Upload
dangtram
View
212
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
QHAFTgR lY
THB METHOD OF STODY
In this chapter, the author Is mainly concerned
with describing the various steps taken to prepare the
theoretical model and collecting evidences in the
form of responses from the selected samples of teachers
of Social Studies from the four Southern States and of
the experts from all over the country,
Praparatlon nf Thflnrfltinal Mndal
Before describing the various steps taken in
the preparation of the theoretical model, it seems in
fitness of the things to state as to what exactly is
meant by a theoretical model and why it is needed.
Without going into technicalities, a theoretical model,
in simple words, can be described as a framework
developed on the basis of thinking of top experts
in the field. In other words, it is the criteria or
standard frame of reference with which existing
conditions can be compared and meaningful conclusions
drawn or from which a series of predictions can be
61
63
made for testing. The investigator needed to prepare
a model of this type for making some predictions on
the understanding and tiiplementation of Social Studies
programme by teachers in the four Southern States.
The factors that constituted the theoretical
model in this study, were discussed broadly ih the
second chapter under the heading curriculum planning.
They were:
i) Statement of the objectives;
ii) Selection of the related content;
iii) Organisation of learning experiences;
iv) Choice of proper evaluation devices.
D e r i v i n g Mfllnr Qhieftt lvas nf Snf.1a1 Shndlas
A rapid screening of all available books,
pamphlets, dissertations and other sources at the
Regional College of Education and the University
Library, Mysore was done. This screening helped to
locate often-quoted authors and expert sources in
the field. Given below is the list of such expert
sources:
ea
Author Title Publishers
I. Wesley & Wronski
II, M,P. Moffatt
Teaching Social Studies in High Schools, 2nd Edn.
Social Studies Instruction, 3rd Bdn.
Ill, Departaaent of Plan & Courses of Study: Methods, Curri- Demonstration Multi-culum & Te£t' purpose Schools, Books, Mew Delhi
IV, Wesley
V, D.E.P.S,E,
VI, James Hemming.
VII. Bining and Bining.
Teaching Social Studies in High Schools, 3rd Ed.
Evaluation in Social Studies.
The Teaching of Social Studies in Secondary Schools.
Teaching the Social Studies in Secondary Schools, 3rd Edition
D.C. Heath & Co., Boston, 1968,
Prent ice-Hall, Inc, Englewood Cliff, 1963.
National Council of Educational Research and Training, 1964,
D.C. Heath & Co., 1950.
National Council of Educational Research and Training, I960,
Longmans, London, 1959,
McGraw-Hills,195a
(See Appendix A)
Each of the above mentioned sources, then, was
minutely studied and exhaustive lists of the objectives
prepared (See Appendix A). These lists were again examined,
compared and analysed and thus a list of most common
objectives was made. It should be mentioned here that
although the style and manner of stating objectives were
different in these sources and a lot of overlapping of words
and phrases was there, a good deal of uniformity in ideas
7a
was found.
PbUowing is the composite list of the
objectives:
1. To help students understand their social
environment.
2. To educate the future citizens of demo
cratic society.
3. To develop among the trainees an under
standing of the interaction and inter
dependence of nations.
4. To help students interpret maps, globes,
charts and graphic materials.
5. To develop patriotism towards one's
country.
$, To enable the students understand the
reciprocal relationship between the
individual and society.
$, To help students understand the major
developments in the growth of civilization.
8. To develop in the students skill in
critical thinking.
iWW^Ii!WWMW^fT]TTT^^
71
9. To provide knowledge of the culture and
achievements of one's community, state,
nation and the vorld»
10, To cultivate the skill of conducting
interviews and socio-economic survey.
