INFORMATION TO USERS

INFORMATION TO USERS

INFORMATION TO USERS

This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted.

The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.

1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages.

This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find

a

good image of the page in the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in

"sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.

4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from

"photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced.

5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received.

University Microfilms International

300 North Zeeb Road

Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 USA

St. John's Road, Tyler's Green

High Wycombe, Bucks, England HP10 8HR

77-11,443

GILLESPIE, Alice Jane Martling, 1925-

CONSTRUCTION OF COGNITIVE MAPS IN

SELECTED EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS.

The University of Arizona, Ph.D., 1976

Education, social sciences

Xerox University Microfilms,

Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106

© 1976

ALICE JANE MARTLING GILLESPIE

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

CONSTRUCTION OF COGNITIVE MAPS IN

SELECTED EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS by

Alice Jane Martling Gillespie

A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

WITH A MAJOR IN FOUNDATIONS OF EDUCATION

In the Graduate College

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

Copyright 1976 Alice Jane Martling Gillespie

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

GRADUATE COLLEGE

I hereby recommend that this dissertation prepared under my direction by

Alice Jane Martling Gillespie

entitled

Construction of Cognitive Maps in Selected

Educational Settings

be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the degree of

Doctor Philosophy

Dissertation Director Date

As members of the Final Examination Committee, we certify that we have read this dissertation and agree that it may be presented for final defense.

16

Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent on the candidate's adequate performance and defense thereof at the final oral examination.

STATEMENT BY AUTHOR

This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfill­ ment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of

Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.

Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quota­ tion from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the copyright holder.

SIGNED:

7

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to express my sincere appreciation to my advisor and dissertation director, Dr. Herbert B. Wilson, for his advice, guidance, and support. My deep appreciation is also extended to the other members of my dissertation committee, Dr. John H. Chilcott, Dr. Macario Saldate, Dr. Alan B. Kite, and Dr. James E.

Officer, for their guidance and encouragement.

Special appreciation is extended to Mrs. Rita Mikula for her care and concern while typing this dissertation.

I wish also to express my profound gratitude and love to my daughters, Regan and Amy, and to my mother, Mrs. Merrifield

Graham Martling, for their encouragement, faith, and patience. iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page vii LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS xi xii ABSTRACT

1. INTRODUCTION 1

Statement of the Problem

Significance of the Study .

Theoretical Framework

Hypotheses

Assumptions Underlying the Problem

6

7

14

22

... 23

Limitations of the Study 25

Definitions of Terms Employed in This Study .... 26

Summary 32

2. REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE 34

43

44

44

Literature on Cultural Perceptions

Literature on Crosscultural Studies

Literature on Theoretical Framework

Literature Concerned With Statistical and

Methodological Procedures in This Study

Summary

3. RESEARCH PROCEDURES

Selection and Design of the Instruments

Selection of the Populations Explored in

This Study

A Model for Developing, Conducting, and

Reporting the Study

The Administration of the Instruments

Treatment of the Data

Summary

61

64

67

72

53

54

55

55

59 iv

V

TABLE OF CONTENTS—Continued

4. PRESENTATION OF THE DATA

Homogeneity

Presentation of Statistically Significant

Independent Variables Within Cultures

Significant Differences of Perception by

Categories Within the Groups in the Rokeach

Dogmatism Scale E

Significant Differences in Perception by

Categories Within the Groups in the Cultural

Literacy Inventory

Presentation of Significant Crosscultural

Evidences of Hetero- and Homogeneity

Presentation of Significant Crosscultural

Differences on Independent Variables and

Their Rotation

Imposition of Own Values

Residential Mobility

Analysis of Crosscultural Differences by Mean

Categorical and Total Scores Extant in the

Three Populations on the Rokeach Dogmatism

Scale

The Cultural Literacy Inventory as Analyzed by Categories, or Primary Message Systems,

Between Groups

Universals, Alternatives and Specialties as

Perceived Within and Between Groups

Assessment of Individual Case Study

Testing of the Hypotheses

Hypothesis 1

Hypothesis 2

Hypothesis 3

Hypothesis 4

Hypothesis 5

Hypothesis 6

Hypothesis 7

Summary

5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction

Summary of the Study

Conclusions

Page

74

75

77

81

84

85

88

90

95

117

129

134

141

141

143

144

144

145

146

146

147

149

149

149

155

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS—Continued

Recommendations

Recommendations for Further Research

Recommendations for the Professional

Education Enterprise

APPENDIX A: CULTURAL LITERACY INVENTORY AND

PERSONAL QUESTIONNAIRE

APPENDIX B: MODAL RESPONSES BY ITEM TO THE

CULTURAL LITERACY INVENTORY BY GROUP,

BY SEX, WITH PERCENTAGES

APPENDIX C: MODAL RESPONSES BY ITEM TO THE

CULTURAL LITERACY INVENTORY BY

ETHNICITY, WITH PERCENTAGES

LIST OF REFERENCES

Page

161

161

162

167

181

184

187

LIST OF TABLES

Table

1. Ethnic Representation by Percent of Population and Cultural Group

2. Sex of Respondents by Percent of Population and

Cultural Group

3. Percentage of Total Possible Variables and Their

Utilization in Within-Group Analysis

4. Percentages of Statistically Significant

Differences Between Means of Variables

Explored Within Groups

5. Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E Total Scores Rotated by Socioeconomic Status Within Groups

6. Percentages of Statistically Significant

Differences Between Means of Variables

Explored Crossculturally .

7. Rotation of Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E Total

Scores by Socioeconomic Status Across

Cultures

8. Rotation of Cultural Literacy Inventory Total

Scores by Socioeconomic Status Across

Cultures

9. Rotation of Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E Total

Scores by Imposition of Values Between

Cultures

10. Rotation of Cultural Literacy Inventory Total

Scores by Imposition of Values Between

Cultures

11. Rotation of Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E Total

Scores by Residential Mobility Between

Cultures vii

Page

60

60

76

76

78

87

89

90

91

94

96

viii

LIST OF TABLES—Continued

Table

12. Rotation of Cultural Literacy Inventory Total

Scores by Residential Mobility Between

Groups

13. Crosscultural Comparison of Residential Mobility by Ethnicity and Sex

14. Crosscultural Comparison of Socioeconomic Status by Ethnicity and Sex

15. Crosscultural Comparison of Significant Differences in Imposition of Own Values by Ethnicity and

Sex

16. Significant Residential Mobility Scores Rotated by Imposition of Values by Sex Between

Groups

17.. Significant Residential Mobility Scores Rotated by Socioeconomic Status by Sex Between

Groups

18. Significant Imposition of Values Scores Rotated by Socioeconomic Status by Sex Between

Groups

19. Significant Differences in Category I: Flexibility of Belief and Disbelief Systems—Rokeach

Dogmatism Scale E, Rotated Between Groups by

Sex and by Ethnicity

20. Significant Differences in Category II: Aloneness,

Isolation, and Helplessness of Man—Rokeach

Dogmatism Scale E, Rotated Between Groups by

Sex and by Ethnicity

21. Significant Differences in Category III:

Uncertainty of Future, Urgency, and Reiteration of Ideas--Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E, Rotated

Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

22. Significant Differences in Category IV: Security of Self-image--Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E,

Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by

Ethnicity

Page

97

99

101

103

103

104

105

107

108

109

110

ix

LIST OF TABLES—Continued

Table

23. Significant Differences in Category V:

Authoritarianism and Cause Identification—

Rokeach Scale E, Rotated Between Groups by

Sex and by Ethnicity

24. Significant Differences in Category VI:

Intolerance—Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E,

Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by

Ethnicity

Page

Ill

112

25. Significant Differences in Category VII:

Ability to Change Beliefs—Rokeach Dogmatism

Scale E, Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

26. Significant Differences in Category VIII:

Value Rigidity Over Time—Rokeach Dogmatism

Scale E, Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

114

30. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy

Inventory Category III: Subsistence,

Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by '

Ethnicity

115

27. Significant Differences in Total Scores, Rokeach

Dogmatism Scale E, Rotated Between Groups by

Sex and by Ethnicity

28. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy

Inventory Category I: Interaction, Rotated

Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

116

119

29. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy

Inventory Category II: Association, Rotated

Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity ..... 121

121

31. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy

Inventory Category IV: Bisexuality, Rotated

Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

32. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy

Inventory Category V: Territoriality,

Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by

Ethnicity

123

123

X

LIST OF TABLES—Continued

Table

33. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy

Inventory Category VI: Temporality, Rotated

Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

34. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy

Inventory Category VII: Learning, Rotated

Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

35. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy

Inventory Category VIII: Play, Rotated

Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

36. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy

Inventory Category IX: Defense, Rotated

Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

37. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy

Inventory Category X: Exploitation, Rotated

Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

38. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy

Inventory Total Scores Rotated Between

Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

39. Universals Within the Cultural Literacy

Inventory as Perceived in Common by All

Three Groups

40. Own Culture Perceived Universals, by Group, by Category, and by Percent

41. Alternatives as Perceived Between Groups as

Determined by Modal Responses to the

Cultural Literacy Inventory

' 42. Specialties as Perceived by Sex by Respondents as Determined by Modal Responses to the

Cultural Literacy Inventory

43. Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E Group Means for

Comparison With Individual Case Study

Findings by Category and Total Scores

44. Cultural Literacy Inventory Group Means for

Comparison With Individual Case Study

Findings by Category and Total Scores

Page

125

129

131

133

125

127

127

128

135

136

138

139

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure

1. Behavior Categories Observed

2. Routes and Levels of Abstraction in Culture and Personality Terminology

3. A Syncretic Model for Acculturation

4. Model for Structuring Significance of Modal

Responses by Variables in Construction of Cognitive Maps in Selected Educational

Settings

Page

20

21

49

62 xi

ABSTRACT

The development of theoretical constructs underlying for­ mulation and assessment of statistically significant holistic cognitive maps was the major research problem of this study.

Three selected populations of 50 each, all within the educational milieu, comprised the sample of 150 subjects:

Group A, 50 graduate and undergraduate students in the

College of Education, University of Arizona; Group B, 50 ethnical­ ly mixed urban high school students; and Group C, 50 public high school students on an American Indian reservation.

The theoretical framework focused on a syncretic and cross disciplinary approach to construction of holistic cognitive maps. Quantification and categorization of data to permit con­ struction of cognitive maps was ancillary to the major premise of this study. tic crosscultural identification of modal cognitive maps, measur­ status, by sex, by residential mobility, and by educational level where applicable may be, in whole or in part, statistically xii

xiii significant and serve as benchline data for predicting individual monalities and differences in cognitive maps are both measurable similarities in modal cognitive maps would prove amenable to the culture or subculture is (or perceives itself to be) removed from the dominant culture, the greater the differences will be statistically.

Each population group was analyzed by sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, residential mobility, and imposition of own values on others. Group A was further analyzed for educational level.

The following data collection instruments were employed:

Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E, Cultural Literacy Inventory, and Per­ sonal Questionnaire. Statistical procedures utilized in analysis of data were modal item scoring and non-directional Student's t. internally homogeneous, followed by Group C (Reservation).

A

(University) and Group B (Urban) were closest in is 94% American Indian and the most remote geographically, was also furthest removed from the dominant culture statistically in versals, alternatives, and specialties as perceived by the three

xiv groupc were assessed on the Cultural Literacy Inventory. Group A

(University) perceived the greatest number of universals operant in all groups followed by Group B (Urban). Group A also per­

Group C (Reservation) perceived the largest number of specialties with males perceiving twice the number females did within group. individual application of ameliorative strategies in the class­ cognitive maps in educational settings were supported.

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

For over 30 years anthropologists,-psychologists, and edu­ cators have shared concern over developing a methodological framework for comparing and analyzing cultural or subcultural differences and commonalities. Most of the research has been particularized by the disciplinary interests or orientations of the investigators. Little has been attempted in terms of a holis­ tic, or overall approach to any specific culture or subculture as it is perceived by the persons belonging within it.

Any person living within a culture or subculture has built up his own set of beliefs, attitudes, values, manipulative techniques, and behavioral expectations to enable him to function within his world. It is the combination of affective and cogni­ tive perceptions which constitute ethos, or world view, for the individual. Such individual perceptions can be classified as cognitive maps of culture.

As each individual perceives his own culture in this fash­ ion, so also does the group perceive its own culture in terms of beliefs, values, attitudes, manipulative techniques and behavior­ al expectations. The group modal perception, may be termed an holistic or overall cognitive map for its culture or subculture.

The purpose of this research was to construct holistic or comprehensive cognitive maps of three selected cultural groups, incorporating perceptions in both the affective and cognitive do­

A

part of the problem was to employ these holistic cog­ nitive maps to compare and analyze group perceptions in differing cultural settings within the educational framework.

Two groups of high school students were analyzed in com­ parison with a College of Education population at The University of Arizona. Each group was analyzed in terms of how own culture was perceived by the group itself. Own culture perceptions for each group were considered to be modal responses to items in in­ struments administered to all three populations. The resultant data were collated and holistic cognitive maps were developed for cognitive maps were processed for statistically significant fac­ tors in an attempt to provide replicable and empirical data.

The discovery of commonalities and differences in group perceptions of own culture, or group ethos, provided an overarch­ ing set of questions for this study. Was the perception of own culture distinctive for the student who identified himself as ethnically different from his group? What was the modal percep­ tion for the population of his fellow students? How and where did these perceptions differ from the mainstream counterpart?

Where and how were they similar to'mainstream perceptions of own

3 culture? Could such differences and similarities be identified, measured, and analyzed on an empirical and replicable basis?

Because cultures or subcultures may differ in how they perceive their own cultures, it is important to be able to iden­ tify and categorize areas in which populations do or do not hold like attitudes, values., beliefs, or behavioral expectations.

Areas in which statistically significant differences occur in perception of own culture between groups may delineate causes for communications breakdowns. Areas in which commonalities of per­ ception occur, or categories which are perceived as offering mu­ tually predictable behavior within and between groups may provide a foundation for better rapport. Such mutually predictable be­ havior perceived among different cultural groups may also enhance the communications process which is essential to learning. A recognition of the discontinuities between cultural groups may form the basis upon which to develop strategies designed to ame­ liorate problems in crosscultural communication.

Inferences concerning the cognitive and affective domains have been drawn from subject responses to two instruments. The

Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E was employed to measure beliefs, atti­ consistent evaluative framework for own-culture perceptions with­ in and between the groups studied. A third instrument, a Person­ al Questionnaire (Appendix A), was also administered to all subjects to provide background demographic and socioeconomic data.

4

A normative educator population was randomly selected without replacement from College of Education students attending

The University of Arizona. This group consisted of both graduate and undergraduate participants. Age ranged from 19 to 55 for this population. Four ethnic groups were represented: Anglo,

Mexican-American, American Indian, and Oriental (Chinese-

An urban, ethnically mixed high school population partic­ ipated in the study. These students were high school seniors, ranging in age from 16 to 21. Five ethnic groups were repre­ sented: Anglo, Mexican-American, American Indian, Black, and

Puerto Rican.

An Indian reservation public high school population com­ prised the third participant group. These students were seniors, ranging in age from 15 to 22. Three ethnic groups were repre­ sented: Anglo, Mexican-American, and American Indian.

Sex ratios were approximately the same for all three pop­

Data collected were compared and evaluated within and be­ have been assessed by statistically significant levels of mean differences in own-culture perception. The Rokeach Dogmatism

Scale E was employed to determine values, attitudes, and belief systems for each group. The Cultural Literacy Inventory was used to explore perceived commonalities and differences existing

within and between populations in categories comprising the cul­

5 tural structure as a whole. The Personal Questionnaire contrib­ uted data on such independent variables as sex, socioeconomic status, residential mobility, and imposition of own values upon others.

It has at no point been intended that this study should concern itself with the resultant data as data, but rather as ancillary demonstration of empirical consistency and replicability for potential analyses of other cultural or subcultural groups.

Data collected in this study were subjected to modal analysis by item and mean analysis by area for all three instru- " ments administered to all three populations. These data were examined for significant mean differences existing within and between groups.

It has been a primary premise of this study that con­ struction of statistically significant holistic cognitive maps of cultures or subcultures was a viable possibility. Given the same selected instruments, culturally different groups have responded to questions and to categorically grouped questions in a manner which permitted modal and mean evaluation of the data obtained.

These data differed, in varying degree, from population to popu­ lation, by question, by category, and by mean total scores on the instruments administered. After codification these variations proved amenable to statistical analysis by use of Student's t to

determine whether or not significant levels of difference between mean scores for categories and for total scores existed within and between the populations. These data were also used to deter­ mine where, within the categories of the holistic cognitive map, excluding the psychomotor domain, these significant differences in cultural perception were located.

It has been this location of commonalities and differ­ ences which is of major concern to the educator, since his cogni­ tive map may or may not be congruent with those of the students whom he teaches. Lack of congruency in some areas of these maps may result in dysfunctional teaching, disruption of the learning

Statement of the Problem

The purposes of this study have been six-fold:

1. To establish modal perceptions, or holistic cognitive maps of own-culture perceptions for three Southwest popu­ lations in the American educational setting, i.e., urban high school students, Indian reservation public high school students, and a normative educator population.

2. To categorize these holistic modal perceptions into basic cultural components in the cognitive domain, and into be­ lief systems areas in the affective domain.

3. To determine what commonalities and differences exist within and between the modal cognitive maps of the three populations.

4. To identify those areas in the respective cognitive maps of the populations which indicate that independent vari­ ables such as sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, resi­ dential mobility, educational level, residential location etc., may be mediating factors in selection of universals alternatives and specialties within the populations analyzed.

5. To locate and identify those perceived cultural univer­ sals and alternatives which might be used as bases of commonalities or as equivalence structures in building learning rapport and improving communications between educator and student, between student and students, and with that larger culture in which all are embedded.

6. To determine whether and where such modal cognitive maps differ from each other in terms of statistical signifi­ construct embodied in this study, since, if the determi­ nation exists, so also does the theoretical premise on which this study is based.

Significance of the Study

There is concern among social scientists and educators with problems reflecting the cultural diversity of the American population, such as sex roles, language differences, socioeconom­ ic factors, and the possible effects of enclaving or isolation.

8

Basic to every cross-cultural decision is a need to analyze such a decision to determine whether it is a decision for cultural determinism, in which the cultural milieu of the individual de­ termines the structure of the idiosyncratic map, or whether it is a decision for cultural pluralism. The need to determine commit­ ment for cultural pluralism is present in any category of interethnic policy-making: funding, civil rights, curriculum, methodologies, instructional materials, or student-teacher relationships. all too often school success is measured in accommoda­ tion and achievement that reflect the middle class social ethic. To solve this dilemma the educator must assist individuals in retaining those cultural traits that pro­ vide self-satisfaction without hindering full participa­ tion in the dominant culture. The educational program should be designed to avoid both withdrawal from partici­ pation and over-identification with the dominant group

(Chilcott 1968, p. 318).

If cultural pluralism is the overarching commitment for the educational process in America, it is important to identify cultural similarities and differences in the holistic cognitive maps by which each cultural or subcultural group perceives its own world. fin example of divergences might be the manner in which different ethnic groups perceive sex roles. Similarities and differences in group perceptions of own culture have been placed in affective and cognitive categories within the instru­ mental framework to:

1. be used by educators in developing curriculum and instruc­ tional theory,

2. be employed for better interpretation of classroom behav­ ior of students,

3. ensure greater relevance in the selection of instruction­ al methods and materials, and

4. prevent communications breakdowns.

If the educator regards his classroom setting as a micro­ cosm of the greater society, he needs to know what cultures or subcultures comprise that microcosm. He needs to know what the demographic composition of his classroom is, and in what ways, and in what areas, his students' perceptions may differ from his own. Many areas of differences of perception may have built in accommodation factors, or equivalence structures, which will predicate any great concern over them. However, the educator should be aware that his modal cultural orientation and his per­ sonal own-culture perceptions and belief systems may not be con­ gruent with those of his students. As a result, the learning process may be impeded, or, in extreme cases, become totally ineffective.

While all such orientations and perceptions are idiosyn­ cratic, they are also, in greater or lesser degree, controlled by the determination of what these group pressures or culturally created perceptions may be that modal responses to items in the

Cultural Literacy Inventory have been employed in this study.

10

The major difficulty in defining the problems inherent in a study of this nature was in resolving a syncretic approach to the multiplicities and fragmentations of disciplines and re­ search. Because all the literature contains fragments of an overarching aegis for this study, most of the literature reviewed contained more questions than answers. What was the ethos or world view of a student who came from a different culture or sub­ culture? Was it developed idiosyncratically? Was it determined by environmental or by peer group pressures or sanctions? How and where did this student's perception of his own culture differ from that of his mainstream counterpart? How and where did his own-culture perception differ from that of his teacher? How and where was this own-culture perception similar? Could these com­ monalities and differences be identified, measured, codified, categorized, and evaluated on an empirical and replicable basis?

It has been in an attempt to reconcile and structure both the ways in which groups perceive their own cultures and the ways in which the scientific community perceives the cultures that many anthropologists have concerned themselves with the identifi­ cation of modal personalities (Benedict 1942, Kardiner 1939,

Kluckhohn and Murray 1953, Mead 1951). There has also been con­ cern for the identification of cultural universals, alternatives, and specialties (Linton 1945). Specialties, in the context of this study may appear only within a sex, or a specific subgroup within one of the cultures or populations under consideration.

Even with this interest in the components of cognitive

11 mapping, there has been little attempt to identify and categorize cognitive maps, either modal or individual, or to place the re­ sultant findings in either an holistic or a cognitive framework in terms of statistical significance. It is the purpose of this study to determine statistically the holistic modal norms for three populations in the educational setting. Within the con­ fines of this statistical construct the educator can:

1. verify differences or commonalities in perceptions or equivalence structures between his own culture and the own-culture perceptions of the students;

2. compare his idiosyncratic cognitive map with those of his peer group;

3. compare his idiosyncratic cognitive map with the cogni­ tive maps of his students to identify areas or categories of harmony or dissonance. This may enable the educator to eliminate false stereotyping, delimit areas which are in conflict, and thus build or strengthen the communica­ tions network which is the basis of education.

For the student, as he is of concern to the educator, de­ viance from the established modal cultural norm in any area could be ameliorated, if necessary, by teacher-student conferences, by counseling, by class discussion of variances, or by curriculum modification, if necessary, to cover the area(s) which fail to meet equivalence structures or congruencies.

12

For the student, knowledge about how he perceives his world in relation to the cognitive maps of his peer group, and the cognitive map of his teacher as representing what he sees of the dominant society might well be decisive for life-style, ca­ reer choice, and educational aspirations. (If the teacher is acting here, however inadvertently, as a model, it is important for both student and teacher to recognize that the educator may in no fashion be representative of the norms for mainstream so­ ciety in some areas or categories.) For many youngsters, iso­ lated from mainstream values, norms, expectations and sanctions, either geographically or culturally, the teacher is the visible representative for the "outside world." If the student's per­ ception of this model is inaccurate or stereotypical, he may ex­ perience real difficulty in the construction of equivalence structures (Wallace 1970, pp. 40-41) which could permit him to function effectively in a larger society.

For the student, insights into the "machinery" of another culture and awareness of the commonalities and differences be­ tween that culture and his own as he perceives it may well spell the difference between success and failure in a world which, in the process of becoming increasingly complex, proliferates stereo­ types in an attempt to restore order (Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum 1957, Sapir 1929, Whorf 1956).

If the teacher-student relationship is to function effec­ tively, the expectations of appropriate behavior must be

13 exercised bilaterally and realistically. The further removed a student is from the mainstream expectations of the educational process, the greater the need for the teacher to act as mediator, change agent, cultural broker, or model. The student should not be compelled to accept dominant norms, values, and sanctions; btit the student should have an opportunity to discover what and where these normsj values, and sanctions are. The student should also be able to examine these norms, values and sanctions in compari­ son with his own personal ethos, and with the norms, values and sanctions (modal perceptions) of his own subculture or ethnic affiliation.

Holistic cognitive maps were developed in this study to provide insights for these cultural or subcultural groups in sim­ cognitive maps were to be compared in terms of commonalities and differences in each group's perception of own culture by instrumentally selected areas or categories of response. In addition, this investigation established modal data from which idiosyncrat­ ic and inter- and intracultural variations in perception could be charted and assessed.

There is need for an integrative study of own-culture perception to determine commonalities, differences, and equiva­ lence structures within and between the educational subcultures present in our society. The significance of the study is in the selection and development of instruments to measure, categorize

mapping is useful in education for:

1. teacher self-assessment in own-culture perception; perception;

3. assessment of individual student levels of own-culture perception;

4. construction of ameliorative strategies for potential communications breakdowns arising from lack of shared ex­ pectations and equivalence structures due to incongruen­ ces between cultures and subcultures;

5. development or modification of counseling, methodologi­ cal, and curriculum planning practices to achieve optimum benefits for the particular cultural milieu.

Theoretical Framework

Construction of statistically significant cognitive maps for cultures or subcultures is a viable possibility. Given the same selected instruments, culturally different groups within the educational setting should respond to questions and to categories of grouped questions in a manner permitting modal quantification and mean statistical analysis of the data obtained. These data might differ from population to population, by item, by category, and conceivably by mean total scores on the instruments adminis­ analysis after appropriate codification.

15

To develop a cognitive map of a culture, both cognitive and affective fixes of perceptions are required. The instrumen­ tation selected for this study makes provision for categorical selectivity in both domains.

"Culture theory" as a whole underlies any approach to cognitive map construction or analysis, and is fundamental to the planning and implementation of data analysis employed in this study. This theory is based on the tenet held by many social scientists, especially cultural anthropologists, that while all human beings share a common psychobiological base, and that while

1972, p. 1). Since this investigation is essentially synchronic in nature, only the first of these premises is considered.

There are, additionally, two broadly defined, observable, and interrelated questions which are operative in culture theory: these different cultural systems come to take the forms they have (Kaplan and Manner 1972, p. 2)?

The first question, modified to read "In the perceptions of the participants, how do different cultural systems work?" has been basic to this investigation.

