFORMAL M SCALE M SCALE M SCALE 6. Contemporary Society 2.9 4 3 2 l 2.8 4 3 2 I 2.8 4 3 2 l (C) (C) 7. Coping 2.9 4 3 2 l 2.9 4 3 2 l 3.4 4 3 2 I (C) (C) 8. Death and Dying 2.5 4 3 2 l 2.7 4 3 2 l 3.I 4 3 2 l (C) 9. Decision Making 3.3 4 3 2 l 3.1 4 3 2 I 3.5 4 3 2 I (C) ID. Family Goals& 3.I 4 3 2 l 2.6 4 3 2 l 3.4 4 3 2 l Objectives (C) II. Family Life Cycle 2.9 4 3 2 I 2.I 4 3 2 I 2.9 4 3 2 | (C) (C) (C) l2. Family Planning 3.I 4 3 2 I 3.0 4 3 2 l 3.4 4 3 2 l (C) (C) l3. Gerontology 2.9 4 3 2 l 2.9 4 3 2 l 2.9 4 3 2 I (C) j (C) (C) l4. Growth and Self 3.I 4 3 2 I 2.7 4 3 2 I 3.0 4 3 2 I Awareness (C) (C) l5. Hobbies I.9 4 3 2 l 2.7 4 3 2 l 3.0 4 3 2 l (C) l6. Homemaking 2.4 4 3 2 l 2.5 4 3 2 l 3.3 4 3 2 I I7. Interpersonal Relation- 3.4 4 3 2 I 3.3 4 3 2 I 3.7 4 3 2 I ships I8. Living With Stress 3.I 4 3 2 l 3.2 4 3 2 I 3.3 4 3 2 l (C) 19. Maturation 2.9 . 4 3 2 l 2.7 4 3 2 l 3.I 4 3 2 l (C) (C) 158 Round Three Part 3: Page 3 Key: V.I. = very important .- 4 l. = important = 3 S.I. = slightly important = 2 U. = unimportant = I CONTENT TOPICS FORMAL NON-FORMAL INFORMAL M SCALE M SCALE M SCALE 20. Middle Age 2.6 4 3 2 l 2.7 4 3 2 I 2.8 4 3 2 I 2|. Parent Education 2.9 4 3 2 I 3.I 4 3 2 I 3.2 4 3 2 l (C) (C) 22. Sexuality 2.9 4 3 2 I 2.9 4 3 2 I 3.3 4 3 2 I (C) (C) 23. Teaching Children 2.9 4 3 2 l 2.8 4 3 2 l 3.6 4 3 2 | About Sex (C) 24. Values 3.4 4 3 2 I 3.2 4 3 2 I 3.8 4 3 2 I ADDITIONAL CONTENT TOPICS SUPPLIED BY PANELISTS 25. Civic Responsibilities 2.7 4 3 2 l 2.9 4 3 2 I 3.0 4 3 2 I 26. Community Support 2.4 4 3 2 l 2.9 4 3 2 I 2.7 4 3 2 l Groups (C) 27. Family Breakdown 2.9 4 3 2 I 2.8 4 3 2 l 2.9 4 3 2 l 28. Marriage Preparation 3.2 4 3 2 l 3.2 4 3 2 | 3.5 4 3 2 l 29. Sexism (Stereotypes) 2.4 4 3 2 I 2.3 4 3 2 l 2.5 4 3 2 l 30. Sexual Therapy 2.0 4 3 2 I 2.2 4 3 2 | 2.2 4 3 2 I 3|. Understanding Emotions 3.2 4 3 2 l 2.9 4 3 2 l 3.3 4 3 2 l 32. Use of Television and 2.0 4 3 2 I 2.I 4 3 2 l 2.8 4 3 2 l Radio in the Home 33. World Citizenship 2.5 4 3 2 l 2.7 4 3 2 l 2.6 4 3 2 l 159 Round Three INFORMATION AND EVALUATION Please place an (X) in the appropriate space or directly on the appropriate number it" a scale is used. I. How long did it take to answer Round Three? (I) under I5 minutes (4) I to 2 hours (2) I6 to 30 minutes (5) over 2 hours (3) 3| to 60 minutes 2. What is your academic standing? _ Obtained in Obtained Saskatchewan Elsewhere (I) High School (2) Baccalaureate (3) Masters (4) Doctoral " (5) Other 1H 3. What is your age group? (I) under 25 (2) *25 to 44 (3) ~45 to 60 (4) *over 60 4. What is your sex? (I) Female (2) Male 5. What is your family situation? I) not married married couple separated 4) “divorced ) “widowed ) —single parent 6. How many children do you have? (I) none (5) Four (2) one (6) ""' " five (3) fW0 (7) six (4) three (3) over six 160 Round Three Information and Evaluation: Page 2 7. How related is your present occupation to families in the terms of this study? Here is a hypothetical example: Mary is a teacher, married with a three year old child, too busy to participate in community activities. Mary would mark: very related = 4 in the fomwal row unrelated = I in the non-formal row very related = 4 in the informal row The terms of this study are: A FORMAL education system offers an established curricula in a designated physical space . A NON-FORMAL education system is learning that does not occur in the institutions of the formal system, nor in the home. An INFORMAL education system is Ieaming that occurs within the boundaries of the home and family environment. Key: Relationship Very related = 4 Related = 3 Slightly related = 2 Unrelated = I SYSTEM RELATIONSHIP Fonnai 1V 3 2 l Non-Formal 4 3 2 I Informal 4 3 2 I B. How confident do you feel about discussing each part of the questionnaire in this study? Key: Confidence Certain = 5 Reliable = 4 Not determinable = 3 Risky = 2 = I Unreliable 161 Round Three Information and Evaluation: Page 3 8. (cont'd) PART CONFIDENCE Part I: Obiectives 5 4 3 TI Part2: Course Groupings 5 4 3 2 I Part3: Content Topics 5 4 3 2 I 9. How do you assess your usual contribution in a face-to-face group discussion or committee meeting? Key: Probability Very probable = 5 Probable = 4 Either Way = 3 Improbable = 2 Very improbable = I Description of Contribution Probability first to offer ideas 5 4 3 2 I offer many ideas 5 4 3 2 I listen 5 4 3 2 I agree with others 5 4 3 2 I challenge other ideas 5 4 3 2 I listen, then offer ideas 5 4 3 2 I I0. What is the effect of the Delphi method? Key: Effectiveness very effective = 4 effective = 3 slightly effective = 2 not effective = I Description Effectiveness influence of feedback 4 3 2 I added to knowledge (participants) 4 3 2 I frustrated participant 4 3 2 I I}? II III. III II III-Ir lull llllr. 