v ADULT EDUCATION AND PERSONALITY OFINMATES OF THE STATE PRISON OF SOUTHERN MICHIGAN Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Harvey Hershey I} J‘h' 2154-22.. 0-169 MICHIG ATE 11/ I! I IIII/I/IIIIIIII Iii/7“ 717171 \ 3 1293 10642 4736 This is to certify that the thesis entitled Adult Education and Personality of Inmates of the State PriSon of Southern Michigan presented by Harvey Hershey has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for illLdegree in- Education “‘ LIBRARY Michigan Stat! University [MW «QCZZJ Major professor RETURNING MATERIALS: MSU Place in book drop to LIBRARIES remove this checkout from gag-g... your record. FINES WIII be charged if book is returned after the date MAé'Fé’E’Ed below. ' , g; MAR 151999 r5310 '83 1 Pr? _‘ .5 I . ABSTRACT ADULT EDUCATION AND PERSONALITY OF INMATES OF THE STATE PRISON OF SOUTHERN MICHIGAN by Harvey Hershey This study was concerned with the determination of differences and similarities between those inmates of the State Prison of South- ern.Michigan who had participated in the adult education program.of the Academic School and another group of inmates who had never par- ticipated in any adult education activity. Differences and similar- ities considered were those in personality factors as defined by the Sixteen PersonalitygFactor Questionnaire and in specified non—person- ality areas as defined by items on the "Adult Education Data Survey" designed by this researcher. Inmates were asked to complete the “Adult Education Data Survey" and the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. The in- mates were selected randomly throughout the cell blocks, the only basis for selection being their willingness to participate in the study. Thirty-two matched pairs of inmates were defined on the basis of the items concerning age, education, recidivism, length of .sentence, and participation in special groups or activities, the only difference being that one inmate had participated in an adult education program at the prison and the other had not been involved. Harvey Hershey The class participators were found to be significantly more rigid, undependable, and conventional than the non—participators, while the non—participators were more easy-going, conscientious, and imaginative than the participators. Both groups are more rigid and undependable than the general non-college adult male population norms provided by the authors of the questionnaire. The participator is similar to the average male on the conventional-—imaginative continuum while the non-participator is much more imaginative than either of the groups. However, in none of these comparisons with general norms was the difference significant. The participator in this study may, therefore,be described as a person who avoids compromise, lacks internal standards and is less inclined to experiment in problem situations. His behavior is in- dicative of self-control rather than emotional behavior. This type of behavior fails to distinguish leadership qualities; and is as— sociated, in all members, with a lower percentage of group-task- orientation. The non-participator in this study, by comparison, may be said to be generous in personal relationships, less afraid of criticism but less dependable in exactly meeting obligations. He may be more in- clined to experiment in problem solving as well as making his own decisions. Many signs of introversion are indicated by the person- ality characteristics. Harvey Hershey The “Adult Education Data Survey" considered thirteen non- personality factors. There were thirty—six items which were to reveal the inmates condition with respect to these non-personality factors: age, education, prison record, extent of participation in adult programs, familiarity with adult programs, health, religious activity, political activity, family, military service record, mobility, and attitude toward adult education programs. In none of these areas were there significant differences. A comparison of thirty-two similar inmate participators and thirty-two non-participators, who were not part of the process used in selecting the matched pairs in this study, did not indicate any significant difference in non-personality factors between the two participator groups or the two non-participator groups. Prison records were used to obtain the facts necessary in the collection of this information. The findings suggest that inmates participatingin adult educa- tion activities have certain personality factors which are unlike the personalities of the non—participators chosen forthis study. These differences should be kept clearly in mind by the adult educa- tor when he is trying to attract the non—participator to the adult program or satisfying him once he attempts to become a participator. This study represents only an initial exploratory attempt to measure an important but small segment of the population. The area Harvey Hershey delineated for observation is necessarily limited, but it is hoped it will point the way for similar studies to continue until a body of knowledge has been assembled that will put adult education on a firmer scientific base than it now enjoys. ADULT EDUCATION AND PERSONALITY OF INMATES OF THE STATE PRISON OF SOUTHERN MICHIGAN By Harvey Hershey A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1965 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my thanks and appreciation to my friend and major adviser, Dr. Harold Dillon, for his continual guidance and optimism during the planning and preparation of this thesis. To Dr. Edward Blackman, Dr. Buford Stefflre and Dr. John Useem, the members of my guidance committee, I would like to offer my gratitude for the valuable criticism and suggestions received in the completion of this work. Additional thanks are due to the State of Michigan Department of Corrections, and in particular to Dr. Ernest Shelly, Gerald Hanson and Alan Krische. And to my wife Shirley and children Lisa and Blake, I would like to express my gratitude for their encouragement and persever- ance without which this thesis would never have'become a reality. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF GRAPHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Statement of the Problem. . . . . . . . . Background and Need for this Study. . Penology and Adult Education. . . . . . . Basic Assumptions of this Study . . . . Limitations of this Study . Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Importance of this Study. . . . . . . . . . . . II REVIEW OF LITERATURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Considerations of Adult Personality . . Considerations of Adult Participation in Educa- tion Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III ‘METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. . The Adult Education Data Survey . . . . . . . The Sample. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Procedure for Analysis of the Data. . . . . IV ANALYSES OF THE DATA. Part A: Report on the Results of the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. . . . . Summary of the Results of the Sixteen Person- ality Factor Questionnaire. . . . . . . . . iii Page ii Vii , viii 10 17 18 20 22 28 44 46 54 54 64 CHAPTER Page Part B: Report on Results of the Adult Educa— tion Data Survey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Prison record . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Recidivism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Health. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Military Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Family. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Mobility. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Special Interests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Political Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Religious Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Interest and Participation in.Adult Education Activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Summary of Responses to the Adult Education Data Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 V IMPLICATIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY. . . . . . . . 92 Implications for the Adult Educator. . . . . . . . 98 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 iv Table 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 LIST OF TABLES Continuum representation of personality factors. Matched pairs of inmates . . . . . . . . . . . . T-values and directions of means of individual factors on the Sixteen Personality Factor Ques- tionnaire. . . . . . . . . . Age of inmates . . . . . . . . . . . . . Age of representative group of inmates Grade level of representative group of inmates . . School experience . . . . . . . . . . .. . Inmates ever enrolled in special, trade or corres- pondence school . Special schools, correspondence schools, trade schools, attended by inmates . . . . . . . . Reason for enrolling in special, trade or corres- pondence school. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Consecutive time in State Prison of Southern Michigan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Length of present sentence Length of sentence of representative inmate group. Types of offenses leading to conviction of inmates Recidivism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recidivism of representative group of inmates. Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of inmates in the military service. Branches of military service . . . . . . . . . . V Page 48 64 66 68 69 71 72 72 73 74 76 78 78 79 79 80 8O 81 Table 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3O 31 Present marital status. . . . . . . . . . . Number of inmates having children . Number of children of inmates State of residence before conviction. Length of residence before conviction . State of birth. Political affiliation . . . . . . . Political activity. . . . . . . . . Church affiliation. . . . . . . . Church attendance in last year. . . . . . . Where participators engaged in adult education programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Adult education activities of participators vi Page 81 82 82 83 83 84 85 86 86 87 89 9O Graph II III IV VI VIII IX XII XIII XVI XVII XVIII XIX Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency LIST OF GRAPHS distribution, distribution, distribution, distribution, distribution, distribution, distribution, distribution, distribution, distribution, distribution, distribution, distribution, distribution, distribution, distribution, Age of inmates. . . . . Factor A. Factor B. Factor C. Factor E. Factor F. Factor G. Factor H. Factor 1. Factor L. Factor M. Factor N. Factor 0. Factor Q1 Factor Q2 Factor Q3 . Factor Q4 . Highest grade attained in school. Consecutive time in State Prison of Southern Michigan. . . . . Length of present sentence. . . . Church attendance in last year. vii Page 55 55 56 S6 57 57 58 S8 59 59 6O 6O 61 61 62 62 67 7O 75 77 88 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A THE SIXTEEN PERSONALITY FACTOR QUESTIONNAIRE. B ADULT EDUCATION DATA SURVEY . C LETTER.TO INMATES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D COHESIVE MATRIX OF CORRELATIONS AMONG REFERENCE VECTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E FORM A STENS: GENERAL POPULATTON; ADULT.AMERICAN NON-COLLEGE MALE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F BIPOLAR DESCRIPTION OF SOURCE TRAITS. viii Page 109 116 121 123 125 128 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Introduction In analyzing any complex situation it is necessary to ob- serve limited aspects of the situation and systematically record the observations. Observing and recording demand the careful use of measuring instruments, which must be specialized as well as ap- plied properly, if results are to be meaningful. The field of adult education is complex. In it are found all kinds of pe0ple and all kinds of non-personal factors, many and diverse relationships among its elements, and a state of continual change. It is sometines felt that no man and no part of man's en- vironment are entirely free of implications for adult education. Instruments for measuring man and his surroundings leave much to be desired. For example, in physical engineering of all kinds it is an axiom that no measurement aside from mere counting of units is or can be perfect. However, it can be improved. Maintaining of accuracy of the simplest standards of measurement of height and length requires frequent international gatherings of national ex- perts to define and protect standards ianashington and Geneva. By comparison, instruments designed for measuring human characteristics often seem crude and their application indifferent. 2 In this paper it will be contended that adult education is a composite of many elements of the tangible and intangible. There- fore, it cannot be said in sweeping style that this or that is true of adult education. It can only be said that available evidence in— dicates that a certain observation has been made with respect to a small, partially homogeneoussegment of the adult education complex, and, within the limits of fallibility of the measuring instrument, a truth is being approached. Statement of the Problem This thesis is concerned with the measurement of personality factors of inmates at the State Prison of Southern Michigan who have participated in adult education activities during their period or periods of incarceration. Also measured are the personality factors of inmates at State Prison of Southern Michigan who have not particip- ated in any activity which could be considered adult education. The two groups have similar characteristics, with the only major differ- ence being the active participation of one group in the adult educa- tion program. The inmates of each group were given the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire by Raymond B. Cattell, David R. 1 Saunders and G. Stice, and a personal data questionnaire, the "Adult Education Data Survey," constructed by this researcher.2 1A copy of the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire is on page 110 of the appendix. 2A copy of the “Adult Education Data Survey" is on page 117 of the appendix. 3 It was expected that in some ways the personalities of the two groupswould differ. It was also expected that in many ways the two groups would be alike in important non-personality areas. Thus it was desired and expected that a clearer picture of both the partic- ipators and non-participators could be found. The personality char- acteristics of the participator are extremely important to the adult educator because he is working with these people and it is their educational needs which are to be met. Alumst equally important are the personality characteristics of the non-participator because it is this person whom the adult educator desires to attract into the program. Since the participants and non-participants have similar backgrounds and present environments, it is expected that non-par- ticipants may be encouraged to use adult education programs by making appeals to their differing personality factors. The field where measurements are to be taken is a comparatively small part of the total field of adult education. It is composed of only men and men who have been separated from society because of vio- lations of that society's standards. The two groups measured have the further limitation that one is composed of participators and the other non-participators in prison adult education programs. Individ- uals in both groups, as in all surveys, have expressed a willingness to cooperate. It is recognized that both cooperation andnon-cooper— ation may indicate differences in personalities of the two groups, and that the restrictions of the prison environment and method of administering the questionnaire must be considered in evaluating findings. 4 Assuming a reasonable accuracy of the measuring instrument and its careful application, the findings can contribute to under- standing in several ways. A trustworthy measure of a small part of the participating population and a similar measure of a related non-participating group will result. This will be another step to- ward the measure of all factors in adult education, which is an overall goal of adult education research. It is probable that cer- tain immediate benefits can be derived from using the results of this study of these restricted groups. And even though the conclusions of this study are confined to the groups under observation, they will hint at fruitful areas for further studies. Background and Need for this Study In the increasingly important role that adult education pro- grams are playing in the life of a community, it is important to know whether all who could conceivably benefit are being adequately served. To state that adult education is an area of increasing im- portance in modern society will not startle anyone who has even a casual knowledge of the bulging enrollments in adult education pro— grams throughout the United States. Adult educators have indicated a strong suspicion that the challenge is not being fully met. Previous studies also indicate that in our democratic society, whose very existence depends on voluntary association and participation, as many as sixty-five percent of the people are not participating in any adult education activities. (50:382) Further, for many of those who try to avail themselves of 5 opportunities in existing adult education programs, satisfaction is by no means assured. It is estimated that one—half of those who commence adult education programs withdraw from the program before completing the activity. (25:1) This, in a sense is a measure of lack of systematic observations of the population with whom adult leaders are and should be working. Knowledge of the total enrollments of adult education programs in the United States is almost non—existent. Figures for the nation and figures for even one city that are clear and meaningful are hard to obtain, but some attempts have been made. Morse A. Cartwright, a director of the Auerican.Association of Adult Education, estimated 14,881,500 participants in 1924 and 22,311,000 in 1934. (13:2) Paul Essert of Columbia University claimed 29,000,000 in 1950 (29:40), and Malcolm Knowles believes almost 50,000,000 were in adult educa- tion in l955.(45:3) These authors all admit that their figures may be in error, but feel they are the best estimates possible. Regarding the number of communities offering adult education courses, Edmund Brunner has this to contribute: In 1934,0nly nine high schools in a nationwide represent- ative sample of one hundred forty village-center agricultural communities offered any adult education and almost all of it was vocational. In 1936, forty-two of these schools had adult education offerings, over one-fifth of them non-voca- tional. By mid-century, according to another study, better than three-fourths of the school districts with populations under ten thousand conducted courses for adults, many non- vocational. Urban proportions were higher. (10:3) It is apparent that adult education has had a rapid nationwide growth. It can also be stated that our society is most demanding on the individual mentally and emotionally. According to C. Hallenbeck: People have a sense of frustration. They realize they are surrounded with controls and forces with which they cannot cope. Bigness and remoteness put the forces which mold their lives beyond their reach. Nothing is more disillusioning or disheartening than to realize that one can do nothing about the things which affect his life. (37:15) Malcolm S. MacLean comments: We have moved from the isolated calm of farm lands to the turmoil of great cities: from the majority of children and young folk to a preponderance of oldsters: from the soft sounds of bird calls, lowing cattle and splashing streams to the roar of a million motors, the jangling of a billion bells, the scream of fire, police and ambulance sirens; and from the safety of intimate knowledge of a few friendly neighbors to the insecurity of ignorance, hostility or indifference of many masses of folks jammed in slums, theatres, claustrophobic apartment cells. Under the impact of these accumulations of noise, movement, machines, and people, disintegration sets in. Solid cores of valud crumble, conflicts replace stability and bewilderment overcomes understanding. (49:48) If mental and emotional health is to be maintained and America is to escape the dire future so many predict, forces must be encouraged which oppose the threatened dissolution. An even broader, more ef- fective adult education program may be one of these beneficient forces. But no plan of action can hope to be effective without measurement and understanding of the specific elements involved. This paper is planned to provide some of those measurements and contribute toward better understanding. Many testify to the confusiornwith respect to research in the field of adult education. HAny examination in research in adult ed- ucation reveals a rather chaotic situation." (10:3) Certain areas have been explored much more than others and some have received almost no attention from adult education researchers. Most of the effective research available, in other than the field of methods, has been completed by persons other than educators of adults. Most has been done by psychologists, social psychologists, and sociologists who had available a considerable body of theory, generalizations and methodology developed by their disciplines and applicable to the problems of adult education. (10:3) Brunner also contends that what has been done by researchers in adult education is chiefly descriptive in nature. These studies indicate and record each detail of a program, or analyze the exper- iences and mistakes of a single individual or of the total effort of a single community or area. (10:2) Studies of local situations are used for building programs appropriate to the people and the locality studied. (10:6) Brunner warns that in such cases improper generalizations must be avoided. The Handbook of Adult Education of the United States contains five hundred pages and includes more than fifty contributors without mentioning research, except briefly in connection with government research organizations which have little to do with adult education directly. (28) Research has contributed to the understanding of behavior in many ways. Information concerning the individual adult is available, such as his ability to learn, his motivation, interests, educational level, and even his socio—economic status. There are techniques for manipulating him. He can be taught to do certain things by himself. Relationships and dependencies among these factors are also known. 