This exploration of construction of cognitive maps has incorporated a syncretic approach to cultural anthropology, gen­ eral systems theory, communications theory, and social

psychological field theory. Because the approach to this re­ search was by definition holistic, it was not possible to exclude any of the above, but it was possible to include them under the aegis of anthropology as the study of man. Anthropology as a discipline was then narrowed to the field of cultural anthropolo­ gy, and where it proved possible within the domains of cultureand-personality and of cognitive anthropology, has subsumed communications theory, systems theory, and social psychological

In this research, the concern was not only with the theo­ retical possibilities of synthesis of these discrete domains, but also with the achievement of an empirical, replicable, and sta­ tistically verifiable foundation for continued study or addition­ al explorations and applications in or out of the educational setting.

Basic to the study was the premise that it was the indi­ vidual's "emic," or idiosyncratic, perception of his own culture which determined his responses to the instrumentation selected for this research. These emic perceptions constitute any one participant's total or holistic cognitive map of the cultural system in which he lives. This emic, or individual, cognitive

.map may agree or disagree in whole or in part with the moda'lly perceived cognitive map for that particular sociocultural system.

It is the considered or "etic" selection and interpretation of the instrumentation-derived data for this research which has

17 provided, at least in part, a replicable statistical base for predictable, shared,

or

public response interpretation. "Etic" observations depend on factors considered to be appropriate by the community of scientific observers, and may either be derived solely from the frame of reference of the observer, or, by in­ ferential application, as in this investigation, of emic data in an investigator-structured framework.

This study, while primarily rooted in the domain of cog­ nitive anthropology, has not been concerned with that field's strong identification with linguistic differentiations and seman­ tic variations within and between cultures other than in terms of cultural choices as determined by responses to the selected instruments. people have a unique system for perceiving and organizing materi­ al phenomena—things, events, behavior, and emotions. The object of study is not these material phenomena themselves, but the way

"It is highly unlikely that members of a culture ever see their culture as this kind of a unitary phenomenon. Each individual member

may have a unique unitary model of his own culture, but is not necesarily cognizant of all the unique unitary models held by other members of his own culture."

Idiosyncratic unitary models may be very like or be radi­ cally dissimilar, and this factor may account in part for the

18 many commonalities and differences observed between cultures and subcultures. It does not, however, resolve problems arising when differences of perceptions of unitary models do exist within or between cultures on either modal or individual levels. Wallace of beliefs, attitudes, values, and the like to be present for cultures or groups to interact effectively. Cognitive sharing is requisite of society, but complementary equivalence structures are a necessity for such interaction:

Evidently groups as well as individuals can integrate their behavior into reliable systems by means of equiva­ lence structures without intensive motivational or cog­ basic cognitive framework be shared, but it is necessary that behaviors must be mutually predictable and equivalent.

(Italics mine„)

It is equivalence structures, with their potential for predictable behaviors and expectations which are of value in the educational setting. It is important, particularly for the edu­ cator working in a crosscultural milieu, that areas of equiva­ lence and areas where actual commonalities, universals, or alternatives exist, can be identified and differentiated from those areas in which expectations differ, with resultant possi­ bilities for communications breakdowns.

What has been lacking in studies to date in cognitive anthropology (Kaplan and Manner 1972, p. 44) because of their almost totally emic approach is empirical evidence that cultural

! >

i

! :

19 that these maps of cognition are essentially psychic phenomena which may show variation between individuals, and that these phenomena are amenable to measurement, categorization, and sta­ tistical analysis. Such analysis has rarely been performed, and very seldom on an holistic or comprehensive basis. It was this type of empirical procedure which was the object of tHis study, without the extension into the metaphysical which "psychic phe­ nomena" often carries in semantic connotation.

Wallace (1970) has postulated that such phenomena do exist, and that the various descriptive terms for them can be categorized in observable behaviors, when one has observed one individual, two or more individuals, or all individuals in a group. When the observed behavior is in one, many, or all cate­ gories of a set of responses or equivalence structures, then these phenomena may be classified by using culture-and-personality terminology. A fourth category, that of the statistical modal construct, has been added to Wallace's model to provide for analy­ sis of replicable and empirical data (see Figure 1). phenomena are amenable to categorization by levels of abstrac­ tion. The dimension of the statistical construct has been added to the model as being the most abstract in level (see Figure 2).

It was one of the premises of this study that such a statistical level could be formulated. Such statistical

Categories

One

Two or

More

One Category habit, response, behavior potential, etc.

Two or More

Categories All Categories character trait, motive, complex, value syndrome, etc. mazeway. personality, psychobiological system, etc.

Statistical Construct

Category (Investigator's

Postulation modal response (combined ideosyncratic responses) culture trait, relationship, subculture, custom, role, institution, status, alternative, ritual, specialty, etc. theme, etc. personality, etc. modal culture, modal

SES, modal perceptions, intracategory

All culture trait, relationship, pattern, custom, role, institution, configuration, theme, theme, focus, culture, universal, etc. etc. national character, etc. cognitive map or culture

Figure 1. Behavior Categories Observed

Number of

Individuals

One

Least

Abstract

Mazeway

More

Abstract

Personality

Most Abstract

(Investigator's

Postulation)

Modal personality profile comparison

_v with individual culture

All

Culture

V

\

\ ality v

^structure

National character

\

n

N

\

\

Modal

Cognitive

Maps

Figure 2. Routes and Levels of Abstraction in Culture and Personality Terminology

constructs are viable in the social sciences. It is this statis­ tical reduction of data, analysis, and comparison for the three participating populations in this investigation which, in rela­ tion to method, is of value to education for the improvement of communications, selection of instructional materials, and meth­ odologies, curriculum planning, and improved teacher-pupil relationships.

Holistic cognitive maps can be determined, using replicable procedures, not only for the three groups herein identi­ fied, but for any other group with clearly defined parameters, and for any other statistically identifiable ramifications of

"culture" either within the United States or in international crosscultural settings.

Hypotheses

The following hypotheses were tested.

In the holistic crosscultural identification of modal perceptions or cognitive maps it was hypothesized that:

1. measurable crosscultural differences in perception do exist;

2. these measureable differences are amenable to categorization;

3. differences between categories, by culture, by socio­ economic status, by sex, by residential mobility, by ethnicity, and by educational level where applicable may be in whole or in part statistically significant;

4. idiosyncratic differences charted in either student or

23 educator populations may be both statistically signifi­ cant and serve as a basis for predicting individual in­ teraction behavior;

5. holistic cultural perceptions of commonalities and dif­ ferences in cognitive maps are both measurable and sub­ ject to statistical analysis on mean and modal bases;

6. these differences and similarities in modal cognitive maps will prove amenable to analysis in terms of statis­ tical significance;

7. the farther the culture or subculture is (or perceives itself to be) removed from the dominant culture, the greater the differences will be statistically.

Assumptions Underlying the Problem

The major assumptions underlying the study were:

1. That the instrumentation for data collection has been field tested and is adequate.

2. That the populations involved in the study are as nearly matched as is possible with numerically limited groups.

3. That the universals, commonalities and differences iden­ tified in the modal cognitive maps will have a statisti­ cally significant base.

4. That such universals, commonalities and differences will be properly identified and placed within the context of the appropriate cognitive map areas, once categorized.

5. That cognitive map perceptions of own culture are amen­

24 able to a modal scoring technique.

6. That if multiple modalities exist in all cultures under consideration one of two situations may be operant: a. the question is semantically ambiguous b. this area of the culture is perceived by all of .the population as being in a state of flux.

7. That modal dichotomies in perception of own-culture sex roles may exist in cognitive maps.

8. That multiple modality in a given question or cognitive map area may be resolved as a sex role dichotomy, and that: a. if multiple modality is present for one sex only, then that sex is in a state of cultural role flux b. if multiple modality is present for both sexes in one culture only, the culture itself is in flux in re sex roles and/or roles in general.

9. That, where both sexes agree on a modal response'to a question, or within an area or category within a culture, that is a universal for that culture.

10. That if cultural concurrence on modality is greater than

45%, then such concurrence is a cultural universal within that particular population.

11. That at this time no other adequate instrumentation existed to measure the holistic modal cognitive maps of subjects.

25

12. That adequate proficiency in the English language for re­ sponse to the instrumentation is assumed for all three populations.

Limitations of the Study

The following were recognized as limitations of the study:

1. No consideration of the psychomotor domain was attempted in this study.

2. Only those independent variables considered in the main body of the study were used, such as sex, socioeconomic status, residential mobility, ethnicity, and imposition of own values upon others.

3. Class achievement levels and IQ test performances (in­ cluding stanine rankings) were not considered in this study.

4. Instruments were administered to volunteer subjects only in all three experimental groups, and reflect populations interested and concerned with the problems of crosscultural and intracultural perceptions.

5. No attempt was made to analyze socialization patterns or teaching methodology.

6. Neither school organization nor teacher preparation were considered in this study.

Definitions of Terms Employed in This Study

Affective domain: that realm of human behavior and per­ ception which concerns itself with emotions, values, be­ liefs and attitudes, and which is observable only by inference.

Bases of commonality: those areas of culture which are delineated in modal cognitive maps, and are perceived by the three populations involved in the study in like man­ ner, or in like degree of intensity.

Belief systems: those areas in the affective domain which can be categorized by an investigator into their underlying states of expectancy, of an individual's per­ ceptions concerning psychical and social reality (Rokeach

1968, p. 2).

Belief systems areas: belief system responses on the

Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E, placed in consolidated cate­ gories by the investigator for purposes of more simplis­ tic scoring. Categories, or Belief Systems Areas employed in this study fall into eight groupings of re­

27

Categorization: here used as the act of selection of certain items in the instrumentation which are related to each other in content, and placing them into groups for convenience in scoring. (Grouping has been performed for the Rokeach as indicated in definition 4 immediately pre­ vious.) Grouping for the Cultural Literacy Inventory items was performed according to the Primary Message Sys­ tems as specified in E. T. Hall's (1959, pp. 171-172)

"Map of Culture."

Cognitive domain: that area of individual perception which can be identified directly by the individual him­ self, and particularly articulated by that individual.

Cognitive maps: consist of a series of assemblages or perceptions held by individuals concerning values, ob­ jects, and associations and techniques or ways of manipu­ lation to achieve desired end-states. This cognitive map is used by the individual to organize and structure such phenomena as role, self, other, generalized other, body image, behavioral environment, and world view. These phenomena normally constitute an integrated system of perceptual assemblages. Within this system nonself and self interact in response to predictable, if idiosyn­ cratic, laws (Wallace 1970, pp. 15-19).

Commonalities: those mutually perceived modal agreements within and between cultures which appear in the responses to the instruments.

9. Cultural alternatives: those options selected modally by individuals within a culture as a life-style, as opposed to universals which are common to all members of a culture.

10. Cultural commonalities: those categories or questions within and between cultures which are perceived by the populations analyzed as being like. If they are per­ ceived as being common to all three groups presently un­ der analysis, then they are to be considered as universals. If they exist in two analyzed groups only, then they qualify as alternatives.

11. Cultural differences: those categories or questions which are perceived within and between cultures or popu­ lations being analyzed as unlike. If they are unlike for all three of the groups being analyzed, they may be con­ sidered as specialties.

12. Cultural Literacy Inventory (CLI): An instrument de­ signed to measure individual cultural perceptions using

Hall's (1959, pp» 171-172) "Map of Culture" with its the selection of categories in the cognitive area for this study.

13. Cultural pluralism: as employed in the educational do­ main, is the concept that cultural differences for groups which do not vary grossly or destructively (both value

29 or mainstream culture, should not only be retained, but actively encouraged (Chilcott, Greenberg, and Wilson

1968, p. 97).

14. Cultural specialties: idiosyncratic activities within a culture.

15. Cultural universals: in this study, those questions or categories of Primary Message Systems which are common to all members of a culture. edge, belief, art, morals, law, customs, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society (Tylor 1871, p. 1)."

17. Emic: those aspects of culture perceived and interpreted by the participant members of the culture themselves.

Emic statements refer to logico-empirical systems whose phenomenal distinctions or "things" are built up out of contrasts and discriminations significant, meaningful, real, accurate, or in some other manner regarded as appropriate by the actors themselves.

An emic statement can be falsified if it can be shown that it contradicts the cognitive calculus by which relevant actors judge that entities are simi­ lar or different, real, meaningful, significant, or in some other sense "appropriate" or "acceptable"

(Harris 1968, p. 571).

18. Ethos: world view.

19. Etic; those aspects of a culture perceived and inter­ preted by the scientific observer.

Etic statements depend on phenomenal distinctions judged appropriate by the community of scientific

• observers. Etic statements cannot be falsified if they do not conform to the actors' notion of what is significant, real, meaningful, or appropriate.

Etic statements are verified when independent ob­ servers using similar operations agree that a given event has occurred (Harris 1968, p. 575).

20. Holistic cognitive map: that construct which comprises the whole of individual or group perceptions of own cul­ ture in both the affective and cognitive domains as reg­ istered by responses to instrumentation employed in this study.

21. Holistic modal personality: that statistical construct which is derived for each culture or subculture in this study as reflected by responses to all instruments.

22. Modal cognitive map: perceptions of own culture elicited from frequency of response to given questions and given categories in the instrumentation selected for this study.

23. Modal perceptions: those perceptual choices selected most frequently by question or by category by a population.

24. Modal personality: personality characteristics or traits shared by a group or subgroup as revealed by studies of individuals. Usually a statement resulting from the findings of projective tests administered to a class of individuals. As used in this study, it is a statistical construct derived from the total perceived modalities within a culture.

25. Own-culture perception: that set of beliefs, attitudes, values, manipulative techniques and behavioral expecta­ tions which have been integrated by the individual to enable him to function within his world. The combination of affective and cognitive perceptions which constitute ethos, or world view, which may be equally applicable for individual or culture group modal perceptions.

26. Personal Questionnaire: an instrument administered in this study to provide demographic data on the respondents.

27. Personality: "The dynamic organization within the indi­ vidual of those psycho-physical patterns that determine his characteristic behavior and thought (Allport 1966, p. 28)."

28. Primary Message Systems: in this study a categorical adaptation of Hall's (1959) "Map of Culture." Primary

29. Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E: instrument used to explore the belief systems of individuals, particularly in regard to open and closed mindedness. For the purposes of this study this instrument has been categorized as follows:

!• :

32

Summary

The major problem in this research was the assemblage or construction and analysis of statistically significant holistic cognitive maps for three populations within the educational mi­ lieu. The theoretical framework focused on a syncretic and cross-disciplinary approach to the construction of such holistic cognitive maps. The postulate that such maps could be empirical, replicable, and statistically significant in whole or in part was also explored. The assumptions, limitations, and definitions of terms employed in this study were enumerated. The hypotheses reflected the populations involved in the study together with the research problem.

A syncretic approach to the construction of holistic cog­ nitive maps was discussed in this chapter. This research indi­ cated a need for construction and comparison of such maps to provide both educator and student with insights into the ways in which they perceive their own cultures. Such research also pro­ vided exploration of the commonalities and differences existing within and between these perceived cultures. These insights may prove of value in facilitating the learning process, suggesting possible modifications in curriculum and teaching methodologies,

33 and prevention of communications breakdowns caused by differing expectations due to culturally induced perceptual variations.

A review of literature pertaining to the historical, theoretical, and methodological aspects of this study is pre­ sented in Chapter 2.

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE

To define, assign parameters, and analyze the postulates and procedures implemented in this study, it was necessary to re­ view many of the publications comprising the body of literature in the behavioral and social sciences. The published data of particular importance were those which contributed to the syn­ cretic approach to the construction of holistic cognitive maps in selected educational settings. The review of the literature included:

1. Literature on cultural perceptions

2. Literature on related crosscultural studies

3. Literature on the theoretical framework embodied in this research

4. Literature concerned with statistical and procedural methodologies employed in this study.

The underlying difficulty encountered in reviewing the material contained in this body of literature was contained pri­ marily in the nature of the study itself. Syncretic combinations

(Oxford Dictionary of the English Language 1971) are essentially those which attempt to combine or reconcile divergent points of view into a whole. In the anthropological context, this

34

35 syncretic approach is construed as indicating a construct combin­ ing features of these divergent viewpoints into a neologistic whole. As a result of the creation of this neologism, it would be simple to assert that neither the syncretic construct, nor literature concerning it, has been extant prior to the publica­ tion of this study. This was, in fact, the situation. However, the generic concepts underlying this syncretic approach have been explored, categorized, and analyzed ad infinitum. The concepts themselves are not new. It is only this particular construct of concepts, instrumentation, categorization and analysis which is unique. Such a construct has not been previously presented. The generic concepts basic to this study have been explored, but in general, such explorations have been on a particularistic, narrow or fragmentary basis, rather than on the broader holistic base implemented here.

A major problem in assessing literature on own-culture or emic perceptions is. the catholicity of the field. The only thing all such literature has in common, particularly in the discipline of anthropology, appears to be a sharing in the expressed need for empirical data.

The social scientists have had prolific input into the research available for consideration. Unfortunately, most such literature has been particularized by discipline, by orientation of author, and by the parametric boundaries of the studies.

Additionally, these boundaries are defined by the thrust of

I

36 interests temporally or temporarily embodied in these disciplines and orientations. In other words, some areas of study are at some times more popular than others; there are "fads" in disci­ plines as well as in the population as a whole.

Another difficulty for the researcher in a syncretic set­ ting is that there is no clear parametric distinction between the behavioral and social sciences as disciplines or as fields of the same overarching continuum. What is of concern to psychology and sociology may also be reflected in the concerns of anthropology.

None of these disciplines is a discrete entity; yet all of them postulate separate as well as shared premises. Sutherland (1973, pp. 3-5) referred to this problem of combined interests and dis­ ciplinary exclusivism when he said: tive which a scientist brings to his field, which in turn determines the subjects he will elect to study, the methodological procedures he will employ, and therefore the character of the results he obtains. And it is on this dimension that we shall expect to find the most critical points of differences between two broad divi­ sions of scientific enterprise. Particularly the lack of articulation between theory and practice in the social and behavioral sciences, a startling symptom of the dichotomization of our disciplines into two ef­ fectively polarized motivational camps; the empiricistpositivist on the one hand and, on the other the deductivist-ideographic. Moreover, not only is there a lack of articulation within the disciplines of the social and behavioral sciences, but also between the disci­ plines. That is, we have partitioned our science into parochialized segments even though the phenomena we col­ lectively study are not so segmented. In short, it is highly unlikely that we could strike any meaningful, properly defined empirical [i.e., real world subject] whose behavior was solely determined by variables drawn from just a single discipline.

37

It has been this amalgamistic-dichotomistic propensity in the social and behavioral sciences which has made it necessary to review the particulate studies generated in each of them. Only under the rubrics of communications theory and general systems theory are there any attempts at synthesis, and these attempts have generally been particularistic rather than holistic in nature.

Honigman (1954, pp. 43-44) has pointed out that these dichotomies exist within as well as between disciplines:

Ethnological descriptions of culture must be dis­ tinguished from cultural descriptions. The latter in­ volve an observer who specifies merely the formal aspects of a situation. For example an American's morning behavior may be set down as follows: "Every morning after Americans have risen they clean their teeth with a toothbrush spread with dentifrice. With the teeth lightly clamped, the brush is inserted be­ tween cheek and teeth in such a way that the bristles are at right angles to the surface of the teeth. Then the brush is vigorously propelled in and out of the mouth .... Behind this activity is the idea that dental decay will be reduced by following such a daily routine."

In this example the form of behavior is given in a fashion analogous to the way in which an architect's drawing reveals the form of the building. In contrast, what we are about to attempt resembles the manner in which an art critic or art historian might approach the building. The emotional quality of the morning tooth-cleaning may be set down like this: "With care­ ful regularity, every morning, Americans, filled with a dread of tooth decay, vigorously clean their teeth.

Behind this activity is the fervent expectation that brushing the teeth will spare them the pain of tooth­ ache and the agony of a dentist's chair." The words careful regularity, dread, vigorously, spare, and the whole tone of the paragraph serve to communicate the emotional quality bound up with tooth-cleaning in the

United States.

38

The concern here is not whether the material is treated objectively or subjectively, but that the inferential level is determined by the discipline and the orientation of the observer.

This study is concerned with a less particularistic ap­ proach to the cognitive domain and to belief systems structure.

A review of the literature over a hundred year period in anthro­ pology disclosed repeated statements of the need for empiricism in the discipline, but nowhere is there evidence that provision has been made for holistic evaluation of cultures as they are perceived by those people who live in them. External observers have, in many cases, resorted to etic criteria, but only in a microcosmic or particularistic approach to selected areas of in­ vestigation. There have also been many ethnologies and studies on "whole cultures," again always by external observers, but these are chiefly characterized by a non-empirical approach.

It is suggested that the only valid bases for own-culture perception must be essentially emic in nature, and generated within the particular culture as an homogeneous entity. This approach permits idiosyncratic variation within the parameters of the culture. Statistical constructs can then be created to identify differences between own-culture perceptions and main­ stream or dominant culture perceptions, but the literature which should provide this bridging function does not exist except at the inferential level.

39

An exhaustive search of the literature in the social and behavioral sciences revealed that no disciplinary synthesis exists, although Sutherland and others have advocated-systemic approaches, which would, if pursued, permit easier access to data within and between the disciplines.

In regard to the prevalence of particulate approaches,

Kurt Lewin (1951, p. 151) has stated succinctly: "Observation of social behavior is usually of little value if it doesn't include an adequate description of the character of the social atmosphere or the larger units of activity within which the specific social act occurs." It is these larger, or holistic, descriptions which are singularly lacking in the studies reviewed.

Additionally, there are several major problems inherent in the review of the literature on unexplored or syncretic areas of research:

1. There are no topic headings in the libraries which would facilitate location and exploration of relevant materi­ als. While cognitive mapping is not a new field (Kaplan and Manner 1972, Sutherland 1973), this particular ap­ proach is ab initio, and therefore no topic headings or cross-references exist.

2. Nowhere, as far as the investigator could determine, is there a cross-disciplinary approach to the construction of holistic cognitive maps, or any guidelines for the construction of cognitive maps of any description.

40

3. All cognitive mapping with which the investigator claims any familiarity is linguistically based, and this was not perceived as a major variable in this study, since all participants were competent in English, either as a pri­ mary or a secondary language.

No evidence was discovered of empirical or statistical explorations of holistic own-culture perceptions (with or without inclusion in Hall's Primary Message Systems, or any other codi­ fied form of categorization) in any research reported within the past 30 years in any of the behavioral or social sciences periodi­ is possible that this is a function of the "narrowing" of topic necessary to comply with the requirements of the publications in­ volved, and that such research may exist, but it has not to date been reported in its more global aspects.

The search of the literature had proven either sterile or at best moderately rewarding in terms of applicable data. Since there was no previously researched topic on which to base the premises postulated in this study, it might be assumed that such explorations would prove futile. This was not the case. In the process of living with a new, or at least a newly-implemented theoretical construct, many fascinating new vistas opened; some in terms of cultural anthropology, but most in behavioral or perceptual psychology. During the discovery process, the author had postulated an unique personality and statistical construct,

in addition to a syncretic theoretical base. There was enrich­

41 ment in the exploration and synthesis of existing atomistic or non-empirical studies.

Because the thrust of the specific premise of the con­ struction of holistic cognitive maps for populations in educa­ tional settings is not included, except fragmentarily, in the general anthropological research, it is difficult to analyze or project except in terms of relevant data.

A search of the available literature revealed that, with the exception of the anthropologists and the social psycholo­ gists, there has been little, if any, attempt to explore areas which are pertinent to this study. With the exception of Honigman (1954), Havighurst (1957, 1961), Spindler (1955, 1959, 1963,

1974a, 1974b), Hall (1958, 1959), Murdock (1949), and Henry

(1960), few attempts have been made at assessing crosscultural or own-culture perceptions of cognitive map areas. Samovar and

Porter (1972) attempted to do so in part with their explorations related to communications theory.

Wallace (1970) contributed to the theoretical base for this study in terms of belief system mazeways, equivalence struc­ tures, the replication of uniformity, and the maintenance of diversity as necessary cultural components. plored in the realm of modal personality types and in terms of general expectations imposed by own culture. Laura Thompson

(1948, 1951) attempted to assess attitudes arid acculturation lev­ els in an effort to predict educational success for the subjects of her studies.

Benedict (1936), and Gorer (1950) have considered the modal per­ sonality, particularly those aspects attributable to childrearing practices in diverse cultures, and thus, by extension from socialization, into education. Allport (1955) concerned himself with, among the many facets of his research, the percep­ tions of the adolescent; however, these tended to be selfrather than own-culture perceptions in the main. Triandis (1960) and others approached the problem, at least peripherally, in re­ lation to problems of stereotyping and commonalities in communi­ cation. Barth (1969) has considered ethnicity and boundary maintenance mechanisms.

Zintz (1969) and Ulibarri (1958) have researched and analyzed differences between cultural perspectives, degrees of acculturation, and their applications to the educational setting, as has Burger (1968). However, none of these investigators has employed a statistically analytical approach to the problems ex­ plored, although most have employed questionnaires or schedules to explore particular aspects of their research.

The psychologists, both behavioral and field, have had considerable input; most of it in terms of perceptual (in the sensory definition) and psychomotor studies. The difficulty in

43 reviewing this literature lies in attempting synthesis from the multiplicity of approaches and studies; all of which are frag­ ments of an overarching set of questions for this study. What is the world view of the culturally diverse student? How and where does it differ from that of his mainstream counterpart? Where and how is it similar? Can these differences and similarities be identified, codified and evaluated on an empirical basis?

Literature on Cultural Perceptions

Literature on perceptions of culture abounds, extends al­ most a century, and is thoroughly eclectic; ranging from Tylor

(1871) with his linear evolutionary constructs to Tyler (1969) with his cognitive anthropology. This literature has run the gamut through the various fields of linguistics (Sapir 1929,

Whorf and Carroll 1956, Chomsky 1968) through the modal personal­ ity and national character studies of the forties and fifties

(Mead 1951, Kardiner 1939, Benedict 1942, Gorer 1950), through field theory and behavioral psychology with authors ranging from

Freud to Skinner, both chronologically and in terms of orienta­ tion; and ultimately into communications theory (Triandis 1960,

Berlo 1960), the Semantic Differential of Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum (1957) and the Instrumental Activities Inventory (Spin-

Tyler 1969). At no point could the investigator locate studies implementing either legitimately cross-disciplinary or holistic constructs employed in an empirical setting.

