AN ANALYSIS or THE VALUESANS VALUE SYSTEMS REPORTED ‘BY: » STUDENTS, THE GENERAL PUBLIC, ‘ - ‘ L '7 AND EDUCATORS {N A SELECTED" APPALACHIAN PUBLEC scz‘iootptsmlcr~._‘f; ’ ‘fgl tisser’cation fer the Segree of PA. 0-. ' MIGWGAN SYA‘E‘E UMVERSETY ' BONALD CARRGLL BUTLER 1973 ‘ mumr"”1!”an 3 1293 ”112": ”MM“ 4 I -ns.I‘-D ~ . If}. ID'I'.’I"“IVO I" ll .4‘ \I .u‘ I ill Illullji‘ ABSTRACT AN ANALYSIS OF THE VALUES AND VALUE SYSTEMS REPORTED BY STUDENTS, THE GENERAL PUBLIC, AND EDUCATORS IN A SELECTED APPALACHIAN PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT BY Donald Carroll Butler Statement of the Problem The problem of this study has been to determine the reported value priorities of three groups in a public school district; to determine differences and similarities that exist among the three groups; and to ascertain the opinions of the three groups regarding selected elements of community education in the district. Plan of the Study The Value Surveyy Form B, developed by Milton Rokeach, was the major research instrument used in this investigation. The value survey consisted of one set each of eighteen terminal values and eighteen instrumental values. The reSpondent was asked to rank each list of eighteen values in a preferred order. A School Opinion Survey and a Personal Information Survey were also used in this study. Donald Carroll Butler The students (N=127) and educators (N=99) were administered the survey in group meetings for each. The general public (N=43) received the survey by mail, with follow-up efforts conducted. Eighty—three per cent of the total sample responded to the survey. Mean scores on each value were computed and sub— jected to the Kruskal-Wallis H Test of significance. The level of significance was set at .05. Variance scores on each value were computed from which the degree of group homogeneity was compared. Percentage scores of the responses to the community education elements of the School Opinion Survey were also computed. Major Findings The students indicated the highest preference for the terminal values, Happiness and Freedom, and the instrumental values Honest and Responsible. The general public group and the educators most preferred the terminal values Salvation and Family Security and the instrumental values Honest and Responsible. All three groups agreed on the low priority given to A World of Beauty and Social Recognition. Similarly, the three groups tended to give more priority to the moral values and less priority to the competence values. Twelve terminal values were found to be ranked differently by the three groups at the .05 level of sig- nificance. The twelve were : A Comfortable Life, An Donald Carroll Butler Exciting Life, A Sense of Accomplishment, A World at Peace, A WOrld of Beauty, Equality, Family Security, Inner Har— mony, Social Recognition, Self'Respect, Salvation, and Pleasure. Similarly, eight instrumental values were dif— ferentiated by group membership at .05: Capable, Cheerful, Clean, Forgiving, Honest, Intellectual, Obedient, and Responsible. When the variables age, sex, income, Appalachian native, years lived outside Appalachia, and education level were considered, some differences were noted within each of the three groups. It was also determined that the general public had a higher degree of group homogeneity in their reported value systems. More than half of the total sample indicated that each of the twelve selected community education elements should be included in the school program. The elements apparently viewed as most important were: vocational training for high school students; career counseling for youth and adults; vocational training for adults; and a basic education/GED program for adults. Ninety-six per cent of the sample agreed the school should work with the other elements in a community to improve community living. Likewise, 91 per cent of the total sample agreed school buildings should be available for use by all citizens in the community. Seventy-one per cent of the respondents indicated that Donald Carroll Butler school-related decisions should be made jointly by edu- cators, students, and the general public. Those who dis— agreed with joint decision making clung to the traditional public school decision-making process, i.e., superintendent and board of education making school—related decisions. AN ANALYSIS OF THE VALUES AND VALUE SYSTEMS REPORTED BY STUDENTS, THE GENERAL PUBLIC, AND EDUCATORS IN A SELECTED APPALACHIAN PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT BY Donald Carroll Butler A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Higher Education 1973 DEDICATION The completion of this dissertation could not have been accomplished without the love, understanding, and support of four very special people. My wife, Rebecca, who has been an associate stu— dent, a wonderful mother, and a loving wife throughout the duration of my adventure in higher education. Our children, Donald, Sandra, and Bridget, whose loving innocence gives inSpiration to all my efforts. You, my wonderful four, are the "sine qua non" of my life; and to you this dissertation is dedicated. ii AC KNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge those persons who contributed to the completion of this task, each in their own special way. Sincere appreciation is expressed to the members of my committee: Dr. Stanley E. Hecker, chairman, for his professional guidance and unfailing support; Dr. Clyde M. Campbell, for making the year as a Mott Intern a meaningful experience; Dr. Albert E. Levak, for giving me a needed perspective in sociology; and Dr. Walter F. Johnson, for his assistance and cooperation. The year as a Mott Intern was made possible by a fellowship from the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, and for their financial assistance I am grateful. I appreciate the many acts of kindness and c00per- ation from Dr. William E. Becker, Director, and all the fine folks at the National Center for Community Education. A special thank you is expressed to John H. Brock, Superintendent, and the Montgomery County, Kentucky, Community Schools for allowing me to conduct this study in their school system. iii I appreciate having known and worked this past year with my fellow Michigan State University Mott Interns. To those many significant others, family and friends who contributed to this effort in their own way, I thank you. Deepest appreciation is reserved for my wife, Rebecca, and our children, Donald, Sandra, and Bridget. For your many sacrifices, your patience, and your devoted love, I thank you. This dissertation is a result of our efforts. iv PREFACE Chapter I. II. III. TABLE OF CONTENTS THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . Theoretical Background. . . Statement of the Problem . . Significance of the Problem . Statement of Limitations . . Definition of Terms. . . . Overview . . . . . . . REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . Clarifying the Meaning and Function Values and Value Systems . The Measurement of Values. . Research Using Rokeach Value Survey Values, The "American Way," and Tra~ ditional Public Education. Values and the Appalachian Situation . Implementing Community Education: Implications Regarding Values Summary . . . . . . . PLAN OF THE STUDY . . . . . Defining the Population . . Description of Montgomery County, Kentucky . . . . . Selection of the Populations. Instrumentation . . . . Collection of the Data. . Analysis of the Data . . Summary. . . . . . . Some Page 14 16 22 23 24 26 27 4O 48 61 75 83 93 98 98 98 100 lOl 106 108 110 Chapter IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA . . . . . . . . Terminal Values . . . . . . . . Instrumental Values . . . . . . Student Group (N=127). . . . . . . sex 0 O O O O O O Q 0 0 Family Income: (under $5,000) ($5,000— $9,000) ($10,000-$15,000) (over $15,000) 0 o o o o o o o 0 Native, Nonnative of Appalachia . . General Public Group (N=43). . . . . Age Group: The Age Groupings for the General Public were the Following: 20-30, 31-40, over 40. . . . . Sex. . . . . . . . . . . . Family Income . . . . . . Native, Nonnative of Appalachia . . Number of Years Lived Outside Appav lachia. . . . . . . . . . Educator Group (N=99). . . . . . . Age Group: The Age Group Categories for the Educators Were as Follows: 20-30; 31-40; Over 40. . . . Sex. . . . . . . . . . . Family Income . . . . . . . Native, Nonnative of Appalachia . Number of Years Lived Outside Appa- lachia. . . . . . . . . . Education Level. . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . V. SUMMARY, FINDINGS, AND DISCUSSION. . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . Statement of the Problem. Assumptions . . . . . Review of Literature . . Plan of the Study . . . C O O O O O 0 O 0 Findings 0 g o o o o 0 Q o o 0 Discussion . . . . . . . . . Recommendations for Further Study. . . vi Page 111 113 115 120 120 122 122 122 122 123 123 123 124 124 124 125 125 126 126 126 132 136 136 136 137 139 142 144 148 150 Page SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . 153 APPENDICES Appendix A. Value Survey, School Opinion Survey, and Personal Information Surveys . . . . . 161 B. Letter of Transmittal. . . . . . . . . 167 C. Tables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 vii Table 2.1. LIST OF TABLES A comparative summary of personal charac— teristics . . . . . . . . . . . A comparative summary of family life charac- teristics . . . . . . . . . . . A comparative summary of interpersonal relationship patterns . . . . . . . Some contrasting value orientations . . . The terminal values and defining phrases. . The instrumental values and defining phrases. . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency distributions of value system reliabilities obtained for Form B . . . Distribution of terminal values ranking for students, general public, and educators . Distribution of instrumental value rankings for students, general public, and edu- cators . . . . . . . . . . . . The moral and competence value (instrumen- tal values) distribution of students, general public, and educators . . . . Terminal value rankings for students, general public, and educators . . . . Instrumental value rankings for students, general public, and educators . . . . Summary of responses to question one, School Opinion Survey (N=269) . . . . viii Page 77 78 79 81 102 103 105 114 116 118 119 121 129 Table 4.7. Summary of responses to question two, School Opinion Survey . . . . . Summary of responses to question three, School Opinion Survey . . . . . . Summary of positive responses to question four, School Opinion Survey . . . Value rankings by sex, students. Value rankings by family income, students Value rankings by age group, general public. Value rankings by sex, general public. . Value rankings by family income, general public . . . . . . . . . . . Value rankings by native, nonnative of Appa- lachia, general public. . . . . . . Value rankings by number of years lived out- side Appalachia, general public. . . Value rankings by age group, educators . . Value rankings by sex, educators . . . Value rankings by family income, educators . Value rankings by native, nonnative of Appa- lachia, educators . . . . . . . . Value rankings by number of years lived out- side Appalachia, educators . . . . . Value rankings by education level, educators Comparison of terminal and instrumental values' Grand Mean and variance scores; students, general public, educators . ix Page 131 131 133 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. A theoretical model to show relationships among beliefs, values, value systems, attitudes, and behavior . . . . . . . 13 PREFACE He who lets the world, or his own portion of it, choose his plan of life for him, has no need of any other faculty than the apevlike one of imitation. He who chooses his plan for himself, employs all his faculties. He must use observation to see, reasoning and judgement to foresee, activity to gather materials for decision, discrimination to decide, and when he has decided, firmness and self-control to hold to his deliberate decision. . . . Human nature is not a machine to be built after a model, and set to do exactly the work prescribed for it, but a tree, which requires to grow and develop itself on all sides, according to the tendency of the inward forces which make it a living thing. . . . There is no reason that all human existence should be constructed on some one or some small number of patterns. If a person possesses any tolerable amount of common sense and experience, his own mode of laying out his existence is the best, not because it is the best in itself, but because it is his own mode. . . . If it were only that people have diversities of taste, that is reason enough for not attempting to shape them all after one model. . . . The same things which are helps to one person towards the cultivation of his higher nature, are hindrances to another. The same mode of life is a healthy excitement to one, keeping all his faculties of action and enjoyment in their best order, while to another it is a distracting burthen {gig}, which suspends or crushes all internal life. Such are the differences among human beings in their sources of pleasure, their susceptibilities of pain, and the Operation on them of different physical and moral agencies, that unless there is a corresponding diversity in their modes of life, they neither obtain their fair share of happiness, nor grow up to the mental, moral, and aesthetic stature of which their nature is capable. John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (1859) CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM I am a human being, whatever that may be. I speak for all of us who move and think and feel and whom time consumes. I speak as an individual unique in a universe beyond my understanding, and I speak for man. I am hemmed in by limitations of sense and mind and body, of place and time and circumstances, some of which I know but most of which I do not. I am like a man journeying through a forest, aware of occasional glints of light overhead, with recol- lections of the long trail I have already traveled, and conscious of wider spaces ahead. I want to see more clearly where I have been and where I am going, and above all I want to know why I am where I am and why I am traveling at all. Man's Emerging Mind, John Berrill (1955), p. l Introduction There is little doubt that public schools in the United States are now being asked to do more than ever before, and at the same time these schools are being cri- ticized for what they presently purport to be doing. The issues are many and complex, and depending upon who one is referring to, these issues occupy a varying position of critical importance. A look at the public school curriculum indicates that the school is charged with the responsibility of providing instruction for everything from interpreting literature to solving a chemistry problem; from analyzing social issues to acquiring a specific trade skill; even to making youngsters better drivers. Add to these the increasing pressures to include in the curriculum such areas as family or sex education, drug education, and minority relations, it is not difficult to envision the complexity of the public school venture in the 1970's. If the schools were concerned only with instruction, perhaps the difficulties inherent in such a broad range of instructional activities could be ameliorated in a reason— ably sane fashion; however, since the school is an integral part of the cultural milieu of the American society, the critics of public school education come from many sectors. Students are calling for more relevance in their school experience. Individual differences and needs of learners are discussed by students, teachers, and administrators. The citizenry is demanding a higher level of accountability for the present tax dollar expenditure, while school officials continue to request additional funds for extended school services. Specific "pressure groups" concern themselves with the desirability of teaching about communism, human evolution, religion, and the con- troversial issues implicit in social justice education. Professional negotiations, citizens' demand for local control of schools, and teacher strikes provide addi— tional fuel for the already raging fire of discontent regarding public education. The cross-district busing of students for the purposes of racial balance and equal educational opportunity; and the realization that the present method of financing public schools is inadequate and inequitable for contemporary educational needs, are both issues that have developed more recently as public educators suffer through an "agonizing reappraisal." An examination of the foregoing issues seems to reflect the essence of three rather general yet basic questions: 1. What is public education supposed to be doing? 2. What are the implications of, and what does equal educational opportunity for all really mean? 3. Who shall be the participants in educational decision—making? While these questions may be basic, the approaches to answering them are obviously quite complex. Yet, what has been the educators' method of responding to the avalanche of criticisms, demands, and general disillusion— ment about the position and purpose of public education in the contemporary social setting? This writer suggests that perhaps educators have attempted to answer the questioners rather than the questions. For problems relating to curriculum and social change the schools have added a "new program." For problems related to the teaching of youngsters with indi- vidual needs, wants, and capabilities, the schools have responded with teaching machines, team teaching, indie vidualized instruction, nongraded grouping, differentiated staffing, open classrooms, and a whole host of other edu— cational innovations. Finally, when public education is confronted with the question of being held accountable for its very existence, various committees, commissions, and task forces have been formed to restate, in similarly ambiguous terms, existing statements of the goals, aims, objectives, and purposes of education. The tragedy of all this confusion becomes evident when one assesses the relatively minimal amount of significant improvement in many areas of the educational process as a result of these efforts. Parents, students, and citizens continue to be disenchanted with school activities. The student drop—out rate of public schools is a continuing concern. The problem of illiterate adults who are dysfunctional in the American society still exists. Social problems con- tinue to deface the image of the "great American dream." What then are the alternatives? What are the issues in public education that must be examined before departing on a different course of action aimed at providing the optimum learning experiences for a given public school setting? pr ‘P 'v .- hi A central tenet of this dissertation that seeks to provide answers to the previous questions may be summar- ized as follows: Before any decisions are made regarding the development and implementation of any new approach to edu— cation (e.g., community education) the basic values of the people included in a given educational enterprise must be identified and studied. The literature provides evidence that a primary purpose of public education is to promote a specified set of societal ideals, or values. One may color this purpose by interjecting such terms as democra— tic and moral, to infer that rejection of such a purpose of education is to oppose democracy, or to support immoral behavior. The issue is clear, however, the social insti— tution of public education transcends the role of simply transmitting information, i.e., explicating what is, or is not; but it actively engages in purporting what should, or should not be done with the information. Consequently, the concept of values surfaces as a critical consideration in a school system's decision to move from a traditional program to community education; for in fact such a decision exemplifies the valuation phenomenon. The concern of this study is not in determining whether people have values, but rather with the relative importance individuals place on specific values within a total value system. Such importance would seemingly be reflected in a priority listing of these values from most important to least important. Theoretical Background The difficulty inherent in the study of values is a result of the ambiguities and confusion that envelOp the concept itself. Quite frankly, a number of linguistic symbols are used interchangeably to describe values. Beliefs and attitudes are two such symbols, with atti- tudes being the most difficult to discriminate from values. Unfortunately, empirical investigation has not always led to the clarification of this confusion. The Allport-Vernon Study of Values1 in 1931 was perhaps the first significant study conducted; and the resulting instrument, for the next several years, became the most popular method of assessing interest and personal motives as value indicators.2 An analysis of the work, however, reveals that the study was actually an investi— gation of basic attitudes rather than a study of values per se. In 1935, Allport was even prompted to write: 1G. W. Allport and P. E. Vernon, A Study of Values (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1931), revised in l96l with Allport, Vernon, and G. Lindzey. (Hereinafter referred to as A Study of Values.) 2W. F. Dukes, "Psychological Studies of Values," Psychological Bulletins, LII (1955), 24-50. (Hereinafter referred to as rFPsycthIogical Studies.") The concept of attitudes is probably the most dis— tinctive and indispensable concept in contemporary American psychology. No other term appears more frequently in the experimental literature.3 Milton Rokeach, whose research has provided much direction to the intent of this study, questions the heavy emphasis on the research of attitudes: Several considerations lead me to place the value concept ahead of the attitude concept. First, value is clearly a more dynamic concept than attitude having a strong motivational component as well as cognitive, affective, and behavioral components. Second, while attitude and value are both widely assumed to be determinants of social behavior, value is a determinant of attitude as well as behavior. Third, if we further assume that a person possesses considerable fewer values than attitudes, then the value concept provides us with a more economical analytic tool for describing and explaining similarities and differences between persons, groups, nations, and cultures.4 Rokeach has also expounded at least four separate subsystems within the value-attitude system that may serve to further clarify the confusion about values and attitudes: First, several beliefs may be organized together to form a single attitude focused on a specific object or situation. Second, two or more attitudes may be organized together to form a larger attitudinal 3G. W. Allport, "Attitudes," in A Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. by C. Murchison (Worcester, Mass.: Clark University Press, 1935), p. 798. 4Milton Rokeach, "A Theory of Organization and Change in Value and Attitude Systems," Journal of Social Issues, XXIV (January, 1968), 19. (Hereinafter referred to as "A Theory of Organization.") system, say, a religious or political system. Third and fourth, two or more values may be organized together to form an instrumental or a terminal value system.5 Another distinction between attitudes and values that Rokeach has set forth, is stated as: An attitude . . . is an organization of several beliefs focused on a specific object (physical or social, concrete or abstract) or situation, pre— disposing one to respond in some preferential manner. Values, on the other hand, have to do with modes of conduct and end—states of existence. To say that a person ”has a value" is to say that he has an enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is per— sonally and socially preferable to alternative modes of conduct or endvstates of existence.6 A value, according to Rokeach, is " . . . a standard employed to influence the values, attitudes, and actions of at least some others--our children's for example." Finally, he states, " . . . a value, unlike an attitude, is a standard or yardstick to guide actions, attitudes, comparisons, evaluations, and justifications of self and others."7 Several writers support the position taken by Rokeach regarding values. Coleman states, " . . . values determine our choices; we choose one objective over SMilton Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes and Values (San Francisco: Jossy—Bass, Inc., I968), p.5162. (Here— inafter referred to as Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values.) 