Toward Shaping the Agenda: A National Survey of Catholic Religious Education, Survey of Diocesan Leaders, 1993

• Summary
• Codebook
• Search
• Download
• Results

APPRO5 One purpose of this study is to contribute to planning for the future of Catholic religious education. Sketched briefly here are several possibilities or new approaches. Please give your rating on each of these possibilities. -- Parish High Tech Learning Centers: Parish or regional 'high-tech' interactive learning centers staffed with well-prepared catechists would operate after school and on evenings and weekends (using computer-based scheduling) with small groups of students. These facilities would operate 40 weeks per year. Students would learn basic religious concepts, explore religious values and applications, and receive personal feedback on their views/learning, including printouts they could share with their parents. The centers would have 5-10 microcomputers and a room set up for small group (5-10) interactive video-disk instruction with a key pad for every student. Students (parents) would pay a per-use fee and schedule, on average, one session per month.   1) Extremely promising   2) Definitely promising   3) Somewhat promising   4) Not promising   5) To be avoided

Pie Chart Bar Chart Cumulative Bar Chart

Category	Frequency	Percentage	Cumulative Percentage	Z-Score
Extremely promising	14	7.3%	7.3%	-1.93
Definitely promising	43	22.4%	29.7%	-1.01
Somewhat promising	64	33.3%	63%	-.1
Not promising	51	26.6%	89.6%	.82
To be avoided	20	10.4%	100%	1.74

Variable Comparisons

Tenure Vocation Education Number of students

Tenure (I-TENURE)

	Less than two years	2-4 years	5-10 years	Over 10 years	TOTAL
Extremely promising	0.0% 0	7.8% 4	7.4% 5	12.2% 5	7.3% 14
Definitely promising	9.7% 3	23.5% 12	26.5% 18	24.4% 10	22.5% 43
Somewhat promising	38.7% 12	27.5% 14	33.8% 23	34.1% 14	33.0% 63
Not promising	32.3% 10	33.3% 17	23.5% 16	19.5% 8	26.7% 51
To be avoided	19.4% 6	7.8% 4	8.8% 6	9.8% 4	10.5% 20
TOTAL	100.0% 31	100.0% 51	100.0% 68	100.0% 41	191

Vocation (I-STATUS)

	Priest	Brother	Sister	Layman	Laywoman	TOTAL
Extremely promising	10.7% 3	0.0% 0	10.7% 8	2.8% 1	4.2% 2	7.3% 14
Definitely promising	17.9% 5	50.0% 2	26.7% 20	25.0% 9	14.6% 7	22.5% 43
Somewhat promising	39.3% 11	25.0% 1	28.0% 21	36.1% 13	35.4% 17	33.0% 63
Not promising	21.4% 6	25.0% 1	28.0% 21	25.0% 9	29.2% 14	26.7% 51
To be avoided	10.7% 3	0.0% 0	6.7% 5	11.1% 4	16.7% 8	10.5% 20
TOTAL	100.0% 28	100.0% 4	100.0% 75	100.0% 36	100.0% 48	191

Education (I-DEGREE)

	Advanced degree	No advanced degree	TOTAL
Extremely promising	5.8% 8	11.5% 6	7.4% 14
Definitely promising	21.9% 30	23.1% 12	22.2% 42
Somewhat promising	33.6% 46	32.7% 17	33.3% 63
Not promising	28.5% 39	23.1% 12	27.0% 51
To be avoided	10.2% 14	9.6% 5	10.1% 19
TOTAL	100.0% 137	100.0% 52	189

Number of students (I-#STUDNTS)

	5K & under	5001-10K	10001-15K	15001-20K	Over 20K	TOTAL
Extremely promising	6.4% 3	6.3% 2	3.7% 1	26.7% 4	7.9% 3	8.2% 13
Definitely promising	21.3% 10	28.1% 9	11.1% 3	26.7% 4	21.1% 8	21.4% 34
Somewhat promising	31.9% 15	31.3% 10	48.1% 13	26.7% 4	36.8% 14	35.2% 56
Not promising	29.8% 14	31.3% 10	25.9% 7	13.3% 2	18.4% 7	25.2% 40
To be avoided	10.6% 5	3.1% 1	11.1% 3	6.7% 1	15.8% 6	10.1% 16
TOTAL	100.0% 47	100.0% 32	100.0% 27	100.0% 15	100.0% 38	159