1| II II II ‘II ‘III 162 Round Three lnforrnation and Evaluation: Page 4 I0. I2. I3. (cont 'd) Description Effectiveness felt rushed for time 2 I felt pressured to conform gave opportunity to communicate 4 4 interesting 4 4 time consuming (more than committee) 4 4 00000309000) NNNNN thought provoking other: Could a Delphi Study of this type, on a continuing basis, assume the role of an advisory committee to a college? (I) yes (2) no How has your evaluation in each round of this study been influenced? Please place an (X) in all that apply. (I) by the possible effect on society (2)—'- by the happiness of the undergraduate in a four year family studies program (3) —— by consideration of the cost to implement such a program (4) —— by knowledge of family needs (5) "— by personal experience with university (6) — by the probable outcome of a four year baccalaureate in family studies (7) —"" by the opinions of other panelists as shown in the feedback (8) "'— by the belief that family studies means the same as home economics (9) —" by the belief that family studies means the same as sociology and/or - ”social work (I0) by the belief that family studies could be a part of a college of home "'_economics (II) b the notion that home economics is concerned with food preparation and “c othing only (I2) by the belief that home economics has a wider meaning than food pre- —— paration and clothing An abstract will be sent to you when the study is complete. If this questionnaire is returned by return mail or by July I, I976 the abstract should be ready in the fall of I976. What mailing address should be used in the fall of I976? (I) the same (2) _ other (please specify) 163 INTERACTION From the Coordinator The program discussed in this study is to be a four year baccalaureate in home economics, with a maior in family studies. You are contributing ideas that may be synthesized into a definition of family studies for Saskatchewan. The literature has few clear definitions of family studies. Some thought has been expressed about family counselling and marriage counselling. Some clarification has been made between sex education and family life education. The secondary education system in Ontario considers home economics and family studies to be the same thing . . Three definitions seem related to the thinking of some of the participants in this study. Wholey (I972) "Family Life education is human education concerned with the total being ---- physical, mental, emotional and relations with others." Goodwin (I972) "The family practitioner is understood to be a helper meeting practical problems having many causes that‘involve both individuals and groups of varying ages." The role is described by Goodwin as one of a change agent who encourages, assists and instigates behavioral modification . Cromwell and Thomas (I976) "Family Life education promotes the delivery, coordination and integration of family development resources to individual units in order to improve family life." Following the third round statistical analyses will be used to determine patterns in your answers . Thank you for the reminders that consideration should be given to pre-requisites; iob opportunities; electives; relationships between objectives, course groupings and content topics; and the opportunity for interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary activities. For more statistically minded participants, the University of Alberta package was used to analyze the interquartile range. The range is a continuous measurement, but when it is recorded as a discrete number on a Likert scale the limits fall one-half unit above and below the value reported. In the calculation, the scores are ranked in a frequency distribution, interpolation occurs and a report such as 4.I may be produced when many subjects rate on item at 4. From The Panelists Only those comments related to items which have not yet reached consensus are reported. The comments are summarized, following a statement of the number received. Items are written in full. 164 Part I: Objectives For A Program In Family Studies For A College of Home Economics 2. To have insight into business and marketing conditions. 