Deriving Gnmrnon ObJefttJves of Soc ia l S tud i e s
frnm hhe S y l l a h i r>f hha Snnt.hflrn Sj-.at.fts;
The Directors of Public Instruction of the
four Southern States, namely, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala,
Madras and l^sore were requested to send copies of
the current syllabi in Social Studies. The
following publications (syllabuses) wfere received:
Publishers Title Year of Publi-cation
1. Director of Public Instru- The AlK3toa 1966 ction, Andhra Pradesh, Pradesh Hyderabad. Gazette,
2. Education Department, Syllabi for Kerala, Trivandrum, Secondary 1962
Schools.
3. Grovernment of Madras, The Port 1965 Madras St.George
Gazette
4. Director of Public Higher Secon-Jnstruction in Mysore, dary Curri- 1964 Bangalore. culum.
72
Bach of these four syllabi was carefully
studied and lists of stated objectives prepared, (see
Appendix B), These four lists were again scrutinised
and a list of common objectives was made. Like the
previous/the objectives as stated in the curricula of
the Southern States showed a high degree of uniformity
though the general pattern of the statement of the
objectives and emphasis on a particular set of
objectives varied from syllabus to syllabus.
The following is the composite list of
objectives:
1, To help pupils to understand interaction
between Man and his environment « social
and physical,
2, To help pupils to become effective
citizens of democracy,
3, To help pupils understand and appreciate
interdependence of nations,
4, To enable the students to interpret maps,
models, charts, tables etc,
5, To enable the students to apply principles
and facts in the solution of day to day
problems.
73
6, To inculcate among the students a senee of
belonging to a family, community, state,
country and the world.
7. To understand and appreciate one's cultural
heritage.
The present state of affairs in the Southern
region regarding objectives is as follows:
The objectives as stated in the syllabus of
Andhra Pradesh are quite comprehensive and broad based.
In the syllabus of Kerala State, on the other hand, the
objectives have been translated into specific expected
outcomes. As many as thirty two educational outcomes of
learning Social Studies have been listed. The syllabus
has been described as"the means of achieving those ends",
i.e,, the educational outcomes of learning Social
Studies, In the Mysore State syllabus, only three
objectives have been given and arte lumped together
in the following manner:
"The aim of Social Studies is to help the pupil to become an enlightened citizen.,... Social Studies should help the pupil develop those skills which are necessary for effective participation in group and national life. They should also develop these attitudes which are basic to successful living in a democracy? 1
• •Higher Secondary Curriculum: Department of Public Instruction, Mysore, 1964,
74
In the State of Madras, Social Studies is not
taught as an integrated course at the high school stage.
Hovever, many of the objectives of teaching. History,
Geography and Civics which the syllabus of the State
seeks to accomplish, are very much like the objectives
stated in the two composite lists. Bbr example,
objectives No. 2, 6 and 4 (See Appendix B) correspond
almost exactly to objectives Nos. 3, 1 and 7 respectively
in the common list described above.
InYefiti1gnt.1oni
On comparing the two composite lists, a good
deal of agreement was found in the statement of
objectives of teaching Social Studies. Having verified
this, the selection of three major objectives which
were found common in the syllabi of the four States,
was made. They were as follows:
1. To help the students understand inter
action between Man and his environment.
2. To help pupils to become effective
citizens of democracy.
3. To develop international understanding
among pupils.
75
A n a l y s i n g nhjef»••^•^ves In Termg n f St-Udant Bahflvlmir^
Ral a had Gnnh A n t , T-aarnlng T7.YpflT»lQn(»ag and Kval Tiat-trin
The objectives of Social Studies as stated
above are quite comprehensive. In order to attain them
in a practical way, they must be translated from the
broad ideals or broad sets of goals to specific ones.
