5.1
t‘::.

._“'r'

. IVE"

 

1‘ - .
fl. », , .
Y. '

7i

 

N‘ '
.p._. -.
' Law's)
a§.;{:
..

 

‘ .

 

J J.

 

‘

 

¢!\!
£
‘

l‘!‘l§l,,..,-'
. ‘ l '
.

h. 1':i:;71

‘
V“ ‘

"Fit;u

I
't'\

:‘E'n‘yhk

49W"!!!
‘5' ‘ .

, '1

,' TV)

     

it x: \r ‘42"... ft.hs\£L..{l-.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi)" {0

V‘..:.‘
.' ‘.

 

{17}! .rIv.
kl. at.

    

5‘; a ‘
‘;2: , a

)up . n ‘s
. 9.....1actl3olflfocti .2!

\ili1‘.» ‘ .Ivl.
. $31.33}- si;:tal.ir?vr
( ‘ . I l .7

“(r‘

 

.0.H

 

n;.
a...

 

4;;3 ' '
.tjq

' 39:

 

                 

 

  

             

 

F #‘ lllliflllll‘l‘llllll’lll‘llllll‘l"!lll5|Ml'lllxHllhllllll

1-1le 3 1293 00771 2478
Michigan State
University

L _,

 

 

'I'hisistoeertifythatthe
dissertationentitled

A STUDY OF EDUCATORS' RESPONSES TO
SEVEN SELECTED GOALS OF EDUCATION

presented by

Ibrahim A. El Sheikhi

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph.D
(1 in Teacher Education

 

 

//g:A(/ é/atwf

Major professor

 

Date 5/16/90

 

MS U it all Aflinnalin Action/Equal Oppornulfly Institution 0—1277 1

 

PLACE ll RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES retun on or before due due.

ll DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

I__. W—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I it I
I n e
[— “ ;

MSU Ie An Affirmative AdiorVEquel Opportunity Institution

 

 

 

 

 

 

A STUDY OF EDUCATORS' RESPONSES TO
SEVEN SELECTED GOALS OF EDUCATION

BY
Ibrahim A. EL Sheikhi

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

College of Education
Department of Teacher Education

1990

{U

ai'
U3

Lf‘)
0

ABSTRACT

A STUDY OF EDUCATOR'S RESPONSES TO
SEVEN SELECTED GOALS OF EDUCATION

by
Ibrahim A. ElSheikhi

The primary purpose of this study was to examine the
problem of discrepancy between goals and practices in terms
of teacher perceptions of current actual practices and their
perceptions of desired achievement of goals. Seven goals were
selected from ASCD's 1978 TaSk Force on Humanistic Education.

The data for this study were collected through the use
of: a rating scale, Flanagan's Critical Incident Technique,
and an Opinion Survey of Educational Goal Statements. The
data were collected from 28 graduate students enrolled in the
classroom seminars during the Fall Term.of 1988 at the College
of Education, Michigan State University.

The gathered data for this study were analyzed at the
Michigan State University Computer Center using SPSS (The
Statistical Package for Social Science). To analyze the data
of the study, several statistical techniques were used
including frequencies, percentages, means, medians, standard
deviations, rankings, f-values and t-test scores.

The major findings of the study were as follows:

1. Respondents were generally favorably disposed toward
humanistic goals and practices.

The results of t-tests revealed that in all seven goals
the mean scores for perceptions of what ought to be practices
were significantly’ higher’ than ‘means for’ perceptions of
current actual practices.

2. However, degree of agreement and/or disagreement
regarding each of’ a developed set of 42 goal
statements derived from the ASCD's seven goals
varied quite widely among the respondents.

Some of the items respondents marked with consistently
high agreement and they consistently responded with
disagreement to others. Responses to still other statements
did not show consistency.

3. Perhaps the most interesting finding in the study
is the appearance of inconsistencies in agreement
in those cases of contrasting statements for which
the respondents simultaneously agreed strongly with
both humanistic and non-humanistic members of the
pair.

It is suggested that these evidences of inconsistency
represent instances of ambivalence among the respondents over
the perennial curriculum issue as to whether learners can be
trusted to make their own best free choices, or whether the
society is required to impose criteria and standards from
outside. However, based on the findings of this study, the

majority of the respondents appeared to at least tend

moderately to agree with the humanistic statements.

Copyright by
IBRAHIM A. EL SHEIKHI
1990

DEDICATION

To my father and my mother who taught me
how to be a person with freedom, dignity
and integrity.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The accomplishment of this research would not have been
possible without the help, support and encouragement of many
friends and family members.

I would like to extend my deepest appreciation and
thanks to my academic advisor, Dr. Ben A. Bohnhorst. He was
caring, understanding, and supportive of my efforts to
achieve this study. He was always available when I needed
help and never gave up on me.

Also, I am grateful to the members of my doctoral
guidance committee, Dr. Charles Blackman, Dr. Louis Hekhuis,
and Dr. Kenneth Neff, for their patience, helpful suggestions
and constructive criticism.

A special thanks and appreciation to my caring wife
Athena ElSheikhi for her constant love, support and patience.
She gave me hope when I was desperate, happiness when I felt
depressed, and encouragement when I was discouraged. My
thanks also are extended to my children Joseph and Sarah for
their patience and understanding.

I would also like to extend my special thanks to my
father-in-law and mother-in-law, Anthony and Marina Lakos, my

brother-in—law, Peter Lakos and his wife Nora, my relatives

Andrew and Maria Jaffas family, John and Tina Baroscz, my
special friends Patrick and Joan Fitzpatrick, and my fine

typist Linda Carroll for their understanding, support and

encouragement.

vi

QQQEEQI

LIST
LIST

I

II

III

TABLE OF CONTENTS

OF TABLES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0
OF FIGURES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . .._ . . . . .
The Problem of Discrepancy Between
Goals and Practices . . . . . .
The Problem Stated More Specifically
The Purposes of the Study . . . . .
Design of the Study . . . . . . . .
Definition of Terms . . . . . . . .
Delimitations and Limitations . . .
Conceptual Foundations of the Study
Organization of the Study . . . . .

REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Major Definitions of Humanistic Education
Major Studies by ASCD and Leading Educators
Document and Dissertation Studies . . . . .
Humanistic and Behavioristic Approaches
to Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Purpose of Humanistic Education . . .
Criticisms of Behaviorists
Regarding Humanistic Education . . .
Purpose of Behavioristic Education . .
Criticisms of Humanists Regarding
Behavioristic Education . . . . . .
Characteristics of Humanistic and
Behavioristic Education . . . . . . . . .
Humanistic Education Practices and Programs
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DESIGN OF THE STUDY . . . . .
Research Methods . . . . . .
Population of the Study . . .
Data Collection Instrument .
Instrument Development . . . .
Pilot Study of the Instrument .
Data Collection Process . . . .
Statistical Analysis Procedures
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . .

vii

xii

HHDmflmUIH H

HF4

13

14
17
27

31
32

32
33

33

34
36
4O

42
42
44
44
45
48
49
50
51

IV

TABLE OF CONTENTS, CONT'D.

PRESENTATION OF DATA ANALYSES AND FINDINGS

Introduction . . . .
Demographic Data . .
Age . . . . . .
Gender . . . . .
Years of Teaching Experience
Educational Level . . . . . .

Current Professional Assignment

Respondents' Perceptions for Each
of the ASCD's Seven Goals . . . .

Goal One: Learner's Needs and Potentials

Goal Two: Student Self-Esteem

Goal Three: Student Skill Acquisition .
Goal Four: Student Involvement

in Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goal Five: Student Value Development . .
Goal Six: Qualities of Learning

Environments . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goal Seven: Developing Respect

for Others . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of t-test Analyses . . . . . . .
Respondents' Perceptions of Rankings

the ASCD's Seven Goals . . . . . . . .
Respondents' Citations of Concrete

Examples of Failure and Success

to Achieve a Particular Goal . . . . .

Respondents' Assessments of 42 Chosen
Propositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Agreement with Humanistic Statements . .
Agreement with Non-Humanistic Statements
Disagreement with Non-Humanistic
Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Disagreement with a Humanistic Statement
No Clear Patterns of Agreement
or Disagreement . . . . . . . . . . .

The ASCD's Seven Goals and 21 Pairs of
Contrasting Statements . . . . . . . . . .

Goal One: Learner's Needs and Potentials
Goal Two: Student Self-Esteem . . . . .
Goal Three: Student Skill Acquisition .
Goal Four: Student Involvement

in Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goal Five: Student Value Development . .
Goal Six: Qualities of Learning

Environments . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goal Seven: Developing Respect
for Others . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

viii

52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55

56
56
58
59

61
62

64

65
66

67

70
73
77
78

79
8O

80
85
86
87
87

89
91

91

92

V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary of the Study . . . . . . . . .
Conclusions and Limitations . . . . . .
Recommendations for Future Research . .

APPENDICES

A EDUCATORS' PERCEPTIONS OF WHAT IS AND
WHAT OUGHT TO BE . . . . . . . . . . .

B AN OPINION SURVEY OF EDUCATIONAL GOAL
STATEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C THE ASCD'S SEVEN GOALS AND 21 PAIRS
OF STATEMENTS O O O O O O O O O O O O O

D 21 CONTRASTING PAIRS OF GROUPED GOALS
STATEMENTS O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

E ASCD'S CHECKLIST FOR HUMANISTIC SCHOOLS

BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O 0

TABLE OF CONTENTS, CONT'D.

Comparison Between Responses of the
Research and Pilot Groups . . . . . .

Discussion of the Small Response . . .

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ix

100
104
105
108
108

111
120

123

128

131

136
140

146

LIST OF TABLES

Characteristics of Humanistic and Behaviorist
Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Age Distribution of Respondents . . . . . . .
Gender Distribution of Respondents . . . . .

Distribution by Years of Teaching Experience
of Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Distribution by Level of Education . . . . .

DistributiOn by Current Professional
Assignment of Respondents . . . . . . . . .

Respondents' Perceptions of Goal One:
Learner's Needs and Potentials . . . . . . .

Respondents' Perceptions of Goal Two:
Student Self-Esteem . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Respondents' Perceptions of Goal Three:
Student Skill Acquisition . . . . . . . . . .

Respondents' Perceptions of Coal Four:
Student Involvement in Learning . . . . . . .

Respondents' Perceptions of Goal Five:
Student Value Development . . . . . . . . .

Respondents' Perceptions of Goal Six:
Qualities of Learning Environments . . . .

Respondents' Perceptions of Goal Seven:
Developing Respect for Others . . . . . . . .

t-test Results of Comparing Actual Practices
and What Ought to be Practices for Each of
the ASCD's Seven Goals . . . . . . . . . .

35

53

54

54

55

56

57

59

60

62

63

65

66

68

LIST OF TABLES, CONT'D.

Mean and Ranking of Respondents' Perceptions
of What Ought to be Practices Concerning
Each of the ASCD's Seven Goal Statements . . . 69

Respondents' Citations of a Bad Example of
Failure to Achieve a Particular Goal . . . . . 70

Respondents' Citations of a Good Example of
Success to Achieve a Particular Goal . . . . . 72

Respondents' Assessments of 42 Chosen
Propositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

Summary Table of Degrees of Consistency in
Agreement or Disagreement with 42 Selected
Humanistic and Non-Humanistic Propositions . . 83

Tendencies and Dispositions in Paired
Responses to Humanistic and Non-Humanistic
Propositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

Pairs of Responses Taken Three at a Time and
Combined Into "Consolidated" Responses . . . . 95

Individual Responses to Non-Humanistic

Statements: 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 13, 16, 18,

20, 21, 22 24, 27, 28, 30, 32, 35, 36, 38,

42 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Individual Responses to Humanistic Statements:
1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 13, 16, 18, 20, 21, 22
24, 27, 23, 3o, 32, 35, 36, 38, 42 . . . . . . 98

t-Test Results Comparing the Research and

Pilot Groups Concerning What Ought to be

Practices to Goal Achievement for Each of

the ASCD's Seven Goals . . . . . . . . . . . 101

xi

1

LIST OF FIGURES

Graphic Display of Mean Differences Portrayed
in Table 4 O 13 O O O O I O O O I O O O O O I O

xii

EASE

69

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The Problem of Discrepancy Between Goals and Practices

Educators often express great concern about the problem
of discrepancy between schools' actual practices and the goals
they ought to be achieving. MacDonald (1971) insisted that
the chief goal of education is freedom. He argued that,
"Contrary to Rousseau's famous opening sentence, Man is born
free and everywhere he is in chains, man is born in chains and
everywhere he tends to remain so" (p. 2-7).

According to MacDonald (1971), the essence of a humane
school is freedom —- freedom for the individual to be able to
exercise his own free will to choose, to develop his own
potentialities for their own sake alone. MacDonald suggested
that to have helpful, positive action in schooling to enhance
freedom, "we must return to the source of creative humanism,
the humanities, and we must infuse this spirit throughout our
substance and processes" (p. 20). This emphasis on freedom
points to the enduring underlying issues, not only in both
current and previous educational discussions in the United
States, but also everywhere in the world. where nations

struggle to create modern and humane educational systems.

2

White (1987) noted that, "The problem in education may
be even more basic than we had imagined. And what humanists
will have to do in order to communicate the severity of the
crisis is to become intellectually and politically engaged
with the literature on educational reform" (p. 24).

Combs (1971) offered a number of cogent observations
about practices irrelevant to learning which he believes are
helping to make schools less humane institutions. Combs
suggested that, "If we are going to make education more
relevant, we must actively work for greater self-direction
and responsibility in the students with whom we work" (p. 35) .

Ryan (1972) pointed out the following elements that may
serve either as barriers or act as facilitators to the design
of a humane curriculum:

1. State department of education prescription (relative

to designs of buildings, programs, requirements,

etc.).
2. Institutional demands vs. flexibility.
3. Specialization (subjects or disciplines).
4. The accountability procedure.

5. The "Educational establishment."

6. Use of grades and rank in class for college
entrance.
7. We want to keep on "grade level" to carry out

traditional patterns of school.

8. Educators do not really want to humanize the school.

3

9. Compromises made in the transition from traditional
curriculum to "humane" curriculum.

10. Involvement of parents, community groups, action
groups, students, etc.

11. Participation. of jparents (a barrier or a
facilitator).

12. Role of the teacher.

a. Place of the teacher in curriculum planning.

b. Teachers not trained in curriculum planning.
c. Difficulty of teachers in communicating with
parents.

d. Teacher schedules -- lack of time for planning.
13 . Involvement of psychologists -- relative to learning
theory.
14. Evaluation of curriculum.
a. What are teachers actually attending to?
b. Must know where we are going. (p. 76-80)
Saylor (1969) emphasized that the creating of goals, as
well as the carrying out of sound human relationships, are of
key importance. He suggested, "The qualities that contribute
to the attainment of a humane secondary school are: (a) the
goal to be sought, (b) administrative structure, (c) policies
and procedures, and (d) human relationships" (p. 122-126).
The problem that this study addresses is the problem of
discrepancies between goal setting and goal achievement.
Literature indicates that there have been two major focuses

of criticism in education. The first criticizes the schools

4

for not fostering such educational goals as the intellectual
development or academic achievement of children. The second
claims that the schools are inhumane in their treatment of
children because they are not concerned with teaching goals
and objectives that lead to more humaneness. This study deals
with these latter goals as the main focus of its
investigation.

Many educational writers, including those cited above,
claim that problems in education today often come from a lack
of clarity about goals and objectives in schools. Combs
(1973) stated, "We are spending millions and millions of
dollars on this very small aspect (Academic Achievement) of
dealing with educational problems, while the problem of self-
concept, human attitudes, feelings, beliefs, and intelligence
are going unexplored" (p. 38-42).

ASCD Studies (1978) indicated that the greatest problems
facing all of us are essentially human ones. The ASCD
suggests that "If education is to assume its responsibility
to prepare young people to meet the challenges of the future,
it must number humanistic objectives high among its
priorities" (p. 23). Silberman (1970) argued that the problem
with American schools comes from their emphasis on developing
technology of education. He pointed out:

The approach to instructional technology that most

researchers are following is likely to compound what

is wrong with American education -- its failure to

develop sensitive, autonomous, thinking, humane

individuals -- our most pressing educational

problem, in short, is not.to increase theiefficiency
of the schools, it is how to create and maintain a

5

humane society. A society whose schools are
inhumane is not likely to be humane itself. (p.
196-203)

A study by Jackson (1968) also suggested that "our most
pressing educational problem involves learning how to create

and maintain a humane environment in our schools" (p. 90)

e o e t te o S ° 'ca

The setting of goals in education is important; and at
the same time it is a very complex process which educators
cannot yet be certain will succeed. Specifically, why is it
that though many educators appear to agree on overall goals
such as freedom.and.humaneness, the actualities in.the schools
often appear to be far from achieving these goals? What are
the major barriers? Where do the breakdowns occur? What are
the key elements that may facilitate the formulation and
achievement of more humane goals?

These more specific questions are also complex.
Therefore, although this study is aimed at trying to shed some
additional light on them, the study deals only with selected
aspects of seven humanistic goals in education. What modest
light may be gained from this research will hopefully help
educators gain some new insights for improving practice. An
incidental hope is that the investigative procedures used may
themselves offer one or two fresh ideas for research
procedures.

Chapter II, Review of Literature, will discuss in more

detail the items referred to above, which articulate

6
discrepancies between desired goals and actual practice, and
which cite various forms of practice which may be barriers to

achieving desired goals or may facilitate goal achievement.

W

The primary purposes of this study are as follows:

1. To describe and examine selected educators'
perceptions of the seven ASCD goals of humanistic
education in regard to what is and what ought to be
educational practice in connection with each goal
(Combs, et al., 1978). The aim behind this purpose
was to try to examine educators' ratings of these
goals and their perceptions of the degrees to which
current practices are delivering them.

2. To gather and analyze concrete instances from
educators' experience with regard to success and
failure in achieving one or another of the ASCD's
seven goals. The aim behind this purpose was to
gather anecdotal data arising directly from
participants' concrete experiences, along with their
perceptions of what served either to block or to
facilitate goal achievement.

3. To determine to what extent educators agree or
disagree with 42 propositions about educational
practices, the propositions having been derived from
the ASCD's seven goals. The aim behind this purpose

was to try to obtain some portrait of the

7
participants' degrees of consistency in agreeing or
disagreeing with propositions of humanistic and non-

humanistic practices.

Design_2f_tns_§tudx

This study asked graduate students in education (see
Chapter III for sample description, p. 44) to share their
perceptions and examples from their experiences which bear on
the selected set of goal statements. The goal statements used
in this study are not the only set which might have been used.
They are, however, a succinct set which bear on the issues of
humane educational practices. The ASCD goals chosen here, as
set forth in 1978, have these additional advantages: (a) they
are manageably few in number, (b) they are current, and (c)
they appear to be goals addressed to important educational
issues. One justification for this study was to find out not
only educators' substantive responses, but also to find out
if these ways of gathering data can yield valuable
information.

The data from the research instruments were analyzed
using the facilities of the Michigan State University Computer
Center. On the basis of this analysis and a review of
relevant literature, the researcher developed a number of
conclusions and recommendations with regard to achieving more

humane goals in education.

8
E E' .!. E T

In order to avoid confusion or ambiguity in the interpre-
tation of this study, major terms have been defined as
follows.

figm§n1§r1g_figggarign: In literature, there are various
definitions of humanistic education. However, this study has
adopted the following definition from the ASCD Working Group
on Humanistic Education. ' "Humanistic education is a
commitment to education and practice in which all facets of
the teaching-learning process give major emphasis to the
freedom, value, worth, dignity, and integrity of persons"
(p- 9) -

arrirggg: Attitude is the predisposition of the
individual to evaluate some symbol, object or aspect of his
world in a favorable or unfavorable manner. Attitudes include
the affective or feeling core of liking or disliking and the
cognitive or belief elements which describe the effect of the
attitude, its characteristics and it relations to other
objectives (Katz, 1960, p. 168).

W: Current practice refers to the present
conditions or status regarding whether a given goal statement
is actually being achieved. (Data in this study on "current
conditions" consist of pergepriogs of educators1as to what.the
status may be.)

Ought to be Practige: "Ought to be" practice, on the
other'hand, refers.to.achievement statuses that educators (the

graduate students participating in this study) would like to

9
see for the given goal statements. (Participating educators
record their preferences, degrees of agreement, perceptions
of barriers, etc., on the instruments developed for this
study.)
ASCD: ASCD refers to the Association for Supervision

and Curriculum Development.

E 1° .! !' l I' '! !° C !l E! 1
This study had the following delimitations and

limitations:

1. This study is limited because of the nature of the
instruments which deal with attitude measurement.
The study is an original design which, if it proves
valid, may lead to further development.

As Borg and Gall (1979) indicated, "Attitude scales are direct
self-report measures, and so have the usual disadvantages of
this type of instrument” The primary disadvantage is that one
can never be sure of the degree to which the subject's
responses reflect his true attitude" (p. 275).

2. This study is limited in that the researcher had
little control over when or how subjects responded
to the instrument items.

According to Mauch and Birch (1983), "A very common limitation
is the willingness and ability of individuals to respond at
all, to respond in a timely fashion, and to respond

accurately" (p. 64-65).