7 comments, pointing out that the family itself is a business, in which economic problems often act as catalysts for stress. The production and maintenance of umon capital in the family requires such insights. 6. To encourage the development of aesthetic appreciation and creative ability. 5 comments, ranging from a reminder that Maslow's hierarchy of needs includes aesthetics and creativity at a high level; to a reminder that a program cannot cover everything . The need to see beauty around us; to use simple things to beautify the space that is our environment; to gain a feeling of accomplishment lacking in routine jobs; to use leisure time creatively were mentioned. 8. To provide training to work with children and families to contribute to the indivi- dual becoming a fulfilled and productive member of society . 7 comments. Support was given to change the wording to “knowledge , insight or understanding" rather than training. One panelist stated that the under- graduate setting does not provide adequate time for such training. 9. To provide an interdisciplinary study of the historical, contemporary and emerging family farms through formal coursework and interaction with individuals and families. I4 comments. Panelists stated the wording is vague . Families have changed in the past. One learns from the past by testing theory and practice alternately, by evaluating current assumptions. Toffler's recognition of transcience and the fractured family was cited. ‘ l2. To help people in all stratas of society in the management of their lives, with respect to food, clothing, shelter and human relationships. 8 comments pointing out that the rimary needs listed above must be satisfied before secondary needs can be fil ed. Not only are these needs basic to life, they are basic to the home economics discipline . I3. To provide a general education. l2 comments expressing the dichotomy between professional studies and liberal education . It is more important to know how to think and apply knowledge than to know all the specifics. For an individual , general education should come before the specialization and continue non-formally and informally long after the program is completed. General education should be a qualification for a person with any university degree, but it may be limiting for employment. I6. 165 To provide liaison between consumers and producers of goods and services utilized by individuals and families. 9 comments indicating that a link is needed to explain what is going on in industry; what causes price changes; what quality and kind of product is preferred and to assist in getting what is wanted. This is central in consumer education which may be a study separate from family studies . To communicate with skill with families at all levels of society . 7 comments. It is important to'help all families regardless of level adapt to change and relate within the family Wwith other institutions. In the past the home economics discipline has been centered on the middle class family . To focus on decision making and organizational processes related to development and use of. family resources. 4 comments. This item is related to eneral education. It is important that clients be able to think and to help emselves. To provide a sound background in natural and social science. 