RETURNING MATERIALS: 1V1531_] Place 1n booE drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES w111 be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. LIBRARIES - N .71.h i‘h‘h‘n 0°35, AN EXPERIMENTAL EXAMINATION OF THE LONG-TERM IMPACT OF THE NONPROFESSIONAL FIELD EXPERIENCE ON COLLEGE STUDENTS: CAREERS, ATTITUDES, AND SOCIAL CHANGE By John S. McVeigh A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fquiIIment of the requirement for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Psychology 1982 ABSTRACT AN EXPERIMENTAL EXAMINATION OF THE LONG-TERM IMPACT OF THE NONPROFESSIONAL FIELD EXPERIENCE ON COLLEGE STUDENTS: CAREERS, ATTITUDES, AND SOCIAL CHANGE By John 5. McVeigh Nonprofessional human service programs in which college students are the service provider of choice have proliferated over the past two decades. To date, however, no systematic follow-up efforts have been conducted to determine the long-term impact of program participation on the college student nonprofessional. This study experimentally examined the long-tenn impact of the nonprofessional field experience on the career choice, career perseverance, future career plans and the attitudes for the former college student participants. Former participants (N=l25) and nonparticipating controls (N=95) were interviewed over the phone to assess their activities and attitudes in a variety of areas. The average time of follow-up was 23 months, post- graduation. Results were analyzed using chi-square analyses, analysis of variance, t-test paired comparisons, and a variety of correlational techniques. The major findings revealed that participants spent 5 % more time in human service employment since graduation than their control counterparts. Among the experimental participants several attitude differences were noted as a function of the specific type of field experience to which they were exposed. Career data were discussed in terms of the field experience as a realistic job preview which enhanced perseverance via career clarification. John S. McVeigh Attitude findings were discussed relative to the training model content and supervisory structure of the different field experiences. The impli- cations of these findings for the creation of social change in the delivery of human services were underscored. To the memory of my father, Joseph F. McVeigh who was not only an able scholar but truly a man of the community. This work is but small thanks for his guidance, love and inspiration. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I have read the acknowledgements in several theses and dissertations. Sounding too much like the acceptance speeches of various Academcy Award winners—~thanking everyone from their director to the stage hands—-they invariably seemed to fall short of their interest. Sincere thanks and warmth are more easily and personally conveyed for me through an eye- piercing handshake or a heartfelt hug. So for all of you who have given unquestioningly and generously of your time, expertise‘and effort; know that I will never forget you,and be ready for some handshakes and hugs. There is one special person, aside from my chairperson, Bill David- son and my able committee members, Robin Redner, Charlie Johnson,and Denis Gray, who I would like to acknowledge. Judy, my friend for life, typed my proposal, coded part of the data, conducted several of the interviews as a member of the interviewing team, and suggested revisions of the final draft. Through her interest and expertise, this has become a better quality product. Continually, she stayed up long nights and listened to my thoughts regarding the meaning of this data. If I have created a quality piece of research in this thesis, then I owe it first and foremost to her. Thanks Jude. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .viii LIST OF FIGURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l Review of the Nonprofessional Movement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Extent of Nonprofessional Utilization . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Nonprofessional Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Impact on the Nonprofessional . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l3 Impact on Careers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l4 Helper Therapy Principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l8 Impact on Attitudes and Knowledge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2l Impact on Treatment Philosophy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 The Field-Based Learning Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Objectives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 METHOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Context of the Present Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Nonprofessional Volunteers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Program Administration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Program Structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Recruitment. . . . . . . . . 36 Training and Field Activity: The Experimental Conditions. . . . . 38 Action Condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Relationship Condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Lo Intensity Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Family Condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Court Condition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Control Condition: Control I and Control II . . . . . . . . 46 The Present Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Follow-up Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 General Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Interviewers: Team Selection, Composition, and Training . . 50 Training of Interviewers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sl The Telephone Interview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Interview Summary. . . . . . . 54 Instrumentation: The Volunteer Follo'-up Duestionnaire (VFQ) . . 55 Measure Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Past Academic Experiences Scale (PAC). . . . . 59 Target Population Attitude Measure- Delinquency Orientation 59 Field Experience Scale (FEX) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 .,-I Page RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 The Effectiveness of Randomization: Control Subgroup Equivalence 68 Career Outcome Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 General Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Employment Data: Human Service vs. Other Careers . . . . . 70 Percentage of Time Spent in Human Service . . . . . . 72 Program Participation and the Confirmation of Human Service Career Interests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Explanation of Dependent Variables. . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Future Career Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Post College Schooling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8O Volunteering Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Summary of Career Outcome Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8l Att.itude Outcome Data. . . . . . . . 82 Personal Benefits Dervied from the Field Experience . . . . 83 Attitudes Toward Target Population 84 Knowledge of Delinquency. 87 Delinquency Orientation . 93 Individual Punitive . 93 Radical Non-Intervention. 95 Individual Treatment. 95 Social Reform . . 98 Summary of the Attitude Data. 98 Impact of Experiential Learning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lOl Summary of Field Experience Data. . . . . . . . . . lO7 Target Youth Outcon1es and Nonprofessional Follow- up. . . . . . . lO9 Youth Outcomes. Success/Failure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . lO9 Target Youth Outcome and Career Data. . . . . . . . . . . . llO Target Youth Outcome and Attitude Data. . . . . . . . . . . llO DISCUSSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ll4 Impact on Careers. . . . . . . . . . ll6 Realistic Job Previews and Career Perseverance. . . . . . . ll8 Differing Degrees of Realism and the Field Experience . . . l2l Impact on Attitudes. . . . . . l26 Attitudes Toward Self, Juvenile Delinquents and Social Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l27 Knowledge of Delinquency. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l3O Delinquency Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T32 The Utility of the Field Experience. . . . . . . . . . . l36 Undergraduate Coursework vs. Field Experience . . . . . . . l3 8 Target Youth Outcome and Nonprofessional Follow up Data. . . . . l4O Caveats for the Interpretation of Results. . . . . . . . . . . . l4l General Conclusions and Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l44 Social Change. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l48 REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l62 APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l58 Appendix A. General Information for VFQ Interviewers . . . . . . l58 Appendix B: Interviewing Outline for VFQ. . . . . . l69 Appendix C: Volunteer Follow- up Questi011nai1e and Answer Sheet . l68 vii Table lO ll l2 l3 l4 l5 l6 LIST OF TABLES Attitudes and Evaluations of Undergraduate Coursework: Internal Consistency Analysis . Attitudes and Evaluations of Target Populations: Principal Components Solution . . . . . . . . . Attitudes Towards Field Experience: Internal Consistency Analysis. Present Employment Chi-Square Analysis. Employment in Human Service Chi-Square Analysis . Analysis of Variance for Percentage of Time Spent in Human Service . Analysis of Variance for Percentage of Time Experimental Groups Spent in Human Service . Analysis of Variance for Confirmation of Career Interests and Field Experience. Analysis of Variance for Personal Benefits Derived from the Field Experience. Analysis of Variance for Attitudes Toward Target Population: Evaluations of Juvenile Delinquents . . . . . . Analysis of Variance for Undergraduate Coursework and Know- ledge of Delinquency. Analysis of Variance for Undergraduate Coursework and Know- ledge of Delinquency. Analysis of Variance for Field Experience and Knowledge of Delinquency . Analysis of Variance for Field Experience and Understanding Adolescents . Analysis of Variance for Attitudes Toward Target Population-- Delinquency Orientation: Individual Punitive . . . . Analysis of Variance for Attitudes Toward Target Population-- Delinquency Orientation: Radical Non-Intervention. viii Page 60 75 76 77 86 87 9O 9T 92 94 96 Table l7 I9 20 22 23 24 Analysis of Variance for Attitudes Toward Target Population-- Delinquency Orientation: Individual Treatment . Analysis of Variance for Attitudes Toward Target Population-- Delinquency Orientation: Social Reform. Analysis of Variance for General Evaluations of the Field Experience . Intercorrelations of PAC Scale Items and Corresponding Items of the FEX Scale . T-Test Comparison of Undergraduate Coursework to the Field Experience: Relevance to Career Goals . T-Test Comparison of Undergraduate Coursework to the Field Experience: Understanding Adolescents . Correlation between Target Youth Outcomes and Nonprofessional Attitudes at Follow-up . Comparative Rank Order of Experimental Groups on Confirmation of Human Service Career.Interests vs. Percentage of Time Spent in Human Service . ix Page 97 99 . lOS lO6 . lOB . ll2 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page l Program Administration: l976-l980 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2 Ratio of Contacted Students to Total Number of Students in Each Condition for Each Nave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Problem Statement Since l960, social programming and policy Mnneemphasized and encouraged the use of nonprofessionals to provide human services to pop— ulations in need (Sobey, l970). Although the general effectiveness of these programs will be documented in some detail in later sections, the long—term impact of these programs on the nonprofessional service pro- vider has not been thoroughly investigated. In most cases the long—range effect of program participation on the nonprofessional has never been assessed at all. Where such studies have been done, the information obtained has often been anecdotal and is usually reported as an after- thought rather than a primary concern. It is important to examine the long-term impact of program participa- tion on the nonprofessionals, themselves, for a variety of reasons. First, it would be especially significant if it could be determined that partici- pation in a nonprofessional program had an impact on career choices, actual employment, or future career plans. This is particularly relevant to the human service profession given the manpower shortage relative to the increasing needs of underserved populations that is currently being experienced in this field. More importantly, the experience of providing human service in a real life situation may help the nonprofessional to clarify career goals and choices. It is equally important to find out whether one is, or is not, suited for a career in human service. The act of participating in a nonprofessional program may provide this insight. I 2 Personal impact may also be assessed psychologically. Specifically, if a program can be said to enhance the psychological well-being of its participants then it has merit. In addition, this information would provide extended empirical evidence for the helper therapy principle (Riessman, l969). Therefore, it is important not only from a humani- tarian perspective but also from a theoretical viewpoint to assess the impact of program participation on such things as self-understanding and feelings of self-worth. The degree to which participation in a nonprofessional program in- fluences participants' attitudes or adds to their knowledge of a certain field is also an important criteria for estimating the worth of a pro- gram. If a nonprofessional human service program can generate positive attitudes among the nonprofessionals towards the target population or towards the mode of treatment used to serve the target population then the program may be considered useful since these positive attitudes may be related to the quality of the interactions between nonprofessional ser- vice providers and the members of the target population (Klein & Zax, 1965). A program could also be considered worthwhile if it added signifi- cantly to participants‘ knowledge of the content area, the target popula~ tion, or other relevant systems or institutions related to the field. This issue of program impact on knowledge acquisition is particularly germane to nonprofessional programs which are utilized in an educational setting not only as a means of providing human service but also as a tool for providing experiential learning opportunities to participating stu- dents (cf. Maier, l97l; Seidman & Rappaport, l974). A concept related to all of these issues is the determination of which program components might be related to the clarification of career 3 choices and other areas of personal impact. If certain aspects of the nonprofessional experience serve to enhance career choices for those participating, then this feedback information can be used to change existing programs to maximally benefit the nonprofessional in present and future programs. Thus, the follow-up of former volunteers may not only provide evidence of personal impact but impact on program planning and policy as well. Hence, the gathering of this information not only allows for the investigation of the issues stated above, as separate individual-level concerns, but also provides the basis for the amalgama- tion of this information into a systemic framework. Simply put, the results of the individual-level assessments may provide feedback to pro- gram administrators for improving the planning and policies of nonprofes- sional programs. Review of the Nonprofessional Movement The emergence and evolution of community psychology have been accompanied by--some say a result of--a growing dissatisfaction with traditional approaches to solving human problems in living (Cowen, Gard- ner, & Zax, 1967). In addition to questioning traditional styles of human service delivery on both theoretical and conceptual grounds, com- munity psychologists have disputed the role efficacy of the professional as primary service provider (Rappaport & Chinsky, l974; Seidman & Rappa- port, l974; Tornatzky, Fairweather, & O'Kelly, l970). In particular, it has been argued that inadequate professional personpower has resulted in an inability to make contact with, and thereby have an impact on, large numbers of potential target groups (Albee, 1959; Pearl & Riessman, l965). Consequently, the utilization of community—based nonprofessionals as human service providers has been a major characteristic of the develop— ment of the community psychology movement (Rappaport, l977; Zax & Specter, l974). 4 Indeed, the last two decades have been witness to a rapid increase in the number of programs utilizing nonprofessionals (Karlsruher, l974), paraprofessionals (Robin 8 Nagenfeld, l98l), indigenous nonprofessionals (Reiff 8 Riessman, l965), and community volunteers (McGee, l974). In fact, Rappaport (l977) has postulated that the mobilization of new kinds of personpower in the form of nonprofessionals may be the major contribu— tion of the community mental health movement. He claims that "to dis- cuss community psychology at all has required, even without intending to emphasize it, the use of nonprofessionals" (p. 376). In short, if we are to realize both maximum efficiency and optimal impact in the provi- sion of human services, then the utilization of nonprofessional person- power is essential. Extent of Nonprofessional Utilization That nonprofessional programs have proliferated is clear. There is some disagreement, however, as to how widely and intensely nonprofes- sionals have been utilized in these programs. In a survey of l85 NIMH- sponsored nonprofessional programs, Sobey (l970) found that nearly all of the participating nonprofessionals were engaged in direct service provi- sion. That is, almost l00% of the nonprofessionals utilized in these programs were working directly with clients and were providing some sort of treatment intervention. This finding was somewhat contrasted with research findings which utilized a different population of nonprofessional programs for its sample. Specifically, Grosser (l969) discovered that of all the nonprofessional programs sponsored by the Labor Department, very few utilized the nonprofessional as a direct care-giver. Most frequently the nonprofessional worker in these programs was used to provide services ancillary to the professional services provided a client. These jobs include clerical positions, administrative flnurtions, and transport 5 services. In fact, of the four categories of service responsibilities distinguished by Grosser (l969), direct service provision is the respon- sibility least often assigned to nonprofessionals. This evidence not- withstanding, he further asserted that it is this responsibility-—pro- viding direct services--for which the nonprofessional is often best suited. Zax and Specter (l974) suggested that the apparent discrepancies in the extent of nonprofessional utilization presented by these studies was a function of the type of program surveyed. Since funding for programs sponsored by NIMH was predicated on a high degree of program innovation it was these organizations who would be more likely to utilize nonpro- fessionals in new and innovative ways. An overview of much of the literature to date has suggested that non- professionals are widely used in many different settings, in varying roles, and with a wide variety of target groups (Durlak, l97l, l979). Cowen, et al. (l967) and Guerney (l969) have produced very complete digests of various nonprofessional programs that were developed in the l960's in the early stages of the mental health revolution. Durlak (l979) argued that this proliferation of nonprofessional programs has continued. He also empirically corroborated Grosser's assertion that nonprofessionals were likely to be successful direct service providers. Especially pertinent to the present research proposal is the fre- quency with which the university undergraduate has been employed in the nonprofessional experience (e.g. Gruver, l97l; Poser, l965; Seidman, Rap— paport, Davidson, 8 Linney, in press). The most probable reason for this occurrence is their ready availability as a source of personpower to university researchers (Heller 8 Monahan, l977). The availability of college credit and the Opportunity for real-world experience may help to 6 explain the large numbers attracted to these programs (cf. Kantrowitz, l978; Mitchell, l980). Consequently, it is on this group that the great bulk of empirical support for the efficacy of the nonprofessional has been based (Durlak, l979; Mitchell, l980). Nonprofessional Effectiveness The matter of positive impact is an important one indeed, but, as is the case with most questions of social research, it is a multi- faceted concern. Successful outcomes may be related to positive results on a number of criterion measures, each of which may, in turn, be a function of a variety of different program characteristics. Illustra- tively, a successful nonprofessional service program may be discussed in terms of a positive impact on the population to which service is being provided (e.g. positive behavior change) or positive outcomes for the non- professional themselves (e.g. feelings of self-worth). In addition, success may be measured in terms of positive systemic Or institutional changes, such as improved planning and policy. Obviously, a rationale for the utilization of nonprofessional volun- teers in social and community interventions, if it is to be at all cogent, must incorporate some evidence of positive outcomes for the target group. Fortunately, early reviews of the research in this area have not only been positive but also have noted the great variety of populations with which nonprofessionals have been successful (Brown, 1974; Gruver, l97l; Karlsruher, 1974). In addition, Sobey (l970) found that there has been a widespread acceptance of nonprofessionals as direct service providers in the mental health network, largely as a result of the community mental health movement. In a later review, Durlak (1979) went so far as to con- clude that nonprofessionals achieved clinical outcomes equal to or signi- ficantly better than those obtained by professionals with certain 7 populations. Essentially, he stated that: The provocative conclusion from these comparative investiga— tions is that professionals do not possess demonstrably superior therapeutic skills, compared with paraprofessionals. (p. 85) Although this review was criticized extensively by Nietzel and Fisher (l98l) on methodological grounds, their conclusions regarding the comparative effectiveness of nonprofessionals and professionals were tantamount to an affirmation of Durlak's position. Specifically, Nietzel and Fisher (l98l) indict Durlak's review for the inadequacy of the cri- teria which he employed to evaluate various comparative studies. As a result, they stated that Durlak's (l979) conclusions were misleading since they were based on studies which had either (l) inadequate internal validity, (2) inappropriate or arbitrary definitions of paraprofessionals versus professionals, or (3) undue reliance on the confirmation of the null hypothesis (i.e. that there are no differences in treatment effec- tiveness between nonprofessionals and professionals). In a rejoinder to these criticisms, Durlak (l98l) accurately pointed out that Nietzel and Fisher (l98l) concluded that there was some evidence supporting the effectiveness of paraprofessionals in a variety of human service fields. In particular, Nietzel and Fisher minimized the sting of their own criticism when, in fact, they stated ". . . it is reasonable to expect professionals to assume the burden of rejecting the null hypoth- esis in their direction" (p. 564). In general, it appears that nonprofessionals have experienced rela- tive success in working with a variety of target groups; what is equally notable is the diversity of pe0ple who have successfully filled these nonprofessional roles (Zax 8 Specter, l974). For example, Rioch (l967) successfully trained housewives to serve as individual psychotherapists; 8 Alinsky (l97l) incorporated grass-roots community volunteers into a scheme of community organization in which they provided the person- power for mobilizing adults from powerless communities for political action; Siegel (l974) utilizing a similar group of nonprofessionals reported successful outcomes for mental patients serviced by these un- trained change agents. Workers, indigenous to the target group have also been pinpointed as effective service providers (Pearl 8 Riessman, l965) particularly in the field of criminal justice (Scott, l98l). Davidson (T975) efficiently utilized college students as family interventionists and community advocates with youthful offenders who had been diverted out of the juvenile justice system. Investigations confirming the effectiveness of college student non- professional change agents abound in the literature. Studies such as the one done by Poser (l966) demonstrated that undergraduates with relatively little training could promote change in the psychological functioning of chronic schizophrenic patients. Gruver (l97l) too, discovered that col- lege students have had positive therapeutic impact on a number of client populations experiencing mild to severe mental problems. Given the prob- lems of outreach and professional personpower shortages, he concluded that this group of students were the key to providing more complete mental health coverage to the entire population. At issue here was the ineffectiveness of professional modes of out- reach, and more importantly, the ineffectiveness of traditional, profes— sional methods of treatment with many target groups. Gruver (l97l) stated that as a result of the fruitlessness of their efforts with these groups, traditional mental health professionals have neglected to provide service to clients such as drug abusers, alcoholics, and juvenile delinquents. In support of what would later be empirically validated by Durlak (l979), 9 he concluded that ”more provocative is the evidence that nonprofessionals are more effective than their professional counterparts in working with some populations which are presently receiving professional focus” (p. ll2). The effectiveness of undergraduate volunteers has been particularly notable in the field of mental health. Typically, student volunteers have been utilized as “companions" to chronic patients in mental institutions (Rappaport, Chinsky, 8 Cowen, l97l). This trend in the utilization of college students in companionship therapy originated in the late l950's at Harvard University (Umbarger, Dalsimer, Morrison, 8 Breggin, l962) and was later adopted by other researchers as an adjunct to formal course offerings (Holzberg, Knapp, 8 Turner, l967) which would provide real life experiences for students as a supplement to class lectures on related topics. The objectives of these programs were to assist overburdened hospi- tal staff, to give students a rewarding emotional and intellectual experi- ence and to provide patients with an opportunity to engage in gratifying social relationships (Holzberg, et al., 1967). Unfortunately, the degree to which these objectives were met was often assessed quite inadequately. For example, the improvement in social skills of the clients was evalu- ated using the subjective, anecdotal views of the students and even then the results were not impressive. No outcome data per se were collected on the target population. Likewise, Klein and Zax (l965) reported that the goal of their companion program at the University of Rochester was to provide patients and students with “pleasant, human interaction” (p. l57), and a meaningful field experience, respectively. Again no data was col- lected on the problem population, precluding definitive conclusions of program success with respect to the target group. lO That these studies lack evaluative rigor and specifically directed intervention goals should be apparent. As well, the evidence that has been obtained was often indirect, subjective in nature, and not drawn from rigorous research designs. In addition, a significant lack in re- search to date has been the inclusion of variables from the perspectives of the recipients of nonprofessional intervention. Even where this in- formation has been gathered research has often focused on simple and often inappropriate outcome measures (Rappaport, et al., l974). Poser (l966), for example, utilized untrained college student volunteers to provide services to chronic schizophrenics. However, his benchmark for nonprofessional effectiveness was the improved performance of the mental patients on psychological tests. Although the outcome measures used in this study may have limited implications for effectiveness-~discharge rates would have been a more significant criterion for success--the sig— nificant finding in this study was that professional psychiatrists, clinicians, and social workers fared significantly worse than the nonpro- fessional comparison group in producing positive changes in the psycho- logical well being of these patients. These results do support his con- tention "that traditional training in the mental health professions may be neither optimal nor even necessary for the promotion of therapeutic behavior change in mental hospital patients" (p. 389). Indications of nonprofessional success in producing positive impact on various client populations in the mental health field coupled with the questionable effectiveness of traditional treatment (punishment) approaches in the field of criminal justice led to an upsurge of volunteer programs in the area of criminal justice. Towards the end of the l960's, Judge Leenhouts argued that volunteer programs, particularly in the juvenile justice system, were the long awaited solution to the problem of crime (Raskin, l97l). lO That these studies lack evaluative rigor and specifically directed intervention goals should be apparent. As well, the evidence that has been obtained was often indirect, subjective in nature, and not drawn from rigorous research designs. In addition, a significant lack in re- search to date has been the inclusion of variables from the perspectives of the recipients of nonprofessional intervention. Even where this in— formation has been gathered research has often focused on simple and often inappropriate outcome measures (Rappaport, et al., l974). Poser (l966), for example, utilized untrained college student volunteers to provide services to chronic schizophrenics. However, his benchmark for nonprofessional effectiveness was the improved performance of the mental patients on psychological tests. Although the outcome measures used in this study may have limited implications for effectiveness--discharge rates would have been a more significant criterion for success-—the sig- nificant finding in this study was that professional psychiatrists, clinicians, and social workers fared significantly worse than the nonpro- fessional comparison group in producing positive changes in the psycho- logical well being of these patients. These results do support his con- tention "that traditional training in the mental health professions may be neither optimal nor even necessary for the promotion of therapeutic behavior change in mental hospital patients" (p. 389). Indications of nonprofessional success in producing positive impact on various client populations in the mental health field coupled with the questionable effectiveness of traditional treatment (punishment) approaches in the field of criminal justice led to an upsurge of volunteer programs in the area of criminal justice. Towards the end of the l960's, Judge Leenhouts argued that volunteer programs, particularly in the juvenile justice system, were the long awaited solution to the problem of crime (Raskin, l97l). ll Unfortunately, the use of nonprofessionals in the criminal justice systen has not been operationalized to the same extent as in the field of mental health. Likewise, in the programs which do exist, the service provider of choice has usually not been the university undergraduate but rather existing court staff (e.g. Baron, Feeney, 8 Thornton, l973; Palmer, l974) or indigenous populations of ex-offenders trained as paraprofes- sionals (Empey, l97l; Scott, l98l). Scott (l98l) reported that the most obvious use of the indigenous ex—offender was to increase service efficiency and effectiveness by relieving the professional of time consuming tasks and by providing new services not offered by the professional. This concept has received con- siderable attention on a national level (Empey, l968; Empey, l97l) and has been widely implemented in a number of states (Scott, l98l). Specific- ally, many states have begun-to utilize ex-offenders as parole and proba- tion officers and these programs have been received very favorably both by criminal justice administrators and the paraprofessional service pro- viders. Although these paraprofessional programs in the criminal justice system have gained widespread popularity, they have generally lacked evaluative rigor. Similarly, nonprofessional interventions aimed at de- linquents have been criticized both on theoretical and methodological grounds. Mullen (l974) noted that certain projects utilizing extant court staff as nonprofessional counselors and family crisis interventionists with juvenile delinquents (Baron, Feeney, 8 Thornton, l973) have extremely limited generalizability. Palmer's (l974) use of probation officers as intensive caseworkers with youthful offenders, although ostensibly evi- dencing positive outcomes, has met with mixed reviews. Rappaport (l977) has suggested that a closer look at the data analysis revealed that the l2 reduced recidivism rates reported in this study may have been a function of improper exclusion of a large portion of the sample from the analysis. Rappaport (l977) further indicated that the use of probation officers in both of these studies indicated that these programs were not truly non- professional in nature and further, may have been antithetical to the stated objectives of diversion and prevention of labeling. In addition to the methodological shortcomings of many volunteer programs in the criminal justice system which were shown to be successful, evidence has also been reported which suggested their possible negative effects on clients, particularly juveniles (Berger 8 Gold, l976). Given the ostensibly conflicting results presented above, conclu- sions concerning nonprofessional effectiveness seemed limited and in need of qualification. However, close examination of program components in conjunction with program impact in many of these studies suggests that what may have been operative was an interaction between service provider and type of service provision. In a similar vein, Rappaport (l977) has concluded