8 However, if the additional fact is given that this adult being studied is a participator in adult education activity, research reveals little more about his personality. It may be assumed that he is more intel- ligent or more ambitious. Certain stereotyped attitudes adult educa- tors have about their clientele may be inferred, but nothing is known through measurement. The conclusions to be drawn from this paper will include the assumption that if a person is a participator in a certain type of activity then it follows that he, within certain statistical limits, is in some respects, different from or similar to an individual of a non—participating group. The adult educator feels it is important to know the similarities and differences if he is going to provide satisfaction to the participator and entice the non—participator to take action and become involved as a participator. A discussion of what research specifically has to contribute toward the understanding of adult personality will be developed more fully in the chapter de- voted to the review of the literature in this area. It is sufficient to say here that there seems to be a lack of the kind of research which this paper hopes to provide. Robert Plummer found in a study he made of participators in a certain adult education program that the chief method of learning about the existence of the program was through a friend. This method was more significant than any other device commonly used by promoters of adult education. (56:34) Other evidence that promotion of adult programs is through acquaintanceship and word of mouth includes a study by Stephen Deane. .He wrote: It is apparent . . . that very few persons seek adult ed- ucation courses entirely on their own initiative. Mbst fre— quently they are told about the courses by friends or rela- tives. In many of the answers the respondent indicated that he was talked into attending by some neighbor who was hesitant to go alone. (25:24) It may be reasoned that acquaintances of a group of participators in adult education are members of the non-participating group on which the most effective known promotional device is being focused. This group is of interest to the adult educator because members of it are in a position to be drawn into adult education and he may soon be deal— ing with them as class members. But they are of interest in this study not only for this reason but also because, being acquaintances in a restricted environment With certain common experiences, they are in many ways like the participating group. Therefore, whatever differ- ences are found will possibly be relevant to a participation pattern. What little has been done in the study of participators was done without comparison to non-participator groups. Probably this is true because the participators have been considered a fairly easy group to reach through actual classes attended whereas non—partici- pators are scattered, heterogeneous and harder to identify and sample. There is some doubt that accurate information, especially in psy- chological areas, can be obtained through a classroom survey. Such questioning of the validity of responds may lead one to doubt results. Also to be considered in discussing the need for this study is the valud of measuring the personality differences of the two groups. If it is assumed that more or less persistent personality factors are at least partly responsible for adult behavior it becomes evident that 10 the modifying of this behavior by taking personality factors into account is within the province of the adult educator. There is al- most nothing in adult education research identifying personality characteristics of participators in adult programs. There are cer- tain personality differentiations for men compared to women and younger adults compared to older adults; but not for participators compared to non-participators. (18:8) This measurement is not easy, but as Cattell implies, this should notbe left to the novelist while the psychometrist has fled to the laboratory "where the husk of measure- ment may be exhibited even when the kernel is lost." (15:1) Penology and Adult Education The value of studying a selected group is not necessarily measured by the group's relationship to the whole field of which it is a part, but in this case the selection of prison inmates pin- points a significant and easily identifiable part of the whole field of adult education. Findings regarding prison inmates as partici- pants (or non-participants) in adult education cannot be applied to participants in general except in very limited ways. Inmates do, however, make up a large part of adult education participants, and must be taken into account in every public consideration of the field as a whole. The State Prison of Southern Michigan has a population of 4,545. (67:1) Of this number 2,969 (67:1) are considered the inside population, those completely restricted. There is no specific history ll of education in the corrections systems and there are only slight references to education in such forms of history as have been written regarding corrections and penology in Michigan.1 The first biennial report of 1937-1938 refers to the educa- tional program in this manner: The change in the type of inmate in the institution leads to greater needs and emphasb on education. The purpose is to influence the ideals of the inmates, train their minds, and equip them with knowledge and skills which will enable them to lead useful, self-supporting careers after they are released. (53:68-9) To provide for these purposes the prison educational program was composed of four separate schools - Vocational School, Commercial School, Arts and Crafts, and.Acadeudc School. At the present time the Academic School and Vocational School remain separate, each with a separate supervisor. These supervisors remain in charge of each facility under the responsibility of the Director of Treatment. (54:5) More and better hformation about this group can result in its better being served by the program. Societal reactions to crime are expressed through our penal systems. It seems only logical that if the causes of deviancy were known, they would be reflected in the procedures used for reformation 1Personal interviews during 1964 and 1965 with Dr. Ernest Shelley, Treatment Supervisor, Corrections Department, State of Michigan; Mr. Gerald Hanson, Director of Treatment at State Prison of Southern Michigan and Mr. Alan Krishche, Supervisor of the Aca- demic School, State Prison of Southern Michigan have provided much knowledge and insight to the problems that must be dealt with in a penal situation. 12 and penal practice. If a crime is committed by someone with relat- ively low intelligence dur partly to lack of formal schooling, then the natural task of the penal institution is to educate and train him so that he can earn his living by some trade, increase his scope of knowledge and not make the same mistake again. If the dominant criminological theory of the time is psychiatrically oriented, then it may be necessary to analyze the personality of the deviant and develop a treatment program that will restore him to normalcy. If a sociological explanation is accepted, then the deviant must go through a process of relearning; he must leave behind the ways of crime and make an adjustment to the normal lawabiding society. Either theory emphasizes the needs of a program of adult education that will meet the individual needs and differences of the inmates. Penal practice can be seen as a continuum from punishment through treatment. Punishment suggests that there is intentional infliction of pain by the corporate group of which the individual is a member. It is assumed that the administration of pain will pro- duce some good on the part of the offender and restore the balance upset by the crime to the social system. When a philosophy of treat- ment is established, the offender is looked upon as someone who is ill and in need of a considerable amount of help and attention. We cannot punish him for being sick; all we can do is facilitate his recovery. In modern penological practice, the trend is in the treat- ment direction. For some inmates, the mere condition of being con- fined to the prison community is punishment enough. (22:95) 13 Edwin Sutherland and Donald Cressey suggest three general prob- lems in the area of crime control and related punitive policies. (68:254-255) First, there is a problem of efficiency; can crime be better controlled through the use of punitive policies, or by treat- ment method? A reduction in the crime rate is one indication of efficiency of the system. This may be expressed by fewer people com— mitting crimes and a lower rate of recidivism. Second, there is the problem of relating correction methods to our existing store of knowledge about crime causation. Society may be unwilling to implement a given method because it is inconsist- ent with cultural values and expectations. Today a human life has considerable value placed upon it. Our penal goals in most modern institutions are rehabilitation and treatment, rather than the in- tentional infliction of suffering, hardship or pain. This is a re- flection of our advanced culture with a relatively high standard of living. Prisons are extremely expensive institutions to operate; it would be much more efficient, financially, to have a mandatory death sentence for offenses, rather than sentence an individual to a term in prison. However, this is not in keeping with the values that our states have incorporated into their criminal codes. Third, we have a problem of variations in punitive policies and methods of crime control. The reasons for this may be found by examination of the moral standards of different societies, their degree of cultural and economic development and the nature and severity of the crime itself. l4 Imprisonment is almost a universal form of punishment imposed upon felons inthe United States today. (68:292) It is hoped that while the individual is confined to the correctional institution, he will benefit from the program of reformation. ‘With the increasing trend toward treatment, the inmate is examined in terms of his in- dividual needs, with a program designed to help satisfy those needs and return him to society as quickly as possible. However, the penal institutions have a multitude of functions, with their major respons- ibility being to protect society from its convicted criminals. Be- cause of this, the treatment process sometimes must take a back seat to maintenance of security, custody, and discipline within prison walls. A logical question that we may ask ourselves concerns the ef- fectiveness of the treatment process and eventual rehabilitation within the prison environment. It must be remembered that prison represents a very special kind of social system. The population being comprised of convicted felons, it may be assumed that because of constant social interaction, their deviant habits and patterns of behavior will be actually reinforced. (22:99) After all, if men of any profession are together, they usually discuss topics related to their trade; criminals most likely will talk about the techniques of crime. Growing out of this concern, many of the modern institutions have developed classification systems. Individuals are selected on the basis of a given set of criteria to be placed in the institution which will be of greatest benefit to them. Perhaps the central 15 determinant is age. Most correction divisions do not want to sub- ject the youthful offender to the habitual criminal. To help solve this problem, many separate units have been established. .An example of the types of correctional facilities for the youthful offenders are reformatories, training camps, farms and trade schools with a maximum age set for admission. The emotional and mental stability of the inmate is also of major concern. We do not want to introduce psychotics, who need a special kind of treatment, to the general prison population. For this reason most states maintain a separate hospital for the criminally insane. The amount of custody and security that an inmate requires is also an important consideration. There are essentially three levels of security maintained: maximum, medium and minimum. The maximum security institution typically contains a high restraining wall, with several guard towers, surrounding the cell block area. This type of institution is usually the largest of the three types. The inmates are more confined with much time to idle away. State Prison of South- ern Michigan at Jackson is an institution of this kind. Within the maximum security institution, two penal philosoph- ies have emerged in the United States, the Pennsylvania System and the Auburn System. (68:450). Believing that the close association of convicted criminals was destructive to the goal of reformation, the Pennsylvania prison authorities adopted a policy of solitary con- finement for all inmates. The prisoners were left alone in their cells to reflect upon their misdeeds and repent. Proving impractical, 16 this system was abolished in 1913 after being in practice for over one hundred years. The Auburn System provided work for the inmates during the day and placed them in solitary confinement at night. This most closely resembles the industrial penal institution of today. Be— cause of the expense of prison Operations, it proved to be impracti- cal to keep men capable of work idle. The same philosophy now applies to the idle hours not spent working in the many prison in- dustries. Formal and informal adult activities must be provided for this time. It appears that there is one factor held relatively constant in the studies of crimes, the factor of individual differences. All criminological theories can explain some crimes, but no theory can explain all crime. Only two centuries ago, criminals were subjected to the most ' horrible of prison conditions and tortures. Sutherland accounts for this reaction by stating: The practices occurred in a culture in which the means of pre- venting pain were not well developed. Today, safeguards against physical suffering have been provided in other fields; a policy of physical torture of criminals cannot be harmon— ized with the general interest in the reduction of suffering and the reaction toward crime is away from the strictly puni- tive. (68:298) In the United States today we have a society which believes that even the most serious disorders can be cured. Growing out of this trend toward individualized treatment has emerged our most modern in- stitutions. It is believed by many clinicians that if an inmate is to 17 benefit from his experience in prison, a program must be developed for him in accordance with his needs. What has been done in effect has been to eliminate the general category of "criminal” in favor of more descriptive, less embracing terms. With this most recent philosophy in mind, clinicians believe that individualized treatment needed to benefit inmates exists in many and various forms. This paper is concerned with the educational aspects of treatment. Because of the age of the individuals confined to the maximum security institution used in this study, the educa- tional treatment will be referred to as adult education. To further limit the scope of this study, only adult education provided by the Academic School at State Prison of Southern Michigan will be considered adult education. .Any inmate who has participated in any other adult education programs will not be considered part of this study, either as a participator or non-participator. In conclusion, it is contended that this group is of sufficient size and importance to make this study worthwhile even though it is a specialized group and conclusions reached about it cannot be gener— alized to include all adult education participators everywhere. Basic.Assumptions of this Study l. The sixteen personality factors described in the Sixteen Personality FactorsyQuestionnaire comprise meaningful classification of personality factors. 2. The Sixteen Personality Factors Questionnaire when properly used measure the stated elements of personality. 18 3. Participators responded truthfully to the questions on the Sixteen Personality Factors Questionnaire. 4. Non-participators responded truthfully to the questions on the Sixteen Personality Factors Questionnaire. 5. The groups studied are an important segment of the adult population. 6. Results of the Sixteen Personality Factors Questionnaire and "Adult Education Data Survey" can be used to improve adult ed— ucation progranm and encourage greater participation. Limitations of this Study This is an attempt to measure the personality factors of a group of inmates in State Prison of Southern Michigan at Jackson who have participated in adult programs and activities offered at the prison and the personality factors of a similar group of inmates that have not participated in any adult programs at the prison or elsewhere. An HAdult Education Data Survey" was administered to each in- mate in order to gather data that will be considered as non-person- ality factors. It is recognized that this method of gathering infor- mation is vulnerable in certain ways. 1. Some men may falsify answers because they do not feel sure of the anonymity of their responses. 2. Participators may be more willing to assist in the study and therefore may provide answers they feel are desired, even if not completely true. l9 3. Some may participate in order to get out of doing some— thing else and not answer what they really feel. 4. Some may be indifferent and give answers that may be ex—— treme and not completely accurate. 5. Some may not participate because they do not want to be bothered. Their absence from the study may create a bias on the basis of their non-participation. 6. This is an attitudinal study in part and as such probably less dependable than a factual study. 7. The degree of inaccuracy cannot be fully measured. Some limited estimation will be attempted in the statistical analysis. Hypotheses In formulating hypotheses for this study, the researcher was motivated by the following considerations: 1. Knowledge of the personality factors of any group of par- ticipators in adult education programs will help in improving that portion of adult education. 2. Knowledge of the personality factors of a group of non- participators who are similar to the participators will help in devising methods to attract and provide proper educational opportun— ities for the non-participator. 3. A comparison of the personality factors of the two groups will make the personality factor measure of each more meaningful. 4. Knowledge of certain non-personality factors of the two groups measured with comparisons to each other and to personality factors will make more meaningful the personality factors. 20 The hypothesis are as follows: 1. There are statistically significant differences between personality factors of the selected participators and the person— ality factors of the non-participators as measured by the Sixteen Personality Factors Questionnaire by Cattell, Saunders and Stice. 2. The participants and non—participants as selected will not be significantly different statistically in non-personality factors as measured by the Data Information Sheet. Importance of this Study This study is an attempt to add to participator studies these heretofore neglected factors. It is designed to examine personality factors of a certain population and relate this information to adult education programs. The area delineated for observation is necessar- ily limited, but it is hoped it will point the way for similar studies to continue until a body of knowledge has been assembled that will put adult education on a firmer scientific basis than it now enjoys. Adult education has grown so fast in recent years that adult educators have been busy merely trying to satisfy insistent demands. The satisfaction of those demands has been on a trial and error basis. Those who clamor the loudest for attention have generally been the groups that have been accommodated and little attempt has been made to consider out-groups. It is quite possible that institution- alized adult education programs, such as the one at State Prison of Southern Michigan, have been serving a limited group of students and have been unable to reach successfully large groups of potential stu- dents. This is inadequate education. 21 Appraisals of adults taken with a view of increasing the ef- fectiveness and services of adult education programs have largely been limited to the measuring of only the participators and the measuring of factual and descriptive features. However easy and use- ful this has been in the past, it is not sufficient because it has neglected the non-participators who are harder to reach and neglected the important personality factors on which so much human direction depends, for both the non-participators who are harder to reach and neglected the important personality factors on which so much human direction depends, for both the non-participator and the participator. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE This chapter will first review certain writings which discuss theories and studies of personality, in particular the personality of adults. Second is presented a discussion of literature pertain- ing to adult participation in group activities, with emphasis on personality factors in relation to participation. Comments concern- ing the present state of personality testing peculiar to adults are included wherever pertinent. Considerations of Adult Personality For the purposes of this paper a working definition of per- sonality is taken to be those characteristics which are measured on the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. The differences be- tween the two selected groups, measured by this instrument, are the main concern of this paper. As background to comparison of these measurements a few references to personality in general and to per— sonality measurement in particular are included. James S. Plant wrote that in the nineteenth century people were considered on the basis of their accomplishments and, therfore a person's acts tended to be equated with his personality. Later the person involved in the act received greater emphasis, and so 22 23 personality came to be regarded as a person behaving. Finally, he believed, each person and his behavior came to be thought of as part of a cultural pattern and so personality, without an understanding of the cultural whole, was meaningless. (55:1-25) Personality must be regarded as a person behaving in his culture. The words used to describe the elements of personality vary with the authors. Plant uses alertness, complexity, pliability, temperament and cadence as well as attitudes towardsecurity, reality, and authority, and with all the relationships between these and the outer world. Leonard V. Gordan lists only ascendancy, responsibility, emotional stability and sociability. (35:2) David C. McClelland dis— cusses trait (expressive performance) as a personality variable, schema (ideas, value, roles) as a personality variable, motive as a personality variable, and the personality as an integration of all these things. (51:XI) McClelland is comprehensive when he writes, "to do the job (describe personality) well requires a knowledge of all present day psychology." (51:XI) Raymond B. Cattell uses the sixteen factors in the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire, treating these factors as the final product of an evolution. He emphasizes the difficulties of personality measurement: Although the ideal in personality measurement, as in ability measurement, is to deal with functionally unitary traits, there are as yet extremely few personality factor scales available. The clinical, educational or industrial psychologist who is ready for the sophisticated and ef- fective diagnosis and prediction which the use of factors . . . makes possible, finds available only a few instru- ments of objective factor measurement and three or four questionnaires. (17:206) 24 Cattell in this article explains the validation factor analy- sis and research basis that makes the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire a suitable measure of adult personaity. Anne Anastasi writes: A phase of psychological testing which is still in its in- fancy is represented by the various efforts to measure non- intellectual aspects of behavior. Tests designed for this purpose are commonly known as "personality tests." (2:16) She goes on to say: For the present, it will suffice to point out that person- ality testing lags far behind aptitude testing in its pos— itive accomplishments. Nor is such lack of progress to be attributed to insufficient effort. Research on the measure- ment of personality has reached vast proportions during the last decade, and many ingenuous devices and technical improve- ments are under investigation. It is rather the special dif— ficulties encountered in the measurement of personality that account for the slow advances in this area. (2:16) Because the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire used in this study includes intelligence as a factor, and because evidence to be presented later indicates there may be statistically significant differences between participators and non-participators in this area, observations on adult intelligence are in order. Whether intelligence is a proper subject for study in the area of personality is not fully agreed upon by psychologists. Cattell in his earlier accounts of his Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire refers to fifteen personality factors and intelligence. In later writings he makes no differentiation and none shall be made in this paper. 