44

Literature on Crosscultural Studies

Here again there is a vast amount of available material, since, by definition, almost any ethnography, regardless of depth or limitations could qualify; together with the greater part of the body of psychological, social, socio-psychological, linguis­ tics and communications output. One factor which has assisted in the screening process here was that any literature, in the con­ text of this study, must have been involved, either in whole or in part, with the educational process. It was here that such writers as Goodman (1957, 1960, 1962, 1964, 1968), Mead (1951),

Fuchs and Havighurst (1972), Havighurst (1957, 1961), Zintz

(1969), Ulibarri (1958), Henry (1957), Spindler (1955, 1959,

1963, 1974a, 1974b), and Dieckman (1970) entered the picture with their concerns for the educational setting and its effects on the maintenance and/or change of culture. In addition, in many cases, these authors shared also an involvement with student and teacher perceptions by culture. Of all this group of researchers, only Goodman and Spindler have utilized statistical analysis. In both cases analysis was employed in highly selective rather than holistic approaches. Goodman worked primarily with the child as an informant, and Spindler concerned himself with his Instrumen­ tal Activities Inventory.

Literature on Theoretical Framework

This area presented fewer difficulties in terms of nar­ rowing the field, since the problem was approached from a modal

45 analysis standpoint. Foremost here was Anthony Wallace (1970) in his consideration of equivalence structures, replication of

Linton (1945) contributed in great measure to the theoretical aspects of this study with his universals, alternatives, and specialties. The last of these constructs was not under consid­ eration to any great degree, since the three cultures or subcul­ tures under consideration were assumed to be relatively homogeneous internally because of the educational setting. The work of E. T. Hall (1959) was basic to this study since his "Map of Culture," with its Primary Message Systems grid was used as the basis for structuring the questions in the Cultural Literacy

Inventory (Featherston, Gillespie, and Wilson 1972) and was em­ ployed in data categorization for the construction and analysis of cognitive maps for the three populations. tribution, not only for his postulate that:

. . . all belief-disbelief systems serve two power­ ful and conflicting sets of motives at the same time; the need for a cognitive framework to know and to understand and the need to ward off threatening aspects of reality.

To the extent that the cognitive need to know is predomi­ nant and the need to ward off threat absent, open systems should result. In the service of the cognitive need to know, external pressures and irrational internal drives will often be pushed aside, so the information received from outside will be discriminated, assessed, and acted on according to the objective requirements of the situa­ tion. But as the need to ward off threat becomes' stronger, the cognitive need to know should become weaker, resulting in more closed belief systems,

46 but also, since his Dogmatism Scale E was employed (with restruc­ turing and consolidation of his scoring areas into belief systems areas by the investigator) to assess subject response in the af­ fective domain. These categories were then to be explored to determine similarities and differences of response for the cul­ tures under analysis. The resultant categories were: flexibil­ ity of belief and disbelief systems; aloneness, isolation and helplessness of man; uncertainty of future, urgency, and reitera­ tion of ideas; security of self image; authoritarianism and cause identification; intolerance; ability to change beliefs; and value rigidity over time.

Kluckhohn (1962), Mead (1951), Kardiner (1939), and Bene­ dict (1943) were relevant to this study because of their pioneer explorations of modal personality and national character. While national character is beyond the scope of this investigation, the recognition that modal tendencies do exist within each culture or subculture was basic to this study. However, no holistic over­ view of own-cultural perceptions was presented by these authors.

In general, their approaches were etic in nature, and the re­ search highly particularized, e.g., socialization in terms of child-rearing practices.

Henry (1960), Murdock (1949), and Spindler (1974a) were valuable in terms of the categorization processes which they em­ ployed in their research. Henry (1960) has constructed a "Cross-

Cultural Outline of Education" which provides categories for

47 assessing the school as a transmitter of culture, and for specif­ ic and primarily etic valuations of data so accumulated under the outline headings on the part of the observer, but there is mini­ mal provision for replication or verification of findings. topic heading 87 in his outline for the Human Relations Area socialization (topicheading 86), and with ethos, norms and the like under the category of Total Culture (topic heading 18), but these are incidental to his overall purpose of setting up liter­ and were not intended to be used as specific instruments for empirical data gathering.

Spindler (1963, pp. 12-13) maintained that the major con­ tribution which anthropology can make to education is to assemble a body of verified empirical knowledge by analyzing various as­ pects of the sociocultural milieu. The "Instrumental Activities

Inventory" (Spindler and Spindler 1965) may be considered as an exploration of one such aspect.

Hall (1959) has constructed a Map of Culture with 10 Pri­ proved invaluable in the construction and evaluation of the Cul­ tural Literacy Inventory. These Primary Message Systems were

48 invaluable for formulating an analytical approach to the problems inherent in establishing degrees of variation in cultural percep­ tion by categories in education.

The work of Zintz (1969), Taba (1962), and Burger (1968) as well as Spindler (1974b) on crosscultural research provided valuable insights into the crosscultural evaluation of education, and into the structuring of the statement of the problem con­ sidered in this study.

Taba (1962), with her interests and insights into curric­ ulum development for the culturally diverse through emphasis on culture, provided an infrastructure for the work of Zintz on crosscultural perceptions and education in the Southwest.

Burger (1968) supplemented and expanded this base in his "Ethopedagogy," and additionally provided a syncretic model for accul­ turation which in part paralleled the syncretic approach employed in this study (see Figure 3).

In addition, all of the above authors concerned them­ selves, in greater or lesser degree, with development of selec­ tive curricula and instructional materials, as well as with aspects of classroom communications. Burger (1968, pp. 101-102) perhaps is the best exemplar of these concerns when he stated:

Just as teaching methods are ethnic-specific, so are the subjects taught. The culture of a society is ex­ pressed through its school system. It tends to teach the child what the society believes it needs, rather than trying to give the child an "absolutely" ideal educa­ be witnessed daily as we find more and more students gifted in one or two fields. They have not had the

Traditional

Folk Culture

Dominant

Culture Pattern

Figure 3. A Syncretic Model for Acculturation opportunity to expand their talents. A typical possible solution is modular scheduling in which associated agrees with anthropology's argument of integration or holism .... The situation worsens where the group dominating the school system differs from that receiv­ should consider the pioneers from the several ethnic groups .... Curricula in literature should include

Studies in art and music should consider all types of dancing, an activity generally more institutionalized in the non-Anglo cultures of the world than among the not necessarily being of mixed-sex couples as in the nuclear Anglo style.J Arts and crafts courses should acquaint all pupils with the various art forms of the minority .... Home economics courses should con­ pupil is taught to use .... Adults and youths, es­ pecially successful ones by the minority value system, should be invited to address the classes, to act as should also include complementary materials related to the ethnic minority .... All opinions should be

50 included—both the middle class orientation and the separatists among that minority. The issues that they raise are real issues that cannot be ignored by the school designed to be involved with its community.

It is the accurate categorization, assessment, and rele­ vant application of subcultural or ethnic similarities and dif­ ferences and their implications for curricular foci which is one of the major concerns of this study.

What became apparent in these varied approaches to the problem of crosscultural factors and own-culture perceptions as they relate to the educational process was that no synthesis existed. All of the literature indicated fragmentation or spe­ cialization. These were studies of specific parts of culture(s) within a specific framework rather than studies of cultures as a whole. Even when a theoretical overview was presented, it was, generally speaking, not backed by systematized crosscultural ob­ servation and comparison on an empirical basis. Recommendations, as they must be when generalizing for several cultures, subcul­ tures, or ethnic groups, were general rather than specific: macro- rather than microscopic. Such generalizations are excel­ lent in theory, but extremely difficult to employ on a pragmatic level where specificity rather than generality is vital. Brameld

(1965) advocated "anthrotherapy," but this remediation for ethnocentrism was to be performed on a one-to-one basis, and was not suitable for group implementation.

Additionally, the studies were not replicated using other cultures, subcultures, or areas. While many models for analysis

51 of time orientation (Whorf and Carroll 1956), religious beliefs and attitudes (Ulibarri 1958), ethos (Zintz 1969), and accultura­ tion, e.g., Madsen's (1964) linear continuum and Burger's (1968) syncretic approach (see Figure 3, page 49), few have been imple­ mented, and fewer still analyzed in i;erms of statistical signifi­ cance. Goodman (1968) with her use of the child as an informant, ties Inventory are notable exceptions.

It is only in the psychomotor areas, which are not under consideration in this study, that much correlation of data has been achieved. Goodenough (1926) with the Draw-a-Man Test, com­ isons of the perception of relative sizes of coins in disadvantaged and mainstream children, and Osgood et al. (1957), in terms of the

Semantic Differential, found, among other things, that some South American Indians equated taking a vacation with being rich. The Semantic Differential explored variations peculiar to or shared by 24 cultures, and has been given extensive statisti­ cal treatment. Because of the limitation on linguistic approaches, and the exclusion of the psychomotor domain, such studies are not germane to the purposes of this investigation.

Kluckhohn (1946) has also done significant work in com­ paring language structures, over-riding concepts in language, and predictable error areas between native speakers of Navajo and Eng­ lish, together with the culture concepts underlying such problems.

52

Murdock and Henry have simply provided data slots and frames of reference into which available information could be in­ serted, together with provisions for categorization and analysis.

Murdock (1949) was almost totally objective to his approach to the construction of his Human Relations Area Files, while Henry

(1960), who was exploring a different, or at least a more re­ stricted domain, was almost totally subjective in terms of ob­ server orientation. Neither one was directly concerned with the ethos of the individual student or teacher nor of the modal par­ ticipant in observed cultures or subcultures. The orientation in both situations was etic rather than emic (Kelly 1969).

Balance needs to be achieved between the nearly total statistical approach of sociology, and the holistic, but devoid of empirical data approach of the anthropologist. In addition to striking this sort of a balance, it is also important to make some provision for inclusion, categorization, and measurement of the affective domains of participants in testing of selected cul­ tures or subcultures within the educational setting.

While the areas of national character, modal perception, perception in the psychomotor meaning, and curriculum expansion have, together with many other peripheral interests, been ex­ plored exhaustively, either separately or in one-to-one combina­ tions, at no point could the researcher perceive that they were either selectively categorized or analyzed on an holistic basis.

Literature Concerned With Statistical and

Methodological Procedures in This Study

Methodological literature appeared to be in two catego­ tical processes necessary for analysis and evaluation of the the­ oretical constructs postulated. views on theory construction in the social sciences; Roger Miller

(1969) on theory in cross-racial or crosscultural social work; with his insights into the application of general systems theory in the behavioral and social disciplines.

The second category, on utilization and analysis of em­ pirical data, included a number of methodological and statistical works, together with many which presented topical information in regard to the research process in general. The relevant litera­ ture of primary interest to this study consisted, of the works of

Bruning and Kintz (1968) with the Computational Handbook of Sta­ tistics; Edwards (1954), Statistical Methods for the Behavioral

Sciences; Slegel's (1956) Nonparametric Statistics; and the Hand­ book in Research and Evaluation by Isaac and Michael (1974). In the area of behavioral testing and measurement, explication and evaluation, Anastasi (1949) was especially important in permit­ ting the researcher to formulate the parameters of expectations for her populations.

54

Summary

A review of the related literature pertaining to the con­ struction of cognitive maps in selected educational settings has been presented in this chapter. A search of publications bearing in whole or in part on this problem has shown that while no syn­ cretic approach to this construct is extant, particularistic ap­ proaches to exist in:

1. Literature on cultural perceptions

2. Literature on crosscultural studies

3. Literature on the theoretical framework embodied in this study.

A fourth category, literature concerned with statistical and pro­ cedural methodologies employed in this study, was.additionally provided.

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH PROCEDURES

The research design and procedures employed in this study are presented in this chapter. Because the construction of holis­ tic cognitive maps is complex, considerable attention has been given to detailing the processes by which these constructs have been assembled and categorized.

The research procedures followed in this study are divided into five sections:

1. Selection and design of instruments used in data collection.

2. Selection and description of the populations to be analyzed.

3. Development of a model to assist in the organization of data.

4. Administration of the instruments.

5. Method for the treatment of the data.

Selection and Design of the Instruments

A combination of three instruments was used to determine the possibility of construction of statistically significant cog­ nitive maps in selected educational settings:

55

56

1. A Personal Questionnaire (see Appendix A) which includes such data as residential mobility, age, sex, education level, socioeconomic status, and degree of imposition of own values upon others.

2. The Rokeach (1960) Dogmatism Scale E was used to deter­ mine mean categorical degrees of open and closed mindedness for the three populations.

Prior to the development of the Cultural Literacy Labora­ tory, a graduate seminar was organized to investigate the possi­ bilities of formulating an own/other culture exploration format to enable students in the College of Education at The University of Arizona to participate in real, rather than simulated crosscultural experiences. It was the assumption of the seminar mem­ bers that on-site experience, plus methodological input for directed field experience, would result in a sum of the products which was greater than the initial whole. A number of attitudi.nal scales, ranging from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality

Inventory through the FIRO B, to the California F Test, were examined and considered. The Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E best measured those attitudes which might have some effect on the ef­ ficacy of such a program.

The Rokeach Scale E measures the relative flexibility and inflexibility of belief systems, and the general open or closed mindedness of the respondent. The instrument, being scored on a Likert Scale, was relatively simple to administer

57 and evaluate. It also had the advantage of having established validity and reliability for possible correlation with the devel­ oped Cultural Literacy Inventory. More important, it also mea­ sured what it was desired to measure—the rigidity or non-rigidity of the belief systems and value structures of the participants in the Cultural Literacy Laboratory.

The Cultural Literacy Inventory (see Appendix A) was de­ signed and developed by a group of four graduate students at The

University of Arizona under the direction of Dr. Herbert B.

Wilson. (The primary contributors were Dr. Wilson, Ms. Featherston, and the investigator.)

Utilizing the Primary Message System presented in Hall's

(1959) "Map of Culture," the investigator formulated 314 ques­ tions which were subsequently screened and categorized by the other members of the seminar. All headings and sub-headings under the Primary Message Systems were included in the final 60 items selected. These items were placed in a multiple choice format.

The Cultural Literacy Inventory was designed as a process instrument for individual self-appraisal in terms of own-cultural and crosscultural perceptions. The utilization of the Cultural

Literacy Inventory as a group diagnostic instrument has been im­ plemented by the investigator for the first time on a statistical­ ly significant basis in this research.

58

Whether considered as process or diagnostic, the Cultural

Literacy Inventory is the only instrument of its kind. It is presently the only instrument extant which permits measurement of own-culture and crosscultural perceptions for individuals or as a group assessment procedure for the cognitive aspects of own/other cultural perceptions. In this research the investigator elected to explore only those aspects of the data which were concerned with own-culture perception.

The determination of categorical designations and score sheets for individual self-analysis of participants in the Cul­ tural Literacy Laboratory were evolved jointly by Ms. Featherston and the investigator.

Kuder-Richardson 21 assessments of reliability performed by the investigator for the three populations involved in the study indicated high reliability (Group A .99, Group B .98,

Group C 1.00).

The Inventory was first employed and field tested with

58 volunteers who participated in the first Cultural Literacy

Laboratory in the Fall Semester, 1971. A research grant from -The

University of Arizona Alumni Association provided support to con­ duct the pioneer project. Subsequent to this initial field test­ ing, minor revisions were made in the Personal Questionnaire to provide additional demographic data. The Cultural Literacy In­ ventory was augmented to provide more comprehensive coverage of

Hall's Primary Message Systems. These revised instruments

(Featherston, Gillespie, and Wilson 1972) were employed in this study.

Selection of the Populations

Explored in This Study

The populations analyzed in this research consisted of three groups in southwestern Arizona involved in the educational enterprise either as learners or teachers.

1. Group A—50 pre-service or in-service educators enrolled in the College of Education, University of Arizona, at

Tucson, randomly selected without replacement.

2. Group B—50 secondary students, mainly seniors, from an ethnically mixed urban high school.

3. Group C—50 secondary students, also mainly seniors, at­ tending an on-reservation public high school.

Ethnic groups, as identified by the participants them­ selves, represented in the university population (Group A) were

Anglo, Mexican-American, American Indian, and Oriental (Chinese-

American). In Group B, the urban high school population, the ethnic groups represented were Anglo, Mexican-American, American

Indian, Black, and Puerto Rican. In the on-reservation public high school student population (Group C), ethnic groups repre­ sented were Anglo, Mexican-American, and American Indian (see

Table 1).

60

Table 1. Ethnic Representation by Percent of Population and

Cultural Group

Ethnicity

Anglo

Mexican-American

American Indian

Group

Educator (A) Urban (B) Reservation (C)

74

4 66

22 20

4 4

2

94

Oriental

Black

2

Puerto Rican

6

2

The proportions of sex distribution among Groups A, B, and C were approximately the same (see Table 2).

Table 2. Sex of Respondents by Percent of Population and

Cultural Group

Sex

Male

Female

Group

Educator (A) Urban (B) Reservation (C)

30

34

66 70

34

66

The three populations had all taken the instrumentation used in this study as an integral aspect of participation in the

Cultural Literacy Laboratory. All participation and data

61 contributions were voluntary. Therefore, for the high school stu­ dents in both urban and reservation populations there tended to be lacunae in the data. Particulate differences and commonali­ ties observed within and between the populations will be pre­ sented in Chapter 4.

A Model for Developing, Conducting, and Reporting the Study

For purposes of illustrating the similarities and differ­ ences existing within and between the three populations under in­ vestigation in this study, a research model was developed to enable the writer to collate the available data and to compare levels of significances for modal responses of the groups to the selected categories of the instrumentation (see Figure 4).

This model was based on the following hypotheses related to the statement of the problem:

1. Measurable crosscultural differences in perception do exist.

2. These measurable differences are amenable to categorization.

3. Differences between cultures by socioeconomic status, by sex, by residential mobility, by ethnicity, and by educa­ tional level where applicable may be, in whole or in part, statistically significant.

4. Holistic cultural perceptions of commonalities and dif­ ferences in cognitive maps are both measurable and sub­ ject to statistical analysis on a modal basis.

Step 1

Categorization of Data by Group (A, B, C)

Step 3

Step 2

Comparison of Significant

Differences Within Each

Southwestern Culture

I

Step 3

Urban

.(B)

Step 3

Reservation

62

Figure 4. Model for Structuring Significance of Modal Responses by Variables in Construction of Cognitive Maps in

Selected Educational Settings

5. These differences and similarities in modal cognitive maps will prove amenable in terms of statistical significance.

6. The farther the culture or subculture is (or perceives itself to be) removed from the dominant culture, the greater the differences will be statistically.

63

As indicated in the research model (Figure 4), the ini­ tial process was the collation and categorization of data by each population. Step 2 was the determination of the degree of homo­ geneity present within each cultural group. This was determined by calculation of the percentage of significant differences by variable present within the populations. It is essential to de­ termine the level of differences in perception inherent in the composition of the three groups to compensate for possible inter­ ference in inter-group comparisons on the variables examined; e.g., if hypothetical American Indian subjects should demonstrate significant differences from the population modal perception in

Group A and Group B, but not in Group C, such differences might either be a function of population size within groups or might be more directly attributable to some specific qualify of "Indianness" in perception of own culture.

Step 3 involved crosscultural or inter-group comparisons between the three populations—Group B (urban high school partici­ pants) with the educator normative Group A; Group C with Group A

(reservation students vs. educators); and GroupB with Group C

64

(both high school populations). It is important to note here that the primary evaluation considered in the utilization of the model is percentage of significant scores for each population de­ rived from the number of statistically significant scores obtained by rotation of the independent and dependent variables indicated for each group. A second process indicated mean scores by instru­ mental categories for each group or subgroup where statistically significant differences have manifested themselves as a result of differing modal perceptions for groups by item in these categories.

The Administration of the Instruments

Instrumentation employed in this study was administered to the participants in all three groups at the time they entered the Cultural Literacy Laboratory. Post-intervention testing was performed on the educator population at all times, but was not administered to Groups B and C, and post-intervention data are therefore not considered in this study. The instruments were administered as a learning process in conducting the Cultural

Literacy Laboratory as a class, or as a class component, at The

University of Arizona for the educator population. For both high school groups instruments were administered as a process compo­ nent in conducting exchange Cultural Literacy Laboratories be­ tween the urban and reservation schools over a three year period.

Data for the educator population were selected randomly, without replacement, from a population of over 1,000 University of Arizona

65

College of Education students who had taken the instruments as a process of laboratory participation, or during other course work.

Participation was voluntary for all three populations. Instrumentally based data were collated and categorized according to the written responses of the participants in all three groups analyzed in this study.

The Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E was scored by adding four to each of the answers to the 40 questions involved, thus con­ verting plus and minus responses to all positive numbers. After conversion, these positive numbers were then summed to provide total scores, and also categorized to provide sub-scores, for each individual within each group or population. To facilitate scoring and participant feedback, the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E categories were generalized from 16 to eight. These categories can be separated into their original components should this be­ come necessary.

The regeneralized categories for the Rokeach Dogmatism

Scale E used in this study were:

1. Flexibility of Belief and Disbelief Systems.

2. Aloneness, Isolation, and Helplessness of Man.

3. Uncertainty of Future, Urgency, and Reiteration of Ideas.

4. Security of Self Image.

5. Authoritarianism and Cause Identification.

6. Intolerance.

7. Ability to Change Beliefs.

8. Value Rigidity over time.

Both mean and modal scores were then computed for each item, and for each category, as well as for total scores.

Those independent variables measured by responses on the

Personal Questionnaire, age, sex, educational level, socioeconom­ ic status, residential mobility, and imposition of own values upon others were collated for each of the three groups, and mean and modal scores were computed for each of these independent variables.

The Cultural Literacy Inventory was designed on the prem­ ise that there are no right or wrong answers to the individual's own-culture perceptions. Normative responses were needed, how­ ever, so that individual parameters could be defined for persons taking the inventory. For this reason, each of the groups in­ volved in this study was normed against itself. Modal responses to each item on the inventory were established for each group.

Responses to the individual items were then placed in the appro­ priate Primary Message Systems categories.

The 10 categories of Primary Message Systems designated in Hall's (1959) "Map of Culture" are as follows:

1. Interaction

2. Association (group structure)

3. Subsistence

4. Bisexuality (male and female roles)

67

5. Territoriality (use of space)

6. Temporality (use of time)

7. Learning

8. Play

9. Defense (law, religion, medicine: the supportive institutions)

10. Exploitation (use of resources)

The scores of individual respondents were compared with the categorized modal scores for those items for each group.

Analysis was made on a concurrence/non-concurrence basis, with one point scored for each answer in agreement with the modal re­ sponse for that item for that group. Mean responses were cal­ culated for each Primary Message System Category, and for total scores for the inventory itself.

Treatment of the Data

The information from all three instruments administered was transcribed to score sheets and then submitted to quantita­ tive analysis to determine mean and modal responses by variables for each participating population.

In the process of data transcription for all three in­ struments, there were strong indications that polymodality rather than discrete modal responses by question as well as by category might result since responses by participants were by nature both idiosyncratic and emotionally tied. Therefore, while

both mean and modal scores were computed for the variables, the investigator elected to utilize the statistically viable compari­ son of means, with a simple percentile statement of modal deviations.

The selected mean scores were computed by item for each of the categories for each population in the study, as well as by categorical and total scores. Each population was analyzed in relation to its own mean response for each variable, each instru­ ment, each category, and each instrumental total. These findings were analyzed for non-directional levels of significance, employ­ ing the Student's t formula. This process was repeated for com­ putation of scores for all three groups and for inter- and intra-group score levels of significance.

While the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E was a valid and re­ liable instrument, the Personal Questionnaire and the Cultural

Literacy Inventory, having been designed as process rather than diagnostic instruments were not so established. For these two instruments it became necessary to devise some sort of "norming" procedure. Therefore, both instruments were subjected to quan­ titative analysis for each population involved in the study.

Both modal and mean responses were calculated for each item in each instrument, by location of the educational setting, by ethnic origin, and by the sex of the respondent. Individual re­ sponses within each population were analyzed by the obtained mo­ dal response for that population for that item, and individual

69

Where the individual response did not agree with the modal re­ sponse for that population, no score was recorded. If the indi­ vidual perceived his own culture in conformity for the modal response for that question within his own population, one point was tabulated for that question.

Categories for the items were assigned by the researcher in the case of the Personal Questionnaire, and according to

Hall's Map of Culture Primary Message Systems for the Cultural

Literacy Inventory. A quantitative analysis was performed and the resultant mean and modal scores were then consolidated by

Primary Message Systems categorical responses, and by total scores on the Cultural Literacy Inventory. In the analysis of these consolidated data, mean scores were employed in preference to modal scores to provide an equated comparison -with the Rokeach

Dogmatism Scale E regeneralized scores, and to provide a basis for statistical analysis. All specific differences emergent in the Cultural Literacy Inventory by item, residential location and sex are expanded in Appendix B. Ethnicity-related variables to­ gether with residential or populational location and sex are ex­ panded in the tables available in Appendix C.

The means of the respective total scores for all catego­ ries and variables in all three instruments employed constitute the bases for the evaluation of levels of significances of differ­ ences derived by Student's t formula in this study.

70

The investigator attempted to accomplish all viable rota­ tions of the variables involved in terms of significance, includ­ ing age and educational level for Group A. It was considered unnecessary for the two high school populations, Groups B and C, since age and educational level are normally functions of the educational setting, and while possibly significant, not meaningful.

In the case of the educator population, age (plus or minus 30) was considered as a variable, since college graduate and undergraduate students were involved in both categories.

The four ethnic groups which were automatically, by vir­ tue of their limited numerical representation in the populations analyzed, considered to be non-significant statistically by ethnic variable only were:

1. Oriental (Chinese-American) in Group A; one female representative.

2. Anglo, for Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E only, in Group C; one female representative.

3. Mexican-American in Group C; one male representative.

4. Puerto Rican in Group B; one male representative.

These individuals are incorporated in group data throughout, with the exception of the ethnic variable.

