CHARACTERISTICS OF PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS RELATED TO INNER-CITY TEACHING PREFERENCES Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY THELMA R. 300A 1969 TH 18'. CHARACTERISTICS OF PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS RELATED TO INNER-CITY TEACHING PREFERENCES 0-169 This is to certify that the thesis entitled Thelma R. Boca has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Mdegree inLl:(§flQ~nI’Gv-7 Ed Wm+\.u'\ 244%, Major professor Date /O/Z'O/é’? presented by I 2-: BINDING BY nuns a SONS‘ . soot mm mm .. LIBRARY BINDERS SIIIIOPOPI. IICII‘A! / CHARA The p\ background anc‘ students prefer preferring othf were formulatt relationships 9 environments 3 Unden education class I I (D a) pond anonvn hundred and six ABSTRACT CHARACTERISTICS OF PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS RELATED To INNER-CITY TEACHING PREFERENCES By Thelma R. Boca The Problem The purpose of this study was to determine the general background and characteristics of undergraduate teacher education students preferring inner-city school assignment and those students preferring other types of school assignments. Twelve hypotheses were formulated to determine whether statistically significant relationships existed between certain variables of the students' environments and their choice of teaching assignments. Procedures Undergraduate education students enrolled in two required eduCation classes at a large midwestern university were asked to respond anonymously to a sixty-one item questionnaire. Five hundred and six questionnaires were analyzed. The We of significance 5 was.05 (a. = ,I desire or non-d. were tested by r Analyses of the ofthe F test, a; 1- So numties had no “figment, I F U! :U ‘1‘ Thelma R. Boca The twelve hypotheses were. stated in null form. The level of significance. selected as sufficient to reject the null hypothesis was .05 (CX. = .05). The major variable in this study was student desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city. Ten hypotheses were tested by means of the chi’square test for independence. Analyses of the data for two other hypotheses were done by means of the F test, an analysis of variance. Major Findings of the Study 1. Social-class composition of students' home com-, munities had no significant relationship to their choice of school assignment. 2. Social-class composition of students' elementary schools had no significant relationship to their choice of school assignment. 3. Social-class composition of students' secondary schools had no significant relationship to their choice of school assignment. 4. Racial composition of students' home communities had no significant relationship to their choice of school assignment. 5. Racial composition of students' secondary schools had no significant relationship to their choice of school assignment. I "‘- ~— 6. High relationship to S“ 7. C011 tionship I0 Stud?“ 8. Beg choice of schOO1 i 9, Rae did have a signifl merit. StudentS' were more likelj 10. Stu parental attitude indents preferr being more fave 11. Sti agreed more oft than students ch 12. SIT M more impo in the inner‘cit; Ninetei in an inner- City teen ' Thelma R. Boca 6. High school academic standing had no Significant relationship to students' choice of school assignment. 7. College grade point average had no significant rela- tionship to student choice of teaching assignment. 8. Beginning education students did not differ in their choice of school assignment from terminal education students. 9. Racial composition of students' elementary schools did have a significant relationship to their choice of school assign— ment. Students who attended racially integrated elementary schools were more likely to choose inner-city school assignment. 10. Students did differ significantly in their perception of parental attitudes toward their decision of teaching assignment. Students preferring inner-city assignment perceived parents as being more favorable toward their decision. 11. Students choosing inner-city teaching assignment dis- agreed more often with opinion statements on a measure of opinion than students choosing other teaching assignments. 12. Students choosing inner-city school assignment attrib- uted more importance to media' S influence on their decision to teach in the inner-city than students choosing other teaching assignments. Nineteen percent (96 students) chose teaching assignments in an inner-city school. Eighty-one percent (410 students) chose teaching assignments in other types of schools. Students astheir first and teaching where it children learn. selected as their inter-city the st; frequent in the ir 1. Th. 5I‘idents who ind greater effort 8}. Erelei'ant educa “Directive tea 2. Att I0 - I mod”), SIUdI’or Elf V.- tht'hone P‘fr‘r‘t Int u Each . . 