8 comments, reinforcing the relation to general education . This objective could be met by entrance requirements. Other panelists viewed the natural and social science background as more im rtant than specific detail because the grafuate will understand cause and e fect relationships that assist in decision ma mg. ADDITIONAL OBJECTIVES SUPPLIED BY PANELISTS 6 comments. Some state the additional objectives are too broad . Others state they are too limiting. They 9:: related to principles already expressed . I9. 20. To be able to integrate scientific knowledge from the various disciplines which contribute to an understanding of family and individual life . 4 comments. One panelist expressed doubt as to the possible application of scientific principles to the humanities. To be able, to integrate material within the curriculum from one course to another. 5 comments. One cites the meaning of integration is to unify into a whole , which is a part of the education process, the develOpment of maturity and of creativity. Another panelist sees a criticism of the educative process, as this objective implies that integration is not being done now. 2I . To translate scientific findings into policy for work with government and power groups and for programmatic statements to affect social change . 6 comments. A dislike for the words "power groups " was expressed . This objective was recommended for graduate students with an interest in law . 23. 24. 26. 27. 28. 29. 166 To provide training for presentation of materials for press media and other forms of communication. 6 comments pointing out that it is important that family studies teachers know how to communicate and what to communicate. The profession should be 351?: to tell its own story vVi'fI'TSut undue reliance on the media . (Coordinator note -- In most universities the study of interpersonal communication is distinct from that of communication arts or mass communications). To comprehend and advance intercultural relations between individuals . 2 comments. Advance means to improve or to cause to occur sooner. To study the processes by which laws can be improved to better family life . 4 comments. Current laws should be known to family studies personnel, but the process of law should be for law students. To emphasize moral values. 22 comments primarily concerned with which. values or whose values. One panelist suggested a change to "teach moral development" (i .e. Kohlberg) b presenting all of the facts so students can formulate their personal values. There are many values in North America which means that one set of values cannot be applied at all times and in all places. To assist families adjust to, contribute to and obtain maximum benefits from existing structures. l0 comments. (Coordinator note -- existing structures are viable organizations, constitutions, or sub-systems such as government, agencies, professional associations, unions, businesses). Panelists see an implication that existing structures need no changing . To influence innovation-decisions by securing the adoption of new ideas or slowing the diffusion and adoption of ideas . I8 comments . This objective describes the role of a change agent. The phrase to analyze and evaluate before adapting an idea might prevent the bandwagon effect evident in education recently. All students may not benefit from innovation . To focus on preschool child development in a modern society. IO comments recommending inclusion of this objective with adolescent development, and adult development into a study of the full family in its life cycle . Part 2: Course Groupings For A Program In Family Studies At A College of Home Economics 2. Biology 3 comments. A study of genetics is important to human development. 167 5 . Clothing I comment. Clothing is a need of all families. No other discipline deals with clothing. 6 . Communications 7 comments. Communication can become a be-all, end-all cult. What is said is important, as unclear expression means unclear thinking. Many family problems arise from a lack of communication . I l . English or French I8. 20. 2|. 