.43

DOCUMENT RESUME ED 026 675 CG 003 558 By-Whitfield, Edwin A.; Glaeser, George A. Project View. History and Development. San Diego County Dept. of Education, Calif. Spons Agency-Office of Education (DHEW), Washington, D.C. Pub Date Nov 68 Note- 17p. EDRS Price ME-$0.25 HC-$0.95 Descriptors-Career Planning, *Guidance Services, OccupationalChoice, *Occupational Guidance, *Occupational Information, *Program Development The Regional Center for the Collection,Synthesis, and Dissemination of Career Information for Schools in San Diego County wasestablished as a pilot project (VIEW) in1965. Participating institutions included the countydepartment of education, colleges located in the county, and theCalifornia State Department of Employment. The present paper gives a history ofVIEW through its pilot developmental, and demonstration phases. Evaluation procedures andresults involving students and counselors are presented. A junior collegefollow-up study and summer training workshop are discussed, with evaluations ofthese project components also included. A discussion of limitations and an outline of1968-69 operations follow. (BP) vvVv.k,FrnAvvuwniv.vvv,v,63.v.r.,,,. v

PROJECT VIEW

HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT

EDWIN A. WHITFIELD GEORGE A. GLAESER

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION & WELFARE

OFFICE OF EDUCATION

THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED EXACTLY ASRECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT.POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS

STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICEOF EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY.

CX) 1!) Lf) CY)

Departmentof Education, San Diego County November 1968 WSW!, 1% 7,?,41,

VIEW

HISTORY OF THE PROJECT

Pilot Phase - February1965 to July 1966

The Regional Center for theCollection, Synthesis, andDissemination of Career Information for Schoolsin San Diego County wasestablished as a pilot project funded in part by theVocational EducationAct--1963 on February 1, 1965. The pilot phase of the project wasextended to June 30, 1966. the six junior The participating schoolsin the pilot activity included college institutions in San DiegoCounty: Grossmont College, MesaCollege, MiraCosta College, Palomar College,San Diego City College, andSouthwestern College, and the Department ofEducation, San Diego County. Mhny agencies development of and institutions alsoparticipated in the first stages of the project. Prominent among them were:

California State Department ofEmployment San Diego State College Hospital Council of San Diego

The pilot program wasdivided into two phases. Phase One began on February 1, 1965 and ended on December1, 1965. Some of the activities in this phase included thecollection and synthesis ofoccupational information based upon student andcounselor perceptions ofwhich oc- cupational information was of most worthand the preparation of data about 55 occupations in the areaof hospital careers; thedevelopment of a system of dissemination andretrieval which was workable,efficient, and relatively inexpensive and thepreparation of ancillarymaterials such as VIEWPOINT, a document preparedby counselors which described entry employment in San Diego for usein the counseling process.

Phase Two, which continued untilJune 30, 1966, centered onthe ex- perimental use of VIEWscript materialproduced on microfilm aperture cards and placed in the schoolsfor use by students seekingoccupational information and counselors advising andcounseling students to better educational and vocational decisions. Careful evaluation of theefficacy of the material took place. The evaluation looked atthe equipment from the point of view of ease of useand acceptance by studentsand faculty alike. (The pilot run included information about55 occupations which were available inhospitals in San Diego County. This information was reported on 165 aperture cards andincluded VIEWscripts, bibliographic trailer cards, and human resourcetrailer cards.)

Developmental Phase - July1966 to July 1967

The objectives of the developmentalphase of the CareerInformation Center, conducted from July 1,1966 through June 30, 1967, mere the following: First to prepare, disseminate,and update occupational information on jobs requiring lessthan a baccalaureate degreefor which local training was availablein San Diego County. Second, to conduct inservice meetingswith counselors and teachers onthe pro- fessional utilization of theseoccupational materials. Third, to sponsor a summer careerguidance workshop for counselorsproviding them with pertinent experiences in localentry occupations to aid themin their work with students. Fourth, to record and disseminatethe reactions of these counselors to thisexperience for the use of othercounselors and students within San Diego County. Fifth, to follow up selected graduates from training programs in thesix local junior colleges toobtain their reactions to the instructionreceived and their analysill oftheir current positions. An additional function of the CareerInformation Center was to prepare a filmstripdepicting tlie activities of theCenter. This filmstrip could then be used toorient students, counselors,and other school personnel to the servicesoffered by the Career Information Center.

