TH ESIS This is to certify that the dissertation entitled TRAINING FOR VOLUNTARY NONFORMAL EDUCATORS: NEEDS, RESOURCES AND FEASIBILITY presented by ELIZABETH R | C0 JAVALERA has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D Administration and degree in Curriculum Major professor Dam—44412, M s”: MSU is an Affirmative Anion/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771 (lulllllllllllllllIlllllllll IVIESI.J RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to LIBRARIES remove this checkout from _.— your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. [101le W P Q ‘96 . I) (pp ’ V tau 3. DC] 2 4 799g ‘ m s *00' 1";33 TTF gmv MAY 1 0 ‘993 l!” 1019” TRAINING FOR VOLUNTARY NONFORMAL EDUCATORS: NEEDS, RESOURCES AND FEASIBILITY by Elizabeth R. Javalera A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Curriculum I983 Copyright by ELIZABETH R. J AVALERA 1983 ABSTRACT TRAINING FOR VOLUNTARY NONFORMAL EDUCATORS: NEEDS, RESOURCES AND FEASIBILITY by Elizabeth R. Javalera The research had a threefold purpose: (a) to design three models of training voluntary nonformal educators, (b) to estimate the anticipated costs and benefits of each model, and (c) to estimate the feasibility of each model in training voluntary nonformal educators in rural and urban Protestant churches in the three major island-groups of the Philippines. Church workers and decision makers from nine selected local churches reprsenting different denominations, geographical locations, sizes, and community structures participated in this study. Data for the study were obtained through the administration of a written questionnaire to all the church workers who attended a specially arranged general meeting and through personal interviews of no more than five decision makers in each of the nine selected churches. The major findings follow: (a) both urban and rural church workers seemed to accept any of the three training approaches (i.e., training-on-your-own, training-with-a-group, and training-through-actual-experience), but training— with-a-group appeared to be the most acceptable to them; (b) urban workers seemed to accept both the self-instructional approach and the experiential learning approach but not the workshop approach, whereas the rural decision Elizabeth R. Javalera makers found the self-instructional approach less acceptable and the other two approaches even less acceptable; and (c) the decision makers generally believed their churches could meet the costs of any of. the three approaches. Recommendations include the following: (a) MODELS I, II, and III should be revised to incorporate some of the suggestions given by the respondents, particularly those of the decision makers; (b) the revised training models should be recommended to both rural and urban churches in the Philippines for use in developing their voluntary nonformal educators; (c) similar studies should be done to estimate the feasibility of using other training models in developing voluntary nonformal educators in rural and urban churches in the Philippines and in other parts of Asia; and (d) a handbook containing (1) practical guidelines on how to select or plan the training program(s) most suitable to a particular situation and (2) detailed designs of several tested training models should be prepared and made available to local churches. DEDICATION TO MY PARENTS lreneo and Salome Javalera and to all my colleagues in PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF CHRISTIAN EDUCATION, INC. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Without the help of God and the assistance of many individuals and groups, this study would never have been possible. I wish to express my sincere appreciation and gratitude to Dr. Ted W. Ward, my advisor and the chair of my guidance committee, for the many hours he has spent guiding me, encouraging me, and challenging me to do my best throughout my doctoral program. I am very grateful also to Dr. Charles A. Blackman, Dr. S. Joseph Levine, and Dr. Lawrence E. Sarbaugh, members of my committee, and to Dr. Jack M. Bain for their invaluable advice and comments. I wish to extend my deep gratitude to those individuals and groups who provided prayers and financial support: to the Board of Trustees and staff of the Philippine Association of Christian Education, Inc., for allowing me to take a study leave, to several denominational heads in the Philippines for granting me the permission and the endorsement to carry out this research in their churches, and to all the pastors and church workers for providing me all the data necessary for the study. Finally, I wish to thank Licerio F. Javalera for doing the computer processing of my data, Violeta Gutierrez for the considerable time and effort she spent typing my manuscript, and other individuals for their helpful feedback, moral support, and other contributions. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables List of Figures CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION The Problem Background of the Problem Importance of the Study The Purpose of the Study A Brief Description of the Proposed Training Models MODEL I—Based on the Self-Instruction Approach MODEL II--Based on the Workshop Approach MODEL III—Based on the Experiential Learning Approach Research Questions Delimitations of the Study Limitations of the Study Definition of Terms Overview CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE The Need for Training Voluntary Church Leaders The Training Process Designing Training Programs Training Models CHAPTER III: RESEARCH PROCEDURE Research Methodology Composition of the Sample Design of the Pr0posed Training Models MODEL I—the Self-Instruction Approach MODEL II—the Workshop Approach MODEL III—the Experiential Learning Approach Estimation of Training Costs Development of the Instruments The Questionnaire The Interview Protocol Validity of the Instruments Data Collection Analytical Methods iv < g... \OO\O\\II~P-PW\AWNN*—*—*" X h—D—b—h— fioxwoo M4>~¢~P~P4>4>~¢~waw OWVVCBUU-fi-S-‘OOCDM \JIKII wt— CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS OF DATA Results of the Questionnaire Category I: Response to Areas of Content Category 11: Response to Training Approach Category III: Response to Trainers/Resource Persons Category IV: Response to Training Schedule Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Respondents' Age by Category Responses Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Respondents' Sex by Category Responses Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Respondents' Marital Status by Category Responses Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Respondents' Educational Level by Category Responses Cross-Tabulation and Chi—Square of Respondents' Employment by Category Responses Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Respondents' Position in the Church by Category Responses Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Respondents' Geographical Location by Category Responses Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Denominational Affiliation by Category Responses Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Church Size by Category Responses Answers to the Research Questions Research Question One Research Question Two Research Question Three CHAPTER V: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Restatement of the Problem and Purpose Description of Procedures Major Findings and Conclusions Implications Recommendations APPENDICES A. Description of the Proposed Training Models B. Estimated Training Costs of MODELS I, II, III C. A Checklist for Program Planners D. The Models of Teaching Classified by Family and Mission E. The Questionnaire F. Interview Protocol G. Correspondence H. Map of the Philippines Bibliography 72 72 80 93 98 98 119 13‘} 146 146 149 152 168 168 168 171 176 178 180 191 194 197 200 205 207 212 213 6.1 6.2 6.3 6J5 6.5 6.6 7.1 7.2 7.3 8.1 8.2 LIST OF TABLES Representation of Church Size and Community Structure Description of Participating Churches Distribution of Subjects by Church Demographic Information on the Questionnaire Respondents Frequency Distributions, Percentages, Means, and Standard Deviations-Workers' Questionnaire Respondents' Age and Acceptability of How to Interpret the Bible Respondents' Age and Acceptability of Training-with-a-Group- of—Other-People Respondents' Age and Acceptability of Training-Through-Actual- Experience ' Respondents' Age and Acceptability of Help from Others Who Are also in Training Respondents' Age and Acceptability of Training for One Hour Each Day for One Year Respondents' Age and Acceptability of Training for Ten Successive Whole Days Once a Year Respondents' Sex and Acceptability of Training-with-a-Group- of-Other-PeOple Respondents' Sex and Acceptability of Training for One Hour Each Week for One Year Respondents' Sex and Acceptability of Training for Five Successive Whole Days Twice a Year Respondents' Marital Status and Acceptability of Training-Through-Actual Experience Respondents' Marital Status and Acceptability of Training for Five Successive Whole Days Once a Year vi #0 41 #2 43 57 66 67 68 69 7O 71 73 74 75 76 77 8.3 8.4 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 . 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9 9.10 9.11 9.12 10.1 10.2 10.4 Respondents' Marital Status and Acceptability of Training for Ten Successive Whole Days Once a Year Respondents' Marital Status and Acceptability of Training for Two Successive Weeks Once a Year Respondents' Educational Level and Acceptability of Victorious Christian Life and Service Respondents' Educational Level and Acceptability of How to Interpret the Bible Respondents' Educational Level and Acceptability of How to Teach a Class or Lead a Bible Study Respondents' Educational Level and Acceptability of How to Train Bible Teachers Respondents' Educational Level and Acceptability of Training-on-Your-Own Respondents' Educational Level and Acceptability of Training-with-a-Group-of-Other-People Respondents' Educational Level and Acceptability of Training-Through-Actual-Experience Respondents' Educational Level and Acceptability of Help from Others Who Are Also in Training Respondents' Educational Level and Acceptability of Help from Experts Within Your Church Respondents' Educational Level and Acceptability of Help from Experts Outside Your Church Respondents' Educational Level and Acceptability of Training for Ten Successive Whole Days Once a Year Respondents' Educational Level and Acceptability of Training for Two Successive Weeks Once a Year Respondents' Employment and Acceptability of Bible Content Respondents' Employment and Acceptability of How to Interpret the Bible Respondents' Employment and Acceptability of How to Understand Learners Respondents' Employment and Acceptability of Help from Experts Outside the Church vii 78 79 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 94 95 96 97 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 12.7 12.8 12.9 12.10 12.11 12.12 12.13 12.14 Respondents' Position in Church and Acceptability of How to Interpret the Bible Respondents' Position in Church and Acceptability of Training-Through-Actual-Experience Respondents' Position in Church and Acceptability of Training for One Hour Each Week for One Year Respondents' Position in Church and Acceptability of Training for One Whole Day Each Week for One Year Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of Bible Content Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of How to Understand'Learners Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of How to Interpret the Bible Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of How to Train Bible Teachers Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of How to Teach a Class or Lead a Bible Study Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of Training-on-Your-Own Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of Training-with-a-Group-of—Other-People Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of Training-Through-Actual-Experience Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of Help from Others Who Are Also in Training Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of Training One Hour Each Day for One Year Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of Training for One Whole Day Each Week for One Year Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of Training for Five Successive Whole Days Twice a Year Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of Training for Ten Successive Whole Days Once a Year Respondents' Geographical Location and Acceptability of Training for Two Successive Weeks Once a Year viii 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 13.6 13.7 13.8 13.9 13.10 13.11 13.12 13.13 13.14. 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of Bible Content Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of How to Understand Learners Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of How to Interpret the Bible Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of How to Teach a Class or Lead a Bible Study Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of How to Train Bible Teachers Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of Training-on-Your-Own Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of Training-with-a-Group-of-Other-Pe0ple Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of Training-Through-Actual-Experience Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of Help from Others Who Are Also in Training Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of Training for One Hour Each Day for One Year Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of Training for One Whole Day Each Week for One Year Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of Training for Five Successive Whole Days Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of Training for Ten Successive Whole Days Once a Year Respondents' Denominational Affiliation and Acceptability of Training for Two Successive Weeks Once a Year Size of Respondents' Church and Acceptability of How to Interpret the Bible Size of Respondents' Church and Acceptability of How to Train Bible Teachers/ Leaders Size of Respondents' Church and Acceptability of Training-on-Your-Own Size of Respondents' Church and Acceptability of Training for One Whole Day Each Week for One Year ix 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 135 136 137 138 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 Respondents' Community Structure and Acceptability of How to Train Bible Teachers/ Leaders Respondents' Community Structure and Acceptability of Training for One Whole Day Each Week for One Year Respondents' Community Structure and Acceptability of Training for Ten Successive whole Days Once a Year Respondents' Community Structure and Acceptability of Training for Two Successive Weeks Once a Year 141 142 143 144 LIST OF FIG URES Spiral Model of Training Process Steps in the Training Process Analysis of Decision Makers‘ Reactions to Estimated Training Costs of MODELS I, II, and 111 Analysis of Acceptabilty of the Training Models to Rural and Urban Decision Makers Analysis of the Acceptability of the Three Training Approaches to the Rural and Urban Workers xi 153 166 167 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The Problem Protestant churches in the Philippines get exposed to all sorts of leadership training approaches many of which are not suitable culturally, economically, and otherwise to their particular situations. This study was conducted in order to determine the feasibility of at least three training models in training voluntary nonformal educators in rural and urban protestant churches in the Philippines. Background of the Problem In recent years many Protestant churches in the Philippines have come to realize how difficult it is to rely mainly on Bible school—or seminary-trained ministers to carry on the varied ministries of the church. Consequently, they now depend heavily on voluntary workers, otherwise referred to as lay leaders and workers. One reason for this heavy dependence on voluntary workers is most of these churches, particularly those in the rural areas, cannot afford to hire even one trained minister. Another reason is there are not enough trained ministers who are available. A deeper reason, however, is they have finally accepted the oft-repeated and long-ignored Biblical teaching that the work of the ministry is the responsibility of all people of the church. Because of this realization, many churches are now striving to recruit more voluntary workers, particularly nonformal educators such as Bible study leaders, Sunday school teachers, vacation Bible school workers, trainers of teachers and leaders and other communicators of the Bible. They are also increasing their e efforts to provide necessary training for their newly recruited workers, as well as for those who are already serving. Unfortunately, however, training programs in many churches are still very inadequate. Pressured by the great demand for training workers, most churches resort to what may be labeled as "instant training programs." They try to do the impossible job of producing "instant workers" by way of hurriedly prepared half- day seminars or else day-long conferences filled with lectures. Some other churches merely depend on what may be described as "packaged training programs" usually offered by well-meaning parachurch organizations. Needless to say, such programs cannot be expected to work in every church. After all, each church, not to mention each trainee or group of trainees, has its own unique characteristics, needs, problems, interests, and aspirations. Importance of the Study Most of these churches have very limited resources. They cannot afford to select training alternatives by "trial and error." They need some specific information which can help them determine the training model or models that will bring them improved benefits for a particular level of resource use. This research provides such badly needed information. In addition, this study offers a research design which, when replicated, may be useful in assessing the feasibility of other training models designed to develop leaders and workers for Churches both in the Philippines and in other parts of Asia. The Purpose of the Study This study had a three-fold purpose: (a) to design three models of training voluntary nonformal educators, (b) to estimate the anticipated costs and benefits of each model, and (c) to estimate the feasibility of each model in training voluntary nonformal educators in rural and urban protestant churches in the three major island groups of the Philippines. A Brief Description of the Proposed Training Models Three models of training voluntary nonformal educators were developed and analyzed for this study. MODEL 1 was based on the self—instruction approach, MODEL 11 on the workshop approach, and MODEL 111 on the experiential learning approach. MODEL I—Based on the Self-Instruction Approach Aimed at helping voluntary Bible teachers and leaders improve their knowledge of the Bible and their competency in communicating its teachings to others, MODEL I takes trainees through two years of learning experience. The first year consists of daily self-studies, using self—instructional texts, during weekdays and of weekly interaction with co—trainees and with a designated leader on Sundays at Sunday school time. During the second year, trainees are provided opportunities to be involved first as Bible study assistants and later as regular Bible study leaders or teachers. MODEL II—Based on the Workshop Approach Intended for training voluntary Bible teachers and leaders, MODEL 11 is divided into four blocks of time called "PHASES." In PHASE 1, trainees are involved in a five—day preliminary workshop; in PHASE 2, in assistantship; in PHASE 3, in a more advanced five-day workshop; and in PHASE 4, in actual teaching. MODEL III——Based on the Experiential Learning Approach Designed for developing trainers of voluntary nonformal educators, MODEL 111 engages trainees in a two-week training experience. period, the trainees are given time to actually plan, implement, and evaluate a training activity for a previously observed church near the training site and to design a plan for training voluntary nonformal educators in their home churches. (See Appendices A and B for a fuller description, illustration, and estimated cost of each of these three training models.) Research Questions The research was guided by the following questions: 1. What are the anticipated benefits of each model of training for the trainees? for the local church? a. How many voluntary nonformal educators can be trained by each model at a time? What specific knowledge, skills, and attitudes will the trainees learn through participation in each training program? Will each program provide for immediate application of learnings to local or back-home situations? Will each program motivate the trainees to further develop themselves through a continuing self-improvement program and through other organized instruction programs? Which model or models are workable for training voluntary nonformal educators in rural churches? in urban churches? a. How much will it cost (monetary and nonmonetary) to operate MODEL 1? MODEL 11? MODEL 111? During this two—week b. Can these costs be met by the local churches? c. Are these costs reasonable in proportion to the anticipated benefits? 3. Which model or models are acceptable to rural churches? to urban churches? a. Which components (training content, manner of training, training personnel, training schedule, training costs) do decision makers find relevant to the particular training needs and interests of the workers in their respective churches? b. What do they see as the strength(s) of each model? c. What do they see as the weakness(es) of each model? d. What specific recommendations do they have for the improvement of each model? Delimitations of the Stud; The research was not designed as a cost-effectiveness analysis in which the monetary measures of resource costs are linked to the effectiveness of a program in producing a particular impact (Levin, 1975). It is simply an estimate of the anticipated costs and benefits of three training models for the purpose of determining their feasibility in rural and urban churches in the Philippines. Neither was the research designed to field test the three training models but to get the reactions of leaders and workers in nine selected local churches so as to determine the likelihood of these models being accepted when introduced to other churches later. Limitations of the Study The participating churches were not selected through random sampling but according to their representativeness in terms of denominational affiliation, geographical location, size, and community structure. The data collected for this study were limited to the responses of church leaders and workers, in nine selected rural and urban churches, to a written questionnaire, and to a personal interview administered immediately after the oral presentation of the three training models. Definitions of Terms Several terms used in this study have special connotations. The precise definitions of those terms are as follows: Assistantship. A form of training in which an inexperienced person assists an able and experienced teacher or leader for a given period of time, with the trainee's beginning as an observer but later taking full responsibility for a few sessions. Bible study leader. a voluntary church worker who serves as a facilitator to a group of young people or adults who study the Bible in a church, in a school, in a home, or elsewhere. Bible teacher. A voluntary church worker in charge of a group of learners in Sunday school, in vacation Bible school, in camp, or in any other church educational agency. Dissemination. Level five in experiential taxonomy which utilizes such teaching strategies as reporting, oral presentation, dramatization, group dynamics, and seminar (Steinaker 6: Bell). Experiential taxonomy. A new approach to teaching and learning in which teachers and learners alike go through five taxonomic levels of educational experience: exposure, participation, identification, internalization, and dissemination (Steinaker 6: Bell). Exposure. Level one in experiential taxonomy in which the strategies for teaching are goal setting, data presentation, demonstration, directed observation, and data exploration (Steinaker 6r Bell). Identification. Level three in experiential taxonomy for which the teaching strategies are field activities, discussion, conferencing, hypothesizing, and testing (Steinaker 6: Bell). Internalization. Level four in experiential taxonomy which makes use of such teaching strategies as skill reinforcement, recreation, role play, comparative-contrastive analysis, and sum marization (Steinaker 6r Bell). Local church. A group of believers who meet in a locale, thereby forming a local representation of the church (Cole). M. A framework for classifying the major elements of an entity or phenomenon (e.g., a training program) with regard to their functions and interrelationships in order to observe more easily how the elements function within the entity, and how they enable the entity to operate, and how they act upon one another (Alkin). Participation. Level two in experiential taxonomy which utilizes such teaching strategies as modeling-recall, expanding data bases, dramatic play, manipulative and tactile activities, and ordering or sequencing. Reconstruction. A stage in the MODEL [11 training program during which each participant is allowed to reconstruct a previously designed and tested training plan or to design a new one which would be suitable for his church back home. Resources. Refers to material goods and services, time and energy which are available for carrying on an activity (e.g., a training program). Spiritual formation. The process by which the trainee for the ministry is influenced and directed in spiritual growth and development (Holland). Theological education by extension. A form of theological education which includes three essential elements: self-study materials, practical work in the students' own congregation and regular encounters or seminars with students and instructors (Kinsler). Training. A continuous daily activity carried on formally in a classroom or clinical environment, or nonformally on the job, at staff meetings or anytime where there is any interaction between any two or more individuals or between individual trainees and resource materials (Rawson- Jones). Training need. May be described as existing any time an actual condition differs from a desired condition in the human or "people" aspect of organization performance or, more specifically, when a change in present human knowledge, skills, or attitudes can bring about the desired outcome (Craig). Voluntary nonformal educators. Refers to teachers and leaders who are involved in that form of education which, like formal education, is deliberate, planned, staffed, and financially supported and yet, like information education, is functional, unrestricted as to time and place, and in general responsive to needs (Ward). In the context of a local church, this term would pertain to such voluntary church workers as Sunday school teachers, vacation Bible school workers, Bible study leaders, trainers of leaders and teachers, and other voluntary workers involved in the educational program of the church. Workshop. Pertains to a group of persons with a common interest or problem, often professional or vocational, who meet together for an extended period of time to improve their individual proficiencies, abilities, or understandings by means of study, research, and discussion (Craig). This dissertation is organized and presented in the following manner. Chapter I gives a short introduction to the study, a statement of the problem, the purpose, the specific research qustions to be answered, the significance of the study, a brief description of the three training models designed for this study, the limitations of the study, a definition of important terms, and the organization of the study. Chapter 11 provides a review of relevant literature including those that deal with the training process, program planning, training models, and with church leadership training. Chapter III discusses the research methodology, the compositon of the sample, the development of the three training models, the estimation of costs for each model, the construction of the research instruments, and the procedures used in gathering, summarizing, and analyzing the research data. Chapter IV presents the analysis of the collected data and reports the findings with the aid of tabular and graphic devices. Chapter V consists of the conclusions of the study and the recommendations based on the research findings. CHAPTER 11 REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE The literature that was considered relevant for this research fell into four categories. The first category of literature analyzes the need for training voluntary church leaders and workers, particularly in the Philippines. The second category gives an overview of the training process. The third category deals with designing training programs. The fourth category describes some training models recommended for use in schools, churches, and other human service organizations. The Need for Training Voluntary Church Leaders Protestant churches in the Philippines are growing. A recent survey indicates that 12 denominations experienced an average decadal growth rate of 171% (Montgomery 6: McGavran, 1980). Three denominations (i.e., the Southern Baptists, the Conservative Baptists, and the Christian and Missionary Alliance) are reported to have more than doubled their membership in 10 years. As churches in the Philippines continue to grow, their need for church leaders and workers multiplies. The kinds of leaders and workers that growing churches, like the Philippine churches, need are grouped by McGavran (1973) into five classes and by McKinney (1975) into five levels. Using McKinney's five categories, these leaders are: Level 1 - persons who exercise teaching, preaching, administrative, and evangelistic functions within a local church such as Sunday school teachers, Bible study leaders, and other voluntary leaders and workers; Level 2 - overseers of small congregations who hold a small 10 11 congregation together or share in the direction of a larger congregation; Level 3 -overseers of a large congregation or a cluster or clusters of small congregations; Level 4 - regional, national, and international administrators who tie associations of churches together; and Level 5 - educator-scholars who exercise influence upon the church through scholarly research and the development of theological disciplines. While Philippine Protestant churches do have a need for all five levels of leaders, several writers (Arthur, 1974; Becker, 1974; Hill, 1973; Montgomery 6c McGavran, 1980; Rambo, 1968; Rotz, 1955; and Villegas, 1982) indicate that the greatest need is for Level 1 leaders, otherwise known as lay or voluntary leaders. Several reasons explain this great need for Level 1 leaders. First, most Protestant churches in the Philippines, particularly in the rural 'areas, cannot afford to hire even one full-time trained minister so they rely heavily on lay leaders who serve without remuneration. As for those trained ministers who get hired, surveys (Rotz, 1955; Hill, 1973) revealed that their greatest difficulty is lack of funds. Rotz writes, "Economic factors create the largest amount of frustration, dissatisfaction and unhappiness among church leaders." Second, lay leadership is now widely recognized by church leaders in the Philippines as a very important key to church growth. According to Waymire, almost all church leaders concerned about church growth in the Philippines recognize the need for better training for and mobilization of their lay people (Montgomery 6: McGavran). Villegas claims the witnessing of laymen and lay preachers was the greatest contributing factor in the numerical growth of the Christian and Missionary Alliance churches of the Philippines. Third, many churches have finally accepted the oft-repeated and long-ignored Biblical teaching that the ministry is the work of all God's people (Ephesians 4:11-12). In 12 nearly all Philippine churches, there is a new awareness that the laity is the church and must be permitted and encouraged to function as such (Becker, 1974). Regarding the number of Level 1 