Suchergebnisse

Western culture emphasizes the ideal of individual attainment in social, pol1tical, religious, and economic fields. The development of qualities of leadership through participation in communal activities by all persons in a community has served as a battle cry for democracy. The acceptance of the free school system meant that everyone was to have a chance to achieve. But equality did not come with opportunity. Somehow the abler ones moved along at a faster rate. Certainly, with all the emphasis on achievement, groups differ widely in the extent to which leadership is dispersed, in the nature of attendance at group functions, and in the character of participation of those who attend. It has been said that the purpose of a community study is to affect a more constructive socialisation program for the future. It is assumed the material found herein may be useful in further understanding rural community life. This study is being made to ascertain the extent to which participation is dispersed and the amount, kinds, and location of social activities and leadership among the people of Plain City, Utah, in activities other than those directly concerned with gaining a livelihood. It is the specific intention of this inquiry: 1. To determine the extent to which the people of Plain City use their own local institutions and the institutions of other communities. 2. To learn the difference in the use of these institutions by farmer groups and non-farmer groups, by age groups, and by groups according to marital status. 3. To clarity the nature and type of leadership in the community. 4. To ascertain the nature of the participation of these people at group gatherings. An analysis of the data secured in this study may assist in showing the weaknesses or strengths of the present methods of attaining individual socialization. It is hoped that it may also throw some light on the success of the institutions involved in the process.

At present, the field of social impact assessment for water resources development contains a proliferation of often divergent listings of indicators for social well-being. One of the major reasons for this is that underlying assumptions concerning the nature of social well-being and its measurement are usually left implicit. This article identifies seven issues and problems relating to SIAs that have contributed to these differing approaches. The seven issues and problems covered are: (1) levels of causation; (2) objective versus subjective conceptualization and measurement; (3) projective versus evaluative assessment; (4) economic versus social and psychological models of motivation; (5) equating microlevel components with macrolevel data; (6) homogeneous versus pluralistic views of American society; and (7) specific phasing. Priorities for future research are also suggested with respect to these issues.