\‘ , Michigan Sézte

I... o
3 1293 10682 7953 L- sfiversaiy

 

 

 

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

An Investigation of the Expectations Adult Learners
Hold Regarding Effort Expenditure, Time Investment,
and Learning Achievement for Four Types of
Prepackaged, Self-paced Instructional Materials

presented by

Mary Lorraine Ploor

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph.D. degree“, Counseling, 1
Educational Psychology,
and Special Education

 

 
    

Major professor

Date July 26, 1985

M50 is an Afl'mmm‘ve Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771

 

P431?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BEIURNING MATERIAL§5
Place in book drop to
remove this checkout from
your record. FINES will
be charged if book is
returned after the date

stamped below.

 

 

AN INVESTIGATION OF THE EXPECTATIONS ADULT LEARNERS
HOLD REGARDING EFFORT EXPENDITURE, TIME INVESTMENT,
AND LEARNING ACHIEVEMENT FOR FOUR TYPES OF
PREPACKAGED, SELF-PACED INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

By

Mary Lorraine Floor

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to

Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology,
and Special Education

1985

ABSTRACT

AN INVESTIGATION OF THE EXPECTATIONS ADULT LEARNERS
HOLD REGARDING EFFORT EXPENDITURE, TIME INVESTMENT,
AND LEARNING ACHIEVEMENT FOR FOUR TYPES OF
PREPACKAGED, SELF-PACED INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

By
Mary L. Floor

The study described adult learner expectations of effort expenditure
and time investment necessary to complete four types of prepackaged,
self-paced instructional materials (textbook-based, audiotape-based,
videotape-based, and personal computer-based) and expected learning
achievement from them. A questionnaire sent to a sample of East Lansing
(Michigan) Arts Workshop patrons had a thirty-four percent effective
return rate.

The method of paired comparisons was used for data collection.
Interval scales were developed for the four types of prepackaged,
self-paced instructional materials (stimuli) on each of the expectation
variables (effort expenditure, time investment, and learning
achievement) according to the Law of Comparative Judgment, Case V. An
arbitrary zero point was calculated for the stimulus scaled lowest on
each variable to indicate distances between the scaled stimuli. The
four stimuli were scaled from least to greatest as follows for
expectation of effort expenditure: videotape-based (.OOO),
audiotape-based (.464), personal computer based (.493), textbook-based
(.543); for expectation of time investment: videotape-based (.OOO),
audiotape-based (.518), personal computer-based (.589), and
textbook-based (.602); and for expectation of learning achievement:

audiotape-based (.OOO), textbook-based (.345), personal computer-based

Mary L. Floor

(.358), and videotape-based (.623).

Expectations of effort expenditure and time investment were
moderately correlated for each of the four types of instructional
materials. Most correlations of experience with expectation variables
were nonsignificant. However, low numbers of "experienced" respondents
may have hampered analysis.

Expectation of time investment explained most of the variance in
expectation of learning achievement with expectation of effort
expenditure contributing either negligibly or nonsignificantly.
Experience did not contribute substantially to explanation of variance
in expectation of learning. Regression coefficients for expectations of
effort and time were negative, implying that as greater learning is
expected, lesser effort expenditure and time investment is expected.

Preferred method and expectation variables were moderately
correlated. Respondents did not necessarily expect their preferred
method to be greater in learning or less in effort expenditure. Most
respondents expected their preferred method to require greater, versus
lesser, time investment.

Recommendations for strategies for development and marketing of

prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials were made.

To

Alice M. and Paul N. Sweetman,
my parents,

who have loved and encouraged me.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

To my husband, Ed, and daughter, Jani, I offer my heartfelt thanks.
They supported me with their faith and love, helped look for solutions
when things seemed to go wrong, and tolerated neglect while I spent
hours at the books or computer. And they prodded when I needed
prodding.

Dr. Castelle G. Gentry, my doctoral committee chairperson, gave
willingly of his time and valuable advice. Tb him I offer my sincere
appreciation. Dr. Bruce L. Miles was my Master's program advisor and a
member of my doctoral committee. I thank him for his eight years of
interest and encouragement. Dr. Peggy Riethmiller, my doctoral
committee member from the Department of Teacher Education, offered me
new ways to look at education during the "Futuristics in Education"
class I took early in my studies and has been an inspiration to me ever
since. Dr. Bruce VandenBergh, Department of Advertising, joined my
committee in mid-project. His "Consumer Behavior" course prompted me to
look at adult students as consumers with needs and expectations to

fulfill. I thank him for the time, effort, and support he gave so

freely to a student from outside his own department.

iii

I was fortunate to hold graduate assistantships under four
professors during my studies at Michigan State. They helped me grow and
learn in experiences that went beyond the classroom, library, and
computer center. I offer my gratitude to them all: Dr. Colleen R.
Cooper, Agricultural Extension and Education (now at Sandy Corporation,
Troy, MI); Drs. William A. Anderson and Robert Bridgham, Office of
Medical Education Research and Development; and Professor Donald J.
Wilkening, Instructional Media Center.

Thank you, also, to Gilbert H. Skinner and Deborah Cheesebro of SCH,
Inc., who encouraged my studies and introduced me to the world of
training in the criminal justice area during the last year of my
doctoral program. Finally, thanks go to all my friends, relatives, and
other coworkers who have encouraged me and/or put up with my absence as

I worked toward my doctoral goals.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES vii

LIST OF FIGURES xii
CHAPTER

I. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

IntrOdUCtiono C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 1

Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Significance of the Proposed Research . . . . . . . 4

Theoretical and Conceptual Foundations. . . . . . . 7

Research Questions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Limitations Of the StUdy. O O O O O O O O O O O 15

Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

IntrOduction. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 19
The Adult Learner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Expectations 0 O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O 27

Prepackaged, Self-paced Instructional Materials . . 46
Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

III. RESEARCH DESIGN

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Dependent and Independent Variables. . . . . . . . 59
Research Questions and Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . 61
Description of the Survey Instrument . . . . . . . 64

Reliability and Validity of the Survey Instrument. 70
Description of the Study Population. . . . . . . . 7S
Selection of the Sample. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Data Analysis Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Chapter Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

IV. DATA ANALYSIS

Introduction . . . . . . . . . .
Survey Returns . . . . . . . . .
Respondent Characteristics . . .
Reliability and Validity . . .
Law of Comparative Judgment, Case V, Analysis
Correlational Analysis . . . . . . . . . . .
Multiple Regression Analysis . . . . . . . .
Crosstabulation Analysis . . . . . . . . . .
Chapter Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

V. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . .
Research Conclusions . . . . . . . .
Discussion of the Results. . . . . .
Recommendations for Future Research.
Chapter Summary. . . . . . . . . . .

APPENDIX A

Cover Letter Accompanying Mailed Questionnaire . . .

Page of Definitions Accompanying Mailed Questionnaire

Mailed Questionnaire Instrument. . . . . . . . . . .

APPENDIX B
Michigan State University Committee on Research

Involving Human Subjects: Letter Granting Approval

to Conduct Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

APPENDIX C
Tables of Matrices Developed for Analysis of Data
by the Law of Comparative Judgement, Case V, for
Hypotheses One, Two, and Three . . . . . . . . .

APPENDIX D
Tables D.1 to D.12: Crosstabulation of Preferred
Method by Expectation Variables . . . . . . . .

APPENDIX E
Varimax Rotated Factor Matrix of the Expectation
Variables after Rotation with Kaiser

Normalization. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

REFERENCES 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

vi

121
122

127
139
140

142
143
144

148

149

158

164

165

TABLE

2.1
2.2

3.1

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10

4.11

LIST OF TABLES

Page

"Planners" of Learning Projects . . ; . . . . . . 23
Cues to Causal Factors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Matrix of Expectations Variables and Types of
Prepackaged, Self-Paced Instructional

Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Report of Survey Returns. . . . F . . . . . . . . 86
Demographic Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Media Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Experience Characteristics. . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Importance of Expectation Factors . ....... 93
Preferred Method of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Coefficients of Consistence . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Coefficients of Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Absolute Average Discrepancy Values . . . . . . . 100
Chi-square Tests of Significance for the Scales

of the Expectation Variables of Effort Expenditure,

Time Investment, and Learning Achievement . . . . 102

Correlation of Expectations of Effort
and Time 0 O O O O O I O O O O O C I O O O O O O O 104

vii

4.12

4.13

4.14

4.15
4.16

C.1
C.2
C.3

C.4

C.5

C.6

C.7
C.8
C.9
C.10

Correlation of Experience Scores with the
Expectation Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Multiple Regression Analysis of Expectations
of Effort Expenditure and Time Investement on
Expectation of Learning Achievement for Each
of the Four Types of Prepackaged, Self-Paced
Instructional Materials . . . . . . . . . . . .

Multiple Regression Analysis of Expectations
of Effort Expenditure and Time Investement and

Experience on Expectation of Learning Achievement

for Each of the Four Types of Prepackaged,
Self-Paced Instructional Materials. . . . . . .

Crosstabulation Measures of Significance. . . .

Analysis of Primary Relationships from
Tables D.1 to D.12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

‘E Matrix: Expectations of Effort Expenditure .

‘E_Matrix: Expectations of Effort Expenditure .

2 Matrix: Expectations of Effort Expenditure .

Theoretical normal deviates 51" corresponding
to the scale distances between the elements of
the §_Matrix for Expectations of Effort

Expenditure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Theoretical proportions 24- corresponding to

the theoretical normal dev1ates ggj' of Table C.4

for expectations of effort expenditure. . . . .

Discrepancies between the theoretical
proportions 24-' of Table C.5 and the observed
proportions 24- for expectations of effort
expenditure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

flMatrix: Expectations of Time Investment. . .
§_Matrix: Expectations of Time Investment. . .

Z Matrix: Expectations of Time Investment. . .

Theoretical normal deviates.§i-' corresponding

to the scale distances between the elements of
the §_Matrix for Expectations of Time
Investment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

viii

106

109

112

116

117
149

149

149

150

150

150
151

151

151

152

C.11 Theoretical proportions 24" corresponding to

the theoretical normal dev ates Ei" of Table C.10
for expectations of time investment . . . . . . . 152

C.12 Discrepancies between the theoretical
proportions Eij' of Table C.11 and the observed
proportions 24' for expectations of time

investment. 0 O O O O O I O O C C O O O O O O O O 152
C.13 .5 Matrix: Expectations of Learning Achievement . 153
C.14 ‘2 Matrix: Expectations of Learning Achievement . 153

C.15 2 Matrix: Expectations of Learning Achievement . 153

C.16 Theoretical normal deviates Edj' corresponding
to the scale distances between the elements of
the ggMatrix for Expectations of Learning

Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154

C.17 Theoretical proportions 2i" corresponding to
the theoretical normal dev ates Edj' of Table C.16

for expectations of learning achievement. . . . . 154

C.18 Discrepancies between the theoretical
proportions 2d" of Table C.17 and the observed

proportions‘pij for expectations of learning
achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154

C.19 Values of 6 corresponding to the P_Matrix Table
(Table C.2) for Expectations of Effort
Expenditure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

C.20 Values of 6 corresponding to the P' Matrix Table
(Table C.5) for Expectations of Effort
Expenditure O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O 155

C.21 Values of O - 9' corresponding to the _P_ - 2'
Tables for Expectations of Effort Expenditure. . 155

C.22 Values of 6 corresponding to the P_Matrix Table
(Table C.8) for Expectations of Time
Investment 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O 156

C.23 Values of Glcorresponding to the Pf Matrix Table
(Table C.11) for Expectations of Time
Investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156

C.24 Values of 9 - 9' corresponding to the P - 3'
Tables for Expectations of Time Investment . . . 156

ix

C.25

C.26

C.27

D.1

D.2

D.3

D.4

D.5

D.6

D.7

D.8

Values of 6 corresponding to the P_Matrix Table
(Table C.14) for Expectations of Learning
AChievement O I O C O C C C O O O C O O O C O O 0

Values of 6 corresponding to the 2] Matrix Table
(Table C.17) for Expectations of Learning
AChievement O I O O O C C O C O C O O C O C O O 0

Values of 9 - 9' corresponding to the P - P'
Tables for Expectations of Learning Achievement.

Crosstabulation of Preferred Method by
Expectation of Effort Expenditure for Textbook-
based Prepackaged, Self-paced Instructional
Materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'

Crosstabulation of Preferred Method by
Expectation of Time Investment for Textbook-
based Prepackaged, Self—paced Instructional
Materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Crosstabulation of Preferred Method by
Expectation of Learning Achievement for Textbook-
based Prepackaged, Self-paced Instructional
Materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Crosstabulation of Preferred Method by
Expectation of Effort Expenditure for Audiotape-
based Prepackaged, Self-paced Instructional
Materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Crosstabulation of Preferred Method by

Expectation of Time Investment for Audiotape-
based Prepackaged, Self-paced Instructional
Materials. 0 O O O O O O O O O I I O O O O O O O

Crosstabulation of Preferred Method by

Expectation of Learning Achievement for Audiotape—

based Prepackaged, Self-paced Instructional
Materials. 0 O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O

Crosstabulation of Preferred Method by
Expectation of Effort Expenditure for Videotape-
based Prepackaged, Self-paced Instructional
Materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Crosstabulation of Preferred Method by
Expectation of Time Investment for Videotape-
based Prepackaged, Self-paced Instructional
Materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

157

157

157

158

158

159

159

160

160

161

161

D.9 Crosstabulation of Preferred Method by .
Expectation of Learning Achievement for Videotape-
based Prepackaged, Self-paced Instructional
Materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162

D.10 Crosstabulation of Preferred Method by
Expectation of Effort Expenditure for Personal
Computer-based Prepackaged, Self-paced
Instructional Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162

D.11 Crosstabulation of Preferred Method by
Expectation of Time Investment for Personal
Computer-based Prepackaged, Self-paced
Instructional Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163

D.10 Crosstabulation of Preferred Method by
Expectation of Learning Achievement for Personal
Computer-based Prepackaged, Self—paced
Instructional Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163

E.1 Varimax Rotated Factor Matrix of the Expectation

Variables after Rotation with Kaiser
Normalization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164

xi

FIGURE

2.1
2.2
3.1

4.1

LIST OF FIGURES

Expectation of Effort Expenditure .
Expectation of Time Expenditure . .
Sample Matrices with Summed Scores.

Interval Scales . . . . . . . . . .

xii

Page

39
42
73

98

CHAPTER I: STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

INTRODUCTION

The development of this research project had its beginnings in the
author's work on the eight-module self-paced "Course on Cancer
Prevention," during the 1980—82 National Cancer Institute-funded project
at Michigan State University. Upon returning for the course posttest,
medical students stated, "I really didn't know what I was getting into
when I began this course," or "It took a lot of time and energy, but I
sure learned a lot." The students seemed to have had either no
expectations of the course or to have had unmet expectations. Two
questions presented themselves: "What expectations do students from
traditional classroom and teacher-centered learning backgrounds have of
the self-paced formats increasingly available to them for post-secondary
and professional continuing education? What are learner perceptions of
prepackaged, self-paced learning materials?"

Prepackaged, self-paced instructional courseware is one type of
resource discussed by Tough (1979, 2nd ed., p. 173), who finds that
three percent of adults who undertake learning projects use nonhuman
resources-versus self, group, or one-to—one helper-—as planners. He
explains, "The learner turns over the planning responsibility [for a
learning project] to the object (or, in a sense, to the person who
earlier created the object)....it provides decisions and
sequence....Generally, the object will provide much of the subject

matter in addition" (p. 79). His examples of "nonhuman resources"

2
include programmed instruction texts, workbooks, tape recordings, and
television program series.

A second pragmatic impetus for this study was the growing number of
prepackaged, self—paced courses available today. Promotional materials
for these courses-directed sometimes at the individual adult learner,
other times at business or professional association personnel or
training and development department representatives-emphasize the
benefits of their subject matter content, but rarely offer hints at
required time or energy investment, or at "what I was getting into" for

their completion.

Houle (1980) was less than complimentary about the unwieldy growth

of prepackaged materials:

The typical professional has many opportunities to buy

"self-teaching books," packets of integrated learning
materials, guided instruction, magazines with learning units or
quiz sections, and manuals organized according to so-called
psychological" rather than logical principles. The torrent of
new materials makes it hard for the individual professional to
find, despite many promises, precisely what he or she may
require. Thus the volume of the new modularized materials is a
blessing in disguise; sometimes the disguise seems almost
perfect (p. 240).

Not knowing "what I was getting into" and the low three percent or
less of adult learners selecting nonhuman resources reflect learners'
typically traditional, group-type educational experiences. They may
also reflect a lack of information provided to potential students by
developers and marketers of prepackaged, self—paced products about that
type of learning experience.

This chapter describes the research problem from the point of view

of the adult learner and of the instructional developer and marketer.

3
It introduces the general research questions and presents the

limitations of the study.

PROBLEM STATEMENT

What types of information would be helpful to the potential
purchaser of a prepackaged, self-paced course? How can the developer or
marketer determine that which would let the adult learner know what he
or she is "getting into?" In order to answer these questions, it would
be helpful to know the expectations the adult learner holds regarding
prepackaged, self-paced types of instructional materials.

This study asks what expectations adult learners, as educational
consumers, bring with them when selecting among four different types of
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials:

(1) textbook-based,

(2) audiotape-based,

(3) videotape-based, and
(4) personal computer-based.

Specifically, it seeks to describe adult learner expectations of the

 

(1) effort expenditure and (2) time investment necessary to complete
such packages, and (3) expected levels of learning achievement from the

four formats.

4

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROPOSED RESEARCH

To the adult learner. It is important to investigate adult
learners' expectations of prepackaged, self-paced learning experiences
for two reasons: (1) There is a growing emphasis on lifelong learning
and on continuing education for professions, jobs, retraining, etc., and
(2) the numbers of and alternatives among proprietary prepackaged,
self-paced educational offerings are increasing. Both occurrences
necessitate knowledgeable "educational consumer" behavior.

Adult participation in organized education and training programs has
grown from 7.6 percent in 1957 (Barton, 1982, p. 39) to 12.8 percent of

the adult population according to a study by the Association of American

Colleges that used U.S. Census Bureau for the National Center for
Education Statistics data (Ordovensky, 1983, p. 6F). Regardless of
which survey of participation you look at, writes Long, "at least 18
million adults were engaged in an educational activity in 1978" (1983,
p. 136). The segment of the population most likely to engage in
learning as adults-—those with higher levels of previous education-has
continued to show higher participation rates. Surveys of participation,

such as the NCES above, measure organized learning, "the part-time,

school-related portion" (1982, p. 39) of adult participation that,
Barton stipulates, has probably stopped growing. Yet, he indicates that
growth in workplace-related programs and individualized study continues.
Growing opportunities and diversity in individualized study are
evident in the catalogs of organizations such as the American Management

Association Extension Institute (American Management Association, 1984)

5
and in self-paced programs offered by professional associations such as
the Insurance Institute of America and American Medical Association.
Bookstores sell both self-paced texts and audiotapes teaching a wide
range of topics from foreign languages to motivation. Videotapes
conduct personal in-home exercise classes and teach such diverse skills
as managerial communication or cooking with a wok. Computer stores
stock self-teaching programs in foreign languages, project management,
and other subjects for use with one's home computer. Universities and
community colleges offer correspondence and televised courses.
Potential adult students face a myriad of choices.

Although millions of adults participate in educational activities,
the numbers who do not-—plus reported high attrition rates among adult
students (Long, 1983)-—also indicate need for research in the area of
educational consumer behavior. Motivation to participate, whether to
attend a group class or complete a self-paced module, is rooted in the
beliefs and attitudes of the learner. Those beliefs and attitudes are,
in turn, derived from past experiences and future expectations.

To the instructional developer and marketer. It is important to
investigate learner perceptions and expectations to better meet the
wants and needs of adult learners. Two elements necessary to attract
and keep the adult learner are (1) promotion of educational offerings
and (2) development of courses to meet learner needs and expectations.
Organized adult and higher education programs have paid increasing
attention to both in recent years, looking to wholistic marketing
approaches (Knox, 1962; Fram, 1973; Univ. of So. California College of

Continuing Education, 1978). Proprietary firms selling prepackaged,

6
self-paced courseware promote their materials through store displays,
catalogs, and flyers, using many of the same approaches marketers use
with other types of products. Yet, the tendency has been to approach
adult learners from the subject matter and instructor-centered, rather
than consumer-oriented, points of view (Morstain & Smart, 1977).

Effort and time spent in learning are dependent upon learner
motivation. Good and Brophy (1977, p. 355) point out that teachers can
influence motivation through how they present a school task, relate it
to existing motivations, and show its relevancy to present needs and
interests. Where there is no teacher such cues must be provided through
the courseware itself and its promotional materials. Systems-based
instructional development models guide materials development, packaging,
and promotional decisions. Instructional developers require information
about student/consumer perceptions and expectations to determine and
make available cues relevant to potential consumers of different
educational products. With additional information instructional
developers can make more informed decisions about development,
packaging, and promotion.

The fields of both instructional development and adult education
stress the importance of knowing the characteristics of audiences in
order to meet their needs and goals. Previously studied characteristics
include, primarily, demographics, prior schooling history, and other
objective data. Houle (1961) and others (Boshier, 1973; Penland, 1977;
Waldon, 1984) have addressed characteristics that correlate with
participation in adult educative activities. It is also important to

contribute to knowledge about more subjective audience characteristics,

7
that is, the perceptions and expectations of adult learners (Boshier,
1976). Addressing consumer perceptions can contribute to the knowledge
necessary to improve participation in and completion rate of

prepackaged, self-paced study programs.

THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS

This study looks at expectations of learning and of the effort
expenditure and time investment necessary to learn through a method of
study: prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials. Expectations,
learner achievement, effort, and time are variables previously examined
.in both the education and consumer behavior fields. This section
provides background for their further exploration and offers evidence of
support for the research need.

Adult Learners' Expectations. Expectations have been studied and
discussed by educators and psychologists. The direction of study has
usually been along one of two routes: (1) teachers' expectations of
pupils and effects of those expectations upon performance (Rosenthal &
Jacobson, 1968; Good, 1981) and (2) individual's expectations of success
or failure (Weiner, 1972; Feather, 1982). Expectations are also
important to the field of consumer behavior, as Cardozo writes,

Knowledge about customer effort and expectation is
important because these factors are major components of
consumer behavior, and because management can, within limits,
influence the amount of effort customers expend and their
expectations. Customer effort includes the physical, mental,
and financial resources expended to obtain a product....The
expectations customers have regarding a product depend upon
information gathered from a variety of sources. Within limits,

8

customer expectations may be influenced by advertising, or
other sales promotion methods (1970, pp. 53-54).

The student is an "educational consumer" who holds expectations
about the instructional program or product to be undertaken. There are
three levels of "product" in educational courseware: (1) student
fulfillment of a goal as to type of knowledge desired (i.e., subject
matter, such as time management, how to write a will, etc.), (2) the
materials themselves, and (3) any additional benefits (e.g.,
availability of a time payment plan for materials). Thus, after effort
(energy expended to make a purchase decision and obtain a product) is
expended to locate and secure the materials in the appropriate subject
matter, effort must continue in order to reach completion of those
materials and achievement of learning with, possibly, credit of some
sort for doing so. And, according to Cardozo, "as a customer expands
greater effort, the situation becomes more important, and some
dissonance is aroused when disappointed" (p. 55).

Subjects in Cardozo's study, "Under certain conditions...used their
expectations as guidelines against which they evaluated the product.
Either their expectations, or an array of products with which they have
had previous experience, may form such guidelines." Cardozo suggests,
"If this interpretation is correct, marketers should endeavor to make
their offerings consistent with customer guidelines, or standards....An
important corollary is that marketers should know what customer
standards of evaluation are, and act accordingly" (p. 63).

McKean (1977) and McCue (1982) investigated, in nongeneralizable

studies, "pedagogical expectations"-—the expectations adults have of

9
learning in, and preferences for, formal and informal types of group
instructional settings. Given pictorial (McKean) or verbal and
pictorial (McCue) illustrations of both informal and formal
instructional settings, subjects in these studies indicated whether they
expected more learning to be taking place in the formal or the nonformal
setting. While the results of their research, targeted at
teacher-centered group instructional situations, have no bearing on this
study, there is acknowledgement that adults as learners have
experience-based expectations of educational experiences.

Blackburn (1967) also found that previous experience with
instruction methods tends to be positively related to future method
choice, indicating the role of educational enculturation discussed by
McCue and McKean. Thus, based chiefly on prior experiences, subjects
demonstrated that adults bring preconceptions, beliefs, and expectations
to a learning situation.

Cross discusses the role of perception of "external barriers" as
explained by Rubenson's paradigm for adult motivation to participate in
educational activities. She describes a hypothetical learner, Henry, in
the following example:

Motivation according to Rubenson, is based on the "perceived"

situation, which may or may not be the "real" situation. If

Henry thinks he lacks the money to participate in adult

education, than his expectancy is zero, and the resultant force

is zero. Presumably, if someone tells an otherwise highly

motivated Henry that the course he wants to take is offered at

no charge, his expectancy for successful participation would

become strong and the forces would add up to participation
(1981, p. 119).

The above studies and the continuing problem of adult dropouts from

10
continuing education programs demonstrate that when expectations are not
met by the educational program offered, the education industry either
fails to attract clientele or produces a dissatisfied educational
consumer/student.

Effort. Effort has been researched extensively by Weiner (1972;
1974; et al., 1971) within the framework of attribution theory.
According to his findings, individuals in achievement situations tend to
attribute success or failure to one or more of four causes: ability,
task difficulty, effort, and luck. He classifies these causes as
"perceived determinants of achievement behavior" (1974, p. 6) along two
dimensions: stability (stable or unstable) and locus of control
(internal or external). Ability and task difficulty are considered
stable, that is, relatively "fixed." Effort and luck are considered
unstable, with effort able to be "augmented or decreased from one moment
to the next" (Weiner, 1974, p. 181) and luck subject to random
variability. Along the locus of control, ability and effort are
considered internal, describing the "qualities of the person undertaking
the activity" (Weiner, et al., 1971, p. 2). Task difficulty and luck
are generally considered as arising externally, part of the environment.

When individuals ascribe success or failure to internal causes
(e.g., effort), they experience greater pride or shame and greater
positive or negative evaluation than when they attribute success or
failure to the external causes of task difficulty or luck (Weiner &
Sierad, 1974). In looking forward to future endeavors, past success or
failure ascribed to effort (unstable-"I just wasn't up to par that

day."-—and internally controlled--"I'll work harder next time.") is

11

is deemed changeable.

Palmer and Willson (1982, p. 343) find, "attributions play an
important mediating role for individuals' expectations for future
performance." One question Weiner, et al., (1971, p. 5) ask is "How
does the individual use available information...to specify future
expectations about success? For example, given a personal success
experience, what cues give rise to the interpretation that 'I was just
lucky' or 'I will do even better next time'." cues affecting effort
ascription include "immediate outcome, past success history, social
norms, pattern of performance,... performance peaks... [and] increments
or decrements in effort expenditure" (Weiner, 1974, p. 9).
Experimenters have attempted to manipulate or evaluate effort with cues
such as these: telling subjects about the "importance" of the task'
(Weiner, 1974, p. 11), telling subjects that persons who "work hard" can
succeed at the particular task, looking at subject's presence or absence
for task, consideration of the overcoming of personal handicaps,
influencing motivation through devices such as contingent rewards and
punishments (Weiner, 1974), and manipulation of task difficulty
(Eisenberger, Masterson, & McDermitt, 1982, p. 499).

Atkinson and Birch write,

in attempting to explain prior success or failure, or in

confronting some new task, an individual ascribes the outcome

to these four potential causes according to characteristics of

the tasks and situation. The causal inferences or subjective

interpretation of the individual in turn influence the

expectancy of goal attainment and affective reactions to

success and failure, which, in turn, determine behavior (1978,
p. 348).

The "characteristics of the tasks and situation" mentioned above

12

imply that effort cues for the four types of prepackaged, self-paced
learning materials will differ from each other. Therefore, individuals'
expectations, based on previous experience and their perception of the
product, will differ from each other. What might their expectations
relative to effort expenditure include? While one might list such
elements as replaying of an audiotape to review or search for specific
information, ease of avoiding interruption while studying, or
portability of materials, this writer has found no investigation of
adult learners' expectations of effort expenditure to guide development
or marketing of prepackaged, self-paced learning materials. Yet,
individuals will build expectations of necessary effort expenditure
based on their range of experience with instructional materials. Their
perceptions will create a favorable, unfavorable, or neutral reaction to
the product (Zaltman & Wallendorf (2nd ed.), 1983).

2222, Time is acknowledged as an important variable in learning in
the classroom (Carroll, 1963; Fredrick & Walberg, 1980; Millman, Bieger,
Klag, & Pine, 1983; Karweit, 1984). The relationship of time on task to

achievement has also been investigated in individualized methods such as

mastery learning, programmed learning, and self-study courses (Sjogren &
Knox, 1965; Dilley, Machen, Dilley, & Howden, 1978; Sanderson, 1976).
Time may be looked at from several viewpoints in adult or continuing
education. From the point of view that time is often equated with money
(Graham, 1981), there is reason to promote efficiency in learning both
from the need to keep training costs minimal while educating large
numbers of persons, as in the military (Judd, MtCombs, & Dobrovolony,

1979), and from the need to teach busy professional audiences urgent new

l3
knowledge and skills, as in medical fields (DeMuth, 1979; Richards &
Cohen, 1981). While the self-pacing feature of prepackaged, self-study
materials can be used to promote learning efficiency in time and cost
savings, the self—pacing feature can also be seen to allow leisurely,
relaxed learning for members of the stay-at-home adult learner segment,
including parents who do not work outside the home and persons homebound
due to disability.