All variables indicated were, with the exceptions of the above-named ethnic groups, computed for analysis. Lack of ade­ quacy of respondent population on any variable may cause

differences in real significance of, or non-significance of, data which may never be recorded, and consequently never replicated.

However, the significant data which are recorded clearly indicate the probability that such data would not occur by chance; that the 1.5% of the totals of the populations lost in this case are not apt to change the levels of significance.

Differences and commonalities in socioeconomic status were calculated for Groups

A

and B on the basis of Warner-Eels for present inflation. Where both parents were employed, or in the case of some graduate students, a spouse was, the higher oc­ cupational standing was employed for assessing socioeconomic pendix A) were then regeneralized by the researcher into four oc­ cupational levels categories for computational purposes:

0. No response, or no specifics given

1. Upper class

2. Middle class

3. Lower class

In evaluating socioeconomic status for Group C, use of such criteria would have proven misleading. Dr. John Chilcott

(1976), in a personal communication, suggested reservation popu­ come and those who did not. To equate this economic situation

72 with that of Groups A and B, the writer established the following four categories for these data:

1. Includes those parents indicated in whatever capacity as government, tribal, or school system employees.

2. Includes those parents who were indicated as self-

3. Specifically indicates those parents who were described by their children as unemployed.

All calculations for this study were performed by the in­ vestigator. All variables were rotated or compared with all other variables, and the differences in group means were checked for statistically significant differences at the .05 level or higher.

All calculations were performed non-directionally, using this method, but greater or lesser variations were indicated for sig­ nificant items by population. The Student's t is considered to be extremely effective provided all variables are accounted for

(Isaac and Michael 1974) and as a method of evaluation, with the use of a calculator, can be easily replicated by the classroom teacher for use with divergent ethnic groups or with students who manifest behavioral problems which may be amenable to analysis.

Summary

A description of the selection of the populations involved has been provided in this chapter. A model to aid in illustrat­ ing the levels of significance on the relationships of the

73 variables within and between the groups has been presented. The original planning, designation, and modification of the instru­ mentation schedule was explained. The procedure for administra­ tion of the instruments was described. Techniques for instrumentation scoring were explicated, and the procedures for treating the data were detailed. The statistical analysis of data and the testing of the hypotheses of the study are presented in Chapter 4.

CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION OF THE DATA

In this chapter the data collected from the three popula­ tions included in the study are presented together with appro­ priate tabulations for interpretation. This information is presented according to the research model in Chapter 3 and is organized in the following fashion:

1. Determination of internal homogeneity for each of these groups.

2. Analysis of statistically significant differences for ro­ tated independent variables, Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E categories and group totals, and Cultural Literacy Inven­ tory categories and group totals according to non-

3. Heterogeneity of cultures; presentation of measurable crosscultural differences on the independent variables in terms of their statistical significance according to nondirectional Student's t tests.

4. Analysis of crosscultural differences by mean categorical scores and mean total scores for the populations on the

Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E.

74

75

Assessment of crosscultural differences in perceptions of own culture as manifested in categorical and total mean scores on the Cultural Literacy Inventory.

6. Crosscultural comparisons of statistically significant differences between the three populations.

7.

Tabulation of cultural universals, alternatives, and spe­ cialties as perceived by the three groups analyzed by percentages of categories involved in the Cultural Lit­ eracy Inventory.

Assessment of a randomly selected case study from any one of these three groups to serve as an example of idiosyn­ cratic application in the classroom setting.

Determination of Intrapopulational Homogeneity

Determination of within-group homogeneity, or solidarity of ethos was established by determining which of the 458 possible variables were applicable to the particular culture and obtaining the appropriate percentage of statistically significant differ­ ences for that population. Percentages were calculated on the basis of the actual number of variables involved for each group

(Table 3). This number varied as a function of ethnicity and lo­ cation, with the university educator population (Group A) pre­ senting the greatest diversity, and the reservation public high

Having established the actual number of variables to be considered in the computations for each group, the percentages

76

Table 3. Percentage of Total Possible Variables and Their

Utilization in Within-Group Analysis

Variables Within

Each Group

Independent

Poten­ tial

%

Group

A

f

3

Group

B

t

3

158 100 135 85.

Group

C /

3

Rokeach Dogmatism

Scale E 135 100 127 94. 07 90 66.

Cultural Literacy

Inventory 165 100 153 92.

Total 458 100 415 90.61 407 88.86 312 65.12 of statistically significant variables within each group were then computed to indicate the relative internal homogeneities of the three populations (Table 4). <

Table 4. Percentages of Statistically Significant Differences

Between Means of Variables Explored Within Groups

Statistically Significant

Variables Present Within

Each Group

Independent

Group

A

%

7 5.18

Group

B

t

%

7 5.

Group

C

%

7 6.25

Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E

4 3.14

7

5. 2 2.22

Cultural Literacy Inventory _1 0.65 _7

4.

_3 2.72

Total

12

2.89

21

5.

12

3.84

! ;

It is interesting to note that the educator population

77

(Group A), while possessing the greatest number of variables ex­ plored, is also the most homogeneous in its ethos or world view.

Next in order of internal consistency of own-culture perceptions is Group C, the reservation public high school, which has 94% shared ethnicity in its population. The least homogeneous, or most diffuse group in regard to ethos, is the urban high school.

Presentation of Statistically Significant

Independent Variables Within Cultures

The first rotation of independent variable performed was determining whether or not statistically significant differences . were present by socioeconomic status for Rokeach Dogmatism Scale

E total scores (Table 5). While all t tests performed were nondirectional, the investigator has taken the liberty, in this and all subsequent levels of significance reporting, of indicating the means. Additionally, the investigator has indicated whether these differences show a more open or closed mind for the Rokeach

Dogmatism Scale E, or a greater or lesser perception of own culture, as indicated on the Cultural Literacy Inventory. Bimodal

The only significant difference here appears to be that reservation students whose parent(s) are either tribal or school district employees, tend to be significantly more rigid or

78

Table 5. Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E Total Scores Rotated by

Socioeconomic Status Within Groups

Group SES No. Mode

106

A

B

C

0

0

0 163

A

B

C

A

B

C

A

B

C

1

1

1

2

2

2

3

3

3

130

128

144

161

JUJU

JU JU

X

S.D.

133.44 28.70

159.00 7.07

165.85 23.02

124.11 22.93

146.00

23.44

165.70 27.78

134.37 26.88

150.24 20.91

166.00

20.18

138.75

30.71

163.42 31.48

200.00 37.72 d.f.

18

20

6

3

11

2

8

1

20

10

17

9

Sig.

..

mm mm mmmm

— ~ structured in their beliefs, attitudes, and values than any other socioeconomically defined segment of any of the cultures.

There were no significant differences in world view for any of the populations in the Cultural Literacy Inventory total scores as rotated with socioeconomic status.

In terms of imposition of the individual's own values upon members of another culture, as rotated with total Rokeach

Dogmatism Scale E scores, the only significant total was for mem­ bers of Group C, who were significantly (-.05) more open-minded, or less rigid than their peers, and who equally apparently felt that they should change the values of others to meet their own.

t i

79

This particular response was, for whatever reason, totally absent in the educator population.

Within the framework of the Cultural Literacy Inventory, as rotated with imposition of the individuals' own values, only those members of Group A who would impose their own values "with reservations" indicated significant statistical differences.

Those individuals indicated that they were (+.05) more perceptive of their own culture than the norm.

The variable residential mobility when explored within each culture as rotated with Rokeach total scores indicated only that males in Group A who had moved frequently tended to be more open-minded. The significance level was -.05 for these individ­ uals. For the Cultural Literacy Inventory, those students who had moved from state to state or lived in more than one country indicated greater perceptions of own culture (+.05).

Because there have been considerable ongoing questions on the part of the participants in the Cultural Literacy Laboratory as to whether or not they, as individuals, were unique by virtue of age, or sex, or educational level, rotational totals for both the Rokeach and the Cultural Literacy Inventory were computed, and it was found that they were not. Within the educator popula­ tion, there were no significant differences for graduate or un­ dergraduate students, for plus 30 or minus 30 years of age, and there were no significant differences by sex of the respondents in any of these categories.

80

In relation to residential mobility as an independent variable without rotation, there were only two groups within pop­ ulations who exhibited significant deviations from their peer groups. In the educator population, Group A, Anglo males were high school population, Mexican-American females were signifi­

There were no significant differences in socioeconomic status within the educator Group A. (See Chapter 3 for descrip­ tion of socioeconomic status.) In Group B, Anglos as a whole had (.01) a higher socioeconomic status with Anglo males (.05) also reflecting this trait. In this group, Mexican-American fe­ by American Indian females.

On the variable imposition of own values on another, there were no significant differences apparent within any of the three populations.

When this variable, imposition of values, was rotated with the variable for residential mobility, women who indicated that they would impose their values on others in some cases were

(.05) significantly less mobile residentially than the rest of the population of educators. For Group B there were no signifi­ cant differences. For Group C, those persons of both sexes who indicated that they would impose their values in some cases, were

81 significantly more mobile (.05) residentially than the group as a whole.

Where the variable residential mobility was rotated with socioeconomic status., it was found that in Group A both middle class males and females differed significantly from the mean.

Males in this group were significantly (.05) more mobile resi­ the mean. In Group B, lower class females exhibited significant­ ly less mobility residentially than the rest of the population.

In Group C, males from the middle class reported significantly

These youngsters almost without exception had reported that cat­ tle raising was the primary source of family income.

In a rotation of the variable socioeconomic status with the variable imposition of values upon others, in Group A middle class females were significantly (.05) less apt to impose their values upon others. In Group B, lower class females were least prone (.01) to value imposition. In Group C, there were no sig­ nificant differences within the population.

Significant Differences of Perception by

Categories Within the Groups in the

Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E

In this and all subsequent analysis of the Rokeach Dogma­ tism Scale E and the Cultural Literacy Inventory, it is important to note that the independent variables of ethnicity and sex are

82 rotated throughout data presentation by categories and by total scores.

In Category I of the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E, Flexibil­ ity of Belief and Disbelief Systems, there were no significant differences exhibited within and between the three groups.

In Category II, Aloneness, Isolation and Helplessness of

Man, there were no significant differences manifested for any group.

In Category III, Uncertainty of Future, Urgency, and Reinteration of Ideas, there were no significant differences appar­ ent in the educator or the reservation populations. In the urban high school group, Anglo subjects as a whole (.01) and Anglo certainty of future, and need for reiteration of ideas than the remainder of the population.

In Rokeach Category IV, Security of Self-image, in Group nificantly less (.01) secure about themselves than did the re­ mainder of the group. In Group B, Black females also felt significantly less secure (.05) than their peers. In Group C,

American Indian females exhibited a significant (.01) level of insecurity of self image.

Analysis of Authoritarianism and Cause Identification,

Rokeach Category V, indicated that in both the educator and urban high school populations, Anglo females felt significantly (.05)

83 less need for emphasis in this area. In Group C, there were no significant differences within the population.

In Rokeach Category VI, Intolerance, there were no-sig­ nificant differences manifested within the reservation high school group. However, Mexican-American females in Group A were opinion and of renegades from the group. This was also true in

Group B, where Mexican-American females again were significantly

For Rokeach Category VII, Ability to Change Beliefs, there were no significant differences within any of the groups.

In Rokeach Category VIII, Value Rigidity over Time, there were no significant differences exhibited within Groups B and C.

In Group A, analysis of male educator responses indicated that they were significantly (.001) more flexible or open-minded than the females.

Analysis of total scores in the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E indicated that there were no significant differences present within Group A. In Group B, the urban high school Anglo females were significantly (.001) more open-minded than their fellow students. In the reservation, population, males, as a group, were

i

}

84

Significant Differences of Perception by

Categories Within the Groups in the

Cultural Literacy Inventory

The Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E is designed to assess the affective domain in culture perception. The Cultural Literacy

Inventory is designed to measure cognitive aspects of how own

• culture is perceived. Within the structure of the Cultural Lit­ eracy Inventory, the participants were asked to respond to the questions as they would behave in their own culture. In other words, they have been asked to assess their cultural expectations in relation to themselves.

In consideration of the Cultural Literacy Inventory, intraculturally there were no significant differences manifested within the Primary Message System I, Interaction.

In Primary Message System II, Association, there were no significant differences manifested in Group A. Group B Mexican-

American females were (.05) less perceptive than the remainder of the group, and in Group C, males were also (.05) less perceptive.

There were no significant differences exhibited in Pri­ mary Message System Category III, Subsistence.

In Primary Message System Category IV, Bisexuality, there were no significant differences for populations A or C. However,

Group B females as a whole were significantly (.001) more percep­ tive of sex roles, as were Anglos as a whole. Mexican-American females were also (.05) more perceptive here.

85

Primary Message System V embodied no significant differ­ ences for Groups A and B, but in Group C American Indian females were (.05) significantly more perceptive of Territoriality.

Primary Message System VI, Temporality, contained no significant differences internally for Groups A and B; however, area.

There were no significant differences present intragroup for the Primary Message System categories VII, Learning, or

VIII, Play.

In Primary Message System Category IX, Defense, only

Group B American Indian females indicated significantly (.05) less perception in own culture than their peers.

In Primary Message System X, the category Exploitation, there were no significant differences manifested intraculturally.

On the Cultural Literacy Inventory mean scores for total evaluation, Group A male educators as a whole were significantly

Presentation of Significant Crosscultural

Evidences of Hetero- and Homogeneity

While the populations analyzed were in varying degree homogeneous intragroup, they proved to be emphatically hetero­ geneous intergroup.

Determination of intergroup heterogeneity of ethos was established by determining how many of the 1,096 variables which

86 were present through rotation were applicable to the particular crosscultural comparison. Subsequently the researcher obtained the appropriate percentages of the statistically significant dif­ ferences in means appearing between the compared populations.

Percentages were calculated on the basis of the actual numbers of variables involved which proved to be statistically significant between groups analyzed on each crosscultural comparison. This number varied as a function of ethnicity and location, with the reservation high school population presenting the least diversity in these areas.

It is apparent from the figures presented in Table 6 that on independent variables, the educator population (Group A) and

81.89% of the time. The educator (Group A) and reservation

(Group C) populations differ to a greater degree, sharing only a

60.72% area of commonality. In this same area, the two high schools exhibit commonalities on 77.68% of the variables ex­ amined. In other words, the urban (Group B) and educator (Group

A) populations share the greatest number of commonalities and the number of commonalities on the independent variables.

For the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E, Groups B and A ex­ hibited 75.60% of commonalities. The reservation group shared

47.98% of their beliefs, attitudes and values with Group A and the two high school groups held common beliefs, values, and

Table 6. Percentages of Statistically Significant Differences

Between Means of Variables Explored Crossculturally

87

Variables Computed Groups'

Between Means B & A

Independent 29

%

Groups

C & A

18.11 44

%

Groups

C & B

39.28 25

%

22.32

Rokeach Dogmatism

Scale E 31

24.46

47 52.22 36 40.00

Cultural Literacy

Inventory 11 7.18 43 39.09 41 37.27

Total 71 17.44 134 42.94 102 32.69 attitudinal systems 60% of the time. The reservation and educa­ tor populations were the most widely separated, while the two high school groups tended to have more in common.

In analyzing the Cultural Literacy Inventory percentage comparisons of commonalities, an even wider difference between the cognitive maps of the different populations was observed.

The educator and urban groups shared 92.82% agreement on the way in which they perceived own culture. On the other hand, Group C shared only 60.91% with the educator population and little more,

62.73%, with the urban high school group.

Considering the total variables examined, crossculturally it was found that Groups A and B perceive their respective worlds in the same or equivalent fashion 84.03% of the time. Reserva­ tion students and educators perceive their equivalence structures

in like manner only 57.06% of the time. Groups B and C share mutually acceptable expectations 70.52% of the time. Teachers and urban high school students are closest in shared perceptions.

Next in order of sharing perceptions are the urban and reserva­ tion students, and the perceptual gulf is widest between educa­ tors and reservation students.

Presentation of Significant Crosscultural

Differences on Independent Variables' and Their Rotation

Socioeconomic status—the first crosscultural comparison performed here was to determine the significant Rokeach scores rotated by the independent variable of socioeconomic status.

These are shown in Table 7.

In terms of SES variable 0, there were no significant differences between educators and urban high school students.

Reservation high school students indicated significantly higher

(.001) or more closed Rokeach total scores than did the educa­ tors, and (.05) than did the urban students.

For participants listing upperclass socioeconomic status there were no significant differences manifested between Groups

A and B. The reservation group again showed a more closed belief systems structure'(.05) than Group A, but did not indicate such difference in comparison with the urban high school students.

Middle class participants manifested the greatest diver­ sity in regard to Dogmatism Scale E total scores, with Group B

89

Table 7. Rotation of Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E Total Scores by

Socioeconomic Status Across Cultures

Groups Compared Variable

B/A

C/A

C/B

0

0

0

X S.D.

159.00 7.07

165.85 23.01

165.85 27.78

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

1

1

1

2

2

2

3

3

3

146.00

23.44

165.70 27.78

165.70 27.78

150.24 20.91

166.00 20.18

166.00 20.18

163.92 31.47

200.00 37.72

200.00 37.72 d.f.

1

20

20

10

9

9

20

6

6

11

2

2

Sig.

— M

— — being (.001) more closed-minded than Group A. Group C was more closed-minded than Group A (.01) and also (.05) more closedminded than its urban counterpart.

For lower class socioeconomic status the only significant difference exhibited was between educators and urban students, with Group B being significantly more closed-minded (.01).

In a comparison of Cultural Literacy Inventory total scores rotated by socioeconomic status between cultures, results were as follows (Table 8).

Only two socioeconomic levels proved to be significant in regard to interaction effect with Cultural Literacy Inventory

90

Table 8. Rotation of Cultural Literacy Inventory Total Scores by

Socioeconomic Status Across Cultures

Groups Compared Variable

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

0

0

0

1

. 1

1

X S.D.

28. 10.65

4.08

4.08

5.10

6.06

6.06 d.f.

3

28

28

10

10

10

Sig.

-.001

-.001

-.01

— total scores compared between groups. For those participants failing to indicate socioeconomic status, cross-group evaluations showed.significantly less own-culture perception, or less defini­ tive modal cognitive maps for Group C in comparison with both educator (-.001) and urban (-.001) populations.

Group C also indicated significantly (.01) less ownculture perception than Group B in rotation with upper class so­ cioeconomic status on Cultural Literacy Inventory totals.

Imposition of Own Values

Analysis of rotation of Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E total scores with the independent variables relating to the imposition of own values upon others is presented in Table 9. Where there were no indications of what degree of values imposition obtained there were also no intergroup significant responses (values im­ position 0).

91

Table 9. Rotation of Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E Total Scores by

Imposition of Values Between Cultures

Groups Compared Variable

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

0

0

0

1

1

1

4

4

4

5

5

5

2

2

2

3

3

3

X

0

165. ,09

165. ,09

156. ,02

158. ,78

158. ,78

153. ,09

183. .99

183. .99

152. ,16

180. ,74

180.

,74

163. .33

163.

,33

152. ,98

152. ,98 d.f.

0

4

4

16

14

14

13

1

1

9

6

6

1

5

5

1

5

5

Sig.

MM

- -

- -

mmm*

In the values imposition category, respondents to the

92 tions to the question: "If I had a foreign friend whose values

. In values imposition category one, where the respondents would change values "not at all," Rokeach total scores were sig­ nificantly higher (+.01 in both cases) for urban and reservation students than for the educators. However, there were no signifi­ cant differences manifested between urban and reservation stu­ dents on total Rokeach score.

For PQ imposition of values category two, in which the question was answered "with reservations," Group B indicated a significantly higher (+.001) Rokeach total score—in other words those urban high school students responding in this category were significantly less open-minded over all than their educator counterparts. There were no significant differences for the reservation population.

For the third category of imposition of values on the PQ, where the response to the question was indicated as "only in a few areas," respondents in the urban high school group manifested significantly higher (+.001) or more closed Rokeach total scores than did either reservation or educator groups.

In category four of imposition of values on the PQ, those responding "at times," there were no significant differences be­ tween Groups A and B. However, reservation students indicated

93

(+.05) more closed beliefs, attitudes and values systems than did their urban or educator counterparts.

The fifth category on the PQ, in which respondents would change the values of others "to meet my values" was significant only in regard to reservation vs. educator comparison. Here,

Group C was significantly (+.01) more rigid or closed-minded in beliefs, attitudes and values. There were no other statistically significant comparisons.

When the Cultural Literacy Inventory total scores were subjected to the same rotation of values imposition variables, the results are those shown in Table 10. In regard to those par­ ticipants who did not indicate any imposition of values hierarchy, there were no significant findings by rotation with Cultural

Literacy Inventory total scores.

Category one of imposition of own values on others, which elicited the response "not at all," was manifested in com­ parison of the three groups or subcultures only between educa­ tors and reservation high school students. Comparison of the latter group's mean scores indicated that Group C was signifi­ cantly less perceptive of own-culture modes (-.001) than was

Group A for total Cultural Literacy Inventory scores.

There were no significant effects on Cultural Literacy

Inventory scores by rotation with values imposition category two,

"with reservations."

94

Table 10. Rotation of Cultural Literacy Inventory Total Scores by Imposition of Values Between Cultures

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B i Compared Variable

0

0

0

1

1

1

2

2

2

3

3

3

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

4

4

4

5

5

5

X

27.00

28.83

28.83

33.41

29.29

29.29

34.50

25.00

25.00

30.90

26.00

26.00

32.50

30.71

30.71

33.00

25.55

25.55

S.D.

7.21

4.95

4.95

4.12

3.65

3.65

3.70

4.58

4.58

4.33

6.41

6.41

3.87

3.29

3.29

4.24

5.19

5.19 d.f.

13

2

2

9

7

7

2

5

5

16

16

16

3

6

6

1

8

8

Sig.

-.001

C5

C5

-.01

95

In category three "only in a few areas," of values impo­ sition, only Groups C and A were affected by rotational compari­ sons. Here the reservation population was significantly less perceptive (-.05) of own cultural cognitive maps than were the educators.

The fourth category of values imposition, "at times," manifested significant statistical differences (-.05) only in the educator/reservation cross group comparison, with Group C signifi­ cantly less perceptive in its modal cognitive maps than were the university participants of theirs.

The fifth category "change to meet my own" shows reserva­ tion participants responding in this category to be significantly less acute than educators (-.01) in perception of own culture, but significantly more perceptive (+.01) of own-culture modes than their urban counterparts.

Residential Mobility

There were no significant variations in mean total re­ sponses for Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E as rotated with the inde­ pendent variables for residential mobility with the exception of those shown in Table 11.

All significant responses were highly stationary in terms of residential mobility. In regard to residential mobility cate­ gory eighteen (town to town within the same state), reservation students were significantly (+.01) more closed-minded than either other group considered crossculturally.

96

Table 11. Rotation of Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E Total Scores by

Residential Mobility Between Cultures

Groups Compared Variable

B/A

C/A

C/B

18

18

18

X

S.D.

150.60 30.64

160.83 17.56

160.83 17.56

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

19

19

19

20

20

20

171.66

24.19

159.67 7.23

159.67

7.23

150.40 11.63

172.10 29.41

172.10 29.41 d.f.

4

5

5

2

2

2

9

9

9

Sig.

Residential mobility category nineteen (house to house in the same town) again manifested significantly more rigid Group C students (+.05) than any other intergroup comparison. These data are shown in Table 12.

Analysis of those students who had never moved from the houses into which they had been born revealed that between urban and educator populations, Group B respondents manifested signifi­ cantly higher Rokeach total scores (+.001) as did the reservation population (+.01). There were no significant differences between high school populations.

In comparison between Groups B and A, urban high school significantly greater (+.05) own-culture perception on the Cul­ tural Literacy Inventory than did the educator population.

97

Table 12. Rotation of Cultural Literacy Inventory Total Scores by Residential Mobility Between Groups

Sig. Groups Compared Variable

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

•14

14

14

15

15

15

16

16

16

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

B/A

C/A'

C/B

B/A

C/A

C/B

17

17

17

18

18

18

19

19

19

20

20

20

X

34.25

23.50

23.50

••••

28.20

28.20

31.20

21.66

21.66

31.66

29.66

29.66

33.33

28.71

28.71

33.00

27.67

27.67

32.90

29.33

29.33

S.D.

1.70

3.53

3.53

7.19

7.19

2.16

7.50

7.50

2.08

2.30

2.30

4.96

5.28

5.28

2.64

1.52

1.52

3.14

4.39

4.39 d.f.

3

1

1

5

5

4

2

2

2

2

2

5

6

6

2

2

2

9

11

11

mmmm

-.M

-.05

-.05

-.01

-.05

98

Reservation students with low residential mobility (moved from house to house in the same community) showed significantly and than their urban peer group (.05). Those reservation stu­ dents who had lived in the same houses all of their lives also demonstrated lower perception of own culture than Group A (.01) and than Group B (.05).

Analysis of Table 13 indicates that Group A exhibits the greatest residential mobility. Group C (-.01) being less mobile, son. For specific breakdowns by sex and/or ethnicity the reader is referred to Table 13.

In considering Table 14, there were no overall differ­ ences in reported mean socioeconomic status between Groups B and

A, or between Groups C and A. However, in a comparison of the two high school populations, the reported mean SES was signifi­ lower socioeconomic mean status.

Between the urban high school and the educator popula­ tion, females reported significantly lower socioeconomic status

In comparing Group C and Group A, American Indian females indicated a significantly lower SES than the educator mean (.05).

Table 13. Crosscultural Comparison of Residential Mobility by

Ethnicity and Sex

Groups Compared

B/A Total Groups

C/A Total Groups

C/B Total Groups

B/A Total Males

C/A Total Males

C/B Total Males

B/A Total Females

C/A Total Females

C/B Total Females

B/A Total Anglo

C/A Total Anglo

C/B Total Anglo

B/A Anglo Males

C/A Anglo Males

C/B Anglo Males

B/A Anglo Females

C/A Anglo Females

C/B Anglo Females

B/A M-A Totals

C/A M-A Totals

C/B M-A Totals

B/A M-A Males

C/A M-A Males

C/B M-A Males

B/A M-A Females

C/A M-A Females

C/B M-A Females

B/A A-l Total

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

X

15.27

16.25

16.25

14.86

16.00

16.00

15.46

16.37

16.37

14.40

8.00

8.00

14.36

0

0

14.42

8.00

8.00

17.27

16.00

16.00

19.50

16.00

16.00

17.88

0

0

18.00

16.45

16.45

S.D.

