___._—— ._—_- ____—— ,__—‘ __———— —_.— ,__#— _——_—— ___—_— __—__.— ____—__ #— —_——— ___' __—— '— _____—_—— A fig’HGNOGRAPHiC 57235? OF THE 59526?! C}? 53 MSCHEGAN ELEMENTARY TEACEERS T‘kaxis far f‘hé Ewes «vi 3%. A. Mifl‘s EGAR STATE CGLLEGE r“; i A .3 m. dim as women n‘wm Wfifi This is to certify that the thesis entitled "Phonographic Study of the Speech of Fifty Michigan Elanentary Teachers" presented by Charles G. Irwin has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Master of Arts degree in Sgeegngramatica, and Radio Education ' _- Z‘H’m/ Major p ofessor Date larch 9, 19148 _ . '. , 4 . ' N -_ ' I-' 1 ‘1: .. .1. - .. 'r‘ . ..'. I. ,' a '.:. ‘ : ‘ ~' . . _ "K“ '12, , . _' . -' - _ . , , 4‘w\% :\ j. .1“: 4‘ v r '; 3'?» E! t .‘.l ‘ "_ - -' t ‘1 . >' ‘ ' ' - ', ‘ ) ‘._ V ' s" 1"‘ ‘ . ~. i. >,.‘,_ ‘.4 ~ ‘ 1‘ n >. . .1 .' , 2 ’ 4,1,1“; H '. "- ,--'r .k'."."".-’. _4 - 1", 07- .— .;(.3:": ; ,:" 1.“.gi .. __ '1 J -. ‘ ,',‘ t ' »-'_. ".5" '5: V‘ “ ' ‘ . v I ‘ ’ I I . ‘ 1. v _ . - . o '. ~ ' . i - . .- , w .. m ‘ , . i r. ' v» '- > " , -. ,r . ’ t , V , .. - I 1‘ r W I ‘1. '!?| ‘ .3 ' a ' “ _ ‘ .. D _ o I ‘ _ , . . ' . _ .- _._ z . 4 5". . I. t ‘. “gin- t 1 , . " I. V _ ‘ > ' ' - I: .- ' . "i ._9 .. ix r. - *H. -" 5-." , , .1; v; m. :43“ , . M ‘- « . up... “fl. ' ~" {in r"_1 “ . *1 ’ ¥ . V V - ' , 1 .- - ‘ h .0 5.. .‘h r , 1 - - v1“ L ‘ ~ “x.- 1.. .- e-A-w-v 2- a??? ' ., (ll, . , . . -~ ' . ' . ‘w- 5 ' ,.‘ - . , a ' ‘-\' ‘~_ 4 WFZKB 3w?! LEV.- _ 40’ v; "Q .‘R. w. ' h T ' h"g=.' ' x -‘ qty. as? _'.‘ S; 11‘ 2'31 ' . ._, t ‘ ms ‘ a" '5 ‘jl '55 1 (I. L .' a} ‘ . IV"..- . (o- U~ U._ ' " ',' ~‘ :‘I. . ' Tu.“$;..l- I ’7 9 ‘ . l ‘ I ‘ 9.. J‘J',.' .. . 1 days}? }_ ~ ..‘4"‘. ' s_- I?" . .. I _- . ‘ - ‘ .. H ‘ .... _ . |_ _ . _' a” . . ‘1‘. .. u . ‘ ‘ _'. - o. . . ~ _ ' 1A.“: .‘ . . .: "z ‘s‘fiu'. iv- ”'3: 1-; 51-5: ' 0 MI, ,1 '- 4 . . § ‘2" A ' ' ' 4r #9}; 1’ 1.. on?” " * "r'. 9 \ f 3‘3; ‘v ' ‘» I - ‘ :‘Vfli‘i" 1"": ~.' I t .u- a . - Armin van A PHONOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE SPEECH 0F 50 MICHLGAN ELEMEETARY TEACHERS by CHARLES GORDON lRWiN a...“ A ‘l‘HESiS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Speech, Dramatics, and Radio 1948 THESIS Ki\\\k\% TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements................................. 1 List of Charts................................... 11 List of Tables...................................111 Chapter I lntroduction................................ 1 Chapter 11 Method of Procedure......................... 3 Chapter iii Voice Qualities............................. 7 Chapter IV Pronunciation............................... 16 Chapter V Conclusions................................. 23 Bibliography..................................... 26 Biographyooooooco0.0000909000000090.0000000000000 27 198865 ACKNUWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to express his gratitude to Mrs. Lucia Morgan Nescm for her invaluable aid and suggestions in supervising this study, to Dr. Charles Pedrey and Dr. ‘Wilson B. Paul for their help in the final stages, and to Professor raul D. Bagwell, Head of the Department of Written and Spoken English, for valuable suggestions in the initial phases. Appreciation is extended to Dr. C. V. Millard for his permission to initiate the study in the Education classes of the summer quarter, 1947, at Michigan State College. The author is especially grateful to the elementary teachers who graciously consented to act as subjects for the study. Their cooperation is deeply appreciated. LIST OF CHARTS Chart I Chart I presents the voice quality judgements of the three speech-trained judges. Chart II Chart 11 presents the judgements of the teachers' voices as checked by the administrator judges 0 Chart III Chart III lists the pronunciations of the 34 words chosen for comparison as used by the 50 elementary teachers, and the number of teachers using each. 11 iii LIST OF TABLES Table I Table I shows the birthplaces of the 50 teachers chosen for the study. Table II Table Ii shows the length of residence in the state of Michigan. Table III Table III shows the amount and kind of speech training of the 50 elementary teachers. Table IV Table IV lists the degrees held by the teachers. Table V Table V shows the percentage of agreement among the three speechptrained judges in the judgement of voice quality. Table VI Table VI shows the percentage of agreement among the three administrator judges in the judgement of the teachers' voices. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The speech of the elementary school teacher is one of the factors insuring adequacy or inadequacy of speech development in young children. For this reason the im- portance of the speech of the elementary teacher cannot be overestimated. Fessenden gives emphasis to the importance of the speech of teachers in the following manner. The teacher's manner of speaking is probably the most important part of her total personality. Throughout educational literature there is a constantly growing emphasis upon the need for teachers to have pleasant speech. This is not only because of the emotional impact that one's speech has upon one's hearers, although that is important enough, but because teachers deal with children who are learning, and speech is a learned activity. Children, as they learn to speak, and as they grow in speech, depend upon those they hear for models of voice, articulation, and manner of speaking. In a survey of 47 leading colleges, universities, and other teacher training institutions, Andersonz found that only approximately 40 percent of them were inspecting the speech needs and abilities of prospective teachers. In another study it was found that, "About 95 percent of all state teachers colleges offer courses in dramatics or forensics or both. Only about a third offer a general course such as fundamentals of speech, and not all of those that do offer it require the fundamentals course of all 1. Seth A. Fessenden, Speech and the Teacher, Longmans, Green and Co., New York, 1946, p. 37: 2. Virgil A. Anderson, "Speech Needs and Abilities of Prospective Teachers," Quarterly Journal 3£_Speech, Vol. 30, (April, 1944), p. 221. students who are preparing to be teachers."3 In the light of this information several questions may arise. The speech teacher might ask: Do elementary teachers possess the type of speech which is desirable for children to imitate? Specifically he might ask: Do elementary teachers possess agreeable voice qualities? Do they adhere to a standard pronunciation? Do they have adequate artic- ulation and enunciation? Errors are recognized most readily in the light of these aspects. The purpose of this study is to make a survey of two fundamental aspects of speech among a group of 50 Michigan elementary school teachers. The aspects of speech to be checked are voice quality, as determined by a panel of trained judges, and pronunciation, including articulation and enunciation as specific factors. 3. D. W. Morris and Alan'w. Huckleberry, "The Student Teacher's Speech," Quarterl Journal of Speech, Vol. 29, (December, 1943), p'TB'S—l. . *— ChAPTER II METHOD OF PROCEDURE The selection of 50 elementary school teachers was based upon the information received from a questionnaire issued to all elementary teachers who were enrolled in education courses at Michigan State College, summer quarter, 1947. They do not necessarily represent an accurate cross-section of the entire group of Michigan elementary teachers. As the great majority of those chosen for the study were completing work toward college degrees, or fulfilling state certification requirements for permanent elementary certification, it may be supposed that the group chosen is a fair representation. The questionnaire was constructed to determine which teachers had been born in.Michigan, had traveled widely, had lived in any other section of the United States