Time has both a physical or functional dimension and a "cognized" or
perceptual dimension. The Continuing Education Unit (CEU) has attempted
to relate the physical time dimension of adult education programs to the
learner: One CEU is given for 10 hours of study meeting certain
requirements (National Task Force on the Continuing Education Unit,
1979).

In looking at how much time the potential adult learner "expects" to
spend to complete a course or to earn a certain number of CEUs, the
perceptual dimension of time becomes important. When estimating time
persons tend to "round off" according to personal criteria and to
overestimate functional time (Mittelstaedt, Curtis, Grossbart, & Rogers,
1975). Estimates of time have been found significantly related to a
customer's evaluative criteria in a study of cognized distance and time
by Mittelstaedt, et al. In that study "ease of driving to the area
(inverse), the price of the merchandise (direct), the quality of the
merchandise (inverse), and the helpfulness of salespeople (direct)"

(p. 193) were all found related to subjects' perceptions of time needed
to shop at a Midwestern city shopping center.

Time, as a component of perseverence, is integral to the need for

14
persistence of the individual learner attempting a self-paced learning
task. Thus, expectations of time investment, along with expectations of
effort expenditure, become of interest to the potential consumer of the
prepackaged, self-paced course. As with effort, it is suggested that
expectations of time investment for the four types of prepackaged,
self—paced learning materials being studied will differ from each other.
Again, as with effort expenditure, expectations-expected time
investment, in this case-will create a reaction to the product.

Therefore those expectations require investigation.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The general research question to be explored is: What are adult
learners' expectations of (1) time investment and (2) effort expenditure

necessary for completion of study and (3) expectation of possible

learning achievement for four types of prepackaged, self—paced learning

materials: (1) textbook-based, (2) audiotape-based,
(3) videotape-based, and (4) personal computer-based?

Specific questions to be answered include the following:

1. How are each of the four types of prepackaged, self—paced
instructional materials perceived as to expected effort
expenditure necessary for learning achievement?

2. How are each of four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials perceived as to expected time
investment necessary for learning achievement?

\

3. How are each of four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials perceived as to expected possible
learning achievement?

15
4. What is the relationship between expectations of effort

expenditure and time investment for each of the four types of
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials?

5. What is the relationship between previous experience as a
consumer of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials and
expectations of effort expenditure, time investment, and
learning achievement?

6. What is the effect of expectations of time investment and
effort expenditure upon expectation of learning achievement for
each of four types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional
materials?

7. What effect do previous experience as a consumer of
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials and
expectations of effort expenditure and time investment have

upon expectations of learning achievement for each of the four
types of prepackaged, self-paced learning materials?

8. What is the relationship between preference for an "ideal"
method of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials and
expectations of effort expenditure, time investment, and

learning achievement for each of the four types of prepackaged
self-paced learning materials?

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

Limitations. Only four types of prepackaged, selffpaced materials
were considered. They included textbook- (text-), audiotape-,
videotape-, and personal computer-based instruction. These types of
materials rarely exist in "pure" form for distribution, e.g., audiotape
combined with text is a popular format. All were defined for
respondents as including accompanying instructions for their use, e.g.,
manual and/or workbook as needed, but to be considered in as "pure" 3
form as possible to better delineate differences for analysis.

Effort was made to ascertain an indication of respondents' levels of
experience with prepackaged, self-paced materials. However, no

information was available as to the quality of those materials used by

l6
so—called "experienced" respondents. That is, their opinions about such
materials might be based upon materials developed according to sound
content, pedagogical, and design standards, or upon materials which did
not fulfill those criteria.

The subject pool was not drawn from the entire adult learner
population, therefore results were generalizable only to the population
from which it was drawn. With evidence (see Chapters Two and Three)
that adults who participate in adult education and who have attained
higher levels of education are more likely to participate in further
learning activities, an attempt was made to secure a sample with those
characteristics.

Mail surveys are subject to two major kinds of bias: the more
highly educated survey recipient is more likely to respond than poorly
educated recipients and those with higher interest in the subject matter
of the survey are more likely to respond (Sudman, 1976). Comparisons
can be made with general census data to examine the first source of
bias. As to the second, those without interest are unlikely to
constitute a market for the types of instructional materials being
studied. However, that bias does constitute another limitation of the
study.

The study did not propose to explain cause-effect phenomena. It was
a descriptive or exploratory investigation. Its conclusions offer
heuristics or suggestions only, no directives.

The instruments used, while relying upon proven methods (i.e.,
paired comparisons), were newly created for this study. It will not be

possible to compare these results across other studies.

Expectations were the focus of the study. Self-report was used. It

17'
will not be possible to confirm results through observation of
behavioral indicators.

Assumptions. Subjects were asked to make several assumptions in
responding to the questionnaire including, (1) that the same
fact/principle-based instructional subject was being considered
regardless of the prepackaged, self-paced delivery format, (2) that the
amount of objectives and content covered by each of the four types of
prepackaged, self-paced materials were equivalent; (3) that the
respondent has the "ideal" situation for any delivery system, i.e.,
possesses necessary A/V and/or computer equipment; and (4) that any
exams/credit for any form of course would be equivalent. Only delivery
method, therefore, method of study, differs. In an attempt to increase
the salience of the topic to the respondent, hence improve reliability,
respondents were also asked (5) to assume their own interest in a .
self-selected instructional subject of a prepackaged, self-paced course
as they completed the instrument. The above assumptions were explained

in the survey instrument used (Appendix A).

CHAPTER SUMMARY

This chapter explained two pragmatic impetuses for this study:
(1) students who appeared to have had either no expectations or unmet
expectations of a self-paced course and (2) the growing numbers of
prepackaged, selffpaced courses commercially available. It stated the
problem statement as an attempt to describe adult learner expectations

of the effort expenditure and time investment necessary to complete four

18
different types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials and
their expected levels of learning achievement from them. The four
different prepackaged, self-paced formats investigated were

textbook-based, audiotape-based, videotape-based, and personal
computer-based.

The proposed research was seen as significant to adult learners in
regard to knowing more about educational consumer behavior, especially
motivation to participate. The need to develop courseware to meet adult
learner needs and expectations and promote that courseware made this
research important to instructional developers and marketers.
Expectations, learner achievement, effort, and time were discussed as
variables important to educators, psychologists, and consumer behavior
scientists, thus providing theoretical and conceptual foundations for
the study.

Finally, the chapter proposed eight research questions for
investigation. Limitations of the study pertaining to the selection of
variables, subject pool, and mail survey technique were described.
Certain assumptions required of respondents to the survey questionnaire

instrument were presented.

19
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

INTRODUCTION

Three areas of scholarly writing relate to the topic of this
research. Those areas are adult education, motivation, and educational
technology. The adult learner was the focus of the first area reviewed.
It offers a definition of the "adult learner," discusses studies
relating to types of participation, "who" participates, and reasons for
participation, and looks at the issue of completion/drop out.

In the second area, expectations were traced in relationship to
their importance to motivation (to participate in educative activities),
through attribution theory and the expectancy-value model. The adult
learner was viewed as an "educational consumer" attempting to balance a
cost-quality relationship of expected effort expenditure and time
investment with learning outcomes.

The field of educational technology has provided literature
regarding self—paced delivery of instruction, the basis for prepackaged,
self-paced instructional materials that are the focus of this research.
Literature related to self-paced instructional materials was reviewed

for the third section of the chapter.

20
THE ADULT LEARNER

Focus of the review. While most research regarding self-paced

instruction in the United States has focused on the student at the
public school or university level, this study sought the opinions of
adults regarding prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials.
Therefore it was felt important to provide an overview including a
definition, types of adult education, and reasons for adult
participation in educational activities. This section provides that
overview.

The adult learner. Who is the "adult learner?" The field of adult
education offers many and various definitions of an adult learner.
According to Long (1983), all definitions and conceptualizations have
three features in common: "(1) age as a legal requirement for civil and
legal designation as an adult and age as it relates to the compulsory
schooling laws of a government, (2) student status as it applies to
full-time or part-time educational activity, and (3) major life role,
which distinguishes between individuals whose primary role is that of
student in contrast with worker, parent, and so forth" (p. 268). He
defines an adult as "anyone who is over eighteen years of age and not
attending secondary school, or anyone who has assumed adult-like
responsibilities such as marriage and parenthood" (p. 268). This
definition eases data collection and provides a basis for description of
a study sample by age, levels of education and employment, and marital

status. Such descriptors take on more importance as increased numbers

of adults mix employment, family responsibilities, and undergraduate,

21
graduate, or professional educational activities.
Types of adult education. Educational activities of adults have
also been the foci of attempts at the definition process. In addition

" the field employs terms including: lifelong

to "adult education,
learning, recurrent education, education permanente, continuing
education, professional education, further education, and nontraditional
education. The first three terms imply education from infancy through
adulthood but appear to receive most attention at the adult end of the
continuum. Continuing and professional education generally refer to
employment-related education that allows the "already-educated" person
to keep abreast of a profession or remain certified. Mandated
continuing education (MCE), discussed by Cross (1981), raises the issue
of the voluntary or compulsory nature of adult education.

Nontraditional programs are generally characterized by
nontraditional locations, delivery methods, or subject matter targeted

to adult audiences (Cross, 1981). Prepackaged, self-paced instructional
materials and correspondence study fall into this classification, as in
Wedemeyer's (1983) definition of nontraditional learning: "outside the
confines and environment of the school and classroom, with teacher and
learner separated in space and time" (p. 53). Cross (1981) grouped
adult learning activities under three headings: Organized (most often
offered in class—type formats), self-directed, and formal learning for
credit (incorporating "nontraditional" approaches such as the external
degree).

Research into the self-directed and/or self-planned learning

activities of adults is an area of interest when considering the use of

22
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials. Tough (1979, 2nd ed.),
whose 1970 study provided much of the following information,
acknowledges that there are many names for the self-planning of learning
projects: "self-education, self-instruction, self-teaching, individual
learning, independent study, self-directed learning, self-study"
(p. 93). Prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials can be
employed by the self-directed adult learner to further customize the
convenience and pace of his or her own studies. Indeed, the increasing
development of packaged courses is a sign of recognition of the value of
autonomous learning (Abercrombie, 1981). Tbugh (1982) also
acknowledges, "The crowded bookstore shelves and the sales figures for
various types of self-help books and cassettes indicate their widespread
use" (p. 71).

Tough conducted intensive and highly structured interviews in 1970
and Penland (1977) interviewed a national sample of 1,501 adults for his
survey of "Individual Self-planned Learning in America." Tough (1979,
2nd ed.) defined a "planner" as "the person (or group or object)
that...is responsible for more than half of the detailed day—to-day
planning and deciding in a learning project....what to learn,...and/or
about how to learn....when to begin each learning episode, and the pace

at which to proceed" (p. 77). In attempts to ascertain the extent of
learning efforts by adults beyond enrollment in institution-sponsored
programs, they identified the following types of planned educational
activities: Self-planned, group-planned, one-to-one helper, and
nonhuman resource-planned. Penland (1977) found that the three latter

methods are multiply correlated with the first and all four are

23
interrelated. Both authors point out that while one of the above

methods predominates in most learning activities, some activities are

characterized by a mixed composite of the methods (included in Penland's
"other" category below). Respondents' reports of types of planners from

the Tough and Penland studies are presented in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1

 

"Planners" of Learning Projects

 

PERCENTAGE OF LEARNING PROJECTS

 

CATEGORY OF PLANNER Tough, 1970 Penland, 1979
Self-planned 68 25.3
Group-planned 12 14.6
One-to-one helper 8 29.0
Nonhuman resource 3 22.7

(Mixed) 9 (Not reported) 8.4

 

(Data from: Tough, 1979, 2nd ed., p. 86; Penland, 1979, 177)

Cross (1981) offers plausible reasons for the differing percentages
between the two studies. A possible explanation for the increase in use
of nonhuman resources as planners is the growth in availability of
audiotapes, videotapes, and self-help books between the dates of the
studies. Another explanation might be a differing approach to
categorization of books. Books, due to their familiarity through the
traditional education process, may be viewed as "standard equipment" in
sglfyplanned activities or as "nonhuman resources" by respondents.

Thus, similarly, prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials might
have been viewed as belonging in either the self— or the nonhuman

resource-planned catagories in that persons who "self—plan" their

24
initial project may then utilize nonhuman resources in reaching their
goals. That confusion might or might not have shown up in the "mixed"
category depending upon how much further the "planning" process was
pursued in the interviews.

Participation in adult education. Who participates in adult
education activities? Tough (1979, 2nd ed.) found that 98% of his 66
interviewees (all but one) had conducted at least one learning project
during the previous year. According to his and Penland's findings,
almost all adults will undertake self-directed learning to learn a
relevant concept or skill (e.g., religious precepts, carpentry, canning
pickles, etc.) at various times in their lives.

The National Center for Educational Statistics measures
participation in organized adult educational activities. According to
preliminary 1978 data examined by Barton (1982, p. 39), 11.6 percent of
the adult population participated in education or training in 1978.
Barton cautions against using NCES data regarding levels of
participation. He finds the data useful, instead, for identifying

"differences in participation tendencies among various population

 

groups" (p. 39). He used the data to characterize those who participate
in largest numbers in adult learning: The participant is likely to be
more highly educated than the nonparticipant, younger, earning more,
white, female (reversal of a trend), and in a professional or technical
occupation. It is reasonable to expect this profile to hold for
participation and both organized and individual learning activities.
Dickinson and Clark (1975) point out, "Learning-oriented adults would

tend to be quite active in both [self and group] types of learning

25

activities in their quest for more knowledge" (p. 5).

In his doctoral dissertation Waldon (1984) surveyed 503 members of
the Association for Educational Communications and Technology with a
resultant usable 296 responses. Discrimination analysis effectively
categorized 101 as "participants" in continuing education with the
"amount of previous participation in continuing professional education"
(p. 105) the strongest contributor to the discriminant score. It is
evident that adults who already participate in further educating
themselves make up a group more likely to participate in further
learning activities.

Huberman (1974) suggested another characteristic of participants:
"We find that most adults enrolled in courses or using
self-instructional materials are in a situation of change [in their
personal or occupational lives]" (p. 52).

Reasons for participation. Houle (1972) states, "The adult
ordinarily embarks on a learning program because it has an immediate and
direct meaning for him [or her]" (p. 138). Surveys bear this out. In
Penland's (1977, p. 40) national survey respondents rated "increase
knowledge" and "meet responsibility" highest among listed goals for
learning and "personal development" as the highest area of life in which
learning was to be used. Cross and Zusman (1979) analyzed data from
major studies between 1973 and 1979 and report six motivational reasons
for participation:

1. desire to achieve practical personal goals-—to get a new

job or advance in one's present job, or to improve one's
income;

2. desire to achieve personal satisfaction and other
inner-directed personal goals, such as personal development

26
and family well-being;
3. desire to gain new knowledge, including the desire to learn
for its own sake;
4. desire to achieve formal educational goals (degrees,
certificates, etc.);
5. desire to socialize with others and/or escape from everyday
routine; and
6. desire to achieve societal/public welfare goals (p. 35).
Studies of why adults in specific professions participate in
continuing education affirm the above reasons for participation. Eskin
(1981) wrote that keeping up with new knowledge appeared to motivate
physicians to participate in continuing education. Richards and Cohen
(1981) listed and summarized 19 studies reported since 1950 regarding
physician attendance at traditional continuing medical education
programs. The recurring motivational theme throngh those studies is new

knowledge ("stay up-to-date") and maintenance and improvement of

professional competence.

Why do some people not participate in educational activities as
adults? Cross (1981) groups perceived barriers into three categories:
situational, institutional, and dispositional. The first two categories
hold the most often cited barriers of cost, time, and home and job
responsibilities, among others. In the Richards and Cohen analysis
(1981), the most often reported reason for nonattendance among
physicians (in studies that surveyed nonparticipants) was
time--inability to be away from patient and/or family obligations.
Perceived situational and dispositional barriers relate directly to
expectations of effort expenditure, time investment, and learning

achievement of this study. Expectations are discussed next.

27

EXPECTATIONS

Focus of the review. Adult education research into participation
shows us that some adults are more likely to participate in educational
activities than others. Participation is a behavior necessary to
education, an achievement-oriented activity. The adult student, or
potential student, of prepackaged, self—paced materials is a consumer or
customer (Rosenberg, 1978-79) who participates (alone or with guidance)
by setting goals for his or her study, seeking the educational
courseware, purchasing it, and following its study program to
completion. In purchasing and using a packaged course, an individual
fits the definition of a consumer who is "directly involved in obtaining
and using economic goods and services" and in "the decision processes
that precede and determine these acts" (Engel, Blackwell, & Kollat, 3rd
ed., 1978, p. 3). The educational consumer weighs a cost/quality
relationship with anticipated effort expenditure, time investment, and
other costs balanced against expected learning achievement and other
outcomes (e.g., certificate of completion). Thus, the review includes
citations which have provided foundation for discussion of motivation in
both the fields of education and consumer behavior.

The terms "attribution" and "attribute" occur frequently in the
following sections. When a person makes an "attribution," he or she
perceives causality or ascribes a reason for the occurrence of a
particular event (Weiner, 1985). This ability of persons to perceive
causality is the foundation of "attribution theory" which received

attention after the study of attributional processes by Fritz Heider

28
(1958). The term "attribute," used as a noun, indicates a
characteristic of a person or object.

Motivation. Motivation is not measurable except in its expression
in terms of participation and/or performance-—in education-or in terms
of purchase and/or use-—in consumer behavior. In other words, we make
inferences about motivation through an individual's behavior in a
situation. Atkinson (1964) recommends various uses for the term
"motivation." The term as used here is understood to mean "the problem
of accounting for the direction, vigor, and persistence of behavior"
(p. 274), especially, the role expectations play in that accounting.

Achievement motivation, according to Atkinson and Birch (1978, 2nd
ed.), "is concerned with the interaction of person and immediate
environment" (p. 126). Motivation, as a function of Motive X Expectancy
X Incentive, is an expectancy-value conception of motivation (Atkinson,
1964, Weiner, 1972, 1974). The arousal of motivation to approach or
avoid a person, task, or object is due to the expected positive or
negative utility of the consequences. The field of consumer behavior
has a parallel concept: "Before purchasing a particular product, a
consumer has some expectations about the outcomes associated with using
that product" (Zaltman & Wallendorf, 1983). Boshier (1976) writes of
the importance of creating learning environments for adults "congruent"
with their "needs, expectations and learning styles" (p. 24). Ward
(1973) discusses the "expectation of instructional procedures" and of
"what constitutes a valid learning experience" as being a result of
cultural conditioning (p. 2).

Expectations "may be the result of either known or unknown past

29
experiences" and "refer to a readiness to respond in a certain way to a
given situation or set of stimuli" (Williams, 1981, p. 22). They are

mental events "somewhat difficult to link to observable behavior" (Rest,

1976, p. 103). Yet expectations are critical to purchase and use of a
product. Zaltman and Wallendorf (1983) state, "If a consumer does not
expect a product to perform well, there is little reason to purchase and
use that product. Furthermore, if a consumer's expectations are low and
they do, in fact, happen to use the product, the consumer's perception
of the product's actual performance may be influenced by his or her
initial expectations about how well that product would perform"

(p. 324).

In achievement situations, expectations change after success or
failure at a task (such as attempting to complete a self-paced,
prepackaged course). Weiner points out, "Generally, success is followed
by an increment in goal anticipation while failure produces decrements
in the subjective probability of success" (1974, p. 21).

Also, a consumer may have uncertain expectations regarding the
consequences of buying/not buying a product. This uncertainty is known
as perceived risk (Wilkie, 1976). "The amount of perceived risk,"
according to Kotler (1980, 4th ed., p. 165), "varies with the amount of
money at stake, the amount of attribute uncertainty [whether a product
has those characteristics perceived as relevant both to the product
class and to the particular consumer's needs and wants], and the amount
of consumer self-confidence."

Uncertainty can be high in novel tasks, such as computer-based

instruction (CBI). Sarason (1979) recognized the role of expectations

30
in CBI and wrote, "The reality of human behavior is that it is modified
by both environmental stimulation and stimulation the individual
supplies for himself in the form of preoccupations, expectations, and
interpretations of what is going on in the environment" (p. 208).
Expectations are also important to classroom—based instruction (see
Chapter I, McKean, 1977, and McCue, 1982, studies). Knox (1977)
encouraged exploring expectations with adult learners in order to reach
"congruent shared expectations" (p. 428).

How does the individual formulate expectations? Palmer and Willson
(1982) investigated "the extent to which ability, effort, task
difficulty, and luck attributions enhance prediction of individuals'
expectations and feeling of pride/shame within an actual achievement
situation (p. 336). Based upon their and others' findings, they suggest
that attributions play an important mediating role for individuals'
expectations for future performance. Those attributions may be made to
ability, effort, luck, and task difficulty, via their cues from past
performance and current situational cues.

Atkinson's (1982) expectancy theory of achievement motivation uses
the term expectancy "to refer to a particular kind of cognitive
association aroused in the person by situational cues" (p. 25). In
classroom learning, situational cues appear to apply most significantly
to the influence of other persons, but also to the "physical and
psychological 'givens' of the classroom, the quantity and types of
curricular materials, and the learning activities" (Finn, 1972, p. 390).
Thus, physical attributes are also situational cues. (This is a basis

for the aptitude/ or trait/treatment interaction studies that ask, "what

media attributes are relevant for learners with what personality traits
for what kind of learning:tasks?" (Heidt, 1978, p. 85).) With
prepackaged courses, the attributes of a product may comprise some or
all of those situational cues. That realization can cause us to look at
motivation for learning from a slightly different viewpoint. Davies
(1971) writes,

It is probably a mistake to think of motivation as a necessary

prerequisite for learning....Frequently, the best strategy is

to ignore any initial motivational states and to concentrate on

presenting the subject matter in such a way that student
motivation is developed and harnessed during the learning

process (p. 150).

Keller (1979) suggests that motivational deficiencies "may be in the
'learner or in the instruction" (p. 32). The latter deficiencies "should
be controllable by means of effective instructional design.

Furthermore, they are probably easier to control than the motivational
problems that lie within the individual" (p. 32). Fennell (1980) writes

that marketing researchers have learned from research on consumer wants

that "elements in the person's environment as well as elements within
the person may motivate behavior, i.e., may activate behavior in a
partiCular direction" (p. 19). Thus characteristics and cues within

instructional materials, along with past experience, may lead the

learner toward expectations of success or failure.
To what do learners ascribe the successes-or failures-that either
motivate or discourage them from future educational endeavors? Weiner

(1974) has extensively researched perceptions of the causes of success

and failure and proposed an attributional model of achievement

motivation. His four causal categories of ability, effort, task

32
difficulty, and luck were presented in Chapter One. He has also
produced a 2 X 2 X 2 table that further classifies the categories

according to locus, stability, and controllability (Weiner, 1982).

Discussed along the dimension of locus of control (Rotter, 1966),
internal or external, ability and effort are seen as causal factors
internal to the person. Effort is the only one of the four factors seen
to be under volitional control by the individual. (Although, Weiner,
Russell, and Lerman (1978) point out that even effort can seem to be
beyond our control at times as in, "I just can't seem to study for this
course" (p. 62).) Dividing the factors on the basis of stability finds
ability and task difficulty generally perceived as stable. Luck is
perceived as more unstable. Effort has both stable and unstable
elements. External factors include, primarily, those cues found in task
difficulty and luck.

Each category holds cues that an individual uses to measure his or
her level or absence or presence of that cause. Some are listed in
Table 2.2.

Individuals use cues to develop perceptions of their own
capabilities (ability and effort) and those of the task or situation
(difficulty and luck). Those perceptions are important to BOTH the
decision to participate and to learning. Weiner, Russell, and'Lerman
(1978) write that both expectancy and affect influence behavior for
"attributions modify expectancy and affect, they also play an important
role in determining the speed of performance, choice, persistance, and

other indices of motivated behavior (p. 65). Feather (1982) conducted

33

Table 2.2

 

Cues to Causal Factors

 

ABILITY CUES

Past success history
(Number of, Z of)
Immediate outcome information
Position relative to social
norms
Pattern of performance
Performance peaks
Task difficulty

TASK DIFFICULTY

Social norms
(Z if others succeeding/
failing at same task
Objective task characteristics

EFFORT CUES

Past success history
(Number of, Z of)
Immediate outcome information
Position relative to social
norms
Pattern of performance
Performance peaks
Success following failures
Failure following successes
Covariation of incentive and
output
Perceived muscular tension,
sweating
Persistance at the task
Task difficulty

LUCK

Apparent lack of personal
control

Variability in outcome
(Randomness, independence)

Objective task character-
istics

 

(From Weiner, 1972, p. 364; 1974, pp. 8-9)

four studies to test predictions of levels of performance and found,

"performance levels tended to be positively related to initial estimates

of chances of success....subjects draw on their past experience at

similar tasks of the same order of difficulty to guide them when they

estimate their chances for success for the present task" (p. 76). A

study by Callaghan and Manstead (1983) found that "failure on a practice

task led to lower expectations of performance on a similar task in the

34
future" and "anticipated pleasure at performing a similar task in the
future was influenced by the conjunctions of outcomes on...two
experimental tasks" (p. 20). And Weiner (1976) summarizes, "Among

adults, it has been demonstrated many times that prior success or
failure at a task influences the future expectancy of success, with
expectancy increasing after a success and decreasing following failure"
(p. 192).

Walberg (1976) discussed, "how perception of environments can
'account' for considerable variation in classroom learning" (p. 155).
He points out that "different cues in the environment may lead people to
the same (or different) perceptions, conclusions, or actions" (p. 157).
Ritchie (1974) examined 12 different leisure activities using
multidimensional scaling analysis to determine whether individuals'
perceptions really differ. He found significant variations in
individual perception.

Weiner (1976) suggests that "educators may find evaluations of
perception useful" (p. 163). Anderson and Walberg found perceived
difficulty and pace of the class linked to cognitive achievement in a
1974 study. Weiner, Russell, and Lerman (1978) also considered the role
of the environment, stating, "the external environment may be
facilitative rather than inhibitory" (p. 75). That external environment
in prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials will include not only
a home or office study setting, but also the materials and their
packaging.

Palmer and Willson (1982) measured subjects' attributions for

correct responses on an exam on seven—point rating scales. They found

35
the stable attributions of ability and task difficulty positively

correlated with expectancy ratings. Their scales offer ways to view or

define Weiner's four causal variables:

You are very smart/not very smart in this subject (Ability).
You are very lucky/not lucky at all in taking tests like

these (Luck).

This test was very hard/not hard at all (Task difficulty).

You studied very hard/did not study at all (Effort).

(p. 337)

Attributes. This study looks at task difficulty through perceived
attributes of effort expenditure, time investment, and learning
achievement. The attributes were selected as a result of experience
developing and implementing a self-paced course (see Chapter I) and from
the literature. This section will define "attribute" and provide a
background in the ways effort, time, and learning have been discussed in
educational literature.

An attribute is a characteristic of a person or object. Kotler

(1980) explained product attributes: "A particular product is perceived
in terms of where it stands on a set of attributes that are relevant to
that product class" (p. 157). He offered examples of attributes of
familiar products:

Aspirin: Speed of relief, reliability, side effects, price

Tires: Tread life, safety, ride, quality, price
Cameras: Picture sharpness, speed, closeup distance,
size, ruggedness, price (p. 157)

Individual consumers consider different attributes relevant to

themselves. They attach different importance weights to those

considered relevant and find some more salient in a specific situation

36
than others. Researchers obtain attributes for study in a variety of
ways: from motivation, by asking subjects to generate lists of product
characteristics, using an existing set (perhaps from an earlier study or
one developed by marketing research), expert judgment, interviews, and
others (Fennell, 1980).

Task Difficulty. Task difficulty is integral in some way to all
four causal factors (see Table 2.2, above). In the factors of ability
and effort, perceived task difficulty determines whether individuals
think they "can" and how hard they "try." In the factors of task
difficulty and luck, learners' perceptions of the objective task
characteristics help them "size up" task difficulty and their "chances"
of success. After concluding that the students in his dissertation
study could not choose validly between two instructional methods,
McIntosh (1981) asked what might.be the basis for their preferences. He
suggested that their criteria might have included "their perception of
how easy or difficult the method was, the way they preferred to manage
their time, fear of something new (i.e., PSI), etc." (p. 112).

Tasks do differ in "difficulty and hence in incentive value of
success" (Atkinson, 1964, p. 280). That fact and McIntosh's (1981)

suggestion (above) that persons base their preferences upon perceptions

of difficulty and other factors helped prompt this study which sought to
determine the perceived levels of effort expenditure, time investment,
and learning achievement necessary for four different "tasks," or
methods of prepackaged, self—paced study. Effort and time are discussed
next.