Every broad objective needs to be understood analyti
cally in terms of student behaviour, i.e., in terms of
what the student understands, does or feels. This is
important for two reasons:
i) to permit effective planning
ii) to give a sound basis for evaluation
In planning the learning situation effectively,
first pre-requisite is to establish concrete goals for
a particular subject, unit or lesson. Ualess these
objectives can be made specific, they tend to be mere
decorations at the beginning of the written course of
study. They do not make any practical difference as
far as planning or carrying out class activities are
concerned. If goals are stated in terms of specific
outcomes of information, understandings, skills,
interests, attitudes, appreciations, values, and habits,
as a part of the task of planning, they become much
more functional. The task of selection and organisation
of the content matter from the point of view of these
78
specific outcomes and the formulation of appropriate
learning situations and activities for the pupils oJt&y
much more clear cut than it is in the case of obje
ctives stated in a broad and general way.
Another advantage of analysing the
objectives in terms of specific outcomes is that
they provide a sound basis for evaluation. The terms
'values', 'goals', or 'outcomes' are often synonymous
in practice. However, they are sometimes somewhat
differentiated in the sense that the goals or values
are those formulated as guides for planning at the
start of the learning process, whereas 'outcomes' is
the term used when values are worded in terms of what
should "come out" as a result of the learning process,
It is important, therefore, to be interested, as
teachers, in the outcomes of a given educational
experience or unit and in devising means Xor testing
to determine if the student has achieved them.
Seraanlng the Lltftyfltiira i
The literature on the analysis of the
objectives of Social Studies was thoroughly screened.
The following literature provided the basis for the
analysis of the three objectives of Social Studies
under study:
77
I. Social Studies:
A draft syllabus
for Classes I to XI.
II, Plan and Courses of
Study.
III. Resource Units in
^cial Studies.
Department of Curri
culum, Methods and
Text-books,
N.C.E.R.T., 1965
Demonstration Multi-'
purpose Schools,
Regional Coibleges of
Education, N.C.E.R.T.
Department of Extension
Services, Teachers'
College, Mysore.
WHth the help of the above sources, the three
major objectives were analysed in terms of expected
outcomes, broad topics, learning experiences and
evaluation devices. The auialysls of expected outcomes
was related to three major areas: knowledi e skills and
attitudes. The same type of links were maintained in
selecting broad topics, in developing learning
experiences and in choosing evaluation devices. This
first draft of the model contained a laLrge number of
items on all the four divisions of curriculum discussed
in Chapter II. Objectives I, II and III were analysed
in terms of expected outccKaes, broad topics, learning
experiences and evsuLuation devices. Exhaustive lists
of items were pooled under each one of these factors.
The items were so arranged that meaningful correspondanc©
73
among the various factors was maintaiaed.
This was a tentative draft prepared by the
sole efforts of the investigator. It had the weakness
of being difficult, vague and subjective. In order to
make the model more reliable, concrete and acceptable
to the workers in the field,some scholars of curri
culum and evaluation and experts in the field of Social
Studies were requested to help modify the analysis.
The names of these experts are as follows:
> 1, Shrl A, Seshiengar, Retired Professor
of Education and Social Studies, Mysore.
2. Shrl Shahkaranarayana, Lecturer,
Teachers• College, Mysore.
3. Dr. Seetharamiah, Reader in Education,
University of Mysore, 'Manasa Gangothri»,
Mysore.
4. Shri P.R. Nayar, Reader in Education,
i Regional College of Education, Mysore.
5. Dr. Ivan Hostetler, U.S.A.I.D., Consultant,
Regional College of Education, Mysore.
6. Dr. Praful H. Dave, Reader in Education,
Regional College of Education, Mysore.