for any considerable period of time, and the amount and kind of speech training each has had. These are factors which.might tend to influence their speech in such.a.manner as to dis- tinguish it from the so-called standard General American speech we expect to hear spoken by native Michigan re idents. The choice of female elementary school teachers/Zea made arbitrarily as a limiting factor. It was felt that the speech contacts of children are most important during the earlier school years. Since there was only one man.among the 108 teachers filling out questionnaires, he was not of statistical value and was not included in the study. Permission was obtained from the Director of the Division of Education, Michigan State College, to issue the questionnaires in the education classes. The instructor of each class was contacted and a time was arranged for the completion of the questionnaires. At the appointed time the questionnaires were filled out by the teachers. The questionnaires were then studied and the selection of the group of 60 teachers was made. The information upon which the choice was made is presented in the following tables. TABLE I Birthplace of Teachers State Number Michigan............. 4 Ohio.................. Pennsylvania ......... Missouri ..0..0.0.0..0 P‘F‘hhfl TABLE II Residence in State of Michigan Residence in State Number Lived in Michigan all of life................. 47 Lived in Ohio firSt 5 years Of life.0000.00000 1 Lived in Pennsylvania first 4 years of life... 1 Lived in Missouri first 2 years of life....... 1 TABLE III Speech Training Number of Teachers Type of course having completed 1 course Voice Improvement................ 11 PUbliO Speaking 00.000......0..0. 23 Oral Interpretation-ooooo-oooo-o- Radio Speaking................... ACting ..0.............0..0.....0 DiaIGCtB Or Phonetics....00000000 Creative Dramatics...0000000000.0 conversation '00....o...0...0.00. Speech Correction for Classroom.TeaCher80.0000.00... No Speech Training .............. I-‘l-‘I—‘I-‘I—‘N PM4 on: TABLE IV College Degrees Degree Number NO degree........ 3 B0 SO 0.000....000 A. B. 000.00.000.0 Hmoocn M. A. .0..00000000 The range of teaching experience in the elementary schools of Michigan'was from 5 months to 28 years. After the selection of the group, a second contact was made with each teacher and individual recording appointments were arranged. The teachers were informed as to the nature of the study and a recording was made of each reading the following test paragraph.4 On Tuesday, the twenty-fifth of February in 1938, Charles Jordan suddenly decided to take a vacation. He recognized the fact that this 'was a rather unusual time for a vacation, but he was employed in a library and felt harassed by the books and newspapers, and needed a respite from them. He put on his hat and coat, and whistling a tune, went to his room to plan a trip. When he got there he poured a glass of cherry soda, sat down.on the sofa, and began to turn over in his mind just what he wanted to get out of such an intermission from his work. For most adults, a vacation consists of a period for rest and relaxation. In this respect, Jordan was not different from others, but he wanted also to receive some educational benefit. A few places began to pass before his mind's eye. A veteran of the first world war, he thought of returning to survey the European battlegrounds. Maybe he ought to see washington, the seat of the government; perhaps even.meet the president. The Egyptian pyramids, the British.Museum, and ancient Scottish castles made their appearance. Suddenly a different kind of scene came into view. Sunkissed palms and a white sandy beach 4. Each teacher was permitted to read the paragraph over once prior to making the recording. with gentle waves lapping at its edge. Beads of perspiration broke out upon his forehead at the very idea of it. "Havana is the place for me," he thought, as he grabbed his swims suit and