Effort. Effort is Heider's (1958) "I try" element (versus "I can,"

37
which relates to ability). Effort is "considered to be a behavior,
whereas performance would be an outcome" (Mitchell, 1982, p. 295).
Keller (1979) also draws Mitchell's distinction between effort and
performance writing, "Effort refers to whether the individual engaged in

action aimed at accomplishing the task" (p. 27). Effort is especially

important to learning, writes Carpenter (1957):

All learning requires effort and the expenditure of energy in
relation to the difficulty of the task. All achievement goals
are to be reached at a price of energy expenditure....
conclusions [of attention to philosophies and theories of
learning] should indicate that audio-visual materials and
methods of instruction are as demanding of disciplined study,
as rigorous and as challenging as other methods which are more
generally sanctioned by educational traditions of the past. It
may be wise in the current "climate of opinion" in educational
circles for proponents of audio-visual approaches to learning,
to make certain that these approaches are applied in ways to
counteract students' tendencies toward indolence and to follow
the "law of least effort" (pp. 366-367).

Attributions to effort, according to Weiner, Russell, and Lerman
(1978), have'"greater affective consequences than ability attributions"
(p. 65). In judging themselves, individuals who fail and feel they have

not put out the effort of which they are capable "punish" themselves
with affects including: shame, fear, sorrow, panic, and guilt (p. 80).
They use indicators such as those listed by Weiner (above, Table 2.2) to
judge their effort output. Keller (1979) has also listed some "common
indicators" of effort, including attention, persistence,
approach/avoidance tendencies, and latency and vigor of response.

Weiner (1972) discusses the importance of attributions to effort:
An attributional analysis of the relationship between task

difficulty and intensity of performance also is based upon
perceptions of effort as an outcome determinant. It is

38

suggested that task difficulty is a cue that gives rise to

differential attributions to effort as a determinant of

achievement outcome. At an easy task effort may be perceived

as unnecessary for success, while at a very difficult task

effort could be perceived as a "waste of energy." Thus, effort

may be considered most important at tasks of intermediate

difficulty (p. 392).

One experiment found that persons saw effort (or its lack) as the
most important determinant of success or failure for tasks of
intermediate difficulty where the probability of success was 50%
(Weiner, Heckhausen, Meyer, & Cook, 1972). Weiner wrote again in 1976,
"Persons highly motivated to achieve success attribute failure to a lack
of effort" (p. 197). They also "are sensitive and reactive to cues
indicating the importance of effort expenditure" (Weiner, 1972, p. 396).

Persistence is a quality including effort and time in that it
implies keeping at a task in spite of difficulty or opposition and,
also, continuing past a usual, expected, or normal time (Webster's New
Collegiate Dictionary, 1981). Effort, according to Keller (1979), "is
usually measured in terms of persistence" (p. 27).

One type of "difficulty or opposition" that may occur in an
instructional situation is a lack of congruence between the task and the
learner's ability and cognitive style (Wittrock & Lumsdaine, 1977). The
need for congruence has been researched by persons in the areas of

"cognitive styles" and "aptitude treatment interactions.‘ Those areas

are not discussed here, except to acknowledge that such incongruence

could result in either great frustration and/or recognition of the need
for increased effort, persistence, and time on the part of the learner.
Other "difficulties," identified by Noble (1980) as inherent in

self-paced distance (correspondence) instruction, are the problems of

39
distraction and procrastination. Overcoming either requires that the
learner try to muster greater effort. (Persistence is discussed more
fully under the section on "Time," below.)

The discussion above of difficulties arising from incongruence,
distraction, and the factors of task familiarity and task variety (Judd,
et al., 1979; Eisenberger, et al., 1982) indicate that expectations of
effort expenditure fall along a continuum such as that in Figure 2.1,
with incongruence, novelty, many distractions, and variety of tasks all
leading to higher expected effort expenditure.

There appears to be an optimum level of motivation intensity for
increased effort. McClelland (1951) reported that "as a motive

increases in intensity it first leads to an increase in the efficiency

 

EFFORT ESTIMATION

 

 

 

 

 

< >
LOW HIGH
Congruent < > Incongruent
with my style with my style
of learning of learning
Familiar < > Novel
task task
Few < > Many
distractions distractions
Single < > Variety of
task tasks

Figure 2.1: Expectation of Effort Expenditure

40

of instrumental activity and then to a decrease....Too little motivation
leads to sluggishness and inertia, too much to disruption and defense
against anxiety" (p. 485).

2392, Carroll had hypothesized in 1963 that the degree of learning
is a function of "time actually spent" divided by the "time needed"

(p. 730). Time has been shown to be a modest predictor of achievement
according to an extensive review of time-on-task research by Fredrick
and Walberg (1980). Sanderson (1976) found time spent significantly
related to achievement for both females and males in an English mastery
learning course. Time can be manipulated both by teachers and by
students themselves. Millman, et al. (1983), demonstrated that rewards
can be useful to increase the amount of time students are willing to
spend learning. Learners can also manipulate their own time investment
based upon situational factors, the value of their goals, and their
expectations of the time investment needed to learn.

Time is an integral part of expectations, as evidenced in this
definition of expectancy by Maddi (1980, 4th ed.): "a cognitive unit,
or thought, referring to what you imagine will be the content and timing
of events in the future" (p. 177). Fraisse (1963) writes of time as an
"obstacle to be overcome in order to continue a task which has been
undertaken, when the initial impulse is exhausted. If there is still an
element of waiting, it is the expectation of finishing the job....The
difference between present result and that which must be realized gives
rise to awareness of duration" (pp. 202-203). Time is an output
measure, used along with "quality" to gauge the worth of a CEU-rated

program (Bramblett & Buchanan, 1978).

41 '

Mittelstaedt, Curtis, Grossbart, and Rogers (1975) found that
cognized time may differ from actual time. Fraisse (1963) offers
reasons: "The simple fact that frustration attracts my attention to the
time interval is enough to cause overestimation of its duration"

(pp. 203-204); likewise, time may appear "too short" when we await a
consequence we fear and want to delay; and, also, "we are not conscious
of time when we are fully satisfied with the present situation"

(p. 206). Fraisse suggests that we frequently compare our intuitive
estimates of time with actual measurements during activities.
Individuals anticipate the probable duration of a task when they begin
(an expectation), then use that as a standard against which they make
judgments such as "it takes so long" or "that didn't take long"

(p. 210). According to Fraisse, they estimate duration using three
indicators: measurement (clock, sun, distance covered, number of pages
written, number of rows knitted, etc.), affective judgments (feelings of
time), and direct judgments (perception of changes around them).
Regarding the third method of estimation, individuals select changes to
which they attend based upon the objective task cues and factors and
upon their own attitude. Fraisse offers an example: "When reading a

novel I can judge the number of changes according to the number of pages

I turn or I can consider nothing but the adventures I live through with
the hero of the book" (p. 217). He shows that "the length of a duration
depends on the number of changes we perceive in it" (p. 218). A new or
different task or experience requires more attention to detail, hence to
time. A too difficult task also creates more attention to changes and

to time, with that attention to time increased if motivation is low.

42
Conclusions developed from Fraisse include those illustrated in Figure
2.2.

Two dimensions of time have been mentioned by Weiner, Russell, and
Lerman (1978), as being determined by attributions: speed of
performance and persistence (p. 64). Speed of performance equates to
"pace of study," one of the levels of choice for a learner in Cornwall's
"hypothetical hierarchy" of factors in the curriculum (1981,
pp. 190-191). "Speed of performance is directly related to the
attribution of failure to bad luck and lack of effort," with the
expectation that "on a subsequent occasion the goal might be attained"

Weiner, et al., 1971, pp. 16, 19).

 

TIME ESTIMATION

 

 

 

 

 

< >
LOW HIGH
Task Characteristics
Familiar to me < > Newer to me
Easy for me < > Harder for me
My Motivation
Low < > High

 

Figure 2.2: Expectation of Time Investment

Allowing control of speed of performance through self-pacing

provides for effective learning, a principle supported by Sjogren and

43
Knox (1965) who found that "speeding-up" and "slowing-down" individuals
in programmed instruction both inhibited performance. Brown, Brown, and
Danielson (1975) also determined that different persons have different
pacing needs in that older persons and those weak in reading ability
prefer slower pace and more repetitions in televised lessons.

However, just as individuals may have different pacing needs, they
may also have different pacing preferences. Thus, homebound persons may
find that self-paced materials can offer an opportunity to extend time
of study to fill otherwise empty hours.

Atkinson and Birch (1978, 2nd ed.) explain "the way in which
motivation influences the proportion of time spent in different
activities...: the proportion of time spent in a given activity depends
upon the strength of the tendency to do it relative to the number and
strength of tendencies for all the competing activities in that
situation" (p. 145). This is a problem in classroom situations which
more often than not require completion of a self-paced course by some
deadline. In those cases, Judd, McCombs, and Dobrovolny (1979) report,
"many students have little motivation to complete a course quickly and
in some instances are actually motivated to prolong their training"

(p. 135). Persons studying self-paced materials may encounter problems
judging pacing if the course culminates in a scheduled examination date
or is required for certification at a certain time. Keller, Goldman,
and Sutterer (1978) studied a PSI course "modified" by requiring midterm
and final exams on specified dates. They found this reduced students'
responsibility for planning and executing their own schedules for work.

This may have reduced the effect of individual differences in time

44
utilization" (p. 419). In a three-year study of a lS-hour-rated
packaged, self-paced course for dental students "students reported
spending an average of 10.8 hours working on the course with a range of
four to 20 hours (Dilley, Machen, Dilley, & Howden, 1978, p. 479).

Persistence is important in considering the problem of the rate of
"drop out" from both classroom-based and prepackaged, self—paced
programs for adult learners because their participation is usually
voluntary. Knox (1976) warns that with voluntary participation, "if the
activity does not fit his expectations the adult will typically
withdraw" (p. 84). Two types of factors appear to be responsible for
drop out: situational factors, in particular, lack of time due to other
responsibilities (Salinger, 1976); and factors internal to the person,
such as unmet expectations or a perception that he or she cannot succeed
at the task.

Weiner (1972) stated, "If the subject thinks that he cannot perform
the task (low ability and/or high task difficulty), he relatively
disengages from behavior (effort expenditure) instrumental to goal
attainment" (p. 391). Janoff-Bulman and Brickman (1982) point out that
subjects whose expectations are for success work harder and longer than
those who are led to expect failure. Both performance and persistence
are impaired by low expectations. Persons with low expectations

evidence poor effort, waste time, or quit altogether. These authors

wrote,

A person turns away from a task, in our analysis, less as a
function of whether they have succeeded or failed than as a
function of whether or not they anticipate that further effort
at that task will produce further, commensurate benefits. They
may have done well, exceeding their initial expectations, and

45

yet continue because they now feel they can do better still.
They may have done poorly, falling short of their initial
expectations, and yet quit because they now feel that they

cannot do even that well (p. 226).

Models of classroom learning acknowledge that time is an important
variable in learning achievement (Walker, 1976; see also Chapter One).
Expectations of time investment thwarted by task attributes or anything

else lead to lack of persistence and, eventually, drop out.

46

PREPACKAGED SELF-PACED INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

Focus of the review. The review begins with a discussion of what

 

self-paced study is and what it is not. The limited literature on
prepackaged, self-paced instruction commercially available for use by
adults as individuals (not classroom-based) was the focus of the second
part of this section. Finally, a brief overview of each of the four
types of prepackaged, self-paced delivery systems in this study is
provided. While most research of self-paced instruction has been at
K-12 or college levels, rather than adult or post-secondary, some of
that research is reported as background for this study.

Self-paced study is known under a variety of terms. It has been
called self-study, self-directed, home study, independent or
individualized study, resource-based learning, and nontraditional
learning. The concept of self-paced study, according to Schein (1972),
involves certain assumptions:

that learning takes place only if the student makes some gggiyg_

response to whatever material is presented...

the response leads to some consequence: better understanding,
the solution to a problem, a passing grade, etc....

that individuals learn at different rates and...it makes no
sense to require a large group...to cover the same material at
some "average" pace....

that the material to be learned can be broken down into
components or units that are in some way cumulative (p. 99).

In Schein's model, which is that of the Keller Plan or Personalized
System of Instruction (Keller, 1968), tutors and teachers function as

consultants and evaluators ("proctors"). Although Schein discusses this

47
type of course as an "innovative mechanism for professional education,"
the systems he cites as examples were designed for and carried out with
university level students. McKeachie and Kulik (1975) report that in
evaluations of PSI courses in the university context, their self-pacing
feature has been the most highly rated feature. Also, in spite of a
high drop out rate, PSI courses generally receive favorable ratings by
students (both completers and noncompleters). These authors find that
students report perceptions of having learned more than in a lecture
course, but also feel they have spent more in time and effort in PSI
than they would have in a traditional lecture course. The "self-paced
module" is a format frequently used in corporate educational settings,
according to Watkins (1983).

Independent study. Independent study is often confused with
self-paced study. However, while self-paced study is generally directed
by its materials (e.g., programmed texts), independent study is
characterized by greater freedom (Schein, 1972). Dressel and Thompson
(1973) define independent study as "the student's self-directed pursuit
of academic competence in as autonomous a manner as he is able to
exercise at any particular time" (p. 1). In independent study the
student may set his or her own objectives, course outline, materials
selection, etc., frequently under the guidance of an advisor. Together
the student and advisor enter into an agreement regarding the objectives
to be satisfied and the type of evaluation to take place.

Nontraditional study. This is an umbrella term for ways of learning
carried out away from a school or classroom environment and "with

teacher and learner separated in space and time" (Wedemeyer, 1983,

48
p. 53). Because it is under the control of the student it is
self-paced.

Self-directed learnifg, Self-directed learning is

learner-initiated. The learner determines his or her own objectives,
method of study, and way to determine progress. The self-directed
learner may choose to learn from an "expert" (e.g., how to make pickles
from one's neighbor), from library books, from organized classes, or
from any number and assortment of methods. Rydell (1983) suggests,
"Self-directed learners may determine that all or a portion of a
prepackaged course meets their learning needs. On the other hand,
self-directed learners may choose a number of alternative learning
strategies" (p. 64). Most self-directed learners develop learning
projects to serve immediate needs-to-know rather than to learn an
academic subject. The work of Tough (1979, 2nd ed.) and Penland (1977),
discussed earlier, provides further description of self-directed
learning.

Individualized study. Individualized study does not necessarily
have the independence of independent or self—directed study. In its
purest form, it is study prescribed for an individual that differs in
some way from study for others. The objectives, outline of subject
matter, and evaluation may all be prescribed with no or little input
from the student. Study may be individualized for any number of
reasons, including to match a cognitive style, to furnish study in an
unusual subject for which no class is available, or to accommodate a

student's handicap. Klein (1982) describes conceptions of

individualized study ranging from tightly teacher controlled to student

49
choice of learning task and activities. According to Dressel and
Thompson (1973), individualized study structured in advance through
programmed materials or mechanical equipment can be less independent
than that carried on the the average classroom.

Self-education. Self—education is "essentially an individual and
private pursuit," according to Dickinson and Clark (1975, p. 5). They
contrast it to "continuing or adult education" which they describe as
"learning that is conducted in the presence of someone external to the
learner who plans and manages the learning process....predominantly a
group activity as several persons other than the learner are usually
involved" (p. 5). (Their definition of continuing or adult education
appears to leave out persons studying via self-paced packages. The
viewpoint taken herein is that continuing or adult education may include
methods of self-education with varying degrees of self-planning and
self-management.) Their study of 200 female nurses found that more were
active in self—education than in group-oriented continuing education in
spite of having high "interaction orientations."

Self-study. This is a term discussed by Apps (1981) who stated,
"self-study is entirely organized and carried out by the learner"

(p. 127). He finds self-study used by persons who want to enrich
classroom studies, review former learnings, and prepare for more
advanced studies in the same area. He writes of the utility of
programmed materials for self-study and, also, less structured materials
that provide exercises for student practice.

Houle's Categpries of Educational Design Situations. Cyril O. Houle

(1972) proposed 11 educational planning categories. One, his category

50

C-11, "Mass," is relevant to prepackaged, self-paced learning. He
defines this category as, "An individual, group, or institution designs
an activity for a mass audience" (p. 44). This includes a televised
course tuned into by many persons at one time, but also includes sets of
books and other materials accessible to many persons according to their
own needs and schedules. The nature of the medium, according to Houle,
"helps to define both the content and the human resources which present
it" (p. 50). Instruction is standardized, not individualized, but can
be personalized to reach specific audiences. Personalization is often
achieved through mixing educational and noneducational goals: "efforts
are made to amuse, to entertain, or to be topical as well as to teach"
(p. 128). Houle's discussion is one of few (outside of literature by
correspondence study practitioners) to address directing instruction at
a mass audience that applies to prepackaged courses. As is customary in
his writing, he decries the lack of teacher contact with learners.

Prepackaged instruction. Prepackaged instruction or courses, also
known as packaged instruction and resource-based learning, have been
used in two primary areas: (1) curriculum packages or kits to permit
self-paced study by individual students from the elementary grades
through university courses and (2) pre-produced courses for
correspondence study (equivalent term: home study [Noble, 1980]) by
adults. There is much written about the former area, especially the AV
audiotutorial instruction of Samuel N. Postlethwait (Postlethwait,
Novak, & Murray, 1971; Fisher & MacWhinney, 1976). Correspondence study
has received attention, also, especially in connection with Great

Britain's Open University.

51
Little research attention has been given to individual adult use of

the prepackaged course not tied directly to an institution, such as

those available through retail outlets including book, videotape, or
computer stores or by mail order. Apart from costly national surveys
such as Penland's (1977), adults studying on their own are a group
difficult to research. Attention to the development area of
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials for adults is
increasing, especially in the area of computer- and computer/video-based
courseware, such as the article by Schuyler and Hilfinger (1982).

Ringis (1974) describes a prepackaged course as "a 'lesson plan' for

an individual learner" (p. 105). Noble (1980) writes of packaged
courses as "a substantial proportion of coursework...assembled as
learning materials and provided together with some statement of
intention, properly sequenced tasks, activities, and tests" (p. 169).
Georgiades (1974) states, "Packaging, while not a new concept, offers
many possibilities for personalizing learning" (p. 111). Ringis finds

six "ingredients necessary for the structure of a package:"

Concept focus

Behaviorally-stated objectives

Multiple activities and methodologies
Diversified learning resources

Evaluation instrumentation

Breadth and/or depth suggestions [suggestions
for further activities] (p. 105).

O‘UIJ-‘LANl—o
O

Ingredient three is more likely to be attended to in a classroom
situation that offers a variety of audiovisual equipment than it is in
packages for "home" study which often feature only one audiovisual

method (often plus an accompanying text). The latter, according to

52

Wedemeyer (1976), frequently receive their names from the type of method
used, such as audiotape course or television course. However,
Georgiades (1974) points out that even packaged courses prepared for
in-school use often offer a "monolithic approach to the learning
goal-—reading" (p. 104).

Conroy (1983) has compiled a directory to "Learning Packaged to Go."
Her volume lists titles and producers of "off-the-shelf...commercially
produced prepackaged training resources" (p. vii). Hundreds of these
package are now available, she finds, with more on the way thanks to the
profit motive. Conroy declares that packages are "convenient, promptly
and consistently replicable, patient beyond belief, and run no risk of
impairing their own ability by burnout caused by repetition" (p. 4).
Her book lists packages for use by individuals and packages that guide
trainers in presenting courses to groups. Those for individuals are
aimed at the "independent self-directed learner who wishes to improve
present skills or prepare for new responsibilities" (p. viii). Another
such listing of packages is Wasserman and Applebaum's (1982), Learning
Independently, a directory of 3,591 self-instruction resources including
materials in subjects from accounting to zero-based budgeting and in
narrow to broad topics from pipe-fitting to management principles.

"Pre-produced" is a name applied to courses packaged for use in
distance education by Borje Holmberg (1981, 2nd ed.). He provides
guidelines for development of courses for instruction by correspondence
methods and an extensive bibliography of many technical issues in their
preparation.

Resource-based learning is another term applied to packages used in

53
distance study by Beswick (1977), Noble (1980), and Clarke (1982).
Beswick states that it is a blanket term covering methods that can be
highly structured and teacher controlled or student directed using
discovery techniques. But the essential element in its definition is

this assumption:

the student will learn from his own direct confrontation,

individually or in a group, with a learning resource or set of

resources, and activities connected with them, rather than from

conventional exposition by the teacher (p. ix).

Beswick points out that the oldest form of resource-based learning
is, perhaps, the book. Noble defines resource-based learning as "any
system whereby teachers organize for students access to stored
knowledge, rather that themselves mediating that knowledge in classroom
discourse" (p. 170). An important difference between packages used for
resource-based distance learning and those available "off-the-shelf" is
the availability of consultation with a teacher or tutor in the former
and the "on-your-own" study of the latter.

Four types of prepackagedyiself-paced instructional materials. The
four types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials in this
study are based in the following delivery systems: textbook, audiotape,
videotape, and personal computer. Each is discussed briefly below.

Textbook-based. As noted above, print materials such as the book
are among the oldest available types of learning resources. They
include the familiar bound textbook, but also come in formats including
ring or spiral bound, workbooks, and manuals.

Audiotape-based. The audiotape (usually in audiocassette form) is

the carrier of instruction next in popularity to print materials (Noble,

54
1980). Audiotape-based courses have been available since World War II,
chiefly for language courses at first, but now as a growing
instructional delivery medium in other areas (Grayson, 1982). Audiotape
has a long history in higher education with Postlethwait's
audio-tutorial method (Postlethwait, Novak, & Murray, 1971; Fisher and
MacWhinney, 1976). Noble states that over 70 percent of Open University
students have access to cassettes for coursework. DeMuth (1979) studied
over 700 pharmacists who had completed 10 different audiocassette
courses as a means of continuing profesional education. He found that
subjects' highest response was to the convenience and time—saving
attribute of the cassette courses.

Low cost and versatility appear to be benefits of audiocassettes for
the course developer with those same benefits plus ease of portability
as benefits for the learner.

Audiotapes can be useful in reducing the loneliness of self-paced
learning in that they can present not only information, but also
discussions that allow the learner to feel closer to peers or an
instructor (Clarke, 1982).

Videotape-based. Development and production of video programs is
costly and time-consuming. Its cost is the highest inhibiting factor in
its use, according to Clark (1982).

Broadcast television as an instructional medium has been used and
evaluated since the 19508. Chu and Schramm (1967) produced the report,
"Learning from Television, What the Research Says." Meyer and Nissen
(1979) provided a bibliography of research literature related to the

effects and functions of television related to children and adolescents

55
that numbered 918 resources.

Until recently, videotaped educational programming for adults has
been available only through over-the-air broadcast to homes or
educational centers, some offering two-way interactive capability
(Benjamin, 1984). Brown, Brown, and Danielson (1975) investigated the
use of broadcast television for off-campus adults in a college level
accounting course and reached the conclusion that older persons
preferred a slower pace and more repetitions. They suggest that older
persons might use repeated viewing as a technique for better learning.
Such a possibility becomes reality in prepackaged videocassette courses.
Their conclusion supports further investigation of use of videocassettes
for adults.

Increasing home use of videotape cassette systems-—one in every nine

American homes with, perhaps, half of American homes with TVs having one
by 1987 (How-to tapes, 1984)-has made personal use of educational
videocassettes a posibility. Martin (1985) calls the videocassette

format for self—paced study, "a boon to the training field" (p. 41) in

industry because the trainee can handle the equipment, control what he
or she does, and control the rate.

Richardson (1983) has proposed five areas of research needs
regarding televised instruction, needs which bear upon both broadcast

and nonbroadcast formats:

1. Existing telecourse packages and their theories of content,
teaching-learning processes, and evaluation.

2. Motivation of various subgroups of adults and the
recruitment and retention strategies which are effective
for them.

3. Instructional strategies effective for adult learners.

4. Logistics and costs of alternative delivery systems and the

56
audiences they are likely to reach.
5. The technical assistance and training needs of the new
adopters (p. 8)

Personal computer-based. Noble (1980) cites these uses of computers
"as learning laboratories" (p. 19): simulations, data bases, and
managers of learning. As managers of learning they sequence and provide
knowledge, offer remediation, allow model-building and decision-making,
and test.

Computers are currently creating much interest in the educational
arena. Meierhenry (1983) reports that most research on educational
media and technology is now centered on mainframe and microcomputers,
especially as an interactive learning system with television or
videodisc. Corporations such as IBM, United Airlines, and others are
training adults on computer terminals and microcomputers. Richardson
(1983), reporting on trends in instruction for adults, states, "Soon
people will be able to purchase courses in a variety of tapics at their
local Radio Shack, and skip the higher education agency entirely, if
they so desire" (p. 6). Evaluations of computer-based instruction have
been encouraging, with most studies showing either no significant

difference or positive effects on student learning and attrition

(Grayson, 1982). But novelty and numerous other effects play a part in
many findings. An examination of computer-assisted instruction for
nursing students produced evidence of greater gains in learning for the

CAI group over two comparison groups, but no significant difference in

attitude scores (Conklin, 1983).

57

CHAPTER SUMMARY

This chapter provided background for the study with an overview of
the adult learner and types of educational activities available to
adults. Review of the literature found that adults who participate in
educational activities are those more likely to participate in the
future. Also, more adults are availing themselves of self-directed
methods of study, with increasing development and sales of prepackaged,
self-paced courses.

Computer-based and manual searches of education and motivation
literature indicated that expectations are important to persons
undertaking achievement-oriented tasks, such as study via prepackaged,
self-paced instructonal materials. However, previous studies on
self-paced materials have been done chiefly with classroom-based
instructional programs at the university level or below. The general

public, the focus of this study, does not provide the "captive audience"

necessary to facilitate research.

The three expectation variables of this study-effort, time, and
learning achievement-were found to be important in both the education
and consumer behavior fields. Persons' expectations of effort
expenditure, time investment, and outcome (learning) were found to be
based upon prior experience and situational cues. Their expectations
are important to both their decision to purchase and, then, their
persistence in the use and study of an educational product to its
completion or fulfillment of their goals.

Finally, various types of "self-paced" instruction were discussed.

58
"Prepackaged" was defined and the limited literature available described
its characteristics and availability. The four types of prepackaged,

self-paced instructional materials in this study were introduced.

59

CHAPTER III: RESEARCH DESIGN

INTRODUCTION

The chapter describes the methods and procedures used in this
descriptive study. It lists the dependent and independent variables and
the research and statistical hypotheses. It explains the mail survey
methodology, including sample selection. The data analysis procedures

are introduced with rationale for their selection.

DEPENDENT AND INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

The general research question to be explored was: What are adult
learners' perceptions of four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials—-textbook-based, audiotape-based,
videotape-based, and personal computer-based--in respect to expectations
of (1) effort expenditure and (2) time investment necessary for

completion of those materials and, (3) expectation of possible learning

achievement? To respond to the three parts of the question, dependent
variables consisting of expectation scores were examined. These

dependent variables were expectations of:
1. Effort expenditure

2. Time investment
3. Learning achievement

60
Expectation scores (with a range of zero to three) were derived for
each of the above expectations from respondents' forced choices from all
possible pairs of four types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional

materials, the independent variables:

Textbook-based
Audiotape-based
Videotape-based
Personal computer-based

wao—I
O O I

The following matrix (Table 3.1) illustrates 12 possible combinations of
the three dependent variables and the above independent variables of

method of instruction.

Table 3.1

 

Matrix of Expectation Variables
and Types of Prepackaged, Self-paced Instructional Materials

 

EXPECTATION TYPES OF PREPACKAGED, SELF-PACED COURSEWARE
VARIABLES
Textbook— Audiotape- Videotape- Personal
based based based Computer-
based

 

Effort Expenditure

 

Time Investment

 

Learning Achievement

 

 

 

 

Additional independent variables included the following:

5. An "experience with prepackaged, self-paced instructional
materials" score (range: zero to ten for each of the four
types of materials under investigation) derived from
responses to four categories of the questionnaire.

61

6. Respondent's choice of a personal "ideal," or preferred,
method selected from the four types of prepackaged,
self-paced instructional materials of the study.

7. The expectation scores for effort expenditure and time
investment on the four types of instructional materials
used with the expectation of learning achievement score as
a dependent variable. (Kerlinger [1973, 2nd ed.] points
out that a variable may be dependent in one study and
independent in another or within the same study: it is
dependent upon its use. In this instance the attempt is to

explain learning achievement based upon information about
the effort and time expectation variables.)

RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

This was a descriptive study. The research questions and their
hypotheses were concerned with whether or not there was a relationship
or interaction, rather than the direction of any such interaction. The
"four types of prepackaged, self-paced types of instructional materials"
referred to throughout are those mentioned above: textbook-based,
audiotape-based, videotape-based, and personal computer-based.

Thurstone's Law of Comparative Judgment, Case V, was used to scale
the four types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials on
each of the expectation variables: effort expenditure, time investment,
and learning achievement. The test of significance for the Case V model
is a goodness-of—fit test. The chi-square for discrepancies between
observed and theoretical proportions tests whether Case V is the
appropriate model for the data. If all the assumptions are met for
scaling with the Case V model the chi-square is nonsignificant. The
null hypothesis, according to Mosteller (1951) is the assumptions of the

Case V model.. The alternative hypothesis is that the null hypothesis is

62
not correct. Because those hypotheses test valid use of the model,

research questions one through three are given in question form only.

Research Question 1: How are each of the four types of prepackaged,
self-paced instructional materials perceived as to expected effort
expenditure necessary for learning achievement?