3.48

5.04

3.29

3.29

3.96

4.17

4.17

4.31

0

0

5.02

0

0

0

0

6.32

0

0

0.70

0

0

2.26

0

0

0

3.73

3.73

28

28

29

0

0

10

0

0

18

0

0

10

0

0

1

0

0

8

0

0

0

41

41

49

43

43

14

14

14

Sig.

-.01

-.05

- -

-.001

- -

-.05

-.05

-.001

- -

-.05'

Table 13, Continued

Groups Compared

B/A A-1 Males

C/A A-1 Males

C/B A-1 Males

B/A A-1 Females

C/A A-1 Females

C/B A-1 Females

X

0

17.23

17.23

18.00

16.10

16.10

0

4.89

4.89

0

3.93

3.93

100

0

12

12

0

28

28

Siq.

-.01

-.001

101

Table 14. Crosscultural Comparison of Socioeconomic Status by

Ethnicity and Sex

Groups Compared

B/A Total Group

C/A Total Group

C/B Total Group

B/A Total Female

C/A Total Female

C/B Total Female

B/A M-A Total

C/A M-A Total

C/A M-A Total

B/A M-A Female

C/A M-A Female

C/B M-A Female

B/A A-l Total

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

B/A A-l Female

C/A A-l Female

C/B A-l Female

X

2.02

1.61

1.61

1.68

1.68

2.72

1.00

1.00

0

0

3.00

1.47

1.47

3.00

3.25

3.25

S.D.

1.37

0.64

0.64

0.76

0.70

0.70

0.46

0

0

0.44

0

0

0

0.97

0.97

0

1.27

1.27

45

20

20

8

0

0

0

20

20

0

7

7

30 •

15

15

10

0

0

-.01

-

- -

- -

— _

-.05

_ _

102

Between Groups C and B, reservation students, as a whole their urban counterparts.

As indicated in Table 15, Group C female students showed on others than did the educators, or than did the urban high school students (.05). Reservation American Indian Students (.01) were significantly more apt to impose own values than Group A, and Group B (.05). Group C American Indian females showed sig­ nificantly (.001) more apt to impose own values than the educa­ group.

In considering the rotation of residential mobility by imposition of own values upon others (see Table 16), one finding is readily apparent. Those participants in all three of the pop­ ulations who would impose their own values upon others "with res­ ervations" are also the most mobile in regard to residence.

In Table 17, Group C participants who did not indicate less mobile than urban high school students. In the case of those participants indicating upper class socioeconomic status,

A. For those indicating middle class status, Group B as a whole

103

Table 15. Crosscultural Comparison of Significant Differences in

Imposition of Own Values by Ethnicity and Sex

Groups Compared

C/A Total Female

C/B Total Female

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

C/A A-l Female

C/B A-l Female

X

2.82

2.73

S.D.

1.65

1.65

1.63

1.63

0.59

0.59 d.f.

31

31

41

41

29

29

Siq.

Table 16. Significant Residential Mobility Scores Rotated by

Imposition of Values- by Sex Between Groups

Groups Compared

C/A Total Group

C/A Total Males

B/A Total Females

C/A Total Females

C/B Total Females

Variable X

1 17.63

1

17.60

1

15.41

1

17.08

1 17.08

C/A Total Group

C/B Total Group

B/A Total Females

C/A Total Group

C/B Total Group

C/A Total Males

B/A Total Group

C/A Total Group

C/A Total Females

C/B Total Females

C/A Total Group

C/A Total Females

2

2

2

3

3

3

5

5

9.33

9.33

15.58

17.62

17.62

17.25

4

4

16.50

17.85

4 18.33

4 18.33

14.22

13.33

S.D.

3.05

3.20

3.05

3.11

3.11

1.52

1.52

4.58

2.38

3.87

2.26

7.90

2.61 d.f.

Siq.

16

4

11

11

11

2

2

11

7

7

3

-.05

-.05

-.01

-.05 3

6

5

5

8

5

-.05

f

Table 17. Significant Residential Mobility Scores Rotated by

Socioeconomic Status by Sex Between Groups

104

Groups Compared

C/A Group Total

C/B Group Total

C/A Total Males

C/B Total Males

C/A Total Females

C/B Total Females

Variable X

0

0

0

0

0

0

15.65

15.65

16.80

16.80

15.93

15.93

B/A Group Total

B/A Group Total

C/A Group Total

B/A Total Females

C/A Total Females

C/B Total Females

B/A Total Females

1

2

2

2

2

2

3

15.41

14.00

18.85

15.38

18.85

18.85

13.41

2.33

S.D.

4.97

4.97

2.65

2.65

4.60

4.60

4.12

5.30

2.26

4.78

2.26

25

25

9

9

14

14

11

20

6

12

6

6

9 again for females (.001). In comparing the two high school popu­ lations, reservation females were significantly less mobile (.01) than their Group B counterparts. In the lower class socioeconom­ residential mobility than Group A.

For those participants who did not indicate socioeconomic status Group C females were significantly (.05) more apt to im­ pose their values on others than Group A (see Table 18). Between the two high school populations, Group C as a whole (.001) was

Table 18. Significant Imposition of Values Scores Rotated by

Socioeconomic Status by Sex Between Groups

105

Groups Compared

C/B Group Total

C/B Total Males

C/A Total Females

C/B Total Females

B/A Total Females

Variables X

0

0

0

0

2.76

2.60

3.07

3.07

3 1.36

S.D.

1.66

1.69

1.59

1.59

0.67

Sig.

24

9

13

13

10 -.01 to do so than females (.001). There were no significant differ­ ences between populations in either upper or middle class socio­ economic categories.

Lower socioeconomic status females in Group B were sig­ the educator population, Group A.

Analysis of Crosscultural Differences by Mean

Categorical and Total Scores Extant in the

Three Populations on the Rokeach

Dogmatism Scale E

The Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E is an instrument designed to measure open and closed mindedness in individuals as it ap­ plies to their belief systems, attitudes and values. This in­ strument was used in this study to provide infrastructure in the construction of holistic modal cognitive maps for populations in

106 instrument were regeneralized to facilitate scoring into eight analyzed in this study are presented together with an analysis of significant differences existing between the selected populations on Rokeach total score means.

In analyzing the significant data presented in Table 19, it becomes apparent that the urban Group B, as a whole, is more closed-minded in regard to flexibility of belief and disbelief

Group C students also indicate statistically significant rigidity. This was also true of the American Indian students as females (.001). The reservation population as a group was less

Group C females (.001) as an entity.

In considering Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E Category II, in this area than did Group A. Group C as a whole was more con­ scious (.001) of aloneness, isolation and helplessness of man nificant differences. American Indian students manifested more

107

Table 19. Significant Differences in Category I: Flexibility of

Belief and Disbelief Systems—Rokeach Scale E, Rotated

Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

B/A Group Total

C/B Group Total

C/A Total Males

B/A Total Females

C/A Total Females

C/A Total Females

C/A Anglo Total

B/A Anglo Female

B/A M-A Total

B/A M-A Female

C/A A-l Total

C/A A-l Male

C/A A-l Female

Mode

9

16

16

10

8

it

*

13

13

13

*

X

14.96

15.07

15.75

15.28

15.66

15.66

14.55

14.74

15.91

16.44

15.68

15.75

15.65

4.68

5.31

3.16

4.67

4.15

4.15

4.82

5.01

4.98

5.12

5.45

3.30

4.22

28

18

10

8

37

11

25 d.f.

Sig.

45

39

12

31

26

26

*Bimodal responses.

**Polymodal responses.

In comparing Groups B and C, we find reservation students as a category (see Table 20).

Category III, when analyzed, produces the following data: in comparison of Groups A and B, the high school students as a

108

Table 20. Significant Differences in Category II: Aloneness,

Isolation, and Helplessness of Man—Rokeach Dogmatism

Scale E, Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by

Ethnicity

Groups Compared

C/A Group Total

C/B Group Total

C/A Total Males

C/A Total Females

C/B Total Females

B/A Anglo Total

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

C/A A-l Male

C/A A-l Female

C/B A-l Female

Mode

16

16

16

16

16

16

*

«v

X

15.67

15.67

15.69

15.66

. 15.66

13.00

15.94

15.94

16.17

15.89

15.89

3.78

3.78

3.06

4.14

4.14

3.68

3.68

5.15

4.11

4.11 d.f.

39

39

12

26

26

28

37

37

11

25

25

Sig.

*Bimodal responses. higher scores, as did Anglo male students (see Table 21). Group ties in this area, as did females within this group. This pat­ tern was repeated when Group C was rotated for ethnicity with ly more rigidity in the category'. This same increase in level of significance applied to female American Indian students. There were no statistically significant variations in means apparent between the two high school populations.

109

Table 21. Significant Differences in Category III: Uncertainty of Future, Urgency, and Reiteration of Ideas—Rokeach

Dogmatism Scale E, Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

B/A Group Total

C/A Group Total

B/A Group Females

C/A Group Females

B/A Anglo Males

C/A A-l Total

C/A A-l Females

Mode

26

27

26

*

21

23

X

21.78

21.72

23.11

20.70

22.96

S.D.

4.73

5.29

4.30

5.72

3.02

5.31

5.78 d.f.

45

39

31

26

9

37

25

Sig

*Bimodal responses.

In comparing Groups B and A for Category IV, it was found that only Black female students attending the urban high school image, indicating that they perceived themselves as less secure.

This, incidentally, was the only category in the entire cognitive mapping instrumentation in which Black students demonstrated any significant differences either within their own group or between groups (see Table 22). cure of self-image than Group A, with American Indian female category also. These same American Indian female students also

110

Self-image—Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E, Rotated Between

Groups by Sex and Ethnicity

Siq. Groups Compared

C/A Group Females

C/A A-l Female

C/B A-l Female

B/A Black Female

Mode

14

15

15

21

X

18.14

18.31

18.31

20.66

S.D.

1.38

1.12

1.12

0.58

26

25

25

2 their urban high school peers.

In regard to Category V, Authoritarianism and Cause Iden­ tification, the following statistically significant differences between groups appeared: Between Group B and Group A, the only students indicating a significantly more closed concept of these belief systems were Mexican-American subjects as a whole (.01) and Mexican-American females (.01). These data are shown in

Table 23.

Between Group C and Group A, Group C total males and to­ tal females exhibited significantly more (.001) rigidity in this respect, as did American Indian students, both as a group (.001) and by each sex (.001).

In comparing the two high school populations, the reser­ the urban, as did the total male group (.001). The American

Ill

Table 23. Significant Differences in Category V: Authoritarian­ ism and Cause Identification—Rokeach Dogmatism Scale

E, Rotated Between Groups by Sex and Ethnicity

Groups Compared

C/A Group Total

C/B Group Total

C/A Group Males

C/B Group Males

C/A Group Females

B/A M-A Total

B/A M-A Female

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

C/A A-l Male

C/B A-l Male

C/A A-l Female

Mode

43

43

36

36

43

35

43

43

36

36

43

X

35.67

35.67

39.69

39.69

24.74

35.54

36.55

35.89

35.89

39.75

39.75

33.53

S.D.

8.25

8.25

7.55

7.55

5.79

8.51

2.99

7.99

7.99

8.21

8.21

10.16 d.f.

39

39

12

12

25

10

8

37

37

11

11

25

Sig.

+'. 001

"Bimodal responses.

Indian students in this population repeated this pattern, with the entire ethnic group significantly (.001) higher in mean their perceptions.

As indicated in Table 24, when Group A was compared to

Group B, it became apparent that Group B as a whole (.001), by male population (.05), and by female total population (.01) scores on the Rokeach category of Intolerance was significantly less tolerant than the educator group. This inflexibility was particularly manifest for Anglo students as a group (.05), for

Mexican-Americans as a group (.001), and for Mexican-American females, as rotated by sex and by ethnicity (.001).

112

Table 24. Significant Differences in Category VI: Intolerance—

Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E, Rotated Between Groups by

Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

B/A Group Total

C/A Group Total

B/A Total Males

C/A Total Males

B/A Total Females

C/A Total Females

B/A Anglo Total

B/A M-A Total

B/A M-A Female

C/A A-l Total

C/A A-l Total

C/A A-l Female

Mode

40

*

40

*

"Si

JU

it

37

28

X

32.09

32.95

33.71

29.92

31.34

33.26

30.62

37.82

37.55

33.42

35.50

33.69

"Bimodal responses.

**Polymodal responses.

S.D.

7.82

8.00

11.85

8.29

11.56

4.13

12.20

8.08

5.00

7.49

8.21

4.79 d.f.

45

39

13

12

31

26

28

10

8 .

37

11

25

Sig.

Group C when compared to Group A showed reservation stu­ dents as being significantly less tolerant (.001) than the educa­ tor norm, with both male and female group rotations displaying the same significance (.001). This same level of significance

(.001) applied for American Indian participants as a whole, and as rotated by sex. There were no significant differences ex­ hibited between the two high school populations in this category.

In category VII, Group B, as a whole, manifested sig­ females as compared to Group A. Group B Mexican-American

V

113 students as an entity were (.01) significantly more closed minded in this respect than Group A, and Mexican-American females also indicated significant inflexibility (.001) in this area (see

Table 25).

Group C as a whole, by total male, and by total female components reflected significantly (.001) less ability to change beliefs than did the educator population. This level of signifi­ cance was repeated for all American Indian males and females in­ cluded in this population.

A comparison of Groups B and C indicated that Group C, in toto, was significantly less flexible (.001) than the urban stu­ dents with males manifesting also (.01) more rigidity than Group

B. There were no significant differences for females as a group.

This pattern was duplicated'for the American Indian students as an entity. As a group they indicated significantly (.001) less ability to change beliefs. Male students demonstrated (.01) significance level less flexibility than their urban peers. Fe­ males did not indicate significant differences.

Assessment of category VIII indicates that in the compari­ son of Groups A and B, both the Anglo urban high school students as a group (.05) and Mexican-American students as an ethnic enti­ ty (.05) manifested significantly greater value rigidity over time than the educator population.

In comparisons between Group A and Group C, Group C ex­ hibited significantly greater value rigidity over time on all

114

Table 25. Significant Differences in Category VII: Ability to

Change Beliefs—Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E, Rotated

Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

B/A Group Total

C/A Group Total

C/B Group Total

C/A Total Males

C/B Total Males

B/A Total Females

C/A Total Females

B/A M-A Total

B/A M-A Female

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

C/A A-l Male

C/B A-l Male

C/A A-l Female

Mode

8

8

8

«v

*

8

8

8

Art

8

8

14

14

8

X

8.74

10.20

10.20

11.00

11.00

8.91

9.81

10.45

10.44

10.16

10.16

11.25

11.25

9.65

"Bimodal responses.

**Polymodal responses.

S.D.

2.89

3.19

3.19

2.38

2.38

2.95

2.92

2.62

2.65

2.62

2.62

2.25

2.25

2.65 d.f.

45

39

39

12

12

31

26

10.

8

37

37

11

11

25

Sig. variables rotated (.001). This also was true of comparisons be­ tween Groups C and B (see Table 26 for unit data).

Analysis of mean differences occurring between popula­ tions on total Rokeach scores indicates that between Groups A and

B, urban high school students as a group presented significantly

CP

(.01) higher or more closed attitude belief and value systems than did the educators. No significant differences were mani­ fested for males as a group; however, Group B female students as

j

115

Table 26. Significant Differences in Category VIII: Value

Rigidity Over Time—Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E,

Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

C/A Group Total

C/B Group Total

C/A Group Male

C/B Group Male

C/A Group Female

C/B Group Female

B/A Anglo Total

B/A M-A Total

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

C/A A-l Male

C/B A-l Male

C/A A-l Female

C/B A-l Female

Mode

* *

19

19

11

A

A

19

19

X

16.92

16.92 •

17.61

17.51

16.81

16.81

14.72

16.30

17.13

17.13

17.75

17.75

17.08

17.08

S.D. ' d.f.

5.14

5.14

3.91

3.91

5.56

5.56

39

39

12

12

26

26

4.62

5.06

5.14

5.14

4.05

4.05

5.50

5.50

28

10

37

37

11

11

25

25

Sig.

"Bimodal responses.

-"Polymodal responses. a whole were (.001) less flexible in outlook than their educator counterparts. Anglo Group B students in toto were significantly

Anglo females (.001) when rotated by the independent variable of sex. Mexican-American students as a whole were also (.01) sig­ nificantly more rigid in their total responses than was Group A.

These data appear in Table 27.

In comparing Group C and Group A, the reservation high school students as a whole were significantly more closed than

Table 27. Significant Differences in Total Scores, Rokeach

Dogmatism Scale E, Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

116

Groups Compared

B/A Group Total

C/A Group Total

C/B Group Total

C/A Group Male

C/B Group Male

B/A Group Female

C/A Group Female

C/B Group Female

B/A Anglo Total

B/A Anglo Male

B/A Anglo Female

B/A M-A total

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

C/A A-l Male

C/A A-l Female

C/A A-l Female-

Mode jj

;V

«V

«V

VfiV

159

ifSt

X

153.17

168.34

168.34

176.41

176.41

153.45

164.65

164.65

197.89

153.90

144.74

168.54

169.38

169.38

164.08

165.07

165.07

S.D.

47.00

14.15

14.15

8.50

8.50

32.08

19.82

19.82

23.56

23.93

18.61

29.80

13.76

13.76

47.31

19.50

19.50

28

9

18

10

38

38

11

26

26 d.f.

45

40

40

12

12

32

27

27

Sig.

-Bimodal responses.

-"Polymodal responses.

(.01) their educator opposite numbers on Rokeach total scores.

Group C males manifested this reaction at the .05 significance level, and Group C females at .001. American Indian students were, as an ethnic entity, significantly (.01) less open-minded than the educators, again with males indicating an .05 signifi­ cance level, and females recording .001 in this respect.

117

Evaluation of differences extant between Group C and

Group B showed that the former was significantly (.01) more closed minded on the whole than the urban high school population. flexible in their overall systems of beliefs, attitudes, and val­ ues than their city student counterparts. Like comparisons were also obtained for Group C, American Indian students, both as an ethnic entity, and when rotated by sex in comparison with

Group B.

The Cultural Literacy Inventory as Analyzed by Categories, or Primary Message

Systems, Between Groups

In considering Cultural Literacy Inventory scores, cate­ gorical or total, it is important to remember that significance is assigned to scores which are less than the mean. In evaluat­ ing own-culture perceptions, it is important also to recall that each group is normed only against itself, and that significant responses between groups are based on mean differences derived from within-culture established modal norms.

It is appropriate to indicate that all data derived in this study are merely ancillary to the hypotheses herein postu­ lated. Such data as are presented in this chapter are supportive rather than definitive in nature. While all findings carry in­ ternal statistical significance, and possible definitive educa­ tional utilities they have no immediate particulate applications to what is essentially a theoretical exercise.

118

Cultural Literacy Inventory items have strong ligations, theoretically and de facto, with E. T. Hall's (1959) "Map of

Culture" and Primary Message Systems. The items analyzed in this section of this study have been placed in 10 categories according to Hall's classifications. Assignment of some of the individual items on the Inventory in some of the categories has been arbi­ trary. It is readily apparent to the observer that many of the items could, with equal theoretical validity, have been assigned to other Primary Message Systems because of the interlocking and overlapping nature of man's activities. The concept of culture, is cludes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, customs, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society (Tylor 1871, p. 1)." Since this concept implies an in­ terlocking function for categories, expectations, beliefs and values systems, no further attempt will be made to qualify item assignment to categories in this study. It is entirely possible that empirical replication of these data could take place with a totally different assignment of items provided that they were held consistent in scoring and evaluation. For the purposes of this research, all items herein assigned will remain as specified.

In comparison of Group A and Group B (see Table 28), only the Mexican-American student body in the urban high school dif­ group indicates relatively greater perception of the interactive

119

Table 28. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy Inventory

Category I: Interaction, Rotated Between Groups by

Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

C/A Group Total

C/B Group Total

C/A Total Females

C/B Total Females

B/A M-A Total

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

Mode

4

4

4

4

5

**

X

3.20

3.20

3.24

3.24

4.09

3.27

3.27

S.D.

1.50

1.50

1.52

1.52

1.18

1.47

1.47 d.f.

49

49

32

32

10

46

46

Sig.

-.01

-.01

-.05

-.05

-.01

--Polymodal responses. process within own culture than does the teacher or potentialteacher group.

In comparison between Group A. and Group C, the latter, as tion of own culture. Female students in this category also indi­

American Indian students (.05).

In comparisons between the two high school populations, the reservation students, in toto, exhibited (.01) less percep­ terms of statistical significance than did their urban peers.

The American Indian population in Group C as a whole indicated less (.01) perception of own culture as well.

j

I;

120

When Group C and Group A were compared (see Table 29), the following statistically significant differences were appar­ ent: as a group the urban students were less (.01) perceptive of this aspect of their own culture, and female students as a whole were (.001) less aware of group structures and interactions than the educators. As an ethnic entity, Mexican-American urban stu­ dents manifested significantly greater (.05) awareness of these processes than did the educator population.

In comparisons between Group C and Group A, Group C mem­ bers as a population indicated significantly less (.01) percep­ tion in this category, as did both males,(.01) and females (.01) comprising this group. American Indian students, both male and female, exhibited significantly less (.001) perception of own culture in this area than did the educator population.

When the two high school populations were compared, Group

C was, once more, as a whole, significantly less perceptive (.05) in the category of association, with both males and females indi­ cating .01 levels of significance for the difference. American group structure and interaction than did the urban high school population.

As Table 30 indicates, the three groups shared great homogeneity of perceptions of own-culture subsistence processes, with only American Indian female students in Group C manifesting significantly greater (.05) awareness in this category than did educators.

121

Table 29. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy Inventory

Category II: Association, Rotated Between Groups by

Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

B/A Group Total

C/A Group Total

C/A Group Total

C/A Total Male

C/B Total Male

B/A Total Female

C/A Total Female

B/A M-A Total

C/A A-l Male

C/B A-l Male

C/A A-l Female

Mode

2

3

3

1

1

2

3

5

*

3

"Bimodal responses.

X

2.87

2.48

2.48

1.76

1.76

2.60

2.85

1.90

1.81

1.81

2.87

S.D.

1.47

1.29

1.29

1.30

1.30

1.63

1.06

2.10

1.33

1.33

0.96 d.f.

49

49

49

16

16

10

32

10

15

15

30

Sig.

-.01

-.01

-.05

-.001

-.01

-.001

-.01

-.001

-.05

-.001

Table 30. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy Inventory

Category III: Subsistence, Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

Mode Groups Compared

C/A A-l Female

X

5.42

S.D.

1.45 d.f.

30

Sig.

-"Polymodal responses.

122

In comparing Groups B and A in the category of bisexuality, or perception of sex roles (Table 31), the urban Group B, as a population, is significantly (.001) less perceptive of own culture, with males indicating .01 less perception and females

.05. Anglo students in this group also demonstrate significantly less (.01) perception of own-culture mores with both males and females manifesting .001 significantly lower perception levels than does the educator population.

Comparison of Groups C and A indicates that as a whole, reservation students are significantly (.001) less perceptive of sex roles, with both males and females manifesting this at the

.001 level, as did American Indian male and female students.

In assessing differences apparent between Groups C and B, reservation female students manifest significantly less percep­ tion (.01) of own culture in this category than their urban high school counterparts.

In comparing Groups A and B (see Table 32), only urban high school female students as a whole displayed any significant

(.001) difference, being more perceptive of territorial aspects of own culture than the university population.

Groups C and A when compared displayed this same trend to a greater degree, with reservation students as a whole, as well as males and females by group, all manifesting significantly

(.001) greater perception of this aspect of own culture. Ameri­ can Indian students exhibited like responses, both as an ethnic entity and by sex.

123

Table 31. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy Inventory

Category IV: Bisexuality, Rotated Between Groups by

Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

B/A Group Total

C/A Group Total

B/A Group Males

C/A Group Males

B/A Group Females

C/A Group Females

C/B Group Females

B/A Anglo Total

B/A Anglo Males

B/A Anglo Females

C/A A-l Total

C/A A-l Female

Mode

6

A

6

6

6

6

6

7

6

6

6

"Bimodal responses.

X

5.24

5.56

5.60

5.23

6.51

5.72

5.72

6.30

5.55

6.00

5.57

5.71

S.D.

1.38

1.64

1.35

0.83

1.37

1.57

1.57

1.47

1.44

1.35

1.68

1.62 d.f.

49

49

14

16

34

32

32

32

11

20

46

30

Sig.

-.001

-.001

-.01

-.001

-.05

-.001

-.01

-.01

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

Table 32. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy Inventory

Category V: Territoriality, Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

C/A Group Total

C/B Group Total

C/A Group Males

B/A Group Males

C/A Group Females

C/B Group Females

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

C/A A-l Males

C/A A-l Females

C/B A-l Females

Mode

2

2

1

1

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

X

1.40

1.40

1.12

0.97

1.54

1.54

1.42

1.42

1.18

1.54

1.54

S.D.

0.67

0.67

0.67

0.89

0.63

0.63

0.65

0.65

0.65

0.62

0.62 d.f.

49

49

16

34

32

32

46

46

15

30

30

Sig.

124

In comparison of Groups C and B, reservation students as a population as well as females as a whole exhibited significant­ ly greater (.001) perception of territorial aspects of own cul­ ture, as did American Indian students, both as an ethnic entity, and by sex.

There were no significant differences in regard to per­ ception of use of time displayed between Group A and Group B (see

Table 33).

Analysis of Group C responses in this category revealed that the reservation students as a whole, by sex, and by ethnici­ ty, were significantly (.001) less perceptive of this aspect of own culture than were either Group A or Group B.