25 Much more research has been devoted to intelligence than to the assessment of personality but as David Wechsler points out, not much research has been carried on with the intelligence of adults. He wrote: Although the earliest investigations in the field of psy- chometrics were made largely with adult subjects, the great bulk of test data which now forms the basis of intelligence scales has been derived from the examination of school child— ren . . . If we inquire why Binet and other children’s scales have continued to be used for the testing of adults, in spite of the criticism that has been leveled against the practice, the answer is not hard to find. No better instruments were on hand. (77:13) Wechsler speaks about the predominance of research and the em- phasis on the use of children in these intelligence evaluation studies. His research in the evaluation of adult intelligence is widely known. The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale is one of the most widely used in the measurement of adult intelligence. However, the emphasis is on children and the research with adults has been limited. Wechsler emphasized the lack of suitable materials and the stress that current intelligence measures place on speed. (77:3) The situation with respect to intelligence testing of adults may have improved in recent years but still leaves much to be desired. Edmund Brunner is emphatic in his appraisal of present-day methods of the evaluation of adult intelligence. He believes measurement of adult intelligence is complicated beyond what has commonly been believed and that the extended use of any tests in use today would be nonproductive. He is in agreement with Plant of thirty-five years ago in emphasizing the importance of environment and the cultural aspects of intelligence. (10:24) 26 Sidney L. Pressey wrote, in considering fluctuations in intel- ligence: As measured by typical group intelligence, mental ability grows rapidly during childhood and adolescence, reaching a peak somewhere during the late teens or early twenties. Ac- cording to the tests a gradual decline begins soon thereafter and by the age of fifty-five ability has receded to about the fourteen year level . . . . These data suggest that either ability does not begin to decline as soon as tests indicate, or that accumulation of knowledge and experience, and maturing of judgment more than compensate for the first decline. Both tests and accomplishment indicate a definite decline after sixty. But individual differences are great. (57:213) The changes with age in their personality factors as well as in intelligence have been considered by several psychologists. Raymond Cattell indicates: The writer's former contention that the greatest part of the variance in the personality sphere can be accounted for by twelve factors, that these factors are stable over adult ranges and that they have the specific characteristics pre- viously described is, therefore, sufficiently confirmed. (14:217) He also wrote: Although the period now to be examined, say from to 20 to 50 or 55 is chronologically the longest, it is in most ways the least eventful in regard to personality change . . . . As with adolescence we shall find the issue best handled sys- tematically by considering on the one hand, the inner bio- logical maturation and changes and on the other, the environ- mental stimuli and poses of possible expression, finally re- viewing the interaction of these. (16:610) He goes on to say: That the period of maturity results in a certain narrowing of interests and at length in a lack of spontaneity and a separation from unconscious needs, evident in some feeling of emptiness and dissatisfaction, has been discussed at length by Jung; but how prevalent this is and what its exact nature may be, is not known in terms of objective psychology. (16:616) 27 E. Lowell Kelly has carried on a longitudinal study designed to reveal the stability of personality. Personality factors measured were physical energy, intelligence, voice quality, neatness of dress, breadth of interest,conventionality, quietness, kind of temper, modesty and dependability. The subjects were three hundred engaged couples. The span of study was twenty years. The findings were not conclusive but are stated thusly: We found evidence for considerable change in all variables measured. These changes were shown to be relatively specific rather than reflecting any overall tendency to change. While measurable changes occurred on most variables, it appears that correlates of these changes are many and elusive and hence, changes in scores are likely to be difficult to predict for individuals. (44:630) Kelly did offer some evidence of consistency of variables in spite of fallible tools and a time span of twenty years. He concluded his report by saying: Such changes, while neither so large nor sudden as to threaten the continuity of the self—concept or to impair one's day-to-day interpersonal relations are potentially of sufficient magnitude to offer a basis of fact for those who dare hope for continued psychological growth during adult years. (44:681) He also comments: In view of the considerable evidence for the general con- sistency of 1.0. during developmental periods and as reported by Owens and Bayley and Oden for adult groups. It is likely that intelligence would have appeared at the top of this chart. (44:675) Herbert Sorenson may have been right when he observed on the subject of age and ability: In general then, abilities that are used throughout adult experiences tend to increase with age, while abilities required 28 by situations that do not come under the scope of adult ex- perience show a definite decline over a range of adult years. (66:181) Another point is offered by Anastasi: Thus if we are interested in the effect of age upon test scores, we need groups which vary systematically in age while being as uniform as possible in otherrelevant variables. For example, owning to the increasing educational level of the U.S. population during the past few decades, older persons living today have less education, on the average, than younger adults. (2:509) A summation of the literature on adult personality may be of- fered by Edward Runquist, who said: "While the importance of person— ality factors in occupational success have been uniformly emphasized, attempts to measure these factors have by and large failed." (58:183) Considerations of Adult Participation in Education Programs Harold J. Dillon comments: Community adult education programs need to be predicated upon the needs of those who are to be served. As dropouts and graduates feed the demand for additional formal training as a result of job demands, they will be in a more receptive mood to benefit by evening courses. Motivation -- the thing which many of them lacked while in school -- is now supplied and education takes on new meaning. (26) E.L. Thorndike reflects on adult education in this way: Age, in itself, is a minor factor in either success or failure. Capacity, interest, energy and time are the es- sentials . . . . In general, nobody under 45 should restrain himself from trying to learn anything because of a belief or fear that he is too old to be able to learn it. Nor should he use that fear as an excuse for not learning anything which he ought to learn. If he fails in learning it, inability due to age will very rarely, if ever, be the reason. The reason will commonly be one of more of these: He lacks and always has lacked the capacity to learn that particular thing. His desire to learn is not strong enough to cause him to give proper attention to it. The ways and means which he adopts are inadequate. and would have been so at any age, to teach 29 him that thing. He has habits or ideas or other tendencies which interfere with the new acquisition and which he is un- able to alter. In that last case, mere age may have some influence. (70:274) The inability—to-learn myth exploded by Thorndike removes a hurdle confronted by all who work with adults. With the removal of difficulties in the path of learning then, they must look into other areas that pertain to adult education. Coolie Verner and John Newberry have stated that: "The nature of participation in organized adult education has been studied less thoroughly than any other aspect." (75:28) Brunner and his assoc— iates comment on the "paucity and limited scope of research on par— ticipation in adult education." (10:98) They also contend that there have been two basic approaches in the study of participation: The approaches are stated as: 1. Study of the characteristics of participants in parti- cular institutions or types of institutional programs, and 2. Sample of a population or area to determine differences between participants and non-participants in various types of adult education--Most of these studies are descriptive. (10:90) That is to say, the emphasis has been placed on the description of participators in existing studies and characteristics of non-par- ticipators have been inferred but not measured. The adult education survey undertaken by the Los Angeles City School District is a good example of a descriptive study. The study reveals that participants in the city program were born in eight or nine different countries, ranged in age from eighteen to sixty-nine years, with the largest percentage in the thirties. Forty-one and a 30 half percent were male and fifty-eight and a half percent female. Sixty-three percent were married and sixty—eight percent attended college. The total questionnaire included similar statistics in these areas: citizenship voting status number of years in California ownership of home personal property tax children in school distance from home to school method of transportation reasons for attending adult school opinions on improving theadult school experience rating of adult school classes attitude toward tuition for adult school attitude toward taxation for adult school annual family income employment status (48) There is no attempt to measure the non-participants in the dis- trict. There is no reference to figures descriptive of the population as a whole in some of the listed classifications. To an adult educa— tion worker these figures are interesting and to the school people they could be useful, but there is much to be done before this report could be considered complete. A descriptive study of characteristics of adult participants completed by Verner and Newberry uses five headings: sex age education level economic status occupational group (75:213) This study has two important improvements over the aforemen- tioned studycf Los Angeles: figures in each category for the general population are also presented and the adult education program is divided into several subgroups: 31 public schools junior college university extension private correspondence Great Books home demonstration (75:213) The general population figures include both the participators and non—participators and consequently comparisons are between par- ticipator and general population and not between participator and non-participator. If meaningful results are to be obtained, the subdivisions of adult education are of great importance. In this study the partici- pation rate for professional people ranges from approximately six percent in the public school program to fifty-five percent in the university extension programs. The rate of participation in private correspondence studies ranges from seven percent for professionals to almost twenty percent for the white collar worker. To combine the various phases of adult education and produce one figure would be quite meaningless. To combine various classifications of people and produce one figure for the whole range of participators would be of very limited value. (75:213) George Baxter Smith's study on the characteristics of adults participating in adult education activities, compares those adults who completed home study courses at Columbia University with those adults who enrolled in the home study courses but did not complete the course or courses. Smith discovers what appears to have been discovered several times—-the tendency is for those who have the 32 highest amount of regular education to enroll and complete the pro— gram. He shows evidence that those adults with vocationally oriented goals are also more apt to enroll and complete adult education home courses. When classified according to age,adults beyond forty years of age complete more courses than younger people. This study makes no attempt to examine other personality or psychological factors. (65) A study by.Abraham Kaplan of socio—economic relationships is another attempt to investigate participation of adults in adult educa- tion activities. This is not an attempt to measure personality factors, but a study of certain non—personality characteristics. He wrote: In general, residents of areas of higher socio-economic status participated to a greater degree and in a larger number of educational activities than residents of lower status areas. (42:114) High rank correlations were obtained between amount of educa- tion and extent of participation as well as between economic status and participation. There did not appear to be a very high correlation between place of birth (native or foreign-born) and participation. Regarding attitude Kaplan comments: . . . it was apparent that there were many persons whocfid not participate because of a feeling of 'not belonging', or not feeling welcome, or because of a conviction that their partic- ular problems were not being considered or would not be given a favorable hearing. (42:68) Another noteworthy descriptive study of participation in adult education activities is that of John Holden. (40) This study was completed in collaboration with the Bureau of Census and the United States Department of Education. It was designed primarily to find: 33 the nature of the participation the number of participants characteristics as to age characteristics as to previous education characteristics as to occupation This survey estimates that in 1957 eight million persons en— rolled in adult education programs. It was found that the types of activities having the greatest enrollment were trade, business, and technical classes. These accounted for nearly one-third of the total. The next largest groups were general education classes and civic and public affairs classes. Home and family living and recreational skills classes followed in that order. Measure of alimited number of characteristics of adult par- ticipation revealed the following: Over forty percent of the par- ticipators were aged thirty to forty-five. The retired group, aged sixty to seventy-five, managed a participation rate of only two and eight-tenths percent. As to education, the percentage of the total population participating increased directly as formal school attain- ment increased. The functionally illiterates had one and a half per— cent participation, while twenty-five percent of those involved had completed one or more years of college. Finally, classification of occupation showed that professional technical groups and clerical sales groups led the list of participators while farmers, farm managers and laborers trailed. (40:271) Some comments on this survey should be made. Holden states that it is a start in the direction of developing a scientific measure of the adult education population. It certainly suggests a limited and selected participation. No attempts have been made to examine 34 psychological or personality characteristics except what may be de- duced from some of the categories established. He concludes his article with the following: If adult education is to help meet the challenge of the pres- ent and foreseeable future, we should have more complete statistics on adult education on the local, state and national levels classified by personal, socia1,economic factors which might be made available only through the decennial census. (40:270) George M. Beal stresses the inadequacy of mere measurement of age, class and income categories, the usual considerations in studies of participation. He suggests more attention to "dynamic factors." By this he refers to a student's participation in group decision- making and to his attitudes of responsibility toward group actions and group values. (7:249) E. J. Brown thought that differential formal participation patterns in rural communities are associated with: positions in the community social structure ecological factors and means of communications self images . varying other images of the community (9) 4?me 0 Roy Buck and Louis Ploch approached the subject ofadult social participation by considering changes in participation of a rural Pen- nsylvania community over a period from 1937 to 1949. Interesting results include the finding that heads of households tended to par- ticipate more in the latter years. This was accompanied by an in- crease in the mean socio-economic status of all household heads during this period, and so agrees with the socio-economic findings of other research. It was found that younger rather than older age was 35 associated with participation. During the survey years, church af— filiation was found to be related to participation. .And lastly, both short and long term residence in the community were related to low participation, but this was more pronounced at the conclusion than at the initiation of the study. (11:29) A study by Harold Kaufman of participation in group activities in Kentucky may be of value only in Kentucky. However, this study appears to confirm other research and offers no new broad generaliza- tions. He finds a great difference in participation rate among various socio-economic classes. Finally, he finds a concentration of leadership among those with a high rate of participation. (43) W} A. Anderson in the first part of his study describes research related to rural social participation and the family life cycle. Each of the six stages into which he divided the family life cycle showed a different mode of social participation. (4:52) His study was limited to a description of non-personality characteristics and yielded es- sentially the same conclusions so often found in participation studies. For example, owner husbands and wives participate more than tenant- laborer husband and wives. Income increases in the post-child-care years, and so does participation, but this study does not suggest a causal relationship. (4:52) Anderson made a second study on thesame subject in another part of the state of New Ybrk which verified the findings of the first. (5) 36 Marvin Stitts completed a similar study with women in adult education classes. He made a comparison of participators and non- participators by having each participator bring a friend to her home, and interviewing both the women. He asked forty questions and used a personality questionnaire in order to gather data about both personality and non-personality factors. This process was time-con- suming, since he used a population of two hundred women. The time taken to complete each interview amounted to approximately one hour. All the women who were considered participants had completed a series of three consecutive courses in sewing offered by the Flint, Michigan adult education program. He was interested in both personality and non-personality differences between the participatorand non-partici— pators of the program. (64) His findings indicated the participants were brighter and more agressive as well as had larger incomes than the non-participants. (64) William.Mather and his staff made a door-to-door canvas of 385 households in Franklin, Indiana to determine the organizational af— filiation of the adult section of the population and relate it to income. (50:382) He concluded that: The implications of these findings are not pleasant for the lover of democracy . . . . These findings indicate that 65 percent of the 6,264 people living in this tyrfical farmers' town are rather completely dominated in their recreation, politics, religion, patriotism, culture--every phase of their organized living--by the remaining 35 percent. (50:382) The thirty-five percent were of the higher income groups. 37 In a comparison of social intelligence with abstract intel- ligence, F. Stuart Chapin wrote the following: We concluded that a measure of over social participation in the organized groups and institutions of the community is itself a rough measure of social intelligence and may be a useful supplement to the existing scales of social intelligence which depends on the measurement of attitude and feeling, rather than upon observable total overt behavior. (21:165) In regard to participation, A. H. Scaff says: Without any conscious effort to be exclusive, the organi- zations in the community are highly selective of the educa- tional and professional groups. High participation scores are thus made by these groups: the lowest participation scores by the poorer educated and employees in industry. (60:220) In a study of social participation John Foskett used 265 adults and a scale measuring overt behavior such as voting in elections; discussion of educational, governmental, and civic affairs with mem- bers of one's family, friends, and officials; and membership in or— ganizations. (32:432) He concluded: That to attribute participation as measured here directly to the effect of education, income or age, or even a combin- ation of these items, would be too easy an explanation. It is generally recognized that traits such as these considered do not operate directly but are part of a wider complex of circumstances . . . . One possible approach would be to draw upon role behavior theory as a theoretical framework for analysis. The basic proposition in role behavior theory is that social behavior is primarily learned behavior and is a function of the position the individual occupies in the social system. (32:437) In an attempt to determine the extent of participation of Americans in voluntary associations and relate this to certain other characteristics, John Scott made the following statements: 38 The ideal voluntary association member in this community might be characterized as a forty-five year old married man who is Protestant, a non-manual worker and possibly the son of native born parents; who has two children, a college ed- ucation fifty or more "friends," his own home which is no more than the third house in which he has lived since he came to the community eleven years ago; and who participates as a member only in a fraternal association, which he attends ap- proximately twice a month, which costshim twenty-three dollars a year and of which he has been a member for ten years. (61:325) Wendell Bell and Maryanne Force studied participation in for— mal associations in San Francisco. They concluded that education and socio-economic position relate to participation. They found a lack of correlation between the role of the individual in the family and participation. They discovered that participation increased with age in high income groups, but not in lower income groups. (8:33) William Evan wrote that three things should be considered in a study of participation: 1. decision making by the rank and file 2. activity of the rank and file 3. value commitment, or acceptance of goals and values of the group, by the rank and file He felt that enough has been done with studies that deal with familiar social categories of class, religion, nativity, sex, and age, and more should be done with "why" and "what" of it. (30) In a study of participation and old age, Taietz and Larson made these conclusions: 1. Low socio-economic status and retirement combine to produce low participation in formal organizations among aged male household heads in rural communities. 