that what is actually done in a given program may be just as important as who is doing it. In short, old techniques with new, more enthusiastic service providers may not be enough to offset the conceptual inadequacy of traditional intervention techniques. The flaws of tradi- tional techniques were highlighted by the probability that most nonpro- fessional volunteers have a distaste for traditional treatment approaches (Klein 8 Zax, l965). Apparently what has been needed are programs which not only utilized nonprofessionals but also incorporated new conceptions in the treatment programs provided to people with problems in living. In addition, rigor- ous evaluations of program impact are needed which supply more comprehen- sive, multidimensional, and approoriate measures of outcome. The program l3 on which this follow-up was based combined the ingredients mentioned above to a remarkable degree (Davidson, l975; Kantrowitz, l979; Mitchell, l980). Although the context of the present research proposal will be high- lighted in detail in the next chapter, it may be beneficial at this point to examine the work of Davidson (l975). Specifically, he utilized college students as nonprofessional change agents working with delinquent youth in a juvenile diversion program. The actual intervention provided relied on treatment methods that were geared towards asset enhancement and child advocacy (Davidson 8 Rapp, l976) rather than traditional approaches of counseling and individual psychotherapy which had proven to be drastically ineffective, particularly with juvenile delinquents (Levitt, l97l). Suc— cinctly, Davidson's (1975) findings revealed that youthful offenders, receiving direct and intense service from college volunteers who were likewise trained intensively in the methods of behavioral contracting and child advocacy, had significantly lower recidivism rates than a randomly assigned group of control youth. In conclusion, it appears that nonprofessional college student ser- vice providers are either as effective or more so than their professional counterparts in providing direct human service to a variety of client populations. Impact on the Nonprofessional The one essential ingredient in the effectiveness of nonprofessional programs is, obviously, the nonprofessional. Many authors have noted the unique characteristics which college students bring to the nonprofessional experience and often these personal features are skills and assets in the helping process (Poser, l966; Gruver, l97l). Moreover, the possession of therapeutic skills such as accurate empathy, naive enthusiasm, and l4 genuineness often afforded the nonprofessional an advantage over pro- fessionals in achieving successful outcomes (Knickerbocker 8 McGee, l973; Truax, l967). Danish and D'Augelli (1976) concluded that the essential first step in the helping process was to develop interpersonal skills, such as empathy. The literature concerning indigenous paraprofessionals has posited the same conclusion: The indigenous workers possess certain unique social and cultural qualities which allow them to work with a like problem group in a way that many middle class professionals cannot, and usually with more positive results (Gordon, l965; Hawkinshire, l969). In sum, nonprofessional programs and their positive effects would not exist without the nonprofessional. Hence, it is as important for a program to provide a positive exper- ience for the nonprofessional service provider as it is to have positive social outcomes for the service recipients. If the experience of partici- pation is positive for the volunteer then that program would most likely be able to continue; that is, barring administrative barriers. Essentially, people will volunteer for good programs and not for others. Satisfying the volunteer, within reasonable limits, is therefore extremely important in maintaining a program. Thus, program administrators must be sensitive to this issue. Positive impact on the nonprofessional can be measured in several ways as there are many criteria for the success of a prograniaS'H:relate5'U3 the nonprofessional. This is especially true of the college-student vol- unteer. Some areas of impact are career choices, attitude change, and social change orientations held by the volunteer. Impact on careers. It was mentioned earlier that investigations of impact on nonprofessionals, as well as on targets, should utilize multiple ‘ outcome criteria for determining effectiveness. Unfortunately, the l5 literature on nonprofessional college students revealed a relative dearth of multiple outcome studies. Egregiously absent from most studies was any consideration of program influence on career choices. Definitive evaluations of this nature were precluded because of a lack of adequate control groups. Also, most studies never gathered preliminary data on information relevant to career choices. On the other hand, career plan- ning and employment issues were emphasized greatly in studies concerned with indigenous paraprofessionals (Alley, Blanton, Churgin, 8 Grant, l974; Pearl 8 Riessman, l965). The history of paraprofessional programs is important in clarifying the growth of career development programs for nonprofessional service providers. From the foundations of the nonprofessional movement there evolved a similar but more progressive model of nonprofessional service provision known as New Careers. Essentially, this viewpoint brought together the general concerns of the community psychology perspective rela- tive to manpower shortages, the need for improved services and the use of nonprofessionals to provide these services. In search of more permanent community structures to perpetuate this philosophy, the New Careers people were interested in preparing noncredentialed workers for permanent careers in community service. Pearl and Riessman (l965) were among the first to associate New Career models of paraprofessional development with the public's need for improved services. Not coincidentally, these authors envisioned vast employment opportunities for large groups of un- employed, poor people. Since these individuals were often indigenous to the target group, their potential for effectiveness was underscored (Reiff 8 Riessman, l970). Precisely, they argued what has already been mentioned; that indigenous workers who share common backgrounds, language, ethnic origin, style, and interests were more likely to possess more l6 intimate knowledge of, and trust within, the community. As such they were better suited to serve these clients than professionals. The major concern of the New Careers movement was the creation and development of jobs for indigenous paraprofessionals in every area of human service provision, from mental health to criminal justice. Per- haps Empey (l968) stated the New Careers direction most succinctly: Our overriding concern is with new careers for offenders, not just with using offenders as a correctional resource. Our task now is to integrate that use into a larger scheme in which, by being of service to corrections they might realize lasting career benefits (p. 6). The cost-effectiveness of these programs and the job development efforts of those who advocated for New Careers for the poor (cf. Pearl 8 Riess- man, l965) resulted in passage of the Manpower Development and Training Act which provided literally thousands of jobs for indigenous parapro- fessionals although very few of these employment opportunities entailed direct provision of services (Grosser, l969). A probable reason for this failure had to do with organizational barriers and professional resistances to the use of paraprofessionals in direct service delivery. Human service delivery is the domain of a large bureaucracy and change is slow. Reiff and Riessman (l965) recommended preparing professionals whose agencies were to utilize nonprofessionals before the program began so as to facilitate organizational entry for the paraprofessional. Similarly, in response to bureaucratic structures where jobs are rigidly defined, it was considered equally important to prepare the nonprofessional by finding appropriate jobs and training paraprofessionals to perform a useful function in a very specific setting (Cowen, Gardner, 8 Zax, l974). What has been advocated was more careful planning so as to fit human resources more closely to human service needs. l7 Recently, the New Careers movement has taken an even more active orientation in the development of jobs for paraprofessionals. Nonprofes- sional program planners in university settings might benefit their pro- grams and program participants by examining this unique perspective (Harvey 8 Passey, l98l). These authors have developed a New Careers program in the context of a university-based field experience for indig- enous paraprofessionals in which the program develOpers have taken on a stance of advocacy for the paraprofessionals involved. In addition to training paraprofessionals for field work, this program also provided the aspiring workers with the technical knowledge to conduct their own com- munity needs assessments so that the paraprofessionals, themselves, might create and design new service possibilities. Moreover, this group structure provided the impetus for the fonnation of a social support net- work centered around conscious career choice decision making. This pro- gram is relatively new and hence, objective measures of program succeSs have not been forthcoming but on a conceptual level alone it would appear that this idea has great promise both for career development and parapro- fessional self-sufficiency. Young, True, and Packard (l976) have estimated that paraprofessional college-level training programs have produced 4000 graduates annually and yet the extent to which these students have gained employment has never been systematically examined. The same has been true in university-based nonprofessional programs where the college student has been the provider of choice. Subsequent follow-up has simply not been conducted and there- fore the effects of program participation on future employment--an impor- tant issue to be suree-has not been assessed. However, Klein and Zax (l965) and Holzberg, et al. (l967) reported that nonprofessional college volunteers had their career choices clarified as a result of participation l8 in a human service program. The examination of the relationship between program participation and such variables as career choices, actual em— ployment, and job satisfaction would appear, therefore, to have a great deal of merit. If participation in a program can help to confirm career plans (e.g. Klein 8 Zax, l965) and provide adjustment to the workplace with greater facility then, for this reason alone, it would have merit. Determinations of this sort, however, must come from systematic, longi- tudinal and empirical evidence rather than the anecdotal reports of investigators. The helper therapy principle. One of the most frequently referenced criteria for demonstrating that a program has been beneficial for the service provider has been the degree to which the program experience has improved the life of the nonprofessional. This positive impact has been termed the helper therapy principle (Riessman, l969). Basically stated, this principle asserted that the nonprofessional could greatly benefit, simply by being in a helping role. Specifically, Riessman asserted that the act of helping or serving as a therapeutic change agent was a poten- tial means of improving the mental health of the helpers. The proposed mechanisms of the helper therapy principle are the following: (l) doing something worthwhile tends to improve one's self- image, (2) having to advocate a position often leads to a commitment to the position, (3) employment as a helper gives one a stake in the inter- vention, (4) the high status associated with being a helper in a pres- tigious endeavor is beneficial, and finally, (5) the leadership develop- ment that may result from the experience of helping is also beneficial. Riessman (l969) acknowledged that although this principle lacked strong empirical validation in a wide variety of situations,it neverthe- less seemed to be operative in some situations, most notably when people l9 identified as disadvantaged or marginal were the providers of service. That is, the indigenous paraprofessional, as well as the nonprofessional, may experience enhanced psychological well being as a function of being a helper or service provider. Peck, Kaplan, and Roman (l966) have sug- gested that the involvement of neighborhood indigenous workers in social action programs enhanced the "mental health” of the workers themselves by increasing their sense of control over their own lives. Zurcher (l970) who studied many poverty programs in which members of the target group participated in program planning found empirical support for these bene- ficial effects of being involved in community programs. However, he issued an important caveat to program planners. He concluded that if this "maximum feasible participation“ in program planning was not accom- panied by real opportunities for social change which met the indigenous person's expectations of his/her own impact, then program participation might further alienate members of the target group. In short, program planners need to be aware of the unintended consequences that might accrue if program objectives are not set realistically. Other researchers have also described intervention programs which have benefitted both the indig- enous nonprofessionals and the clients which they serve. Klein (l967) has coined these reciprocal gains as double-barrelled intervention which not only provided needed mental health manpower and effective service but also served to rehabilitate a segment of society that would normally have been a drain on its resources. Although the helper therapy principle was mainly meant by Riessman (l969) to apply to marginal or indigenous helpers, corroborating evidence of the plausibility of this theory has come from programs which utilized non-indigenous volunteers. Retirees who served as mental health aides with children benefitted significantly from their participation. They 20 expressed enjoyment and satisfaction with the work, they reported learn- ing a great deal from the experience, and most importantly they wanted to continue serving in the program (Cowen, Leibowitz, 8 Leibowitz, l968). College students have also shown improved psychological adjustment as a result of participation in the nonprofessional experience. Specifically, studies have reported that students who worked mainly with mental patients reported improved self-awareness and understanding after participating in programs which were part of formal course offerings in abnormal psychology at Wesleyan University (Holzberg, et al., l967) and the University of Rochester (Klein 8 Zax, l965). The authors at Wesleyan described the helper therapy principle in terms of "non-intellective education" (p. l03). In essence, they distinguished between gains achieved in knowledge of psychological processes (intellectual education) and growth in social awareness, empathetic range and self acceptance (non-intellectual educa- tion). Participating college students at Wesleyan had significantly higher performance on both of these educational indicators than a group of nonparticipating control students who were matched on social interest with the experimental group. Anecdotally, students at Rochester often stated that their involvement in the program was their most meaningful college experience (Klein 8 Zax, l965). In a more recent investigation, Mitchell, et al. (l979) suggested that the extent of positive impact on nonprofessionals' self-concept may be a function of differential training and supervision intensities and structures. For those students who were involved in low intensity train— ing--that is, they received little supervision and no specific skills with which to intervene in the lives of delinquent youth--self-concept decreased. Students who received high intensity training and supervision, however, showed evidence of the benefits suggested by the helper therapy 21 principle. It should be noted that the results presented above reflected a true experimental comparison. This review suggested that evidence which supported the contention that volunteers were positively affected merely by the act of helping, although strong and widely stated, should be examined more closely and in a variety of training and service provision contexts (cf. Mitchell, et al., 1979; Zurcher, 1970). The quality of the helping experience may mediate these positive effects, but it seems a matter of consensus that the helper is often positively affected by the helping experience. Impact on attitudes and knowledge. Throughout the existence of non- professional programs such attention has been accorded the impact of par- ticipation on the attitudes held by the nonprofessional service provider (Gruver, 1971; Rappaport, Chinsky, 8 Cowen, 1971). Here, I am discussing not only the personal, "therapeutic" benefits which may be derived from the therapy of helping but also the changes in attitude towards the tar- get population and the system in which the helping process was implemented (e.g. the mental health or juvenile justice system). In addition, many projects have found differential impacts of program involvement on the nonprofessional's evaluations of the program experience depending on the nature of the involvement (c.f. Mitchell, Kantrowitz, Parisian, 8 Davidson, 1979). Also significant in this area of impact on the nonprofessional, particularly in the case of the college student volunteer, were the sig- nificant gains in knowledge of the program content area exhibited by the nonprofessionals (Kantrowitz, 1979; Mitchell, 1980). In short, this sec- tion is concerned with the personal, attitudinal and educational values that involvement in a human service program may have for the student. Finally--and this is an issue which has only recently received atten- tion--the program treatment philosophy may be adopted by the nonprofessionals 22 and thus be utilized in future human service provision. The degree to which these philosophies or intervention orientations are espoused by the nonprofessional, of course, may be mediated by the intensity of training or by the success of the intervention as perceived by the non— professional. Examples of the first three attitudinal effects abound in the litera— ture. In general, much of the research has shown not only was the nonpro- fessional positively affected by the helping experience, but he or she was also likely to have experienced some degree of positive attitude change (Durlak, 1971). For example, Holzberg, Knapp and Turner (1967) concluded from their evaluation of the student companion program at the Connecticut Valley State Hospital that student volunteers displayed an increased understanding and acceptance of chronic mental patients with whom they worked. Their research also reported positive gains in knowledge of men- tal illness on the part of the volunteers. Students who worked with emotionally disturbed children in a school setting also reported more favorable attitudes towards the target population upon completion of the field experience (Cowen, Zax, 8 Laird, 1966). These authors attributed these positive changes to exposure and interaction with youngsters exper- iencing emotional difficulties. These interactions constituted a basis for more positive and accepting attitudes of the children. These results have been corroborated by other investigators and fur- ther clarified with regard to the program components which may be respon- sible for these positive attitude changes. Goodman (1967), for example, found that male college students who served as counselors to troubled boys manifested a heightened interest in the behavior of the target popu- lation as a result of participation in this nonprofessional program. Moreover, he more specifically concluded that the extent of this program 23 influence on student attitudes was related to the amount and type of training that the students received. Those who received intensive in- service training at weekly sessions during involvement with the troubled boys showed more positive change than untrained counselors (Goodman, 1967). Evidence from the project which is the focus of this study has further developed the existing knowledge relative to the effects of pro- gram training on student attitudes (e.g. Kantrowitz, 1979). It seemed that students who underwent more intensive and specifically directed training and supervision had more favorable attitudes toward the experi- ence itself as well as toward the target population--in this case, juve- nile delinquents (Mitchell, et al., 1979). The evidence from this project (e.g. Kantrowitz, 1979) has conversely highlighted some discrepancies among various programs on measures of how volunteers change in self- perceptions as a result of program participation. Many programs have reported positive changes in volunteers' self-evaluation as a function of program participation (e.g. Holzberg, et al., 1967) while this particular diversion program for juvenile offenders has reported the opposite trend towards more negative self-evaluations by the college volunteers. Specific- ally, as training and supervision became more intensive and as more spe- cific intervention strategies were employed, volunteers' self-evaluations diminished across time. Another consistent finding throughout the nonprofessional literature was the evidence of more negative attitudes from pre to post involve- ment towards the relevant social system in which the nonprofessional was either directly or indirectly engaged. Illustratively, Klein 8 Zax (1967) reported that college students who were serving as companions to chronic schizophrenics were extremely dissatisfied with the bureaucratic struc- ture of the mental health system and had similarly negative impressions 24 of the mental hospital in which they worked. Much of the research to date has verified this finding (e.g. Kantrowitz, 1979; Mitchell, 1980; Rappaport, Chinsky 8 Cowen, 1971). Thus, it was apparent that involvement in a nonprofessional program had a variety of effects--mostly positive--on the attitude of the nonpro- fessional participants. Moreover, this impact seems, in some cases, to have been mediated by the structure of the training and supervision com- ponents of the program. Thus, not all programs have had the same degree of positive influence on participants' attitudes. Explanations of this differential impact have suggested that different programs engender dif- ferential levels of commitment, satisfaction and motivation (Conter, Seidman, Rappaport, Kniskern 8 Desaulniers, 1977). These factors were considered to be key, unique variables in the helping process (Durlak, 1971) and were found to be regulated, in part, by different types, amounts, and formats of training, supervision, and intervention in which nonprofes— sionals engaged (Mitchell, Kantrowitz, 8 Davidson, 1979). In a similar vein, Zurcher (1970) depicted a situation in which community-based service providers felt alienated when program goals did not meet the expectations of the members of the target population. Like— wise, Reiff and Riessman (1970) characterized the mood of the indigenous paraprofessional as one of defeatism when positive target change did not occur rapidly. As in the Kantrowitz (1979) study, these nonprofessionals got down on themselves and tended to blame the relevant social systems for this lack of change. Impact on treatment philosophy. The final area related to impact on nonprofessional attitudes which was mentioned above is concerned with the effects of program participation on the treatment philosophies or inter- vention orientations of the nonprofessional. Although evidence supporting 25 the adoption of treatment values has been sparse, there has been some empirical testimony which suggested that certain programs have influenced nonprofessional attitudes in the direction of acceptance of the inter- vention strategies which were utilized. Given that most programs which utilized nonprofessionals as direct service providers tended to be more innovative and less traditional in their perspectives towards treatment, it was not surprising that adoption of these orientations by nonprofes- sionals occurred. The previously cited research which evidenced decreased satisfaction with traditional systems (e.g. Klein 8 Zax, 1967) was con- sistent with the adoption of new, less traditional approaches to the treatment of various target populations. In fact, Kulik, Martin, and Scheibe (1969) have suggested that this dissatisfaction with systems was a result of the nonprofessionals' pessimism with the current methods of treatment utilized by these systems. Similarly, Snellman, Redner, McVeigh and Davidson (1981) have shown that the philosophy which undergirded an intervention strategy for treat- ing delinquent youths was adopted by college student volunteers who were providing this intervention. It may be that, once again, different for- mats of training and supervision result in varying degrees of adoption of the program treatment philosophy. This discussion becomes particular- ly significant when the particular intervention strategy has resulted in positive outcomes for the target population. For example, the diversion of delinquents from the juvenile justice system has resulted in signifi- cantly lower recidivism rates for diverted youth as compared to court handled control youth (Seidman, et al., in press). Within this same project, Snellman, et al. (1981) found that college students were much more likely to espouse an orientation of radical non-intervention 26 (cf. Schur, 1973) which was the philosophy upon which diversion was partly based (see also Blakely, 1981, p. 130, 148-150). The significance of this issue is couched in the degree to which non- professional programs can convince, persuade or train future human service providers to endorse demonstrably superior intervention strategies. If so, then former volunteers now employed in the human service arena may serve as the catalysts for the adoption of innovative strategies within the traditional and often ineffective treatment systems. As such, nonprofes- sional programs may provide the impetus, albeit indirect, for sweeping systemic social change. One qualification of these implications is in order here. The Snellman, et a1. (1981) results were based on attitudes towards treatment orientations held by the college student nonprofessionals immediately after their involvement in the program. Thus the social change which may be derived from such a philosophical insemination of a class of people is dependent on a variety of factors. First, there is an assump- tion that nonprofessionals will continue their careers in the provision of human service; this has not been empirically verified. Secondly, an assumption is made with respect to the lasting nature of this orientation adoption. It could be that nonprofessionals become coopted by the tradi- tional human service delivery systems once they become employed in them. Finally, the degree to which these two aforementioned assumptions are true may, like other areas of attitude impact, be a function of the specific type of program structure in which volunteers were trained and supervised. The present investigation was an attempt to provide empirical evidence relative to these questions of long term impact. Through these assessments, an understanding of the ramifications which nonprofessional programs have for widespread systemic and social change may be forth- coming. 27 In conclusion, it is obvious that questions of career choice clari- fication, personal growth, and attitude change as a function of partici- pation in nonprofessional programs are allintegrally related. Each aspect may impact on the other in an interrelated fashion. Also, the degree of impact on the nonprofessional may vary as program structures and formats vary. It is with these thoughts in mind that the academic field experi- ence as a context for nonprofessional programming will be discussed. The Field—Based Learning Experience From the discussion of the relationship between the nonprofessional movement in community psychology and the use of college volunteers to fill roles created by this perspective, it can be seen that the provision of field experiences for undergraduates dovetails very neatly with the flourishing use of nonprofessionals in human service settings (Mitchell, 1980; Snellman, et al., 1981). Moreover, the use of field-based learning experiences has proliferated as a result of the pressure for course exper- iences to become more directly linked to real world experiences particular- ly in the teaching of psychology (Baskin, 1967). The marriage of the nonprofessional movement in community psychology with the development of field learning experience should provide for nuptial bliss indeed. Illustratively, the goals of the companion therapy program described by Klein and Zax (1965) emphasized the importance of the field experience to participating students. Students had as much to gain as they did to give and it was also considered useful in recruiting possi- ble trainees for the mental health field. Similarly, the field experience may utilize resources already available in the community and, in a recip- rocal manner, students contributed needed personpower to those community systems. 28 The field experience has gained widespread acceptance and popularity as an alternative teaching strategy in psychology departments (Kulik, 1973) possibly because of ever-increasing enrollments and the subsequent need for innovations in teaching which maximize student involvement (Maier, 1971). In fact, Kulik (1973) noted that 16% of all psychology teaching innovations involved a field experience of some kind. Maier (l97l) emphasized the need for modern education to abandon educational philosophies of the past since pure knowledge acquisition, a hallmark of traditional teaching philosophy, did not necessarily translate into prob- lem solving action. Consequently, he concluded that modern innovations in education should encourage the acquisition of skills that require doing rather than memorizing. The field experience in which students actually provide services to other human beings would fulfill this proposition very nicely. Again the links between field experience and career choices is clear. For example, Kulik (1973) stated that "in such field experiences, students get first-hand experience of important data bases of psychology, they observe professional models and explore tentative career commitments" (p. 202). Once again, Davidson's (1975) investigation and subsequent replica- tions (Emshoff, 1979; Kantrowitz, 1979; Mitchell, 1980) may serve as exemplary models of the amalgamation of strong evaluative methodology, effective nonprofessional service provision to delinquent youth, and the use of field-based learning in a university setting to train and supervise nonprofessionals. Once again, however, systematic evaluations of the long-term impact of such a learning experience on the nonprofessional service providers both in terms of careers and attitudes have not been carried out. It was to this issue that the present study spoke. 29 Objectives Given the several conclusions reached in the above review, it appeared extremely important to finally assess the long-term effects of program par- ticipation on nonprofessional service providers. Therefore, the author conducted a follow—up investigation of approximately 264 former college students who took part, either on an experimental or control basis, in a diversion program for youthful offenders. Specifically, volunteers were randomly selected for participation in a nonprofessional program in which they provided one-to-one services to delinquent youth who were being diver- ted out of the juvenile justice system. The program, itself, represented a replication and experimental examination of an empirically validated diver- sion project for juvenile offenders (Davidson, 1975; Davidson 8 Rapp, 1976; Seidman, et al., in press). Based on several impressions presented above, it was the specific intention of this study to assess the impact of program participation on three general areas in the life of the former nonprofessional: (l) employ- ment, (2) attitudes, and (3) orientations to social interventions. For these purposes a survey instrument was designed and constructed for this study. Information and feedback for the planning of programs which more optimally benefit the nonprofessional service provider was a pragmatic result of this survey. A related issue was the provision of feedback infor- mation to university administrators for the improvement of courses which provide field-based learning experiences. More precisely, this study experimentally examined the impact of the field-based nonprofessional experience on career choices, current employment, and future career plans. Following the lead of Klein and Zax (1965) it was hypothesized that participating nonprofessionals 30 have had their career decisions clarified as a result of participation in the nonprofessional program. Whether the experience influenced career choices towards or away from a human service career is an open question. Furthermore, this research investigatedihe relationship between the out- come of each volunteer's assigned youth and career goals and types of jobs obtained by the volunteers. Secondly, this research presenteaan excellent opportunity to deter- mine the validity of the helper therapy principle described earlier. This experimental research should cast some conclusive empirical light, not only on the question of the existence of this principle, but also on the question of its permanence or lasting nature. As mentioned previously, findings related to these issues not only have humanitarian value but also theoretical import. Finally, this research may provide insight into the effects of parti- cipation in a nonprofessional program on attitudes held by former volun- teers towards social interventions which have been utilized with youthful offenders. If program participation has produced a lasting affinity among volunteers for successful social interventions then this effect may have implications for the creation of meaningful social change through educa— tion. This research, although far from producing definitive conclusions concerning the above question of the indirect creation of social change, may suggest some ideas for more closely examining this phenomenon, particu- larly if these findings can be meaningfully couphaiwith the results per- taining to career choices. If a nonprofessional program can influence the volunteer to pursue a career in human service dedicated to the use of pro- gressive, more humane, and demonstrably successful intervention philoso- phies then that program has had a positive impact. 