As seen in Table 34, there were no significant differ­ ences displayed between Groups A and B, or between Group C and

Group A in the category of Learning; however, between Group C and

Group B, significant differences did exist. Group C as a whole, as well as all reservation population males, manifested signifi­ cantly less (.01) perception in this category than did urban high school students. This was also true of American Indian students as an ethnic entity; however, American Indian female students demonstrated significantly greater (.05) awareness of own-culture aspects of learning than did their peers in Group B.

There were no significant differences apparent between

Group A and Group B in Category VIII, Play.

125

Table 33. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy Inventory

Category VI: Temporality, Rotated Between Groups by

Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

C/A Group Total

C/B Group Total

C/A Group Male

C/B Group Male

C/A Group Male

C/B Group Female

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

C/A A-l Male

C/B A-l Male

C/A A-l Female

C/B A-l Female

Mode

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

1

X

0.56

0.56

0.29

0.29

0.69

0.69

0.51

0.51

0.31

0.31

0.61

0.61

S.D.

0.54

0.54

0.45

0.45

0.53

0.53

0.50

0.50

0.48

0.48

0.49

0.49 d.f.

49

49

16

16

32

32

46

46

15

15

30

30

Sig.

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

Table 34. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy Inventory

Category VII: Learning, Rotated Between Groups by

Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

C/B Group Total

C/B Group Male

C/B A-l Total

C/B A-l Female

Mode

2

2

2

4

X

2.76

2.76

2.85

2.84

S.D.

1.35

1.44

1.30

1.27 d.f.

49

16

46

30

Sig.

-.01

-.01

-.05

126

As indicated in Table 35, Group C American Indian female students displayed significantly less (.05) perception of the recreational aspects of own culture than did either Group A or

Group B.

There were no significant differences in perception of own culture in Category IX, Defense, between Group A and Group

B (see Table 36). However, Group C student responses in whole, by sex, and by ethnicity indicated that the reservation popula­ tion was significantly (.001) less perceptive of defense systems and mechanisms operant in own culture than were either the edu­ cator or the urban high school populations.

In comparing Groups A and B, the urban high school popu­ lation was significantly more perceptive (.001) in regard to own culture use of resources in Exploitation than was Group A. These data appear in Table 37.

Comparison of Groups A and C revealed that Group C as a whole (.05) and Group C males (.01) were significantly less per­ ceptive in this category than were the educators. This pattern, with the same levels of significance maintained was repeated for the American Indian students in comparison with Group A.

Comparison of Group B and Group C indicated that as a culture in this categoiy as were males (.001) and females (.001).

This lower perception of own culture in this area was replicated in the American Indian student responses, with significantly

127

Table 35. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy Inventory

Category VIII: Play, Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

C/A A-l Female

C/B A-l Female

Mode

1

1

X

1.06

1.06

S.D.

0.67

0.67 d.f.

30

30

Sig.

-.05

-.05

Table 36. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy Inventory

Category IX:' Defense, Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

C/A Group Total

C/B Group Total

C/A Group Male

C/B Group Male

C/A Group Female

C/B Group Female

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

C/A A-l Male

C/B A-l Male

C/A A-l Female

C/B A-l Female

Mode

5

5

3

3

5

5

5

5

3

3

5

5

X

4.32

4.32

4.35

4.35

4.30

4.30

4.34

4.34

4.44

4.44

4.29

4.29

S.D.

1.43

1.43

1.37

1.37

0.88

0.88

0.31

0.31

0.34

0.34

0.90

0.90 . d.f.

49

49

16

16

32

32

46

46

15

15

30

30

Sig.

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.01

-.001

-.001

-.001

128

Table 37. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy Inventory

Category X: Exploitation, Rotated Between Groups by

Sex and by Ethnicity

Groups Compared

B/A Group Total

C/A Group Total

C/B Group Total

C/A Group Male

C/B Group Male

C/B Group Female •

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

C/A A-l Male

C/B A-l Male

C/B A-l Female

Mode

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

X

1.94

1.38

1.38

1.12

1.12

1.51

1.44

1.44

1.18

1.18

1.58

S.D.

0.34

0.88

0.88

0.48

0.48

0.90

0.85

0.85

0.95

0.95

0.89 d.f. Sig.

49

49 -.05

49

16

16

32

-.001

-.01

-.001

-.001

46

-.05

46 . -.001

15

15

30

-.01

-.01

-.05 lower perceptions (.001) as a group, for males (.01) and for fe­

In regard to Cultural Literacy Inventory total scores

(Table 38), there were no significant differences between Group B and Group A.

In comparing Group A and Group C, on reservation both male and female students showed significantly lower (.001) over­ all perceptions of own culture. The same level of significance

(.001) obtained for American Indian students as an ethnic entity, and by sex.

In comparing Groups C and B this same level of signifi­ cance obtained (as in Group C comparisons with Group A); however,

129

Table 38. Significant Responses to Cultural Literacy Inventory

Total Scores Rotated Between Groups by Sex and by

Ethnicity

Groups Compared

C/A Group Total

C/B ' Group Total

C/A Group Male

C/B Group Male

C/A Group Female

C/B Group Female

C/A A-l Total

C/B A-l Total

C/A A-l Male

C/B A-l Male

C/A A-l Female

C/B A-l Female

Mode

26

26

29

29

26

26

C/B Anglo Group Total

*

26

26

29

29

26

26

"Bimodal response.

X

27.92

27.92

26.06

26.06

28.87

28.87

27.50

28.23

28.23

26.81

26.81

27.21

27.21

S.D.

7.42

7.42

5.07

5.07

9.71

9.71

3.53

4.66

4.66

4.14

4.14

4.81

4.81 d.f.

49

49

16

16

32

32

1

46

46

15

15

30

30

Sig.

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.05

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001

-.001 additionally, Anglo students attending the reservation high school showed a significantly lower perception (.05) of own cul­ ture than did their urban peers.

Universals, Alternatives and Specialties

""as Perceived Within and Between Groups

It should be noted that Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E re­ sponses by item and by category were not included in this portion of the study. By definition, belief systems, attitudes and val­ ues are emotionally tied, and idiosyncratic. While individual items on the Rokeach Scale E are amenable to modal separation,

130 the categorical arid total scores tend to be bi- or polymodal re­ sponses, and therefore are calculated by comparison of means (see

Tables 19 through 27).

All three of the populations included in this study have shared a basic mutual perception of some items in the Cultural

Literacy Inventory as requiring the same responses both within and between cultures. When such responses to items are common to all three populations, they are considered to be universals (see definition, page 26), inasmuch as all three populations under consideration may be said to be sub-populations of the overarch­ ing "American,

Tr or "core" culture—under the qualifier

"Southwestern."

Those perceptions which are common to all three of the groups analyzed in this study are presented by item and by cate­ gory in Table 39.

In consulting this table it is apparent that 33.33%, or one-third of perceptions of own culture within the educational setting as delimited by this study, are held in common. There also exists, however, within these parameters, a residual, or unaccounted-for area of 66.67% of perceptions of own culture.

Residual perceptions will vary from the educator mean in greater or in lesser degree according to the proximity or distance indi­ cated from cultural perceptions of the "norm" perceived by the populations.

131

Table 39. Universals Within the Cultural Literacy Inventory as

Perceived in Common by fill Three Groups

PtlS

1 A i B ,

X Interaction

C

4

28

33

41

55

\ i

1

1 i J. | 1

y I ^ !

3

1 ? |

i

2

J ! 3

!

i i

a.

!

i

1 2

56

58 i 5 I l / S j 1

4

m

I I Association i 1

22

2

2 i 2

24 5

4 3

25

49

| 2

1 1

1

2

2

50

9

1 5

57

1

!

- 17%

4 4 2

I I I Subsistence

7

a

I 2

_5_

_l

5

3

2

2/3

1

1

1

1

2

18

3

1

3

23

27

34

3

3

2

T

"5

3

1

5

5

1

48 5

51

! 2

2

1

1

1 l - n *

IV Bisexualitv

2

3

5

6

12

14

1 4 i 4

15

16

17

26 1

: 4

4 t 2

1 4

4

2

2

2 )

1 5

1

I

i

3

3

?

3

i

!

*

4

3

1 1

u.

2 j l '

1

2

i

i

n/u.

4 1 4

30 ! 1 . ' 3 1 1

37

33

13 13 1 1

... „i3 - 23* 1 i

1 a

1 S i

\

v

Territoriality

46 iS t «5

54

1 » i 5 ; 5

50%>

!

4

r.

1

VI ; Teraporalitv

4 7 j

52 !

( 4 ( 4

1 5 I <;

1 1 - <Kl!*

VII ) Learning

1 j

19

20

!

21

2

5 i 4.

1 2

35

36

53

1 3

1/3

1 5

1 - 1«SS

VIII Play

.

2

5

2

k

1

2

1

59 1 5

60

1 1

2 - idas:

IX Defense

3

10

11

29

!

4

! 2

5 ! 5

1 j 1

1

3

k

2

' 1 .

! 5

1

1

5

4

4

S

4

4

1

4

2

31

32

39

40

43

44 i 3

! 5

! 3

3

.3

4

3

5

3

! ?

1 4

1

X

Exploitation

13

42

: 4 l 4

1 1 • 1

45

6 - 6758

0 - 0 %

4 1 4

1

! 3

S

1

3

5

4

1 1

%

Totals

20

33.33

1

!

1

1

132

The 66.67% residual area of perceptions which is not held in common by all three groups may be absorbed in one of the three following ways:

1. It may be considered as a cultural or populational uni­ versal: a response which the specific group indicates as modal for more than 45% of its respondents.

2. The residual area may be absorbed in part in the form of group-selected, or modal alternatives, which are shared with one or the other of the two remaining populations, but not with both.

3. A portion of the residual may appear as specialties, which are here construed to be those perceptual catego­ ries which exist in one group or subculture only. Such specialties may frequently be additionally dichotomized by sex.

Rotations for ethnicity within or between groups were not performed for this portion of the study, since assignment to the discrete categories of universals, alternatives, and specialties was determined by modal responses to specific items in the Cul­ tural Literacy Inventory, and mean scores were subsequently es­ tablished for the respective categories.

Table 40 indicates alternatives for the absorption of residual data, and the populational universals.

It should be noted that these own-culture perceptions of universals may or may not be present across the three groups.

Table 40. Own Culture Perceived Universals, by Group, by

Category, and by Percent

Category

Interaction

Association

Subsistence

Bisexuality

Territoriality

Temporality

Learning

Play

Defense

Exploitation

Totals

2

7

_1

9

1

2

3

Group A

. 4

5

%

Group B

%

Group C

%

57

3

43

2

29

83 4 67 3 50

8 89

42

69

50

100

43

100

78

33

70

8

6

1

2

3

2

8

_2

37

89

46

50

100

43

100

89

67

65

4

5

2

2

1

1

6

_1

27

44

38

100

100

14

50

67

33

45

133

A category may be perceived as a universal within one group, and not so perceived in the other two. If this group is to be con­ sidered as representative of the greater population which it rep­ resents, then Group A is the most homogeneous in perceptions of own culture, and Group C the least.

The second residual area may be absorbed in whole or in part in the form of group-selected, or group modal alternatives, which are shared with one or the other of the remaining popula­ tions, but not with both.

In assessment of alternatives (Table 41), Group A per­

134 ceives the greatest number as shared with Group B, the urban high school, and the fewest with Group C.

Specialities, as perceived within one culture only by its members are presented in Table 42. Perception of specialties ap­ pears in many instances to be dichotomous by sex, and therefore speciality responses are so tabulated in Table 42.

In Group A, males manifested slightly greater sexual dichotomies in perception, with the greatest difference being em­ bodied in the category Learning. Group B males exhibited roughly three times as many specialty determinations by sex as did the female urban high school students, with the greatest difference in perception embodied in Bisexuality. Reservation male students followed this pattern also, with twice as many modal specialties indicated, again with the major difference manifested in Bisexu­ ality. Reservation female students differed in that their major area of divergent perception was in Association, or group struc­

Assessment of Individual Case Study

The subject of this analysis was randomly selected with­

The subject is a 17 year old American Indian female, senior, at­ tending the on-reservation public high school. Her father is a tribal employee. She has moved from house to house once in her

135

Table 41. Alternatives as Perceived Between Groups as Determined by Modal Responses to the Cultural Literacy Inventory

Cateqory

Interaction

Association

Subsistence

Bisexuality

Territoriality

Temporality

Play

Defense

Exploitation

Totals

Groups

A-B

1

2

2

%

14.28

33.33

Groups

A-C

-

(

1 16

Groups

B-C

-

22.22

-

%

-

1 16.66

4

44.44

6 46.15

-

3 23.07

-

1 14.28

-

3 33.33

_3 100.00

19

31.66

-

1 14

-

-

_

2

-

1

14.28

-

-

_

9

-

-

15.00

Table 42. Specialties as Perceived by Sex by Respondents as Determined by Modal

Responses to the Cultural Literacy Inventory

Male

No.

Group ft

i

Female

No. %

Male

Group B

Female

No.

I

No. %

3 33

-

Male

Group C

Female

No.

'o

No. %

1 14

-

Interaction

-

flssocation

Subsistence

-

-

-

1 16, 2 33 3 50,

1 11

-

-

1 11 .11

-

-

1 7 5 38 1 7 4

.76

1 7, Bisexuality

Territoriality

1

50

-

1 50

-

-

-

Temporality

Learning

-

3 37

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

50

-

1 14

.28

Play

-

Defense

Exploitation

Totals

-

1 50

-

1 11

.11

-

-

2 66

-

6 10.00 5 8.33 10 16.66

-

-

3 . 5.00

2

1 33

12

22

20.00

-

.11

6 10.00

137 lifetime. She indicated that she would not impose her values on another at all.

In individual scoring, significance level for both the

Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E and for the Cultural Literacy Inventory is considered to be greater than one standard deviation above 'or below the mean. The word significantly will only be used in this context here.

Total mean scores for Group A, Group B, and Group C as well as the scores for the subject of the case study are provided in Table 43. To facilitate comparisons, for the Rokeach Dogma­ tism Scale E, the same procedure was followed in Table 44 for the

Cultural Literacy Inventory.

On the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E the subject is signifi­ cantly less flexible in her belief and disbelief systems than the reservation mean score. She is less concerned about aloneness, isolation, and helplessness of man than are her peers. She is somewhat more uncertain of the future than the average, but is quite secure in her self image. She indicates significantly less authoritarianism and cause identification than does the average reservation high school student, and is very close to her group mean on intolerance. She is significantly open in her ability to

t

change beliefs, but is also significantly more committed to main­ taining her values over time. Her total Rokeach score indicates more open-mindedness than the group mean score.

i-

138

Table 43. Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E Group Means for Comparison

With Individual Case Study Findings by Category and

Total Scores

Category

!

Group A Group B Group C Student

I. Flexibility of belief and disbelief systems

12

II. Aloneness, isolation and helplessness of man 12

III. Uncertainty of future, urgency and reiteration of ideas

IV. Security of self image

20

17

V. Authoritarianism and cause identification

Intolerance

25

25

14

13

21

18

29

31

16

16

23

18

36

33

19*

13

26

14

25*

4

VII. Ability to change beliefs

VIII. Value rigidity over time

Totals

8

13

131

8

14

147

13

16

168

4

22*

155

^Indicates significant difference from Group C mean.

139

Table 44. Cultural Literacy Inventory Group Means for Comparison

With Individual Case Study Findings by Category and

Total Scores

Category

I. Interaction

II. Association

III. Subsistence

IV. Bisexuality

V. Territoriality

VI. Temporality

VII. Learning

VIII. Play

IX. Defense

X. Exploitation

Totals

Group A Group B Group C Student

4 4 3 3

4 3 3 3

5

7

1

1

3

1

6

_2

34

5

5

1

1

4

1

6

__2

32

5

6

1

1

3

1

4

_1

28

4

5

2*

1

4

1

2

*

26

^Indicates significant difference from Group C mean.

140

In assessing this student for her responses to categories of the Cultural Literacy Inventory, it is determined that she shares equal perceptions with her peer group in Interaction, and in Association, but is less perceptive than the norm in terms of

Subsistence and Bisexuality. She is significantly more percep­ tive of Territoriality than are her classmates. She is in agree­ ment with her peer group on the use of time, and is more perceptive than the norm in the category of Learning. She per­ ceives the category Play as her peers do, however, she is sig­ nificantly not as perceptive of the Defense mechanisms operant within her culture as the rest of her group. She conforms to the norm for the category Exploitation. Her total Cultural Literacy

Inventory score is lower than the mean; she perceives her own culture as her peers do 43% of the time. Mean perception of own culture for Group C is 47%. This student is not significantly deviant from her group in own-culture perception, but it might prove helpful to her to explore sex roles and the defense systems operating in her own culture (see Table 44). Her Rokeach scores indicate that she is open-minded enough to be able to explore these categories fairly easily, if they are brought to her atten­ tion. For the classroom teacher to assist this student in expan­ sion of own-culture perceptions, several factors must be taken into consideration. The student is relatively open-minded in comparison with members of her peer group, but she is signifi­ cantly more closed-minded than the educator population norm.

141

She also indicates significantly less flexibility in belief and disbelief systems than her peers as well as greater value rigid­ ity over time. Therefore, exploration of own-culture areas in which the student manifests low perceptual levels should be ap­ proached on a cognitive rather than an affective basis through action learning programs. •

Testing of the Hypotheses

Data for this study were processed utilizing Student's t, with an acceptance level of significance of .05. This statisti­ cal method was selected because of the number of variables ro­ tated, and because of its applicability within actual classroom settings. Both dependent and independent variables were rotated within and between populations, and those variables which mani­ fested appropriate levels of significance were retained for analysis.

Hypothesis 1

In the holistic crosscultural identification of modal cognitive maps measurable crosscultural differences do exist.

As summarized in Tables 3 and 4 of this chapter, measur­ able differences of own-culture perception did exist within and between populations and these data were used to determine the de­ gree of intra-cultural homogeneity within the groups analyzed.

Although such data were ancillary to the theoretical constructs

j

;

142 embodied in this study, they have been included here. Group A manifested the greatest internal consistency, followed by Group

C, the reservation high school students. The greatest intragroup divergence' was found in Group B, the urban high school students.

For intercultural comparisons the reader is referred to

Table 6 of this chapter. In analysis of these data it was deter­ mined that Group A and Group B shared the greatest number of com­ mon perceptions concerning their own culture on the independent variables, and that Groups A and C expressed the fewest shared perceptions in this regard.

In consideration of total Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E re­ sponses, Groups A and B again manifested the greatest degree of commonality of perceptions in their beliefs, attitudes, and val­ ues.. Here again, the reservation/educator populations were the most divergent, while the two high school groups indicated more in common.

Analyses of the responses to categories in the Cultural

Literacy Inventory, percentage perceptions of commonality indi­ cated the same pattern, with Groups A and B sharing the greatest number of perceived commonalities, and Groups A and C the least.

In considering the total variables examined crosscultur­ ally, it was found that Groups A and B perceived their respective worlds in the same or equivalent fashion 84.03% of the time, while reservation students and educators perceived their equiva­ lence structures in like manner only 57.06% of the time.

143

Groups B and C shared mutually acceptable expectations 70.52% of the time.

The intra-populational homogeneity manifested in this study, together with measurable intergroup differences in ownculture perceptions indicates that such differences do indeed exist and are measurable. Since these data are computed on total number of variables exhibiting .05 or greater significantly dif­ ferent means found within and between the three groups, and are ancillary to the theoretical construct presented in this study, no level of significance was assigned or calculated, but it is readily apparent that Hypothesis 1 is supported.

Hypothesis 2

Measurable crosscultural differences are amenable to categorization.

r

Assignment of responses by categories was performed and analyses were then made for the resultant data. Internally, the three groups assessed exhibited few differences, even when the variables were rotated, reflecting the intragroup homogeneity present. Between-group significant differences by assigned cate­

Significant differences between groups were manifested in all categories for the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E as well as for total

144 and analyzed for the Cultural Literacy Inventory and its total scores.

Therefore, Hypothesis 2 is supported.

Hypothesis 3

Differences between categories by culture, by socioeco­ nomic status, by sex, by residential mobility, by ethnicity, and by educational level where applicable may be, in whole or in part, statistically significant.

Results of rotations of independent variables, with the exception of sex by ethnicity, are presented in Tables 3 through

18. Rotation of categorical dependent variables by sex and eth­ nicity of respondents within and between groups are presented in

Tables 16 through 40. Since these data are ancillary to the theoretical thrust of the research, no level of significance is assigned. Significant differences are present in all betweengroups categories analyzed, and Hypothesis 3 is supported.

Hypothesis 4

Idiosyncratic differences charted in either student or educator populations may be both statistically significant and serve as benchline data for predicting individual inter­ action behavior.

Analysis of Table 43, the records compiled for a randomly selected without replacement female student from Group C,

indicates that such predictions are feasible and that idiosyn­

145 cratic variations may be used to assess or predict interactive behavior in both own-cultural and educational settings, varia­ tions by category and total, in both the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale

E measurements of beliefs, attitudes, and values, and the Cul­ tural Literacy Inventory for perception of own culture.

Therefore, Hypothesis 4 is supported.

Hypothesis 5

Holistic cultural perceptions of commonalities and dif­ ferences in cognitive maps are both measurable and subject to analysis on a modal basis.

This hypothesis has presented some problems because of the terminology employed. The term "modal" as here used is con­ strued to mean that perception held by the majority of the group under consideration for each item within a designated category or area, and not the modal response for area or categorical total scores. Such modal responses would be unamenable to statistical analysis. Therefore, the groups analyzed were first tabulated quantitatively to establish modal or normative responses by item in the instruments employed. These items were than placed in the appropriate categories. Individuals were evaluated on a conform/ non-conform basis by category. Mean scores were then calculated for categories and these mean scores were subjected to rotation of variables and to statistical analysis for significance of

146 difference by use of Student's t at the .05 level. Hypothesis 5 was supported.

Hypothesis 6

Differences and similarities in modal cognitive maps would prove amenable to analysis in terms of statistical significance.

This hypothesis has been supported throughout all of

Chapter 4. This hypothesis was tested within and between groups, and on an idiosyncratic basis for prediction of individual behav­ ior in an educational setting.

Hypothesis 7

The further the culture or subculture is (or perceives itself to be) removed from the dominant culture, the greater

^the differences will be statistically.

The groups under consideration in this study were first examined for intra-group homogeneity, and it was found that Group

A was the most internally homogeneous, followed by Group C, the reservation high school population. Group B, the urban high school group, exhibited the least internal consistency of ethos.

This may well have reflected the ethnic varieties of the popula­

Indian, and Oriental respondents. Group C was composed of Anglo,

Mexican-American, and American Indian respondents, and Group B,

i j

i

i •

147 the least homogeneous of the populations, of Anglo, Mexican-

American, American Indian, Black, and Puerto Rican Students.

Ethnic groups not statistically viable because of small size were eliminated from ethnic data, although they were included in all other calculations. These were Oriental in Group A, Puerto Rican in Group B, and Mexican-American in Group C.

In terms of crosscultural frequency of occurrence of sta­ tistically significant data, Groups A and B were closest to each other on overall perceptions (84.03%). Groups B and C shared

70.52% of cognitive mapping responses, and Group C was furthest removed from Group A, the educator population. Here only 57.06% of cognitive maps responses were shared. Group C, the reserva­ tion high school population, which is 94% American Indian, and the most remote geographically, is also the furthest removed from the dominant culture as embodied in middle class Anglo percep­

Summary

Analysis of data collected from the three populations of

50 each included in this study, together with appropriate tabula­ tion of interpretation, was presented in this chapter. Degrees of internal homogeneity were determined for each population in terms of explored variables found to be significant at the .05 level. An analysis of significant differences for rotated inde­ pendent variables, Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E categories and group totals, and Cultural Literacy Inventory categories and group

148 totals, was made using non-directional Student's t. Analysis of the Rokeach and the Cultural Literacy Inventory were performed, by mean category and mean total scores. Universals, alterna­ tives, and specialties as perceived by the three groups were pre­ sented by percentages of categories on the Cultural Literacy

Inventory. Assessment of a randomly selected case study was com­ pleted to serve as an example for individual application in the classroom setting.

All hypotheses generated concerning the construction of cognitive maps in educational settings were tested and supported.

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction

A summary of this study is presented in this chapter which includes a review of the problem, the methodology employed, analyses of the data, and the conclusions. Recommendations for application in educational settings based on the conclusions evolved from the research are also presented.

Summary of the Study

The problem underlying the research was the construction of holistic cognitive maps for the three populations considered, and the utilization of these maps for exploration and comparison of group perceptions in differing cultural settings. The con­ structed cognitive maps were analyzed for statistically signifi­ cant variables to provide replicable and empirical data.

The purposes of this study were:

1. To establish holistic modal perceptions, or cognitive maps of own-culture perceptions for three Southwest popu­ lations in the American educational setting.

2. To categorize such holistic modal perceptions or cogni­ tive maps into basic cultural components in the cognitive

149

) '• i :

150 domain, and into belief systems areas in the affective domain.

3. To determine what commonalities and differences exist

• within and between the modal cognitive maps of the three populations.

4. To identify those areas in the respective cognitive maps of the populations which indicated that independent vari­ ables such as sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, etc. might have been mediating factors in the selection of perceived universals, alternatives and specialties within the populations analyzed.

5. To locate and identify those perceived cultural univer­ sals and alternatives which might be used as bases of commonalities in building rapport between educator and student, between student and student, and with that larger culture in which all are embedded.

6. To determine where such modal cognitive maps differed from each other in terms of statistical significance.

Three groups composed of 50 individuals each within the educational setting were selected for the study:

Group A, a normative educator population, was drawn from

College of Education students attending The University of Arizona at Tucson. This group consisted of both graduate and undergradu­ ate students. Age of participants ranged from 19 to 55. Four

151 ethnic groups were represented: Anglo, American Indian, Mexican-

American, and Oriental.

Group B, an urban ethnically mixed high school popula­ tion, participated in the study. These students were seniors, ranging in age from 16 to 21. Five ethnic groups were repre­ sented: Anglo, American Indian, Black, Mexican-American, and

Puerto Rican.