Research Question 2: How are each of the four types of prepackaged,
self-paced instructional materials perceived as to expected time
investment necessary for learning achievement?

Research Question 3: How are each of the four types of prepackaged,

self-paced instructional materials perceived as to expected possible
learning achievement?

Research questions four through eight looked at relationships, their
presence or absence and strength. Questions four and five investigated
the relationship between expectations of effort expenditure and time
investment for each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials. Question five looked at possible relationships
between respondents' experience with prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials and their expectations of effort, time, and

possible learning achievement. Correlational analysis was used.

Research Question 4: What is the relationship between
expectations of effort expenditure and time investment for
each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials?

Research Hypothesis 4: There will be a relationship between

respondents' scores on expectations of effort expenditure and
their scores on expectations of time investment for the four

types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials.

Research Question 5: What is the relationship between
previous experience as a consumer of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials and expectations of effort
expenditure, time investment, and learning achievement?

63

Research Hypothesis 5: There will be a relationship between
respondents' scores on the expectations of effort expenditure,
time investment, and learning achievement on each of the four
types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials and
their level of previous experience for each.

Questions six and seven-using expectation of learning as the
dependent variable-—explore the effects of effort and time expectations
(question six) and those expectations plus experience (question seven)

upon expectation of possible learning from each type. Multiple

regression analysis was used.

Research Question 6: What is the effect of expectations of
time investment and effort expenditure upon expectation of
learning achievement for each of the four types of prepackaged,
self-paced instructional materials?

Research Hypothesis 6: Scores for expectations of effort
expenditure and time investment will have an effect upon the
score for expectation of learning achievement for each of the
four types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials.

Research Question 7: What effect do previous experience as a
consumer of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials and
expectations of effort expenditure and time investment have
upon expectations of learning achievement for each of the four
types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials?

Research Hypothesis 7: Scores for expectations of effort
expenditure and time investment and for experience will have an
effect upon the score for expectation of learning achievement
for each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials.

Question eight categorized respondents according to each
individual's choice of a preferred method (from among the four being

investigated) to investigate the relationship between a preference or

"favorite" method and expectations of effort expenditure, time

64

investment, and learning achievement. Crosstabulation analysis was

used.

Research Question 8: What is the relationship between
preference for an "ideal" method of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials and expectations of effort expenditure,
time investment, and learning achievement for each of the four
types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials?
Research Hypothesis 8: There will be a relationship between
respondents' scores on expectations of effort expenditure, time
investment, learning achievement, and their preferences for an

"ideal" method for each of the four types of self-paced
instructional materials.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SURVEY INSTRUMENT

The mailed survey instrument (Appendix A) consisted of three items:
(1) cover letter, (2) page of relevant definitions, and (3) a three-part
questionnaire. The four-page questionnaire was printed back and front

and folded book-style. Descriptions of each of the parts of the survey

instrument follow.

Cover letter. A one-page letter stated the purpose of the study and
the usefulness of responses to both the doctoral research project and
the development and marketing of prepackaged, self-paced instructional
materials. The letter explained why recipients of the survey had been
chosen. It suggested a return date for the questionnaire and promised
confidentiality.

An incentive was attached to the cover letter-a lollipop to attract

attention and for "energy" while completing the questions. The lollipop

65
incentive was chosen for two reasons: high return rates when used with
two other surveys (C. R. Cooper, PhD, personal communication,
January 17, 1985) and because survey recipients, East Lansing Arts
Workshop patrons, were thought to appreciate novel ideas according to
personnel at the Workshop.

Examples of local retailers of prepackaged, self-paced packages were
mentioned in the cover letter in an attempt to increase the salience of
the topic. Salience of the research topic is important to obtain
cooperation from potential respondents (Sudman & Bradburn, 1982). Other
attempts to increase salience were made in the introductory part of the
questionnaire itself.

Definitions. A separate page of relevant definitions of terms used
in the study was included following the cover letter. Respondents were
asked to refer to the definitions as necessary so that everyone who
responded might have the same meanings in mind.

Questionnaire. The first part of the questionnaire (page one)
introduced the four types of prepackaged, self—paced instructional
materials being studied. It listed subjects often covered in such
packages, asked the respondent to check those of interest to him or her
and add another of interest on a blank line, and to assume that he or
she had decided to study a subject through prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials. This attempt to increase salience also
increased the size of the questionnaire, a negative aspect when probable
response rates were considered (see below).

In addition to the salience factors discussed above, a question

prefaced the data-gathering portion of the questionnaire. That question

66

asked respondents to check a box if they would NEVER consider taking a
'prepackaged, self-paced course because they believed learning to take
place only in the classroom or other group situation. The survey of
the literature for the previous chapter made the researcher aware that
many adult educators discuss adult education as primarily institutional
or classroom-based. Thus the question was inserted for two reasons:

(1) To reduce chances that nonrespondents would differ from respondents
on this basis by giving those who favored group learning the opportunity
to state that fact and respond in spite of it, and, (2) it was thought
that if many respondents felt that way, their profile or responses might
also differ in some way.

The second part of the questionnaire, pages two and three, held the
instructions and research questions. First, respondents were asked to
assign points (zero to 100) to four "importance" factors. Because the
attributes of effort expenditure, time investment, and learning
achievement had been selected from experience and the literature, it was
necessary to gauge their importance in selection of a prepackaged,
self-paced course. They were listed along with a category of "other"
factors including cost, course sponsor, or whatever the respondent might
deem important. The second question asked respondents to indicate which
would be their "ideal" type of study from among the four types of
prepackaged, self-paced delivery systems in the questionnaire. Their
ideal could then be compared to the one type they scored as highest in
expected possible learning achievement in that section of the paired
comparisons.

The dependent variables of expectations of effort expenditure, time

67

investment, and learning achievement were measured on page three using a
"forced-choice" method, the method of paired (or, pair) comparisons.
Torgerson explains the method:

The method of paired comparisons is essentially a

generalization of the two-category case of the method of

constant stimuli....In paired comparisons, each stimulus serves

in turn as the standard. Each stimulus is paired with each

other stimulus. With p_stimuli, there are thus 2(271)/2 pairs.
Each pair is presented to the subject, whose task is to

indicate which member of the pair appears greater...with

respect to the attribute to be scaled. The subject must

designate one of the pair as greater (1958, 167).

The paired comparisons method is an effective way to handle responses
from both experienced respondents and those with no or little experience
(who might need to make estimations or to guess). The latter persons,
although naive, may have formed attitudes or opinions. Those attitudes
or opinions may be effectively measured using paired comparisons
(Thurstone, 1959). Persons who may have difficulty ranking objects can
frequently make judgments when objects are presented two at a time
(Luck, Wales, Taylor, & Rubin, 1982, 6th ed.).

An example of paired comparisons using types of sporting activities
was completed to demonstrate how respondents were to circle the one
stimulus in each pair judged "greater than" the other on the dependent
variables of expectations of effort expenditure, time investment, and
learning achievement. Further instructions were adapted from those
given to subjects in a 1931 study by Thurstone in which he wrote, "If
you find it difficult to decide for any pair be sure to underline one of
them, even if you have to guess" (1959, p. 310).

The arrangement of the paired stimuli is important because "no

68

explicit provision is made for time or space errors in the law of
comparative judgment" (Torgerson, 1958, p. 167) used for analysis of the
data. He points out that randomizing the stimuli as to their positions
in the pairs and the presentation of the pairs is often adequate.
However, four stimuli were too few to randomize efficiently. Instead, a
counterbalancing method was used. With counterbalancing, in so far as
is possible, each stimulus appears first for half of the time and
appears second for the other half the time. The order of presentation
was varied slightly between each of the three sets of stimuli by
starting with a different pair in each set. Torgerson offers other
precautions to avoid time or space errors and practice or fatigue
effects, many of which either could not be adhered to due to the small
number of stimuli, or did not need to be due to the type of study (e.g.,
dividing "correct" responses between first and second members of pairs
when there was no pattern of "correct" responses). However, all were
taken into account in developing the sets of paired comparisons.

Part three, the demographic section of the questionnaire, asked for
information about previous experience with the four types of
prepackaged, self-paced types being studied. Fennell (1980) wrote that
her analysis of consumer decision processes "suggests the importance of
distinguishing between instances in which consumer's information about
the marketplace is based on experience and those in which it is not"

(p. 30). For example, McIntosh (1981) found prior experience with a
Personalized System of Instruction to be a significant predictor of
success in that method (and also in traditional lecture/discussion

method as well). The experience question was divided into four

69
sections:
Exposure--having seen advertisements for any of the four types
of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials;

Familiarity and Minimum Experience--attempting but not
completing any of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials;

High Familiarity--having taken part in development of any of

the four types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional

materials; and,

High Familiarity and Experience-having completed any of the

four types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials.

For data analysis, points were assigned arbitrarily to each of the above
experience levels with one point for the lowest level (exposure) to four
points for the highest level.

Information about respondents' media habits was sought through
questions about book and newspaper reading habits, number of magazine
subscriptions, and time spent watching television and listening to the
radio. Ownership information regarding the hardware was sought to gauge
familiarity with the electronic devices used for audiotape-, videotape-,
and personal computerebased prepackaged, self-paced instructional
materials.

Demographic information requested included level of education
completed, household income, sex, age, marital status, number in
household, ZIP code, level of employment, and whether handicapped. This
information was sought primarily to furnish a profile of the respondent
sample.

Follow-up mailing. A postcard thanking respondents and encouraging

others to respond was mailed several weeks after the questionnaire had

70

been sent.

RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF THE SURVEY INSTRUMENT

Three types of validity must be considered when developing and using
any research instrument: predictive, construct, and content. Within
the instrument itself, both effort and time have previously been shown
to be predictors of learning achievement. Predictive validity of the
total instrument was not a concern as this was a descriptive study.

Construct validity concerns itself with the abstractness or
concreteness of a variable (Nunnally, 1978, 2nd ed.). In this study
expectations are measured globally with no attempt to break them down
into observable attributes. This admittedly leaves each construct open
to individual interpretation. However, the survey instrument attempted
to guide respondents to a common understanding by furnishing a page of
definitions for each construct.

Assurance of content validity was attempted through use of the
well-researched method of paired comparisons technique within the
already acknowledged limitations of the study. In an attempt to
ascertain the aspect of content validity known as "face validity," or
"an inspection of the final product" (Nunnally, 1978, 2nd ed.), the
instrument was pretested with a convenience sample of 16 adult students
in an evening course at Michigan State University. They completed the
instrument and added suggestions for its improvement. The instrument

received final revisions and review by persons regarded as competent in

71
survey research before mailing.

The method of paired comparisons was used to derive the expectation
scores. The technique has a long history. Bock and Jones (1968) trace
its development back to G.T. Fechner who suggested in 1876 that objects
could be compared on other than purely physical dimensions. Most of
today's use of the method relies upon Thurstone's (1959) work,
especially his Law of Comparative Judgment, discussed later. Nunnally
(1978, 2nd ed., p. 46) finds the method "more thorough" than straight
ranking with respect to an attribute. Luck, et. al., (1982, 6th ed.)
states that the method avoids order bias.

Thus, the method is a well-researched and proven technique. But
individual studies must evidence their own reliability and validity.
Kendall's (1970) coefficient of consistence and coefficient of agreement
were used to demonstrate reliability and validity in this study.

Circular triads demonstrate inconsistencies of judgment in paired
comparisons studies. A circular triad occurs when a judge (respondent)
indicates that: A -> B -> C -> A, where the arrow (->) means "is
preferred to" (David, 1963, p. 11). If a judge expresses preferences in
a circle, a condition known as intransitivity, a ranking of the objects
cannot be attained. Thus, the presence of circular triads can lessen
both reliability and validity of an instrument. According to Edwards,
circular triads may result from deficiencies in the judge or in the
instrument. Regarding the judge, deficiencies include carelessness due
to disinterest in the task or a personality or ability trait reflecting

general inconsistency. Regarding the instrument, inconsistency might

result from stimuli not falling "along the single dimension on which we

72
are trying to scale them" or differing "with respect to attributes or
dimensions other than the one in which we are interested" (Edwards,

1957, p. 67). In this study, with perceptions of even naive respondents

wanted, directions adapted from Thurstone (1959) were used to encourage
respondents to guess. David states that the simplest explanation for
circular triads "is that the judge is at least partially guessing when
declaring his preferences. He may be guessing because of incompetence
or because the objects are in fact very similar" (1963, p. 10).

The coefficient of consistence (Zeta, ED ranges from O to 1.00 with

zero "indicating the maximum number of circular triads and 1.00
indicating consistency, the absence of any circular triads" (Edwards,

1957, p. 68). When there is an even number of stimuli to be ranked the
coefficient is calculated on individual judge rankings according to the

formula:

z- 1 -24d/(n’-4nl

where g_is the observed number of triads for a given judge. With 234,
the possible number of triads is O, 1, or 2.

Presence of circular triads was determined by making a matrix for
each judge's responses on each of the three paired comparison segments:
expectations of effort expenditure, time investment, and learning
achievement. The number of times each of the four types of prepackaged,
self-paced instructional materials was rated "greater than" the other
for all pairs was recorded in the matrix (See Figure 3.1). These were
summed across the rows to obtain "scores" for each type of instructional

materials on each of the three dependent variables. If the scores

73
formed a ranking, 0 to 3, transitivity was assumed. With n = 4,

possible triads were scores of 1,1,1,3; 2,2,2,0; l,1,2,2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

T A V PC SCORES _ T A V PC SCORES
Text—based - O O O O Text-based - O O 1 1
Audio-based 1 - 0 O 1 Audio-based 1 - 1 O 2
Video-based 1 1 - 1 3 Video-based 1 O - 1 2
PC—based 1 1 O - 2 PC-based O 1 0 - 1
Transitive Scores Intransitive Scores

(Two circular triads, §_-.000)

 

Figure 3.1: Sample Matrices with Summed Scores

The coefficient of consistence was calculated on individual judge
rankings for each of the judges who responded on the expectation of
effort expenditure, time investment, and learning achievement scales.

Edwards points out that although judges may have a coefficient of
consistence of 1.000, they still might not agree in the judgments they
have made. He suggests using Kendall's coefficient of agreement (3) to
determine "the extent to which a group of judges agree in their
comparative judgments" (Edwards, 1957, p. 76). The value of u_ranges
from -1.000, no agreement, to 1.000, complete agreement. If u_is
positive we know that the judges agree to some degree.

The calculation of u_begins with development of a frequency matrix
showing the frequency with which one stimulus (column in matrix) was
judged "greater" than another (row) by all judges. Column scores below
the diagonal are summed. Each column score below the diagonal is also
squared, then summed. These numbers plus the number of judges, the

number of combinations of the m_judges taken 2 at a time or 9(mfl)/2,

74
and the number of combinations of the p_stimuli taken 2 at a time or
3(371)/2 are then used as input into formulae explained well by Edwards
(1957).

Kendall provides tables (for values of g_up to 8 and judges (m)
numbered up to 6) and formulae (for values of g_over 8 and 9 over 6) to
test the significance of g.by "considering what the distribution would
be if all the preferences were allotted at random" (1970, 4th ed.,

p. 152). The chi-square distribution is used. The coefficient of
agreement for each of the scales in this study was calculated and

reported with its chi-square value and significance level.

75
DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY POPULATION

Survey recipients were chosen from patrons of the East Lansing Arts
Workshop (ELAW). The Workshop offers courses that draw participants
from East Lansing and surrounding area. ELAW provided a mailing list of
1,900 course participants and other interested persons. Those persons
had, through their participation, indicated interest in educational
opportunity outside regular school hours. Approval to undertake the
survey research involving human subjects was granted by Michigan State
University (see Appendix B).

David (1963) describes research of the type herein as a "consumer
panel," presenting "the familiar difficulties of finding a
representative and yet co-operative group" (p. 93). A study population
as representative of the general population as possible was sought with
the one qualification the Workshop patrons appeared to fulfill: The
population was to be highly motivated toward taking advantage of
educational opportunities.

Prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials of the type being
studied are increasing in availability from mail order companies, and in
book, video, and computer retail markets, but they require investment of
both time and money. Data indicates that persons who have already
invested in their educations make up the most likely market for more
education. 1975 National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) data
provided this profile of the "largest number" of adult learners, "They

were white high school graduates, between 25 and 34 years of age,

employed more than 35 hours per week, with annual family incomes of

76
$15,000 to $25,000. Female participants were slightly more numerous
than male participants" (Cross & Zusman, 1979). That same data
indicated that 57.4 per cent of adults participating in adult education
had completed four or more years of college. A more recent
interpretation of NCES data led to this statement, "The more education
an adult has obtained, the more likely he or she is to take even more
courses, the study shows" (Ordovensky, 1983, p. 6F).

The East Lansing, Michigan, area surrounds Michigan State University
and is a population of high educational achievement. 96.4 percent are
high school graduates. 65.4 percent of adults 25 years and over have
completed four or more years of college (U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau
of the Census, 1983). As residents of this area, ELAW patrons were
expected to represent a group with high educational achievement and

interest.

SELECTION OF THE SAMPLE

Names and addresses of the 1900 members of the East Lansing Arts
Workshop mailing list were received on sets of mailing labels organized
by geographical area. The sampling procedure was to be manual. For
these reasons a simple random sample was ruled out, both to reduce labor
and to avoid possible clustering of respondents from particular
neighborhoods. A systematic random sample (see Sudman, 1976) was
selected.

With the exception of the pilot survey--which used a convenience

77
sample-no advance estimation of population characteristics was
available upon which to base sample size decisions. Determination of
sample size was made chiefly upon practical (cost) requirements. Tull
and Albaum (1973) state that five percent is regarded as a significant
proportion of a population. Five percent of the ELAW population is 93
persons. For reasons of cost, it was necessary to keep the mailing at
300.

Selection of five percent as a target was also supported by the
pilot test results which indicated that the lengthy letter/
definitions/questionnaire procedure might meet with some resistance.
The pilot test, using a controlled convenience sample of 16 adults in an

evening course at Michigan State University, had resulted in 10 usable

questionnaires. With no control over respondents from the general
public it was felt that, even after improvements in the instrument,

usable returns might be half that of the pilot test, or 30%.

DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES

Respondent data was coded and analyzed using both manual and

computerized data analysis techniques. Computer-based data analysis was
accomplished using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
(§2§§) (Nie, Hull, Jenkins, Steinbrenner, & Bent, 2nd ed., 1975) and
SPSS Update 7-9 (Hull & Nie, 1981) at the Michigan State University
Cyber 750 computing facility. This section introduces the four major

analysis procedures, Thurstone's Law of Comparative Judgment, Case V;

78
correlation; multiple regression; and crosstabulation.

Thurstone's Law of Comparative Judgment, Case V. Thurstone's Law of
Comparative Judgment, Case V, was used to develop an interval scale for
the four types of prepackaged, self-paced materials on each of the
expectation variables: effort expenditure, time investment, and
learning achievement. The Test of Internal Consistency (Guilford, 1954,
2nd ed., p. 163), a chi-square test for the matrix of proportions from
which the interval scale is developed (based upon Mosteller, 1951), was
used to test the null hypothesis of applicability of the Case V model
for scaling. A description of the Case V procedure follows.

Thurstone states the Law of Comparative Judgment as follows:

 

e, -e,- al.,(vE? “TS-3'0? 0’: 1.
In which

8,endagtuethenemuwueoknueeakvnflueeelflurhmaeenulweaeflmuuL

x“ - theelgnlevalue compendlnotemepreeemanefludolnentep, , . Whenp, > la
greeterthen .50, the numerleal velueetx“ lapealtlve. Whena, , a m.3o.
the numerical value of x" la

a; - dlaerllnlnal dleperelon or etllnulue n,.

q - dlaerllnlnal dleeerelon ot ethnulue a,

r-«anuauenIneaeenthedwlwunwuleauaflenaellganalglnfluwalaehuhuaent
(1 sea, a. 41).

The "discriminal dispersion" is the standard deviation of the

distribution of discriminal processes on the scale for a particular
stimulus. Torgerson explains the law as "a set of equations relating
the proportion of times any given stimulus k_is judged greater on a
given attribute than any other stimulus j_to the scale values and

discriminal dispersions of the two stimuli on the psychological

79
continuum" (1958, p. 159). The reader is referred to Thurstone (1959),
Torgerson (1958), or texts by Guilford (1954), Edwards (1957), Bock and
Jones (1968), David (1963), Kendall (1979), and Nunnally (1978, 2nd ed.)
for derivation of the law and assumptions made in its use.
Thurstone has formulated five cases of the law. Case I concerns

repeated judgments made by a single respondent. Cases II - V are forms
used with multiple respondents making only one judgment for each pair of

stimuli. Case V makes one assumption additional to those made by Cases
I-IV, namely that all discriminal dispersions are equal. Guilford
states, "Discriminal dispersions will be equal when stimuli are equally

easy to place on a scale" (1954, p. 156). A Test of Internal

Consistency is made using chi-square to verify that discriminal
dispersions are equal and that the scaling meets all assumptions of Case
V. A nonsignificant chi square indicates that Case V scaling
assumptions have been met. A significant chi-square may mean "lack of
normality, lack of unidimensionality, or unequal standard deviations"
(Guilford, 1954, p. 165).

Implementing the Law of Comparative Judgment implies following

several steps (following Guilford, 1954):

1. Develop a frequency matrix (F) of judgments for each of the
stimuli in the paired comparisons.

2. From the frequency matrix develop a proportion matrix (P).

3. Compute the Test of Internal Consistency from the
proportion matrix to verify that Case V can be used.

4. Use the normal curve tables to derive a matrix ;
corresponding to the proportion matrix.

5. Sum the columns of matrix 2,

6. Determine the mean of each column. The means provide the
scale values of the stimuli.

7. Add a constant (the absolute scale value of the stimulus
with the largest negative deviation) to all scale values to
develop a scale with all positive signs.

80

The above steps result in a scaling of stimuli located on a
"psychological continuum with respect to one another only" (Torgerson,
1958, pp. 194-95), an interval scale. The scale has an arbitrary zero
point based only upon judgments of differences between the stimuli.
Additional statistical steps could be employed to determine a rational
and psychologically meaningful zero point. Other, outside information
is necessary to make that determination. Guilford (1954) illustrates

the method using a second sample of subjects to obtain the needed

information. In this study the exploration of the differences between
the four types of prepackaged, self—paced instructional materials ended
with development of the interval scale.

Correlation. Analysis of the data for hypotheses four and five was

 

accomplished using correlational programs available in the §£§§
software. This section explains reasons for choice of the method and
its use for those hypotheses.

As described for the "Case V" procedure, a matrix was made of each
respondent's discriminations for each set of the paired comparisons.
The responses were added across the rows, giving "scores" for each of
the four types of prepackaged, self-paced materials on each of the
dependent variables. These "scores" provided a ranking (ordinal data)
for each respondent (whose responses were transitive), but also, because
of the additivity and subtractivity of the distances between items,

provided an interval level of measurement. In actuality, the level of

measurement fell somewhere between ordinal and interval. Thus, to

select tests for the hypotheses, the researcher referred to Kirk who has

81
written,
If a level of measurement greater than ordinal but less than
interval is achieved, an experimenter may choose to use a
parametric test in order to take advantage of the additional
information that is available....it is common practice in the
behavioral sciences to use the more powerful parametric tests

even though the assumptions are only approximately fulfilled"
(1968, p. 492—93).

Means and standard deviations for respondent data indicated
normality. However, both parametric and nonparametric correlation
coefficients were requested for analysis of hypothesis four in order
that they might be compared and the validity of use of interval measures
examined before analysis of succeeding hypotheses.

Hypothesis 4: This hypothesis looks at the two expectations of

 

effort expenditure and time investment. As noted in Chapter Two, the
quality of persistence includes both elements of effort and time. This
led to the question of whether the two expectations are highly related
to each other on each of the different types of prepackaged, self-paced
courses. The Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated for
expectations of effort expenditure and time investment for each of the
four types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials. For
comparison purposes and to determine the robustness of the interval
measure, Spearman Rhg_and Kendall £§u_coefficients were also calculated
using the §P§§_(Nie, et al., 2nd ed., 1975) Subprogram Nonpar Corr.
Hypothesis 5: Does experience with a prepackaged, self-paced course
make a difference in the expectations respondents hold regarding effort
expenditure, time investment, or learning achievement on the four types

of instructional materials under study? Respondents' scores on

82
experience (Range: zero to ten) were correlated with their expectation
scores for each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials. The Pearson £_and probability levels were
calculated.

Multiple Regression. Multiple regression was used for analysis of
hypotheses six and seven. This section explains reasons for choice of
the procedures and their use for those hypotheses.

Multiple regression is a parametric procedure useful for prediction
of a single dependent variable from any number of independent variables.
Respondents had been asked their choice of a preferred method of
instruction and their expectations of effort expenditure and time
investment before they responded to the item that measured their
expectation of learning achievement. Therefore those three measures,
along with prior experience, could be used as independent variables for
analysis. Using the "scores" as interval level data, and relying on the
robustness of the procedure, multiple regression was employed to explore
whether those measures had any impact upon expectation of learning
achievement on each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials for hypotheses six and seven.

Hypothesis 6: The scores for expectation of effort expenditure and

 

expectation of time investment were used as independent variables in the
SPSS New Regression (Hull and Nie, 1981) analysis with the score for
expectation of learning achievement as the dependent variable to
determine their effect upon the dependent variable for each of the four
types of prepackaged, self-paced learning materials.

Hypothesis 7: The scores for expectation of effort expenditure,

83

expectation of time investment, and experience were used as independent
variables in the SPSS New Regression (Hull and Nie, 1981) analysis with
the score for expectation of learning achievement as the dependent
variable to determine their effect upon the dependent variable for each
of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced learning materials.

Crosstabulation. McIntosh (1981) found that students do express

 

preferences for type of course, but had found no interaction between
preference and performance when studying lecture/discussion versus a

Personalized System of Instruction course. But would preference make a
difference in expectations of a course?

Hypothesis 8: Respondents had been asked to indicate their

 

preferred method of study from among the four in this study. Their
preferences were crosstabulated with the expectation variables for each
of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials to
explore possibility of relationships. The SPSS (Nie, et al., 2nd ed.,

1975) Subprogram Crosstabs was used for the analysis.

CHAPTER SUMMARY

The chapter described the methods and procedures used in this
descriptive study. The dependent and independent variables examined in
the study were listed. Research questions and research hypotheses were
given as the basis for statistical analysis procedures. The mailed
survey instrument, consisting of a cover letter, page of definitions,

and three-part questionnaire was described. The use of a forced-choice

84
method of data collection, paired comparisons, was explained. The
factors of predictive, construct, and content validity were discussed in
respect to the instrument. Another way to judge reliability and
validity, the use of coefficients of consistence and agreement, was
described.

The study population, a systematic random sample from patrons of the
East Lansing (Michigan) Arts Workshop mailing list was described and
reasons offered for its selection. Finally, four groups of data
analysis procedures were introduced: Thurstone's Law of Comparative
Judgment, Case V; correlation; multiple regression; and crosstabulation.

Rationale was offered for their selection.

85
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS

INTRODUCTION

This chapter reports the results of analysis of the data received
from respondents to the questionnaire sent to a systematic random
sample of the East Lansing Arts Workshop mailing list. Survey returns,
respondent characteristics, and results of tests used to assess
reliability and validity are reported in the first three sections of
the chapter. Next, the four types of prepackaged, self-paced

instructional materials are scaled on the three expectation variables

of effort, time, and learning according to the results of statistical
analysis using the Law of Comparative Judgment, Case V, for hypotheses
one through three. Fifth, results of the correlational analysis for
time and effort expectations presents information about relationships
between those variables. The correlation of experience with effort,
time, and learning expectations is also presented.

The sixth part of the chapter presents multiple regression analysis
results for hypothesis six, regression of effort and time expectations
upon expectation of learning, and hypothesis seven, regression of
experience and effort and time expectations upon expectation of
learning. Seventh, relationships between expectations of greater or
lesser effOrt, time, and learning and respondents' choices of a
preferred method of prepackage, self-paced method of study from among

the four types in the study are examined using crosstabulations. A

86

summary concludes the chapter.

SURVEY RETURNS

Survey questionnaire returns are reported in Table 4.1.
Respondents were asked to indicate their ZIP code on the questionnaire
so that results could be matched to the expected population.
Seventy-one percent of the returns came from the city of East Lansing

and the immediate surrounding area. Remaining questionnaires came from
Lansing and small towns in the mid-Michigan area. This was consistent

with original population proportions.

Table 4.1

 

Report of Survey Returns

 

 

# Returned, # Usable istable
# Sent Undeliverable # Returned Returns Returns*
300 ’ 15 100 97 34

 

* Based on # deliverable

Comments were written on a number of returned surveys regarding the
lollipop incentive. One respondent who described him/herself as "an
educational research (sic) with 50 years experience" was "insulted by
your flippant 'sucker' approach," and returned an uncompleted
questionnaire. All other comments received, such as the following

examples, were favorable:

87

Thanks for the sucker.
Thanks for the sweet treat! I happened to need it today.
Terrific gimmick-That's the only reason this survey is not
in the wastebasket!
A number of respondents wrote that they found the questionnaire
"interesting," and others wished the researcher "good luck" in notes on

the questionnaire or envelope.

RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS

Demggraphic characteristics. The final page of the questionnaire
asked for routine demographic information and, also, for information
regarding personal media habits so that an overall profile of the
respondent group might be presented as background for the study results.
Table 4.2 presents summary data for the demographic characteristics.

It was thought that the data would have most significance if it came
from a group likely to comprise a market for prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials. That is, it was hoped that respondents would
be adults, well-educated, and earning at a high enough level to be
expected to have discretionary income. All respondents were over the
age of 20, with a majority (66%) between the ages of 25 and 44. Over
sixty-three percent of respondents had total household incomes of more
than $25,000. Fifty percent reported full-time employment. Almost all
(94%) had at least some college education, with 76.2% of respondents
having earned a Bachelor's or more advanced degree. The female-male

ratio differed from the 51 percent/49 percent East Lansing area ratio

88

a n n manna“:

m.na ~a oz

q n n ma»
eeaneunceez aaueuwmasm

a «gamma:
. m an eeueueaee
no .euuuo>nv
.uusovw: .efiuaum
m.mn hm ceases:
maueum “cause:

N.@h as nausea
m.n« nu can:
new
~.n n eouaoaae .euaauoa
n.a a hexane-o:
~.n n . ueevsue a use
.90a0mesucs hauueuoeafla
«.5 h veaoaaau unduluuea
.ueuesum eaauluumm
_.n m cascades diagnosed
.ueovsum uauulmfism
n.o a ueevsum usuuluasm
«.mu Nu aeocsue a use
.ueaouasu eaauluumm
«.mn NH assuage uawuluuea

.vmaoHnae uaaulmuam
~.mn an emkoaaaa uaauugfiaa
msuauw ueeesumxueeaso~eam

~.m Aeneas eaogomaoa as

 

emeueuuuem hoseseeum uuumuuouueueau

 

OGOQhOk HO hflnlflz

magma“:

+ooo.on»
aoo.¢q-ooo.mm»
osm.sn.ooo.m~»
aaa.s~.ooo.o~»
sao.o_.ooo.o_»
ooo.o~. toes:
OEOUEH vHozmmaoz

House eueaaxOuea<

means“:

summon “unease:
seamen m.uoumez

Anne» «v

masseuse omuafioo

Anne» NV

seamen ouauuomm<

emenaoo seem
Hoonum an“:
segueusem mo
~95; among:

+ms
«sumo
«clan
«nuns
«clam
«Mina

«NION
um<

 

ammueeuuem succeeds“

 

uaumwuuuueumgw

 

Asa-2v

euwumaueuuaueau oueaeumoeea

~.e smash

89
(U. S. Dept of Commerce, 1983) in that females responding to the survey
outnumbered male respondents by three to one. The higher proportion of
female respondents, while high, does echo the "more than half are women"
found enrolled in noncredit classes reported by Naisbitt (1984). Over
half the respondents (58.8%) were married. The average number of
persons per household was 3.1.

One question asked if the respondent was handicapped and, if so,
how. Only three respondents reported handicaps. Reported handicaps
were related to vision, asthma, and arthritis. Prepackaged, self-paced
instruction is useful for handicapped, especially homebound, persons.
However, this study did not result in enough numbers of handicapped
persons to look at their responses as a separate set.

Media characteristics. Reading, listening, and viewing habits may
play a part in an individual's receptiveness to prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials. Questions were asked to develop a profile of
the respondent group's media characteristics. -The ranges of responses
for reading, listening, and viewing habits were especially broad. Mean
responses are reported in Table 4.3 along with the range for each
category.

Over ninety-four percent reported owning a television. Eighty-one
percent own an audiotape or audiocassette player. Less than half of the
respondents reported owning a personal computer or videocassette
recorder.

Experience characteristics. Respondents were asked to check whether
they had seen or received advertisements for prepackaged, self-paced

instructional materials, or had started (but not completed), completed,

90

or developed such materials. Less than half of the respondents reported

seeing or receiving ads for audiotape, videotape, or personal computer

Table 4.3

 

Media Characteristics
(N-97)

 

Characteristic

HABITS

Mean Range

Books read in past month 3.6 O — 15
Personal magazine subscriptions 4.0 O - 35
Minutes spent reading newspaper yesterday 26.9 0 - 120
Hours spent watching television yesterday 1.4 O - 9
Hours spent listening to radio yesterday 1.7 O - 16.7

 

 

OWNERSHIP
94.8% Television
81.4% Audiotape or audiocassette recorder/player
24.7% Personal computer
18.6% Videotape cassette receiver/player

 

materials. The numbers of persons having developed these types of

courseware is small, but probably higher than for the general population

due to the university community from which the sample was drawn. With

the exception of the personal computer-based type of prepackaged,

self-paced courses, those respondents who had either started 95_

completed prepackaged, self-paced courses numbered almost fifty percent

of the sample.

questions.

Table 4.4 summarizes responses to the experience—related

91

"Never" question. The first page of the questionnaire was used to
introduce the topic of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials.
The final item on that page was a question allowing persons who might
not favor this type of study an "escape" to state their preference but
respond to the rest of the questionnaire in spite of it. That item
suggested they put an "X" in the blank if they "would NEVER consider
taking a prepackaged, self-paced course" because they felt learning took
place only in classroom or other group situations.

Four persons marked the item. Their demographics were analyzed to

Table 4.4

 

Experience Characteristics
(N=97)

 

Percentage of respondents
reporting having seen or
or received advertisements
for the following types of
prepackaged, self-paced
courses:

70.2% textbook-based

49.5% audiotape-based

38.1% personal computer—based
34.0% videotape-based

Percentage of respondents
reporting having studied, but
NOT completed the following
types of prepackaged, self-
paced courses:

24.7% textbook-based

13.4% audiotape-based

5.2% videotape-based

5.2% personal computer-based

Percentage of respondents
reporting having developed
or been responsible for
development of the following

types of prepackaged, self-paced
courses:

5.2% textbook-based
4.1% personal computer-based
2.1% audiotape-based
1.0% videotape—based

Percentage of respondents
reporting having studied AND
completed the following types
of prepackaged, self-paced
courses:

27.8% textbook-based
15.5% audiotape-based
9.3% personal computer-based
5.2% videotape-based

 

92

determine whether they differed in any notable way from the other 95% of
respondents. Three were over 45 years of age, with the fourth in the
20-24 age range. The oldest of the four had completed high school, two
held four-year degrees, and one a Master's degree. Two were single, two
married. Regarding experience, the respondent holding the Master's
degree reported having developed a personal computer-based course, but
the other three respondents were in the "no experience" category. Two
were males, full-time employed and reporting incomes over $50,000. One
of the two females was retired, the other a full-time student with
part-time employment and both reported their incomes below $19,000.
Media habits and ownership were well within the averages of the other
respondents for these four persons. The two female respondents
indicated that degree of personal learning achievement would be the most
important factor in their choice of a course. The two full-time
employed males marked time investment or time-tied-with-effort as most
important. When asked to state a preference, two indicated
videotape-based materials. The other two respondents chose textbook and
audiotape. One female respondent evidenced inconsistency in her
judgments in the "expected effort expenditure" section of paired
comparisons, making two circular triads. Overall, these four
respondents did not differ in any marked way from the other 95% of
respondents.

Importance of expectation factors. With the expectation variables
having been selected from the researcher's experience and the
literature, an indication of their importance to respondents was wanted.

The three expectations were listed with a category of "other

93
expectations" and respondents were asked to allot 100 total points among
the factors to indicate their importance if the respondent were to

select a prepackaged, self-paced course. The average number of points

assigned to each set of expectations is given in Table 4.5. Degree of
personal learning achievement was rated most important overall, with
time and effort considered next in importance and almost equally

important with each other.

Table 4.5

 

Importance of Expectation Factors

 

Factor Mean

Effort I would expect to expend to study the subject 21.3

Time I would expect to invest to study the subject 22.9

Degree of personal learning achievement I would 39.9
expect to attain in learning the subject

Other expectations (for example: cost of course, 16.2

sponsor of course, other elements important to you

Total points (not equal to 100 due to rounding) 100.3

 

Preferred method. Respondent's choice of preferred type of
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials was asked before
respondents completed the paired comparisons so that their preferences
might be used as an independent variable in later analysis to examine
whether preference would interact with expectations of effort, time, and
learning. The frequency and proportion of respondents choosing each of

the four types is presented in Table 4.6.

94
Table 4.6

 

Preferred Method of Study

 

 

Freq. %
Textbook-based 30 30.9
Audiotape-based 16 16.5
Videotape-based 31 32.0
Personal computer-based 16 16.5
Missing 4 4.1
Total 97 100.0

 

RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY

To assess whether inconsistencies indicated deficiencies in either
the judges or the instrument, the number of circular triads was -
determined on the expectation variables over all the respondents.
Kendall's (1970) coefficient of consistence was calculated according to
the number of circular triads found. Table 4.7 provides the number of
judges who were determined to have the possible coefficients of 1.000,
.500, and .000.

Ten respondents were responsible for the 11 circular triads with one
judge inconsistent in both the "time" and "learning" expectations
sections of the instrument. Although the chi—square for significance of
the coefficient Z_cannot be performed for an g_of less than seven
(Edwards, 1957), it can been seen that 96 percent of the ratings were

totally consistent. Another three percent were consistent at the .500

level.

95
Table 4.7

 

Coefficients of Consistence

 

SCALES
Expectation Expectation Expectation
Z. of Effort of Time of Learning Total
1.000 91 96 92 279
.500 4 1 3 8
.000 2 O 1 3
Total 97 67 91* T69

 

*One respondent did not complete this set of paired comparisons.

Judges may be highly consistent in their comparative judgments yet
lack agreement in those judgments. Kendall's coefficient of agreement
(2) was calculated for each of the scales in this study according to
Edwards (1957). The upper value of 1.000 for u_indicates perfect
agreement. With 97 judges (effort and time scales) the minimum value of
.u is -.010. With 96 judges (learning scale) its minimum value is -.011.
Edwards points out, "If u_takes any positive value whatsoever, then
there is a certain amount of agreement among the judges" (p. 78).

The coefficients are reported with their chi-square values and
significance levels in Table 4.8. There is evidence of agreement,
although not a large amount, among the judges. For each of the scales
the chi—square indicates that the probability of the value of 2.13 much
less than .01 if the comparative judgments of all the judges were made
at random. It can be concluded that the observed value of u_is
significant.

To summarize, judges were consistent in their judgments on the three

96

Table 4.8

 

Coefficients of Agreement

 

SCALES g_ '5' df Prob.
Expectation of
Effort Expenditure .069 168.868 6 (.01
Expectation of
Time Investment .091 59.332 6 <.01
Expectation of
Learning Achievement .070 46.351 6 (.01

 

paired comparison scales. As a group they also evidenced some agreement
in their comparative judgments on the three scales. The scales offer

evidence of reliability and validity.

LAW OF COMPARATIVE JUDGMENT, CASE V, ANALYSIS

The Law of Comparative Judgment, Case V (Thurstone, 1959), provided the
basis for analysis of the data gathered by the method of paired
comparisons in the survey questionnaire. The following research
questions were answered using the Law of Comparative Judgment, Case V,

scaling method following procedures given by Edwards (1957):

1. How are each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced

instructional materials perceived as to expected effort
expenditure necessary for learning achievement?

2. How are each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials perceived as to expected time

97
investment necessary for learning achievement?
3. How are each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced

instructional materials perceived as to expected possible
learning achievement?

Using Edwards procedures (see Guilford's 1954 summary of steps in
Chapter Three), the four types of instructional materials (stimuli) were
scaled on a psychological continuums with respect to the degree of three
attributes (expectations of effort, time, and learning) each possesses.
Appendix C provides the frequency matrices (Tables C.1, C.7, C.13),
proportion matrices (Tables C.2, C.8, C.14), and §_matrices (Tables C.3,
C.9, C.15) used for the scaling procedures for each of the four types of
prepackaged, self—paced instructional materials.

In the final step of development of the scale values (the Z matrix)
a constant-—the absolute value of the stimulus with the largest negative
deviation--is added to the means in each column to provide an arbitrary
zero point for the scale. The final row of figures in each of the _Z_
matrices for expectations of effort expenditure, time investment, and
learning achievement calculated in that final step provides the interval
scale for each variable. The interval scales thus developed for each of
the three variables are presented in Figure 4.1.

As can be seen, respondents expected that videotape—based
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials would require both least
effort and least time of the four types of materials to study a
hypothetical subject of their choosing. The other three types of

materials fell close to one another on the scale, but at considerably
higher expectation of effort and time, with textbook-based materials

expected to require the greatest effort and time. According to the

98

 

 

EFFORT TIME
EXPENDITURE INVESTMENT
“#16“ .901 P .mqf
.801P .304.
070 E b .10. b
'flnnbook
OOjb'hunbook Fanuuuu .60 LOOQ)
Amman-l,5o-b L589) .518)
“"PW'J Audiotape
“‘31 \(AM)
.40 ‘ " .40 d -
.301. «30" I-
.201P ,20«.
L .‘ 0‘ p 01 0 " '
kaunlpo kaunapo
LOW .004 b/ (.000) .ooJ Ll (.OW)

EXPECTATION 0F

 

EXPECTATION 0F

 

 

EXPECTATION OF
LEARNING
ACHIEVEMENT

.OOTF
.801-
.701;:=MKNIDO
.023)
.OO-P

.GO‘-

humonal.

‘0! I-
c‘"“““" ‘hunbook
(.350) IVs—(3.5,

.201

.101P

Audknapo
.00dhfi’KJlln

 

 

Figure 4.1:

Interval Scales

interval scale, it is evident that respondents expected to exert about

five and one-half times more effort to study via textbook-based

prepackaged-self paced materials than via videotape-based materials, but

saw textbook-based materials requiring less than twice the effort of

personal computer-based or audiotape-based materials.

0n the time

99

dimension, textbook-based materials were expected to require slightly
over six times more time investment than videotape-based materials but,
as with effort expectations, less than twice the time investment of
personal computer- or audiotape-based materials.

0n the expectation of learning dimension, respondents expected
greatest learning to be achieved from use of videotape-based materials,
over six times more learning achieved than through audiotape-based
materials. Textbook-based and personal computer-based materials were
scaled almost three times lower in expected learning than
videotape—based materials.

Two types of tests were performed to further analyze the data used
to develop the above interval scales. First, the "Absolute Average
Discrepancy" (AAD) between observed and theoretical proportions were
calculated following Edwards (1957). He terms this analysis an
"internal consistency check....determining how well our observed or
empirical proportions...agree with those to be expected in terms of our
derived scale values" (PP. 37-38). Appendix Tables C.4-C.6, C.10-C.12,
and C.16-C.18 provide results of the analysis used to develop the AAD.
For comparison purposes Edwards offers previous studies with AADs of
.032 for seven stimuli, .024 for 20 stimuli, and .031 for 25 stimuli.
The values calculated for this study of four stimuli fall at values

somewhat higher than his examples. They are reported in Table 4.9.

100
Table 4.9

 

Absolute Average Discrepancy Values

 

SCALE AAD
Expectation of Effort Expenditure .024
Expectation of Time Investment .034
Expectation of Learning Achievement .043

 

The significance test for paired comparison judgments described by
Edwards (1957) is a goodness of fit test for "the discrepancies between

the observed and theoretical proportions obtained with Case V of the

method" (p. 53). The chi-square tests whether the Case V model is
appropriate for analysis of the data. According to Mosteller (1951),
In such a test of significance involving goodness of fit, we
are interested in knowing what the null hypothesis and the

alternative hypothesis are....the null hypothesis is given by
the [assumptions of the Case V] model....However, the

alternative hypothesis is quite general: merely that the null

hypothesis is not correct. In particular, the null hypothesis

assumes additivity" (p. 208).

In other words, the researcher is looking for a nonsignificant
chi-square. If significant, an interval scale cannot be developed for
the stimuli by means of Case V due to the data not meeting the necesary
assumptions, namely, that "all the discriminal dispersions are equal"
(Thurstone, 1959, p. 49), plus the other assumptions for Thurstone's
Cases 1-4.

The chi-square test for the Case V method is given by Edwards (1957,

p. 56) as the following:

101

x3 - 2(0- 0):
(.21 IN)

with degrees of freedom given by

dl-gn-zl
2

with g_as the number of stimuli.
Analysis of the three scales for the chi-square test is provided in
Appendix Tables C.19-C.27. Steps for the test of significance

corresponding to the tables were as follows:

1. Development of a matrix of values of 9 corresponding to

the observed proportions.

2. DevelOpment of a matrix of values of 9 corresponding to
the theoretical proportions.

3. Subtraction of each theoretical 6' value from each
corresponding observed 0 value and development of a matrix
of those discrepancies (9- 9').

4. Discrepancies are squared and summed and substituted in
the above formula for chi-square.

5. Degrees of freedom are calculated and the significance
of the chi-square value is evaluated using a chi-square
distribution table.

Chi-square values for each of the three expectation scales were

found not significant at the p ( .05 level, resulting in no rejection of
the null hypothesis. Thus, the assumptions for the Case V model held

and the stimuli could be scaled on an interval scale according to the

Law of Comparative Judgment. The chi-square values for the three scales

are reported in Table 4.10.

102

Table 4.10

 

Chi-square Tests of Significance for the Scales of
the Expectation Variables of Effort Expenditure,
Time Investment, and Learning Achievement

 

SCALES

Expectation of Effort Expenditure
Expectation of Time Investment
Expectation of Learning Achievement

:
é.

UIUJN
0

CD00

\lt-‘U

df prob.

3 .50>p<.30
3 .50>p<.30
3 .20>p<.10

 

103
CORRELATIONAL ANALYSIS

Research questions four and five explored the possibility of a
relationship between the time and effort expectation variables and, for
question five, the relationship between expectations of time, effort,

and experience. The research questions were as follows:

4. What is the relationship between expectations of effort
expenditure and time investment for each of the four types of
prepackaged, self—paced instructional materials?

5. What is the relationship between previous experience as a
consumer of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials and
the expectations of effort expenditure, time investment, and
learning achievement?

The hypotheses corresponding to the above research questions were
investigated using correlational analysis. The research and null

hypotheses were as follows:

Research Hypothesis 4: There will be a relationship between
respondents' scores on expectations of effort expenditure and
their scores on time investment for the following types of
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials:

N911 HYPOChESiS 43 Exy a O for a, b, c, d (where a, b, c d
are the four types of materials .

Research Hypothesis 5: There will be a relationship between
respondents' scores on the expectations of effort expenditure,
time investment, and learning achievement on each of the four
types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials and
their level of previous experience for each.

Null Hypotheses 5: Exw . 0 for a, b, c, d.

Exy a O for a, b, c, d.
Exz a 0 for a, b, c, d.

Hypothesis Four. Significant correlations were found between

 

expectations of effort and time for all four types of prepackaged,

104
self-paced instructional materials. Thus, there is evidence to reject
the null hypothesis of no relationship between expectations of effort
expenditure and time investment. The correlation coefficients and their

probability levels are reported in Table 4.11.

Table 4.11

 

Correlation of Expectations of Effort and Time

 

Type of Prepackaged,

Self-paced Instructional Pearson Spearman

Material £_ prob. £_ prob.
Textbook-based .6112 .001 .6190 .001
Audiotape-based .5252 .001 .5503 .001
Videotape—based .3883 .001 .4407 .001
Personal computer-based .6389 .001 .6528 .001

 

As explained in Chapter Three, an interval level of data was
assumed, but because the method used to develop the "scores" used for
the analysis (see Chapter Three) also results in a ranking of the four
types of materials for each respondent, both Pearson and Spearman
coefficients were obtained. SPSS (Nie, et al., 2nd ed., 1975)
Subprograms Pearson Corr and Nonpar Corr were utilized. The Pearson
coefficient is slightly more conservative than the coefficient obtained
by nonparametric methods. The closeness of the Pearson, Spearman, and
Kendall (not reported) coefficients led to a decision to employ only
interval level measurement for the remaining hypotheses.

Because no direction of relationship had been hypothesized,
two-tailed tests of significance were requested. The direction of the

relationship between expectations of effort expenditure and time

105
investment for all types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional
materials was positive. As respondents expect to spend greater effort,
they also expect to spend greater time. As can be seen in the table,
correlations are above .50 for textbook, audiotape, and personal
computer types of materials. Expectations for effort expenditure and
time investment are seen as not quite as highly correlated for
videotape-based materials.

Hypothesis Five: Is there a relationship between experience with
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials and respondents'
expectations of effort expenditure, time investment, and learning
achievement? Respondents scores for experience, ranging from zero to 10
on each of the four independent variables were correlated with their
scores on the three expectation variables using §£§§_(Nie, et al., 2nd
ed., 1975) Subprogram Pearson Corr. The correlations are presented in
Table 4.12. Primarily nonsignificant findings indicate that experience
and expectations of effort expenditure, time investment, and learning
achievement appear unrelated for prepackaged, self-paced instructional
materials. Findings of low correlations are significant (p < .05) on
three variables only:

. Experience with textbook-based prepackaged, self-paced

instructional materials and expectation of learning
achievement

. Experience with personal computer-based prepackaged,

self-paced instructional materials and expectation of time
investment

. Experience with personal computer—based prepackaged,

self-paced instructional materials and expectation of
learning achievement.

106 '

Table 4.12

 

Correlation of Experience Scores

with the Expectation Variables

 

 

INDEPENDENT
VARIABLES EXPECTATION VARIABLES
Effort Time Learning
(n=97) (n-97) (n-96)
Textbook-based -.O888 -.0955 .2240
Experience p-.387 p-.352 p-.028
Audiotape-based -.0971 -.0701 .0706
Experience p=.344 p-.495 p-.494
Videotape-based .0151 .1154 —.0343
Experience p-.883 p-.260 p-.740
Personal Computer— -.1677 -.2803 .2779
based Experience p=.101 p-.005 p=.006

 

 

MULTIPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS

SPSS (Nie, et al., 2nd ed., 1975) Subprogram New Regression was used

to investigate research questions six and seven:

6. What is the effect of expectations of effort expenditure
and time investment upon expectation of learning achievement
for each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced learning
materials?

7. What impact do previous experience as a consumer of
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials and
respondents' expectations of effort expenditure and time
investment have upon their expectations of learning achievement
for each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials?

With so small a sample and, for question seven, a substantially

107
smaller group of experienced respondents, there was no effort made to
predict from this data. Rather, the multiple regression analysis was
directed at calculating the coefficient of multiple determination Rf to
learn whether any variance in expectation of learning achievement as the
dependent variable might be explained by expectations of effort
expenditure, time investment, and (question seven) experience as
independent variables. Neter and Wesserman (1974) explain cautions to

be taken even when a large Rf is found:

A large Rf does not necessarily imply that...[a] fitted model is
a useful one. For instance, observations may have been taken

at only a few levels of the independent variables. Despite a
high 33..., the fitted model may not be useful because most
predictions would require extrapolations outside the region of
observation (p. 229).

The research and null hypotheses for questions six and seven were as

follows:

Research Hypothesis 6: Scores for expectations of effort
expenditure and time investment will have an effect upon the
score for expectation of learning achievement for each of the
four types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials.

Null Hypothesis 6: fl, .5:- 0.

Research Hypothesis 7: Scores for expectations of effort
expenditure and time investment and for experience will have an
effect upon the score for expectation of learning achievement
for each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced

instructional materials.

Null Hypothesis 7: fl‘ -fi2-pa- 0.

Hypothesis Six: The two independent variables of expectation of
effort expenditure and expectation of time investment were entered into

a multiple regression analysis with expectation of learning achievement

108
as the dependent variable. Both stepwise and forced entry procedures
were attempted. With expectation of time investment entered first in
the stepwise procedure, both independent variables were entered
successfully for only the textbook-based and audiotape-based
expectations of learning achievement category. Because interest was in
the variance explained by both independent variables, regardless of the
small addition made by the second, the forced entry procedure was then
used. Table 4.13 reports results from the forced entry procedure.

The nonsignificant litests for the regression coefficients for
expectation of effort expenditure for videotape and personal
computer-based materials indicate that expectation of effort expenditure
contributes little, if anything, to expectation of learning achievement.
If a linear regression model were to be built for those independent
variables, expectation of effort expenditure could be dropped from any
such proposed model. This also indicates that it contributes little to
the variance in the significant Rf for those two variables. The
significance of §_is largely due to the contribution made by
expectations of time investment. Expectations of effort expenditure for
textbook-based and audiotape-based prepackaged, self-paced instructional
materials have significant regression coefficients, but, again,
contribute less to Rf than does expectation of time.

Also, as seen with the analysis for Hypothesis Four, expectations of

effort and time are correlated. Neter and Wasserman (1974) explain:

109

Table 4.13

 

MultipleRegression Analysis
of Expectations of Effort Expenditure and Time Investment

on Expectation of Learning Achievement for Each
of the Four Types of Prepackaged, Self-Paced

Instructional Materials

(N

a 96)

 

finstandardized
Regression
VARIABLE Coefficient T

 

Textbook-based
Expectation of
Learning Achievement

Expectation of
Effort Expenditure

Expectation of
Time Investment

Audiotape-based
Expectation of
Learning Achievement

Expectation of
Effort Expenditure

Expectation of
Time Investment

Videotape-based

Expectation of
Learning Achievement

Expectation of
Effort Expenditure

Expectation of
Time Investment

Personal computer-based
Expectation of
Learning Achievement

Expectation of
Effort Expenditure

Expectation of
Time Investment

-.231

-0519

-.220

-.5m

-5 a 137“

-6.117*'

-.440

-4.964**

.453

.478

.252

42.511**

15.668**

43.144**

 

* Degrees of freedom: 2
** Significant at p < .05

, 93

110

When independent variables are correlated, the regression
coefficient of any independent variable depends on which other
independent variables are included....Thus, a regression
coefficient does not reflect any inherent effect of the
particular independent variable on the dependent variable but
only a marginal or partial effect, given whatever other
correlated independent variables are included in the model

(p. 252).

Thus, certain cautions must be taken into account when interpreting
the above results. The relatively small size of the sample and the
intercorrelatedness of the independent variables are two of those
cautions. With those taken into account, the results can be interpreted
as indicating that expectations of effort expenditure and time
investment do have an impact upon expectation of learning achievement
with significant Fs resulting in rejection of the null hypothesis for
each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced learning materials.
Furthermore, the regression coefficients are negative. This confirms
the trend shown by the interval scales developed in the Law of
Comparative Judgment, Case V, analysis: Expectation of greater learning
appears to be inversely related to expectations of greater effort
expenditure and greater time investment.

Hypothesis Seven. For hypothesis seven, experience was also
entered-along with expectations of effort expenditure and time
investment--into the regression analysis on the dependent variable of
expectation of learning achievement. The objective was to learn whether
experience might help further explain the variance in the dependent
variable. As with the analysis of data for hypothesis five, this

analysis is somewhat limited by small numbers of respondents considered

111
as "experienced." The results of the analysis are reported in Table
4.14.
The addition of experience to the independent variable list resulted

in minimal differences from the results of the analysis of the previous
hypothesis. Interpretation is, as noted above, somewhat hampered by the
small numbers of experienced respondents. The only significant finding
was for experience in textbook-based prepackaged, self-paced materials.
Lack of a significant finding for experience on the other three
dependent variables may have been due low numbers of respondents
experienced with those types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional
materials.

Again, the Eltests are significant, resulting in rejection of the
null hypothesis for all four dependent variables. However, as with
hypothesis six, the major contributor to the variance in expectation of

learning achievement is expectation of time investment.

112
Table 4.14

 

Multiple Regression Analysis of Expectations
of Effort Expenditure and Time Investment and Experience
on Expectation of Learning Achievement for Each
of the Four Types of Prepackaged, Self-Paced
Instructional Materials

 

 

(N - 96)
Uhstsndsrdized
Regression
VARIABLE Coefficient T ' R' E.
Tex: book-based
Expectation of
Learning Achievement
Expectation of
Effort Expenditure -.222 -2.146*' .478 28.065"
Expectation of
T1“ In'”mt -.509 -Se 129..
Experience .079 2.083..
Audiotape-based
Expectation of
Learning Achievement
Expectation of
Effort Expenditure -.219 -2.626" .478 28.051**
Expectation of
Time Investment -.500 -6.081*'
Experience -.005 .154
Videotape-based
Expectation of
Learning Achievement
Expectation of
Effort Expenditure -.042 -.427 .253 10.371**
Expectation of
Time Investment -.504 —4.937**
Experience .016 .291
Personal computer-based
Expectation of
Learning Achievement
Expectation of
Effort Expenditure -.097 -.997 .489 29.295**
Expectation of
Time Investment -.621 -6.070**
Experience .053 1.145

 

—‘IDegrees of freedom: ’3, 93
*3 Significant at p < .05

113
CROSSTABULATION ANALYSIS

In addition to the impact of experience upon expectation of
learning, the role of respondents' preferred method of study from among
the four types of prepackaged, self-paced instruction materials was
explored. Prior to responding to the expectation section of the
questionnaire, respondents had been asked to indicate their preferred
method. 93 persons indicated one of the four. Frequencies of
respondents for each preferred method of study were reported in Table
4.6. Because this was a categorical variable it was analyzed through
crosstabulation via the §2§§_(Nie, et al., 2nd ed., 1975) Subprogram

Crosstabs. Measures of association were employed to judge significance.