31 In order to assess the degree to which the above objectives have been met, several research questions were posed and systematically examined. (1) What was the long-term impact of the nonprofessional exper- ience on the choice of future activities, such as career choices, present employment, graduate school, and subse- quent decisions to perform other volunteering activities? How did program participation impact on the attitudes of volunteers towards themselves, juvenile delinquents, and relevant social systems in the long run? Were there any self-reported differences between program participants and non-participating controls,or among the various experimental participant groups,on the degree to which their undergraduate coursework or field experience added to their knowledge of delinquency in the long run? Did program participation have a lasting influence on participants' treatment philosophies? In other words, was participants' commitment to a specific treatment phil- osophy as a result of participation an ephemeral or long- lasting phenomenon? If the latter is true, what are the implications for systemic change in the human services? How did students view their field-based learning experience in comparison with the rest of their undergraduate courses? Was there a differential impact for volunteers on any of the variables mentioned above depending on the type of training, intervention, and supervision strategy in which they took part. Finally, was the eventual outcome of their youth (success vs. failure) related to any of the above-mentioned vari- ables such as present employment or attitudes? CHAPTER II METHOD Context of the Present Research In order to fully comprehend the thrust of the present research, it is important to understand that this study nanated from a much larger research project funded by the National Institute of Mental Health for the period l976-1982. The overall project, the Adolescent Diversion Pro- ject, was aimed at replicating and experimentally examining an empirically validated diversion program for delinquent yoUth (Davidson, 1975; David- son, Seidman, Rappaport, Berck, Rapp, Rhodes, 8 Herring, 1977; Davidson 8 Rapp, 1976). Throughout the life of this program, college volunteers have served as the nonprofessional change agents and have provided service to referred youth on a one-to-one basis. The overall research project has examined such components as the relative efficacy of different training, intervention and supervision strategies, selection of nonprofessionals, potentials for dissemination, and program impact on the decision making apparatus in the juvenile justice system. In short, the project has taken a multi-level research perspective. The entire program operated under the educational pyramid model (Seidman 8 Rappaport, 1974). Other investigators have referred to this model of service delivery as the triadic model in which the professional staff have no contact with the target population but do train and super- vise the nonprofessional service providers who in turn provided the inter- vention to the delinquent youth (Tharp 8 Wetzel, 1969). In the Adolescent 32 33 Diversion Project, the principal investigator supervised, trained and consulted with graduate students in psychology who, in turn, trained and supervised the college student service providers in the appropriate inter- vention strategies. Subsequent to the nonprofessional training, the under- graduate then provided the intervention for their respective youth. Hence, nonprofessionals were recruited through a university course offering which emphasized the field-based learning experience. This course demanded a three term commitment on the part of the volunteers and was offered as a 12 credit package. In addition to the close ties that this project had with the Univer- sity, there was also a network generated between the project and the local juvenile justice system. In order to obtain youth referrals, the project had to initiate and maintain a working relationship with the Ingham County Probate Court and also had to generate agreements which would safeguard not only the rights of the youth but also the integrity of scientific inquiry. Thus, intricate procedures had to be enacted for the handling of youths that were referred to the project to which the court, the Uni- versity, and the project all agreed. The magnitude of such an endeavor cannot be over-emphasized. It was from this juvenile court that project referrals were made. From 1977 to 1980 approximately 2000 youths were handled by the court and from this group, 184 youths were referred by the court and randomly selected by project staff to participate in the Adolescent Diversion Project. Those referred but not selected (N = 52) were directed back to the court for normal system handling and served as the control comparison group. Thus, there were 236 total referrals during this time period. Youths were eligible for referral to the project if (a) they had a court petition filed against them by police, school, parents or others; 34 (b) the court accepted the petition; and (c) during the inquiry and pre- liminary hearing, the youths admitted to the charges presented against them. The project did not accept youths who were involved in only a single minor offense or would have been dismissed by the court. Youths who volunteered to participate were randomly assigned to experimental con— dition. It is within this context of nonprofessional service provision to delinquent youth that the present research is embedded. Nonprofessional Volunteers From April, 1977 to June, 1980, 148 undergraduate students were ran- domly selected for participation (i.e. experimental students) in the pro- ject from a total recruitment pool of approximately 10,000 students who were majoring in some field within the Social Sciences at Michigan State University. Only students with sophomore status or above were recruited for participation. Of those students not selected for participation during this time period, 116 were randomly selected for placement in a control group. These control students had no function in the project except that they agreed to answer questionnaires prior to the three term course offering for which they had applied, and after the course had ended. They received no credit for this participation as control sub» jects; merely, our thanks and $12 for their time and effort. It should be noted that £93 all of the control subjects decided to participate in the post measurement phase, that is, after the course had ended. 0f the 116 originally selected controls, only 64 returned to complete the paper and pencil measures which were given to both the control and eXperimental participants after the experimental groups had terminated their involve- ment with their youths. Thus, from the research perspective of the larger program, there were only 64 control subjects. In this particular investigation, however, all 116 members of the originally selected control 35 group served as members of the control comparison group. The reasons for the inclusion of the 52 non-returning control members in this particular study will be explained later in detail, as will the ramifications of this inclusion. Of the students who showed interest in the program and were subse- quently selected for participation, approximately 90% were psychology and criminal justice majors while the other 10% were majors in other fields within the Social Sciences. Sex was equally represented among all volun- teers for both experimental and control groups since each condition was stratified for sex. Program Administration Again, in order to fully understand and appreciate the ramifications of the present research, it will be imperative to understand the specific manner in which the overall project, on which this research is based, was administered from year to year, with particular reference to volunteer recruitment, selection, training, and supervision. This is particularly important in terms of the nonprofessional experience since not all volun- teers were exposed to the same training/intervention/supervision strate- gies. As stated above, attempts were made to discover the salient fea- tures of successful interventions by comparing the relative efficacy of different formats of training and supervising volunteers with respect to youth outcome, volunteer attitudes, and the latter's satisfaction with the program. This section will describe the general structural features of the project and will elucidate, in detail, the various experimental con- ditions which were examined within this structure from 1977 to 1980. Program structure. The general format of the administration of the experimental conditions of this program may most easily be clarified through a graphical presentation of the program structure from 1976-1980. 36 In particular, Figure 1 presents a general overview of the administra- tion of the program and depicts, specifically, the number of volunteers who participated in each experimental condition (training/intervention/ supervision strategies) at each time period or wave (see Figure 1). Note that a wave consisted of a nine month span which covered three terms of the academic year. Remember, that volunteer participation required a three term commitment. In the first term, students were trained by two graduate student supervisors utilizing the appropriate training and intervention strategy. Towards the end of the first term, or at the beginning of the second term, students were assigned to their randomly matched youth and proceeded to carry out the particular intervention in which they were trained. During the 18 week intervention, students were supervised by the graduate stu- dent trainers in a classroom setting. Note also in Figure l the over— lapping nature of each successive wave. For example, while Wave 2 stu- dents were concluding their intervention during the Fall term of 1977, Wave 3 students were just beginning training. It should be clear that Wave 1 and Wave 6 students were omitted from this follow-up since no research was conducted during these phases of the project on the student volunteers. Further, it should also be evident that control groups were utilized only during Waves 3 and 7 yielding a total N = 264 for the present research. Those controls in Wave 4 were not asked to return to complete post-project measures. Thus, they Will be considered as part of the 52 non-returning controls. Recruitment. Student participants were recruited by mail and usually about 2000 letters were sent to social science majors before each wave, announcing the availability of a three-term psychology field experience sequence. The specifics of their potential involvement with a delinquent 4O Supervisors and classmates then provided the student with feedback clarifying accomplishments and assisted in the planning and implementa- tion of future intervention techniques. In these weekly supervisions, considerable attention was given to goal setting and attainment. Overall, this condition represented an intensive intervention in all life systems of the youth including family, school, and the community at large, and, yet, this intervention model was designed so that very specific activities and techniques were to be implemented in these systems with the youth assigned to these students. In addition, social support systems for the volunteer were provided through the interactive class structure. Relationship condition, As Figure l illustrated, this condition or intervention model was utilized and examined during Wave 3 only (Kantro- witz, 1979). The relationship training, intervention, and supervision model closely resembled the action condition in format but not at all in content. Specifically, classes were structured in the same fashion as in the action condition and similarly consisted of weekly class meetings, group discussion and supervision of cases, weekly quizzes during training (both oral and written), the use of roleplays as a didactic device, and the same weekly requirements such as progress reports, log book comple- tion, outside readings and readings from a manual specifically designed for training in this intervention model. However, the content provided by this manual was markedly different from the action training manual. Students in the relationship condition were trained in different methods of intervention. Likewise, they performed different activities with, and provided different services for, their youths. In contrast to the action condition, students in this condition were trained in the skills needed for establishing and developing trusting and therapeutic relationships with their youths. Therefore, ”relationship” 41 training covered such definitive areas as the theoretical rationales behind the practical applications of the interpersonal conception of human behavior to delinquency and the development and use of skills such as empathy, unconditional positive regard, and genuineness, all of which are essential to the creation and maintenance of a therapeutic relation- ship. In addition, training stressed self-understanding, identification of feelings, and constructive openness as tools for effective interaction. Students were also versed in techniques, such as paraphrasing and clari— fication, which were geared towards assisting the youth to understand his/her own feelings. Finally, students were instructed in methods of developing the youth's autonomy and independence. The one similarity between the relationship and action conditions was the emphasis on youth self-sufficiency at the end of the intervention. Summarily, students were to help the youth to solve his own problems through their relation- ship with the youth. Student involvement in the youth's life was to revolve around the youth, not the systems affecting the youth. Students were not to initiate action on behalf of the youth, as in the action model, but were to encourage the youth to identify and understand his own problems and thereby solve them. Supervision structure closely paralleled the action model in that the final two terms of the course were spent in the weekly supervision of cases in a group setting. Again, students and supervisors provided feed- back to presentations of individual case progress with more emphasis on how the students felt about their cases as well as future directions and alternatives to be considered. Thus, the thrust of both training and supervision was to enhance the students' repertoires of interpersonal and helping skills and to utilize these skills with their youths and in super- vision classes. This intervention model was also considered, both in 42 course structure and in degree of service provision, to be an intensive treatment modality. Lo Intensity condition. This condition which also occurred solely in Wave 3 was an attempt to model typical volunteer programs in the juvenile justice system. Accordingly, neither training nor supervision were conducted with the level of intensity, in terms of time spent in class and material covered, that was characteristic of the two previous— ly mentioned training/intervention/supervision strategies. As in most other volunteer programs sponsored by the court, therefore, students were provided with a core of necessary information concerning the nature of the program, the phenomenon of delinquency, and what activities they might perform with their youths. This occurred at three training sessions-- as opposed to eight sessions in action and relationship training--and thus the training was very generalized as were the explanations of activi- ties to be performed. Students were encouraged to be flexible in what- ever they chose to do, thereby utilizing the "natural" skills they pos- sessed. Some specific t0pics which were covered included getting to know the assigned youth as they would any stranger, helping the youth to make changes in his or her life, and assisting the youth to solve prob- lems. The necessity of being supportive and hanging in there with the youth were emphasized but no specific intervention plans were suggested. Students were encouraged to try out all kinds of alternatives in the actual interventions with the youths; to use whatever they thought seemed useful. No manual was provided. Supervision sessions in the 10 intensity condition were two hours in length and held monthly for the remaining three terms. The overall philosophy hi supervision was that the special, natural skills and enthusiasm of the college student nonprofessionals could have positive 43 impact on juvenile offenders. Supervision, therefore, was non-directive; students were encouraged to do what they thought best. The monthly meet- ings were a time for exchange of ideas, discussion of problem-solving and dealing with routine administrative matters. Given the levels of train- ing and supervision described above, the title of this condition should be self-explanatory. With respect to the youths this was an attention placebo condition since they received no precise intervention. There was a manipulation within this condition that is worthy of mention. Precise- ly, class size was systematically differed in the three classes which existed in this condition. Two of the classes were ”small” classes con— sisting of seven to eight students while the remaining "large” class con— sisted of 14 students. The large class was identical to the small classes in every aspect except size. The analyses in the present study, however, will differentiate between the large and small groups within this 10 intensity condition. Family condition. Due to the vast amount of literature linking the family to delinquency (e.g. Stuart, 1981), it was felt that specifically pinpointing this social system for intervention might be effective in pro- ducing positive changes in the lives of the youths assigned to this condi- tion. In Waves 4 and 5 of the overall project, this type of intervention strategy was experimentally examined (Emshoff, 1980). Again, a training manual was designed especially for the training of students in this particular intervention; however, this condition closely resembled the action condition in nearly all aspects of training and super- vision, including course structure, course content, and the level of inten- sity with which the training, supervision, and intervention were conducted. Unlike the action condition, this strategy focused the intervention solely and entirely within the family of the youth rather than in all life systems 44 affecting the youth. The training sessions reflected this distinction in that behavioral contracting within the family was stressed more heavily than advocacy since advocacy was more appropriate in systems such as school and community. In fact, students in this condition were specific- ally instructed not to work on behalf of the youth in the school or com- munity. Supervision in these classes utilized the same weekly group discus- sion of, and feedback to, individual cases as in the action and relation- ship conditions. In the interest of intervention fidelity, students were actively encouraged to limit their activities to the family with special emphasis on the use of behavioral contracting. In short, students were directed to do a lot in one area of the youth's life, in contrast to the action model, where students were encouraged to do as much as they could in a lot of areas. The family condition was also a high intensity train- ing, supervision, and intervention model. Court condition. After the experimental success of the techniques utilized in the action condition (i.e. behavioral contracting and advocacy in all life systems) was replicated in Waves 2, 3, and 4, Blakely (1981) decided in Wave 5 to experimentally examine the feasibility of dissemina- ting the "action" program to the existing juvenile justice system. Specifically, students were trained in the principles and techniques of the "action" intervention model within the context of the Adolescent Diversion Project but were supervised by an intake referee at the juvenile court in Lansing, Michigan. The training was provided by one graduate student under the same format, class structure, and course requirements as were the other high intensity conditions. The content of the course materials was identical to the action condition, as state above. In fact, the action training manual was used module for module to present class material. 45 Weekly supervision was carried on at the juvenile court under the direction of the aforementioned intake referee. These meetings were in- tended to be similar to supervision in the action condition and the referee-supervisor was versed in the intent and practice of the action intervention. Although supervision was monitored, no active manipulations were implemented to ensure adherence to the model. In point of fact, it became obvious that the integrity of the program was being gradually weakened during the supervision process and students in turn were per— forming activities and provided services that did not adhere to the intended intervention strategy. This departure from the intervention strategy was extremely important in the interpretation of many of the results of the present study. Control condition: Control I and Control II. Control students were randomly selected from the available pool of interested students who attended both orientation meetings and who completed all of the pre—project questionnaires. These students neither received training nor worked with a youth. They merely progressed through their academic coursework as usual. As was mentioned before, the control group was comprised of two sub- groups. Although all 116 members of the general control group partici- pated in the pre-assessment phase of the general research project (1976- 1980), not all of these students volunteered to participate in the post- assessment phase. The first control subgroup (Control I) consisted of the 64 students who volunteered to return upon the conclusion of the particu- lar project wave to participate in post data collection. The second sub— group of control students (Control II) consisted of the 52 students who did not reconvene at the end of their respective "waves" to complete the post—project measures. 46 In the interests of experimental comparison with regards to nonpro- fessional outcomes, the refearch that was carried out during the implemen- tation of each project wave utilized only the former control group (i.e. Control I) since only this groUp had completed both pre and post project attitude measures. Even though the initial control group was randomly selected, it could be contended that Control I--because of the voluntary nature of post-project participation--represented a self-selected subset of the true control group. Thus, in order to circumvent this design problem and to achieve a more rigorous experimental comparison, both subgroups of controls were used as a control comparison group. The subgroup identity of each was maintained, however, to enable an examination of the degree of equivalence between these two groups. Of note here, was the research by Mitchell (1980) and Kantrowitz (1979) which found that the returning con- trols (N = 64) were not significantly different from those who did not return on a variety of different demographic and attitudinal variables which were collected during the two orientation meetings. The Present Research Follow-up Participants The subjects of the present follow-up study were those current and former students (N = 220) from the total pool of experimental and control participants listed in Figure 1 who were able to be contacted by phone for the purpose of the follow-up interview. Figure 2 presents the cell ratios of those able to be contacted to the total pool of possible participants in each condition at each time period. Fairly equivalent proportions of subjects in each condition at each time period were contacted and thus no one cell was disproportionately under or overrepresented. Figure 2 further indicated that over 83% (220/264) of the total pool of research participants were contacted. Again, as was explained in Figure 1, students m>mz gumm to» covancou comm cw mpcmcsum mo cmpE:z _mu0H cu mpcmvzwm umuomucoo mo cream .N mczmvm .umpumucou on o» anm mew: m_ .m>mz new cowumncou was“ Eocm mpcmawuwucma up mg» we page mzocm cram; mwnhw som\omm z Pouch . mm 1 z aacaapeou m.occeou "mm, 1 z aauaapcoomzaazaswcaaxm .u . . Nm\mmuc ea\nm1= m N_\o_1c aN\_N1: am\m~1: -\PF1: _~\Nm1c mumz u” m N_\o~1= Np\opna Np\aua mk\8-mk\m “ m m>m3 Np\a1c m N_\__1c Np\muc m~\~c-mx\¢ " a w>m3 oe\mN1c mN\mN1= m aN\8N1: NP\P_1= ep\_Pu= mk\o-xk\m " m m>mz " m e~_\m_1= NN\N_-NN\¢ " N m>m3 HH H “c308 .- Aficsaa Appasm a macauu - acemeocoa_am cocpa< . Focpcou Focpcou xprmcmucm 04 >wmhmmm:m\zo~hzm>mmth\wszH=a up s.mo —.e me. .p 11 opqoma voom mm. Po.- Pa. Po. co. mo. oo. oo.1 mam mucaaacvpmv wpvcw>=a m— m.~m w.o hm. op 11 gaze» supnoga new: mm. mm. co. Po.- .o.- NP. No.1 No. m>ruumwca «Lagoon» poocum mp a.~m m.m mm. a mucaaacvpuu sow :. No; 2. 8. .3. 8.- 5.- mo. 88 888.... 8:828 w. «.3 em a... m 11 meovurvcou pavuom a. 8. an. :. 8. 8.- 8.- N..- 2 833 8885.8 : 8.2 w; 8. N i 33ch . mm. 8.- _~.- 5. 8.- 8.- 8. 8. 232. .2; 33.5 8:29 a 8.2. a.“ 8. o sync» 11. co» mewpnoga wmaau mac. KN. Fm.- mF. ow. —e.- m—.1 on. No.1 .1vmouoca assoc upecu>=a m o.~o m.m mo._ m 11 mucuaocppmv a“. op. mo. no.1 mp. po.1 oo.1 om. cup: uuvcum on «was one u m.nm o.op “N.” e . 1n «cowcup me. No.1 a..- «o.- No.- o—. -.- us. can a? ugaou opvcu>sa v o.~v o._P om.p m 11 Aucosac.—uc commmp ms. No. m_.1 ~p.1 as. «at «N. mo. p—.: xaugwgu vamomcuc_ m n.—m m.~p cm.— m xucomo cu An cmpuca; mam ah. mp. oo.1 mo.1 po. pa. .mm. -.1 w? mwo coupon mo—.:o>=a — m.op m.mp m~.~ — muvpocaseau m>_uumupu mucoaac._mo Ecocma acoEuowc» xuvcogu=< covuco>goacu o>vupcam1- mammImHmmflumm .mmm La> mo mapo> acmcomsou «cocuoop o_'cm>=a co pavuom paau.>.uc_ 1:02 pau'vom poavv>vuc~ ,szu «on 1c0m_u Poogum aco.uo3_o>m o>,u.moa co—uspom mucwcoaeou pan_u=—gg 1 Am agony co_uap=nog cause» no meovuo=~u>u van movau.uu< u «pack 64 singlets concerning students' evaluations of juvenile delinquents and; school teachers, respectively. For the components which consisted of more than one item, component scores were computed for each respondent by averaging the response scores on the items which defined the component. These item markers which de- fined each component were underlined in Table 2. 3. Field Experience Scale (FEX). The 11 items on this attitude measure of the VFQ (Part C) were rationally devised precisely for utiliza- tion in this investigation. For obvious reasons, this measure was only administered to former project participants. The items on this scale were designed to reflect these students' evaluations of their field ex- perience in the Adolescent Diversion Project at Michigan State University. Such aspects of this experiential course as its relevance to career goals, its impact on their personal growth and knowledge of delinquency, and the extent to which this experience confirmed or disconfirmed students' interest in a human service career were all measured. In addition, sat- isfaction with the field experience was embedded within two items of this scale. As was mentioned previously, this attitude scale was directly con- trastedivith the PAC scale (Part A) in order to assess the relative evalua- tions of project participants on these two scales. In short, an attempt was made to determine the relative merits of traditional classroom teach- ing methods versus the more innovative techniques of experiential learn- ing through field experience. An analysis of the reliability of this FEX scale revealed a high degree of internal consistency (11 items, a = .81). In addition, all of the items reasonably reflected the general meaning of the scale, as evi- denced by the range of item—total correlations in Table 3 (.34-.62). don-I “"OLOmNOWm-DwN-J 65 Table 3 Attitudes Towards Field Experience (Part C) Internal Consistency Analysis Variable Relevant to Career Goals Helpful in Getting a Job Helped Self-Understanding Enhanced Self-Esteem My Work was Successful Re: Youth Would Take Course Again Confirmed Interest in Human Service Career Improved Understanding of Juvenile Delinquency Improved Understanding of Adolescents Would Recommend Course Disconfirmed Interest in Human Service Career Alpha = .81 Corrected Item-Total Correlation .53 .41 .34 .50 .45 .57 .62 .40 .43 .48 .46 CHAPTER III RESULTS The results of this experimental investigation will be presented in four major sections and will be organized according to the outline of the research issues which were posed earlier (see p. 31). First, the analyses of the employment and career data will be presented. Within this section, an analysis of the extent to which the field experience played a role in human service career choice clarification will be detailed. The second major section of the results was devoted to an analysis of the impact of program participation on the present attitudes of the nonprofessionals. This section,therefore,included the results concerning program impact on the attitudes of former volunteers toward themselves, juvenile delinquents, and the various social systems which were relevant to this study. In addition, the effects of program involvement on self-reported knowledge acquisition relative to the discipline of juvenile delinquency will be presented. Finally, the analysis of former students' present treatment philosophies or delinquency orientation will be described. Third, the analysis of the relative merits of the students' field experiences vis-a-vis the remainder of their undergraduate coursework will be presented. The last major section of the results will describe the relationship between target youth outcome (success/failure) and all of the career related data and attitude variables just mentioned. The analysis of the employment data utilized both x2 and one-way univariate analyses of variance whereas the attitudinal impact of program 66 67 involvement was assessed through the use of the one-way univariate analy- sis of variance technique. Throughout the presentation of the results, attention was paid to the differential impact of the various training, intervention, and supervision strategies on the variables noted above. Therefore, several Scheffé planned comparisons1 were performed on the data from each analysis of variance. Unless noted otherwise, all of the Scheffé analyses which are presented were significant at the .05 level. With regards to the utility of the field experience as an educational alternative to traditional academic coursework, several dependent t-tests were performed on the corresponding items of the Past Academic Experiences (PAC) scale 60d the FIEId Experience (FEX) scale. These analyses were preceded and guided by a correlational analysis of the relationships among all of the items on these scales.in general, as well as a more specific analysis of the degree of association between the corresponding items of these two scales. Correlational analyses were also utilized to detail the relation- ship between youth outcome data and all of the nonprofessional outcome variables presented above. At this point, it is important to issue a caveat in the interpreta- tion of these results. Research on the long term impact of participating in a nonprofessional program has never been done before. As a result, a very large number of variables and their inter-relationships were examined. The analyses, reflecting this inclusive strategy, have examined a variety of effects and relationships among variables. Thus, the exploratory nature of this research cannot be overemphasized. Caution should there- fore be exercised when considering any single significant finding. In 1The formula which was used for this analysis was taken from Keppel (p. 353). It is the formula used for post-hoc analysis of one factor design experiments with unequal sample sizes. 68 order to alleviate this problem, the convergence of various significant results will be noted when appropriate. Also, the following presentation of results will include important trends in the data as well as signifi- cant findings,with this distinction noted. It is hoped that this strategy will provide a more comprehensive and ultimately clearer picture of the true nature of this data. The Effectiveness of Randomization: Control Subgroup Equivalence Before proceeding to the bulk of the results, the effectiveness of the randomization should be considered. It was noted earlier that the use of two control groups was considered essential in order to maximize the generality of the present results. It was also explained that the ideal situation, however, would be the discovery of equivalence between these two groups to simplify the interpretation of findings. Several com- parative analyses on a variety of variables were performed to assess the degree to which these two control groups were equivalent. Analyses of 15 demographic variables, 18 job related variables for each job held, plus 10 variables related to future career plans, schooling and community volun- teering activities revealed no significant differences between these two groups. Moreover, the two control groups differed on only one of the 27 attitude variables for which control subjects provided data. This dif- ference was not greater than that expected by chance so it was concluded that these two control subgroups were equivalent. In addition, previous research on these subjects in the Adolescent Diversion Project revealed no significant differences between experimental and control groups of nonprofessionals on a variety of variables collected prior to program participation. These results provided supporting evi- dence of the true experimental nature of the present investigation. For 69 these reasons the data of the two control subgroups were aggregated to form one control group, hereafter referred to simply as Controls (n = 95). Career Outcome Data The basic question to be answered in this investigation centered around the impact of participation in a nonprofessional human service program on the actual career choices of former participants. Central to this concern is the degree to which program participation not only con- firms participants' interest in a human service career but also-~and this is a more substantive outcome--actually leads to employment in the human service arena. Prior to the description of these results, a general em- ployment profile of the experimental and control groups will be presented. General Profile As indicated previously, 193 of the present research subjects had graduated or left school. Of these, 113 were experimentals and 80 were controls. Of this total number, 184 or 95% had been employed at one time or another since leaving Michigan State University. Further, 165 of the respondents or 86% of those that were no longer enrolled in college were presently employed. On these two variables experimentals and controls did not differ by more than three or four percentage points. Controls were just as likely as experimentals to have found at least one job or to be presently employed. Given these employment statistics, many of the analyses had different sample sizes depending on the intent of the analysis. For example, the analysis of present job data operated on a sample size of 165 whereas the analysis of Percentage of Time that experimental students spent in human service employment was limited to the 113 program partici- pants who had graduated or left school. Understanding these nuances in sample size will be critical to an understanding of the tabular presenta- tions of results. 