leaders that churches would need, McKinney thinks a realistic ratio would be one Level 1 leader for every five members of the church. If this kind of figuring is followed, then every local church in the Philippines with 50 members would need at least 10 Level 1 leaders while every local church with 500 members would need no less than 100 Level 1 leaders. In the case of an entire denomination, the size of CAMACOP with more than 70,000 members (Neumann, 1983), the need would be for 14,000 or more Level 1 leaders. When the number of Level 1 leaders needed in all the presently organized churches in the Philippines is calculated and the continuous growth of each group is planned for, the need for Level 1 leaders in the Philippines becomes more overwhelming. But the real need in the Philippines today is not just for thousands of lay or voluntary leaders and workers. The need, as pointed out in a survey of Philippine church leaders themselves, is for "trained lay leadership" (Hill, 1973). Thus Becker underlines the importance of training lay leaders in the country: An army of soldiers is powerless without weapons. So also, an army of laymen cannot be effective unless they are properly equipped for their priesthood and ministry. The motivation . . . may be considered. as part of the equipment--in fact the most basic part of it. Another part is a mature understanding of the tasks to be done by the church. A very important part is the skills needed to perform those tasks. As well-equipped servant of the Lord is also one who has a feeling of confidence and optimism as he goes about his ministry. Even after Juan de la Iglesia has been motivated to serve as a good soldier of Jesus Christ, we can hardly blame him for hesitating if he remains empty-handed. He has a right to expect good equipment for his battle and the Lord of his church has made provision for equipping him (p. 58). The suggestion to emphasize the group Bible study method in lay leadership training is justified by the fact that this method is now recognized by most Protestant church leaders in the country as their most effective strategy for l3 evangelism and church growth (1979 PHILCOE Declaration; Montgomery 6: McGavran, 1980; Skivington, 1970). Montgomery explains why the group Bible study method is especially effective in the Philippines: It follows the pattern of the New Testament with its churches in the home and its teaching of the Word from house to house . . . . The method is eminently reproducible on a local level in that there is potential leadership in every congregation, the cost is nothing or next to nothing and there are always meeting places available . . . . The method is appropriate to the Philippine culture with its large and close-knit extended families. It is effective in the Roman Catholic setting where the Bible, which has been kept so long from laymen, is now eagerly sought after . . . (p. 56). The Training Process At one time the word training had a very restricted meaning referring to drilling peeple in manual skills. Currently, however, the term has come to have wider connotations. Some of these connotations are evident in the following features of training which are described in more details by Miles (1981) in his guidebook: Skill emphasis. Training implies a focused concern with skills-- the tools a person needs to bring his actions into line with his intention. Whole-person learning. Training includes ideas, values, principles, attitudes, feelings, and concrete behaviors, all of which are involved in whole-person learning. Guided practice. Training implies practice, that is, repeated performance of particular skills, with explicit, immediate information on the results of a particular try. Psychological safety. Training implies a situation which is at least partially protected and psychologically safe—a situation in which the trainee is free to be creative, to think provisionally, to 14 make missteps, and to try out new ways of behaving without fear of the usual consequences of failure. Focus on member change. Training places less emphasis on the accomplishment of a specific external task and more emphasis on improvement of the trainees' skillsntheir ways of doing things, their procedures, and their practices. Focus on the social self. Training is concerned with how someone does something, what the impact is on others, and how he can improve what he does to become more skillful. Training is not a confined activity experienced only once by the trainees. To Rawson-Jones (1975) training is a continuing process through a person's life, strengthening and expanding what has been learned, opening up new opportunities for development and meeting changes in personal and technical needs that evolve in relation to that development. It is a continuous activity carried on formally in a classroom or clinical environment or nonformally on the job, at staff meetings, and actually any time there is any interaction between two or more people who are doing their work activities. This continuous nature of training must never be overlooked because training means not only helping people to gain new attitudes, knowledge, and skills but also helping them to maintain and deveIOp to a greater degree the required attitudes, knowledge, and skills. The training process is seen by Lynton and Pareek (1967) as a learning spiral with three major phases: pretraining, training, and posttraining. The spiral (see Figure 1) shows the different phases through which a trainee passes as he learns and assumes his new job or assumes an old job with his capacities enhanced. At various stages in the process, the trainee is aided by "inputs" (represented by arrows) provided by the work organization and the training institution. FOLLOW-UP WORK \ : CONSULT/I 770” WITH ORGAN/ZAWON CONTINUED CON TA 07' ”077/ PfiRT/GIPNNKS PREPflMflO/V FOR ”IA/V5}??? 0F I'M/WING ”V5 r/rzmomz. CLIMATE 1:3 7////// ‘hn' o .- a 1‘. ..o‘d .‘ I' a a ’g.‘ .0. . o . 8...... o"‘s FIGURE '1- SFIRAL MODEL. OF TRAINING PROCESS (LoYNT’ON AND wreak, 197a) INITIAL EXPECTATION AND READINESS 15 D I \ waver/57117.. WORKING 01/7 3( COMMON/0,4 TIA/6 7' Rfi/IV/IVG SPEC/FICAHONS . s-' ' I .0 y 0 FEEDfiflCK MOCEDURE '0 on“. :- v 5.2;}. inst-.399 . [—r HELP WITH SELECT/N6 PflRUC/Pfl/VKS Pkg TRAIN/1V6 monk/977019 SKILL PRACTICE PR5 VRA/IV/IYG TRAIN/1V6 P057 TRAIN/1V6 mfi/IVM/G gym 77/71/115)? BEfiAV/a‘? flan/”we 445771045 mar/P cLIMAIE l6 Lynton and Pareek discuss the three phases of the training process from the point of view of the trainers. The first phase, pretraining, is concerned mostly with the clarification of the precise objectives of training, the selection of qualified participants, and the building up of the participants‘ expectations and motivations before training. The second phase, training, has to do with the exposure of the participants to learning opportunities. Hopefully, these learning opportunities would result in a series of interrelated five-stage sequences, namely selection of some items for learning, initial trial experience, feedback from the initial trial, reinforcement and continued practice, and internalizing what is learned. The third phase, posttraining, deals with the transfer of learning to the back-home situation. Miles (1981) sees training as a cyclical process of an experimental, diagnostic nature taking place in a supportive group situation. Using a graphic illustration (see Figure 2), he explains that after going from step A1 through step E1, the participant returns to step A2 which is then followed by B2, C2, and so on. Over a period of time, the learning cycle would be repeated many times. If training is effective, this spiral would move, over time, in the direction of better and better behavior on the part of the participants. The training process according to Miles has several psychological steps. Following is a brief description of each step. Dissatisfaction, a problem. The person in training must first believe that effective group work is an important matter to him and be dissatisfied to some extent with his own attitudes, understandings, and behaviors as a participant in working groups. Selecting new behaviors. The trainee must become aware of and consider trying out new actions which promise to help him solve the problem(s) he faces in his work with groups. l7 1)1 ennne EVIDENCE ON 115311113 0, PRACTICING NEW BEHAVIORS 51 GENERALIZING 5, SELECTING APPLYING RINTEGRATING 115w BEHAVIORS A, 511101116 NEW mssmsmcnous 8r PROBLEMS A, DISSATISFACTION A PROBLEM FIGURE 2. STEPS IN THE. TRAINING PROCESS (MILES/1981) 18 Practicing new behaviors. Given the felt need to learn and some new ideas about what might work, the trainee must be provided plenty of opportunities to practice, with reasonable safety, some of the behaviors that he and others consider to be promising. Getting evidence on results. The trainee who is experimenting with his behavior in a training situation must be able to get some feedback or evidence as to the effectiveness of what he does. Generalizing, applying, and integrating. Since the learner now knows what works or does not work, he must be able to relate this new knowledge to himself and to his job situation, thereby linking his training experience and his job situation. Finding new dissatisfactions and problems. Almost inevitably the trainee will come out of the training process with new dissatisfactions and problems, in addition to new insights and ways of behaving. Hopefully, these new dissatisfactions and problems would cause him to repeat the process of selecting new behaviors, practicing new behaviors, getting evidence on results, generalizing, applying and integrating his training experience and his job situation. Designing TrainingPrograms Before a training program could be designed, the type of training needed has to be determined first. Several writers (Ilsley 6r Niemi, 1981; McDonough, 1976; Miles, 1981; Rawson-Jones, 1975; Schindler-Rainman 6t Lippitt, 1971; Wilson, 1976) identify at leat three general types of training: pre-job training, on-the-job training, and continuing education. Pre-job training, often called pre-service training, refers to the preparation of a volunteer for a particular job before he begins. It is intended to l9 assess the abilities of a volunteer and to equip him with basic knowledge and skills needed for the performance of a job. This type of training may be given individually or in a group setting, depending on the timing, the number of volunteers, and the kinds of resources and facilitites available (Ilsley 8r Niemi, McDonough, Schindler-Rainman 6c Lippitt, Wilson). On-the-job training, sometimes referred to as maintenance-of—effort training, is aimed at increasing the skill of the volunteer, getting him out of any ruts he might have fallen into, answering his questions, dealing with his concerns, and refining his practices. Much of this training can be given informally and irregularly by a supervisor or consultant, but some formal training sessions can also be arranged (Ilsley 6r Niemi, McDonough, Schindler-Rainman dc Lippitt, Wilson). Continuing education is based on the belief that learning is a lifelong process and, therefore, human resource development should continue to provide possibilities for all persons (paid staff and volunteers) in an organization to deveIOp to their fullest potential. Seminars, workshops, and other kinds of group and individualized (self-directed) training activities provide Opportunities for continuous growth and deveIOpment if done well. It is suggested that this third type of training be given greater emphasis in order to reinforce the experience of earlier training, to sustain motivation, and to provide Opportunities for the acquisiton of new attitudes, knowledge, and skills (Miles, Rawson-Jones, Wilson). When the type of training needed in a particular situaiton is already decided upon, careful planning follows. Miles suggests that planning be done by a group which includes no more than eight persons representing the initiator(s), the diagnosers, the key authority persons who must approve decisions involving money or commitments of persons and who give support, persons in the organization with special skills or interests who may serve as trainers in the program, outside 20 consultants (if any) who will be actively involved in the program as trainers, speakers, et al., and representatives of different kinds of people who will be in the program. Most groups that plan training programs have to face at least nine areas of decision: (a) purpose, (b) participants, (c) content, (d) procedure, (e) personnel, (f) evaluation, (g) time arrangement, (h) physical arrangement, and (1) costs. To be sure nothing gets overlooked in each of these areas while planning, Miles recommends the use of a checklist'(see Appendix C). How carefully and explicitly planning for training should be done depends on the resources and demands of a particular situation. Some situations may call for elaborate arrangements of committees, agendas, and decisions. In other situations (e.g., a situation where many of the planning decisions have already been made) the planning group may move right into designing training activities. Most kinds of training, according to Wilson, can be planned by following a sequence of steps. These steps are: identify problem, define training objective, consider alternatives and choose the best, design materials and methods and choose faculty, operate the training event, and evaluate training. The author stresses the importance of involving in the planning process all who will be affected by the training, including the trainees whose input may be secured through questionnaires and interviews or else through a sample representation on the planning committee. She also suggests that questions such as the following be considered seriously when designing training programs. 1. What is the need? 2. What do we want to accomplish? (State objectives.) 3. Who are to be trained? (Identify professional or non-professional ' persons or other classifications.) 4. How many are to be trained? 10. 11. 12. 13. l4. l5. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 21 What is the present general level of knowledge and experience of those to be trained? What are the general capabilities Of those to be trained? What new knowledge and understanding will be required? (Outline the general sc0pe and content Of instructions.) What new or improved skills will be needed? (Indicate behavior goals.) How can the training or development be conducted? (Consider apprOpriate methodology and plan Of Operation.) What instructional materials and aids are available or obtainable? What time factors need to be considered? (Include availability Of trainees, work requirements, personal needs of trainees, on whose time they are going to be trained, and travel considerations.) What should be the starting date, timing, frequency, and length Of sessions? What should be the content and sequence Of the sessions? Who is to do the training? Is instructor training needed? If so, what training is needed? What instructor guides or lesson plans are needed and what information should those guides or lesson plans contain? Where is the program to be conducted? What facilitites, equipment, and services will be used? What study or instructional materials will be used? What records and reports will be needed? 22 22. How will participants be prepared for the learning experience? 23. How will participants be selected? 24. What will be the estimated cost of the program? (These would be itemized according to personnel, materials, and supplies.) 25. How will results of training be measured and evaluated? Concerned mostly with "peOple-On—jObs-in-Organizations," Lynton and Pareek prOpose five steps in designing a training program apprOpriate to the needs of the participants and their organizations. The first step is to choose a strategy or a combination of strategies in the light of general training Objectives (previously determined on the basis of identified training needs) and available resources. The second step is to break the general training Objectives into constituent parts (i.e., into component knowledge, understanding, and skill) and to choose training methods and materials with apprOpriate specifications for each. The third step is to sue the specifications of different training methods in order to arrive at the total time and facilitities required for meeting the Objective(s). The fourth step is tO decide on the different packages in which the program could be Offered and to ask the organization to choose from among them. The fifth step is to work detailed training events into training sequences and finally into the shape of the total training program package. When composing the detailed syllabus Of the training program, the authors suggest that sufficient flexibility be built into the program to allow for normal variations between groups and also for adjustments to unforeseen events. They also suggest that provisions be made for evaluating and reviewing the participants' progress in the program so that adjustments in the program could be made with accuracy. For designing programs of nonformal education, Ward and his associates (1977) recommend a systems approach involving tasks which are presented as a series of problems. A short explanation of each task or problem follows. 23 Problem I: Specify the learning to be achieved. The training program should specify learning in terms of its practical use, not in terms of abstract or theoretical understandings. Problem 11: Describe the target population. Each proposed target group must be carefully studied and understood in terms of their motivations, value systems, reward systems, abilities, and expectations. Problem 111: Specify the instructional tasks. The designer or team of designers of the program may either identify and/or create the possible instructional procedures that promise to achieve the learning Objectives or else make choices among the alternatives in order to move ahead in the development of the program. Problem IV: Specify the support and management tasks. One Of the two Options may be taken by the designer(s): (a) use existing resources ("hardware") and put the new instruction through these channels with minor modification, or (b) develop new resources to use as instructional channels. Problem V: Specify the level of performance to be learned. The important issue tO be determined here is what will constitute the lowest acceptable level Of performance (i.e., the accuracy, the rate Of performance, or quality level) for any learner. Problem V1: Prepare instructional materials. DevelOping new materials may be more satisfactory than attempting to adopt or revise existing instructional materials. Problem VII: Train human resources. The peOple who will Operate (manage or deliver) the major instructional experiences and those who will Operate the support systems must be trained using not 24 necessarily one common training program but programs that are overlapped in order to ensure that the various human roles will be compatible and supportive. Problem VIII: Design evaluative procedures. The evaluative procedures must include data collection at the beginning and at several points during the learner's progress through the stages of the instructional procedures. Problem IX: Operate the system. At the beginning the instructional program will be Operated as a sort Of trial or experiment, the major Objective Of which is to gather evaluative data. Problem X: Evaluate the learning. The primary purpose of evaluating is to get information that can be used tO recycle (make changes in) the instructional system in order to increase the effectiveness Of the learning resulting from the system. TO Ward and his associates, the relationship of the learning experiences to the learners' characteristics and life experiences constitutes the most demanding problem. SO they prOpose a careful and thorough study of the target population using a set of 14 questions concerned with three major factors: (a) the motivations that drive the learners and the sorts of psycho-socio-economic rewards that will sustain them as learners, (b) the habits and expectations that their previous learning experiences have included, and (c) the styles of mental processes and learning characteristics that have been induced by previous formal and informal learning experiences. Miles (1981) believes planning and carrying out a training design that fits the needs of a particular group (and the skills and style Of a particular trainer) is better than merely duplicating a training design prepared for another target 25 group. Thus he shares some very helpful suggestions on (a) identifying training problems, (b) selecting training methods, (c) producing a tentative design, (d) testing the design against criteria Of adequacy, and on (e) Operating the training design. He also suggests the following criteria of adequacy which can be used in , deciding whether a particular training activity can and should be adOpted or else revised for a particular group. ApprOpriateness to member needs. The prOposed training activity should be aimed at meeting member needs for improved group behavior that are real and compelling. Helpfulness in relating the training and job situations. The proposed activity should help members test their job demands against the events of the training situation and vice versa. Location within the trainer's range of competence. Trainers should not try things they feel they cannot handle although some insecurity is natural and much skill can be learned. Optimal emotional impact. The training procedures themselves- -aside from the importance Of the job problems being dealt with- should encourage active interest. Multiple learning. The prOposed activity should take account Of the fact that "whole persons" are involved and should, therefore, provide for intellectual, emotional, and action types of learning. Self-correction. A good training activity should contain provision for its own evaluation and self-correction. Presence of support for learning. The proposed training activity should provide for guided practice Of specific skills-learners should get feedback on the consequences of their acts. 26 Training Models Over the years many educational models have been developed by educators, psychologists, systems analysts, and others who have produced theoretical positions about learning and teaching. Some of these models are based on experimental research, others on theories, and still others are based on speculations about the meanings of theories and research done by Others. In a study of more than 80 sources of models, Joyce and Well (1972) were able to identify many different models which they organized into four "families." The four families Of models follow: (a) those oriented toward social relations and toward the relation between man and his culture and which draw upon social sources; (b) those which draw information processing systems and descriptions of human capacity for processing information, (c) those which draw on personality, development, the processes of personal construction of reality, and the capacity to function as an integrated personality as the major source; and (d) those developed from an analysis of the processes by which human behavior is shaped and reinforced. (See Appendix D for a list of models classified by "family" and goals.) These models, according to Joyce and Well, can be used for different purposes. They can be used for making curriculum plans (e.g., a training program). They can also be used as guidelines for interactions between teachers and learners and as specifications for instructional materials. The authors maintain that there is no single educational model which can be applied to accomplish every purpose. SO they advise educators to master several different strategies which can be applied to different kinds of learning problems. A number of educational models described in the literature can be used for training purposes. Among them are the nine-step problem-solving model, the experiential learning model, the participation training model, the sensitivity 27 training model, the team-building program, and several other models which use a combination of training approaches. The nine-step problem-solving model, described by Earley and Rutledge (1980), is designed for individuals and small groups and may be applied tO any problem regardless Of its size and intensity. The nine steps to follow when using this model are: (a) define the problem: conflict or nonconflict; (b) decide on a method of attack for the problem; (c) generate alternatives, (d) test alternatives for reality; (e) choose an alternative; (f) plan for action; (g) implement the plan; (h) evaluate; and (i) plan next steps. Earley and Rutledge explain that for more complex problems, the model may be used in successive rounds on different aspects Of the problem through the fifth step, then the various choices can be integrated into a signle or coordinated plan of action. Considered a complete learning model by Marks and Davis (1975), the experiential learning model combines a personal reference point, cognitive and affective involvement and feedback, and theoretical and conception material. The focus of this mdoel is on content and process. The participants experience the issues as well as identify them intellectually. The steps in this model are (a) preparation: diagnosing learning needs, setting Objectives, preparing materials, sequencing events for the planned experience; (b) introduction: introducing the activity and providing participants with instructions; (c) activity: conducting the planned experience; (d) debriefing: relating the participants' experiences to existing knowledge; and (e) summary: making connections and generalizations which are helpful to the participants. This model can be used in the develOpment Of personal growth, interpersonal relationships, decision-making, problem- solving, group dynamics, leadership, planning and organizing, and for several other purposes. 28 Participation training or PT is described by McKinley (1980) as a total educational program consisting of a series of guided small group discussion activities with two major teaching-learning goals. The two goals are the developemnt of effective group discussion teamwork and the development of program planning skills and insights participants can use to plan, conduct, and evaluate adult education programs in both large—group and small-group settings. The typical events in a PT training program are (a) participants volunteer for the group service roles of discussion leader, recorder, Observer(s); (b) the group plans a discussion—deciding topics, goals, and outline of discussion tasks; (c) the group conducts its topical discussion; (d) the group gets feedback from observer(s)' reports concerning its operation in steps p and E; and (e) the group evaluates its process and diagnoses its process problems. PT programs may be conducted as massed-sessions over a period of five consecutive days or as spaced-sessions in the form of a series of two-three hour sessions spaced over a longer period. According to This and Lippitt (1971), sensitivity training is based on a laboratory concept of learning which believes that individuals can best learn interpersonal and group skills through actual experience which is analyzed for the benefit of the learner. This kind of training usually includes the methods of unstructured group learning, individual feedback, skill practice, and inforamtion sessions. Participants in sensitivity training meet in groups of 12-15 with a professional trainer. They have no formal agenda or prior-determined leader. Usually the groups meet once a day for two hours, but sometimes they meet twice a day for approximately two-hour sessions. Some sensitivity training programs last for three weeks, but others run for as short a period as two days only. Simply called the training model, this model is presented by Joyce and Well. According to them it is applicable to a great variety of simple and — 29 complex skills, including psychomotor skills, problem-solving strategies, and interpersonal competencies. The training model has five phases: phase one, clarifying objectives; phase two, explaining theory or rationale of performance; phase three, demonstrating correct performance; phase four, practicing with feedback under simulated conditions; and phase five, training for transfer to "real world." Solomon (1977) describes the team-building program as a training approach designed to identify those aspects of group functioning that are barriers to effective group effort and to introduce strategies to modify those aspects constructively. The primary strategy Of this approach, according to Solomon, is to increase the awareness of the group members regarding their own processes as a group, to focus attention not only on "what" the group is doing but also on "how" it is doing it. A team-building program, as conceived by Solomon, may consist of a series of weekly four-hour sessions over a six-week period and may incorporate the following events: session 1, session Objectives; session 2, building cohesiveness; session 3, the helping relationship; session 4, process awareness; session 5, application to job situation; and session 6, teamwork and cooperation. Theological education by extension or TEE (Winter, 1969; Kinsler, 1981; Covell 6r Wagner, 1971) is a training program which seeks to extend the resources of theological education to those people who are the natural leaders of local churches such as the lay workers, the elders, the youth leaders, the candidates for the ministry and others who carry the primary responsibilities in local churches. TEE, as described by Kinsler, includes and integrates three elements: self-study materials for individual study, practical work in congregation, and regular class encounters or seminars. Participants in TEE programs get the basic content of their courses on their own using self-instruction materials. While taking their courses, they get involved also in practical work in their own 30 congregations. At least once a week, they meet with other TEE participants and their instructors for seminars at an extension center. These center meetings have three functions: (a) to provide fellowship and inspiration for the participants and instructors; (b) to provide motivation, clarification, and confirmation of their studies; and (c) to integrate through discussion the course content and the practical problems and work in the congregations. The effectiveness Of the self—study materials and the practical work depends greatly on what happens in these meetings. Some Of the training programs reviewed for this study have direct bearing on lay leadership training. Three of these are the Equipment Room Of All Souls' Church in London, the Theological Education by Extension Program Of New England in Australia, and the Teacher Trainers' Camp and Advanced Program for Trainers of the Philippine Association Of Christian Education. The Equipment Room, according to Stott (1982), is the umbrella title for all the training schemes now available at All Souls Church in London. Its stated objective is to equip Christians with the knowledge, skills, and desire to serve the Lord as He deserves. The basic foundation course of the Equipment Room is known as the core year. The core year consists Of 30 complete evenings, once a week throughout three lO-week terms. Term 1 concentrates on "The Teaching Of the Bible," term 2 focuses on "The Interpretation Of the Bible," and term 3 is a practical one in which participants are divided into smaller groups, according to their own choices, each of which studies a specific form of Christian service. At the completion of the core year, each participant is commissioned to a specific task. Stott explains that the resultant service is not the end Of the road for core year graduates. Ongoing specialist training sessions are arranged for those already involved in each area of service (e.g., Sunday school teachers, fellowship 31 group leaders, and door-tO-door visitors). For those whose gifts Of leadership have come to be recognized, an annual course called second thoughts is designed. Like core year, second thoughts consists of three lO-week terms. Its aim is to help participants to submit themselves yet more radically to Biblical scrutiny and reformation. Participants in this course already occupy positions of responsibility in All Souls Church and are likely in the future to become team leaders, Sunday school superintendents or lay pastors, or to Offer for the ordained ministry. A third training program in All Souls Church is the All Souls College of Applied Theology or ASCAT which seeks to provide full-time training for those considering a future as clergy, parish workers, or missionaries. The theological education given in ASCAT is as rigorous as in other institutions, but it is done in the real life context Of a church and all the teaching relates every area of Biblical truth to the needs of men and women in the twentieth century. Described by Harrison (1982), the New England TEE program's purpose is to train lay leaders and potential leaders for ' local churches in Australia, particularly in the Anglican Diocese of Armidale. The main target pOpulation of the program includes lay leaders and preachers, parish councilors, Sunday school teachers, and those who conduct religious instruction permitted in public schools, and group facilitators Of various kinds. The courses Offered were the practical ones that churches requested such as homiletics and Christian education Of children. Other popular courses include Bible surveys, hermeneutics, local church principles, Christian beliefs, sharing one's faith. Only one course is Offered in an extension center at a time. Each courses lasts 10 to 12 weeks. All courses are Offered at two levels, ordinary and advanced, and participants are allowed to choose their preferred level. 