The research question responded to was:

8. What is the relationship between preference for an "ideal"
method of prepackaged, self—paced instructional materials and
expectations of effort expenditure, time investment, and
learning achievement for the four types of prepackaged,
self-paced instructional materials?

Research and null hypotheses for question eight were as follows:

Research Hypothesis 8: There will be a relationship between
respondents' scores on expectations of effort expenditure, time
investment, learning achievement, and their preference for an
"ideal" method for the four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials.

Null Hypothesis 8: P1 = P2= P3 = P4.

Twelve separate tables were constructed to analyze this hypothesis.
Four groups of respondents, categorized by their preferred method, were

crosstabulated with two categories of "greater" and "lesser"

114
expectations for effort expenditure, time investment, and learning

achievement. The four expectation scores were collapsed into the two

greater/lesser categories in order to provide the needed expected cell
frequencies for chi-square test of the independence of the variables to
be valid. The contingency coefficient, 9, was also calculated to judge
the magnitude of significant associations. Tables D.1 to D.12 in
Appendix D present the crosstabulations of the variables. Statistics
for three tables need to be interpreted guardedly for the following
tables as they did not meet the minimum expected cell frequencies:
Table D.3, preferred method by textbook-based expectation of learning
achievement; Table D.7, preferred method by personal computer-based
expectation of effort expenditure; and Table D.10, preferred method by
videotape—based expectation of effort expenditure.

Measures of significance for the Tables D.1 to D.12 are reported in
Table 4.15. As can be seen in Table 4.15, all crosstabulations are
significant at the p < .05 level with the exception of Table D.3 which
did not have the necessary minimum expected cell frequencies for the
chi-square statistic to be valid. The validity of the chi-square is
also uncertain for Tables D.7 and D.10 for the same reason. For all
other tables, the contingency coefficient indicates a correlation
ranging from small but definite to substantial between preference and
the expectation variables.

In order to facilitate examination of the relationships between
preferences and the three expectation variables, Table 4.16 presents the
expectation variables compared with the frequencies of the four

preferred methods drawn from Tables D.1 to D.12.

115

Examination of the comparisons reveals that, on the expectation of
time investment variable, more respondents in all preference groups tend
to rate their preferred method as greater for expectation of time
investment. With the exception of those who rated audiotape-based
methods as their preference, more respondents who preferred a method
rated it as lesser for expectation of effort expenditure. Most persons
who preferred personal computer-based materials rated their preference
as greater in expected learning achievement. The majority of persons in
all three other preference groups expected lesser learning from their

favorite methods.

Table 4.15

 

Crosstabulation Measures of Significance
(N-93, df-3)

 

TABLE N0.

D.1
D.2
D.3*
D.4
13.5
D.6
D.7*
D.8
D.9
D.10*1
p.11

D.12

MEASURE

lcnx lrflx lrfix lrflx lrnx lrflx lcfix lcflx lrflx lrux
9 D U U U N U U I) U

IC'DIx

lrflx

VALUE

26.197
.469

13.894
.361

4.142
.207

13.776
.359

30.352
.496

16.260
.386

22.415
.441

13.066
.351

35.377
.525

25.133
.461

27.517
.478

14.439
.367

SIG. LEVEL

.0000

.0031

.2466

.0032

.0000

.0010

.0001

.0045

.0000

.0000

.0000

.0024

 

* Table with expected cell

frequencies below minimum level.

117

Table 4.16

 

Analysis of Primary Relationships from Tables D.1 to D.12

 

 

Expectation of Effort Investment

 

 

PREFERRED EXPECTATION LEVEL
METHOD Lesser Greater
Textbook 22 8
Audiotape 5 11
Videotape* 31 0
Personal Computer* 15 1

 

 

Expectation of Time Investment

 

 

PREFERRED EXPECTATION LEVEL
METHOD Lesser Greater
Textbook 11 19
Audiotape 2 14
Videotape 10 21
Personal Computer 7 9

 

 

Expectation of Learning Achievement

 

 

PREFERRED EXPJ " 'E"CI"A"TGN"EEVEIIT
METHOD Lesser Greater
Textbook* 20 10
Audiotape 14 2
Videotape 21 10
Personal Computer 1 15

 

*Chi-square not valid for table from which
these numbers are taken.

 

118
CHAPTER SUMMARY

Chapter Four presented results of analysis of the survey data. 34%
of deliverable questionnaires were returned providing a sample of 97.
Respondent characteristics were summarized to provide a profile of the
sample as a group. Demographics, media habits, and experience with
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials were among the
characteristics reported. 'Also reported were responses to questions
regarding whether the subject would ever consider studying via
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials; the importance of the.
expectation factors of effort, time, learning, and others; and the
respondent's preferred method of study from among the four investigated
in this research.

Next, coefficients of consistence and agreement were reported as a
way to assess the reliability and validity of the instrument. From
among 290 completed sets of paired comparisons, there were only 11
circular triads found, indicating 96 percent consistency. The
coefficient of agreement was found to be small, but positive, and
significant at the p < .01 level.

The Law of Comparative Judgment, Case V, was used to develop

interval scales for the four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials (stimuli) on the three expectation variables of
effort expenditure, time investment, and learning achievement.
Calculations of the Absolute Average Discrepancy values and a chi-square
test verified that the stimuli could validly be Scaled according to the

Case V method. Results of the scaling indicated that videotape-based

119

prepackaged, self-paced materials were expected to require considerably
less effort expenditure and time investment than the other three methods
investigated. Textbook-based materials were expected to require the
greatest effort and time, with personal computer and audiotape scaled
closely to textbook. Respondents expected videotape-based materials to
result in greatest learning, audiotape-based in least learning.
Textbook and personal computer materials were scaled midway between
videotape and audiotape methods on the expected learning dimension.

Correlational analysis resulted in reporting of the Pearson
Correlation coefficient for the relationship between expectations of
effort expenditure and time investment. Pearson Correlation
coefficients were also reported for relationships between experience and
each of the three expectation variables. Expectations of effort
expenditure and time investment were found moderately correlated for
each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced types of instructional
materials. Nine of the twelve correlations of experience with the
expectation variables were nonsignificant. Small relationships were
found between experience and the expectation variables for
textbook-based experience and expectation of learning and personal
computer-based experience and expectations of time investment and
learning achievement. Small numbers of "experienced" respondents may
have contributed to the low correlations and lack of significance.

Multiple regression analysis was reported to attempt to explain

variance in expectation of learning achievement as a dependent variable
by the independent variables of expectation of effort expenditure,

expectation of time investment, and experience. The independent

120

variables explained a proportion of over .45 of the variance on the
textbook—based, audiotape-based, and personal computer-based materials.
A .25 proportion of the variance in videotape-based expectation of
learning was explained by the independent variables. The addition of
experience to the regression analysis did not contribute substantially
to explanation of variance in the dependent variable of expectation of
learning achievement. The regression coefficients for expectations of
effort and time were negative, implying that as greater learning is
expected, lesser effort expenditure and time investment is expected.

Crosstabulations of greater and lesser expectations of effort, time,
and learning were made against respondents' choices of a preferred
method of study from among the four investigated in this study. Twelve
tables were constructed with 11 found to have significant associations
among the variables. The contingency coefficient was calculated to
discover the strength of relationship between the variables. There was
a moderate correlation, indicating a substantial relationship between
the ideal and expectation variables for all tables with a significant
chi-square. Finally, it was noted that a respondent's preferred method
was not always the method found to be greater in expected learning or
less in expected effort expenditure. The preferred method was expected
by most respondents to be greater, rather than lesser, in expected time

investment.

121
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS

INTRODUCTION

This study asked what expectations adult learners, as educational
consumers, bring with them when selecting among four different types of
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials: textbook-based,
audiotape—based, videotape-based, and personal computer-based.
Specifically, it explored adult learner expectations of the (1) effort
expenditure and (2) time investment necessary to complete such packages,
and (3) expected learning achievement from the four formats.

A population highly motivated to participate in educational
activities was sought. The 1900-person membership of the East Lansing
(MI) Arts Workshop was selected. Using systematic random sampling, a
mail survey methodology was employed, resulting in 97 usable
questionnaires returned for a 34 percent return rate, or 5.1 percent of
the population. The method of paired comparisons was the primary means
of data collection. Correlation, multiple regression, and
'crosstabulation were used for data analysis. Respondent characteristics
and results of the data analysis were reported in Chapter Four.

Chapter Five presents research conclusions drawn from the data
analysis and discusses the findings in respect to the analysis and
conclusions. Conclusions are presented according to the type of
statistical analysis following the order of the eight research

questions. Next, the three expectation variables of effort

122
expenditure, time investment, and learning achievement are discussed,

followed by examination of the importance of respondents' experience and
preferred method of study. The final section of the chapter makes

recommendations for future research in regard to this topic.

RESEARCH CONCLUSIONS

The following sections summarize research conclusions based upon a
review of the analyses presented in Chapter Four. All tests of

statistical significance reported were at the p < .05 level.

Conclusion 1: Each of the four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials under investigation were perceived differently
as to expected effort expenditure, time investment, and learning

achievement.

The Law of Comparative Judgment, Case V, analysis found that
respondents were able to order the four types of prepackaged, self-paced
types of instructional materials by judging which member of each pair of
all possible pairs was "greater" on the dimensions of expectation of
effort expenditure, expectation of time investment, and expectation of

learning achievement. According to Edwards, "The ordering of the

 

objects upon the basis of judgments is said to be on a psychological

continuum" (1975, p. 19). In interpreting and discussing the results it

is important to realize that the judgments were not made on actual

123
indicators of effort, time, or learning, but upon respondents' opinions
which may or may not have been formed as the result of experience,
seeing advertisements, talking with others, etc.

The interval scale values provide quantitative representation to the
differences between respondents' expectations on the three variables.
Types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials and their scale
values (from least to greatest) were as follows for the expectation of
effort expenditure variable: videotape-based (.000), audiotape-based
(.464), personal computer-based (.493), and textbook-based (.543). They
were scaled as follows on expectation of time investment (least to
greatest): videotape-based (.000), audiotape-based (.518), personal
computer-based (.589), and textbook-based (.602). On expectation of
learning achievement, the four types were scaled as follows (least to
greatest expected learning): audiotape (.000), textbook-based (.345),
personal computer-based (.358), and videotape-based (.623).

Overall, videotape-based prepackaged, self-instructional materials
were scaled substantially lower on expected effort expenditure and time
investment for study and substantially greater on expected possible
learning achievement than the other three types. Audiotape, personal
computer, and textbook based types were clustered as fairly similar on
expectations of effort and time needed for study. Audiotape-based
materials were scaled substantially lower than the others on expected
learning, with textbook and personal computer grouped very closely
together midway between audiotape and videotape.

One caution to be considered in interpretation of the interval

scaling results is the artificiality of the presentation of the four

124
types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials. They were
presented to be in as "pure" a format as possible, rarely-—except for
text-found that way in actuality. Also, the definitions provided (See
Appendix A.) to give respondents a common understanding, although
carefully worded, may have introduced a degree of experimenter bias in
giving respondents indication of greater or lesser effort, time, or
learning achievement.

(Another dimension can be added to the findings of the Law of
Comparative Judgment, Case V, analysis in light of an exploratory factor
analysis performed on the expectation variables for all four types of
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials. The results of the

factor analysis are reported in Appendix E. The analysis found that

expectations of effort, time, and learning for textbook-based and
computer-based materials loaded on one factor. All three expectations
for audiotape-based materials loaded on a second factor. A third factor
encompassed the expectations of time and learning for videotape-based
materials, with expectations of effort for videotape-based materials on

a fourth factor.)

Conclusion 2: There was a relationship between expectations of

effort expenditure and time investment for each of the four types of

prepackagd, self-paced instructional materials being studied.

A significant positive correlation was found between expectations of
effort expenditure and time investment for each of the four types of

prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials. Highest relation

125
between the variables was found on personal computer-based and
textbook-based materials. Lowest relation between effort and time

expectations was found for videotape-based materials.

Conclusion 3: There was no significant relationship found between
respondents' experience with prepackaged, self-paced instructional
materials and the three expectation variables of effort expenditure,
time investment, and learning achievement with the exception of three

combinations.

Respondents' experience scores were correlated with their scores on
each of the three expectation variables. Experience was found to have a
significant correlation on only three of the twelve possible
combinations of variables. Experience with personal computer-based
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials was found to have a
small but definite negative relationship with expectation of time
investment necessary for study of those materials. Two small positive
correlations were found between experience with textbook-based
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials and expectation of
learning achievement and experience with personal computer-based
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials and expectation of

learning achievement.

Conclusion 4: Expectations of effort expenditure and time
investment were found to contribute significantly to expectation of

learning achievement with expected time investment being the major

126

contributor.

The expectations of effort expenditure and expectation of time
investment were found to contribute significantly to expectation of
learning achievement in a multiple regression analysis. The direction

of contribution was inverse, that is, as respondents expected greater

learning, they expected to need less effort and time. However,
regression coefficients indicated that expectation of time investment,
rather than expectation of effort expenditure, was the major contributor
to the expectation of learning, with the coefficients for expectation of
effort expenditure found significant on only the textbook-based and
audiotape-based types of materials. Regression coefficients for
expectation of effort expenditure for videotape—based and personal

computer-based were not significant.

Conclusion 5: Experience, expectation of effort expenditure, and

expectation of time investment contribute to expectation of learning

achievement with time having the major effect. However, experience made

a significant contribution in only one of the possible 12 instances.

When experience was added to the multiple regression analysis along
with the expectations of effort and time very little change was found
from the earlier analysis. Experience had a small, positive, and
significant regression coefficient on only expectation of learning for
textbook—based prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials. While

overall contribution of the three variables was significant, again the

127
major contributor to the significance was the expectation of time

investment.

Conclusion 6: There was a relationship between respondents'
preferred type of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials (from
among the four in this study) and some, but not all, of the expectation

variables.

In a crosstabulation analysis respondents' preferred methods of
study from among the four in the study were found significantly
associated with textbook-based expectancies of effort expenditure and
time investment; audiotape-based expectancies of effort expenditure,
time investment, and learning achievement; videotape-based expectancies
of time investment and learning achievement, and personal computer-based
expectancies of time investment and learning achievement. Results were
mixed for the expectation variables of effort expenditure and learning
achievement. However, for all four types of prepackaged, self-paced
instructional materials most persons perceived their preferred method as

greater, rather than lesser, in time investment.

DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS

Expectation of effort expenditure. Audiotape, personal computer,
and textbook types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials

were scaled closely on the variable of expectation of effort

128
expenditure. The scaling of videotape substantially below the three
others along with the findings that respondents were low in experience
for videotape learning, low in ownership of videotape recording/playback
equipment, and high in television ownership, suggests that they may have
extrapolated the passive atmosphere of recreational television viewing
to study via videotape-based instruction.

But, whatever the findings for expectation of effort expenditure,
expected effort expenditure was found to contribute negligibly to
expected learning achievement. Respondents may have felt that,
depending on the subject matter or type of instruction, they would be
able to vary their effort to meet their interest (motivation) level or
the demands of the instructional method. This reflects the research by
Weiner (1982) indicating that effort has both stable and unstable
elements. Weiner (1972, 1974) suggests that only attributions to the
wholly stable elements of ability and task difficulty affect expectancy.
Likewise, Palmer and Willson (1982) found that, after success or
failure, expectations for performance on a future task were related to
attributions to ability and task difficulty, but not to effort.

Another possible explanation for the negligible effect of
expectation of effort expenditure upon expectation of learning could be
the global way in which it was measured. Incongruency of learning style
with method, set up and handling of necessary equipment for
audiovisual-based courseware, and the organization of self-paced study,
among others, all may contribute to effort attributions. Respondents,
mostly unexperienced with prepackaged, self-paced materials, may not

have been able to determine the attributes of those materials that would

129
be effort-producing.

In view of the fact that time and effort share qualities such as
persistance and perseverance, they were not as highly related on any of
the four types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials as had
been anticipated. This may have been due as Weiner (1982) explained,
that persons feel they can vary their effort (its unstable element) to
meet challenges. For example, they may expect to be able to increase
effort to reduce time spent. 0r, conversely, they may expect to reduce
effort by spending additional time at a task.

No attempt had been made in this study to determine each
respondent's locus of control. This study may have resulted in
different findings for expectations of effort expenditure had
respondents been categorized according to internal/external locus of
control. As Fanelli (1977) points out, "rather than attributing failure
to his own lack of ability, the internal ascribes failure to his own
lack of effort" (p. 56). Thus a group of subjects who were known to be
internals may have perceived expectations of effort expenditure as
contributing more to expectation of learning than did this respondent
group.

Expectation of time investment. As for expectation of effort
expenditure, audiotape, personal computer, and textbook types of
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials were also scaled closely
on the variable of expectation of time investment. The scaling of
videotape substantially below the three others along with the findings
that respondents were low in experience for videotape learning, low in

videotape recording/playback equipment, and high in television

130
ownership, again suggests that they may have extrapolated the passive
atmosphere of recreational television viewing to study via
videotape-based instruction.

A suggested explanation was based upon the opinion that with
broadcast or videotaped television, the typical viewer turns on the
program, watches it, and turns it off. This ability to "get it over
with" may have carried over to expectations regarding time investment
for instruction via videotape. The other three types of instruction may
be viewed as more of the start—and-stop variety, thus perceived as
consuming more time investment. This explanation would be consistent
with Fraisse's (1963) explanation of time's continuity dimension. That
is, activities perceived as more continuous are perceived as shorter in
duration.

Time spent on task (Fredrick & Walberg, 1980) and pace (Walberg,
1976) have been found positively related to learning. The results of
this study also imply that expected time contributes to expected
possible learning achievement. However, expectations are an inverse
relationship! As the respondent expects greater learning, he or she
expects to spend less time. While educators find that the student will
learn more with more time spent, the learner—~according to these
findings--expects to learn more with methods expected to require less
time.

One explanation for these findings may be that respondents with

experience or a preferred method of study might have seen themselves as

being able to handle the materials more efficiently, thus making study

less time consuming. However, experience contributed negligibly to

131

expected learning. (But those findings could be considered tenuous due

to low numbers of experienced respondents.)

This would appear to have definite implications for the developer
and marketer of prepackaged, self-paced materials. While the educator
wants the learner to spend all the time he or she needs to study a
subject for effectiveness, the learner wants to be efficient and
effective. Frequently, the organization sponsoring the learning also
requires efficiency, as Judd, MtCombs, and Dobrovolny (1979) write,
"Every day of training time saved by innovations in materials or
procedures translates directly into considerable savings of training
dollars and more efficient utilization of manpower in the field"

(p. 133). What, then, must the developer and marketer consider for

prepackaged, self-paced learning materials? Judd, et al., suggest a

time management component prior to the actual presentation of subject

matter for individualized and/or computer-managed instructional systems.

Paul Fraisse (1963) wrote of the "organizing activity of the human
mind" (p. 220) that plays an important role in minimizing our perception
of time passing. Drawing conclusions from his writing, instructional
materials developers and marketers might take the following steps in the
advertising and introduction to materials to help learners minimize
their perception of time spent with the materials:

1. Organize for fewer changes. For example, group learning activities
that have similar procedures; cluster similar aspects of the subject
matter. Novelty draws attention to changes, hence to time being
spent. Keep novelty at a minimum, especially in a program that
might use equipment that is new of itself to the learner.

2. Accent the goals and purposes of study. Provide a long range view.

For example, relate the particular module to the overall program,
relate a program to types of employment, promotions, careers, and

132
other benefits derived from its completion.
3. Help the learner foresee success. For example, provide opportunity
to respond and offer the "correct" answer, but also inform the

learner how his or her correct response will help with understanding
forthcoming subject matter.

4. Make the task challenging without being too difficult.

Motivation of the learner plays a part in the need to attend to the
above suggestions. Because the motivation of a person who buys a
commercially available course is unknown, the developer or marketer
would be wise to pay careful attention to any elements that alleviate
possible perceptions of excessive time. Whether or not the motivations
of a group of learners are known, these words of Fraisse (1963) should

be remembered:

Attitude...is a function of the motivations behind it; we work
toward a goal if we expect some gratification from it.

When...motivation is slight, our attention turns to the
various steps of the task; we are also easily distracted by
outside incidents or by chance thoughts, or we may concentrate
on the effort involved....When the motivation is very
strong...we are absorbed by the task itself, which takes on a
unity of significance, and we realize ourselves that we are not
aware of the passing of time (p. 220).

Millman, Bieger, Klag, and Pine (1983), studying children and
college students, have found, "it is possible to increase through
rewards the amount of time that students are willing to spend learning"
(p. 433). The incorporation of positive reinforcement, perhaps with a
moderate degree of acceptable novelty, into prepackaged, self-paced
learning would appear a necessity, especially where the developer and

marketer are unsure of the goals of potential purchasers of the

materials.

133

An apparent contradiction of the inverse relationship between
expectations of time investment and learning achievement was found in
the crossstabulation analysis: Most persons with a preferred method
fell into the "greater" expectations of time investment category for
their preferred method. Thus, if respondents "liked" a particular
method they expected to spend more time to learn via that method. This
would appear to indicate that respondents might be willing to spend more
time learning with their preferred method than with other methods. If
so, this conclusion is to the advantage of instructional developers and
marketers in that time-on-task research indicates that if more time were
spent they would learn better via their preferred method. Yet, the
results of the multiple regression analysis indicates that respondents
look for greater learning from least time spent. The challenge appears
to be to determine the preferred methods of study of the educational
market, provide them as options, and make them efficient ways to learn.

Expectation of learning achievement. The degree of personal
learning achievement expected to attain in studying a subject via
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials was rated as the most
important factor in selection of such a course. Expectations of time,
effort, and other factors fell substantially behind the importance of
expected learning.

Videotape-based prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials were
expected to result in greater learning achievement than the other three
types of materials studied, audiotape-based in the least learning. This
researcher had expected that respondents, most of whom were highly

educated through traditional schooling and not well-experienced in

134
self-paced study, might have placed textbook-based materials at the top
of the scale.

Most reported studies of learning through television have involved
children, not adults, and those studies frequently pertain to learned
aggressive behaviors (Comstock, Katzman, McCombs, & Roberts, 1978). The
studies do find that children learn from television, even when a program
is meant only to entertain. It is probable that respondents realized
that they learn from the television medium. In fact, although 74
persons were categorized as not experienced with videotape-based
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials, 31 respondents
indicated that it would be their preferred method.

The expectation of learning achievement scale relates to Weiner's

(1972, 1974) ability and task difficulty causal factors. Cues to those
factors (Table 2.2) include past success history, pattern of
performance, and objective task characteristics, among others. Learners
will have experience and/or expectations for those factors regarding the
methodology of a course as well as the subject matter. In other words,
learners will perceive themselves as successful or failing at the task
of learning via the instructional system. This study implies that

learners expect themselves to be most successful at learning via

videotape methods of the four considered.

What does that imply for the instructional developer and marketer?
First, before deciding against incorporating videotape into self-paced
courses, they need to carefully weigh decisions about such factors as
its suitability for the subject matter, cost, availability of playback

equipment to potential learners, etc. Attempts need to be made to

135
overcome perceived drawbacks so as to incorporate videotape whenever
possible according to the results of this study. The move in industry
to incorporate videotape and videodisc into computer-based training is
one step in this direction that will, with increasing equipment
availability and lessened costs, benefit the general learning public.

The scale also indicates that the lowest scaled method,
audiotape-based, might benefit from being combined with those expected
to result in greater learning. In course catalogs such as that of the
American Management Association (1984) and others, audiotape lessons are
frequently accompanied by text materials. This study implies that high
quality text materials ought to be an essential component of
audiotape-based courses. Other combinations of the four types of
systems are also possible. The Maclntosh Computer of the Apple Computer
Company (registered trademarks) accompanies its computer software with
audiotape guides to listen to as the new owner watches the screen.
Cautions implied would include minimizing any combinations that provided
the bulk of instruction through a media type with a lower scaling. For
example, a videotape-based course accompanied by bulky text materials
might result in its being perceived lower on the scale.

In the crosstabulation of expected learning level against preferred
method of study, most respondents expected lesser learning-which they
had judged to be the most important factor in choice of method--from
their preferred method except for those who preferred personal
computer—based prepackaged, self-paced instruction. A suggested
intuitive explanation might be that adult learners from traditional

educational backgrounds do not trust themselves to learn from the method

136
they enjoy best. They have usually been handed their learning tools by
an educational "authority," e.g., the teacher who selected a text or
film.

This last finding requires further investigation. The unclear
(results for those who preferred textbook-based materials were
nonsignificant) and seemingly illogical results may be due to the small
numbers of respondents in each preference group. McIntosh (1981) had
found no effect upon performance for choice or preference and drew the
conclusion that students could not choose validly between instructional
methods. He asked (1981, p. 112), "What, then, was the basis for the
preferences expressed by the students? It is possible that the criteria
for their preferences were quite different from performance or
satisfaction." Further investigation is needed to determine those cues
or attributes used by learners to select commercially available
instructional materials.

Experience with prepackaged, selfepaced materials. Research
hypothesis five explored the relationship between the three expectation
variables and respondents' experience with the four types of
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials. Research hypothesis
seven suggested that experience, along with expectations of effort
expenditure and time investment, might have an effect upon expectations
of learning. McIntosh (1981) had found that prior experience with a
method of study (PSI) was a significant predictor of success in both PSI
and lecture/discussion methods. It was reasonable to expect that

experience might also affect expectations, especially for the

expectation of learning achievement variable. Low numbers of

137
experienced respondents (see Table 4.4) hampered investigation of these
hypotheses. Also, the method used to categorize respondents according
to experience was arbitrary and, except for a small pilot study,
untested.

The three significant correlations found for hypothesis five
indicated almost negligible relationships. It appears that further
research is required to establish whether experience is related to
expectations of effort expenditure, time investment, and learning
achievement. Such research would require a larger sample and further
refinement of a method of determining levels of experience.

Preferred method of study. Hypothesis eight suggested that
respondents' preferences regarding the four types of prepackaged,
self-paced instructional materials would have a relationship with their
scores on the expectation variables. Preferences were crosstabulated
with two categories of each expectation variable: "lesser" and
"greater" expectations. While three crosstabulations were
unsatisfactory due to below minimum expected cell frequencies, certain
trends were evident upon inspection of the other tables.

With only two of four tables significant for expectation of effort
expenditure, the results were mixed. The majority of people preferring
textbook-based materials saw text as lesser in effort. The majority of
those preferring videotape-based materials viewed their favorite as
greater in effort.

Three of four tables were significant for expectation of learning.
From those tables it was evident that 15 of the 16 respondents who

checked personal computer-based materials as their favorite expected

138

greater learning from personal computer-based instruction. However,
most of the respondents who preferred audiotape and videotape types of
instruction felt that their preferred methods would result in lesser
learning. They tended to rate either textbook or personal
computer-based instruction higher than their expressed favorite.

All four tables on the expectation of time investment dimension had
significant chi-squares. The majority of respondents with a preference

on any of the four types of instructional materials saw their preference

as greater in expected time investment. Thus, the only clear indicator
for all four types of instructional materials resulting from this
hypothesis seems to be the relationship between preferred method and

expected greater Eime_investment. Other results were mixed or
nonsignificant. Low cell numbers resulting from the small sample size
may have been a factor.

A person's preference plays a role in the initial decision to
purchase a product (such as a prepackaged, self-paced course) and to
continue in its use or make future purchases. This is an aspect of
educational consumerism that warrants further study. Future research
needs to employ larger sample sizes and, probably, offer an increased
number of types of courses from which to select. Pictures,
descriptions, or samples of actual or hypothetical courses would help
the potential learner who is unexperienced with prepackaged, self-paced

courseware estimate more accurately what he or she might determine to be

a preferred method.

139

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Some recommendations have already been made for future research.
The central focus of those recommendations has been the need for a
larger sample of subjects, especially those from an group that could be
termed experienced. Following are additional recommendations based upon
the background, findings, and discussion of this study.

1. Further research needs to be done on the relationships among
the various types of instructional systems regarding such variables as
expectations, experience, and preferences. Future studies should be
multivariate, looking at scores on the variables across all types of
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials with several samples of
subjects.

2. The types of delivery systems are rarely as "pure" as defined
for this study. Another study of this type needs to include more of a
variety of commercially available offerings.

3. The type of subject matter to be learned is an important
determinant of the elements of the delivery system. Future studies into
expectations ought to take into consideration the possibility of

differing expectations for courses that teach primarily cognitive or

affective learnings or motor skills.
4. There is a need for follow-up studies of persons who purchase
and complete (or do not complete) commercially available prepackaged,

self-paced courses. Most currently available research was done with

institution-based courses. The self-pacing feature in those studies was

frequently limited by constraints of completion required within a

140
semester, term, or other time frame. Persons who might purchase
commercially available instructional courseware may not a "captive
audience" and will be difficult to follow up. A postage-paid
registration card or some other means to follow such students needs to
be developed and included with the instructional materials.

5. Instructional developers and marketers need to adopt the

techniques of the marketers of other products to determine which
features of promotion and instructional materials, while pedagogically
sound, entice potential learners to purchase and complete instructional
packages and which features do neither. A two-stage study needs to be
done, first to identify attributes of self-paced instructional packages
adult learners find salient and, second, to determine which of those
attributes are relevant to the decision to purchase and complete such

packages.

