The educators regarding data was basically formal Enneagram teachers regarding Narrative Community. Brand new Enneagram Interval training Programmes made use of four pri sort of boards, (2) didactic reading, (3) reflection knowledge, and (4) experiential mining. Enneagram Intensive Classes educators followed an overview titled The latest Enneagram Rigorous®: Integrating Psychological Existence and you may Heart.

The three Basic classes incorporated pri understanding methods. The Berkeley path incorporated casual Enneagram types of panels and you may didactic reading. The newest Minnesota course utilized all four of your number 1 learning strategies. The brand new Palo Alto way made use of Enneagram sorts of boards, didactic reading, and you will experiential exploration including led visualization.

Analysis Investigation

Surveys was basically penned from the research secretary and you can taken to a great Cook-Greuter-authoritative SCT scorer (Hy and you can Loevinger 1996) via post mail. Password number were utilized therefore the rater is actually blind so you can the kind of your shot, the fresh new schedules of your own sample, in addition to studies classification particular. Brand new scorer implemented the education from the Susan Create-Greuter, using the amazing Loevinger guidelines, with the exception of stems outside the manual (Cook-Greuter 1999). Obtained solutions were sent back into the scientists for the a be noticeable pass on layer that was then utilized for investigation data. To ensure precision of your own rating for contributes to and therefore professionals ran right up otherwise off 2 or more levels, an example ones training has also been scored because of the Get ready-Greuter herself.

Results

An analysis of variance (ANOVA) confirmed that there were no pre-existing ego development differences at baseline among the participants between the sites, F(8, 9) = 0.38, p = .93. The pretest and posttest ego development scores were significantly correlated (r = .48, p < .001), whereby participants with higher pre-training scores also had higher post-training scores.

Because there are a great deal more over the age of young adults in this shot, an analysis try used to test the partnership anywhere between age bracket and you will education effect. In total, forty users (33%, n = ) increased no less than one level after the training. Proportionally, far more 50–59 season olds (45%, letter = ) as compared to most other a long time enhanced a minumum of one levels immediately following the education (20%, n = 1/5, lower than 29; 0%, letter = 0/step 3, 30–39 year olds; 25%, n = 7/twenty eight, 40–44 season olds; and 24%, letter = 8/33, 60+ year olds). To examine whether it development was mathematically high, a beneficial ? 2 shot away from versatility try determined of the comparing age class and you will whether or not a person educated ego phase growth of one feabie phone number to or maybe more degrees pursuing the input (or not).

A diagnosis was also presented to check the connection ranging from participant sex and you will education feeling. Whether or not proportionally, significantly more lady (36%, n = ) than simply people (18%, n = 4/22) state-of-the-art one or more grade after the knowledge, a great ? 2 take to out-of liberty revealed zero matchmaking anywhere between gender and you may ego creativity.

Two repeated-measures ANOVAs were conducted to test for within-subject ego development changes across the training sites. The first model examined the interaction term of ego development by training site type as a dichotomous variable (intensive site vs. introductory site); the model was not significant at the p < .05 level, F(1,120) = 1.32, p = .25. The second model examined the interaction term of ego development by individual training site; the model was also not significant at the p < .05 level, F(7, 114) = 1.40, p = .21.

Paired sample t tests were conducted to examine whether there were significant changes in ego development scores before compared to after the Enneagram training interventions at each site. Data revealed that the Asheville 2005 participant group showed a significant increase in ego development scores following the intervention, t(22) = ? 3.36, p < .01. Table 4 sument scores and the paired t test results.