32 Two kinds of seminars, major and minor, are provided regularly. Major seminars involve visits from the tutor or instructor while minor seminars, between visits of instructors, are led by a local leader. In addition, participants are encouraged to meet together on their own in small groups for mutual help and learning whenever they wish. Local seasons such as school holidays, harvest, etc., are taken into account when scheduling courses. Known as the Teacher Trainors Camp or TTC and the Advanced Program for Trainers or APT, this two-level training program is one of several leadership training programs of the Philippine Association of Christian Education, Inc. (Marquez 6r Javalera). Designed to train trainers of voluntary workers for local churches, TTC (the basic level training) and APT (the advanced level training) are held simultaneously for 10 consecutive days during the summer break. Participants (limited to 50 per session) in this program put in no less than eight hours a day to a variety of learning activities which stress "learning by doing." Lectures at the camp are kept to a minimum although there are several (10 or more) Bible and Christian education specialists from different evangelical institutions involved in this training program who could give excellent lectures. Instead of just serving as lecturers, these specialists are asked to serve as facilitators, training demonstrators, resource persons, evaluators, and advisers. Participants are encouraged to take active roles in most of the activities such as in inductive Bible studies, in small group discussions, in case studies and in special interest workshops. They are also given opportunities to Observe and evaluate the educational work of nearby churches, to observe and evaluate training demonstration sessions conducted by the specialists, and to practice training others (i.e., participants) at the camp. In addition, a big block of time is set aside each day to allow each participant to work on two major projects: (a) a one—year leadership training plan which will be submitted to his church board or 33 council for approval upon his return and which can be implemented upon approval, and (b) a special library research paper on any course which is relevant to the needs and interests Of his prospective trainees and which can be included in his training plan. Of the training manuals examined, two stand out as excellent examplers Of how a training program should be presented so that it becomes useful to a diverse audience. These two are Community Development: An Intensive Training Manual (North Central Regional Center for Rural DevelOpment, 1978) and A Training Manual in Community Technology: An Integrated Approach for Training DevelOpment Facilitators (Farallones Institute Rural Center and CHP International, 1982). Both manuals describe explicitly the training Objectives Of the program, the target population, the content, the instructional procedures, the training personnel, the evaluation procedure, the time arrangements, the physical arrangements, and the training costs. The training program described in the first manual, Community Development: An Intensive Training Manual, is designed to increase the competence and confidence Of field workers whose responsibilities include work with community decision-making groups. The prOgram consists Of five instructional units, the first four of which are intended for use in training sessions attended by field workers Of any agency, and the fifth one for use with those who have already completed the training based on Units I through IV and with those who have had extensive community develOpment experience. Because the training requires extended and intensive audience contact, it is recommended that a total Of four weeks of training time be used for the entire sequence of units. The training methods to be used in each unit include presentations by apprOpriate resource persons, discussion-reaction sessions, workshop activities, field trips, field experiences, and reporting-analysis 34 sessions. A daily evaluation and feedback session is scheduled each day to provide a continuing flow Of information about participants' reactions to the training experiences. The training program described in the second manual, A Training Manual in Com—munity Technology: An Integrated Approach for Training Develom Facilitators, is based on nonformal education principles and is designed to strike a balance between structured learning and guided, yet independent discovery. The sessions, resources, and methods included in the program reflect the belief that adults are capable of self-direction and creativity when encouraged to apply their knowledge and skills in ways that are relevant to their lives. This training program is divided into six structured blocks of time, termed "phases." The first and last phases introduce and conclude the program while each of the Others is organized around a specific technical area which is integrated with relevant information and activities from the other program components. 3 Some sessions in each phase are designed to help participants acquire, practice, and apply technical and facilitation skills. Other sessions are designed to complement the technical materials with background information and added prospective. The sessions, within each phase, are presented in such a manner that the participants are able to build upon previous knowledge and apply what they have already learned about technical and non-technical areas of their work. CHAPTER III RESEARCH PROCEDURE The purpose of this research is three-fold: (a) to design three training models, (b) to estimate the anticipated costs and benefits of each model, and (c) to estimate the feasibility of each model in training voluntary nonformal educators in rural and urban protestant churches in three major island groups of the Philippines. To achieve this purpose, three training models were designed using elements taken from relevant literature and from some training models being used by schools, churches and other human service organizations, and two types of meetings were conducted in each of the nine selected protestant churches in different parts of Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. The first type Of meeting (a general meeting of all paid and voluntary workers in each church) was intended for surveying, through general and small group discussions and through a written questionnaire, the training needs and interests of these workers. The second meeting (a private meeting with the local pastor and no more than four other key decision makers of the church) was for the purpose of presenting the three training models especially designed for this research and surveying, through personal interviews, the reactions of these decision makers to each model. This chapter contains pertinent information relating to the research methodology, the composition of the sample, the design of the three training models, the estimation of costs for each model, the development Of the instruments, and the collection and treatment Of data. 35 36 Research Methodology The research method used in this study is the descriptive survey, sometimes called the normative survey. This type of research is based on the assumption that whatever is observed at any one time is normal and, under the same conditions, could conceivably be observed at any time in the future (Leedy, 1980). The descriptive survey does not necessarily seek or explain relationships, test hypotheses, make predictions or get at meanings or implicaitons. Instead, it collects detailed factual information in order to describe systematically the facts and characteristics of a given population or area of interest, factually and accurately (Isaac 6: Michael, 1981). Leedy (1980) outlines the basic structure of the descriptive survey as a method of research, indicating its salient characteristics. 1. The descriptive survey method deals with a situation that demands the technique of observation as the principal means of collecting the data. 2. The population for the study must be carefully chosen, clearly defined, and specifically delimited in order to set precise parameters for ensuring discreteness to the population. 3. Data in descriptive survey research are particularly susceptible to distortion through the introduciton of bias into the research design. Particular attention should be given to safeguard the data from the influence of bias. 4. Although the descriptive survey method relies upon observation for the acquisition of the data, those data must then be organized and presented systematically so that valid and accurate conclusions may be drawn from them (pp. 98—99). 37 Using these characteristics of the descriptive survey as guidelines, the following steps were taken. 1. Relevant literature was reviewed in order to analyze carefully the need for training voluntary nonformal educators in local churches, particularly in the Philippines; to understand more clearly the training process; to consider seriously the suggestions of several experts in program planning; and to examine existing training programs. 2. Three training prOgrams were designed, adapting some Of the elements derived from existing training models and following some of the advice offered by experienced program planners (see Appendix A) and their training costs estimated (see Appendix B). 3. Two instruments for collecting data were developed: (a) a written questionnaire (see Appendix E) which was used in identifying the training needs and interests of church workers, and (b) an interview protocol (see Appendix F) which was used in getting the individual reactions of key decision makers in each local church to the three training models presented to them as a group. These two instruments were checked for validity by a panel of five knowledgeable and competent persons and pretested with a group of subjects similar to the sample. 4. With the Official permission and kind COOperation of denominational heads, nine local protestant churches representing different geographical locations, sizes, and community structures were selected for this research (see Appendix C). All workers (both paid and voluntary) who attended a pre-arranged general meeting and no more than five key 38 decision makers, selected with the assistance of the local pastor in each of these nine churches, served as subjects for this study. 5. In each of these nine churches, two types Of meetings were conducted. One was a general meeting of all workers (both paid and voluntary) of the church at which all the attendees first discussed in small groups their training needs and later responded individually to a written questionnaire. The other was a private meeting with the pastor and no more than four decision makers of the church at which the researcher gave a brief oral presentation of the three training models. Then during the following days, she interviewed each decision maker personally to get their reactions to each of the models. 6. All the data collected through the use of the written questionnaire and through personal interviews were summarized and analyzed using apprOpriate statistical techniques. From the results Of the analysis, conclusions and recommendations were carefully drawn. Composition of the Sample Nine local protestant churches were selected for this research. They were selected according to their representativeness in terms of the following characteristics. Denominational Affiliation. Nine major protestant denominations included in a recent church growth survey conducted in the Philippines (Montgomery 6: McGavran, 1980) were presented: Christian and Missionary Alliance Churches of the Philippines (with 830 organized churches) 39 Church of the Foursquare Gospel in the Philippines (with 416 organized churches) Conservative Baptist Association of the Philippines (with 81 organized churches) Convention of Philippine Baptist Churches (with 442 organized churches) Free Methodist Church Of the Philippines (with 41 organized churches) Iglesia Evangelica Metodista En Las Islas Filipinas (with 126 organized churches) Philippine General Council Of the Assemblies of God (with 600 organized churches) Southern Baptist Churches of the Philippines (with 522 organized churches) Wesleyan Church of the Philippines (with 95 organized churches) Geographical Location. Participating churches were from different parts of the Philippines (see Appendix H): LUZON Sampaloc, Manila (representing Metro Manila) Santiago, Isabela (representing Northern Luzon) Aniban, Bacoor, Cavite (representing Southern Luzon) VISAYAS Tacloban City, Leyte (representing Eastern Visayas) Pavin, Iloilo (representing one section of Western Visayas) Bacolod City, Negros Occidental (representing another section of Western Visayas) 40 MINDANAO Kabacan, North Cotabato (representing Central Mindanao) Tagum, Davao del Norte (representing Southern Mindanao) Zamboanga City, Zamboanga del Sur (representing Western Mindanao) _S_i_z_e_. Churches were classified according to the number of communicant members: M. A church with under 100 communicant members Medium. A church with 100 to 399 communicant members L_ar_gg. A church with 400 or more communicant members Community Structure. Participants were selected from two types of community structures: rural and urban. The essential representation is shown in Table 1. Table 1 Representation of Church Size and Community Structure Church Size Community Structure Small Medium Large Rural 1 3 1 Urban 2 l 2 Using letter designations (SB for a church under Southern Baptists, CB under Conservative Baptists, IE under IEMELIF, FM under Free Methodists, CP under Convention of Philippine Baptists, AG under Assemblies of God, WC under Wesleyan Church, FG under Foursquare Gospel, and CA under CAMACOP) for 111 identification purposes, Table 2 lists and describes the nine churches which participated in this research. Table 2 Description of Participating Churches Denominational Geographical Community Church Affiliation Size Location Structure SB Southern Baptists 2118 METRO MANILLA Urban Sampaloc, Manila CB Conservative Baptists 35 NORTHERN LUZON Rural Santiago, Isabela IE IEMELIF 600 SOUTHERN LUZON Rural Aniban, Bacoor, Cavite FM Free Methodists 44 EASTERN VISAYAS Urban Tacloban City, Leyte CP Convention of Philip- 147 WESTERN VISAYAS (1) Rural pine Baptists Pavia, Iloilo AG Assemblies of God 550 WESTERN VISAYAS (2) Urban Bacolod City, Negros Occidental WC Wesleyan Church 139 CENTRAL MINDANAO Rural Kabacan, North Cotabato FG Foursquare Gospel 227 SOUTHERN MINDANAO Rural Tagum, Davao del Norte CA CAMACOP 350 WESTERN MINDANO Urban Zamboanga City, Zamboanga del Sur In each of these nine churches, data were collected from two groups of subjects. One group was comprised of all the workers (both paid and voluntary) of the local church who attended a previously arranged general meeting, 42 discussed in small groups their training needs and interests, and responded to a written questionnaire. The other group was made up of key decision makers (arbitrarily limited to five per church) who were selected with the cooperation Of the pastor of each church. The five decision makers were chosen on the basis of their direct involvement in making decisions concerning the educational and training ministry of the church (see letter dated June 1, Appendix G). At each church the researcher presented three training models to these decision makers, after which she interviewed them individually to get their reactions to each model. Table 3 shows the distribution of these two groups of subjects by church. Table 3 Distribution of Subjects by Church Number of Subjects Church Church Workers Decision Makers SB 60 5 CB 7 4 IE 29 5 F M 16 5 CP 23 5 AG 34 5 WC l6 5 F G 30 5 CA 30 5 TOTALS: 245 44 113 Table 4 records some demographic information about the respondents to the questionnaire. Table 4 Demographic Information on the Questionnaire Respondents Demographic Information Number Percentage AGE Under 20 24 10 20 and above 218 89 SEX Male 85 35 Female 156 64 MARITAL STATUS Married 114 47 Widow 8 3 Single 119 49 EDUCATIONAL LEVEL High school and below 51 21 Above high school 189 77 EMPLOYMENT Employed or self-employed (full or part time) 142 58 Unemployed 102 42 POSITION IN CHURCH Pastors l7 7 Elders/deacons 62 25 Christian education directors/ ministers 5 2 Youth ministers 7 3 Organizational leaders 37 15 SS/VBS workers 61 25 Bible study leaders 15 6 Outreach workers 10 4 Others 27 11 NOTE: The total number of respondents was 245, but about 2% did not give sufficient information. Some respondents hold more than one position in church but only one position per respondent was considered in this table. 44 Design of the Proposed Training Models Following some of the suggestions offered in the literature by experts in prOgram planning (e.g., BishOp, 1976; Craig, 1976; Ilsley 6r Niemi, 1981; Lynton 6t Pareek, 1967; Miles, 1981; Ward et al., 1977; and Wilson, 1976) and adapting some Of the elements found in training models being used in schools, churches, and human service organizations, three training models were designed. While each model might have characteristics of the other two models, each model can be described primarily as follows: MODEL 1, the self instruction approach; MODEL 11, the workshOp approach; and MODEL 111, the experiential learning approach. MODEL was based on the self-instruction approach, MODEL 11 on the workshop approach, and MODEL III on the experiential learning approach. MODEL 1. The Self-Instruction Approach Patterned after the Theological Education by Extension (Kinsler, 1981; Winter, 1969) concept of training, MODEL I was designed to help Bible teachers and leaders improve their knowledge of the Bible and their competency in communicating its teachings to others in a small group setting. For a period of one year each trainee, at his own pace, studies a lesson or more in a self- instructional text during the week days and interacts with co-trainees and with a discussion leader in his own church on Sunday mornings during Sunday school time. By the beginning of the second year, trainees who have demonstrated adequate knowledge of the Bible and competence in communicating its teachings involve themselves first as assistants to regular Bible study teachers or leaders and later as teachers or leaders of regular or else newly started Bible study‘ groups. 45 MODEL 11. The Workshop Approach This model is intended to help Bible teachers and leaders in local churches improve their knowledge of the Bible and develop their skills in sharing its teachings with others in both formal and nonformal settings. It is divided into four blocks Of time referred to as "PHASES." In PHASE 1 the trainees participate in the first five-day workshop, the general format Of which was adapted from Davis (1974) and Diamondstone (1980). In PHASE 2 each trainee assists an able and experienced Bible teacher or leader in Sunday school, in vacation Bible school, in camp, in small Bible study groups and in other situations where the latter may be serving. In PHASE 3 the trainees take part in a second five day workshop, the Objectives and content of which are different and more advanced. In PHASE 4 teach trainee gets the Opportunity to start handling a class or group compatible with his special abilities and interests. MODEL 111. The Experiential Learning Approach Designed for helping a select group of experienced and competent local church leaders develop their skills in planning, implementing, and evaluating leadership training programs for their own churches, MODEL 111 is based on the experiential learning approach designed by Steinaker and Bell (1979) and marks and Davis (1975). For two consecutive weeks, the participants go through a training experience consisting of eight stages: EXPOSURE, PARTICIPATION, IDENTIFICATION, INTERNALIZATION, DISSEMINATION, RECONSTRUCTION, PRESENTATION, and EVALUATION/FOLLOW THROUGH. Being experienced and competent teachers and leaders themselves, participants in this model play the dominant role in all the activities for two successive weeks. The trainers serve mainly as motivators, catalysts, moderators, sustainers, and critiquors. A very important feature of this model is the involvement of each participant in 46 actual planning, implementing, and evaluating of a weekend training seminar in a laboratory church (i.e., a previously observed church) and the planning of a suitable training program for his home church. These three training models were presented to five key decision makers in each of the nine churches selected for this research (see Appendix A for a more detailed description and illustration of these models). Estimation of Train_i_ng Costs Training costs were given consideration in the development of the three training models. Following some guidelines on cost estimation, the researcher tried to answer the question, "How much will it cost to operate MODEL 1? MODEL 11? MODEL 111?" Through interaction with key decision makers in each church, the researcher also sought answers to two other questions: "Are these costs reasonable in proportion to anticipated benefits?" and "Can these costs be met by rural churches? by urban churches?" The "ingredients approach" (Levin, 1975) was the method used in estimating costs. The first step taken was to write a description of each of the training models and its corresponding ingredients or components. From this description a list of all the components of each program was derived. The components included personnel, travel and subsistence, equipment and supplies, commodities, communication, and contingency (10%). After the list of components had been prepared, the next step taken was to estimate their costs. The cost of each component was established on the basis of cost experiences for that input, calculations done by others who operate similar training programs, and some other guidelines on cost estimation provided in the literature (Borus, n.d.; Craig, 1976; Levin, 1975; Richardson, 1980). 47 Anticipated cost increases caused by inflation were built into the cost estimates. Resources to be contributed, in cash or in kind, were also included. Attempts were made to calculate the costs, if paid for, of donated equipment, training supplies, volunteers' time, travel costs, etc. (For the estimated training cost of each model, see Appendix C.) Development of the Instruments Two basic instruments were developed for this research. The first instrument was a questionnaire (see Appendix D) designed to identify some of the training needs and interests of church workers‘ and to get some general background information about them. The second instrument was an interview protocol (see Appendix E) aimed at getting the reactions of key decision makers to the prOposed training models. The Questionnaire The questionnaire included a five point rating scale which involved a qualitative description of a limited number of elements of a learning activity. The classifications were set up in five categories of responses using the following terms: very strongly/strongly/moderately/slightly/not at all very important/ important/ less important/ least important/not important very much/much/some/a little/none very convenient/convenlent/less convenient/least convenient/inconvenient The rating scale, according to Best (1977), has several limitations. In addition to the difficulty of clearly defining the element to be evaluated, the halo effect (i.e., the tendency for the. rater to form an early impression of the one being rated and to permit this impression to influence his ratings) causes 48 raters to carry quantitative judgment from one element to another. Another limitation of the rating scale is the tendency of the rater to be too generous. Despite these limitations, however, the rating scale is still widely used, especially in evaluating training. Miles (1981) points out some of its advantages. 1. Ratings can be administered to trainers, participants, or their associates with a variety of directions for responding. 2. Ratings may be presented in a variety of ways. For example, the alternatives for choice may be fixed or the rater may be asked to check his estimate somewhere along a line with a few positions labeled. 3. 1f the rater is given a rather thorough description of what he is rating, ratings can be more stable (pp. 288~289). Part I of the questionnaire consisted of questions related to at least four components of training: (a) areas of content, (1)) training approaches, (c) trainers or resource persons, and (d) training schedule. These questions were asked in order to identify some of the training needs and interests of the church workers in each of the nine churches selected for the study. Several questions seeking some general background information were added as Part 11 of the questionnaire. In these questions, each respondent was asked to supply some important data about himself. These data were essential in the formulation of adequate classification in the tabulation, treatment, and analysis of the rating scale responses. Although the data called for in the qustionnaire are neither highly personal nor threatening, the respondents were not asked to identify themselves. They were classified according to the letter designations of their churches (see section on composition of the sample). (+9 The Interview Protocol The second tool was intended for getting the reactions of key decision makers in each church to the three training models previosuly presented to them. It consisted of a core of structured questions from which the interviewer was able to branch off to explore indepth. The core questions follow. I. In light of what you heard your church workers say at the general meeting about their training needs and interests, what do you think they would consider as the strong points of MODEL 1? MODEL II? MODEL III? 2. What do you think they would consider as the weak points of MODEL I? MODEL II? MODEL III? 3.. If you were to use MODEL I (or MODEL 11 or MODEL III), what would be the greatest difficulty or difficulties to your workers? to your church as a whole? . 4. What do you think about the estimated cost of operating each model? Can your church meet the costs of MODEL 1? MODEL II? MODEL Ill? 5. If it were up to you to redesign these models, what would you suggest for the improvement of MODEL 1? MODEL 11? MODEL III? 6. For which group of leaders and workers in your church would you recommend the use of MODEL 1? MODEL II? MODEL III? 7. If given an opportunity to take part in any of these three training models, in which would you participate? Why? These questions were asked in order to answer two of the three research questions posed at the beginning of the study: (a) which model or models are 50 workable for voluntary nonformal educators in rural and/or urban churches? and (b) which model or models are acceptable to rural and/or urban churches? For the benefit of those subjects who were not very comfortable with English, both the questionnaire and the interview protocol were translated into three of the eight major mother tongues sponken in the country (Philippine Yearbook, 1981). A staff worker of the Philippine Bible Society, an instructor at FEBIAS College of Bible, and the researcher herself translated the two research instruments into Ilonggo (spoken in Western Visayas), Cebuano (spoken in Central Visayas and in Northern and Southern Mindanao), and Tagalog (spoken in Metro Manila, in Southern Luzon, and in some parts of Northern Luzon and in Southern Mindanao), respectively. Validity of the Instruments To assess the validity of the instruments, they were submitted to a panel of five knowledgeable and competent persons. One member of the panel whose ability as a church administrator and an educator is recognized not only in the Philippines but also abroad is a Filipino with an Ed.D. and the president of one of the largest denominations in the Philippines. The second panelist, a Filipino with an M.A. in education, is the principal of a Christian day school in the Philippines who also teaches in a graduate theological seminary. The third panelist, a Filipino with an M.R.E., is the chairperson of the Christian education department in a well—known Bible college in the Philippines who is also frequently involved in lay leadership training activities sponsored by churches and parachurch organizations. The fourth member of the panel, an American with a Ph.D., is a missionary who has had many years of administrative and teaching experiences in Asia and who now serves as the coordinator of Christian education for Asia under the Asian Theological Association. The last member of 51 the panel, an American with a Ph.D., is a missionary who is presently serving as the academic dean in another seminary in the Philippines. These five panelists were asked to check each item in the questionnaire and in the interview protocol for validity and reliability. Those items were four of the five panelists concurred were used in the final instruments. Other valuable suggestions given by the panelists were incorporated in the instruments. To find out if confusing or unnecessarily offensive statements exist in the questionnaire, a pretest was conducted. This pretest was administered to a sample of church workers who are similar to those who received the final questionnaire. Those who responded to the pretest questionnaire were encouraged to make comments and suggestions which were carefully considered in the construction of the final questionnaire. Data Collection To ensure a complete return of the questionnaire, this researcher personally went, on dates pre-arranged with local pastors, to the nine selected churches located in different regions of the Philippines. In each church, two types of meetings were conducted. One was a one-hour general meeting, the purpose of which was to identify some of the training needs and interests of the local church workers (both paid and voluntary). At this general meeting, all the decision makers and workers who came were divided into small groups with three to six members each, to discuss, with the aid of some guide questions, their training needs and interests. After the small group discussions, each worker was asked to indicate some of his own particular needs and interests by answering a written questionnaire. The administration of the questionnaire was immediately followed by a general discussion of some of the reasons behind certain responses I 52 to the questionnaire (e.g., "Why do you prefer a one-hour-per-week training to a week-long training?") In places where many workers have difficulty understanding either English or Tagalog, the researcher was assisted by local interpreters. They helped her as she gave instructions for the small group discussions and for the questionnaire and as she interacted with them in the general discussion. The other one-hour meeting, held immediately after the general meeting, was with the pastor and no more than four other decision makers of the church. At this private meeting, the researcher gave a brief oral presentation of the three training models to the group of five decision makers, after which she handed each one a copy of the more detailed description of the three models for their personal study. The following days, at times and places mutually agreed upon, she interviewed each one personally in order to get their reactions to the models. Both note taking and audio recording were employed to preserve the data collected in these interviews. A supply of interview guides, containing the questions to be asked during the interview with spaces for recording, were used. As each question was asked, the researcher jotted down the information given by each respondent below the apprOpriate question on the interview guide. Even though note taking was done during the interview, the researcher saw the value of audio recording the interviewers. The use of an audio recorder speeded up the interview process since there was no necessity for extensive note taking. More importantly, it ensured that all responses, not just those that agree with the expectations of the interviewer, were properly recorded (Borg 6: Gail, 1979). Before each interview the purpose of the recording was carefully explained to each interviewee in order to minimize any undesirable effects of having the interview recorded. 