10
This study is limited to a small population of
educators in the State of Michigan. Any future
studies would almost certainly need to extend the
range of contributors.
This study is limited to the investigation of seven
key goals in humanistic education which represent
a primary interest to the researcher. Further
studies might be needed to investigate other
educational goals, e.g., in humanism, behaviorism,
existentialism and so forth.
It would be ideal for the researcher to be able to
determine a wide ‘scope of educators' attitudes.
This study, however, attempts to report only
attitudes in response to statements concerning seven
key goals. Therefore, no attempt will be made to
examine the whole gamut of educator's attitudes or
any other aspects of any educator's personality.
This study is limited because data were not
collected about respondent's professional context
out of which they came. Further research is needed
to explore relationships between respondents'
professional contexts and their perceptions about
how specific practices relate to particular goals.
That is to say, some school settings may challenge
teachers more than others to think carefully about

the relationships between practices and goals.

11
o t s o t
This study is based on conceptual frameworks advanced by
Combs, Aspy, Brown, Clute, and Hicks. The educators referred
to above led task forces of ASCD (1978) to suggest the
existence of seven :major' goals in. humanistic education.

Discussion of these goals will be presented in Chapter II.

MEMO!

The specification of‘ goals is a key’ process which
typically engages the values, attitudes, and preferences of
the goal setters. This study made an attempt to gather data
on selected educational preferences regarding a specific set
of goals that were formulated by ASCD's Working Group on
Humanistic Education.

Chapter I has attempted to develop a brief rationale for
the study including the problem of discrepancy between goals
and practice, the problem stated more specifically, purposes
of the study, design of the study, definition of terms,
delimitations and limitations of the study, a brief reference
to the conceptual foundations of the study and the overall
organization of the study.

Chapter II basically presents a review of the literature
related to humanistic practices in education.

Chapter III deals with the research design used in this
study. It also points out how the population studied was
selected and its potential relevance to dealing with the

issues being investigated. In addition, the chapter presents

12

the data collection plan, provides information regarding the
data collection instrument, and finally describes the
statistical procedures and techniques used to analyze the
data.

Chapter IV contains the results of the data analyses and
highlights the findings of the study.

Chapter V presents a brief summary of the study, as well
as conclusions and recommendations for future studies on the

basis of the findings of this study.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW 0? LITERATURE

W

The purpose of this chapter is to review a representative

sample of literature in the field of Humanistic Education and

its applications. The following sources were searched to

identify relevant studies:

1.

The
sections:
1.

2.

Major studies by the ASCD and leading educators in
the field.

Dissertation studies and published research papers.
Periodicals and bulletins dealing with research in
humanistic education.

Documents published by the U.S. Government, "White
House Conference on Children" (1970) and "The Joint
Committee on Educational Goals and Evaluation of the
California Legislature" (1970).

chapter has been organized into the following

Major definitions of humanistic education.

Major studies by the ASCD and leading educators in
the field.

Comparisons of humanistic and behavioristic

approaches to education.

14

4. Purpose of humanistic education.

5. Criticisms of behaviorists regarding humanistic
education.

6. Purposes of behavioristic education.

7. Criticisms of Ihumanists regarding’ behavioristic
education.

8. Characteristics of lhumanistic and behavioristic
education.

9. Humanistic education practices and programs.

't' s o ' ' u

During the past two decades, humanistic educators have
developed a variety of definitions for humanistic education.
Macdonald (1977) argued that these:

Definitions differ according A to proponents, but

there is a general focus that appears in varied

forms. This is a focus on education for human
beings -- in contrast to educational practices
thought to be dehumanizing to deal with limited
aspects of human capability or to focus narrowly
upon, role, requirement. designed. for' our' present

society. (p. 345)

For the purposes of this study, the researcher has
selected the following definition as the most appropriate:
"Humanistic education is a commitment to education and
practice in which all facets of the teaching-learning process
give major emphasis to the freedom, value, worth, dignity and
integrity of persons" (Combs, 1978, p. 9).

Volett (1977) defined humanistic education as the

development of the total person:

15

Humanistic education is education that is concerned

with the development of the total person. It is

concerned with designing and providing learning

experiences that will help people of all ages and
stages of life to continue to develop our uniquely
human potentialities. It is concerned with
facilitating our growth and changing behavior so
that we may become more wholesome, balanced, self-

actualized and responsible persons. (p. 1-2)

Weinberg ( 1972) defined it as: "Humanistic education
views the child as a potential orchestra and encourages him
to experiment with every instrument and every theme that is
in him" (p. 7).

Hitt (1973) suggested that education should be viewed as
a human enterprise: "Humanistic education views education as
a human enterprise -- designed for people. The student as a
whole person is the central focus of the school. Student
self-fulfillment is the end of education. Education should
be designed and managed to achieve this end" (p. 24).

Lyon (1971) argued that: "Learning can be enjoyable if
it is humanized. What's more, learning which retains the
human element is much more relevant to life. ‘The intellectual
must be coupled with the emotional if behavior is to retain
a human quality" (p. 13).

Funderburk (1972), Director of Supervisory-
Administrative Services for the National Affiliated and
Associated Organization of the National Education Association,
presented the following definition for a humane school at a
meeting of the Northern Virginia Chapter of Phi Delta Kappa:

[A humane school] is one which attempts to stress

the ideal psychological atmosphere for each student
to learn in school -- a place where a student can

16

learn to like himself better, to understand himself
better, to fit into society, to be able to work with
others, and to be able to learn in diverse ways in
different fields. It is a place where he is not
only free to learn but learns that freedom is not
doing as he pleases -- that freedom carries with it
grave responsibilities -- a happy place where there
is order without regimentation, where there are
teachers who have empathy -- who do care -- where
there is curriculum and methodology which stimulate
the ability and the disposition to learn, where the
student has a feeling of worthwhileness and
belonging, and where teachers and administrators
dare to care and dare to act. (p. 16)

Wilhelms' (1971) definition of a humane school is similar
to the ideas of Glasser and Erikson who suggested that school
should help each youngster establish his own self-identify.
Wilhelms insisted that: "The humane school primarily focuses
on the youth themselves, and guides them in the kind of
activities and experiences that enable all of them
individually to attain optimum self-actualization, self-
realization, self-dignity and self-respect" (p. 54).

Myers (1972) suggested that the full meaning of a
humanistic school concept is needed to secure the wider view.
He described the following conceptions of the humanistic
school as being parochial positions:

Naturalists (Neill) want it to be a student-

centered or more accurately a student-dominated

school. The "Third Force Psychologists" (Rogers,
Maslow) would see it dominated by an interpersonal

or human relations curriculum. Humanists
(Lowenfeld, Reed) emphasize increased sensitivity
to the fine arts . Social scientists (Fenton ,

Morissett) would have the social studies move front
and center. The "mankind advocates" (Hirschfeld,
Eisner) envision an educational program that
emphasizes mankind in contrast to narrow
provincialism. (p. 53-54).

l7

Myers (1972) suggested that the humanistic school should
have five essential components: "Conventional content with
a mankind perspective, interpersonal relations, teacher action
and Geist" (p. 55).

Weller ( 1977) indicated that most educators probably
would accept a broad definition for humanistic education such
as: Is it "education designed to increase the dignity and
quality of life for all people?" (p. 3). .According to Weller,
such a definition offers little in the way of clarification.
He argued that the problem is: "Any discussion of humanistic
education raises difficult questions of definition and
perspective. The concept has itself become so broad and
complex that one could almost argue that all education is

fundamentally humanistic in intent" (p. 4).

H . E! 1' ! Eiifi ! I 3' E3 !

Many educators seem to embrace the idea of humanistic
education. waever, literature indicates that despite its
goals, humanistic education has been more often honored in
theory rather than in practice.

According’ to the .ASCD's studies, one of the major
barriers to practicing humanistic goals in schools is that
goals, stated in very general terms, are difficult to measure,
and this fact has impeded the extension of humanistic thought
and practice into our public schools. In dealing with this
issue, the ASCD's studies suggested that: "For humanistic

education to become a reality rather than a pie in the sky

18

theory, it must be clearly defined, the goals must be stated,

and assessment must be made" (Combs, 1978, p. v). To

investigate the problem, ASCD's Working Group on Humanistic

Education

1.

The
suggested

captioned

directed its studies toward three major needs:

A need for a clear definition of humanistic
education, and a need to define some of the most
significant humanistic objectives, were assigned to
a task force under the leadership of Morrel J.
Clute.

The need for appropriate and workable techniques
for the assessment of humanistic objectives. Combs
(1978) provided a set of general considerations
about assessment of humanistic goals. Aspy and
Hicks led a task force exploring ways to assess
humanistic objectives for research.

The need for a simple device by which interested
parents, teachers, citizens and educators might
judge the humaneness of their local schools.
Responsibility for the development of such a
checklist for humanistic schools was assigned to
Doris M. Brown.

ASCD's Working Group on Humanistic Education
a series of seven major goals. These goals may be
as follows:

Learner's needs and potentials.

Student self-esteem.

Student skill acquisition.

19

4. Student involvement in learning.

5. Student value development.

6. Qualities of learning environments.

7. Developing respect for others. (See p. 47-48 below.

Also see Appendix A, p. 122 and Appendix C, p. 128.)

As guides for action, the working group listed, under
each of the goals mentioned, some specific objectives
suggested by research and experience through.which humanistic
goals may be achieved.

As one of the solutions for removing barriers to
humaneness in the school, the ASCD studies suggested:

If education is to place priority on the development

of humane people, it must utilize and expand those

methods and practices that are known to facilitate

positive growth and eliminate those administrative
structures, policies, and teaching procedures that

make the achievement of humanistic goals difficult.

(Combs, 1978, p. vii).

Macdonald (1971) analyzed some of the barriers that work
against freedom developing in the school. He argued in the
Minneapolis Fourth Conference on the Humane School that the
schools are not organized around philosophical commitments
about the nature of humaneness or even human condition, but
on the basis of the ideology of scientific measurement and
achievement. According to Macdonald, the essence of a humane
school is freedom of choice and freedom from the constraints
of others. He stated the following distinction between a
humane school and an inhumane one:

If the school exists and if its program is so shaped

as to make the individual subservient to the
collective group and to carry out the roles it

20

assigns,' schooling becomes a sham, an empty,
inhumane enterprise: but if the school enables the
individual to exercise his own free choice, to
develop his own potentialities for their own sake
alone, to serve the social group collectively
because he has freedom to do so rather than because
of pressure to conform, or to achieve for the
group's sake, then humaneness pervades the school.

(P-

23)

Macdonald's (1971) paper suggested the following ways of

enhancing freedom in the school:

1.

School should focus upon the fundamental goals of
freeing persons for self-responsibility, and self-
directed fulfillment of their own emerging potential
and involvement.

School must look to the humanities for broadened
freedom through self-development of individual
potentiality, because the humanities promise freedom
to man's aesthetic or qualitative relation to the
world as well as his quantitative scientific bent.
School should make strenuous efforts encouraging
students, to 'take 'things seriously, making free
choices and assuming the responsibility for these
choices and trying to find the greatest meaning out
of their living in schools, to be a vital and
energetic person in their activity.

The school system should shift its focus from a way
of relating to things to a way of relating to
people.

School should have a commitment to humaneness rather

than the quantitative ideology of achievement.

21

6. School programs must face up to the contradiction
between humaneness and the press of our
technological society.

7. School's activities should be focused on the
creative potential of feeling and thinking human
beings, rather than on objective assessments,
because, the intellectual power of achieving our
goals is useless without the directions of our
feelings.

8. We must deliberately encourage and support the
aesthetic approach to curriculum criticism because,
it may well be armore natural way for people to
enter into the reality of schooling.

Leonard (1968) also emphasized the concept of free-
learning in schools. He advocated a "free-learning situation"
in which the student is free to go anywhere within the school
and do anything he pleases in a rational and responsible
manner. Leonard reported that the children he observed on
West Fifteenth Street in New York City displayed a tremendous
expression of joy while learning. According to the principal
of the school, in the free-learning environment, the children
often help each other, and assume responsibility of the best
teaching. Leonard believed that education in the free-
learning situation is more efficient and someday in the
future, may be easier to handle than the traditional

classroom.

22

Hitt (1973) suggested the following methods for the
development of objectives for a humanistic school system:

1. Looking at the barriers to humaneness.

2. Discussing the fundamental problem underlying these

barriers.

3. Outlining a description of the effective human

being.

4. Listing indicators of humaneness. (p. 51-58)
According to Hitt (1973), we must deal with these major
psychological problems that serve as barriers to humaneness:

1. Lack of identity

2., Lack of authenticity

3. Closed-mindedness

4. Fear of freedom

5. Lack of responsibility

6. Poor communication

7. Irrationality

8. Lack of coping

9. Lack of concern for others

10. Lack of commitment to the everyday (p. 51-58)
Hitt (1973) indicated that these ten characteristics represent
barriers to achieving a partial model of the effective human
being. In addition to these traits, he suggested that.we must
integrate the world of reason with the world of feeling to
form a fully human person that manifests balance of all the

traits described above.

23

The ASCD Council on Secondary Education (1971) asked
participants from schools, state departments, and educational
agencies to help general session speakers identify the
"barriers to humanizing the secondary schools" and to discuss
how to overcome such barriers. The participants identified
the following as barriers to humanizing the secondary schools:

1. Prohibiting the teacher from humanizing by the
department chairman.

2. Prohibiting the department chairman from humanizing
by the principal.

3. Prohibiting the principal from humanizing by the
central office.

4. Prohibiting the central office from humanizing by
the state department.

5. Excessive emphasis on achievement as exemplified by
the College Board Examinations, laws and policies
external to the school such as tenure, union
policies, parental groups, board of education,
American Civil Liberties Union, budgetary problems,
and inadequate teacher training programs.

The participants believed that the barriers described
above are external because they seem to refer to someone or
something outside one's control, but in reality the vast
majority of the problems rest inside the school itself, and
can be resolved if the educators set their minds to it. At
the end of the conference, the discussion groups suggested

that:

24

Basic to any change bringing about a greater
humanization of the schools, the faculties must
begin with human relations between teacher and
pupil, teacher and teacher, where each human
relationship is cherished. School personnel tend
to look elsewhere and outside themselves for the
barriers to promoting a more humane school, but the
blame and the resolve can be placed right inside and
much can be done if persons would stop saying "if
only" and begin planning. (Scully, 1971, p. 72-
73)

Goodlad (1983) conducted.a major research project called

"A Study of Schooling." The project was an inquiry into 38

elementary, junior high, and.senior'high.schools selected from

urban, suburban and rural populations in seven states in the

United States. Interviews, questionnaires, observations and

collection of documents in the curriculum domain were used to

gather data. The purposes of the project were as follows:

1.

To examine schooling goals, teaching practices,
curriculum content , school and classroom
organization, material used, problems and issues,
rules and regulations and so on.

To view schools from the perspectives of students,
teachers, parents, principals and others.

To gain some insight into the satisfactions,
dissatisfactions, values and attitudes of the
respondents with regard to their schools.

To understand schools clearly in our minds so we

might be more successful in improving them. (8-17)

Findings of Goodlad's (1983) study may be summarized as

follows:

25
The study reveals that both parents and
professionals believe that schools ought to be
concerned with a wide range of goals -- not merely
with narrow, 3 R's based academic achievement.
The study reveals that despite this wide range of
stated goals, the schools studied are emphasizing
a narrow academic curriculum, while largely ignoring
broader goals.
The study reveals that a great amount of teaching
practices used by the vast majority of teachers in
the school studied are: reading, writing, arith-
metic, textbooks, workbooks, dittoed sheets, quizzes
and teacher-dominated talk as the prime teaching
techniques.
The study reveals that the schools studied are not
concerned with academic goals such as: "developing
the ability to communicate ideas through writing and
speaking." Evidence from the data shows: students
passively listening, reading textbooks, completing
assignments and rarely initiating anything -- at
least in the academic subjects.
The general conclusion from the data indicates that
the schools studied did not place a high premium on
experiencing democratic processes, independent
thinking, creativity; personal autonomyy and

learning for the sake of learning. (p. 8—17)

26
Goodlad (1983) argued that there is a discrepancy between
our idealistic expectations for students and actual classroom
practice. He suggested that:

The goals set for schools are particularly
idealistic in 'the social, civic, cultural, and
personal domains. It is here that we find the most
altruistic expectations for understanding differing
value systems, developing productive and satisfying
relations with others based on respect, trust,
cooperation, and caring; developing a concern for
humanity: developing the ability to apply the basic
principles and concepts of the sciences, fine arts,
and humanities to the appreciation of aesthetic
matters; and developing an understanding of the
necessity for moral integrity. And it is here that
we find statements about developing the ability to
use leisure time effectively, to perceive self
positively to deal with new problems in original
ways, and to enjoy and be willing to experience a
range of imaginative alternatives. (p. 17)

Goodlad (1983) concludes that the schools in his sample were
contributing minimally to the attainment of such goals.
Therefore, if we are seriously interested in improving the
quality of our educational systems then it appears that
profound changes in the conduct of schooling are required.
Tyler (1983) described the contribution of "A Study of
Schooling" to educational research. He stated that "John
Goodlad and his associates have enlarged our understanding of
schools in America and their findings provide a more
comprehensive basis for understanding U.S. schools than any

previously published study" (p. 33-34).

27
£0 ! 1 E' ! !l S! 3'

Literature indicates that governmental bodies such as
the White House Conference on Children (1970) and the Joint
Committee on Educational Goals and Evaluation of the
California Legislature (1970) have always included humanistic
goals such as: worthy home membership, good citizenship,
commitment to democratic ideas, self-esteem, a healthy mind
in a healthy body, concern for other people, responsibility,
creativity, intelligent behavior, effective use of leisure
time and many more.

In a report to the president, the White House Conference
on Children and Youth (1970) described what goals of education
for a twenty-first century person should be:

We ask first, then, not what kind of education we
want to provide but what kind of human being we want
to emerge. What would we have twenty-first century
man be?

We would have him be a man with strong sense of
himself and his own humaneness, with awareness of
his thoughts and feelings, with the capacity to feel
and express love and joy and to recognize tragedy
and feel grief. We would have him be a man who,
with a strong and realistic sense of his own worth,
is able to relate openly with others, to cooperate
effectively with them toward common ends, and to
view mankind as one while respecting diversity and
difference. We would want him to be a being who,
even while very young, somehow senses that he has
it within himself to become more than he now is,
that he has the capacity for lifelong spiritual and
intellectual growth. We would want him to cherish
that vision of the man he is capable of becoming and
to cherish the development of the same potentiality
in others. (p. 78)

Kalunion (1974) studied the effects of a humanistic

education curriculum on attitude, self-concept, anxiety and

28

achievement level of primary school children and teachers.

The research was structured to determine whether:

1.

Kalunion

Teachers who present a humanistic education
curriculum to students will experience a
significantly greater increase in positive attitude
towards students than teachers who do not present
a humanistic education curriculum to students.
Students who experience presentations of a
humanistic education curriculum will experience a
significantly greater increase in positive self-
concept change than students who do not experience
presentations of a humanistic education curriculum.
Students who experience presentations of a
humanistic education curriculum will experience a
significantly greater reduction in test anxiety than
students who do not experience presentations of a
humanistic education curriculum.

Students who experience presentations of a
humanistic curriculum will experience a
significantly greater increase in school achievement
than students who do not experience presentations
of a humanistic education curriculum.

(1975) administered four major criteria: Self-

Appraisal Inventory, Test Anxiety Scale for Children, Stanford

Achievement Test and Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory.

Findings of Kalunion's (1975) study indicated that:

29

1. The treatment process did not influence the
development.of enhancing positive teacher attitudes
toward students.

2. Students who experienced the presentation of the
humanistic education curriculum did experience a
significantly greater increase in positive self-
concept for all three grade levels, and did
experience a significant reduction in test anxiety
for grades two and three.

No significant positive change in school achievement was
found. Based on the findings, the researcher suggests that
the inclusion of a humanistic education curriculum within the
school curriculum can play an important role in enhancing
positive self-concept, and can assist in helping students
reduce test anxiety.

In a quasi-experimental study, Clausell (1974)
investigated the effect of a humanistic teacher training
program as compared to the effect of traditional teacher
training methodology on: (1) teacher attitudes, (2) pupil
affective learning and (3) classroom climate. Instruments
used to study the problem were the Minnesota Teacher Attitude
Inventory (MTAI) as a measure of teacher attitude change, the
Focus Inventory (PI) for pupil affective learning, and the
Openness of Classroom Climate (OCC) and a classroom climate
indicator for teachers.

Results of the study'indicated; .First, teacher'attitudes

were influenced not only by the training program method, but

30

also by the individual teacher's prior educational experience
and their individual personality disposition. Humanistically-
trained teachers scored significantly higher on the MTAI than
did the traditionally-trained teachers. Second, pupils taught
by humanistically-trained teachers scored higher on the Faces
Inventory than did pupils taught by traditionally-trained
teachers. Third, humanistically-trained teachers maintained
statistically significant different (greater) openness of
classroom climate than did traditionally-trained teachers.

In conclusion, the study suggested that humanistic
education should be adopted by schools to enhance the
attitudes of teachers and pupils toward more stimulating
learning environments and greater interest and pleasure in
schooling.