CHAPTER SUMMARY

Chapter Five presented research conclusions, discussion of the
results of the analysis, and suggestions for future research. The study
found that four types of prepackaged, self-paced instructional
materials-textbook-based, audiotape-based, videotape-based, and
personal computer-based, could be placed on interval scales for
expectations of effort expenditure, time investment, and learning
achievement. The videotape-based type of materials was scaled as

expected to require least effort and time and result in greatest

141
learning.
The expectation of time variable was found to be the greatest

contributer to expectation of learning. The relationship was inverse:

As respondents expected a type of instructional material to result in
greater learning, they also expected it to require less time. However,
respondents expected to invest greater time studying their preferred
methods of prepackaged, self—paced instructional materials.

The low numbers of experienced respondents hampered analysis of the
impact of experience upon expectations. Despite findings of significant
relationships between experience and performance in other studies, this
study found nonsignificant and/or negligible relationships between
experience and expectations.

This study was an effort to look at adult learners' expectations of
prepackaged, self-paced instructional materials. John Keller (1983) has
proposed that instructional developers consider "motivational design of
instruction." Awareness of learners' expectations and the elements of
instruction that serve to motivate them to initiate or continue study is
prerequisite to developing promotional and instructional strategies.

How do we influence expectancy for success in the educational
achievement situation? How can we carry out that influence with
learners who elect to study on their own? The final hope of this study

is that others will also attend to these questions.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

Cover Letter Accompanying Mailed Questionnaire
Page of Definitions Accompanying Mailed Questionnaire
Mailed Questionnaire Instrument

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

couscrovmucamN-oomorcoum. mw-m-mm
mmunvomvmmmm

February 26, 1985

Dear Mid-Michigan Resident:

You are one of a group of persons randomly selected to receive the enclosed
questionnaire because you-—or another member of your family-—have participated in
educational courses outside of regular school hours. Your family members
obviously value opportunities to develop their interests and abilities to invest
time and, often, extra dollars in such activities.

This survey deals with other opportunities to further our personal learning:
prepackaged, self-paced courses. These packaged learning opportunities are
growing in number on the shelves of B. Dalton, thdanbooks, and other bookstores,
in videotape rental and urchase centers, and on the racks of computer software at
local computer stores. y come in textbook. audiotape. videotape, and on
computer diskette or tape. Have you seen any?

Now-if you are an adult (if not, please give this to an adult in your house)-I
need "just a lick of your time” to let me know what you think about certain
aspects of those courses. So sit back, unwrap the enclosed sucker for instant
energy. take a few deep breaths to relax, peruse the questionnaire, than take a
pencil or pen firmly in hand and give the questions your best shot. Stick to
it—-the sucker should outlast the time it takes to answer the questions.

Perhaps you would like some background before you start "licking” this task. I am
a doctoral student in the Educational Systems Development program at Michigan
State university's College of Education. Many persons with traditional
classroom-bound educational backgrounds have told me, "I didn't know what I was
getting into," when they started self-paced, on-their-own types of learning
experiences. The information I receive from you and others who respond to this
questionnaire will be used to complete my doctoral dissertation about that problem
and, hopefully, add to the base of knowledge about how to develop and market
prepackaged, self-paced learning experiences so we learn better from them.

With this background in mind, you are likely ready to get started before your
sucker is gone. I appreciate your help.

Please return only the completed tan-colored questionnaire by Mnrch 8, 1985, in
the enclosed addressed, stamped envelope. Do not put your name or address on the
returned questionnaire so that your responses remain anonymous and confidential.

“fir. RM

Mary L. Ploor (Ph.D. cand.)

mun-wwwwm

142

 

You are already familiar with any words used in this survey. But, to assure
that everyone who responds will have the s- maanings in aind. please read
the definitions on the next page before proceeding. These definitions
indicate the way the words are used in the ques you will answer. Refer

to the definitions as necessary.

 

 

 

. . m . .
_—

m—energy expanded to nke a purchase decision, obtain the product,
handle the study materials, study the subject, complete an em. and do
whatever else is necessary to reach completion of the study goal.

TIDE—measurable period (seconds, minutes. hours. days. etc.) during \dlich an
action, process. or condition exists or nastiness.

W mam—en. goal of the study process, one's own satisfaction at
achievingthemoetunderstandingofatopicenscanwithinhisorherowa

capacity.

mum. SEE-Pm WEI—self-eontaiaed course of instruction,
including. as needed. instructional materials. learning aids. guide or .nenl.
pre- and or post-tests. validation data. description of intended audience, and

learning objectives, arranged with provision for an individual to set his or
her own schedule for learning and to monitor his or her on progress. A
package deals with a definite subject of study that is systntically arranged
and intended for use at a specified level of instruction. It would be the
principle source of study nterial for the course.

 

manna-mm mama—printed course -terial, hard-bound. soft-bond.
ring-bound, or in monograph form. Feedback to the student is generally
provided through practice exercises. case studies, and of chapter questions,
etc., with answers following the exercises or at the and of the book.

momma-um MCI—course material offered on one or more
audiocassette tapas. Feedback may be provided to the student in either or
both of these ways: (I) a workbook (with answers) or (2) a narrator asks
questions or presents problem on the tape: a pause follows or the student is
asked to stop the tape to allow time to form a response: the narrator than
suggests a correct response so that the student my compare his or her on
wit it.

WARE-BASED MIG—course nterial offered on one or more
videocassette tapes. Feedback may be provided to the student is either or
both of these ways: (1) a workbook (with answers) or (2) questions-or
problem is presented on the tape either by the actors or by text on the
screen: apause followsortheatudentisasksdtostopthetapatoforma
response: the actor or tent on the screen then suggests a correct response.

W W Worse uterial offered on one or more
microcomputer memory devices such as cassette tapes or floppy disks. Personal
computer-based instruction presents information to learners and provides
opportunity for the student to respond to questions on the information.
including reacting to the learners' responses with some form of i-sdiate

feedback.

REFER TO THIS PAGE AS NECESSARY.

 

 

RETURN ML! 11!! WESTIGINAIRE IN THE MAIL.

 

143

E
E

Examples of subjects for which adults may purchase prepackaged, self-paced
courses are listed below. Courses of this type (sometimes called "self-study"
or "home-study") usually present facts and principles about the subject and
include review questions, case studies, and practice exercises. Often such
courses include a test or examination. They may offer continuing education
units or certification after successful completion of one or a series of
courses. The courses may be available for purchase in different formats, such
as textbook-based, audiotape-based, videotape-based. and personal
computer-based.

Building Memory Skills How to Write a Hill
Personal Financial Planning Time Management

Modern Marketing Fundamentals Strategic Planning
Building Your Vocabulary Better Sales Techniques
Creative Problem Solving Assertiveness Training
How to Set Your Own Goals Stress Management
Improving Customer Relations Weight Loss Techniques
Good Study Habits Emergency Care Update

How to Speak...[a foreign (physicians)
language] Infectious Diseases Update
Research and Planning (physicians)

(insurance industry)

 

Did you see any subjects about which you might like to learn more at your
own convenience? Check ( X ) those subjects in the spaces provided..

Do you know of another fact or principle-based topic-not listed-that you

would consider studying on your own if a prepackaged, self-paced course
existed for it? If so, write it in the blank space at the end of the list and

check it.

, (I) assume that you have decided to learn more about one of the subjects
above. Hrite the name of the subject here: .

i

(2) Assume that you have also, for reasons known only to you, decided to study
that subject through a prepackaged, self-paced course.

(3) Having made those assumptions, please respond as requested to the
following items.

 

Check ( X ) if the following statement applies to you.
But, please answer the remaining questions, too.

( ) I would NEVER consider taking a prepackaged, self-
paced course because I believe that learning can take
place only in the classroom or other group situation.

 

 

 

144

m Throughout this questionnaire:

1.
2.

3.

5.
6.

Please consider the course you named above when responding.

Base your responses upon each course being offered in as ”pure" a form as
possible, even though many prepackaged, self-paced courses are. in
reality, combinations of two or more of the methods in this questionnaire
(for example, text accompanied by audiotapes).

Assume that the same objectives would be fulfilled, equivalent material
covered, equivalent test or exam provided, and equivalent credit offered,
regardless of the method of study.

Assume that you have any equipment (e.g., audiocassette player,
videocassette player, or personal computer) necessary to complete the
course regardless of which of the four ways it is offered.

Assume that all prepackaged. self-paced courses include a manual with
course directives. outline. and objectives.

Assume that the source (producer) for the course and the cost of the
course would be the same, regardless of the way it is offered.

D’Listed below are the factors of expected (I) effort expenditure,
E2; tine invest-eat. (3) learning achievement. and
4 other expectations.

Assume that you have 100 points to allocate among the factors.
Allocate the‘points to show the importance each factor would
have for you in selecting a prepackaged, self-paced course.

The effort I would expect to expand to study the subject
The time I would expect to invest to study the subject
The degree of personal learning achievement I would expect
to attain in learning the subject
Other expectations (for example: cost of course. sponsor
of course. other elements important to you)

:EEEF'Tbtal points

5 Of those listed below, the ideal way
for MB to study a prepackaged,
self—paced course would be...

(My preference is...)
Check ( X ) only 0MB response.)

( ) textbook-based

( ) audiotape-based

( ) videotape-based

( ) personal computer-based

 

 

 

The next three sections ask you to circle 0M8 from gg§h_pnir of items that is
GREATER than the other in some way. For example. assume you were asked to
circle which one of each of the following pairs of sports is GREATER FUN for

you.

If you have more fun playing swi-ing, tennis. and volleyball, than you

do ice hockey, soccer, or bowling. your responses would look like this:

m,
m...
volleyball - bowling

L45

 

 

In each of the following pairs of types of prepackaged. self-paced courses
circle the ONE type of course from a pair that you think would require
GREATER m expenditure on your part to study the subject you mod on the
first page. If you find it difficult to decide for any pair be sure to circle
one of them. even if you have to guess.
videotape - textbook
textbook - personal computer
audiotape - videotape
personal computer - audiotape
audiotape - textbook

videotape - personal computer

IPPOIT

 

 

 

 

 

In each of the following pairs of types of prepackaged. self-paced courses
circle the NE type of course from E pair that you think would require
GREATERTDIBinvestmsntonyourparttostudythesubject you named on the
first page. If you find it difficult to decide for any pair be sure to circle
oneofthen, evenifyouhnvetoguess.
audiotape - videotape
personal computer - audiotape
udiotapa - textbook
videotape - personal computer
videotape - textbook

textbook - personal computer

TIME

 

 

 

 

 

In each of the following pairs of types of prepackaged, self-paced courses
circle the (NE type of course from _e_a_ch_ pair that you think would result in
CREATE mum achieve-ant for you if you studied the subject you mod on
the first page. If you find it difficult to decide for any pair be sure to
circle one of thc, even if you have to guess.

audiotape - textbook
videotape - personal computer

videotape - textbook
textbook - personal computer

audiotape - videotape

personal computer - audiotape

 

 

 

 

LEARNING
146

 

 

“(1)-ydthefollowiagit-thatyoaolm.

(
(
(
(

Your response to the following questions is ascssmuyfsraccurstsdata

 

tabulation. Please do not emit any sectiema. lam-her, all infer-ties
provided is confidential and will be reparted sassy-enly.

no you have experience with any of the following types of repackaged.
self-paced instructional .terials? Please check ( I ) el that apply.

For which of the following types
of prepackaged. self-paced courses
have you ever seen or received
advertis-snts?

( ) textbook-based

( ) audiotape-based
( ) videotape-based
( ) peraaaal ceqetc-bassd

lhsvestadiedandsm

requirements of a prepackaged.
self-paced course uisg
instructional .teriels that were

( ) textbook-based

I luvs helped develop a been
responsible for develepant of

a prepackaged. self-paced course
that was pri-rily

E
E

tiaalnterialsthuware

( ) textbook-based
audiotape-based

Hm...

Please answer the following questions with the closest approxi-u file ”or. If -
answer is sore (0)._priat 0. Do nst leave my blank.

Mow-nybeokshnveyoereadlnthspst-nth?

Tuba-sy

or journals do you parsnnalIT'i'n'b'scribel

“nines __
law-shtiasdidyeeqandreadingaaswepapsa’yeatsrhy“!I ainetas

law-chti-didyenepadwntchintelevisdnyeaterdeyl.__

hours
minutes

hats

hoe-chumsdidyeespsndlist-iagtsthsradieyeaterdsy; niaetes

) Televisi.

) Audiotape or endincasaetts recorder/player

) Videotape cassette receiver/player
) Personal computer

highest level of education
completed: (Check one)

) Grade eight (8) or less
) Some high school

) high school graduta

) Some college

) Associate degree (2 yr.)
) College grad-ts (4 yr.)
) Inster's degree

) Doctoral degree

) be. t). 310,”
) SID.” - 19.999
) mg“ - 2‘.”
) $25.“ - 36.999
) 835.” - 49.999
) 3”.” e

“I

 

hatisyecmesdsl

 

htisyauegsl(0sckens)

( )lOerlsas ( No-56

5 20-24 ( )55-6‘
25-34 ( )65-7A

( ya-“ ( )nv

Areyoepras—tly (Osckthaflthntmdascribssyoe) . . .

) Pull-time .ployed

) Pull-ti. nployed. part-time studut

) Part-tins uployed. not a student

) Pull-ti- student (includes graduate assistants)
) Pull-time student. part-time uploysd

) Part-time student. part-ti- .ployed

) Temporarily mloysd. not a student

) Home-ker

) Retired/disabled

AAAA “AAAA

"Mfcmisgtimstorespasdtothisservey.

 

 

 

Please return is the enclosed. eta-ad envelope.

147

APPENDIX B

Michigan State University Committee on Research
Involving Human Subjects: Letter Granting Approval
to Conduct Research

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

 

unwnn'rrcounrrruounssuscwnwowmc mm-w-m
Hum sunyccrs (W)

as mm moms

mn 3:9.qu February 20, 1985

Ms. Mary L. Ploor
llZ‘l Montevideo Drlve
Lanslng, Mlchlgan 48917

Dear Ms. Ploor:

Subject: Proposal Entltled, "An lnvestlgetlon of the Expectetlons
Adult Learners Hold Regerdlng Effort Expendlture, Tlne
Investment. and Learning Achievement for Four Types of
Prepackgged, Self-pecad Learnlng Materlels"

I am pleased to edvlse that I concur wlth your evaluation that thls project ls
exempt from full UCRlHS revlew, and approval ls herewlth granted for conduct
of the project.

You are reminded that UCRIHS approval ls valld for one calendar year. If you
plan to contlnue thls project beyond one year, please make provlslons for
obtslnlng appropriate UCRIHS approval prlor to February 20, l986.

Any changes In procedures lnvolvlng human subjects must be revlewed by the
UCRIHS prlor to lnltlatlon of the change. UCRIMS must also be notlfled
promptly of any problems (unexpected slde effects. couplelnts, etc.) lnvolvlng
human subjects durlng the course of the work.

Thank you for brlnglng thls project to my ettentlon. If I can be of any future
help, please do not hesltate to let me know.

Sln ly,

Henry E. Bredeck
Chelrnlan, UCRlllS

HEB/jms

cc: Dr. C. G. Gentry

usua-mwwwm

148

APPENDIX C

Tables of Matrices Developed
for Analysis of Data by the
Law of Comparative Judgment, Case V,
for Hypotheses 1, 2, 3

Tilda!

Flinn-ix: Expeditedfflmifxpeflhs'e

 

VIDEO-BASED AUDIO-BASED PC-MSED TEXT-BASED

 

 

VIDEO-BASED 46.5 70 67 64

AUDIO-BASED 27 46.5 50 56

I’D-BASED 30 47 46.5 51

TEXT-BASED 33 41 46 46.5
I‘D 6.2

when» mmdfflu'ltxpenlhre

 

VIDEO-BASED MIG-BASED PC-UAED TEXT-BASED

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VIDEO-BASED 0.500 0.722 0.691 0.660
AUDIO-BASED 0.278 0.500 0.515 0.577
Pc-BASED 0.309 0.485 0.500 0.526
TEXl-BASED 0.340 0.423 0.474 0.500
Sues 1.427 2.130 2.180 2.263
Tile 0.3

I Merit: W a Efln‘l Exp-dun

VIDEO-BASED MID-DASH) Pit-BASED lEX'l-IASED
VIDEO-BASED 0.000 0.589 0.499 0.412
AUDIO-BASED -0.589 0.000 0.038 0.194
Pc-BASED -0.499 -0.038 0.000 0.065
TEXT-BASED -0.412 -0. 194 -0.065 0.000
Suns - 1.500 0.357 0.472 0.671
Menu -0375 0.089 0.1 18 0.168
Hun + .375 0.000 0.464 0.493 0.543

 

149

I‘D 0.4

marshal mm:wm1olluemlsdlslmum1leemdlle
[Murmur influential-1W

 

WVNJIS VIDEO-BASED ”IO-BASED I’ll-BASED TEXT-BASED

 

 

sour VALIES 0.000 0.464 0.493 0.543

VIDEO-BASED 0.000

AUDIO-BASED 0.464 ' -0.464

PCB-BASED 0.493 -0.493 -0.029

TEXT-BASED 0.543 -0.543 -0.079 -0.050
ICU 0.5

Ilse-ales! Winn pu'nrrmlpullew “men's 1¢h04
wmdmm

 

VIDEO-BASED “IND-BASED PC-MSED I'm-m

 

VIDEO-BASED

MIG-BASED 0.321

Pit-BASED 0.31 1 0.466

TEXT-BASED 0.294 0.466 0.460

 

Idh 0.6

Wmmwmnapu'nmucsmuam
Willpfl' nmmnmmm

 

VINO-BASED AUDIO-BASED I’ll-BASED TEXT-m

 

 

 

 

MING-BASED -0.043

I'D-BASED -0.002 -0.003

Tall-WED 0.046 -0.045 -0.006
Suns 0.091 0.048 0.006
Slsnsd AbsVsllu - 0.145

 

AbaAvnDlsrepew- 0.024

 

150

This 0.7
F Mel-1r: Expulsion d Tllns lnvulmed

 

VIDEO-BASED MEMO-BASED PCB-BASED TEXT-BASED

 

 

VIDEO-BASED 46.5 72 71 65

AUDIO-BASED 25 46.5 54 54

PC-BASED 26 43 46.5 53

TEXT-BASED 32 43 ' 44 46.5
Iii 0.6

PM”: Wd‘llmslw

 

VIDEO-m ”IO-BASE!) I’ll-BASED TEXT-BASED

 

 

 

 

VIDEO-BASED 0.500 0.742 0.732 0.670

“DIG-BASED 0.256 osoo 0.557 0.557

PC-BASED 0.266 0.443 0.500 0.546

TEXT-BASED 0.330 0.443 0‘4 0.500

Suns 1.356 2.126 2.243 2.273
7‘“ 0.9

IMIrlx: Wdllmslmdmen

 

VIDEO-BASED MDIO-BASED PC-BASED TEXT-BASED

 

 

 

 

VINO-BASED 0.000 0.650 0.619 0.440
AUDIO-BASED -0.650 0.000 0.143 0.143
PC-BASED -0.619 -0.143 0.000 0.116
TEXT-BASED -0.440 -0.143 -0.1 16 0.000
51.8 - 1.709 0.364 0.646 0.699
m -0.427 0.091 0.162 0.175
MB 4 .427 0.000 0.516 0.569 0.602

 

151

I.b0.10

‘mulmmzfl'mummmmmmam
Imuwmmdum 1W

 

WVNJES VIDEO-BASED HMO-BASED 90-65550 TEXT-BASED

 

 

601.6 VALIES 0.000 0.516 0.569 0.602

VIDEO-BASED 0.000

MDIO-BASED 0.516 -0.516

PC-BASED 0.569 -0.569 -0.071

TEXT-M650 0.602 -0.602 -0.064 -0.013
Iflb 0.1 1

W Wflf Minn-W mull au- ’11. denhclo
thtmmlt

 

VIDEO-BASED AUDIO-BASED PO-MSED TEN-BASED

 

VIDEO-WED

MIG-BASED 0.302

PO-BASED 0.276 0.472

TEXT-BASED 0.274 0.466 0.495

 

7CD 0.12

Wmmwmpwwmbcnumm
Wynn-mama”:

 

VIDEO-BASED MOO-BASED 90-min TEXT-WED

 

 

 

 

VIDEO-BASED

MIG-BASED -0.o«

90-min -0010 -0029

Ian-m0 0.056 -0023 -0041
Sun: W 0.052 0041
mamwm- 0203

 

mmowm- 0.034

152

 

1&013
[Mix amt-«mum

 

AUDIO-EASE!) TEXT-BASED PO-BASED VINO-BASED

 

 

AUDIO-BASED 46.5 57 57 77

EXT-BASED 39 46.5 49 54

PO-BASED 39 47 46.5 54

VIDEO-M660 19 42 42 46.5
7" 0.14

Pm mammm

 

MDIO-MSED EXT-BASED P045550 mom-m

 

 

 

MIG-BASED 05” 0.594 0594 0002

TEXT-6&0 0.406 0500 0.510 0.563

PO-BASED 0406 0.490 05” 0563

VIDEO-BASED 0.196 0.436 0436 0500

61m 1.510 2.022 2.042 2.426
lib 0.15

[W mmdwmm

 

AUDIO-BASED TEXT-BASED 90-60650 VIM-BASED

 

 

 

 

MIG-BASED 0.000 0.238 0.238 0.849
TEXT-BASED -0.238 0.000 0.025 0.159
Pc-BASED -0.238 -0.025 0.000 0.159
VIDEO-BASED -0.849 -0.156 -0.156 0.000
31m -1.325 0.057 0.107 1.167
Hun -0.331 0.014 0.027 0.292
run 9 .331 0.000 0.345 0.355 0.623

 

153

7Ch016

Thu-011131 mmqumu-ubmmmomam
Immmmdmmw

 

ME VALIES “IO-BASED TEXT-BASED 90-01550 VIDEO-BASED

 

 

sou VNJE 0.000 036 0346 0623

”IO-BASED 00M

TEXT-BASED 0345 -036

PO-MSED 0.356 -0.356 -0013

VIDEO-M650 0.623 -0623 -0276 -0275
‘Iflb 0. 17

wmpu'mbmmwmzu'nucm
1a- dem w

 

MING-BASED TEXT-BASED PO-MSED VINO-BASED

 

MID-BASED

TEXT-BASED 0365

PO-BASED 0360 04%

VIDEO-BASED 0267 0390 0392

 

7" 016

mmmwmmpu'amucnumm
Wimp“ mmdh'mm

 

HMO-BASED TEXT-BASED PC-BASED VIDEO-BASED

 

 

 

 

 

MING-BASED
TEXT-BASED 0041

90-64550 0046 -0005

mom-045:0 -0.069 0.046 0046
51-15 —0Ts'6' 0.053 0046
muMWu- 0255

 

mmmm- 0.043

154

 

IWNNNFIMFQMM'M

1" 0.19

Volt-ad defll Pm1¢b(1¢b02)wfixmd Etta-1
W

 

wow-04550 Mono-m 1110-04650 tea-men

 

VINO-MD

MIG-BASED 31.62

PO-BASED 33.77 44.14

TEXT-M650 35.67 4057 43.51

 

70“ 020

Wind 0' M1011. P'Mlel (IOBQSHG' Wt! EM
Exp-dun

 

VIDEO-M550 HIDE-BASED PO-BMED TEXT-BASED

 

VIDEO-MD

MIG-BASED 34.51

PO-MSED 33.69 44.31

TEXT-BASED 32.63 43.17 43.65

 

Iii 021

ma 0- B'Mbmfi- P'MTOIQUW «mm
W -

 

VIDEO-M550 “IMO-BASED PO-BASED tan-0.4550

 

 

 

 

VIDEO-BASED

HMO-BASED ~269

PO-BASED -0.12 -017

TEXT-M550 284 -2.60 -0.34

m d( a - I)! 22.22
310 Dav. d 0 6.46
(In-sure 2.63

 

mama” 3

 

155

Iflb 0.22

mu ammo-Pmmb (101006”de 111110
1W

 

VIDEO-BASED AUDIO-BASED PO-BASED TEXT-BASED

 

VIDEO-66550

MID-BASED 3053

PO-BASED 31.16 41.73

TEXT-BASED 35.06 41.73 42.36

 

lib 0.23

mm IMhfllPMT‘b (10100.11)de 11.0
1W

 

VIDEO-BASED AUDIO-BASED PO-BASED TEXT-M550

 

VIDEO-BASED

MIG-BASED 33.34

PO-MSED 31.62 43.39

EXT-BASED 31.56 43.05 44.71

 

1’" 0.24

mu 0- IWWUUP- PMTflbflrW G"-
1mm

 

VINO-BASED AUDIO-BASED P046550 I'm-BASED

 

 

 

 

VIDEO-WED

AUDIO-BASED -2.61

PC-BASED -0.64 - 1.66

TEXT-BASED 3.50 - 1.32 -2.35

mm d( o- I) 2 30.55
5111. M. d 0 6.46
01140.1 3.61

 

man-m 3

 

156

'lflb 0.25

mm ecu-W101:- pmmmmuamm Wham
W

 

HMO-BASED TEXT-BASED PO-MSED VIDEO-BASED

 

MID-BASED

TEXT-BASED 39.56

PC-BASED 39.56 44.43

VIDEO-BASED 26.42 41.44 41.44

 

til-0.26
11611.11 0' W100. P' mum-(11616017111: wuss-m
W

 

MIG-WED Tin-WED 90-04650 VIM-66650

 

wow-611650

TEXT-BASED 37.17

110-34550 36.67 44.71

11050-04550 31.11 36.65 36.76

 

7‘3 0.27

mu 0- d'Mth— Imutdluflrw 11mm
W

 

VIDEO-BASED ADM-BASED 90-65550 TEXT-6m

 

 

 

 

VIDEO-BASED

HMO-BASED 2.41

Pc-BASED 2.71 -0.26

Tin-BASED -4.69 2.79 2.66

W11( 0 - 0‘) 2 50.19
5111 01». a a 6.55
We . 5.87

 

warm 3

 

157

APPENDIX D

Tables D.1 to D.12:
Crosstabulation of Preferred Method
by Expectation Variables

 

 

 

 

 

5.552 5.65 o.n5 2555a
n5 mm DR 5.5265
2.22 5.52 5.2 65555-55
52 52 n 25555652
n.nn c.5n n.«n
2n m2 mm 56556552>
«.52 5.5 n.~n
cm n nu vacuoaua<
n.~n 5.nn 5.22
on 52 22 xooauxoa
Hayes nouomuu uoauoq Au Hoov
30m ugaflz
2u>mq zo~a<yuamnm semen:
252250556

 

«Howuauu: mucouuuauuuaH
vuuon1mflom .vuuuxuoaoum vomuAIxoonuxoh
you unoaumo>=H «saw He coauauuonxm an

vegan: vuuuuuoum uc cowuoaanaummouo

 

«.9 aways

 

 

 

 

5.552 2.55 5.65
.mp1. marl. .hnnu
«.22 5.22 2.52
52 52 5
5.55 5.55 5.52
mm .mm o
«.22 5.52 o
.52 52 5
5.25 5.52 5.55
an 5 22
Hausa uououuo nommoa
36m

qm>m4 onH<hUmmxm

HauOH
cazaoo
uouaaaoo
Hacomuum
mamuoova>
oamuowu=<
xoonuxob
2a 2555
aunauz
nomhmx
ammmmhmmm

 

uaawuouuz HocowuuzuumcH
uouoa1uaom .vomuxuunoum voaan1xoonuxya

you unauwcconxm uuouum mo cowunuuunxm an
vegan: aouuuuuum «o couuaaanaummouo

 

~.n «Hana

158

 

 

 

 

5.552 5.55 5.55
55 55 55
5.52 5.5 5.55
55. m, 52
5.55 2.55 5.55
25 52 52
5.52 5.55 5.52
55 25, 5
5.55 5.25 5.55
55 55 5
HCUOH. H00 GURU “0&0“..—
Dom

4m>mq onhiHUEANM

 

Hayes
alsaoo
houanlou
50:00505
0nauoov5>
0qnuowva<
306:0509
25 2555
5053::
consul
ammxmmmum

 

05055005: Hocowuuauuuan
v0uoa1u50m .a0uuxuua0um 5000:10nouoav=<
uou 05=u5vc0nxm uuouuu no =05uauu0num an

50:00: v0uu0m05m no gawuaaaaouuuouo

5.: 0Hngh

 

 

 

 

o.oo~ h.nu n.on 50099
no mm a» glance
«.5— h.N~ n.n~ 50055300
mm .M 22 Hucouu0m
n.nm «.mu c.0n
um hw11 mm 0nauooc5>
N.h~ 2.0 n.m2
cu N «a 0aouowva<
n.Nn n.n< «.mn
on c" an xooaux0a
50099 5000050 500004 AN doov
30m 50na=z
qu>mq chhaHummNm Dozen:
amxmmmmum

 

aauwuouu: Hacouuuauuuau
5555515255 .55555555555 55555125555505
uou ua0a0>0anu< unwaua0a no =05u0000axm an
vosu0: v0uu0m0um mo :owuuasnoumuouo