53 To make sure no valuable information has beenoverlooked, the researcher checked her notes against the audio recording and wrote down whatever else needed to be included. To facilitate data analysis, the responses of the interview were arranged by models and by kinds of information and transferred to 3 x 5 index cards. Analytical Methods The data collected from the questionnaires were analyzed by doing a frequency distribution of the responses on all items and determining the mean response of the group for the purpose of describing and comparing attitudes of the sampled population. Scale scores were calculated and scale means and variances were analyzed in order to characterize the attitudes of the sample subjects and to determine the variability of their responses. Because both dependent and independent variables are categorical, cross— tabulation was chosen as the method of analysis. A cross-tabulation is a joint frequency distribution of cases according to two or more classificatory variables (Nie et al., 1975). Cross-tabulations of demographic variables and acceptability of different categorical items were made. To determine if a systematic relationship exists between the category responses and the demographic variables, chi-square tests were performed on each cross-tabulation. Since the frequency data were grouped into more than four cells, the type of chi-square test employed is based on the formula: X2 :2 (O - E); E A chi-square table (Isaac 6: Michael, 1981) was consulted to determine whether a particular chi-square value has reached the level of significance. Because of the 5Q exploratory nature of this study, .10 is used as the cut-off point for assigned significance (Borg 6c Call). In the process of doing chi—square tests, the researcher also computed the contingency coefficient (C) to get an estimate of the magnitude of the relationship between variables in a chi-square table. The formula used for computing C is as follows: The minimum value of C is 0. The maximum value of the contingency coefficient depends on the number of categories of the variables (Ferguson, 1981). The processing of the questionnaire data was done at the Computer Information System in Manila Electric Company using the IBM System 370 Model 3031. For the interview data, qualitative analysis was used. This analysis involved classifying the responses of the interviewees into seven kinds of information: strengths of each of the three models, weaknesses of each, anticipated difficulties related to the implementation of a model, reactions to the estimated training cost of each, suggestions for the revision of each model, group(s) for which a model is recommended, and interviewees' personal preferences for a model. The results of the analysis were related to the research questions. To determine the workability of a particular training model to rural or urban churches, the decision makers' reactions to the estimated training costs of each model were analyzed by means of a relative frequency (percentage) distribution and a bar graph (Figure 3). Responses were classified into three: (a) can meet costs—when the respondent's reply indicated the particular church 55 would be able to afford or might be willing to try to find ways to afford the estimated training costs of a particular model, (b) cannot meet costs-«when the respondent's reply suggested the particular church probably could not shoulder . the estimated training costs or when the respondent indicated no interest in trying to accommodate such costs, and (c) no comment--when the respondent did not give any opinion. To determine the acceptability of a particular training model to rural or urban churches, the decision maker's overall reactions to each model were analyzed using relative frequency (percentage) distribution and a bar graph (Figure 4). The degree of acceptability was interpreted in the following manner: (a) most acceptablenwhen 91% or more of the respondents indicated that a particular model was acceptable to them, (b) more acceptable--when 81 to 90% of the respondents indicated that a particular model was acceptable to them, (c) acceptable--when 71 to 80% of the respondents indicated that a particular model was acceptable to them, (d) less acceptable—when 61 to 70% of the respondents indicated that a particular model was acceptable to them, and (e) least acceptable—when 60% or less of the respondents indicated that a particular model was acceptable to them. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA This chapter presents the findings of the research. The first section of the chapter is devoted to the presentation and analysis of the data collected from the questionnaire. The second section is concerned with summarizing the findings, including those of the interview, and relating them to the research questions. Results of the Questionnaire The following data pertain to the results of the questionnaire administered to paid and voluntary church workers. These data were based on a total of 205 respondents from nine local churches representing different denominations, sizes, geographical locations, and community structures in the Philippines. In analyzing these data, an effort was made to determine the level of respondents‘ attitude toward four components of training (i.e., areas of content, training approaches, trainers/ resource persons and training schedule). This was done by means of a frequency distribution of the responses on all items. The frequency distribution, percentage for each item, mean, and standard deviation are shown in Table 5. Mean scores were interpreted according to the following range intervals: Interval Range Interpretation 4.51 - 5.00 Very strongly favorable 3.51 - 4.50 Strongly favorable 2.50 —- 3.50 Moderately favorable 1.50 - 2.49 Slightly favorable 1.00 - 1.19 Not favorable 56 57 mnm.o mom.v 00H mom v.o H m.H v m.m m m.HH mm H.om we m.mm mMH mumcomq Ho mumaoome mHQHm GHMHE ou 30m .m mom.o mHm.v OOH mom ¢.o H q.o H m.v HH m.m «N v.Hm hm m.mm HMH QDOHO xvsum wHQHm m wqu Ho mmmHU m comma on 30: .m wmm.o vmv.w OOH mvm III I «.0 H v.m m squ Hm m.mm hm N.Hm omH mHnHm mnu pmumuoucH Cu 303 .v mmo.o ooo.v 00H mvm v.0 H III I m.v NH n.mm mm m.mm mm H.mm om mumcummq ocmumumvca ou 30m .m vww.o mmm.v OOH mvm III I «.0 H N.H m o.m mm m.mm hm H.0m NmH 00H>me Una GMHH cmHumHuno msoHuouoH> .N Hmh.o hmm.v OOH mom III I v.o H o.N m 0.x Hm «.mm mm m.w© mmH ucwucou MHQHm .H mmuwxu03 HmcoHumo I560 use» can so» “Om Emumoum mchHmu# o :H @mNHmmsmEm ucmucoo mo mmmum mcHonH0m on» mxHH so» GHSOB #cmuxm was: ou "H whomwumo :03 :82 m 1 w ac w a w a w H w a w a 983320 ImH>mD mu mu wmcommmm HH< >Hu£mHHm >Houm >Hmcouum mHmcouum cumvcmum 09 09 oz um uoz Iumwoz. >um> mHHmcaoHpmwsa .mumxHOBIImCOHHMH>®Q @Hmocmum 0cm.mcmmz.mmmmucmou®m.mcoHuanHumHo mocmsvmum m oHnme 58 NHm.O mnw.v OOH mew O.H v III I O.H v w.n OH H.vm mm m.vo mmH AmoHuH>Huom mcHoc >2 mchummH zmsonnu ..m.HV mocmHMmm Ixm Hmsuom.£msouze mmm.o owv.a QOH mam w.H a m.o m v.0 H o.~ m N.Hs HOH m.mm mmanmmmooum msoum emsousu ..m.HO mHmomm Mosuo mo msoum m anz Oh>.O vmm.v OOH mvm v.O H III I O.H w 0.0H ON «.mv OOH m.vq OOH AmmHUsumIMHmm canons“ ..m.Hv :30 use» :0 .h mumccma mcHBOHHow mnu SH mchHwHu pom 30> Hosp 30> on pH mH ucmu IHOQEH 30m "HH muomwumo Hams damz.fiw H# w a w a w a w a w a w # mcoflummso IMH>wQ m m mmcomm pcmu uamu ucmu undo ucmu cumccmum uo no Iwm oz IMOQEH IHOQEH IHOQEH IHOQEH ImomEH B E uoz ummmq mmmq >Mm> UmscHucoo .m mHQMB 59 OOO.H nOH.v OOH mvm m.H m N.H m m.v NH h.VH mm N.mm mm m.mv mmH nuance H50» Iuso mpu0mx0 nmm.O nmv.v OOH mvm N.H m v.O H O.N m 0.0 AH O.mm on 0.00 mvH nonsno chuHB mun0mx0 mmm.o mnm.m OOH mvN N.H m v.0 H_h.m m m.mm hm H.5m Hm m.vm vm UCHCHMHH cH 0H0 0:3 mu0suo mmchHmHu cH 0H0 0UHm scum .NH usow Eoum .HH omHm Eoum .OH 50% S033 0HQO0Q H0390 Eonw 0>H0o I0H on ucmz 50% 06 QH0£ £098 30m ”HHH >H0m0u00 :ofiu :09; w w w w w w w ¢ w w w w w # mCOHamme I0H>0o Hm Hmu 0mcomm “Ekga 0HpUHH 050m :05: cos: wumwzmum #05 09 I0m oz a >u0> ©0scHucoo .m 0Hnme 60 mom.H mmm.~ OOH mwm m.m vm O.NN vm H.mH mm m.ON Hm m.mH we m.mH mm H00» 0 0000 0x003 0>Hmm00000 03% .OH hum.H mmo.m OOH mvm m.m «N 0.0N me m.mH Om 0.0m me 0.0N av m.VH mm H00» 0 0000 m»00 0H003 0>Hmm00000 009 .nH mom.H mmm.m OOH mvm N.m ON O.HH mm h.NH Hm O.mm H» 0.0N me v.mH mv H00» 0 00HBH m»00 0H003 0>Hmm00000 0>Hm .wH «Hm.H mmm.m OOH mvm O.w Hm ».NH Hm H.mH.Nm m.mm No m.vm Om m.mH mm H00» 000 How #003 0000 »00 0H003 00o .mH mom.H mmh.m OOH mvm O.m Hm O.wH ow N.NH Om m.mm m0 n.0H Hv H.>H Nv H00» 000 How »00 0000 H000 00o .VH mom.H mvm.m OOH mvm n.m vH «.HH mm m.o 0H m.vH mm m.mm hm m.mm mm H00» 000 H00 x003 0000 H000 00o .mH mno» ou m0H000000 00H I0H0HH m0H30HH0m 00H 0H0 000H00>0000H H0 H00H00> I000 30m ">H »H0@0H00 000» 009; w H# w # w w w w w w w w w # m00HHm000 I0H>0Q H0 0 0000mm HO0H00> HO0H00> HO0H00> H00H00> HO0H00> 0H0000um Ho Ho I0m oz I0000H I000. I000 0000 I000 I000 »H0> B E Hm00H U000Hu000 .m 0H00B 61 Category 1: Response to Areas. of Content This category is composed of workers' response to this question: To what extent would you like the following areas of content emphasized in a training program for you and other educational workers? Bible Content. Eighty-nine percent of the responding workers indicated that they like this course to be strongly emphasized in a training program, nine percent like it moderately emphasized, and two percent want it slightly emphasized (mean of 4.5, Table 5). Victorious Christian Life and Service. According to eighty-nine percent of the respondents, this course should be given a strong emphasis in training. Nine percent felt this should be given moderate emphasis, while two percent felt it should receive a slight emphasis (mean of 4.5, Table 5). How to Understand Learners. Seventy-one percent of the respondents were in favor of strongly emphasizing this course in training. Twenty-eight percent suggested that it be emphasized moderately, while five percent suggested slightly emphasizing it (mean of 4.0, Table 5). How to Integgret the Bible. Eighty-five percent of the respondents agreed that this course should be emphasized strongly in a training program, while thirteen percent thought it should be emphasized moderately. Three percent are of the Opinion that it should be stressed slightly (mean of 4.4, Table 5). How to Teach a Class or Lead a Bible Study Group. According to eighty— five percent of the respondents, this course should be given a strong emphasis in 62 training. Ten percent suggested a moderate emphasis in the course, while five percent suggested a slight emphasis (mean of 4.3, Table 5). How to Train Bible Teachers or Leaders. Eighty-four percent of the respondents expressed agreement that this course should receive a strong emphasis in a training program. Twelve percent felt it should be given a moderate emphasis, while five percent felt it should be given a slight emphasis or no emphasis at all (mean of 4.3, Table 5). Category II: Response to Training Approaches This category consists of workers' responses to this question: How important is it to you that you get training in the following m anner? On Your Own (i.e., Throuth Self-studies). Eighty-seven percent of the respondents indicated that training through self-studies is important to them, while eleven percent indicated that it is less important to them. Two percent considered it least important (mean of 4.3, Table 5). With a Group of Other PeoLle (i.e., Through Group Processes). Ninety-five percent of the respondents expressed a favorable attitude toward the group process of training. Two percent reported this type of training less important to them while one percent considered it least important or not important at all. Two percent did not respond (mean of 4.4, Table 5). Through Actual Experience (i.e., Through Leaming-by—Doinfi. This type of training was favored by eighty-nine percent of the respondents. Eight percent counted it less important, while two percent indicated it is not important. Two percent did not respond (mean of 4.5, Table 5). 63 Category III: Response to Trainers/ Resource Persons This category comprises the respondents' responses to this question: How much help do you want to receive from other peOple when you are in training? From Others Who Are also in Training. According to seventy-one percent of the respondents, they need much help from their co-trainees. Twenty-three percent indicated they need some help from co-trainees while four percent need a little or no help at all from them (mean of 4.0, Table 5). From Experts Within Your Church. Eighty-nine percent of the respondents expressed that they need help from experts within their churches. Seven percent reported they need some help from inside experts, while two percent need a little or no help at all from them (mean of 4.4, Table 5). From Experts Outside Your Church. Seventy-eight percent want to receive much help from experts outside their churches. Fifteen percent indicated they need some help from outside experts, while six percent need a little or no help at all from them (mean of 4.2, Table 5). Category IV: Response to Training Schedule This category is made up of the respondents' responses to this question: How convenient or inconvenient are the following training schedules to you? One Hour Each Week for One Year. Sixty-two percent of the respondents reported that this schedule is convenient to them. Fourteen percent, however, indicated that this schedule is less convenient, while eighteen percent considered it inconvenient. Two percent gave no response (mean of 3.5, Table 5). 64 One Hour Each Day for One Year. Thirty-four percent of the respondents expressed that this schedule is convenient to them, but twenty-seven percent considered it less convenient, and thirty-one percent inconvenient. Nine percent did not respond (mean of 2.8, Table 5). One Whole Day Each Week for One Year. According to forty percent of the respondents, this schedule is convenient to them. Twenty-five percent, however, reported it is less convenient, and the other twenty-five percent reported it as inconvenient. Nine percent gave no response (mean of 2.9, Table 5). Five Successive Whole Days Twice a Year. Thirty-eight of the respondents found this schedule convenient to them, but twenty-nine percent found it less convenient, and twenty-five percent inconvenient. Eight percent did not answer (mean of 3.0, Table 5). Ten Successive Whole Days Once a Year. Thirty-four percent of the respondents indicated that this schedule is convenient to them. Twenty percent reported it less convenient, while thirty-six percent found it inconvenient. Ten percent did not respond (mean of 2.6, Table 5). Two Successive Weeks Once a Year. Thirty-four percent reported that this schedule is convenient to them. Twenty-one percent, however, considered it less convenient, and thirty-five inconvenient. Ten percent gave no answer (mean of 2.6, Table 5). Cross tabulations were made on each of the demographic variables by respondents' attitudes to all the categorical items on the questionnaire. Then a chi-square test was performed on each cross-tabulation to determine whether a systematic relationship exists between the demographic variables and the 65 category responses. The type of chi-square test used is based on the following X2 __§:(0 - E)2 E formula: Because of the exploratory nature of this study, .10 was used as the cut-off point f0r assigned significance (Borg 6c Gall). The following data pertain to the results of the cross-tabulations made on each of the demographic variables and the acceptability of the different categorical items on the questionnaire. Only those items which showed statistically significant relationships were selected for presentation in tabular form and for special comments. Items which were found to have no significant relationships were discussed generally. Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Respondents' Age by Category Responses The results of the cross-tabulations of the respondents' age by the different category responses indicated a significant relationship between age and the following categorical items: "How to Interpret the Bible" (p = 0.0343, Table 6.1), training with a group (p = 0.0000, Table 6.2), training through actual experience (p = 0.0046, Table 6.3), help from others who are also in training (p = 0.0725, Table 6.4), training for one hour each day for one year (p = 0.0877, Table 6.5), and training for ten successive days once a year (p = 0.0247, Table 6.6). There is a slight predictable correlation between the respondents' age and training for one hour each day for one year (Table 6.5). The older a worker is, the more he finds training for one hour a day for one year less convenient. No useful correlation was found between the respondents' age and acceptability of the rest of the category items. 66 VOOOm.O "p00H0me000 »000@0H9000 mamo.o "moamoHHquHm ON ”00000Hm m0 m00HO0Q onmvo.mm "mumsvaHno 0.00H mwN v.O H O.N O ».NH Hm m.MN hm N.HO OOH "m00909 223000 m.o m coo o ooo o 0.0m H III I 0.0m H 0meomm0H oz O.» OH III I III I O.Hm N O.mH m O.Nm OH 0>000 H0 OO H.MH Nm III I H.m H m.O N H.ON O O.NO ON Om I om N.NH Om III I m.m H 0.0N O m.MN n m.mm OH Ow I ow H.mH hm ».N H >.N H v.m N m.wN O O.¢O ON Om I om 0.0Q OOH III I O.N N O.m m O.mN ON 0.00 OO ON I ON N.OH ON III I O.v H 0.0m O 0.0H v O.vv HH ON H000: w # w t w w w H w w w w 000 H0009 300 HH0 H0 002 »HHSOHHm »H0H0H0002 »HO00HHm »HO00HHm »H0> 0H0Hm 000 H0HmH0H0H OH 30m 00 »HHHH00HQ0000 O00 0O0 H.O 0H00B .mu00c0omm0m 67 mNmnw.O ”000H0Hmm000 »000O0Hu000 oooo.o "mocmonHcmHm Om "00000Hm mo 000Hm0o Rmaoa.oa "mumsOmIHco 0.00H mvN O.H w m.O N v.O H O.N m N.Hv HOH O.mm NMH "000909 ZZDHOO 0.0 m III I III I III I 0.0m H 0.0m H IIII II mmcommmu oz O.» OH m.mH m III I III I III I H.Nv O H.N¢ m 0>000 H0 OO H.MH Nm OOO O OOO O OOO O OOO O 0.0m OH 0.0m OH Om I om N.NH om III I m.m H III I m.m H m.mv OH 0.0m mH Ow I OO H.mH hm >.N H >.N H III I III I m.ov mH H.vm ON Om I om 0.0v OOH III I III I O.H H O.N N O.Nm Nm O.mO mO ON I ON N.OH mN III I III I III I O.v H O.VO OH O.Nm 0 ON H000: w * w * w H O O O O O H w w 000 H0H09 Bom 00000000 H00HHOQEH H00HHOQEH H00HHOQEH H00HHOQEH u00uHOQEH oz 002 00000 0000 »H0> 0Hmo0mIH0zuoImoIm00H0I0InuHBIm0H0H0HB mo »HHHH00um000< 000 0m0 .0H0000mm00m N.O 0HQ0B 68 HO»OM.O "U00H0Hmm000 »000m0Hu000 0066.0 "mocmoHMHcmHm vN “00000Hm mo 000Hm00 Ovva.O¢ "0H0000IH00 c.00H mam O.H q O.H a m.a mH H.0m mm a.vm mmH "000509 222000 IIII II IIII I IIII I IIII II 0.00 H O.OO H 0000000H oz O.» OH m.OH m IIII I m.O H O.Hm O w.»¢ O 0>000 H0 OO H.mH Nm IIII I H.m H v.O m O.HN m 0.00 HN OO I OO N.NH om IIII I IIII I m.MH v m.mm OH m.mO OH Ov I Ov H.OH hm O.N H n.N H v.O N ».ON HH 0.00 NN Om I Om 0.00 OOH IIII I O.H H 0.0 O 0.0H OH O.mh mm ON I ON N.OH ON IIII I O.v H 0.0H v O.Nm O O.mv NH ON H000: w 0 w H w H w H w H m 0 00¢ H0005 300 0000HOQEH 000HHOQEH 000HHOQEH 000HHOQEH 0000HOQEH 002 00000 0000 »H0> 0000HH0meIH00u04I0m00H05Im0H0H0HB mo »HHHH00HQ000< U00 0m< .0000000m00m m.O 0HQ0B 69 OmNOm.O "000H0Hmm000 »000O0Hu000 mmno.o "mocmonHcmflm om "00000Hm mo 000Hm00 HHmmm.H¢ "mumswmIHso 0.00H OVN N.H m q.O m n.m O 0.0N nO H.Om HO 0.00 vO "000909 220000 0.0 N IIII I III I IIII I 0.00 H IIII II O.OO H 0000000H oz O.» OH 0.0H N III I 0.0H N H.HN v O.Hm O 0.0N O 0>000 H0 OO H.OH Nm IIII I III I IIII I 0.00 HH O.Hm OH 0.00 HH OO I OO N.NH Om IIII I m.m H m.m H 0.0N n 0.0m O 0.00 NH Ow I ow H.OH hm >.N H III I v.O N O.HN O O.»N OH N.Ow OH Om I Om 0.0v OOH IIII I III I O.N N 0.0H OH 0.00 Ow 0.00 «m ON I ON N.OH ON IIII I III I 0.0 N O.Nm O 0.0v OH 0.0N O ON H000: O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 000 H0009 300 00000000 0002 0HuHH0 0000 00:2 000: oz 0 »H0> 00H0H0HB 0H 00H0 0H0 003 0H0QHO 00H0 mH0m mo »uHHHQ0um000< 000 0m0 .0000000m00m v.O 0HQ0B 70 OOOOO.O "000H0Hmm000 »00000H0000 nnmo.o "mocmoflchOHm OO "E0000Hm mo 000HO00 mmomm.ov "mumsvaHso 0.00H OON 0.0 HN 0.0H OO N.NH OO 0.0N OO ».OH HO H.OH NO "000508 220000 O.O N 0.00 H IIII II IIII II 0.00 H IIII II IIII II 0000000H 02 0.0 OH H.HN O 0.0H N 0.0H N H.HN O 0.0H N 0.0N O 0>000 H0 OO N.OH Nm O.NH O 0.0H O 0.0 N 0.0N O 0.0N O 0.0H O OO I OO N.NH OO 0.0 H 0.00 HH 0.0 N 0.0N n 0.0 H 0.0N O OO I OO H.OH hm 0.0H O O.HN O 0.0H O O.Nm NH H.O m 0.0H O OO I cm 0.00 OOH 0.0 O 0.0H OH 0.0H OH 0.0N ON 0.0N ON 0.0H OH ON I ON N.OH ON IIII I O.NH m O.NH m 0.0N O O.Nm O 0.0N O ON H0000 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 000 H0009 300 00000000 000H00> 000H00> 000H00> 000H00> 000H00> 02 I0000H I000 00000 I000 0000 I000 I000 »H0> H00» 000 H00 N00 0000 H000 000 H00 O0H0H0HB 00 »0HHH0000000¢ 000 0O< .00000000000 0.0 0HQ0B 71 0.0 0HQ0E OMHOO.O "000H0000000 »00000H0000 quo.o .mocmoOchmHm Om "00000Hm mo 000H000 mmmmo.sO "mumsOmIHno 0.00H OON 0.0 ON 0.0N OO 0.0H Om. 0.0N OO 0.0N OO 0.0H Om "000909 220000 O.O N O.OO H IIII II 0.00 H IIII II IIII II IIII II 0000000H 02 0.0 OH 0.0N O 0.0H N 0.0N O 0.0H N 0.0 H H.HN O 0>000 H0 OO H.OH Nm O.NH O 0.0 m H.O H 0.0N O 0.0N O 0.0N O OO I OO N.NH OO 0.0 N 0.0N n 0.0H O 0.0H O >.OH O 0.0N O OO I OO H.OH mm 0.0H O H.Om OH N.OH O O.»N OH O.»N OH HWO O OO I om 0.00 OOH 0.0 h 0.0N ON 0.0H OH O.HN HN 0.0N ON 0.0H OH ON I ON N.OH ON 0.0 H 0.0H O 0.0N O O.NH m O.Nm O 0.0H O ON H0000 O OOOOO OO OO OO OO 03 H0009 300 00000000 000H00> 000H00> 000H00> 000H00> 000H00> 02 I0000H I000 00000 I000 0000 I000 I000 »H0> H00» 0 0000 0»00 0H003 0>H0000000 009 How 00H0H0HB 00 »0HHHQ000000< 000 000 .00000000000 72 Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Respondents' Sex by Category Respmes The cross-tabulations of the respondents' sex by the different category responses showed that sex was significantly related to the acceptability of three items only: training with a group (p = 0.0000, Table 7.1), training for one hour a week for one year (p = 0.0487, Table 7.2), and training for five successive days twice a year (p = 0.0413, Table 7.3). There is a slight correlation between the respondents' sex and acceptability of training with a group (Table 7.1). The males hold in somewhat greater importance training with a group than do the females. A slight correlation wa also observed between the respondents' sex and acceptability of training for five succesive days twice a year (Table 7.3). The females, slightly more than the males, see training for five successive days twice a year as more convenient. No useful correlation was found between the respondents' sex and acceptability of training for one hour a week for one year (Table 7.2). Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Respondents'Marital Status by Category Responses The chi-square test of significance used to show association by cross- tabulation of the respondents' marital status with the category responses revealed a significant relationship between marital status and the following items: training through actual experience (p = 0.0001, Table 8.1), training for five days twice a year (p = 0.0681, Table 8.2), training for ten days once a year (p = 0.0544, Table 8.3), and training for two weeks once a year (p = 0.0498, Table 8.4). The widows are slightly less likely than the others to indicate that training for five days twice a year (Table 8.2) and training for two weeks once a year (Table 8.4) are not convenient to them. The widows, however, are more likely 73 OONN0.0 "00000Hmm000 »000O0H00o0 OOO0.0 "00000HOH00HO OH "50000Hw mo 000HO00 OHOO0.00 "0H0000I000 H.OOH OON O.H O 0.0 N 0.0 H O.N O N.HO HOH 0.00 NOH "004905 220000 IIII II III I III I III I 0.00 N O.ON H O.ON H 0000000H 02 0.00 OOH O.N O 0.0 H III I O.H O 0.00 OO O.HO OO 0H0E00 0.00 OO III I N.H H N.H H III I 0.00 NO 0.00 HO 0H02 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 200 i 0000 I HONOR. 30m. QmCOQmwm IWMM—WH INOQEH. IWWMHWH IMMMHH IWMMHWH 02 002 00000 0000 »H0> 0H0o00IH0000IwoI000H0I0I00H3IO0H0H0HB mo »0HHHQ0000000 000 200 .00000000000 H.O 0HQ0B 74 ONOON.O "000H0Hmm000 »000O0H0000 nOOO.O "00000HOH0OHO OH "00000Hm mo 000HO00 Hmmmm.mH mumsvaHso 0.00H OON 0.0 OH O.HH ON 0.0 OH 0.0H OO 0.0N mm 0.00 OO "000808 . 220000 O.H O 0.00 N IIII II III I IIII II IIII II 0.00 N 0000000H 02 0.00 OOH H.O O 0.0H OH 0.0 O 0.0H ON 0.0N OO 0.00 OO 0H0E00 0.00 OO 0.0 O H.OH NH N.O m O.HH OH O.NN OH 0.00 OO 0H02 O O O O O .O O O O O O O O O 000 H0008 300 00000000 000H00> 000H00> 000H00> 000H00> 000H00> 02 I0000H I000 00000 I000 0000 I000 I000 »H0> H00» 000 How 0003 0000 H000 000 H00 00H0H0HB mo »0HHH0000M000 000 000 .00000000000 N.O 0HQ0B 75 O99ON.O 00000000000 »00000H0000 MHOo.o "mocmoH000000 OH "00000Hm mo 000HO00 mhmHm.mH "mumswmIHno 0.00H OON N.O ON O.HH ON O.NH HO 0.0N HO 0.0N OO 0.0H OO "000909 220000 O.H O 0.00 N III. II 0.0N H IIII II IIII II O.ON H mmcommmH oz 0.00 OOH 0.0 OH H.OH NN 0.0H 9H 0.0N OO 0.0H HO N.HN OO 0H0E00 O.H O 0.0 O N.O 9 0.0H OH 0.00 HO N.HN OH O.NH HH 0H02 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O x00 H0009 300 00000000 000H00> 000H00> 000H00> 000H00> 000H00> 02 I0000H I000 00000 I000 0000 I000 I000 »H0> H00wmw00H39 0»00 0H003 0>H0000000 0>H0 How 00H0H0H9OvawHHH0000000< O00 x00 .00000000000 0.0 0HQ09 76 HNOOO.o "00000H00000 >000O00H0000 Hooo.o "000000000000 OH "E000000 00 0000O0Q 808.3 "33305 0.00H OON O.H v IIII I O.H O 0.0 OH H.ON OO 0.00 OOH "000909 223000 N.H O IIII I IIII I III I IIII II O.OO H O.OO N 00000000 oz 0.00 OHH IIII I IIII I O.H N 0.0 h O.HN ON O.Hn Ow 0HO0H0 0.0 m 0.0N N IIII I III I O.NH H 0.0N N 0.00 O 0030003 0.00 OHH O.H N IIII I O.H N 0.0 0H N.ON HO 0.00 OO 00H000E O O O W O O O O O O O O O O 050000 H0009 300 000000 0 0000, 0000 0000 . 0000 0000 - 0000002 oz I000EH IHO0EH IMOCEH I000EH IHO0EH . 002 0000.0 0000 >00> 0000H000x0IH0000000O000000 $86 "8:803:30 ON "E00000m 00 0000000 $03.90 "00023-30 0.00H OON N.O ON O.HH ON O.NH HO 0.0N HO 0.0N OO 0.0H OO ”000908 220000 N.H O 0.00 H IIII II 0.00 H IIII II IIII II 0.00 H 00000000 oz 0.00 OHH O.H N 0.0H OH H.OH OH 0.00 OO 0.0N ON 0.0H NN 0HO000 0.0 O 0.0N N O.NH H 0.0N N O.NH H 0.0N N IIII II 0030003 0.00 OHH N.OH OH N.OH OH 0.0 OH 0.00 OO 0.0H OH 0.0H HN 0000002 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 000000 H0009 300 00000000 000000> 000000> 000000> 000000> 000000> H00OH002 OZ I0H I000 00000 I000 0000 I000 I000 >00> 000% 0 0000 0000 0H003 0>00000000 0>00 000 00000003 00 >00H00000000< 000 000000 H000002 .00000000000 N.O 0HQ0B 78 NOOOO.O "00000000000 >00000000OU :35 "8:830:30 ON "E000000 00 0000000 OOOOO.HO "000000I00U 0.00H OON 0.0 ON 0.0N OO 0.0H OO 0.0N OO 0.0N OO 0.0H OO "000905 220000 N.H O 0.00 H IIII II 0.00 H IIII II IIII II 0.00 H 00000000 oz 0.00 OHH 0.0 O 0.0H ON 0.0H ON O.NN ON 0.0N NO 0.0H OH 0H0000 0.0 O O.NH H IIII II 0.0N N O.NH H 0.0N N 0.0N N 0030003 0.00 OHH 0.0H OH O.NN ON 0.0H OH 0.0H HN N.OH OH 0.0H OH 0000002 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 000000 H0000. 300 00000000 000000> 000000> 000000> 000000> 000000> 1000002 OZ I0H I000 00000 I000 0000 I000 I000 >00> 000» 0 0000 0000 0H003 0>00000000 00B 000 00000009 00 O00H000000000 000 000000 H000002 .00000000000 0.0 0H00B 79 OHOO0.0 u00000000000 >00000000ou mmOo.o "mocmo000cm00 ON "8000000 00 0000000 mmmmq.0m "mumsOmIHno 0.00H mON 0.0 ON O.NN Om H.OH NO 0.0N H0 0.0H 0O 0.0H OO "000909 ZZDOOU «.0 m m.mm 0 IIII II m.mm 0 IIII II IIII II m.mm 0 mmcommm0 oz 0.00 OHH N.O m 0.0H NN 0.0H OH 0.0N ON O.NN ON 0.0H OH 0H0000 0.0 O O.NH H “O.NH H O.NH H O.NH H 0.0m O IIII II 0030003 0.00 OHH 0.0H 0H N.ON HO 0.0 HH 0.0H HN N.OH mH 0.0H OH 0000002 O O O O O O O O O O O O . O O 000000 H0000. 300. 0000m00m 000000> 000000> 000000> 000000> 000000> 0000.002 I0m I00 I000 00000 I000 0000 I000 I000 >00> 000% 0 0000 00003 0>00000000 03B 000 00000009 00 >00H0000m0000 000 000000 H00000z .00000000000 0.0 0H00B 80 than the others to indicate that training for ten days once a year (Table 8.3) is convenient to them. No useful correlation was found between the respondents' marital status and acceptability of training through actual experience (Table 8.1). Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Respondents' Educational Level llCategorLResponses A significant relationship was shown between the respondents’ educational level and twelve of the eighteen categorical items according to the chi-square test of significance. A significant relationship existed between the respondents' educational level and acceptability of the following: "Victorious Christian Life" (p = 0.0008, Table 9.1), "How to Interpret the Bible" (p = 0.0070, Table 9.2), "How to Teach or Lead a Group" (p = 0.0463, Table 9.3), "How to Train Bible Teachers or Leaders" (p = 0.0741, Table 9.4), training-on-your-own (p - 0.0197, Table 9.5), training-with-a-group (p = 0.0005, Table 9.6), training-through-actual-experience (p = 0.0000, Table 9.7), help from others who are in training (p = 0.0031, Table 9.7), help from others who are in training (p = 0.0031, Table 9.8), help from experts within your church (p = 0.0462, Table 9.9), help from experts outside your church (p - 0.0299, Table 9.10), training for ten days once a year (p = 0.0831, Table 9.11), and training for two weeks once a year (p = 0.0401, Table 9.12). It is important to note that the extent of the workers' previous formal education is slightly negatively correlated with preference for "How to Interpret the Bible" (Table 9.2), "How to Teach or Lead a Group" (Table 9.3), and "How to Train Bible Teachers/Leaders" (Table 9.4). Workers with more formal education are also less likely to indicate preference for training with a group (Table 9.6), but they are more likely to express that training on your own (Table 9.5) is less acceptable to them. 81 vmmwv.o "ucwHonmmoo hocmeHpcou wooo.o "oocmoHMHcmHm om "Eooowuw mo wowumoo HhHom.mm "wumzvmcho 0.00H mew v.0 H H.N m o.m mm m.mm hm H.mo NmH «madeoa ZEDHOU N.H m III: II III: I: III: I: III: In o.ooH m wmcommmu oz ¢.N m III: II III: II III: I: n.wH H m.mm m “mayo woummu mums m.v HH lull II H.m H H.m H N.mH N o.mw h Iwmum Um>Hwomm mchHmuu mum O.HH R .1. I I} I a.» N 92 m 0.3 5 L688 332. mmumww wme m.Hm mm III: II till I: v.w m H.qH HH m.m> mm 1H00 wo>Hmomm mmmHHoo m.hm mm m.H H III: I: m.w m m.om mm m.mm om Amchcwwcouu< Hoozom H.v 0H lull I: lull in III: I: III: II o.ooH 0H zch woumHQEou Hoocom LmHQ m.m mH III: I: III: II N.NN v m.mm o v.vv m AmcHVUopcmHa< Hoonom .Eme m4. 3 I: l «.3 N mém m H5 H 93 m 88358 Hoocom m.m MH III: I: III: II 5.5 H H.mm m «.mo m .EwHo womcwuu< w w w w w * w # w w w * Hm>mq HmcoHuoosvm Hmuoe 30m HHd pm uoz wHHQmHHm >Hmumumcoz mecouum mHmcounm OOH>H®m 0G6 meH cmHumHuno mSOHHou0H> mo quHHQmumwoo< can H.m wHQME H®>®Q HMSOHHMOSUW .wucwwcommmm 82 vowev.o uucwHonwmoo xocwmcHucou Ohoo.o "wocmonHcmHm om ”Eowwmum mo mmwmmmo mHHhH.ow "mumsvmich 0.00H mvN 4.0 H 4.N o N.NH Hm N.NN km N.Ho omH MmHHmomm mCHCHmuu mam o.HH NN nun- n nun: n: 4.5 N m.mN n N.oo mH isomum mcmee mmummw mmmH N.HN ma 1... I o.N N 4.9 m N.NH 4H H.mN mm [H00 oo>Hmomm mmmHHoo N.NN me u--- . m.N N N.OH N m.NN mH N.Nm ow Amchemeamuoa Hoozom H.« OH nun: n In]: In o.ON N o.om m o.om m anc owuoHoEcu Hoozom sch m.N mH u--- - o.m H N.mH m N.NN m o.om m Amchemecmooa Hoozom .Eme m.v HH 1:1: I H.m H v.mm a H.m H m.mv m omomHmeou Hoozom m.m MH III: I :11: in m.mm m m.» H m.mm n .Eme woocouu< w # w ¢ w w w w w t w # Ho>oH choHpmosom Hmuoe 20m HH< um mHusmHHm HHmum HHmcouum mHmcouum uoz lumwoz >Hm> mHQHm map wounumucH ou 30m mo thHHnmumwooa can Ho>oH HMCOHHMODUM .mucmwcommom N.m mHQME 83 vomvv.o "HamHOHmmmoo mocmmCHucou movo.o “mocmoHMHcmHm me "Eocmmum mo mmmummo vmmmo.mw "muosvaHno 0.00H mvN v.o H «.0 H m.v HH m.m vN «.Hm 55 m.mm HmH "mqmeoe ZEDHOU N.H m IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II 5.mm N m.mm H mmcommmn oz v.N m IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II 5.mm v m.mm N umnuo m.v HH IIII II IIII II H.m H m.5N m v.0m v m.5N m owumop mum: Ivmum cw>Hmomm O.HH 5N IIII II IIII II v.5 N 5.m H m.mm m m.mm mH mchHmuu mum Iscmum mcmee N.Hm m5 IIII II IIII II m.H H 5.5 o o.mN ON v.mo Hm moumoo wmmH IHoo ©w>Hmomm m.5N mo IIII II m.H H m.H H N.OH 5 m.om HN m.mm mm mmmHHoo Amchomocmuua H.