Group C, an American Indian reservation public high school population, comprised the third participant group. These students were also seniors, ranging in age from 15 to 22. Three ethnic groups were represented, Anglo, American Indian, and

Mexican-American, although 94% of the population analyzed was

American Indian.

Data were collected over a three-year period, 1972-1975.

Sex ratios were approximately the same for all three populations.

Participation was voluntary for all subjects.

Inferences concerning the cognitive and affective domains, such as the identification of cultural universals, alternatives and specialties, together with values, attitudes, belief systems and value hierarchies have been drawn from two instruments: the

Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E, and the Cultural Literacy Inventory.

These were employed to provide a consistent framework for assess­ ment within and between the groups studied. A third instrument, a Personal Questionnaire, was also administered to all subjects

152 by the investigator to provide background demographic and socio­ economic data.

Instrumentation was administered to the educator popula­ tion, Group A, as a learning process for participants in the

Cultural Literacy Laboratory. Instrumentation was administered to Groups B and C, as a learning process component in an intercultural exchange program between the urban and reservation schools.

Data collected in this study were categorized, normed within groups for own-cultural perception, and examined for sig­ nificant mean differences existing by category and by total with­ in and between groups.

Data collected were compared and evaluated within and be­ tween the three populations. The results of these comparisons have been assessed by statistically significant levels of mean differences in own-culture perception. The Rokeach Dogmatism

Scale E was employed to determine values, attitudes and belief systems of the subjects in each group. The Cultural Literacy In­ ences existing within and between populations. Designated areas comprising perceptions of Primary Message Systems and the cul­ tural structure as a whole were analyzed. Data on such indepen­ dent variables as sex, socioeconomic status, residential mobility, and imposition of own values upon others, were obtained from responses to the Personal Questionnaire.

This study has at no point been concerned with the re­

153 sultant data qua data. However, these data have been an ancil­ lary demonstration of empirical consistency and replicability for potential analyses of other cultural or subcultural groups, by educators, industrialists, or others concerned with crosscultural communications*

It has been a primary premise of this study that con­ struction of statistically significant cognitive maps for cul­ tures or for subcultures was a viable possibility. Given the same selected instruments, culturally different groups have re­ sponded to items and to categorically grouped items in a manner which permitted modal analysis by item and mean analysis by cate­ gory of the data obtained. These data differed in varying degree from population to population, by item, by category, and by mean total scores on the instruments administered. After codifica­ tion, these variations proved amenable to statistical analysis by use of nondirectional Student's t to determine whether or not significant differences between mean scores for categories and for mean total scores existed within and between groups. A sig­ nificance level of .05 was employed in all data analysis in the study.

These data were also assessed to determine where, within the categories of the holistic cognitive maps, these significant differences in own-cultural perceptions were located for each population.

154

The hypotheses tested in the study were:

In the holistic crosscultural identification of modal or cognitive maps measurable crosscultural differences did

> exist.

These measurable differences were amenable to categoriza­ tion.

Differences between categories by culture, by socioeconom­ ic status, by sex, by residential mobility, by ethnicity, and by educational level, where applicable, were in whole or in part, statistically significant.

Idiosyncratic differences charted on either student or educator populations were both statistically significant and served as benchline data for predicting individual interaction behavior.

Holistic cultural perceptions of commonalities and dif­ ferences in cognitive maps were both measurable and sub­ ject to analysis on a modal basis.

These differences and similarities in modal cognitive maps proved amenable to analysis in terms of statistical significance.

The further the culture or subculture was (or perceived itself to be) removed from the dominant culture, the greater the differences were statistically.

155

Analysis of the data resulted in support of all hypothe­ ses. The results of the analysis of the data generated the fol­ lowing conclusions and recommendations.

Conclusions

An assessment of intragroup homogeneity in terms of per­ centages of significant responses to items on the Cultural Lit­ eracy Inventory indicated that Group A was most unified in total own-cultural perception. Group C followed, and Group B was least consistent in solidarity of ethos.

There were scant differences in the rotation of indepen­ dent variables, with Group C manifesting the greatest differences within own culture, and Group A the least.

It might be speculated that Group A manifested greater solidarity of ethos because there has been greater opportunity for institutional socialization, represented by the presence of the educational process for a longer period of time. It might also be speculated that Group B was the most divergent because it was the most ethnically diffuse. An explanation for Group C's consolidated Rokeach Dogmatism Scale E scores may possibly be found in Dr. Rokeach's contention that as a culture perceives it­ self as being different from other cultures, belief systems, attitudes and values become more rigid or closed. Closed belief systems indicate that such a culture is less flexible or more dogmatic in outlook than other populations in the study.

156

In crosscultural comparisons the educator population and the urban high school group shared commonalities on rotated in­ dependent variables 84.03% of the time. Groups B and C shared mutually acceptable expectations 77.68% of the time, while reser­ vation students and educators perceived their worlds in similar fashion only 60.72% of the time. By extension, then, the pertages of possible experiential gaps between groups would be

18.11% for Groups A and B, 22.32% between Groups B and C, and

39.28% between educators and reservation high school students.

As such gaps widen, it may be inferred that educational efficien­ cy may well be proportionally impaired. If teachers and students do not share experiential and perceptual bases, or fail to rec­ ognize where and to what degree they do not do so, then it may' prove impossible to communicate on a broad enough basis for the learning process to be implemented.

In considering rotated variables on the Rokeach Dogmatism

Scale E the divergence between groups became even wider, with educators and urban students manifesting 75.60% commonalities in beliefs, attitudes and values. Groups B and C shared attitudinal systems 60.00% of the time, but educators (Group A) and reserva­ main perceptions. These divergencies may well result in inability to understand or respect the points of view of others, with concomitant potentials for basic communications breakdowns..

In consideration of rotated variables on the Cultural

157

Literacy Inventory scores, a still wider divergence of cognitive maps was observed. Analysis revealed that while Group A and

Group B perceived their respective worlds in the same or equiva­ lent fashion 92.82% of the time, Group C shared only 60.91% with the educator population (Group A) and little more (62.73%) with the urban high school students (Group B). This would indicate that while there was a 7.18% residual (or unaccounted for) area in cognitive aspects of culture in which urban students and edu­ cators might experience difficulties with expectations and equi­ valence structures, the reservation high school students must build a cultural bridge to span 37.27% of differences in percep­ tions when interacting with the educator Group A. There are many implications involved here, as the gap will remain apparent in social, educational and industrial settings unless remedial ac­ tion is taken.

Educators find a perceptual hiatus of 39.09% to contend with in their interactions with the reservation students.

When nearly 40% of another's culture is alien or unidentified, it becomes difficult to assess levels of learning, and how and what is communicated and perceived. It is also difficult to determine how far and in what areas interaction is possible.

In analyzing the total variables explored crossculturally it was found that Groups A and B perceived their respective worlds in the same or equivalent fashion 84.03% of the time, while reservation students and educators perceived their

158 equivalence structures in like manner only 57.06% of the time.

Groups B and C shared mutually acceptable equivalence structures

70.52% of the time. It would appear that higher educational lev­ els may have widened the communications gaps between teacher and student as the student becomes further removed culturally and/or geographically from mainstream culture and as educators are pro­ fessionalized into the educational process.

In analyzing the areas in which these gaps occurred it was important to determine which items in the cognitive domain were perceived as universals and alternatives within and between cultures. Rokeach Scale E responses by item and by category were not included in this portion of the study.

It was found that, in analysis of universals, alterna­ tives, and specialties as manifested in the Cultural Literacy In­ ventory, 33.33% of perceptions of own culture were held in common by all three groups. There remained, however, a residual area of

66.77% of perceptions of own culture which varied in greater or lesser degree according to how greatly the three groups perceived their own cultures as variant. This residual area, or those per­ ceptions not held in common by all three populations, was- ab­ sorbed in one of three ways:

1. It could be considered as a group or populational univer­ sal; a response which the specific group indicated as modal for more than 45% of its respondents.

159

2. This residual could be absorbed in the form of groupselected or modal alternatives which were shared with one or the other of the two remaining populations, but not with both.

3. A portion of the residual might have appeared as special­ ties, or those perceptual categories which existed in one group or subculture only. Such specialties were also frequently dichotomized by sex.

In relation to the first of these alternatives for the absorption of residual data—the within-group universal, Group A perceived 70.00% of its common cultural area to be so absorbed.

Group B perceived 65.00% and Group C 45.00%. Group A then was the most homogeneous in this area of own-culture perception.

In consideration of shared alternatives, Groups A and B perceived themselves as sharing 31.66% of the time, Groups B and

C as sharing 15% of the time, and Groups C and A as sharing 3.33% of the time. This pattern was repeated for the third method of absorption of residual data with Group C again indicating the greatest degree of divergence. As indicated in the support of

Hypothesis 7, it can be concluded that the more divergent the group is from the norm, the greater its divergence also will be as indicated in terms of own-cultural perception. In this in­ stance it is concluded that the greatest divergence in ownculture perception lies in the reservation high school group, and

160 that for this group some accommodation procedures should be gen­ erated for modification.

An assessment of an individual case study was performed to indicate the possibilities of analyzing and predicting idio­ syncratic interaction behavior. While the randomly selected reservation high school subject did not differ in many areas from own-cultural norm, there were some indications that this student was not as aware as others in her peer group of sex roles and defense systems operant in her culture. This deficiency might be remedied in part by teacher intervention with explanations of some of the needs for the youngster to reassess her intracultural expectations. However, this could be handled better and more ef­ ficiently if the student were assigned action learning projects designed to focus her attention on the particular areas of insufficiency.

Throughout the study, significant divergences in ownculture perception between the three groups were analyzed. In general, Group

A

was the most consistent in perceptions of own culture. Groups A and B shared the greatest number of commonali­ ties, with Groups B and C following. Group C was most divergent not only as the most removed in geographical location, but in own-culture perceptions also. Since these reservation high school students manifested divergent attitudinal and experiential bases as well as differences in own-culture perception, it would appear that one of the primary tasks for southwestern educators

161 serving in such schools is that they should become aware of the commonalities and differences extant between the cultures present in the classroom. Educators should endeavor, through action learning programs, class discussion groups, counseling, curricu­ lum modification, and expansion of communications techniques, to provide ethnically divergent students with insights into the ex­ stream culture. Such insights could provide a foundation for building the manipulative and interactive techniques required for survival in the dominant society. These skills might do much to alleviate the feelings of passivity, isolation, and anomie which ing the higher educational system, or experience in joining the off-reservation labor force.

Recommendations

There are two types of recommendations emergent from this study. One set of the recommendations is directed toward addi­ tional or augmented study and exploration of this research. The other recommendations have application in the professional educa­ tion enterprise.

Recommendations for

Further Research

For additional research it is recommended:

1. That additional culturally diverse populations be se­ lected and analyzed within the educational setting, not

162 only with respect to ethnic diversity, but also in terms of educational level.

2. That alternative educator populations be selected and analyzed in order to offset possible regional bias.

3. That the present study be replicated in other locations in the United States apart from the Southwest, particu­ larly in regard to student populations, since other areas may well reflect different ethnic concentrations and dif­ ferent attitudinal structures, and different own-culture

4. That analysis of an educational administration population be performed to determine possible divergencies in cogni­ tive maps between teacher and administrator, and adminis­ trator and students on the same between-groups analysis basis.

5. That such additional testing be conducted in a pre-test, intervention, and post-test format to assess validity and reliability.

Recommendations for the Professional

Education Enterprise

For clarity in presentation, recommendations for the pro­ one includes analytical and statistical skills employed in utiliz­ ing the instrumentation for construction of cognitive maps. Part

163 two suggests recommendations for implementation of the skills and methods required for successful crosscultural interactions and communication.

It is important to replicate and validate this research in other educational settings. The findings of the study indi­ cate that members of the professional educational enterprise should:

1. Be encouraged and educated to employ analytical approaches in the assessment of cultural cognitive maps within the classroom setting.

2. Become aware of the possibilities of establishing expectational, interactional, and behavioral cultural norms for classroom students by use of instrumentation and ba­

3. Through analysis of student responses to instrumentation, construct cognitive maps for classroom assessments of student own-cultural perceptions, attitudes, values, and belief systems.

4. Through the use of constructed cognitive maps, assess the possibility of need for interactive intervention if re­ quired on individual or ethnic group bases, i.e., whether differences from the class cognitive maps are culturally based factors or are inherent in the world view of the student.

164

5. Augment educator and student awareness of the fact that all individuals are unique within their cultural set­ activities and expectations which are shared or partici­ pated in by one, but two or more, by all individuals in a culture, or by a statistically constructed norm (modal perception) within the culture. For effective group in­ teraction and communication to take place, it is neces­ sary that members of the group discover where areas of commonalities are shared, and where differences exist.

When differences are present, the development of equiva­ lence structures should be facilitated to improve communi- , cations and to enhance the learning process for both student and educator.

6. Be assisted in determination of within-class norms, ex­ pectations and values by holistic cognitive mapping to ensure that the needs of ethnically or individually di­ vergent students are met.

7. Be enabled to assess individual student divergences from perceived own-culture or classroom norms as reflected in the cognitive map to determine whether manifested diver­ gencies are inhibitive of or enhancing to the communica­ tions and learning processes.

8. Be enabled to assess personal divergences from the educa­ tor norms to determine whether personal divergences might

165 enhance or inhibit the communications/learning process in the culturally particular classroom setting. This as­ sessment can be performed by comparison of the individual teacher's own responses to the instrumentation with the educator holistic cognitive map.

9. By assessing differences and commonalities present in in­ dividual teacher responses to instrumentation in compari­ son with the student holistic cognitive map, be enabled to develop compensatory strategies to facilitate student/ teacher exploration of the beliefs, attitudes, values, and own-culture perceptions present in the classroom milieu.

Important as assessment and analysis skills are in the construction of cognitive maps, it is even more important to pro­ vide participants in the educational enterprise with the skills and methods requisite for successful crosscultural interaction and communication. It is with the acquisition and implementation of these skills and techniques that the second part of the rec­ ommendations for the professional education enterprise is directed.

It is additionally suggested that for participants in the educational enterprise there should be:

1. Teacher education centers, institutes, or workshops estab­ lished to develop own/other cultural awareness,

166 interaction, and assessment skills, to foster flexibility for personnel within the educational milieu.

2. Student laboratories or mini-courses established to ex­ plore own/other cultural perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, and values. Student laboratories or mini-courses should augment intercultural or interethnic interaction and communication. Emphasis on commonalities rather than differences between cultures should be stressed as a ba­ sis for effective coexistence in the greater American culture. mini-courses, or institutes, emphasis is to be placed on suggestions for, and development of, action learning pro­ grams. The action learning programs are to be designed to broaden the cultural interface of shared commonali­ ties, attitudes, values, and beliefs. By decreasing per­ ceived own-cultural differences, action learning programs can be designed for particular culture groups and class­ and utilization of the methods and skills necessary to effective functioning in the dominant society. At the same time, the action learning programs should foster ap­ preciation of and respect for the divergent attitudes, values, beliefs and own-culture perceptions of the indi­ viduals or ethnic groups contributing to the cognitive maps construct of the particular classroom.

APPENDIX A

CULTURAL LITERACY INVENTORY

AND PERSONAL QUESTIONNAIRE

*

167

Name

Date

CULTURAL LITERACY LABORATORY

C U L T U R A L L I T E R A C Y I N V E N T O R Y

Developed by:

Jo Featherston

Jane Gillespie

Herbert B. Wilson

University of Arizona

Multicultural Education Center

College of Education

168

Copyright 1972

Herbert B. Wilson

All Rights Reserved

Tucson, Arizona USA

Permission for reproduction has been granted by the copy­ right holder.

INSTRUCTIONS (FOR MACHINE SCORING):

Print your name in the space provided on your score sheet. Fill in the other information requested in the appropriate spaces. Use a

No. 2 pencil or a mechnical pencil with soft lead. Do not use a ballpoint pen. When you have selected an answer fill in the dotted space beside the appropriate number. Be sure your marks are heavy and black. Erase comDletely any answer you wish to change.

SELECT ONLY ONE ANSWER. ANSWER EACH QUESTION. Use answer spaces 1 through 60 for Own Culture; use answer spaces 101 through 160 tor the Target Culture. l£ hand-scored answer on the following pages.

IMPORTANT: Own Culture is defined as the culture in which you in­ teract the majority of the time. It is realized that we all inter­ act in a variety oi sub-cultures within our society. However, each question should be answered in relation to how you would respond the majority of the time. For example:

Sample la. What is the attitude in regard to physical exercise?

You personally believe that answer No. 1 is correct, however, the culture in which you interact the majority of the time believes that exercise is a physical necessity. Because of the culture's attitude you exercise. Therefore, you would mark No. 2 on the score sheet under Question la.

Target Culture is the culture in which you will have Impact Tasks in this laboratory. Identify this culture and answer all ques­ tions as you think your counterpart in the Target Culture would.

For example:

Sample 2a. You are introduced to a person in this culture.

You react by: name

If the person you've been introduced to is Navajo, for example, no answer but No. 2 would be considered truly courteous.

FOR MACHINE SCORING—remember that answer spaces 1 through 60 are for your Own Culture; answer spaces 101 through 160 should

ae

used for the Target Culture.

If machine-scored, follow instructions; if hand-scored, mark selected number in appropriate column.

Own Target

1. Formal education is regarded in this culture as: up in the society)

2. If an important decision is to be made in the family, the responsibility rests with:

170

3. Older brothers and sisters play an important role in the family: mother's way

4. George is a middle-aged, middle-class man. He runs into another man the same age just as he is about to cross the street in a large city.

The second man had been his very, very good friend but the two men have not seen each other for five years. What will George do? hug him

(5) bow and exchange greetings

5. In marriage the major responsibility of the woman is:

_(2) to raise her children well

6. Henry is 33, has a wife and three children at home, but is having an affair with another woman on the side. If his wife finds out, what will she do about it? happy

7. The most common economic exchange within the culture in rural areas is by:

(1) barter or trade

Own Target

8. Alfred and Lucy are a newly-married, middleclass couple. Alfred will expect Lucy to: family matters money and have no say in finances

9. George and Inez are lower economic class and newly married. George will expect Inez to:

(2) work if she wants to family matters money and have no say in finances

(5) plan all expenditures

10. Which of these agencies or institutions has the most power within the society:

(5) military

U. Which of these agencies or institutions is re­ garded with fear and/or distrust within the society:

12. A female is considered in her "prime" at:

(2) 50 years societies within the culture by:

(1) word of mouth

(3) public announcements and orders

' .

171

14. To the male, love, as differentiated from sex, is:

(2) mystical

(4) not necessarily a consideration in marriage

15. To the female, love, as differentiated from sex, is:

Own

Culture

Target

Culture

172

marriage

16. Free sexual behavior by the male is:

17. Free sexual behavior by the female is:

(4) permitted after marriage

18. John, age 15, earns money. Which of the following will he probably do? for board and room

19. The status of university professors and in­ structors is considered to be:

(1) politically suspect

20. The attitude of the community toward the elementary teacher is:

I •

21. The status of the secondary school teacher within the culture is:

Own

Culture

Target

Culture

173

22. The society as a whole tends to be:

23. Work is:

(1) morally desirable

24. Caste distinctions are present in the society

—in the sense that people "are born to be what they are:" ward social mobility background limitations moving up in the society depending on the individual

25. Social Class distinctions within the society tend to be:

(2) blurred

(4) minimal

26. Teenage females are:

27. For business purposes, you would seek advice from:

20. The husband and wife are talking. How will the wife interpret the husband's stance?

Own

Culture

Target

Culture

(4) pleading

29. Sickness can be prevented by:

t

174

mitted in the society)

30. Generally, a male is expected by society to be:

31. To be clean is:

32. Robbery and cheating are:

33. The principal is making a speech to the faculty. How will the faculty interpret the principal's attitude from his stance? f

, IP

34. Your mother cannot live by herself because

' of illness. You:

(4) have her live with another relative

35. Children within the culture are treated:

36. Teenagers in the culture are considered to be:

Own

Culture

Target

Culture

175

(4) adults, once they have passed the age of puberty

37. A male is considered adult in his culture when he: desired way of life

(5) marries

38. A female is considered adult within her culture when she reaches:

(1) reproductive age way of life

39. What is the function of the healer within the society?

40. what is the function of the religious leader within the society?

(2) production of fears faith

41. Father stands in the doorway. How will the children interpret his emotional state?

(5) impatient

42. The use of group property, if it exists in the culture, has the following implied rather than apparent meaning: this patterning up in the minds of the participants

43. What is the function of the military, if it exists? to a given number of years of service)

44. What is the function of the police (if existent) within the culture?

Own Target

^

45. The major ecological problem within the society is:

(4) population

46. Within the culture, eating is generally done in the:

(5) kitchen

47. Is the main meal of the day served:

(1) morning

(2) midday

48. If the father dies, the children are pro­ vided for by:

49. The community is organized by means of kin­ ship into: children) parents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc.)

176

!

50. In metropolitan areas what takes place of kinship associations?

Elks, Shriners

51.

German-American club, etc.)

Defective offspring are:

(2) placed in institutions

52. The bus does not leave on time, and you have an appointment to keep: it doesn't matter friends waiting with you

53. Teaching and learning of sex roles: of change of status - confirmation, high school graduation, etc.) culture

54. Property lines are designated by:

Own

Culture

Target

Culture

177

55. In comparison to the other culture your culture is:

56. Your friends are from another culture. They greet each other in your presence and begin speaking in their language which you do not understand. You:

Own

Culture

Target

Culture

(3) believe this is a way of keeping secrets from you language when with their own people through non-verbal cues (such as body language)

57. The major cultural orientation is:

(5) militaristic

58. Customs differ from culture to culture. In doing field work, which would you consider to be the most sensitive area to investigate?

(1) male-female relationships

59. Participation in sports is based on:

178

60. Teaching of sports and games in the culture is:

(1) primarily at school

Data

•pqBSOPAI. OTreSTIOKHAIRS 'cD 1972 please print. Answer all questions. Mark those not applicable

JTA.

Full Name Age Sex

Check One J Grad Undargrad High School Other

Major Advisor

rapt

grade level/class School Presently Attending

If University: Degree presently held

Degree working toward

Beaching certificate haId

Working for

Permanent address completion date

Phone

Are you married? Uumber of children

Fext of kin ______________

Address Phone

Do you have Medical/Hospital Insurance ?

Ages

Company

Give a brief work profile. Please include all activities which may have given you interaction skills (i.e., recreational activi­ ties* social or professional organization work}. Indicate year and length of time.

What is your occupational goal or present position?

Father's occupation Mother's occupation

List any problems you may have in accommodating to a new environment? (i.e., food, sanitation, housing)

Can you furnish your own transportation for off-campus observations and field trips? If 30, would you be willing to take other students with you? Number of passengers possible

Do you have any health problem which may prevent you from partici­ pating in this laboratory? (Sxplain)

P3HS01TAL aTTSSTIOimAIRS,^

T9?2

If this laboratory ia to be machine-scored, please answer the following questions using tha score shaat furnished you. Print your name in appropriate space provided on 3core sheet. Answer all other data at "top of score sheet. In the space, Fame of Test, print P3RS0FAL QU3STI0NWAIR3 C.L.L. If this laboratory is to be hand-scored, please circle appropriate number on this sheet.

1. My ability at forming friendships ia:

(1) Poor (4) Good

(2) Pair (5) Outstanding

(3) Average

2. When interacting with others I try to understand the other person'a viewpoint?

(1) Fever

(2) When convenient

C 3) Sane of the time

(1+) Eepends on situation

(5) Always

3. My accommodation to a new environment ia:

(1) Poor

(4)

Good

(2) Pair (5) Outstanding

(3) Average

U. My academic background in anthropology, aociology, psychology

(one or all) ia: (conaidar ninehours or more outstanding)

(1) Poor (I4.) Good

(2) Pair

(3) Average

(5) Outstanding

5. Bate the extent of interaction you have had with those of another culture: (consider aub-culturas as well)

(1) Eone

(2) Very little

(If.) Above average

(5) Hear to total participation

(3) Average contact b. How many times have you moved from house to house?

(1) Fever

(2) Once

(3) 2-3 times

(4) 4-5 timea

(5) Over 6 times

7. How many times have you moved from community to community?

(1) Never (4) lj.-5 timea

(2) Once ( 5 ) Over 6 times

(3) 2-3 times

8. How many timea have you moved from atate to atate (in the same country)?

(1) Fever

(2) Once

(U.) k-5 times

(5) Over 6 times

(3) 2-3 timea

9. How many times have you movad from country to country?

(1) Fever

(2) Once

(4) 4-5 timea

(5) Over 6 timea

(3) 2-3 times

10. If I hada. foreign friend whose values conflicted with mine,

I would afffeimpt to change his values:

(1) To meet my own

(2) At times

(3) Only in a few areas

(!;) With reservations

(5) tfot at all

11. I speak the Target Culture language:

(1) Hot at all (l(.) yell

(2) Poorly

(3) With Average competency

(5) jlscellently

180

APPENDIX B

MODAL RESPONSES BY ITEM TO THE CULTURAL

LITERACY INVENTORY BY GROUP, BY SEX,

WITH PERCENTAGES

181

182

<jl , D®

V b" <A

*

2 a l s

1

«

(N! diO^vSiva rll riivQi ri ^N. 0\! O!

Os ^lt>

IVj

^ ON, rriiC^; t^ivS U i ^ ^

"V>! >- (9 fr); foj "ij ^-j

U

Uj>| WjNDlll hrjj i^i Nl

1

I

"J

• » 1

1

'

1 i

M

1

IL

Ja*

1 1 1

1

*' M M '1

1

M ' i ' i ' i

1 j

> i

'

T T i

T T T i i | «r j

> i M M 1

<X t»l fr\ Iftl ">•! ON tK e°

8*

>

*> s&j ^

£

"S

1 1 t 1 i

\

1

M

1

£

A oi

'i '

1 jV

V)

ONl Nsi Ui i*. u j

»

( j \ j 11

1

Ui &N N» v, U f»-i

*oi ^ TC ^OiU i i

\

1

'

«<

U|^rw i 1 i • 1 1 i

4" "x

T i R

JvfO

H 1

M

J

"VI ^Iva

!