At the first meeting with the above stated
experts, the tentative draft of the theoretical model
73
was presented and explained by the author. Several
questions of general nature relating to 'why', 'what'
and 'how' of various items were raised. In the following
two meetings each and every item relating to different
factors was critically examined by the group. As a result
of this, several alterations by way of changing words,
phrases, structures, patterns and presentation of ideas
were made. Quite a number of eliminations and additions
were also made. It must be admitted that the efforts of
these experts really helped to improve the theoretical
model to % great extent. The final d«aft of the model
had the different number of items under different
factors for the Objectives I, II and III. The final
number of the items under each factor was as follows:
TABLE 2
OBJECTIVE-WISE FINAL NDMBSR OP IT3MS*
UNDER DIFFERENT FACTORS
4Objectives
I
II
III
F Expected outcomes
12
20
16
A C T 0 Broad Learning topics experiences
14
17
18
40
37
37
R S Evaluation devices
19
18
19
*(See Appendix G for d e t a i l s )
80
After having analysed the major objectives
in a form of curriculum plan, the Conuaittee still felt
that the model represented the thinking of a small group
of experts and it needed some more evidence for further
verification. It was most pertinent that the model itself
was again verified by the experts on national level. In
doing so the assumption of theoretical model being the
thinking of experts would not just remain an ad-hoc
assumption but turn into a supported one. If the data
thus obtained were compared with the reactions from the
teacher gjroup, it would certainly give a sound basis for
making assertions about the teacher's understanding of
the programme of Social Studies and the extent to which
they are practicing it in actual teaching.
QfiVQlnpIng a Ratlns SCftlft:
Incidentally, in the previous meetings, some
experts raised the question as to how the reactions of
experts and teachers on the theoretical model were going
to be collected. A meeting of the same experts was
arranged to discuss the format of the rating scale.
Several suggestions from different experts came up.
Below are mentioned some of those suggestions:
i) Open-end questionnaire
ii) yes or no type questionnaire
81
iii) rating scale In which responses in
terms of agreement/disagreement,
approval/disapproval, etc., are sought
on a three-point scale
The pros and cons of all these means were
extensively discussed. It was agreed that open-end
questionnaire would not in any way serve our purpose
of assessing the understanding of teachers because
usually such questionnaires are used for collecting
factual information rather than opinionnated judgment.
In addition to this, it is always extremely difficult
to treat data obtained through such measurement
qualitatively or quantitatively. Qualitative judgments
can best be obtained by rating scales. It was obvious
that since the author was interested in collecting
qualitative judgements from experts and teachers,
neither the open-end questionnaire nor the 'yes or no'
type scale could be employed with success. Besides,
no meaningful comparison of the responses obtained
through both these tools could be made with that of
theoretical model. This discussion resulted in a useful
conclusion, i.e., why not utilise the theoretical model
for developing a rating scale.
The next question discussed was, what kind
of rating scale would be appropriate. This raised
several fundamental questions pertaining to the central
theme of the study. How can one measure teachers'
82 understanding of the programme of Social Studies? What
is meant by understanding in terms of measurement? In
other words, when can it be said that teachers understand
the theoretical modelC To be more specific, what kind of
data, scores, statistics or, information can give an
indication of the same. In what form should this data
or information be obtained? The same type of questions
were raised about the implementation aspect of the
programme. For example, what is meant by practice in
coacxrete terms for this study? In brief, it was the
question of defining these terms related to the hypothe
tical statement given in the third chapter. All the above
stated questions were considered for developing the rating
scale. A sample format was prepared by the Committee and
the author was asked to develop the full scale on the
same line.
The Scale
The essexice of the thinking of the Committee for
the format was as follows:
By teacher's understanding was meant how far they
understood the theoretical model. To put in different words,
whether they agreed with the thinking of experts as pre
sented in the frameworl. An agreement or disagreement on
any statement in the framework might throw light on the
degree of understanding of the teacher since it was assumed
that the theoretical model, by and large, was the ideal
83
representation of thinking in the field. The model consisted
of statements under the four factors that comprised it*
These statements had to be scaled to ascertain the degree
of differences of reactions on some qualitative criteria.
Two points in making the scale were important. One, the
selection of (jualitative criteria and second, the points
on that qualitative continuum. The recommendations of
the Committee on criteria and the assignment of the
points on the continuum for each factor were as follows;
1. Expected Outcomes
2. Broad Topics
3. Learning Experiences
4. Evaluation Devices
Criteria Points on the continuum
Desirability
Suitability
Desirability
Practicability
Provided or not
Desirability
Practicability
Used or not
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
C
C
c
c
c
c
c
G
Thus the theoretical model was converted into
rating scale by introducing in it the criteria and the
points on the continuum in the manner described above*
(See Appendix C).