almost ran out of the room. All benefits of education had vanished and his hat and coat lay on the table, forgotten. The recordings were cut on a'Wilcox-Gay Recordio, Edu- cational Model, at a speed of 78 r.p.m. Three judges were selected and requested to participate in a judgement of voice quality. The three judges are members of the staff of the Department of Speech, Dramatics, and Radio, Michigan State College. At an arranged time the judges met, listened to the records, and made their independent judgements of the voices on records. A second group of three judges was selected. This group 'was composed of the Superintendent of Schools, East Lansing, Michigan, the Assistant Director of Teacher Certification, the state of Michigan, and the Director of Elementany Teacher Training, Michigan State College. These persons were requested to participate in a judgement of the speech of the 50 elementary teachers. The second three judges met at an arranged time and made their independent judgements of the voices on records. Upon completion of the judgements by both groups of judges, the records were phonetically transcribed. The phonetic transcriptions were spot checked by an instructor of phonetics in the Department of Speech, Dramatics, and Radio, Michigan State College. From the phonetic transcriptions, data were taken to determine the type and extent of pronuncia- tion deviations from so-called standard General American speech. CHAPTER III VOICE QUALITY Authorities agree that voice quality is the characteris- tic of the tone produced by the vocal bands and modified by the various resonators. Beyond this basic definition there is less agreement in descriptive terminology. Each authority uses terms which have been assigned meanings growing out of his own experience and observations. The quality to be sought is usually labeled as "effective," "good," "agreeable," "pleasant," or "normal." The qualities which are to be avoided are often referred to as the opposites of the desired qualities. More specifically, descriptive terms are used such as: nasal, breathy, hoarse, thin, harsh, gutteral, oratund, and many others. Fairbanks5 says, "For the average speaker, normal, pleasant quality is the goal. This quality can best be defined by saying that it does not have the attributes of the defective qualities." Gray and Wise6 write, "Speech to be most effective as an inr strument of communication, should have agreeable voice quality. It should not be harsh, or shrill, or excessively nasal, or muffled, or strident, or possessed of any of those characteristics that will arouse feelings of unpleasantness on the part of the listeners." For the purpose of this study, the judgements of voice quality were made on a rating sheet which was constructed on the basis of the preceding statement, with the descriptive terms for voice qualities taken from.the same source. The three speech-trained judges were asked to indicate their judgements on the sheet provided, according to the 5. Grant Fairbanks, Voice and Articulation Drillbook, harper, New York, 1940, p. 203. 6. G. W. Gray and C. M. Wise, The Bases 23 Speechz Rev. Ed. Harper, New York, 1946, p. 10. following directions. As each of the records is played, will you please give your opinion of the quality of voice in the following manner. (1) If the voice is effective for that of a Michigan elementary school teacher will you make a check in the column.beneath the word "effective" to the right of the number corresponding with that of the record. For this purpose, "effective" shall be taken to mean that the voice quality is satisfactory without further training. (2) If the voice displays qualities which cause it to be ineffective for that of a Michigan elementary school teacher, will you make a check mark in.the column (s) beneath the term (3) designating the qualities of voice and to the right of the number corresponding with that of the record. For this purpose, "ineffective" shall