« OH IIII II IIII II 0.0H H o.OH H 0.0m m 0.0N N Hoonom ann omumHmsoo m.5 NH IIII II IIII II m.m H N.NN v m.5N m v.vv w Hoocom cmH: Hmchemecmuua m.v HH IIII II IIII II m.5N m H.@ H N.NH N m.mv m Hoonom .EmHm UmumHQEoo m.m MH 5.5 H IIII II 5.5 H 5.5 H m.om v N.ov o Hoocom .EmHm pmpamuud w # w ¢ N ¢ w a w # N # w ¢ Hm>mH Hmuoe 30m mmcommmm HH¢ um wHucmHHm mHmum >Hmcouum >Hmaouum HmcoHumosUm oz 902 Iuwcoz >Hm> madam mHQHm m coma no mmmHU m somme Op 303 mo quHHnmummoo< can Ho>wH HmcoHpmozwm .mucmwcommmm m.m mHQME 84 mmva.o HucmHOHmwooo homomchcou H45o.o “mocmoHMHcmHm mv ”Eowommm mo mommmmo mHNmm.mm ”mumsvang 0.00H mVN «.0 H m.H 5.m N.HH mN H.mN 4o m.mm mmH ”mHaeoa ZEDHOU N.H m IIII II IIIIIII IIII IIII II m.mm H 5.0@ N omcommmu oz w.N o IIII II IIII IIII IIII II m.mm N 5.om v Hozuo m.4 HH. IIII II IIII H.m H.m H m.m4 m 4.Nm 4 mmummo mom: I HomIHv wm>Hmomm O.HH 5N IIII II 5.m 4.5 N.NH v H.HH m o.mm 5H m:HCHmuu mpo Iswmum OCmee N.Hm ms IIII II IIII m.H 4.0 m m.mN mN N.Nm m4 omummw wmmH IHOo ©0>Hmowm m.5N mm IIII II m.H 4.4 5.4H oH H.mH MH m.ow H4 mmmHHoo Hmchwmecmpum H.4 OH IIII II IIII 0.0H 0.0H H 0.04 4 o.ow 4 Hoocom ans omomHmsoo m.N NH IIII II IIII N.m N.NN m 4.44 N N.NN 4 Hoosom zmHg Hmchomocmuua m.4 HH IIII II H.m IIII N.NH N 4.mm v 4.0m 4 Hoonom .EmHm GmHmHmEOU m.m mH 5.5 H 5.5 IIII 5.5 H 5.5 H N.mm m Hoonom .Eme Umocmuua N N N N N N - N N N. N N N Hm>mH Hmpoe 30m macommmm HH4_um anno >Hmum >Hoaouum >Hmcoupm HmcoHumosom oz #02 Iumwoz >Hm> wnmnomme mHQHm GHMHB ou 30m 0m >HHHHnmummoo< paw Hm>mH HmcoHuooDUm .mucmwcommmm v.m mHnme 85 Nmva.o uucmHonmmou hocmmCHucou 5mHo.o ”mocmonHcmHm wm ”Eowwwum No mmmnmmo_ 5VHmm.mm "mumswmIHEU 0.00H mwN «.0 H IIII II N.H o.oH oN N.NN NOH m.vv OHH "mH¢BOB ZZDHOU N.H m IIII II IIII II IIII IIII II m.mm H 5.0m N mmcommmn oz v.N m IIII II IIII II 5.0H H m.mm N m.mm N 5.mH H stuo m.v HH IIII II IIII II IIII H.a H w.mo 5 m.5N m mmnmmo mums Immum Um>Hmomm O.HH 5N IIII II IIII II IIII H.HH m H.N4 NH N.O4 HH mcflchuN mum ISUMHO mcmee N.HN Nb IIII II IIII II N.H N.HH a N.N4 om o.H4 Nm mmummw mme IHOU wo>HmUmm N.NN No IIII II IIII II N.H N.N N N.HN mm N.NN NN ommHHoo Amchmmncmupm H.v 0H IIII II IIII II IIII 0.0H H o.om m 0.0N w Hoozom _ an; cmumHmeoo m.5 NH IIII II IIII II IIII H.HH N N.5N m H.HN HH Hoosom ang AmchomocNNNN m.v HH IIII II IIII II H.m H.m H H.m H 5.N5 m Hoonom .EmHm wmumHmEoo m.m MH 5.H H IIII II IIII 5.5 H 5.5 H m.o5 OH Hoonom ..EmHm Umccmuufl N N N N N N N N N N N N N me>mq _ Hmaoe I .30m... mmcommmm ucmuuomEH ucmuHOQEH ucmuuomEH pamNfiHOQEH ucmnzomEH H MCOHuMUDEM oz #02 ummmq mmmq >Hm> Id30.Haoquo.wchflmne mo NHHHquummoud 0cm Hm>mH HocOHumudUmI.mudmnccmmmm m.m mHQma. 5mNom.O "wcoHOmeooo NocomcHNcoo mOO0.0 HoocmonHcmHm 86 mw “Eowmwum mo moonmmo. womNm.Nm "mumswmIHco 0.00H mvN w.H v N.O N N.O H O.N m N.HN HOH m.mm NMH "mHNBOB ZZDHOU N.H m IIII II IIII II IIII II m.mm H m.mm H m.mm H omcommmu oz v.N m IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II m.mm N 5.mw v szuo m.v HH IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II m.vm m m.mv m wmmmww mwm: Iwmnm Ow>Hmowm O.HH 5N IIII II IIII II 5.m H 5.m H N.NN m O.mw 5H mchHmuu mum Izwwum mcmee N.Hm m5 IIII II IIII II IIII II m.H H N.NN mm N.Nm vv owumww wmmH IHoo ©®>Hwoom N.NN NN IIII II N.H H IIII II IIII II N.H4 NN 4.5m mm mNmHHoo HmcflvwmwcmNNN H.v OH IIII II IIII II IIII II 0.0H H 0.05 5 0.0N N Hoonom an: nmumeEoo N.N NH IIII II N.m H IIII II IIrI II 4.44 N O.ON N Hoonom nmflc Amchcmucwuum m.v HH N.NH N IIII II IIII II IIII II m.mv m N.NM v HOOSOm .EmHm UwNmeEOU m.m MH «.mH N IIII II IIII II 5.5 H H.MN m m.mm 5 Hoonom ,.EMHm wwwcmuum N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Hw>wH H.309 30m mmcommmm pcmunomEH ucmayomEH ucmuuomEH ucmugomfiH ucmuuomEH HchHumoswm oz #02 ummmq mme >Hw> meommIHmzpoImoImDOMGImInuHBImQHchue mo wuHHHnmwmmoom vcm Hw>wH HmcoHpmoscm .mucwwcommmm w.m mHnme mNNHm.o "NamHOHNNmoo NocmmcHNcou oooo.o "Noam0HNHcmHm 87 mm "Eowmwnw wo momummo mvm55.mm anGDWmIHzo 0.00H m¢N m.H w IIII II m.H v m.5 mH H.¢N mm m.vm mmH "mdmeoe ZZDHOU N.H m IIII II . IIII II IIII II IIII II m.mm H 5.wm N mmcommmu OZ ¢.N w IIII II IIII II m.mm N IIII II 5.oH H o.om m Hwfiuo m.w HH IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II m.vm m m.mv m mmummw mum: Iwmnm U®>Hwomm O.HH 5N IIII II IIII II IIII II v.5 N N.NN m «.05 mH mcHCHmuw mam Izwmum mcmee N.Hm m5 IIII II IIII II m.H H v.0 m N.HN 5H m.on mm wmumwo mme IHOU Uw>Hwowm w.5N mm IIII II IIII II IIII II ¢.v m m.mm wH H.N5 av wmmHHOU Amchwomcwuu< H.v OH IIII II IIII II IIII II 0.0H H 0.0m m 0.00 w Hoocom nuH: UmpmHmEoo m.5 mH m.m H IIII II m.m H m.5N m 5.0H m w.vw m HOOSOm smHn chchmwchNN m.v HH N.mH N IIII II IIII II H.m H m.5N m m.mw m Hoonom .EmHm @wumeEOU m.m MH 5.5 H IIII II IIII II v.mH N H.MN m m.mm 5 Hoonom .Eme Umwcpr< N N N N N a N N N # N N N N Hm>wH Hapoe 30m wmcommom ucmuuomaH pamanomEH NQMNHOQEH ucmuuomEH ucmuuomEH HMNZVHumnzuwm oz #02 umqu mme >uw> wocmHnwmeIHmsuouHHHQmumwoo< 6cm Hm>mH HmcoHumoswm .mucwcccommm 5.m oHQwB 88 5Nvm¢.O "ucmHonmmoo mocmmcHucoo HMO0.0 "mocmonHcmHm mw “Eoommuw Mo mmoummo 5OMNN.m5 "mumsvaHLU N.NOH N4N N.H m 4.0 H N.m N.NN NN H.NN Hm m.4m 4N .NNNNOB ZEDHOU N.H m IIII II IIII I IIII m.mm H IIII II 5.NN N mmcommmu oz 4.N N IIII II IIII I IIII IIII II 5.NN 4 N.NN N ngpo moummm mum: N.4 HH IIII II IIII I IIII N.NH N N.4N N N.NN m Immum cw>Nmomm mchflmuu mum N.HH NN IIII II IIII I N.m N.NH N 4.44 NH N.NN m Iswmum chxme mmumww mmmH N.Hm m5 IIII II IIII I m.N m.mN HN m.mm Om H.Nm mN IHOU Um>Hmowm mmmHHoo N.5N NN IIII II IIII I N.N N.NN NH NH.4 NN 4.Nm NN AmcHONmNchNN Hoonom H.v OH IIII II 0.0H H 0.0H 0.0m m 0.0H H 0.0N v 50H; wouonEou Hoocom :mH; m.5 NH IIII II IIII I N.N N.5N N N.NN N N.NN N AchvaNcmNNN Hoozom .EoHo m.v HH N.NH N IIII I H.m N.NH N N.NH N N.NN v @mumHmEou Hooaom m.m mH 5.5 H IIII I 5.5 v.mH N N.NH N N.NN 5 .Eme ©0©cwuu< N N N .N N N N N N N N N N Hm>mH Hmuoe 30m omcommmm mcoz wHuuHH meow £052 :05: chofiumosvm 4 >H0> WGHCHNMB CH 0mH< mu< 0:3 mumnuo Eoum mHmm mo huwHHnmummood paw Hm>wH HmcoHumosom .mucmwcommmm m.m mHQme 89 momvv.o “ucwHonmmoo wocmeHucou NNV0.0 ”wocmonHcmHm mv ”Eowwmuw mo wwwumma mammO.No "mumsvaHfio 0.00H mvN N.H m N.O O.N m m.N 5H N.NN O5 N.ON NVH “mH4909 ZZDHOU N.H m IIII II IIII I IIII I IIII II IIII II 0.00H m wmcommmg oz v.N N IIII II IIII I IIII I IIII II m.mm N 5.NN v uwzuo m.v HH IIII II IIII I H.m H H.m H N.Nm v m.mv m mwumww mum: Iwmum vm>Hwomm O.HH 5N IIII II IIII I 5.m H v.5 N m.mN 5 O.mm 5H mchHmNu mpm Iswwum mcmee N.Hm m5 IIII II m.H H IIII I H.m w N.NM 5N O.Nm Nv ooummw ammH IHoo Uo>Hmowm N.5N NN IIII II IIII I N.H H 4.5 N N.5H NH N.N5 om mNmHHoo chNONmNcmNNN H.v OH IIII II IIII I 0.0H H 0.0H H 0.0m m 0.0m m Hoozom 50H: woumHmEoo m.5 NH IIII II IIII I IIII I H.HH N 0.0m m m.mm 5 Hoocom anc HmcHONoocmupd m.v HH N.NH N IIII I H.m H H.o H m.5N m v.mm v Hoocom .Eme wwumeEoo m.m MH 5.5 H IIII IIII I 5.5 H H.MN m m.HN N Hoonom .EmHm wovcmuufi N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Hw>mH HMNOB 30m mmcommmm wcoz meuHH wEom £052 £052 HmcoHumoscm oz < Num> nousso H50» :HnuHB muummxm Eouw mHmm mo,>uHHHnmquuod m.m wHQMB UGM H®>®1H HMCOHIIwMUDUW .mu.CwmuGOnmw0m 90 vamv.o ”ucmHonwmoo xocwmcHucou mmNo.o "wocmonHcmHm mv ”Eocmwum wo mwmummo NNNNV.NN ”wumzvaHzo 0.00H mvN N.H. N.H N.v NH 5.vH mm N.NN mm N.NN NNH “NHHwowm O.HH 5N IIII 5.m v.5 N H.HH m «.5 N v.05 NH mchHmup mum . Iscmum mCmee N.HN N5 IIII IIII N.m m N.NH 0H m.mN MN N.Nm Nv mwummw mme IHoo ©m>Hmowm N.5N NN IIII N.H m.m v H.NN mH m.5N NH N.NN mN ommHHoo Amcflvcwwcmuum H.v 0H IIII IIII IIII II 0.0N N 0.0N v N.NN v Hoonom zch UmumHmEoo m.5 NH IIII N.m N.m H H.HH N N.NN N N.NN N Hoonom ann Amcflvumncwuua m.v HH N.NH IIII IIII II m.5N m N.NH N N.NN v Hoonom .EwHw @wumHmEOU m.m NH 5.5 IIII 5.5 H 5.5 H m.Nm m N.NN m Hoonom .EmHm owwcmuud N N N N N N N N N N N * Hw>mq Hmuoe 30% mmCOQmmm mcoz pruHH mEom £052 £052 HmcoHpmoswm oz ¢ >um> nousno wuHHHQmpmwood cam Hw>wH HmcoHumosom .mucmwcommmm Mao» memuso muuwmxm Eouw mem mo 0H.m mHQMB 91 mmmmvé "ucmflodwmoo 359350 285 "853233 mv ”Eowmwuw NO mwoummo mNNNN.Nm ”mumsvaHLU N.OOH NNN N.w vN N.NN Nv N.NH mm 0.0N mv 0.0N mv N.NH mm ”mqflw00m O.HH 5N «.5 N N.NH m N.NH v N.NN N N.NN m 5.m H mcflchuu mum Iswwum mcfixme N.Hm N5 5.5 N N.HN 5H m.5H NH N.NN NN N.NH NH N.OH N mmnmow vmmH IHoo Um>floomm N.5N NN «.5 m N.NH m N.NN NH N.NH HH m.5N NH 5.NH 0H ommHHoo AmcflvwmwcmuNN H.v OH 0.0N N N.NN N IIII II N.NN N N.NN N 0.0N N Hoosom zch UmpmeEOU m.5 NH 5.NH m 5.NH m H.HH N N.NN v N.NN v H.HH N Hoonom SON: AmcflvvmwcwuuN m.v HH H.m H H.m H N.NH N H.m H H.m H N.NN N Hoonom .Eme UmumeEOU m.m NH H.NN m N.NN m IIII II IIII II 5.5 H N.NN N Hoonom .EmHmw wacmuu< N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Hm>wq Hmuoe 30m wmcommmm pcoHco> ucchw> ucchw> ucchm> ucmHCmS HMCOHUMODUH oz IGOGCH Icoo ummmq Icoo mme IGOU Icoo >Hm> Ham» 6 mono mxma wHonz w>Hmmwoosm :mB uom mchHmue mo NUHHHnmummoofl Nam Hm>wq HH.N mHnme Hmcoflumoscm .mucwwqommmm 92 mmamv.o "ucmfloflwmmoo Nozmacflgcoo Hoqo.o "mocmoflwflcmflm mw “Eowomum NO mmommmo NNHNN.NN "GHMDWmIHLU 0.00H mwN N.m vN O.NN vm H.NH Nm N.ON Hm N.NH Nv N.NH Nm "mHH$Omm O.HH 5N «.5 N N.NN 5 N.NN N N.NH m v.5 N m.NH m mcflcflmuu mwm Iswmum mcmee N.HN N5 5.5 N N.NN HN 5.NH NH N.NN NN m.HH m O.N 5 mmummw wmmH IHOO Um>flmoom N.5N NN v.5 m N.NH HH N.NH m N.NH HH N.OM HN N.NH HH ommHHOO Amcflvwmccmupm H.v OH 0.0N N 0.0H H IIII II 0.0H H 0.0H H 0.0m m HOOSOm nmfl: mmpmameoo m.5 NH 5.NH m 5.NH m IIII II m.mm N N.5N m N.m H HOOSOm 50H: . AmcflvwmwcmpuN m.v HH H.m H H.m H N.NH N N.NH N m.5N m N.NH N HOOEUm .EmHm mmumHQEOU m.m NH H.NN m N.NN v IIII II IIII II H.NN m H.NN m Hoonum .EmHm wwwcmyud N N N ,N N N N N N N N N N N Hm>mH HMNOB 30m mmcommmm ucchm> ucwficmky ucmflcmxw pzmflcmx/ ucwflcmxy HMGOHuNmofimvm oz IcoocH Icoo ummmq Icoo mme Icoo Icoo >um> Mmmw m 0020 mxmmz m>Hmmmoosm 039 HON mcHCHmue mo NHHHHnmummoo< Nam Hm>mH HNCOHumosom .mucmocommmm NH.N mHnme 93 The extent of the workers' previous formal education is slightly negatively correlated with preference for help from experts inside their church (Table 9.9) and slightly positively correlated wit preference for help outside the church (Table 9.10). The more formally educated workers are also more likely to express that training for ten days once a year (Table 9.11) and training for two weeks once a year (Table 9.12) are not convenient to them. No useful predictable correlations were found between the respondents' educational level and acceptability of "Victorious Christian Life and Service" (Table 9.1), training-through-actual-experience (Table 9.7), and help from co— trainees (Table 9.8). Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Respondents' Employment by CategorL Responses According to the chi-square test, the respondents' employment was significantly related to the acceptability of the following: "Bible Content" (p = 0.0011, Table 10.1), "How to Interpret the Bible" (p = 0.0078, Table 10.2), "How to Understand Learners" (p = 0.0750, Table 10.3), and help from experts outside your church (p = 0.0112, Table 10.14) Of the groups identified by employment, the employed or self-employed (full-time) are more inclined than the other groups to indicate preference for "Bible Content" (Table 10.1), for "How to Interpret the Bible" (Table 10.2) and "How to Understand Learners" (Table 10.3). The employed (part-time) are slightly less inclined to indicate their need for experts outside their church (Table 10.4). 94 5NNNN.o "pcmHOHmmwoo NocwmcHucoo 0N "Eocmmum mo mmmumwo HHoo.o "woamoHMHcmHm HoNNm.vv "mumswmIHso 0.0NH NNN N.N H O.N N N.N HN N.NN mm N.NN NNH "NHNBOB ZEDHOU N.N H IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II O.OOH H omcommwu oz N.O N IIII II IIII II IIII II 0.00HN IIII II mEHquumm NwNOHQEm .Uwuflumm m.m m IIII II IIII II m.NH H 93 v mt? m cmNoHQEm mecoH o: .NmHHumm N.NN vm H.H H N.N N N.NH NH H.NN NN N.5v mv wwNOHQEmc: o.m mm IIII II mé H 92 m NNH m N.NN mH merqumm umNonsm N.NN NHH IIII II N.O H N.N m O.HH NH N.NN NN mEHuIHHsN NwNOHme ImHmm Mo UmaonEm N N N N. N N N N N N N N unmENonEm Hopoe 30m HHN um p0 NHuanHm NprmmmUoz NHmcouum NHmcoupm Nuw> ucwucoo wHQHm mo NNHHHnmwmmood Nam pawENOHQEm .mgsmwcommwm H.NH wHQoB 95 mnmmm.o "ucmHOHmwmoo mocmmaflucoo om "Eowmmum mo mmmummo omho.o ”moamonHGmHm mmvmo.mm "mumswmIHnu 0.00H mvm «.0 H v.m m 5.NH Hm m.mm hm N.Hm omH "queoa ZSDHOU v.o H. IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II 0.00H H mmcommmu oz N.O m IIII II IIII II o.om H IIII II 0.0m H meHquumm waonEm .meHpmm m.m m IIII II IIII II IIII II o.mm N m.nm m wwonQEm HmmcoH 0c .UmHHumm v.mm vm IIII II m.v v m.Hm om m.mm «m m.mv mv wmonQEmca O.N mm IIII II IIII II N.NH N H.m m N.NN NH. maHquumm ommonem mEHuIHHDm wwmoHQEm N.NN NHH N.O H N.H N N.N N N.NN Nm N.ON MN INHmm Ho cmonQEm N N N N N N N N N N N N ucmamonam ku09 Box HHd um #02 mHuanHm meumumwoz mHmcouum mHmcoupm >Hm> wHQHm map pmumumucH ou 30m mo huHHHnmuQmoo< can ucwENoHQEm mvcwccommmm N.OH mHQME 96 thmm.o "ucmHonmmoo mocmmcHunoo mnoo.o "mocmoHMHcmHm ON "Eowmmum mo mmmummo mMva.mm "mumsvaHno. 0.00H mvN v.o H IIII II m.v NH n.mN mm m.mm mm H.mm om "mHNBOB 223400 «.0 H IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II 0.00H H mmcommmu oz m.o N IIII II IIII II 0.0m H IIII II o.om H IIII II mEHquumm .HmEm “@mHHumm m.m m IIII II IIII II IIII II 0.0m v o.om w IIII II .HmEm HmchH o: uanHuwm N.Nm vm H.O H IIII II m.v w o.vm Nm m.Hm om 5.NN 5N wmonmEmcD O.N NN IIII II IIII II N.mH m m.mN o N.Nm m N.NN m mEHu qumm UmmonEm N.NN mHH IIII II IIII II v.m v m.mH mH H.Nm mv m.vv mm mEHuIHHsm omonmEmIMHmm Ho cwmonEm w w w * w # w w w # w w w # ucmfionmEm Hmuoezzom mficdmmmm HH< um mHyanHm mHmum >Hmcoupm >Hmaouum oz #02 Iumwoz >um> mumaummq @Gmumumvcb ou 30m mo NUHHHnmuQmoo¢ N.OH mHnme cam unweonmEm .mucmccommwm 97 mommm.o nucmHonmwoo mocmmcHucoo NHHo.o "MOGMOHMHcmHm mN "Bowmmum mo mmmummo NNNNN.NN "mumswmIHnu o.QQH mvN N.H. m N.H m m.v NH N.NH om N.NN mm N.Nv NNH "mHNBOB ZEDHOU «.0 H IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II 0.00H H mmcommmu oz N.O N IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II 0.00H N IIII II mEHquumm .HQEm “UmuHumm m.m m IIII II IIII II m.NH H m.NH H m.wm m m.nm m .HmEm HmmcoH 0c “UmHHuwm N.NN No N.N m H.H H H.H H N.NN MN N.NN NN N.NN NN omNoHQEmca O.N NN IIII II IIII II N.NH N N.NN N N.NN m N.Hm N meHquumm ammonEm N.NN mHH IIII II N.H N H.m o H.m o >.mN mm m.mm mo mEHuIHH9m cahonEmeme no cmmoHQEm N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Namemonam Hmuoe Bomnuwmcommmm wcoz mHuuHH . meow :09: :05: 02 N >Mw> sousso HHm£B mUHmwso muummxm Eouw QHmm mo wuHHHQMpmmoom cam pqmeonmEm v.0H wHQMB .mucmccommmm 98 Cross-Tabu1ation and Chi-Square of Respondents' Positions in the Church by Category Responses According to the chi-square test of significance, the respondents' position in the church were related to the acceptability of the following: "How to Interpret the Bible" (p - 0.0000, Table 11.1), training-through-actual-experience (p —0.0391, Table 11.2), training for one hour a week for one year (p — 0.0103, Table 11.3), and training for one day a week for one year (p = 0.0144, Table 11.4). Among the church workers studied, the youth ministers/directors are the most inclined to show their preference for that particular course (Table 11.1). The youth ministers/directors are also the most inclined to indicate preference for training through actual experience, while the Christian education ministers/directors appear .to be the least inclined to show preference for that mode of training (Table 11.2). The Bible study leaders are the most inclined to express preference for training for one hour a week for one year, while the Christian education minister/directors seem to be less inclined than the rest of the workers to indicate preference for such training schedule (Table 11.3). The youth ministers/directors are the most inclined to show preference for training for one day a week for one year (Table 11.4). Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Geographical Location by Category Responses A significant relationship was shown between the respondents' geographical location and fourteen of the eighteen 18 categorical items according to the chi- square test of significance. The respondents' geographical location was significantly related toward the following: "Bible Content" (p = 0.0009, Table 12.1), "How to Understand Learners" (p = 0.0751, Table 12.2), "How to Interpret the Bible" (p = 0.0000, Table 12.3), "How to Teach or Lead a Group" (p = 0.0768, 99 hmoom.o "pcwHOHmmwoo wocwmcHucoo om "Eovmwnw mo mwwumwo ooo.o "wOCMOHMHcmflm mwah.Hw "mumsvaHnu 0.00H NNN N.O H N.N N N.NH Hm N.NN NN N.HN ONH ”NNNBOB zzOHou N.H N O.NN H IIII II IIII II O.NN H O.ON N mmcomwwu oz O.HH NN IIII II N.N H N.N N N.NH N N.ON NH mnmcuo H.N OH IIII II IIII II 0.0m m 0.0N N 0.0m m umxgoz nommuuso H.N NH IIII II IIII II N.N H N.NN N N.NN OH umNmmH Nwspm mHnHm N.NN HN IIII II N.H H N.NH OH H.Hm NH N.ON Hm wauoz Hoonom wHQHm :oHumow> \HoxHOB Hoocom hmwcsm H.NH mm IIII II N.N H N.N N N.NH N O.NN NN umNmoH HmcoHumNHcmmuo N.N N IIII II IIII II N.NH H IIII II N.NN N uouomuHN \gwpchHE nusow O.N N IIII II IIII II 0.0N H 0.0N N 0.0N N “ouomuHN\umuchHe :OHumosww :mHumHuzo N.NN NN IIII II N.N N H.NH OH N.NH NH N.HN Nm coomwN\umNHm N.N NH IIII II N.N H N.N H N.NH m N.On NH HONmmm N N N N N N N N N N N N nonsno :H :OHNHmom Hmwoe 30m HH< um #02 NHNNNHHN NHmNmumNoz NHmcopum NHmcouum >H®> wHQHm may HmumuowcH Op Bom mo huHHHnmumwoo< mam sousnu CH GOHuHmom .mucwwcommwm H.HH mHQmB lOO mNmHv.O uucmHonmooo monomcHucoo Nm ”Eocmmuw mo mwmumoo HmmO.O "moemoHNHcmHN NNNNN.NN "mumswmIHco 0.00H NNN N.H v N.H N N.N mH H.NN mm N.NN mmH "mH \menoz Hoosom mocczm H.NH Nm IIII I IIII I N.OH v O.NN OH N.NN mN Hmmme HmcoHpmuHcmmuo N.N N IIII I IIII I m.NH H IIII II N.NN N HouownHU \HopchHE cpsow O.N N IIII I O.ON H IIII II 0.0N m O.ON H uouomuHN\umuchHe :oHumoswm cmHumHuno N.NN NN N.H H N.H H N.HH N N.NN NH N.NN Nm coommN\umNHm m.N NH IIII I IIII I N.N H N.NH m N.NN NH uoummm N N N N N N N N N N N N couscu :H coHuHmom Hmuoe 30m HH< pm uoz mHucmHHm mHoumHmwoz NHmcouum NHmcouum , >Hw> mocmHHmmmeHmsuo \IHmvHIHOB . com . csm H.NH Nm IIII II H.N m N.N H O.NH N N.ON mH N.ON HH HmommH .cmmuo O.N N m.NN m m.NH H IIII II m.NH H IIII II N.NN N Houooun Ho HmumHGHE nuso» O.N m IIII II IIII II 0.0N N 0.0N N 0.0N H IIII II .HHU\HmumH:HE .oscm GNHumHHQU m.mN NN N.H H N.O N N.N N H.NH OH N.NN NH m.HN NN coommU\HmUHm m.N NH N.HH N N.NH m N.HH N m.m H N.N H H.NN m Hoummm N N N N N N N N N N N N N N sousco cH Hmuoe.zom mmcommmm HNN um NHuanHm NHmum NHmcouum NHmcouNm :oHuHmom oz uoz Iumwoz >um> Hmmw mco HON xmmz comm Moon one Now mchHmHB Mo wvHHHQmumm004 Ucm nouscu CH coHpHmom .mucmccommmm m.HH GHQMB "ucmfloflmmmoo hormonaucoo NNNNN.O NNHO.O "mOCMOHMHcmwm NN "Eowwmum mo mmmummo Hooom.mN "mumswmINno 0.00H NNN N.N HN N.NH Hm H.NH Nm N.NN NN N.NN ON N.NH mm “NANBOB ZZDQOU N.H N IIII I IIII II IIII II IIII II 0.0N N 0.0N N mmcommmm oz O.HH NN N.N H H.HH m N.NH N N.NN N N.NH N N.NN N mumsuo H.N OH 0.0N N 0.0m m 0.0H H IIII II 0.0N N 0.0N N hmfltzgpnommuuso H.N NH IIII I N.NH N N.NH N 0.0N N N.NN N IIII II HmwmmH Nwsum mHnNm N.NN HN N.N m N.N N N.N N N.Nm ON N.NN NH O.NH HH Hmcommu .nom mHQHm .umom> \menoz, . 50m . cam H.NH Nm H.N m N.NH N N.NH N N.NH N N.NN NH H.N m HmcmmH .cmmuo N.N N H.NN N IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II N.NN m uouomuflc no HmNmHQHE susow O.N N IIII I IIII II IIII II 0.0N N 0.0N H IIII II .HN©\HmuchHE .oscm :MHumHHSU N.NN NN N.N N N.NH N N.NH HH N.NH NH N.NN NH N.NH HH coomm©\HmUHm N.N NH N.HH N N.HH N N.NH m N.NN N N.NN N N.N H Hoummm N N N N N N N N N. N N N N N nousgu aN Hmuoe 30m mmzommmm HH¢.uw mHuanHm NHmum mHmcouum hHmcouum :OHuHmom oz #02 Iymwoz Num> Hmmw mco Mom xmmz £06m Nam wHozz mco new NQHCHMMB mo muHHHQmumwoo< Nam nousno 2H :oHuflmom .mpcmwcommmm N.HH mHQMB 103 NNHNN.O uucmfloNNmmoo Nocmmcflucou mooo.o “mocmonflcmNm Nm “Eowommw mo mownmwo NNNmN.NN ”mumswmIflnu 0.00H NNN N.O O.N N.N HN N.NN NN N.NN NNH ”NQNBOB ZZDHOU IIII II IIII IIII IIII II IIII II IIII II omcommmu oz OMCNNCNZ N.NH ON IIII N.N IIII II 0.0N N N.NN NN :Nmummz Omcwwc H2 N.NH\ ON IIII N.N 0.0H N N.NN N 0.0N NH cuocwsom omcwwcfiz N.N NH .IIII IIII IIII II N.HN N N.NN HH Hapucmu NNoHoome N.NH Nm IIII N.N N.NH N H.NN NH N.NN NH mmxmmfl> .ummz AoHHoHHV N.N mm m.N N.N N.N N N.NN N N.NN ma mmNNmN> .Nmmz N.N NH IIII IIII m.Nm m N.NN m o.om N mmNmmN> .Nmmm N.HH NN IIII IIII mmOH m N.NN OH N.NN NH CONDQ :umzu90m m.N N IIII IIII IIII II m.NH H N.NN N acmsq cumsuuoz N.NN ON IIII IIII O.N N O.N m 0.0N NN mHHCME ouumz N N N N N N N N N :oHumooq Hmuoe 30m HHN um NszmH mHmumquoz NHmcouum hHmcouum Hmoflnmmwmomo >um> Ncmucoo mHnNm H.NH mHQme mo huHHflnmumwoom Nam COHNMOOH Hmoflcmmumoww .mucmwcommmm 104 N.NH mHQMB NNONN.O Nucmfloflmmwoo Nocwmcfipcou NmNo.o "mocmoNNNcmNm NN “Eowmwum mo mmwummo NNONH.NN "mumswmINNU 0.00H NNN N.O H N.N NH N.NN NN N.NN NN H.NN. NN "NAmmfl> .ummz NoNNoNHV N.N NN N.N H N.N H N.ON N N.NN N H.NN N mmmmmfl> .umwz N.N NH IIII II N.NH N N.NN N N.HN N N.NH N mwxmmfi> .ummm N.HH NN IIII II IIII II N.NH N N.NN NH N.NN N CONDQ amonusom N.N N IIII II IIII II N.NH H N.NN N H.NN N CONDA cmwcuyoz N.NN ON IIII II O.N N 0.0N NH N.HN NH N.NN NN mHflcwE ouuoz N N N N N N N N N N N N :ONMNOMN Hmpoa 30m HH< um #02 NHuanHm NHmumumwoz NHmcouum NHmcouum HNON: an 030 Num> mHmcnmmq wcmumHGUCD ON Box No NNHHHnmummoo<.©cm coflumooq HMOH:QMMmomw .mucmocommmm 105 NNNNN.O Nucoonmwmoo Nocwmcflucou OOO0.0 "mocmowmwcmHm NN ”Eowmmuw mo mmmumwo NNNNH.NN NwHNDWNIficu 0.00H NNN NuO H N.N N N.NH HN N.NN NN N.NN ONH "NHNBOB ZEDHOU IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIIII II IIII II mmcommmu oz omcmccflz N.NH ON IIII II N.N H N.N H N.NN HH N.NN NH cumummz omcmwcHz N.NH ON IIII II N.N H N.NH N N.NN N N.NN NH cumnpsom omcmccflz N.N NH IIII II IIII II IIII II N.NH N N.HN NH Hmuycmo AUOHoommv N.NH Nm IIII II N.N m N.NN m m.m~ N H.NN NH NNNNNN> .Nmoz NOHHOHHV N.N NN IIII II N.N N N.NH N N.ON N N.NN OH mmxmmfl> .Nmmz N.N NH IIII II IIII II N.HN N O.NN N N.NN N mmNmmN> .Nmmm N.HH NN IIII II IIII II N.NH N N.NH N N.NN NH CONSA cuosusom N.N N N.NH H IIII II IIII II N.NH H N.HN N CONSH cnwsuuoz N.NN ON IIII II IIII II N.N N N.NH OH 0.0N NN mHHcmz ouumz N N N N N N N N N N N N CONNNOOH Hmuoe 30m HH4 #6 uoz hHucmHHm NHmNMMGCOE hHmcougm NHmGOHum Hmoflsmmumooc Num> mHnHm map umNNNmNcH on Bom mo N.NH mHQMB NuHHHQmummoo< can COHNMOOH HmoHnmmHNomo .mucmwcommmm 106 Table 12.#), "How to Train Bible Teachers" (p = 0.0051, Table 12.5), training-on your-own (p = 0.0127, Table 12.6), training-with-a-group (p = 0.0169, Table 12.7), training-through-actual-experience (p = 0.0815, Table 12.8), help from co-trainees (p - 0.0881, Table 12.9), training for one hour a day for one year (p = 0.0536, Table 12.10), training for one day a week for one year (p = 0.0156, Table 12.11), training for five days two times a year (p = 0.0084, Table 12.12), training for 10 days once a year (p = 0.0015, Table 12.13), and training for two weeks once a year (p = 0.02lt3, Table 12.14). Workers from Metro Manila and Northern Luzon are the most inclined to indicate their preference for "Bible content," while workers from Western Visayas (Bacolod) appear to be the least inclined to show preference for that particular course (Table 12.1). Workers from Central Mindanao and Northern Luzon are the most inclined to express preference for "How to Understand Learners," while workers from Eastern Visayas are the least inclined to show preference for it (Table 12.2). Workers from Central Mindanao and Metro Manila are the most inclined to indicate preference for "How to Interpret the Bible," while workers from Eastern Visayas and Western Visayas (both Bocolod and Iloilo) are the least inclined to show preference for it (Table 12.3). Workers from Central Mindanao are the most inclined to express preference for "How to Train Bible Teachers," while workers from Southern Mindanao seem to be the least inclined to indicate preference for that course (Table 12.4). Workers from Metro Manila and Northern Luzon are the most inclined to show preference for "How to Teach or Lead a Group," while workers from Western Visayas (Iliolo) appear to be the least inclined to indicate preference for that course (Table 12.5). 107 NNNNN.O Nucofloflwmmoo Nocomcflucou HNO0.0 "NOGNONMHCNNN ON “Eowwmum mo mmmummo NONNN.NN "mumsvaqu 0.00H NNN N.O H N.H N N.N N.HH NN H.NN NN N.NN NNH NNHNECB ZZDHOU IIII II IIII I IIII II IIII IIII I III: II IIII II omcommmu oz omcwwcHz N.NH ON IIII I IIII II N.N 0.0H N N.NN N 0.0N NH cumumwz omcmwcflz N.NH Om IIII I N.N N N.NH 0.0N N N.NN N N.NN OH cumspnom ONCNUCHZ N.N NH IIII I IIII II IIII N.N H N.NH N O.NN NH kupcmu AGOHOommV N.NH NN IIII I IIII II N.N N.HH N N.NN N N.HN HN NNNNNN> .Nmmz NoHHoHHO N.N NN N.N H N.N N IIII N.N N N.NN N N.NN NH NNNNNN> .waz N.N NH IIII I IIII II IIII N.NN N N.NH m N.NN N NNNNNH> .ummm N.HH NN IIII w IIII II N.N N.OH N N.HN NH N.HN NH CONDA CMNSNDON N.N N IIII I IIII II IIII IIII I N.NN N H.NN N CONSH cumnuuoz N.NN ON IIII I IIII II IIII N.N N 0.0N NH N.NN NN mecmz ouumz N N w IN N N N N N N N N N CONNMOOH HNNOB BoNthmGOQmmm HH¢ um NHNQN >Hmuo NHmcouum NHNQOHNN .Hmoflsmmumomo oz #02 IHmUOZ Num> muocomme mHQHm QNNHB on Box No NNHHNnmpmmoo< cam coflpmooq Hmoflnmmgmomw .mucmvcommmm N . NH mHQMB 108 NNNNN.O ”pcoHonmmoo wocwmcHucou NNN0.0 ”mocmoHMHcmHm ON "Eowmmum mo mmmymmo HNNNm.mN ”mymswmIch 0.00H NNN N.N .H N.O H N.N HH N.N NN N.HN hm N.NN HNH "NHNBOB ZZDHOU IIII II IIII I IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II omcommwu oz omcmw5Hz N.NH ON IIII I IIII II N.N H N.NH N N.NN OH N.NN NH cumummz omchCHE N.NH ON IIII I IIII II 0.0H N N.NH N N.NN OH 0.0N NH cumnpsom owcmwcHz N.N NH IIII I IIII II IIII II IIII II N.NN h N.NN N Hmuucmo AmoHoommO N.NH NN IIII I IIII II N.N N N.N N N.NN NH 0.0N NH mmxmmH> .ummz AoHHoHHN N.N NN N.N H N.N H O.NH N O.NH N N.HN N N.NN OH mmwmmH> .pmmz N.N NH IIII I IIII II N.N H N.NN N N.N H N.NN NH mmxmmH> .pmmm N.HH NN IIII I IIII II N.N H N.N N N.NN NH N.NN NH CONDH cumausom N.N n IIII I IIII II IIII II IIII II N.NN N N.HN N CONSH :umnuuoz N.NN ON IIII I IIII II IIII II N.N N N.NN NH N.NN HN mHHcmz ogpmz N N N N N N N N N N N N N N :OHNMOOH Hmuoe 30m macommmm HH4 um NHuanHm mHmum >Hmcouum mecouum HMUHSQmumomo oz uoz Iumwoz wum> wwsum . mHQHm m ommq HO mmmHu m nommB Op 30m wo wuHHHQmummoo¢ cam COHNMUOH HMUHnmmumomw .mucmwcommmm N.NH wHQME 109 NNNHN.O ”ucmHonmooo NocmmcHucou NNHO.O ”mocmonficmHm NN "Eocmmuw mo mooumwo NOONN.NN "mumSWmIHco 0.00H NNN N.O H N.H N N.OH NN N.NN NOH N.NN OHH "NHNBOB . ZZDHOU IIII II IIII I IIII I IIII II IIII II IIII II mmcommwu oz omcmmcHz N.NH ON IIII I IIII I IIII II N.NN NH N.NN NH cumumoz omcmwcH: N.NH ON IIII I IIII I N.N N N.NN OH 0.0N NH cumzpsom omcmwcHz N.N NH IIII I IIII I N.N H O.NN N N.NN HH Hmuycwo HNoHoommN N.NH NN IIII I IIII I N.NH N H.NN NH N.HN NH mmNmmN> .ummz AoHNofi: N.N NN N.N H N.N H O.NH N N.HN N N.NN NH mm>mmH> .umoz N.N NH IIII I N.N H N.NN N O.NN N N.HN N mahmmfl> .ummm N.HH NN IIII I N.N H N.ON N N.NN NH N.NN N CONDH cumcusom N.N N IIII I IIII I N.NH H H.NN N N.NN N CONSQ Chesuuoz N.NN NN IIII I N.H H N.N N N.HN Hm H.NN NN mHHcmz ouuoz N N N N N N N N N N N N coNumooq Hmaoe 30m mmcommmm ucmuuomEH uCMNMOQEH ucmuuomEH NCMNHOQEH HmoHnmmumomw Num> CBOIHDONICOINGHGHMHB mo NHHHflnmummooé 0cm :oHumooq HMOHQQmumomo .mucmwcommmm II N.NH mHQmB llO ONNNN.O ”ucmHonmmoo NocmmcHucou NNHo.o "mocmoHNHcmNm ON ”Eowmmum mo mmmummo NHNNN.HN ”mumzvaHzo 0.00H NNN N.H IN N.O N N.O H O.N N.HN HOH N.NN NNH ”NHNBOB. ZZDHOU IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII IIII II IIII II omcommom oz OGCGUCHZ N.NH ON IIII II N.N H IIII II IIII 0.0N NH N.NN HH :Mmumoz OMCMUCHE N.NH om IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII N.NN NH N.NN NH cgocusom OmcmficHz N.N NH IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII N.NN N N.NN m Hmuucmu HonoommN N.NH NN N.N N N.N H IIII II N.N N.NN NH H.NN NH mmxmmH> .ummz AOHNOHHV N.N NN N.N N IIII II IIII II IIII N.NN HH N.NN NH mmNmmN> .umoz N.N NH IIII II IIII II IIII II N.NH 0.0N N NNNN N mmxmmfl> .wmmm N.HH mN IIII II IIII II IIII II I IIII N.NN NH N.NN NH CONSH :Hwfiudom N.N N IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII N.NN N N.HN N CONDH cumfiuuoz N.NN ON IIII II IIII II N.H H IIII N.NN NH O.NN NN MHHCMZ Ouumz N N N N N N N N N N N N N coHumooq Hmuoe 30m mmcommmm uCMpHOQEH pcmuHOQEH ucmuHOQEH ucmuuomEH ucmuuomEH .fimoHHthumXXwU oz. uoz pmmmH mmmH >uw> mHmomaLmnuOImobsouwImhuHBImchHmIHB mo NuHHHnmummOON. N.NH mHQMB Ucm coHumooq HMOHLQmumomw .mucmccommmm lll MOONm.O "ucmHoHNNmoo OocmmcHucou mHmo.o "mommOHchOHm mm "Eowmonm mo mmmummo MNOON.mv ”mgmswmIHnu 0.00H mvm N.H v N.H v 0.0 OH H.NN Om 0.0N ONH “NHNBOB . ZEOHoo .IIII II IIII II IIII I IIII II IIII II IIII II mmcommwu oz omcmncHz N.NH om IIII II IIII I IIII II O.Nm HH 0.0N OH snowmoz omcmncHz N.NH om IIII II IIII I 0.0H m 0.00 O 0.0N OH cumnusom omcmocHz N.N NH IIII II IIII I IIII II m.N H 0.00 NH Hmuucmu ANoHoommO 0.0H vm 0.0 m IIII I 0.0 m 0.0N N 0.0N ON mm>mmH> .pmmz AoHHoHHv H.O mm m.v H m.v H o.MH m v.0m n m.n¢ HH mmxmmH> .ummz N.N NH IIII II IIII I N.OH m O.NN v O.NN O mmxmmH> .ummm O.HH Om IIII II 0.0 H 0.0H m 0.0N N N.NN OH CONSH :szusom O.N O IIII II O.NH H IIII II N.NN N H.Om v CONSH cumnuuoz N.NN ON IIII II O.H H O.N v O.NH HH m.m> Ow mHHcmz ouuw: N N N N N N N N N N N N COHNMOOH Hapoe 30m mmcommmm NCMNHOQEH ucmquQEH ucmuuomEH NcmuuomEH HmoHLOMHOOmU oz ummmH mmmH wum> mocmHHmmeIHmsuo .Nmmz . AoHHoHHO N.O mN O.N H IIII II O.NH m N.NH v H.NN N H.Om O mmxmmH> .ummz N.N NH IIII II IIII II O.N H N.mv n O.NN N O.NN v mammmH> .ummm N.HH ON IIII WI . IIII II N.N H I O.Hm O N.HN NH H.NN m CONDH :umnusom O.N m IIII II IIII II IIII II O.NN m N.NN N N.NN N :oqu cumnuuoz N.NN ON IIII II IIII II N.H H N.HH n 0.0N vN N.NN NN wHHcmz ouumz N N N .N N N N N N N N N N N GOHNNOOH Hmuoe 30m mmaoammm mcoz mHuuHH mEom £032 £052 Hmofinmmumomw oz N Num> OGHCNMHB :H omHm mué 0:3 mumsuo Eoum mHmm No NuHHHnmummoofi Nam SOHumooq HNOHnmmuOomo .mwcwwcommmm O.NH mHnt 113 NNONN.O "ucmwuflwwmoo Nocmmcchou Nmmo.o "mocmoflmflcmHm ON "EONmmHN NO mowummo mmem.mm ”mumsvnIHLU 0.00H NNN N.O .HN N.NH NN N.NH om N.NN mN N.NH HN H.NH NN ”NQNECB ZZDHOU IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II mmcommmu oz ONCNNCHZ N.NH ON 0.0N N O.NN N N.N N N.NN N N.NH m 0.0H m prummz . omcmccflz N.NH ON N.N H 0.0N N 0.0H m N.NN OH N.ON N 0.0H m Gymnasom ONCNNCHE N.N NH IIII II N.NH N O.N H N.N H N.Hm m N.NN N Hmuucmu ANoHoommO O.NH Nm N.NH m N.NH m N.NH m N.ON N N.NH m N.ON N mmxmmH> .ummz AoHHoHHO N.O MN O.NH m N.N N N.NH N N.Nm O N.N H N.HN m mmxmmH> .ummz N.N NH O.NN N m.N H O.NN N N.NH m IIII II OrmN N mammmH> .ummm N.HH ON N.N H H.NN N O.mH N N.ON N H.NN N N.NH N CONDH cnmcusom O.N N IIII II N.NH H IIII II O.NN m N.ON N O.NH H CONDA cumnuuoz N.NN ON N.H H O.NN NH N.HH N N.NN ON O.NH O N.OH N mHflcmz Chum: N N ,N N N N N N N N N N N N coHumooq HMNOB 30m mmcommmm ucchm> ucchm> ucchw> pcmHam> ucchw> HMUHSQMHWOQU oz ICOUGH ICOU umqu IGOD mmmq IGOU ICOU Nmm> Hmmw mac HON Nam comm usomImco OQHQHNHB No NuHHHQmummoo¢ Nam coaumooq OH.NH mHnme Havacmmumomo .mucmwcommmm 114 OmmNN.O "wcmHonmmoo NocmmcHucou NNHO.O "wocmoflchmHm ON ”EONmmuN No mmmumma NNHNN.HN "mumsmmIch 0.00H NNN N.N .HN N.NH Hm H.NH Nm N.NN NN N.NN ON O.NH Om ”NANBOB ZZDHOU IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II III: II IIII II mmcommmn oz omcmNcHZ N.NH ON N.NH N N.NH N N.NH N 0.0N O N.NH N N.NH N cumpmwz ONCNUCHE N.NH Om. IIII II 0.0H m 0.0H m N.NN OH N.NN m 0.0N N cmmnusom OmchCHz N.N NH IIII II N.N H IIII II O.NN N N.NN N O.NN N kupch HNOHoommv O.NH Nm N.NH N N.ON N O.N N N.ON N N.NH N N.NH N mmxmmfl> .umwz AoHHoHHO N.O mN N.O N N.N N H.NN N N.NH N N.HN N N.NH N mmmme> .ummz N.N NH N.NN N IIII II N.NN N N.NH m N.NH m IIII II NNNNNH> .pmmm N.HH ON N.N H N.OH m N.NH N H.NN N N.NN O N.ON N CONDA cumnusom O.N N IIII II IIII II IIII II N.ON N H.NN N N.NH H causq cumcuuoz N.NN ON N.H H N.NH HH O.NH O N.NN NH O.NN NH N.NH N mHHcmz ouumz N N N N N N N N N N N N N N coflumooq Hapoe 30m mmcommwm pcchw> ucoHcm> ucmflcm> ucchm> pcchm> .fiMOHnflwwuHXwa oz IcoocH Icou ummmq IGOU mmmq Icoo Icou >um> Hmmw mac Mom xmmz comm Nmo mHonz mco HON OCHCHMMB mo NuHHHnmumm00< Nam coHumooq HNOHnmmnmomw .mucmccommmm HH.NH mHQmB llS OONNN.O ”ucmHoHNNmoo NocmmcHNcou NNH0.0 ”mocmoHNHcmHN ON ”Eowmmum mo mmoumma NNNmN.ON ”mumswmIHco 0.00H NNN N.N .ON N.HH ON N.NH Hm 0.0N HN 0.0N ON N.NH NN ”NQNBOB 223400 IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II mmcommmy oz omcmNCHz N.NH ON N.NH N N.N H N.NH N O.NN N N.NH N N.NN N :umumoz omchCHz N.NH Om. N.N H N.NH N N.N N N.NN HH 0.0N N N.NH N cumzusom omcmNCHz N.N NH IIII II N.N H N.NH m O.NN N N.NH N N.NN N Hmuucwo ANoHoommv O.NH Nm N.ON N N.NH N N.HH N N.NN NH N.N m O.N N mNNNmH> .umwz AoHHoHHO N.N mm N.NH m IIII II N.NH N N.N N N.NN N H.NN N mNNNmH> .pmmz N.N NH N.NH m N.N H IIII II N.NH m N.NH m N.NN N mmNmmH> .ummm N.HH ON N.N H N.OH m N.NH N O.NN HH H.NN N N.OH m CONDH cumnusom O.N N IIII II N.NN N IIII II H.NN N N.NH H IIII II CONSH cumnuuoz N.NN ON N.H H N.NH HH O.NH O N.NN NH N.NN NH O.NH O mHHcmz ouuwz N N N N N N N N N N N N N N :oHumooq HMNOB 30m wmcommmm “Evin; ucchm> pcmflcm> ucchm> ustcm> H NOH SQMH mommy oz IcoocH Icou umqu Icoo mmmq I200 IGOU NHm> Nmo w moHBE mwmo mHonz m>Hmmmoosm m>Hm How OCHCHNMB No NNHHHQmwmmoofl Nam COHNmooq HNOHQQmHmomw .mucmwcommmm NH.NH mHQMB 116 NONNN.O "wcmHoHNwmoo NocmmcHucoo NHO0.0 "NUCMOHNHCOHN ON ”Eocmmuw mo mowumma NONON.HN ”mumsvaHzo . . . .N am N.ON mN N.NN mN N.NH Nm ”NNNBOB O OOH NNN N O NN O ON ON O H ZZOHOU IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II omcommmu OZ omcm©:Hz N.NH Om 0.0N N N.NH N N.NH N N.NH N 0.0N N N.NH N cuwumoz omcmwcflz N.NH on. N.N H N.NH m N.NH N N.ON m N.NN N N.NH N sponusom omcmccHz N.N NH IIII II N.NH m IIII II N.HN N N.NN N N.NN N Hmuwcmo HGOHoommv O.NH Nm N.ON N N.N m N.NN O N.NN N N.NH N O.N N mwNmmH> .ummz AoHfloHHO N.N mm o.mH m N.HN N H.NN N N.N N N.N H H.NN N NNNNNH> .ummz N.N NH N.HN N N.NH m N.N H N.NH m N.NH N N.NH N mmxmmfl> .ummm N.HH ON N.N H H.NN N O.N N O.N N N.NN N O.HN O CONSH cuwnpsom O.N N IIII II H.NN N N.NH H N.NH H N.NH H IIII II CONSH cnmnuuoz N.NN ON N.H H N.NN NH N.NH OH N.NN NH N.NN NH N.N N mecmz ouumz N N N N N N N N N N N N N N COHNNOOH Hmuoe 30m mmcommmm pcmflcw> ucchm> ucchm> ucmfico> ucmflcm> .HMOHrfimmgAXEwU oz IcoocH Icou ummmq I200 mme Icoo Icoo Num> Hmmw m mono mNMQ wHonz m>fimmmoosm awe Mom OQHCNNHB wo NuHHHnmpmmoofl can coflwmooq HMUHnmwumomw .mwcwvcommmm NH.NH mHQMB 117 NOHNN.O ”ucmfloflwwmoo chwmcHucou NNNN.N ”mocmoNNNcmflm ON ”Eowmmum mo momnmmo NONNN.ON ”mumsvaNLU 0.00H NNN N.O INN O.NN NN H.NH NN N.ON HN N.NH NN N.NH NN ”m; .ummz AOHHOHHO N.O NN O.NH N H.NN N O.NH N O.NH N N.NH N N.NH N mmNmmH> .waz N.N NH N.HN N O.NN N IIII II N.NH N N.NH N .WnNH N mahmmfi> .ummm N.HH ON N.N H N.ON N O.N N H.NN N N.ON N H.NN N cemsq cumnusom O.N N IIII II H.NN N N.NH H N.NH H IIII II N.NH H :oNSQ cuwnuuoz N.NN ON N.H H 0.0N NH 0.0N NH N.HN NH 0.0N NH N.NH OH mHHcmz Chum: N N N .N N N N N N N N N N N coHuMOOH HMNOB 30m mmcommmm ucchm; “$5.29, . ucmflcmg pcchw> ucchm> HMOHSQNHmOmO . oz IcoocH Iaou pmmmq Iaoo mmmq I200 I200 Num> Hmmw m moco mxmmz w>Hmmmoosm 039 How mcflcflmue No NuflHflnmummoo< cam coflumooq HNOHnmmuOomw .mucmwcommmm NH.NH mHQme 118 Workers from Central Mindanao are the most inclined to express preference for training on your own while workers from Eastern Visayas and Southern Luzon are the least inclined to show preference for that type of training (Table 12.6). Workers from Metro Manilla are the most inclined to indicate preference for training with a group, while workers from Eastern Visayas and Western Mindanao are the least inclined to show preference for that type of training (Table 12.7). Workers from Central Mindanao are the most inclined to express preference for training through actual experience, while workers from Western Visayas (Iloilo) appear to be the least inclined to indicate preference for that type of training (Table 12.8). Workers from Central Mindanao are the most inclined to show preference for help from co-trainees (Table 12.9). Workers from Central Mindanao are the most inclined to indicate preference for training for one hour a day for one year (Table 12.10). Workers from Central Mindanao are the most inclined to show preference for training for one day a week for one year, while workers from Metro Manila and Western Visayas (Bacolod) are the least inclined to indicate preference for that kind of schedule (Table 12.11). Workers from Eastern Visayas are the most inclined to express preference for training for five successive days twice a year, while workers from Northern Luzon seem to be the least inclined to show their preference for that schedule (Table 12.12). Workers from Central Mindanao are the most inclined to indicate their preference for training for ten successive days once a year, while workers from 119 Northern Luzon are the least inclined to express their preference for such a schedule (Table 12.13). Workers from Northern Luzon are the least inclined to show their preference for training for two successive weeks once a year (Table 12.14). Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Denominational Affiliation by Category Responses Cross-tabulations made between the respondents' denominational affiliation and acceptability of the various categorical items indicated a significant relationship on fourteen items according to the chi-square test of significance. Those items with which the denominational affiliation was significantly related are the following: "Bible Content" (p = 0.0009, Table 13.1), "How to Understand Learners" (p = 0.0751, Table 13.2), "How to Interpret the Bible" (p = 0.0000, Table 13.3), "How to Teach or Lead a Group" (p = 0.0768, Table 13.#), "How to Train Bible Teachers or Leaders" (p = 0.0051, Table 13.5), training-on-your-own (p = 0.0127, Table 13.6), training-with-a-group (p = 0.0169, Table 13.7), training-through-actual-experience (p = 0.0815, Table 13.8), help from co-trainees (p = 0.0881, Table 13.9), training for one hour a day for one year (p = 0.0536, Table 13.10), training for one day a week for one year (p = 0.0156, Table 13.11), training for five days two times a year (p = 0.0184, Table 13.12), training for ten days once a year (p = 0.0015, Table 13.13), and training for two weeks once a year (p = 0.0243, Table 13.14). The Southern Baptist and Conservative Baptist workers are the most inclined to indicate preference for "Bible Content," while the Assemblies workers are the least inclined to express preference for that course (Table 13.1). The Wesleyan workers are the most inclined to show preference for "How to Understand Learners," while the Free Methodist workers are the least inclined to indicate preference for it (Table 13.2). 120 NNHNN.O "ucwHoflmmwoo Nocmmcfiucou Nooo.o "mocmofiwflcmflm NN “Eowmwmm mo mmwumwo NNNNN.NN "mumstIflzo 0.00H NNN N.O H O.N N N.N HN N.NN NN N.NN NNH "NA4908 ZEDHOU N.NH ON IIII II N.N N IIII II 0.0N N N.NN NN NOUNZNU Hmmmow N.NH om IIII II N.N H N.NH N N.NN N N.NN NH mgmsvmusom N.N NH IIII II IIII II IIII II N.HN N N.NN HH cmNmHmmz Now mo O.NH NN IIII II O.N H N.NH N H.NN NH N.NN NH mmflHnEmmm< mumfiummm N.O NN N.N H N.N H N.N N N.NH N N.NN NH coflucm>coo mumHnosumz N.N NH IIII II IIII II N.HN N N.NH N 0.0N N mmum N.HH ON IIII II IIII II N.OH N N.NN OH N.NN NH qumzmH mumfiymmm O.N N IIII II IIII II IIII II N.NH H N.NN N m>Hum>uomcou mumflgmmm N.NN ON IIII II IIII II O.N N O.N N 0.00 NN cumgusom N N N N N I N N N N N N N COHNNHHHNN< Hmuoe 30m HHN pm uoz NHpchHm NHmpmumcoz NHmcouum NHmcouuN Hmcoflumcfleocmo Nuw> ucmucoo mHnHm mo NuHHHQmumwoo< 0cm COHHMHHHNNN HMQONNNCNEOQmQ H.NH mHQme .mucmwcommmm 121 OONNN.O "ucwHOHmmmoo Nocmmcflucou oooo.o "mocmoNNNcmNN NN “Ecummum mo mwmumoo NNNNH.NN "mumswmINNU O.NNH NNN N.N H N.N N N.NH Hm N.NN NN N.HN ONH "mqmeoe zzoqoo N.NH om IIII II N.N H N.N H N.NN HH N.NN NH mou¢zcoo NNNNNONNNZ N.N NH IIII II IIII II N.HN N N.NN N N.NN N mmum N.HH NN IIII II IIII II N.NH N N.NH N N.NN NH NHANZNH mumflummm O.N N N.NH H IIII II IIII II N.NH H N.HN N m>me>ummcou mnmwumwm N.NN NN IIII II IIII II N.N N N.NH NH N.NN NN cungsom W # w ¢ w # \I w # \flmvm # %W t. COHHNQHHHMMNN Hmpoe 30m HHN pm uoz NHNNNNHN .Hmpmumco: Honoupm Hmcmwgm HmcoNchfleocoo .H mHaNm map umumumucH ou Box No NuNHHQmwmmoom can coflumHHme< HmcoHpmcHEocwo N.NH GHQMB .mucmocommmm 122 NONNv.O ”ucmHONwmmoo NocomcHucoo NNNo.o ”mocmoHNHamHm ON ”Eowmmum mo mmmummo Hmva.mm "mumzvaHnu 0.00H NNN N.O H N.O H N.N HH N.O NN N.Hm NN m.mm HmH ”mHmaoe ZEDHOU N.NH Om IIII II IIII II N.N H N.NH m N.NN OH N.Nv NH moudzmo Hmmmow N.NH Om IIII II IIII II 0.0H m N.NH m m.mm OH 0.0v NH mumsvmusom N.N NH IIII II IIII II IIII II III: II N.NN N N.NN O CNNQHmmB woo mo N.NH Nm IIII II IIII II N.N N N.N m N.NN NH 0.0N NH meHnEmmw< mpmHummm N.O MN N.N H N.N H O.NH m O.NH m N.HN m m.mv OH :OHucm>coo mumHUocumz N.N NH IIII II IIII II m.N H O.NN v N.N H N.NN OH mmum N.HH mN IIII II IIII II v.m H O.N N N.NN NH m.vv MH NHHMEMH_ mumHummm N.N N III: II IIII II IIII II IIII II N.NN N N.HN m m>Hum>ummcoo mumHummm N.NN ON IIII II IIII II IIII II N.N N N.NN NH N.NN Hv cwmcusom w w w w w w w w w ¢ w w N * coHumHHHmm< Hmuoa 30m mmcommmm HHN um NHuanHm NHmum NHchHum NHmCOHpm HmcoHumcHEoch oz uoz Inmwoz Num> m Uan Ho Nosum anHm mmmHU m nommB Op Box No NHHHHQmuQmoofi cam coHumHHHmm¢ HmcoflumcHEOcmo .mucmwcommmm N.NH mHnma 123 NNNNN.O HucmNoHNNmoo NocmmcHucoo HmO0.0 ”wocmonHcmHm OQ ”Eowmwum mo mmmummo NONNN.NN ”mumsvach 0.00H NNN IIII II N.O H N.H v N.N m N.HH NN N.NN NNH umHcou mumHUOSpmz N.N NH IIII II IIII II IIII II N.Nm N N.NH m N.NN N mmum N.HH NN IIII II IIII II N.N N N.OH N N.HN NH v.Hv NH NHHmzmH mpmHummm N.N N IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II N.NN N H.NN N m>Hum>ummcou mumHummm N.NN ON IIII II IIII II IIII II N.N v 0.0N NH N.NN vv cumnusom N N N N N N N N N N N N N N coHumHHHmmm HmuOB 30m mmaommwm HHd um NHpanHm hHmum NHmcouum NHmcouum HmcoHumcHEoch oz #02 IHmUoz Num> muwnomme mHnHm :Hmue Op 30m mo NpHHHQmemoo¢ can :onmHHme¢ HmcoHpmcHEocmo .mucmwaommmm N.NH mHQMB 124 mmmHN.O "ucwHonwmoo Nocomcflucou NNHo.o “mocmoHNHcmHm NN "Eowmmum mo mmmummo NONNN.~N "mumstIHNu 0.00H NNN N.O N N.H N N.OH NN N.NN NOH N.NN OHH umHcov mpmflwozwmz N.N NH IIII II N.N H N.NN N O.NN N N.HN N mwum N.HH mN IIII II N.N H N.ON N N.NN NH N.NN N NHHMZMH mumflgmmm N.N N IIII II IIII II N.NH H H.NN N N.NN N m>HNN>Hmmcou mumflummm N.NN ON IIII II N.H H N.N N N.HN HN N.NN NN cuocusom N N N N N N N N N N N N coflmeHwad Hmuoe 30m mmcommmm unapuomfiH ucmguomEH uampuomfiH uCNNHOQEH HmcoHumcHeoch ummmH mmmH Nnm> N.NH mHQme CEOIHSONIaOImCHCHmuB mo NpHHHQmumwoofi Nam :oHumHHmed HmcoflpmcHEocmo .mucmwcommmm r3 1 ONNNN.O nucmfionwwoo Nocmacfiucou NNHo.o ”mQCNOHNHcmHN ON ”aowmmum No mmmumma NHNNN.HN ”mumswmIng 0.00H NNN N.H N N.O N N.O H O.N N H.HN HOH N.NN NNH ”mHcOU mumflwonumz N.N NH IIII I IIII II IIII II N.NH N 0.0N N N.NN N mmnm N.HH NN IIII I IIII II IIII II IIII II N.NN NH N.NN NH NHHmzmH mgmwpmmm N.N N IIII I IIII II IIII II IIII II N.NN N NH.N N m>Hum>mecou mumflummm N.NN ON IIII I IIII II N.H H IIII II N.NN NH O.NN NN campusom N N N N N N N N N N N N N coaumHHHmmm . H.309 30m mmcommwm #CNHTHOQEH pcmulHOQEH pcmuuomEH pcmulHOQEH pampIHOQEH HMCOHHMCNEOch oz #02 umme mmmH an> mHmomm IumnuoImolmsouwImISNHBINCHCNMHB mo NuHHHnmpmmoo< New :oHpmHHHmm4 Hmcoflumcflaocma .mucmwcommmm N.NH mHQMB 126 NONNN.O HucmHonNmoo Nocmmcflucou NHNO.O "wocmoflchmNm NN "Eowwwuw mo mmmummo NNONN.NN "mumeNIHQU 0.00H NNN IIII II N.H N N.N NH H.NN mN N.NN NNH "NHNBON ZEDHOU N.NH ON IIII II IIII II IIII II N.NN HH N.NN NH @004240 Hmmmow N.NH ON IIII II IIII II 0.0H N O.ON O.ON NH mumsvmnzom N.N NH IIII II IIII II IIII II N.N N.NN NH :mNmHmmz cow mo N.NH NN N.N N IIII II N.N N N.NN N.NN ON mmNHnEmmm< mumfipmmm N.N NN N.N H N.N H O.NH N N.ON N.NN HH CONucm>coo mgmflwozumz N.N NH IIII II IIII II N.NH N N.NN N.NN m mmpm N.HH NN IIII II N.N H N.OH N N.ON N.NN NH NHHmzmH mumflpmmm N.N N IIII II N.NH H IIII II N.NN H.NN N m>Huw>ummcou mgmflummm N.NN ON IIII II N.H H N.N N N.NH HH N.NN NN cmmzuzom N N N N N N N N N N N COHNNHHHNN< Hmpoe 30m mmcommmm pcmuuomEH ucmuHOQEH uCNNHOQEH ucmpHomEH HmcoHpmcHEocoo ummmH mmmH Num> mocmflnmmxm IHmsuoéIcmDOHQEImchHNHB mo NUNHflnmummoufl can COHNMHHme¢ HmcoflumcHEoch .mucmwcommmm N.NH mHQMB 127 ONONN.O uucmfioflwwmoo Nocmmcflucoo HNNO.O ”mocmoflmflcmfim ON ”Eocmmum NO mmoummo NNNNN.NN ”mumsmmIHco 0.00H NNN N.H N N.O N.N N.NN NN H.NN Hm N.NN NN ”NHNNOB . ZZDHOU N.NH ON IIII II IIII 0.0H 0.0N N 0.0N NH 0.0N N moo¢zcoo mumHanumz N.N NH IIII II IIII N.N N.NN N O.NN N O.NN N wmum N.HH NN IIII II IIII N.N O.HN N N.HN NH H.NN N qumZmH mumflumwm N.N N IIII II IIII IIII N.NN N N.NN N N.NN N m>Hum>ummcoo mpmflummm N.NN ON IIII II IIII N.H N.HH N 0.0N NN N.NN NN cumnusom N N N N N N N N N N N N :oflumHHmefi Hmpoe 30m mmcoammm mcoz mHuvHH mEom £052 £052 Hmcoflumcflaocmo 02 d Num> mcficflmue GN 0mH< mum Eoum mHmm mo NpHHHQmummoo< Nam COHuMHHHmma HmcoNumcHEocmo .mucmwcommmm on: mnguo N.NH mHQMB 128 NNNNN.O upcwHonmmoo Nocmmcflucoo NNN0.0 ”mocmoflwflcmwm ON ”Eowmmuw NO mmmummo mmem.mm ”OHQDUmlflfiU 0.00H NNN N.N HN N.NH NN N.NH ON N.NN NN N.NH HN H.NH NN ”NANEOB ZSDHOU N.NH ON 0.0N N N.NN N N.N N N.NN N N.NH N 0.0H N mou<240 Hmmmoo N.NH .ON N.N H 0.0N N 0.0H N N.NN OH N.NN N 0.0H N mpmsvmusom N.N NH IIII II N.NH N N.N H N.N H N.HN m N.NN N cmxmammz woo m0 N.NH NN N.NH N N.NH N N.NH N N.ON N N.NH N N.ON N mmHHQEmmm4 . mNmHummm N.N NN O.NH N N.N N N.NH N N.NN N N.N H N.HN N coflucm>cou mumHUOSNmz N.N NH O.NN N N.N H O.NN N N.NH N IIII II O.NN N mmum N.HH mm N.N H H.NN N N.NH N N.ON N H.NN N N.NH N qumZMH mpmflpmmm N.N N IIII II N.NH H IIII II N.NN N N.NN N N.NH H m>Hum>HmchU mwmflummm N.NN ON N.H H O.NN NH N.HH N N.NN ON O.NH m N.NH N cumnusom N N N N N N N N N N N N N N GOHNMHHHNNN Hapoe 30m mmcommmm pcmflcmxy ”Emacm». ucwflcm; naming ucmflcm> HMCOHUMCNEOCGQ oz IcoocH Icoo ummmq ICOU mmmq Icoo ICOU >Hm> Hmmw mco Mow moo 30mm usom mco How mCHchue mo NNHHNQMNQwoofl Nam :oHpMHHHmM¢ HmcoflumcHEOQmo .mucmwcommmm OH.NH GHQMB ONNNN.O "ucmHonmmoo NochCHucou NNH0.0 "mOCNOHchmHm ON "Eowmwum we wmwummo NNHNN.HN ”mumswmIHco 0.00H NNN N.N HN N.NH HN H.NH NN N.NN NN N.NN ON N.NH NN ”NHNEOB ZZDHOU N.NH ON N.NH N N.NH N N.NH N 0.0N N N.NH N N.NH N mOUNENU Hmmmoo N.NH ON IIII II 0.0H N 0.0H N N.NN OH N.NN N 0.0N N mumsvmusom N.N NH IIII II N.N H IIII II O.NN N N.NN N O.NN N cmmemoz U00 mo N.NH NN N.NH N N.ON N N.N N N.ON N N.NH N N.NH N mmHHQE®mm< mumflummm N.N mN N.N N N.N N H.NN N N.NH N N.HN m N.NH N :oHucm>coo \ mumeonpmz N.N NH N.NN N IIII II O.NN N N.NH N N.NH N IIII II mwum N.HH NN N.N H N.OH N N.NH N H.NN N N.NN N N4ON N NHAMZMH mumflummm N.N N IIII II IIII II IIII II N.NN N H.NN N N.NH H m>Huw>ummcoo mumHummm N.NN ON N.H H N.NH HH O.NH N N.NN NH O.NN NH N.NH N cumnusom N N N N N N N N N N N N N N :oHumHHmed Hmuoe 30m wmcommmm pcwacm; ucwflcmxw acmflcm> ucwflcw> ucchw> HMCOHHMCHEoch oz IcoocH Icou ummmH Icou mmmH ICOU Icoo NM®> Ham» mco HON xmmz comm Nam mHozz mco MON NCHQHMHB mo NpHHHnmummoo< Ucm coHpmHHme¢ HmcoflumcHEocmo NH.NH mHQMB .mpcmocommmm 130 OONNN.O nucmHonwmoo NocmmcHucou NNHO.O ”mocmonwcmHm ON ”Eocmmuw No mmmummo NNNNN.ON ”mHMSWmIHfiu 0.00H NNN N.N ON N.HH NN N.NH HN O.NN HN 0.0N NN N.NH NN ”NHNEOB ZZDHOU N.NH ON N.NH N N.N H N.NH N N.NN N N.NH N N.NN N mou:OU mumeonumE N.N NH N.NH N N.N H IIII II N.NH N N.NH N N.NN N mmum N.HH NN N.N H N.OH N N.NH N N.NN HH H.NN N N.OH N mHHmzmH mumHummm N.N N IIII II N.NN N IIII II H.NN N N.NH H IIII II m>wum>ummcoo mumHummm N.NN ON N.H H N.NH HH O.NH N N.NN NH N.NN NH O.NH N cumnusom N N N N N N N N N N N N N N :oHumHHHmma Hapoe 30m mmcommmm ucchmS ucmflcm> pcchm> pcchm> ucchm> HMCOMHMCNEOGGQ oz ICH Icoo ummmq Isoo mmmH Icoo ICOU Num> mama mHonz m>Hmmmoosm m>Hm HON mchHMHB wo NuHHHnmgmmoofi cam COHNMHHHNNN HmcoHpmcHEOch .mucmccommmm NH.NH mHQMB «I. 3 1L NONNN.O nucmHonwmoo NocmmcHucoo mHOO.O “mocmoflmflcmflm ON ”Sowmwum NO mmmummo NNNNN.HN ”mumsvaHco 0.00H NNN N.N NN 0.0N NN N.NH NN 0.0N NN 0.0N NN N.NH NN ”NHcoo mumflwocumz N.N NH N.HN N N.NH N N.N H N.NH N N.NH N N.NH N mmum N.HH NN N.N H H.NN N N.N N N.N N N.NN N O.HN N qumzmH mumflpmmm N.N N IIII II H.NN N N.NH H N.NH H N.NH H IIII II m>Hym>pmmcou mumHumwm N.NN ON N.H H N.NN NH N.NH OH N.NN NH N.NN NH N.N N cuwnusom N N N N N N N N N N N N N N coHumH HHNNN H.309 30m mmcommmm ucchw> acchm> waqum> ucchm> pcchm> HMCOHHMCHEocmD oz IcH Icoo ummma ICOU mme ICOU Icou Nuw> ®>Hmmmoosm awe HON NCHCHMHB mo NuHHHQmumm004 Nam coHumHHHmw< HmcoHumcHEocmo Hmmw m moao mNmo mHosz NH.NH mHQme .musmwcommmm 132 w®H¢V.O ”UCOHOHMWOOO %OCQDCH#COU NNNO.O ”mocmoHNflcmHN ON ”Eocmonw NO momumoa NNNNN.NN ”mumzamIHco 0.00H NNN N.N NN O.NN NN H.NH NN N.ON HN N.NH NN N.NH NN "NH4909 ZZDHOU N.NH ON 0.0N N N.NN N 0.0N N 0.0H N N.NH. N N.NH mou<2¢o Hmmmoo N.NH ON N.N H 0.0N N N.N H 0.0N NH N.NN N 0.0H wuwsvmusom N.N NH IIII II N.HN N IIII II N.NH N N.NN N N.NH :stHmmz 600 No N.NH NN N.ON N N.HH N N.ON N N.ON N N.NH N N.HH meHnEmmm< mNmemmm N.N NN O.NH N H.NN N O.NH N O.NH N N.NH N N.NH coHucm>cou mumHNOLNmz N.N NH N.HN N O.NN N IIII II N.NH N N.NH N N.NH mmum N.HH NN N.N H N.ON N N.N N H.NN N N.ON N H.NN NHHmzmH mpmflummm N.N N IIII II H.NN N N.NH H N.NH H IIII II N.NH m>HNm>~mmcou mumflummm N.NN ON N.H H 0.0N NH 0.0N NH N.HN NH 0.0N NH N.NH cumzusom N N N N N N N N N N N N coHumHHHmwd Hmuoe 30m mmcommmm ucchw> pcchm> ucwHCmS ucchw> ucchm> HMCOHuMCHEoch oz IcoocH ICOU umme Icoo mmmH IGOU IGOU Num> Ham» m mono mxmmz m>Hmmmoosm 039 HON NGHCHNHE No NpHHHnmummoo< Nam :oHumHHHmN¢ HmcoHuchoEoch .mvcmwcommmm NH.NH GHQMB 133 The Wesleyan workers are the most inclined to express preference for "How to Interpret the Bible," while the Assemblies, Conservative Baptist, and Free Methodist workers are the least inclined to show preference for that course (Table 13.3). The Southern Baptist and Conservative Baptist workers are the most inclined to indicate preference for "How to Teach or Lead a Group," while the Convention Baptist and Foursquare workers are the least inclined to express preference for it (Table 13.4). The Wesleyan workers are the most inclined to show preference for "How to Train Bible Teachers/Leaders," while the Foursquare workers are the least inclined to indicate preference for it (Table 13.5). The Wesleyan workers are the most inclined to express preference for training-on-your-own, while the Free Methodist workers are the least inclined to show preference for that type of training (Table 13.6) The Southern Baptist workers are the most inclined to indicate preference for training-with-a-group, while the Free Methodist workers are the least inclined to express preference for it (Table 13.7). The Wesleyan workers are the most inclined to show preference for training-through-actual-experience, while the Convention Baptist and Conservative Baptist workers are the least inclined to indicate preference for that kind of training (Table 13.8). The Wesleyan workers are the most inclined also to express preference for training for five successive whole days twice a year, while the Conservative Baptist and Free Methodist workers are the least inclined to indicate preference for that training schedule (Table 13.12). The Conservative Baptist workers are the least inclined to show preference for training for 10 successive days once a year (Table 13.13). 134 The Wesleyan workers are slightly more inclined than the rest of the workers to indicate preference for training for two successive weeks once a year, while the Conservative Baptist workers are slightly less inclined than the rest to show preference for that schedule (Table 13.14). No useful pattern of correlation was observed between the respondents' denominational affiliation and acceptability of help from co-trainees (Table 13.9), training for one hour a day for one year (Table 13.10), and training for one whole day a week for one year (Table 13.11). Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Square of Church Size bLCategory Responses The chi-square test of significance indicated that size of the respondents' church was significantly. related to the respondents' attitude toward "How to Interpret the Bible" (p = 0.0940, Table 14.1), "How to Train Bible Teachers or Leaders" (p = 0.0130, Table 14.2), training-on-your-own (p = 0.0073, Table 14.3), training for one day a week for one year (p = 0.0074, Table 14.4), training for ten days once a year (p = 0.0287, Table 14.5), and training for two weeks once a year (p = 0.0145, Table 14.6). Workers from larger churches are more inclined than workers from smaller churches to indicate a strong preference for "How to Interpret the Bible" (Table 14.1), "How to Train Bible Teacher/Leaders" (Table 14.2), and training-on-your- own (Table 14.3). No useful pattern of relationship was observed between the size of the respondents' church and acceptability of training for one whole day a week for one year (Table 14.4) and training for ten successive days once a year (Table 14.5). A weak linear relationship was found between the size of the respondents' church and acceptability of training for two successive weeks once a year (Table 135 HONNN.O ”ucmHonmmoo mucoNCHucou ONN0.0 "mocmoHMHcmHm N "Eoommum mo mmmnmmo NHONN.NH "mumsvaHno 0.00H NNN N.O H N.N N N.NH HN N.NN NN N.HN ONH "NHNBOB ZZDHOU N.ON NNH IIII II N.N N N.N NH N.NN NN N.NN ON m>onm Nam OON 0.0N NN IIII II H.N N N.NH NH N.NN NN N.NN NN NNN I OOH N.N NN N.N H IIII II N.HN N N.HN N N.NN NH OOH Hows: N N N N N N N N N N N N mNHN nousnu Hmnoe 30m HHN um #02 NHNSNHHN NHmumHmwoz NHNQOHum NHmcouum . Num> mHQHm mnu pmumwmucH Op 30m mo NuNHNnmvmmoo< New nousno .mucmocommmm H.NH mHQMB No mNHN 136 NNNNN.O nucmHOHmmmoo NocmmcHucou ONHO.O "moamonHaNNN OH "Eovwwum No mmmumma NNNNN.NN "mumswmIHno 0.00H NNN N.O H N.H N N.N N N.HH NN H.NN NN N.NN NNH umHonm Nam OON 0.0N NN O.H H H.N N H.N N N.NH NH N.HN HN N.NN NN NNN I OOH N.N NN IIII I IIII I IIII II H.NN N H.NN N N.NN HH OOH Hows: N N N N N N N N N N N N N N mNHm souonu HmuOB 30m mmcommmm HHd um NHusmHHm NHGNM NHmconum NHmcoupm oz #02 Immooz Num> mumvqu\mumnomm9 mHQHm cHMHB Op 30m mo muHHHnmummoom N.NH mHnt Nam sousno .mucmwcommmm mo mNHm 137 HNONN.O ”ucmHonmmoo NocmmcHucoo mNOO.O ”momm0NNNcmHm N "Eowmmum mo mmmumoo NNNNN.ON "mumsvaHno 0.00H NNN N.O H N.H N N.OH NN N.NN NOH N.NN OHH "NHonm New OON 0.0N NN O.H H O.N N N.NH NH N.NN NN O.HN ON NNN I OOH N.N NN IIII II N.N H N.ON N N.NN N N.ON N OOH Hmccb N N N N N N N N N N N N mNHN nousco ngoe 30m ucmauomEH ucmuHOQEH ucmguomEH pcmuuomEH NamuHOQEH uoz ummmH wwwq Num> c3OIHSONIc0INCHCHmHB mo NuHHflnmummoom can SOHDSU N.NH mHQMB .mucmccommmm mo mNHm 8 3 l NHNNN.O "ucmHonmmoo Nocmmcflgcoo NNOO.O "mocNONmflcmHm OH "Eowmmum mo mommummo NNNNO.NN ”mumsvaHno O.OOH NNN N.N HN N.NH HN H.NH NN N.NN NN N.NN ON N.NH NN "NANNON zzoqoo N.ON NNH N.N NH N.NH NN H.NH NH N.NN NN N.ON NN N.NH NH m>onm new OON O.ON NN H.N N N.N N N.NH NH N.NN NN N.NN NN N.ON ON NNN I OOH N.N NN H.NN N IIII II N.NH N N.HN N N.ON N N.N H OOH “mac: N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NNHN nousso Hmuoe 30m mmcommmm udmficm> pcmHam> ucchm> ucwwcm> ucchm> oz ICOUGH ICOU ummmH Icoo mmmH ICOU ICOU Nuw> Ham» mco How xmwz comm Nam mHOSB mco HON NCHQNMHB No NUHHHQmummoo< New nousno .mucmwcommmm mo ONHN N.NH mHQMB 139 mnnmm.o "pcmHonmmoo mocmmcHucou NNHO.O "moamoHNHamHm OH "Eowmmhm mo mmmummo ONNHH.NN “mumsvaHsu 0.00H mwm 0.0 vm O.NN vm H.mH mm 0.0N Hm N.OH ON m.mH Om "madeoe ZEDHOU 0.0m «NH m.HH NH m.NH mm N.ON mm m.NH mm O.NH Hm m.vH NH m>onm cam OON 0.0N mm H.m m m.mm mm H.O O m.vm vm m.mm mm m.OH OH mom I OOH N.O mm O.HN m N.Nm O m.¢ H N.OH v O.N m O.mH m OOH H062: N N N N N N N N N N N N N N oNHm sousnu Hmuoe 30m mmcommmm ucchw> ucchw> ucmflcm> pcchm> ucch®> oz IcoocH 1:00 ummmH ICOU mmmH IGOU 1:00 >Hm> Hmmw m mono mxmmz m>Hmmmoosm 039 HON mchHMHB mo wuHHHQMHQmoom 0cm nousso .mucmwcommwm mo mNHm ©.¢H mHQMB 140 14.6). That is, the larger the church, the more convenient this particular training schedule seems to be for the workers of that church. Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Sguare of Community Structure by Category Responses The results of the cross-tabulations revealed that the respondents' community structure was significantly related to the acceptability of the following: "How to Train Bible Teachers or Leaders" (p = 0.0095, Table 15.1), training for one day a week for one year (p = 0.0109, Table 15.2), training for ten days once a year (p = 0.0192, Table 15.3), and training for two weeks once a year (p = 0.0177, Table ISA). The urban churches are more inclined than the rural churches to express preference for "How to Train Bible Teachers/ Leaders" (Table 15.1). The rural churches, on the other hand, are more inclined than the urban churches to indicate preference for training for one whole day a week for one year (Table 15.2), training for 10 successive whole days once a year (Table 15.3), and training for two successive weeks once a year (Table 15.4). In summary, the cross-tabulations made on each of the demographic variables and the acceptability of the different categorical items on the questionnaire indicated that the respondents' educational level, geographical location, and denominational affiliation have significant relationship to more categorical items (from 12 to 14 items out of 18) than all the other demographic variables, according to the chi-square test of significance. To get an estimate of the magnitude of the relationship between variables in a chi-square table, the contingency coefficient (C) was also computed. The formula used for computing C was as follows: c: _?5.2 x2+N 141 mOHNN.O NucmHonwmoo wocmmchcoo mmO0.0 "oocmuHMHcmHm m "Eocmmum mo mwmummo OONON.NH ”mumswmIHso 0.00H mvm N.O H O.H v >.m m O.HH ON H.NN NO m.mm mmH umqmeoe ZSDHOU IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II mmcommmu oz H.Om ONH IIII II IIII II H.N m H.NH OH N.HN Om m.vO Om comm: O.NN mOH O.H H 0.0 w O.m w «.HH NH N.Nm vm h.mv NO Honsm N N N N N N N N N N N N N N musuusuum Hmpoe 30m mmcommmm HH¢ um >HH£OHHm >Hmpo hHmcoupm >Hmcouum huHcsEEOU oz uoz Iumcoz >Hm> mHmcwwH\mum£ommB mHnHm CHMHB OH 30: mo NMHHHQmummoo< Ucm musuosupm muHcsEEou .mucmccommmm H.mH GHQMB 142 mmmmm.O uwcwHonmmoo wocmmchcov NNHO.O "mocmoNNNcNHm m "Eocwmum wo mmmummo mmmOH.vH "mumswmIHco 0.00H mvm O.N Hm N.NH Hm H.OH mm m.mm NO m.vm OO O.mH mm ”madeoe ZEDHOU IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II IIII II mmcommmu oz H.nm ONH O.NH NH n.mH mm O.mH OH O.mm mm 0.0N mm O.NH OH CMQHD O.NN mOH O.N m O.N m N.NH mH n.mm hm m.om mm 0.0N Hm Housm N N N N N N N N N N N N N N musuosuum HMHNOB 30m mmcommmm ucchm> ucchm> “25.39,. ucchm> ucchm> NAHNHCSEEOU oz IcoocH Icou umqu IGOU mmmq I200 I200 >uw> How» mco How xmmz comm moo mHocz mco MOM mchHMHB mo auHHHnmummoofi cam mHSNODHNm wuHGSEEOU .muzmccommmm N.mH GHQMB 143 ONNNN.O "ucmfloflmmmoo wucmmchcou NNHO.O "mocNONmflcmHm m "Eoommum mo mmmummo ONHNN.NH ”mumswmIHno 0.00H mvN N.O vN 0.0N mv O.mH mm 0.0N av 0.0N ON m.vH mm umqfieoe ZSDHOU H.nm ONH O.NH mH m.mH NN O.NH mN N.HN om N.NH NN N.N NH comm: O.NN mOH N.N m O.HN NN m.mH vH H.NH mH O.HN NN N.HN MN Housm N N N N N N N N N N N N N N musuosnum Houoe 30m mmcommmm ucchm> ucchm> pcmflcm> pcwflcm> ucchm> wuHézngoo oz IcoocH Icou wmmmq Icou mmmq IGOU Icou >H®> Hmmw m mono mmmm mHOQB m>Hmmmoosm awe HON mCHcflmue Mo wuHHHvaQmOUN cam musuosnum wuHCDEEOU .mucmccommmm m.mH mHQMB 144 OOONN.O ”ucmHOHmwmoo wocmmcHucoo ONHO.O "mocmoflmflcmflm m "Eocmmum mo mmmumma NOONO.NH “mumswmIHno 0.00H mvN 0.0 «N O.NN «m H.mH Nm N.ON Hm N.NH ON m.mH mm umqfleoe ZEDHOU H.Om ONH O.NH mH N.OH ON N.OH mN O.NH mN N.OH MN N.NH ON can“: O.NN mOH N.N m O.mN ON O.N O N.NN mN O.HN mN H.OH NH Housm N N N N N N N N N N N N N N musuosupm Hmuoe 30m mmcommmm pcoch> pcchm> ucchm> ucchm> ucchm> >¢HAZ§E§OU oz IcoocH Icou ummmq Icoo mmmq Icoo Icou >um> “mow m muco mxmmz ®>HmmmUUSm 039 HON OQHCHMHB mo wuHHHnmummoo< can musuosuum ONHQSEEOU .mucmccommmm v.mH GHQMB 145 The minimum value of C is 0, while the maximum value, which is never greater than one, depends on the number of categories of the variables (Ferguson, 1981). When the number of rows and columns of a contingency table is equal to K, the maximum value of C is given by (K - l)/K (Spiegel, 1961). Thus the computed maximum value of C for each of the different contingency tables in this study is as follows: 0.9258 for a 2 x 5 table 0.9354 for a 3 x 5 table 0.9428 for a 4 x 5 table 0.9487 for a 5 x 5 table 0.9535 for a 6 x 5 table 0.9574 for a 7x 5 table 0.9608 for an 8 x 5 table 0.9636 for a 9 x 5 table 0.9661 for a 10 x 5 table 0.9354 for a 2 x 6 table 0.9428 for a 3 x 6 table 0.9487 for a 4 x 6 table 0.9535 for a 5 x 6 table 0.9574 for a 6 x 6 table 0.9608 for a 7 x 6 table 0.9636 for an 8 x 6 table 0.9661 for a 9 x 6 table 0.9682 for a 10 x 6 table The greater the value of C, the greater is the degree of relationship between variables in a contingency table (Spiegel). 146 Answers to the Research Questions Three sets of questions guided this research. The first set consists of questions regarding the anticipated benefits of each of the three training models (MODELS I, II, and III) for the trainees and the local church. Answers to the first set of questions were derived from the description of the three models (see Appendix A) especially designed for this research. The second set of questions deals with the issue of workability of each model for training voluntary nonformal educators in rural and‘urban churches. To answer these questions, the cost of operating each training model was carefully estimated and then presented, together with the description of each model, to key decision makers who were each interviewed to get their reactions to each model. The last set of questions pertains to the issue of acceptability of the model or models to rural and urban churches. Answers to these questions came from the questionnaire and interview results. Following are the research questions and their corresponding answers. Research Question One What are the anticipated benefits of each training model for the trainees? for the local church? a. How many voluntary nonformal educators can be trained by each model at a time? b. What specific knowledge, skills, and attitudes will the trainees learn through participation in each training program? c. Will each program provide for immediate application of learnings to local or back-home situations? 147 MODEL l—Self-Instruction Apm'oach. As many as are qualified and willing to study, at their own pace, a lesson or more in a self-instructional text during the weekdays and interact with co-trainees and with a discussion leader in his own church on Sunday moring can be trained by MODEL 1. However, the number and size of the interaction groups and the number of discussion leaders depend upon the number of trainees taking a course. Ideally, no less than six and no more than 20 trainees are assigned to a leader. MODEL I is designed for helping voluntary Bible teachers and leaders improve their knowledge of the Bible and their competency in communicating its teaching to others in a small group setting in church, in a home, in an office, or elsewhere. Thus the content of MODEL I includes courses such as Bible, Bible interpretation, and Bible study methods. Since MODEL I does not require trainees to leave their home and church to undertake this training, they get exposed to all kinds of opportunities around them to make immediate application of what they are learning in their self- studies. Besides, direct involvement of the trainees in Bible teaching and/or leading, by the second year, is an important part of this training package. As individual trainees develop the habit of studying on their own everyday and of interacting with others once a week, it is anticipated that they would be motivated to further develop themselves by taking more self-instruction courses and even joining organized group training programs. MODEL ll—Workshop Approach. A group of 20 to 35 voluntary workers can be trained through MODEL 11. A group of this size can have enough points of view to stimulate a lively discussion without being so large as to limit interactionn among the trainees. 