Howard (1977) studied student's perceptions of the value
of humanistic practices in public school education. He
surveyed 188 students at a school in an industrial city in
Michigan. This sample involved 100 ninth-graders and 88
eighth-graders. The major purpose of the study was to
discover what students liked and disliked about the
traditional school practices, and to test them to ascertain
their feelings about humanistic ideals in education. The
study used a Likert-type research instrument to collect data.

The major findings of Howard's (1977) study revealed:

1. Ninth-graders made more humanistic choices than

eighth graders. They were especially more

humanistic on matters such as planning what they

31

would study, freedom of movement within the
classroom, opposition to memorization, not being
punished for forgetting to bring their textbooks to
class, being doubtful of the infallibility of
teachers, being on their own responsibility, more
uncertain that what they were learning now would be
of value to them after graduation, and that there
could be student talking and learning in the same
classroom.

2. Boys and girls were both highly humanistic in their
attitudes toward school life and no significant
difference was found in attitude between the sexes.

3. All ages within the same grade level were highly
humanistic, and no significant difference between
different age groups was found.

4. The A-B students tended to be more humanistic in
their choices than the C-E group.

5. Far more students favored humanistic practices of
education than were satisfied with the traditional
policies and data showed only 15 of the 88 students

chose to return to traditional approaches to school.
(p. 1168A)

Humanistis_and_fiehaxigristis
Approaghes t9 Edugarion

Humanism and behaviorism are among the prominent psycho-
logical theories in contemporary education. Most methods of

teaching and patterns of curriculum are based on one or

32
another (or' both) of these theoretical approaches. In
professional literature, many educators have both advocated

and condemned humanistic and behavioristic education.

Proponents of humanistic education believe that the
purpose of education should be the development of a fully-
functioning human being. They emphasize that curriculum
should be seen as a liberating process that can meet the need
for growth and personal integrity. Humanists suggest that
education should not be primarily focused on the heritage or
the material that is to be learned, but that the primary focus
should be on the student himself as a person with freedom,

value, worth, dignity and potentials.

' ' ‘ v' ' ts e

Behavioristic educators have raised the following

criticisms:

1. Objectives of humanistic education are vague and
cannot be observed, measured or tested through a
scientific method.

2. Humanistic psychology fails to explain such things
as love, purpose, or meaning: or self-concept, self-
determination, and self-actualization in
behavioristic terms.

3. The humanist's recommendations for educational

reform are too fuzzy, too idealistic, too

33
sentimental, too impractical, too romantic, and too
unscientific to be of any use. (Kolesnik, 1975, p.
82-83)

4. The humanistic assumptions of freedom.are likely to
do more harm than good to the individual as well as
society.

5. The behaviorists believe that it is not enough for
a teacher to be a warm, friendly person, she or he

must also be a skilled technician -- a behavioral

engineer.
0 e v'o 'st'c d '0

According to the behavioristic view, the purpose of
education is to teach students certain specific predetermined
concepts, skills, values, or attitudes for'new'and.better'ways
of behaving internally as well as externally. Skinner (1978)
indicated that experimental analysis of behavior has improved
education by clarifying its objectives, suggesting new
practices in classroom management, and introducing
instructional programming texts and other. materials. As a
result, according to Skinner, students learn better in less
time and with less effort.

' ' 's
Behaxicristic.§dusatien

Opponents of the behaviorist approach have pointed out

the following criticisms:

34

1. Behavioristic education ignores consciousness,
feelings, and states of mind.

2. It formulates behavior simply as a set of responses
to stimuli and treats a person as an automaton: a
robot, a puppet, or a machine.

3. It limits itself to the prediction and control of

behavior and ignores the essential nature of being

a human.
4. It has no place for intention or purpose.
5. It neglects the cognitive processes.
6. It is concerned only with general principles and

ignores the uniqueness of the individual who must

live in a social cultural context.

7. It regards ideas such as morality or justice as
fiction.
8. It cannot explain creative achievement in art,

literature, science, or mathematics.

v o s a

Literature indicates that humanistic and behavioristic
education are separately (or both) applied in most schools to
achieve desired goals. Table 2.1 shows the characteristics
of humanistic and behavioristic education identified by

Kolesnik (1975).

35

Table 2.1

O I
g. . t : ‘ e ,

S
u.g
-A- _,

 

The need for more student
freedom

Student-centered classroom

Democratic classroom
management

Teaching of children
Discovery methods

Emphasis on the processes of
learning

Learning how to learn

Fostering self-actualization

Psychological organization

Informal instruction
Meaning and relevance
Student responsibility
Teaching as an art
Subjective tests

Teacher regarded as a
facilitator

Aims at producing the free
happy person

Prev. ,‘ O... .0!

The need to regulate or
restrict student freedom

Teacher-centered classroom

Authoritarian classroom
management

Teaching of subject matter
Programming

Emphasis on the products of
learning

Giving the correct answer

Passing on the cultural
heritage

Logical organization of
material

Formal instruction
Desired response
Teacher accountability
Teaching as a science
Objective tests

Teacher regarded as
technician or engineer

Aims at producing the good
citizen

 

36

Research indicates that both humanistic and behavioristic
education have strengths and limitations. A study done by
Hitt (1973) suggested that, "The most urgent need in education
at this time is for a unified educational model that builds
on the strengths of both the human and the technological
model" (p. 12). Hitt also offered a unified model of
education that he believes is designed to meet the needs of
students in a changing society. However, he indicated that
developing and implementing such a unified model will not be
an easy task.

The last section in this chapter focuses on schools'
practices and programs in humanistic education. The
applications of behavioristic education will not be included

in the discussion which follows.

Humanistic Education Pracriggs and Programs

Throughout their research papers, lectures and
conferences on education, humanistic educators have emphasized
the need for applying humanistic curriculum in school.
Goodlad (1984) stated that, "There is much to be done in
humanizing knowledge through curriculum development and
creative teaching so that more and more students will make it
on their own" (p. 271).

Gardner (1970), head of "Common Cause," also reported
that the people now want a society that, "puts human values
above materialism, commercialism, technology and the success

ethic" (p. 129).

37

Keller (1972), a former director of the John Hay Fellows
Program, also suggested that, "When education is humanized,
young people learn not only to read and really understand and
to write and really say something, but also to look and really
see, to listen. and. really' hear, to feel and really’ be
involved, to learn about creativity and really create" (p.
19) .

Strong evidence in research indicates that the
applications of humanistic programs in some American schools
have been achieved with great success and have produced
desirable outcomes. The research also revealed that some
humanistic projects and practices can be found in public
schools, in private camps, in community centers, universities
and colleges, and in school districts.

A task force of the ASCD Working Group on Humanistic
Education devised a checklist in 1978 (see Appendix E) for
assessing the humanistic orientation of a local school or
classroom. The study indicated that the checklist can be and
has been used to assess teacher perception of the
effectiveness of humanistic classroom practices and for
implementing humanistic goals. The task force suggests that
the checklist is useful for achieving the following
objectives:

1. Observing the degree to which school systems,

schools, teachers and students are operating in

humanistic ways.

38

2. Getting teachers, administrators and other school
personnel to examine their own practices, then
setting and pursuing goals for improving them.

3. Helping parents, board members, legislators and the
general public better understand and support
humanistic endeavors of schools. (Combs, et al.,
1972, p. 45)

A.study'byuAspy'and.Roebuck (1978) indicated that, "There
is research evidence from 42 states and seven foreign
countries clearly showing that.not.only'will achievement.gains
be significantly higher with humanistic teaching, but there
will also be greater gains in intelligence measures" (Coombs,
1972, p. 5). V

The Louisville Public Schools developed one very
impressive set.of humanistiijrojects to deal with the problem
of their students drop-out rate which was the highest among
large U.S. cities in 1963. The objectives of the Louisville
Public Schools were as follows:

1. Replacing the self-contained classroom with an open
learning environment organized around groups of
students assigned to a teaching team.

2. The programs are keyed to flexibility, individual-
ized instruction, self-directed humanistic learning
processes, and daily team critiquing and planning.

3. The traditional role of teacher as an authority is

to be replaced by'a new role of teacher'as.a helping

39
or facilitating person. (Walter, et al., 1970, p.
111-120)

The Louisville schools required the humanistically-
oriented teachers to develop six areas of personal growth such
as awareness, identity, commitment, involvement, meaning and
becoming. The applications of humanistic programs by the
Louisville schools produced desirable outcomes in terms of
enhancing students' interest in schooling, drastically
decreasing the drop-out rate, and turning over the control of
the schools to administrative councils consisting of parents,
teachers and students.

Brown conducted an important exploratory study of the
ways in which affective techniques can be applied to school
curriculum. The project involved elementary school teachers,
junior high social studies teachers and senior high English
teachers. The goals of the project were as follows:

1. To collect, describe and organize available

approaches to learning in the affective domain.

2. To select from these approaches those that can be
adapted for the public school curriculum.

3. To develop sample lessons and units based on these
including special materials where necessary and to
try these out in the classroom.

4. To examine how these can fit into the conventional
curriculum, or how the curriculum can be modified
to include them with an end toward better

integration of the affective and cognitive domain.

40

5. To make a face evaluation of these changes.

6. On the basis of the results of this pilot project,
to plan broader model programs such as subject area
and school-wide or district-wide curriculum
improvement including a more vigorous evaluation.
(Brown, 1970, p. 5-12)

The project was designed around a series of workshops in
which the teachers studied theories and experienced methods
of humanistic psychology and planned how to integrate some of
these affective experiences with cognitive learning in the
classroom. The teachers then applied these plans in their
individual classrooms and assessed the outcomes. The project
was a success in terms of offering the opportunity for
classroom teachers from various levels to gather periodically
to develop and experience various affective techniques which
had classroom application, and then to try out what they had
developed in their classrooms. Then they would gather again
to share experiences of success and failure from ‘their

classroom experimentation.

Summary

This chapter was devoted to the review of literature
related to humanistic education and its implementation in
school. The main purpose of the review was to gain needed
insights and direction for this study.

The review indicates that the term "humanistic education"

has a variety of meanings and purposes, however, the general

41

focus of the term seems to be on education for human beings
-- in contrast to educational practices thought to be
dehumanizing to deal with limited aspects of human capability
or ‘to focus only' on learner's intellectual achievement.
Review of studies on humanistic education revealed that some
successful humanistic teaching and learning has occurred.

Chapter III addresses the methodology and procedures used

in collection and analysis of data for this study.

CHAPTER III

DESIGN OF THE STUDY

latmdustien

This chapter contains information about research design,
population of the study, data collection procedures, the pilot
study, data collection instruments, and statistical techniques
and procedures used to analyze the data. The primary concern
of this study was to examine the problem of apparent
discrepancies between desired goals and actual practice in
education with regard to seven goals selected from the ASCD's
1978 task force on humanistic education. The study has also
attempted to achieve the following purposes:

First, the overarching issue is why it may be that though
many educators appear to agree on overall goals such as
freedom and humaneness, the actualities in the schools often
appear to be far from humane as defined by humanists? Where
do the breakdowns occur? What are the major barriers? What
are the key elements that may facilitate the formulation and
achievement of more humane goals? ‘Within this large issue the
specific purpose of this study has been to inquire into the
degree to which teachers' values and perceptions tend to

concur with humanistic values.

43

Second, perceptions of graduate students in the field of
curriculum were studied with regard to what is and what ought
to be practiced for each of seven goals (Combs, 1978).

Third, concrete instances from graduate students'
experiences with regard to success or failure to achieve
particular goals were also described and analyzed.

Finally, the degree to which the graduate students agree
or disagree with 42 propositions of educational practices was
ascertained. The propositions had been derived from ASCD's

1978 task force statements of seven goals.

es a t o s

The researcher used the following methods to study the

problem:

1. Graduate students' perceptions of actual practice
and what practices ought to be with regard to
achieving each of the seven ASCD goals were measured
and reported using a 0 to 10 scale.

2. Flanagan's (1954) Critical Incident Technique was
used to analyze respondents' examples from their
experiences of failure or success to achieve
particular goals.

3. An opinion survey of educational goal statements
was developed to gather the degree to which graduate
students agree or disagree with 42 propositions of

educational practices.

44
4. The respondents' relative agreement with each of
the seven ASCD goals were analyzed. The 42
propositions were grouped into three pairs of
contrasting propositions for each goal, but were
randomly presented in the instrument. Responses
were subsequently regrouped for purposes of

comparative analysis.

W

The target population for this study consisted of 125
graduate students enrolled in the Fall of 1988 curriculum
seminars at Michigan State University. These seminars were
held under the leadership of Professors Charles Blackman, Roy
Wessleman, Carol Hatcher and Robert Hatfield. Most of the
participants in the this study were females between the ages
of 30 and 45, had between 2 to 11 years of teaching
experience and held educational leadership positions in the
State of Michigan. The response rate for this study was 22.4
percent. which is considered too :much below' the desired
objectives of this study. However, in spite of the low
percentage of return, the collected data were examined for
information about how the problem of discrepancy between
goals and practice in education might be researched employing

the instruments designed for the study.

ta '0 s t
The data for this study were collected by three

instrumental forms (see Appendices A and B). The first asked

45
respondents to indicate how they perceive each of the seven
goals by marking both an A and an O for each on a scalar line
where A equals the degree to which the goal is perceived to
be "actually" achieved, and 0 equals the degree to which
respondents perceive the goal "ought" to be achieved. The
second form asked respondents to cite bad and good examples
from their experiences in education of achievement of
selected goals, along with their descriptions of the barriers
and facilitators that caused the failure or success to occur.
The third form asked respondents to indicate on a four point
scale (strongly agree, moderately agree, moderately disagree,
strongly disagree) their degree of agreement or disagreement

with 42 propositions about educational practice.

W

The instruments for this study were developed to study
the problem of discrepancy between goals and practice in
education. A descriptive study method was selected as stated
by Babbie (1973):

Surveys are frequently conducted for the purpose of

making descriptive assertions about some population:

discovering the distribution of certain traits or
attributes. In this regard, the researcher is not
concerned with why the observed distribution exists,

but merely with what that distribution is. (p. 57-

58)

Borg and Gall (1979) also indicated that, "Survey
research in education often yields a normative description
which. may' provide important leads in identifying' needed

emphases and changes in school curricula" (p. 286).

46

Another study by Good and Scates (1954) defined the
questionnaire as:

A form prepared and distributed to secure responses

to certain questions. As a result, these questions

are factual, intended to obtain information about

conditions or practices of which the respondent is

presumed to have knowledge. The questionnaire has

been used increasingly, however, to inquire into the

opinions and attitudes of a group. . .. . it is a

major instrument for data-gathering in descriptive

survey studies. (p. 254).

The researcher reviewed numerous surveys, questionnaires
or instruments. None of them appeared to be appropriate for
the purposes of this study. Therefore, with help from
academic advisers, the researcher developed his own
instruments to inquire into the status of seven goals
suggested by the ASCD's Working Group on Humanistic Education
in 1978. They are as follows:

1. Education today should accept the learner's needs
and purposes and develop experiences and programs
around the unique potentials of the learner.

2. Education today should facilitate self-
actualization and strive to develop a sense of
personal adequacy in all persons.

3. Education today should foster acquisition of basic
skills necessary for living in a multi-cultured
society, including academic, personal, inter-
personal, communicative and economic survival
proficiencies.

4. Education today should personalize educational

decisions and practices. To this end it should

47
include students in the processes of their own
education via democratic involvement in all levels
of implementation.
Education today should recognize the primacy of
human feelings and utilize personal values and
perceptions as integral factors in education
processes.
Education today should strive to develop learning
environments which are perceived by all involved as
challenging, understanding, supportive, exciting,
and free from threat.
Education today should develop in learners genuine
concern for the 'worth. of others and skill in

conflict resolution.

The instruments for this study asked participants for

background

information about themselves and asked for

information concerning their perceptions of the seven goal

statements. The development of the instruments went through

four stages:

1.

The instruments were discussed with the Office of
Research Consultation at Michigan State University
whose observations and feedback were taken into
consideration.

The researcher's committee chairperson reviewed the
instruments thoroughly and.made vital revisions for

their improvement.

48

3 . The instruments were pilot tested on volunteers from
Michigan public schools and members of the local
Chapter of the American Humanist Association. Their
comments and recommendations were then taken into
consideration.

4. The final, more efficient formats were developed
with the help of the researcher's committee
chairperson.

The 42 propositions formulated for the ASCD's goals are

presented in Appendix C and are also reiterated in Chapter IV
where the responses to each of the sets of propositions are

examined in detail.

0 u 5
Two groups of volunteers served as pilot-participants
for this study. The reasons for this pilot test were:
1. To examine the clarity of items in the instruments.
2. To validate the groupings of the propositions as
presented in Appendix C and to test participants'
responses against a criterion grouping of the 21
contrasting pairs of grouped goal statements (please
see Appendix D).
3. To estimate the length of time needed to complete
the instrumental forms (please see Appendices A and
B).
The first group of volunteers in the pilot study

consisted of 13 teachers in public schools. The second group

49
was seven members of the local chapter of the American
Humanist Association. The instruments were given to a total
of 20 volunteers. The results of this pilot study suggested
few changes: however, these changes were incorporated in the
final formats of the instruments. .About 35 to 45 minutes were

needed to complete the instrumental forms.

W

The researcher received generous help from Professors
Charles Blackman, Roy wessleman, Carol Hatcher, and Robert
Hatfield in collecting the data for this study. A total of
125 copies of the instrument and pre-addressed envelopes were
distributed by the professors to their students in the seminar
sessions.

Two weeks later the researcher began receiving a few
responses each day. By the middle of October, a total of 20.8
percent of the responses was collected. Two weeks then went
by in which no responses were received. Then the researcher
began to express his concern about the low outcomes to
Professor Blackman 'who suggested that. he and the other
professors remind their students to fill out and mail the
instrumental forms. One week later, two more responses were
received. When no more responses were received after November
26, the researcher decided to send follow-up letters to
participants through the help of their professors. However,

no additional responses were received. At the end of

50
December, 1988, the total number of responses collected was

28 or 22.4 percent of the 125 potential participants.

5! !' !° 1 E J . E 3

Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the responses
to the instruments. The data were organized and recorded on
computer data cards and programmed into the Michigan State
University computer. The Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences (SPSS) was used to tabulate and analyze the data by
frequency, percentage, mean, median, standard deviation, and
a t-test for comparing mean differences. The level of signifi-
cance was set at .05. The reason five percent (.05) was
chosen for this study was the small sample size. Detailed
descriptions and analyses of the data are included in Chapter

IV.

SBEEAI!

The primary objective of this study was to examine the
perceptions of selected graduate students in education with
regard to seven goal statements suggested by the ASCD's
Working Group on Humanistic Education in 1978. The study
tried to inquire into the problem of discrepancy between
desired goals and actual current practices. The research
methods that were used to study problem were:

1. A. measuring scale of 0 ‘to 10 to examine the

perceptions of graduate students with regard to each

of the seven goals.

51

2. Flanagan's (1954) Critical Incident Technique to
analyze respondent's examples of experiencing
success or failure to achieve goals.

3. An opinion survey of educational goal statements to
examine the degree to which graduate students agree
or disagree with 42 chosen propositions.

The population for this study consisted of 125 graduate
students that were enrolled in curriculum seminars in the Fall
of 1988 at Michigan State University. Out of the total 125
instrumental forms distributed, only 28 were returned.

Responses to the instruments were recorded on computer
data cards and processed at the Michigan State University
Computer Center using SSPS. The statistical techniques used
to analyze the data included: means, frequencies, percen-

tages, standard deviations, and t-test results.

CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION OF DATA ANALYSES AND FINDINGS

11121991191191!

This chapter presents the data analyses and findings of
the research. The data presented here are based on responses
given by one group of 28 graduate students (the "target"
group), along with a group of 13 additional graduate students
who responded initially as a "pilot" group. Combined data on
the total group are presented. All of the students were
studying education at Michigan State University.

This chapter is organized into four sections. The first
reports the target group's demographic data. The second
analyzes the respondents' perceptions of actual practices for
each of the ASCD's seven goals, along with their perceptions
of what.practices ought.tolbe achieved regarding each of these
goals. The section also examines the respondents' citations
of good and bad examples, in which they have witnessed one
failure and one success in an effort to achieve one or another
of the seven goals. The third section reports the
respondents' level of agreement or disagreement with 42 chosen
propositions concerning what educational practices ought to

be. The propositions were derived from the ASCD's seven

53
goals. 'The fourth section compares data from.the target group

and the pilot group.

9.9119912111112291:

The first. part. of’ the research instrument elicited
personal and demographic data regarding each respondents' age,
gender, years of teaching experience, level of education, and
current professional assignment. This information is reported
by frequency and percentage as shown in Tables 4.1 through

4.5.

ASE

Table 4.1 presents the distribution of respondents by
age. The modal ages are in the 41-45 year range (28.6

percent), and in the 30 or younger range (21.4 percent).

Table 4.1

'0 es 0 nts
Total Response = 28

 

 

Age N % Total Pereentege
30 or younger 6 21.4 6 21.4

31 to 35 years 4 14.3 4 14.3

36 to 40 years 5 17.8 5 17.8

41 to 45 years 8 28.6 8 28.6

46 to 50 years _5 i7.§ _§ 17.§
Total 28 99.9 28 99.9*

 

'Percentages have been rounded and will not necessarily add
to 100.

54
QQQQQI
As is shown in table 4.2, three of the respondents (10.7
percent) were males, while 25 respondents (89.3 percent) were
females. Clearly, the responding group was not representative
in terms of gender. In the general population, data on the
gender'distribution in the total of the 125 target respondents

were not obtained.