70 To continue, approximately 44% of the 165 respondents who were pre- sently employed were working in business or government related jobs, 45% were in human service jobs; and 11.5% were police officers of some sort at present. Of the 184 research participants who have been employed since graduation, 54% have been in human service at one time or another. Again, no condition differences were noted either among experimental conditions or between the experimental and control groups on any of these job type variables, however, some meaningful trends for the latter comparison will be given shortly. With this profile in mind let us now move to the more specific analyses of career outcome data. Employment Data: Human Service vs. Other Careers The results which will be presented in this particular section are concerned with the assessment of the extent to which the respondents were or were not employed in the human service sector either presently (n = 165) or at any time since graduation (n = 193). Analyses based on these two sets of data were examined in the form of 2 x 2 chi-square contingency tables comparing experimentals to controls on the two dependent variables mentioned above. Some interesting trends emerged from these analyses which are presented in Tables 4 and 5, respectively. First, Table 4 pre- sents the number of people in each condition who were presently employed in human service compared to those who were not. Although this comparison did not achieve significance, a meaningful trend was evident which sug- gested that program participants were somewhat more likely than control subjects to be presently employed in human service. Whereas only 36% of the control respondents were presently employed in human service fields, over 50% of the experimental groups were so employed. The second chi-square analysis shown in Table 5 compared the number of nonprofessionals who have been employed in human service jobs at ggy Experimental (n = 99) Control (n = 66) 71 Table 4 Present Employment In Not In Human Service Human Service 50 49 99 24 42 66 74 91 165 x2 - 3.37 df - l 72 timg_since graduation to those who have never been employed in the human service area. A meaningful but nonsignificant trend favoring the experi- mental group is again indicated. Nearly 60% of the experimentals have been involved in human service occupations at some time since graduation while only 47% of the control group have done any work in human service positions. The trends that emerged from theseanalyses were fairly clear and straightforward. Although both groups are represented in human ser- vice fields by their members, the experimentals or former human service nonprofessionals have a higher probability of actually working in human service professions when this variable is viewed dichotomously (i.e. yes or no) both for present employment and when all employment since gradua- tion was considered. Percentage of time spent in human service. Another and possibly more meaningful method of examining these career variables with respect to the human service professions is to view employment as a continuous rather than dichotomous variable. An investigation of the amount of time spent in human service careers fulfills this proposition nicely. Percentage of time since graduation that was spent in the provision of human service was analyzed using a two condition (experimental vs. control) one-way univariate analysis of variance. In addition, this analysis was performed on these data with the amount of time since graduation controlled for time spent in further educational pursuits. Thus, time spent in graduate or profes- sional schooling was subtracted from the total time out of college to yield a variable called total time eligible for employment, which was than used as the denominator in the percentage-of-time-spent-in-human-service ratio. Table 6 depicts the group means and the summary of the analysis of variance of percentage of time spent in human service for the experimental and control groups. Both the time-controlled and time-uncontrolled analyses 73 Table 5 Employment in Human Service Ever In Never In Human Service Human Service Experimental (n = 113) 66 47 113 Control (n = 80) 38 42 80 104 89 193 x2 = 2.24 df = l 74 are presented here. In both presentations a significant main effect for condition is indicated. The more conservative, time-controlled analysis revealed that former program participants spent significantly more time in human service employment than those who did not participate in the pro- ject as nonprofessional service providers. Indeed, the experimental group spent 50% more time in human service jobs than their control counterparts (see Table 6). A more specific analysis of variance among the six experimental con- ditions (excluding controls) manifested no significant differences among these groups on the amount of time members from each experimental group spent in human service. Table 7 reports the group means on this variable and summarizes the analysis of variance for these comparisons. Although the group differences were nonsignificant, some interesting trends were again noted. Both the Relationship and Family conditions tended to spend longer periods of time in human service careers while the other groups spent less than 50% of their time in human service jobs. Again, it should be noted that the degree of within-group variation precluded the achieve- ment of significance in this analysis. Program participation and the confirmation of human service career interests. Convergent results similar to those just presented were obtained among the experimental groups when consideration was given the extent to which program participants felt that the field experience had confirmed their interests in a human service career. This data was also analyzed with a six condition univariate analysis of variance. Table 8 presents the group means and the analysis of variance of the degree to which the experimental group felt that their involvement in the nonprofessional program confirmed their interests in a human service career. Although no significant group differences were evident from this analysis, the 75 Table 6 Percentage of Time Spent in Human Service (Controlled for Time in School) , , Group Condition Means Experimental 46% (n = ll3) Control 3l% (n = 80) Analysis of Variance Source Qf_ §§_ M§_ f_ Prob. g: Condition 1 1.02 1.02 5.55 .02 .02 Subjects 191 35.24 .18 Total l92 36.26 (Uncontrolled for Time in School) G Condition Mgggg Experimental 40% (n = ll3) Control 25% (n = 80) Analysis of Variance .5222: 2f. :5. Mi 5. P322; 23 Condition 1 1.10 1.10 7.40 .007 .03 Subjects 19l 28.33 .l5 Total 192 29.42 76 Table 7 Percentage of Time Experimental Groups Spent in Human Service (Uncontrolled for Time in School) Group Condition Means Action 33% (n = 50) Relationship 56% (n = l0) Large 38% (n = l3) Small 4l% (n = 13) Family 55% (n = l9) Court 32% (n=8) Analysis of Variance Source .Qf 55. IMS .5 Prob. 9: Condition 5 .95 .19 l.ll .36 .01 Subjects l07 l8.27 .17 Total ll2 l9.22 77 Table 8 Confirmation of Human Service Career Interests And Field Experience Group Condition Means Action 3.82 (n = 57) Relationship 4.56 (n = 11) Large 4.08 (n = 13) Small 3.46 (n = 13) Family 4.l4 (n = 2l) Court 4.50 (n = 10) Analysis of Variance . Source Qf_ §§_ HS _[ Prob. 23 Condition 5 11.77 2.35 1.6 -15 ~02 Subjects 119 176.19 1.48 Total l24 l87.96 78 main effect for condition approaches significance. Once again, the Relationship and Family conditions reported with stronger agreement than did the Action, Large and Small groups, that the field experience had indeed confirmed their interest in a human service career. (See the next section for an explanation of the precise meaning and derivation of the content of the dependent variables). In addition, the Court group members joined the Relationship and Family conditions in bringing about this trend. What is interesting in these two results is the conformity of group order across these two analyses (see Table 7 and Table 8). In the two analyses, the Relationship and Family conditions evidenced a higher percentage of time spent in human service as well as stronger agreement than the other experimental conditions that the field experience had con- firmed their interest in a human service career. The only major deviation from these combined findings.was indicated by the Court group which re- ported the second highest degree of career interest confirmation as a result of program participation but actually spent less time in human ser- vice employment than any of the other groups. These findings, therefore, generally exhibit an empirical convergence. Specifically, it appeared that the higher percentage of time which the Relationship and Family con- ditions spent in human service jobs may be a function of the field exper- ience. This convergence and the deviations therefrom will be discussed at length in the next chapter. Some caution is warranted, however, given that these results did not fully achieve significance. Moreover, it is not known whether more suitable sample sizes for the Relationship, Court, Large and Small groups would augment or deteriorate these trends. Explanation of dependent variables. It seems crucial at this point to more systematically explain the meaning of the dependent variables (i.e. group means) which were utilized in Table 8 and which will be 79 utilized in Tables 9 through 24. Precisely, these group means represent the group averages on the various Likert-scale items which had the follow- ing item response scales: l=strongly disagree; 2=slightly disagree; 3=neutral; 4=slightly agree; 5=strongly agree. Thus, a group average of 4.00 on any dependent variable shows that,on the average,respondents in this particular condition slightly agreed with the item or items which were used to construct this dependent variable. Where it is not clear which items comprised a certain dependent variable, delineations of the dependent measure's content and the methods by which it was constructed will be provided. In general, when more then one item was used to com- prise the dependent variable, the summed average of the item response scores were utilized to construct the group mean for that condition. Future Career Plans The next three sections of this chapter will be devoted to a presen— tation of additional career-related data, the analyses of which yielded neither significant findings nor any clear trends. Specifically, there were no differences between experimentals and controls or among the individ- ual experimental conditions on variables such as future career plans, amount of subsequent schooling, and number of community volunteering activities in which they engaged since graduation. For these reasons, the reporting of these results will be confined to the text and no tabular presentations will be provided. Future career plans were examined utilizing the same categorization procedures which were used in the chi-square analysis of present employ- ment (see Table 4). Specifically, this variable was coded as either "in human service" or "not in human service." The analyses indicated that 57% of the total sample expressed a desire to either become, or remain employed in human service positions. Sixty percent of the experimentals 80 expressed this desire for their future while 54% of the controls reported that they had plans to be employed in human service at some time in the future. As mentioned, no significant differences among or between con- ditions were observed on this variable. In addition, for those that wished to be employed in human service in the future, there were no dif— ferences between or among groups on the type of target groups with whom respondents wanted to work, nor were any differences observed among condi- tions on the type of human service field in which these same subjects wished to be employed. Controls were just as likely to have a career planned in mental health as were experimentals, for example. Similarly, 60 to 100% of the subjects in each condition who expressed interest in a human service career for the future wished to work directly with their respective target population rather than in an administrative capacity. Post College Schooling This variable was also examined dichotomously using chi-square analy- sis. In brief, experimentals were compared to controls on whether or not they attended school after leaving or graduating from MSU either for an additional bachelor‘s degree in another field or for a graduate degree. 0f the ll3 experimental students and the 80 controls who had graduated or left college, approximately 45% of both groups attended school at some time since departing from MSU. Hence, both groups were just as likely to attempt to further their education in pursuit of another degree. No dif- ferences on this dichotomous were observed when the experimental groups alone were compared to each other. Volunteering Activities Again utilizing a dichotomous outcome (i.e. yes or no), experimentals were compared to controls in a chi—square analysis on the variable, volunteering activities subsequent to graduation. No differences were 8l obtained between these two groups. Control subjects were just as likely as experimentals to perform some type of volunteer work in their respec- tive communities. In fact, 40% of the control subjects who were no longer in college volunteered in some capacity while 36% of the experimental group who had graduated or left school were involved in community volun- teering activities. Summary of Career Outcome Data A brief summary of each of the main portions of the results will be provided in order to consolidate and integrate the many analyses and find- ings which were reported. Taking eligibility into account, it was found that former program participants spent a significantly greater proportion of their time in human service employment when compared to nonparticipating controls. In sum, they spent approximately 50% more time than controls in human service jobs. These results were augmented by the meaningful but nonsignificant trends which Suggested that experimental subjects were some- what more likely to be presently employed in human service. Moreover, they demonstrated a greater probability of being employed in human service when any and all jobs since graduation were considered. A word of caution is warranted with respect to these last two findings since they were only nonsignificant trends. Among experimental conditions alone, a trend indicated that the field experience had confirmed an interest in a human service career more strongly for the Family, Relationship, and Court group than for the Action, Large, and Small conditions. With one exception (i.e. the Court), these results dovetailed neatly with the interesting but nonsignificant trend which sug- gested that the Relationship and Family group spent a higher percentage of their time in human service professions than did the Action, Large, Small and Court Groups. However, there were no differences among groups on their intentions to pursue a future career in human service. 82 Attitude Outcome Data This section of the results will present and describe in detail, the findings concerned with the long term impact of the field experience on the attitudes of the former nonprofessional participants. As such, an effort was made to determine the impact of past academic coursework, in general, as well as that of the field experience on respondents' attitudes toward themeselves, their careers, delinquent youth,and various social systems with which delinquents often come in contact. In addition, the relative impact of these two areas on subjects' self-reported knowledge acquisition in the field of juvenile delinquency will be examined and re- ported. The final subsection of this portion of the results will center on the analyses of students' philos0phies of what is appropriate treatment for delinquents. All of these attitude results were obtained through the performance of several univariate analyses of variance on a variety of single items from one of the three attitude sections of the VFQ, or where appropriate, on averaged linear combinations of items. Obviously, the analyses of attitudes relative to the field experience (i.e. the FEX Scale: Part C of the VFQ, Appendix C) were performed only on the experimental conditions since these questions did not apply to the controls. As the tables of results are presented, this control group exclusion will become self— evident. Rather than present the analyses of each of the three attitude sections of the VFQ separately, the format which will be used for present- ing these particular outcomes will be organized according to the rational content of the analyzed items and will conform closely to the presentation of the research questions. It was felt that this format of presentation would be more useful for the logical integration of findings across both 83 the various scales and components within scales. As before, only signifi— cant findings and meaningful trends will be presented in tabular fashion. Clarification of the tables will be enhanced considerably by referencing item content given in Tables l, 2, and 3 since these items were used as the dependent measures in the presentation which follows. Personal Benefits Derived from the Field Experience In order to assess the extent to which the helper therapy principle (Riessman, l966) was operative on a long term basis, several analyses were performed on the relevant items of the PAC scale and the FEX scale. Spe- cifically, the degree to which all of the respondents felt that their undergraduate coursework, in general, resulted in self-improvement or enhanced self-esteem was analyzed in two ways. First, a two-condition univariate analysis of variance was executed comparing all experimentals to the control group. Second, a six condition analysis of variance was accomplished in order to examine differences among the individual experi- mental conditions on this variable. Neither of these analyses achieved significance. In other words, there were no differences between any of the seven groups on the degree to which they felt that they had derived significant personal benefits from their past academic experiences in general. Examination of the grand mean for all conditions revealed that all of the conditions, on the average, slightly agreed that their under— graduate coursework resulted in enhanced self-esteem or self-understanding (Y’= 4.05). The next step in this analysis entailed a test of the impact of the specific field experience in the Adolescent Diversion Project on students' feelings of self-worth. Again, a six condition univariate analysis of variance was conducted for the individual experimental conditions on this personal benefits variable which was calculated from the averaged item 84 response scores of the two pertinent items from the FEX scale. Table 9 summarizes the analysis of variance and presents the group means for this dependent measure. A strong main effect for condition was observed. Planned Scheffe comparisons indicated that the Action and Family conditions derived significantly greater (p < .01) personal benefits (i.e. enhanced self-esteem and self-understanding) than all of the other experimental groups. In short, it appeared that the extent to which the helper therapy principle was operative in the long run, varied greatly among experimental conditions depending on the type of training, supervision, and interven- tion strategy which was utilized with each group. Attitudes Toward Target Populations The single item component from the Target Population attitude measure, which was labeled Positive Evaluations of Juvenile Delinquents (see Table 2, p. 63L,was analyzed using a seven condition analysis of variance with con- trols included. Once again, a significant main effect showing condition differences was obtained (see Table l0). Precisely, the Action and Family groups were significantly more positive in their evaluations of delinquent youths than both of the L0 Intensity conditions, Large and Small. Again, these planned comparisons were significant at the .Ol level. Parenthetically, it was interesting to note that the Control group also evidenced more positive evaluations of juvenile delinquents than both of the L0 Intensity groups. Conclusions based on this trend must be tempered given the nonsignificance of this post hoc comparison. Additional analyses of variance were conducted for the two components, Authority and School Teachers Effective. These factors, derived from the Target Population attitude measure, were used to-examine the formertvolun- teers' present attitudes towards social systems as well as towards people who are usually identified with those systems. Specifically, 85 Table 9 Helper Therapy Principle: Personal Benefits Derived From Field Experience Group Condition Means Action 4.47 (n = 57) Relationship 3.64 (n = ll) Large 3.85 (n = l3) Small 4.00 (n = 13) Family 4.33 (n = 2l) Court 3.50 (n = 10) Analysis of Variance Source Q: §§_ {MS §_ Prob. g3 Condition 5 15.15 3.03 4.77 .001 .12 Subjects ll9 75.6l .64 Tota1 124 90.76 86 Table 10 Attitudes Toward Target Population (Part 8) Positive Evaluation of Juvenile Delinquents Group Condition Means Action 4.00 (n = 57) Relationship 3.82 (n = ll) Large 3.3l (n = 13) Small 3.l5 (n = l3) Family 4.05 (n = 2l) Court 3.80 (n.= 10) Control 3.88 (n = 95) Analysis of Variance Source Of. §§_ M§_ f_ Prob. ‘93 Condition 6 12.37 2.06 2.259 .039 .03 Subjects 2l3 l94.38 .9l Total 219 206.75 87 the Authority factor,which was comprised of evaluations of the effective- ness of the juvenile justice system and parents in handling delinquents, was analyzed using a seven condition univariate analysis of variance, as was the School Teachers Effective component. Results for both of these analyses indicated neither significant group differences nor any clear trends favoring any of the conditions. In an absolute sense, however, it was clear that all of the groups felt some- what negatively about the effectiveness of the Authority systems in their ability to handle delinquents (7': l.82). With regards to the effective- ness of school teachers, most respondents were fairly neutral or slightly negative in their evaluations (Y = 2.79) but, again, there were no trends indicating that one group was more negative than the other. Furthermore, there were no differences between experimentals as a unit and controls on either of these two variables. Knowledge of Delinquengy Within the PAC scale and FEX scale, respondents were asked to respec- tively assess the degree to which their undergraduate coursework, in total, and the field experience improved their knowledge of delinquency and under- standing of adolescents. As with the other attitude measures, a one-way univariate analysis of variance was utilized to assess group differences on knowledge and understanding. Given the convergence of results that were obtained from separate analyses of the impact of undergraduate course- work on self-reported gains in knowledge of delinquency and understanding of adolescents, the analysis was performed on the summed averages of these two variables of the PAC scale. The results of this analysis, which are reported in Table ll,also conformed with the individual analyses of both items in terms of the overall group differences and with respect to the direction and magnitude of the group means. In addition, these two items 88 Table 11 Undergraduate Coursework And Knowledge of Delinquency . . Group 290913190 Means Experimentals 4.32 (n = 125) Controls 3.66 (n = 95) Analysis of Variance Source Of §§_ ‘MS 5_ Prob. 23 Condition 1 23.20 23.20 24.56 <.0005 .10 Subjects 218 205.93 .94 Total 219 229.13 89 were highly correlated (r = +.62); therefore, these items were combined for this particular analysis to form the single dependent variable: know- ledge of delinquency. The findings which are recorded in Table ll demonstrated large and significant differences between experimentals and controls. Succinctly, experimental program participants felt much more strongly than control subjects that their undergraduate coursework, in general, had improved their knowledge of delinquency. With respect to the differential impact of undergraduate coursework among the specific experimental groups on the outcome of improved know- ledge of delinquency, analyses again revealed significant group differences. In particular, Table l2 presents the group means and the numerical ab— stract of the analysis of variance for knowledge of delinquency as a func- tion of undergraduate coursework. According to the Scheffé analysis, the Action and Family group scored significantly higher than the Relationship and Court groups. Although the items on the FEX scale which were concerned with know- ledge of delinquency and understanding adolescents were also highly corre- lated (r =-t6l) these items were analyzed separately since Scheffe analyses of these two items individually produced somewhat divergent results. Table l3 summarizes the analysis of variance for knowledge of delinquency as a function of involvement in the field experience. A significant main effect for condition was observed. Individual group comparisons indicated that the Action, Family and Court conditions agreed more strongly than the Relation- ship, Large and Small groups that the field experience improved their know- lege of delinquency. Table l4 illustrates the analysis of variance and the group means for understanding adolescents as a result of participation in the field 90 Table l2 Undergraduate Coursework and Knowledge of Delinquency Group Condition Means Action 4.53 (n = 57) Relationship 4.00 (n = ll) Large 4.l5 (n = l3) Small 4.23 (n = 13) Family 4.43 (n = 2l) Court 3.65 (n = 10) Analysis of Variance Source Df_ §§_ M§_ f_ Prob. ‘gi Condition 5 8.75 l.75 2.50 .03 .06 Subjects 119 83.38 .70 Total 124 92.12 91 Table13 Field Experience And Knowledge of Delinquency Group Condition. Means Action 4.6l (n = 57) Relationship 4.00 (n = ll) Large 4.00 (n = 13) Small 4.00 (n = l3) Family 4.62 (n = 2l) Court 4.72 (n = l0) Analysis of Variance Source Dj_ §§_ M§_ f_ Prob. Condition 5 lO.24 2.05 3.l02 .Ol Subjects ll9 78.56 .66 Total l24 88.80 8 b.) 92 Table 14 Field Experience and Understanding Adolescents Group Condition_ Means Action 4.54 (n = 57) Relationship 4.27 (n = 11) Large 4.l5 (n = l3) Small 4.08 (n = 13) Family 4.46 (n = 21) Court 4.70 (n.= l0) Analysis of Variance Source Df_ §§_ MS, f_ Prob. of Condition 5 5.38 1.08 2.70 .025 .06 Subjects ll9 47.70 .40 ‘Total 124 53.09 93 experience. Once again, a significant condition effect was discovered. Unlike the previous Scheffé analysis, the Relationship group merged with the Action, Family,and Court condition to provide this combined group with significantly higher group means than the L0 Intensity, Large and Small groups on this variable. Delinquency Orientation This next, and last portion of the attitude section of the results will speak to the long-term impact of participation in the nonprofessional field experience on participants' orientations to four typologies of treatment for delinquents (cf. Schur, l973). Specifically, these analyses, all of which were seven condition univariate analyses of variance, explored the differences among conditions on their endorsement of punitive orienta- tions, individual treatment for delinquents, social reform, and non- interventionist or diversion philosophies. As is noted with the utiliza- tion of seven conditions in these analyses, controls were included to pro- vide true experimental findings with regards to these scales. Again, reference to Table 2 (p. 63) will be helpful in denoting the precise content of the variables which comprised each of these four components. Individual punitive. This analysis was designed to assess the degree to which respondents endorsed punitive treatment for delinquents. Table l5 reports the group means and the summary of the analysis of variance for the Individual Punitive component of the Target Population attitude measure. A significant condition effect was noted. The post hoc analysis of group differences strongly suggested (p < .Ol) that the Action and Control groups were much less punitive than the Small and Court groups. The Relationship, Large and Family conditions fell in between these two sets of conditions on this variable and were not different than either. 94 Table 15 Attitudes Toward Target Population (Part B) Delinquency Orientation: Individual Punitive Group Condition Means Action 2.75 (n = 57) Relationship 3.05 (n = 11) Large 3.12 (n = 13) Small 3.81 (n = 13) Family 3.19 (n = 21) Court 3.65 (n = 10) Control 2.97 (n = 95) Analysis of Variance Source Df_ 55 MS_ f_ Prob. ‘93 Condition 6 16.98 2.83 2.677 .016 .04 Subjects 213 225.08 1.06 Total 219 242.06 94 Table 15 Attitudes Toward Target Population (Part B) Delinquency Orientation: Individual Punitive Group Condition Means Action 2.75 (n = 57) Relationship 3.05 (n = 11) Large 3.12 (n = 13) Small 3.81 (n = 13) Family 3.19 (n = 21) Court 3.65 (n = 10) Control 2.97 (n = 95) Analysis of Variance Source Of_ §§_ M§_ F_ Prob. ‘93 Condition 6 16.98 2.83 2.677 .016 .04 Subjects 213 225.08 1.06 Total 219 242.06 95 Radical non-intervention. The analysis of this component from the Target Population attitude measure appraised students' endorsement of non- interventionist treatment for delinquents. In short, respondents who scored high on this measure agreed that delinquents would be better off if they were diverted out of the juvenile justice system and away from official agencies entirely. Table 16 presents the group means and the analysis of variance summary for the Radical Non-Intervention component. Again, a condition effect was noted which was highly significant and fairly strong. The planned compar- ison indicated that the Action condition exhibited significantly more agreement that agencies should not intervene in the lives of delinquent youth than the Relationship and Court groups. Careful scrutiny of the group means suggested that the Action group was the only condition whose mean tended towards agreement whereas all of the other group means sug— gested that these conditions tended to disagree with this diversion phil- osophy. And yet, significant findings were maintained when Action and Controls were compared to the Relationship and Court groups. Individual treatment. The two items which comprised this component were designed to evaluate students' attitudes toward aui individual treat- ment orientation with respect to delinquency interventions. Respondents who strongly agreed with these items sanctioned the use of individual therapy and counseling techniques to treat youthful offenders. Table 17 summarizes the analysis of variance and presents the group means for the Individual Treatment component of the Target Population attitude measure of the VFQ. As before, a significant effect for condition was obtained. According to the Scheffé analysis, the Court and Family conditions were significantly more likely than the Large and Action conditions to endorse the use of individual therapy as an intervention for delinquents. Note, 96 Table 16 Attitudes Toward Target Population (Part B) Delinquency Orientation: Radical Non-Intervention Group Condition Means Action 3.20 (n = 57) Relationship 2.00 (n = 11) Large 2.15 (n = 13) Small 2.58 (n = 13) Family 2.57 (n = 21) Court 2.05 (n = 10) Control 2.61 (n = 95) Analysis of Variance Source Of §§_ MS .[ Prob. 93 Condition 6 28.49 4.75 4.828 <0.0005 .09 Subjects 213 209.45 .98 Total 219 237.94 Attitudes Toward Target Population (Part B) Delinquency Orientation: Individual Treatment Source 2: Condition 6 Subjects 213 Total 219 97 Table 17 Group Condition Means Action 3.86 (n = 57) Relationship 4.18 (n = 11) Large 3.62 (n = 13) Small 3.92 (n = 13) Family 4.48 (n = 21) Court 4.25 (n =10) Control 4.18 (n = 95) Analysis of Variance 55 mg F 10.52 1.75 2.812 132.84 .62 143.36 2 w .10 98 however, that all of the groups tended towards agreement with the use of individual treatment or counseling methods in working with delinquents. Social reform. The analysis of this attitudinal factor was an attempt to differentiate among the various conditions as to whether they felt that dysfunctional social systems, as opposed to individual youths, should be the proper focus of change. Table 18 depicts the analysis of variance summary table and provides the group means for each condition. A minimally significant condition effect was observed in this analysis which suggested that the Action, Family and Control conditions scored significantly higher on this component than the Large group. The Scheffé analysis confirmed this suggested result. Summary of the Attitude Data Some very clear findings, which were rationally consistent across the dependent measures, emerged from the attitude outcome analyses. Specific- ally, it was observed that the Action and Family groupsexhibited the most positive attitudes towards themselves and delinquents as a result of their experience in the Adolescent Diversion Project while the Court group reported the least favorable attitudes concerning the personal benefits which they derived as a function of the field experience. Further, the two Lo Intensity groups manifested the most unfavorable attitudes towards target youth. While program participants,in generaL felt that they had gained sig- nificantly more knowledge from their undergraduate coursework about the field of delinquency than had nonparticipating controls, it was more interesting to note the differences among experimental groups on this know- ledge acquisition variable. In particular, the Action and Family groups again reported more positive gains in knowledge of delinquency both from their general past academic experience as well as from the field experience. 99 Table 18 Attitudes Toward Target Population (Part B) Delinquency Orientation: Social Reform Group Condition Means Action 3.75 (n = 57) Relationship 3.14 (n = 11) Large 2.96 (n = 13) Small 3.23 (n = 13) Family 3.50 (n = 21) Court 3.25 (n.