84
BxplanatJon nf the, Rat.ing Snalft
This tool of measurement enabled the Investi
gator to get answers from the selected samples of experts
and teachers (refer discussion on samples below) to the
questions raised previously, i.e., what is meant by
understanding and implementation of Social Studies pro
gramme in high schools of Southern Region and how best
these factors can be measured. Ratings on the criteria of
desirability, suitability and practicability gave indica
tion of the understanding whereas that of used or not/
provided or not threw light on the extent to which it was
implemented. These ratings were sought in terms of
A, B, and C meaning thereby high, moderate and low agreement
with the model respectively. Criteria A meant high, B meant
moderate and C meant low approval of a given statement in
the model. Thus, high, moderate and low degree of under
standing in operational terms, meant high, moderate and
low number of times individuals encircling A, B and C
respectively. Similarly, on the criteria of used or not/
provided or not, high, moderate and low number of encircling
A, B and C, in turn, implied high, moderate and low levels
of implementation of the programme of Social Studies.
Method of Selecting Samples
It is not feasible for any kind of research to
include the whole large population in the study. In other
words, it is extremely difficult to seek reactions from
85
all the experts all over the oountry. In fact, It Is not
necessary since the same job can be done by a well selected
representative sample. To the extent possible, an attempt
was made to select good representative samples of Social
Studies teachers in the Southern Region and the experts
all over the country. It must be readily admitted here
that the investigator faced a lot of difficulty in follow
ing a strictly theoretical sampling technique.
Sample of Experts
It was a difficult job to get a representative
sample of experts in the field of Social Studies. The
author contulted various reports of seminars, workshops,
conferences etc. held at national and state levels on
various themes of Social Studies programme and noted down
the names and addresses of the directors, resource persons
and the participants. A list of Social Studies experts was
obtained from the Department of Field Services of the
National Council of Educational Research and Training,
New Delhi. The list of research studies done in the
field of education, published by N.C.B.R.T., enabled the
author to collect the names of some experts who had conducted
research in Social Studies at M.Ed,, level. In other words,
the names of those persons who had to their credit, some
contribution in the field of Social Studies, were collected
by different ways. Thus, a list of two hundred experts of
Social Studies was prepared.
86
This list included all possible names of experts
in the field of Social Studies as found in the sources
mentioned above. Although it is readily admitted that this
might not be an exhaustive list of all the experts in India,
it is not an exaggeration to say that it went quite beyond
a sample that is randomly selected. Since the number in
this list was only 200, it was decided to include all the
experts in the study rather than selecting a small represen
tative sample from it. In other words, the entire faculty
of available experts constituted the experts * sample for
this study. The analysis of the list showed the following
categories of experts*
1. Teacher Educators,
2. Text-book Writers.
3. Subject Inspectors.
4. Research Workers.
5. Members of Syllabus Committees.
6. Research and Evaluation Officers, (in the Department of Curriculum and Evaluation, N.C.E.R.T., New Delhi)
Saiapla of Igagtors
Selecting representative samples of teachers of
Social Studies from four Southern States was really a huge
task. A representative sample of this kind has to be a st-
rlt ified random sample. In other words, it must have a good
representation of districts, of schools and of all categories
of teachers. In this selection, seveaal assumptions were
made which need to be clarified here. First, it was assumed
87
that if the careful random selection of the districts was
made, it might not only represent the regional scatterings
of the 3tate, but also take care of the urban and rural
representation of teachers. Secondly, since there was no
easy way of ascertaining the number of more experienced
and less experienced and male and female teachers teaching
Social Studies, it was assumed that a careful random
selection of schools would meet the demands of the
representative sample, Garrett and Woodworth observe
that • ••
"a representative sample is one in which the distribution of scores in the sample closely parallels that of the population. Experience has shown that if one is asked to get representative samples from a population, he will, for various reasons, often draw samples which exhibit constant biases of one sort or another. The most trustworthy way of securing representativeness, therefore, is to make sure that the sampling is random",2
fbr this purpose, some device was to be utilised because,
in the words of Walker and Lev.••
"it is comt)letely impossible for a person to pick a book at 'at random* from a book case or even to pluck a blade of grass *at random' if he looks at it".3
If the exact population is known, each individual can be
S* Henry S, Garrett & R,S, Woodworth, Statistics in Psychology and Education, Allied Pacific Private Ltd,, 1961, p,203.