23. I2 comments, primarily related to the base these studies give to communication . Recently language standards have dropped. English or French is required to be an effective student writing term papers or an effective professional writing re arts and to understand and appreciate the writing and communication of at ers. The class as presently taught at the university, however, does not ' fulfill this need. A study of literature can provide insights into the characteris- tics and problems of families . Family Management I comment. This is applied economics, physics and psychology. Food Preparation 7 comments. As costs escalate and resources diminish this area increases in importance . Low 6 comments. A family worker should be able to give a rudimentary interpretation of the law; to exert influence to change laws to benefit the family. Tapics such as marriage laws, property, estates, wills, human rights, could be offered. Non-traditional Families 9 comments. Both traditional and non—traditional families are served. An understanding of the non-traditional will supplement the study of "normal" families. Nutrition 6 comments divided between the universal importance of nutrition and the recommendation that the specialization remain within the nutrition, food science major. Physiology 3 comments. To Charlesworth, physiology is primary to human development. It is necessary for sex education . 24. 28. 168 Physics 4 comments. Physics is a difficult subject, worth taking because there are many applications in home economics areas concerned with the family environment. Social Work 8 comments. Home economics has a broader approach than social work . ADDITIONAL COURSE GROUPINGS SUGGESTED BY PANELISTS 34. 35 . 36. 37. 38. 39. 4l. 4 comments. These courses could be useful electives . Agriculture 5 comments. The area dealing with food production would be useful for a person working in rural Saskatchewan. Computer Science 6 comments. This could be an elective for undergraduates interested in technology and research . Counselling (Methods of Therapy) 7 comments. To be an effective counsellor more study time is required than would be available in this particular program. Food Management (Purchase, Safety) 8 comments. This could be included with food preparation, family management and family finance. Futuristics (Change and Innovation) 5 comments. This is a multidisci Iinary study of change and what is needed and what may happen . There is an e ement of speculation that is a current fad . Government and Community Services 3 comments. This is straightforward and subject to change so does not warrant course time. Human Development I2 comments. Call the discipline human development and include a study of the child, the adolescent, middle age, adults and psychology. International Relations, Including History 3 comments. This could be an interesting elective to fulfill the requirements for a general education . 169 Part 3: Content Topics For Learnings In Famin Studies In Formal, Non-Formal and 4. I6. 20. 23. Tn tormaTTduca fiénfiystems Communication Skills 2 comments. Most persons can improve communication skills. Lack of effective communication may be the result of informal Ieaming. Death and Dying 5 comments. The reaction to death and dying is a very personal form of coping with more impact in the informal system. Decision Making 3 comments. Scientifically derived theories are available for use in the formal system. Decision skills are acquired extraneously through coping . Family Goals And Objectives 2 comments. More consideration of family goals could be given by the public in the non-formal system. Hobbies 3 comments. Place hobbies in the non-formal setting where individual preferences of persons with increased leisure time may be considered. Homemaking 7 comments, supporting the importance of the home and of home economics. "I think homema ing can be a supportive element in stregthening the family. In a home economics class students are in close proximity to a home setting and can learn joy with responsibility; consideration for others; sharing and caring" . Interpersonal Relationships 2 comments. This is the key to family relationships and the satisfaction of psychological needs. Living with Stress 4 comments. This is related to coping, in informal settings. Middle Age 5 comments. Students in formal setting should be aware of the stresses and conflicts of middle age, to prepare for their future role. Teaching Children About Sex 5 comments, simply stating that sex education is a family responsibility. Too mUch information may cause perversions. 