61bid., pp. 156-60. 71bid., p. 160. 10 another on the basis of our own values."8 Herrick regards values as, " . . . the relation existing between the thing sought and the satisfaction it gives, or may give, 9 the seeker.” Williams asserts that values, " . . . serve 10 as criteria for selection in action." Cantril says, " . . . values are the compass which gives man his direction, both as to how he should act and what his action if for."11 Finally, Kluckhohn states: "A value is a conception, explicit or implicit, distinctive of an individual or characteristic or a group, of the desirable which influences the selection from available modes, means, and ends of action."12 8James C. Coleman, PersonalityiDynamics and Effec- tive Behavior (Glenview, 111.: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1960), p. 300. 9C. Judson Herrick, The Evolution of Human Nature (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1956), p. 138. 10Robin M. Williams, Jr., "The Concept of Values," International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, XVI (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1968), p. 238. (Here— inafter referred to as "The Concept of Values.") 11Hadley Cantril, The "Why" of Man's Experience (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1950), pJI37} 12Clyde Kluckhohn, ”Values and Value Orientations in the Theory of Action," in Toward a General Theory Action, ed. by Talcott Parsons and Edward A. Shils (Cam- Sridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1954), p. 395. (Hereinafter referred to as "Values and Value Orien— tations.") 11 An analysis of the foregoing statements very clearly reveals that values have behavioral consequences; and when this behavior assumes some order or pattern, one can infer that a particular system of valuation has developed. Inasmuch as one value may at times be in conflict with another value, the individual is forced to make a choice, or to place one value higher than another on a priority list. The end result may be thought of as a hierarchial ranking of specific values, perceived by an individual as being important, with the resulting value system ultimately determining an individual's behavior in a given situation. This value system is subject to change, and may be incongruous with another individual's system, or with that "specified value system of society" that public schools seek to enhance. Rokeach has found that certain combinations of values differentiate individuals, groups, nations, and cultures. "They can differentiate men from women, hippies from non—hippies, hawks from doves, Jews from Catholics, Democrats from Republicans, and so forth." Socio-economic status, church attendance, and educational level may be reasonably predicted by analyzing the ranking of values.13 The theoretical constructs providing the direction for this study are reflected in the following assumptions that have been gleaned from the literature: 13 . Rokeach, "A Theory of Organization,‘ pp. 13—33. 12 1. Values are more stable, fewer in number, and are distinct from attitudes. 2. Institutions within the American culture seek to promote selected values for the society in general (e.g. public schools). 3. Values have behavioral consequences. 4. Individuals possess these values, but differences may be noted in the order of importance for each value. (Consequently, conflicts may develop between individual and individual, or individual and institution, as to what is the preferred end state of existence, or mode of conduct.) 5. Patterns of behavior resulting from valuation process infer the formation of a value system that guides the actions of an individual. 6. Specific values may be grouped together to form two sub-systems of values, i.e., terminal values, or end—state of existence, and instrumental values, or modes of conduct. 7. Values are capable of being identified and analyzed. These assumptions are outlined in Figure l. Rokeach has developed a phenomenological approach to the measurement of values. He has devised a survey, 13 PERSONAL INFLUENCE SOCIAL INFLUENCE *BELIEFS VALUES TERMINAL VALUES INSTRUMENTAL VALUES VALUE SYSTEM ......... ---- .............. a ATTITUDES STIMULI VALUATION ------- ---- SOCIAL BEHAVIOR ~~-—-—-~~~--~ Figure l.—-A theoretical model to show relation— ships among beliefs, values, value systems, attitudes, and behavior. 14 that requires the respondent to rank, in the order of per- ceived importance, his own values. Eighteen terminal values (end-states of existence), and eighteen instru— mental values (modes of conduct) comprise the two-part survey. A complete description of the Vglue Survgy l4 instrument is given in Chapter III. Statement of the Problem The problem of this study is to identify the values and value systems reported by selected groups in a public school district. More specifically, this study seeks to: 1. Select from within the public school district the high school senior students; the general public members of the school-advisory committee; and the certified professional educators. 2. Administer the Rokeach Value Survey, a personal information survey, and a specially developed school Opinion survey. 3. Determine by statistical analysis, similarities and differences in the reported values among the three groups based on selected variables. 14Milton Rokeach, "The Measurement Of Values and Value Systems," in Social Psyghology and Political Behavior, ed. by G. Aboarian and J. W. Soule (COIfimbus, 0510: Charles E. Merrill, 1971), pp. 22-23. (Hereinafter referred to as "Measurement of Values.") 15 In lieu of hypotheses, the following research questions are posed to direct the focus Of this study: 1. What is the reported value hierarchy for the student group? What is the reported value hierarchy for the general public group? What is the reported value hierarchy for the educator group? To what degree is the reported value systems for each group internally homogeneous? Are there differences in the ranking of specific values among the reported value systems of the three groups? Are there more differences in the instrumental or the terminal value rankings? Are there similarities among the reported value systems of the three groups? What is the reported preference for the moral and competence (instrumental) values? Are there differences or similarities in the reported values and value systems Of the three groups based on these selected variables? a. age group b. sex 16 c. family income d. years residence in the school district e. native of Appalachia f. number of years, if any, lived outside Appalachia 9. education level 10. What are the opinions of each group toward selected elements of community education in the Montgomery County public schools? Significance of the Problem If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away. Henry David Thoreau, Walden, p. 311 The significance of the problem grows out of the concern to provide educational experiences that are appropriate to the contemporary needs Of the American society. If one assumes that the concept Of community education reflects a different value orientation than that Of the traditional K-12 program, then it follows that any change from one to the other implies the neces- sity tO examine such value differences, so as to minimize confusion and conflict (inner-personal, interpersonal, or personal-institutional conflict) during the adoption of the new approach. The following vignette, however, 17 expresses the apparent lack of attention given to the con— cept Of values, their effect on behavior, and their relation to education: In the spring Of 1970 on a small college campus in the West, a group of students ran the American flag up a pole upside down. Another group objected and one of its members climbed the pole and brought the flag down. This precipitated a major altercation, and in the melee that followed, the flag was torn apart and local police had to be called to quell the disturbance. Although these young people were living in the year 1970 and had the advantage of thirteen to sixteen years Of formal education, their ability to resolve value conflicts was evidently little better than that Of their forebears who inhabited the earth many thousands Of years ago-~long before there were schools and formal education, to say nothing of social studies education.15 Otto von Mering suggests that this lack of attention to values study may have been the result of social scientists accepting such assumptions as: "There exists an absolute difference between value and fact, or between ethical and scientific statements"; . . . and, ”values are not amenable to scientific treatment."16 He continues by saying: "During the first half of this century most social scientists . . . regarded values as a problem for the philosophers"; and thus, "They preferred 15John Jarolimek, President, National Council for the Social Studies, Values Education:_;§ationale, Strate- gies, and Procedures, 41st Yearbook, 1971 (Washington: National Council for the Social Studies, 1971), p. v. 16Otto von Mering, A Grammar of Human Values (Pittsburgh: University Of Pittsburgh Press, 1961), p. 3. 18 to concentrate on the gathering of immediately observed data and on their Objective interpretation."l7 Thus, the rationale for this study suggests that the values of individuals involved in a change process must be examined before any course of action is taken. Some years ago, Howard W. Beers stated: Part of our task in understanding a particular‘com- munity is to discover its individuality in the pattern Of emphasis on values. NO member or insti— tution can undertake projects for effective com- munity service without sensitivity to community values.l8 And: A conspicuous aspect Of many communities today is lack of concensus on values with the resulting confusion about which components shall be highest in value hierarchy by which the community shall live.19 Beers concluded: TO weigh any situation in any community without earnest consideration of the value system is not to weigh it at all for the scales are out of balance at the start. In fact, an identification of the hierarchy of values may well be a starting point for any labor in the development of community programs.20 Though speaking in a different context, Peter Drucker concurs with Beers regarding the need to determine 17Ibid. 18Howard W. Beers, "American Communities," National Societ for the Study of Education, Fifty-second Yearbook, Part II, The Community School, ed. by Nelson B. Henry (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953), p. 28. (Hereinafter referred to as "American Communities.") 19 20 Ibid. Ibid. 19 existing realities before decisions are made concerning future directions or actions. In Age of Discontinuity, Drucker states: It is not possible to be effective unless one first decides what one wants to accomplish. It is not possible to manage, in other words, unless one first has a goal. It is not even possible to design the structure of an organization unless one knows what it is supposed to be doing and how to measure whether it is doing it.21 Drucker further states that, "The most important phase Of planning is neither the goal-setting nor the evaluation; it is involvement Of the public in reviewing the results of education in deciding what to give priority to and to concentrate on and what to abandon as no longer worthwhile.“22 Drucker's comments are particularly applicable to this study since it is assumed that the decision to adopt a community education philosophy implies a broader, more comprehensive purpose of education; and further implies that such a purpose represents a shift in the value priorities Of those involved in educational decision making within a given school district. Perhaps the following passages best describe the dynamics of com- munity education. The descriptions should support the 21Peter Drucker, The Age Of Discontinuity (New York: Harper and Row, 1968), p. 190. 221bid., p. 192. 20 assertion that a values survey is an educational impera— tive for any school district contemplating community edu- cation as a "way Of life." In 1966, the late President Lyndon Johnson stated: Tomorrow's schools will be schools without walls: a school built of doors which Open to the entire community. Tomorrow's schools will reach out to the places which enrich the human spirit-vto museums, theaters, art galleries, to the parks and rivers and mountains. It will ally itself with the city, its busy streets and factories, its assembly lines and laboratories, so that the world of work will be the center of community life; for grown-ups as well as children; a shopping center of human services. It might have a community health clinic, a library, a theater and recreational facilities. It will provide formal education for all citizens-~and it will not close its doors at three o'clock. It will employ its buildings round the clock and its teachers round the year. . . . We cannot afford to have an 85 billion dollar plant in this country Open less than 30 per cent of the time.23 Clyde Campbell graphically describes the essence Of "tomorrow's schools" as follows: No longer should the school stand isolated from such issues as War and Peace, Poverty, Automation, Racism, and the like. These topics should be the heart of the curriculum at the public school level, not appendages to the curriculum. . . . Community edu- cation in its perfect state would see everyone studying social problems-—1oca1, state, national and international in scope. Teachers, students, and adults would be trying to solve social problems, not standing aloof waiting for a message from above, on what to think and how to behave. Administrators, teachers, students, and adults would be attacking problems cooperatively. Everyone would be studying-- everyone would be learning--everyone would be getting 23Lyndon B. Johnson, Address given to American Association Of School Administrators, Atlantic City, New Jersey, February 16, 1966, in Administration of Continuing Education, ed. by Nathan C. Shaw (washington, D.C.: NAPSAE, 1969), P. 160. 21 at the frustrations, tensions, and aSpirations of people. As I see it, this would be democracy in action. In summation, therefore, the significance Of this study is a result of the dynamic nature of community edu- cation. A movement from a traditional education program to the community education approach, clearly suggests that significant changes must take place in the value orien— tations of those involved. As Beers intimates, a study Of values is perhaps the most important factor to consider before beginning "any labor in the development of com- munity programs"; and furthermore, such a values study may serve to avoid, "confusion about which components shall be highest in the value hierarchy by which the community shall live."25 Rokeach, in Psychology Today, expresses the urgent need to clarify the concept of values as they relate to education: If it is possible to alter the process of valuation so that freedom and equality go up in the value market; it is also possible to short-sell them. we Obviously need safeguards tO insure that the values we choose to change in our students and the direction we choose in changing them are consistent with the values of our educational and scientific institutions, and we are consistent with political 24Clyde M. Campbell, "The Administration of Com- munity Schools," in The Role of the School in Community Education, ed. by H._Hickey and C. Van VOOrhees (Midland, Mich.: The Pendell Company, 1969), p. 51. 25Beers, "American Communities," p. 28. 22 democracy and above all with interests of all humanity. What exactly are the values Of education, science, democracy, and humanity.26 This study seeks to examine these questions, and to provide some understanding of the concept of values in the context of the educative process. Statement of Limitations The limitations Of this study are: l. The student group is limited to the senior class in the school district. 2. The method of data collection differs for one group. The general public received the survey instruments by mail while the students and edu- cators received the instruments at a scheduled group meeting for each. 3. The study is limited to one geographic location. 4. The myths and realities of the Appalachian setting may produce certain limitations on the ability tO generalize from the findings. 5. Assuming that perception is functionally selective, responses are to be considered accordingly. +7— v 26Milton Rokeach, "Persuasion That Persists," ngcholo y Today, September, 1971, p. 92. 23 Definition of Terms The following definitions have been gleaned from the literature and are presented to clarify the intent of this study. Attitude.——an organization Of beliefs, influenced by values, and focused on a specific object or situation. Belief.-—any simple proposition, conscious or unconscious, inferred from what a person says or does, capable of being preceded by the phrase, "I believe that . . . " Value.--an integration of beliefs causing one to behave in a certain manner seeking a preferred end— state Of existence. Terminal values.--an organization of two or more values implicit Of an individual's preferred end-state of existence. Instrumental values.-—an organization of two or more values indicative Of desired patterns of behavior. Moral values.--refers to interpersonal modes of behavior which when violated cause feelings Of guilt for violating society's accepted rules. Competence values.—-refers to personal modes of behavior, having to do with one's own capability. 24 Value system.--a rank ordering of values along a continuum Of importance. Overview This study is concerned with the values and value systems of three groups in a public school district. In Chapter I, the theoretical bases for this investigation were discussed, the problem statement was made, and specific research questions were posed to direct the intent Of the study. The significance of the problem was considered, and limitations to the study were pre- sented. Selected terms were defined to clarify the focus of this thesis. In Chapter II, the Review of Literature is divided into six sections: (1) Clarifying the Meaning and Function of Values and Value Systems; (2) The Measurement of Values; (3) Research Using Rokeach Value Survey; (4) Values, the American way and Traditional Public Education; (5) Values and the Appalachian Situation; (6) Implementing Community Education: Some Impli- cations Regarding Values. 25 In Chapter III, the plan of the study is pre— sented. A description of the population, and of the sub— jects participating in the study, is given. The instru- ments used in the investigation are described in detail. Finally, the data collection procedure and the selected data analysis techniques are presented. In Chapter IV, the analysis of the data is pre— sented. Each research question is stated, related data given, and an interpretation made of the findings. In Chapter V, a summary of this study is given, the findings presented, followed by a discussion of the same, and conclusions are made accordingly. Recommen- dations and implications for further study are drawn from the findings of this investigation, as well as from the literature reviewed in Chapter II. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE The literature presented in this chapter is reviewed in six major sections: (1) Clarifying the Meaning and Function of Values and Value Systems; (2) The Measurement of Values; (3) Research Using the Rokeach Value Survey; (4) Values, the American Way, and Traditional Public Education; (5) Values and the Appalachian Situation; (6) Implementing Community Education: Some Impli— cations Regarding Values. Through this format for the literature review an effort has been made to discuss the theoretical and philo- sophical questions regarding values; the various attempts to measure values; the sociological and psychological factors related to values and human behavior; and the relationship between values, the United States social setting, and public education in the United States. 26 27 Clarifying the Meaning and Function of VaIues and Value Systems The phenomenon of value appears in human behavior daily. The human is continually labeling a particular object, idea, or situation as "good or bad"; "desirable or undesirable"; "right or wrong." A problem develops, however, inasmuch as it is difficult to attain a broadly based consensus regarding the meaning and function of values. As indicated in the Introduction to this work, several terms are used interchangeably with that of value. Under the Definition of Terms, in Chapter I, an attempt was made to delimit the confusion regarding values, beliefs, and attitudes; and to set the focus on the intent of this study. It seems imperative for one to clarify, as much as one can, a particular concept before attempting a systematic investigation of that concept. Handy and Kurtz, in A Current Appraisal of the Behavioral Sciences, describe the problems of the scien— tific study Of preferential behavior, i.e., values. They state: Because the field for a long time was discussed pri- marily by philosophers, the scientific testing Of preferential behavior is quite recent. The many conflicting uses Of "value" make it difficult to ascertain precisely what has been measured and tested. Progress probably will be slow until terminological confusion is reduced. In the past fifty years, however, many philosophers and behavioral scientists have become aware of the verbal difficulties involved in value inquiries, 28 and they recognize that covert or unrecognized preferences and assumptions have often influenced such inquiries. Another problem elucidated by Handy and Kurtz relates to the essence of what researchers have really been investigating: . . . scientific inquiries have not always distin— guished clearly between what is "desired" and what is regarded as "desirable." The two may coincide, or they may diverge considerably, but to use "value" uncritically to refer to either situation may invite serious confusion. The description and explanation of human preferences is quite different from the advocacy Of those preferences or opposition to them. If one assumes that much of the previous values' research has accomplished nothing more than intensifying the confusion about the meaning of values, then one may want to ask: Why inquire about that which cannot expli- citly be identified? The implications of such an activity are clear, i.e., to attempt to develop a theory of value without some consensus regarding the factual base would seem to be an exercise in futility. Ralph Perry, however, presents a rationale for value inquiry in this manner: NO one would be disposed to deny that there is a common something in truth, goodness, legality, wealth, beauty and piety that distinguishes them r lRollo Handy and Paul Kurtz, "Value Inquiry," A Current Appraisal 9f the Behavioral Sciences (Great Barrington, Mass.: Behavioral Research Council, 1964), p. 132. (Hereinafter referred to as "Value Inquiry.") 21bid., p. 135. 29 from gravitation and chemical affinity. It is the express business of theory of value to dis— cover what this something is; to define the genus and discover the differentiae of the species.3 John R. Reid adds another view as he states: Considering the number of times of day we express preferences or value judgements, make critical comparisons of one sort or another, and try rationally to justify them, it would seem that these activities, which constitute the subject matter of value theory, ought to be on their own account worth investigating. While Perry and Reid present a rationale for the necessity of value research aimed at clarification of the concept, two other writers suggest that a more crucial consideration may be that of determining the relationship of values to human behavior. Maslow stated: we need a validated, usable system of human values that we can believe in and devote ourselves to because they are true rather than because we are exhorted to "believe and have faith." And for the first time in history, many of us feel, such a system-~based squarely upon valid knowledge of the nature of man, of his society, and Of his works--may be possible. . . . It appears possible for man, by his own philosophical and scientific efforts, to move toward self—improvement and social improvement.5 3Ralph Barton Perry, General Theory of Value (New York: Longmans, Green, 1962), pp. 4F5. (Hereinafter referred to as General Theory of Value.) 