148 This model is intended to help voluntary Bible teachers and leaders in local churches improve their knowledge of the Bible and develop their skills in communicating its teachings to others in both formal and nonformal settings. The content and learning activities in the workshOps are, therefore, those which would fulfill these objectives. Opportunities for immediate practice and application of what is being learned are already built into the workshOps (PHASES l and 3). In addition, an assistantship period (PHASE 2), of no less than three months, is included in this training program in order to allow trainees to immediately apply what they learned in WorkshOp I (PHASE 1) in real situations (e.g., in Sunday school, Bible study groups, etc.). Then after Workshop 11 they begin handling a regular class or group first with on-the-job guidance from an experienced teacher/leader and later on their own (PHASE 4). It is expected that this four-phase training model will be able to provide each trainee with the basic knowledge and skills necessary to get started in teaching or leading a group in Bible study. It is also expected that this will give each trainee a strong motivation to continue in training so that he can become m ore competent. MODEL lII-Experiential Learning Approach. Being an advanced-level type of training, participation in this training program is restricted to a group of less than 20 and no more than 35 highly selected local church leaders who can play the dual role of trainee and trainer at the same time. To encourage participation from as many local churches as possible (this being interdenominational), each participating church is allowed to send and sponsor a maximum of three qualified leaders only. 149 MODEL III is designed to help a select group of experienced and competent church leaders develop their skills in planning, implementing, and evaluating voluntary leadership training programs for their own churches. To accomplish this objective, participants engage in a training experience which is process- rather than content-oriented. Thus more time and effort are spent by participants in actually doing a job (e.g., actually planning and implementing a training prOgram) than in discussing how a job ought to be done. Obviously, immediate application is stressed throughout the duration of the training. A discussion, for instance, on how to do observations and personal interviews is immediately followed by visits to neighboring churches (i.e., those selected to serve as laboratory churches) to actually observe their educational activities and interview some of their leaders and workers. Toward the end of this experiential learning program, participants are asked not only to evaluate their experience but also to discuss what and how they. intend to further develop their training knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Research Question Two Which model or models are workable for training voluntary nonformal educators in rural churches? in urban churches? a. How much will it cost (monetary and non-monetary) to operate MODEL 1? MODEL II? MODEL 111? b. Can these costs be met by the local churches? c. Are these costs reasonable in proportion to the anticipated benefits? MODEL I—Self-Instruction Approach. To operate model I for 20 trainees for a period of one year, a local church would need a total of at least one hundred seventy dollars ($170.00). One hundred fifty-five dollars ($155.00) would 150 be used for the purchase of self—instructional materials (including leaders' guides, students' texts, and tests) and fifteen dollars and fifty cents ($15.50) for contingency (estimated at 10%). In case the individual trainees themselves should decide to take care of their own expenSes, the estimated cost per trainee is eight dollars and fifty cents ($8.50) (see Appendix B). Of the 44 decision makers personally interviewed in this resarch, 77% (41% from rural churches and 59% from urban churches) said their church can meet the estimated costs of operating MODEL 1. Some of the reasons they give for saying so are the following: "Our church has a budget for training purposes." "Our church can raise the needed funds." "We can call on members to contribute." "The trainees themselves can afford to buy their own texts and pay their own fees." "Most of those who would take MODEL I are earning and can very well afford to buy their own texts." "The estimated cost is low." Only 11% of the respondents claimed their church could not afford to operate MODEL 1. About 20% fo the interviewees did not offer any comment on the training costs. MODEL II-Worksh0p_ Approach. A total of at least one hundred forty- three dollars ($143.00) would be needed by a local church to train 20 workers using MODEL 11. Of this amount fifty dollars ($50.00) would be used for providing appreciation gifts for trainers/ resource persons, forty dollars ($40.00) for snacks, another forty dollars ($40.00) for miscellaneous supplies, and thirteen dollars 151 ($13.00) for contingency. The cost per trainee is estimated at seven dollars and fifteen cents ($7.15) (see Appendix B). The costs of operating MODEL 11 can be met by their churches according to 73% of the decision makers who were interviewed (38% from rural churches and 63% from urban churches). Among the comments they made were the following: "To our church, financial matters are a secondary consideration." "Our church can raise the needed funds." "Our members are good givers." "The training costs can be included in our church budget." Only seven percent of the interviewees said their church could not meet the costs. About 20% of the decision makers did not say anything about the training costs. MODEL [IL-Experiential Learning Approach. Of the three training models, MODEL 111 was considered by the decision makers as the most expensive to get involved in. It would cost a local church no less than forty-nine dollars and eighty-nine cents ($49.89) to sponsor only one church leader in a MODEL 111 training course (see Appendix B). Despite this high cost, however, 57% of those who were interviewed (32% from rural churches and 68% from urban churches) believed their church can afford to support more than one delegate in this type of training. Some of the comments they gave in relation to the cost of sending delegates to MODEL 111 are the following: "The cost is not really high if benefits to be derived from such training are taken into consideration." "The expenses involved become insignificant if sent delegates can train more workers, when they return, not only in our own church but in other churches as well." 152 "If convinced of the need for such a training, our church can raise the necessary funds." "Our church will raise the needed funds because it believes in training leaders." "No problem since only one or two delegates will be sent by the church. Selected delegates might even shoulder their own expenses." Only 11% of the decision makers indicated their church would have difficulty underwriting the expenses of their selected delegate(s) to a MODEL 111 training. About 32% offered no comments. The decision makers' reactions to the estimated training costs of each model were analyzed by means of a relative frequency distribution. Responses were classified into three: (a) can meet costs—when the respondent's reply indicated the particular church would be able to afford or might be willing to try to find ways to afford the estimated training costs of a particular model, (b) cannot meet costsnwhen the respondent's reply suggested the particular church probably could not shoulder the estimated training costs or when the respondent indicated no interest in trying to accommodate such costs, and (c) no comment-- when the respondent did not give any opinion. In summary, the decision makers generally believed their churches could meet the costs of Operating MODELS I and II. The majority also felt that their churches could and would be willing to shoulder the cost of sending at least one or two delegates to 3 MODEL 111 type of training (see Figure 3). Research Question Three Which model or models are acceptable to rural churches? to urban churches? REL A T'IVE— FREQUENC Y 1153 100" s01? 70‘- :04— 101- 4 \ 31:} § 1.3.5152; AaxJEL 17 ~uzma. :1 m NO NMMNT .c\ .- -'... I .-....--'. I'.'-u' “.0 CANNOT MEET CmTS _ 0N Mm N.N i 3 H FIGURE 3 ANALYSIS OF DECISIONMAKERS’ REACTIoNs TO ESTIMATED TRAINING COSTS or MODELS 11!: AND E. 154 a. Which components (training content, manner of training, trainers/ resource persons, training schedule) do decision makers find relevant to the particular training needs and interests of the workers in their respective churches? b. What do they see as the strength(s) of each model? c. What do they see as the weakness(es) of each model? d. What specific recommendations do they have for the improvement of each model? By participating in a specially arranged discussion meeting with the workers of their churches and by examining the initial results (i.e., the relative frequency distribution of responses) of the questionnaire survey shared with them by this researcher, the decision makers were able to discover some of the specific training needs and interests of their own workers. On the basis of what they discovered, these decision makers individually gave, through personal interviews, their reactions to the three training models presented to them prior to the interviews. MODEL I--self-instruction apgroach. This model was considered the most practical and the easiest to implement in a local church. "MODEL 1" several decision makers pointed out "does not call for a big budget, for special facilitities, and for outside experts. The training can be done by local pastors and leaders." This comment, especially the last part, is important because, according to an analysis of the questionnaire results, 89% of the local church workers chose to receive help from "experts within your church" (see Table 5). A few of the decision makers believed that MODEL 1 could be utilized for "all types of leaders and workers in a local church," particularly the working people who find it difficult to attend group training sessions. More were of the 155 opinion, however, that this model is better for "those with higher education who are used to studying diligently." The decision makers saw a number of strong points in MODEL 1. Among these strengths are the following. 1. Each MODEL I trainee can study at his own pace, time, and place. 2. MODEL I gives each trainee plenty of time to study, to reflect, to do research, to get help from other resources (both human and materials), and to review his lessons. 3. Because there is a change of courses every three months and because content and methodology courses are offered alternatively, boredom on the part of the trainees is prevented. 4. This model allows concentration in one course at a time. 5. The weekly interactions provide trainees opportunities to ask questions and share ideas freely. 6. Trainees are given something to look forward to and that is direct involvement in a church ministry after a year of training. 7. This type of training helps develop a trainee's self-discipline, self-reliance, and self-confidence. 8. It also encourages continuous learning. A number of weakjoints in MODEL I were also brought up by the decision makers. These weaknesses include the following. 1. Daily self-studies could easily be crowded out by more pressing responsibilities of the trainees. 2. This type of training might encourage laziness, procrastination, and cramming; 3. A trainee gets limited to one self-instructional text. It appeared that training for "one hour each day for one year" is not strongly favored by the majority of local church workers either. An analysis of the questionnaire data revealed that only 34% of the respondents find this 156 The interpretation of instructions, lessons, and questions in a self-instructional text might vary from individual to individual. A trainee who encounters a difficulty in his daily self-studies has to wait for one whle week before he gets any help. This model does not provide enough practical training. One year of training might be too long to some who want to be involved right away. Not all courses necessary for training can be taken through self- instruction. training schedule convenient (see Table 5). When asked for recommendations for the improvement of MODEL 1, the decision makers gave a long list. 1. Length of training should be flexible, depending upon the courses being offered. Shorten training period to six months, but double the time put into daily self-studies, so trainees can be involved right away. Shorten self-instruction period to one month per course. Group trainees according to educational level, providing self- instructional texts suitable to each level. Provide a catalogue of self-instruction courses so each trainee can choose the course that will best meet his particular needs and interests. 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. MODEL II—Workshop Approach. A number of decision makers described 157 Reverse sequence of courses so that principles and methods (e.g., Bible interpretation) are learned before content (e.g., Gospel of John). Let the trainees themselves choose the time most convenient for them to get together for interaction. Conduct interaction sessions for two hours instead of one. Have small core group sessions between interaction sessions (e.g., on Wednesdays); assign a "discipler" to each group. Allow trainees to approach their discipler or interaction leader any time they need help. Motivate trainees by phone (if this is available) or by personal contact during the week. Secure each trainee's profile and provide for individualized guidance. Allow prospective trainees to sit in interaction sessions to stimulate their interest in self-instruction. Allow trainees to begin observing and doing practical training while still taking self-instruction. Have an evaluation and a practicum every quarter. Alternate self-instruction with involvement every other quarter. MODEL 11 as a "rigid," "concentrated," "intensive," "in-depth," and "progressive" type of training. They believed this approach can be "more effective than self- instruction because of the workshop-assistantship-workshop combination and the provision for immediate application of learning." 158 Several considered MODEL 11 as "the most suitable approach to use in training voluntary workers in a local church." Such an opinion appeared to be justifiable since an analysis of the quesitonnaire results showed that 89% of the local church workers were strongly in favor of "training with a group of other people" (see Table 5). According to some decision makers, MODEL 11 is "good for training all types of leaders and workers." Others held, however, that this model is applicable only to "non-working pe0ple, to students and teachers who do not have classes during summer and semestral breaks, and to working people who are willing to take a leave of absence from their regular jobs." The following strengths of MODEL 11 were pointed out by the decision makers. l. The flow of training in MODEL 11 is uninterrupted—learning progresses from one phase ot the next. 2. This model offers a variety of learning activities: lectures, discussions, projects, etc.. 3. Eight hours a day for five consecutive days give participants ample time for discussion, exchange of ideas, and practice. 4. Because of group interaction, interest would be high and participation good. 5. What is learned is not only explained but demonstrated as well. 6. This model provides for practical training and testing period. 7. Immediate feedback and immediate correction are both built into the program. 8. It establishes a good trainer-trainee relationship. 9. Both trainers and trainees are obliged to prepare and perform well. 10. ll. 12. 159 Trainers themselves can learn in the process of training others. Trainees can feel they are a part of a working grOUp. Trainees can treat this training program as their own brainchild since they are involved from beginning to end: assessing their own training needs and interests, planning, executing, evaluating, etc. The decision makers also observed some weaknesses in MODEL [1. Among these weaknesses are the following. 1. 6. 7. Most working *peOple, even the self-employed, cannot attend, unless they take a leave of absence, because they have to work all year-round. Gathering for workshops eight hours a day for five days might be difficult even for students who usually go home, attend summer classes, or else look for a job during vacation time. Workshops held during vacation time might conflict with local church or denominational activities (e.g., vacation Bible school, camp). Some trainees, particularly those who do not have strong motivations, may not want or may not have the ability to complete the whole package of training (i.e., all four phases of MODEL 11). In a group process, aggressive participants are likely to dominate the timid ones. Opportunities for meditation and reflection are limited. Trainees have very little time to prepare for each day's session. Training for "five successive whole days two times a year" was also considered difficult by the majority of local church workers. "‘ fact, according 160 to the questionnaire results, only 38% of the respondents find this training schedule convenient (see Table 5). They also offered several excellent suggestions for the improvement of MODEL 11. l. Operate MODEL II as an interchurch training activity. 2. Make MODEL 11 a "stay-in" type trainning program in order to avoid tardiness. 3. Schedule training according to the convenience of the trainees (e.g., before opening of summer classes). 4. Cut down daily workshOp sessions (e.g., meet four hours a day), but add more days (e.g., run each workshop for 10 successive days). 5. Break down the workshop into two or more weekends, putting in the equivalent of 40 hours per workshop. 6. Hold each workshOp for 40 successive nights, meeting for one hour each night. 7. Shorten or lengthen assistantship period according to the ability and progress of each trainee. 8. Conduct the workshOps away from the church. 9. The training personnel for the workshOp and the assistantship phases should be carefully selected and adequately trained first. 10. Those who will be assisted by the trainees must be competent not only as teachers and leaders, but as trainers as well. 11. Include all types of workers, but allow for both general and small interest group sessions. 12. Have a different workshop for each group of workers in the church. 161 13. Run simultaneous but separate sessions for new recruits and regular workers. 14. Make sure what is learned in WorkshOp 1 (PHASE I) is actually applied during the assistantship (PHASE 2). l5. Allow trainees to do their assistantship in churches other than their own. 16. Ensure supervision during the assistantship stage. 17. Do evaluation on a daily basis. 18. Have participants pledge or sign up for the whole package of training; i.e., through the completion of all phases. MODEL III—Experiential LearninL Approach. Some of the general comments made by the decision makers about MODEL 111 were the following: "a high standard of training," "a detailed and thorough type of training," "an ideal program for developing skills," "a good combination of theory and practice," and "most effective of the three methods." MODEL III was also considered "more economical in the long run since MODEL 111 participants can serve as regular trainer(s) not only in their own church but in other churches as well" (see answer to Research Question Two—MODEL 111). Most of the decision makers were convinced that MODEL 111 is good only for the "experienced, capable, and recognized leaders in the church." They included as possible participants in MODEL 111 such church leaders as the elders, the deacons, the Chairpersons of various organizations in the church, the full- time church workers, and other recognized leaders in the church who possess the necessary educational background and the potential for training others. Following are some of the strengths of MODEL III as enumerated by the decision makers. 2. 162 Participation in MODEL 111 could mean more training programs and, therefore, more trained workers for the local church. The develOpment of training skill is by actually training others in real situations. Because MODEL 111 is interdenominational, participants get exposure to other evangelical leaders from whom they can gain other ideas. This model provides participants plenty of Opportunities to exchange ideas and experiences and to work together. As participants work on something (e.g., a training program) and produce it, they each get a feeling of fulfillment. Close relationship is established among team members as they work together. Participants also develop more confidence in planning and implementing training programs in their respective churches. The model has provision for immediate application and implementation. Immediate feedback and correction are also built into the program. The decision makers also brought up some of the weaknesses of MODEL III. 1. This model may not be applicable to new and small churches whose funds and personnel may be lacking. Participation from each church is very limited, three participants being the maximum. The two-week schedule is very inconvenient for most workers. The operation of the church might get disrupted while certain key leaders are away attending 3 MODEL III training program. 163 5. The work requirements of the model might be too demanding or too difficult for some participants. 6. There is no guarantee that sent delegate(s) will serve long as ' trainers in their home churches. 7. The cost of sending even one delegate is high. Training for "two successive weeks once a year" was not also very favorable to the majority of church workers who answered the qustionnaire. According to the results of the questionnaire survey, only 38% of these workers indicated that this kind of training schedule is convenient to them (see Table 5). A number of valuable suggestions for the improvement of MODEL 111 were shared by the decision makers. These are as follows: 1. Extend the training session from two weeks to one month so there will be more time for assessing needs, designing training programs, and implementing them. 2. Make sure the schedule is not in conflict with that of other denominational or interdenominational activities. 3. Have each educational agency (e.g., Sunday school, women's group, men's group) in the church sponbsor its own top leader. 4. Have expenses shared by the sending church and the sent delegate(s). 5. Hold it camp style. 6. Provide 40% theories and 60% practice. 7. See to it that the skill to be developed is useful in designing a training program for any group of voluntary leaders in the local church. 8. Limit team membership from three to five in order to allow for maximum interaction and involvement within the team. 164 9. Allow MODEL III participants to contact and consult trainers even after the training program (i.e., the two-week session) is over. To determine the ;degree of acceptability of a particular training model or approach to a group of respondents (i.e., rural or urban decision makers and rural or urban workers), percentages were used. The degree of acceptability of a particular model or approach to a group was then interpreted in the following manner. Most acceptable: when 91% or more of the respondents indicated that a particular model or approach was acceptable to them. More acceptable: when 81 to 90% of the respondents indicated that a certain model or approach was acceptable. Acceptable: when 71 to 80% of the respondents indicated that a particular model or approach was acceptable. Less acceptable: when 61 to 70% of the respondents indicated that a particular model or approach was acceptable. Least acceptable: when 60% or fewer of the respondents indicated that a particular model or approach was acceptable. The different degrees of acceptability are summarized thus: 91 - 100% Most acceptable 81 - 90% More acceptable 71 — 80% Acceptable 61 - 70% Less acceptable 60% or less Least acceptable Using this gauge for interpretation, the general reactions of the decision makers toward each training model could then be interpreted as follows. MODEL I was less acceptable to the rural decision makers (67% of the decision 165 makers), but acceptable to the urban decision makers (80% of the decision makers); MODEL II was least acceptable to the rural decision makers (58% decision makers), and less acceptable to urban workers (65% of the decision makers); and MODEL 111 was least acceptable to the rural decision makers (54% of the decision makers), but acceptable to the urban decision makers (80% of the decision makers) (see Figure 4). In like manner, the general reactions of the workers toward a particular training approach could be interpreted as follows: training on your own (counterpart of MODEL 1) was more acceptable to the rural workers (85% of the workers) and more acceptable to the rural workers (90% of the workers), training with a group (counterpart of MODEL 11) was most acceptable to the rural workers (97% of the workers) and most acceptable also to the urban workers (92% of the workers), and training through actual experience (counterpart of MODEL III) was more acceptable to the rural workers (88% of the workers) and more acceptable to urban workers (90% of the workers) as well (see Figure 5). FRL'O LIE/v0 Y RE LA 77 V: 100 1b 70 --‘ 2o -- MCDEL I MODEL. ,7! maocz _/7_/’ FIGURE 4 311/341. 14R54A/ ANALYsls OF ACCEPTADILITY OF THE TRAINING MODELS To RMKAL AND uRBAN DHJISIONMAKERS. RE LA 77 \E FKEOMENC Y 167 80, ' V \ x 70 -- \ s \ \ \ s N \ \ 0 x \ R m aux/II. - unw/ FIGIARE. 5 ANALYSIS OF THE AccEP'TABILITY OF THE THREE. TRAINING APPROACHES To TH: Rum AND MREAN WORKERQ. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter gives a brief statement of the problem and purpose of the study and a short description of the research procedures. It also presents the findings and conclusions of the study. In addition, it offers some recommendations for the implementation of the findings and for additional research. Restatement of the Problem and Purpose Most protestant churches in the Philippines have very limited resources. They cannot afford to select leadership training alternatives by "trial and error." They need some specific information which can help them determine the training model or models that will bring them improved benefits for a particular level of resource use. To help provide this badly needed information, this study was conducted. This study had a threefold purpose: (a) to design three models of training voluntary nonformal educators, (b) to estimate the anticipated costs and benefits of each model, and (c) to estimate the feasibility of each model in training voluntary nonformal educators in rural and urban protestant churches in the three major island groups of the Philippines. Description of Procedures The research method used in this study is the descriptive survey. Using the characteristics of this method as guidelines, several steps were taken. 168 169 First, relevant literature was reviewed with the following objectives: (a) to analyze carefully the need for training voluntary nonformal educators in local churches, particularly in the Philippines; (b) to understand more clearly the training process; (c) to consider seriously the suggestions of several experts in program planning; and (d) to examine training programs currently being used in schools, churches, and human service organizations. Second, three training programs were designed adapting some of the elements derived from existing models and following some of the advice offered by experienced program planners, particularly designers of training programs for voluntary workers. Third, two instruments for collecting data were constructed: (a) a written questionnaire which was used in identifying some of the training needs and interests of church workers, and (b) an interview protocol which was used in getting the reactions of key decision makers to the three training models presented to them prior to the interview. These two instruments were checked for validity by a panel of five knowledgeable and competent persons and pre— tested with a small group of subjects similar to the sample. Fourth, with the official permission and cooperation of denominational heads, nine local protestant churches representing different denominations, sizes, geographical locations, and community structures were selected for this research. All paid and voluntary workers who attended a pre-arranged general meeting (a total of 245 workers) and no more than five key decision makers per church (a total of 44 decision makers) served as subjects for the study. Fifth, in each of the nine churches, two types of meetings were conducted. One was a general meeting of the church workers at which all the attenders first discussed in small groups their training needs and interests and later responded individually to a written questionnaire. The other was a private meeting with 170 the pastor and no more than four other decision makers of the church at which the researcher gave a brief oral presentation of the three training models. Then during the following days each decision maker was interviewed personally to get his reactions to each model. Sixth, all the collected data were summarized, tabulated, and analyzed using appropriate statistical techniques. In analyzing the questionnaire data, an effort was made to determine the level of acceptability of four components of training (i.e., training content, training approach, trainers/ resource persons, and training schedule) to the respondents. Special attention was given to determining the acceptability to the workers of each of the three training approaches: (a) training-on-your-own or self-study approach (counterpart of MODEL 1), (b) training-with—a-group or group process (counterpart of MODEL 11), and (c) training-throug-actual-experience or experiential learning approach (counterpart of MODEL 111). This was done by means of a frequency distribution of workers' responses on all items in the questionnaire. Cross-tabulations were also made on each of the demographic data by the acceptability of the different categorical items in the questionnaire. A chi-square test was performed on each cross-tabulation to determine whether a systematic relationship existed among these variables. The contingency coefficient (C) was also computed in order to get an estimate of the magnitude of relationship among variables in a chi-square table. The data gathered through the interviews were analyzed to determine the acceptability of the decision makers of the three training models: (a) MODEL 1 (self—instruction approach), (b) MODEL [1 (workshop approach), and (c) MODEL 111 (experiential learning approach). This was done by means of a relative frequency distribution of the decision makers' responses to the interview questions which 171 were related to the three training models. Bar graphs were used to emphaize and clarify the findings of the interview data analysis. Major Findings and Conclusions After analyzing the data, the following findings and conclusions are noted. 1. Most of the church workers were in favor of emphasizing the following courses in training programs: "Bible Content," "Victorious Christian Life and Service," "How to Understand Learners," "How to Interpret the Bible," "How to Teach or Lead a Group," and "How to Train Bible Teachers/Leaders." Of these six courses, the workers seemed to prefer putting the strongest emphasis on "Bible Content" and "Victorious Christian Life and Service." This preference could be understood in light of the fact that in practically all denominations in the Philippines, having a working knowledge of the Bible and living a victorious Christian life have been emphasized as among the most important qualities good Christian workers most possess. 2. Most of the church workers indicated that they want to receive help from co-trainees, from experts within their churches, and from experts outside their churches. Of these three groups of trainers/ resource persons, the workers seemed to want the most help from experts within the church. Apparently workers were influenced by the strong denominationalism that exists in most of the churches included in the study. Many of them expressed fear that outside experts might bring into the training programs their (the experts) own denominational beliefs and practices. 