During the developmental phase, careerinformation was produced for all occupations requiring less than abaccalaureate degree for which training was available in San Diego County. This resulted in approxi- mately 200 eight-page job descriptions. This information was dissemi- nated to twelve participating schoolsand an evaluation of thematerials and dissemination procedures wassecured from the students,counselors, and school administrators.

The dissemination vehicle used was asystem based on the use ofthe microfilm aperture card. A two-card format was chosenfor each oc- cupation with the first card containingfour pages of general inform- ation and a second card containing four pagesof local information. Each of the twelve participatingschools in the project wassupplied with a microfilm reader and areader-printer which enabled the students to project the microfilm copy on a screenand, if desired, print out hard copy for sUbsequent discussionswith their counselors orparents. In addition, parameters pertinentto the occupation, such asaptitudes, length of training, restrictions, etc., werekey-punched into each aperture card.

The main body of informationfor each occupation was preparedin a standardized format suitable forconversion into microfilm form. Each brief in its uncOnvertedform consisted of four8- by 11-inch pages. A standardized heading was alsochosen, the acronym VIEW (Vocational Information for Education andWork); and the briefs were referred to as VIEWscripts. Each of the pair of briefs for an occupation was put on microfilm whichis mounted in an aperture card by use of a processor-camera.

The first four-page V/EWscriptcontained information about the occupation which was generally applicablethroughout the country, The order of presentation ofthe information, however,differed from conventional practices. That is, a thorough look atthe criteria which applicants must meet(including such items as physical health, verbal ability, character,training required, advantages and disadvantages) preceded any detailed descriptionof the job itself. The second four-page VIEWscriptfor each occupation containedpertinent local information including alisting of local traininginstitutions, a bibliography oflocally produced studies and surveysrelating to the field, and a listing ofcommunity resource people workingin the occupation who had agreed to talk abouttheir occupations directly with the students. The use of this two-card formatcould make it

- 2 `Is v

possible for the more general descriptive data to be preparedat a central location and the local information to be preparedregionally with the possibility of a card exchange betweencenters. The number of printouts that could be produced from oneaperture card is unlimited and the cost per copy is modest.

A summer workshop in entry employment was heldduring the time period June 27 - August 5,1966, which enabled ten high school and junior college counselors to study and observe the entryoccupational patterns of selected businesses and industries in theGreater San Diego area and to relate to their experiences to the career andeducational programs of the secondary schools and junior colleges. The participants spent four weeks on the job in entry occupations and twoweeks in the class- room. The classroom activities were carefully articulatedwith the participants' experiences on the job. During the two weeks of instruc- tion, the first week and the sixth week, the focus was ontheory and process of vocational choice. The group had the additionalresponsibility of producing copy for a document describing entryemployment in San Diego. This document was then distributed to all secondaryschool counselors in San Diego County for use in counselingstudents.

Meetings were held with representatives of thecounseling departments and vocational education departments in each of thesix junior colleges in San Diego County. From these meetings a questionnaire wasagreed upon and it was decided that the June1966 graduates or certificate recipients in the programs common to all six juniorcolleges would be included in this survey. This resulted in a sample of 331 studentsin the business, electronic, and drafting programsin these junior colleges.

EVALUATION PROCEDURES

The evaluation of the VIEW materials and their usein the pilot schools involved several phases, each utilizing a differentevaluation instru- ment.

Immediate Student Reaction Questionnaire

Immediately before and after using the VIEW aperturecards each student was asked to record his reaction onevaluation cards provided by the Career Information Center. These-two cards elicited from the userhis reaction to previous occupational information he hadencountered and his comparison of it with the VIEWscripts. Other data collected by these instruments included referral source, frequency of use,grade level in school, high sdhool grades, past vocationalexploration, previous use of occupational information and otherinformation.

Data collected by means of these instruments wererecorded in two ways. First, the reactions of the students were tabulatedand totals and percentages given for each of the questions, Second, a random sample of one hundred students was drawn from thetotal questionnaires received, and where applicable, the z statistic was usedto ascertain the significance of change in the reaction of thestudents to previous occupational information, and then to the VIEW materials.

-3 Later Student Evaluation and Use

In early June 1967 a random sample of students whohad used the VIEW occupational file in each of the twelve participating schools was drawn. Their reactions to the VIEW materials and their use of the information was elicited using a questionnaire designed for this purpose. Responses were then totaled and presented in the form of percentages.