 

 

 

 

Table 4.2
e 's ' ’ c
Total Response = 28

Gender____£reguencv Percentage Total Percentass___
Male 3 10.7 3 10.7
Female 15 §2.3 25 §2,;
Total I25 100.0 28 100.0
Isars_9f_Teacnins_Ezesrisnss

The distribution of respondents according to years of
teaching experience is shown in Table 4.3. More than 75
percent of the responding group had at least two years of
experience, ranging up to 11 years. Few of the group were

novice classroom teachers.

 

 

Table 4.3
Disrributiog 9! Peers er Ieeening
Ereeriense_2f_ae§22ndents
Total Response = 28

Isarsii N % Total Percentase____
1 year or less 1 3.6 1 3.6
2 to 6 years 12 42.8 12 42.8
7 to 11 years 10 35.7 10 35.7
12 to 19 years 2 7.1 2 71.
20 or more years _; iQ.1 3 19.2
Total 28 99.9 28 99.9

 

'Percentages have been rounded and will not necessarily add
to 100.

55

WI

The responses presented in Table 4.4 show that 50 percent
of the responding group had Bachelor of Arts Degrees, 35.7
percent had Bachelor of Science Degrees and 14.3 percent had
Master of Arts. It is to be remembered that all of the
respondents were at the time enrolled in further graduate
study. They were, therefore, a group who were engaged in

upgrading their professional qualifications.

 

Table 4.4
's ' ' ve
Total Response = 28
Level gr Eggcerign N 3 Terel Pereenrege
Bachelor of Arts 14 50.0 14 50.0
Bachelor of Science 10 35.7 10 35.7
Master of Arts _5 14,3 .4 i4,3
Total 28 100.0 28 100.0

 

s 'o ' t
Table 4.5 presents data concerning the respondents'
current professional assignment.' As the table shows, there
appears to have been widespread experience among the
respondents in terms of current assignments. Except for those
currently unemployed, however, most were involved in various

ways in classroom teaching.

56
Table 4.5
’s ' t' o s '0

Total Response = 28

 

 

 

Wm N %

Kindergarten Teacher 1 3.6
Elementary School Teacher 5 17.8
Middle School Teacher 8 28.6
High School Teacher 2 7.1
Educational Resource Spec. 1 3.6
Graduate Assistant 1 3.6
Substitute Teacher 4 14.3
Unemployed _§ 2i.§
Total 28 100.0

Res 0 s' e ce t' s o a
“WM

This section analyzes the respondents' perceptions of
actual current practices and what practices ought to be for
each of the seven goals. It also examines the respondents'
citations of good and bad examples in which they have experi-
enced one failure and one success regarding achievement of
some‘particular'goaln These inputs are reported by frequency,

percentage, mean, standard deviation and t-test scores.

Goal Oge: Learger's Neede and Porentiale

Table 4.6 presents the respondents' ratings of actual
current.practices and.what.practices ought to be for achieving
this goal. As the table shows, the modal ratings of "actual"
practices are 2 and 3; whereas, 8, 9 and 10 are the modal

ratings for what "ought" to be. The standard deviations for

57
responses of actual current practices and what ought to be
were 1.987 and 1.625. The means for actual current practices
and what ought to be were respectively 3.7778 and 8.2222,
respectivelyu An analysis of the data indicates that the mean
for what ought to be (X8.2222) is significantly higher than
the mean (x3.7778) for actual current practices (mean
difference = 4.4444) (see Table 4.13 for a summary of t-test
values). This 'mean difference suggests that Goal One:
Learner's Needs and Potentials was not perceived as actually
being achieved to the degree it should in the eyes of these
respondents. According to the majority of the respondents

(82.1 percent), this goal ought to be accomplished more

 

 

 

effectively.
Table 4.6
t ' ' o a 0 e'
's s ' 5
Total Response = 27
AQIHQI.QEII§E§.£I§QLIQ§§ Eh2L_QBQDS_§Q_D§_E£§Q§1§§Q
R e t' e v %
1 3 10.7 4 l 3.6
2 6 21.4 5 1 3.6
3 5 17.9 6 2 7.1
4 3 10.7 7 3 10.7
5 4 14.3 8 7 25.0
6 2 7.1 9 6 21.4
7 4 14.3 10 7 25.0
. 1 3.6 . 1 3.6
Total 28 100.0 28 100.0
SD = 1.987 SD = 1.625
Mean = 3.778 Mean = 8.222
(Mean Difference = 4.4444)
Valid Cases 27 Missing Cases 1
Nere: In no case did any respondent rate actual current

practices higher than 7, nor any lower than 4 on
what ought to be.

58
. e -

Table 4.7 presents the respondents' ratings of actual
current.practices and what practices ought to be for achieving
goal two. As the table shows, the model ratings of "actual"
practices are 5 and 7; whereas, 9 and 10 are the modal ratings
for what ought to be. The standard deviation for actual
current practices and what ought to be were 2.024 and 1.450.
The mean scores for actual current practices and what ought
to be were 4.5926 and 8.4444, respectively (mean difference
= 3.8519). An analysis of the data indicated that the mean
for responses of what ought to be practices (X8.4444) is
significantly' higher’ than the :mean (X4.5926) for' actual
current practices. This significant difference between the
two means suggests that Goal Two: Student Self-Esteem was
perceived as not actually being achieved as it ought to be.
The majority of the respondents (89.3 percent) felt that this

goal ought to be accomplished more effectively.

59
Table 4.7
U e ° 0

Student.§elf:§stesm
Total Response = 27

 

 

 

Actual_§urrent_£rastises Ehat_Qusnt_te_he_Prastissd
Batins____Ereguens2____1______Batins_____Ereguencv %
1 2 7.1 5 2 7.1
2 3 10.7 7 5 17.9
3 3 10.7 8 4 14.3
4 4 14.3 9 9 32.1
5 7 25.0 10 7 25.0
6 2 7.1 . 1 3.6
7 4 14.3
8 2 7.1
. 1 3.6
Total 28 99.9’ 28 100.0
so = 2.024 so = 1.450
Mean = 4.5926 ‘Mean = 8.4444

(Mean Difference = 3.8519)

Yalid Cases 27 Missing Cases 1
Percentages have been rounded and will not necessarily add
Eggégo° In no case did any respondent rate actual current

practices higher than 8, nor any lower than 5 on

what ought to be.

: t e ' c ' 't

Table 4.8 presents the respondents' ratings of actual

current practices and what ought to be for achieving goal
three. As the table shows, the modal ratings of "actual"
practices are 5 and 7; whereas, 8, 9 and 10 are the modal
ratings for what "ought" to be. The standard deviations for
responses of actual current practices and what ought to be
were 2.101 and 1.545, respectively. The means for actual

current practices and what ought to be were 4.4815 and 8.1852

(Mean Difference = 3.7037). An analysis of the data reveals

60
that the mean for responses of what ought to be practices
(X8.1852) is significantly higher than the mean (X4.4815) for
actual current practices. This mean difference suggests that
Goal Three: Student Skill Acquisition was perceived as not
actually being achieved to the degree it should in the eyes
of these respondents. According to the majority of the
respondents (89.2 percent), believe this goal ought to be

accomplished more effectively.

 

 

 

 

Table 4.8
Re 5' cs Go °
S . . . .
Total Response = 27
Actual_§urrent_£ractise§ ‘ Ehat_nght_tg_he_£rastised
Batlns____£resnencv % Rating Fresuencv %
1 2 7.1 5 2 7.1
2 4 14.3 6 3 10.7
3 4 14.3 7 2 7.1
4 3 10.7 8 7 25.0
5 5 17.9 9 7 25.0
6 2 7.1 10 6 21.4
7 6 21.4 . 1 3.6
8 l 3.6
. l 3.6
Total 28 100.0 28 99.9'
SD = 2.101 SD = 1.545
Mean = 4.4815 Mean = 8.1852
(Mean Difference = 3.7037)
Valid Cases 27 Missing Cases 1

*Percentages have been rounded and will not necessarily add
to 100.

Pore: In no case did any respondent rate actual current
practices higher than 8, nor any lower than 5 on
what ought to be.

61

G : S e v

Table 4.9 presents the respondents' ratings of actual
current practices and what ought to be for achieving goal
four. As the table shows, the modal ratings of "actual"
practices are 2 and 4; whereas, 7 and 8 are the modal ratings
for what "ought" to be. The standard deviations for responses
of actual current practices and what ought to be were 1.357
and 2.212, respectively: The ‘means for’ actual current
practices and what ought to he were 2.9259 and 6.7407 (Mean
Difference = 3.8148). An analysis of the data reveals that
the mean for responses for ‘what ought to be practices
(X6.7407) is significantly higher than the mean (X2.9259) for
actual current practices. This significant difference in
means suggests that. Goal Four: Student Involvement in
Learning was perceived as not being achieved to the degree it
should in the eyes of the respondents. According to the
majority of the respondents (75.0 percent), believe this goal

ought to be more fully achieved.

62
Table 4.9
U o e

atudent_Inxelxement_in_Learnins
Total Response = 27

 

 

 

 

Actual_§urrent_2ractise§ Ehat_Qusht_te_he_2rasticed
Batins____£rsgusnsx % Ratins_____£reguencv %
l 4 14.3 2 l 3.6
2 8 28.6 3 2 7.1
3 5 17.9 4 3 10.7
4 7 25.0 6 4 14.3
5 2 7.1 7 6 21.4
6 1 3.6 8 6 21.4
. l 3.6 9 2 7.1
10 3 10.7
. 1 3.6
Total 28 100.0 28 99.9’
SD = 1.357 SD = 2.212
Mean = 2.9259 Mean = 6.7407
(Mean Difference = 3.8148)
yalid Cases 27 Missing Cases 1

Percentages have been rounded and will not necessarily add
Egrégo. In no case did any respondent rate actual current
practices higher than 6, nor any lower than 2 on
what ought to be.
G v ' V v o e
Table 4.10 presents the respondents' ratings of actual
current practices and what ought to be for achieving goal
five. As the table shows, the modal ratings of "actual"
practices are 4 and 5: whereas, 6, 8 and 9 are the modal
ratings for what "ought" to be. The standard deviations for
responses of actual current practices and what ought to he
were 1.968 and 1.618, respectively. The means for actual
current practices and what ought to be were 3.8889 and 7.1852

(Mean Difference = 3.2963). An analysis of the data reveals

that the mean for responses for what ought to be practices

63
(X7.1852) is significantly higher than the mean (X3.8889) for
actual current practices. This difference between the two
means suggests that Goal Five: Student Value Development was
perceived as not actually being achieved to the degree it
should in the eyes of the respondents. According to the

majority of the respondents, this goal ought to be better

 

 

 

 

accomplished.
Table 4.10
s U . . e
u V
Total Response = 27
Wes Maximum
Perigg Pregeencv % Rating Fregeencv %
1 4 14.3 ' 4 1 3.6
2 3 10.7 5 2 7.1
3 4 14.3 6 9 32.1
4 6 21.4 7 3 10.7
5 6 21.4 8 5 17.9
7 3 10.7 9 5 17.9
8 l 3.6 10 2 7.1
. l 3.6 . l 3.6
Total 28 100.0 28 100.0
SD = 1.968 SD = 1.618
Mean = 3.8889 Mean = 7.1852
(Mean Difference = 3.2963)
Valid Cases 27 Missing Cases 1
Nere: In no case did any respondent rate actual current

practices higher than 8, nor any lower than 4 on
what ought to be.

64
E J 5' . : 1.!. E I . E . !

Table 4.11 presents the respondents' ratings of actual
current practices and what practices ought to be for achiev-
ing goal six. As the table shows, the modal ratings of
"actual" practices are 4 and 5: whereas, 8, 9 and 10 are the
modal ratings for what "ought" to be. The standard devi-
ations for responses of actual current practices and what
ought to be were 2.074 and 1.251, respectively. The means
for responses of actual current practices and what ought to
be were 4.0741 and 8.7778 (Mean Difference=4.7037). An
analysis of the data reveals that the mean for responses for
what ought to be practices (X8.7778) is significantly higher
than the mean (X4.0741) for actual current practices. This
significant. difference in. means suggests that Goal Six:
Qualities of Learning Environments was perceived as not being
achieved to the degree it should in the eyes of the
respondents. A majority of the respondents (85.7 percent),

believe that this goal ought to be better achieved.

65

Table 4.11
Peepongenrs' Pereeeriene gf gee; Sir:

e

v' 5

Total Response = 27

 

 

 

 

Actual_£urreot_£rastlses 'c
Ratlog____rreguencv % Ratios_____Eregusncv %
1 4 14.3 6 3 10.7
2 3 10.7 8 6 21.4
3 3 10.7 9 9 32.1
4 5 17.9 10 9 32.1
5 6 21.4 . 1 3.6
6 3 10.7
7 2 7.1
9 1 3.6
. 1 3.6
Total 28 100.0 28 99.9'
so = 2.074 so = 1.251

Mean = 8.7778
(Mean Difference = 4.7037)
yalid Cases 27 Missing Cases 1
Percentages have been rounded and will not necessarily add
to 100.

Mean = 4.0741

Here: In no case did any respondent rate actual current
practices higher than 9, nor any lower than 6 on
what ought to be.

Go eve : ve o es e t o Ot ers

Table 4.12 presents the respondents' ratings of actual
current practices and what ought to be for achieving goal
seven. As the table shows, the modal ratings of "actual"
practices are 3 and 5; whereas, 8, 9 and 10 are the modal
ratings for what "ought" to be. The standard deviations for
responses of actual current practices and what ought to be
were 2.173 and 0.909, respectively. The means for actual
current practices and what ought to be were 4.1923 and 9.1154
(Mean Difference = 4.9231). An analysis of the data reveals

that the mean for responses for what ought to be practices

66
(X9.1154) is significantly higher than the mean (X4.1923) for
actual current practices. This mean difference suggests that
Goal Seven: Developing Respect for Others, was perceived as
not actually being achieved to the degree it should in the
eyes of the respondents. According to the majority of the

respondents (92.8 percent), this goal ought to be better

 

 

 

 

achieved.
Table 4.12
es 0 ' c 'o s o a v '
Deveioping Peepeer for Others
Total Response = 26
W Weed
wow ’5 Rating Frequencv 9.
l 2 7.1 7 l 3.6
2 4 14.3 8 6 21.4
3 5 17.9 9 8 28.6
4 3 10.7 10 11 39.3
5 7 25.0 . 2 7.1
6 3 10.7
9 l 3.6
10 l 3.6
. 2 7.1
Total 28 100.0 28 100.0
SD = 2.173 SD = 0.909
Mean = 4.1923 Mean = 9.1154
(Mean Difference = 4.9231)
Valid Cases 26 Missing Cases 1
Me: In no case, one respondent rated actual current

practice as high as 10 while no one rated this goal
lower than 7 on what ought to be.
- s s
The data were examined to locate further differences
between perceived actual current practices and perceptions of

what ought to be practices, in any one of the seven goals.

67
For this purpose, a t-test was used at .05 level of
significance. The results of the t-test comparing the mean
scores of actual and what ought to be display significant
differences for every one of the seven goals. As presented
in Table 4.13, statistically significant differences were
found at the 0.000 level of significance for all seven goals.
The higher the difference, the higher the discrepancy between
actual current practices and what ought to be practices. The
preceding analysis suggests that in all seven goals, the mean
scores for perceptions of what ought to be practices were
significantly higher than the means for perceptions of actual
current practices. As shown in Table 4.13, the three highest
mean differences were found for goals 7, 6 and 1 which are,
respectively: Goal Seven: Developing Respect for Others;
Goal Six: Qualities of Learning Environments: and Goal One:
Learner's Needs and Potentials.

Pespengenrs' Perceptiene es Bankinge of
rne neen's Seven Goels

Table 4.14 presents the respondents' rankings of the
seven goals with regard to what ought to be practices in
achieving them. As the table shows, Goal Seven: Developing
Respect for Others (X9.1154) was given the highest ratings.
All "ought to be" means showed average ratings higher than

6.0.

68

 

 

ooo.o ss.oa Hn~6.4 ooo.o amHH.m msH.~ nmoa.a

ooo.o mo.oH smos.a Hm~.H msss.a aso.~ Haso.a

ooo.o ma.o nom~.m oHo.H moms.» mom.H momma.n

ooo.o sn.s oaam.n ~H~.~ hoes.o smm.a mm~m.~

ooo.o 66.6 uno>.n mem.a «mma.a HoH.~ mama.a

ooo.o am.» mflmo.m ome.H «444.6 ano.~ ommm.¢

ooo.o 54.6 «444.4 mmo.a --.m som.H oss5.m

. QOHm O5Hfl>lu . MHHD Om mOOHUOMHm TD Om mmOflHOMHm— Z

Hamsum com: on unoso can: Hasuoa Haoo
no one: no new:

 

 

ma . c OHQMB

69

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4.1
E l' E'8 1 E H E’EE
W
Goal Responses Responses

NBEDQISI A/Mean OlMean
1 °. °.

\ I

2 t ;

l ;

3 I ‘ e

4 , - ’ . . '

5 ‘ ~ , ‘ x.

‘ \

6 L ‘ .

7 ‘. ‘ ‘ .
Mean Response 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A = Actual Practice 0 = Ought to be Practice

Table 4.14
' s s' e ' s
of What WWW
Each of tow
W MW
Goal One: Learner's Needs

and Potentials 8.2222
Goal Two: Student Self-Esteem 8.4444 3
Goal Three: Student Skill

Acquisition 8.1852 5
Goal Four: Student Involvement

in Learning 6.7407 7
Goal Five: Student Value

Development 7.1852 6
Goal Six: Qualities of Learning

Environments 8.7778 2

Goal Seven: Developing Respect
for Others 9.1154 1

 

Respondents were asked to cite concrete examples
(Flanagan, 1954) of one bad example of failure and one good
example of success which they had experienced with efforts to
achieve one or another of the ASCD's Seven Goals. The
responses are reported by frequencies and percentages in
Tables 4.15 and 4.16

Peg__fixenn1ee__er__fieilnre. Table 4.15 shows the
frequencies among the seven goals selected by the respondents

for their bad examples.

Table 4.15

Respondents' Citations of a Bad Example of
Failure to Achieve a Particular Goal
Total Response = 16

 

 

 

gee; Ne. Pregnencv Pereent Total Pereenr

l 6 21.4 6 21.4

2 2 7.1 2 7.1

3 1 3.6 1 3.6

5 l 3.6 l 3.6

6 4 14.3 4 14.3

7 2 7.1 2 7.1

. 12 42.9 12 42.9
Total 28 100.0 28 100.0

 

Valid Cases 16
Missing Cases 12

According to the respondents, the common barriers to goal
achievement were:

1. Lack of developing experiences and programs dealing

with learner's needs and purposes.

For example,

71
Lack of developing learning environments which are

perceived by all students as supportive, exciting,

and free from threat.

3. Lack of applying effective teaching methods that

are tailored to enhance students' motivation and

interest in learning.

one of the respondents described an incident

which she had witnessed as a failure to achieve goal one.

She cited:

goal

I know a teacher that began the school year by
having the entire class read from the same basic
reader at the same level, there was no allowance
for individual levels of abilities. This teacher
was new to the grade and thought this way was common
practice. '

Another respondent cited an example of failure to achieve

six. She said:

The incident occurred in a math classroom. The
professor introduced new materials, then called on
students at random to answer questions applying the
new information. Students who could not quickly
assimilate the new materials and apply them were
badgered for an answer. If a response was given,
the professor would not relent, but continually
pressed the student for some answers. This
professor did not create a supportive learning
atmosphere that was free from threat. Consequently,
student morale declined. I do not believe this was
a result of the school system, or administration
and curriculum pressures, but simply this
instructor's style of teaching.

G d c s . Table 4.16 shows

frequencies among the seven goals for good examples.

the

According to the respondents who did respond with good

examples (the majority, 53.6 percent did not respond),

common facilitators of goal achievement were:

the

72
Table 4.16
Respondents' Citations of a Good Example of

Success to Achieve a Particular Goal
Total Response = 13

 

ggg] Hg, Pregnencv Perseus ____IQ§§l_____E§I§§D§____.

 

1 2 7.1 2 7.1
2 4 14.3 4 14.3
3 2 7.1 2 7.1
4 2 7.1 2 7.1
6 2 7.1 2 7.1
7 1 3.6 1 3.6
. 15 53.6 15 53.6
Total 28 99.9 28 99.9‘

 

Valid Cases 13

Missing Cases 15

Percentages have been rounded and will not necessarily add
to 100.

1. Developing experiences and programs relevant to the
learner's needs and purposes.

2. Providing students with a variety of learning
options relevant to their personal values and
aspirations.

3. Facilitating students' self-actualization and
developing in them a sense of personal adequacy.

For instance, one of the respondents described an incident
which she had witnessed as a success in achieving goal two.
She cited:

We had a student at the middle school who was on

the verge of dropping out of school. Through the

efforts of a very good counselor, the student began

attending school every day. Improving her
appearance improved her behavior, and she was able

to pass to the next grade with satisfactory grades.

The rest of the staff provided low level academic

stress throughout the return and transition period.
The student gained enormous self-confidence and the

73

ability to recognize her problems and deal with them
rationally rather than give up -- a real success.