be taken to mean that the voice quality is such that it renders the voice unsatisfactory without benefit of further training. NOTE: No reference need be made to degree of unpleas- antness. If the voice is, to you, effective in spite of unpleasant qualities which may be present, please check in the effective column. The results of the judgements are presented in Chart I and Table V. The three administrative officials serving as judges were provided with a rating sheet and made their judgements according to the following directions. Will you please listen to each of the 50 meant and indicate, by checking in the appropriate column, whether you consider each voice to be "satisfactory" or "unsatisfactory" for that of a Michigan elementary school teacher. This is merely an indication of your Opinion of the effectiveness of the voices. The results of the judgements are presented in Chart II and Table VI. CHART 1 Chart I lists the records of the voices of the 50 Michigan elementary school teachers by numbers from.l to 50. The judgements of the three speech-trained judges are indicated after each record number in the columns representing Effective, Ineffective, Breathy, Husky, Muffled, Shrill-Harsh, Thin, and Nasal. In the "Effective" column, "x" means that the judge checked that voice effective. In "ineffective" column, "x" means that judge checked that voice ineffective. In all other columns, "x" means that the judge checked these qualities as existing to such an extent as to render the voice ineffective. CHART I KY ' THIN MAS/u. U U 1231231 312312 12318 12 XXX XXX X X X I NNH X I X I X X I NNXNXHN H N flHNHHHH fl CHART, (cmrb) SHRILL- USKY HRRSH THIN NASHL 065 06 23(23l23I23IZ3183lZ3 >4 NXHflfiN XHHNHHNH X I X I I X I I X I X HHNHHNNNH?‘ H ll TABLE V Percent of Agreement Among Three Speech-trained Judges In Judgement of Voice Quality Quality Percent of Judges Judges Judges Total Agreement 1&2 1&3 2&3 Effective .10 .21 .18 .20 Ineffective .66 .69 .78 .83 Breethy' 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Husky .16 .42 .45 .22 muffled .00 .06 .00 .00 Shrill- Harsh .17 .32 .27 .37 Thin .09 .18 .21 .33 Nasal .25 .40 .45 .62 CHART 11 Chart II lists the records of the voices of the 50 Michigan elementary school teachers by numbers from 1 to 50. The judgements of the three administrative officials are indicated by "x" after each record in the columns representing "sati sfactory " and ”unsatisfactory " . l3 [HA KT SU JUDGE JUDGE 12318 H E) N’ 0 £3 U! 27 28 31 2 SU JUDGE JUDGE 123)23 l4 TABLE VI Percent of Agreement Among Administrator Judges In Judgement of Teachers' Voices Voice Percent of Judges Judges Judges Total Agreement 1&2 1&3 2&3 Satisfactory .42 .48 .56 .73 Unsatisfactory .04 .20 .24 .46 CHAPTER IV 16 PRONUNCIATION In order to show adherence to or divergence from a particular way of pronouncing a word, some authoritative standard.must be selected. As there is no one standard of pronunciation in the United States, it is necessary to 00D? fine any comparison to one of the three major American dia- lects. These dialects are: the Southern, the Eastern, and the third, called General American, Northern, or Western. The so-called standard pronunciation within.any one of these is commonly considered to be that which is used by the majority of educated people in the particular dialect area. By reason of their backgrounds, the elementary teachers selected for this study could be expected to exhibit pro- nunciations comparing most favorably'wdth the General American or Northern pronunciations. The teachers were chosen with this in.mind. The Northern or General American pronunciations, as listed in the Pronouncing Dictionagy.2£ American English by John S. Kenyon and Thomas A. Knott7, were selected to comply with the demand.for an authoritative standard. This standard is compiled on the basis of actual cultivated usage. Kenyon and Knott say, "No other standard has, in point of fact, ever finally