Meetings with Student Groups

Group discussions were held with the students whohad used the materials in the pilot schools. The purpose of these meetings was to more clearly and specifically identify student useof the project materials and to encourage any comments and criticisms that werenot possible to elicit through the use of an objective typeinstrument.

Counselor Reaction

In June 1967 a questionnaire was administered tocounselors working with the VIEW materials in the pilot schools. The purpose of this questionnaire was to obtain their reaction to and use of VIEW.

Evaluation of Summer Workshop

Two procedures were used in evaluating the effectsof the six-weeks activities: (1) an evaluative questionnaire was administered to all counselor participants and, (2) an evaluation of thedocument VIEWPOINT, Entry Employment in San pieJ was conducted witheach school counselor in San Diego County receiving the questionnaire. These two instruments were used to obtain the perceptions ofthe counselor participants as to the value of their six-weeks experiences and to Obtain ageneral evalua- tion of the timeliness and usefulness of VIEWPOINT inthe various schools.

RESULTS

The results Obtained from the evaluation instrumentsused for the VIEW materials indicated that of the three major referral sourcesto the VIEW files (teachers, students, andcounselors) most referrals came from the classroom teacher. In many cases the student indicated that his introduction to the files was a self-referral. The majority of the students used the matcwials only once and these users wereusually high school students receiving average grades and whohad decided only recently to investigate the occupation. Many of the students indicated that they had not used occupational informationprevious to coming to the VIEW files. Those students who did have some comparisonbasis for evaluation of VIEW (students who had used other types ofoccupational information) considered the VIEW occupational information more helpful, understandable, realistic, interesting, complete, and up todate than the occupational information they had investigatedpreviously (significant at .001). The microfilm reader-printer, either alone or incombination with the microfilm reader, was used by over three-fourthsof the students. A similar percentage of students also took a printed copyof at least some of the materials in the VIEWfile. When students were asked to rank the overaUmethod of presentation of the VIEWmaterials over three fourths also indicated they "very much" or"extremely" liked this method. by high schoolstudents(N=175) generally supported The later evaluation that is, a the ImmediateReaction Questionnaires, the findings from only once ortwice majority of thestudents used theVIEW materials of the information. that they didtake a printed copy and most indicated had "some" or Three-fourths of thestudents said thatthe information their choice of a career. Students at ft much" of an effect on very of the different this time were alsoqueried regardingtheir utilization From this it wasfound that aspects contained inthe VIEWscripts. had made use ofthe printed approximately one-halfof the students listed, whileconversely very few sources ofadditional information agreed to talkwith students students used the resourcepeople who had counselor in verifyingand utilizing about their jobs.The aid of a generally ignoredby the information contained inthe VIEWscripts was materials incounseling Professional utilizationof the VIEW students. generally lackingin the situations with students seemsto have been however, didindicate that they A. majority ofthese students, schools. with their parents. sometimes or usuallydiscussed the VIEWscripts the generalinformation, were The first four pagesof information, or printed out by thestudents. The localinformation the pages nost students were out by few students. Paradoxically, when was printed materials, thelocal asked to list themost valuableaspect of the VIEW additional information, was information, as well asthe sources of mentioned frequently.

Counselor Reaction evaluation question- twenty-one counselorsreturning the Generally, the the in their estimationstudent reaction to naire indicated that Approximately VIEWscripts was eitherfavorable or veryfavorable. of othervocational two-thirds of the counselorssaid that the use of the VIEWmaterials materials had increasedsince the installation least same increase and over three.fourthsindicated that there was a from the totalschool staff since in interest invocational guidance All counselors the VIEW project wasinitiated in theirschoola. materials in classroomactivi- surveyed indicated thatthey used VIEW ties.