Another respondent had experienced a success with efforts
to achieve Goal Four. She wrote:

Students in my class were to write a report as a

part of a science laboratory. Then we wrote down

as a class all the things we knew or thought.we knew

about the topic. Each student was to think up

things that his or her research would be. The
projects were very successful and students enjoyed
research because the answers were meaningful to
them. They really wanted to find the answers. They

also could see how much they already knew about

their subjects.

A summary of the preceding data indicates that Goal Two
was most frequently cited by respondents for good examples of
success to goal achievement, while Goal One was most
frequently cited for bad examples. However, none of the
respondents selected Goal Four for a bad example of failure,
and not one respondent selected Goal Five for a good example
of success. The data also indicated that responses for a bad
example of failure to goal achievement (57.1 percent) were
slightly higher than responses for a good example of success
(46.3 percent).

It appears that it was not a task that almost half of

the respondents were willing to try to perform.

:‘ 0011‘! .' 4 “ u‘n ‘ 0 ‘ 108‘! ' Or°=' "

An opinion survey of educational goal statements was
presented to the participants. The respondents were asked to
mark levels of agreement or disagreement with 42 selected

propositions using the following scale:

74

Strongly Agree

Moderately Agree

Moderately Disagree

Strongly Disagree

The 42 propositions had been derived from ASCD's 1978
Task Force Statements of seven goals. For each of the seven
ASCD Humanistic Goals, three statements were formulated (based
on the Task Force's discussions of their goals) which were
intended to exemplify in more operational terms what the goals
might mean in practice. Thus, 21 "humanistic" propositions
were included in the survey. The next step was to formulate
an opposing or contrasting "non-humanistic" proposition (21
in all) for each of the "humanistic" propositions (see
Appendix C). Finally, all 42 statements were entered into the
survey (see Appendix D) in random order. The first step of
analysis was to examine degrees of agreement and/or
disagreement with the 42 propositions on the part of the
respondents.

As Table 4.17 indicates, degrees of agreement and/or
disagreement regarding each of the 42 statements varied quite
widely among the respondents. Some items the respondents
marked with consistently high agreement: whereas, they
consistently responded with disagreement to others. Responses
to still other statements did not show consistency. In the
following analysis, a criterion of 75.8 percent or more for
consistent agreement and a criterion of 50.0 percent or more

for consistent disagreement were used to select particular

statements for attention.

75
Table 4.17 shows that the respondents tended to agree
much more frequently than they tended to disagree. These
tendencies are perhaps mere artifacts of the nature of the
instrument, which was a "Forced Choice" instrument. For
purposes of comparing groups of respondents who responded
consistently, the criterion of 75.8 percent or more for
consistent agreement sorted out a group of slightly more than
half of the respondents (N=22).
The criterion of 50.0 percent or more for consistent
disagreement sorted out a group of slightly less than one-

quarter (N=10) of the total group of 42 respondents.

76

Table 4.17

*

WWW

 

 

Item Strongly Moderately Moderately Strongly
No.'s Agree Agree Disagree Disagree
(H or N) N a N % N t N %

1. N 9 32.1 19 67.9 -- -- -- --

2 II 7 25.0 19 67.9 2 7.1 -- --

3 II 4 14.3 16 57.1 8 28.6 -- --

4 ll 2 7.1 16 57.1 8 28.6 2 7.1

5 ll 3 10.7 8 28.6 13 46.4 4 14.3

6 ll 1 3.6 13 46.4 13 46.4 4 3.6

7 ll 4 14.3 14 50.0 6 21.4 3 10.7

8 Ii 9 32.1 12 42.9 7 25.0 -- --

9 ll 5 17.9 16 57.1 6 21.4 1 3.6
10 I! 15 53.6 12 42.9 1 3.6 -- --
11 Ii 4 14.3 13 46.4 11 39.3 -- --
12 Ii 16 57.1 12 42.9 -- -- -- --
13 ll 6 21.4 5 17.9 12 42.9 5 17.9
14 11 24 85.7 4 14.3 -- -- -- --
15 Ii 20 71.4 7 25.0 1 3.6 -- --
16 ll -- -- 3 10.7 17 60.7 8 28.6
17 II 24 85.7 4 14.3 -- -- -- --
18 ll 11 39.3 17 60.7 -- -- -- --
19 I! 5 17.9 17 60.7 5 17.9 1 3.6
20 it 2 7.1 11 39.3 13 46.4 1 3.6
21. N 6 21.4 11 39.3 10 35.7 -- --
22 I! 2 7.1 4 14.3 12 42.9 10 35.7
23 Ii 4 14.3 14 50.0 9 32.1 1 3.6
24 ll 16 57.1 12 42.9 -- -- -- --
25 I! 13 46.4 14 50.0 1 3.6 -- --
26 II 18 64.3 9 32.1 -- -- 1 3.6
27 It 14 50.0 9 32.1 5 17.9 -- --
28 ll 1 3.6 12 42.9 14 50.0 -- --
29 Ii 17 60.7 10 35.7 1 3.6 -- --
30 ll 10 35.7 11 39.3 5 17.9 2 7.1
31 Ii 13 46.4 12 42.9 2 7.1 1 3.6
32 ll 15 53.6 10 35.7 2 7.1 -- --
33 ii 18 64.3 9 32.1 -- -- -- --
34 Ii 14 50.0 11 39.3 1 3.6 -- --
35 ll -- -- 4 14.3 12 42.9 11 39.3
36 ll 7 25.0 16 57.1 4 14.3 -- --
37 Ii 10 35.7 13 46.4 4 14.3 -- --
38 ll 3 10.7 7 25.0 12 42.9 4 14.3
39 I! -- -- -- -- 20 71.4 7 25.0
40 Ii 17 60.7 8 28.6 2 7.1 -- --
41 II 13 46.4 9 32.1 4 14.3 1 3.6
42 ll 19 67.9 7 25.0 -- -- 1 3.6

 

'The letters H and N indicate whether the item is intended as

a "humanistic" or "non-humanistic" proposition)

77

E ! '!l H . !° 5! ! !

Humanistic statements that respondents consistently

strongly agreed with were 2, 12, 14, 15, 17, 25, 26, 29, 31,

33,

Item

Item

Item

Item

Item

Item

Item

Item

Item

34,

2:

15:

17:

25:

26:

31:

37, 40 and 41.

Children's needs and purposes have priority over
demands of subject matter.

Teachers should help students explore a variety of
conflict resolution strategies.

The school program should provide opportunities for
students to discover themselves as individual
persons of unique worth and dignity.

Both the students and staff of a school should have
the right to disagree.

Teachers should regularly encourage students to
attempt something new even though risks of failure
may be involved.

Teachers should help students to identify possible
choices and justify their choices in terms of their
personal views.

High school graduates should clearly understand the
principles and operations of our democratic society.
Teachers should establish classroom climates that
encourage full acceptance of children's feelings to
help children understand the emotional qualities of
living.

Students can usually be expected to try to behave

in an orderly way.

78

Item 33: Children should feel secure that their teachers like
them.

Item 34: The curriculum should concentrate on developing
students' skills for' maintaining their optimal
physical and mental health.

Item 37: Teachers should arrange to have students learn at
their own optimal rates using styles of learning
which they prefer.

Item 40: Schools should provide ample opportunities for
students to develop personal and educational
programs that are relevant to their needs and
purposes.

Item 41: The major function of educational evaluation is to
aid in facilitating planning for future learning

experiences.

WWW
Non-humanistic statements with which respondents strongly

agreed at levels of 78.5 percent consistency were 1, 10, 18,

24, 27, 32, 36.

Item 1: Immature students need to be guided by mature adults
in reaching solutions to problems that students may
be facing.

Item 10: Teachers should arrange to give students who fall
behind special help to bring them to levels where

they belong.

79

Item 18: Teachers should help students to obey the law and
to respect duly constituted authority.

Item 24: Codes of conduct should be clearly stated and
consistently enforced so as to maintain order in
the school.

Item 27: A common core of learning objectives and minimum
achievement outcomes should be required of all
students.

Item 32: Teachers should regularly encourage students to
develop through performing tasks that are highly
likely to assure success.

Item 36: Teachers should establish classroom climates that
focus on firm discipline, good order and high
productivity.

Item 42: All students should be given an opportunity to
develop skills necessary for their vocational and
economic adequacy.

Non-humanistic statements that respondents disagreed with

at levels of 50.0 percent or greater were 5, 13, 16, 20, 22,

28, 35 and 38.

Item 5:

Item 13:

Students can usually be expected to get away with
anything if given a chance.

Children should understand that school is a place
where they are expected to work hard and compete

for success.

80

Item 16: In productive classrooms, the greatest portion of
time will be spent by students' listening to
teachers.

Item 20: In carrying out the school's program, conflicts
should be avoided insofar as possible.

Item 22: Questioning, doubting and challenging of teachers
by students tends to undermine the teacher's
authority.

Item 28: Curriculum decisions should be derived from
professionally'determined.andgpublished.objectives.

Item 35: School should not be burdened with responsibility
for instructing students in social and personal
aspects of human sexuality.

Item 38: Teachers should view students' mistakes as
indicators that teaching has not yet been

successful.

'5 e e h a u ' t' t
One humanistic statement that respondents disagreed with
at levels of 50.0 percent or greater was item 39.
Item 39: Given opportunities to decide for themselves,
children can usually find answers appropriately

satisfying to both themselves and to others.

N e e o
The items for which there was no clear consistency of
agreement or disagreement were item numbers 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9,

11, 19, 21, 23, and 30.

Item

Item

Item

Item

Item

Item

Item

Item

Item

Item

11:

19:

21:

23:

81
In productive classrooms, the greatest portion of
time will be spent on teacher's listening to
students.
The major function of educational evaluation is to
assess prior success in having met objectives.
The curriculum should concentrate on developing
students' optimal skills in. the Ibasic 3R's --
reading, writing and mathematics.
Responses to children's expressions of- needs and
purposes should channel students' energies toward
meeting subject-matter demands.
Instruction in sex education, family life and
parenting should be requirements for high school
graduates.
Curriculum decisions should be made jointly by staff
and students.
Students shouLd be able to choose for themselves
curriculum content and methodology from a range of
approved available options.
Students may be allowed.to act freely'when they know
that those around them accept them as they are.
Major emphasis should be placed on agreed on
curriculum objectives established by the school.
Teachers should view students' mistakes as

indicators that learning is progressing.

82
Item 30: The school program should provide opportunities for
outstanding individuals to achieve recognition in
the form of comprehensive awards and honors.

Table 4.18 is a summary table of the data discussed
above.

Several comments may be made about the patterns as
observed in Table 4.18.

There is no observable consistency of either agreement
or disagreement among the population with respect to ten (less
than 25 percent) of the 42 statements (5 humanistic, 5 non-
humanistic).

The largest cell in the table (N=15) is for humanistic
statements with which the population agreed to a high degree
of consistency (78.5 percent or more).

Another large cell (on the lower right, N=8) is for non-
humanistic statements, with which 50.0 percent or more of the
population disagreed -- another relatively high degree of
consistency on the pro-humanistic side.

Taking the previous two paragraphs together, there are
23 of the 42 statements (more than half) toward which this
population took a consistently pro-humanistic stance. That
is, they consistently agreed with 15 of the humanistic
propositions and consistently disagreed with eight of the non-
humanistic propositions.

To some degree, therefore, (to the degree displayed in
Table 4.13) this population of educators has confirmed their

strong and clear endorsement of ASCD's Seven Goals as shown

83
in Table 4.13 (see p. 68 above). However, their confirmation
by way of the propositions is not nearly so strong or clear

as are their endorsements of the seven general goal

 

 

 

 

statements.
Table 4.18
W
eem ' ee e w' e ec
. . _ u ‘s . . 'o
Humanistic Non-Humanistic
Consistency Statements Statements
Consistent Items: 2, 12, 14, Items: 1, 10, 18,
Agreement 15, l7, 19, 25, 24, 27, 32, 36, 42
(78.5% or more of 26, 29, 31, 33, ~
the population) 34, 37, 40, 41
(N = 15) (N = 8)
No Consistent Items: 3, 8, 9, Items: 4, 6, 7,
Agreement or 11, 23 21, 30
Disagreement (N = 5) (N = 5)
Consistent Item 39 Items: 5, 13, 16
Disagreement 20, 22, 28, 35, 38
(50.0% or more of
the population) (N = 1) (N = 8)

 

What these findings appear to suggest is that when
educators are presented with humanistic goals stated in very
general and global terms, they readily concur even unanimously
that actual practice falls far short of the degree to which
the goals ought to be achieved. But when presented with
propositions (some humanistic, some non-humanistic) which

refer to more specific and concrete examples of attitudes and

84

practices, educators are much less strongly consistent in
agreement with the humanistic propositions or in.disagreement
with the non-humanistic propositions. At more concrete levels
of practice and attitude, there is much more ambiguity in the
outlooks of educators about humanistic education. Further
reflections on this key issue are presented in Chapter V
below.

What appears to be the most anomalous cell in Table 4.18
is the cell in the upper right corner. It lists eight items
which were propositions intended as "non-humanistic, " but with
which the respondents .egreeg ‘with 'very high degrees of
consistency. Intuitive inspection of these eight items as a
group suggests that they all contain a common factor which
might be called a factor of "external criteria": criteria of
what constitutes "maturity" or "law and order" or "curriculum
standards," etc. Impositions of external criteria are
typically considered by humanists to be non-humanistic.

The single anomaly of item 39 (lower left corner in‘Table
4.18) may be worth noting. The item reads, "Given opportuni-
ties to decide for themselves, children can usually find
answers appropriately' satisfying’ for' both. themselves and
others." This proposition would appear clearly to be in line
with humanistic outlooks. Nevertheless, 27 of the 28
respondents (one not responding) marked disagreement with this
proposition (see Table 4.17). How to understand this anomaly
appears obscure, but it may suggest that teachers are not very

confident about giving children opportunities to decide for

85
themselves, or perhaps they are not confident that children
will make satisfactory decisions, or there may be some lack
of confidence on both counts.
Ihe_A§§DL§.§§¥§E.§Q§1§.§D§_ZI
E . E ; ! !° 5! ! !

Half of the 42 statements are intended as positive
expressions of the ASCD's goals. Half are intended as
negative or contrasting or opposite expressions of the
intentions of the ASCD's goals.

It will be recalled that the 42 statements were also
grouped into 21 pairs of contrasting statements. Hence, the
agreement/disagreement patterns in Table 4.17 could be
regrouped in pairs (three pairs for each of the seven goals).

The results were examined to see to what degree the
respondents tended consistently to agree or disagree with each
of the ASCD's goals. Responses were taken in seven sets of
three pairs of contrasting statements. A t-test was used to
compare two mean scores for members of each pair of the
statements to assess if there was any significant difference
in responses to the 21 paired statements. The following are
the results of the pairing of responses. Beside each
statement is a (+), a (c) or a (-). A (+) indicates
consistent agreement as shown in Table 4.17, a (0) indicates
no evidence of consistent agreement.or disagreement, and.a (-)
indicates consistent disagreement.

In the following listings, pairs are presented goal by

goal, three pairs at a time. In the case of each pair, the

86
humanistic statement is presented first with its contrasting
non-humanistic statement beneath it.
The t-test of significant differences in the paired
responses were all significant at levels less than .05, except

in one case for Goal Three which will be noted below.

Go ° ' N o

(+) 17. Teachers should regularly encourage students to
attempt something new even though risks of failure
may be involved.

(+) 32. Teachers should regularly encourage students to
develop through performing tasks which are highly

likely to assure success.

(+) 37. Teachers should arrange to have students learn at
their own optimal rates using styles of learning
which they prefer.

(+) 10. Teachers should arrange to give students who fall
behind special help to bring them up to levels where

they belong.

(o) 11. Students should be able to choose for themselves
curriculum content and methodology from a range of
approved available options.

(0) 21. Major emphasis should be placed on agreed on
curriculum objectives established by the school

community and state.

(+)

(0)

(+)

(+)

(+)

(+)

a

(+)

(+)

87
14. The school program should provide opportunities for
students to discover themselves as individual
persons of unique worth and dignity.
30. The school program should provide opportunities for
outstanding individuals to achieve recognition in

the form of comprehensive awards and honors.

25. Teachers should help students to identify possible
choices and justify their choices in terms of their
personal values.

18. Teachers should help students to obey the law and

to respect duly constituted authority.

19. Students may be allowed to act freely when they know
that those around them accept them as they are.

24. Codes of conduct should. be clearly stated and
consistently enforced so as to maintain order in

the school.

r ° Stu t S i l c
26. High school graduates should clearly understand the
principles and operations of our democrative
society.
42. All students should be given an opportunity to
develop skills necessary for their vocational and

economic adequacy.

88
(+) 34. The curriculum should concentrate on developing
student's skills for' maintaining their optimal
physical and mental health.
(0) 6. The curriculum should concentrate on developing
students' optimal skills in the basic 3R's, reading,

writing and mathematics.

(0) 8. Instruction in sex education, family life and
parenting should be requirements for high school
graduation.

(-) 35. School should not be burdened with responsibility
for instructing students in social and personal
aspects of human sexuality.

Note: Responses to this pairing of items 8/35 were the only

responses which failed to show a significant t-test

difference.

Examination of Table 4.17 reveals, however, that
responses to item 8 were almost sufficiently in agreement,
but not quite, to meet the criterion used in these analyses.
At the same time, the group's degree of disagreement with the
non-humanistic proposition did meet the criterion used in this
study.

As a result, this pairing is entered.in Table 4.19, along
with others, showing' a pattern of having an "anti-non-
humanistic tendency" which patterns are grouped in turn under
the general headings of those displaying "humanistic

dispositions." The issue in the item 8/35 pairing is whether

89
or not it is humanistic for schools to be burdened with
providing sex education as a requirement for high school
graduation. Perhaps while not agreeing to reject the burden
of teaching about sexuality, this group of educators is not
entirely clear that such instruction should be a requirement
for high school graduation. In any case, in view of the t-
test's failure to show a reliable difference, one cannot be

confident of what the responses to this pairing mean.

Goa Four: tu t vo v ' a in

(+) 41. The major function of educational evaluation is to
aid in facilitating planning for future learning
experiences.

(0) 4. The major function of educational evaluation is to

assess prior success in having met objectives.

(0) 7. Curriculum decisions should be made jointly by staff
and students.
(-) 28. Curriculum decisions should be derived from

professionally'determined.and.published.objectives.

(+) 40. Schools should provide ample opportunities for
students to develop personal and educational
programs which are relevant to their needs and
purposes.

(+) 27. A common core of learning objectives and minimum
achievement outcomes should be required of all

students.

90

Table 4.19

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P
Indefinite or
Humanistic Contradictory Non-Humanistic
Dispositions Dispositions Dispositions
(N = 12) (N = 8) (N = 1)
+/- Clearly +/+ Contradictory -/+ Clearly
Pro-H Pro-N
33/13, 15/22, 17/32, 37/10, 39/1
31/5, 12/30 25/18, 26/42
40/27, 29/36,
19/24
(N = 4) (N = 7) (N = 1)
+/o Pro-H o/o Indefinite o/+ Pro-N
Tendency Tendency
14/30, 34/6, 11/21
41/4, 2/7
(N = 4) (N = 1) (N = 0)
o/- Anti-N -/- Contradictory -/o Anti-H
Tendency Tendency
8/35, 7/28,
23/38, 3/16
(N = 4) (N = 0) (N = 0)
Apprx 57% Apprx 38% Apprx 5%

 

GO

(+)

(0)

(+)

(+)

(')

(+)

(+)

(-)

'v

2.

29.

36.

39.

33.

13.

91
V ev e
Children's needs and purposes have priority over
demands of subject-matter.
Responses to children's expressions of needs and
purposes should channel students' energies toward

meeting subject-matter demands.

Teachers should establish classroom climates which
encourage full acceptance of children's feelings to
help children understand the emotional qualities of
living.

Teachers should establish classroom climates which
focus on firm discipline, good order and high

productivity.

Given opportunities to decide for themselves,
children can usually find answers appropriately
satisfying both to themselves and to others.

Immature students need to be guided by mature adults
in reaching solutions to problems which the students

may be facing.

'es 0 nin v' o e s
Children should feel secure that their teachers like
them.
Children should understand that school is a place
where they are expected to work hard and compete

for success.

(O)

(-)

(+)

(")

92
23. Teachers should view student's mistakes as
indicators that learning is progressing.
38. Teachers should view student's mistakes as
indicators that teaching has not yet been

successful.

15. Both the students and staff of a school should have
the right to disagree.

22. Questioning, doubting and challenging of teachers
by students tends to undermine the teacher's

authority.

WW

(0)

(‘)

(+)

(')

(+)

(-)

3. In productive classrooms, the greatest portion of
time will be spent on teachers' listening to
students.

16. In productive classrooms, the greatest portion of
time will be spent by students' listening to

teachers.

31. Students can usually be expected to try to behave
in an orderly way.
5. Students can usually be expected to try to get away

with anything if given a chance.

12. Teachers should help students explore a variety of
conflict resolution strategies.
20. In carrying out the school's program, conflicts

should be avoided insofar as possible.

