John R. Boatwright

PDFBO2 | Descriptive Abstract | In this study, we used a two-phase mixed methods research design in which qualitative methods were followed by a quantitative method to investigate work ethics as defined by the Georgia Department of Technical and Adult Education. Though work ethic instruments exist in the literature, none were suitable to serve as an evaluation instrument for the work ethic component of the curriculum taught in the technical institutes in the state of Georgia. Following an show more extensive content analysis of pertinent documents, two focus groups, and a needs assessment, a Likert survey was developed and administered to 307 persons. Participants clearly recognized and supported commonly accepted work ethic values, with females reporting stronger work ethics than males. Age and maturity of respondents were related to work ethics. Implications of our findings are discussed. |
Research Questions
1. What factors and values comprise work ethic as defined by:
a. Technical Institute Advisory Committee members?
b. Technical institute faculty members?
c. the Georgia Department of Technical and Adult Education?
2. How do the factors and values of the three populations noted in question one interrelate?
3. Is there a statistically significant difference in work ethics as a function of respondent demographic variables? | http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/ | http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JVER/v25n4/ | http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JVER/ |

Contents
1. Introduction pg. 1
2. Definition of Work Ethics pg. 2
3. Measurement Instruments pg. 4
4. Research Questions pg. 6
5. Methods and Procedures pg. 6
-- Qualitative Procedures
-- Table 1 Questions Used in the Focus Groups
6. Quantitative Procedures pg. 8
-- Table 2 Characteristics of Participants Who Responded to the Importance and Values Survey Items
-- Table 3 Quantitative Survey Instrument: Means and Standard Deviations
7. Results pg. 12
-- Table 4 Standardized Discriminant Coefficients Differentiating Males and Females Based on the Variable of Importance
-- Table 5 Standardized Discriminant Coefficients Differentiating Males and Females Based on the Variable of Importance
8. Discussion pg. 16
9. Limitations pg. 17
10. References pg. 17

SA - https://www.librarything.com/work/32735859/book/269796331 | https://www.librarything.com/work/31349262/book/253839229 | https://www.librarything.com/work/31349262/book/253823817 | https://www.librarything.com/work/31086202/book/250711494 | https://www.librarything.com/work/31083358/book/250697032 | https://www.librarything.com/work/30975214/book/249438991 |
RT - Values
BT - Education
NT - Vocation
UF - The document is about a study on measuring the work ethics of vocational students in Georgia, focusing on the curriculum taught in technical institutes and the development of a survey instrument to assess work ethic values.
SN - This PDF was downloaded from the internet server/database where the journal is stored. (This entry does not reference a hierarchical list) show less