Emluation - SummerWorkshop workshop participants The results of thequestionnaire sent to in the summer program indicated that a majorityof the participants occupations in theSan felt they had becomefamiliar with entry experience as a valuableaspect Diego area and sawthe on-the-job felt that theyhad of their workshopexperience.Most participants entry jobs availablein San gained the mostinformation concerning of local businessesand industry, rdego County,personnel practices greatest utilityof the and entry levelexperience. They saw the sessions with studentscon- workshop experiencein later counseling The documentVIEWPOIET producedby the participants cerning careers. This document distributed to allschools in San DiegoCounty. was in their contained a record ofthe experiencesof the participants sent to all pupilpersonnel job experiences. A questionnaire was County who hadreceived a copy ofthis document. workers in San Diego to administrators, andteachers who responded Of the 103 counselors, indicated they hadused the questionnaire,approximately one-half

5 eR

previous VIEWPOINTS in the past. Of these, most indicated they had used it in conjunction with student occupational informationfiles and in counseling with individual students. Also over one-half of the respondents who had used VIEWPOINT indicated that the use of thisdocument by students was greater than the use ofother local occupational information. In comparing the usefulness of VIEWPOINT with other localinformation, 70 percent of the total respondents said that it wasbetter or much better and only4percent indicated that it was not as good. Over three...fourths of the total sample rated VIEWPOINT valuable or veryvaluable as a counsel- ing tool while 47 percent indicated that student reactionto this document was either favorable or very favorable.

Junior College Follow-up Study

All students who graduated or received their Certificateof Competency in June 1966 in the business, electronic, or drafting programsin the six junior colleges in San Diego were included in the surveyresulting in a total sample of 313 students. Three mailouts to these students resulted in a return of 224 questionnaires(71 percent). Caution was used in interpreting the results of the study forthree reasons: First, most of the respondents had been enrolled in abusiness curricu- lum. Second, few of the respondents completed the entirequestionnaire. And third, no statistical analyses were performed on thedata received.

Generally, as a total student group the junior collegegraduates or certificate holdersin the business, electronics, or draftingcurricula of the San Diego junior colleges were 21 to 25 years oldand perceived themselves as ranking approximately in the middle of theirhigh school graduating class. They obtained information on their educational choice from many and diverse sources, but for the most partdid not rely upon the help of their high school counselor. The majority of these students made the final decision to attend juniorcollege while still in high school. These students tended to choose thejunior college because of its nearness and perceived themselves asbeing rather independent in this choice. As a group, the students also tended to.choose their occupation late in their senior yearof high school or after. Many did switch programs from a collegetransfer to a terminal program after they had once entered thecollege. Generally one-half of these students also indicated they weresatis- fied both with their choice of school and their choice of training and would repeat these choices again if given theopportunity. Electronics students more than the others indicatedgreater satis- faction with their training and with the first job theyreceived .as a result of this training. Conversely, this same group indicated less often than the other students that they wouldrepeat this same choice. Drafting students on the other hand seemed to takeadvantage of the counseling help available to them during high schooland seemed also to put forth more effort in investigating the juniorcollege before enrolling (e.g., visiting the school), but yet less oftenreceived a first job related to their training and seemed more oftento be dis- satisfied with that job.

-6 CONCLUSIONS

VIEW

Students, when made aware thatpertinent information does exist,and is available for them, will make use ofthis information in theirdecision advantage making. Over 1700 students in thetwelve pilot schools did take of the VIEW files, and a majority ofthese students indicated that pre- viously they had never or hadinfrequently, used information ofthis type. Apparently the VIEW system motivatedthe students to use occupational with the information. The use of the materials atschool in conjunction counselor was generally ignored bymost of the students andpoints to the need for further emphasisin this area. The evaluation of students in ranking the VIEW materials incomparison with other materialsof this nature was generally favorableindicating that the VIEW approachto oc- cupational information, both in themedia used and the contentand format being of the occupational informationitself, is viewed by the students as of more value than the informationthey had used in the past.When one combines the favorable reaction ofthe counselors and studentsto this material in conjunction with the factthat the microfilm aperturecard facilitates storage and retrieval andallows for continuous updatingof the information, it isevident that the system developedby the San Diego County Department ofEducation Career InformationCenter holds promise for utilization in schoolsystems throughout thenation.

The reactions of the counselorsto the VIEW project indicatedthat the VIEW concept of an occupationalfile is wanted, needed, andenthusias- tically supported by counselors inthe public schools. The frequent use of VIEW materialsin classroom situations emphasizedthe future implications of the materials for these purposes. There is, however, of definite need to work with counselorsconcerning the effective use the VIEW information or anyinformation in counseling withstudents. The VIEW program to date hasconcentrated on student needsin providing students with realistic up-to-datevocational information. The next with the step in the project must includeconcentrated inservice work counselors and staffs in the schoolswhere the VIEW project isin operation.

