Date of Award
1-1-1985
Document Type
Dissertation
Degree Name
Doctor of Education
Department
Center for the Advancement of Education
Advisor
George M. Barton
Committee Member
Ronald A. Newell
Committee Member
Ross E. Moreton
Keywords
external incentives, facilitation, independent learners, internal motivations, learning philosophy, learning techniques, multiple exposures, personality makeup, self-directed learning, self-directiveness, teaching methods, teaching techniques
Abstract
The purpose of this investigation was to determine if the method based on what is known about the psychological, behavioral, and attitudinal characteristics of the self-directed learner was responsible for facilitating self-direction in engineering and construction personnel of a public electric utility. The sample consisted of 173 participants drawn from a total departmental population of 998 workers. A combination of two-group designs, a post-test only and a pretest post-test known as the Solomon Four Group design was followed.
Participants volunteered or at the request of their supervisors, entered the treatment to take a self-directed, self-paced instructional packet. Participants were then randomly divided into one of two treatment groups. Before participation in the method to increase self-directedness, both of these groups participated in the method. The method involved a process which allowed the treatment participants to emulate the behaviors, to perceive the attitudes, and to learn the personality characteristics attributed to the self-directed learner. Three components combined the method in orientation, self-assessment, and self-instruction of the two treatment groups. One received the pretest and posttest, and the other received only the posttest.
The other participants were randomly selected for placement into the two control groups (n=70, n=63). Both of these groups did not participate in the method. One group received a pretest and posttest, and the other received only the posttest.
Facilitations of self-directiveness was measured by Gulinino's Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale. Before data analysis, all four groups were compared demographically. It was found that the groups were similar on descriptive demographic variables, age, number of years of education, but somewhat dissimilar on nominal demographic variables, race, sex. The homogeneity of variance assumption was checked statistically using an F distribution. The null hypothesis of equal population variance could not be rejected at the 0.01 level. The group were found to be statistically homogeneous.
Data were analyzed by a two-way analysis of variance and an analysis of covariance. The two-way analysis of variance compared the posttest SDLRS scores of the four groups at the 0.01 level of significance. For this analysis, it was concluded that (1) the method for facilitating self-direction in learning did not contribute significantly to variance in posttest SDLRS scores, (2) the pretest did not contribute significantly to variance in posttest SDLRS scores, (3) interaction between experiencing the method and the pretest did not contribute significantly to variance in posttest SDLRS scores. The analysis of the covariance compared the gains of the two pretest-posttest groups. When the 0.01 level of significance was used to test the null hypothesis controlled for the pretest SDLRS scores, it was concluded that the method for facilitating self-direction in learning did not contribute significantly to variance in posttest SDLRS scores after equating both groups of the pretest-controlled variable.
The results of this investigation do not reflect the effectiveness of ineffectiveness of the method under study, rather it reflects more on the principles accepted for self-directed learning. Self-directed learning goes beyond consideration of media, methods, and techniques. It actually enters a domain of an individual's personality makeup, that is, an individual's learning philosophy. The major finding of this investigation was that facilitating self-direction requires one to change those internal motivations necessary for self-direction. It requires more than emulating the skills and acknowledging the attitude of the independent learner. The results suggest that facilitation of self-directed learning takes time and that learners require multiple applications of the process to learn techniques and adapt to the new concepts. Future studies will need to concentrate on the effects of multiple exposures to the self-directed process and increases in self-directiveness. Other studies should explore the effects of using internal versus external incentives in teaching self-directness.