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.