4John R. Reid, A Theory_of Value (New York: Charles Scribner and Son, 1938), p. v. (Hereinafter referred to as A Theory Of Value.) sAbraham H. Maslow, ed., New Knowledge in Human Values (New York: Harper, 1959), p. viii. 30 Brewster Smith, another psychologist, asserted: In the study Of optimal human functioning, I have argued, behavioral and social scientists can put their special qualifications to work toward the clarification of values among which people must choose and of the causal relations that are relevant to value choice. From it we should not only increase our knowledge about ways and means of attaining the values we agree on; we should also bring to light factual relationships that have a bearing on our choice of what values to pursue, individually and socially. Having enunciated fundamental difficulties in previous attempts to study values, and at the same time having presented a rationale for the continuing need of values research, it seems appropriate to discuss two related questions: 1. What have been the methods employed in previous empirical investigation of values? 2. What are the bases Of the most frequently for- warded hypotheses studied by researchers regard- ing values? Handy and Kurtz summarized the various methods that are representative Of the work done: 1. Polling techniques have been used to ascertain what peeple say they want or like, what goals they profess or actually pursue, and so forth. 2. Various experiments have been conducted to investigate the choices made among alternatives in gambling and other situations. 6Brewster Smith, "'Mental Health' Reconsidered: A Special Case Of the Problem Of Values in Psychology," American Psyghologist, XVI (1961), 306. 31 Psychologists have developed many attitude scales that are often regarded as measurements of values. Anthropologists Often explore the "value systems" of given cultural groups. . . . Interest has also been shown in comparing the value systems of different cultures, in order to ascertain what values, if any, are universal. WOrkers in different areas of behavioral science have made content analysis studies in which the values Of groups are investigated on the basis of mass media. Studies have been conducted to determine "con- ceptions of the good life" using prescribed "ways of life" for subjects to choose among.7 Handy, in 1969, also listed the eight bases of most frequently forwarded hypotheses studied by investi— gators in the social sciences as related to values: Values help to organize, guide, and direct behavior. Many values are not explicitly or consciously held. The value system of a culture tends to maintain itself and to change much less rapidly than any other aspect of the culture, such as its mode of economic organization. Land normally is a value symbol in peasant societies but not in huntingvgathering societies. Values can be measured through the use of attitude scales. Content analysis Of literature, the mass media, etc., can reveal the values held by social groups. A person's attitude toward an event tends to be consistent with his values and the way he sees the event relevant to those values. The values held by a person are strongly influenced by the values he judges other people to hold.8 7Handy and Kurtz, "Value Inquiry," p. 132. 8Rollo Handy, Value Theory and the Behavioral Sciences (Springfield,_I11.: Charles C. Thomas, Pub- _,______ lisher, 1969), PP. 48-49. 32 With the major methods Of previous value inquiry established; and with the general hypotheses directing previous values research identified, the focus of this review will shift to specific attempts to clarify the value concept. Charles Morris, in Varieties of Human Values, identified three classes of values. Operative values are viewed as selection of specific preferences from real alternatives. Physical things, persons, thoughts, and symbols are examples of such real alternatives. The realm of ideal conceptions of what "should be" or the behavior individuals "should" exhibit reflect the essences of ESE" ceived values. The means—ends relationship refers to Object values. Thus, according to Morris, operative values are studied by Observing preferential behavior, while conceived values are examined based upon the relationships between symbols and preferential behavior. The Object value concept presents difficulties in Oper- ational investigation according to Morris.9 Clyde Kluckhohn said three elements were neces— sary when thinking about values: the affective (desirable), cognitive (conception), and conative (selection).10 A value, according to Kluckhohn, 9Charles Morris, Varieties Of Human Values (Chi- cago: University Of Chicago Press, 1956), pp. 10-11. (Hereinafter referred to as Human Values.) 10Kluckhohn, "Values and Value Orientations," p. 595. 33 . . . is a conception, explicit or implicit, distinctive of an individual or characteristic of a group, of the desirable which influences the selection from available modes, means, and ends to actions."ll He classified values by the dimensions Of: modality (content, including aesthetic and cognitive), and moral (generality and intensity).12 Williams listed three types of values: cognitive (desire, liking), achievement (success versus frustration), and affective (pleasure versus pain or unpleasantness).13 A philosophical theory of value purported by Abraham Edel supports Williams' position. Edel comments: Descriptively, a man's "values" may refer to all his attitudes "for or against anything." His values include his preferences and avoidances, his desire- Objects and aversion—Objects, his pleasure and pain tendencies, his goals, ideals, interests and dis- interests, what he takes to be right and wrong, good and evil, beautiful and ugly, useful and use— less, his approvals and disapprovals, his criteria of tastes and standards of judgement and so forth. llIbid., pp. 388-433. lzIbid., p. 595. 13Williams, "The Concept of Values," p. 238. 14Abraham Edel, "Concept of Values in Contemporary Philosophical Value Theory," PhilOSOphy of Science, XX (1953), 198. 34 Ralph B. Perry15 said value is "any object of any interest," and John Reid16 defined value as "given affective quality." Gotshalk, however, in Patterns Of Good and Evil, views both positions as being limited in their scope. He suggested a triad Of elements to define value: an Object component, a subject component, and a relational component.l7 Gotshalk attempted to further clarify the concept of value by presenting a telic view of man in contrast to a theological view. He stated: The human being acts from desires, drives, bents, goal seeking directional impulses. These are fun- damental in his everyday behavior and the basic clues to it. He is telic in this crude matter-Of— fact sense. Also according to our account, the principles of human value as all telic principles, are certified not by their high origin, but by their own merits. . . . This position is not only Obviously different from the theological View . . . which locates the basic principle of value outside mundane human experience.1 This position, according to Gotshalk, has three implications for developing a theory Of value. First, human values can be dealt with and solved definitively using properly understood empirical methods. Second, it fi— 15Perry, General Theory Of Value, p. 116. 16Reid, A Theory Of Values, p. 54. 17D. w. Gotshalk, patterns of Good and Evil (Urbana, Ill.: University Of Illinois Press, 1963), P. 1. 18Ibid., p. 133. 35 implies that values have a subject matter of their own, and thus can be studied with a certain autonomy. Finally, the position implies that the human value sciences can be set up independent of a theological base and can enjoy the kind of freedom enjoyed by the natural sciences.19 Smith views values as a conceptual handle for discerning and dealing with the behavior regularities of persons engaged in processes of selection or choice with respect to Objects. The selective behavior, accord— ing to Smith, "may be instrumental to attaining some further object or state of affairs beyond that to which it is immediately oriented, or it may be consummatory, an end—term in the behavioral sequence."20 Robinson and Shaver identified five categories Of value characteristics. Distinctions were made between values that are individual and collective, explicit and implicit. The five categories are: Eglig_values, refering to ultimate means and ends; ethical values, dealing with good and evil; aesthetic values, defining the beautiful and the ugly; intellectual values, out- lining how the truth is to be known; and economic values; lgIbid. 20Brewster Smith, Social Psychology and Human Values (Chicago: Aldine Publishing CO., 1969), pp. 100—01. 36 dealing with definition of both preferences and the preferable in the realm Of social exchange.21 Four approaches to the definition of values were suggested by Adler. First, values may be considered as absolutes, existing as eternal ideas or as parts of the mind of God. Second, values may be thought of as inherent in objects, as the potential of those objects to satisfy needs or desires. Third, values may be seen as present in man, as preferences held by people, whether learned, innate, or both. Fourth, values may be viewed in terms of action, meaning what people do is all that can be known about what they value.22 Milton Rokeach, whose research provides much direction to this study, outlined his position on the meaning and function of values as follows: I consider a value to be a type Of belief, centrally located within one's total belief system, about how one ought or ought not to behave, or about some end state of existence worth or not worth attaining. Values are thus abstract ideals positive or negative, not tied to any specific attitude Object or situation, representing a person's beliefs about ideal modes Of conduct and ideal terminal goals. . . . A person's 21John P. Robinson and Philip R. Shaver, Measures Of Social Psychological Attitudes (Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center, The University Of Michigan, 1970), p. 410. 22F. Adler, "The Value Concept in Sociology," American Journal of Sociology, No. 62 (1956), 272-79. 37 values like all beliefs, may be consciously con— aeived or unconsciously held, and must be inferred from what a person says or does.23 Examples of ideal modes of conduct according to Rokeach, "are to seek truth and beauty, to be clean and orderly, to behave with sincerity, justice, reason, compassion, humility, respect, honor and loyalty." Some examples of ideal terminal goals may be "security, happiness, freedom, equality, fame, power, and salvation." Rokeach argues that to say a person has a value means that he has "an enduring belief that a particular mode Of conduct or end state of existence is personally and socially preferable to alternative modes of conduct or end state of existence."24 Thus, one may infer that a value becomes a standard, determines attitudes and behavior and supplies meaning for the individual's existence. Much of the literature reviewed thus far has implied that values are organized by individuals and by society into a value system. The final comments included in this section are intended to further clarify the con— cept of value system. F. Kluckhohn and F. Strodtbeck posed five crucial problems that are viewed as being common to all 23Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes and Values, p. 124. 24Milton Rokeach, "The Role Of Values in Public Opinion Research," The Public Opinion Quarterly, XXXII (Winter, 1968-69), 536. 38 human groups. These problems reflect specific orien- tations that provide the range for a system Of values to develop. Stated in question form the problems are: 1. What is the character of innate human nature? (human nature orientation) 2. What is the relation of man to nature (and super— nature)? (man-nature orientation) 3. What is the temporal focus of human life? (time orientation) 4. What is the modality of human activity? (activity orientation) 5. What is the modality of man's relationship to other men? (relational orientation)25 With these orientations as a theoretical base, F. Kluckhohn defines the value—orientation (system) con- cept in this manner: Value orientations are complex but definitely patterned (rank—ordered) principles resulting from the transactional interplay of three analytically distinguishable elements of the evaluation process-- the cognitive, the affective and the directive elements—-which give order and direction to the ever-flowing stream of human acts and thoughts as these relate to the solution Of "common human” problems.26 Clyde Kluckhohn concurs with this view and defines value system as "generalized and organized conceptions, influencing behavior, Of nature, Of man's place in it, r 25Florence Kluckhohn and Fred Strodtbeck, Variations in Value Orientations (Evanston, 111.: Row, Peterson and Company,'l961), p. 11. (Hereinafter referred to as Value Orientations.) 261bid., p. 4. 39 of man's relation to man, and of the desirable and non- desirable as they may relate to man—environment and interhuman relations."27 Rokeach described value system as a hierarchial organization of ideals along a continuum of importance. He distinguished between an instrumental value system (preferred modes of conduct), and a terminal value system (desired end-states of existence). Operationally a per- son's value system assists him in making choices and in resolving any value conflicts that may develop. For example, a person may have to choose between behaving truthfully or patriotically; or between seeking salvation or a comfortable life. The person's value system (orien- tation) ultimately determines such choices between two. or more modes of behavior or two or more end-states of existence.28 In summary, values are seen as enduring clusters Of beliefs, thoughts, and attitudes, which determine and guide the behavior of individuals toward persons, situ— ations, or ideas. Values transcend specific Objects, or situations, and are viewed as abstract ideals organized in some manner and giving meaning to man's experience and existence. v— 27 p. 411. Kluckhohn, "Values and Value Orientations," 28Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes and Values, p. 161. 40 The Measurement of Values Before the 1930's the social scientist concerned himself more with collecting factual data and avoided the investigation of such elusive concepts as that Of "values." Since that time, however, interest has grown in studying the relationship Of value to human behavior. Dukes listed three primary directions taken in the psychologi— cal measurement Of values: 1. Measuring the values of groups or individuals and relating the results to other data concern- ing the groups or individuals (demographic or personal data). 2. The origin and development of values within the individual. 3. The influence of an individual's values on his cognitive life.29 The problems inherent in the measurement of values Obviously are precipitated by the differing views Of the value concept that were elucidated in the prior section Of this chapter. John Dewey called attention tO the problem when he stated: In the present state of the subject of value, the decisive issue is methodological; From what stand— point shall the subject matter Of valuings and evaluation be approached? . . . It is not meant that the methodological question can be separated from that Of subject matter nor that the former should remain paramount indefinitely. . . . For the confused controversial state Of the subject seems to arise from the fact that there is no agreement about the "field" in which events having value-qualifications are located. Till 29Dukes, "Psychological Studies," p. 24. 41 this field is reasonably settled discussion is a good deal like firing birdshot in the dark at some— thing believed tO exist somewhere, the "where" being of the vaguest sort.30 Thus, it seems imperative to identify those threads of commonality in the investigation of values if this con— fusion is to be ultimately clarified. The Allport—Vernon Study of Values31 was perhaps the first significant attempt to measure values (even though the test apparently was more a test of the atti- tude concept). First administered in 1931 and contin- uously revised for the next thirty years, the test instrument is based upon Spranger's32 six "ideal" value— type distinctions. Spranger indicated that the label "ideal value type": . . . does not mean that the types are necessarily good, or that they are ever found in their pure form. An ideal type is rather a "schema of comprehensi- bility"--a gauge by which we can tell how far a given person has gone in organizing his life by one, or more, of the basic schemes.33 :7 30John Dewey, "The Field of 'Value'," in Value: A Cooperative Inquiry, ed. by Ray Lepley (New York: Columbia University Press, 1949), p. 64. 31Allport, Vernon, and Lindzey, A Study of Values. 32Gordon w. Allport, Pattern and Growth in Per- sonality (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1961), quoted in E. Spranger, Lebensforem [Types Of Men] (New York: Stechert, 1928). (Hereinafter referred to as Pattern and Growth.) 33Ibid., p. 297. 42 The six value types identified by Spranger and used as the bases of the Study Of Values are as follows: theoretical, the discovery Of truth; economic, an interest in what is useful; esthetic, the highest value being in form and harmony; social, the love of people; political, a primary interest in power; and religious, the quest for unity. The test itself consists of forty—five questions related specifically to the six ideal value types.34 Findings from early research efforts indicated certain patterns of value preferences do occur for selected occupation groups. For example, engineers have relatively high theoretical and economical values. Clergymen have relatively high religious and social values; students of business administration, relatively high economic and political values; artists relatively high esthetic values, and so on.35 Research in the past decade using the Study of Values instrument has revealed similar findings as those discovered in previous studies. Norwalk-Polsky reported that college teachers Of elementary education scored higher on social values, while college teachers Of 34Ibid., pp. 297—99. 35Allport, Pattern and Growth, pp. 456-57. 43 secondary education scored higher on theoretical values.36 Kelsey found that some significant changes over the past few decades include an increased preference for theoreti- cal and political value types, with a corresponding decrease in a preference for aesthetic values.37 Both writers discovered similar patterns of value preferences for each sex. For example, males reported greater preferences for theoretical, economic, and political values, while females preferred religious, aesthetic, and social values.38 F. Kluchohn and Strodtbeck developed an instrument around four Of the five value orientations suggested in their work, Variations of Value Orientations. Twenty-two items were organized around the orientations as follows: relational orientation; man-nature orientation; time orientation; and activity orientation. The human nature orientation was not included in the investigations. The 36Zita Norwalk-Polsky, "A Preliminary Study of the Belief Systems and Selected Values and Attributes of Faculty and Students in a State College for Teachers" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, New York University, 1968). (Hereinafter referred to as "Preliminary Study of the Belief Systems.") 37Ian Bruce Kelsey, "A Comparative Study of Stu— dents Attending the University Of British Columbia in 1963 as Measured by the Allport-Vernon Test for Personal Values" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University Of washington, 1963). (Hereinafter referred to as "Comparative Study.") 38Norwalk-Polsky, "Preliminary Study Of the Belief Systems"; Kelsey, "Comparative Study." 44 items first attempted tO “delineate a type of life situation which was believed to be common to most rural, or folk societies and second, posed alternatives of solution for the problem." When a particular alternative is selected, a theoretical value orientation is inferred from the selections.39 Subjects for the initial study were drawn from five communities in the American Southwest. The five communities were a settlement of Navaho Indians; a Pueblo Indian community; a Spanish American village; and a farming village of Texas and Oklahoma homesteaders. A review of the results is unnecessary, however, the summation statement by F. Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck is appropriate. They stated: "Significant within—culture regularities and significant between culture differences were found in the data as analyzed by the methods which the preceding chapter explains."40 The implications Of their comments seem to be the important item for this discussion, i.e., patterns Of value orientations were noted within a particular culture, with corresponding differences identified between cultures. This supports 39Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, Value Orientations, p. 77. 4oIbid., p. 138. 45 the theoretical background to this study that patterns of values do exist, and a society or culture is one determinant of that pattern. Morris, in attempting to support his views regarding operative, conceived, and object values, con- ducted a cross cultural study to determine conceptions of the "good life." A sample of students in the United States, China, Japan, Italy, and Norway comprised the research group. Participants were presented with thirteen ways to Live, described in paragraph form, and were asked 41 to rank in priority fashion their preferences. The thirteen ways are presented here in a brief form: 1. preserve the best that man has attained . cultivate independence of persons and things . show sympathetic concern for others . experience festivity and solitude in alternation . live with wholesome, carefree enjoyment . wait in quiet receptivity . control the self stoically . meditate on the inner life . act and enjoy life through group participation . constantly master changing conditions . integrate action, enjoyment and contemplation 12. chance adventuresome deeds 13. obey the cosmic purposes.42 Morris found that most United States students preferred to "integrate action, enjoyment, and contem- plation," while showing least preference for "wait in 41Morris, Human Values, p. l. 421bid. 46 quiet receptivity."43 Commenting on Morrisl work, Allport indicated American youths are inclined toward "dynamic integration of diversity," showing that they wish a rich, full life and abhor both routine and boredom in their . 44 ex1stence. Rokeach offered a critique of the values measure— ment attempts by AllporthernonvLindzey, Morris, and Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck. His position is worth noting for a clearer understanding of the Rokeach Value Survey approach to the measurement of values. Rokeach stated: . . . Charles Morris' approach to the measurement of values is rather complex and requires a high level of education on the part of the respondent; Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck's method requires time-consuming interviews with individual respondents which would be economically prohibitive if applied to large samples. The Allport-Vernon-Lindzey scale of values is probably too lengthy a test for use in survey research, and measures only a limited number of general values. Our purpose in this paer is to describe a way of thinking about values and value systems and a way of measuring them so they may be widely employed as social indicators. The final method of values measurement reviewed in this work is that of Ralph K. White. Using a process for 43Ibid., pp. 45-46. 