settled pronunciation."8 If direct comparisons are made with a standard, matters of articulation.and.enunciation are provided for automatical- ly. Sound substitutions, misplaced accent, omissions, 7. John S. Kenyon and Thomas A. Knott, A Pronouncing Dictionagy of American English, G. and C. MerFiam.Co. pring e d, Mass., I9 . , 80 113511., P. Vi. 17 additions, metathesisg, and incorrect enunciation of vowels can be shown. Thirty-four words were selected from the test paragraph to form.a basis for comparison. These words were selected because their pronunciations seldom.change in relation to their positions in sentences; that is, they are pronounced the same way in stressed and unstressed positions. These words, with the teachers' pronunciations of them, are pre- sented in Chart III. 9. This term is used here to refer to transposition of sounds within a word. CHART III Chart III lists the thirtybfour words chosen to form a basis for comparison. Each word is presented orthographically. The pronunciation of each word as listed in the selected standard is shown in the symbols of the International Phonetic Alphabet. The different pronuncia- tions of each word as used by the 50 elementary teachers are shown in symbols of the International Phonetic Alphabet. The number of teachers using each pronunciation is entered b810W'that pronunciation. 18 19 mu H muHSF HHS-5 PHSBH waged? H m m on HH 3an «A fem-H." page w." 3.2:: a 9 Emma ammo wu 3.....an on m n H «a 3 .e. unease panama Pa 93: an 78: 9.8.6: an H has an 3.5 commend: H ”v e He Humps..." Human: aH H has”: 2 «.2: 1H up when: has-.33 m 3 mm .m mummy .0qu .m was.“ acme: gone..." « m on m e... annexe." can .332 3 ”some. 3 v» Madmen—e." causeway?" vouHamooou « e e 8 e ”@610 H6 gdoufl finudn H6 UQGHdoHfi UHflHdu MU UHdenHv flowdoov e . e . e». . ”Haws :56 ”Huge ”Huge 3533 o a » mm HH 2323 Seaweed Hue-538 2333 2338 22.38 shapes on o HH » an :55 mesa seen» are 35.5 are 35.5 mac 3&3 flatness.» u» b 3 HH HH H .momm 3mm .aofi .zoem .aomm is: @353 n8: HHH ago 20 mm H». A ”may.“ Page 2 “Ian up voodoo." m 3 m p3 «and. 3 one: 33 33 33 name} up» Hoaoo m m¢ .pHée 335 $13 322. a mm as “gnu same-Sea enmeshed“ 533.833 mH an .t w 3m 3m new a . H m 5H m pH was! Each was! 3 as! «She! 3953 u 331 to»? H H o s a an n H mu 0 a mu u > H HHH HH H .nofi .zomm .aofi .zofi .zomm .zomm @353 as 3383 H: .3qu 22 {.9 H w 3 . a canon 3qu @3qu 3.8% 3.8.“ 39:98.“ «H m» . ammoummuuum am 9593 no 0.59.3 uOHpnuHmzom a a. . H5? 33m. 33m. .38» a m n H0. 33 553 an gum an uaHdm tr > >H HHH HH H .zomm .zomm .223 £33 .zomm .nomm 5393.5 \ an: 3.233 5 .233 1 CHAPTER V 23 CONCLUSIONS VOICE QUALITIES I. There was little agreement (.10) among the 3 speech-trained judges regarding the effectiveness of the voices. This may be due to the way in which the judgement was made; it was necessarily subjective in nature. A. The voices of 2 of the elementary teachers were rated by all 3 speech-trained judges as being effective. The voices of 3‘of the elemen- tary teachers were rated by 2 of the 3 speech- trained judges as being effective. The voices of 14 of the elementary teachers were rated by 1 of the 3 speech trained judges as being effective. B. Thirty-one of the 50 voices were rated by all three of the speech-trained judges as being ineffective because of undesirable qualities existing in them. C. 0f the 31 voices rated by all 3 speechs trained judges as ineffective, the undesirable qualities existing in the voices were checked by one or more of the judges as follows: (1) Twenty-nine voices were checked as being shrill-harsh. (2) Twenty-eight voices were checked as being nasal. (3) Twenty-seven voices were checked as being thin. (4) Fifteen voices were checked as 24 being muffled. (5) Thirteen voices were checked as being husky. (6) One voice was checked as being breathy. 