93

Patterns in the above pairings are classified and grouped
in Table 4.19. Several comments may be made about Table 4.19:

At first glance, it seems anomalous that the largest cell
(Na-7) should be a cell for "contradictory" (+/+) patterns.
This means that in these seven paired cases, the respondents
marked strong agreement with both statements of the pairs.
The humanistic members of the pairs (17, 37, 25, 26, 40, 29,
19) appear to have a common theme of the encouragement of
individual choice on the part of students. The non-humanistic
members of the pairs (32, 10, 18, 42, 27, 36, 24) are all
present in the upper right cell in Table 4.18 which has
already been discussed. They seem to have a common theme of
acceptance of various external standards that children should
meet. Hence, it might appear that this may be the chief
ambivalence among teachers regarding humanistic practices:
Which should prevail? The trusting and encouraging of
students to make their own best choices? or requiring of
students to meet standards set by society? This issue appears
to be a perennial issue. It surfaces here perhaps in these
seven pairs of items.

The paired items (ll/21) in the middle of Table 4.19
perhaps show most succinctly the issue of whether students
should have a major choice among curriculum options, or that
instead, major emphasis should be placed on curriculum
objectives decided by the school. It is interesting that this

group of respondents did not go clearly for either one of

94
these alternatives. This ambivalence would seem to
corroborate the comments in the paragraph immediately above.

There were no pairs of items for which the respondents
clearly disagreed with both members of the pair, hence this
sort of contradiction did not appear in the study.

Comments have already been made about item 39 (children
can usually find answers for themselves) in connection with
Table 4.18. Item 39 was paired in this study with item 1
(immature students need to be guided by mature adults in
reaching solutions to problems that students may be facing).
This is the only pairing for which this group of educators
consistently disagreed with the humanistic proposition while
simultaneously consistently agreeing with the non-humanistic
proposition. Again, the issue appears to be whether children
may be trusted to choose and decide for themselves. The study
group of educators appear not to believe it, or at least to
have doubts and ambivalences on the issue.

The other two cells under non-humanistic dispositions
are void.

Humanistic dispositions in varying patterns add up to
approximately 57 percent. Contradictory or indefinite
dispositions total approximately 38 percent. But since about
half of these latter were consistent votes for agreement with
humanistic propositions, one may say this group of educators
is disposed toward humanistic stances more than 75 percent of

the time.

95

Assessments of the "consolidated responses" of paired
items taken three at a time per each of the Seven ASCD goals
are cited in Table 4.20. These indicate that the clearest
humanistic support among these respondents appears to have
been for Goal Six: Qualities of Learning Environments and
Goal Seven: Developing Respect for Others.

These patterns tend to corroborate the rankings of the

goals portrayed in Tables 4.13 and 4.14 as cited before.

 

Table 4.20
E . E E T 1 I] t T’ l
C . UU . UU 8
Goal One: Each of the sets of responses to the three pairs

for Goal One were either:
"Contradictory" or "Indefinite"
Consolidated response: nneieer.

Goal Two: Two sets of responses were contradictory, while
one set showed a pro-humanistic tendency.

Consolidated response: eiightiy pro-humanisrie.

Goal Three: One set was contradictory, one set showed an
anti-humanistic tendency and the third set showed
a pro-humanistic tendency.
Consolidated response: nnel_er.

Goal Four: The same pattern as for Goal Three: nneleer.
Goal Five: One set was non-humanistic, one set was

contradictory, and one set showed a pro-
humanistic tendency.

Consolidated response: nneieer.

Goal Six: Two sets were pro-humanistic and one set showed
an anti-non-humanistic tendency.
Consolidated response: on uma ° ' .

Goal Seven: The same pattern as for Coal Six.
Consolidated response: on hum 's ' .

 

96

Table 4.21

 

 

l
2 16
3 15
4 10
5 15
6 12
7 17
8 14
9 18
10 12
11 8
12 13
13 16
14 10
15 10
16 13
17 16
18 6
19 15
20 8
21 15
22 12
23 13
24 15
25 14
26 15
27 16
28 13

Totals:
28 367

I 11

l-‘

l"
oomcsxlosootomuonomoooopmoousouxlemaH-mm

211

H
O

OOOOOOOOOHGOOUOOOOOOOOOOOOOOI

 

97

Several comments may be made about Table 4.21:

The total responses of agreement on non-humanistic
statements was 367, while 211 was the total for disagreement,
and 10 was the total for no response.

The results suggest that the majority of respondents
(78.5 percent) agreed with non-humanistic statements by a 3
to 2 ratio of agrement/disagreement.

Note that only five respondents (1, 4, 11, 14, 20)
disagreed with non-humanistic statements more than half of the
time. Only two respondents (7 and 9) agreed with non-
humanistic statements more than 75 percent of the time.

The total responses of agreement on non-humanistic
statements was 367, while 211 was the total for disagreement,
and 10 was the total for no response.

The results suggest that the majority of respondents
(78.5 percent) agreed with non-humanistic statements by a 3

to 2 ratio of agreement/disagreement.

98

Table 4.22

MW

 

N0 Response

 

1 21 O
2 17 4
3 18 3
4 19 2
5 19 2
6 18 3
7 19 2
8 21 0
9 l6 5
10 19 2
11 21 0
12 19 2
13 18 3
14 20 1
15 19 l
16 18 3
17 19 2
18 12 3
19 19 2
20 19 2
21 15 6
22 19 2
23 19 2
24 19 2
25 17 4
26 19 2
27 15 6
28 17 4

\l
O

28 511

0000000OOOQOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

99

Several comments may be made about Table 4.22:

The total responses of agreement on humanistic statements
was 511, while 70 was the total for disagreement, and a total
of seven items had no response. The respondents had a much
higher ratio of agreement/disagreement (about 7 to 1) for the
humanistic statements than they had with the non-humanistic
statements. Only three of the respondents (9, 18, and 21)
disagreed. with fewer’ than 75 jpercent of the humanistic
statements.

The total responses of agreement on humanistic statements
was 511, while 70 was the total for disagreement, and a total
of 7 items had no response.

These results suggest .that the :majority of the 28
respondents agreed with the humanistic statements by a 7 to
1 ratio of agreement/disagreement.

Looking at Tables 4.21 and 4.22 together, one might see
that the respondents appear to display patterns of
contradictory dispositions by agreeing with both humanistic
and non-humanistic statements. However, if we take out the
votes of the six respondents who disagreed with the non-
humanistic propositions and add them to the votes of the
humanistic statements, there would be 15 statements of
agreement (35.7 percent) with non-humanistic propositions,
versus 27 statements of agreement (64.3 percent on the
humanistic side).

Non-humanistic Statements: 21 - 6 = 15 (35.7 percent)

Humanistic Statements: 21 + 6 = 27 (64.3 percent)

100
Or, if the six votes of disagreement are discarded for being
humanistic or non-humanistic statements, the results would be
22 respondents (78.5 percent) agreeing with non-humanistic
statements versus all 28 respondents (100.0 percent) agreeing
with the humanistic propositions.

Non-humanistic Propositions: 22 respondents agree (78.5
percent)

Humanistic Propositions: 28 respondents agree (100.0
percent)

In either of the two cases above, the respondents tended
to express a stronger agreement with the humanistic statements

rather than non-humanistic ones.

' we 5
W

The content validity for the instrument of this study

may be estimated by comparing responses of the research group

with responses from the pilot study. The reason for the

comparison was to find out whether the responses of these two

groups ‘were similar' to each. other, or’ conversely, were

different from each otheru The comparison may also reveal the

degree to which the instrument items in the study represent
the content that the instrument was designed to measure.

Table 4.23 indicates that the responses of both the

research and pilot groups were very similar on six of the

ASCD's Seven Goals.

101

 

Nmm.o

mHH.o

vwb.o

mHo.o

mmN.o

mmm.o

mmm.o

suaaaoaoouo

¢H.OI

Hb.H

bN.OI

om.~

mo.Hl

no.0!

no.0

osao>nu

HNm.o

Nmm.o

mmm.o

Hv¢.o

mem.o

omm.o

bdm.o

suaaaoaoouo

oo.a
mn.H
oo.H
~4.H

.oa.H
mo.”

NO.H
osao>uu

HM¢.N
finn.N

nom.~
HM¢.N

Ohm.m
HM¢.N

HON.m
omo.N

mNn.N
hmh.~

mov.~
nH¢.N

mw¢.N
mm¢.N
Gm

mm.v OHQME

mono.m
Hamm.v

momm.m
finch.v

mmnm.m
finch.v

mwho.H
mew.m

emHo.¢
finch.m

vmam.¢
mamm.n

Hnmm.m
evfiv.v

.Hmfio and:

ma
0N

ma
on

ma
hm

ma
on

ma
on

ma
hm

ma
SN
2

poaam
concomom

bosom
coucomom

uoHflm
couommmm

UOHHQ
concommm

UOHMm
couoomom

UOHMm
concomom

uoawm
concomom
macho

 

a
.oz Haoo

102

As the table shows, in response to Goal One: the mean
difference between actual current practices and what ought to
be practices for the research group was 4.4444 while the mean
difference for the pilot group was 3.9231. These two mean
scores produced a t-value of only 0.63, and an f-value of
1.02, indicating that no significant differences could be
found at the 0.05 level between these two groups of
respondents regarding their means for actual and what ought
to be practices for goal achievement.

In response to goal two, the mean difference between
actual current practices and what ought to be, for the
research group was 3.8519, while for the pilot group, the mean
difference was 4.6154. These two mean scores, produced a t-
value of -0.93 and an f-value of 1.05, indicating that these
differences also could not be considered significant at the
0.05 level.

In response to goal three, the mean difference for the
research group was 3.7037, while for the pilot group the mean
difference was 4.6154. These two mean scores produced a t-
value of -l.03 and an f-value of 1.40 indicating again that
no significant differences at the 0.05 level could be found
between responses of the two groups.

In response to goal four, the mean difference for the
research group was 3.8148, while for the pilot group the
difference was 1.0769. These two mean scores produced a t-
value of 2.84 and an f-value of 1.42 suggesting that signifi-

cant. differences existed. at the 0.05 level between the

103
research and pilot groups with the pilot group perceiving a
smaller gap between actual and what ought to be practices.
However, an analysis of variance produced an f-value of 1.42
indicating that no significant differences at the 0.05 level
could actually be found between the two groups.

In response to goal five, the mean difference between
actual and what ought to be for the research group was 3.2963,
while for the pilot group the mean difference was 3.5385.
These two mean scores produced a t-value of -0.27 and an f-
value of 1.06 indicating no significant differences could be
found at the 0.05 level between the responses of the research
and pilot groups.

In response to goal six, the mean difference between
actual and what ought to be for the research group was 4.7037,
while for the pilot group the mean difference was 3.2308.
These two mean scores produced a t-value of 1.71, and an f-
value of 1.33 indicating that no significant differences could
be found at the 0.05 level between these two groups.

In response to goal seven, the mean difference between
actual and what ought.to be for the research.group was 4.9231,
while for the pilot group the mean difference was 5.0769.
These two mean scores produced a t-value of only -0.19 and an
f-value of 1.09 indicating that no significant differences
could be found at the 0.05 level between responses of the

research and pilot groups.

104
The preceding results of the t-test analysis suggest that
in general, no significant mean differences could be found
between responses of the research and pilot groups.
The responses of these two groups appeared to be very
similar with regard to their consistent agreement that each
of the ASCD's Seven Goals ought to be achieved more than they

actually are.

si e m s

The researcher for this study is aware that his data are
vulnerable to criticism because of the low percentage sample
from the original population. It is quite possible that
several of the findings of this study might have been altered
if more non-respondents had answered, and had they answered
in a markedly different manner than the responding group.

Borg and Gall (1979) indicated that several studies have
investigated.whether personality and intellectual differences
exist between respondents and non-respondents. The general
findings of these studies is that respondents and non-
respondents do not usually differ on any significant
personality dimensions. However, non-respondents tend to have
achieved less academic success than respondents.

In an effort to increase the percentage of the responses,
the researcher made several attempts, sending many follow-up
letters. However, unfortunately, no responses other than
those reported were received. Reasons for not receiving more

responses may have included the following:

105

The collecting procedures of responses turned out
not to be an effective approach for increasing
subject responses” Therefore, these procedures are
not recommended for future research.

The non-respondents maybe did not have the time or
interest to reply. Therefore, they preferred
working on something else more important to them.
The non-respondents may have had negative attitudes
toward surveys in general or the survey format and
its complexity’ may' have been a turn off, and
therefore, they tended to discard any survey they

received.

Simon

This chapter presents the findings of the study and

provides a brief discussion of the results. The following

elements were examined in the study:

1.

The respondents' perceptions of what is and what
ought to be levels of practice for achieving each
of the 1978 ASCD Task Force Seven Goals in
humanistic education.

The respondents' examples of one failure and one
success with particular goal achievements drawn from
their own experiences.

The respondents' expressions of agreement or

disagreement with 42 propositions, half of which

106
were intended as humanistic and the other half as
non-humanistic.

The findings of the study revealed that the respondents
consistently perceived current practice far below what ought
to be on all of the seven ASCD goals. The majority of the
respondents ranked Goal 7 (Developing Respect for Others)
first, followed by Goal 6 (Qualities of Learning Environments)
as second in importance.

Based on the findings of this study, the majority of the
respondents appeared to at least moderately agree with the
humanistic statements. The conclusion is that in general,
respondents recommended that all of the ASCD's Seven Goals
ought to be achieved more effectively.

The data for this study were collected from 28 graduate
students enrolled in curriculum seminars at Michigan State
University during the Fall Term of 1988.

To analyze the data, statistical techniques used were
frequencies, percentages, means, medians, standard deviations,
f-values, and t-test scores.

Perhaps the most interesting finding of the study is the
appearance of inconsistencies in agreements. In those cases
of contrasting statements, many of the respondents strongly
agreed simultaneously with both members of the pair (see Table
4.19 and comments following). It is suggested that these
evidences of inconsistency represent instances of ambivalence
among the respondents over the perennial curriculum issue as

to whether learners can.be trusted to make their own best free

107
choices, or whether the society is required to impose criteria

and standards from outside.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Contained in this concluding chapter are a summary of the
study, conclusions drawn on the basis of the findings and

recommendations for future research.

W

Educators often express great concern about the problem
of discrepancy between schools' actual practices and the goals
that they ought to be achieving. Goodlad (1983) indicated
that the discrepancy between our idealistic expectations for
students and actual classroom practice is particularly
troublesome because American schools claim to educate broadly,
but in practice emphasize a narrow academic curriculum and
teacher-dominated talk as the prime teaching techniques.

Goodlad (1983) suggested that we must be concerned with
more idealistic goals in schools such as: thinking rationally
and creatively: understanding others with differing value
systems; interacting with others in cooperative, caring and
trusting ways: and developing a concern for humanity.

Other educators, including MacDonald, Combs, and Saylor
also suggested goals that ought to be achieved such as: (l)

removing barriers to humaneness in the school; (2) gaining

109
freedom from the constraints of others: and (3) making free
choices and assuming the responsibility for these choices.
The primary purpose of this study was to examine the
problem of discrepancy between teacher perceptions of current
actual practices and desired achievement of goals with regard

to seven goals selected from the ASCD's 1978 Task Force on

Humanistic Education. These goals may be captioned as
follows:

1. Learner's needs and potentials.

2. Student self-esteem.

3. Student skill-acquisition.

4. Student involvement in learning.

5. Student value development.

6. Qualities of learning environments.

7. Developing respect for others.

The data for this study were collected through the use
of: a rating scale: Flanagan's Critical Incident Technique:
and an Opinion Survey of Educational Goal Statements.

The data were collected from 28 graduate students
enrolled in Curriculum Seminars during the Fall Term of 1988
at the College of Education, Michigan State University. Most
of the participants in this study happened to be female
students between the ages of 30 and 45 years of age, had two
to 11 years of teaching experience, and held educational
leadership positions in the State of Michigan. Copies of the
research instruments were distributed among the participants

at their seminar sessions.

110

The gathered data for this study were analyzed at the
Michigan State University Computer Center using SPSS (The
Statistical Package for Social Science).

To analyze the data of the study, several statistical
techniques were used including frequencies, percentages,
means, medians, standard deviations, rankings, f-values and
t-test scores.

The major findings of the study were as follows:

1. Respondents were generally favorably disposed

toward humanistic goals and practices.

The results of t-tests revealed that in all seven goals,
the mean scores for perceptions of what ought to be practices
were significantly higher than means for perceptions of
current actual practices.

2. A majority of the respondents ranked Goal 7

(developing respect for others) first, followed by
Goal 6 (qualities. of learning’ environments) as
second in importance. I

3. Respondents cited Goal 2 (student self-esteem) most
frequently for good examples of success to goal
achievement while Goal 1 (learner's needs and
potentials) was most cited for bad examples.

4. Respondents perceived the common barriers to goal
achievement as lack of developing experiences and
programs around the unique potentials of the
learner, lack of developing learning environments

perceived by all students as supportive and free

111

from threat, and lack of applying effective teaching
methods for enhancing student interest in learning.
Respondents also perceived the common facilitators
to goal achievement as: developing experiences and
programs relevant to the learner's needs and pur-
poses, providing students with a variety of learning
options relevant to their personal values and
aspirations, and facilitating student's.self-esteem
and developing in them a sense of personal adequacy.
5. Degrees of agreement and/or disagreement regarding
each of a developed set of 42 goal statements varied
quite widely among the respondents. Some items that
respondents marked with consistently high agreement:
whereas, they consistently responded.with disagree-
ment to others. Responses to still other statements

did not show consistency.
In the following sections, conclusions and implications
of the findings of this study are provided.and recommendations

for further studies are made.

5' ' ' 'ons
Based on the results of this study, the following
conclusions are drawn, and related implications are presented.
The results of a t-test comparing the mean scores of
actual and what ought to be practices indicate statistically
significant differences were found at the 0.000 level of

significance for all of the ASCD's seven goals.

112

The t-test analysis suggests that in all seven goals,
the mean scores for perceptions of what ought to be practices
were significantly higher than the means for perceptions of
actual current practices. Therefore, there is to some degree
a disposition for this population to confirm their strong
endorsement of ASCD's goals.

The findings of this study also reveal that responses for
a (bad) example of failure to achieve a goal (57.1 percent)
were slightly higher than responses for a (good) example of
success (46.3 percent). Writing out examples was not a task
that almost half of the respondents were willing to try to
perform.

Degrees of agreement and/or disagreement regarding each
of the 42 goal statements varied quite widely among the
respondents. Some items the respondents marked with
consistently high agreement: whereas, they consistently
responded with disagreement to others. Responses to still
other statements did not show consistency.

What these findings appear to suggest is that when
educators are presented with humanistic goals stated in very
general and global terms, they readily concur, even
unanimously, that actual practice falls far short of the
degree to which the goals ought to be achieved. But when
presented with propositions (some humanistic, some non-
humanistic) that refer to more specific and concrete examples
of attitudes and practices, educators are much less strongly

consistent in agreement with the humanistic propositions or

113
in disagreement with the non-humanistic propositions. At more
concrete levels of practice and attitude, there is much more
ambiguity in the outlooks of educators about humanistic
education. However, based on the findings of this study, the
majority of the respondents appeared at least to tend
moderately to agree with the humanistic statements.

Perhaps the most interesting finding in the study is the
appearance of inconsistencies in agreement in those cases of
contrasting statements for which the respondents
simultaneously agreed strongly with both humanistic and non-
humanistic members of the pair.

It is suggested that these evidences of inconsistency
represent instances of ambivalence among the respondents over
the perennial curriculum issue as to whether learners can be
trusted to make their own best free choices, or whether the
society is required to impose criteria and standards from
outside. If a teacher is (unconsciously?) ambivalent
regarding contrary goals, maybe this is one way that
discrepancies arise between what is and what ought to be
practices in schools.

One of the limitations of this study is that the
researcher does not know the school contexts out of which the
respondents came. These respondents surely came from
different professional settings and were, therefore, probably
sharing perceptions from.different.data bases. If this is the
case, then one might say that ambiguities about goals in

perceptions of this population of educators may not be

114
confusion related, but related instead to degrees to which
they have thought carefully about goals, and degrees to which
they have developed understandings or insights about how
specific practices relate to particular goals.

Another explanation for this ambiguity may be because the
term Humanism itself is undefined and in conflict with other
educational philosophies. As a result of this conflict, the
respondents may not have been consistently clear in their
outlooks about humanistic education.

Concerning the issue of ambiguity, Yatvin (1983) argued
that schools must be consistently clear about goals and
practices. He suggested that:

If schools are to become healthy, they must provide

opportunities for teachers to read, think and talk

about what it is they are trying to do. Teachers

need to look critically at their goals and figure

out how they can be loyal to their employer and

still true to their students and themselves. Then

they need assistance in turning goals into classroom

living and objectives into lessons and materials.

Is it possible (or likely?) that humanistic goals in
education are too idealist/or unrealistic?

Behavioristic educators claim that humanistic goals are
too idealistic and too impractical. They base their
criticisms on the following issues:

1. Objectives of humanistic education are vague, and

cannot be observed, measured or tested through a
scientific method.

2. Humanistic psychology fails to explain such things

as love, purpose, meanings, or self-concept, self-

115
determination, and self-actualization in
behavioristic terms.

3. The humanists' recommendations for educational
reform are too fuzzy, too idealistic, too
sentimental, too impractical, too romantic, and too
unscientific to be of any use.