44Allport, Pattern and Growth, p. 296. 45Milton Rokeach and Seymour Parker, "Values as Social Indicators of Poverty and Race Relations in America," The Annals Of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, CCCLXXXVIII (March, 1970), 98. (Hereinafter referred to as "Values as Social Indicators.") -‘\ II. 47 value analysis of verbal data, a content analysis was made Of the propaganda and public Opinion materials in Hitler, Roosevelt, and the Nature of war Propaganda, and Of the personality study in Black Boy.46 White devised a system Of symbols to represent the basic values of which there were two kinds, goals and standards of judgment. Indi— viduals examined the two works and responded according to these directions: 1. Put in the margin a symbol corresponding to each goal or each value judgement that is explicitly stated in the material, or clearly implied by it. . Tabulate the results. 47 3. Interpret each numerical result . . . Additional analyses were conducted on a selected autobiography producing a reliability correlation coef~ ficient of .93.48 After several similar uses of the value analysis technique White concluded that, "Our culture does have a value system which can be empirically studied, and which constitutes a common background for the most diversified types of research."49 r v v f f 46Ralph K. White, Value Analysis: The Nature and Use Of the Method (Glen Garden, N.J.: Libertarian Press, I951), p.414} 7 47 48 Ibid., p. 22. Ibid., p. 81. 491bid., p. 87. 48 Research Using Rokeach Value Survey Milton Rokeach conducted extensive research in the area of attitudes,50 prejudice,51 dogmatism,52 and social psychology,53 before turning to the investigation of values. He contended that a clearer understanding of human problems could be achieved if more were known about the basic values and value systems of people. His approach to the measurement of values was based on three assumptions: 1. . . . every person who has undergone a process of socialization has learned a set of beliefs about "modes of behavior" and about "end states of existence" that he considers to be personally and socially desirable. 2. . . . every person differs from every other per- son not so much in whether or not he possesses . . . values but rather in the way he arranges them into value systems, a hierarchy or rank ordering. 50Milton Rokeach, "The Nature of Attitudes," International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, Vol. I (New York: The MacMillan Co. and the Free Press, 1968) pp. 449-57. 51Milton Rokeach, "Prejudice, Concreteness of Thinking, and Reification of Thinking," Journal of Abnormal Psychology, XLVI (January, 1951), 83-91. 52Milton Rokeach, "The Nature and Meaning of Dogmatism," Psycholggical Review, LVI (May, 1954), 194-204. 53Milton Rokeach, The Open and Closed Mind (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1960). 49 3. . . . everything that a person does and all that he believes is capable of being justified . . . in terms of modes Of behavior and end-states of existence are personally and socially worth striving for.54 As an explication to this final assumption Rokeach indi- cated that a person will only express those values that he is willing to admit possessing to others as well as himself. Since developing the Value Survey instrument, Rokeach has reported several pertinent findings regarding values and value systems. From the data collected in a study conducted through the National Opinion Research Center in 1968, the role of values in religion, politics, prejudice and public opinion has been explored. A sample of 1,400 Americans over 21 years of age responded to the survey instrument. Investigations Of value systems in religion were reported in the H. Paul Douglass Lectures of 1969.55 Using the named religion, frequency Of church attendance, and self-ratings on perceived importance of religion in Y—f 54Rokeach, "Measurement of Values," pp. 21-22. 55Milton Rokeach, "Value Systems in Religion," Review of Religious Research, XI (1969), 3-23. (Herein- after referred to as "Value Systems."); Milton Rokeach, "Religious Values and Social Comparison," Review of Religious Research, XI (1969), 24-38. (Hereinafter referred tO as "Religious Values.") 50 one's daily life as variables, the value systems of the national sample were examined for differences. Rokeach reported: Religiously oriented Christians constantly ranked the terminal values "salvation" higher and "pleasure" lower than those less religious and nonreligious. Moreover, the religious typically ranked the moral values "forgiving" and "obedient" and the competence values "independent," "intellectual," and "logical" lower than the less religious and non religious. And when magnitude of value difference was considered as well as statistical significance, two values, "salvation" and "forgiving" were found to be most distinctively Christian values.56 A companion study to the one just described attempted to determine to what extent religious values are related to a compassionate social outlook. Responses to several questions from the national study were recorded and analyzed. The questions related to the following areas: reactions to the assassination of Martin Luther King; attitudes toward equal rights for blacks, the poor, the student protest movement, and the church's involvement in political and social affairs. Summarizing the find- ings, Rokeach stated: The findings suggest that those who place a higher value on "salvation" are conservative and anxious to maintain the "status quo," and are generally more indifferent and unsympathetic with the plight Of the black and the poor. They had reacted in a more fearful and calloused way to the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, were more unsympathetic 56Rokeach, "Value Systems," pp. 3-22. (It is important to note that the classifications religious, less religious and nonreligious, were derived from the self-rating of the importance of religion in the respondents' daily lives.) 51 with the student protest movement, and were more Opposed to the churches involvement in everyday affairs. . . . (The) value for "forgiving" (the second most distinctively Christian value) was also found to be negatively related to social compassion, but to a generally lesser extent than was the case for salvation. . . . Frequent churchgoers were found to be somewhat less com- passionate than less frequent churchgoers.5'7 A desire to determine relationships between reported value systems and political ideologies stimulated the development of the Rokeach, Two Value Model of Politics. Rokeach used the content-analysis method in analyzing value systems expressed in writings representing four political ideologies. Selected for analysis were 25,000 word samples taken from socialist writers Norman Thomas and Erich Fromm, Hitler's Mein Kampf, Goldwater's Conscience 58 of a Conservatiye, and Lenin's Collected WOrks. Sig- nificant differences were found with regard to two values, "freedom" and "equality." More specifically, the analysis revealed the following: A straightforward count of the values found in Consciencgjof a Cgpservative revealed that Goldwater mentioned "freedom" most frequently and "equality" least frequently among seventeen terminal values. A similar count of Lenin's Collected WOrks, employ- ing the same seventeen termifial values, showed the Opposite: "equality" was mentioned most frequently and "freedom" least frequently. For the socialists, "freedom" ranked first and "equality" second among 57 Rokeach, "Religious Values,‘ p. 24. 58Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values, p. 171. 52 the seventeen values, and for Hitler‘s Mein Kampf content analysis revealed that "freedom“iand "equality" were at the bottom of his lists of values.5 Based upon these findings, a two-dimensional model with four distinct points (two sets Of opposites) was developed for the content-analysis procedure to express political ideology. Another significant report of the findings from the national sample survey cited previously, is a study of the extent of cultural differences between groups of different socioeconomic levels and race. Using the value responses, comparisons were made according to income, level of education (both of which relate specifically to this study), and race (blacks and whites), and race matched for income and education. Rokeach and Parker, in "Values as Social Indicators of Poverty and Race Relations in America," concluded that: The results show that persons Of low status, as compared with persons of high status, are more religious, more conformist, less concerned with responsibility, more concerned with friendship than love, and less concerned with competence and self- actualization. When we move to an analysis of value differences between whites and Negroes, however, we find generally fewer differences. The major dif- ference is on the value for "equality." Other value differences, such as those involving com- petence and self-actualization, seem to parallel the differences found between groups of high and low status. When status is held constant, or when poor whites and Negroes are compared with one another, most Of the value differences previously found dis- appear or become minimal. 59Rokeach, "Measurement of Values," pp. 33-34. 53 Our summary of these differences indicates that many are characteristics attributed by various writers to the culture of poverty. With regard to Negro-white differences, however, we saw that the relatively few differences that remained when status position was controlled provide no support for a distinctive Negro culture of poverty.60 A summary of the research findings reported by Rokeach and Parker clearly support the assertions that value patterns do exist within specific groups, and that value differences can be linked to differing social factors. Whether or not cause-effect conclusions can be drawn is perhaps a risky extension of the reported data; however, value orientations, related to given sociological conditions can reliably be identified. The remaining portion of this section, Research Using Rokeach Value Survey, focuses on other research studies using the Value Survey. Hollen sought to determine the reliability of the terminal and the instrumental value scales; to deter— mine whether some people are more reliable than others in terms Of assessing values; and to determine whether certain factors in the test influence the reliability of the scale. The study was conducted in two parts in the spring term 1966 at Michigan State University. The first set of data was obtained from 444 introductory psychology students' responses to the Value Survey, 60Rokeach and Parker, "Values as Social Indicators," p. 110. 54 Form A. Seven weeks later, 210 of the students were retested to determine the reliability of the scales in a test-retest situation. The second group of data was collected from 444 introductory psychology students responding to a questionnaire containing the value scales Form B and a short form Of Rokeach's Dogmatism Scale.61 The major conclusions drawn from Hollen's study indicated that although the value ranking scales provided data Of sufficient reliability to discriminate between groups, they are not reliable enough to warrant the use for correlational techniques.62 Hollen conducted another study to test the effect of an induced value change on changes in instrumentally related attitudes. Three hundred and twenty students in an introductory psychology course at Michigan State Uni- versity were administered the Value Survey and a Values and Attitude Questionnaire. The experimental group was given selected information regarding current social issues and after a period of time, both the experimental and control group again responded to the two instruments. Significant changes were noted in the experimental group, but not in the control. The major results of the study 61Charles C. Hollen, "The Stability of Values and Value Systems" (unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, 1967), p. 24. 621bid., p. 52. 55 were: "Individual values are amenable to influence through traditional persuasive methods; changes in values bring about changes in attitudes toward instrumentally related Objects; and these changes in attitudes do not decrease over time."63 Hollen concluded: "It is the author's view that the most important effects of per- suasion are the effects on individual's values."64 Beech studied the relationships among value sys- tem similarity, attitudinal similarity, and interpersonal attraction. The findings of the study were: the more a person perceives another person to be similar to himself, the more likely he is to be attracted to that person; and attitudinal similarity is Of greater importance than value system similarity in determining attraction between 65 Whether two persons who have had a brief interaction. or not this importance changes as a result of interaction over a longer period Of time was not investigated; how- ever, if one assumes that values are more stable than attitudes, it seems logical to conclude that such a change may take place. 63Charles C. Hollen, "Value Change, Perceived Instrumentality, and Attitude Changes" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1972), p. 57. 64Ibid., pp. 57-58. 65Robert Paul Beech, "Value Systems, Attitudes, and Interpersonal Attraction" (unpublished Ph.D. disser— tation, Michigan State University, 1966), pp. 80-88. 56 A study of the cognitive and associative meaning of each item in the Value Survey was reported by Homant in 1967. The subjects for the study were 264 social psy— chology and introductory psychology students at Michigan State University. They were asked to define the meanings of: (l) the value terms in Form D Of the value scale; and (2) a set of control words selected for the study. Agreement was found on the connotative meaning of both the terminal and instrumental values, and agreement on the associative meaning of instrumental but not terminal values.66 Roth investigated the role Of values and value systems in the identification and selection of partici- pants in an internship program in educational leadership. Applicants for the following year's intern program, the current interns, (1970) the interview team members, and a national sample of educators responded to the yeiee Survey, Form B. Three levels Of the "application to selection" procedure were analyzed for differences. The findings presented here in summary form were: (1) interns in the program placed high priority on A Sense of Accom- plishment, and Self-Respect and a low priority on National Security, Pleasure, A Comfortable Life, and 66Robert J. Homant, "The Meaning and Ranking Of Values" (unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State Uni- verSity’ 1967), pp. 65‘670 57 Salvation as goals in life; the values Honest, Responsible, Capable, Broadminded and Independent were rated high; and Obedient, Clean, Cheerful, and Polite were ranked low as modes of behavior; (2) the value systems of the candidates not selected and the candidates selected in the interview were significantly different from the value systems Of the members of the interview teams; (3) the value systems of the candidates not selected were sig- nificantly different from the value systems of the current interns; (4) six values, A Sense Of Accomplishment, Obedient, Salvation, Freedom, Capable, and Wisdom, dif- ferentiated at varying degrees, the interns from the 67 Roth cautioned against national sample of educators. drawing absolute causations from the findings, but he intimated that educational leaders involved in training programs for educators should be attuned to possible differences in value orientations among students and teachers, as well as differences that may exist among the individuals themselves. Spears examined the values and value systems of a national sample of professors Of general education and self-identified professors Of adult education. A total of 347 professors of general education, and 77 professors Of adult education returned by mail the Rokeach Value fi— '_ 67Harley Roth, "Values and Value Systems in the Selection Of Leaders in Education" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1970), pp. 115-20. 58 Survey and a personal information form. The major find- ings were: (1) professors Of general education tend to place more priority on the competence values; (2) pro- fessors of adult education tend to be of more liberal persuasion; (3) general educators preferred the terminal values, Self-Respect, Wisdom, Inner Harmony, True Friend- ship; and the instrumental values Broadminded, Intel- lectual, Independent and Self-Controlled; (4) adult edu- cators preferred the terminal values, A Sense of Accom- plishment, Freedom, Family Security, Equality; and the instrumental values, Helpful, Imaginative, Forgiving, and Ambitious; (5) both groups valued the terminal values, Self-Respect, A Sense of Accomplishment, Wisdom, Freedom, Family Security, Equality; and the instrumental values, Honest, Responsible, Capable, Broadminded; (6) low priority was given to the terminal values, A World Of Beauty, Social Recognition, A Comfortable Life, National Security, Pleasure, Salvation; and the instrumental values Obedient, Clean, Polite, Cheerful, and Ambitious. Spears concluded that enough differences were noted between the two groups to warrant additional efforts aimed at clarifying the values education should seek to enhance.68 68George Spears, "A Comparison of Values and Value Systems Reported by Professors of General Education and Professors of Adult Education" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1972), pp. 125-26. 59 Florence Brawer attempted to identify value similarities and differences between the students and faculties of three junior colleges in the greater Los Angeles area. She was interested further in identifying value-related factors that may explain the "generation gap" phenomenon. The student sample (N=l, 877) was drawn from the freshman class at each of the three schools. The staff members (further divided into faculty and administrators) of each of the three schools (N=238) comprised the faculty sample. The Rokeach Value Survey, Form E, was among three instru- ments used in the study, and the discussion of the results herein is limited to the findings gathered from the value scales.69 The terminal values, Equality, Family Security, Freedom, National Security, and True Friendship were found to be identically ranked by both groups. The terminal value differences identified were as follows: the students placed more value on A Comfortable Life, Happiness, Mature Love, and Freedom; the staff reported preference for Self-Respect, A Sense Of Accomplishment, 69Florence B. Brawer, Values and the Generation Gap; Junior College Freshman and Faculty (monograph series) No. 11 (Washington, D.C.: AmeriEan Association of Junior Colleges, 1971), pp. 29-32. 60 Inner Harmony. Brawer further concluded that the "students seem more inner oriented than the staff."70 With respect to the instrumental values both groups ranked Honest first. The students, however, indicated preferences for Loving, Ambitious, and Responsible, while the staff selected ReSponsible and Capable as their second and third choices. The most notable difference was found for the value Ambitious, ranked third by the students, but thirteenth by the staff.71 The studies conducted by Hollen, Beech, Homant, Roth, Spears, and Brawer indicate an increasing interest in the use of the Rokeach Value Survey. Furthermore, patterns appear to be emerging that indicate existing relationships among reported values and value systems and factors such as income, education, role status, sex, and age. Many of the researchers have cautioned against drawing conclusions of a cause-effect, or projective nature based upon their specific findings; however, the information bank regarding values as related to behavior patterns appears to be reaching the point where predictive statements can begin to be made in a reasonably reliable and valid manner. 70 71 Ibid., p. 35. Ibid., pp. 35—41. 61 Values, The "American Way," and TraditiOnal Public Education That education should be regulated by law and should be an affair of state is not to be denied, but what should be the character of this public education, and how young persons should be educated, are questions which remain to be considered. For man- kind are by no means agreed about the things to be taught whether we look to virtue or the best life. Neither is it clear whether education is concerned with intellectual or with moral virtue. The exist- ing practice is perplexing; no one knows on what principle we should proceed--should be useful in life, or should be virtue, or should be higher knowledge be the aim of our training; all three opinions have been entertained. Aristotle, Politics, Book VIII The literature review thus far has focused on attempts to clarify and define the value concept, and on various efforts to systematically measure values. From the previous discussions, it can reasonably be concluded that conflicting views on values do exist; however, one can identify certain patterns, or themes among the many views. Thus, the purpose of this section is first, to present evidence from the literature that supports the notion of a core of values in the "American way of life"; and secondly, to examine the stated goals and Objectives of traditional public education that reflect an effort to teach "values," and thus sustain the "American way Of life." Several writers have isolated a core Of values that reflect common themes. Robert C. Angell stated that the ideal Of American life consisted of four clusters Of 62 values that center around: (1) patriotic loyalty to the national state, involving a feel of community; (2) the dignity of the individual--acceptance of the moral worth of the common man, of freedom for the individual and the personal responsibility that such freedom entails; (3) democracy as a social organization influencing social as well as political behavior; and (4) technological efficiency as the means to furthering man's control of nature.72 Gunnar Myrdal in An American Dilemma wrote of the generally accepted, idealistic "American creed of liberty, equality, justice, and fair opportunity for everybody."73 Graham found that belief in freedom, individualism, equality, progress, social mobility, material wealth, and humanitarianism are among the major values in our society. He stated that, "Americans inter- pret both freedom and equality largely in a materialistic sense,‘ and that "American beliefs appear to be more materialistically oriented than those Of many other societies."74 Beardsley suggested four persistent values found in the American culture: (1) a common concern for 72Robert C. Angell, The Integration of American Society: A Study of Groups and Institutions (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1941), pp. 206-09. 73Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944), p. xlvii. 4Saxon Graham, American Culture (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1957), p. 138. 63 progress; (2) an ultimate belief in the brotherhood of man; (3) respect for excellence; and (4) the recognition of a need for spiritual guidance.75 Williams likewise attempted to answer the question: What are the "Dominant Values" in the American culture? He stated that "Dominant and subordinate values 'for a group or social system as a whole' can be roughly ordered to these criteria: 1. Extensiveness of the value in the total activity of the system. What proportion of a population and of its activities manifest the value? 2. Duration of the value. Has it been persistently important over a considerable period of time? 3. Intensity with which the value is sought or maintained as shown by: effort, crucial choices, verbal affirmation and by reactions to threats to the value--for example, promptness, certainty, and severity Of sanctions. 