2. Retirement produces a change in the pattern of parti- cipation through a shift in emphasis from occupation oriented activities to activities which provide sociability and face- to-face group satisfactions. 39 3. Advanced age brings about less of a reduction in par- ticipation than either low socio-economic status or retire- ment. (69:229) Hester Chadderdion and Mary Lyle investigated reasons given by Iowa women for attending homemaking classes for adults. In a questionnaire completed by the women, reasons given for attending adult classes included a strong desire for new ideas and skills which would help the women directly in their problems, especiaDy in the home. A common reason for attending was adesire to help the adult education program by attending classes. Women giving this reason preferred to take a passive part rather than an active part in the class. (20) The only study found which was planned to show relationships between participation and personality factors is by Herbert Goldhamer. (34) This study relates age and education with participation. In a portion of the study, he relates neuroticism as measured by the Thurstone Inventory to these other factors. His conclusions include: 1. Thirty percent of the men and forty percent of the women responding listed no affiliations at all. 2. Age and associational participation were inversely re- lated in the early years of the age range studied and directly related in the latter years. 3. Participation in voluntary associations varied directly with education for adults. 4. Membership frequency varied inversely with total neurotic score. The study is of interest because it considers participation in some depth. The questionnaire not only asked whether or not the respondent joined an organized group, but also asked about his 40 frequency of attending, position of responsibility, financial con- tributions and the nature of the group. A list of non-personality factors which Goldhamer proposes as relevant to this type of study, but which he felt he could not include in his one-page questionnaire, parallels the non-personality factors examined in this study. Literature that is related directly to measurement of person- ality factors of adults participating in adult education courses is limited in quantity. The majority of studies of adult participators have dealt with factors which are termed in this paper as non—per- sonality factors. They have agreed, with few exceptions, that a typical participator is a somewhat older person, but not retired; he is in the higher socio-economic level; he has a broad partici- pation pattern; and is better educated than the non-participator. Several of the authors quoted have advocated measurements of personality traits and a more careful study of relationships among all personality factors, non-personality factors, and cultural and environmental factors in general. This is seen to be a logical devel- Opment, but complicated. It is not surprising that almost nothing has been done in an effort to measure these qualities in participators in adult education projects. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire A questionnaire suitable for measuring the personality factors of a group of adults who had enrolled in a specified adult education program as well as those of a similar group who were not enrolled had to meet certain requirements. It had to be of sufficient length to cover an acceptable range of personality areas, but it also had to be brief enough to be administered in the relatively short period that the subjects would be able to spend in theirinvolvement in the research. It had to be accompanied by sufficient descriptive material to enable the investigator to judge its reliability, validity, and general design. The questionnaire had to be suitable for adults, and in particular for the non-college men who were expected to make up a great majority of the population. Of the questionnaires examined, the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire seemed best for use in this study for several reasons. First, the division of personality into sixteen factors seemed to cover the area more fully than would fewer divisions. Cattell wrote in 1957: The busy psychometrist may sometimes feel that sixteen sub- scores is a lot, but if such is the real complexity of human nature, and if, as studies show, the majority of these per- sonality characteristics are involved in most criterion pre- dictions, a much better multiple correlation is to be obtained 41 42 by respecting the complexity than by indulging in a fool's paradise of over simplification. (18:10) Furthermore, "intelligence” is omitted as a personality factor in other questionnaires studied evidently because there are much better measuring instruments for intelligence than can be provided by a small section of one questionnaire. This is, however, a serious omission for the purposes of this research, since it was impractical to use a separate intelligence test. Apart from intelligence, the fifteen factors in the Cattell questionnaire cover a wide field. It may have been of greater advantage if they had been grouped in some order. However, this fact does not detract from the value of the factors. (1:2) But as an indication of the comparative intelligence level of two specific groups, it is adequate, granting an author's claimed reliability of .86 and a validity of .80 or .93 depending on the method of figuring. (18:3) There is some question, both by.Anastasi and by those with whom the researcher has discussed the test, as to the suitability of the language used in describing personality char— acteristics. This difficulty was greater in early editions of the Handbook for the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. Cattell writes that he has used: . . . the technical names used by the professional psycholog— ist based on the discussion of scientific meaning of the fact- ors . . . e.g., cyclothmia—vs.—schizothymia, for Factor A; ego strength-vs.-neuroticism for Factor C; and simpler descriptive labels for use in communicating with the lay public, e.g., warm, outgoing-vs.-stiff, aloof, for Factor A; and the stable, mature—vs.-emotional, ill-balanced for Factor C. (18:2) Another favorable group of features of the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire is associated with the questions themselves. First, there is a comparatively large number of questions. They 43 appear to apply better to the group of men under study since there are few questions that would invite the response, "These do not have anything to do with me." And finally, the language used is within the reading comprehension level of the inmates. The reading level of the inmates, determined by the Metropolitan Achievement Test and individual evaluation by the academic school personnel, is suitable for completion of the questionnaire by most of the inmate population. This information was provided by the supervisor of the Academic School. Anastasi feels that Cattell's questionnaire is not well sup- ported by the accompanying handbook and that some of the trait names and other terms are unclear. (2:540-1) She made these observations in 1954. Since 1954 an article by Cattell, published in the Journal of Clinical Psychology (17:205—14) and a revised handbook for the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire, would make less applicable her criticism. (18:11) Finally, a group of miscellaneous desirable features of Cattell's questionnaire include an estimated time of forty minutes for adminis- tering, which was believed right in light of methods to be followed. Age corrections are available if desired. Although no built—in lie detector is provided in Froqu, it was expected that enough rapport could be established with subjects to minimize tendencies to lie or give random answers. The personality factors considered in Cattell's questionnaire are shown in Table 1. 44 Table l. Continuum representation of personality factors (18:11-19) Factor Continuum Aloof, riding..............Easy-going, sociable Dull, low capacity.........Bright, intelligent Emotional, unstable........Mature, calm Submissive, mild...........Dominant, aggressive Glum, silent...............Enthusiastic, talkative Casual, undependable.......Conscientious, persistent Timid, shy.................Adventurous, "thick skinned" Tough, realistic...........Sensitive, effeminate Trustful, adaptable........Suspecting, jealous Conventional, practical....Imaginative, creative Simple, awkward............Sophisticated,polished Confident, unshakable......Insecure, anxious Conservative, accepting....Experimenting, critical Dependent, imitative.......Self-sufficient, resourceful Lax, unsure................Controlled, exact Phlegmatic, composed.......Tense, excitable OOOOOZKHHmOmmOw> .P'OQNI-J On page 110 of the appendix is a copy of the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire used in this study. The Adult Education Data Survey The second instrument used was a fact sheet and questionnaire designed by this researcher to reveal a number of non-personality facts as well as the past record of adult activities of the groups examined. In the development of this "Adult Education Data Survey," the Department of Educational Research of the College of Education, Michi- gan State University was consulted. With the assistance of a consult- ant, Sarah Hervey, the researcher produced what was felt to be a series of items that would provide the necessary information needed to compare the two groups in the best possible manner. 45 The questions on the sheet could be grouped under the fol- lowing headings. The numbers appearing under the headings are the numbers of the questions on the "Adult Education Data Survey" which pertain to the heading. Age 13 Familiarity with adult program 12529 Extent of participation in adult programs 2, 6, 10 Extent of participation in social activities 3, 7, 11, 29-32 Education l8, 19 Health 26 Religion 33, 34 Political activity 35, 56 Family 20, 21, 22 Service record 27, 28 Prison record 14, 15, l6, 17 Mobility 23, 24, 25 Attitude toward adult education programs 4, 8, 12 The data survey sheet was used to establish the extent of sim- ilarities or differences between the participating and non-participat- ing groups in non-personality areas, since the hypothesis had been put forward that the two groups would show more similarities in these areas than in personality factors. Also it seemed reasonable that a know- ledge of such areas would make more understanding any personality dif- ferences. 46 The Sample The sample was obtained from the general populatiaiof inmates confined behind the walls of the State Prison of Southern Michigan. Permission was granted by the Director of Treatment of the institution to select inmates from the cell blocks. The researcher and an inmate assistant selected inmates on the basis of their willingness to par- ticipate. Of the inmates approached for consideration, over ninety percent were willing to participate. Two cell blocks were solicited in order to obtain the number of inmates necessary for the proper size sample group. Due to the difficulties of approaching the inmates a second time, all inmates were asked to complete the information on the “Adult Education Data Survey" and then to proceed with the Sixteen Person- ality Factor Questionnaire. The inmates are confined to their cells between the period of six o'clock and nine o’clock in the evening. They were asked to complete both sets of questions during this time. In several cases, approximately ten percent, the inmates asked for more time. In these situations the questionnaires were collected within the next three days. Two hundred and fifty inmates were selected as participants in the study. Two hundred and twenty-two returned the completed answer sheets and questionnaire. Of those returned two hundred and seven were considered complete and useful for the selection of the sample group. Inmates who responded positively to question one, "Are you attending any adult education activities or classes now or have you attended any during the last year?" were considered participants. Inmates who responded negatively to question one and negatively to 47 question five, "Have you attended any other adult activities or classes in the last five years?" were considered non-participants. Inmates who were not now attending adult classes but who had attended any such activities, in the prison or elsewhere, during the past five years were eliminated from the study. The survey of inmates producedtinety-one non-participators and ninety-seven participators. In order to obtain matched pairs of in- mates information from the "Adult Education Data Survey" was used. The inmates were compared on the basis of age, education, recidivism, length of sentence and participation in special clubs or groups, the only difference being participation in adult education programs. Thirty-two matched pairs of inmates were selected by this pro- cess. (Table 2) In sixteen cases the pairs were perfect matches. A variance in age or education of one choice on the "Adult Education Data Survey" was the only difference in the remaining pairs. In these situations there were as many non-participators who differed from the participators by being older or having more education than were younger or had less education. Therefore, the average age and level of educa- tion should be almost identical. Confidentiality was guaranteed to the inmates by the use of the cover sheet. Subjects did not have to write their names on the cover sheet if they did not wish to do so. Since the interest in the results appeared to be intense, any inmate desiring a profile sheet indicating his scores would be presented with these scores if his name appeared on the cover sheet. A standard profile sheet prepared by the Institlte for Personality and Ability Testing was prepared by the researcher for 48 Table 2. Matched pairs of inmates Question- Age in Highest Length of Recid- Special In- Pair naire No. Years Grade Sentence ivism terest Mem- Level in Years bership l np 6 26-30 7—9 4-5 recidivist no 1 p 182 26—30 7-9 4-5 recidivist no 2 np 115 21-25 7—9 6-10 first-timer no 2 p 177 21-25 7-9 6-10 first-timer no 3 np 69 36—40 7-9 over 10 first-timer no 3 p 139 36—40 7-9 over 10 first-timer no 4 np 102 under 21 7-9 4—5 first-timer , no 4 p 77 under 21 7—9 4-5 first-timer no 5 np 107 31-35 college over 10 first-timer no 5 p 258 31-35 college over 10 first-timer no 6 np 116 26—30 10-12 over 10 recidivist no 6 p 138 26—30 10-12 over 10 recidivist no 7 mp 127 21—25 high school 6-10 recidivist no graduate 7 p 214 21-25 high school 6—10 recidivist no graduate 8 np 146 36-40 under 6 6-10 recidivist no 8 p 204 36-40 under 6 6—10 recidivist no 9 np 222 41—50 10-12 6-10 recidivist no 9 p 261 41-50 10-12 6—10 recidivist no 10 np 236 41-50 7-9 over 10 recidivist no 10 p 266 41-50 7-9 over 10 recidivist no 11 up 241 26-30 10—12 1-3 recidivist no 11 p 173 26-30 10—12 1-3 recidivist no 12 np 246 26—30 10-12 6-10 recidivist no 12 p 114 26-30 10-12 6-10 recidivist no 13 up 265 26—30 10-12 6-10 recidivist no 13 p 283 26-30 10-12 6—10 recidivist no 49 Table 2 continued Question- Age in Highest Length of Recid- Special In- Pair naire No. Years Grade Sentence ivism terest Mem- Level in Years bership 14 up 273 21—25 7—9 6-10 recidivist no 14 p 289 21-25 7-9 6-10 recidivist no 15 np 72 26—30 7-9 6-10 first-timer no 15 p 292 26-30 7—9 6—10 first-timer no 16 up 67 26-30 10—12 1—3 first-timer no 16 p 13 26-30 7-9 1—3 first-timer no 17 hp 68 26—30 10-12 3—5 first-timer no 17 p 252 26-30 10—12 1-3 first timer no 18 up 3 21-25 10—12 1-3 recidivist no 18 p 92 21-25 high school over 10 recidivist no graduate 19 up 8 21—25 10-12 over 10 recidivist no 19 p 192 21-25 7-9 over 10 recidivist no 20 np 12 31—35 10-12 over 10 recidivist no 20 p 256 31-35 7-9 over 10 recidivist no 21 up 101 41-50 high school 6-10 recidivist no graduate 21 p 195 36-40 high school 6—10 recidivist no graduate 22 np 129 26-30 7-9 3-5 recidivist no 22 p 290 26—30 10-12 3—5 recidivist no 23 np 131 26-30 under 6 6-10 recidivist no 23 p 227 26-30 7—9 6-10 recidivist no 24 np 78 41-50 10—12 over 10 first-timer no 24 p 161 36—40 10-12 over 10 first-timer no 25 up 52 31-35 10-12 over 10 recidivist no 25 p 169 31-35 7-9 over 10 recidivist no 26 np 137 26-30 10-12 over 10 recidivist no 26 p 263 26-30 high school over 10 recidivist no graduate 50 Table 2 continued Question- Age in Highest Length of Recid- Special In- Pair naire No. Years Grade Sentence ivism terest Mem- Level in Years bership 27 up 149 31-35 10-12 6-10 first-timer no 27 p 140 31-35 high school 6—10 first-timer no graduate 28 np 213 26-30 high school 6-10 first—timer no graduate 28 p 171 26-30 10-12 6-10 first-timer no 29 up 232 under 21 10—12 6-10 first-timer no 29 p 197 under 21 7-9 6-10 first-timer no 30 np 76 31—35 under 6 6-10 first-timer no 30 p 270 36-40 under 6 6-10 first-timer no 31 up 95 26-30 7—9 over 10 first-timer no 31 p 123 26-30 7—9 over 10 first-timer no 32 np 99 21—26 high school 1—3 recidivist no graduate 32 p 269 21-26 10—12 1-3 recidivist no 51 the interested inmates. A total of 159 inmates indicated either their name or number. Procedure for Analysis of the Data ,The scores of the matched pairs of inmates on the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire were treated first. They were changed to sten scores and presented graphically, using superimposed graphs. In this way the personality factor scores of the participators were compared with the non-participators and with the given norms. Also a t-score characteristic was computed and evaluated so that a possible significant difference between participators and non—participators on the sixteen factors could be determined. The responses on the “Adult Education Data Survey" were then examdned. The information used in matching the samples is presented first. Next is a computation of other comparable information obtained by using the remaining questions in the survey. In cases involving comparative statistical information the chi—square was applied, and the level of significance of the difference between participator and non-participator was determined. In cases where no differences are obvious, the use of the chi—square was omitted. In a few areas, the difference of means was also examined to support evidence secured otherwise. Tables are used to present information and graphs are used to emphasize skewed distributions. An attempt was made to measure the accuracy of the responses of both the participators and non-participators by comparing ques- tionnaires with the official prison records of the inmates. This 52 information is reported with the stated responses of the inmates and the relationship of the two were examined by chi-square. Fifty names in each group were examined and reported upon as to agreement between the stated response and the official prison record on questions relating to age, education, recidivism and length of sentence. It must be kept in mind that the submitting of names was not required in the completion of the questionnaire. Approximately seventy-five percent of the inmates did write either their name or number on the front sheet. The names of inmates examined came from this group. In order to determine if the sample groups are representative of the total prison population additional inmates were checked by means of prison records regarding age, education, recidivism, and length of sentence. Thirty-two inmates randomly selected, by pick- ing every fifth name, from the classlists of present adult education classlists were checked in the prison records. Seventy inmates whose last number ended in five were also checked and the first thirty-two inmates who had never been registered in adult education classes were used. A chi-square was applied in order to determine any signif- icant levels of difference between the two participator groups. The same procedure was followed in determining possible differences between the two non-participator groups. The acceptable level of significance is the five percent level. This will apply to both the t—ratio and the chi-squares. A consultant in the Department of Educational Research of the College of Education, Michigan State University, made a statistical 53 examination of methods of computation. He also examined the results of the statistical work. Based on his experience in the study of the methods of research in education, he felt that all conclusions were arrived at in a statistically suitable manner. CHAPTER IV ANALYSES OF THE DATA Part A: Report on the Results of Six- teen Personality Factor Questionnaire Subjects for this study were thirty—two matched pairs of inmates from the State Prison of Southern Michigan. Each matched pair included an inmate who had participated in adult education classes or activities offered by the Academic School at the prison and one who had not participated in any such adult education pro- gram. The inmates in each pair were similar in age, education, recidivism, length of sentence and participation in special clubs or groups. The questionnaire was administered at the same time as the “Adult Education Data Survey." These instruments were both administered during a period from December, 1964 through April, 1965. Arrangements for the use of inmates in this study were made through the Michigan State Department of Corrections and the Corrections Commission of the State of Michigan. The results of the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire are contained in the following sixteen graphs. The scores used are sten scores obtained from raw scores. (The table used to convert the raw scores is on page 126 of the appendix.) The solid line in each graph represents the participator, and the broken line repre- sents the non-participator. 54 55 m ocuomm mmaoom zoom OH R m m # O\ (I) v- \ I \ ocumowowuumolooc 1:1: powwowowuwmo ill! OH HH agate <.uouomm OH m m m w ocumowowuomoncoc can: ocumowowuomo III! moooom :mum m m H compo 56 m oouomm mmooom zoom 0H m m m o m d m m o I! I ./ \ xx \ H I \ z \ \ /< m , x , m , , \ rut L d ,, 1 m / . I o / ‘ / 1 k , \ i x w , I . , ‘ : ( oH ooumowowuummucoe III: powwowowuomm >H compo ocu H : E.m u m m z D 8.0 o o o oouomm mouoom doom 0H m m n o m d m ooomowowuummlaoc luau napmowowuomo HHH agape ‘H HcEm-IJQJUJ O z D 8.0 m o 57 HOP NQHUflPHNQ .HOQ. GQH 0% 4" ” "_—-*~—--- ’ - noon Lftt > nampo .p p (U Q: 58 ‘_ - 59 mmooom scum OH m m m e m a m w H o , \x H / \\\IIII\ I \ ,, \ N , x / x. m , \ / .3 x x m w L x . x . x e I \ t . \\ A m . . x a .. t a s . a "x < m 2 0H ooumowowuomoncoc nun: powwowowuumd 1111. x compo u nouomm mouoom zoom 0H m m m o m J m N x . A x _ . \ . \ _ \ \ _ xx \ . \ 1 _ \ x . \ _ \ x _ \ . \ x _ x. \ . \ . _ \ . \ r32. 