172 Most of the church workers indicated that the following training schedules were not very convenient to them: one hour a week for one year, one hour a day for one year, one whole day a week for one year, five successive days twice a year, ten successive days once a year, and two successive weeks once a year. Of these six training schedules, one hour a week for one year seemed to be the most convenient, while ten successive whole days once a year and two successive weeks once a year seemed to‘be the most inconvenient to them. That the workers should find most of the training schedules specified in the questionnaire inconvenient could probably be explained by the fact that the majority (58%) of the workers were either employed or self- employed (full-time or part-time) and, therefore, have to work all year round, while many of the unemployed (42%) were students who have to go to school or else work even during vacation time. Most of the church workers seemed to accept many of the following three training approaches: training-on-your-own (counterpart of MODEL 1), training-with-a-group (counterpart of MODEL 11), and training-through-actual-experience (counterpart of MODEL 111). However, training-with-a-group appeared to be the most acceptable to the workers, probably because this particular approach gives them (particularly those with limited education) the sense of security and belongingness for which they expressed a need. According to the chi-square test of significance, the m workers' educational level, geographical location, and 173 denominational affiliation were significantly related to acceptability of most of the training courses, training approaches, trainers/ resource persons, and training schedules. a. The more formally educated the church workers are, the less likely they are to indicate preference for certain training courses (e.g., "How to Interpret the Bible," "How to Teach or Lead a Group," and "How to Train Bible Teachers or Leaders"), for the group training approach and for trainers/resource persons within their church. The m formally educated they are, the more likely they indicate that the self-instruction approach and training for 10 successive days or two successive weeks once a year are less acceptable to them. b. Church workers from Central Mindanao are the msot inclined to indicate preference for training courses (e.g., "How to Udnerstand Learners," "How to Interpret the Bible," "How to Teach or Lead a Group," "How to Train Bible Teachers/Leaders"), for training approaches (e.g., training- on-your-own, training-through-actual-experience), for trainers/ resource persons (e.g., co-trainers), and for training schedules (e.g., one hour a day for one year, one day a week for one year, ten successive days for one year). These positive responses of workers from Central Mindanao might be due to the fact that most of these workers are migrants or descendants of migrants from Northern Luzon who are generally known for being industrious, hardworking, and ambitious. 174 On the other hand, church workers from Eastern Visayas are the least inclined to indicate preference for training courses (e.g., "How to Understand Learners," "How to Interpret the Bible," "How to- Train Bible Teachers or Leaders"), for training approaches (e.g., training-on-your- own, training-with-a-group), and for trainers/ resource persons (e.g., co-trainees). Church workers from Northern Luzon are the least inclined to indicate preference for long training schedules (e.g., five successive days twice a year, ten successive days once a year, two successive weeks once a year). That this particular group of workers found long training schedules less acceptable might be due to the fact that most of them are self-employed and, therefore, cannot leave their jobs for long periods of time. Furthermore, they belong to an ethnic group which is known for thriftiness and industriousness. The Wesleyan church workers are the most inclined to indicate preference for training courses (e.g., "How to Understand Learners," "How to Interpret the Bible," "How to Train Bible Teachers or Leaders"), for training approaches (e.g., training-on-your-own, training-through-actual- experience), and for longer training schedules (e.g., five successive days twice a year, two successive weeks once a year). A possible explanation for the apparent positive attitude of the Wesleyan church workers toward several training components is the fact that holy living and serving are strongly emphasized in the denomination, so they tend 175 to be very open to anything that would help them in these two areas. On the other hand, the Free Methodist church workers are the least inclined to indicate their preference for training courses (e.g., "How to Understand Learners," "How to Interpret the Bible") and for training approaches (e.g., training-on-your-own). The response could be understood in light of the fact that almost 50% of the church workers studied have already had formal Bible college training and probably feel they already have enough competence in understanding learners and in interpreting the Bible, while, at the same time, they recognize the need for utilizing approaches other than the self-instructional approach. The Conservative Baptist church workers are the least inclined to indicate their preference for longer training schedules (e.g., five successive days twice a year, ten successive days once a year, two successive weeks once a year). A possible explanation for the negative response of these workers is the fact that their local church is.still in the pioneering stages and, therefore, they are not ready yet for longer and more in-depth training. Decision makers generally believed their churches could meet the costs of operating MODELS I and II. The majority also felt their churches could and would be willing to shoulder the cost of sending at least one or two delegates to a MODEL 111 type of training. 10. ll. 12. 13. 176 MODEL I (Self-Instruction Approach) was less acceptable to the rural decision makers but acceptable to the urban decision makers. MODEL H (Workshop Approach) was least acceptable to the rural decision makers and less acceptable to the urban decision makers. MODEL 111 (Experiential Learning Approach) was least acceptable to the rural decision makers but acceptable to the urban decision makers. Training-on—your-own (counterpart of MODEL 1) was more acceptable to both the rural and urban church workers. Training-with-a-group (counterpart of MODEL 11) was most acceptable to both the rural and urban church workers. Training-through-actual-experience (counterpart of MODEL 111) was more acceptable to both the rural and urban church workers. Decision makers and church workers differed in their preferences for training models or approaches. Whereas the decision makers found the group training approach less acceptable, the church workers found it the most acceptable. Implications Some of the implications derived from the research were the following. 1. Since church workers differ from decision makers in several ways, even in their preferences for training approaches, each group should be represented on the committee or group responsible for planning the training program of a local church or organization . 177 Church workers should be actively involved in all phases of the training process (i.e., in pretraining, in training, and in posttraining) so that they feel the training program is their own and not something imposed on them by the decision makers. While some voluntary workers know what they need and like in terms of training courses, others do not know; so it is advisable to prepare some kind of catalogue of training courses which will aid people in selection of particular course(s) they feel they need and like. ' Before looking outside the church for possible trainers/resource persons to invite, a local church should first tap their own qualified and available leaders. The research showed the workers' preference for receiving help from experts within their churches. When setting the schedule for a training program, the schedule of activities (at home, at school, at work, or elsewhere) of the individuals concerned, of the local church (and various organizations within the church), of the denomination, and of parachurch organizations (in whose programs some of the church workers might get involved) should be taken into account. For example, while most church workers are off work or school during the Christmas break, this period may be found to be the least convenient because, aside from various Christmas activities conducted by the local church, denominations usually hold special youth conferences and parachurch organizations sponsor interdenominational gatherings (e.g., a missionary conference) during that period. 178 6. Inasmuch as there are different types of workers within a local church (e.g., paid or voluntary, formally trained or untrained, experienced or inexperienced, regular or newly recruited, administrative or educational, et al.), a local church should not limit itself to utilizing only one training approach for all types of workers. Rather, a local church should look into the feasibility of employing, perhaps, a different approach for a different type or group of workers. As suggested by the decision makers in the study and if feasible, a local church might consider utilizing the Self-Instructional Approach with the working and/or better educated type of workers, the Workshop Approach with the non- working and/or newly recruited type, and the Experiential Learning Approach with the paid and experienced type and/or with those who are holding key educational responsibilities in the church. Recommendations Following are some recommendations for the implementation of the findings and for additional research. 1. MODELS I, II, and 111 should be revised in order ot incorporate some of the very valuable suggestions given by the respondents, particularly those of the decision makers. 2. The revised training models should be offered to both rural and urban churches in the Philippines so that they' can utilize them in training their voluntary workers, particularly their voluntary nonformal educators. 3. 179 A handbook, containing (a) practical guidelines on how to select or plan the training program(s) most suitable to a particular situation and (b) detailed designs of several tested training models, should be prepared and made available to local churches. This research study should be replicated in order to estimate the feasibility of using other training models in develOping voluntary church workers in rural and urban churches in the Philippines and, if possible, in other parts of Asia. APPENDIX A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED TRAINING MODELS DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED TRAINING MODELS Three models of training voluntary nonformal educators were developed and analyzed for this study. MODEL I uses the self-instruction approach, MODEL II the workshop approach, and MO DEL III the experiential learning approach. MODEL I—Based on Self-Instruction Approach Patterned after the Theological Education by Extension (Kinsler, 1981; Winter, 1969) concept of training, MODEL I (illustrated in Figure A-l) is designed for helping prospective Bible teachers and leaders improve their knowledge of the Bible and their competency in communicating its teachings to others in a small group setting in church, a home, an office, or elsewhere. For a period of one year, each trainee, at his own pace, studies a lesson or more in a self- instructional text during the weekdays and interacts with co-trainees and with a discussion leader in his own church on Sunday mornings during Sunday school time. The local church pastor himself and/ or qualified leaders in the same church serve as discussion leaders. The number and size of the interaction groups and the number of discussion leaders depend upon the number of trainees taking the course. Ideally, no less than six and no more than 20 trainees are assigned to a leader (Bergevin, 1964). To provide a proper balance between content and methodology and to encourage trainees to keep moving ahead in their self-studies, the church provides each trainee with a different self-instructional text every three months. Thus, for the first three months, a trainee is given a text on the Bible; for the 180 181 YEAR 1 YEAR 2 SUNDAY First Quarter W KDAYS D-II azm§m§1BET R. JAVALERA General Secretary MINISTRIES TUTE . . .CHURCH YOUTH 20 7 EQXSECE‘fll‘Eih‘éi‘iE???‘1*?11’1‘23'11511.1 .11 mm. sou- CATION . .. LEARNING CENTER ...NATIONAL SUNDAY SCHOOL CONVENTIONS . . . SPECIAL SERVICES TO SCHOOLS AND CHURCHES . . . STANDARD TRAINING COURSE . , . SUNDAY SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS' INSTITUTE . . . TEACHERS TRAINORS CAMP. 1 1 1 West Avenue, Quezon City Philippines 3010 Phone No. 99-41-13 P.O. Box 1882 MANILA CABLE ADDRESS: CBAP Manlle T .- . -~ ‘5‘ _._' £3C-3£ ;ac111co 18:1,: (‘- - - 'I h: 1. 1’1” ‘1 413.1..5.’ Jan 1.181: 1.1.5 \— ..‘.J ‘C: o - -. —.. 1 1 -C'.’ an, LEaDGLE‘. Re: Research of 1_i:atetn Jevalera e be in.fo; med that we urge you to cooperate beth Java 11ers in her :esearcl rega: in . the ry workers, particvlarly in the area Of our aizcaya add Isabela. She is doing this f to help the jhilipgine Association Of Chris of which sh~ is “he Genera Sec:e“a- an. A4 our SE4: chrrc ,. .. .. , A.‘ 7. . q . flu "Jana you 10. 8CCOWOOO-1D$ ne: and snow_rg ne1 n 1 ul 2 3L: Yonderf 7 “'.\" "‘ x 1—1 witr‘ J. .stbvi. 11. .3. 4.14.; -OAP )irecto: for Church 3153:15 SUPPORT HARVEST 20fi00 ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES INC. Wlin 1. .2 '...-. .a1n115 2 Work . Eaviou:, 209 June 1, 1983 ILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF CHRISTIAN EDUCATION, INI. ACPO Box 301, Quezon City, Philippines — Tel. 78-75-25 Pastor Pacifico Basto Cauayan Baptist Church Cauayan, Isabela Dear Pastor Basto: In a church growth survey conducted in the country in 1979, it was reported that almost all church leaders in the Philippines who are concerned about church growth recognize the need for better training and mobilization of their lay or voluntary leaders and workers (Montgomery 6: McGavran, 1980). Having been directly involved, myself, in training church leaders and workers for a number of years, I am naturally challenged to help meet this great need. So during the next three months, I will be conducting a special research survey about voluntary workers' training in several selected churches in different parts of the Philippines. This research is expected to yield some very valuable information which can help decision makers in local churches, in denominations, and in parachurch organizations determine the training program or programs that will bring them maximum benefits for a particular level of resource use. One of the churches I selected for this research is your church in Cauayan. As the enclosed letter shows, Rev. Gilbert Vitaliz, President Of CBAP, and Rev. Jacob Toews, CBAP Director for Church Planting, Officially endorse this research. Now I would like to seek your consent and cooperation in arranging two types of meetings. One is a eneral meetin to be participated in by all the decision makers and workers of your church (including you, the Church Board, the Board of Elders, the Board of Deacons, the organizational leaders, the Sunday school and vacation Bible school staff, and other paid and voluntary workers) to discuss their training interests and needs, and to ask them to respond to a written questionnaire. Another is a private meeting (with you and no more than four other church leaders who are responsible for making decisions concerning the educational and training ministry of your church) at which three training alternatives will be shared by this researcher and at which these decision makers' reactions to those alternatives will be surveyed through personal interviews. As this research will have to be done in different parts of the country (in Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao) within the limited period of three months (June, July, and August), I would like to request you to schedule these meetings at the Cauayan Baptist Church during the fourth week of June. Should you find, however, that week very inconvenient, please let me know right away so we can arrange other dates which are more convenient for all concerned. I will be most grateful for your kind COOperation and prompt reply, if possible, within the next two weeks. Respectfully yours, . 0’1 at; “V MTJLCS MINISTRIES ELI l' BET‘ R' JAVALERA CAMP COUNSELORS TRAINING INSTITUTE . . .CHURCH YOUTH General Secretary LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE . . .INTERNSHIP IN CHRISTIANHEgoUL- CATION ...LEARNINO CENTER . . .NATIONAL SUNDAY sc CONVENTIONS .. . SPECIAL SERVICES To SCHOOLS ANo CHURCHES . . .STANOARD TRAINING COURSE . , . SUNDAY SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS' INSTITUTE . . . TEACHERS TRAINORS CAMP. 210 REPLY FORM Miss Elizabeth R. Javalera PACE, Inc. ACPO Box 301, Ouezon City 3001 Philippines Dear Miss J avalera: I will be glad to arrange for you at the the two types Of meetings you have requested for your research: 1. a general meeting of all the decision makers and educational workers of the church to be held on 1983, at (am/pm), and a private meeting with the local pastor and with no more than four other decision makers of the church to be held on , 1983, at (am/pm). signature of local pastor date Church Address 211 General Information about Your Church Pastor Date INSTRUCTION: Kindly fill out this questionnaire and mail it immediately to: Miss Elizabeth Javalera, PACE, Inc. ACPO Box 301, Quezon City 3001 Beginnings of your church (i.e., your local congregation) a. b. C. When was it started? Who started it? How was it started? Two years Last This Ago Year Year Number of communicant members Average attendance in workship service(s) Average attendance in Sunday school Number of small Bible study groups Average attendance in each Bible study group Number of paid church workers Number of voluntary church workers Additional information about the training programs of your church: a. b. Average duration of each training program? Average number of participants per training program? Average number of new voluntary leaders/workers mobilized in Christian service after a training program has been completed? THAN YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COOPERATION A PPEN DIX H MAP OF THE PHILIPPINES Q I 1 REPUBLIC OF THE Provincial and regional map Philippine Copyright. 1983 by National Book Store. Inc. I) \ " CIIOO I. I ;‘e I". 1:! '\ r Insane“ ~': .7 , '1 suoeuu‘fi T- "A "ml en‘uIO °' - ‘3 , a cum-1%, : I by“ lm‘ . eI. lllA'lCA ‘q ’ O SIIAV I. 1 1 I and"! I. 1 I 1 I ~ ' i I I 1 BATANES 1 1 m ‘ ‘: [sun-CI" mm I 1 E / 1 I 2 l 2 i I l j E I 2-14va ulna: ' E p ‘ w, 1 _ I Mumm- I, l 1 _,3 - I 1 6:3va I. I .r 1 I I i ”f l I I , 1 ' i x; 1 1 / | i D I I E 1 I 1 i - 1 . I L I 1 | : a 1 I 1 1 . 1 1 1 ' __ _ __1 i i I . 1“";al l”. I I ‘ l L-uufivv-h .u-v l 5. I 1 l '7“ ‘1 :0" 1 7‘ I -; I I L'— ’ I i __ 1 l 1 L I ' , , r . l I 1 ‘ . ‘ ‘7‘. l I c: | 1 2— .. , z ' '1 ‘ 31.1., I 1 ——-\ M~ “fiflfHM‘WI-Eé. . ' \YA‘; ‘1‘. ‘ ’I’II‘MAI I. 1 ’ ’ a 1 1,. f ‘ I)” Wt: .... .11.- ,_. JO-“ul ’ .—- r" - ' lJE’ 1: _"‘1 '- -~ . .‘ 1' “mm, r . ‘t 1 i", 3 new do; 75:111. . ~ '5 VP. “‘0‘! h \ Mun m 1 . L—T——.m~...~ e- . 4a“: .2111.“ we 3. . ."."'__f:t:;)""" r'f———- ’ .1 .. mean 1 i i I 1,-Cartographic Design: Heinrich Engeler 1980 ' PHILIPPINES }_. Scale 1 : 5.000.000 ’ a so 100 Iso 200 so soon- I tiff-T ‘ .1 .‘ _ ..- ' I can e museum 0 W on ‘ 1 _ mausueo ANO mums“ nun-Tout» er 1 1 '. . I 1 30015103121312. 1 II: A ' ...», I 1 .r ‘ . e I l j I I I I f 1 l -— I _ l 1 I I 2!) I I 1 A I ’ I a ’7 I I . I 1 € 7 . 5 I l , I i I . .fi‘fa-‘A \uns ._ ' neu- Y‘ ,1 _. f I 1 7%)" 807316 ,’ .. $213.“, "I". 1 ' . ,. - / / ' _ 9.7 '01 India. . .E \Q— l ' 2 / 1 . / gfi”‘" J's—x, ' ‘"""“ uuuc I / 1 1 / .- 1’ 11' . ' V i / LAN-«Jags - // 1 / 3: Mull! ‘ CASATAI at set“ 1 / 1X," ‘ / I l / a 9 : ‘ 0.. / / ‘ -. . I "tutti-e1}, ’ . “a, 1 > 1:; 1- war.- 1-0 1 I / a I: a. d v / . -—,,fl . 1 / s.UL02?./c;./ E/ 1 ' _. 1 1/ -. ‘ noun: / 1 . l MAOHOIflIIh .\ 1 ;Iunun. /1 -.. . “uni; o /1 1 1 '1‘ - «we-727+ .. / : e. ~ " ' 1 T ..."... A B A q : V v 1 1 o- . fl, ‘. w / 1 (7 11:: [.1 '5‘ 1.. : . i "' I (NORTH BORNEO) " ‘j P... ’~ Illéivnwonf- e . '. / 1 I ‘ .- . “ ', ./ . “1" / 1 i I , I 1i: M. ~° / 1 -1 L: A V - ’1 1 1 ”'22- / 1 3. 1 no! Sink; - f“ "T— ‘51“ Steele'l / 1 g j \V BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Ahmed, Mansoor. The Economics of Nonformal Education: Resources, Costs, and Benefits. New York: Praeger, 1975. Alkin, Marvin C. Evaluating the Cost Effectiveness of Instructional Program. C. E. Report 310. 25. Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Evaluation of Instructional Programs, University of California, 1969. Becker, Norbert V. Laymen; Hope of the Church. Quezon City, Philippines: New Day Publication, 1974. Beckhard, Richard. How to Plan and Conduct Workshops and Conferences. New York: Association Press, 1956. Berdie, Douglas R. and Anderson, John F. Questionnaires: Design and Use. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1974. Best, John W. Research in Education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1977. ‘ . Borus, Michael E. "Measuring the Cost of Non-Formal Education." In Hunter, J. M., Borus, M. E., and Mannan, Abdul, Economics_ and Nonformal Education. East Lansing, MI: Institute for Studies in Education, Michigan State Univesity, 1974. Boyd, Harper W., Jr., Westfall, Ralph and Stasch, Stanley F. Marketing Research. Homewood, IL: R. D. Irwin, Inc., 1977. Clinton, J. Robert. ML531 Leadership Training Models: Syllabus Notes. Pasadena: Fuller Theological Seminary, 1982. The Conference Planner: A Guide to Good Education Meetings. Washington, DC: National School Public Relations Association, NEA, 1967. Community Development: An Intensive Training Manual. Ames, 10: North Central Regional Center for Rural Development, Iowa State University, n.d. Continuing Educa_tion _for Teacher Educators: Advafinced Level Workshops. Report of a Task Force Meeting. Bangladesh: UNESCO, I976. Covell, Ralph R. and Wagner, C. Peter. An Extension Seminary Primer. South Pasadena, CA: W. Carey Library, 1971. Craig, R. L. (Ed). Training and Development Handbook. New York: McGraw- Hill, 1976. 213 214 Davis, Larry N. Planning, nguctinj and Evaluating Workshops: A Practitioner's Guide to Adult Education. Austin, TX: Learning Concepts, 1974. Diamondstone, Jan M. Designing, Leading, and Evaluating Workshops for Teachers and Parents. Ypsilanti, MI: Hope/Scope Educational Research Foundation, 1980. Earley, Leigh C. and Rutledge, Pearl B. "A Nine-Step Problem-Solving Model." In Pfeiffer, J. W. and Jones, J. E. (Eds.). The 1980 Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators. San Diego: University Associates, 1980. Edwards, A. L. The Techniques of Attitude Scale Construction. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1957. ' Ferguson, George A. Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education. New York: McGraw—Hill, 1981 Gerber, Vergil. Discipling Through Theological Education by Extension. Chicago: Moody Press, 1980. Grabowski, Stanley M., et al. Preparing Educators of Adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1981. Gwynn, Price H., Jr. Leadership Education in the Local Church. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1952. Harrison, Pat J. "A Rural Australian Experiment in Training Church Leaders." International Review of Mission, 1982, 71 (282), 184-192. Havelock, Ronald G. and Mary C. Trainingfor Change Agents: A Guide to the Design of Training Programs in Education and Other Fields. Ann Arbor: Center for Research on Utilization of Scientific Knowledge, University of Michigan, 1973. Henerson, Marlene 5., Morris, Lynn Lyons and Fitz-Gibbon, Carol Taylor. How to Measure Attitudes. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1978. Heuser, D-B. Helping Church Workers Succeed. Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1980. Heyman, Margaret M. Criteria and Guidelines for the Evaluation of Inservice Training. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1967. Huber, Evelyn M. Enlist, TraiL Support Church Leaders. Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1975. Ilsley, Paul J. and Niemi, John A. Recruiting and Training Volunteers. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1981. Isaac, Stephen and Michael, William B. Handbook in Research and Evaluation. San Diego: EDITS, 1981. Jones, John E. and Pfeiffer, J. William (Eds.). The Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators. San Diego: University Associates, 1979. Joyce, Bruce and Weil, Marsha. Models of Teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1980. Kinsler, F. Ross. The Extension Movement in Theological Education. Pasadena, CA: W. Carey Library, 1981. Leedy, Paul D. Practical Research: Planning and Design New York: MacMillan, 1980. Levin, H. M. "Cost-Effectiveness in Evaluation Research." In Guttentag, M. and Struening, E. L. (Eds.). Handbook fo Evaluation Research, Vol. 2. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1975. Levin, Richard I. Statistics for Management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice— Hall, 1981. Lindgren, Alvin J. and Shawchuck, Norman. Let My People Go: Empowering Laity for Ministry. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1980. Loether, Herman J. and McTavish, Donald G. Descriptive and Inferential Statistics: An Introduction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1980. Lynton, Rolf P. and Pareek, Udai. Training for Development. Connecticut: Kumariana Press, 1978. Marks, Stephen E. and Davis, William L. "The Experiential Learning Model and Its Application to Large Groups." In Jones, J. E. and Pfeiffer, J. W., The 1975 Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators. San Diego: University Associates, 1975. Marquez, Willy D. and Javalera, Betty. Christia_n Education in the Philippines: PACE. Asian Perspective 19. Taipei: Asia Theological Association. McDonough, Reginald M. Working with Volunteer Leaders in the Church. Nashville: Broadman, 1970. McGavran, Donald A. and Arn, Win. How to Grow a Church. Wheaton: Scripture Press, 1973. McKinney, Lois. "Plan for the Church's Leadership Needs." Evangelical Missions Quarterly, 1975, 11 (3), 183-187. Miles, Matthew. Learning to Work in Groups: A Practical Guide for Members and Trainers. New York: Teachers College Press, 1981. Minor, Harold D. Handbook: Finding and Training Leaders in the Local Church. Nashville: Board of Education, the United Methodist Church, 1972. Montgomery, James H. and McGavran, Donald A. The Discipling of a Nation. Santa Clara, CA: Global Church Growth, 1980. 216 Naylor, Harriett H. Volunteers Today—Finding, Training and Working with Them. New York: Dryden Associates Press, 1973. Neumann, Paul. "Protestant Churches Post 11.8% Growth Rate in 1971-1981." Research Notes. June, 1983. Nie, Norman H. SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975. Oppenheim, A. N. Questionnaire Design and Attitude Measurement. New York: Basic Books, 1966. Pfeiffer, J. W. and Goodstine, L. D. (Eds.). The 1982 Annual Handbook for Facilitators, Trainers and Consultant. San Diego: University Associates, 1982. Posavac, Emil J. and Carey, Raymond G. Program Evaluation: Methods and Case Studies. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1980. Program Evaluatorjs Guide. Princeton, NJ: California State Department of Education, 1979. Richardson, Lucy E. The Pr0posa1 Writer's Budget Guide. Paper prepared for the "Workshop on Planning for Action in Community Welfare," the Ministry of Plan Implementation and the Year of the Child Secretariat, Sri Lanka, February 12-16, 1980. Schindler-Rainman, Eva and Lippitt, Ronald. The Volunteer Community: Creative Use of Human Resources. Washington, DC: Center for a Voluntary Society, 1971. Seay, Maurice F, et a1. Community Education: A Developing Concept. Midland, MI: Pendell Publishers, 1974. Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956. Skivington, Robert S. Mission to Miflanao. Quezon City, Philippines: Conservative Baptist Publications, 1977. Smith, Bobbington B. and Farrel, B. A. Training in Small Groups: A Study of Five Methods. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1979. Solomon, Lawrence N. "Team Development: A Training Approach." In Jones, J. E. and Pfeiffer, J. W. (Eds.), The 1977 Annualeandbook for Group Facilitators. San Diego: University Association, 1977. Spiegel, Murray R. Theory and Problems of Statistics. New York: Schaum Publishing Company, 1961. Srinivasan, Lyra. Pgrspectives on Nonformal Adult Learning. New York: World Education, 1977. 217 Stott, John. One People. Old Tappan, NJ: F. H. Revell, 1982. This, Leslie and Lippitt, Gordon L. "Managerial Guidelines to Sensitivity Tra1n1ng " In Lippitt, G. L. This, L. E. and Bidwell, R. G. Jr. Optimizing Human Resources. Reading: MA: Addison and Wesley, 1971’. Training of Adult Education Functionaries: A Handbook. New Delhi: Ministry of. Education and Social Welfare, 1978. A Training Manual £1 ApproLriate Community Technology: An Integrated Approach for Training Development Facilitators. A training manual prepared by the Farallones Institute Rural Center and CHP International, Inc. ., in collaboration with the Peace Corps Energy Project/OPTC, January 1982. Ward, Ted. The Split Rail Fence: An Analogy for the Education of Professionals. East Lansing, MI: College of Education, Michigan State University, 1969. Ward, Ted W., et al. Effective LearningLin Nonformal Education, Study Team Report . East Lansing, MI: Program of Studies in Nonformal Education, Michigan State University, 1977. Waterman, Floyd T., et a1. Designing Short-Term Instructional Progams. Washington, DC: Association of Teacher Educators, 1979. Wilson, Marlene. The Effective Management of Voluntary Programs. Boulder, CO: Volunteer Management Association, 1976. Winter, Ralph D. Theological Education by Extension. South Pasadena, CA: W. Carey Library, 19691 Zaltman, G., Florio, D. H. and Sikorski, L. A. Dynamic Educational Change: Models, StrategiesLTactics and Management. New York: Free Press, 1977. Unpublished Materials Berk, Kevin Anthony. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Three Demonstration Parent Education Programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, 1980. Cole, Victor Babajide. LeadershigCriteria and Their Sources among ECWA Church of Nigeria: Implications for Curriculum in Ministerial Training. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1982. Coles, Laurence W. A Study of the Differential Effects of Two Leadersm Training Styles on United Methodist Adult Groups. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1971. Downey, Raymur James. Old Testament Patterns of Leadership Training Prophets, Priests and Kings. Unpublished Master's thesis, Fuller Theological Seminary, 1981. 218 Galosy, Julia Reid. The Development and Evaluation of a Self— Use Workbook to Help Adults with the Initial Stages of Planning Their Learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1978. Graves, John C. A Needs Assessment to Determine the Training Needs for I.C.B.S. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1981. Hazlett, James. The Training of Laypersons for Positions of Leadership Within the Local Church. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fuller Theological Seminary, 1976. Hill, David Leslie. Designing a Theological Education by Extension Program for the Philippine Baptist Mission. Unpublished Master's research project, Fuller Theological Seminary, 1973. . Theological Education in Missions as a Factor in Baptist Church Growth with Special Emphasis on the Philippines. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fuller Theological Seminary, 1979. Holland, Fredric L. Theological Education in Context and Change: The Influence of Leadership Training and Anthropology on Ministry for Church Growth. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fuller Theological Seminary, 1978. Neuenburg, Neal Hull. Developing Lay Leadership for a Growing Church. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fuller Theological Seminary, 1981. O'Connell, Maurice J. The Floating Faculty: The Local Design and Implementation of a Prototype for Inservice Staff Development and Educational Change. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, 1980. Ohman, Robert Baird. Training the Laity for Ministry. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fuller Theological Seminary, 1976. Rambo, David L. Training Competent Leaders for the Christian and Missionary Alliance Churches of the Philippines. Unpublished Master's thesis, Fuller Theological Seminary, 1968. Roberts, Robert C. The Construction and Field Testing of a Program Planning Model for Nonformal Education in Human Service Agencies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, 1978. Rotz, H. W. A Study of the Recruitment, Training, Support and Performance of Church Leaders in Three Protestant Denominations in the Philippine Federation of Christian Churches. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell University, 1955. Villegas, Ceferino D. Principles of Lay Leadersm. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fuller Theological Seminary, 1982. II»: T IV RTE UN . LIBRARIES 11111111111111 111111111111111111 1&4 8632 MICHIGAN 5 11111111111111 3'12 EKL £351