 

n.n 0Hngh

159

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.004 5.Nn n.50 50509 0.004 4.0m 0.00 50509
F El P 5.2.28 hull mml .mml 55250
5.52 5.55 5.5 532.85 5.52 5.52 5.52 55555555
02 n4 n 50000505 04 D— m‘ 50000500
n.nn h.nn 4.5m n.nn n.n< 0.n5
25 52 52 553555; 25 55 5 553552.;
«.54 4.0 0.5m «.55 n.n~ n.n
on \tmx‘ <4 00050500< 04 an N 000505v=<
n.~n n.0n n.5N n.~n 0.05 ~.n0
on 04 «4 30055009 on 0 0a 50055509
50509 5050050 500004 AN 5000 H0509 5050050 500004 an 5000
’08 93.32 30“ 502—52
4m>m4 =0H9<yuamxu 00:9m: 4m>M4 =0H9<9ummum 00:9m:
numthmmm cummmmmmm

 

 

04055050: 500055005500H
00000-550m .00m0xu0005m 0000nu0005050=<
505 500a0>0500< 00505004 50 0055050005m 55
00:50: 005505050 50 005504050500050

05055050: 400055005500H
00000-550m .00003000050 0000AI0005055=<
505 500l500>0H 0059 50 00550500axm an
00:50: 005505050 50 005505050500050

 

 

0.: 0H009 n.a 05509

160

I, [qt-1.0.. a

 

 

 

 

o.oo~ c.m~ c.uh nouns
ma on so alaaoo
N.h~ n.n N.<n nouaaaoo
mu \m m" Hacouuum
n.nn «.mn n.ou
hm! am on unuuoovfi>
~.s~ o.o~ «.n~
a” g" n unauafiu=<
n.~n c.0n n.o~
on ON cu soonuxvh
gauge. uouoouo gonna; AN Hoov
30m wanes:
qm>mq ona<aummnu Goran:
amammmmum

 

naaauuuux Hocowuuauuucm

voquIuHum .vomuxuuaoum womanloquuouvw>
uou unuauuo>:H made no couuauuunxm an
vegan: vuuuououm no cowuaaaaouuaouo

 

m.a manna

 

 

 

 

c.ccH o.m~ o.~n aauoa
marl. .mmuu .rmnu casfloo
«.su ~.n~ n.<~ uouaaaoo
o" o o~ Hocomuum
n.nn o n.mn
mm D‘ Hm unauooufi>
u.n— n.e a.n~
ea c N“ manuoflv=<
n.~n n.~o a.o~
an cu «a xoonuxuh
adage unecouo uuuuoq AN Hoov
:63 uoaasz
4m>mq 20Hh<aommxm nozhmz
ammmmmmmm

 

unawuouuz HaaowuusuumaH
vouunluaom .oomaxunaoum vauunlumauouvw>
uou chauavcanxm uuouum mo =o«unuumnxm an

vacant euuuoHuum no cowuuaaaaummouo

5.: manna

161

 

 

 

 

 

0.00" o.o~ H.nh
.mpl Mml. .mpl
N.h~ o.< ~.NN
mu a nu
n.mn o.~n m.mn
an a mu
N.h~ o.m< o.n
mu mmv\ .w
n.~n o.o— «.mn
on e 0N
Hauoa uououuu umuuoa
30m

4m>mq chh<hummNu

Hanna
alaaoo
nouanaou
uncouuom
onuuoovw>
onnuowvac
xoonuuus
Q 38
gonna:
semen:
ammmmmmmm

 

 

 

 

unuwuouu: HucoauuauuucH vouualuaom

.vomuxuunoum vonunuuuuaaaoo Hucomuom
how ouauancoaxu unamum no cowuuuuunnm an

vegan: vouuuuuum uo coauouznouauouo

 

o~.n «flank

o.oo~ o.~n «.me
.mlol... .mNI F
N.h~ 5.0” m.-
mu \m m
n.nn m.o~ n.0q
an 0“ Ha
N.h— ~.c ~.~m
\mw mm «a
n.~n m.mn e.¢
on mm N
Houph nouumuo ummaoq
30m

qm>mq 20Hh<aommxm

Haupa
casnoo
umuzaaoo
Hocomuom
mqmuoouw>
mauuowvz<
soonuxoh
G 38
wanes:
nozhm:
nmxmmmmmm

 

uaowuouuz Hacouuuauuuau
vouuanuaom .vomuxuaauum umuuanonauooca>
now ucoam>oacu< mcwcuooq no nauuouuunxm an
vacant vouuououm mo cowuonaaaunuouu

 

o.n manna

162

 

 

 

 

c.oo~ h.~n m.~e
ma on mm
«.hfi o.on n.~
o“ m“ _
n.nn o.on e.on
an \mH o_
“.5“ ~.o~ o.n~
o_ n H“
n.~n o.¢~ e.on
on «u o“
HQHOF hfluflflhu hfluflflfl
30¢

4m>mq 20Hh<h0flmxm

gauge
alsagu
nouanaoo
naaoauom
2.32;;
onuuowv=<
soonuxuh
Au Hoov
uuansz
nczhm:
nmxxmmmxm

 

aaowuuuu: HucowuuauumaH vmuoauuuom
.vomnxuaoum vuugauuusnaoo H3030.—
uou unnuuucwnxm uucuum mo coauouuonnm an
conga: uuuuuuoum no coauaaaaoumaouo

 

N~.a manna

 

 

 

 

o.oo~ h.~o «.mm
huwu. hurl. _nmnu
~.h_ n.¢~ m.n~
o_ o p
n.nm o.~c n.n
mmv cm ,H
~.h~ o.o~ o.o~
o“ Hm“ w
n.~n n.h_ m.no
on “a ¢~V
HGUDH uuuflflha hflaufld
30m

4M>m4 onH<HUmmNm

Munch
nasaoo
housnaoo
Hmcomuom
onuuooca>
wauuowv=<
xoonuxoh
G 38
nupaaz
combat
ammmmmmmm

 

mauuuounz HuaoauuauumaH vuuunluaum
.vuquuuaoum vomoauuousnaoo Hacoauum
how uaoluno>=H oafih no coauouuonxm an
vegan: euuuououm no couuaaannunuouu

 

um.n «Hana

163

APPENDIX E

Varimax Rotated Factor Matrix

of the Expectation Variables
after Rotation with Kaiser Normalization

 

 

Varimax Rotated Factor Matrix
of the Expectation Variables

Table E.1

after Rotation with Kaiser Normalization

 

 

EXPECTATION FACTORS
VARIABLES 1 2 3 4
Effort:
Textbook -.5766 .3511 .2172 -.4069
Audiotape —.1457 -.7046 -.0271 -.1599
Videotape -.0565 -.0014 -.2153 .9791
Personal computer .7114 .2908 -.0057 -.0629
Time:
Textbook -.6477 .3061 .4179 —.2225
Audiotape -.0494 -.8391 .0102 .1388
Videotape .0050 -.0565 -.6881 .2852
Personal computer .7576 .4628 .1550 -.1273
Learning:
Textbook .6051 -.3118 -.4486 .0297
Audiotape .0567 .7559 .1843 -.1117
Videotape .0164 .0321 .7911 -.0195
Personal computer -.6588 -.2852 -.2740 .0690

 

164

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

Abercrombie, M. L. J. (1981). Changing basic assumptions about teaching
and learning. In D. Boud (Ed.), Developing Student Autonomy in
Learning (pp. 38-54). London/New York: Kogan Page/Nichols Publishing
Company.

American Management Association. (1984). 1984 self-studygcurriculum
guide. New York: AMA Extension Institute.

Anderson, C. J., & Walberg, H. J. (1974). Learning environments. In H.
J. Walberg (Ed.), Evaluating Educational Performance. Berkeley, CA:
McCutchan.

Apps, J. W. (1981). The Adult Learner on Campus:_A Guide for
Instructors and Administrators. Chicago, IL: Follette Publishing
Company. .

Atkinson, J. W. (1964). An Introduction to Motivation. Princeton, NJ:
D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc.

Atkinson, J. W. (1982). Old and new conceptions of how expected
consequences influence actions. In N. T. Feather (Ed.), Expectations
and Action: Expectancy-Value Models in Psychologp (pp. 17-52).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Atkinson, J. W., & Birch, D. (1978). An Introduction to Motivation (2nd
ed.). New York: D. Van Nostrand Company.

Barton, P. (1982). Worklife Transitions. New York: McGraw—Hill Book
Company.

Benjamin, C. (1984, August 27). TV degree: It's easier than changing
channels, Lansing State Journal, p. 1D.

Berenson, M. L., Levine, D. M., & Goldstein, M. Intermediate

Statistical Methods and Applications: A Computer Package Approach.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1983.

 

Beswick, N. (1977). Resource-Based Learning, London: Heinemann
Educational Books, Ltd.

Blackburn, D. J. (1967). Method orientations of adults for

participation in educative activities (Doctoral dissertation,
University of Wisconsin, 1967). Dissertation Abstracts

165

 

International, 28(8), 2871A.

Bock, R. D. Multivariate Statistical Methods in Behavioral Research.
NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1975.

Bock, R. D., & Jones, L. V. (1968). The Measurement and Prediction of
Choice. San Francisco, CA: Holden-Day.

Bose, R. C. (1956). Paired comparison designs for testing concordance
between judges. Biometrica, 43, 113-121.

Boshier, R. (1973). Educational participation and dropout: A
theoretical model. Adult Education, 23(4), 255-282.

Boshier, R. (1976). Factor analysts at large: A critical review of the
motivational orientation literature. Adult Education, 21(1), 24-47.

Bramblett, L. R., & Buchanan, W. W. (1978). The CEU in marketing
continuing education._ In H. B. Long and C. B. Lord, The Continuing_
Education Unit: Concept, Issues, and Use (pp. 95-104). Athens, GA:
The University of Georgia Center for Continuing Education.

Brown, R. D., Brown, L. A., & Danielson, J. E. (1975). Instructional
treatments, presenter types, and learner characteristics as
significant variants in instructional television for adults. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 61(3), 391-404.

Callaghan, C., & Manstead, A. S. R. (1983). Causal attributions for
task performance: The effects of performance outcome and sex of

subject. British Journal of Educational Psycholggy,.§§, Part I,
14.23.

Cardozo, R. N. (1970). Motivation: An experimental study of customer
effort, expectation, and satisfaction. In S. H. Britt (Ed.),
Psychological Experiments in Consumer Behavior (pp. 53-63). New
York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Carpenter, C. R. (1957). Psychological concepts and audio-visual
instruction. Audio-visual Communication Review, 5, 361—369.

Carroll, J. B. (1963). A model of school learning. Teachers Colleggf
Record, 64(8), 723-733. ‘

Chu, G. C., & Schramm, W. (1967). Learninggfrom Televigion: What the
Research Says (Stanford University Contract # 2 EFC 708 94).
Washington, DC: U. S. Office of Education.

Clarke, J. (1982). Resource-Based Learning for Higher and Continuing_
Education. London/New York: Croom Helm/John Wiley & Sons.

Comstock, C., Chaffee, S., Katzman, N., McCombs, M, & Roberts, D.

(1978). Television and Human Behavior. NY: Columbia University
Press.

166

Conklin, D. N. (1983). A study of computer-assisted instruction in
nursing education. Journal of Computer—Based Instruction, 2(3),

Conroy, B. (1983). Learning Packaged to Go: A Directory and Guide to
Staff Development and TrainingiPackages. Phoenix, AZ: Onyx Press.

Cornwall, M. (1981). Putting it into practice: Promoting independent
learning in a traditional institution. In D. Boud (Ed.), Developing
Student Autonomy in Learning_(pp. 189-204). London: Kogan Page.

Cross, K. P. (1981). Adults as Learners. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey—Bass Publishers.

Cross, K. P., & Zusman, A. (1979). The needs of nontraditional learners
and the response of nontraditional programs (1977). In U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and welfare, National Institute of
Education (Eds.), An Evaluative Look at Nontraditionalyggstsecondary
Education (pp. 1-89). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing
Office.

David, H. A. (1963). The Method of Paired Comparisons, Griffin's
Statistical Monoggaphs and Courses (No. 12). New York: Hafner
Publishing Company.

Davies, I. K. (1971). The Management of Learning. London: MtGraw—Hill.

DeMuth, J. E. (1979). Audio cassettes as a means of professional

continuing education for pharmacists. Adult Education, 22(4),
242—251.

Dickinson, 0., & Clark, K. M. (1975). Learning orientations and
participation in self-education and continuing education. Adplp
Education, 26(1), 3-15.

Dilley, G. J., Machen, J. B., Dilley, D. C. H., & Howden, E. F. (1978).
Acquisition of psychomotor skills in tooth preparation using
self-paced instruction. Journal of Dental Education, 42(8), 476-480.

Dressel, P. L., & Thompson, M. M. (1973). Independent Study. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.

Edwards, A. L. (1957). Techniques of Attitude Scale Construction. New
York: Appleton—Century-Crofts, Inc.

Eisenberger, R., Masterson, F. A., & MCDermitt, M. (1982). Effects of
task variety on generalized effort. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 24(4), 499-505.

Engel, J. F., Blackwell, R. D., & Kollat, D. T. (1978). Consumer
Behavior (3rd ed.). Hinsdale, IL: The Dryden Press.

Eskin, F. (1981). A hierarchical model of continuing education.
Medical Education, 22, 346-348.

167

 

Fanelli, G. C. (1977). Locus of control. In 8. Ball (Ed.), Motivation
in Education (pp. 45-66). NY: Academic Press.

 

Feather, N. T. (1982). Actions in relation to expected consequences: An
overview of a research program. In N. T. Feather (Ed.), Expectations
and Action: Expectancy:Value Models in Psychology (pp. 53-95).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Fennell, G. (1980). Attitude, motivation, and marketing or where do the
attributes come from? In R. W. Olshavsky (Ed.), Attitude Research
Enters the 80's (pp. 14-33). Chicago, IL: American Marketing
Association.

Finn, J. D. (1972). Expectations and the educational environment.
Review of Educational Research,‘42(3), 387-410.

Fisher, K. M., & MacWhinney, B. (1976). AV autotutorial instruction: A
review of evaluative research. AVCR, 24(3), 229-261.

Fraisse, P. (1963). The Psycholggypof Time. (J. Leith, Trans.) New
York: Harper & Row, Publishers.

Fram, E. H. (1973). Marketing higher education. In D. W. Vermilye

(Ed.), The Future in the Making: Current Issues in Higher Education,
1973 (pp. 56—67). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Publishers.

Fredrick, W. C., & Walberg, H. J. (1980). Learning as a function of
time. Journal of Educational Research, 22(4), 183-194.

Georgiades, W. (1974). Introduction: The advent of packages. In W.
Georgiades & D. C. Clark (Eds.), Models for Individualized
Instruction (pp. 103-104, 111). New York: MSS Information
Corporation.

Good, T. L. (1981). Teacher expectations and student perceptions.
Educational Leadership, 2§(5), 415-422.

Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. E. (1977). Educational Psychology: A
Realistic Approach. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Graham, R. J. (1981). The role of perception of time in consumer
research. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 2, 335-342.

Grayson, L. P. (1982). New technologies in education. In H. E. Mitzel,
Enc clo edia of Educational Research (5th ed.) (Vol. 3:
pp. 1324-1336 . New York: The Free Press.

Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometric Methods (2nd ed.). New York:
McGraw—Hill Book Company, Inc.

Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New
York: Wiley.,

168

Heidt, E. U. (1978). Instructional Media and the Individual Learner.
New York: Nichols Publishing Co.

Holmberg, B. (1981). Status and Trends of Distance Education.
London/New York: Kogan Page/Nichols Publishing CEmpany.

Houle, C. O. (1961). The InquiringgMind. Madison, WI: University of
Wisconsin Press, 1961.

Houle, C. O. (1972). The Design of Education. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Houle, C. O. (1980). ContinuinggEducation in the Professions. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

How-to tapes rolling up sales. (1984, May 27). Chicago Tribune,
p. 7A, 8A.

Huberman, R. C. (1974). Some Models of Adu2t Learnipggand Adult Change,
Studies on permanent education No. 22/1974. Strasbourg: Universite
de Geneve.

Hull, C. H., & Nie, N. H. (Eds.). (1981). SPSS Update 7-9. New York:
McGraw—Hill Book Company.

Jackson, J. E., & Fleckenstein, M. (1957). An evaluation of some
statistical techniques used in the analysis of paired comparison
data. Biometrics, 22, 51-64.

Janoff-Bulman, R., & Brickman, P. (1982). Expectations and what people
learn from failure. In N. T. Feather (Ed.), Expectations and Action:
Expectancy-Value Models in Psychology.(pp. 207-237). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Judd, W. A., McCombs, B. L., & Dobrovolny, J. L. (1979). Time
management as a learning strategy for individualized instruction. In
H. F. O'Neil, Jr., & C. D. Speilberger (Eds.). [Eggnitive and
Affective LearninggStrategies (pp. 133-175). New York: Academic
Press.

Karwait, N. (1984). Time-on-task reconsidered: Synthesis of research on
time and learning. Educational Leadership, 42(8), 33-35.

Keller, F. S. (1968). "Good-bye, Teacher..." Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 2, 79-89.

Keller, J. M. (1979). Motivational and instructional design: A

theoretical perspective. Journal of Instructional Development, 2(4),
26-34 0

Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. M.
Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design Theories and Models: An
Overview of their Current Status (pp. 383-434). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Asociates, Publishers.

169

Keller, J. M., Goldman, J. A., & Sutterer, J. R. (1978). Locus of
control in relation to academic attitudes and performance in 3

Personalized System of Instruction course. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 29(3), 414-421.

 

Kendall, M. G. (1970). Rank Correlation Methods (4th ed.). London:
Charles Griffin & Company Limited.

Kerlinger, F. N. (1973). Foundations of Behavioral Research (2nd ed.).
NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

Kerlinger, F. N., & Pedhazur, E. J. (1973). Multiple Regression in
Behavioral Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

Kirk, R. E. (1968). Ex erimental Desi n: Procedures for the Behavioral
Sciences. Belmont, CA: Brooks7Cole Publishing Company.
Klein, M. F. (1982). Independent study. In H. E. Mitzel (Ed.),

Enc clopedia of Educational Research (5th ed.) (Vol. 2: pp. 835-844.
New ork: The Free Press.

 

Knox, A. B. (1962). The Audience for Liberal Education. Chicago:
Center for the Study of Liberal Education for Adults.

Knox, A. B. (1976). Helping adults to learn. In R. M. Smith (Ed.),
Adult Learning: Issues and Innovations (Information Series No. 8,
NIU Information Program in Career Education). DeKalb, IL: Northern
Illinois University.

Knox, A. B. (1977). Adult Development and Learning. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Kotler, P. (1980). 'MarketingManagement (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Long, H. B. (1983). Adult Learning: Research and Practice. New York:
Cambridge, The Adult Education COmpany (Available from Follett Pub.,
Chicago).

Luck, D. J., Wales, H. G., Taylor, D. A., & Rubin, R. S. (1982).
Marketing Research (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall,
Inc.

Maddi, S. R. (1980). Personality Theories (4th ed.). Homewood, IL: The
Dorsey Press.

Martin, P. (1985). Training by video: How to shoot yourself in the
foot. Training, 22(4), 39-41.

McClelland, D. C. (1951). Personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.

McCue, J. R. (1982). A procedure for identifying adult learners'

170

expectations for curriculum in a specific continuing education
program (Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1982).

Dissertation Abstracts International, 42(05), 1411A.

McIntosh, D. K. (1981). Effects on performance and satisfacton of
student choice of method of instruction (Doctoral dissertation,

Syracuse University, 1980). Dissertation Abstraccts International,
42(1), 104A.

McKeachie, W. J., & Kulik, J. A. (1975). Effective college teaching.
In F. N. Kerlinger (Ed.), Review of Research in Education (Vol. 3:
pp. 165—209). Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock Publishers, Inc.

McKean, R. B. (1977). Adult learners' pedagogical expectations about
level of formality and type of learning experience (Doctoral
dissertation, Michigan State University, 1977). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 2§(10), 5850A.

Meierhenry, W. C. (1983). Current research in educational media and
technology: A survey. In J. W. Brown & S. N. Brown, (Eds.),
Educational Media Yearbook, 1983 (pp. 101-105). Littleton, CO:
Libraries Unlimited, Inc.

Meyer, M., & Nissen, U. (Eds.). (1979). Effegts and Functions of
Television: Children and Adolescents. New York: K. G. Saur
Publishing, Inc.

Millman, J., Bieger, G. R., Klag, P. A., & Pine, C. K. (1983). Relation
between perseverance and rate of learning: A test of Carroll's model

of school learning. American Educational Research Journal, 29(3),
425-434 0 '

Mitchell, T. R. (1982). Expectancy-value models in organizational
psychology. In N. T. Feather (Ed.), Expectations and Action:
Expectancy-Value Models in Psychology (pp. 293-312). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Mittelstaedt, R., Curtis, W. W., Grossbart, S. L., & Rogers, R. D.
(1975). Psychophysical and evaluative dimensions of cognized
distance in an urban shopping environment. In R. C. Curhan (Ed.),
1974 Combined Proceedings (No. 39: pp. 190-93). Chicago: American
Marketing Assn.

Morstain, B. R., & Smart, J. C. (1977). A motivational typology of
adult learners. Journal of Higher Education, 48(6), 665-679.

Mosteller, F. (1951). Remarks on the method of paired comparisons: III.
A test of significance for paired comparisons when equal standard

deviations and equal correlations are assumed. Psychometrika, 26(2),

Naisbitt, J. (Ed.) (1985). John Naisbitt's Trend Letter, 2(15).
ial Task Force on the Continuing Education Unit. (1979). The

171

 

Continuing Education Unit: Criteria and Guidelines. Washington, DC:
National University Extension Assn.

Nie, N. H., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K., & Bent, D. H.
(1975). SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (2nd ed.).
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Noble, P. (1980). Resource-Based Learning in Post Compulsory Education.
London/New York: Kogan Page/Nichols Publishing Co.

Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Ordovensky, P. (1983, December 25). Educated adults study more.
Lansing State Journal, p. 6F.

Palmer, D. J., & Willson, V. (1982). Prediction of Attributional
consequences in an actual achievement setting. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 2, 334-345.

Penland, P. R. (1977). Individual Self-Planned Learning in America.

Washington, DC: United States Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare.

Postlethwait, S. N., Novak, J., & Murray, H. T. (1971). The
Audio-Tutorial Approach to Learning thropgh Independent Study and
Integrated Experiences. Indianapolis, IN: Burgess Pub. Co.

Rest, S. (1976). Schedules of reinforcement: An attributional analysis.
In J. H. Harvey, W. Ickes, & R. F. Kidd. New Directions in
Attribution Research (Vol. 2: pp. 97-120). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Richards, R. K., & Cohen, R. M. (1981). Why physicians attend
praditional CME programs: Supplement to a CME research report.
Kalamazoo, MI: The Upjohn Company.

Richardson, P. L. (1983). Issues in television-centered instruction for
adults. Journal of Instructional Development, 6(3), 6-13.

Ringis, R. H. (1974). What is an "instructional package?" In W:
Georgiades & D. C. Clark, Models for Individualized Instruction
(pp. 105-110). New York: MSS Information Corporation.

Ritchie, J. R. B. (1974). An exploratory analysis of the nature and

extent of individual differences in perception. Journal of Marketing
Research, 22, 41-49.

Rosenberg, M. J. (1978-79). Advertising, learning, and educational
media. International Journal of Instructional Media, 6(4), 323-327.

Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the Classroom. New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

172

 

Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus
external control of reinforcement. Psycholggical Monographs, 66,
(Whole No. 1).

Rydell, S. T. (1983). Educational materials development and use with
self-directed learners. In J. P. Wilson (Ed.), New Directions for
Continuinngducation (No. 16.), Materials for Teaghing_Adults:
Selection, Development, and Use (pp. 61-67). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.

Salinger, R. D. (1976). Correspondence study. In R. L. Craig (Ed.),
Training and Development Handbook (2nd ed.) (pp. 38/1-38/14). New
York: McCraw-Hill Book Company.

Sanderson, H. W. (1976). Student attitudes and willingness to spend

time in unit mastery learning. Research in the Teaching of English,
26(2), 191-198.

Sarason, I. G. (1979). A person-by-person view of computer-based
instruction. In H. F. O'Neil, Jr., & C. D. Speilberger (Eds.),
gpgnitive and Affective Learning Strategies (pp. 207-211). New York:
Academic Press.

Schein, E. H. (1972). Professional Education. New York: MtGraw-Hill
Book Company.

Schuyler, J. A., & Hilfinger, S. J. (1982, April 16). Three routes to
developing educational courseware. Publishers Week2y,
pp. 34, 36, 38.

Sjogren, D. D., & Knox, A. B. (1965). The influence of speed and prior
knowledge and experience on adult learnipg, Lincoln, NE: University
offiNebraska.

Slavin, R. E. (1984). §6§earch Methods In Education: A Practical Guide.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Sudman, S. (1976). Applied Sampling, New York: Academic Press.

Sudman, S., & Bradburn, N. M. (1982). Asking Questions. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Thurstone, L. L. (1959). The Measurement of Values. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.

Torgerson, W. S. (1958). Theorygand Methods of Scaling, New York: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Tough, A. (1979). The Adult's Learning Projects (2nd Ed.). San Diego,
CA: Learning Concepts, University Associates, Inc.

Tough, A. (1982). Intentional Changes. Chicago, IL: Follett Publishing
Company.

 

173

 

Tull, D. 8., & Albaum, G. S. (1973). Survey Research: A Decisional
Approach. New York: Intext Educational Publishers.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census (1983). 1980 Census
of Population and Housing, Census Tracts: Lansing-East Lansing,
Michigan. Washington, DC: Author.

University of Southern California College of Continuing Education in
Cooperation with UNESCO. (1978). ways and means of strengthening
information and counselling services for adult learners (Report of
the International Symposium, May 22-27, 1977). Los Angelos, CA:
Author.

Walberg, H. J. (1976). Psychology of Learning Environments: Behavioral,
Structural, or Perceptual? In L. Shulman (Ed.), Review of Research
in Education, (Vol. 4: pp. 142-178). Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock
Publishers, Inc.

Waldon, G. D. (1984). Variables related to the intent togparticipate in
continuipgfprofessional education. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Michigan State University.

Walker, D. F. (1976). Toward comprehension of curricular realities. In
L. S. Shulman (Ed.), Review of Research in Education (Vol. 4).
Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock Publishers, Inc.

Ward, T. (1973). Cognitive processes and learning: Reflections on a
comparative study of "cognitive style" (Witkin) in fourteen African
societies. Comparative Education Review, 22(1), 1-10.

Wasserman, P., & Applebaum, E. L. (Eds.). (1982). Learning
Independently (2nd ed.). Detroit, MI: Gale Research Company.

Watkins, B. T. (1983, April 13). Higher education now big business for
big business. The Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. 1, 6.

Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (1981). Springfield, MA: G. & C.
Merriam Company.

Wedemeyer, C. A. (1976). Independent study. In S. E. Goodman (Ed.),

Handbook on Contemporary Education (pp. 578-585). New York: R. R.
Bowker Co.

Wedemeyer, C. A. (1983). Materials for nontraditional study and the
natural learning of adults. In J. P. Wilson (Ed.), New Directions
for ContinuingiEducation (No. 17), Materials for Teaching Adults:
Selection, Development, and Use (pp. 53-60). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.

Weiner, B. (1972). Theories of Motivation from Mechanism to Cognition.
Chicago: Markham Pub. Co.

Weiner, B. (1974). Achievement motivation as conceptualized by an
attribution theorist. In B. Weiner (Ed.), Achievement Motivation and

174

 

 

Attribution Theory (pp. 3-48). Morristown, NJ: General Learning
Press.

Weiner, B. (1976). An attributional approach for educational
psychology. In L. Shulman (Ed.), Review of Research in Education,
(Vol. 4: pp. 179-209). Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock Publishers, Inc.

Weiner, B. (1982). An attributionally based theory of motivation and
emotion: Focus, range, and issues. In N. T. Feather (Ed.),
Expectations and Action: Expectancy-Value Models in Psychology
(pp. 162-204). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers.

Weiner, B. (1985). Human Motivation. NY: Springer-Verlag.

Weiner, B., Frieze, I., Kukla, A., Reed, L., Rest, S., & Rosenbaum,
R. M. (1971). Perceiving the Causes of Success and Failure.
Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.

Weiner, B., Heckhausen, H., Meyer, W., & Cook, R. E. (1972). Causal
ascriptions and achievement motivation: A conceptual analysis of

effort and reanalysis of locus of control. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 22, 239-248.

Weiner, B., Russell, D., & Lerman, D. (1978). Affective consequences of
causal ascriptions. In J. H. Harvey, W. Ickes, & R. F. Kidd. fl
Directions in Attribution Research, (Vol. 2: pp. 59-90). Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Weiner, B., & Sierad, J. (1974). Misattribution for failure and the
enhancement of achievement strivings: A preliminary report. In
B. Weiner (Ed.), Achievement Motivation and Attribution Theory.
Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.

Wilkie, W. L. (1976). How consumers usegproduct information: An
assessment of research in relation to public policy needs (Report
prepared for National Science Foundation). washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office.

Williams, K. C. (1981). Behavioral Aspects of Marketing, London:
William Heinemann, Ltd.

Wittrock, M. C., & Lumsdaine, A. A. (1977). Instructional psychology.
Annual Review of Psychology, 26, 417-459.

Zaltman, G., & Wallendorf, M. (1983). Consumer Behavior: Basic Findings
and Management Implications. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

175