4. Prestige of value carriers--that is, of persons, objects or organizations considered to be bearers of the value. Culture heroes, for example, are significant indexes of values of high generality and esteem.76 Using these criteria, Williams identified certain value themes that emerge within the American culture. Stated in summative form these themes are classified as follows: 75Florence E. Beardsley, "The Drowning Sphinx," Educational Leadership, XVIII (May, 1961), 480. 76Robin M. Williams, Jr., American Society: A Sociological Interpretation (New York: Knopf, Inc., 1960), pp. 409-10. (Hereinafter referred to as American Society.) 64 . . . there are the quasi-values or "gratifications" . . . especially important in the section on "material comfort." Second we may identify the "instrumental interests" or means-values, for example, wealth, power, work, efficiency. . . . Third, we have the "formal-universalistic values of Western tradition": rationalism, impersonal justice and universalistic ethics, achievement, democracy, equality, freedom, certain religious values, value of individual per- sonality. Fourth, there is a class of "particu- laristic, segmental, or localistic evaluations" that are best exemplified in racist-ethnic superiority doctrines and in certain aspects of nationalism.77 Thus, according to Williams, "American society is characterized by a basic moral orientation, involving emphases on active, instrumental mastery of the world in accordance with universalistic standards of per- formance."78 Furthermore, Williams asserted that, "It is a pluralistic system in which it is not easy to secure unitary commitment to collective goals," thus, "It per- mits a wide range of goals for achievement."79 Cuber and Harper identified seven value themes in the American culture that are consistent with some of those previously reported. The seven value patterns are: monogamous marriage, freedom, acquisitiveness, . . . . . . 80 democracy, education, monotheistic religion and sc1ence. 77Ibid., pp. 468-69. 78Williams, American Society, p. 470. 791bid. 80John F. Cuber and Robert A. Harper, Problems of American Society: Values in Conflict (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1948), p. 368. 65 Coleman in an earlier attempt to identify "American traits," agreed with the essence of Cuber and Harper's list. The predominant American traits according to Coleman are: associational activity; democracy, and belief and faith in it; belief in the equality of all as a fact and as a right; freedom of the individual in ideal and in fact; disregard of law--"direct action"; local government; practicality; prosperity and general material well-being; puritanism; emphasis on religion, and its great influence in national life; uniformity and conformity.81 Nelson, Ramsey, and Verner first classified a general framework for dealing with value orientations, and then listed those orientations that typically are found in the "American way of life." The orientations were classified according to: (l) the emphasis given some institution, such as the family or economic insti- tution; (2) the interest in some segment of the population, such as the youth or the aged; and (3) the general cri- teria of decision making, such as belief in science or 82 tradition. From these general classifications, Specific American value orientations were identified as follows: 81Lee Coleman, "What Is American: A Study of Alleged American Traits," Social Forces, XIX, NO. 4 (May, 1941), 498. 2Lowrey Nelson, et al., Community Structure and Change (New York: The MacMiIIan Company, 1964), p. 98. 10. 11. 66 Traditionalism: the uncritical adoption of pre- cedents as the criterion of decision making. Rationality: the uncritical adoption of con- sequences as the criterion of decision making. External conformity: the uncritical adoption of group patterns as a criterion of decision making. Achievement: a state of satisfaction based upon a choice among alternatives which results in a high position in the social structure for the person, and which brings self-respect along with respect and often envy from others. Individualism: acceptance of decision making based upon the conviction that the best state of affairs is one in which self-reliant and indepen- dent men personally assume the responsibility for their own decisions without compulsion from external powers. Democracy: the process of discussion and compro- mise whereby individuals or social units make a unitary decision which is binding upon all but where the majority position is modified to satisfy the minorities. Material comfort: satisfaction in the possession of material items of the culture. Progress: belief that socially acceptable trends are good. Efficiency and practicality: selection of courses of action in terms of the least waste of time and effort. Security: selection of alternative courses of action which involve the least risk of changing the status quo. Hard work or Protestant ethic: the conviction that the individual is the master of his destiny through quantity Of work performed and the prac- tice of frugality.83 Now it is true that the value orientations described by the various writers reflect the idealized "American way of life," and consequently are not indica- tive Of certain real conditions that exist in the con- temporary American social setting. The current treatment 83Ibid., pp. 111-12. 67 of minority groups is but one example of the difference between the "idealness" and "realness" of one value orien— tation, that of equality. The reasons for disparities among American value orientations are not, however, the problem of this discussion. Rather it is the purpose here to determine what the predominant American value orientations are; and to assess public education's attempts to sustain and further these values. James Quillen listed six fundamental values that the American people want to preserve, enhance, and more fully understand through education: . . . the first of these is a recognition of the unique worth and dignity of every individual--a belief that individuals cannot be just means that they must always be ends as well, and that the good society rests on the fullest development Of the individuality of each person. . . . A second value, which emerges from the first, is a belief in equality of Opportunity for every individual to develop and use his potentialities regardless of race, creed, nationality background or economic circumstances. . . . A third value is a belief in basic rights and liberties for all. This is expressed in the American concern about civil liberties. . . A fourth value is a belief that the best way to solve common problems and promote common concerns is through cooperation among equals. . . . A fifth value is a belief in the use of reason as the most effective way to solve problems. . . . The major function of education is to develop the intellectual potentialities of the individual so that he can use his mind effectively in disciplined thought to solve problems and direct effective action. A final value that is important in the American tradition is Optimism and hope for the future. This has been called the "mission of America" and 68 the "American dream"--the mission to preserve and extend liberty and individual opportunity and the dream of equality and greater well-being for all.84 Williams stated that certain cultural themes do pervade education: 1. Emphasis is put upon the practical usefulness of formal education. Contemplative or speculative thought art, highly abstract theoretical work are relatively little valued. 2. Emphasis is put upon competitive success. . Continuous and widespread stress is put upon con— formity to group standards, largely those of broadly middle-class strata. 4. Great attention is paid to the creed of democratic values, and teacher-student relations are supposed to be "democratic." 5. In practice, public schools attempt to develop patriotic values and beliefs (the theme that Counts called "national solidarity").85 For the past several decades there have been many efforts to codify the major value orientations that public schools should seek to enhance. Various commissions, task forces, study groups, and organizations have recorded educational goals and objectives aimed at achieving one of the generally accepted purposes of public education, i.e., fostering democracy, or the American way of life. The writer does not wish to burden the reader with a lengthy, historical review Of the attempts to prescribe standard goals for public education 841. James Quillen, "Values the American People want Through Education," from "The Evolving Objectives of Education in American Life," The Educational Record, XXXIX (July, 1958), 222-29. 85Williams, American Society, p. 296. 69 (i.e. values); however, a brief summary of the major efforts is presented for a clearer understanding of the role public schools have played in promoting certain specified values. The Commission on the Reorganization of Secondary Education formulated what have commonly become known as the “Seven Cardinal Principles of Secondary Education." Briefly stated, the principles are as follows: good health; command of fundamental processes; worthy home membership; vocational efficiency; good citizenship; worthy use of leisure time; and ethical character.86 Though these statements were very general, they have greatly influenced subsequent efforts to list educational goals. The Educational Policies Commission of the National Education Association classified the objectives Of secondary education in four general categories. The four categories and selected specific objectives for each are: l. Self-realization: skills in reading, writing, arithmetic, intellectual and aesthetic interests, good character. 2. Human relationship: respect for humanity, appreciation of the home. 86"Cardinal Principles of Secondary Education," formulated by the Commission on the Reorganization Of Secondary Education U.S. Office of Education Bulletin, No. 35 (1918). 7O 3. Economic efficiency: appreciation of good work- manship, consumer skills, and knowledge of occu- pations and their requirements. 4. Civic responsibility: understanding of democratic processes, respect for law, appreciation of social justice.87 Havighurst divided the life span into age periods and then identified specific developmental tasks as edu- cational objectives that are applicable to each age group. An examination of selected portions of his work suffi- ciently describe the many tasks viewed as desirable values to enhance. For "Middle childhood" some of the tasks are: learning to get along with age mates; develop- ing fundamental skills in reading, writing, and calcu- lating; developing conscience, morality and a scale of values; developing attitudes toward groups and insti- tutions.88 For "Adolescence" specific tasks identified are: achieving new and more mature relations with age mates of both sexes; selecting or preparing for an occu- pation; preparing for marriage and family life; developing intellectual skills and concepts necessary for civic competence; and acquiring a set of values and an ethical 87Educational Policies Commission, The Purposes of Education in American Democracy (Washington, D.C.: National Education Association and the American Associ- ation of School Administrators, 1938). 88Robert J. Havighurst, Human Development and Education (New York: David McKay Company, 1953), pp. 25- 41. 71 89 Additional tasks for system as a guide to behavior. adult years were also listed. Taking on and achieving civic responsibility; adjusting to changing personal and interpersonal life patterns; maintaining an economic standard of living; and achieving happy family relation- ships are all viewed as tasks (goals) to be achieved in later life.90 Kearney prepared a statement of educational Objectives for elementary education. Nine curriculum areas were considered as follows: physical development, health and body care; individual social and emotional development; ethical behavior standards, and values; social relations; the social world; the physical world; esthetic development; communication; and quantitative relationships.91 The specific behavior for the curricu- lum area, "ethical behavior, standards, and values, is indicative of the desired values to be taught. For example, the pupil is to develop an awareness Of pro- perty rights, and of truth and falsehood"; and “the pupil habitually acts in accord with a system of ethical values, although these are not always the same as adult values."92 agléiég. pp. 111-58. 9°1bid., p. 160. 91Nolan C. Kearney, Elementarnychool Objectives (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1953), pp. 34-35. 921bid., p. 68. 72 French and associates developed a list of edu- cational objectives for the secondary school that was similar to the work of Kearney. The objectives for the general education program were classified under three maturity goals and four areas of behavioral competence. The maturity goals are: 1. Growth toward self-realization. Self-realization is described as the development of "the common kinds of behavior indicative of such personal growth and development as will enable them (the students) within the limits of their native environments, to live richer, more satisfying, more productive lives consonant with our ethical, aesthetic, and social standards and values. 2. Growth toward desirable interpersonal relations in small groups. 3. Growth toward effective membership or leadership in large organizations.93 The four areas of behavioral competence outlined by French are as follows: 1. Attainment of maximum intellectual growth and development. 2. Cultural orientation and integration. 3. Physical and mental health. 4. Economic competence.94 The major purposes of the secondary school program pur- ported by French are oriented to developing individual competencies, and to developing capabilities to deal with civic responsibilities. 93W. French and associates, Behavioral Goals of General Education in High School (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1957), pp. 92-102. 94Ibid. 73 The most recent attempt to develop a system of educational goals that reflect the American value orien- tations was conducted by the Commission on Educational Planning of Phi Delta Kappa. The final list of eighteen educational goals was gleaned from existing goal state- ments of over 600 school districts across the country. The eighteen goals are stated here in brief form: 1. Learn how to be a good citizen. 2. Learn how to respect and get along with people who think, dress, and act differently. 3. Learn about and try to understand the changes that take place in the world. 4. Develop skills in reading, writing, speaking, and listening. 5. Understand and practice democratic ideas and ideals. 6. Learn how to examine and use information. 7. Understand and practice the skills of family living. 8. Learn to respect and get along with people with whom we work and live. 9. Develop skills to enter a specific field of work. 10. Learn how to be a good manager of money, property, and resources. 11. Develop a desire for learning new and in the future. 12. Learn how to use leisure time. 13. Practice and understand the ideas of health and safety. 14. Appreciate culture and beauty in the world. 15. Gain information needed to make job selections. 16. Develop pride in work and a feeling Of self-worth. 17. Develop good character and self-respect. 18. Gain a general education.95 The rationale for developing this list of eighteen goals was an effort to assist school Officials, and individuals from the general public, to jointly determine those 95Carrol Lang, "Setting Educational Goals," Speech given at workshop, Mott Leadership Training Pro- gram, Flint, Michigan, April 12, 1973. 74 items of most value that should be incorporated in the educative process of any given public school. The many statements of educational goals and objectives that have been discussed herein are not to be construed as all inclusive, nor as limited to the references cited; however, those reviewed do represent the major attempts to deal with the fundamental question: What is the purpose of American public education? An examination of the predominant value orientations found in the American culture, and a similar examination of the many statements of the goals of public education in America, clearly reveal common themes. The recognition of the worth of the individual; the emphasis on civic and economic responsibility; the emphasis on learning to get along with others; the recognition of a moral and ethical code for behavior; the belief in the fundamental precepts of democracy; the recognition of the value of education to achieve intellectual and vocational com- petence; and, the belief that the "American dream" does exist, are all examples of specific value orientation that permeate the American culture and the institution Of public education. How successful the public schools have been in achieving their stated goals is, of course, a subject for another discussion. 75 Values and the Appalachian SituatiOn The search of the literature revealed that investi- gations of the concept of values in relation to the Appalachian Region are virtually nonexistent. There have been attempts, however, to describe traditional characteristics of the Appalachian people, and more recent studies have been concerned with identifying changes that are occurring within the Appalachian cul- ture--changes in life styles, communication patterns, and the individual's participation in the larger American society. From this information one can identify patterns of behavior that reflect specific value orientations, and it is in this context that the literature reviewed in this section is presented. Jack Weller, in Yesterday's People: Life in Contemporary Appalachia, discussed the Appalachian situ- ation. He based his comments on several years of intimate association with the peOple of the region. For the past few years, Weller's work has been considered one of the best descriptions Of the realities of Appalachian life. At the conclusion of his work, Weller summarized the major differences that he found to exist between the Southern Appalachian and the Middle Class American with respect to personal characteristics, family life charac- teristics, and relationships with others. The comparative summary is essentially a description of contrasting value 76 orientations between the two groups, and for this reason it is eSpecially germane to this discussion. Tables 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 contain a summary of Weller's account. Many Of the characteristics purported by Weller reflect the essence of two sociological concepts, alien- ation and anomie, both of which have been used to describe the life conditions in Appalachia. The following descriptions of the two concepts should clarify this point for the reader.. Seaman identified five meanings of alienation: l. Powerlessness: the expectancy or probability held by the—individual that his own behavior cannot determine the occurrence of the outcomes, or reinforcements he seeks. 2. Meaningless: the individual is unclear as to what he ought to believe--when the individual's minimal standards for clarity in decision making are not met. 3. Normlessness: high expectancy that socially unapproved behaviors are required to achieve given goals. 4. Isolation: those persons who assign low reward value to goals or beliefs that are typically highly valued in the given society. 5. Self-estrangement: the degree Of dependence of the given behavior upon anticipated future rewards.96 Regarding the concept, anomie, Merton hypothesizes that high anomie is associated with the existence of dif- ferences between culturally prescribed aspirations and 96 . . . n M. Seaman, "On the Meaning of Alienation, American Sociological Review, XXIV, 788-91. 77 TABLE 2.1.--A comparative summary of personal characteris- tics97 Middle Class American -... 0—— .—-—~..__-._—.__.-. _—_——~_ ...—_—_-..._.—.._—. .waw—n~- Southern Appalachian —-—-——-——- .1... w... nun-w“ 1. 10. 11. 12. 13. Emphasis on community, church, clubs, etc. Thoughts of change and progress; expectation Of change usually for the better. Freedom to determine one's life and goals. Routine-seeker. Self-assurance. No particular stress on maleness. Use of ideas, ideals, and abstractions. Acceptance of object goals. Oriented to progress. Strong emphasis on saving and budgeting. Desire and ability to plan ahead carefully. Placement of group goals above personal aims. Recognition of expert Opinion. 1. (A) c 11. 12. 13. Individualism; self- centered concerns. Attitudes strongly tra- ditionalistic. Fatalism. Action-seeker. Sense of anxiety. Stress on traditional masculinity. Use of anecdotes. Rejection of object goals. Oriented to existence. No saving or budgeting. No interest in long- range careful planning. Precedence of personal feelings and whims over group goals. Expert opinion not recognized. 97 Jack Weller, Yesterday's People: Life in Con- tegporary Appalachia (Lexington: Press, 1966), p. 161. day's People.) University of Kentucky (Hereinafter referred to as Yester- 78 TABLE 2.2.--A comparative summary of family life charac- teri stics98 Middle Class American Southern Appalachian Child-centered family. Responsibility for family decisions shared by husband and wife. "Togetherness" Of hus- band and wife. Home tasks shared by husband and wife. Many family activities shared (vacations, amusements, etc.). Disciplined child- rearing; stress on what is thought best for the child's development. Family bound by common interest as well as emotional ties. Family a bridge to out- side world. Adult-centered family. Male-dominated family. Separateness of husband and wife; separate reference groups. Sharp deleniation of home tasks between husband and wife. Few shared family activities. Permissive child- rearing; stress on what pleases the child. Family bound by emotional ties; few common interests. Separation of family and outside world. 981bid. 7 9 TABLE 2.3.--A comparative summary of interpersonal relationship pattern599 . —-, Middle Class American -——. c..--__’.‘. --- —.._ - ..- . p o o. - .——-...-_ .__- -w-w .w..- n.-- ‘4— ._ ~~ _ ..—__..__.._— '-.-- _-—-. Southern Appalachian l. 10. ll. 12. 13. Reference group less important. Object-oriented life pattern. Association between sexes. Strong pressure of status. Striving for excellence. Readiness to join groups. Ability to function in objective ways in a group. Attachment to work; con- cern for job security and satisfaction. Emphasis on education. Cooperation with doc- tors, hospitals, and "outsiders." Use of government and law to achieve goals. Acceptance of the world. Participation in orga- nized amusements, cul- tural activities, etc. 1. 10. 11. 12. 13. Reference group most important. Person-oriented life patterns. Little or no associ- ation between sexes. No status seeking. Leveling tendency in society. Rejection of joining groups. Ability to function in a group only on a personal basis. Detachment from work; little concern for job security or satis- faction. Ambivalence toward education. Fear of doctors, hos- pitals, those in authority, the well- educated. Antagonism toward government and law. Suspicion and fear of outside world. Rejection of organized amusements cultural activities, etc. 99Ibid. , n- ._.. ,__ _ ... - - -... _ .-——.~*_--._._.-.1- 80 socially structured awareness for realizing these aspirations.100 MacIver described anomie as "the absence of values that might give purpose or direction to life, the loss of intrinsic and socialized values, the insecurity of the hopelessly disoriented."lOl Using the six classifications of value orien- tations suggested by F. Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, Dr. Marion Pearsall elucidated "some contrasting value orientations" between the Southern Appalachian and the upper-middle class (professional) American. The results of her findings are summarized in Table 2.4. There are writers who have disagreed with some of the characteristics Weller purported regarding Appa- lachian people. Ford stated that parents are becoming more interested in the educational advancement of their children and that vocational aspirations are increasing.102 7 100Robert K. Merton, Social Theopy and Social Structure (Glencoe, 111.: Free Press, 1949), p. 728. 101Robert M. MacIver, The Ramparts We Guard (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1950), pp. 84-92. 