3, Walker and Lev, Statistical Inference, Holt, Rlnehart and Winston, Inc, 1953, p,10.
88
given a number and selected by well shaken-up slips drawn
out from a container by a blind-folded person. This type
of process is not subject toithe whims of the experimen
ter. The sample obtained by this way can be taken as a
representative one as every person in the population has
the same chance of being chosen for the sample. This is
an extremely laborious Job. In order to avoid this
clumsy and time consuming procedure, the author made use
of the scientifically prepared random selection tables
recommended by various statisticians. The procedure
described below was also influenced by considerations such
as magnitude of work, finance, time at the disposal of the
author and the quantity of work to be done at M.Sd., level,
A standard and scientific procedure of selecting
random sample has just been described. The reasons given
in the preceeding lines and some other practical difficul
ties hampered the investigator's efforts to select a truly
representative sample of Social Studies teachers from the
Southern Region. The author has to admit that from the
strict technical view point the sample selected for the
study cannot be called truly a random sample and conse
quently, a real representative one. So the conclusions
derived from this data have to be interpreted cautiously.
The procedure followed for collecting data is <tescribed
below:
Though good offices of the Director of Public
89
Instruction of the respective States, the lists of school
districts were obtained. The number of districts in the
States of Andhra, Kerala, Madras and Mysore is 20, 20, 11
and 19 respectively. A decision was taken to include 1/2 of
the number of districts from each state. This arbitrary
decision yas taken in view of the difficulties mentioned in
the preeeeding paragraph. The districts in each State were
alphabetically arranged and serial numbers were given. A
simple procedure for random selection was followed. The
list of random selection numbers given by Walker and Lev
in their book "Statistical Inference" was used to select
samples, A row or a column in a table was selected by
flipping a coin. Then arbitrarily a number of row or column
was selected and followed horizantly or vertically upto the
end. For exsuaple, number 5 was chosen for a column. That
was followed till the end of that particular table. Since
the serial numbers in a row or column were confined to
only two digits, sometimes first two digits or last two
digits or middle digits were followed for the selection.
To be specific, if digit 18 appeared first, district with
18 serial number was selected. Different columns or rows
were followed until the 1/2 of the districts were chosen.
The collection of data was done more or less on a personal,
basis. The contacts with the old students of the author,
headmasters, teachers, inspectors and others were made.
The rating scales were sent to these friends who were
requested to approach the Social Studies teachers in the
selected districts. The rating scales to some schools were
90
sent directly where such contacts were not possible but the
•anies of the schools were known. On average not more than
three teachers in a school were asked to fill out the scales.
In general, extensive scattering of samples was perferred
rather than intensive one. In other words, whenever possi
ble, more responses from different schools rather than
from the same school were preferred. Such situations were
arisen when there was only one teacher in a school or there
was no teacher for some odd reasons. In special situations
like these the concerned school was requested to pass on
the scales to the other schools in the area. About 200 rating
scales were sent to experts in the different States of India
and about 800 to teachers of Social Studies in the four
Southern States (two hundred in each of the States of
Andhra, Kerala, Madras and Mysore). The rating scales were
despatched in the first two weeks of October, 1966. The
analysis of the data is discussed in the next Chapter.