= 10) Control 3.56 (n = 95) Analysis of Variance Source Of §§_ MS F Prob. 93 Condition 6 10.76 1.79 2.131 .051 .03 Subjects 213 179.20 .84 Total 219 189.96 100 The Court condition displayed an interesting fluctuation of their per- ceptions regarding their acquisition of knowledge in the area of juvenile delinquency. Whereas they scored the highest of all the groups on the extent to which they felt that the field experience had improved their knowledge of delinquency, they gave the least favorable evaluation of the impact of their undergraduate coursework on knowledge acquisition. Finally, all of the high intensity training, supervision and intervention conditions (Action, Relationship, Family and Court) reported greater understanding of adolescents as an outgrowth of the field experience than both of the L0 Intensity groups. No differences were found among any of the groups, controls included, on their attitudes towards parents, school teachers, or the juvenile justice system. It was noteworthy, though, that all of the groups gave less than positive evaluations of these concepts. The results of the four delinquency orientation analyses, although more complex, provided evidence of consistency across measures. For example, the Action condition, which felt more positively about delinquents, was also less punitive towards this target population. Consistent with this finding, the Action group espoused nonintervention as a treatment philosophy while the Court group was more likely to be punitive and inter- ventionist if! their orientation. Similarly, the L0 Intensity, Small condition, which had given negative evaluations of delinquents, was the most punitive of all the groups in their delinquency orientation. Al- though all the groups tended to espouse individual treatment approaches as a mode of intervention with youthful offenders, the L0 Intensity and Action conditions were least likely to endorse this view while the Family and Court groups fell on the other end of this continuum. Significant differences were also observed between groups on the Social Reform variable 101 in that the Action and Family respondents encouraged societal change as an alternative to changing individual youths,while the Large group did not. The complexity of these results was made apparent in the trend for the Control group to combine with the Action condition in being less puni- tive, and more oriented towards social reform than the other experimental groups. The problematic nature of this finding as it relates to program planning will be discussed at length in the next chapter. In conclusion, a consistent trend was noted which suggested that the Court and Lo Intensity groups derived significantly fewer personal bene- fits from the field experience and were more punitive and interventionist as a result. As well, the L0 Intensity groups felt more negatively about delinquents. In juxtaposition to these views, the Action and Family group benefitted greatly from the field experience, felt more positively toward delinquents, and were less punitive and intervening in their approaches to the handling of delinquents. In sum, there appeared to be differential, long-term effects on the attitudes of former volunteers depending on the type of training, supervision, and intervention strategy to which they were exposed. The Imgact of Experiential Learning One of the main objectives of the present study was to assess the utility of the field experience as an educational device for undergraduate training. Field training and experiential learning,as an alternative to traditional classroom coursework,wasan inherent ramification of this assess- ment. This was accomplished in two ways. First, averaged sums of the course evaluation items of the FEX scale (see Variable #6 and #10, Table 3, p.65) were analyzed using a univariate analysis of variance. Second, each set of corresponding items from the PAC and FEX scales were submit- ted to a dependent t-test. As mentioned previously, these corresponding 102 items indirectly compared the relative worth and relevance of students' undergraduate coursework and their field experience. Further, students were asked to pinpoint the relative merits of each of these aspects of their academic careers with respect to the personal benefits and knowledge which they felt that they had gained from each separately. As an example, one of the items on the PAC scale read, "My undergraduate coursework enhanced my self—esteem." It's corresponding item on the FEX scale therefore read, "My experience in Psychology 370 (the course number of the field experience) enhanced my self-esteem." The dependent t-tests thus compared the group means for each of these items. No significant condition differences were observed in the analysis of course evaluations of the field experience; however, the results are presented in Table 19 because they were interesting in an absolute sense, as well as for the trends which were observed. A broad overview of the group means in Table 19 indicated that all of the conditions evaluated the field experience very positively. Specifically, all of the conditions concurred strongly that they would take the course again if they had the opportunity and would also highly recommend the field experience to a student now enrolled at MSU. In an absolute sense, it was concluded that former participants strongly agreed that the field-based course was a good academic experience. These results, in and of themselves, provided no basis for definitive conclusions regarding the superiority of the field experience vis-a—vis traditional academic coursework. Table 19 also indicated a slight but nonsignificant trend for the high intensity training conditions (i.e. Action, Relationship, Family and Court) to evaluate the field experience more positively than the L0 Intensity groups. 103 Table 19 General Evaluations of the Field Experience Group Condition Means Action 4.35 (n = 57) Relationship 4.45 (n = 11) Large 4.08 (n = 13) Small 4.08 (n = 13) Family 4.69 (n = 21) Court 4.70 (n = 10) Analysis of Variance Source .0: §§_ MS’ f_ Prob. 2: Condition 5 5.54 1.11 1.3 .269 .01 Subjects 119 101.39 .85 Total 124 106.93 104 The analysis of the paired comparisons (i e. dependent t—tests) of the corresponding items of the PAC and FEX scales were extremely problem- atic for several reasons. First, the items from both scales were highly correlated,suggesting that these scales may have been measuring similar dimensions. Second, the more specific intercorrelations of the corres- ponding items from each of these scales were, in general, significantly correlated. Table 20 presents the correlation matrix of Pearson product-moment coefficients for the items of these two scales. Particular attention was given to the intercorrelations of corresponding items. This analysis indicated a mild trend of association between the two scales. More impor- tantly, the correlations of four of the seven corresponding items achieved significance and one correlation was marginally significant. In addition, an examination of the individual group means for each of these items showed strong similarities within conditions between the corresponding items whichvere significantly correlated. Hence, it could be argued that the performance of dependent t-tests on the item averages of the corres- ponding items is not meaningful for the purposes of comparing the field experience to traditional coursework. For this reason, dependent t—tests were carried out only on the corresponding items whose correlations did not reach significance. Thus, paired t-tests were performed on the item means for all experimental groups on two sets of corresponding items (PAC 1, FEX 1 and PAC 9, FEX 9) from the PAC and FEX scales (see Table 20). The first dependent t-test analysis compared former participants' regular coursework to their field experience on the relevance of each to the volunteers' career goals. Table 21 depicts the corresponding item means of each scale as well as their standard deviations. As is noted, this comparison achieved significance. In short, program participants 105 Table 20 Intercorrelations of PAC Scale Items (Evaluations of Past Academic Experiences) and Corresponding Items of the FEX Scale (Evaluations of the Field Experience) (N = 125) FEX 1 FEX 2 FEX 3 FEX 4 FEX 7 FEX 8 FEX 9 PAC 1 .1gl .17 -.01 .06 .14 .11 .17 PAC 2 .10 .§33* .04 -.09 .13 ~.01 .13 PAC 3 .11 .05 .1g* .21* .18 .14 .23** PAC 6 .07 .05 .27** .§§§* .04 .10 .11 PAC 7 -.11 .04 .21* .09 -.oo .2§f* .09 PAC 8 .3o** .19* -.01 .09 .§g§* -.02 .06 PAC 9 -.O6 -.01 .10 .21* -.03 .21* .lg 1Underlined correlations represent correlations of corres~ ponding items. * p < .05. ** p < .01. CONTENT OF THE CORRESPONDING ITEMS OF THE PAC SCALE AND ITEMS FEX SCALE PAC 1 - FEX 1 Relevance to career goals PAC 2 - FEX 2 Getting a job PAC 3 - FEX 3 Better myself as a person PAC 6 - FEX 4 Enhanced self-esteem PAC 7 - FEX 8 Knowledge of juvenile delinquency PAC 8 - FEX 7 Confirmed interest in a human service career PAC 9 - FEX 9 Understanding adolescents with problems 106 Table 21 T-Test Comparison of Undergraduate Coursework to the Field Experience: Relevance to Career Goals (N = 125; Ss - all experimentals) Item Standard Variable Item Means Deviation Relevance of Undergraduate 3 73 1 1? Coursework to Career Goals (PAC 1) ‘ ° 9 Relevance of Field Experience L to Career Goals (FEX l) 1'06 1-25 t = -2.38 p < .005 107 felt that the field experience was significantly more relevant to their career goals than was their classroom coursework. The second analysis compared undergraduate coursework to the field experience on the extent to which each of these methods of learning improved experimental subjects' understanding of adolescents with prob— lems. Table 22 displays the item means and standard deviations for the appropriate corresponding items from each scale. As before, this paired comparison produced significant findings which favored the field experi- ence. Respondents who had worked with a youth in the Adolescent Diversion Project felt that the field experience was far superior to their under- graduate coursework in improving their understanding of adolescents with problems. Summary of Field Experience Data The results in this section have indicated that the experimental groups, as a unit, evaluated the field experience quite positively. A trend which did not achieve significance suggested that high intensity training conditions may be more positive than the L0 Intensity groups in their evaluations of the field experience. Other findings suggested that this particular field experience was superior to undergraduate classroom coursework in two areas: (1) relevance to career goals and (2) improved understanding of adolescents with problems. Conclusions based on these results should be qualified, however, with the reminder that many of the corresponding items of the two scales from which these analyses were derived were highly correlated, thereby weakening the meaning of these comparisons. Conversely, the results which were reported focused only on comparisons of corresponding items which were uncorrelated, thus strengthening the utility of the present findings.. In summary, evidence was provided which indicated that the field experience was at 108 Table 22 T-Test Comparison of Undergraduate Coursework to the Field Experience (N = 125; Ss - all experimentals) Item Standard Variable Item Means Deviation Undergraduate Coursework Improved Understanding of Adolescents With 4.19 .99 Problems (PAC 9) Field Experience Improved Under- standing of Adolescents With 4.46 .65 Problems (FEX 9) t = -2.74 p < .001 ON lO9 least a positive academic experience for those involved and was, at best, superior to traditional academic coursework in certain areas. Target Youth Outcome and Nonprofessional Follow-Up This final section of the results analyzed the relationship between the outcomes of target youth (success/failure) and all of the nonprofes- sional variables which have been examined in the previous sections of this chapter. Before proceeding to the results of this analysis, once again, a cautionary note is in order. It was mentioned previously that the exploratory nature of this research could not be overemphasized. This caveat is issued once more with regards to the interpretation of the results which are to follow. Target youth outcome was collected at three time periods. Over 40 variables from this follow-up study were selected as meaningful, and therefore utilized in this particular correla- tional analysis. Thus, the analysis of relationships among these data produced over 120 correlations. One would expect six of these correla- tions to be significant as a result of chance alone. To be brief but no less direct, it is advised that conclusions not be drawn from any single significant finding. Youth Outcome: Success/Failure In order to determine the relationship of nonprofessional measures to target outcome, it was necessary to establish success—failure categories for the youth. It was decided to define this dichotomous variable using archival data collected from the police and court. Cases were defined as failuresif the youth had a contact with the police or had a petition filed with the court. This variable was expanded to include archival data which was collected at three different points in time. Specifically, success/failure during (SFDUR) was calculated by using archival data which referred to youth contacts with police or the court that occurred only 110 during the intervention interval. Success/failure follow-up data was also collected for the year-long interval immediately following the interven- tion (SFlYR) and again for the annual period which began when SFlYR ended (SF2YR). As a result, one and two-year follow-up data were not available for Project Wave 7 youths. Wave 7 nonprofessionals were, therefore, excluded from all correlations involving the SFlYR and SF2YR variables. Furthermore, a conservative calculation of target youth outcome was utilized; if a youth had a contact during one of the first two intervals (i.e. SFDUR or SFlYR) then that case was considered a failure not only for that particular interval but for all subsequent intervals as well. Target Youth Outcome and Career Data The relationship between target youth outcome and nonprofessional outcome data were analyzed using correlational techniques. Over 60 corre- lations between success/failure and career related variables such as percentage of time Spent in human service, type of job, future schooling, future career plans, and job satisfaction were generated. From this analysis only three significant relationships were noted. The number of significant observations, therefore, did not exceed that which would be expected by chance. These relationships did not evidence any rational coherence when considered together, either. Moreover, no statistically meaningful trends were observed. Essentially, target youth outcome did not appear to be associated with career choices, future plans, or other career characteristics. Target Youth Outcome and Attitude Data Correlational analyses were also utilized to assess the degree of association between youth recidivism and the attitudes held by the program participants at follow-up. Table 23 presents the correlation matrix 111 describing these relationships and notes the significance of correlations where applicable. The lack of association between success/failure and the present attitudes of former volunteers was again observed,as only seven of 63, or one out of every nine, correlations reached the .05 level of significance. Overall, the analysis produced low correlations even when significance was achieved. For these reasons, and because of the caveat issued earlier, the following summary will detail only the relationshipsbetween recidivism and student variables that are not only significant but also consistent within student variables for the three archival data collection intervals. Close inspection of Table 23 revealed significant, consistent rela- tionships with success/failure for three of the student attitude measures. Specifically, an association with recidivism was observed for the Individual Punitive and Radical Nonintervention components of the Target Population attitude measure (Delinquency Orientation) and for one item of the FEX scale (i.e. FEX 5). Quite interestingly, this item from the field experi- ence attitude scale was concerned with the former volunteers' retrospec- tive evaluations of the success of his or her particular intervention. Since successes were coded as "l" and failures as ”2," the matrix shows that students whose youths had failed by the end of the one year post project interval felt that the work that they did with their youth was not successful. This relationship is even stronger when 2-year follow-up tar- get youth outcome data was considered. The relationships that were observed between the other two attitude variables were consistent not only within each variable but also converged rationally across the two variables. That is, respondents whose cases were considered successes at all three time periods tended to be less punitive and more likely to endorse nonintervention as a response to 112 Table 23 Relationship Between Target Youth Outcome And Nonprofessional Attitudes at Follow-up Radical Non- PAC 1a PAC 2 PAC 3 PAC 6 PAC 8 UGDELa Punitive Interventionb SFDUR -.l6** -.O7 -.10 -.02 -.O3 —.18** .25*** -.ll SFlYR .05 -.OO -.09 .01 -.O6 -.11 .13* - 19** SF2YR .02 .03 -.08 -.O4 -.O7 -.10 .18** -.l3* Positive School Evaluations Individual Social Teachers of b c Treatmentb Reformb Effectiveb Delinquents Authorityb FEX 1 FEX 2 SFDUR .13* -.08 -.03 .09 .O7 .03 -.05 SFlYR —.O6 -.O6 .01 .07 .1O .07 .10 SF2YR .05 .Ol .05 .13* .05 .07 .08 Personal Knowledge of FEX 5 FEX 6 FEX 10 Benefitsc Delinquencyc ConfirmC SFDUR - 14* .08 O8 -.O4 -.05 .06 SFlYR - 17** .09 O6 -.05 -.Ol .10 SF2YR - 21** .03 02 -.10 .02 .05 *p .10 **p .05 ***p .005 VARIABLE LEGEND SFDUR Success/failure data for the youth during the project. (n=ll4) SFlYR Success/failure data for the youth one year post. (n=99) SF2YR Success/failure data for the youth two year post. (n=99) a See TableZK) for item content of all PAC items (UGDEL refers to the average of PAC 7 and PAC 9). b These variables refer to the component scores that were derived from the principal components analysis (see Table 2 for component content). c See Table 20 for item content for all FEX items: - personal benefits = (FEX 3 + FEX 4)/2 - knowledge of delinquency = (FEX 8 + FEX 9)/2 - confirm = (FEX 7 + FEX ll)/2 (Confirmation of Career Interests) 113 delinquent behavior. Given that this data was confined to one tabular presentation, no summary of the relationship between youth recidivism and the attitudes of former nonprofessionals will be presented. The following chapter will attempt to integrate the findings pre- sented here, in a unified manner, with consideration given to previous research that has been documented in the nonprofessional literature. Ultimately, however, the discussion of the results will focus on provid- ing empirically based answers to the research questions that were posed at the conclusion of the first chapter. Where answers are not forthcoming, or where the evidence is inconclusive, these shortcomings will be noted. CHAPTER IV DISCUSSION The purpose of this scientific investigation was to experimentally assess the long-term impact of participation in a nonprofessional field experience on the former college students who served as the nonprofessional human service providers in a diversion program for delinquent youth. Re- lated to this general assessment were a number of very specific research questions concerning the long range effects of program participation on participants' chosen field of employment, their future career plans, and their attitudes in a variety of areas. A unifying thread that ran through all of these analyses was the determination of differential impact in these specific areas which resulted from the systematic variation of the training, supervision, and intervention (TSI) components of the nonprofes- sional program in question. Thus, questions of interest had a dual focus. For example, the matter of career choice clarification, as a function of participation in the pro- gram, was examined with the overall effects of program participation in mind, as well as with regards to the differential effects that partici- pation in a particular experimental condition may have had on this career outcome variable. The examination of program impact on attitudes and eval- uations of the field experience was also guided by this double-barrelled approach. Finally, a ggeneral correlational scheme was utilized in order to determine the relationships of youth outcome to all of the nonprofes- sional measures mentioned above. 114 115 Consequently, the discussion of results will attempt to present answers to the research questions posed earlier, as well as to derive conclusions regarding which specific program components are related to positive outcomes for the nonprofessional. The overall results of this study indicated only a slight programmatic effect on career choices in human service, but a strong impact on perseverance within that chosen career. In terms of attitudinal impact, this investigation manifested differential effects among the six experimental groups depending on the type and intensity of the 151 strategy to which former participants were exposed. Because of the integrative nature of this research, conclusions based on the present findings will be related in a systematic fashion to the previous research efforts that have been conducted in the Adolescent Diver— sion Project (Blakely, 1981; Davidson, et al., 1977; Emshoff, 1980; Kan- trowitz, 1979; Mitchell, 1980). Hence, an understanding of the interpreta- tions contained in this chapter will be facilitated by an ability to dis- cern the differing nature of each of the six experimental conditions. These nuances among the T81 components of each condition were reviewed in Chapter II (pp. 38-46). For each question of interest, the results will be summarized and dis- cussed, general conclusions will be drawn, and possible explanations of the findings will be explored. A final assessment of the data, in total, will be offered after these presentations, and the implications of these results will then be discussed accordingly. This chapter will than pre- sent the limitations which must be imposed on the interpretation of these results. Finally, the discussion will conclude with a consideration of the broader impact that nonprofessional programming may have for the creation of social change. 116 Impact on Careers As previously stated, one of the major objectives of this study was to determine the impact of program participation on the future employment activities of the nonprofessional college students once they had graduated from college. A related issue--one frequently raised in the nonprofes- sional literature--has been the extent to which the college field experi- ence confirmed or clarified for students, their desire to pursue a career in human service (e.g. Holzberg, Knapp, & Turner, 1967; Klein 8 Zax, 1965). More specifically, the question, “Does program participation influence the participants to actually become, and remain, enployed in the human service fields?” seemed critical in the assessment of long term impact. The results of this study provided definitive answers to this ques- tion in the affirmative. Specifically, students who participated in this particular nonprofessional program spent a considerably higher percentage of their time since graduation, in human service employment, than those who were not selected to participate. The effects here were rather drama- tic. When all of the experimental graduates were compared to a like group of controls, it was found that the experimental group, as a whole, spent approximately 50% more time in human service. This result is fairly straightforward since this dependent measure (i.e. percentage of time in human service) was corrected for eligibility (total time since graduation) and was further controlled for time spent in post-graduate educational pursuits. The use of these precautions, notwithstanding, the average amount of time since graduation, or eligible time, was roughly equivalent for all the groups. In general, respondents had graduated two years prior to the interviews. This situation adds greatly to the validity of these findings. Although the experimentals did not differ significantly from controls when employment in human service was viewed dichotomously (yes or no), ll7 marginal trends were noted which suggested that experimental subjects were somewhat more likely to be employed in human service jobs, either presently, or at any time since graduation. These results were consis- tent with the findings relative to percentage of time spent in human service but,certain1y, do not provide a complete explanation of why the percentage of time variable favored experimentals. In any event, the data clearly suggested that program participants were employed in human service jobs for a greater percentage of time than the control comparison group. In general, it seemed that involvement in the program not only led to a career in human service but more significantly, it resulted in perseverance within this chosen field. Previous researchers who have conducted nonprofessional, human ser- vice programs with college students have suggested that the nonprofessional experience served to confirm or clarify a career in human service (Holz- berg, Knapp, 8 Turner, 1967; Klein & Zax, 1965). The evidence upon which these conclusions were based was sketchy at best, and often consisted only of the anecdotal reports of self-selected participants. Klein & Zax (1965), for example, utilized conversations with program participants-~before they had graduated--to conclude that a field experience in a mental hospital had convinced them that they were interested in a mental health career. The subjects for this study were selected on the basis of their availability, and no control opinions were solicited. Holzberg, Knapp and Turner (1967), although somewhat more systematic in their evaluations, similarly did not utilize a control group of nonparticipants. These investigators conducted a questionnaire mailout campaign to solicit responses regarding confirma- tion of career interests. No actual employment data was reported in this study, however. Moreover, the selection bias which is endemic to surveys conducted through the mail, seriously calls the validity of this study into question. 118 In fact, results from earlier research in the Adolescent Diversion Project suggested that students evaluated a career in human service less positively, over the course of their involvement with delinquent youths (Kantrowitz, 1979). The results presented here, therefore, are the first to systematically examine this phenomenon in an experimental manner. Un- like previous studies, actual career choices and employment data were utilized to conclude that the program had an impact on human service career choices and perseveration in that field. These results concerning the likelihood of employment in human ser- vice did not gel with the findings presented in the Kantrowitz (1979) study. How, then, did these results obtain? The reasons for these appar- ent contradictions will be presented below. It is hoped that this discus- sion will also provide an explanation of the dynamics of the current data. Realistic Job Previews and Career Perseverance It was emphasized earlier (p. 18) that the worth of a nonprofessional program would be demonstrated if it could be shown that participation provided nonprofessionals with an experience which eventually enhanced their adjustment to the workplace. The present findings have provided just such evidence: students in the experimental conditions perseverate in human service careers longer than control subjects. This has generally been interpreted as testimony of greater adjustment to the workplace. Given the lack of significant differences between experimentals and controls on whether they actually become employed in human services, it seems that experimentals exhibit greater adjustment to this career since they spend more time in it, once employed. The question remains, however, as to how this occurs. "What are the mechanisms which are operative in this phe- nomenon?" 119 Inherent in much of the discussion of program impact on the nonpro- fessional, has been the idea of the recruitment of nonprofessionals to the human service professions (Kulik, et al., 1969). Precisely, the non- professional field experience was to be the training ground for future human service workers (e.g. Harvey & Passey, 1981). The Kantrowitz study suggested that program participation might have exactly the opposite effect of that which was desired by those suggesting the use of nonprofessional programs as recruitment devices. Further, the present results did not provide conclusive evidence for the utility of nonprofessional programs as a means of recruitment since there was only a slight tendency for experi- mentals to go into human service with greater frequency than controls. Why, then, did they persevere in this career once it was chosen? An explanation of these results may be found in the recent work which has been done in the area of organizational entry (Wanous, 1980). Even though much of this research has been done from the perspective of the organization (i.e. recruitment and personnel selection), the data which has been provided is extremely relevant to the particular discussion. In a nutshell, Wanous (1980) stated that newcomers to an organization or a pro- fession were more likely to stay with a job if they were given a more realistic preview of that job by the organization. Realistic job previews are those that present newcomers with all relevant information concerning the job, without distortion. He summarized his position in the following manner. Sources that provide job candidates with the most realistic picture of a job situation are those that provide the employer with longer tenure employees (p. 33). It definitely could be argued that participation in a nonprofessional field experience, in which the volunteers provided direct services to delinquent youth for eighteen weeks, six to eight hours a week, was a 120 realistic preview of working with delinquents in particular, and of pro- viding human service in general. This involvement was tantamount to on- the-job experience. Wanous (1980) further stated "that actual job experi- ence provides (the most) ample source of realism” (p. 41). The interpretation of the present data which was posited here borrowed heavily from this organizational entry analysis, but utilized it from the perspective of the job candidate. Precisely, experimental participants tended to persevere in human service jobs to a greater degree than con- trols, because their field experience provided them with a more realistic preview of the nature of this profession. With this preview in hand, they spent a greater percentage of their time in human service. Or, to reiter- ate Wanous' claim, they became longer tenure employees. It should be noted that this is much different than concluding that the field experience “confirmed” a career in human service since many participants neither entered the human service field (42%) nor had any future plans for such employment (40%). However, it does point out that for those who chose careers in human service, the field experience may be instrumental in enhancing their adjustment to this career,therebyresultingin career perseverance. Using this line of argumentation, it could be suggested that the decline in positive evaluations of human service careers found by Kantro— witz (1979) was simply a readjustment of expectations to a more realistic level (Cowen, et al., 1966). In corroboration of both points presented here, Mitchell (1980) concluded that these more realistic appraisals ”may prove beneficial in career choices and perseverance in the Chosen career” (p. 148). 121 Differing Degrees of Realism and the Field Experience This discussion has focused on the field experience as a realistic job preview which engendered perseverance in human service careers. Fur- ther support for this conclusion was found when a more specific analysis of the six experimental conditions was performed. Specifically, the results of the career choice confirmation analysis (Table 8) were compared to the results of the analysis which reported the percentage of time spent in human service for each of the six experimental conditions (Table 7). The comparative rank orderings of the experimental groups on these vari- ables further illustrated the fit between the field experience as a real- istic job preview and employment perseverance in human services. This relationship will be elucidated below. The comparative rank order of the experimental group means for per- centage of time spent in human service, and confirmation of human service career interests as a function of the field experience, are illustrated in Table 24. Careful inspection of this table revealed a strong conver- gence of rank orders for the groups on these two variables. It was noted when these tables were presented separately in Chapter III, that no signifi- cant group differences were observed, yet there was a trend for the Family and Relationship groups to spend a greater percentage of time in human service egg to retrospectively report strong agreement that the field experience confirmed their interest in a human service career. Similarly, the groups which spent the smallest percentage of time in human service (the Court group is a notable exception) tended to feel that the field experience was less likely to confirm their interest in a human service career. The interpretations of these results and the explanations thereof, will proceed along three interrelated lines of thought. First, a general 122 interpretation of the superiority of the Family and Relationship groups on these variables will be presented. This explication will then be related to the preceding discussion of realistic job previews. Secondly, reasons for caution will be attached to the foregoing interpretation in order to clarify it. Finally, the divergence of the Court group from the general pattern will be pinpointed and explained. The question arises, "If the field experience provides a realistic job preview which then results in more realistic expectations of the human service professions, and hence greater perseverance in this career if it is chosen, why do the experimental groups tend to differ on the degree of perseveration that they exhibit individually?” The answer can be found in the differing degrees of realism which were provided by the different TSI strategies. Recall that the Relationship and Family groups partici- pated in high intensity training and utilized intervention techniques that are used widely in the human service professions (i.e. relationship therapy, family counseling,and behavior modification). As such, these strategies were more closely aligned to the activities that are performed in a typical human service job. The Action group, on the other hand, which ranked next to last on percentage of time spent in human service, as well as on confirmation of career interests, performed duties which were not reminiscent of typical human service activity. Traditional human service practitioners rarely conduct advocacy interventions in which the main thrust is to change social systems. More often, human service practition- ers attempt to change individuals "with problems" rather than alter com- munity systems (Caplan & Nelson, 1973; Ryan, 1971). The Action group was encouraged to do the opposite; rather than "treat" their youths, they were trained to advocate for them. Thus, it could be argued that the Action group obtained a less realistic picture of what the human service 123 Table 24 Comparative Rank Order of Experimental Groups on Confirmation of Human Service Career Interests vs. Percentage of Time Spent in Human Service Field Experience Confirmed Percentage of Time Human Service Career Interests Spent in Human Service Condition Group Means Rank Group Means Rank ?§t:°go) 3.82 5 33% 5 ?