Summer Workshop

The reactions of the counselorswho participated in the summerworkshops in entry employment recommendssuch experiences forother counselors working with youth. Such an approach provided theworking counselor with a valuable source ofinservice education in bothacademic training and personnel experiences inentry types of employment. The reactions of San Diego businesses andindustry to this workshop hasshown that such community groups are morethan willing to provide timeand financial compensation to educators for such anexperience. The experiences and results evident in San Diegoindicated that such an approachis feasible in many areas where community groupsand educators plan togetherto increase the effectiveness of counselorsin working with students. The reaction to and use of VIEWPC1NT, EntryEmployment in San Diego, inthe schools has shown that the knowledge andexperiences gained by workshopparticipants can be sharedthroughout a school system.

- 7 - Junior College Follow-up

Trends evident from the responses of the junior college vocational graduates indicated a need for both high school and junior college counselors to devote more time and aid to students in their decision- making process involving the choice of post-high school training and subsequent jobs. For many of these students, it appears, the choices regarding these matters are an individual matter and these choices later on result in both time consuming changes in training programs and oc- cupations.

Demonstration Phase - July 1967 to July 1968

The demonstration phase of Project VIEW was designed to enable all school counselors and administrators in San Diego County to become thoroughly informed on the services of the Regional Career Information Center. The Center also served during this time as a model for other geographic regions wishing to establish asdmilar service. The objectives of the developmental phase were:

1. To continue to provide secondary school students with current occupational information on local job opportunities.

2. To demonstrate how students could investigate on their own many occupational fields and receive printed in- formation they could study and retain.

3. To illustrate how one basic occupational information system can be adapted to meet the needs of students from both small rural and large urban school populations.

I. To encourage students to discuss occupational information with their parents.

5. To demonstrate a realistic process by which counselors who by training and experience are most often oriented toward working with college-bound students could utilize materials and information to aid non college-bound youth.

6. To disseminate information detailing the services and the results of this program.

7. To demonstrate the services provided by the San Diego County Career Information Center to the educational, business, civic and cultural communities in San Diego County and the State of California and throughout the nation.

Procedures

The objectives of the project were accomplished through the dissemination of career information in public and nonpublic, nonprofit school districts of varying size in San Diego County. The demonstration program involved: a. Demonstration of this exemplary method ofproviding occupational information in schools ofvarying size.

1. Small schools (less than 500A.D.A.). Four secondary schools with an average dailyattendance of less than 500 pupils weresupplied an aperture card file containing the completeoccupational information collected and prepared ,by theCenter. These schools were alsoprovided with a DuKane MicrofiLm Reader to allow thestudents and counselors to read the information containedin the microfilm aperture card.

2. Schools of average and large size(500-3500 A.D.A.). Eight secondary schools of averageand large size were supplied with the microfilm aperturecard files, a DuKane Microfilm Reader and aFilmac 400 Microfilm Reader-Printer.

3. Eight additional schools of averageto large size (500 - 3500A.D.A.). Eight additional schools of average and large size weresupplied with printed copies of all materials providedto the other schools in the form of microfilm aperturecards. These printed materials were contained in standardoccupational files to be used by the students andthe counselors in these eight schools.

Sample conventional To ascertain theincreased value of the VIEW system over occupational materials, in September1967 a research study was initiated involving the following experimentalsituations:

Group One involving the useof the VIEW microfilm aperture card deck, a reader-scanner and areader-printer.

Group Two involving the useof a full set(200 occupations) of printed(8i- by 11- inch) VIEWscripts in a conventional but separate file drawer.

Eight high schools withA.D.A. greater than 500 wereincluded in each group and theinstrument used was a shortquestionnaire card soliciting the reaction of the studentsto previous occupationalinformation before using the VIEW materials andhis reaction to the VIEWscriptsimmediately after using them. Students had complete accessto the information with a minimum ofsupervision. After five months of use thequestionnaires were collected ateach of the schools resultingin 981 usable returns from Group One and281 in Group Two.

In addition, on a moreinformal basis, four smallschools (Group Three) (A.D.A.< 500) had a deck of aperturecards and a reader-scanneronly. Whenever possible counselorsin these schools were askedto have students complete the questionnaireconcerning the materials. No concentrated effort was made to collectdata or to insure propersampling techniques. , ,9,774,7,7-17,17,77Y74

Due to this and the number of usablereturns (N=34) from these schools no statistical analyses werecomputed. Whenever pertinent, however, trends in the responses of these students werenoted in relationship to the answers of students in other groups tothe same questions.