170 24. Values 5 comments. Values are best learned at home. Formal education can include a critical examination of different values, but should not impose one set of values. ADDITIONAL CONTENT TOPICS SUPPLIED BY PANELISTS 7 comments. This seems to be an attempt to make home economics a nacea . The teaching profession has made this mistake and now is trying to backtrac . In promising the impossible we are spread too thin. The amount of expertise developed in four years is insufficient. It is better to refer clients to specialists . 25 . Civic Responsibilities 2 comments. The topic alligns with civil rights. 26. Community Support Groups 5 comments. This is related to the course grouping item, government and community services . 27. Family Breakdown 4 comments, primarily to include with other topics. 28. Marriage Preparation 4 comments. This is an interdisciplinary topic to be shared with other professionals . 29. Sexism (Stereotypes) 4 comments. Sexism assumes that one sex is superior -- a topic that has been overworked recently. ' 30. Sexual Therapy ll comments. Interested persons could study after the baccalaureate and work experience . 3l . Understanding Emotions . 4 comments, primarily to include with other topics. 32. Use of Television And Radio In The Home 5 comments. Discuss in informal settings. 33. World Citizenship 5 comments, primarily to include in other topics. 171 In Part 3, if consensus has been reached in two of the three systems, the item did not appear in Interaction . Part 3: Rank Order According to Means Rank, Out of 33 Item Formal Non-Formal Informal I. Care of Children 5 l0 4 2. Censorship 33 33 33 3. Civil Rights 22 I7 26 4. Communication Skills I I 2 5. Conflict Resolution II 9 l0 6. Contemporary :Society l6 I9 25 7. Coping l4 l2 ll 8. Death and Dying 25 25 l8 9. Decision Making 4 6 7 IO. Family Goals and Objectives I2 27 9 ll. Family Life Cycle I3 3l 24 l2. Family Planning I0 8 8 l3. Gerontology 2l l8 22 I4. Growth and Self Awarness 6 ll 6 I5. Hobbies 32 23 20 I6. Homemaking 27 28 I5 I7. Interpersonal Relationships 2 2 3 I8. Living With Stress 7 5 l4 l9. Maturation l8 22 I9 20. Middle Age 24 26 30 2|. Parent Education 20 7 I6 22. Sexuality l9 l4 l3 172 The rank is based upon the mean, which is the average of the scores. Rank, Out of 33 Item Formal Non-Formal Informal 23. Teaching Children About Sex I7 2l 5 24. Values 3 3 I 25. Civic Responsibilities 23 I5 2| 26. Community Support Groups 29 I6 29 27. Family Breakdown I5 20 23 28. Marriage Preparation 9 4 l2 29. Sexism (Stereotypes) 28 29 3I 30. Sexual Therapy 30 30 32 3|. Understanding Emotions 8 l3 I7 32. Use of Television And Radio In The Home 3l 32 27 33. World Citizenship 26 24 28 APPENDIX F ADVISORY COMMITTEE LETTER AND QUESTIONNAIRE A copy of the model may be obtained by writing the author UNIVER B ITY OF SASKATCHEWAN IAIKAYOOH. BANADA -LL£.E OF HON! ECONOMIC. 87N OWO August 5 , 1976 . In‘Hay you agreed to he a neaher of the advisory cannittee for Iy study "Objectives. Course Groupings and Content Topics for a Prograa in really Studies in a College of Bone Ecanaaics: A Delphi Study". Ninety-three subjects. classified as specialists and generalists replied to the three round study. reedhack about opinions expresses in the preceeding round was distributed with the second and third rounds. These replies have been analysed. A framework of objectives for a program in family studies in a College of lane Boone-ice and a nodal of course groupings for such a four year progra- are enclosed. Would you please read the fraaeeork of objectives and nodal of courses and coaplete the one-page questionnaire which accoupanies this letter and return it to as in the envelope provided hygreturn nail. Thank you very such for your assistance with this project. when the study has heen.coapleted an abstract will he nailed to you. Sincerely. Vanda Young. HY:LIV Enclosures. 173 1% Advisory Connittee Signature Number V DATE: Advisory Committee Delphi-Panily Studies wands Young August 5, 1976. 