CARACTERISTICAS GENERALES DE LA LÍNEA

The PRC based model exposed a totally unique structure of beliefs, beyond the initial expectations of this researcher, and potentially offers an entirely new avenue for future research. The fundamental nature of this structure offers a tantalisingly brief insight into the beliefs system of an interesting and culturally diverse participatory cluster of learners.

Figure 28: P.R.C. Based Belief Values offers a graphical representation of the mean belief values supporting their structure by presenting the observed factor loadings from highest loaded factor subsets (left side, 31←) to lowest loading factor subsets (right side, →33).

PRC Nationality based factor loaded groupings of EBS Re-Coded Data

0 1 2 3 4 5 31 23 32 17 28 6 25 20 15 10 11 5 27 9 19 2 29 13 21 26 16 30 8 14 4 3 7 12 24 22 1 34 18 33 Statement No M e a n Re sp o n se V a lu e s China

Figure 28: P.R.C. Based Belief Values

6.7.5.1

P.R.C. Based Subset Qualitative Observations

The thirteen subsets exposed within this dataset analysis numbered more than any other analysis. Upon closer observation it appears that the beliefs maintained within each subset were merely more concise than in the USA or Australian structures. In the following discussion I must state again that while this discussion does not imply causality, it does provide a richer understanding of what this particular analysis iteration revealed from within this particular dataset.

• The “Learning is Quick” subset appeared to expose a strong belief that by rereading text or other information, the learner was better able to understand the information. There was also a strong tilt toward the authoritative source being an acceptable guide in the assimilation of new knowledge. Finally, the lessons from previous experiences definitely maintained an influence on the way information or knowledge is treated by this cluster.

• The subsets “Knowledge is Certain (1) & (2)”, exposed the participants’ beliefs that reliable truth does change and is sometimes so elusive that there may never be an exact solution for any one particular problem.

• The “Avoid Ambiguity (1) and (2)” subsets suggested that the participants believed that ambiguous problems or information provided no real dilemma as they understood most things to also require context in an effort to fully understand. As context appears to be seen as an individual trait and beyond the controlling ability of any one learner the majority were therefore comfortable with ambiguous information.

• The “Learn the First Time” subset revealed that this particular cluster of learners viewed the learning process as anything but quick. With a strong emphasis on the need to re-visit information as a necessity to understand or assimilate new information into their own knowledge base.

• The subsets “Avoid Integration (1) & (2)” exposed a belief that new information should maintain its originally presented form or structure as it is being assimilated. This differed from most other nationality based datasets, as it gave the impression that the learner should maintain and even adopt the current form of this new knowledge rather than just absorb the new information into their existing knowledge base. It seemed that the form had a level of implied importance as well.

It was also apparent that this group appeared quite comfortable in asking for assistance from the authoritative sources of information, (rather than questioning the validity of the information), in an effort to better understand.

• From the “Seek Single Answers” subset there emerged a clear picture that questioning experts or authorities was not considered acceptable. When seeking guidance from an educator, it was revealed that this group of learners were more interested in pieces of information as an answer, rather than just simple facts as a response.

• Finally, the reference to an “Innate Ability” subset suggests that while some may appear to learn faster than others, generally it was accepted that the term “innate Ability” referred more to the individual’s ability to pursue and complete harder study or work, rather than a generally constituted internal increase in learning capacity.

6.7.5.2

P.R.C. Based Factor Qualitative Observations

The diverse and segmented makeup of this particular model illustrated in Figure 29: P.R.C. Based Belief Structure Model, proved intriguing. However the repetition of factor labels gave rise to the discovery that the PRC participatory cluster was merely more concise about placing their beliefs in relation to particular concepts. Overall there actually appear only four factors, as the factor “Omniscient Authority” and “Certain Knowledge” is repeated, albeit in connection to differing levels of influence within the model.

The factor of “Certain Knowledge” appears to apply directly to both the degree of integration of the form that the new knowledge currently has, as well as the learners search for unambiguous concepts containing this new knowledge that they are able to understand by keeping it within its existing form.

The “Omniscient Authority” label was used in this model primarily as the learners seemed comfortable that some form of authority was always present, so they did not feel the need to seek it further. Authority, within the context of this particular cluster, appears to be revered and not to be trivially questioned but only as an effort to understand the concepts presented within any new information.

“Fixed Ability” is more of a social comment on the fact that learning is more likely to be attained from hard work or study rather than a reliance on an internal capacity to understand quickly.

The “Simple Knowledge” factor reiterates all the underlying principles associated with learning as a process by this cluster. The search for unambiguous information or the addition of authority engaged activities in an effort to clarify concepts within any new information, supported by re-visiting the information or knowledge in an effort to relay understand what it is.

Figure 29: P.R.C. Based Belief Structure Model

While the overall structure looks complicated and convoluted, the meta-dimension principles appear to have again emerged, the left hand sub-structure offers suggestions in regards to how knowledge and the learning process is perceived, the right hand structure suggests as to the possible sources of the knowledge, and perhaps joining the two structures is a third dimension as to the speed at which learning is perceived to be able to take place.