RESULTS

Student Reaction

Students in the three experimental groups wereasked to compare the helpfulness, understandability, realism, interest,completeness, and currency of the VIEW materialswith those they had used in the past. Table 1 presents the mean ratings of thestudents in the three groups for the VIEW materials and occupationalinformation previously experienced. (See Table 1)

In all instances in Groups One and Two,the VIEW materials received a higher rating than other vocational materials. Similar increases were found in Group Three schools having only microfilmreaders with the exception of an identical rating given to thecompleteness of the two types of information. Statistical analyses presented in Tables 2 and 3 for the students having microfilm readers andreader-printers (Group One) and those having printed copy only (GroupTwo) emphasize the higher rating given to the VIEW materials. The differences between the rating given by students in both groups weresignificant at the .0001 level. (See Tables 2 and 3)

When students in the three groups were askedhow well they liked the overall method of presentation of the VIEW materials,all gave a high rating to the materials regardless of thedissemination media. Students having the microfilmed materials did, however,give a slightly higher rating to the VIEWscripts than those having onlyprinted copies of these same materials.

Counselor and Teacher Reaction

Counselors and teachers in the schools includedin Groups One and Two were also asked for theirreactions to the VIEW materials used in their schools. Questionnaire returns were received from 55 facultymembers in Group One and 27 returns were received fromGroup Two. Approximately 50 percent of the respondents were schoolcounselors. The reactions to the materials, like those of the students, wereextremely favorable.

Slightly over 60 percent in both groups estimatedthat the use of the VIEW materials motivated students to continuetheir occupational ex- ploration by using additional vocational materialscontained in the school files. Seventy-nine percent of the Group One respondentsand 68 percent of those from Group Two said an increase inparticipation and/or interest in the guidance program by the total school staff had occurred since VIEW was initiated at theirschools. An increase in the effectiveness of the vocational guidance program wasperceived by 96 percent of the staff in Group One and by86 percent in Group Two. Finally, over 8o percent in both groups indicatedthat the VIEW materials had been used by teachers in classroom activities.

- 10- 17,41,7,77, r.navv.,....-1`FFTRE.r:41,117,7P 7

TABLE 1

UTILIZATION AND EVALUATION OF OCCUPATIONALMATERIALS*

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 mean mean mean (N=981) (N=281) (11=314)

liNNIOYMILI111. VINIMAIM

Helpfulness of Previous Information 3.28 2,93 3.714

Helpfulness of VIEW Information 3.78 3.514. 3.76

Understandability of Previous Information 3.52 3.25 3.147

Understandability of VIEW Information 3.90 3.92

Realism of Previous Information 3.57 3.34. 3.91

Realism of VIEW Information 3.91 3.87 14..03

Interest level of Previous Information 3.53 3.31 3.59

)Interestlevel of VIEW Information 3.79 3.75 3.88

Completeness of Previous Information 3.50 3.15 3.88

Completeness of VIEW Information 3,80 3.73 3.88

Currency of Previous Information 359 3.214 4.09

Currency of VIEW Information 3.93 3.96 14..15

How well did you like the Overall Method of Presentation of the VIEW materials 3.98 3.80 4.09

* 1 = Not at all 2 = Slightly 3 = Moderately Li. = Very Much 5 = Extremely

NOTE Students were asked to respond to thesequestions only if they had previous experience with occupational information. TABLE 2

USING VIEW MICROFILMMATERIALS- ALYSES OF DIFFERENCES OF STUDENTREACTIONS BEFORE AND AFTER (EXPERIMENTAL GROUP #1 - EQUIPMENTSCHOOLS) 1

r z* Sig. Diff. P

12.024 4: 00001 pfulness 879 o.488 1.2o3

7.245 4: .0001 derstandability 849 0.284 1.139

7.545 4. .0001 all.= 832 0.291 1.112

1.199 6.052 e. .0001 terest 813 0.255

7.291 4: .0001 mpleteness 825 0.303 1.194

6.750 4. 0000l o date 838 0.290 10244

z +4.00and z TABLE 3

ANALYSES OF DIFFERENCES OF STUDENT REACTIONS BEFORE AND AFTER USING VIEW PRINTED MATERIALS (EXPERIMENTAL GROUP 42- PRINTOUTSCHOOLS)

F sp z* Sig, Diff. P.