§1:t1895“1p 4.56 1 56% 1 ygrgel3) 4.08 4 38% 3 i2a1113) 3.46 6 41% 4 Egmiwg) 4.14 3 55% 2 Com 4.50 2 32% 6 (n = 8) 124 professions would be like than did the Relationship and Family groups. The resulting tendencies of the Relationship and Family conditions to spend more time in human service than the Action group are understandable using the job preview analysis as an explanatory model. Illustratively, previous research in this project by Kantrowitz (l979), Emshoff (1980), Blakely (1981) and Mitchell (1980) indicated that the different conditions did adhere to their respective training models in the execution of inter- ventions. Once again, the Court condition is a notable exception. The convergence of the group ranks on the "confirmation” variable with the "percentage“ variable augments these explanations. Those who had more realistic previews as a result of belonging to a more typical TSI condition, generally felt that the field experience was more instrumental in confirming their interest in a human service career. It should be realized that this "confirmation" data was retrospective in nature. Thus, feelings of agreement that the field experience confirmed their interest in a human service career may have merely been a collateral by-product of actual employment in human service. Since there was no data collected on this variable subsequent to participation in the project, but p519: to becoming employed, it is difficult to determine the reasons for this uni- formity of rank order. In addition, the lack of significance associated with these group trends minimizes the strength of these explanations. It was interesting to note the deviation of the Court group from the parallelism demonstrated in Table 24. Specifically, they reported that the field experience did indeed confirm their interests in a human service career, and yet, they spent the least amount of time in human service employment. More careful scrutiny of the data revealed that 50% (n=4) of the Court group had been employed at some time since graduation as police officers. In this particular study, police positions were not coded as 125 human service jobs. Further, this is the highest percentage of police employment that was evinced by any of the groups. In conjunction with these explanations, it was observed that nearly all of the respondents who were employed as police officers, described the duties of their jobs as ”public service.” Hence, it may be possible that the Court group had a career in law enforcement confirmed as a result of their participation in the project. This would not be a surprising finding given that this group seriously digressed from the Action model in which they were trained. In fact, they tended to perform law enforcement-like duties with their youths (Blakely, 1981). In this sense, their experiences also may have been a realistic preview of police work. Obviously, these particular conclusions are highly speculative because of the small sample size which was used in this condition. What may be concluded from the career data? Surely, there were pro- gram effects relative to perseverance in human service careers for those who chose these professions. This evidence was unequivocal. That the field experience "confirmed" a career in human service for participants, is not so clear an issue. There were_only marginal trends suggesting that experimentals were more likely than controls to become employed in human service. Likewise, experimentals were no different from controls with respect to future career plans. Controls were just as likely to aSpire to a career in human service as were program participants. How- ever,it was concluded that program participation provided participants in general, with a more realistic preview of the human service professions. Thus, those participants who ultimately decided on a career in human ser- vice became longer tenure employees in those jobs. This interpretation was supported by the observation of differential‘ human service career perseverance exhibited by the individual experimental 126 conditions. In sum, those conditions whose field experience was more "realistic" (i.e. more like typical human service activity) tended to persevere longer in human service employment than those conditions-— particularly the Action group-~whose field training and intervention were least akin to traditional human service work. From these results it seems that mere participation in the nonprofessional program had a greater impact on the careers of former participants than the particular content and format of the particular TSI strategies, although minimal evidence has been provided to support the latter's impact on percentage of time spent in human service careers. Impact on Attitudes Three different scales within the Attitudes and Evaluations measure of the Volunteer Follow-up Questionnaire (VFQ) were utilized to assess the impact of program participation on the attitudes of former volunteers. In contrast to the career findings which suggested a generalized program effect on career stability, the attitude data evidenced no discernible differences in attitudes between experimentals and controls. This lack of results was embedded within another contrast between the attitude and career data-~that of large differences in attitudes among the individual groups of experimental participants. Whereas the career data produced large, generalized program effects, but only minimal differences between the six individual TSI conditions, the attitude results showed almost no ‘generalized program impact, but relatively strong and significant differ- ences among the six different participant groups. The former attitude result was probably due to the latter; that is, the large variation in attitudes which was encountered among the various experimental conditions precluded the attainment of significance when all of the experimental groups were compared as a unit to the controls. 127 These findings of differential impact on attitudes, as a function of the specific structure and content of the diverse TSI conditions, repli- cated the previous findings of Kantrowitz (1979) and Blakely (1981). Thus, the present findings provided ample support, in the form of long-term follow-up, for the conclusions of others who worked with subsets of sub- jects from the current data set. In short, the present data confirmed earlier contentions that the mere act of participation was not enough to produce positive attitude outcomes for the nonprofessionals. The spe- cific quality (i.e. structure and content) of the field experience is integrally related to differences in attitude change in the short run (Kantrowitz, 1979). According to the present results, these distinguish- ing program features have a lasting impact on attitudes as well. With this in mind, let us turn to a closer examination of these effects on the specific attitude categories which were considered rele- vant to the effectiveness of nonprofessional programs from the standpoint of the nonprofessional and from the perspective of this investigation. Attitudes Towards Self, Juvenile Delinquents and Social_§ystems Besides determining the extent to which program participants felt that involvement in the field experience benefitted them personally, and as such, was a positive experience, the current research has emphasized the importance of extending the helper therapy principle (Riessman, 1966) utilizing long-term follow-up data. Precisely, it was felt that conclu- sions regarding the personal impact of program participation would be more meaningful if it could be shown that this phenomenon contained a certain measure of permanence. The results of this study clearly suggested the lasting nature of this principle. However, it was additionally obvious that the degree of per- sonal impact depended on the type of training and supervision that students 128 received in this course. The Action and Family conditions reported deriving significantly greater personal benefits from the field experi— ence than the other experimental groups. Parenthetically, there were no observed differences between experimentals and controls or among the experimental conditions on personal benefits derived from their general academic experiences. Thus, the increased self-understanding and en- hanced self-esteem indicated by the Action and Family groups strongly suggested that these personal benefits came as a specific result of par- ticipation i? a particular type of field experience. In particular, it appeared that students who received high intensity training in the specific attion-oriented techniques of advocacy and behav- ioral contracting, as well as specifically structured supervision which maintained adherence to this training model, reaped significantly greater personal benefits as a result. Given that the Court group reported the least improvement in selfcesteem and self-understanding, it is probable that the amount and type of supervision received, played an undsually large role in the derivation of lasting personal benefits. Recall that the Court group was trained in the same manner as the Action group but was supervised by juvenile court staff. Similarly, the L0 Intensity groups who received very little direct supervision felt more negatively about the experience while they were in the midst of participation (cf. Kantrowitz, 1979) and these feelings seemed to result in permanent negative perceptions concerning the personal benefits which they derived from their involvement. Criticisms could be levied against the present interpretations since the nature of the self-worth questiomsof the VFQ were explicitly related to involvement in this particular field experience, thereby creating a possible response bias. It could be argued that more general, non—directive 129 self-evaluations would have provided better estimates of personal impact. However, other researchers have suggested that such a broad variable as self-worth may be affected by a wide range of factors, thus, clouding the data, particularly in follow-up studies (Holzberg, Knapp, & Turner, 1967). Therefore, it was felt that a clearer and more direct link between program participation and self-perceptions would be established if this connection were made explicit for the respondents. Also recall that respondents were unaware that this research was being specifically conducted by the Adoles— cent Diversion Project. This procedure should have further reduced any response bias that may have occurred. In sum, it can be concluded that program participation in certain TSI conditions had a significant, positive, and lasting effect on partici— pants' attitudes towards themselves. More intense and specifically directed supervision, in particular, seemed to be related to positive and long- lasting feelings of self-worth. Consequently, these findings suggested that the helper therapy principle was not only operative but may be of a lasting nature within specifically structured nonprofessional programs. The results concerning respondents' attitudes towards target youth and relevant social systems were rather clear cut. Although no group dif- ferences on evaluations of social systems were observed, the data replica- ted the results of Kantrowitz (1979) and Mitchell (1980) which indicated more negative attitudes towards social systems. This finding not only persisted over time but was true for all the experimental conditions. This finding was also in agreement with that segment of the nonprofessional literature which has considered the nonprofessional's attitude toward institutions, whether it be the educational system (Cowen, et al., 1966), the mental health system (Rappaport, et al., 1971) or the juvenile justice system (Davidson, 1975). Whether this negative attitude is a function of 130 program participation may be debated since Controls were similarly negative in their evaluations. The evidence in this inquiry regarding follow-up attitudes toward delinquents was again contingent upon membership in particular TSI condi- tions, with results similar to those found in the personal benefits analy- sis. The importance of intense and specifically directed TSI strategies was again suggested. That the Action and Family conditions were more positive about delinquents, further implied the superiority of these TSI strategies in creating positive attitudinal change towards targets. Since these groups were specifically superior to the two Lo Intensity conditions in this regard, it seemed that the general level of intensity of the TSI components was responsible for this outcome. Kantrowitz's conclusions are illustrative at this point: .On the whole, the L0 Intensity groups appeared to find the experience negative and thus all of their attitudes became more negative over time . . . The Action group seemed to be the most positive about the total TSI experience and the results found (for this group) were those expected from the literature (p. 183). The implications of these results are twofold. First, this field experience not only created during-intervention effects, but also resulted in long-term impact which was consistent with the during—intervention findings. Second, these data more specifically suggeSted that program participation does not, in and of itself, effectuate positive attitudes, as much of the literature concluded (e.g. Gruver, 1971). The quality of the experience, as determined by careful structuring of the program com- ponents is crucial, not only in the outcomes for targets (Blakely, 1981; Davidson, et al., 1977) but for the nonprofessionals as well. Knowledge of Delinquency The general program effects on knowledge of delinquency that were evidenced in Table 11 (p. 88) were not surprising if one notes the 131 specificity of the field experience with respect to the academic disci- pline of delinquency. In addition, the nature of the training component may also be important to an explanation of this result. In brief, since training was conducted in a classroom format, it was highly possible that experimental respondents were unable to distinguish between their under- graduate coursework and the training component of the field experience on these particular questions. It is possible that the knowledge that was imparted to them in training was seen as part of their undergraduate course- work and was, therefore, responsible for the observed effects. In addi- tion, it is possible that the differences between experimentals and con- trols was accounted for by the tendency for experimental students to take additional formal courses in delinquency as a result of the interest created by their involvement in the program. Since no data were collected on these issues, these explanations are purely speculative in nature. We can merely conclude that involvement in the program led to perceived increases in delinquency knowledge acquisition. Based on the findings for improved knowledge of delinquency as a function of program participation, it was obvious that those trained in Action techniques perceived significant gains in knowledge while those trained in less specific or tangible interventions did not. The Action, Family and Court groups scored significantly higher than all other exper- mental conditions. This is perfectly understandable since Lo Intensity groups were given no specific training and the Relationship group was instructed in intervention techniques that were more closely related to the field of mental health than that of delinquency. The dissatisfaction that this group displayed towards the Relationship training model was illustrative for the present analysis (cf, Kantrowitz, 1979). They felt that the model of intervention was inadequate, they became frustrated, 132 and consequently reported at follow-up that their knowledge of delinquency had not been improved. Moreover, this consistent trend of negative attitudes among Relationship group members was borne out by their lower scores on the personal benefits variable discussed earlier. However, when the impact of participation on understanding of adolescents was examined, this group combined with the three other high intensity groups, and as a four group bloc were superior to the L0 Intensity groups. Again, this is comprehensible since the T51 strategy for the Relationship condition emphasized "relating" to the youth, ”understanding” his or her needs and so on. This finding, therefore, was to be expected. In sum, it again appeared that differential strategies, particularly in training, resulted in different perceptions of knowledge acquisition. The groups which reported the most significant gains in knowledge were precisely those groups that were exposed to an intense and highly struc- tured training component, which was further augmented by providing inter- vention techniques that were systematically made relevant to the problem of delinquency. Obviously, no conclusions are warranted regarding the actual improve- ments in knowledge that resulted from the field experience. The self- reported, perceptual nature of this data did not permit such conclusions concerning actual knowledge acquisition. Illustratively, Blakely (1981) found that the Court group, when tested at the post-intervention period, gave evidence of a severe lack in retention of training material. Con- versely, the Court group reported the most significant gains in knowledge of delinquency in this particular follow-up investigation. Delinquency Orientation Since the separate analysis of the four components which comprised the Delinquency Orientation Scale of the VFQ were not only logically 133 related but also produced rationally convergent results, they will be discussed in a systematically integrated fashion. A comprehension of the particular TSI components for each condition will again be useful for an understanding of the interpretations which follow. In particular, an understanding of the philosophical basis of the advocacy intervention techniques, which was utilized most fully in the Action condition, will be extremely helpful. To be brief, the advocacy approach which underscored Action training, supervision,and intervention, basically presented the delinquent youth as an individual with assets and strengths rather than as a individual with problems. Accordingly, the focus of the intervention was geared towards maximizing these strengths rather than treating the youth or reacting punitively to problem behaviors. Incorporated within this philosophy was the necessity for reforming.institutions and social systems so that the youth's needs were met. Further, diversion or nonintervention was at the heart of this philoSOphy given the negative effects of labeling that con- tact with formal systems was likely to produce (Schur, 1973). With this background in mind, the attitude results which accrued from these analyses were easily interpretable. The delinquency orientation findings clearly indicated that the Action group's intervention philosophies were obviously more in synchrony with the philosophies of the Action model just presented. Specifically, they were less punitive, less treatment oriented, more social reform oriented, and more likely to endorse nonintervention. Without exception, they agreed with every intervention orientation which was espoused by the Action training model. The Court group was also trained in Action inter- vention techniques, yet their supervisory structure appeared to override these philosophies since the orientations of this group were significantly 134 more punitive, more treatment oriented, and less inclined towards a philosophy of nonintervention. These results concurred with Blakely's (1981) findings which suggested a philosophical continuum ranging from punitive to nonintervening. His research concluded that the Court group fell on the punitive end of this continuum while the Action group clearly demonstrated a tendency towards nonintervention. The present results replicated these findings and confirmed Blakely's conclusions. They seem as appropriate now for the present study as they did then for his investigation. The Action group was "more likely to recommend minimal entry into the justice system and much less likely to consider any puni- tive intervention strategies than volunteers in the Court condition” (p. 150). Othe findings suggested that the Relationship group, in keeping with their program training, were likely to encourage intervention into the lives of youths. The L0 Intensity groups, in general, also seemed to polarize atti- tudinally against the Action group but not in a consistent manner. While the Small group was significantly more punitive in their orientations, the Large group was not. Then, when the Large group opposed Action and Family by being less social reform oriented, the Small group did not do likewise. The reasons for these inconsistencies between the L0 Intensity groups were not provided by the present data. For example, the Large group was sig- nificantly different from the Action condition on Social Reform, but remarkably similar to this group on the Individual Treatment component. The inconsistencies of the L0 Intensity groups rendered interpretations of their intervention philosophies unintelligible. It was also noteworthy that the Family condition did not conincide with the Action condition philosophically. They underwent nearly the same 135 TSI strategy as the Action group and yet did not demonstrate similar trends of philosophical adherence to the Action model. An explanation of this ostensible divergence by the Family group was forthcoming upon closer examination of the actual content description of their didactic training. Emshoff (1980) noted that it “would have been an inefficient use of training time and resources to teach the students the advocacy approach" (p. 54) since the advocacy strategy is rarely used within the context of the Family. In conclusion, the results of the delinquency orientation attitude measure can be summarized in the following manner. Those students who were not only trained in the advocacy approach, but actually implemented this intervention technique with their youths in the community, came to identify with the philosophy which undergirded this approach. The Action group was the only condition which fulfilled both pre- requisites of this process of identification. The Court group clearly did not implement the advocacy approach (Blakely, 1981) and the Family group did not emphasize it either in training or in the intervention. Hence, neither of these groups internalized the model's underlying principles. The Action group on the other hand, did identify with this approach, and as a result, were less punitive, less treatment oriented, less intervening, and more social reform oriented in their delinquency orientation. In discussing the dynamics of this process of identification, Riessman (1966) so aptly and relevantly stated that having to advocate a position often leads to a commitment to that position. As with the discussion concerning the helper therapy principle and positive evaluations of targets, the beauty of these findings rests in their lasting quality. In response, then, to the fourth research question which was put forth at the conclusion of the first chapter, it may be said that program l36 participation did have a lasting influence on participants' treatment philosophies, but only for those TSI strategies which engendered an iden- tification with that treatment approach among its members. Further, it was concluded that the means by which this internalization was achieved was through specifically structured and intense training procedures which were coupled with careful, supervisory monitoring of the intervention which ensured its implementation. Obviously, the Action group's commitment to the adovcacy intervention treatment philosophy was underscored by the present results. Thus, the Action group's consistent commitment to a particular treatment philosophy, as a result of program participation, was definitely a lasting phenomenon. The implications which these find- ings have for social change in human services will be presented in the final section of this chapter. The Utility of the Field Experience All of the topics which have been discussed up to this point are quite interrelated; attitudes may be related to career choice, delinquency orientations may be related to attitudes towards juvenile delinquents, and so on. In this particular research effort, however, the central mech- anisms around which all of these issues have revolved has been the nonpro- fessional, college field experience. This experiential technique of education is the elemental feature—-the seedling from which this research has germinated. Thus, a crucial question in this inquiry seemed to be "how good is this experiential mode of teaching college students?" An outgrowth of this first question was "how did students view their field- based learning experience in comparison with the rest of their under- graduate courses." Given the exploratory nature of this research, definitive answers 137 cannot be provided; however, the results which have been presented regarding these issues are at least illustrative, if not conclusive. In an aboslute sense, it appeared that students generally enjoyed their involvement in this field experience. All of the experimental groups offered better than slight agreement that they would either take the course again if they had the opportunity, or would recommend it to a student now enrolled at MSU. Furthermore, it was shown that students in the four high intensity training conditions tended to give more favorable evaluations of the field experience than 'Uwe two Lo Intensity groups. These results exhibit some conformity with earlier research in this project regarding course evaluations (cf. Kantrowitz, 1979). Rather than provide definitive answers, the present data merely suggested that, in retrospect, former students viewed this experience positively. These results certainly did not contraindicate the use of the field experience as an educational tool. Some explanations of this uniformly positive evaluation have been posited by other researchers who have utilized the field experience, both as an educational tool and as a means of providing human service. Holz- berg, Knapp and Turner (1967), for example, have concluded that the field experience provided students with a rewarding emotional and intellectual experience, fostered their adjustment, and enhanced career choices. Klein and Zax (1965) mentioned that the field experience was, for many, their most meaningful college experience. To be sure, our interviews, although systematically less anecdotal, produced similar sorts of stories. In fact, one respondent claimed that "it was the most exciting thing I'd every done." And yet there were two Lo Intensity respondents who suggested that "psych- ology professors who provide experiential programs should be held more accountable” for the courses offered. Hence, definitive conclusions concerning the benefits of the field experience must be qualified. The previously reported results, found 138 in this study, strongly suggested that much of the utility of a specific field experience depends heavily on its training and supervisory Struc- ture as well as the level of intensity provided in each of these com- ponents. Undergraduate Coursework vs. Field Experience In much of the education literature there has been a good deal of concern, particularly in psychology, with the paucity of relevance afforded students through formal coursework (Baskin, 1967). The field experience has been offered as a superior alternative (Kulik, 1973). The present investigation attempted to directly assess the relative merits of each of these types of education. As mentioned before, these analyses yielded highly problematic results. As you will recall, the assessment of gains in knowledge suf- fered because of the similarity between the formats of undergraduate coursework and the formal training component of this particular field experience. The overall usefulness of the paired comparisons of corres- ponding items from the PAC and FEX scales demanded that students be able to differentiate between their undergraduate coursework and the field experience. The results from the knowledge of delinquency analyses, in conjunction with the high degree of association found between the corresponding items, suggested that this distinction was not achieved. Hence, only the two analyses for uncorrelated items seemed meaningful to perform. The results of these paired comparisons indicated that students felt that the field experience was significantly more relevant to their career goals than was their undergraduate coursework. These findings were conso- nant with the speculative claims made by proponents of experiential learning that the undergraduate field experience was an opportunity to 139 explore tentative career choices (Kulik, 1973). In a general sense, this result was consistent with the other career findings which suggested that 60% of the experimental participants reported employment in human service as part of their future career plans. The other t-test analysis compared undergraduate coursework to the field experience on the capacity of each to improve participants' under- standing of adolescents with problems. Rationally, it was not surprising to find that the field experience was far superior to undergraduate course- work on this variable. Even the group means for the L0 Intensity groups on these two items favored the field experience on this variable. This was compelling since the L0 Intensity groups were significantly less positive than all the other experimental conditions on the extent to which they reported improved understanding of adolescents as a function of the field experience. In general, these findings supported Holzberg, et al's (1967) affirma- tion that the field experience achieved a more transcendent educational aim than that commonly subsumed under the designation “academic.” In turn, the generally positive evaluations given to the field experience by program participants, coupled with the equally positive results suggesting its greater relevance to career goals, may be participants' response to what Rappaport, et al. (1971) described as: A strongly felt need to become involved in experiences that bridged the gap between the academic ivory-tower and exist- ing, entirely real problems of society and the surrounding community (p. 49). The results of this study strongly suggested that this particular oppor- tunity for field work, although clearly frustrating for some (i.e. Rela- tionship and Lo Intensity), fulfilled this need for relevance for those who participated. 140 Target Youth Outcome and Nonprofessional Follow—up Data The results detailing the relationship of target youth outcome to the career and attitude data collected in this study were disconcerting but not surprising. No association between youth success/failure and any of the career related variables was found. In short, the outcome of a par- ticipant's youth was unrelated to, and had no impact on, such variables as present employment, job satisfaction, percentage of time spent in human service, or future career plans. Similarly, there was a general lack of significant relationships between youth outcome and participant attitudes. Rappaport, Chinsky and Cowen (1971) observed similar negative findings in their examination of college student volunteer characteristics as predictors of mental patient outcome. They noted that problems in design and small sample size miti- gated against finding relationships. In the present study, these problems were corrected but positive results were still not forthcoming. Those relationships that were found between youth outcome and partici- pants'attitudes were tantalizing, but far from conclusive (see p. 112). The negative relationships between youth outcome and the Individual Puni- .piye component suggested that students' whose cases were considered fail- ures at all three time periods, tended to be more punitive in their treat- ment philosophies at follow-up. Although this relationship was consistently documented for all three time periods, it is probable that a large part of the variance in these correlations was accounted for by the disproportionate number of Court group failures (cf. Blakely, 1981). As we recall, these participants were more punitive than most other groups. Hence, the ob- served relationship between punitive orientations and target failures was most likely an artifact of Court group membership. 