175 Questionnaire: Reaction of Advisory Committee To Proposed Objectives. Course Groupings and Content Topics_ for a Program 1; Family Studies for a College of Home Economics The enclosed framework for objectives. course groupings and content topics for a program in Family Studies for a College of Home Economics is foraulated from the consensus of opinions of a Delphi panel of specialist and generalist experts. would you please answer the questions below for suitability of the framework for use in Saskatchewan. (1) Do you approve of the enclosed framework for a program in Family Studies for a College of Home Economics in Saskatchewan? YES NO (2) If the answer to (l) is Yes. what date do you see that such a progran‘will be possible . probable . (3) Comments: APPENDIX G TABLES 176 TABLE 19.--Demographic Description of Panelists Characteristics Categories Panelists No. Z Participant in prior Delphi Yes 3 3.3 No 88 94.5 Missing ._2 2.2 Total 93 100.0 Highest Academic Level Baccalaureate 62 66.6 Masters 18 19.4 Doctoral 7 7.5 Other 5 5.4 Missing _1_ 1.1 Total 93 100 0 Degrees Obtained in Saskatchewan 64 68.8 Elsewhere 28 30.1 Missing __1 1.1 Total 83 100.0 Age Under 25 7 68.8 25 to 44 53 57.0 45 to 60 27 29.0 Over 60 _§_ 6.5 Total 93 100.0 Sex Female 76 81.7 Male .11 18. Total 93 100.0 Marital Status Not Married 19 20.4 Married Couple 62 66.7 Separated 6 6.5 Divorced 3 3.2 Widowed 3 3.2 Single Parent _9_ 0 Total 93 100.0 Children None 31 33.3 One 7 7.5 Two 30 32.3 Three 12 12.9 Four 7 7.5 Five 4 4.3 Six 1 1.1 Over Six _1_ 1.1 0.0 93 10 177 TABLE 20.--Percentage of Demographic Variables Within Six Sections* of Panelists Demographic 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total Highest Academic Level B.A. 11.1 28.6 33.4 9.5 7.9 9.5 100.0 M.A. 44.4 5 6 44.4 5.6 100.0 Ph.D. 85.7 ... ... ... 14.3 100.0 Other 40.0 40.0 ... 20.0 100.0 Age -25 28.6 42.8 28.6 ... ... .. 100.0 25 - 44 20.0 25.5 21.8 14.5 9.1 9.1 100.0 45 - 60 30.8 15.4 19.2 15.4 11.5 7.7 100.0 60 + 16.7 33.3 33.3 16.7 100.0 Sex F 26.6 27.8 25.3 1.3 8.9 10.1 100.0 M 6.7 . 86.6 6.7 100.0 Marital Status Not Married 35.0 40.0 5.0 5.0 15.0 0 100.0 Married Couple 21.8 18.8 25.0 17.2 4 7 12.5 100.0 Separated 33.3 16.7 33.3 16.7 . . 100.0 Divorced 33.3 33.3 33.3 ... . 99.9 Widowed 33.3 . . 33.3 33 3 . 99.9 Single Parent . . . . Children 0 41.4 37.9 13.8 ... 6.9 100.0 1 . . 28.6 28.6 ... 42.8 ... 100.0 2 15.2 18.2 15.2 33.2 ... 18.2 100.0 3 30.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 10.0 . . 100.0 4 12.5 75.0 .. 12.5 100.0 5 25.0 . 25.0 25 0 ... 25.0 100.0 6 .. ... ... 100.0 100.0 6 + . ... 100.0 ... ... 100.0 *Key 1. Specialist hierarchical 4. Generalist hierarchical 2. Specialist heterogeneous 5. Generalist heterogeneous 3. Specialist homogeneous 6. Generalist homogeneous 178 TABLE 21.--Re1ationship of Occupation to Formal, Non-Formal, and Informal Systems, Self Description by Panelists Description Formal Non-Formal Informal No. Z No. Z No. Z Very related 45 48.4 22 23.7 52 55.9 Related 14 15.1 36 38.7 19 20.4 Slightly related 15 16.1 18 19.4 11 11.8 Unrelated 14 15.1 12 12.9 6 6.5 Missing 5 5.3 5 5.3 5 5.3 Total 93 100.0 93 100.0 93 100.0 TABLE 22.--Confidence in Ability to Rate Objectives, Course Groupings and Content Topics of Panelists Degree of Confidence Part One Part Two Part Three Objectives Course Content Groupings Topics No. Z No. Z No. Z Certain 9 9.7 7 7.4 11 11.8 Reliable 59 63.4 53 57.0 45 48.3 Not determinable 19 20.4 26 28.0 28 30.0 Risky 3 3.2 5 5.4 6 6.5 Unreliable 1 1.1 0 0 1 1.1 Missing 2 2.2 2 2.2 2 2.2 Total 93 100.00 93 100.0 93 100.0 179 c.00H mm o o o o H.H H m.qm mm o.Hm we o.NN Hm mamaH momma aaau .aaumHH c.00H mm H.H H H.H H m.m A m.om no m.mm Hm m.n m mauaH Hanna awaaHHano 0.00H mm o o o o N.m m m.om Hm «.mH wH H.H H mnmnuo nuH3 aauw¢ o.OOH mm H.H H H.H H H.H H n.om mH m.mq ow n.mm Hm amumHH o.OOH mm N.N N m.m m m.oH mH H.me Ho w.om mm q.e a maaaH hams Hawmo c.00H mm N.N N m.m m m.¢H MH o.qq oo H.em Hm ¢.q a mauaH nmmmo ou umuHm N .02 N .02 N .02 N .02 N .02 N .02 N .02 aHnmnouaBH ua3 aHnanoum Hauoe waHmmHE knu> aHnanonaaH HanuHm ananoum mua> aOHuaHuumun aOHuaHuuman MHam .aonmaumHa comm ou comm aH umHHaaam mo aOHuanHuuaoorr.mN mqm