4. The humanistic assumptions of freedom are likely to
do more harm than good to the individual as well as
society.

5. Behaviorists tend to believe that it is not enough
for a teacher to be a warm, friendly person. She
or he must also be a skilled technician -- a
behavioral engineer.

According to the behavioristic view, the focus in
education should be on teaching students certain specific
predetermined concepts, skills, values, or attitudes for new
and better ways of behaving internally as well as externally.

However, humanistic educators deny charges that
humanistic goals are unrealistic or impractical.

They insist that The Humanistic Education is an effort
to achieve a better balance in emphasis between humanistic
goals and the more easily measured behavioral objectives. The
humanists claim that a primary example of this imbalance can
be observed in the hundreds of millions.of dollars poured into
programs and research on behavioral objectives and the
comparatively small amounts devoted to the exploration of

humanistic goals.

116

According to the humanistic views, the focus in education
should.be on utilizing programs and.practices designed to meet
the needs and.purposes of the learner, helping each individual
develop skills, attitudes and understandings necessary for
individual self-fulfillment and making students free so that
they may make wise choices from the options open to them and
decide their own best choices and potentials in learning.

This study does not favor either side of the arguments
above. Research indicates that both humanistic and
behavioristic education have strengths as well as limitations.

However, if educators choose to endorse a humanistic
approach, is it not crucial that the teachers of children be
consistently clear about what it means to create free self-
reliant, self-esteeming young persons?

Based on the findings of this study, the majority of the
respondents selected Goal Two (student self-esteem) for good
examples of goal achievement. However, consistent disagree-
ments appear among responses for Item 39 (Given opportunities
to decide for themselves, children can usually find answers
appropriately satisfying to both themselves and to others.),
while consistent agreements show in responses for its
contrasting statement, Item 1 (Immature students need to be
guided.by:mature adults in reaching solutions to problems that
students may be facing.)

This is the only pairing in the study for which this

group of educators consistently disagreed with the humanistic

117
proposition while simultaneously agreeing with the non-
humanistic proposition.

How to understand this anomaly appears obscure, but it
may suggest that teachers are not very confident about giving
children opportunities to decide for themselves, perhaps they
are not confident that children will make satisfactory
decisions, or there may be some lack of confidence on both
counts. In any case, the study group of educators does not
appear to believe that children may choose and decide for
themselves, or at least those educators have doubts and
ambivalences on the issue or maybe this group of educators
has never thought about the matter of inconsistency.

Is it not crucial that a society which espouses freedom
be prepared to support learning environments that provide
learners with experiences in freedom? The findings indicate
no evidence of agreement or disagreement in responses. With
regard to the issue of whether students should have a major
choice among curriculum options, or that instead major
emphasis should be placed on curriculum objectives decided by
the school, it is interesting that this group of respondents
did not go clearly for either one of these alternatives.

This ambivalence among teachers regarding humanistic
practices would seem to corroborate the comments made earlier
about the trusting and encouraging of students to make their
own best free choices or the requiring of students to meet

criteria and standards set by society.

118

MacDonald (1971) argued that, "Contrary to Rousseau's
famous opening sentence, ‘Man is born free and everywhere he
is in chains.' Man is born in chains and everywhere he tends
to remain so" (p. 2-7). According to MacDonald, it becomes
easy to keep our focus upon the achievement of learning goals
and to forget the fundamental goal of freeing persons for
self-responsible and self-directed fulfillment of their own
emerging potential. Macdonald's statement relates to the
difficulty involved in moving from a general goal to
particular learning objectives. Perhaps not enough time is
spent thinking about what it means to translate global goals
to particular goals. Setting aside the issue of humanistic
goals, this general lack of thinking may be a basic and
pervasive problem.

MacDonald (1971) suggested that, "Schooling must be for
the benefit of individuals, not the collective society within
which it takes place." In other words, it would seem he wants
a society to espouse freedom and support learning environments
in which the individual is able to exercise his own free
choice and to develop his own potentialities for their own
sake.alone, and.to serve the social group collectively because
he has freedom to do so rather than because of pressure to
conform or to achieve for the group's sake.

Feinberg (1975) also called for more freedom and
humaneness in the society. He suggested that:

If one is concerned to establish a more humane

society, then he ought to work to establish that
society in the very places where people live and

work.

119

If the child is ignored or dehumanized at

home and on the block, it is unlikely that the
school will save him. If the parents are treated
like slaves at work, it is unlikely that they will
demand that schools treat their children as free
and intelligent human beings.

Yatvin (1983) demanded that society should be concerned

with these two major school problems:

1.

2.

There is not enough philosophy in schools nor enough
help in creating good practice.
There is too much reverence in schools for authority

and too much fear.

Yatvin (1983) suggested the following recommendations for

schools to become healthy:

1.

If schools are to become healthy, they must provide
opportunities for teachers to read, think and talk
about what it is they are trying to do. Teachers
need to look critically at their goals and figure
out how they can be loyal to their employer and
still true to their students and themselves. Then,
they need assistance in turning goals into classroom
living and objectives into lessons and materials.
If schools are to become healthy, they must also
free themselves from the tyranny of tradition,
textbooks, and.test scores. .For too long, they have
let the past define them, faulty tools measure them,
and self-appointed authorities judge them.

Schools need to stop being afraid of making

mistakes, learning something by trying out new ways,

120

trusting their own knowledge and experience, but
most of all they need to stop being afraid of
incurring public displeasure. Fear is neither a
good motivator nor a reliable guide. It cripples
the ability to act, numbs judgement and kills joy.
How can anyone teach or administer a school by
acting on fear?

The conclusions above have important implications for
those involved in the task of bringing more humanistic goals
and practices into school systems. Freedom and involvement
of students, teachers, parents and administrators are
important components in creating learning environments which
are supportive, exciting and free from threat.

Finally, it must be remembered that the findings of this
study, unfortunately, cannot be generalized with very great
confidence. The study only included 28 graduate students in
education and dealt only with seven selected goals of
humanistic education. As a result, its power to offer

generalizable data must be considered very limited.

Pecennendetions for Puture Research

The following recommendations are offered for future
studies:

1. Data gathering methods used here are not recommended

for future studies because of the need for more

reliability and validity. Nevertheless, the concept

appears promising (a) of employing a population to

121
record its perceptions of important educational
goals typically stated in general, global terms, and
then (b) asking the population to indicate its
agreement with sets of relatively more specific,
operational propositions, embodying the goals.
The procedures used here, assuming they are valid
and reliable, render patterns of findings which
would not have been predicted, and thus they shed
fresh light and ideas for research procedures.
The issue of relationships between statements of
philosophical goals, operational formulations of
them and actual practices aimed at them, is an issue
much in need of study, since discrepancies in these
relationships are likely to be crucial if we are to
hope for coherence in our educational practices.
The study included only seven goals of humanistic
education. For greater insights into the problem,
future research should include a greater number of
goals in humanistic or other educational
philosophies.
The findings of this study are based on respondents'
feelings about humanistic goals in education, which
create complications for measurements because
researchers can never be sure of the degree to which
the: subject's responses reflect ‘their ‘true

attributes. Therefore, future studies should also

10.

11.

122
Further research needs to be done*with regard to the
relationships between teachers' involvement in
setting goals and the improvement of their classroom
achievements.
Further research is also needed to study the
relationships. between. teachers' applications of
desired educational goals and their content and
satisfaction with current actual practices.
It would be valuable to study the relationships
between teachers' exposures to humane goals and
practices and improvement in their attitudes toward
students.
The members of the research population in this
study, by chance, happened to be mostly female
students. Further studies should include even
numbers of male/female students based on more valid
and reliable sampling procedures.
To find out the effectiveness of humanistic
practices in education, future studies should be
done to compare schools which appear to enhance the
concept of freedom and humaneness with those which
appear to work against them.
Further research is needed to contrast responses
from persons in schools marked by lots of faculty
dialogue about goals and practices, and those from

schools with little dialogue.

APPENDIX A

EDUCATORS' PERCEPTIONS OF WHAT IS
AND WHAT OUGHT TO BE

123

The following seven goals were suggested in 1978 by the ASCD's
Working Group on Humanistic Education.

Pieeee indicate how you perceive each one of them by marking
both an A and an O on each scalar line.

A a degree to which goal statement is eernelly being
achieved.

0 = degree to which goal statement engnr__re__ne
achieved.

fixennlee of how you may enter an A and an O on the scalar
lines below:

If you enter A close to 0, but both low on the scale, then you
are indicating that the actual achievement is low, but the
goal is not important and actual achievement though low is
close to where it ought to be.

A O
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

If you enter A close to 0, but both high on the scale, then
you are indicating the goal is actually being achieved at high
levels and that it also ought to be achieved at high levels.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

If you enter A and O with a sizeable gap between them and A
is entered below 0, then you are indicating actual achievement
is significantly below where it ought to be.

A O
l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

If you enter A and O with a sizeable gap between them and O
is entered below A, then you are indicating actual high
achievement which may be costing more energy than should be
expended on that goal.

0 A
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

e I
t t'
Education today should
accept the learner's
needs and purposes and
develop experiences and
programs around the

unique potentials of the

learner.

Esteem
Education today should
facilitate self-

actualization and strive
to develop in all persons

a sense of personal
adequacy.

Go ee: tude t
53111

E s'!’

Education today should
foster acquisition of
skills necessary for
living in a multi-
cultured society,
including academic,

personal, interpersonal,

communicative and
economic survival
proficiencies.

G ‘ S

Involvemenr in Leerning
Education today should
personalize educational

decisions and practices.

To this end it should
include students in the
processes of their own

education via democratic
involvement at all levels

of implementation.

0
H
30-

u..-
p..-
01....
|
OS-

I I I I I I I
I__I__I__I__I__I_.I
0 l 2 3 4 5 6
I I I I I I I
I__I__I__I__I__I__I
0 l 2 3 4 5 6

q...—
00
\O
H
C

q-..
00
\O

10

7 8 9 10

N-
u——
.35
UI
Os-
\1
00
\O-

v 0 10
Education today should
recognize the primacy of
human feelings and

utilize personal values

and perceptions as

integral factors in

educational processes.

--. I_
W 0
Education today should
strive to develop
learning environments
that are perceived by all
involved as challenging,
understanding,
supportive, exciting, and
free from threat.

H-
w-..
u
.5
UI
O)
\l
00
\O

10

Goa even° evelo in {__ __ __
Reggae; fer Otner§ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Education today should .

develop in learners

genuine concern for the

worth of others and skill

in conflict resolution

A. Please describe in anecdotal form, based on your own
personal experience in education, a flagrantly beg example
when one of the above goals clearly failed to be achieved.
In your anecdote, include: (a) What happened, and (b) What
barriers or breakdowns caused the failure to occur.

Peg_fixennie¥of,Goal : (Please specify goal number)

126

B. Please describe in anecdotal form, based on your own
personal experience in education, a markedly gene example

when one of the above goals was clearly
achieved. In your anecdote include: (a) What happened, and

(b) What factors facilitated the success.

geed_£xemnie_ef_§oal : (Please specify goal number)

 

127

To help you prepare your anecdotes, here are two models
which you might wish to follow:

When I was a student in high school, teachers gave priority
to subject matter disciplines over students' needs and
purposes. I was frustrated and my interest in learning went
down. I complained to the teachers several times about the
difficulties that I had in memorizing class materials, but
their responses were always the same: "There is nothing we
can do." "It is your problem." "If you want to pass the
final examination, then you must memorize your textbooks."
This was a bad learning experience for me. My perceptions
of the barriers that caused the failure to achieve the above
goal are as follows:

1. The school system had not given teachers enough
responsibility nor freedom to place priority on
student's needs and purposes over subject matter
disciplines.

2. Teachers had not been given time or authority to
explore student's needs and purposes because the school
-requires accomplishment of prescribed curriculum by a
definite date: otherwise, teachers will receive poor
reports about their performance.

3. Evaluation had been used as a punitive measure, rather
than as a diagnostic tool to facilitate planning for
future needs and purposes.

W

Years ago I was a participant in a college seminar
concerning qualities of learning environments. The seminar
was conducted by two instructors who devoted most of their
time to developing a learning environment that was perceived
by all participants as challenging, supportive and free from
threat. The major emphases of the seminar were freedom,
value, worth, dignity and integrity of all participants.
This seminar gave me a good experience in learning how to
express my own feelings, how to communicate with others, and
.how to care for others. In my opinion, the factors that
facilitated the success of the above goal are:

1. Teachers and students were free to design their own
learning environment and find operational procedures
for achieving the goals that were important to them.

2. Students perceived their teachers as facilitators of
the learning processes, rather than as imposers or
authoritarians in the learning environment.

3. Students were treated as people with dignity and
integrity. They were seen by their teachers as
trustworthy and responsible in all phases of the
seminar activities.

APPENDIX B

AN OPINION SURVEY OF EDUCATIONAL
GOAL STATEMENTS

128

As experienced professional educators, please draw a circle
around an X for each item to indicate your degree of
agreement or disagreement with the following propositions.

Strongly Moderately Moderately Strongly
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree

 

1. immature students need to be guided by mature
adults in reaching solutions to problems that X X X X
students may be facing.

 

 

 

 

2. Children's needs and purposes have priority
over demands of subject matter. X X X X

 

 

 

 

3. In productive classrooms, the greatest
portion of time will be spent on teacher's X X X X
listening to students.

 

 

 

 

4. The major function of educational evaluation
is to assess prior success in having met X X X X
objectives.

 

 

 

5. Students can usually be expected to try to
get away with anything if given a chance. X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

6. The curriculum should concentrate on
developing students' optimal skills in the X X X X
basic 3R's -- reading, writing and
mathematics.

 

 

 

 

7. Responses to children's expressions of needs
and purposes should channel students' X X X X
energies toward meeting subject-matter
demands.

 

 

 

 

8. instruction in sex education, family life and
parenting should be requirements for high X X X X
school graduation.

 

 

 

9. Curriculum decisions should be made jointly
by staff and students. X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

10. Teachers should arrange to give students who
fall behind special help to bring them up to X X X X
levels where they belong.

 

 

 

11. Students should be able to choose for
themselves curriculum content and methodology X X X X
from a range of approved available options.

 

 

 

 

 

12. Teachers should help students explore a
variety of conflict resolution strategies. X X X X

 

 

 

 

13. Children should understand that school is a
place where they are expected to work hard X X X X
and compete for success.

 

 

 

 

14. The school program should provide
opportunities for students to discover X X X X
themselves as individual persons of unique
worth and dignity.

 

 

 

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

26.

25.

26.

27.

28.

30.

129

Both the students and staff of a school
should have the right to disagree.

In productive classrooms, the greatest
portion of time will be spent by students'
listening to teachers.

Teachers should regularly encourage students
to attempt something new even though risks of
failure may be involved.

Teachers should help students to obey the law
and to respect duly constituted authority.

Students may be allowed to act freely when
they know that those around them accept them
as they are.

In carrying out the school's program,
conflicts should be avoided insofar as
possible.

Major emphasis should be placed on agreed on
curriculum objectives established by the
school.

Questioning, doubting and challenging of
teachers by students tends to undermine the
teacher's authority.

Teachers should view students' mistakes as
indicators that learning is progressing.

Codes of conduct should be clearly stated and
consistently enforced so as to maintain order
in the school.

Teachers should help students to identify
possible choices and justify their choices in
terms of their personal values.

High school graduates should clearly
understand the principles and operations of
our democrative society.

A common core of learning objectives and
minimum achievement outcomes should be
required of all students.

Curriculua decisions should be derived from
professionally determined and published
objectives.

Teachers should establish classroom climates
that encourage full acceptance of children's
feelings to help children understand the
emotional qualities of living.

The school program should provide
opportunities for outstanding individuals to
achieve recognition in the form of
comprehensive awards and honors.

Strongly Moderately Moderately Strongly

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agree Agree Disagree Disagree
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X

 

 

 

31.

32.

33.

35.

37.

38.

39.

4°.

61.

42.

130

Strongly Moderately Moderately Strongly

Students can usually be expected to try to
behave in an orderly way.

Teachers should regularly encourage students
to develop through performing tasks that are
highly likely to assure success.

Children should feel secure that their
teachers like them.

The curriculum should concentrate on
developing students' skills for maintaining
their optimal physical and mental health.

School should not be burdened with
responsibility for instructing students in
social and personal aspects of hunan
sexuality.

Teachers should establish classroom climates
that focus on firm discipline, good order and
high productivity.

Teachers should arrange to have students
learn at their own optimal rates using styles
of learning which they prefer.

Teachers should view students' mistakes as
indicators that teaching has not yet been
successful.

Given opportunities to decide for themselves,
children can usually find answers
appropriately satisfying to both themselves
and to others.

Schools should provide ample opportunities
students to develop personal and educational
programs that are relevant to their needs and

purposes.

The major function of educational evaluation
is to aid in facilitating planning for future
learning experiences.

All students should be given an opportunity
to develop skills necessary for their
vocational and economic adequacy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agree Agree Disagree Disagree
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X

 

 

APPENDIX C

THE ASCD'S SEVEN GOALS AND
21 PAIRS OE STATEMENTS

131

The following seven goals were suggested in 1978 by the.ASCD's
Working Group on Humanistic Education.

0 e U
N ds d ot '

Education today should accept the learner's needs and purposes
and develop experiences and programs around the unique
potentials of the learner.

G ' - st
Education today should facilitate self-actualization and
strive to develop in all persons a sense of personal adequacy.

ee:
'3 t'
Education today should foster acquisition of skills necessary
for living in a multi-cultured society, including academic,
personal, interpersonal, communicative and economic survival
proficiencies.

Education today should personalize educational decisions and
practices. To this end it should include students in the
processes of their own education via democratic involvement
at all levels of implementation.

WW

Education today should recognize the primacy of human feelings
and ‘utilize jpersonal values and jperceptions as integral
factors in educational processes.

G ° ' ' ° 0 ' Env' on e ts

Education today should strive to develop learning environments
that are perceived by all involved as challenging,
understanding, supportive, exciting, and free from threat.

Goal §§veg: Developing Respect for Others

Education today should develop in learners genuine concern for
the worth of others and skill in conflict resolution.

132

Please try to match the following 21 paired statements in sets
of three with the seven goals on the attached chart.

1A.

13.

2A.

28.

3A.

33.

4A.

43.

5A.

SB.

6A.

GB.

7A.

78.

High school graduates should clearly understand the
principles and operations of our democrative society.

All students should be given an opportunity to develop
skills necessary for their vocational and economic
adequacy.

Schools should not be burdened with responsibility for
instructing students in social and personal aspects of
human sexuality.

Instruction in sex education, family life and parenting
should be requirements for high school graduation.

Children should feel secure that their teachers like
them.

Children should understand that school is a place where
they are expected to work hard and compete for success.

Teachers should view students' mistakes as indicators
that learning is progressing.

Teachers should view students' mistakes as indicators
that teaching has not yet been successful.

The major function of educational evaluation is to aid
in facilitating planning for future learning experiences.

The major function of educational evaluation is to assess
prior success in having met objectives.

Teachers should regularly encourage students to attempt
something neW' even. though risks of failure ‘may be
involved.

Teachers should regularly encourage students to develop
through performing tasks which are highly likely to
assure success.

Teachers should arrange to give students who fall behind
special help to bring them up to levels where they
belong.

Teachers should arrange to have students learn at their
own optimal rates using styles of learning which they
prefer.

BA.

BB.

9A.

98.

10A.

103.

11A.

118.

12A.

123.

13A.

13B.

14A.

14B.

15A.

133

Curriculum decisions should be made jointly by staff and
students.

Curriculum decisions should be derived from

professionally determined and published objectives.

Children's needs and purposes have priority over demands
of subject matter.

Responses to children's expressions of needs and purposes
should channel student's energies toward meeting subj ect-
matter demands.

The school program should provide opportunities for
students to discover themselves as individual persons of
unique worth and dignity.

The school program should provide opportunities for
outstanding individuals to achieve recognition in the
form of competitive awards and honors.

In productive classrooms, the greatest portion of time
will be spent on teachers' listening to students.

In productive classrooms, the greater portion of time
will be spent on students' listening to teachers.

The curriculum should concentrate on developing students'
optimal skills in the basic 3R's -- reading, writing and
mathematics.

The curriculum should concentrate on developing students'
skills for maintaining their optimal physical and mental
health.

Teachers should establish classroom climates which focus
on firm discipline, good order and high productivity.

Teachers should establish classroom climates which
encourage full acceptance of children's feelings to help
children understand the emotional qualities of living.

Students can usually be expected to try to get away with
anything if given a chance.

Students can usually be expected to try to behave in an
orderly way.

Teachers should help students to identify possible
choices and justify their choices in terms of their
personal values.

158.

16A.

16B.

17A.

17B.

18A.

183.

19A.

193.

20A.

203.

VZlA.

218.

134

Teachers should help students to obey the law and to
respect duly constituted authority.

Codes of conduct should be clearly stated and
consistently enforced so as to maintain order in the
school.

Students may be allowed to act freely’when they know'that
those around them accept them as they are.

Schools should provide ample opportunities for students
to develop personal and educational programs which are
relevant to their needs and purposes.

A common core of learning objectives and minimum
achievement outcomes should be required of all students.

Immature students need to be guided by mature adults in
reaching solutions to problems which the students may be
facing.

Given opportunities to decide for themselves, children
can usually find answers appropriately satisfying both
to themselves and to others.