1 u . m ,4 u \ e u \ \ k T \ _ ‘ m m CH ooumowowuomonaoz :11: ooumowowuomo :: xH cameo 60 O oouomm mouoom zoom OH 0 m m o m d z monomm moooom zoom 0 m # o Samk ) ‘ ---- \ OH 0H --_ ‘ ocumawowuomoncoc noumowoauoma Ill! HHx mambo powwowowuomoncoc 'l" ‘ ooumowowuwmo “Hun Hx compo 61 NO oouomm mmooom scum OH m m m o m d > \ Loomowowoomouooc Inn: ooumowowuomo m -N H O 0") N 3 CD 0\ >Hx agape M H c E m u m m 0 z D E.o m p HO oouomm mmooom zoom 0H m m m o m 3 m N H ooumdwowuomonco: In: woumowowuomo HHHx agate 62 do ucpomm mmooom scum OH m m m o m : powwowowuammaaoc Inn: powwowowuumm OH H>x named m: H a E m-u m m 0 z D 8.0 m o no nopomm mouoom doom OH o m n o m d m x/\\\ . . > \/ \ / \ , 1 /\ \ V \ x x/ x 1 /\ I \ \ i 1 i \ ooumoHowuomalco: I. u noumowowuumo m: H i E m # m m 0 z D 8.0 m o 63 Since the two groups are independent, Fisher‘s t-test can be applied to test the difference between the means of the two groups. After deciding upon this statistical treatment, the researcher met with Dr. Charles Wrigley of the Computer Institute for Social Science Research, Michigan State University. Dr. wrigley thought the method decided upon was an apprOpriate means of comparing the two groups in the sixteen variables. All computations for Fisher's t- test were completed with the use of a Victor desk calculator. The formula used to compute Fisher's t-test was: _ M1 - M2 t — : ('diff (73 127) In order to check the level of significance of t, a table of values of t at the five percent and one percent levels of significance was consulted. (73:230). A t of 1.96 or larger was necessary to in— fer a significant difference at the five percent level and a t of 2.58 or larger was necessary to infer a significant difference at the one percent level. When all the computations had been completed, all figures were computed a second time in order to eliminate any errors in mathematical computation. The t-values are indicated in Table 3. Thus, on the basis of the t-ratio, it is seen that Factors A, G and M have means that are significantly different at the five per— cent level. In other words, the class participators are statistically significantly more rigid, undependable, and conventional than the non—participators. 64 Table 3. T-values and directions of means of individual factors on the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire Factor Direction of Means Value of t A P {_NP 2.175* B P 7’NP 1.243 C P (.NP .709 E P < NP .214 F P < NP 1.031 G P 4 NP 1.964* H P 7 NP .559 I P 7NP 1.292 L P L.NP .348 M P <_NP 2.343* N P 7NP .065 O P )NP .067 Q1 P >rNP .662 Q2 P < NP 1.259 Q3 P ) NP .380 Q4 P 7 NP 1.319 Legend: < = is less than *Statistically significant Summary of the Results of the Six- > N NP teen Personality Factor Questionnaire is more than Participator Non-participator Results of the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire indicated that the participators and non-participators: are significantly different at the five percent level of significance on the scores for Factors A, G and M. have scores which tend to be most alike on Factors E, H, L, N, o and Q3. 65 Part B: Report on Results of "Adult Education Data Survey" Each inmate included in this survey completed an HAdult Educa- tion Data Survey." This sheet contained thirty-six questions related to theinmate's age, extent of participation in adult education activit- ies, education, health, religious activities, political activities, mobility, family life, military service record, prison record, and attitudes toward adult education. These elements, although related to personality, are not personality characteristics as defined by the Sixteen Personalitquactor Questionnaire. It was anticipated that a measure of these elements, which will be referred to as "non-person- ality factors," would be necessary in the determination of the valid- ity of the hypotheses of this study. A comparison of a similar group of inmates who did not par- ticipate in this study was obtained through use of prison records. This comparison will be reported along with survey data on the in- mates who were used in the study. The items compared were age, ed- ucation, recidivism, and length of sentence. The accuracy of the responses was also checked by reference to the official prison records. The inmates checked in the records all had completed the questionnaires as part of the selection of the matched pairs for the study. The results of this reliability check will be included with the results of the "Adult Education Data Survey." Age Table 4 is designed to show the age groups of adult education participators and non-participators. The mean age for the non-par- ticipators is 30.7 years and the mean age for the participators is 29.3 years, making a difference in mean ages of 1.4 years. 66 Table 4. Age of inmates Age Participators Non-participators under 21 21-25 26-30 1 31—35 36-40 41-50 51-60 over 60 oombtwwm Dormant—INN The table of ages seems to indicate a preponderance of inmates in the twenty-one to thirty year range, fifty-seven percent of the non-participators and sixty-three percent of the participators. Thirty percent of the participators and thirty—eight percent of the non-participators are over thirty years old. Two superimposed graphs emphasize this distribution (Graph XVII). However, the skewed form of the graph suggests that tests based on a normal distribution as- sumption might be unreliable. Therefore, a test was used which would compare frequency distributions without regard to the form of the distribution. The chi-square technique was applied to compare the frequency distributions of the age of participating and non-participating in- mates. The chi-square of 1.84 does not approach the value indicated in the tables as being necessary for significance; therefore, we can assume that there is no significant difference in the observed age distribution between the two groups of subjects. 67 Graph XVII. Age of inmates [AI / I ’ I 10 I, Participator I, —-- Non-participator I 9 l N 8 u m b I e 7 I r I I I O I f 6 \ I \ I I n I m 5 \ a \ t I e I s 4 \ A \ II \ I \\ \ / I I ’ I 3 \ \ I I \ I I I II I V I 2 I I I I 1 1 I I Cu 21 26 31 36 41 51 o n to to to to to to V d 25 3O 35 40 50 60 e e r r 60 21 Years 68 A similar group of inmates randomly selected from the prison records (by selecting the first thirty-two participants and non- participants whose prison numbers ended in five) did not differ significantly from the matched sample group. The average age of the participators of this group was 28.7 compared to 29.3. The differ- ence in the participator groups is .6 years. The non-participators of the representative group averaged 30.5 years compared to 30.7 years for the matched sample, the difference between the two groups being only .2 of a year. Table 5. Age of representative group of inmates Age Participators Non-participators under 21 21-25 26-30 1 31-35 36—40 41-50 CDU‘I-Ir-I-‘OOImI #wwmwo A check of the official records of the inmates who participated in thaoriginal study reveals that a total of three inmates out of one hundred gave their age as different than the official record. The three percent of inmates that falsified their records is not significant statistically. 69 Education There were five questions in the "Adult Education Data Survey" related to education; numbers 18, 19, 9, 10 and 11. The results will be reported in this order. Question eighteen asked, "What was the last grade or year you attended regular school?" The results are indicated in Table 7 and Graph XVIII. The grade levels of the participator and non-partici- pator groups appear to be similar. Eighty-eight percent of the non- participators and eighty-one percent of the participators did not complete high school. The average grade completed is 9.78 for the non-participator and 9.41 for the participator. This is a difference of .37. In applying a chi-square, a value of 4.18 is found which does not indicate significant difference. (73:235) TableES. Grade level of representative group of inmates Grade Level Participators Non—participators under 6 5 4 7, 8, 9 16 9 10, ll, 12, did not graduate 7 18 12, graduated 4 1 college, did not graduate 0 O In the randomly selected representative group the average grade level of the participators was 8.63 compared to 9.41 of those in the present sample. The difference of .78 of a grade level is not significant as indicated by a chi—squareof 3.84. In comparison with the non—participator groups, the representative group averaged school Participator ~~~ Non~participator I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I n I m l a I t I e I s I I I l O 6 12 College Four Graduate or 11 Graduate Non Year werk less 9 12 Graduate Colle Non Degree Graduate 71 9.00 grades while the study group average is 9.78. The difference in the non-participator group is also .78 of a grade, which is not significant as indicated by a chi-square of 1.54. For the group that was checked with the official prison records, only two inmates indicated grade levels that did not correspond to the records. (It must be mentioned that the prison records obtained much of this information directly from the inmate in a method similar to this researcher's.) Question nineteen was, "Did you enjoy regular school when you attended?" Of the participators, sixty percent enjoyed school when they attended. Of the non-participators, fifty percent enjoyed school. Applying a chi-square, we find a value of.l8, a difference of no statistical significance. (73:235) Table 7. School experience Participators Non-participators Enjoyed regular school 19 16 Disliked regular school l3 l6 Question nine asked, "Have you ever enrolled in any special school, trade school or correspondence school since leaving regular school?" Of the participants, fifty-three had enrolled in such a school, while only forty-four non-participators had so enrolled. The chi-square fails to indicate a significant difference at the five ' 72 percent level. The value of 2.00 is less than the value needed for significance. (73:235) Table 8. Inmates ever enrolled in special, trade or correspondence school Participators Non-participators Enrolled 17 , 14 Not enrolled 15 18 Question ten stated, "If yes (to question nine), name the school." Schools named are listed in Table 9. Table 9. Special schools, correspondence schools, trade schools, attended by inmates Participators Non-participators Name _ Attending Attending International Correspondence School, Scranton, Pa. Welverine Trade School Moody Bible School Ionia Reformatory Pioneer Trade School, Lansing Cassidey Lake Trade School Cass Technical High School, Detroit Michigan Training Unit 0 Dunbar Vocational School of Diesels l 0 Moore Vocational School, Detroit 1 Government Trade School American Correspondence Schools 1 0 ONONNI—I I—‘OI—‘t—‘OI—l O H H CO 73 Table 9 continued Name Participators Non-participators Attending Attending University of Michigan Ex- tension and Radio, Elec- tronics and TV School 1 0 Flint Community Schools 1 0 University of California and University of Minnesota 1 0 Linsey-Hopkins Vocational School, Miami 1 0 Diesel and Auto Mechanics School 0 1 Texas State Prison 0 1 Federal Prison 0 1 Michigan Center High School 0 1 Military Police School, U.S. Air Force 0 1 20th Century Bible School 0 1 University of Minnesota 1 0 Vocational School 1 0 Alcoholic Treatment Center 0 l Apprentice School for Pattern- makers 0 ,_I Question eleven asked, "If yes (to question nine), why did you enroll in this school?" The results are found in Table 10. Table 10. Reason for enrolling in special, trade or correspondence school Participators Non-participators Self-improvement 3 6 To learn skill or trade 7 6 Required 1 2 Enjoyment l 0 Continue education 4 0 Earn more money 1 0 74 Prison Record A series of questions was devised for the purpose of elicit- ing information regarding length of sentence, offenses, committed, and frequency of confinement in a penal institution. Question fourteen asked, "How long have you been here?" Respon- ses are presented in Table 11 and Graph XIX. Sixty-three percent of the participators have been in the State Prison of Southern Michigan for a period of less than three years. Sixty-six percent of the non- participators have been confined at the institution for a period of less than three years on the present sentence. A chi-square value of .82 does not indicate a significant dif- ference at any acceptable level. Table 11. Consecutive time in State Prison of Southern Michigan Participators Non-participators Less than 1 year 8 7 1-3 12 14 4-5 6 4 6-10 3 4 Over 10 3 3 The length of the present sentence that these inmates are serving, asked for in question sixteen, is tabulated in Table 12 and plotted in Graph XX. Seventy-eight percent of both groups of inmates have been committed for a period of over five years. This 75 Graph XIX. Consecutive time in State Prison of Southern Michigan 10 ___ Participator --- Non-participator O FICDU‘BCJZ I'h ON mart-manta less 1 4 6 over than to to to 10 Years 76 indicates that three-fourths of the inmates involved in this study have time which they would be able to devote to an adult education activity. Table 12. Length of present sentence Participators Non—participators Less than 1 year 0 0 1-3 4 3 4-5 3 4 6-10 l3 14 Over 10 12 11 The representative group of participants and non-participants did not differ much from the study group. Table 13 indicates the distribution of inmates and their length of sentence. A chi-square of 1.54 for the participator groups and 1.36 for the non—participator group are no significant. In checking the prison records it is very difficult to deter— mine the actual length of sentence as stated on the “Adult Education Data Survey." Sentences are mentioned with both a minimum and max— imum length. Also, some sentences run concurrently and others are consecutive. It is difficult to evaluate a lie factor on this item. 77 Graph XX. Length of present sentence 10 / Participator --- Non-participator O HCDU‘Bc-‘Z m m m H m g s H Over 10 Years 78 Table 13. Length of sentence of representative inmate group Participators Non—participators Under 1 O 0 1-3 3 2 3-5 6 0 6-10 12 16 Over 10 ll 12 The types of offense and the number of inmates committed for each offense are presented in Table 14. Table 14. Types of offenses leading to conviction of inmates Offense Participators Non-participators Armed robbery 6 9 Breaking and entering (day time) 2 5 First degree murder 2 1 Breaking and entering (night time) 0 5 Assault with intent to do bodily harm, less than murder 2 1 Second degree murder 1 2 Uttering and publishing 1 2 Unarmed robbery 2 0 Auto; theft 1 1 Violétion of check laws 2 O Narcotics, sale and possession of 2 0 Manslaughter 0 1 Larceny from a person 1 0 Assault with intent to do bodily harm while armed l O Indecent liberties l 0 Attempted murder 0 l Embezzlement O l Kidnap 0 1 Assault to commit rape l O Larceny 2 0 Not stated 4 2 79 Recidivism Question seventeen had to be reworded from the original draft of the survey. The original question was, "Are you a recidivist?" Mr. Gerald Hanson, Director of Treatment at the institution, indicated that although the inmates knew the meaning of the word recidivist, the average reading grade level was below the comprehension level for such a term. The question was changed to ask, “Are you a first- timer?" Sixty-two percent of both groups indicated that he was serving at least a second sentence in a penal institution. Since the number of responses were very similar, no test of significant difference was applied. This information is indicated in Table 15. Table 15. Recidivism I Participators Non-participators First-timer 12 11 More than first-timer 20 21 The prison records indicated that eleven inmates out of one hundred said they were first-timers while the records indicated they were returnees. None of the first-timers stated they were recidivists. The representative group of participators and non-participators did not differ much from the study group. Table-16 indicates the number of recidivists. A chi-square of .58 for participator group and .26 for the non-participator were well below any significant figure. Table 16. Recidivism of representative group of inmates Participators Non-participators First-timer 15 13 More than first-timer 17 19 80 Health Only one question directly concerned health. This was ques- tion twenty—six, "How is your health?" Results from this question are shown in Table 17. Again it appears there is little difference re- vealed here. The chi-square value is 1.42, which is below the figure necessary to indicate any significant difference. (73:235) Table 17. Health Participators Non-participators Often ill 1 2 Sometimes ill 6 3 Almost never ill 25 27 Military Service Questions twenty-seven and twenty-eight regarding service in the armed forces were asked because many men above the age of eighteen have been in service. Forty—seven percent of the participators and fifty-three percent of the non-participators were never in any branch of military service. (Table 18) The inmates who were in some branch of the service and the name of the branch are indicated in Table 19. Table 18. Number of inmates in the military service Participators Non—participators Service record 17 15 No service record 15 17 81 Table 19. Branches of military service Participators Non-participators Army 6 8 Air Force 6 4 Navy 3 1 Marine 2 2 Family Answers to questions regarding marital status indicated that only thirty—one percent of the participators and nineteen percent of the non—participators are married at the present time, as indicated in Table 20. A chi-square of 1.34 fails to indicate a difference of any significance. Table 20. Present marital status Participators Non—participators Married 10 6 Not married 22 26 Responses regarding the number of children indicate that fifty percent of the non-participators and fifty-nine percent of the par- ticipators had families. The number of inmates with families and the number of children of each of these inmates are indicated in Tables 21 and 22. An evaluation of the responses to the two questions 82 pertaining to the family situation indicates much instability in marital relationships. Applying a chi-square, the value of .56 indicates no significant difference. Table 21. Number of inmates having children Participators Non-participators Has one or more children 19 16 Has no children l3 l6 Table 22. Number of children of inmates Number of children Participators Non-participators 0 13 16 l 9 6 2 5 5 3 2 2 4 2 l 5 1 l 6 O l Mobility Questions twenty-three, twenty-four and twenty-five were con- cerned with the mobility of the inmates. Questions twenty-three and twenty-four asked, "Where and how long did you live at that place before coming here?" Eighty—eight percent of the non—participators and eighty—one percent of the 83 participators lived in the State of Michigan at the time of their incarseration. Table 23 indicates the states that the inmates re- sided before going to the State Prison of Southern.Michigan. Table 24 indicates the number of years that each inmate lived in that state before his conviction. Table 23. State of residence before conviction State Participators Non-participators Michigan 26 28 California 1 0 Florida 1 0 Illinois 3 2 Louisiana 1 0 New Jersey 0 1 Texas 0 l Table 24. Length of residence before conviction Participators Non-participators Less than one year 0 1 1-3 years 2 4 4—5 years 1 4 6-10 years 0 0 Over 10 years 29 23 Question twenty—five asked, "Where were you born?" Of the non-participators sixty-three percent were born in the State of Michigan. In the participating group fifty percent were born in Michigan. Table 25 presents the place of birth of each of the in- mates in the study. Table 25. State of birth Participators Non—participators Michigan ' 1 Alabama Arkansas Illinois Kentucky Mississippi North Carolina Pennsylvania South Carolina Texas Tennessee West Virginia Not stated HIDLACDthJCDNJNJkJFJNDm Oraroracpcneaoaedelele-o Again, it did not appear necessary to compute a test of signi- ficant difference since the percentages of the two groups of inmates convicted or born in Michigan were in great majority as well as similar. Special Interests Questions twenty-nine through thirty-two were intended to dis- cover the interest the inmates had in special clubs. Only a total of three percent of the inmates indicated any interest in special clubs or groups. The only information obtained through the use of these questions is that most inmates are not interested in special groups. These data may be of no special significance to the total study other than indicating that neither participators nor non—participators react differently in this situation. 85 Political Involvement Another type of participation, related to political interest, is touched on briefly in questions thirty-five and thirty-six. In Michigan, inmates confined to penal institutions lose their rights of franchise while so incarserated. Therefore, many inmates may never have had the opportunity to participate even if they desired to do so. Question thirty-five asks, "What is your political party?" The answers to this question are summarized in Table 26. A chi- square measure of significance reveals a value of 5.66. This value indicates no difference at any significant level. (73:235) Table 26. Political affiliation fin - I I Participators Non-participators Democrats 16 10 Republicans 4 1 Neither or varies 12 21 Question thirty-six stated: "I have voted in: a. national elections b. state elections c. local elections d. never voted" Responses to either a, b, or c placed the inmate in the classifica- tion of having voted as related to d, never voted. Five percent of the inmates did not respond to this question. These inmates were placed in a third category of "not stated." The results are summarized 86 in Table 27. A chi-square value of 2.40 indicates no significant difference at any acceptable level. (73:235) Table 27. Political activity Participators Non—participators Voted 15 9 Not voted 17 23 Religious Involvement Another type of participation considered in questions thirty- three and thirty-four concerned religion and church attendance. Question thirty-three asked, "What is your church affiliation?" The responses are indicated in Table 28. Using a chi-square, a figure of 4.38 was obtained. This value indicated no significant difference at any acceptable level. (73:235) Table 28. Church affiliation Participators Non-participators Catholic 8 10 Protestant 16 14 Jewish 0 1 Other 3 0 None 5 7 87 Question thirty—four asked, "How many times in the last year have you attended a regular church meeting?" The results of the re- Sponses are indicated in Table 29, and Graph XXI. The chi—square value is 4.90 on these responses. A value equal to this would in- dicate no statistically significant difference. Table 29. Church attendance in last year Participators Non-participators None 13 21 1-5 times 4 4 6-25 times 8 4 26-50 times 4 2 Over 50 times 3 l Interest and Participation in Adult Education.Activities One of the purposes of the “Adult Education Data Survey" was to select which inmates would be considered participators and which inmates would be considered non—participators. The first question on the survey asked, “Are you attending any adult education activities or classes now or have you in the last year?" Only if an inmate re- sponded yes would he be considered a participator. The names or num- bers of inmates, if known, were checked with the adult education classlists for the past year. This check indicated that all the known inmates were truthful in their response to this inquiry. Graph ”)0 d m o'a c z UJtDrrmB'Jl—l 10 88 Church attendance in last year \ ___ Participator \ --- Non-participator \ \ \ \ ‘\ \ l \ \ \ \ \ \ “““““““ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \\ \ \\ \ \ O l 6 25 0 V e r 50 Number of Times Attended 89 In order to screen more carefully, question five asked, "Have you attended any other adult activities or classes in the last five years?" Any inmate responding yes to question five and no to ques- tion one was not used as a subject in the study. Only those respond— ing negatively to both question one and question five were considered non—participators. Of the inmates selected as participators, only one indicated that he had not enjoyed the experience in adult education. This made up only three percent of the participator group. However, one in- mate did not respond to this question in any manner. Adult education classes and activities may have been offered in many places to the inmates before they began serving their pre- sent sentences. On the