11. There was a greater percentage of agreement (.42) among the 3 administrator judges in the judgement of the 50 voices. This judgement was also subjective in nature. A. Twenty of the 50 voices were rated by all 3 administrator judges as being satisfactory. Thirteen of the 50 voices were rated by 2 of the 3 administrator judges as being satisfactory. Fifteen of the 50 voices were rated by l of the 3 administrator judges as being satisfactory. B. Two of the 50 voices were rated as unsatis- factory by all 5 administrator judges. Fifteen of the 50 voices were rated as unsatisfactory by 2 of the 3 administrator judges. Thirteen of the 50 v01ces were rated as unsatisfactory by l of the 3 administrator judges. 25 CONCLUSIONS PRCNUNCIATIONS 1. Sound substitutions, sound omissions, sound additions. and misplaced accent were present in the pronunciations of the 34: words which were chosen for comparison with the standard. Words were mispronounced as many as 6 different ways, due to sound substitution, sound omission, and misplaced accent. A. Twenty-four of the 34 words were mis- pronounced due to sound substitutions. Example: M, E13251? or 53mg for {31ij . B. Eighteen of the 34 words were mispronounced due to sound omissions. Example: wanted, fimnld} for fivantrd] . C. misplaced accent accounted for mispronuncia- tions in 5 of the 34 words. Example: respite, [impala for [respltj . D. Sound additions accounted for mispronunciations in 3 of the 34 words. Example: Washington, Evorjlntorg for fivajlntary . l. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 26 B128 LiOGRAPHY Anderson, Virgil, "Speech Needs and Abilities of Prospective Teachers," Quarterly Journal of Sgeech, Vol. 30, (April, 1944;. pp. Fessenden, Seth A., S eech and the Teacher, Longmans, Green and Co., ew or , I§4 . Fairbanks, Grant, Voice and Articulation Drillbook, Harper, New York, 1940. Gray, Giles W., and Wise, Claude 111., The Bases _o_f_‘_ Speech, Rev. Ed., Harper, New m, I946. Kenyon, John S., and Knott, Thomas A., A Pronouncing Dictionafigf Arnerican En lish, G. andW Eerriam 00., Springfield, Lass” 1944. mc Coard, William B., "Speech Factors as Related to Teaching Efficiency, " S eech Abstracts, Vol. 3, (April, 1943),‘2—1'8'p. ._"'"""" Minchew, E. R., A Surv of Speech Anomalies Amo Teachers of bienvil'l'e, Jackson and Red River Parishes 31' Louisiana, Universiiy Press, Baton Rouge, Ia., 1538. Morris, D. W., and Huckleberry, A. W" "The Student Teacher's Speech, " Quarterl Journal of S eech, Vol. 29, (December, 1943), pp. 485-4897 Pre-Service Education of Elementa Teachers, Report of the Teadher Edu'é'a'ti on florEsEoP, Division of Surveys and Field Studies, George Peabody College for Teachers, Nashville, Tenn., 1944. 27 BIOGRAPHY Charles G. Irwin was born at Cortland, Ohio on Januany 25, 1920. He was graduated from BaldwinsWallace College in June 1942. Upon graduation, he enlisted in the United States Marine Corps where he served both in the United States and overseas. Upon release from active duty he was employed as a teacher of Speech, English, and History at the Southington Township School, Phalanx Station, Ohio. In the fall of 1946 he entered the Graduate School of Michigan State College where he did his graduate work in speech correction under the direction of Mrs. Lucia Morgan Nesom. In 1116 fall of 1947 he was appointed an instructor in the Department of'written and Spoken English, Michigan State College. .0 i n. .A. . \. I. . \ . . a x ‘u. ‘ I. . \v v . \ .n. (N .. . Q . a v To. I \l“ . rd. . o ,. t. . _§. §.' . WM. . . ., .. 8. ll.. -. ..D \ I I .\. ' I ._ .- . l . J u u s v I. \\ . .o r .l ‘ . I)“; u ‘ pd I , i in | . ..\ . n 4 r 1 oil" .. ~ .c h .«...S.....VO... .’ n n) ...V n u u . . ‘ . , ‘ . u \ . I: .r... . A. ...19.;,... .t .... . Q. g a v .. . .s u 5.. . ‘4 A o I . \ I ... . to. t ..m| . o s \\ it -I’ T. . .‘.I”‘ . ‘ f, t. . . . . - 1v \ n . J. . 3 ..... . r l \. 0 v- . d ' A ‘5 .. iv”... I ‘ ‘ . .I . r . _ a. Q: . . x , n'. _. ‘0- . \, . -~ ~ . c . m A I ~ ~ . u .. n . v . .u x by 1.." UC:.... urp . .t‘ .. . .. .9 . .. {:7 I. s? . . . .. .. ._ . .. _