102Thomas R. Ford, ed., The Southern Appalachian Region: A Survey (Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1969). . s F~ni a I~Av pin- S a.) sans.- .a I- ..In a...» U.~Nn;v...ia mVnEAAuh‘ui.) : N1 0 .1 . .. I‘.t,|n. I...) ."..lu(|alfll.||lhlu«l1|l.1|.)lll,ll IAIII I 1‘! d‘ A. 81 .m .Q .OHQOOQ m.hooumum®w .HOHHOZ moa mmaon we wanna no mnwmnonum maonmn “maneufino nflxnon mNHn (woven “Annemnmmfifl >a0>wumHmm uoemwnm mum mnwmnmnum “owmmnlmflnmnflx “HonOmHom mmnofluoaon nmEdn mo mnnpmn men we use: mnfloo mnflem mmufl>fluoo noes: we munumn one we pong mfiooneuao “HH>e nuHB ooom omxHE no .oooo kHHMOAmmm noflpnm>nmunfl mnH>Ho mo eonmmoo onu nfl one mnmnuo MOM enema um .manm Inmpamns one Hfl>m >HHMOHmom monsoon nmEsn we eunumn one we pong mnflnpmnm>e one mnonzmno>m Op noflumunmflno mmnflnu HMHSOHHHMQ one mmooad mnemonoo ou noflpobnmflno mmommm Ou noE mo nOHuoHen one ma pong mmoaon snoop one .nmoneamo .xooao men he omuoaomon “umow “man unoam one nowumunmflno mnnpnm menussn =Hmnsumn= cam 30am homeoommaep mnouow one pnommnm uneapmuneflno anemone mmEHu ou nmE mo nofluoaen one we pong OHDmHEflumo waam0Hmoo “non nmoonnu mxwo3 ooo no mnsumn Houunoo nmo no: Emflaopom uhnflumwo no>o Houpnoo nonnn mauuwa «ooo one ensumn ou omuomsnonm no: mawnnpmnummnm onmv eunumn on non mo nofiumamn one we umnz Amamnoflmmmmonmv mmmno mappflsunmmno noenomaommn nnmnusom mnOHummsO mnflmanmono 11‘ moamnOHDMpanHo enam> mnflummupnoo mEom11.v.N mqmoq muspmz m>oq ensue: mo mmcmm < Ha dflnmpcmfium mane dflnmpcowuh mums soflum>amm 0H unmenmwamfiooo< momma um pauoz a mo mmcmm m emaq manmuuomfiou « m ucmfizmaamEooo< mo mmcmm 4 maoEnmm HmccH m>oq mucus: m 80pmfl3 mmmswmdmm huwusomm wawfimm h AQOEumm umccH wommm um pauoz a uowmwmmtmawm m Eoommum Eonmwum Eopmflz m mmmcwmmmm 50pmH3 mflnmpcmwum mane v uommmmmsmamm uoommmmsmamm mommm um pauoz m m GOaum>Hmm muwnsomm xawfimm Eoemmum m muflusomm waflsmm coflum>amm mmmcflmmmm a mosam> HODMUSUm mmsHm> oaansm Hmuwcmw mosam> pampsuw xsmm muouMOSUw paw .oflansm Hmumcmm .mucmpsum MOM mafixsmu mmsHm> Hmcflfiumu mo coausnwuumflols.a.v mqmfia 115 Instrumental Values The students gave high priority to the values Honest, Responsible, Loving, Ambitious, and low preference for Imaginative, Logical, Obedient, and Intellectual. The general public group preferred Honest, Responsible, Forgiving, Self-Controlled, and viewed as less important, Imaginative, Cheerful, Logical, and Intellectual. The educators saw themselves as being Honest, Responsible, Capable, and Ambitious, and gave low priority to the values, Obedient, Imaginative, Logical, and Polite. More similarity was noted among the three groups instrumental value rankings than the terminal value rankings. All three groups ranked as their first and second preference the values HoneSt and Responsible, while low priority was given to the values Imaginative and Logical. A summary of the distribution of the reported instrumental value system for each group is contained in Table 4.2. ‘Research Question II: How does each group rank the moral and competence (instrumental values) values? The instrumental values may be classified as either moral or competence values. When these values are violated feelings of guilt or shame may result.2 All 2Rokeach, "Value Systems in Religion," p. 6. 116 ucmfipmno m>wumcflmmEH m>flpmcwmmEH ma m>wpmcflmmEH admummno Havamoq ha Hmoamoq Hmowmoq newswono ma muflaom HmsuomaamucH HmsuomaamusH ma smeau ucoaowbo msommmnsou «a msoommusou cmmHU anneamm ma Hammamm muaaom manmmmo NH admummcu ucmpcmmmch popswfipmoum AH mcfl>flmuom manmmmu mufiaom 0H ucmpsmmmch acmdamm ucmpcmmmpsH m HoppomaampsH msommmudoo msfl>flmnom m poaaouucounmamm msowuwnem admuomnu h popcaspmoum mcfl>oq pmHHouucoowamm m msH>OA popcwfipmonm smwao m msofluwnfid pmHHOHDCOOImem mSOHuHQE< v manmmmu msfl>flmuom mCH>OA m mabflmcommwm mHQHmCOQmwm oabamsommmm N ummsom ummcom ummsom a mesam> uoumospm mosam> owansm Hmumcmo mmsHm> usmpsum xsmm muoumospm paw .OHHQSQ Hmumcmm .musmpsum MOM mmsaxcmu 05Hm> Hmucmfisuumcw mo coflusnwnumwass.m.w mamas 117 three groups in this investigation tended to give priority to the moral values and regarded as less important the competence values. The distribution of these values for the three groups is contained in Table 4.3. Research Question III: Are there differences in the reported value systems among the three groups? Using the Kruskal—Wallis H test of significance, the mean scores of twelve terminal values were found to be different among the three groups at the .05 level of significance. The twelve values are: A Comfortable Life, An Exciting Life, A Sense of Accomplishment, A World at Peace, A World of Beauty, Equality, Family Security, Inner Harmony, Social Recognition, Self-Respect, Sal- vation, and Pleasure. The most notable differences were found among the values Salvation, Inner Harmony, and Family Security. A summary of the differences among the three groups is contained in Table 4.4. Using the same test of significance, the mean scores of eight instrumental values were found to be different: Capable, Cheerful, Clean, Forgiving, Honest, Intellectual, Obedient, and Responsible. Cheerful and Clean had the highest level of significant difference, p = .0000, and Intellectual was different at p = .0014. The educators ranked Intellectual eighth, while the general public and students ranked it fifteenth. The .mmsam> mocmummfioo Ho HMHOE Honuflm mm pmHMHmmmao you mum mosam> wmmsem mmsoommusou monommmusou mmdommmuooo masmumwnu madmummnu maswummnu ucmflpmno m>apmcflmmEH m>apmcwmwfiH ma m>HumcflmmEH HMUHUOQ 5H HMOHmoq HMOHmOA ucmflpmno ma muaaom amouomaamucH HmsuomaamucH ma smmHU ucmflpmno vH cmmao Humaamm ma Hammamm muaaom magmmmo NH ucmpcmmmGCH meCHEUmoum Ha mca>amuom magmamo muaaom OH ucmpcmmmch H5wmawm ucmpcmmmUaH m HmsuomaamucH mcfl>flmuom m pmaaonusoo :33 90333 N. m emaaouucoo 1 emecasemoum maa>oq smamm m msfl>oq popsaEpmoum smeau m pmaaonpcou m90fluflbfi< Imamm mSOHuHQE¢ v GHQMQMU mcfl>flmuom OGH>OA m mabfimcommmm mabflmcommmm manwmcommwm N ummsom ummcom ummcom a mmsHm> mmsHm> monam> mesam> mesam> mosam> mocmummeou Home: mocoumdeou ammo: museummfioo Homo: in Li L xcmm HOpmospm oaansm amuwcmu usmpsum mHOpMUSUm paw .UHHQDQ Hmnwcmm .musmp Isum wo coausnfluumflp Ammsam> HmucmssuumCHv msHm> mocmpmmeoo paw Hmuofi onast.m.v mqmda 119 mesmOHMHcmwm mo Hm>mH mo. xcmn Hmoflucmpfl suaz mesam> n um usmummmwp mmuoom :me nuHB mmsHm>m NNNH. mHmH.m m vo.m a No.N m sm.m eoemHz onN. mqu.N m Nm.m OH «H.m v VN.m aHamvcmHum mans amvoo. Noem.0H NH mm.eH NH om.sH NH mN.NH coHuHcmoomm HmHoom mHooo. HNNm.NH N mN.o m mm.m m oo.m uommmmmsMHmm moooo. mmmm.mm nH 90.0 H No.m OH sN.m coHum>Hmm «Nooo. mNms.NH NH Nm.NH 8H mo.mH «H ow.OH musmmmHm seem. mNoo. NH om.HH «H mm.HH NH mo.NH suHusomm HmcoHumz mmmH. ONNo.s OH vs.a HH mm.0H m am.m m>0H musumz moooo. aNmo.mm m mm.N m mm.m SH mv.HH scoeHmm HmccH omHH. NNNN.N m mq.m N HN.N H mm.m mmmchmmm ommq. mNms.H v mm.N m mo.N N No.N Eoemmum mvoooo. NNNq.mN nH 00.8 N No.v N mm.m suHusomm NHHamm mmooo. HHNm.mH mH NN.mH NH VN.OH NH om.OH suHHmsem mmmNo. ooom.N 8H Nm.mH mH NH.mH mH mN.HH spammm mo cHuoz « mmNHo. OHOH.v m mm.m m 0N.N m Hm.N momma um eHuoz a mvao. ONmo.m N Hm.m a NN.N HH mH.oH unmaanHm SEOUO< MO mmfiwm d «0000. vmmN.NN VH 8N.NH NH NN.mH NH NH.OH mNHH mcHuHoxm c< «vao. mNma.NH HH $0.0H NH No.HH a sN.N meH mHnmuHoHsoo 4 um um xx :2 am :2 xx 2: umme-m mmuz msuz NNHuz mmsHm> mfiaamzlamxmsux muoumospm owansm Hmumcmw mucwpsum muoumospm paw .oflabsm Hmuwcmm .mucepsum now mmcflxcmu msHm> HmcHEumesw.v.v mamme 120 mean scores for Honest and Responsible were different at .05, however, in the overall rankings the three groups ranked them in the first two priority positions. The instrumental value systems for the three groups is reported in Table 4.5. Research Question IV: Are there differences among the reported value sys— tems of the three groups based on selected variables? Analysis was conducted on the data to determine if differences existed within each of the groups' value systems based on the variables: age, sex, family income, Appalachian native, number of years, if any, lived out- side Appalachia, and education level. In each case the group variable was held constant and the selected variables were introduced for individual analysis. The following portion of this chapter presents the findings for each of the groups. For each test of significance the .05 alpha level was used. Student Group (N=127) Sex The mean scores of six values were differentiated by sex. Males indicated more preference for the terminal value, An Exciting Life and the instrumental value, Ambitious. Females indicated significantly higher 121 mocmoHMHcmHm mo Hm>mH mo. map um ucmHGMMNp mmuoom cmmE suHB mmsHm>m NNos. NSNN.H N mm.m v mo.m m HH.m vaHoHHcoosmHmm mHHHo. oomm.m N Ho.m N mo.m N mo.N mHnHmcoammm News. NmHs.m mH mm.HH NH mm.OH OH Nm.m mHHHom mmmHo. HNmm.w NH mm.mH VH NN.HH mH 4N.HH Hamembo NmOH. mmmv.s m ON.N m Nm.m m HN.N mcH>oH mmvH. omvm.m SH om.HH SH mN.NH NH aN.NH HmonOH mvHoo. mmoH.mH m Nm.m mH oo.NH mH Hm.HH HmsuomHHmucH msmH. mmmN.m a ms.m HH mm.0H a Nm.m ucmncmmmecH smNo. NHNo.m NH mo.mH NH No.4H NH NH.VH m>HumaHmmsH moooo. HmNm.HH H av.m H Nv.m H Hm.m ummcom mmNN. mavm.N NH No.0H m NH.N NH om.OH HammHmm mHmHo. «Ham.m OH Hm.m m mm.m m om.m mcH>HoHom memo. NHNN.H mH 8N.OH m NN.m VH NN.OH msommmusoo moooo. Hmov.mN sH VN.OH NH mm.OH m oe.N cmmHo moooo. mesN.wN HH HN.N NH No.mH N mm.m Hsmuwmno mNHoo. HONs.mH m Ho.w OH Nm.m NH NH.OH mHnmamo oHoo. mmNm.m o NN.N m HN.N HH om.m omecHeemoum NmNo. mmmo.m v mm.m N mm.m v NH.N msOHansa um um xm c2 xm a: xm CZ ummenm uz msuz NNHuz mmsHm> mHHHmzumemsux mHOuMOSUM UHHQDQ Hmumcmw mucmpzum muouMOSUm paw .UHHQDQ Hmumsmm .mucmpsum How mmcflxcmu 05Hm> HmucmfiduumcHss.m.v mqmfia [22 priority for the terminal values, Equality and Happiness, and the instrumental values, Honest and Loving. Family Income: (under $5,000) $15,000) (over 515,000) The terminal values, National Security and Wisdom, were differentiated by income level, with the $10,000— $15,000 group giving more priority to both values. The instrumental values found to be different were Forgiving, Helpful, Logical, and Responsible. Of the four income levels, the under $5,000 group gave higher priority to Forgiving and Helpful, and the $10,000-$lS,000 group higher priority to Logical and Responsible. Native, Nonnative of Appalachia No difference was found on the preference given any of the thirty-six values between the students who were natives or nonnatives of Appalachia. General Public Group (N=43) Age Group: The Age Groupings for the General Public were the Following: 20-30, 31-40, over 40 The terminal values True Friendship and Wisdom had mean scores that were differentiated by age. The over-40 age group indicated a higher priority for True Friendship while the 20-30 age group indicated more preference for Wisdom. 123 The instrumental values differentiated by age group were Broadminded, Cheerful, Clean, Courageous, and Imaginative. The 20-30 age group indicated a higher preference for Broadminded, Courageous, and Imaginative; the 31-40 age group more preference for Clean; and the over-4O age group preferred Cheerful. egg The terminal values, A Comfortable Life and Equality; and the instrumental value, Intellectual, were ranked differently by general public males and females. The male subjects indicated more preference for A Com— fortable Life, and the females more preference for Equality and Intellectual. Familyilncome Wisdom and Ambitious were differentiated by income level for the general public group. Those persons with a family income greater than $10,000 preferred the terminal value Wisdom, and the instrumental value, Ambitious. The $10,000-$15,000 income group indicated more preference for both values. Native, Nonnative of Appalachia The terminal values, A Sense of Accomplishment, Inner Harmony, National Security, True Friendship; and the instrumental values, Clean, Imaginative, Polite, and Self-Controlled were ranked significantly different 124 by the native, and nonnative Appalachians. The Appa- lachian native group indicated more preference for Inner Harmony, National Security, True Friendship, Clean, and Polite, while the nonnative group gave higher priority to A Sense of Accomplishment, Imaginative, and Self- Controlled. Number of Years Lived Outside Appalachia The terminal value, Inner Harmony, was the only value differentiated by number of years lived outside Appalachia. Those subjects who had lived at least five years, but less than eight years outside Appalachia indi- cated more preference for the value, Inner Harmony. Educator Group (N=99) Age Group: The Age Group_Cate— gories for the Educators Were as Follows: 20-30; 31-40; Over 40 The terminal values, A Sense of Accomplishment, Mature Love, and Pleasure; and the instrumental values, Broadminded, Clean and Loving were ranked different by the three age groups. The 20-30 age group showed more preference for Mature Love, Pleasure, Broadminded, and Loving; the 31-40 age group more preference for Clean; and the over-40 age group indicated a higher priority for A Sense of Accomplishment. 125 Four values were differentiated by sex. The male educators indicated more preference for the instrumental values Capable, while the female educators indicated a higher priority for the terminal value Happiness, and the instrumental values Cheerful and Independent. No difference was found in the priority given any of the terminal values. Family Income Three income levels were established to compare the value rankings of the educators: ($5,000—$9,999) ($10,000-$15,000) (over $15,000). Terminal values found to be different were Salvation, True Friendship, and Wisdom. Helpful and Imaginative were the two instru- mental values that were differentiated by family income. The lower income group gave higher priority to True Friendship and Helpful; the middle income level, higher priority for Salvation and Wisdom; and the higher income level indicated more preference for Imaginative. It should be noted, however, that all three educator income groups indicated low priority for Imaginative, ranking the value either seventeenth (the middle and higher income levels) or eighteenth (the lower income levels). 126 Native, Nonnative of Appalachia The educators who were natives of Appalachia indicated the highest priority for the terminal value Salvation, ranking it as their most important terminal value. The nonnatives of Appalachia showed more preference for A World at Peace and Wisdom. No dif— ferences were found among any of the instrumental values. Number of Years Lived Outside Appalachia No differences were noted in the preference given any of the terminal values. Differences were noted in the ranking of the instrumental values Broadminded, For- giving, Honest, Logical, and Polite. The educators who had never lived outside Appalachia showed more preference for Broadminded. Those educators who had lived outside Appalachia at least one year but less than five years indicated a higher priority for the value Logical; and those who had lived eight years or more outside Appa- lachia reported a higher preference for Forgiving, Honest, and Polite. Even though there was a difference in the mean score for Honest, all four of the sub—groups ranked it as the most important instrumental value. Education Level The terminal values, A Comfortable Life, An Exciting Life, and Salvation; and the instrumental values Ambitious and Polite were differentiated by education 127 level. The educators who had completed the bachelor of arts degree indicated a higher preference for A Com- fortable Life; those who had a bachelor of science degree more preference for Salvation and Polite; and those who completed post—Masters' degree work indicated a higher priority for An Exciting Life and Ambitious. All of the data pertaining to Research Question IV is contained in Appendix C, Tables C.l through C.18. Research Question V: Is one of the groups internally more homogeneous in their reported value systems? To determine the homogeneity of the reported value systems for the three groups, group variance scores for each of the thirty-six values were computed. A value-by- value comparison revealed that the general public group had consistently lower variance scores (on twenty-one of the thirty-six values) thus, reflecting a reported value system that was more homogeneous than the student or educator group. By contrast, the students had the greatest variability in their reported values systems, thus reflect- ing a low degree of homogeneity. The Grand Mean and variance scores for the reported value systems of each group is contained in Appendix C, Table C.l9. Research Question VI: What are the opinions of the three groups regarding selected elements of community education in the school district? - 128 A series of items relating to community education comprised the School Opinion Survey. Each of the sub~ jects was asked to respond to the survey, and the results of those comments are presented at this time. For pur— poses of this portion of the study percentage scores on each item are reported. Question One on the School Opinion Survey required the subjects to make a determination of those elements of community education that should be included in a total school program. A list of twelve such items was developed and is contained in Table 4.6. More than 50 per cent of the total sample indi- cated that each of the twelve elements should be included in the school program. Based on the percentage of posi- tive responses, those items that appeared to be of most importance were: (1) Vocational training for high school students; (2) Career counseling for youth and adults; (3) Vocational training for adults; (4) Basic education GED program for adults. Those items that appeared to be of lesser importance were: (1) Pre—school programs; (2) Programs for family activities; (3) Cultural enrichment activities for all citizens; (4) Programs for senior citizens. 129 mm.om mma Hm.om om HN.Nm 0H oo.nv om mfimumonm Hoonomnmum ms.mm eNH mm.Hm Hm H4.Nm NN Hm.ms mm menus auNH zmsounu cwuummuwpcflx om.mm an N@.@@ we mN.Nw NN mm.om we mcwufluflu Ham How mfimumoum coaumospm Spammm om.Hm mmH 0N.mm mo wH.Hm mm Ho.Nm Ne mmHuH>Huo¢ mHHEmm How mEmumoum NH.mm mNH mn.NN NN «v.Nm mm mm.mm NN mcmNHUHU pmmmmoflpsmm may now mamumoum Hafiommm mo.mm mvH No.mm om VH.mm mm mm.vv Nm mcmnwuflo uoHcmm How mfimnmoum Hafiomem mo.mo mmH NN.mN mN NH.mm mm om.mm mN mcoNHuHU HH< How . mmflufl>fluo¢ HMQOHpmmHomm mm.vm mVH mN.mN mm VH.mm mm mm.mm mv msmNHuHU HHM How merH I>Huo< ucmEnOanm Homepaso em.mN vow mm.Hm Hm ON.om mm «H.mm em muH5p¢ paw sumo» MOM mcHHmmcsou Hmmumu mm.mm ovm vo.mm mm No.mm ov mm.wm NQH mucmpsum Hoonom swam How mCHCHMHB HocOHumoo> mm.HN mmH Hm.om om mo.mN Hm mN.mm Hm muaspfi How mchHmua Hmcoflumoo> mm.mm mmH Hm.om om mv.vN mm em.mm wN muH5pd How Emumonm omo\coHumospm OHmmm d w newt w mmw# m mmw# w moww EmUH mHmEmm Hmuoa Houmospm UHHnsm Hmumcmw pampsum umcHBOHHom map m0 news: mp pasosm Emumoum Hoonom Hmuou may CH UmpDHUsHllcoHummDO Hmmmuzv mm>usm cochmo Hooaom .mco cOHumqu on mmmcommmn mo mumfifismbb.m.v mqmme 130 The element that appeared to generate the greatest amount of disagreement was: Programs for family activi— Eiee. Only 37 per cent of the student group indicated that family activities should be a part of the school program, while 70 per cent of the educators felt it should be included, and 51 per cent of the general public group felt it should be included in the school program. A complete summary of the data related to question one of the School Opinion Survey is contained in Table 4.6. Item two of the School Opinion Survey was: The school should work with the community (agencies, groups, Business) to improve community living (health, employment, education). Ninety—six per cent of all respondents indicated that the school should work with the community to improve community living (Table 4.7). The third item of the School Opinion Survey was related to use of school facilities: School buildings should be available for use by all citizens in the community (meetings, recreation, educational programs). Ninety-one per cent of the total sample agreed that school buildings should be available for use by all citizens in the community (Table 4.8). 131 TABLE 4.7.-—Summary of responses to question two, School Opinion Survey ...__.. Item-~The school should work with the community (agencies, groups, business) to improve community living (health, employment, education). Unde— Group Yes % No % cided % Total % Student 120 94.49 1 .79 6 4.72 177 100 General Public 42 97.67 0 .00 l 2.33 43 Educator 97 97.98 1 1.01 l 1.01 99 Total 259 96.28 2 .74 8 2.97 269 100 TABLE 4.8.--Summary of responses to question three, School Opinion Survey Item--School buildings should be available for use by all citizens in the community (meetings, recreation, educational programs). Group Yes % No % Undecided % Student 113 88.98 7 5.51 7 5.51 General Public 39 90.70 2 4.65 2 4.65 Educator 94 94.95 3 3.03 2 2.02 Total 246 91.45 12 4.46 11 4.09 132 The final item on the School Opinion Survey was related to educational decision making: Educators, students and the general public should participate in making school-related decisions (planning, policy, curriculum). Seventy—one per cent of the sample indicated that educational decisions should be made by educators, stu— dents and the public. The educators had the smallest percentage of group consensus on this item (68% responded yee), while the public group had the highest percentage of group consensus (77% responded yee). These data are presented in Table 4.9. Almost without exception, those persons in the total sample who disagreed with the pro- position of joint educational decision making (%=l6) indicated that the superintendent and board of education should make all educationally related decisions. Summary The purpose of this chapter has been to present the analysis of the data pertaining to the stated research questions, and to report the findings drawn from the data analysis. Perusal of the data revealed similarities and differences do exist among the reported value sys— tems, both within group and among the groups. The students indicated the highest preference for the terminal values, Happiness and Freedom, and the instrumental values Honest and Responsible. The general 133 TABLE 4.9.——Summary of positive responses to question four, School Opinion Survey -a. ._ —— .—.—-——.—.—._ ,-___._ ~——_—-—.___._.__._.... _. —. ~.-— - - _.- , -.-ra_.-H-.—-_..~ -——-- .___.__..._..-H _.._ --_ . Item—~Educators, students, and the general public should participate in making school-related decisions (planning, policy, curriculum, etc.) Group Yes % No % Undecided % Student 92 72.44 17 13.39 18 14.17 General Public 33 76.74 8 18.60 2 4.65 Educator 68 68.69 19 19.19 12 12.12 Total 193 71.75 44 16.36 32 11.90 public group most preferred the terminal values Salvation and Family Security, and the instrumental values Honest and Responsible. The educators indicated agreement with the general public on their value preferences. Highest priority was given to Salvation and Family Security as terminal values, and Honest and Responsible as instru- mental values. All three groups agreed on the low priority given to A World of Beauty and Social Recog- nition. Regarding the moral and competence values the three groups gave high priority to the moral values, Honest and Responsible, and ranked as least important such competence values as Imaginative and Logical. Twelve terminal values were found to be ranked differently by the three groups at the .05 level of 134 significance. The twelve were: A Comfortable Life, An Exciting Life, A Sense of Accomplishment, A World at Peace, A World of Beauty, Equality, Family Security, Inner Harmony, Social Recognition, Self-Respect, Sal- vation, and Pleasure. A look at the data in Table 4.4 indicates the specific direction of the differences. Similarly, eight instrumental values were dif— ferentiated by group membership. Capable, Cheerful, Clean, Forgiving, Honest, Intellectual, Obedient, and Responsible had mean score rankings that were different at .05. The values, Honest and Responsible, had sig- nificantly different mean scores, however, each group ranked them first and second in their reported instru— mental value system. When the variables age, sex, income, Appalachian native, years lived outside Appalachia, and education level were considered, some differences were noted within each of the three groups. A summary of these differences is contained in Appendix C, Tables C.1-C.13. By comparing the variance scores on each value among the three groups it was determined that the general public had a higher degree of group homogeneity in their reported value systems. Regarding the School Opinion Survey, it was found that more than half of the total sample indicated that each of the twelve selected community education 135 elements should be included in the school program. The elements apparently viewed as most important were: vocational training for high school students; career counseling for youth and adults; vocational training for adults; and a basic education/GED program for adults. Those items that appeared to be of lesser importance were: pre—school programs; programs for family activi— ties; cultural enrichment activities; and programs for senior citizens. Ninety—six per cent of the sample agreed that the school should work with the other elements in a com— munity to improve community living. Likewise, 91 per cent of the total sample agreed that school buildings should be available for use by all citizens in the community. Seventy—one per cent of the respondents indicated that school-related decisions should be made jointly by educators, students, and the general public. Those who disagreed with joint decision making clung to the traditional public school decision—making process, i.e., superintendent and board of education making school-related decisions. In Chapter V, a summary of this investigation is outlined; the findings are reviewed and summarized; a discussion of these findings in relation to the theoreti- cal background and purposes of this study is presented; and questions for further study are postulated. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, FINDINGS, AND DISCUSSION This concluding chapter is devoted to a summary of this study and to a discussion of the findings derived from the analysis of the data. Recommendations for further study, suggested by this writer, bring closure to this investigation. Summary The phenomenon of values appears in human behavior daily. The human is continually labeling a particular object, idea, or situation as Lgood or bad"; "desirable or undesirable"; "right or wrong." The concern of this study was not in determining whether people have values, but rather with the relative importance individuals place on specific values within their total value systems. Statement of the Problem The problem of this study has been to answer the following questions: 136 137 1. What is the reported value hierarchy for the students, general public, and educators? 2. How does each group rank the moral and competence values (instrumental values)? 3. Are their differences in the reported value sys— tems among the three groups? 4. Are their differences in the reported value sys- tems of the three groups based on selected variables? 5. Is one group internally more homogeneous in their reported value systems? 6. What are the opinions of the three groups regard— ing selected elements of community education in the school district? Assumptions The following assumptions were made to direct the intent of this study: 1. Values are more stable, fewer in number, and are distinct from attitudes. Institutions within the American culture seek to promote selected values for the society in general (e.g., public schools). Values have behavioral consequences. 138 4. Patterns of behavior resulting from the valuation process infer the formation of a value system that guides the actions of an individual. 5. Specific values may be grouped together to form two subsystems of values, i.e., terminal values, or end—states of existence, and instrumental values, or modes of conduct. 6. Individuals possess these values, but differences may be noted in the order of importance for each value. (Consequently, conflicts may develop between individual and individual, or individual and institution as to what is the preferred end state of existence, or mode of conduct.) 7. Values are capable of being identified and analyzed. 8. Community education reflects a broader, more com- prehensive value system than does the traditional approach to public education. A central tenet of this study suggested that before decisions are made to develop and implement any new approach to education the basic values of those involved in the change process must be considered. Thus, since the school district providing the setting for this 139 research has recently adopted the philosophy of community education, this study of values was viewed as an edu— cational imperative. Review of Literature A review of the literature revealed conflicting views regarding values and value systems; however, cer- tain items of commonality were identified that have implications for this study. Values are seen as endur- ing clusters of beliefs, thoughts, and attitudes, which determine and guide the behavior of individuals toward persons, situations, or ideas. Values transcend spe- cific objects, or situations, and are viewed as abstract ideals organized in some manner and give meaning to man's experience and existence. The values an individual holds are formed by social, cultural, and personality factors, and tend to express religious, ideological, political, and interpersonal beliefs and attitudes. Values are arranged in a system (orientation) and people differ in the relative importance attached to a specific value. Three primary directions taken in the psycho- logical measurement of values were also identified: (1) Measuring the values of groups or individuals; (2) Identifying the origin and development of values within the individual; (3) Determining the influence of values on one's life. It was 140 found that most value's studies are guided by one of the following general hypotheses: 1. Values help to organize, guide, and direct behavior. Many values are not explicitly or consciously held. The value system of a culture tends to be self- maintaining. Values can be measured through the use of atti- tude scales. Values can be identified through content analy- sis of literature and other media. A person's values tend to be consistent with the person‘s attitudes and perceptions of life. An individual's values are influenced by the values of others. Several methods have been used in attempts to measure values: polling techniques to determine what people say they want; analysis of goal statements; attitude scales; cross-cultural value comparisons; content analysis of various media; and the use of pre- scribed "ways to live" for individuals to choose among. The Rokeach Value Survey was found to be an efficient and reliable instrument for the measurement of values. 141 Common themes were identified between the "core of American values,‘ and the values purported by tra- ditional public education. Some examples of this are: (l) The recognition of the worth of the individual; (2) An emphasis on civic and economic responsibility; (3) Loyalty to the established government; (4) An emphasis on learning to get along with others; (5) The recognition of a moral and ethical code for behavior; (6) A belief in the fundamental precepts of democracy; (7) The recognition of the value of education in achieving intellectual and vocational competence; (8) A belief in progress and the "American dream." Differences were noted between the values of the Appalachian culture and the values of the larger American society. The Appalachian seems to be alienated and isolated from the modern urban, industrialized "American way of life," and tends to reflect traditional and rigid value orientations. More recent investigations suggest that changes in these life styles are taking place. Evidence from the literature supported the assertion that the philosophy of community education and the community school approach to public education reflect a broader more dynamic value orientation than 142 traditional approaches to education. Community education concerns itself with all aSpects of living within the community. It is concerned with meeting the many edu— cational needs (academic, social, vocational, avocational) of children, youth, and adults. The curriculum is flexible and centers around the contemporary needs of society. In a Eppe_community education setting, lay citizens, school officials, and various community agencies join forces in attempting to solve community problems and improve community living. Community education advocates greater use of physical and human resources and recognizes that a major function of education is to provide needed services to all citizens. Thus, in a very real sense community educators must take an active part in the formulation and execution of broad social policy. In effect community education attempts to bring the "island" and the "mainland" closer together. Plan of the Study This study of values and value systems was con- ducted in three phases: 1. The subjects were selected to participate in the study (N=269). 2. The Rokeach Value Survey, Form E; a Personal Information Survey; and a specially developed School Opinion Survey were administered to the subjects. 143 3. The data were collected, organized, and analyzed using the Computer Laboratory facilities at Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. The value survey instrument consists of eighteen terminal values (desired end states of existence), and eighteen instrumental values (preferred modes of behavior). The respondent is asked to rank order each list of values from one to eighteen, or from their most preferred value to their least preferred value. Previous research by Rokeach and others using the Value Survey, Form B has shown that respondents rank the terminal and instrumental values in a manner reliable enough for research purposes. For Form E, reliabilities range from about .10 to the high .90's for terminal values, and from about -.20 to the high .90's for the instrumental values. The mean reliability scores for the terminal values is .65, and the mean reliability score for the instrumental values is .60. In addition the subjects were administered a Personal Information Survey designed to acquire data such as age, sex, family income, native, nonnative of Appalachia; years lived outside Appalachia, and edu- cation level. The third part of the instrument, the School Opinion Survey, was designed to secure the sub— jects' opinions of selected community education elements in the school district. 144 The student and educator groups were administered the instrument in individual group meetings. The general public members of the school—community advisory committee were mailed the three—part instrument, accompanied by a letter of transmittal from the superintendent of schools. Follow—up efforts were conducted on the mail survey to the general public group. A total of 269 subjects participated in the study, and this represented 83 per cent of the total population. The number of students responding to the survey was 127 (98% of the student group); the number of general public members was 43 (61% of the general public group); and the number of educators responding to the survey was 99 (88% of the educator group). The Kruskal-Wallis H Test was the major method of statistical analysis employed. Comparisons were made among groups and within groups. The level of significance was set at the .05 level. The variance scores for each of the reported value systems were compared to determine the level of group homogeneity. Findings The following findings pertaining to the research questions were drawn from the analysis of the data. 1. The students gave high priority to the terminal values Happiness, Freedom, A world at Peace, and True Friendship. 145 The general public and educators generally agreed on the importance of their first three terminal values. Each ranked among the top three positions the values, Salvation, Family Security, and Self- Respect. The general public's next preferred value was Wisdom, while the educators‘ next pre- ferred value was Happiness. All three groups agreed that their least pre- ferred terminal value was Social Recognition. Other values given low priority were National Security and Inner Harmony by the students; An Exciting Life and Pleasure by the general public; and A World of Beauty and Equality by the edu' cators. There was general agreement by the three groups on the priority given to the instrumental values at both extremes. All three groups ranked as their first and second choice, Honest and Responsible. The students next preferred Loving and Ambitious; the general public, Forgiving and Self-Controlled; and the educators next pre- ferred Capable and Ambitious. The values of each group falling in the range of the least preferred were Logical and Imaginative. The students also indicated low preference for the 146 values Intellectual and Obedient; the general public low preference for Intellectual and Cheerful; and the educators low preference for Obedient and Polite. Each of the three groups tended to place higher priority on the moral values and lower priority on the competence values. Honest and Responsible were listed as the first two preferences of each group, and Logical and Imaginative were listed as values in the range of low priority. The edu— cators did, however, rank as their third and fourth preferences, the competence values, Capable and Ambitious. Twelve terminal values were differentiated at the .05 level by group membership: A Comfortable Life, An Exciting Life, A Sense of Accomplishment, A World at Peace, A World of Beauty, Equality, Family Security, Inner Harmony, Social Recog- nition, Self-Respect, Salvation, and Pleasure. The most notable differences were among the priority given the values Salvation, Inner Harmony, and Family Security. Values such as Social Recognition and A Wbrld of Beauty had significantly different mean scores, but in the overall rankings by the three groups, both values were given low priority. 147 The instrumental values found to be different among the three groups were: I apable, Cheerful, Clean, Forgiving, Honest, Intellectual, Obedient, and Responsible. The mean scores of Honest and Responsible were found to be significantly dif— ferent, but were ranked first and second by the students, general public, and educators. Cheer— ful, Clean, and Intellectual had the highest level of significant difference. The educators ranked Intellectual eighth, while the general public and students ranked it fifteenth. When the independent variables, age, sex, income level, native of Appalachia, years lived outside Appalachia, and education level were introduced for intra-group analysis, significant differences were identified on the priority given certain values. The complete list: of these differences and the respective direction of these differences are included in the tabular data, Appendix C, Tables C.1-C.13. A comparison of the group variance scores on each of the thirtyvsix values indicated that the general public had the highest degree of internal group homogeneity, and that the students had the lowest level, or was more heterogeneous in their reported value systems. 148 10. More than half of the total sample indicated that each of the twelve selected community education elements should be included in the school pro- gram. The elements of most importance appeared to be: Vocational training for high school stu- dents and adults; career counseling for youth and adults; and a basic education/GED program for adults. Those elements that appeared to be of lesser importance were: pre—school programs; programs for family activities; cultural enrich— ment activities; and programs for senior citizens. ll. Ninety—six per cent of the total sample indicated that the school should work with the other ele— ments in a community to improve community living. Ninety-one per cent agreed that school buildings should be available for use by all citizens in the community. Seventy-one per cent of the respondents indicated that school-related decisions should be made jointly by students, general public, and educators. Discussion The theoretical constructs undergirding this study suggested that: (1) people possess values, but may differ in the relative importance placed on specific values within a total system; (2) values have behavioral 149 consequences; and (3) institutions within the American society seek to enhance certain values for the society as a whole. A discussion of the findings contained herein should be considered in the context of the established theoretical background. The findings of this value‘s study support many of the previous investigations using the Rokeach Velpe Survey. Differences in the patterns of reported value preferences appear to be related to such variables as age, sex, income, and education level. In addition, differences were noted among the overall group value systems. These findings should not be interpreted as indicators of absolute differences in value preferences, resulting in constant dissimilar behavior patterns. Rather it seems more logical to conclude that the find- ings reported herein represent a series of linkages between the realm of the theoretical and the realm of observable behavior. Community education reflects a different value orientation than that of traditional public education. Thus, any change from one to the other implies the necessity to examine such value differences, so as to minimize any confusion or conflict (inner—personal, inter-personal, personal-institutional) that may develop during the change process. Since a major theoretical consideration to this study postulated that values have behavioral consequences, it might be concluded that individuals with differing value systems, might in turn differ in their preference for an educational philosophy and delivery system. For this reason, this study was viewed as an educational imperative. The findings drawn from the School Opinion Survey clearly revealed the educational programs viewed as most important in the school system. Those elements of com- munity education that were reported as being the most desirable were related directly to employment, either at present or in the future. Thus, it would seem that Montgomery County would want to continue to consider as a top priority such community education programs as vocational training and career counseling for the citizens of the school district.. The unemployment and underemploy- ment, with the corresponding financial conditions of many of the citizens, offer concrete evidence of such a need. Recommendations for Further Study Based on the findings of this investigation the following recommendations for further study are suggested: 1. Replication of this study in the school district, with a broader representative sample of students, and general public. 151 Expand the investigation to more settings within Appalachia to determine if similar findings can be derived. Since education has as one of its purposes the enhancement of certain values, a systematic values clarification program could be develOped. A pre— test using the Value Survey could be administered, followed by the values clarification program, and a post-test administered to determine if any changes can be noted. Study selected behavior patterns of educators, students, and general public. Administer the Value Survey and determine if there is any relationship between the reported value preferences and observable behavior (e.g., Salvation and church—going behavior). Compare the reported value systems of subjects in a school district that has had community edu- cation for some time, with a district that has no community education. Using the same three sample populations compare the reported value systems of subjects in an Appalachian school district with a school dis— trict outside Appalachia. 152 7. Expand the School Opinion Survey to acquire additional information about those elements of community education that should be included in a given school program. Howard Beers, in "American Communities,‘ sug- gested: To weigh any situation in any community without earnest consideration of the value system is not to weigh it at all for the scales are out of balance at the start. In fact an identification of the hierarchy of values may well be a starting point for any labor in the develOpment of com- munity programs. This study has been an effort to keep the "scales balanced" as community education becomes a way of life for another school system. 1Beers, "American Communities," p. 28. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Allport, G. W. "Attitudes." A Handbook of Social Psy- chology. Edited by C. Murchison. Worchester, Mass.: Clark University Press, 1935. . Pattern and Growth in Personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1961. , and Vernon, P. E. A Study of Values. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1931. (Revised in 1961 by Vernon Allport and G. Lindzey.) Angell, Robert C. The Integration of American Society: A Study of Groups and Institutions. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1941. Beers, Howard W. "American Communities." National Society for the Study of Education, Fifty-seeond Yearbook, Part IIL The Community Schools. Edited by Nelson B. Henry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953. Brawer, Florence B. Values and the Generation Gap: ‘ Junior College Freshman and Faculty (monograph series) No. 11. Washington, D.C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1971. Chao, Lincoln L. Statistics: Methods and Analyses. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1969. Campbell, Clyde M. "The Administration of Community Schools." The Role of the School in Commenipy Education. Editediby Howard Hickey and Curtis Van Voorhees. Midland, Mich.: The Pendell Company, 1969. Cantril, Hadley. The " yf of Man's Experience. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1950. 153 154 Clapp, Elsie R. Community Schools in Action. New York: Viking Press, 1939. Coleman, James C. Personality Dynamics and Effective Behavior. Glenview, 111.: Scott, Foreman and Company, 1960. Cuber, John F., and Harper, Robert A. Problems of American Society: Values in ConfliCt. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1948. Dewey, John. "The Field of 'Value'." Value: A COOper- ative Inquiry. Edited by Ray Lepley. New York: Columbia University Press, 1949. Donohew, Lewis, and Singh, B. Krishna. "Modernization of Life Styles." Community Action in Appalachia. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1968. Drucker, Peter. The Age of Discontinuity. New York: Harper and Row, 1968. Educational Policies Commission. The Purposes of Edu— cation in American Democraey. Washington: National Education Association and the American Association of School Administrators, 1938. Ford, Thomas R., ed. The Southern Appalachian Region: A Survey. Lexihgton: University of Kentucky Press, 1969. French, W., and associates. Behavioral Goals of General Education in High School. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1957. Gotshalk, D. W. Patterns of Good and Evil. Urbana, 111.: University of Illinois Press, 1963. Graham, Saxon. American Culture. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1957. Handy, Rollo. Value Theopyeand the Beheyioral Sciences. Springfield, 111.: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher, 1969. , and Kurtz, Paul. "Value Inquiry." A Current Appraisal of the Behavioral Sciences. Great Barrington, Mass.: Behavioral Research Council, 1964. 155 Hanna, Paul R., and Naslund, Robert A. "The Community School Defined." National Society for the Study of Education, The Community School. Fifty-second Yearbook, Part II. Edited by Nelsen B. Henry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953. Havighurst, Robert J. Human Development and Education. New York: David McKay Company, 1953. Herrick, C. Judson. The Evolution of Human Nature. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1956. Jarolimek, John. Values Education: Rationale, Strategies and Procedures. Preface. Forty—first Yearbook National Council for the Social Studies. Washing- ton: National Council for the Social Studies, 1971. Kearney, Nolan C. Elementary School opjectives. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1953. Kluckhohn, Clyde. "Values and Value Orientations in the Theory of Action." Toward a General Theory of Action. Edited by Talcott Parsons and Edward A. Shils. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1954. Kluckhohn, Florence, and Strodtbeck, Fred. Variations in Value Orientations. Evanston, Ill.: Row, Peterson and Company, 1961. Lowrey, Nelson, et a1. Community Structure and Change. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1964. MacIver, Robert M. The Ramperts We Guard. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1950. Maslow, Abraham H., ed. New Knowledge in Human Values. New York: Harper, 1959. Merton, Robert K. Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1949. Misner, Paul J. "A Communication Center." The Com- munity School. Edited by Samuel Everett. New York: D. Appleton-Century Company, 1938. Morris, Charles. Varieties of Human Values. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956. 156 Mouly, George J. The Science of Educational Research. New York: American Book Company, 1963. Myrdal, Gunnan. An American Dilemma. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944. Perry, Ralph Barton. General Theory of Value. New York: Longmans, Green, Inc., 1962. Reid, John R. A Theory of Value. New York: Charles Scribner and Son, 1938. Robinson, John R., and Shaver, Philip R. Measures of Social Psychological Attitudes. Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center, The University of Michigan, 1970. Rokeach, Milton. Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values. San Francisco: Jossy~Bass, Inc., 1968. . "The Measurement of Values and Value Systems." Social Psychology and Political Behavior. Edited by G. Abcarian and J. W. Soule. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Company, 1971. . "The Nature of Attitudes." International Eneyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Vol. I. New York: The MacMillan Company and the Free Press, 1968. Shaw, Nathan C., ed. Administration of Continuing Edu— cation. Washington: National AssociatiOn for Public School Adult Education, 1969. Portion of speech given by the late and former President Lyndon B. Johnson to the American Association of School Administrators, February 16, 1966. Smith, Brewster. Social Peychology and Human Values. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1969. Totten, W. Fred, and Manley, Frank J. The Community School, Basic Concepts, Function and Organi- zation. Galien, Mich.: Allied Education Council, 1969. von Mering, Otto. A Grammar of Human Values. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1961. Weller, Jack. Yesterday's People: Life in Contempprary Appalachia. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1966. 157 White, Ralph K. Value Analysis: The Nature and Use of the Method. Glen Garden, N.J.: Libertarian Press, 1951. Williams, Robin M. American Society: A Sociological Interpretatiop. New York: Knopf, Inc., 1960. Periodicals Adler, Franz. "The Value Concept in Sociology." American Journal of Sociology, No. 62 (1956), 272—79. Beardsley, Florence. "The Drowning Sphinx." Educational Leadership, XVIII (May, 1961). Coleman, Lee. "What Is American: A Study of Alleged American Traits." Social Forces, XIX, No. 4 (May, 1941). Donohew, Lewis, and Singh, B. Krishna. "Communication and Life Styles in Appalachia." The Journal of Communication (September, 1969), 202-16. Dukes, W. F. "Psychological Studies of Values." Psy— chological Bulletin, LII (1955), 24-50. Edel, Abraham. "Concept of Values in Contemporary Phil- osophical Value Theory." Philosophy Science, XX (1953), 198. Minzey, Jack. "Community Education: An Amalgam of Many Views." Phi Delta Kappan, Commupity Education: Special Issue, LIV (November, 1972), 150-53. Quillen, I. James. "Values the American People Want Through Education," from "The Evolving Objectives of Education in American Life." The Educational Record, XXXIX (July, 1958), 222-29. Rokeach, Milton. "The Nature and Meaning of Dogmatism." Peycholegical Review, LVI (May, 1954), 194-204. . "Persuasion that Persists." Psychology Today. September, 1971. . "Prejudice, Concreteness of Thinking, and Reification of Thinking." Journal of Abnormal Psychology, XLVI (January, 1951), 83-91. Rokeach, Milton. "Religious Values and Social Comparison." Review of Religious Research, XI (1969), 24-38. . "The Role of Values in Public Opinion Research." The Public Opinion Quarterly, XXXII (Winter, 1968- 69), 547—59. . "A Theory of Organization and Change in Value and Attitude Systems." Journal of Social Issues, XXIV (January, 1968), 13-33. . "Value Systems in Religion." Review of Religious Research, XI (1969), 3-23. , and Parker, Seymour. "Values as Social Indi- cators of Poverty and Race Relations in America." The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, CCCLXXXCIII_TMarch, 1970), 97-111. Seaman, M. "On the Meaning of Alienation." American Sociological Review, XXIV, 788-91. Smith, Brewster. "'Mental Health' Reconsidered: A Special Case of the Problem of Values in Psy- chology." American Psycholegist, XVI (1961). Williams, Robin M. "The Concept of Values." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, XVI (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1968?. Unpublished Materials and Other Sources Beech, Robert Paul. "Value Systems, Attitudes, and Inter- personal Attraction." Unpublished Ph.D. disser- tation, Michigan State University, 1966. Bingham, Florence C., ed. "Community Life in a Democracy." Unpublished report, National Congress of Parents and Teachers, 1942. "Cardinal Principles of Education." Formulated by the Commission on the Reorganization of Secondary Education. U.S. Office of Education Bulletin, No. 35, 1918. Hollen, Charles C. "The Stability of Values and Value Systems." Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, 1967. 159 Hollen, Charles C. "Value Change, Perceived Instrumen— tality, and Attitude Change." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1972. Homant, Robert J. "The Meaning and Ranking of Values." Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, 1967. Kelsey, Ian Bruce. "A Comparative Study of Students Attending the University of British Columbia in 1963 as Measured by the Allport—Vernon Test for Personal Values." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington, 1963. Lang, Carroll. "Setting Educational Goals." Speech given at Workshop, Mott Leadership Training Program, Flint, Michigan (April, 1973). Melby, Ernest O. "The Community Centered School." Speech given at a WOrkshop in Community Education, February 28, 1957. Reprinted in Clarence H. Young and William A. Quinn, Foundations for Living. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1963. Montgomery County Board of Education. "Statement of Edu- cational Philosophy." September, 1972. "Montgomery County Rural Community School Demonstration Project Proposal." Montgomery County Kentucky, September, 1972. Montgomery County Schools. "Neighborhood Facilities Proposal." 1971. National Community School Education Association. "Phil- osophy of Community Education." Second Annual Directopy of Membership, 1968. Norwalk-Polsky, Zita. "A Preliminary Study of the Belief Systems and Selected Values and Attributes of Faculty and Students in a State College for Teachers." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, New York University, 1968. Plunkett, H. Dudley. "Elementary School Teacher as an Interstitial Person: An Essay in Human Ecology and the Sociology of Communication." Unpub— lished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 1967. 160 Rokeach, Milton. "Value Survey, Form B." Roth, Harley. "Values and Value Systems in the Selection of Leaders in Education." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1970. Singh, B. Krishna. "Modernization and Diffusion of Inno- Spears, vations, A Systems Analysis in a Rural Appalachian County." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Uni- versity of Kentucky, 1970. George. "A Comparison of Values and Value Systems Reported by Professors of General Education and Professors of Adult Education." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1972. APPENDICES APPENDIX A VALUE SURVEY, SCHOOL OPINION SURVEY, AND PERSONAL INFORMATION SURVEYS APPENDIX A The Terminal Values FORM E VALUE SURVEY Below is a list of 18 values arranged in alphabetical order. Your task is to arrange them in order of their importance to YOU, as guiding principles in YOUR life. Study the list carefully. Then place a 1 next to the value which is most important for yep, place a g next to the value which is second most im- portant to you, etc. The value which is least important, relative to the others, should be ranked £3; Work slowly and think carefully. If you change your mind, feel free to change your answers. The end result should truly show how you really feel. A COMFORTABLE LIFE (a prosperous life) AN EXCITING LIFE (a stimulating, active life) A SENSE OF ACCOMPLISHMENT (lasting contribution) A WORLD AT PEACE (free of war and conflict) A WORLD OF BEAUTY (beauty of nature and the arts) EQUALITY (brotherhood , equal opportunity for all) FAMILY SECURITY (taking care of loved ones) FREEDOM (independence, free choice) HAPPINESS (contentedness) INNER HARMONY (freedom from inner conflict) MATURE LOVE (sexual and spiritual intimacy) NATIONAL SECURITY (protection from attack) PLEASURE (an enjoyable, leisurely life) SALVATION (saved, eternal life) SELF-RESPECT (self-esteem) SOCIAL RECOGNITION (respect, admiration) TRUE FRIENDSHIP (close companionship) WISDOM (a mature understanding of life) (c) 1967 by Milton Rokeach 161 162 The instrumental Value“. —-—v—--——- — .H..._—-_—_-—. Below is a list of another 18 values . Rank these in order of importance in the same way you ranked the first list on the preceding page. _ ____AMBITIOUS (hard-working, aspiring) __ BROADMINDED (open-minded) ' CAPABLE (competent, effective) ___C HEERFUL (lighthearted, joyful) CLEAN (neat, tidy) _________COURAGEOUS (standing up for your beliefs) __ FORGIVING (willing to pardon others) HELPFUL (working for the welfare of others) HONEST (sincere, truthful) IMAGINATIVE (daring, creative) INDEPENDENT (self-reliant, self-sufficient) INTELLECTUAL (intelligent, reflective) LOGICAL (consistent, rational) LOVING (affectionate, tender) OBEDIENT (dutiful, respectful) POLITE (courteous, well mannered) RESPONSIBLE (dependable, reliable) SELF-CONTROLLED (restrained, self—disciplined) Please check to be sure you do not have any duplications or omissions. 163 DIRECTIONS: Please check the answers that best describe your feelings about the Montgomery County Schools. l. Included in the total school program should be which of the following: A Basic Education/GED program for adults Vocational training for adults Vocational training for high school students Career counseling for youth and adults Cultural enrichment activities for all citizens Recreational activities for all citizens Special programs for senior citizens Special programs for the handicapped citizens Programs for family activities llllllllll Health Education programs for all citizens Kindergarten through 12th grade Pre-school programs Other 2. The school should work with the community (agencies, groups, business) to improve community living (health, employment, education). Yes No No Comment 3. School buildings should be available for use by all citizens in the community (meetings, recreation, edu- cational programs). Yes No No Comment 4. Educators, students, and the general public should participate in making school-related decisions (planning, policy, curriculum, etc.). Yes No No Comment 5. If you checked Ne_for the previous question, please indicate who you feel should participate in making school-related decisions. l. 3. 164 STUDENT PERSONAL INFORMATION SURVEY Sex: _____Male ______Female Approximate family income: _____Less than $5,000 ___$5,000 - 9,999 _____$10,000 - 15,000 _____more than $15,000 Years residence in this school district: ,_____less than 3 years 3 - 6 years more than 6 years Are you a native of the Appalachian region? Yes No The place where you grew up was: rural urban suburban Please indicate the number of years you attended the following types of school. public school private school/specify Catholic Protestant Non-demonimational Thank you very much for your time and effort. 1. 7. 9. 10. 165 GENERAL PUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION SURVEY Age group: _____under 20 _____20 - 30 _____31 - #0 over #0 Sex: _____Male ____Female Approximate family income: _____1ess than $5,000 _____$5,000 - 9,999 $10,000 - 15,000 more than $15,000 Present full-time occupation: Years residence in this school district: less than 3 years 3 - 6 years more than 6 years Highest level of education completed: _____;Less than 8 years ._____completed college _____8 - 12 years _____Master's Degree ._____high school diploma Post Master's work _____13 - 16 years _____Vocational or trade school Are you a native of the Appalachian region? _____Yes No How many years have you lived outside of the Appalachian region? The place where you grew up was: rural urban suburban Please indicate the number of years you attended the following types of school (K-12): Public schools_____ Private schools: Catholic______ Protestant Non-denominational Thank you very much for your time and effort. 1. 7. 9. 10. 166 PROFESSIONAL EDUCATOR PERSONAL INFORMATION SURVEY Age group: under 20 20 - 3O 31 - HO over MO Sex: Male Female Approximate family income: $5,000 - 9,999 $10,000 - 15,000 _____more than $15,000 Occupation: Administrator Teacher/ Elementary Secondary Years residence in this school district: less than 3 years 3 - 6 years more than 6 years Highest level of education completed: BQAQ. B.S. Master's Degree Post Master's work (Rank I, Doctoral, Non-degree) Are you a native of the Appalachian region? ____;Yes No How many years have you lived outside of the Appalachian region?._____ The place where you grew up was: . rural ,____;urban ,_____suburban ‘Please indicate the number of years you attended the following types of school (K-12 only): public school private school/specify Catholic Protestant Non-denominational {Thank you very much for your time and effort. APPENDIX B LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL APPENDIX B March 20, 1973 Dear We would like to ask for your help in completing the enclosed survey questionnaire. The Montgomery County Schools are cooperating with Mr. Don Butler of Mason County, in conducting this survey. He is a doctoral student in community school education at Michigan State University, and the information collected here will be used for his doctoral dissertation. In addition the information will assist the school administrative staff in providing the best school system that is possible for the citizens of Montgomery County. We want you to indi- cate the answers that best describe your feelings about values, and about the Montgomery County Schools. On the last two pages of this survey, we want you to supply some information about yourself and your family. Please Note! All of the information will be handled confidentially and anonymously. Please do notyput your name on any of the pages. When you have read the directions, please complete the questionnaire and check to make sure that all the requested information Has Been given. Return the survey in the stamped self-addressed envelope to: Montgomery County Board of Education Mt. Sterling, Kentucky 40353 We would like to have the survey returned to the office by next Friday, March 30. Thank you very much for your patience and help in completing this survey. It is very much appreciated. Sincerely, John H. Brock Superintendent of Schools JHB/efm 167 APPENDIX C TABLES 168 s .oenoouwdque mmpmoHnCH HJw.m can» umpmmem oSHmb m ”Hume AHo>oH mo.v HJm.muosHm> NN HaOHpHnon .oocmoHMHerm no Ho>mH mo. pm vacuoHMHv monoom came an3 mmaHm>¢ mam.o m om.m o om.m maa>og :mm.m H om.: H HH.w amazon :m:.o a mm.w m mm.o msoapanaa mos m> a» m an umo.u H um.m m :m.u mmocHnnmm :::.: 0H H:.m mH am.HH aaaHasam Hm:.mH mH om.mH b wm.m omHH wquHon G4 wumHmMIdmmdeMH um xm n: xm :2 «mosHa> pmma m omuz Hauz é $8.? .E J 1 mucmpsum .xmm an mmCchmu msHm>::.H.U mqm<9 169 :Hw.u awn» nmummnw osHm> mx . .oocaoHMHcmHm momechH ”mane AHm>mH mo.v :Hm.uuosHm> mu HmoHpHuo .oocmonHcmHm mo HoboH mo. pm unoanMHc n nmuoom name up? 3322; Hmm.HH H mw.m N oa.m a :m.m e ::.m oHnHmconmom umo.m RH NH.HH :H mo.HH sH m:.mH :H mo.mH Haonoq mum.a mH ww.HH 0H oa.HH HH oe.m a mm.m HueaHom HHo.m m wH.a HH aH.OH m NH.m : Hm.m waHsHmnom mmmHm: Hammad» :m:.m 0H ,m.m H ma.o 0H mo.m 0H mo.m aoemHz m:m.w mH mm.mH mH m:.HH 5H mu.mH wH om.~H thnsoom HaaoHpuz «on m> a Hence um .xm .§ .05 , é: .xm 5: .3 .§ pmme m .aHuz 0:": H:uz eHuz amonHap mHH manaxmsamOoo mHa ampo ooo.mH omm.m-ooo.me coo.m can» mme -ooo.0Hm mucmcsum .mEoocH >HHEmw an mmcHxamn msHm>:I.~.U mqmde .oonaOHuHcmHm mopmoHccH Hmo.m can» umpwmum oaHmb m «Name .AHO>0H moev Ham.muonHm> NN HmoupHuo.n .oocmoHuH:MHm mo Hm>mH mo. pm economch moaoom coca nauz moaHu>o omo.o mH HH.mH aH mm.mH mH aH.~H ¢>HpaaHmaaH m:m.oH m oo.a mH ::.HH m mm.m unnameusoo oom.0H mH ::.OH OH mm.m mH mm.oH cuoHo mwo.m mH mm.HH wH om.:H 5H oo.:H Haunomno mam.o a mm.m m mm.m H Hw.m eoecHaeaoum m mmmHmHIHmmmmammmmmH :mc.e m :o.w m 00.0 m om.: aoemHz HHo.m : em.a NH :m.0H m am.m aHameaoHum onus mmmHmmnquHmmmm um .xm .qz .um .az .xm .nz pmma m mHuz wHuz . an emmsHa> mHHmwe-wamaex o: ampo 0:-Hm cmuow mammmmlmmm OHHQDQ Hmumcmm .mdoum 0mm ma mmcHxGmu 09Hm>1v.m.u flames l7l mmpmoanH Hzmé 2Q: .Hmpmmnm mSHmb m «Hume AHoboH mOJ H:w.muo:Hm> .oonwOHMHGMHm NM Hmowpdhun .mocmonH:MHm no Ho>oH mo. pa paouomch mouoom some an3 mmsHaba oHo.: NH oo.0H 5H mm.mH HanuuoHHman no” d> an. w an H mHm.: m mo.o :H «w.~H auHHunem mom.m mH om.mH HH Hm.m meHA oHnupuomaou 4 monwwb ammuahoh um .xm .n: .xm .nx pmoa m omuz mmuz mmmnHm> mmHHm3IwaerHM mHmEom OHQZ OHHQSQ Hmuwcmm .xmm an macchmu msHm>ss.v.U mummy 172 .oocmonHCMHm moumOHccH :Hm.u cmzp gouache osHm> m «mama .AHo>mH mo.v :Hw.uuoaHm> mm HmoHpHnon .oocmonHCMHm mo HoboH mo. pm monoom names :sz monHw>m MH:.m : ma.u o HH.a mH om.HH 0H oo.oH msoHpHnaa mmmfl¢> spaceshpm uum.mH o oo.w m mH.: w oo.m 5H oo.mH aocmH: mo: m> m 0 um .xm .az .xm .nz .xm .n: .xm .nz pmme m emuz .oHuz OHuz . . Huz mmwsHm> mHHmm3-memsna ooo mHa ampo coo mH-ooo.0Ho www.muooo me 000 m» can» mmog mao>mH oaommm OHHQSQ Hmnmcmm .mEoocH mHHEmw an mmcchmu mSHm>::.m.U mqmda 173 - .oOCNOHchme mmmechH H:w.m can» nopwmum osHmp m «Hump .AHobmH mo.v HJw.muous> NM HuoHpHuon .oocmoHuchHm mo Ho>oH mo. pm pcmumuch mopoom cmma ana moaHm>m Noo.a m ao.m a aa.m emHHoupcooueHom HAH.® 0H N:.mH NH no.0H opHHoa aNm.e :H ma.HH mH mm.:H o>HuachaaH HH:.HH NH ma.:H 0H ma.¢ :aoHo moanb HousmanupmcH Nc:.m MH m:.HH m mm.m anmccoHnm maps om:.w qH mm.:H HH mo.OH huHusoom HmcoHpmz mmm.: HH oo.OH o mm.u hdoanmm nonnH mma.o : No.0 0H am.¢ pamaanHasoooa no omcmm d mwmd¢>.dmmHamma um .xm .nz .xm .2: Demos m . HHuz omuz .mmmnHub mHHHm3 mHnomHman¢ mHnomeaa< umemsum m>Hpmcncoz o>Huwz UHHQSQ Hmumcmm .MHcOMHmmm< mo 0>Humccoc .m>Humc an mmcwxcmu msHm>::.m.o mqmfle 174 .ooamonHcNHm mmvaHccH :Hw.u cmcu popmmpm msHm> m «mumc .AHm>mH mo.v :Hw.numsHm> NN HonuHHUn .mocmOHchmHm no HobmH mo. pm pcououuHc nmuoom Gama szs mofiHmbm moN.mH :H ow.NH m om.m a mN.m m am.m acoaumm noan muadmb unHaAoa um .mm .:x .xm .qz .xm .nz .xm .qz pmma m muz OHuz :uz :Nuz umcaHm> bmHHHm3 memo» m can» one: mama» mum memo» :uH munch o umemSAM MMme_um nonmmm UHHQSQ Hmumcmm .MHnomHmmm¢ mUHmuso Um>HH mummm m0 Hogans an mmCchmu msHm>::.b.U mqmfia mmmeHucH Hmm.m menu panama» ous> m «Numc .AH0>0H mo.v Hmm.muonHm> mx HonpHno .oocmoHMchHm mo Ho>oH mo. um ucmnmmch .oocmonHcmHm b monoom came an3 mofiHm>m N:0.NH HH 0N.OH HH N0.0H m :0.0 NaH>0H 000.0H :H Hm.oH m Nm.n 0H :O.NH cumHo 000.0H OH 10.0 NH ma.OH : 00.5 emecHaeaoum mmnHm> mace hum H s 05:.0 :H :H.mH aH ow.:H HH mH.HH whammmHa 7 i H0N.NH mH HN.NH m 00.0 a 50.5 osoH waspmx Now.OH : no.0 a mm.a HH ma.m puma uanHgaooo< no omnow 4 «unHuHIHuqHauuH um .xm .5: .mm .5: .xm .a: «0005 m 0H" mHuz mzuz mmoaHm> mHHH 3-memsam o: eo>o oanm om-0N unmouo mud muoumospm .msoum mom ma mmcchmu 05Hm>vs.m.o mqmfia 176 .oonaOHuHcmHm mopmoHccH H:w.m awn» poemopu osHm> m ”Hume .AHm>oH mo.v HJm.muoSHm> N Hwoprnon m .oocmoHMHcMHm mo Hm>mH mo. um pneumHMHu mmuoom came 29H: mosHm>m Nem.m 0 05.0 0H H:.HH paoeamaoeaH :Ho.: 0 :m.o 0H 0:.HH Hsauomgo 0¢N.J : 50.0 m Nm.0 mHneamo o: a> up 0 p H mmo.: H om.m w oo.m mmocHanmm mfifldm> HdeHMmH um .xm .nz .xm .c: 0009 m N5uz 5N": mmmnHes mHHamzuHaxmsax 0Hmawm 0H0: mu0u005©m .Xmm ma mmcchmu msHm>:I.m.U mqm<9 .ooconmH:MHm mmponccH Hoo.m awn» mmpwopm oSHmb m ”mumn .HHmbmH mo.v Hmm.muosHm> NM HmOHanon .moconMHcmHm mo HopoH 00. pm pcoummme monoom amoa cpHs monHm>m 000.5 5H 0:.NH 5H 05.NH 0H N0.:H 0>H00=H00aH 000.0 0H 00.0 :H 0H.HH 0 00.0 H000H00 mmmdMMIHdemammmmqu ., 000.0 0 05.5 0 0:.5 0H 00.0 a000H3 7 .0 H0H.0 0 00.0 HH N0.0H 0 0H.5 0H00000H00 0900 N00.0 0H 00.0 H 00.: H 00.0 00000>H00 nonamb demfiauoe um .00 .0: .00 . .0: .x0 .0: 0000 m .NNuz 0:uz . Hmuz 0000H0> 0HHm0suH000000 000 0H0 0000 000.0H-000 0H0 000.0-000.0o mdm>oH mamwmm muoumoscw .mEoocH mHHEMM we mmcqumu msHm>::.0H.U mqmda 178 .oocaoHuchHm mopmoHocH HJw.m can» nmpmmum osHm> m «Hump .HHeboH mo.v HJm.mumsHm> NN HwOHpHuon .oochHmH:MHm no Hm>oH me. am pcwuwHMHccmmuoom came nuH3 mwSHmbm 000.: 0 N:.5 0 00.0 aoe0H: 000.0 0 0N.0 H 0:.0 00H00>H00 :0N.0 0 00.5 HH 50.0 00000 00 0H003 0 mmmflmmidmmdmuum um .08 .50 .03 .ax gamma m on»: menu mHHH03 mHzoaHmnnd anoaHmnn< mmouHmb nmemsuM 0>Haanunoz obuuez mnoumospm .MHcomHmmmd mo m>Humccoc .m>Humc an mmcfixcmu 05Hm>ll.HH.U mamma 179 .ooaaOHuchHm uoumochH :Hw.5 can» umpmonm osHm> m «mama .AHmbmH mo.v :Hm.muoaHa> NM HuOHpHuon .wocmoHMHcMHm no Ho>mH 00. «a vacuouuHc noncomwawoa 39H: nosHu>a 000.0H 0 00.0 0H 00.NH HH 00.0H 0H :0.HH opHHom 500.0 5H 0:.0H 0H 00.NH 5 00.0 0H N:.HH H00H00H NN0.:H H 00.H H 00.: H 5H.N H 00.: 000000 005.0H 0 00.5 0 00.0 0H 0N.0H HH 5H.0H 00H>H0000 05N.HH 0H 00.NH : 00.0 0 5H.0 0 5:.5 0000Hse0oum mmmamu dmauwamummd» um .xm .qz .xm .q: .xm. .n: .um .nz 0000 m 0Nuz Hmuz NHuz 00a: 0005H0> b mHHHms 00000 0 can» who: 00000 mum mama» :uH 09000 0 unxman Mumuwlwmluwmmmm muoumospm .MHcomHmmmm mchuso Um>HH mnmmh mo H0085: an mmcchmu 05Hm>1:.NH.U mqm<9 180 mmpmoHocH :Hw.m :05» 000000» 05H0> m ”mama .HHo>oH waxy :Hm.uuosHm> .oocmoHuHcmHm NM Havapuhon .ooconchmHm mo HmbmH mo. 00 pawnwmch 000000 2008 an3 monHmba 000.0 5H 55.0H NH 5:.0H 0 0H.0 0H N0.HH 00HH00 HOH.0 0 H0.5 :H 00.0H NH 0N.oH 0 00.5 0:0H0H0a4 mmmHmH Hummmmmmmmmm 50N.0 5 0H.0 0 00.0 H 00.N N 00.0 noH00>H00 NH0.0 HH 00.0H 0H NH.0H 0H 50.0H 0H 00.NH 00HH 00H0Hoxm :4 000.0 :H 0H.NH HH NH.0 0H 0N.NH HH 00.0 00HH 0H000000aoo < mmmHmH aqumwmw um .00 .0: .00 .0: .00 .0: .00 .0: 0000-0 0H": 5H": 0H»: 00 z 0009H0> 0 0HHH03 x003 000000zu0000 4.: 0.0 0.m ImemsnM m>oH GOprouvm mnoumoscm .Hm>mH GOHumoscm an mmGchmn msHm>::.0H.U mamma 181 00. 0H :0.0 05. 0N No.5 00.:N :0.0 aoemHz N0. :H 5m.0 :0. NH :H.0 0 .0H N.0 0Hn0000H00 0:00 00.NH 0 .:H HN. 0H 00. :H .0H 5. NH 00H0H000000 H00000 0H.0H 0N.0 50. 0H 00. 0 H0. 0N 00. 000000010H00 00.50 00.0 5:.0H No.0 0. 0: :N. aoH00>H00 N0. 0H 50.NH 0.0H 00. 0H 0:.0N 00. 0H 00:000H0 HH. :N 00.HH :. NN mmfi 05. 0N 00. NH 00000000 H000H002 05. NN m:.0 N5. HN 0H. NN 00. 0 0000 00000: 0H.H 0.5 N0. 0H 00. 0H 05. N 0:.HH 0003000 00:0H H0. H 0m.0 05. 0N HN. m H5. H 0.0 0000H000n :H.0N 0 .5 $.0H 00. 0 .0N 0.5 5000000 0:. 0H 00.0 :N. 0 50.: H .0N 00.0 00H00000 0H0000 00. 0H 0N.0H 50. HN :5. 0H :0.0N 00. 0H 000H0000 00.NH N0.0H :H. :H NH. 0H :H. 5N 0N. HH 000000 00 0H003.< 0N.HN 00.0 H0.0N 05.5 00. :N H0. 5 00000 00 0H003 4 00.5H H0.0 N0.0H N5.0 HN.:N 0H. 0H 0006 nzmHngaee< no omnom 4 00.:N 05.NH 0:.0H 55.0H N0.NN 5H.0H 00HH 0=H0Hoxm :0 00.NN 00.0H 0:.:N 50.HH :0.NN :5.0 0000 0H0000o0aoo < modflmb Handflhma Oon> on: Ohw> 0c: 0““ In: myopmofiom OHHDSQ “dHOQOW mpflocfium moflfldb muoumospm .OHHQSQ Hmumcmm .mucmcsum mUQMHum> 0:0 :00: wanna .mmnHm> Hmucmfidnumaw cam HmcHEHmu mo COmHHmmEousv.vH.u mqm<fi «mmHOOW 182 HH. :N 5 .0H 0 .HN 0H.0H 00.5N 00.0H H0. 0N .10. :5. NH 0N.NN H0.:N 05. :N H0. :N 00.:N :0. 0H 05. 0N 0N. HN 0N.0 00.0 N0. 0N 0:. 0H 00. NN 0M.mw 00.ma coHHonpaoonuHom oHnHmnonmom mpHHom pcodvmno wanoa Haoamon Haspomanopan pcooconoccH 0>vaunmaH ammaom H000H0m mcH>kuom .mnoomauaoo aamdo Hamuoono 0H00000 cocawacwonm 0:0H9Hnld mm: «b an m an 0000H0000»:.0H.u 00009 "I7'EWE‘M‘WMJWM'QE'MTEVI“