survey, no inmate indicated participation at any other place unless he also indicated participation at the State Prison of Southern Michigan. Table 30 presents a list of places in which the inmates had participated other than the prison. Table 30. Where participators engaged in adult education programs — 4 Name of Place Number of Inmates State Prison of Southern Michigan 30 State Prison of Southern Michigan and other prison 1 State Prison of Southern Michigan and public schools 1 90 The various types of activities and the number of partici- pants in each activity are listed in Table 31. Many inmates have participated in a variety of classes or activities offered at the institution. Table 31. Adult education activities of participators Number of Activities , , Part1c1pants Academic 1 Academic, vocational and technical Vocational and technical Academic, vocational and technical, rehabilitation Academic, rehabilitation Academic, rehabilitation, social Rehabilitation Academic, social Academic, vocational and technical, rehabilita- tion, social Rehabilitation, social 1 mmwwwppm D—' Summary of Responses to the "Adult Education Data Survey” The class participators and non-participators were not signi- ficantly different in any specific elements of the non—personality area. The “Adult Education Data Survey” contained thirty-six ques- tions and observations under thirteen general headings; there were no questions in which a significant difference appeared. There were findings of similarity between participators and non-participators which were important enough to merit special em— phasis. The highest school grade achieved by the non—participator 91 was 9.78, somewhat higher than the 9.41 of the participator, but not enough to indicate any significant difference. The two groups were Hatched in health. There was no difference with respect to claimed political party affiliation, although more non-participators indicated no special party and fewer voted. The two groups were also similar in amount of military service, marital relationships, mobility, religious interest, and prison record. However, these differences were not significant at any acceptable level as indicated by chi- square. Findings in the non-personality area of this study generally conform to the findings of the related studies indicated in the re- view of the literature. One outstanding disagreement is in the area of education. Other studies find that the participators are the better educated for the populations measured. Here the educational levels are very similar as indicated by the years of regular school attended. Therefore, it is assumed that the two groups being measured are similar. CHAPTER V IMPLICATIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY This study was concerned with the determination of differ- ences and similarities between those inmates of the State Prison of Southern Michigan who had participated in the adult education pro- gram of the Academic School and another group of inmates who had never participated in any adult education activity. Differences and similarities considered were those in personality factors as defined by the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire and in specified non—personality areas as defined by items on the "Adult Education Data Survey" designed by this researcher. Inmates were asked to complete the "Adult Education Data Survey" and the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. Inmates were selected randomly throughout the cell blocks, the only basis for selection being their willingness to participate in the study. The sample of 250 prisoners was obtained from the general population of inmates behind the walls of the State Prison of South- ern Michigan. Inmates who indicated participation in the adult education program in the past year were considered participators. Inmates who indicated no participation in adult activities were considered non-participators. Inmates who had participated in adult education but not within the past year were not considered in the study. 92 93 Thirty-two matched pairs of inmates were defined on the basis of the items concerning age, education, recidivism, length of sen- tence, and participation in special groups or activities, the only difference being that one inmate had participated in an adult educa- tion program at the prison and the other had not been involved. Information gathered through the use of the Sixteen Person- ality Factor Questionnaire concerned the respondent's personality in sixteen areas grouped by the following continua: easy—going--rigid, bright--dull, calm--emotiona1, aggressive--mi1d, enthusiastic--g1um, conscientious-—undependab1e, adventurous--shy, sensitive--tough, jealous--accepting, imaginative--conventioned, polished——simple, timid-~confident, radical--conservative, self-sufficient-—group- dependent, controlled--lax, and tense—-ph1egmatic. The class participators were found to be significantly more rigid, undependable, and conventional than the non-participators, while the non-participators were more easy-going, persevering, and imaginative than the participators. Both groups are more rigid and undependable than the general non-college adult male population. The participate is similar to the average male on the imaginative, con- ventional continuum.while the non-participator is more imaginative than either of the groups. However, in none of these comparisons with general norms was the difference significant as determined by the t-test. A participator in this study may, therefore, be described as a person who avoids compromise, lacks internal standards, and is less inclined to experiment in problem situations. (18:11-19) This person 94 is easily annoyed by things and people, is dissatisfied with the general situation and the restrictions placed on him. His behavior is indicative of self-control rather than emotional behavior. This type of behavior fails to distinguish any leadership qualities; and is associated, in all members, with a lower percentage of group-task- oriented participation. We may picture the participator as a person who would tend to want to be alone yet want a certain amount of guidance. This in— clination would send him seeking ways to satisfy his needs in a rather narrow, short-term way. This attitude would make him more aware of adult education and its possibilities for him. Enough structure would exist to satisfy his needs and he would remain to complete what he started. The non-participator in this study, by comparison, may be said to be generous in personal relationships, less afraid of criticism but less dependable in exactly meeting obligations. He may be more inclined to experiment in problem solving as well as making his own decisions. (18:11-19) This person displays an imaginative, asethetic mind with some immaturity in practical judgment. Many signs of introversion are indicated by the personality characteristics. (18:16) Non-participators may be looked on as people who would tend to feel unaccepted but unconcerned. They express more dissatisfactions with group unity and its regard for rules and procedures. They may participate and make original leadership suggestions, and are not immediately ignored, but their suggestions often turn out to be re- jected. A temperamental capacity to disassociate can also be discerned. 95 On this basis the non-participator may not want to get involved in an adult education program. In cases where he might begin a class, he may become dissatisfied and terminate when he feels the results are not worth his efforts. It should be remembered that the differences between the par— ticipators and the non-participators have been established at an acceptable level of significance only with respect to the rigid—-easy- going, undependable--conscientious, imaginative--conventional continua. Use of other factors in describing the inmates must be tentative. Both the participators and the non-participators were similar to the general non-college adult male population on these continua: calm--emotional, agressive--mild, enthusiastic--glum, adventurous--shy, sensitive——tough, jealous--accepting, polished-—simple, radical--con- servative and controlled--lax. The mean score in each of these cases was similar to the mean score of the norm group provided by the authors of the questionnaire. In the continua: timid--confident, self-sufficient--group de- pendent and tense--phlegmatic the inmates were Hume timid, self-suf- ficient and tense than the norm group. The non-participators were more self—sufficient than the participators. The participators were brighter than the norm group; they were also brighter and more tense than the non-participators. The fact that the participants were brighter than the general population was unusual. In the studies of inmates examined for this paper, all the research indicated the gen- eral population to be brighter than the inmate population. In none of these cases was the difference at a significant level as deter- mined by the t-test. 96 The findings of this study appear to support the hypothesis of this study with the qualifications noted. Hypothesis 1: There are statistically significant dif- ferences between certain personality factors of the selected participators and the same personality factors of the non-participator as measured by the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire by the Institute for Personality and Ability Testing. From the investigation it appears that the participants were significantly different at the five percent level from the non- participants in the scores on Factor A, which designates the continuum rigid--easy—going; on Factor G, which designates the continuum un- dependable--conscientious; and on Factor M, which indicates the con- timuum conventional——imaginative. The participators tended toward the rigid and of the A continuum, toward the undependable end of the G continuum and toward the conventional end of the M continuum. Hypothesis 2: The participators and non-participators as selected will not be statistically different in other non-personality factors which will be measured on the "Adult Education Data Survey." Thirteen non-personality factors were considered in this part of the survey. These were: age, education, prison record, extent of participation in adult programs, familiarity with adult programs and activities, health, religious activity, political activity, family, military service record, mobility and attitude toward adult education programs. In none of these thirteen areas were there significant dif- ferences. Thirty-six questions and observations were designed to reveal the inmate's condition with respect to the thirteen non-personality factors. Of the thirty-six questions, there were no significant differences on any as indicated by chi-square. 97 A comparison of thirty-two similar inmate participators and thirty—two non—participators, who were not part of the matched pairs in this study did not indicate any significant difference in non- personality factors between the two participator groups or the two non-participator groups. Prison records were used to obtain the facts necessary in the collection of this information. The inmates used in the comparison were selected randomly from the classlists of the Academic School and from the files of the Correction Department. In each case every fifth name was selected from the list. In the case of non-participators, seventy names were compared to the adult education classlists and the first thirty-two that did not appear were used. An additional sample of fifty participators and fifty non- participators were examined by comparing the ”Adult Education Data Survey" with the prison records. The fifty inmates in each group were selected from the original sample group of 207. Names were selected from the seventy—five percent of the questionnaires which had names or numbers written in the blank. This check of the reliability of the inmates in filling out the questionnaires failed to reveal any differences at an acceptable level of significance. However, the number of inmates indicating their first incarceration was more than the actual number as revealed in the prison records. This difference was not significant statistically. Therefore, it can be said that this hypothesis is fully sup- ported since differences were not found at any acceptable level of 98 significance. The small differences found, not being significant, could not create enough difference in the total "Adult Education ‘Data Survey" to indicate that the participator and non—participator groups were not similar. Implications for the Adult Educator The worker in adult education has two basic responsibilities. First, he must acquaint people with the opportunities available through adult education. Second, he must adequately provide for the needs of pe0p1e once they have become participators. These two responsib- ilities will each have to be considered in the light of results of the analysis of the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire and “Adult Education Data Survey." With respect to rigidity, it should be noted that the non- participator population was comparable to the general non-college adult male population in the norms supplied by the authors of the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. The participator group was much more rigid than both the general population and the non-participator population. This means that attracting the non—participator in the inmate population may require the same techniques that would be em- ployed to attract the general population. The low mean score in this personality area obtained by the participator may indicate that all participators in adult education programs are more rigid. Additional research with other participator groups in the personality area of rigidity would be of interest and value to adult educators. 99 A logical appeal to attract the person of less rigidity would be to change_the operation of the class. The easy-going individual will not fit into a highly structured situation, particularly inmates who have enough regimentatiaiin their daily life. Adult education is commonly thought of as school. A person with this type of personality orientation will expect, and probably get, a situation similar to his concept of the school situations. To make the program attractive the adult educator must provide the means of dealing with the individ- ual on an individual basis. Allowance must be made for the easy-going just as structure must be provided for those who desire it. In class the instruction methods must first be directed toward the individual. The teacher must realize that the objectives of the class may not differ from that of the child. The need to deal with individual differences is of primary importance. Once the individual takes an active interest in his role in the instructional environ— ment, the attention may then be focused on teamwork, or in this case, the group. Good presentation is the best motivation to the participator. Once the proper mood is set, the adult will take an active interest, which will in turn bring his back for more. The implications of the scores on the undependable--conscient- ious continuum are varied. The non-participator is below the means of the general population. The participator group has a mean score that is significantly lower than the non-participator. All inmates are less dependable than the general population. This personality difference may be one of the reasons the inmate is in his present situation. 100 Special interest in a program or activity along with other personality factors may be a reason for the less dependable inmate to enter an activity. This inmate may also be doing what he feels is the lesser of two evils and participate on this basis. The rea- sons may vary as to why the less dependable inmate participates more than his peer, the most dependable of the two. On the conventional versus imaginative continuum the par- ticipator has a median which is the same as the general non—college adult male population. The non-participators are much more imagin— ative than either group. The situation may be very much the same as with the personality factor of easy-goingness; that is, the imagin- ative factor may be prevalent in all groups of non-participators in the general population, or stated conversely, imagination may be less in those who participate. To attract the creative or imaginative person requires the establishment of a program similar to the one suggested for the easy- going person. In most cases the imaginative person will not want to conform to the patterns that are being set for him. The failure to have less regimented programs is unsatisfying to him as an individual. An adult education program should offer him the enjoyment of studies or activities in a manner suited tohis desires. An imaginative approach appears to be needed to attract the non-participator into an adult education program. Personal satis- factions to be gained from the program must be stressed. This stress need not be based on any concrete set of facts. An approach aimed at individual recognition and creative opportunity should be em- phasized more in order to attract free—wheeling, imaginative people. 101 To keep this person interested in a class or activity once he has enrolled can be accomplished with little difficulty if individual differences and differing desires are taken account of. With each session the individual must gain something that he may take home and must retain some enthusiasm that will keep him coming back. Just what the individual may accomplish may depend on himself, but the person of limited capacity desires success as well as anyone with greater abilities. These data further suggest that this investigation can only be viewed as an initial exploratory attempt to measure a small but important segment of the population not participating in adult educa- tion classes. If similar methods could be used on other populations of participators and non—participators, eventually a body of knowledge could be secured which would enable the adult educator to know and serve better an ever-increasing number of people. BIBLIOGRAPHY 10. 11. BIBLIOGRAPHY Adcock, C. J. "The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire," Fifth Mental Measurements Yearbook, edited by Oscar K. Buros, Highland Park, New Jersey: The Gryphon Press, 1959. Anastasi, Anne. ”Age Changes in.Adult Test Performance," Psycho— logical Reports, II, 1956, cited by Edmund deSchweinitz Brunner, David S. Wilder, Corrinne Kirchner and John S. Newberry, 52. Overview of Adult Education Research. Chicago: Adult Education Association of the U.S.A., 1959. Anastasi, Anne. Psychological Testing, lst and 2nd editions. New YOrk: The Macmillan Co., 1954, 1961. Anderson” WilliamHA. Rural Social Participation and the Family Life Cycle, Part I: Formal Participation, Memoir 314. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Agriculture Experiment Station, 1953. .Anderson, WilliaulA. Rural Social Participation and the Family Life Cycle, Part II: Informal Participation, Memoir 314. Ithaca, New Ybrk: Cornell University Experiment Station, 1953. Arnold, Dwight L. "Kuder Preference Record, Personal," Fifth Mental Measurements Yearbook, edited by Oscar K. Buros, High- land Park, New Jersey: The Gryphon Press, 1959. Beal, George M. "Addition Hypothesis in Participation Research," Rural Sociology. XXI, No. 1-4, 1956. Bell, Wendell and Maryanne T. Force. "Urban Neighborhood Types and Participation in Formal Associations," Auerican Sociolo- gical Review, XXI, No. 1 (February 1956). Brown, Emory J. Elements Associated with.Activity and Inactivity in Rural Organizations, Bulletin 574, University Park; Pa.: State University.Agriculture Experiment Station, February, 1954. Brunner, Edmond deSchweinitz andDavid S. Wilder, Corrinne Kirchner and John S. Newberry. An Overview of Adult Education Research. Chicago: Adult Education.Association of the U.S.A., 1959. Buck, Roy C., and Louis A. Ploch. Factors Related to Changes in a Rural Pennsylvania Community, Bulletin 582, Pennsylvania State College, Pa: State University Agricultural Experiment Station, 1954. 103 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 104 Buros, Oscar Krisen (ed.). Tests in Print. Highland Park, New Jersey: The Gryphon Press, 1961. Cartwright, Morse A. Ten Years of Adult Education. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1935, cited by Edmund deSchweinitz Brunner, David S. Wilder, Corrinne Kirchner and John S. Newberry,.Afl Overview of Adult Education Research. Chicago: Adult Education Association of the U.S.A., 1959. Cattell, Raymond B. "Confirmation and Clarification of Primary Personality Factors,” Psychometrika, XXI, No. 3 (September, 1947). Cattell, Raymond B. Description and Measurement of Personality. Yonkers-on-Hudson, New York: WOrld Book Co., 1946. Cattell, Raymond B. Personality: A Systematic Theoretical and Factual Study. New York: McGraw Hill Book Co., 1950. Cattell, Raymond B. "Validation and Intensification of the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire," Journal of Clinical Psychology, XII, (1956). Cattell, Raymond B. and David Saunders, G. Stice. Handbook for Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. Champaign, Illinois: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, 1962. Cattell, Raymond B., David Saunders, G. Stice. Tabular Supple- ment to the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (revised) Champaign, Illinois: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, 1964. Cadderdon, Hestor and Mary S. Lyle. Reasons Given by Iowa Women for Attending Homemaking Classes for Adults. Special Report No. 12, Aues, Iowa: Iowa State Agricultural Experimentation, June, 1955. Chaplin, Stuart F. "Social Participation and Social Intelligence," American Sociological Review, IV, No. 2 (April, 1939). Cohen, Jerome B. "Differential Correctional Treatment Programs and Modifications of Self-Image," Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1964. Cressey, Donald R. "Changing Criminals: the Application of the Theory of Differential Association,” American Journal of Soc- iology, No. 61 (September, 1955). Cressey, Donald R. (ed.) The Prison, Studies in Institutional Organization and Change. New YOrk: Holt Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1961. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 105 Deane, Stephen R. "A Psychological Description of Adults Who Have Participated in Selected Activities," Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland, 1949. Dillon, Harold J. Early School Leavers: A Major Educational Problem. New York: National Child Labor Committee, 419 Fourth Avenue, 1949. Dixon,.Alfred J. and Frank J. Massey. Introduction to Statistical Analysis. New York: McGraw Hill Book Co., Inc., 1951, 1957. Ely, Mary L. Handbook of Adult Education in the United States. New York: Institute of Adult Education, 1948. Essert, Paul. Creative Leadership of Adult Education. New York: Prentice Hill, 1951. Evan, William M. "Dimensions of Participation in Voluntary'As- sociation," Social Forces, XXXVI, No. 2 (December,l957). Fisher, Ronald A. Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd Ltd., 1958. Foskett, John M. "Social Structure and Social Participation," Auerican Sociological Review, XX, No. 4 (August, 1955). Fricke, Benno G. "The Gordon Personal Profile," Fifth Mental Measurements Yearbook, edited by Oscar K. Buros, Highland Park, New Jersey: The Gryphon Press, 1959. Goldhamer, Herbert. "Participation in Voluntary Association," Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, Univer- sity of Chicago, 1952. Gordon, Leonard V. Gordon Personal Profile, Manual. Yonkers- on-Hudson, New York: WOrld Book Co., 1953. Guilford, Jay P. and C. Zimmerman. Temperament Survey. Beverly Hills, California: Sheridan Supply Co., 1949. Hallenbeck, Wilbur C. "Participation in Public Affairs," Adult Education, 11, No. 1 (October, 1951). Hathaway, Starke and Elio D. Monachesi. .Analyzing and Predict- ing Juvenile Delinquency with the MMPI, Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1953. History of Probation, Prisons, Pardons and Paroles in Michigan. State Department of Corrections, State of Michigan, 1938. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 106 Holden, John B. "A Survey of Participation in Adult Education Classes," Adult Leadership, VI CApril, 1958). Jackson, Harry H. The Michigan State Prison, Jackson, pamphlet, State of Michigan, 1928. Kaplan, AbrahaulA. "Socio-Economic Circumstances and.Adult Participations in Certain Cultural and Educational Activities," Contribution to Education, No. 889. New York: Bureau of Pub- lication, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1943. Kaufman, Harold F. Participation in Organized Activities in Selected Kentucky Localities, Bulletin 528. Lexington: Univer- sity of Kentucky, Agricl. Experiment Station, 1949. Kelly, Lowell E. "Consistency of the Adult Personality," American Psychologist, I, No. 11 (November, 1955). Knowdes, Malcolm. “Adult Education in the United States," Adult Education, V, No. 2 (Winter, 1955). Kuder, Frederic G. Examiner Manual for the Kuder Preference Record, Personal. Chicago: Science Research Associates, 1953. Kuder, Frederic G. Kuder Preference Record, Personal. Chicago: Science Research.Associates, 1948. Los Angeles City Board of Education. "Informational Report on Adult Education to the Los Angeles City Board of Education," Los Angeles: December 10, 1959 (mimeographed). Maclean, MalcolutS. "Learning to Live with Atomic Energy," Unpublished address before the Institute on Atomic Energy, University of California, Los Angeles, May 28, 1947. Mather, William G. "Income and Social Participation,".American Sociological Review, VI, No. 3 (June, 1941). McClelland, David C. Personality. New York: William Sloane As- sociates, 1951. McCormick, Thomas Carson. Elementary Social Statistics. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1941. Michigan's Correctional System. First Biennial Report, State Department of Corrections, State of Michigan, 1937-1938. Michigan State Prison, Jackson. Information on the State Prison of Southern Michigan, 1958. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 107 Plant, James S. Personality and Cultural Pattern. New York: The Commonwealth Fund, 1937. Plummer, Robert H. ”An Experiment in Counseling," Adult Educ- ation, IX, No. 1 QAutumn, 1958). Pressey, Sidney L., Elliott J. Janney and Raymond G. Kuhlen. Life: A Psychological Survey. New York: Harper and Co., 1939. Runquiest, Edward A. "Personality Tests and Prediction," Handbook of Applied Psychology, edited by Douglas Fryer and Edwin R. Henry. New York: Rinehart and Co., 1950. Saunders, David R. ”Guilford and Zimmerman Questionnaire," Fifth Mental Measurements Yearbook, edited by Oscar K. Buros, Highland Park, New Jersey: The Gryphon Press, 1959. Scaff, Alvin H. "The Effect of Commuting on Participation in Community Organizations," American Sociological Review, XVII, No. 2 (April, 1952). Scott, John C. "Membership and Participation in Voluntary As- sociation," American Sociological Review, XXII, No. 3 (June, 1957). Shaw, George B. The Crime of Imprisonment. New York: Philosoph- ical Library Inc., 1946. Sheats, Paul H., Clarence D. Jayne, and Ralph B. Spence. Adult Education, the Community.Approach. The Dryden Press, 1953. Sitts, Marvin, VA Study of the Personality Differences Between a Group of'WOmen Who Had Participated in Sewing Classes in an.Adult Education Program and a Group of Their Friends and Neighbors Who Had Not Participated in Any Adult Education Program," Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1960. Smith, George Baxter. "Purposes and Conditions Affecting the Nature and Extent of Participation of Adults in Courses in the Home Study Department of Columbia University, 1925-1932."‘922- tributions to Education, No. 663. New York: Bureau of Pub- lications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1935. Sorenson, Herbert. Adult.Abilities: A Study of University Ex— tension Students. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1938. Spectator. Jackson, Michigan, 4000 Cooper Street, Vol. 35, No. 7, February 12, 1965 (prison newspaper). 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 108 Sutherland, Edwin H. and Donald R. Cressey. Principles of Criminology. Chicago: J. B. Lippincott Company, 5th Edition, 1955. Taietz, Philip and Olaf F. Larson. "Social Participation and Old.Age," Rural Sociology, XXI, No. 1-4 (December, 1956). Thorndike, Edward L., Elsie O. Bergman, J. W. Tilton, and E. Woodyard. Adult Learning. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1928. Thurstone, Louis L. Temperament Schedule. Chicago: Science Research Associates, 1949-53. Traxler, Arthur. Technique of Guidance. New York: Harper and Bros., 1957. Underwood, Benton J., Carl P. Duncan, Janet A. Taylor, and John W. Cotton. Elementary Statistics. New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts, Inc., 1954. Van Steenberg, Neil J. "Thurstone Temperament Schedule," The Fifth Mental Measurements Yearbook, edited by Oscar K. Buros Highland Park, New Jersey: The Gryphon Press, 1959. Verner, Coolie and John Newberry. "The Nature of Adult Par— ticipation," Adult Education, VIII, No. 4 (Summer, 1950). Walker, Helen M and Joseph Lev. Elementary Statistical Methods, New YOrk: H. Holt and Company, 1958. Wechsler, David. The Measurement of Adult Intelligence. Balti- more: The Williams and Wilkins Co.,1944. APPENDIX.A THE SIXTEEN PERSONALITY FACTOR QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX A —PAT 16 p_ F_ M WHAT TO DO: Inside this booklet are some questions to see what attitudes and interests you have. There are no “right” and “wrong” answers because everyone has the right to his own views. To be able to get the best advice from your results, you will want to answer them exactly and truly. If a separate “Answer Sheet” has not been given to you, turn this booklet over and tear off the Answer Sheet on the back page. Write your name and other particulars at the top of the Answer Sheet. First, you should answer the four sample questions below so that you can see whether you need to ask anything before starting. Although you are to read the questions in this booklet, you must record your answers on the answer sheet (alongside the same number as in the booklet). There are three possible answers to each question. Read the following examples and mark your answers at the tap of your answer sheet where it says “Examples.” Put a mark, x, in the left- hand box if your answer choice is the “a” answer, in the middle box if your answer choice is the “b” answer, and in the right-hand box if you choose the “c” answer. EXAMPLES: 1. I like to watch team games. (a) yes, (b) occasionally, (e) no. 2. I prefer people who: .(a) are reserved, (b) (are) in between, (c) make friends quickly. 3. Money cannot bring happiness. (a) yes (true), (b) in between, (c) no (false). 4. Woman is to child as cat is to: (a) kitten, (b) dog, (c) boy. In the last example there is a right answer—kitten. But there are very few such reasoning items among the questions. Ask now if anything is not clear. The examiner will tell you in a moment to turn the page and start. When you answer, keep these four points in mind: 1. You are asked not to spend time pondering. Give the first, natural answer as it comes to you. Of course, the questions are too short to give you all the particulars you would some- times like to have. For instance, the above question asks you about “team games” and you might be fonder of football than basketball. But you are to reply “for the average game,” or to strike an average in situations of the kind stated. Give the best answer you can at a rate not slower than five or six 3 minute. You should finish in a little more than half an hour. 2 . Try not to fall back on the middle, “uncertain” answers except when the answer at either end is really impossible for you—perhaps once every two or three questions. 3. Be sure not to skip anything, but answer every question, somehow. Some may not apply to you very well, but give your best guess. Some may seem personal; but remember that the answer sheets are kept confidential and cannot be scored without a special stencil key. Answers to particular questions are not inspected. 4. Answer‘as honestly as possible what is true of you. Do not merely mark what seems “the right thing to say" to impress the examiner. Co ri ht b The I t't f P rsonalit & Ability Testing, 1956, 1962. International. copyright in all countries under the Berne Union, Buenos Aires, Billinyteril. Sid 3Universnafil 'c‘éfyrigm eConventions. All property rights reserved by The Institute for Personality & Ability Testing. 1602-04 Coronado Drne, Champaign, Illinois, U.S.A. Printed in U.S.A. 110 NH 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 111 I have the instructions for this test clearly in mind. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, (c) no. I am ready to answer each question as truthfully as possible. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, (e) no. . It would be good for everyone if vacations (holidays) were longer and everyone had to take them. (a) agree, (b) uncertain, (c) disagree. . I can find enough energy to face my difficulties. (a) always, (b) generally, (c) seldom. . I feel a bit nervous of wild animals even when they are in strong cages. (a) yes (true), (b) un- certain, (c) no (false). . I hold back from criticizing people and their ideas. (a) yes, (b) sometimes, (e) no. . I make smart, sarcastic remarks to people if I think they deserve it. (a) generally, (b) sometimes, (c) never. . I prefer semiclassical music to popular tunes. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. . If I saw two neighbors’ children fighting, I would: (a) leave them to settle it, (b) uncertain, (c) reason with them. On social occasions I: (a) readily come forward, (b) respond in between, (c) prefer to stay quietly in the background. I would rather be: (a) a construction engineer, (b) uncertain, (c) a teacher of social studies. I would rather spend a free evening: (a) with a good book, (b) uncertain, (c) working on a hobby with friends. I can generally put up with conceited people, even though they brag or show they think too well of themselves. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I’d rather that the person I marry be socially admired than gifted in art or literature. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. I sometimes get an unreasonable dislike for a person: (a) but it is so slight I can hide it easily, (b) in between, (c) which is so definite that I tend to express it. In a situation which may become dangerous I believe in making a fuss and speaking up even if calmness and politeness are lost. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. iaim always keenly aware of attempts at propaganda in things I read. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, c no. I wake up in the night and, through worry, have difficulty in sleeping again. (3) often, (b) some- times, (c) never. I don’t feel guilty if scolded for something I did not do. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. I am considered a liberal “dreamer” of new ways rather than a practical follower of well-tried ways. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. I find that my interests in people and amusement tend to change fairly rapidly. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. In constructing something I would rather work: (a) with a committee, (b) uncertain, (c) on my own. I find myself counting things, for no particular purpose. (a) often, (b) occasionally, (c) never. When talking I like: (a) to say things, just as they occur to me, (b) in between, (c) to get my thoughts well organized first. I never feel the urge to doodle and fidget when kept sitting still at a meeting. (a) true, ('1) un- certain, (c) false. (End of first column on answer sheet.) 3 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.- 36. 37 . 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. With the same hours and pay, I would prefer the life of: (a) a carpenter or cook, (b) uncertain, (c) a waiter in a good restaurant. With acquaintances I prefer: (a) to keep to matter-of-fact impersonal things, (b) in between, (c) to chat about people and their feelings. “Spade” is to “dig” as “knife” is to: (a) sharp, (b) cut, (c) shovel. I sometimes can’t get to sleep because an idea keeps running through my mind. (a) true, (b) un- certain, (c) false. In my personal life I reach the goals I set, almost all the time. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. When telling a person a deliberate lie I have to look away, being ashamed to look him in the eye. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. I am uncomfortable when I work on a project requiring quick action affecting others. (a) true, (b) in between, (c) false. Most of the people I know would rate me as an amusing talker. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, (e) no. Many ordinary people would be shocked if they knew my inner personal opinions. (a) yes, (b) un- certain, (c) no. I get slightly embarrassed if I suddenly become the focus of attention in a social group. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I am always glad to join a large gathering, for example, a party, dance, or public meeting. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. In school I preferred (or prefer): (a) music, (b) uncertain, (c) handwork and crafts. I believe most people are a little “queer” mentally though they do not like to admit it. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I like a friend (of my sex) who: (a) seriously thinks out his attitudes to life, (b) in between, (c) is efficient and practical in his interests. “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try, again,” is a motto completely forgotten in the modern world. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, (c) no. { f)eel a need every now and then to engage in a tough physical activity. (a) yes, (b) in between, e no. I( would rather mix with polite people than rough, rebellious individuals. (a) yes, (b) in between, c no. In intellectual interests, my parents are (were): (a) a bit below average, (b) average, (c) above average. When I am called in by my boss (or teacher), I: (a) see a chance to put in a good word for things I am concerned about, (b) in between, (c) fear something has gone wrong. I feel a strong need for someone to lean on in times of sadness. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I occasionally get puzzled when looking in a mirror, as to the meaning of right and left. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. As a teenager, I joined in school sports: (a) occasionally, (b) fairly often, (c) a great deal. I would rather stop in the street to watch an artist painting than listen to some people having a quarrel. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. I sometimes get in a state of tension and turmoil as I think of the day’s happenings. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I sometimes doubt whether people I am talking to are really interested in what I am saying. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. (End of second column on answer sheet.) 4 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67 . 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 112 I would like to be: (a) a forester, (b) uncertain, (c) a grammar or high school teacher. For special holidays and birthdays, 1: (a) like to give personal presents, (b) uncertain, (c) feel that buying presents is a bit of a nuisance. “Tired” is to “work” as “proud” is to: (a) rest, (b) success, (c) exercise. Whiclzh if the following items is different in kind from the others? (a) candle, (b) moon, (c) elec- tric ig t. I admire my parents in all important matters. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, (c) no. I have; some characteristics in which I feel definitely superior to most people. (a) yes, (b) uncer- tain, c no. If it is useful to others, I don’t mind taking a dirty job that others look down on. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. I like to go out to a show or entertainment: (a) more than once a week (more than average), (b) about once a week (average), (c) less than once a week (less than average). I think that plenty of freedom is more important than good manners and respect for the law. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. I tend to keep quiet in the presence of senior persons (people of greater experience, age, or rank). (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I find it hard to address or recite to a large group. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I would rather live in a town: (a) which is rough, prosperous, and booming, (b) uncertain, (c) artistically laid out, but relatively poor. If I make an awkward social mistake, I can soon forget it. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. When I read an unfair magazine article, I am more inclined to forget it than to feel like “hitting back.” (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. My memory tends to drop a lot of unimportant trivial things, for example, names of streets or stores in town. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I am considered a person easily swayed by appeals to my feelings. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I eat my food with gusto, not always so carefully and properly as some people. (a) true, (b) un- certain, (c) false. I generally keep up hope in ordinary difficulties. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, (e) no. People sometimes warn me that I show my excitement in voice and manner too obviously. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. As a teenager, if I differed in opinion from my parents, I usually: (a) kept my own opinion, (b) in between, (c) accepted their authority. I prefer to marry someone who can: (a) keep the family interested in its own activities, (b) in between, (c) make the family a part of the social life of the neighborhood. I would rather enjoy life quietly in my own way than be admired for my achievements. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. I can work carefully on most things without being bothered by people making a lot of noise around me. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I feel that on one or two occasions recently I have been blamed more than I really deserve. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I am always able to keep the expressions of my feelings under exact control. (a) yes, (b) in be- tween, (c) no. (End of third column on answer sheet.) 5 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. In starting a useful invention, I would prefer: (a) working on it in the laboratory, (b) uncertain, (c) selling it to people. “Surprise” is to “strange” as “fear” is to: (a) brave, (b) anxious, (c) terrible. Which of the following fractions is not in the same class as the others? (a) 3/7, (b) 3/9, (c) 3/11. Some people seem to ignore or avoid me, although I don’t know why. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. People treat me less reasonably than my good intentions deserve. (a) often, (b) occasionally, (c) never. The use of foul language, even when it is not in a mixed group of men and women, still disgusts me. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I have decidedly fewer friends than most people. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I would hate to be where there wouldn’t be a lot of people to talk to. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. People sometimes call me careless, even though they think me an attractive person. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. My reserve always stands in the way when I want to speak to an attractive stranger of the op- posite sex. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I would rather have a job with: (a) a fixed, certain salary, (b) in between, (c) a larger salary, but depending on my constantly persuading people I am worth it. I prefer reading: (a) a realistic account of military or political battles, (b) uncertain, (c) a sen- sitive, imaginative novel. When bossy people try to “push me around,” I do just the opposite of what they wish. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. Most people would be “better off” if given more praise instead of more criticism. (a) true, (b) un- certain, (c) false. In discussing art, religion, or politics, I seldom get so involved or excited I forget politeness and human relations. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. If someone got mad at me, I would: (a) try to calm him down, (b) uncertain, (c) get irritated. I would like to see a move toward: (a) eating more vegetable foods, to avoid killing so many animals, (b) uncertain, (c) getting better poisons to kill the animals which ruin farmers’ creps (such as squirrels, rabbits, and seme kinds of birds). If acquaintances treat me badly and show they dislike me: (a) it does not upset me a bit, (b) in between, (c) I tend to get downhearted. Careless folks who say “the best things in life are free” usually haven’t worked to get much. (a) true, (b) in between, (c) false. Because it is not always possible to get things done by gradual, reasonable methods, it is some- times necessary to use force. (a) true, (b) in between, (c) false. At fifteen or sixteen I went about with the opposite sex: (a) a lot, (b) as much as most people, (c) less than most people. I like to take an active part in social affairs, committee work, etc. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. The idea that sickness comes as much from mental as physical causes is much exaggerated. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. Quite small setbacks occasionally irritate me too much. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. E yefry rarely blurt out annoying remarks that hurt people’s feelings. (a) true, (b) uncertain, c alse. (End of fourth column on answer sheet.) 6 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 113 I would prefer to work in a business: (a) talking to customers, (b) in between, (c) keeping of- fice accounts and records. “Size” is to “length” as “dishonest” is to: (a) prison, (b) sin, (c) stealing. AB is to dc as SR is to: (a) qp, (b) pq. (c) tu. When people are unreasonable, I just: (a) keep quiet, (b) in between, (c) despise them. If people talk loudly while I am listening to music, I: (a) can keep my mind on the music and not be bothered, (b) in between, (c) find it spoils my enjoyment and annoys me. I think I am better described as: (a) polite and quiet, (b) in between, (c) forceful. I attend social functions only when I have to, and stay away any other time. (a) yes, (b) uncer- tain, (e) no. To be cautious and expect little is better than to be happy at heart, always expecting success. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. In thinking of difficulties in my work, I: (a) try to plan ahead, before I meet them, (b) in be- tween, (c) assume I can handle them when they come. I have at least as many friends of the opposite sex as of my own. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. Even in an important game I am more concerned to enjoy it than to win. (a) always, (b) gen- erally, (c) occasionally. I would rather be: (a) a guidance worker with young people seeking careers, (b) uncertain, (c) a manager in a technical manufacturing concern. If I am quite sure that a person is unjust or behaving selfishly, I show him up, even if it takes some trouble. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. Some people criticize my sense of responsibility. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, (c) no. I would enjoy being a newspaper writer on drama, concerts, opera, etc. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, (e) no. I find it embarrassing to have praise or compliments bestowed on me. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I think it is more important in the modern world to solve: (a) the political difficulties, (b) un- certain, (c) the question of moral purpose. I occasionally have a sense of vague danger or sudden dread for no sufficient reason. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. As a child I feared the dark. (a) often, (b) sometimes, (c) never. On a free evening I like to: (a) see an historical film about past adventures, (b) uncertain, (c) read science fiction or an essay on “The Future of Science.” It bothers me if people think I am being too unconventional or odd. (3) a lot, (b) somewhat, (c) not at all. Most people would be happier if they lived more with their fellows and did the same things as others. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I like to go my own way instead of acting on approved rules. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. Often I get angry with people too quickly. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. When something really upsets me, I generally calm down again quite quickly. (a) yes, (b) in be- tween, (c) no. (End of fifth column on answer sheet.) 7 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. Iflthe earnings were the same, I would rather be: (a) a lawyer, (b) uncertain, (c) a navigator or pi ot. “Better” is to “worst” as “slower” is to: (a) fast, (b) best, (e) quickest. Which of the following should come next at the end of this row of letters: xooooxxoooxxx? (a) xox, (b) oox, (c) oxx. When the time comes for something I have planned and looked forward to, I occasionally do not feel up to going. (a) true, (b) in between, (c) false. I could enjoy the life of an animal doctor, handling disease and surgery of animals. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I occasionally tell strangers things that seem to me important, regardless of whether they ask about them. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I spend much of my spare time talking with friends over social events enjoyed in the past. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I enjoy doing “daring,” foolhardy things “just for fun.” (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I think the police can be trusted not to ill-treat innocent people. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I consider myself a very sociable, outgoing person. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. In sopial contacts I: (a) show my emotions as I wish, (b) in between, (c) keep my emotions to myse . I enjoy music that is: (a) light, dry, and brisk, (b) in between, (c) emotional and sentimental. I try to make my laughter at jokes quieter than most people’s. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I( admire the beauty of a fairy tale more than that of a well-made gun. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, e) no. Hearing different beliefs about right and wrong is: (a) always interesting, (b) something we cannot avoid, (c) bad for most people. I am always interested in mechanical matters, for example, in cars and airplanes. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I like to tackle problems that other people have made a mess of. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I am properly regarded as only a plodding, half-successful person. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, (e) no. If people take advantage of my friendliness, I do not resent it and I soon forget. (a) true, (b) un- certain, (c) false. I think the spread of birth control is essential to solving the world’s economic and peace problems. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, (e) no. I like to do my planning alone, without interruptions and suggestions from others. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I sometimes let my actions get swayed by feelings of jealousy. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I believe firmly “the boss may not always be right, but he always has the right to be boss.” (a) yes, (b) uncertain, (c) no. I tend to tremble or perspire when I think of a difficult task ahead. (a) generally, (b) occasionally, (c) never. If people shout suggestions when I’m playing a game, it does not upset me. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. (End of sixth column on answer sheet.) 8 151 152. 153. 154. 155. 156. 157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168. 169. 170. 171. 172. 173. 174. 175. 114 I would prefer the life of : (a) an artist, (b) uncertain, (c) a secretary running a social club. Which of the following words does not properly belong with the others? (a) any, (b) some, (c) most. “Flame” is to “heat” as “rose” is to: (a) them, (b) red petals, (c) scent. I have vivid dreams, disturbing my sleep. (a) often, (b) occasionally, (c) practically never. If the odds are really against something’s being a success, I still believe in taking the risk. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I like it when I know so well what the group has to do that I naturally become the one in command. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I would rather dress with quiet correctness than with eye-catching personal style. (a) true, (b) un- certain, (c) false. An evening with a quiet hobby appeals to me more than a lively party. (a) true, (b) uncertain, (c) false. I close my mind to well-meant suggestions of others, even though I know I shouldn’t. (a) oc- casionally, (b) hardly ever, (c) never. I always make a point, in deciding anything, to refer to basic rules of right and wrong. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I somewhat dislike having a group watch me at work. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. I keep my room smartly organized, with things in known places almost all the time. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. In school I preferred: (a) English, (b) uncertain, (c) mathematics or arithmetic. I have sometimes been troubled by people’s saying bad things about me behind my back, with no grounds at all. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, (e) no. Talk with ordinary, habit-bound, conventional people: (a) is often quite interesting and has a lot to it, (b) in between, (c) annoys me because it deals with trifles and lacks depth. 1 like to: (a) have a circle of warm friendships, even if they are demanding, (b) in between, (c) be free of personal entanglements. I think it is wiser to keep the nation’s military forces strong than just to depend on international goodwill. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. People regard me as a solid, undisturbed person, unmoved by ups and downs in circumstances. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I think society should let reason lead it to new customs and throw aside old habits or mere tra- ditions. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. My viewpoints change in an uncertain way because I trust my feelings more than logical reason- ing. (a) true, (b) to some extent, (c) false. I learn better by: (a) reading a well-written book, (b) in between, (c) joining a group discussion. I have periods when it’s hard to stop a mood of self-pity. (a) often, (b) occasionally, (c) never. I like to wait till I am sure that what I am saying is correct, before I put forth an argument. (a) always, (b) generally, (c) only if it’s practicable. Small things sometimes “get on my nerves” unbearably though I realize them to be trivial. (a) yes, (b) in between, (e) no. } dorfi’tl often say things on the spur of the moment that I greatly regret. (a) true, (b) uncertain, c) a se. (End of seventh column on answer sheet.) 9 176. 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. 182. 183. 184. 185. 186. 187. If asked to work with a charity drive, I would: (a) accept, (b) uncertain, (c) politely say I’m too busy. Which of the following words does not belong with the others? (a) wide, (b) zigzag, (c) regular. “Soon” is to “never” as “near” is to: (a) nowhere, (b) far, (c) next. I have a good sense of direction (find it easy to tell which is North, South, East, or West) when in a strange place. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I am known as an “idea man” who almost always puts forward some ideas on a problem. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. ' I think I am better at showing: (a) nerve in meeting challenges, (b) uncertain, (c) tolerance of other people’s wishes. I am considered a very enthusiastic person. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I like a job that offers change, variety, and travel, even if it involves some danger. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I am a fairly strict person, insisting on always doing things as correctly as possible. (a) true, (b) in between, (c) false. I enjoy work that requires conscientious, exacting skills. (a) yes, (b) in between, (c) no. I’m the energetic type who keeps busy. (a) yes, (b) uncertain, (c) no. I am sure there are no questions that I have skipped or failed to answer properly. (a) yes, (b) un- certain, (c) no. 10 115 auoosmvu 'WJE“ lo 'm I... |._1 [2 [2 lo J6 [0'7 I0: 1074 ~D°D°EI°EJ~D «DD ,_ a: «DDDDD aDrJ g -Cl-El-D-D-El -El-Cl 2 2 E 5 .3. .. 2 a": ~D°D°D°D~D ~D-D~D~El-D ~DDDDD oDDDDr: aDDDDD aDDDDD aDDDDD aDnDnDaDaU see-e4? ses-9e see-9e ease-e 3 ~DDDDD «DDDDD ~D~D~D~D~D ~D~D~D~D°D < f aDDDDD aflaflaflaflnfliaflnflalflafl-D =DDDDD aDDDDU z g g -DDDDD-D-D-D-D-D§-DDDDD~DDDDD-DDDDU law -555 ______ 5535.8. 2223.. =23 < i :7; I 3 g .‘L' ; ~DDDDD °t:1-[:J-t:)--DI:1 *0 ~DDDDD -DDDDD -El DDDD : : aDaDaDaDaD aDDDDDgaDDDDD aDDDDD aDDDDD :2 a "‘3 -El-D-D-Cl-El -D D D DC] a -D D D D [:1 -El-El-Cl-D-El -El 0-0-0 [1 : 2§§§ _____ =t—EEEEE ==§=.. 8253: E III 8D It) i 55 g E “3 on DDD D «DDDDD E ~DDDDD «DDDDD ~D-D-D~D~D 3:: 3 D aDDDDD aDDDDD aDDDDD aDDDDD aDDDDD E «DDDDD-DD-D-DU-DDDDU-DDDDD-DDDDD 3 ‘D can: 8 83883 8888 BBISQ 3 .a ”@0600 flwDDDD Dflflflfl DDGGD magma E DGDGG flG-DDD -Dflflflfl cacao Dflflflfl 43:22:: a 23238 a: :eczrz '19 DDGGD flwDDUD Dflflflfl @0000 comma «(:1 aDDDDD aDDDDD sDDDDD aDaDaDaDaD aDDDDU .D 4:] El-El-Cl-El -D-El-Cl-Cl-El -EJ-El-El-Cl-Cl ~El-Cl-El-El-D -Cl-D-E]-El-D t 8783 Sfiflfifi 83889 $3333 3%988 {I'D oDDDDU «DDDDD «DDDDD «DDDDD «DDDDU w I l 9:. a-g-u-Q-D-Q 'Q'D'Q'Q'Q Eve-9&9 mew-cg “Q'Q'Q'Q'Qi APPENDIX B ADULT EDUCATION DATA SURVEY APPENDIX B This survey is confidential. When all the information has been collected and tabulated this sheet will be removed and discarded. Please print your name on this sheet only. Copy this number . on your answer sheet in the space after the word "name." Name 117 118 ADULT EDUCATION DATA SURVEY Ilris is a study designed to secure information from peOple regarding their adult ethncation activities. This information may make possible a more worthwhile adult education program. we: appreciate your frank answers. Thank you for your help. "k*********7’c7’c7‘:**************** 1. Are you attending any adult education activities or classes now or have you attended any during the last year? Yes No 2. If yes, check type of activity. (You may check more than one) academic vocational and technical rehabilitation (group therapy, etc.) ______ social other 3. Where? Here_____ Other (name) 4. Did you enjoy this activity? Yes No 5. Have you attended any other adult activities or classes in the last five years? Yes No 6. If yes, check type of activity. (You may check more than one.) academic vocational and technical rehabilitation (group therapy, etc.) “_____ social other ,7. Where? Here_____ Other (name) 8. Did you enjoy this activity? Yes No 9. Have you ever enrolled in any special school, trade school or correspondence ? school since leaving regular school? Yes No 10. If yes, the name of the school or schools eu-‘oq n... 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 119 If yes, why did you enroll in this school? Did you enjoy this activity? Yes No What is your age group? under 21 __ 26 to 30 36 to 40 __ 51 to 60 21 to 25 __ 31 to 35 __ 41 to 50 __ over 60 How many years have you been here? less than 1 4 - 5 over 10 1 - 3 ‘__ 6 - 10 On what offense were you convicted? What is the length of your present sentence? less than 1 5 - 10 over 10 Are you a first-timer? Yes No What was the last grade or year you attended regular school? 6 or less 7, 8, 9 10, 11, 12, but did not graduate 12, graduated college, but did not graduate four year college degree graduate work in college Did you enjoy regular school when you attended? Yes No Are you married? Yes No 21. Do you have any children? YES 22. If yes, how many? 23. Where did you live before coming here? 24. How long? 25. Where were you born? 26. How is your health? often ill or handicapped sometimes ill almost never ill 27. Have you been in military service? YES NO 28. If yes, what branch? 29. Do you belong to any special clubs or groups? YES NO 30. What is the name or names of these clubs or groups? 31. How many times in the last year have you attended regular meetings? none '__ 6 - 10 .__ 21 - 50 __. more than twice weekly 1 - 5 __ ll - 20 .__ 51 - 100 32. Do you usually attend with a friend? YES'_____ NO _____ 33. What is your church affiliation? Catholic _ Protestant__ Jewish __ Other __ None __ 34. How many times in the last year have you attended a regular church meetivv? None__ 1 - 5___ 6- 25__ 26- 50_ More than 50___ 35. What is your political party? Democratic Republican Neither or varies 36. I have voted in: national elections local elections state elections never voted . . u . ' V I A . . . . . _ . -.... .. e - -u~ - '. ~.v-”-" . .--. ....... .. ..... .ik.. - ,. .. .—.. - . .. .., .7 1 \. '- ' I _ . , .. 1-.....” -.-.. ' I . . l . ... --... . . . .. ..~ “a...” . ,,._ ,.... .2. .... ...- .....- , - . . 4.....- --.... ....-,*.._....-..-v.._-. .....- .. --. ' n ’ - - . y , , ( l ’ -' ' . . _ . ,V , . . -.......-... _ a.-. . ~ ... v. ' ;‘ , .. . ‘. . , ...,, ...... .<.i....-....__.. .. I e .~' I ‘- -. ‘ - v— ..4 ~~ -- 4 -~ ‘ .5 w - I — -- I a ‘ . “-‘Q- -—>_‘-- ~ -‘~ 4.n'--« I.‘ C. e ' . . i . , 1. 1 -. p \ ,, ' 7. v . ‘ V . I . u i I -’ - - . 1!. ~ ,. ‘. .Iix ' V or . « ‘ .‘ | . . . ‘ 'a ' .‘ ,. . . . . . .. J . _ , ,. J ' . . :13} J . A ...,. _- I I _- \ l .l' . ....... ,', - , . \ ‘ r. \., ‘ ‘ . . .,......,.-.- .. ...... .. . 7 . . . . . . . ,.‘, p .' 4. _ | , : ,,_ . . -.... »- ‘ - ' f , , _. . . . .‘ > ' t . .‘ .. ..»“ ‘. ..o _) l .. . ‘ , - . j | . .tn Il ‘ I ll . - . a... 1...- . .. . N .- v . . . 1\-' . "4 . . , . l. . ‘ o ,. - . v . - - I I l r . _. J . ,. ’ . I ‘ , .a -..-._.. . .... ‘._’.__ t . I v . , .« .- . . ' ' ‘ ; . ..... .. . . -_ APPENDIX C LETTER TO INMATES APPENDIX C MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION LANSING LYNN M. BARTLETT State Superintendent July 30, 1965 4000 COOper Street Jackson, Michigan Dear Sir: I would like to thank you for your fine cooperation in the adult education survey earlier this year. The information thazwas made available through this survey will be very helpful in the operation of the adult education program. The Academic School will continue to try to offer the best program that is possible. An invitation is extended to you to take an active part in these activities. It is my per— sonal hOpe that you take advantage of this program. Thank you again. Very truly yours, Harvey Hershey, Director Adult Education Survey HH:ds 122 APPENDIX D COHESIVE MATRIX OF CORRELATIONS AMONG REFERENCE VECTORS .oHN .m .Aommav HHx .zwofionommm Hmowzwao mo HmGHDOh :.muwmazowummso nouomm >uw~m¢0mumm :mouxwm as“ NO mcowwmowmwmaoucH mam mGOwumpHHm>z .HHmupwo .m ccoa>mm "Scum cmmeH APPENDIX D 00.H mm. H0. ma. NH.- 50.- H0.- ma.- ma. H0. m0.- m0. N0. 00. :0. do 00.H NH. 00. 0N. mm.- :0.- HH. N0.- 0a.- 0a.- mm. NH. aH.- 0m. 00 00.H :H.- m0. m0. HH.- H0.- HH.- m0. N0. am. we. H0.- n0. mo 00.H H0. 00. as.- H0. «0. a0.- as. N0.- Hm.- m0. mH.- H0 00.H :0. 00.- m0.- HH.- ma. N0. :0.- 00. ma. N0. 0 00.H «0.- m0.- 0N. m0.- ma. NH.- HH.- H0. m0. z 00.H “0.- as. m0. :0.- am. 00. as. 00. z 00.H #0.- 0m. a0.- se.- 00.- H0.- H0.- a 00.H as. 00. H0. 00.- 30.- 0N.- H 00.H 00. 0N.- se.- NH.- 00.- m 00.H m0. N0.- :0. 00. o 00.H 00. m0. H0.- a 00.H 00. n0. m 00.H me. o 00.H a :0 no No Ho 0 z z a H m u a m u 4 msouomm Hmuowom> mocmuommu macaw mcowpmamuuoo mo Xapums m>wmmnoo 124 APPENDIX E FORM A STENS: GENERAL POPULATION; ADULT AMERICAN DUN-(IDLLEGE MALE APPENDIX E N m w a w m N a a 0 0 o m 2 N N m m m N N m w m 0 a s 3 N N N N m 0 0 0 m m m m s 0H 0H s 0 N N N a 0 N N m a m .N 0H NH 0 m 0 a 0 m m N N a a s m 0H . HH 0 m m. m 0 a a 0 0 a m a N a 0H m a m m m m a 0 0 a m m N 0 0 m m a a m m m m m N m m N 0 m a m a m a N N a m m N N H N N a N m N a H N a a m N N H 0 a m N 0 N m H H m a N N H H m m m H N H m H H m m N H H H a a m H H H N H H N N H H H H m m N H H H H H H H H H H H H N N N H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H 0 so no No Ho 0 z 2 H H HH 0 m o m 88m m-Honomm 3mm mama mwmgooucoa sag-Hue}. pflswm :oHumHHHmoa $.5me “macaw mm .wcHumoH szHHn< paw muHHmCOmHom How upsuwumcH H.HHH .cwwwmamno .xOOQCCmm muwmccowummsd Hepomm zuHHmCOmHmm pamEmHemsm HmHsan .moHum .0 ram mumpcsmm .m .Q .HHmuawo .m pcoakmm "Scum :mmeH 00.: HH.m 03.0 m0.N N0.0 N0.N 03.0 0N.m 00.0 0H.m 00.0 03.: 00.0 mN.m 00.N 00.0 0H.HH 00.0H 0N.HH 00.0 0N.NH 00.0H 00.0H Nm.0 0mm: 00.0H NH.0H mm.0 mH.NH 00.0 :0.0H Hm.mH No.0 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0N 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0N 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H :N 0H 0H 0H 0 0H 0H 0 MN 0H 0H 0H 0 0H 0H 0 NN 0H 0H 0H 0 0H 0 0 HN N 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0 0H 0 0 0 0H 0N .1 0 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0 0H 0H N 0 0 0 N 0H 0H 0 0H 0H 0H 0H 0H 0 0H 0H N 0 0 0 N 0H 0H 0 0 0 0H 0 0 0 0H 0H N N N N 0 0H NH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0H 0H 0 N N N m 0 0H so 00 No Ho 0 z 2 H H m 0 m m o m < macaw muouomm 3mm wmscwpcoo APPENDIX F BIPOLAR DESCRIPTIONS OF SOURCE IRAITS (FACTORS) A THROUGH Q4 APPENDIX F Bipolar descriptions of source traits (factors) A through Q41 High Score Low Score Factor A CYCLOTHYMIA, A+ Versus SCHIZOTHYMIA, A- (WARM, SOCIABLE) (ALOOF, STIFF) This factor has been found to load most highly the following traits: Good Natured, Easy Going vs. . Aggressive, Grasping, Critical Ready to Cooperate vs. Obstructive Attentive to People vs. C001, Aloof Soft Hearted, Kindly vs. Hard, Precise Trustful vs. Suspicious Adaptable vs. Rigid warm Hearted vs. Cold Factor B GENERAL INTELLIGENCE, B+ Versus MENTAL DEFECT, B- (BRIGHT) (DULL) The measurement of intelligence has been shown to carry with it as a factor in the personality realm some of the following ratings: Conscientious vs. Of Lower Morale Persevering vs. Quitting Intellectual, Cultured vs. Boorish Factor C EMOTIONAL STABILITY OR EGO Versus DISSATISFIED EMOTIONALITY, C- STRENGTH, C+ (EMOTIONAL, IMMATURE, UNSTABLE) (MATURE , CALM) This factor loads: Emotionally Mature vs. Lacking in Frustration Tolerance Emotionally Stable vs. Changeable (in attitudes) Calm, Phlegmatic vs. Showing General Emotionality Realistic about Life vs. Evasive (on awkward issues and in facing personal decisions) Absence of Neurotic Fatigue vs. Neurotically Fatigued Placid vs. WOrrying 1Taken from: Raymond B. Cattell, D. R. Saunders and G. Stice, Handbook for the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire, Champaign, III: Institute for Personality andIAbiIity Testing, 1957: p. 11-19. 129 DOMINANCE OR ASCENDANCE, 13+ (AGGRESSIVE, COMPETITIVE) Assertive, SelfeAssured Independent Minded Hard, Stern Solemn Unconventional Tough Attention Getting SURGENCY , F+ (ENTHUS IASTIC, HAPPY-GO -LUGKY) Talkative Cheerful Serene, Happy-go-lucky Frank, Expressive Quick and Alert CHARACTER OR SUPER-EGO STRENGTH, G+ (OONSGIENTIOUS, PERSISTENT) Persevering, Determined Responsible Emotionally Mature Consistently Ordered Conscientious Attentive to People mmm,m (ADVENTUROUS , "THINK-SKINNED") Adventurous, Likes Meeting People Active, overt Interest in Opposite Sex Responsive, Genial Friendly Impulsive and Frivolous 130 Factor E Versus VS. VS. VS. VS. VS. VS. VS. Factor F Versus V3. V8. V8. V8. VS. Factor G Versus VS. VS. VS. VS. VS. VS. Factor H Versus VS. VS. VS. VS . Emotional and Artistic Interests vs. Carefree, Does not See Danger Signals VS. SUBMISSION, E- ("MILK-TOAST", MILD) Submissive Dependent Kindly, Soft-Hearted Expressive Conventional Easily Upset Self-Sufficient DESURGENCY, F- (GLUM, SOBER, SERIOUS) Silent, Introspective Depressed Concerned, Brooding Incommunicative, Smug Languid, Slow LACK OF RIGID INTERNAL STANDARDS, G— (CASUAL, UNDEPENDABLE) Quitting, Fickle Frivolous Demanding, Impatient Relaxed, Indolent Undependable Obstructive THRECTIA, H- (SHY, TIMID) Shy, Withdrawn Retiring in Face of Opposite Sex Aloof, Cold, Self-Contained Apt to Be Embittered Restrained, Conscientious Restricted Interests Careful, Considerate, Quick to see Dangers Pmmm,h (SENSITIVE, EFFEMINATE) Demanding, Impatient, Subjective Dependent, Seeking Help Kindly, Gentle Artistically Fastidious, Affected Imaginative in Inner Life and in Conversation Acts on Sensitive Intuition Attention Seeking, Frivolous Hypochondriacal, Anxious PROTENSION (PARANOID TENDENCY) L+ (SUSPECTTNG, JEADOUS) Jealous Self-sufficient Suspicious Withdrawn, Brooding Tyrannical Hard Irritable AUTIA , M+ (BOHEMIAN INTROVERTED, ABSENT- mmm) . Unconventional, SelfeAbsorbed Interested in.Art, Theory, Basic Beliefs Imaginative, Creative Frivolous, Immature in Practical Judgment Generally Cheerful, but Occasional Hysterical Swings of "Giving Up” 131 Factor I Versus VS. VS. VS. VS. VS. VS. VS. VS. Factor L Versus VS. VS. VS. VS. VS. VS. VS. Factor M Versus VS. VS. VS. VS. VS. mmm,b (TOUGH, REALISTIC) Realistic, Expects Little Self-reliant, Taking Respone sibility Hard (to point of cynicism) Few.Artistic Responses (but not lacking taste) Unaffected by "Francies" Acts on Practical, Logical Evidence Self—Sufficient Unaware of Physical Disabilities RELAXED SECURITY, L- (ACCEPTING, ADAPTABLE) Accepting Outgoing Trustful Open, Ready to Take a Chance Understanding and Permissive, Tolerant Soft-Hearted Composed and Cheerful PMEMM,» (PRACTICAL, CONCERNED WITH mam Conventional, Alert to Practical Needs Interests Narrowed to Immediate Issues No Spontaneous Creativity Sound, Realistic, Dependable, Practical Judgment Earnest, Concerned or WOrried, but Very Steady 132 Factor N SHREWDNESS, N+ Versus (SOPHISTICATED , POLISHED) Polished, Socially Alert vs. Exact, Calculating Mind vs. Aloof, Emotionally Disciplined vs. Esthetically Fastidious vs. Insightful Regarding Self vs. Insightful Regarding Others vs. Ambitious, Possibly Insecure vs. Expedient, "Cuts Corners" vs. Factor 0 GUILT PRONENESS, O+ Versus (TIMID , INSECURE) WOrrying, Anxious vs. Depressed vs. Sensitive, Tender, Easily vs. Upset Strong Sense of Duty vs. Exacting, Fussy vs. Hypochondriacal vs. Phobic Symptoms vs. Mbody, Lonely, Brooding vs. Factor Q1 RADICALISM, Q1+ Versus Factor Q2 SELFjSUFFICIENCY, Q2+ Versus (SELF-SUFFICIENT, RESOURCEFUL) Factor Q3 HIGH SELF-SENTTMENT Versus FORMATION, Q3+ (CONTROLLED, EXACTING WILL POWER) Factor Q4 HIGH ERGIC TENSION, Q4+ Versus (TENSE , EXCITABLE) NAIVETE, N- (SIMPLE , UNPRETENTIOUS) Socially Clumsy and "Natural" Vague and Sentimental Mind Warm, Gregarious, Spontaneous Simple Tastes Lacking Self Insight Unskilled in Analysing Motives Content with What Comes Trusts in.Accepted Values CONFIDENT ADEQUACY, o- (CONFIDENT, SELF-SECURE Self-Confident Cheerful, Resilient Tough, Placid Expedient Does Not Care Rudely Vigorous No Fears Given to Simple Action CONSERVATISM OF TEMPERAMENT, Q1- GROUP DEPENDENCY, Q - (SOCIALLY GROUP DEPENDENT) POOR SELF—SENTIMENT FORMATDN, Q3- (UNCONTROLLED, LAX) LOW ERGIC TENSION, Q4- (PHLEGMATIC, COMPOSED) 1’ 1’ l[(’. I. If. "Illlllfllllll'lllllllllt