Helpfulness 269 0,669 1.379 70959 I 000i

Understandabilit- 261 0.732 1.332 8.877 < .0001

Realism 258 0.562 1.360 6.637 < .0001

Interest 254 0.504 1.458 50510 <0001

)Completeness 249 0.606 1.411 6.784 < oloca

up to date 251 0.721 1.487 7.685 < .00ca

*R,z; z +4.00 and z 15:1 -4.00 DISCUSSION study that the microfilmaperture It is evident fromthe results of this information is highlyfavored card approach todisseminating occupational and the staffs ofsecondary schools. It is also by both the students of the apparent from the reactionof those havingonly printed copies the provision VIEWscripts that theshort, concise formatused for VIEW and students, counselors,and of local informationis well accepted by teachers.

given by the studentsregardless of group doesnot, The high ratings Students having however, decrease thevalue in the microfilmapproach. it must be remembered,were only printed capiesof the VIEWscripts, materials they had ex- comparing these materialswith other printed microfilmed VIEW materials. A perienced in the pastand not with the comparison of the twomethods of disseminatinginformation more direct microfilm approach. might result in aclearer differencein favor of the the number of studentsusing This hypothesis ispartially supported by present study. Less than 50 the VIEW microfilmaperture cards in the Questionnaires from GroupOne were percent of the totalStudent Reaction indicated they used in Table 1 dueto the large numberof students who previously and consequentlywere had not usedoccupational information The VIEW systemevidently undble to make acomparison concerningVIEW. motivates students to useoccupational information. study to the Even with thefavorable reaction ofthe students in this evident that students werenot VIEW method ofdissemination it is also information they had usedin the severely critical ofthe occupational students to the oc- The relatively highrating given by these past. coincide with the cupational informationpreviously used does not occupational files in theschools. numerouscriticisms of typical inspection of occupationalinformation materials However, even a cursory doubt of the commonly contained inschool files willquickly dispel any concerning criticisms. The responsesof these students validity of such support to the had previously usedthen gives added this information they in the need for current, accurate, usableoccupational information (unlessspecifically schools. Apparently studentstake little notice dates, accuracy, andobjectivity asked to doso) of such things as revision at face value andgood materials. Information is accepted in occupational an equal basis information as well asmisinformation is incorporated on Only by insuring theavail- in the students'decision-making processes. objective information can ability of accurate,up-to-date, complete, and for career decisions aresound. we be sure thatthe factual foundations 1968-69 Operation

Materials

200 VIEWscripts in English 200 VIEWscripts in Spanish 10 VIEWscripts on local colleges(English) 40 VIEWscripts on professional careers(English)

The VIEW project is funded byESEA Title III and continuesresearch in adult education and continuationschools. VIEW materials are madeavail- able in Spanish for the Mexican-Americanmembers of the community.

Four Adult Schools

-Chula Vista Adult School -Midway Adult School - MountMiguel Adult School - SanDiego Unified Skill Center

During 1968-69 the San DiegoRegional Career Information Centeris providing services and materials forthe following San Diego area institutions: Junior High Schools -Gompers Junior High School - MarstonJunior High School -Kemorial Junior High School - SpringValley Junior High School -Wilson Junior High School

High Schools

-Borrego High School -Coronado High School -Escondido High School District Escondido High School Orange Glen High School -Grossmont Union High SchoolDistrict El Cajon Valley High School El Capitan High School

. Granite Hills High School Grossmont High School

. Helix High School Monte Vista High School

. Mount Miguel High School Santana High School -Julian High School -Mountain Empire High School -Oceanside High School - PowayHigh School - RamonaHigh School - SanDieguito High School

-15- - Sweetwater UnionHigh School District

. Sweetwater High School

. Bonita Vista High School

. Castle Park High School

. Chula Vista High School

. Hilltop High School . MarVista High School - SanDiego Unified School District

o Clairemont High School

. Crawford High School Hoover High School

. Kearny High School

. La Jolla High School

. Lincoln High School

. Madison High School

. Mission Bay High School . MorseHigh School

. point Loma High School San Diego High School Career Development Center - SierraVista School - Rancho DelCampo School

Continuation Schools

- MidwayJunior-Senior High School - SanDieguito Continuation School - SnyderContinuation School - WrightBrothers Junior-Senior High School

Junior Colleges

- GrossmontJunior College -Imperial Valley College - MiraCostaCollege - SanDiego Mesa College - SouthwesternCollege

Colleges

- SanDiego State College