•U va

Nil \i Ti %ol VS 0 s3

Ck> feN

>

HN

«0 T) >•

>

ro

>•

«3 fo

£

•i?

1

1

i

f i

\

1

1

1

1

\

}

l

\

»

\

1

1

'1

1

1 ' *

•>

N3

*tl c^l>sl\3lW

»0

\

•1

1 i u Pl^i \S|^>

»

I t i| i

In

>

rV

If*

V L

TV

1

I

Hi «l r»P

-V.

S

1

-

>

ft. *0 rk "3

>-

sa o> u to O-

*

11

?

1

1

I i

1 t i

1 i 1 i

\

1 i 1

\

t 1

£

<F

S

L c!

\

r

,

>

\

t»ri.

TK

>

fr> c* i 1 1 I

«

1 i ' 1

1

1

3 vi

<0 S

S

5j

$•

I

*

<

"N

- ! I s r>s

9 fe

a

o.

5>4N

S va

Q O ^1

>

>4 0

WI^J tlo OjN&lfc* o O w sN

&»lbs!oi w

1

$S> i.

VSM >

1

L .1

* . ,

J T.

I

11

•sJ ^

1 1 ^

\3i f** vai va

CNh)

'N Ql O

(*)| 0NN8 rt-

>

salQIO

Nfl frs

Q <9 vU N® u

H

N

»•

>

1

)

1 1 i i ba sfi

NO

";

>

i i 1 i 1 1

\

1 jv;

< fti

0 r*4f> o rv o W) Q Ql tvj fr^ **7 l{ 1 , .

•S, J Ja l.i

<*

>S

^N. fS»

1

0 rk li. rt*

to

U 5X

^ ti. 0 0 ^ t i

"\ " \

•*> 1«1 «*»i 1

PS. i 1 1 1 i

1

1

\ \

1 wl vfi U

n

U rts t^-v

1 1 i I i 1 i 1 1 i 1 e

|,j

\ r

u

>

1

\

*

\

%

5K

«<

\

i

\

1

N>

•ff

\ ,

1

>•

\

^s U <»5 rs. u

«)

\

1 i 1 i uk i 'i

•*v

Coi

>

•1

1

J

1

I

*c q): N

I N i? p

$ y»

&

>J va w •s nS lo ,o*l

1 I

1 i i 1 i i 1 1 1 i i

\

1 t

!

1 i i i i I t I i '1 '1 1

^ -

i

Ti

>

VJJ

Vl rHt* w t) Ns HI.mIOQ cij u T< OH t

>

**?

^0 u (vv ro o.

1.

?<

Ulrw Vtt

N»lMl 1

O u &oi &s is rv.

>

>

1 i

m/

"i H l

, J i jJ !

"' "; " i

1 • pQ H N® as va •>. "J t> Ui U|

<1

S*

$

>-*

41

3; a:

^1

H i i

N|

'

1

\

1

\

i 1

9 l

^.1 «x ^1 W)1

TV

W r*H

3v

>4 U oi ioiti-jtt-

1

~

*^| ^i

^1

1 ' i

\

J

,J

1 "*r" j

1 m O"! ^1

U| f0

T<j

I*i| U

>

rkiV^i Uisa V n l O l t O i i

^!°;°

, >

! [

1

..1 _»1 — i| i j ' I i |

1

1

\

• 1 •

J

"?r

'«j i 1 j I

!

M i

1

M

. !

1

I 1

I

<c

3 "8 I 1 1

»

!

£

y

5

X.

\b -

•i

_*1

**

Si p

"K

--J

*|

V

*

N f l j & O ^SvSlvsi ^ Q u

C7

1

1

^5 n9 %a

\

J i

J, l

^Si *<l V)i

*o tw Cx. u

1 1 1

'•)

I

1

' M l

1

1

I

1

Vo

•ol "3

>&|C0 f*3|N&

>

H-|N3

»

> 6ai 01 T<I 5>4 'S" l| 1

V

1 y*) *TI »»J rtJI K> si-J \\j *\

x

)

">* *N» *"Nl

1

1

! i i 1 t

1

Oi Q i fto i

\

1

\ \

'!

.! 1 tjN

1 1 • *

Vf* ^|TV| ^ci o| mi »i Ui t*>

<NI Q| rsi rri Ui siltv ol i r<j

1 1 1

!

1 1 ! r< i ' i i I i !

1

MM

! M : i

M i

1

*<! *< ?0t |

183

£

<l)

1

*\

fc

BL

H. v» PCii vi CSi voi 1^

Vfl •J w>i^i wj *0

1 1 li i 1

-4-

1

Osi fr>

ftal ^ s>

I ' 1

<*)

^

1 1 1 1 '! 'I '!

1 i

1

• i! 11 i 1

Y

| h,L i i 1

J.) i 1 1

i

0!t^;

m

i !

^Pl i

>. (J-* %»i sa rOl

'1 'i M '

1

^ssi

| i » 1 ' 1 |

JUJ 1

M i l

U

\.

\

H y\

>*i In ro tal r< ^3 rK Ml*,

<*)

5s> "il ^1 *< ui*> roi U;

£

•if

\

J l 1 1 i 1 1 i '1 ' I 1

2

r*i *

u

*

>

N ro x[ vi In

1

1

*

\

w

Ui f^i foi s.i m Nh»V)!S#I i

^ u

>

UjTKj

\

1 >i... i t

» i 1 1

'i

1

1 1 •1

L N w rt*i In J

1 1 i

Q, v!

15

T5

>- oi

5^ SO U *0 V) «i

N

0 o cn u U

U 0 val vftl ^

^0 "5 val Vi vi o^l ^

PO sS U SJ t, 5N sai ^ t i i

»

I

\

t

\

s I

» i I

\

\

1 i 1 I

*

In s

>,

?h l> w V| s.

*0

NO u T> U !J.| S5

1 1 1 1 i i i '1'

TN/

1 ] i 'I ! 1

<s> m

s fa

#

n?

*)

<ai fcy

1

\

u i

vlo o rk 0 n-ji*. tv rsj ol oi val>

\

U

1 t I i 1 i ri

>

*0 u rw

*y

»

^0 fo sa 0^

\

,

V

1 "1 1

r*>\

1 1 i J M • 1 1 1

0

( si h- s

>3 u "5 >A VI

to*

1 t s3 u u 5sj fKj >0j u u

>

.luLI

1

.

'

'•

( m

1 i i j

1 ! 1

J

H

N

»>Q *0 PK 0 o 0 0 PK rs 0 rkl Q M. pklofjl ^1 ro 0 rojm n Q «H f) tk t* sfl 5K

>

>

r< W s3 vS

(»)| rrj ml sA s3 Uf sSjf^ is ^0 u va sa r*» >1 rK "31 U W

<*

*

1 1 1

i,

»

I

\

i i i

l<-

.

h*T

1 t I

\

I

,J

M

,

l

>

1

> \

t 1 i

1. rrr^

\

\

i I • I i 1 1 < |

•s •s U In

s

1

1 i

1

«0

1. Q) s yl

h<> 0 oq r< o

c*

N H- v3 U b-

>

1 1 I

\ ,

t

<

0 b« VI si

to

DcJ Q ^1 tJIo u rw *T| i 1 I 1 1 i 'I w

"

1

V ts s3 rw

\

»

>

>

t+» U U u v3 i i i ro •4s

>

>

I

rl

\S H V SI &q 6Qi >. Q >i (Sol 5.1

» i

•s.

_

»

>.

u

>

S3 fTj|s» s3|

1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 '1

In u In

*> s u v i J

<T"| 1

«

$

1l

ft

»<5 rt u ro CtJ v tfc|6#

•««»

>1 Oil ^

U *ai "S •*)! m

<M <*3( *<l

0* 6o CK ••0

*)

Ui*^ In

SB u •0 *S >h

*)

>

rK

>

a

OS* i I t 1

\

11 i 1 i i i

1

\

I i i

X

(

m

1 i i h

\

»•

I vj >i?»-i ^ (ij *i

'I ' 1

1 t t i r

t

X.

>

\n

L

> • ,

\ . \ \ *

1.

>

vU i v i

M

'1 '1 i 1 "i 1 "i

V"

10

fi

S*- r^J

Si •5 t

«;

i

\,,

i

\

ll > I I

\

I I

'I '! '

Prj IT)

•\

! s

»•)

> bo »»J H v*-;

1 V i 1 1 1 1 1 1

\

1 i i

'! l l

1

1 " t V ~ '1 bJ

J\

-J -> 1. i

|

1 "I " 1 ~ "i "! 1 i

1

1

<!

4)

S< w tjI fai ^

1* H«4 ^ U

>

s3

<*

t I 1 1

**)

JO! "4<

\

.co

\

I t

,f

)

1

I

Kr\ fc

\

Si >K3i>i 0 sSI ^i Wl nH ^ oi "Ss b4 6o Qi>: 0». !

>-

V

^

>•

^V,!^ ;

'1 i '|

1

1 H.) i

.

"f "1 *]

I M

" v t M

1 i 1

J, v, u f

»

,

\

i

!

t L s!

«-

*•*. ri wii ixmlvalfi. c^i^!

*o w>

"5jf*l tO ro ro

^0

>

>s»

°oi o i v.'!^< mi^lUivSi

1

^ O! i

^ U j u iAjUkj'NQl i

**1?

m I

C

S;?

•01

1

1

1 ! 1

I l

1

I l

I

I I I ! i

I ; i

1 !

1

! 1 1 i

1 I

! i i i

1 I i i ! f ! !

APPENDIX C

MODAL RESPONSES BY ITEM TO THE CULTURAL

LITERACY INVENTORY BY ETHNICITY,

WITH PERCENTAGES

184

XJ

•i.

£Q i rs

S j* i

K

8

«

rJ 'S. ns L >JU

>

U u rn

Uj

&»j lo ^1 ri U

I i

<

1 i i 1 t t

1 I 1 1

»

1

1 I ' 1 1 t 1

-U f0( boi^ o 6oi f^l w rtj vo

1 j

Go b«i>"v u *0( *i

• 1 ' !

1

M ' 1

1 '

Jly

1 c( k

M l " " V

3

U vy

<1

V

CO u_

3

-c t r

» rs

rt.

H- rs r< n rs q

*)

(*• otrv! rrj tri ri.j rsi rsl psj o fO n-|ttirt-irt-

>3 v9 N0 v3 >3 0 y vfi| \9

\»| V91 -\3 i va «]| (V)| ^]V3

J l 1 I i

, /

X,

1 i

(

>

I 1 i i 1 1

$

*>

>

• l . '

1

' 'I ' '1 '

.

1 u ^IU jo u u N3 W) rs rs \9 U

V* in'rot%oi U

>

N3

1 i .| 1 I 1! 1

M '! ' t

<

1

*<

2*'VI "1" t^l

i l l

^

t^i >i •»

VS %9

u

U! Nil 'Ul INJ

>

U |tO

0%

5>)

1 1 1

1 1 i 1 1 i 1 i 1 1 | 1 i t i 1 1

>,

>

l„

H

U

L f

"J

\ i i

'

1

1

1

1

11

1

1 1

•j. i. V >K V u >L,u

"1 1

•1"I"I a

1 nlffi r»3 t,

Wllo r*- U >lfO

1 1 i i 1 i|. t 1

1

1

1> J- I, u »j| *v.

>1 6^i Wi UI N ol val rJ

0 *s»,

«> tK» «Yi IT) N3| > \S "1 *v

1V)I S»|TS

» t

1

1 i I I 1 1 1 1

1

1 1 1 ,

1

1 ,

>

I,

1

>

re fO

\

>

T

4a jk

>1 1

<

g i

• i.

*

S

5

0 0 o

* >3 -3 U

1 1 i 1

>

•> o 0 0 0 o o! o 0 0 0! 0 0 o| ol oi o Q n 1 0 0 ol o u n- rs N3 sa|v3 r+*

U rs >(rS u

>

Ql Q! 0

i/i

NS rvjivS CN 3> 5>ini t

>i

./

»

I I i i i 1 1 i i r 1*

» 1 I i 1 I 1

' «

ri

(Vi N -3H

Lrri J

I-.

ri

' 1

1

In r/ ^>L

»

1

.1

1 i 1^1 r i i

-el

1

4J

3

0 s

PJ

Vfl e JK5 n

-j

§

i.

•i

«? r>

.1 p. n> >1 a n fcn H c* 0

In t*. •U do sa r*- (K c-i tO Ul u 0 WlroirM (VJ Go Wl Ui Ol r*«

rri

to \3 vfl rt-

Nfl In rt^ O"- U| U m

>

ro va

>

U| ""-s rS va

I 1 i

\

1 i t I

i

»

I

\

1

1

\

i

M

1 i

\ \

)

\

' ! •

-

i 1

. ' 1 .

>

N* dl

>

'1 V

K

-J ^v-

1.

rJ

>

fn i-!«{] -

1

! * ! ~

1 !

Co

^1 ^ ol>Jva tol OQ O j<» 1 *<[ 6ol> 5s &oi o 1 HI >

>1 >| Vll Q 1

U O U 0» roi> >s|U >a U[ kn P»i6«|

Irt r#)[>»; sai CO! v3|> >'v3

}

1 i 1 t t

•1

1

J _

\

' 1 ' ll

»

I

• I ' i - i ' 1 • '1

1 1

I ' c4 "5

>

'

!

''•*. "*

t

^°| ^7 **

1

1 i

50

\X

Q> O ts

<*i

> U

:

^4k rs.oaiOi Oiv.

I

' 1

«\IW|« jfX W

"""*

1 1 s3i *>

1 »i

1

'1 •

|

11 i i i

I

MM

M M

1 1 I i ! ! i 1 1 i 1 !

1 1 i

! 1 1

185

186

0

1 i I 1 I i i 1 1 1 1

» it

c

fco olpf.

f\

f) W 0 Q 'Jl! *5i POI ^ r*» i* ro U >!<A PO

PO

(VI 0"

>

£

n/ In

\

1 w

«^0

>

I i

I;

r4 f*ij t>-

>

u tl

POI b«ai ^isiito r*- p)!rJirt-

Ui mi®i KlirojW i i 1 i I

\

'h 1 1 ' »

' ! '

>1 u •s.

Ink In W ?v v .1'

1 i 1 M i "

3

J! a

M

0

ff)

| i

2 Q^

A

5t t<3

\

i 1 i t 1 1 i 1

0

cr> p- sfl va

*

>

to

$

mivj O o

1

"Svs W

«)

V. ro sfl M ro nol ^

U

k

_j

IA'

11 rni" "I I l

1 i 1 1 i 1

» i i t

<t i

J

u rtn'

V*1 n

>

m

>

\3

>

W|

i

>

» rsl oirs c i

1 1 so oj^

) hi

1

0

\ t

ss nil N» O •^3

>s I 1 . 1 t

T>

•N,

>1

r{

*{

•H

>s 1,

rt\

NO

n

1 1 1

. « . . , vo

i I 1 1 '

>

v pj

>

UlcJ >»| u wl u ul pn u i*l u "S,

> 6« o« U|&«

U to

>

>

rk

V3 H|U (N

1'

1

N1 n4i.

>

1 1 t 1 i i

»

i

»

i 1 1

vi '

1

3: u

I

^l, tr» o <rJ \a t> *1 >>i vii v. w CN "i w f^l 0 u

«>

,0 p?

T*- TK 5v "0 s~

>

i t rt- va! ^ w

**)

cp- ol>

>a w- PO m NS cSs.

>

r*-

>

v9 ro Nfl

\9 li r»« ^0 rs sb g tr

k

1

i 1 1 i i i i i i 1 1 i I 1 i 1 t 1

1 i 1 11 i

^

i i l

1 1

£

>1 <t|

Q* u

*( i,

T>

>

r^ "•s Us. 1

M

•j

1

L

<

i. v!)

)

<5 tt-

Q fO

>.

nu ro

>

Ol al Q|

0«>i N3 NS 0^-

1 i i 1 i 1

1 i 1 i i i 1 1 I i I 1 1 to

i

v3

>

1 I 1 i sO rk •0 0- s-j tr-

1 i 1 I 1 •i

4

X

*

<

a, u

% , r>^ W v3 0 •v r» *1

>

-sj U "N, x3

~-

*|H Ul rtl &>ir>-! 6«

Q IS 5N

o

i f-TS

<<<]

t/\

I

s3

*>•

CO

L

%• s3 to tt*

>

>•

>

1 fi u ^i U

>

H

rf t, u a» ii 1

<

>*

*h

4* \„k

N3 ro ro

T»» i 1 1 1 i t

»

1

» i

\

t 1 1

'

•i • I

\

' i 1 i 1

' i i M »

\D

<

a.

?

Va

N^,

<* u

I

>

>1,

In

1

M I " 1 '!

\

\ tfl Ujw >j ^Si PO

1 »l

1

. >1. 1

\

1

\

i )

! 1 1

0 «<l 0 &c ^

>

! bo t*lw-

1 i I i

^

4 u

V

1

•J

^1 ^H>1 *3 i i

•c| 'oj w

PO

<

1

\

>s

1

\

«»

\

»

+J

1.

1.

U

A

v<

Ia

rf

I J 1^ i T w

1 "i "1 "

M|

L

*)

«0 *0

n

t"1 CO

•*1 s

-a

g

H* o

0 5.

•»».

v\

>

u vS rt-l t>o cH oi

,

\

» t0| rr >i l/v ^

1 s-

3-

*J ^oi oi

T41 C^l ^

>1^

%A

1 i

1

*r\

VAI i i I-

LIST OF REFERENCES

Allport, Gordon. Theories of Perception and the Concept of

Structure. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1955.

. Patterns and Growth in Personality. New York: Holt,

1966.

Anastasi, Ann. Psychological Testing. London: The Macmillan

Co., Collier MacMillan, Ltd., 1949.

Anderson, Ned. "I Broke the Barrier," Indian Programs, Univer­ sity of Arizona, Winter 1970.

Barth, Frederic (ed.). "Introduction," Ethnic Groups and Bounda­

Basso, Keith H. "'To Give Up on Words,' Silence in Western Apache

Keith H. Basso and Morris Opler. Tucson: University of

Arizona Press, 1971.

Benedict, Ruth. "Continuities and Discontinuities in Cultural

Conditioning," Psychiatry, Vol. 1936 (1936), 161-167.

. American Melting Pot, 1942 Model. Washington, D. C.:

United States Printing Office, 1942.

. "Transmitting Our Democratic Heritage in the School,"

American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 48 (1943), 722-727.

Berlo, David K. The Process of Communication. New York: Holt,

Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1960.

Black, Max. Models and Metaphors. Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell Press,

Brameld, Theodore. "Anthrotherapy—Toward Theory and Practice,"

Human Organization, Vol. 24 (1965), 288-297.

Bruner, Jerome S. "On Perceptual Readiness," Psychological Re­ view, Vol. 64 (1957), 123-152.

187

188

Bruning, James L., and B. L. Kintz. Computational Handbook of

Statistics. Glenview, 111.: Scott Foresman and Co.,

1968.

Burger, Henry G. "Ethnopedagogy: A Manual in Cultural Sensi­ tivity, With Techniques for Improving Cross-Cultural

Teaching by Fitting Ethnic Patterns." Publication No. 2-

0768. Albuquerque: Southwestern Cooperative Educational

Laboratory, Inc., 1968. (Mimeographed.)

Chilcott, John H. "The School as a Cultural System," Readings in the Sociocultural Foundations of Education, eds. John H.

Belmont, Cal.: Wadsworth and Co., 1968.

, Professor of Anthropology and Educational Foundations and Administration, University of Arizona. Personal com­ munication, 1976.

, Norman C. Greenberg, and Herbert B. Wilson (eds.).

Readings in the Sociocultural Foundations of Education.

Belmont, Cal.: Wadsworth and Co., 1968.

Chomsky, Noam. Language and Mind. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc., 1968.

Devereaux, George, and Bert Kaplan (eds.). Studying Personality

Cross-Culturally. New York: Harper and Row, 1961.

Dieckman, Mildred. "Thoughts on the Dominant American," South­ west Intergroup Relations Council (March 1970), 1-28.

New York: Rinehart, 1954.

Featherston, Jo A., Jane M. Gillespie, and Herbert B. Wilson.

Cultural Literacy Laboratory Workbook. Tucson: Univer­ sity of Arizona, 1972.

American Indian Education. New York: Doubleday, Inc.,

1972.

Goodenough, Florence L. Draw a Man Test: Measurement of Intel­ ligence by Drawing. New York: World Book Co., 1926.

Sage Foundation, 1963.

189

Goodman, Mary Ellen. "Values, Attitudes and Social Concepts of

Japanese and American Culture," American Anthropologist,

Vol. 59 (1957), 979-999.

. "Children as Informants: The Child's Eye-View of So­ ciety and Culture," The American Catholic Sociological

Review, Vol. 21 (1960), 136-145.

. "Culture and Conceptualization: A Study of Japanese

386.

. Race Awareness in Young Children. New York: Collier

Books, 1964.

. "Child's-Eye View of Life in an Urban Barrio," Ameri­ can Ethnological Society Proceedings of 1968. Annual

Spring Meeting, 1968.

Gorer, Geoffrey. "The Concept of National Character," Science

News, Vol. 18 (1950), 104-122.

Hall, E. T. "The Anthropology of Manners," Scientific American,

Vol. 192 (1958), 84-90.

. The Silent Language. Greenwich, Conn.: Fawcett Pub­ lications, Inc., 1959.

Harris, Marvin. The Rise of Anthropological Theory. New York:

Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 1968.

Havighurst, Robert J. "Education Among American Indians: Indi­ vidual and Cultural Aspects," The American Indian,

Vol. 311 (May 1957), 105-115.

. "Social Class Influences on American Education," So­ cial Forces Influencing Education, ed. Nelson B. Henry.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.

Henry, Jules. "Attitude Organization in Elementary School Class­ rooms," American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol. 27

. "A Cross-Cultural Outline of Education," Current An-

Honigman, John J. Culture and Personality. New York: Harper and Row, 1954.

190

Isaac, Stephen, and William B. Michael. Handbook in Research and

Evaluation. San Diego: Robert R. Knapp, 1974.

Kaplan, David, and Charles A. Manner. Culture Theory. Englewood

Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1972.

Kardiner, Abram. The Individual and His Society. New York:

Columbia University Press, 1939.

Kelly, William H. "Culture and the Individual: A Selection of

Readings." Tucson: University of Arizona Bookstore,

1969. (Mimeographed.)

Kluckhohn, Clyde. The Navaho. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni­ versity Press, 1946.

. Mirror for Man. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.,

1949.

. Culture and Behavior. New York: The Free Press, and H. A. Murray. Personality, Nature, Society, and

Culture. New York: Alfred E. Knopf, 1953.

Lewin, Kurt. "Psychological Ecology," Field Theory in the Social

Sciences, ed. Darwin Cartwright. New York: Harper and

Row, 1951.

Linton, Ralph. The Cultural Background of Personality. New

York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1945.

Madsen, William. The Mexican-Americans of South Texas. New

York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1964.

Mead, Margaret. The School in American Culture. Cambridge,

Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1951.

. "The Training of the Cultural Anthropologist," Ameri­ can Anthropologist, Vol. 54 (1954), 343-346.

Miller, Roger (ed.). Race, Research, and Reason. New York:

National Association of Social Workers, 1969.

Murdock, George P. Social Structure. New York: Macmillan Co.,

1949.

Osgood, Cornelius, E., J. G. Suci, and P. H. Tannenbaum. The

Measurement of Meaning. Urbana, 111.: University of

Illinois Press, 1957.

191

Oxford Dictionary of the English Language. London: Oxford Uni­ versity Press, 1971.

Rokeach, Milton. The Open and Closed Mind: Investigations into the Nature of Belief Systems and Personality Systems.

New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1960.

Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1968.

Samovar, Larry A., and Richard E. Porter (eds.). Intercultural

Communication: A Reader. Belmont, Cal.: Wadsworth Pub­ lishing Co., 1972.

Sapir, Edward. "The Status of Linguistics as a Science," Lanquage, Vol. 5 (1929), 209-210.

Siegel, S. Nonparametric Statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill

Book Co., 1956.

Angeles: University of California Press, 1955.

. The Transmission of American Culture. Cambridge,

• Mass.: Harvard University Press for the Graduate School of Education, 1959.

. Education and Culture: Anthropological Approaches.

New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1963.

. Education and Cultural Process: Toward an Anthropolo­ gy of Education. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,

Inc., 1974a.

. "From Omnibus to Linkages: Cultural Transmission

Models," Council on Anthropology and Education Quarterly,

Vol. 5 (February 1974b), 220-222. and Louise S. Spindler. "The Instrumental Activities

Inventory, A Technique for the Study of the Psychology of Acculturation," Southwestern Journal of Anthropology,

Vol. 21 (1965), 1-23.

Stinchcombe, Arthur L. Constructing Social Theories. New York:

Sutherland, John W. A General Systems Philosophy for the Social and Behavioral Sciences. New York: George Braziller,

1973.

192

York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc., 1962.

Thompson, Laura. "Attitudes and Acculturation," American Anthro­ pologist, Vol. 50 (1948), 200-215.

Vol. 14 (1951), 255-263.

Triandis, Harry. "Cognitive Similarity and Communication in a

Dyad," Human Relations, Vol. 13 (1960), 175-183.

Tyler, Stephen A. (ed.). Cognitive Anthropology. New York:

Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1969.

Tylor, Sir Edward B. The Origins of Culture. London: Murray,

1871.

Ulibarri, Horacio. "Teacher Awareness of Sociocultural Differ­ ences in Multicultural Classrooms." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of New Mexico, 1958.

Wallace, Anthony F. C. Culture and Personality. 2nd ed. New

York: Random House, Inc., 1970.

Whorf, Benjamin C., and John Carroll (eds.). Language, Thought and Reality. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1956.

Zintz, Miles V. Education Across Cultures. 2nd ed. Albuquer­ que: University of New Mexico.

Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Related manuals

Download PDF

advertisement