141 The remaining significant trend in this analysis was particularly intriguing but far from conclusive. For all youth outcome time periods, relationships between success/failure and participants' present evalua- tions of the success of the intervention (FEX 5), either approached or reached significance. In particular, if a youth had one or more contacts with the police or court during the intervention, then the student was likely to feel pessimistic at follow-up about the success of his or her intervention. What is interesting is that this association grew stronger through two year follow-up of the youth. Could it be that the volunteers can accurately predict the success or failure of the youth based on their own perceptions of the success of the intervention? Or, more likely, does the volunteers' knowledge of youth recidivism during the intervention color their perceptions of their own effectiveness? Kantrowitz's (1979) research provided evidence for the latter explanation. The major findings here have suggested what others have known; namely that it is difficult to predict target outcomes using the attitudes or characteristics of the nonprofessionals as the predictors. Rappaport's (l977) conclusion that what was actually done in a given program was more important than who did it, may prove useful in directing our attention to the process of an intervention in order to gain insight into outcomes. In a general sense, his remark was particularly relevant to the results of the present study. That is, what was done in each TSI condition had significant impact on the outcomes for the nonprofessional participants. Caveats for the Interpretation of Results Throughout the preceding discussion, certain limitations concerning the interpretations of specific results were pinpointed in each section, where appr0priate. Rather than reiterate these particular notes of caution, 142 this section will present some general caveats for the interpretation of these results in total. It should be noted, however, that the utilization of a large sample size and a clear-cut experimental design,coupled with rather strong and direct findings have enhanced the breadth and validity of the present interpretations. In general, the conclusions of this inves— tigation would seem to be based on sound empirical evidence and, therefore, highly credible. Regardless, certain limitations of this study must be noted. It is advised that these general qualifications be considered when interpreting the results of this study. First, though the results of this study were fairly clear and often replicated the findings of previous research in the Adolescent Diversion Project, this follow-up research was primarily an exploratory study. Such a systematic attempt to determine the long—term impact of participation in a nonprofessional program has never been accomplished before. Accordingly, broad research questions, rather than specific hypotheses, were put forth to guide this research effort. Hence, these results and concomitant con- clusions should not be viewed as the final word on the subject. Rather, the present findings should be primarily utilized as a basis for future attempts to determine the long-term impact of program participation on the nonprofessional. The importance of exploratory research relative to its potential for aiding in hypothesis generation and its capacity for increas- ing our understanding of what the important questions are in this type of research cannot be overemphasized. In sum, this research should be viewed as a springboard rather than a final landing. The fact that many of the results provided only partial answers to some of the important questions underscore this concern. Second, the definition of the term ”follow~up“ applied neither fully nor equally to all of the research participants. Many respondents in this 143 investigation had graduated only recently. This is a cause for concern even though the average length of time since graduation for all subjects was close to two years. Students from Wave 5 and Wave 7, in particular, had only just graduated a month or so before the implementation of the interviews. This fact may have implications for many of the conclusions regarding career impact since some of the subjects whose data was included in this research have only been in the work force for short periods of time. Thus, this study can be considered longitudinal, but in varying degrees for different subjects. Cause for concern in this area may be re- duced by the knowledge that the groups did not differ considerably on the average number of months since graduation. The point is well taken, though, that more research needs to be done. Finally, some caveats should be mentioned with regards to the career data. This research was conducted at a time when federal and state fund- ing for human services was being seriously reduced. The resulting decrease in demand for human service workers may impinge, in ways unknown, upon the results of this study. Changes in careers reported by former volunteers may, therefore, have been just as much a function of the vicissitudes of the human service labor force as they were of career perseverance. However, the use of a randomly selected control group should have equalized the impact of these external, social and economic conditions on each of the groups. Yet, the fluctuations in the human service labor force as a result of reductions in funding cannot be denied and, thus, should be con- sidered in interpreting these results. As a final note, interpretations of these results seem to be bolstered by the general convergence of results across different measures, thereby strengthening the reliability and validity of the present findings. Con- clusions based on these results are similarly reinforced by this convergence, 144 as well as by the causal inferences which are allowed given the use of true experimental design. As before, these strengths were amplified by the use of a large sample size. General Conclusions and Implications In addition to the specific caveats associated with particular find- ings, each section of this chapter included a discussion of the specific conclusions associated with each set of results. This section, then, will present a broad overview of these interpretations, noting the convergence of various results. Prior to this investigation, the impact of nonprofessional programming on the nonprofessional was thought to be universally positive. Nonprofes- sionals were thought to derive significant benefits as a result of the mere act of participation (Durlak, 1971). Previous research in this project has suggested that these positive outcomes may not be forthcoming if par- ticular attention is not paid to the structuring of the specific training and supervisory components of the nonprofessional field experience (e.g. Kantrowitz, 1979). The present results have amplified the appropriate- ness of these qualifications. Similarly, researchers have previously supposed that program partici- pation always would have a positive impact on the nonprofessional partici- pant's ability to decide on a career (Holzberg, et al., 1967). In short, they declared that program participation resulted in confirmation of career interests in human service. The present study has suggested, on the other hand, that confirmation of career interests may also be a function of the particular type of experience to which participants were exposed. However, it was concluded that program participation did have a positive impact on career perseverance. Illustrating this point, it was found that partici- pants spent about 50% more time in human service than Controls. But they 145 were no more likely than Controls to actually be employed in human ser- vice at any time since graduation. Similarly, both groups expressed a uniformly representative interest to pursue a career in human services at some time in the future. Therefore, it may be that participation “glgrj:_ fled," rather than "confirmed? participants' interests in a human service career. Previous investigators had talked about these two issues as if they were one and the same. From the present investigation it seems impor- tant to distinguish between confirmation (actually going into or wanting to go into human service) and clarification (understanding the nature of human service employment). With this dichotomy in mind, it was concluded that the greater per- severance in human service employment which was exhibited by the experi- mental conditions was a result of the realistic job preview that was afforded by the field experience. In short, their expectations were clarified; as a result of this clarity of expectation, adjustment to the workplace was facilitated and career stability or perseverance was accom— plished. These conclusions, which revolved around the realistic preview that the field experience provided, were augmented by the finding that those participants, whose activities in the project were more like the activities (If a typical human service career, spent more time in human service than those whose previews were not as realistic or typical (e.g. Action). The attitude results showed similar convergence across measures. Un- like the career findings, these results more clearly manifested the specific impact that resulted from varying the structure, content, and intensity of the TSI components. Specifically, it appeared that mere participation had no impact on attitudes; experimentals did not differ from Controls. How- ever, there were large and consistent differences among experimentals. 146 In particular, TSI conditions which provided a high level of inten- sity, as well as highly structured and Specifically directed training components which were made specifically relevant to the problem of delin- quency,in combination with careful supervisory monitoring by project staff, resulted in more positive attitudes. Students who participated in the conditions which were structured in this manner (i.e. Action and Family) had more positive attitudes towards themselves and towards juvenile delin- quents than the other experimental conditions. Although the Relationship group was highly structured and was trained and supervised with a high level of intensity, the type of direction they were given in supervision tended to be less related to tangible problems that their youths might be experiencing. This is what is meant by the phrase ”made Specifically rele- vant to the problem of delinquency.” They were directed to work out the problems of their youths by building a relationship. They felt this to be irrelevant at times and, thus, felt frustrated in their roles. Consequent- ly, they were more negative in their attitudes concerning the impact of the field experience. Thus, it was concluded that supervisory structure was especially relevant to attitudinal outcomes. With respect to self-reported gains in knowledge, it appeared that the type of training that students received was instrumental in producing posi- tive outcomes in this area. Specifically, those trained in the Action inter- vention techniques of advocacy and behavior contracting (Action, Family and Court) reported significantly greater improvement in knowledge of de— linquency as a result of participation. Again, this training component, which was highly intense and structured,was more specifically related to the problems of delinquency than Relationship training. Thus, the Rela- tionship group was similarly more negative in this area as well. 147 Finally, the delinquency orientation results revealed that the Action group demonstrated the most positive attitudes towards successful (cf. Davidson, 1976) intervention philosophies. It was concluded, again, that training and supervision (particularly in the fundamentals of advocacy) were again operative in producing these results. These conclusions cen- tered on the need for training and supervision to engender a commitment to the intervention,if it was desired thatthe nonprofessionals adopt the intervention philosophy. This identification with the intervention phil- os0phy on the part of the nonprofessionals requires more than training alone. Active supervision which, by its close monitoring of the interven- tion, ensured implementation of the training model seemed requisite to this identification process. The attitude continua in the Delinquency Orientation scales were specifically related to the philosophies undergirding the advocacy approach. Further, the Action group was the only condition which met the require- ments of intense training gpd_implementation of the advocacy approach. Thus, they were significantly less punitive, less treatment oriented, more social reform oriented,and noninterventionist in their approach. Not co- incidentally, these were attitudes that were fostered by the advocacy model. Finally, it was concluded that the field experience was a positive academic experience for all involved. In addition, participants felt that the field experience was superior to their general classroom coursework in selected areas, such as relevance to career goals and in its capacity for improving their understanding of adolescents. The implications of these conclusions are far-reaching. First, it appeared that the field experience was not only a high quality educational tool but. that students who participated,reaped lasting professional and 148 personal benefits as a result of participation. Inasmuch as the experi- ence provided a preview of what the human service professions would be like, it enabled participants to clarify their career expectations and ultimately resulted in career perseverance in, and successful adjustment to, their chosen careers. Also implied by the present findings is the need for program planners to be sensitive to the impact that varying the components of the field experience may have on the participants. The current results suggested that this impact may extend well into the future. Because of this, pro- gram developers need to be aware of the responsibility that they have not only to the target population involved but to the nonprofessional partici- pants as well. For these reasons, evaluation should always accompany the implementation of nonprofessional field experiences in which students are providing community service.. In light of these concerns, Klein's (1967) words seem rather compelling: Perhaps the simplest guiding principle for successful integra- tion is contained in the notion of flexible and self-critical programming . . . the use of the term self-critical is intended to underscore the necessity that the program be set up and kept open to receive continually, informational feedback about pro- gram impact on targets as well as the nonprofessional (p. 158). In sum, the implications of this investigation suggested that partici- pation in a nonprofessional college field experience has long-term effects on participants' future behavior in their careers and on their attitudes. The relationships of these behaviors and attitudes may have serious impli- cations for the creation of social change. It is this topic to which the present discussion will now turn. Social Change Much of the nonprofessional literature has discussed the implications that nonprofessional programming may have for sweeping changes in the 149 delivery of human services. Albee (1959) was among the first to suggest the importance of nonprofessional programming in this regard. Even with this new concept in the development of alternative sources of personpower, Rappaport and Chinsky (1974) noted the preponderance of traditional approaches to the solution of human problems. What was needed, they said, was a change not only in our styles of human service delivery, but also in our attitudinal and conceptual approaches to problems in living. This philosophy was more clearly defined by Seidman and Rappaport (1974) who suggested an “educational pyramid“ whereby professionals could increase the scope of their impact through the use of nonprofessional change agents. Although this impact was now more indirect, it could be more far-reaching. This particular discussion has centered on the impact that nonprofes- sional programs may have for styles of human service delivery and hence, social change, by virtue of their provision of human services. However, I would like to suggest another means by which the creation of social change may result from the development of nonprofessional programming. Inherent in all of the previous discussions (e.g. Rappaport & Chinsky, 1974) was the need for changes, not only in the style of delivery but also in styles of philOSOphy or attitudes. Community mental health, for instance, was considered not just a new technology, but for these authors, a new attitude as well. In terms of primary prevention, they argued for social systems change and not individual change. The correspondence with the previously defined advocacy approach was made explicit. If real social change was to occur, fundamental changes in our treatment philosophies must occur. The relevance of the present study to this issue can be seen in this manner. If participation in a nonprofessional college field experience 150 can foster the adoption of these new attitudes, then it may produce just those types of people who will put these new ideologies into practice in the human service arena. In this sense, nonprofessional programs have even more potential for the creation of social change. The results of this study point up an interesting dilemma, however, when one considers the different impact that program participation had on each of the experimental conditions in this research. Specifically, the most positive attitudinal outcomes with respect to delinquency orientations were exhibited by the Action group. Because they were en- gaged in innovative treatment approaches and identified with these new approaches, their philosophies towards interventions became more innova- tive and this impact was lasting. However, because all of the Action group's activities in this program were so innovative and atypical, they obtained a less realistic picture of the human service profession, and, consequently, they spent less time employed in that career than most of the other experimental groups. Those participants who hold the key to creating the types of changes that Rappaport and Chinsky (1974) called for in the human services, because of their possession of new and innovative attitudes towards treatment, were just those participants who were less likely to be in a position to put these attitudes into practice. As stated previously, this was probably due to the lack of fit between their career expectations (as generated by the field experience) and the actual nature of the career. Thus, we face a dilemma: "Do we train students in traditional, less effec- tive methods of human service provision so as to enhance their adjustment to the workplace, or, do we train students in more successful methods even though this may have an adverse impact on their ability to persevere within the human service field?” 151 An appropriate solution to this problem was suggested by the results of this study. If the Action condition were to contain an additional career development component, then problems of adjustment to the workplace could be circumvented. Realistic previews of what to expect in the human services could be provided as; part of training and supervision, thereby maximizing their ability to adjust to the workplace. The model presented here, which is supported by the findings in this study, would suggest that the Action group nonprofessionals would have just as good a chance to accomplish career perseverance in the human service professions with this realistic preview in hand. Additionally, they would also possess an arma- mentarium of innovative treatment philosophies that are characteristic of the advocacy approach. We already know that the long—term inculcation of these philosophies is possible. If the participants who hold these philos- ophies can be assisted in adjusting to the human service workplace while maintaining these innovative treatment approaches, then the creation of system-level social change which Rappaport and Chinsky called for;may be accomplished through the person of the college student nonprofessional. We did not know this before. REFERENCES Albee, G.W. Mental health manpower trends. New York: Basic Books, 1959. Alinsky, S.D. Rules for radicals. New York: Random House, 1971. Alley, 5., Blanton, J., Churgin, S., 8 Grant, J.D. New careers: Strate- gies for change in mental health (3 vols.). Berkeley: Social Action Research Center, 1974. Baron, R., Feeney, F., 8 Thornton, W. Preventing delinquency through diversion: The Sacramento County 601 diversion project. Federal Probation, 1973, 37, 13-18. Baskin, S. Innovations in college teaching. In C.B.T. (Ed.), Improving college teaching. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Edu- cation, 1967. Berger, G., 8 Gold, M. Experiment in juvenile court. Ann Arbor: Insti- tute of Social Research, 1976. Blakely, C.H. The diversion of juvenile offenders: A first step towards the dissemination of a successful innovation. Unpublished doc- toral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1981. Blanton, J., 8 Alley, S. Evaluation of paraprofessional programs in the human services. In 8.5. Robin 8 M.O. Wagenfeld (Eds.), Para: professionals in the human services. New York: Human Sciences Press, 1981. 1 Brown, W.F. Effectiveness of paraprofessionals: The evidence. The Per— sonnel and Guidance Journal, 1974, 53, 257-263. Conter, K., Seidman, E.S., Rappaport, J., Kniskern, D., 8 Desaulniers, G. A comparative evaluation of two college student volunteer pro- grams by the volunteers themselves: The importance of commit- ment and supervision. Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois, 1977. Cowen, E.L., Gardner, E.A., 8 Zax, M. (Eds.) Emepgent approaches to men- tal health problems. New York: Appleton-CenungeCrofts, 1967. Cowen, E.L., Zax, M., 8 Laird, J.D. A college student volunteer program in the elementary school setting. Community Mental Health Journal, 1966, 2, 319-328. Cronbach, L.J. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 1951, 16, 297-334. 152 153 Danish, S.J., 8 D'Augelli, A.R. Rationale and implementation of a train- ing program for paraprofessionals. Journal of Professional Psychology, 1976, 7, 38-46. Davidson, W.S. The diversion of juvenile offenders: An examination of the processes and relative efficaey of child advocacypand behav- ioral contracting. Unpublished doctoral dissertatwwt University of Illinois at Champaign/Urbana, 1975. Davidson, W.S., 8 Rapp, C. Child advocacy in the justice system. Social Work, 1976, 21, 225-232. Davidson, W.S., Seidman, E.S., Rappaport, J., Berck, P.L., Rapp., N., Rhodes, W., 8 Herring, J. Diversion program for juvenile offen— ders. Social Work Research 8 Abstracts, 1977, l, 40~54. Durlak, J.A. The use of nonprofessionals as therapeutic agents: Research, issues, and implications. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Vanderbilt University, 1971. Durlak, J.A. Comparative effectiveness of paraprofessional and profes- sional helpers. Psychological Bulletin, 1979, 8Q, 80-92. Durlak, J.A. Evaluating comparative studies of paraprofessional and pro— fessional helpers: A reply to Nietzel and Fisher. Psychological Bulletin, 1981, 89, 566-569. Empey, L. Offender participation in the correctional process: General theoretical issues. In Joint Commission on correctional man- ppwer and training: Offenders as a correctional manpower resource. Washington, D.C.: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1968. Empey, L. Alternatives to incarceration. Washington, D.C.: Superinten— dent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1971. Emshoff, J.G. The diversion of juvenile delinquents: A comparison of intervention with the family and intervention with all life systems. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1980. Gartner, A., Riessman, R., 8 Jackson, V.C. Paraprofessionals in education today. New York: Human Sciences Press, 1977. Goldenberg, 1.1. Build me a mountain: Youth poverty and the creation of new settings. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1971. Goodman, G. An experiment with companionship therapy: College students and troubled boys—-assumptions, selection and design. American Journal of Public Health, 1967, 57, 1772-1777. Gordon, J.E. Project cause, the federal anti-poverty program and some implications of subprofessional training. American Psychologist, 1965, 39, 334—343. 157 Truax, C.B. The use of supportive personnel in rehabilitation counsel- ing: Process and outcome. In 8.8. Leslie (Ed.), Supportive personnel in rehabilitation centers: Current practices and future needs. Washington, D.C.: Association of Rehabilitation Centers, 1967. Young, C.E., True, J.E., 8 Packard, M.E. A national study of associate degree mental health and human service workers. Journal_pf Community Psychology, 1976, 4, 89-95. Zax, M., 8 Specter, G.A. An introduction to community psychology. New York: Wiley 8 Sons, Inc., 1974. Zurcher, L.A. ~The poverty board: Some consequences of maximum feasible ~ - participation." Journal of Social Issues, 1970, 2p, 85—107. APPENDIX A GENERAL INFORMATION FOR VFQ INTERVIEWERS (GIVFQI) 158 Appendix A General Information for VFQ Interviewers (GIVFQI) The interviewer should basically be aware of the following points, paying more attention to some than others depending on the situation. For example, if the respondent is curious or nervous about being evaluated, explain Points #1, #2 and #4 more fully. -- Points to be aware of so that you could explain them, if questioned. 1. ‘J You are working for the College of Social Science at MSU. You are working on a project following up former graduates of MSU. Also, we are interested in evaluating courses offered by the College of Social Science. We are not evaluating them as individuals. Your total involvement in the project is doing interviews. The subject ar.d purpose of the interview. There will be a script which you will read verbatim that should cover this topic. However, they may, out of interest, press you further about the nature of our investigation. You will be asking them questions about their activities (job, school, etc.) and attitudes (how they viewed their past academic experiences, job satisfaction, etc.). You may add in a general manner that we are conducting these interviews to help us improve certain course offerings in the College of Social Science. You may then refer to the script again, stating the purpose of the interview. Stress that we are evaluating pp: course offerings. What will happen during the interview. You will ask them a set of questions. This should take approximately 1/2 hour. If they cannot take the time to do the interview at the time when you call, set up another appointment and ask them to make a note of it. Then ypg make a note of it on the cover sheet in the slot labeled RE-CALL DATE. Also, set up a time for the interview. This should gel with your schedule. IRY_IQ_G§I_I§E INTERVIEW DONE 9N THE FIRST CALL. All information and opinions they give you will be ke ept con- fidential. They will be given a case number and their answers will be punched on computer cards. No names will be used. Thank the respondent for his/her help in providing accurate information. Upon completing the interview, go back and check the contents of the responses you have recorded. Make sure that anyone who was coding your interview could do so from your recording; that is, clarify abbreviations or notes you have made. Then code the interview utilizing your VFu codebook. Now go to STUDENT MASTER LISTS and record the six- digit ID # from these lists onto the VFQ Cover Sheet in the t0p right corner. Make sure the fifth column is correctly coded. males = 1, females = 2. APPENDIX B INTERV'IEWING OUTLINE FOR VFQ II. ‘44 " v ' \. p. ‘ . 411' 1 ‘1. 9“ I \J I ’ J INTERV L :33 UCTLINE FOR VEn 1. Read over the handout, General Information for VFQ Integrigyeflé (GIVFQI) and this INTERVIERIRC OUTLINc FORFVFQ. -— Do you know the purpose of the study? -- What are the major concerns of this investigation? —- What is your role in the evaluation? -- What will happen during the interview? -- Confidentiality!!! -- Herenber the irnortance of being a neutral interviewer. -- Appreciation for their help. YOU may mention this general information at any time during the inter- view ii,i§ i§_DE£§55§£E- 00'1 Offer any information, other than what 15 1“ the SCFIPE nawever, unless i: does appear to be necessary (e.g.. reSpondent appears curious, nervous, etc.). Be conversational when explaining the general information and when asking questions. KNOW YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE (VFQ). T’"' 2. figyp your material ready! -- Interviewing outline (read it over before starting). -- DO vou have complete VF? answer Sheet? -- Codebook -- Coding Sheets -- GIVFQI -- IS Cover Sheet complete? Fill in your name on the cover sheet as well as your ID :. INTRO -- Call permanent phone = first.' SCRIPT: "Hello this is ... (YOUR NAME) ... from the College of Social Science at Michigan State University. Is this the (VOLUNTEER'S NAME) ... residence? (For college residences ask for the volunteer py full pme). IF YES: CONTINUE (GO TO PAGE 2 - 111- [SIABIIBG.IBE IBIEEEIEU”1 IF NO: VERIFY THE PHONE NUMBER AND THE ADDRESS. IF THE VOLUNTEER HAS MOVED OR LIVES ELSEWHERE, ASK IF THEY HAVE A FORWARDING ADDRESS AND/DR PHONE NUMBER. IF THEY 00: GET COMPLETE ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER WITH AREA CODE AND THANK THEM FOR THEIR HELP. WRITE THIS NUMBER ON THE COVER SHEET IN THE SPACE PROVIDED. NOW START OVER AT THE INTRO. IF THEY DON'T KNOW: ASK IF THEY KNOW WHERE (CITY AND STATE) THE VOLUNTEER LIVES. IF THEY DO KNOW, FIND OUT AREA CODE FROM MAP AND C L OPERATOR TO GET NUMBER (1-area code-555—1212). 1F SUCCESSFUL HERE PLACE e AND ADDRESS ON COVER SHEET. III. 160 IF THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY LIVE: Thank them anyway and try the college phone number using protocol described at INTRO and start the whole process over. Anyone can be foundlf If through your conversations it appears that you might be able to gather some information as to volunteer's whereabouts by calling at a later date (e 9., person who would know where he is), make a note of this on the bottom of the cover sheet in "CALL LOG NOTES." Record person's name you should call, date and time when he/She can be reached. Remember, your goal is to FIND THE FORMER VOLUNTEER. Congenial, personable persistence will help you to achieve thTShgoaTT_ STARTINS THE INTERVIEW SCRIPT "Could I Speak with ... (VOLUNTEER'S NAME) ..." -Before starting, record the exact time at which respondent gets on the phone in the call log notes (e.g., ST = 2:16 P.M.) on cover sheet. Remember, now, TALK WITH THE INTERVIEWEE NOT AI_HIM/HER. B§_CONVERSA- IIQNAL. SCRIPT "Hello...(RESPONDENT'S NAME)...this is ..(YOUR NAME)...from the College of Social Science at Michigan State University. We are interested in what-our former graduates are doing now in terms of employment and career plans. We would also like to know how you viewed your past academic experiences at Michigan State University. 00 you have a few minutes to talk now? (only if_the péy; "The interview should take approximately 20 to 30 minutes.”1 IF YES: CONTINUE WITH NEXT SCRIPT (at top of page 3) IF RELUCTANT: EXPLAIN TO THE RESPONDENT THAT HIS/HER HELP WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED AND THAT THE INFORMATION THEY PROVIDE WILL BE HELPFUL TO US IN IMPROVING THE COURSES THAT ARE OFFERED AS HUMAN SERVICE FIELD EXPERIENCES HERE AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY. TRY TO GET THE INTERVIEW DONE ON THE FIRST CALL. IF NO: IF THEY ARE BUSY, RESCHEDULE THE INTERVIEW, NOTING THE EXACT TIME AND DATE ON THE COVER SHEET (see RE-CALL DATE AND TIME). ASK THEM POLITELY TO MAKE A NOTE OF IT TO THEMSELVES (e.g. "It might be a good idea to just make a note of it to remind yourself"). VERIFY THE RE—CALL DATE AND TIME. THANK THEM (e.g. "Thanks a lot for your time. I'll look forward to talking with you on the 23rd”). SCRIPT: GO 161 1. ”Were you involved in the Mental Illness Project which was offered at MSU as Psychology 485 ?” 2. “Were you involved in the Adolescent Diversion Project which was offered as Psychology 370 ?” IF YES: GO TO NEXT SCRIPT BELOW IF NO: GO TO QUESTION #3 BELOW IF RESPONDENT SEEMS UNSURE: CLARIFY WHAT YOU MEAN HERE. ASK THE RESPONDENT IF THEY WORKED WITH A DELINQUENT YOUTH FOR 18 WEEKS AS PART OF THEIR INVOLVEMENT IN PSYCHOLOGY 370. “I'd like to find out how you viewed your involvement in Psychology 370. In order to do this, I will again read you a set of statements concerning your participation in this course. For each statement I read you should tell me whether you agree or disagree using the same five responses. Do you recall what the five possible responses are?” REPEAT RESPONSES IF NECESSARY TO PART C ANSWER SHEET -- PSYCHOLOGY 370 3. "Did you have any undergraduate courses at MSU other than Psy- chology 370 in which you engaged in direct human service activity?" IF YES: CONTINUE -— GO TO QUESTION 4 IF NO: GO TO QUESTION 6 4_ "What was the name of the course?" 5, ”What were the nature of your activities in this course?” — who did they work with? (i.e. what group of people received services) - what organization supervised the activity? - find out what they did, where and with whom (i.e. what target group they worked with). Also find out what organ- ization supervised the activity (e.g. psychology depart- ment, etc.). 6. "Did you have any non-credit experiences in human service while you were at MSU?" IF YES: GO TO QUESTION 7 IF NO: END THE INTERVIEW -- Thank the respondent 7, ”What were the nature of your activities in this experiencel“ — find out what they did, where and with whom (i.e. what target group they worked with). Also find out what organ~ ization supervised the activity (e.g. psychology depart- ment, etc.). --CORDIALLY CONCLUDE THE INTERVIEW IV. 162 IF THEY FLATLY REFUSE: ASK THEM WHY -— TRY TO TALK THEM INTO IT (use prod given under IF RELUCTANT). RECORD THIS IN CALL LOG NOTES; i.e. REFUSAL AND REASONS. CONDUCTING THE INTERVIEW l. Demograpgfi; Information I" 701'. SCR.tI- "Before we start I'd like to ask you a few general questions about your background and present living situation." GO TO ANSWER SHEET - PAGE 1 - DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION. ASK ALL QUESTIONS EXACTLY AS THEY ARE WORDED AND PROBE, IF NECESSARY, TO GET A CODEABLE RESPONSE. 2. Activities SCRIPT: P “Now I'd like to get an idea of what you have been doing since you graduated from MSU, such as any jobs you have had, schools you‘ve attended and volunteering activities you‘ve engaged in; O.K.? (pause for acknowledgement) RECORD ALL INFORMATION Ovagg QUESTIONAIRE AND ANSWER SHEET. IN THIS SECTION YOU MAY NEED TO PROBE IN ORDER TO GET ALL_THE ACCUg RATE INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR EACH OF THE NEXT THREE SECTIONS (i.e., JOBS, SCHOOL, AND VOLUNTEERING). USE YOUR JUDGEMENT AND BE CONVERSATIONAL. H. Employment 1. SCRIPT: Have you been employed at any time since graduation? IF YES: CONTINUE -- GO TO QUESTION 2 IF NO: ASK THE RESPONDENT IF HE/SHE HAS HAD ANY PART-TIME OR TEMPORARY JOBS. PROBE HERE -- WE WANT TO KNOW ABOUT ANY JOBS THEY HAVE HAD SINCE GRADUATION. (e.g. “...and that includes any part time or temporary jobs?”) IF NOT, GO TO (8. SCHOOL). How many jobs have you had since graduation? - again this refers to all jobs. (Probe here). A promotion to a new title, position, or to new duties (not necessarily a financial promotion) represents a new job. ”Now I'd like to get some information about each job. Are you presently employed?” RECORD THIS ANSWER BY LISTING "PRESENT” ON THE ANSWER SHEET IN THE SPACES PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS: from _ _ to (present) . 1. What was your job title? la) Was this a full time, part time, temporary or seasonal job? 2. When did you hold that job? (For present job ask "How long have you held that job?) 155 Kulik, J.A., Martin, R.A., & Scheibe, K.E. Effects of mental hospital volunteer work on students' conceptions of mental illness. Journal of Clinical Psychology, l969, 2§, 326-329. Levitt, E.L. Research on psychotherapy with children. In A. Bergin & S.L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change. New York: Wiley & Sons, l97l. Maier, N.R.F. Innovations in education. American Psychologist, 197l, 26, 722-725. McGee, R.K. Crisis intervention in the community. Baltimore, MD: Uni- versity Park Press, 1974. Mitchell, C.M. Nogprofessionals working with delinquent youth: An ex- perimental comparison of university, community college and community nonprofessionals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, l980. Mitchell, C., Kantrowitz, R.E , & Davidson, W.S. Differential attitude change in nonprofessional experience: An experimental compar- ison. Paper presented at the 87th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, New York, l979. Mitchell, C.M., Kantrowitz, R.E., Parisian, J., & Davidson, W.S. Varying formats of undergraduate field courses: An experimental exam- ination. Paper presented at the 87th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, New York, 1979. Mullen, J. Pre-trial services: An evaluation of policy related research. Cambridge, MA: ABT Associates, Inc., 1974. Nietzel, M.T., & Fisher, S.G. Effectiveness of professional and parapro- fessional helpers: A comment on Durlak. Psychological Bulletin, l98l, B2, 555-565. Palmer, J.B. The youth authority's community treatment project. Federal Probation, 1974, 3B, 3-l4. Pearl, A., & Riessman, F. New careers for the poor. New York: MacMillan Publishing Co., Inc., 1965. Peck, H.S., Kaplan, S.R., Roman, M. Prevention, treatment and social action: A strategy of intervention in a disadvantaged urban area. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, l966, 36, 57-69. Poser, E.G. The effects of therapists' training on group therapeutic outcome. Journal of Consulting Psycholqu, 1966, 3Q, 283-289. Rappaport, J. Community psychology: Values, research, and action. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, l977. Rappaport, J., & Chinsky, J.M. Models for delivery of service from a historical and conceptual perspective. Professional Psychology, 1974, 5, 42-50. 156 Rappaport, J., Chinsky, J.M., & Cowen, E.L. Innovation in helping chronic patients: College students in a mental institution. New York: Academic Press, 1971. Raskin, M. Volunteer probation counselors: A new dimension in senten- cing youthful offenders. Marquette Law Review, 1971, 53, 41-49. Reiff, R., & Riessman, F. The indigenous non-professional: A strategy of change in community action and community mental health pro- grams. New York: Behavioral Publication, Inc., 1970. Riessman, F.” The helper therapy principle. In S.G. Guerney (Ed.), Psycho- therapeutic agents: New roles for nonprofessionals, parents, and teachers. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1969. Rioch, M.J. Pilot projects in training mental health counselors. In E.L. Cowen, E.A. Gardner, & M. Zax (Eds.), Emergent approaches to mental health problems. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1967. Schur, E. Radical non-intervention. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1973. Scott, J.E. Paraprofessionals in criminal justice. In 5.3. Robin & M.O. Wagenfeld (Eds.), Pargprofessionals in the human services. New York: Human Sciences Press, 1981. Seidman, E.S., & Rappaport, J. The educational pyramid: A paradigm for research, training and manpower utilization in community psychol- ogy. American Journal of Community Psychology, 1974, g, 119-130. Seidman, E.S., Rappaport, J., Davidson, W.S., & Linney, J. Changing human service systems: Interventions with children, adolescents, adults, and the elderly. New York: Earlbaum, in press. Siegel, J. Mental health volunteers as change agents. American Journal of Communitngsychongy, 1973, 1, 138-158. Snellman, L.A., Redner, R.L., McVeigh, J.S., Davidson, W.S., & Badger, K. Psychology as field experience: Impact on attitudes toward social interventions. Paper presented at the 89th Annual Con- vention of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, 1981. . Sobey, F. The nonprofessional revolution in mental health. New York: Columbia University Press, 1970. Stuart, R.B. Behavioral contracting within the families of delinquents. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatny, 1971, 2, 1'1]. Tatsuoka, M. Multivariate statistics. New York: Academic Press, 1973. 163 Could you tell me, in order of importance, your four most important duties at this job? ‘ Jo - TRY TO GET FOUR DUTIES LISTED. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY ONLY LIST THREE DUTIES, ASK THEM WHAT OTHER DUTIES THEY HAVE? OBTAIN AND RECORD THIS INFORMATION AS IT IS GIVEN. IF YOU, OR THEY, MISS SOMETHING, POLITELY ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN (e.g., ”I'm sorry but what did you say your job title was?“) SCRIPT: ”Now, I'd like to find out a little bit about the organization for which you worked. Could you tell me the name of the organ— ization for which you work (worked)?” —”Could you tell me briefly the purpose or function of that organization?” -“Finally, I'd like to find out how satisfied you were (are) with this job. Would you say that you were (are) extremely satisfied, slightly satisfied, neutral, slightly dissatisfied, or extremelydis- satisfied with your job as (...job reported...).“ -“Did (has) your level of satisfaction with your job as (...job reported...) change (changed) over time?” IF YES: "How has it changed, from what to what?“ IF NO: GO TO NEXT SCRIPT BELOW SCRIPT: "Using this same five point scale of extreme satisfaction to extreme dissatisfaction, how would you characterize your satis- faction with the organization you worked for? Were ou extremely dissatisfied, slightly dissatisfied, neutral, slighty satisfied, extremely satisfied with (.. .name of organization.. .)?” -"Did (has) your level of satisfaction with this organization change (changed) over time? IF YES: “How has it changed, from what to what?” IF NO: GO TO NEXT SCRIPT BELOW SCRIPT: “OK, finally we are interested in how former graduates of MSU found their jobs. Could you tell me briefly how you found your job as (...job reported...)?“ -“Were there any particular individuals that you met while at MSU who were helpful to you in finding thcs job as (...job reported...)?” IF YES: “WHO WERE THEY?" (Probe here. We want to know how they knew these individuals and what these individuals do?" (e.g. Oh really, what's her position?) IF NO: GO TO NEXT PAGE 164 after question 2 in this section) FOR EACH JOB. -e 9. “You mentioned that you had more than one ion. What was your next most recently held job? -60 THROUGH THIS PROCEDURE FOR EVERY JOB THEY REPORT IN CHRONO- LOGICAL ORDER, GOING FROM PRESENT JOB BACK TO THEIR FIRST JOB SINCE GRADUATION. WHEN FINISHED THIS PROCEDURE FOR EACH JOB GO TO SCRIPT BELOW. - SCRIDT: “What are your future career P1695?" (Probe here to determine what pgéjtigg_they would like to have in the future as well as what J0b related activities they would like to perform. Remem- ber, g€t position (or title) and activities) 8m 1. “Have you attended school at all since graduating from MSU?” IF YES: CONTINUE -- GO TO QUESTION 2 IF NO: GO TO (C. COMMUNITY AND VOLUNTEER ACTIVITIES) 2. ”What were the dates of attendance?" 3. “What is your field of study?" 4. "What degree are you working towards?" 5. “Are you receiving some sort of financial support from your institution?” IF YES: CONTINUE -- GO TO QUESTION 6 IF NO: GO TO QUESTION 8 6. ”What is the source of this support"(i.e. what type of support -- assistantship, fellowship, internship, loans, etc.) IF ON ASSISTANTSHIP OR INTERNSHIP: GO TO QUESTION 7 IF NOT: GO TO QUESTION 8 ON TOP OF NEXT PAGE 7. "What are your duties for the (...assistantship or internship...)?“ (find out job title here -- e.g. teaching assistant, introduction to psychology) 8. "Now I'd like to find out how satisfied you are (were) with (...program in type of school reported above...). Would you say you were extremely satisfied, slightly satisfied, neutral, slightly dissatisfied, or extremely dissatisfied with your (...program in graduate school...)?" u 5.. Luffir... ii I 1‘ M 157 Truax, C.B. The use of supportive personnel in rehabilitation counsel- ing: Process and outcome. In G.B. Leslie (Ed.), Supportive personnel in rehabilitation centers: Current practices and future needs. Washington, D.C.: Association of Rehabilitation Centers, 1967. Young, C.E., True, J.E., & Packard, M.E. A national study of associate degree mental health and human service workers. Journal of Community Psychology, 1976, 4, 89-95. Zax, M., & Specter, G.A. An introduction to community psychology. New York: Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1974. Zurcher, L.A. EThe poverty board: Some consequences of “maximum feasible v- participation.” Journal of Social Issues, 1970, 26, 85-107. APPENDIX A GENERAL INFORMATION FOR VFQ INTERVIEWERS (GIVFQI) 158 Appendix A General Information for VFQ Interviewers (GIVFQI) The interviewer should basically be aware of the following points, paying more attention to some than others depending on the situation. For example, if the respondent is curious or nervous about being evaluated, explain Points #1, #2 and #4 more fully. -- Points to be aware of so that you could explain them, if questioned. 1. ‘J You are worling for the College of Social Science at? iSU. You are working on a project following up former graduates of MSU. Also, we are interested in evaluating courses offered by the College of Social Science. We are ggt evaluating them as individuals. Your total involvement in the project is doing interviews. The subject and purpose 9f the interview. There will be a script which you will read verbatim that should cover this topic. However, they may, out of interest, press you further about the nature of our investigation. You will be asking them questions about their activities (job, school, etc.) and attitudes (how they viewed their past academic experiences, job satisfaction, etc.). You may add in a general manner that we are conducting these interviews to help us improve certain course offerings in the College of Social Science. You may then refer to the script again, stating the purpose of the interview. Stress that we are evaluating gg§_course offerings. What will happen during the interview. You will ask them a set of questions. This should take approximately 1/2 hour. If they cannot take the time to do the interview at the time when you call, set up another appointment and ask them to make a note of it. Then ygg make a note of it on the cover sheet in the slot labeled RE-CALL DATE. Also, set up a time for the interview. This should gel with your schedule. IRY_TQ_§§I_IHE INTERVIEW DONE QN_THE FIRST CALL. All information and gpinions they give ygg_will pg kept Egg: fidential. They will be given a case number and their answers will be punched on computer cards. No names will be used. Thank the respondent for his/her help in providing accurate information. Upon completing the interview, go back and check the contents of the responses you have recorded. Make sure that anyone who was coding your interview could do so from your recording; that is, clarify abbreviations or notes you have made. Then code the interview utilizing your VFQ codebook. Now go to STUDENT MASTER LISTS and record the six- digit ID # from these lists onto the VFQ Cover Sheet in the top right corner. Make sure the fifth column is correctly coded. males = 1, females = 2. APPENDIX B INTERVIEWING OUTLINE FOR VFQ II. .,\_.u' s/ INTEICVILP;L.G LN.:LIIV F TChR \FIJ BEFORE STIRTINC 1. Read over the handout, Gener 1 Information for [[i_IntervTeTcIs (GIVFQI) and this I'TEr. EhI IIG O TLIHr TOP VFQ. -- Do you know the purpose of the study? -- What are the major concerns of this investigation? -- What is your role in the evaluation? -- What will happen during the interview? -- Confidentiality!!! -- Here“ber the ii“nortanc- Of being a neutral interviewer. —- Appreciation for their help. You nav mention this general information at any time during the Inter- VIEW 1' L2.l§ Q§§€_5§iLY L'Oi't offer any information, Other than what 15 I” the SCFIPt UPREVEI, uniess i: does appear to be necessary (e.g.. FESPODGEDA appears Curious, nervous, etc.). Be conversational when “"1' 'ri explaining the general infor ation and when asking questions. KnUn YOUH QUESTIONNAIRE (VFQ). 2. Hgvg your material ready! -- Interviewing outline (read it over before starting). -- Do vou have complete VFQ answer sheet? -- Codebook -- Coding Sheets -- GIVFQI -- Is Cover Sheet complete? Fill in your name on the cover sheet as well as your ID #. INTRO -- Call permanent phone = first.' SCRIPT: "Hello this is ... (YOUR NAME) ... from the College of Social Science at Michigan State University. Is this the (VOLUNTEER'S NAME) ... residence? (For college residences ask for the volunteer by_fgll_ga§§fi. IF YES: CONTINUE (GO TO PAGE 2 — 111- {SIARTING THE INTERVIEV”‘ IF NO: VERIFY THE PHONE NUMBER AND THE ADDRESS. IF THE VOLUNTEER HAS MOVED OR LIVES ELSEWHERE, ASK IF THEY H VE A FORWARDING ADDRESS AND/OR PHONE NUMBER. IF THEY DO: GET COMPLETE ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER WITH AREA CODE AND THANK THEM FOR THEIR HELP. WRITE THIS NU'BER ON THE COVER SHEET IN THE SPACE PROVIDED. NOw‘ START OVER AT THE INTRO. IF THEY DON'T KNOW: ASK IF THEY KNOW WHERE (CITY AND STATE) THE VOLUNTEER LIVES. IF THEY DO lNOW FIND OUT AREA CODE FROMI MAID CALL OPERATOR TO GET NUMBER (11m -area code- 555-1212). IF SUCCESSFUL HERE PLACE R AND ADDRESS ON COVER SHEET. III. T60 IF THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY LIVE: Thank them anyway and try the college phone number using protocol described at INTRO and start the whole process over. Anyone can be found!! If trrough your conversations it appears that you might be able to gather some information as to volunteer's whereabouts by calling at a later date (e.g., person who would know where he is), make a note of this on the bottom of the cover sheet in ”CALL LOG NOTES." Record person's name you should call, date and time when he/She can be reached. Remember, your goal is to FIND THE FORMER VOLUNTEER. Congenial, personable persistence will help you to achieve this goal. STARTING THE INTERVIEW SCRIPT “Coqu I Speak with ... (VOLUNTEER'S NAME) ...” -Before starting, record the exact time at which respondent gets on the phone in the call log notes (e.g., ST = 22l6 P.M.) on cover sheet. Remember, now, TALK WITH THE INTERVIEWEE NOT AI_HIM/HER. §§_CONVERSA- .ILQNAL; SCRIPT "Hello...(RESPONOENT'S NAME)...this is...(YOUR NAME)...from the College of Social Science at Michigan State University. We are interested in what'our former graduates are doing now in terms of employment and career plans. We would also like to know how you viewed your past academic experiences at Michigan State University. 00 you have a few minutes to talk now? (only if the .Qéki “The interview should take approximately 20 to 30 minutes.") IF YES: CONTINUE WITH NEXT SCRIPT (at top of page 3) IF RELUCTANT: EXPLAIN TO THE RESPONDENT THAT HIS/HER HELP WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATEO AND THAT THE INFORMATION THEY PROVIDE WILL BE HELPFUL TO US IN IMPROVING THE COURSES THAT ARE OFFERED AS HUMAN SERVICE FIELD EXPERIENCES HERE AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY. TRY TO GET THE INTERVIEW DONE ON THE FIRST CALL. IF NO: IF THEY ARE BUSY, RESCHEDULE THE INTERVIEW, NOTING THE EXACT TIME AND DATE ON THE COVER SHEET (see RE-CALL DATE AND TIME). ASK THEM POLITELY TO MAKE A NOTE OF IT TO THEMSELVES (e.g. "It might be a good idea to just make a note of it to remind yourself"). VERIFY THE RE-CALL DATE AND TIME. THANK THEM (e.g. "Thanks a Tot for your time. I'lT look forward to talking with you on the 23rd“). SCRIPT: GO l6l l. “Were you involved in the Mental Illness Project which was offered at MSU as Psychology 485 ?“ 2. “Here you involved in the Adolescent Diversion Project which was offered as Psychology 370 ?” IF YES: GO TO NEXT SCRIPT BELOW IF NO: GO TO QUESTION #3 BELOH IF RESPONDENT SEEMS UNSURE: CLARIFY WHAT YOU MEAN HERE. ASK THE RESPONDENT IF THEY NORKED WITH A DELINOUENT YOUTH FOR l8 WEEKS AS PART OF THEIR INVOLVEMENT IN PSYCHOLOGY 37D. “I'd like to find out how you viewed your involvement in Psychology 370. In order to do this, I will again read you a set of statements concerning your participation in this course. For each statement I read you should tell me whether you agree or disagree using the same five responses. Do you recall what the five possible responses are?” REPEAT RESPONSES IF NECESSARY TO PART C ANSNER SHEET -- PSYCHOLOGY 370 3. "Did you have any undergraduate courses at MSU other than Psy- chology 370 in which you engaged in direct human service activity?” IF YES: CONTINUE —- GO TO QUESTION 4 IF NO: GO TO QUESTION 6 4, "What was the name of the course?" 5, "What were the nature of your activities in this course?” - who did they work with? (i.e. what group of people received services) - what organization supervised the activity? - find out what they did, where and with whom (i.e. what target group they worked with). Also find out what organ- ization supervised the activity (e.g. psychology depart— ment, etc.). 6. "Did you have any non-credit experiences in human service while you were at MSU?" IF YES: GO TO QUESTION 7 IF NO: END THE INTERVIEU -- Thank the respondent 7, "What were the nature of your activities in this experience)” - find out what they did, where and with whom (i.e. what target group they worked with). Also find out what organ- ization supervised the activity (e.g. psychology depart- ment, etc.). -—CORDIALLY CONCLUDE THE INTERVIEW IV. I62 IF THEY FLATLY REFUSE: ASK THEM WHY -— TRY TO TALK THEN INTO IT (use prod given under IF RELUCTANTI- RECORD THIS IN CALL LOG NOTES; i.e. REFUSAL AND REASONS. CONDUCTING THE INTERVIEW l. Democraphic Information SCDTQT- VI\A' ‘- “Before we start I'd like to ask you a few general questions about your background and present living situation." I - DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION. ASK ALL GO TO ANSWER SHEET - PAGE UEY ARE WORDED AND PROBE, IF NECESSARY, TO QUESTIONS EXACTLY AS Tn GET A CODEABLE RESPONSE. 2. Activities SCRIPT: “H Now I'd like to get an idea of what you have been doing since you graduated from MSU, such as any jobs you have had, schools you've attended and volunteering activities you've engaged in; O.K.? (pause for acknowledgement) RECORD ALL INFORMATION ON V£Q_QUESTIONAIRE AND ANSWER SHEET. IN THIS SECTION YOU MAY NEED TO PROBE IN ORDER TO GET ALL_THE EEEQr RATE INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR EACH OF THE NEXT THREE SECTIONS (i.e., JOBS, SCHOOL, AND VOLUNTEERING). USE YOUR JUDGEMENT AND BE CONVERSATIONAL. A. Employment l. SCRIPT: Have you been employed at any time since graduation? IF YES: CONTINUE -— GO TO QUESTION 2 IF NO: ASK THE RESPONDENT IF HE/SHE HAS HAD ANY PART-TIME OR TEMPORARY JOBS. PROBE HERE -- WE WANT TO KNOW ABOUT ANY JOBS THEY HAVE HAD SINCE GRADUATION. (e.g. ”...and that includes any part time or temporary jobs?“) IF NOT, GO TO (8. SCHOOL). How many jobs have you had Since graduation? ~ again this refers to all jobs. (Probe here). A promotion to a new title, position, or to new duties (not necessarily a financial promotion) represents a new job. ”Now I'd like to get some information about each job. Are you presently employed?" RECORD THIS ANSWER BY LISTING "PRESENT" ON THE ANSWER SHEET IN THE SPACES PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS: from _ to (present) . l. What was your job title? la) Was this a full time, part time, temporary or seasonal job? PO When did you hold that job? (For present job ask “How long have you held that job?) T63 3. Could you tell me, in order of importance, your four most important duties at this job? - TRY TO GET FOUR DUTIES LISTED. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY ONLY LIST THREE DUTIES, ASK THEM WHAT OTHER DUTIES THEY HAVE? OBTAIN AND RECORD THIS INFORMATION AS IT IS GIVEN. IF YOU, OR THEY, MISS SOMETHING, POLITELY ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN (e g., ”I'm sorry but what did you say your job title was?“) SCRIPT: ”Now, I'd like to find out a little bit about the organization for which you worked. Could you tell me the name of the organ- ization for which you work (worked)?“ —“:ould you tell me briefly the purpose or function of that organization?” -“Finally, I'd like to find out how satisfied you were (are) with this job. Would you say that you were (are) extremely satisfied, slightly satisfied, neutral, slightly dissatisfied, or extremelydis— satisfied with your job as (...job reported...).” -“Did (has) your level of satisfaction with your job as (...job reported...) Change (changed) over time?" IF YES: "How has it changed, from what to what?" IF NO: GO TO NEXT SCRIPT BELOW SCRIPT: ”Using this same five point scale of extreme satisfaction to extreme dissatisfaction, how would you characterize your satis- faction with the organization you worked for? Were ou extremely dissatisfied, slightly dissatisfied, neutral, slight y satisfied, or extremely satisfied with (...name of organization...)?” -"Did (has) your level of satisfaction with this organization change (changed) over time? IF YES: “How has it changed, from what to what?” IF NO: GO TO NEXT SCRIPT BELOW SCRIPT: "OK, finally we are interested in how former graduates of MSU found their jobs. Could you tell me briefly how you found your job as (...job reported...)?” -”Were there any particular individuals that you met while at MSU who were helpful to you in finding thcs job as (...job reported...)?” IF YES: ”WHO WERE THEY?" (Probe here. We want to know how they knew these individuals and what these individuals do?" (e.g. Oh really, what's her position?) IF NO: GO TO NEXT PAGE SCRIPT: l64 NOW GO THROUGH THIS SET OF QUESTIONS (beginning with the Script after question 2 in this section) FOR EACH JOB. ’9-9. “You mentioned that you had more than one ioo. What was your next most recently held job? -GO THROUGH THIS PROCEDURE FOR EVERY JOB THEY REPORT IN CHRONO- LOGICAL ORDER, GOING FROM PRESENT JOB BACK TO THEIR FIRST JOB SINCE GRADUATION, WHEN FINISHED THIS PROCEDURE FOR EACH JOB GO TO SCRIPT BELOW. “What are your future career plans?” (Probe here to determine what pggitign they would like to have in the future as well as what job related activities they would like to perform. Remem- 7 Der, get position (or title) and activities): 8. School l. “Have you attended school at all since graduating from MSU?“ IF YES: CONTINUE -- GO TO QUESTION 2 IF NO: GO TO (C. COMMUNITY AND VOLUNTEER ACTIVITIES) ”What were the dates of attendance?” ”What is your field of study?" "What degree are you working towards?" ”Are you receiving some sort of financial support from your institution?” IF YES: CONTINUE -- GO TO QUESTION 6 IF NO: GO TO QUESTION 8 . ”What is the sOurce of this support”(i.e. what type of support -- assistantship, fellowship, internship, loans, etc.) IF ON ASSISTANTSHIP OR INTERNSHIP: GO TO QUESTION 7 IF NOT: GO TO QUESTION 8 ON TOP OF NEXT PAGE "What are your duties for the (...assistantship or internship...)?“ (find out job title here -- e.g. teaching assistant, introduction to psychology) "Now I'd like to find out how satisfied you are (were) with (...program in type of school reported above...). Would you say you were extremely satisfied, slightly satisfied, neutral, slightly dissatisfied, or extremely dissatisfied with your (...program in graduate school...)?" C. l65 “Have you gone to any other schools or been in any other fields of study Since you graduated from MSU?“ IF YES: GO BACK TO QUESTION 2 AND PROCEED IF NO: GO TO (C. COMMUNITY AND VOLUNTEER ACTIVITIES) Community and Volunteer Activities SCRIPT: “Now I'd like to ask you some questions about your extra- curricular activities such as your involvement in the com- munity and any volunteering activities you may have engaged in Since graduating from MSU.” “S nce graduating have you been involved in any volunteer v: 1' cti 'ties in your community?” 0) IF YES: GO TO QUESTION 2 IF no; so To ATTITUDES AND EVALUATIONS (ON NEXT PAGE) ”How many different activities have you been involved in since graduation?“ ”Beginning with the most recent volunteer work that you were or are now involved in, would you tell me what your actTVities in this position consisted of?” —PROBE AS NEEDED TO GET THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION Title or Position Nature of Activities Did they work with a target group? Who was it? ~Direct or Indirect Service (4) Organization that supervised the activity. ( ( ( (A) N -‘ V\’V l'Now I'd like to find out how much training you received for this volunteer position. Would you say that you received none, very little, a moderate amount, or a great deal of training for this volunteer work?“ ”Would you say that you received none, very little, a moderate. H amount, or a great deal of supervision in this volunteer aCthlLy?' “OK, now I'd like to get an idea of how satisfied you are with this volunteer work. Would you say you were extremely satis- fied, Slightly satisfied, neutral, slightly dissatisfied, or extremely dissatisfied with this volunteer work?" 3. ATTIEDLS BELT? E_Y__ALU; TION_S Pa r t A- BEES}. (Iced e112 HIEF‘JLLCLILCEE SCRIPT: “One of the things we are interested in is how former students. like yourself, view your past academic exper- iences at MSU. I'd like to ask you a few questions along these lines, Oi? Remember these questions refer to your classroom undergraduate coursework and not to awy_com"un ' field experiences you may have been in— _-.__.._..._.——-:.._VVJ - volved in, OK?“ IF RE SPOYLF‘T SEEMS TIRED, MOODY, ETC. ASSURE HIM/ HER THAT THE INTERVIEW IS NEARLY COMPLETED AND THAT YOU O;LY HAVE A FEW MCRE QUESTIONS TO ASK. SCRIPT: “I am going to read to you a set of statements. For each of the following statements I'd like you to tell me whether you strongly agree, slightly agree, are neutral, slightly dissagree, or strongly dissagree with the statement I read. You may use any one of the five responses I‘ve just given you. Do you understand?” IF RESPONDENT SOUNDS UNCERTAIN OF TASK, DOES NOT USE CORRECT RESPONSE (e.g., ”I agree") OR NEVER USES A RESPONSE, REPEAT THE POSSIBLE RESPONSES (e.g., “Remember, for each statement you can say ...etc....You may use any of these five responses”). DO THIS WHENEVER NECESSARY. NOW WORK FROM THE ANSWER SHEET - ATTITUDES AND EVALUATIONS (PART A) Part 8. Target Population Attitudes SCRIPT: ”Now I'd like to ask you some questions concerning your attitudes about certain target populations with whom students in Social Sciences often work. Again I will read you some statements about these target populations and you can tell me whether you agree or disagree with each statement using the same five responses as in the previous section. Do you understand?” -REPEAT THE POSSIBLE RESPONSES HERE IF NECESSARY. -NOW GO TO ANSWER SHEET (PART B) Part C. Field Experience SCRIPT: "The interview is just about finished now but before we end I would like to ask you some questions about human service field experiences you may have been involved in at MSU, OK?” APPENDIX C VFQ QUESTIONNAIRE AND ANSWER SHEET l67 Appendix C VOLUNTEER FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONNAIRE (VFQ) Telephone Interview Cover Sheet ID # (in red) VOLUNTEER'S NAME: DATE: ADDRESS: PHONE #: RE-CALL DATE: NEW ADDRESS: RE-CALL TIME: RE-CALL #: RE-CALL MADE ( ) (check here) NEW PHONE #: ’ DATE‘ 3rd ADDRESS: ‘ TIME‘ 3rd PHONE #: COLLEGE ADDRESS: COLLEGE PHONE #: CONDITION: INTERVIEWER'S NAME: ID #: RATER'S NAME: ID #: CALL LOG NOTES: (Use other side if necessary) l68 VFQ Questionnaire and Answer Sheet l. DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION (Circle the given response or write in the space provided) I. 2. l0. ll. l2. What is your marital status? I. Single 2. Married 3. Divorced 4. Separated 5. Widowed Do you have any children? l. Yes 2. No a. If so, how many? (actual number of children) What is your age? What field of study did you get your undergraduate degree in? (If more than one, list all majors in which respondent received a degree). l. 2. 3. When did you graduate from MSU? Year Month (probe to get year and month) In what state do you now live? How long have you lived in (...state named above...)? How many times have you moved since you graduated? What was your final GPA when you graduated? What is the size of the town in which you now live? Would you describe the town in whiCh you now live as urban, suburban, or rural? l. Urban 2. Suburban 3. Rural How many people live in your present household? - GO TO INTERVIEWING OUTLINE - ACTIVITIES 2. ACTIVITIES A. Employment; (circle the response or fill in the blank) 1. Employed since graduation: l. Yes 2. No 2. Number of jobs since graduation: 3. Presently employed: I. Yes 2. No a. l69 Job #l Dates held: from to l. Job title: lA) Type of job: 2. Name of organization: 3. Type of organization: 4. Functions of organization: 5. Job duties:l. 6. Job satisfaction: (circle one) 1 . 2 3 4 5 extremely slightly slightly extremely dissatisfied dissatisfied), neutral satisfied satisfied 6A) Change of satisfaction over time? I. Yes 2. No 68) Direction of Change: from to (fill in both spaces with one of the choices given in question 6 above) 7. Organizational satisfaction: (circle one) I 2 3 4 5 extremely slightly slightly extremely dissatisfied dissatisfied neutral satisfied satisfied 7A) Change of satisfaction over time? l. Yes 2. No 73) Direction of Change: from to 8. How job was found: 9. Helpful individuals met while at MSU? I. Yes 2. No l0. Helpful Individuals l. 2. 3. l7O ll. Future career plans: 8. School l. School attended since graduation: I. Yes 2. No Bl. School #l Dates attended: From: To: 2. Field of study: 3. Degree: 4. Receiving support: I. Yes 2. No 5. Source (type) of support: 6. Duties: 7. Satisfaction with graduate school program: (circle one) l 2 3 4 S extremely Slightly slightly extremely . dissatisfied dissatisfied neutral satisfied satisfied 82. School #2 Dates attended; From:' To: 2. Field of study: 3. Degree: 4. Receiving support: l. Yes 2. No ‘ 5. Source (type) of support: 6. Duties: 7. Satisfaction with graduate school program: (circle one) I 2 3 4 5 extremely slightly slightly extremely dissatisfied dissatisfied neutral satisfied satisfied C. Community and Volunteer Activities l. Volunteer activities: l. Yes 2. No 2. Number of volunteer activities: l7l Nature of activity Pl(brief description): 3a) Volunteer's title: 3b) Target group: 3c) Supervising organization: 3d) Amount of training: l 2 3 4 none very little moderate amount great deal 3e) Amount of supervision: l 2 3 4 none very little moderate amount great deal 3f) Satisfaction with volunteering activity: I 2 3 4 5 extremely slightly slightly extremely dissatisfied . dissatisfied neutral satisfied satisfied Nature of activity #2 (brief description): Aa) Volunteer's title: 4b) Target group: 4c) Supervising organization: 4d) Amount of training: l 2 3 4 none very little moderate amount great deal 48) Amount of supervision: l 2 3 4 none very little moderate amount great deal 4;) Satisfaction with volunteering activity: I 2 3 4 5 extremely slightly slightly extremely dissatisfied dissatisfied neutral satisfied satisfied 3. T72 5. Nature of activity #3 (brief description): v 5a v 5b 5a) 5e) 5f) Volunteer's title: Target group: Supervising organization: Amount of training: l 2 3 4 none very little moderate amount great deal Amount of supervision: l 2 3 4 none very little moderate amount great deal Satisfaction with volunteering activity: 1 extremely dissatisfied 2 3 4 5 slightly slightly extremely dissatisfied neutral satisfied satisfied ATTITUDES AND EVALUATIONS Past Academic Experiences Part A. strongly slightly disagree disagree l 2 (circle one) l. l 2 3 4 5 2. l 2 3 4 5 3. l 2 3 4 5 4. l 2 3 4 5 5. l 2 3 4 5 slightly strongly neutral agree agree 3 4 5 My undergraduate coursework was relevant to my career goals. My undergraduate coursework was helpful to me in getting a job or getting into graduate school. My undergraduate coursework helped me to better myself as a person. My undergraduate coursework, in general, helped me to better understand the problems encountered by people with mental illness. My undergraduate coursework improved my under- standing of mental illness. Part 8. l0. ll. I73 strongly slightly slightly strongly disagree disagree neutral agree agree l 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 My undergraduate coursework enhanced my self-esteem. l 2 3 4 5 My undergraduate coursework improved my understand- ing of juvenile delinquency. l 2 3 4 5 My undergraduate coursework, in general, helped to confirm my interest in a human service career. l 2 3 4 5 My undergraduated coursework, in general,helped me to better understand adolescents with problems. GO TO SCRIPT IN PART 8 ON INTERVIEWING OUTLINE (PAGE 7) Target Population Attitudes l 2 3 4 5 Juveniles would be better off if they were not officially handled by an agency. l 2 3 4 5 Increasing individual therapy would lessen delinquency l 2 3 4 5 Increasing individual therapy will decrease mental _illness. I 2 3 4 .5 The juvenile court is generally too lenient with delinquents. l 2 3 4 5 The mental health system is effective in dealing with people who have mental illness. l 2 3 4 5 One must be strict when dealing with a delinquent youth. l 2 3 4 5 Psychiatrists are good people to turn to if one has mental problems. l 2 3 4 5 Making a youthful offender of the law go through juvenile court proceedings can only cause more problems in the future of the youth. I 2 3 4 5 In dealing with delinquency one should aim at changing groups and neighborhoods not individual youngsters. l 2 3 4 5 Mental patients can be trained to live successfully in the community. l 2 3 4 5 Factors giving rise to delinquent behavior are found in external social and economic conditions rather than within the personalities of certain individuals. T74 strongly slightly slightly strongly disagree disagree neutral agree agree l 2 3 4 5 l2. l 2 3 4 5 Special counseling programs should be provided for the youth who engage in delinquent activities. l3. l 2 3 4 5 School teachers are effective when dealing with youths who have problems. T4. l 2 £4) b (fl Mentally ill people are basically good people; they just need some understanding. l5. l 2 3 4 5 Mental illness is caused by social injustices rather than internal personality problems. l6. l 2 3 4 5 Juvenile delinquents are good people; they just need some understanding. l7. l 2 3 4 5 The juvenile justice system does a good job handling youthful offenders. l8. l 2 3 4 5 Parents of juvenile delinquents do a good job of dealing with their kids' problems. Part C. P§ychology 370 A. Involved in Mental Health Project 1. Yes 2. No B. Involved in Psychology 370 1. Yes 2. No strongly slightly slightly strongly disagree disagree neutral agree agree T 2 3 4 5 l. l 2 3 4 5 My experience in Psychology 370 was relevant to my career goals. 2. l 2 3 4 5 My participation in Psychology 370 was helpful to me in getting a job or getting into graduate school. 3. l 2 3 4 5 My participation in Psychology 370 helped me to better understand myself as a person. 4. l 2 3 4 5 My experience in Psychology 370 enhanced my self- esteem. S. l 2 3 4 5 I feel that the work I did with my youth in Psychology 370 was successful. 6. l 2 3 4 5 I would take the Psychology 370 course again if I had the oppurtunity. T75 strongly slightly Slightly strongly disagree ‘disagree neutral agree agree l 2 3 4 5 7. l 2 3 4 5 My involvement in Psychology 370 helped to confirm my interest in a human service career. 8. l 2 3 4 5 My involvement in Psychology 370 improved my understanding of juvenile delinquency. 9. l 2 3 4 5 My involvement in Psychology 370 helped me to better understand adolescents with problems. TO. l 2 3 4 5 I would recommend Psychology 370 to a student now enrolled at MSU. ,ll. l 2 3 4 5 My involvement in Psychology 370 helped me to realize that I was not interested in a career in human service. "OK, now I'd like to ask you one more question about your involvement in Psychology 370." l2. 13. T4. ”Were there any individuals that you met during your involvement in Psychology 370 or as a result of your involvement with your youth that were helpful jg_ggthgy to you in finding any of the jobs you reported. For example, did anyone write references for you or give you job leads? l; Yes 2. No Who were they? (Probe here to find out what the individual's position was and what they did; also how the knew them.) How did they help you? GO TO QUESTION 3 ON INTERVIEWING OUTLINE (PAGE 8) Human Service Undergraduate Course: l. Yes 2. No Course title: Nature of course (brief description): 5a) Target group: 5b)‘ Supervising organization: T76 Non-course-credit human service: l. Nature of service (brief description): Yes No 7a) Target group: 7b) Supervising organization: “‘IIYIIITITITITIIES