Both the students and Staff of a school should have the
right to disagree.

Questioning, doubting and challenging of teachers by
students tends to undermine the teacher's authority.

In carrying out the school's program, conflicts should
be avoided insofar as possible.

Teachers should. help students explore a 'variety of
conflict resolution strategies.

Major emphasis should be placed on agreed curriculum
objectives established by the school, community and
state.

Students should be able to choose for themselves
curriculum content and methodology from a range of
approved available options.

135

ta e t e o s
W: Please match the following 21 paired statements
into sets of three with the seven goals below. Put one pair

number'in.each parenthesis until all 21 pair numbers have been
placed somewhere on the chart.

Goal 1: Learner's needs and Goal 2: Student self-esteem

potentials
Pair Nos. ( ) Pair Nos. ( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
Goal 3: Student skill Goal 4: Student involvement
acquisition in learning
Pair Nos. ( ) Pair Nos. ( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
Goal 5: Student value A Goal 6: Qualities of
development learning environments
Pair Nos. Pair Nos. ( )

( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( )

Goal 7: Developing respect
for others
Pair Nos.

( )
( )
( )

Thank you! Please return this form to:

Ibrahim ElSheikhi
1518 J Spartan Village
East Lansing, Michigan 48823

APPENDIX D

21 CONTRASTING PAIRS OP GROUPED GOALS STATEMENTS

136

WWW

6A.

68.

7A.

78.

21A.

218.

G

10A.

108.

15A.

158.

16A.

168.

Teachers should regularly encourage students to attempt
something’ new even though risks of failure 'may be
involved.

Teachers should regularly encourage students to develop
through performing tasks which are highly likely to
assure success.

Teachers should arrange to give students who fall behind
special help to bring them up to levels where they
belong.

Teachers should arrange to have students learn at their
own optimal rates using styles of learning which they
prefer.

Major emphasis should be placed on agreed on curriculum
objectives established by the school, community and
state.

Students should be able to choose for themselves
curriculum content and methodology from a range of
approved available options.

The school program should provide opportunities for
students to discover themselves as individual persons of
unique worth and dignity.

The school program should provide opportunities for
outstanding individuals to achieve recognition in the
form of competitive awards and honors.

Teachers should help students to identify possible
choices and justify their choices in terms of their
personal values.

Teachers should help students to obey the law and to
respect duly constituted authority.

Codes of conduct should be clearly stated and
consistently enforced so as to maintain order in the
school.

Students may be allowed to act freely when they know that
those around them accept them as they are.

137

i J I] . E! l ! 51.1] E . °!°

1A.

18.

2A.

28.

12A.

128.

5A.

SB.

8A.

83.

17A.

178.

G

9A.

High school graduates should clearly understand the
principles and operations of our democratic society.

All students should be given an opportunity to develop
skills necessary for their vocational and economic
adequacy.

Schools should not be burdened with responsibility for
instructing students in social and personal aspects of
human sexuality.

Instruction in sex education, family life and parenting
should be requirements for high school graduation.

The curriculum should concentrate on developing students'
optimal skills in the basic 3R's -- reading, writing and
mathematics.

The curriculum should concentrate on developing students '
skills for maintaining their optimal physical and mental
health.

' O V

The major function of educational evaluation is to aid
in facilitating planning for future learning experiences. .

The major function of educational evaluation is to assess
prior success in having met objectives.

Curriculum decisions should be made jointly by staff and
students.

Curriculum decisions should be derived from
professionally determined and published objectives.

Schools should provide ample opportunities for students
to develop personal and educational programs which are
relevant to their needs and purposes.

A common core of learning objectives and minimum
achievement outcomes should be required of all students.

' V3 V6 e

Children's needs and purposes have priority over demands
of subject matter.

138

98. Responses to children's expressions of needs and purposes
should channel students' energies toward meeting subj ect-
matter demands.

13A. Teachers should establish classroom climates which focus
on firm discipline, good order and high productivity.

138. Teachers should establish classroom climates which
encourage full acceptance of children's feelings to help
children understand the emotional qualities of living.

18A. Immature students need to be guided by mature adults in
reaching solutions to problems which the students may be
facing.

18B. Given opportunities to decide for themselves, children

can usually find answers appropriately satisfying both
to themselves and to others.

Goa S' : u ' e ' v'

3A. Children should feel secure that their teachers like
them.

38. Children should understand that school is a place where
they are expected to work hard and compete for success.

4A. Teachers should view students' mistakes as indicators
that learning is progressing.

48. Teachers should view students' mistakes as indicators
that teaching has not yet been successful.

19A. Both the students and staff of a school should have the
right to disagree.

19B. Questioning, doubting and challenging of teachers by
students tends to undermine the teacher's authority.
Go ve : ev 'n e ec 0 th

11A. In productive classrooms, the greatest portion of time
will be spent on teachers' listening to students.

118. In productive classrooms, the greater portion of time
will be spent by students' listening to teachers.

14A. Students can usually be expected to try to get away with
anything if given a chance.

148. Students can usually be expected to try to behave in an
orderly way.

139

20A. In carrying out the school's program, conflicts should
be avoided insofar as possible.

208. Teachers should help students explore a variety of
conflict resolution strategies.

APPENDIX E

ASCD'S CHECKLIST FOR HUMANISTIC SCHOOLS

140

Items are listed in rank order as arranged by Educators,
Teachers, and High School Students.

1.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

Teachers who are genuine, warm, and empathic.
Student mistakes not resulting in a damaged self-concept.

Policies aimed directly at maintaining personal worth,
dignity, and rights of students.

Staff treating students with same courtesy and respect
accorded peers.

Students listening to each other.

Necessary disciplinary treatment tempered with compassion
and understanding.

Staff emphasizing positive rather than negative
consequences in guiding behavior.

A library with an abundance of books and other materials.

Principal truly using the staff and students in making
decisions which affect them.

Teachers conveying through action that they trust the
students.

At least once a day, teachers finding the time and
incident to indicate to each student "I care who you
are."

Activities which encourage divergent thinking and other
forms of creative effort.

Teachers using objectives for humane teaching rather than
against it: student choice, pacing: teacher time
management for greater individual attention.

Teachers showing competence in subject matter control.
Developmental characteristics of students taken into
consideration more than age and grade when planning
learning experiences.

Staff able to detect and respond appropriately to signs
of personal problems of students.

Free access to counselors, nurses, tutors, and other
special personnel.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

141

Teachers making verbal or nonverbal responses to students
to indicate "I hear you."

All students receive some "ego-builders," honors status,
roles, "happy grams," positive comments by others.

Teachers giving observations as feedback, not judgment.

Small group field trips and excursions which make in-
school learning relevant.

Students readily assisting and sharing with other
students.

Students involved in discovery and "hands on" activities.
A school philosophy, including values and attitude
concerns, being used by teachers in planning classroom
activities.

Free discussion of questions and issues not covered in
the text.

Teachers motivating students with intrinsic value of
ideas or activity.

Teachers having greater concern for the person involved
than for task achievement.

Curriculum materials accurately reflecting our
multiethnic society and varying family structures.

Evidence of well-planned lessons.

Access to activities regardless of sex, age, personality,
and other characteristics.

Interest or learning centers being used with purpose.

Students talking enthusiastically about what they are
doing in school.

Teachers making comments during a dialogue with students:
for example, "tell me more," "that sounds interesting."

New students and family members given a tour of the
building and an explanation of the program.

A student attitude of, "I've chosen this hard thing.
Learning is challenging, stretching, sometimes hard, but
oh so worth it!"

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

54.

142

Wide variety of courses and special events from which to
choose.

Staff seeking training in communications and human
relations.

Evaluation of student work emphasizing correct responses
instead of errors.

Planned school interactions which foster appreciation of
human differences.

Students questioning accuracy, applicability, and
appropriateness of information.

Spontaneous discussions being encouraged.
Principals and teachers seeking suggestions from parents.

An entrance area with a friendly decor which displays
students' work.

Students involved in self-evaluation.

Students, teachers, and parents displaying symbols of
school pride.

Students sharing classroom and school responsibilities.

Teachers knowing specific things each student likes and
dislikes, as well as personal tragedies and successes.

Adults laughing with students: lots of smiling.

Learning' organized. around students' own. problems or
questioning.

Community volunteers assisting in learning centers,
libraries, teaching technical skills, and serving as
special resources.

Opportunities for students to be involved in career
exploration or job location through out-of—school work.

A resource center in which students are free to use
projectors, filmstrip viewers, and cassette tape
recorders.

Teachers who view teaching as "freeing" rather than
controlling.

Class meetings held to discuss solutions to problems
which arise.

55.

56.

57.

58.

59.

60.

61.

62.

63.

64.

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

70.

71.

72.

73.

74.

75.

143

Space outside where people can run.
Teachers seeking parents' evaluation of child's progress.

Student records which note student's strengths and
interests more than limitations.

Playground with grass as well as asphalt.
Teacher stopping to talk to parents in the school.

Teachers questioning misconceptions, faulty logic, and
unwarranted conclusions.

Teachers working, playing, learning along with the
students.

Evaluations as important in areas of personal-social
development as in academic progress.

Spontaneous laughter.

Representative student governments dealing with relevant
school problems.

Utilization of available non-classroom space for
activities, learning centers, tutors.

Teachers building student ideas into the curriculum.

TEacher disclosing aspects of own experience relevant to
the teaching-learning.

System for students accepting responsibility for movement
within the school, and to other places of learning.

Outsiders feeling welcome in the classroom.

Classes working outdoors when it is appropriate to the
experience.

Student access to materials for on-going projects.

Principal spending some of his or her time working with
students.

Space to "move around" in every classroom.

Availability of tools and scientific instruments for use
by the students.

Staff and students sharing resources.

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

81.

82.

83.

84.

85.

86.

87.

88.

89.

90.

91.

92.

93.

94.

95.

96.

144
Student sub-groupings based on special interests, social
preferences, as well as skill needs.
Parents welcomed as a member of instructional team.

Classwork evolving from out-of-school events in the lives
of students.

A brief period each day to do "fun things."

Teacher talk supplemented with some friendly physical
gestures.

Presence of alternatives to traditional grading systems.
"I'll help with that" actions by teachers.
Students working independently on what concerns them.

Secretary providing a positive greeting when meeting
visitors, students, and faculty.

Presence of human development and study of humankind as
a regular part of the curriculum.

Teacher not always expecting students to come up with
answer he or she has in mind.

An absence of negative comments to students by teachers.
Students working independently in small groups.

Teachers getting students entering and leaving classroom.
A setting for student dramatic and musical production.

A setting for students to sit, think, and mull things
over.

All students evaluating the classroom and school
instructional program.

Senior citizens involved with students, at school, in
their home, and in care homes.

Students doing some of the teaching and other leadership
tasks.

Student task-oriented committees.

Students able to go to the school resource center
whenever needed.

97.

98.

99.

100.

145
Teachers spending some of their unscheduled time with
students.

Libraries, laboratories, shops, and recreational areas
available to students after school hours.

Surprise exhibits such as a litter of pups, white
rabbits, unusual type plants.

Students engaged in community service.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

14 6
BIBLIOGRAPHY

ASCD Studies. Humanistic Education Objectives and Assessment.
Arthur W. Combs, et al., Washington, D.C.: ASCD, 1978,

pp. 1-5.

Aspy, David and Flora Roebuck. Humanist;g__fignggtlpn
. Arthur W. Combs et al.,
Washington, D.C.: ASCD, 1978, p. 5.

Babbie. Earl R. Surxex__3e§eareh__netheds. Belmont.
California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1973.

Berdie, Douglas R. and John F. Anderson. W
Qg§i33_§ng_u§§. Metuchen, New Jersey: The Scarecrow
Press, Inc., 1974.

Berkshire, J. R. "Comparisons of Five Forced-Choice Indices."

Edus_ti_nal_anQ_E_xsnel_gisal_uea_uremen_ 18 1958 pp-
553-561.

Borg, Walter R. and Meredith D. Gall. u ' n s ~

533W, third edition. New York: Longman,
Inc., 1979.

Brewer, Joseph and Donald Heges. "The Search for Unity in
Higher Education," New York: Columbia University,
Unpublished pages, 1945.

Brown, George I. Human Teaching £93; Human gaming. New
York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1970, pp. 5-12.

Buswell, M.M. "The Relationship Between the Social Structure
of the Classroom and the Academic Success of the Pupils."

Jggrnal of Education, 22, 1953, pp. 37-52.

Clausell, T. R. "Humanistic Education and Its Implications
for Inner-City Teachers." .Dissertatign_eb§trast§. 34

8, Feb. 1974 .

Combs, Arthur W. "The Human Side of Learning." Ihg_NQ§igngl
Elementarx_2rinsinal. January 1973. pp- 38-42-

Combs, Arthur W., et. al. uma ' t'c Ed t' : Ob 'v s
ang_A§§g§§mgnt. Washington, D.C.: ASCD, 1978.
Denton, J.C. "Building a Forced-Choice Personality Test."

BS:§QDD§1.£§YED212§Y: 7, 1954, PP- 449-459-

Dickenson, Walter A.: M. Foster Car: J. Walker Newman: and
Frank Yeager. "A Humanistic Program for Change in a
Large City School System. na u a ' t'c

Psychology, 10, Fall 1970, pp. 111-120.

147

Dressel, Paul L.: Lewis B. Mayhew: and Earl J. McGrath. The
'se,; :em_.> V'ew‘q . ,. _ t etge ‘ , °_o e-si-1.
5.911.921.5- Published for the Institute of Higher Education
by the Bureau of Teacher's College Columbia University,
1959.

Dressel, Paul L. and Margaret F. Lorimer. W
W
Professionel_zdusation- Published for the Institute of

Higher Education by the Bureau of Teacher's College
Columbia University, 1960.

Flanagan, John C. "The Critical Incident Technique."
W. 51:4. July 1954. pp- 327-358-

Funderburk, Earl. "On Humanizing Schools: Point of View and
Basic Issues." National Association of Secondary School

Principals. NA§§£_§glle§in, 56, 361, February 1972, p.

16.

Gardner, John W. v o o ' . New York: W.W.
Norton and Co., Inc., 1970.

Ghiselli, E.E. "The Forced Choice Technique in Self-
Description-" W. 7. 1954. pp. 201-
208.

Good. CN- (Ed-) 21W. third edition.
New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1973.

Good, Carter V. and Douglas E. Scates. e o 0 se h.
New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1954.

Goodlad, J.I. 0 ° 'v o
zeeeze. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1984.

Gordon, L.V. "Validities of the Forced-Choice and
Questionnaire Methods of Personality Measurement."

W. 35. 1951. pp- 407-412-

Funderburk, Earl. "On Humanizing Schools: Point of View and
Basic Issues." National Association of Secondary School

Principals We, 56, 361, February 1972, p. 16.

Hitt. William 0. W Belmont.
CA: Wadworth Publishing Company, Inc., 1973, p. 24.

Hitt, William D. "Objectives for a Humanistic School System."
ca as a e ' . Belmont, CA: Wadworth
Publishing Company, Inc., 1973, pp. 51-58.

148

Howard, Richard. "Student Perception of the Value of
Humanistic Practices in Public School Education."
' ' , September 1977,
V01. 38, No. 3, pp. 1167A-1168A.

Jackson. Philip W- W- Pittsburgh:
University of Pittsburgh Press, 1968.

Kalunian, Peter J. "The Effects of a Humanistic Education
Curriculum on Attitude, Self-Concept, Anxiety and
Achievement Level of Primary School Children and

TeacherS-" MW 35 9 1975.

Kasper, A. A. "A Study of the Relationships Among Classroom
Climate, Emotional Adjustment, and Reading Achievement."

W71671955: PP- 1399-1400-

Katz, D. "The Functional Approach to the Study of Attitudes."
W3: 24 1960 p 168-

Keller, Charles. "Humanizing Education." National
Association of Secondary School Principals. HAAéE

33112313, 56, 361, 1972, p. 19.

Kestenbaum, Justin L.: Edna M. Anderson: and Cynthia A.
McCarty. "At the Campus Gate: A History of East Lansing
Public Schools." East Lansing Bicentennial Committee,
East Lansing, Michigan, 1976.

Kolesnik, Walter B. v 'sm u o .
Boston: Allyn Bacon, Inc., 1975.
Leonard, George. Edncenign ang Eeege 1. New York: Delacorte

Press, Dell Publishing Co., Inc., 1968.

Lyon. H-D. Jr. Learning to Feel -- PW.
Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company,
1971, p. 13.

 

Macdonald, James B. "Toward a Platform for Humanistic
Education." WW

Richard H. Weller (ed.) CA: McCutchan Publishing
Corporation, 1977, pp. 345-346.

Macdonald, James B. "A Vision of a Humane School." BenLving

' ' . J. Galen

Saylor and J.L. Smith (eds.) Washington, D.C.: ASCD
Council on Secondary Education, 1971, pp. 2-7, 20.

Macdonald, James B. "The Ideology of Achievement." Removing
Bannieze £9 flunenenees in fine Hign §cneol. J. Galen
Saylor and J.L. Smith (eds.) Washington, D.C.: ASCD
Council on Secondary Education, 1971, pp. 5-6.

149

Mauch. J.E. and J-W- Birch. Guide_to_the_§usse§§ful_1hesis
end_Qieee;§e§ign. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc., 1983.

Moser, Claus A. and A.E. Kalton.

Ingeenigegign. London: Heinemann, 1972.

Myers, Donald. As "The IHumanistic School: A Critical

AnalysiS-" MW. Vol. XXVII. No. 1.
November 1972, pp. 53-55.

National Association of Secondary School Principals.

"Humanizing Education." NA§§£__Bn1ie§in, 56, 361,
February 1972.

Oppenheim. A-N- Maw—Attitude
MSQSBIEEQEE- New York: Basic Books, 1966.

Patterson, C.H. .HQEQDiSEiQLEQBQQLlQD- Englewood Cliffs, New

Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1973.

Rousseau , Jean Jacques . MW. Charles
Frankell (eds). New York: Hofner Publishing, Company,

1954.

Ryan, Mary P. "Design of Curriculum as a Barrier to

Humanizing Secondary Schools . " WW

fiuneneness in gne nign Sengoi. J. Galen Saylor and J.L.
smith (eds.) Washington, D.C.: ASCD Council on Secondary

Education, 1971, pp. 76-81.

Saylor, J. Galen. "Some Characteristics of a Humane Secondary

School." B2manizing_the_§e22ndarx_§29221- K-H- Norman
and J. Galen Saylor (eds). Washington, D.C.: ASCD
Council on Secondary Education, 1969.

Saylor, Galen and J.L. Smith (eds). Beneving Benniers te
Humaaene§§_in_the_nish_§shool- Washington. 0.0.: ASCD
Council on Secondary Education, 1971.

Scully, S.M.E. "Barriers Arising from External Factors."
W J .

Galen Saylor and J.L. Smith (eds.) Washington, D.C.:
ASCD Council on Secondary Education, 1971, pp. 72-73.

Shaw, Marvin E. and Jack M. Wright. S a es for the

Meeennenent of ntninndes. New York: McGraw Hill Book
Company, Inc., 1967.

Silberman, Charles. Crisis in tne Ciessroom. New York:

Random House, 1970.

15o
simpson. E-L. and M-A- Gray. Humanistiwasationw

IDEQIEIELQLiQD- A Report to the Ford Foundation.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: Ballinger Publishing Company,
1976.

Skinner, B.F. ' 's

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc. , 1978.

Stone, Philip, Dexter'C. Murphy, Marshall 8. Smith, and Daniel
M- Ogilvie- W

;e_gen;en;_5nelyeie. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1966.

Thompson, George E. gniig_£eyengiggy. New York: Houghton-
Mifflin Company, 1952.

Tittle, Charles R. and Richard J. Hill. "Attitude Measurement
and Prediction of Behavior. An Evaluation of Conditions
and Measurement Techniques." EQQiQEQLIY. 30, 1967, pp.
199-213.

Tyler, Ralph W. "The Contribution of ‘A Study of Schooling'

to Educational Research." EQQQQLiQD§l_L§§Q§I_nin, Vol.
41, April 1983, pp. 33- 34.

Volett, R.E. ' ' ' ° °
Beneen. St. Louis: The C.V. Mosby Company, 1977.

Walter, A. et al. "A Humanistic Program for Change in a Large
City School System." u i s o ,
10, Fall 1970, pp. 111-120.8

Weinberg, C. ' ' t' u 'o . Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1972.
Weller, R.H. fluneniseie Educatien; Visione eng Reaiitiee.

California: McCutchan Publishing Corporation, 1977.

't o e e c ' . Report to the President.
Superintendent of Documents , U . S . Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C., 1970.

White, Stephen W. "Wither Education Reform? Fresh
Perspectives and Concrete Goals can Revitalize Public
Education." Ine_flnnenie§. 47, May/June 1987.

Wilhelms, Fred T. "Design of the Curriculum." mm
a ° t u e ess ' ' Sc oo . .J. Galen
Saylor and J .L. Smith (eds.) Washington, D.C.: ASCD
Council on Secondary Education, 1971, p. 54.

Yatvin, Joanne. "Response to Goodlad." Educational
Leggenenip, Vol. 41, April 1983, p. 24.

151

Zavala, Albert. "Development of the Forced-Rating Scale
Technique-" WW3 63: 1 January 1965-