1n the Ir [6C95~' pFO§ She II plaCEment 3’ CO pOQp f 1 :ti'v't Thelma R. Boca Students preferring inner-city school assignment selected as their first and second reasons for teaching in the inner-city as teaching where they could make a real contribution in helping children learn. Students preferring other teaching assignments selected as their first and second reasons for not teaching in the inner-city the statement that discipline problems would be more frequent in the inner—city schools. Implications and Recommendations 1. There is an identifiable group of teacher education. students who indicate a willingness to teach in the inner—city. A greater effort should be made to identify these students and provide a relevant education to insure a more successful experience for both prospective teachers and disadvantaged youth. 2. Attention should be given to development of strategies to modify student resistance toward teaching in the inner-city. Since eighty-one percent of the students questioned indicated a desire not to teach in the inner—city, adequate staffing of inner-city schools may necessitate programs designed to modify students' attitudes toward such placement. 3. Construction and implementation of tests for the pur— pose of selective recruitment of candidates for inner-city schools incorporating item differences betwee those students whc Thelma R. Boca incorporating items that demonstrate significant statistical differences between students oriented toward the inner-city and those students who are not should be initiated. CHARA( IN? ir Depar CHARACTERISTICS OF PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS RELATED TO INNER—CITY TEACHING PREFERENCES By Thelma RI ’Boca A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education Department of Elementary and Special Education 1969 The an for directing h“ ton, Ill, \I’illial appreciation f0i To fri' Banks who cont author express Gratit tional Consulta in research de State Universit 05the data. Love her continuing Who has been a Q, (0/59“ 0 #rr70 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author is deeply grateful to Professor William K. Durr for directing her doctoral studies. To Professors Frank Blacking— ton, HI, William Walsh, and Bruce Cohen the author expresses her appreciation for their continual support and encouragement. To friends Ermon O. Hogan, Robert Green, and James Banks who contributed their personal support and materials, the author expresses her thanks. Gratitude is expressed to members of the Office of Educa- tional Consultation, Michigan State University, for their assistance in research design and data interpretation and also to the Michigan State University graduate assistants who cooperated in the collection of the data. Love is acknowledged especially to the author' s mother for her continuing faith in all mankind and to her daughter, Deborah, who has been a delight and joy through the duration of this program. ii ACKNOWLE DGI lIST OF TAB L. CHAPTER 1. INT TABLE OF CONTE NT S ACKNOWLEDGMENT S LIST OF TABLES CHAPTER I. INT RODU CT ION General Statement of the Problem Definition of Terms . . . . Specific Statement of the Problem Importance of the Investigation Limitations of the Study . Organization of the Thesis II. SURVEY OF RELATED LITERATURE The Influence of Social-Class Back— ground of Teachers and Prospective Teachers on Their Ability to Teach Disadvantaged Youth Successfully The Genesis and Influence of Racial Attitude of Teachers and Prospective Teachers on Their Ability to Teach Disadvantaged Youth Successfully Review of Recent Innovative Training Programs for Prospective Teachers of Disadvantaged Youth Summary iii Page ii p—s I—aI—t OOOOCDUTH 13 20 26 32 CHAPTER lli. METI IV . AX A .Ippexom CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURE The Sample Instrumentation Statistical Hypotheses and Analysis Procedures . Summary IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA General Background and Characteristics of Students Participating in the Study . Analyses of the Hypotheses . Reasons Students Give for Choice of School Assignments Summary V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary and Findings Discussion of the Findings Implications of the Study Recommendations APPENDIX A. ADDITIONAL DATA Frequency Distributions and Means for Individual Opinion Statements and Choice of Teaching Assignment Frequency Distributions of Importance Attributed to Specified Sources by Students in Making Their Decision of the Type of School Assignment Preferred . . . . . . B . INSTRUMENT: GENERAL EDUCATION SURVEY BIBLIOGRAPHY iv Page 35 35 36 38 42 43 44 53 74 77 81 81 86 89 92 93 93 100 106 123 Table 3.1 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 ‘4 A Table LIST OF TABLE S Summary of the Characteristics of the Sample . Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignment and Predominant Ethnic Back- ground of Head of Student' 8 Household Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignment and Major Occupation of Heads of Students' Households . Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignment and Type of Elementary Schools Students Attended . Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignment and Type of Secondary Schools Students Attended . Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignment and Type of Community in Which Students Spent the Major Part of Their Youth . . Frequency Distribution for the Kind of School in Which Students Prefer to Teach Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignment and Grade Level Students Prefer to Teach Frequency Distribution for Student Choice of School Assignment and Elected Teaching Major Page 36 44 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 REM I9 £10 £11 4l2 I14 I15 4.16 4.17 4.18 Freq Free Fret FI‘QI Fre FEE FEE Fre Table Page 4. 9 Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignment and Social-Class Composition of Students' Home Communities . . . . . . . 55 4. 10 Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignment and Social-Class Composition of Students' Elementary Schools . . . . . . . 57 4. 11 Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignment and Social-Class Composition of Students' Secondary Schools . . . . . . . 59 4. 12 Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignments and Racial Composition of Students' Home Communities . . . . . . . . 61 4. 13 Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignments and Students' Attendance or Non-Attendance in Racially Integrated or Segregated Elementary Schools . . . . . . . 62 4. 14 Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignments and Students' Attendance or Non—Attendance in Racially Integrated or Segregated Secondary Schools . . . . . . . . 64 4. 15 Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignment on the Basis of Students' College Grade Point Averages . . . . . . . . 65 4. 16 Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignment on the Basis of Students' High School Academic Standings . . . . . . . 66 4. 17 Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignment for Beginning Education Students and Terminal Education Students . . . 67 4. 18 Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assignment and Students' Perceptions of ParentalAttitude. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 vi Table 4.19 Analy C C 4.20 Analy c c t t 4.21 Rank 4-22 Rank A-l Freq I2 Free A M Frec Table 4. 19 4.20 4.21 4.22 Analysis of Variance of Mean Scores of Opinions of Inner-city Students and of Opinions of Non-Inner-city Students Analysis of Variance Between the Mean Scores of Students Choosing to Teach in the Inner- city on a Measure of Importance Attributed to Media in the Making of Their Decision and the Mean Scores of Students Choosing Other Teaching Assignments Ranking of Students' Reasons for Wanting to Teach in the Inner-city Ranking of Students' Reasons for Not Wanting to Teach in the Inner-city Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Generally speaking, school achievement is negatively influenced by the home environment of the students in the inner-city while it is positively influenced for children in other schools Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Parental plans for the future of the child have a significantly more positive influence for outer-city children' 5 school achievement than such plans do for inner- city children Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Generally speaking, children in the inner-city schools are characterized by shorter attention spans than children attending other schools Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Values of inner-city children are in conflict with teachers' values vii Page 70 72 75 76 93 94 94 95 TEE A6 Frequer Ska inn 10‘s are if Freque SE ea In I7 Frequ S. rent! ASIO I7r Table A.5 Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Generally speaking, children in inner-city schools are characterized by a lower potential for effective learning than are other children Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Appropriate learning experiences can significantly raise the I.Q. level of inner-city children . Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: It is generally true that it is necessary for those who teach inner-city children to spend more time in motivating the student Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Most teachers in the outer-city fear teaching in the inner—city . Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Because of the nature of the problem and the nature of intelligence, there is little that can be done to raise the I.Q. level of inner-city children . Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: School tends to be a happier experience for outer-city children than for inner-city children . Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Discipline problems are more frequent in inner-city schools as compared with outer-city schools Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Generally, inner-city children have little desire to learn in school . viii Page 95 96 96 97 97 98 98 99 Table 113 A14 A15 AIS All A48 A.19 A.20 Freque to Free Fro FEE Fr Table Page A. 13 Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Conversations with School Personnel Students Knew in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to Teach In . , , 100 A. 14 Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Conversations with Friends in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen toTeachIn................ 101 A. 15 Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Personal Experience in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to TeachIn................. 101 A. 16 Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Lectures in Education Courses by Students in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to Teach In . . . . . . . . . 102 A. 17 Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Reading Materials in Education Courses by Students in Making Their Decisions of Type of School Chosen to Teach In . . . . . . . . 102 A. 18 Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Conversations with Student' 5 Family in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School ChosentoTeachIn............. 103 A. 19 Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Articles in Magazines in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to TeachIn................. 103 A. 20 Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed by Students to Articles in Newspapers in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School ChosentoTeachIn .... . . . . . . .. 104 ix Table 4.21 Freq 4.22 Freq Table Page 4. 21 Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed by Students to Television Programs Including the News in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to Teach In . . . . . . 104 4. 22 Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed by Students to Radio Programs Including the News in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to Teach In . . . . . . . . 105 13.5 The Shor deficient bines wi schools Afier Commj employed 0p teachers won 136'] 193(2th accept a DOsi The \ lHa 2 0p Ost ] 103. PP. 102 - CHAPTER I IN TRODUC TION General Statement of the Problem U. S. Commissioner of Education Harold Howe wrote in Grade Teacher, ‘I‘he shortage of highly skilled teachers is still the most serious deficiency in the schools of our impoverished areas. It com- bines with the segregation which characterizes many of these schools to offer second-rate education. [sic] After Commissioner Howe' s assertion, Grade Teacher magazine employed Opinion Research Corporation to determine where new teachers would most like to teach. They found that only 12% of the 1967 teacher graduates who were sampled stated that they would accept a position teaching in the inner-city. The Coleman report studied the preferences of future teachers concluding that there are more children of blue-collar 1Harold Howe, ”Where Teachers Are Needed the Most, " Grade Teacher, May/June 1967, pp. 102-103. Opinion Research Corporation, "Where New Teachers Would Most like to Teach, " Grade Teacher, May/June 1967, pp. 102-103. workers than tee that very few lU‘ dominantly min< more popular it states that rela find their way i entironmental Our 1; inferior" that 2 Efforts, Fear ““1595 young 1 systems. Inn. IEHCI‘IE‘I‘3_ The inner~city Sc} The mor. attract“, the leaSt eaChEI‘: and then agg Pa‘pat workers than teachers being produced who prefer to teach them; that very few future teachers of either race wish to teach in pre— dominantly minority schools; and that high ability pupils are much more popular with future teachers than low ability ones. Coleman states that relatively few of the best prepared future teachers will find their way into classrooms where they can offset some of the environmental disadvantage suffered by minority children. 3 Our large cities have schools labeled "depressed--ghetto—- inferior" that are not adequately staffed despite intensive recruiting efforts. Fear of assignment to schools regarded as "difficult" causes young teacher candidates to reject appointments to city school systems. Inner-city schools are not the first choice of most teachers. The critical need for thousands of well-trained teachers for inner-city schools requires immediate action. The more experienced teachers normally select the more attractive schools in white neighborhoods, thereby relegating the least experienced teachers to the disadvantaged schools. Teachers often begin with negative attitudes toward students and their ability and willingness to learn. These attitudes are aggravated by serious discipline problems, by the high crime 3United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Equality of Educational Opportunity (Washington, D. C. : U. S. Government Printing Office, 1966), Director of Study, Dr. James Coleman, p. 27. rates in 2 difficultic grounds. The ates. Only a survey, chos preference tc of the attituo‘ western univ Tea Perceptions I HThere are I 51311001 35 an Caucasian te \ 4 .- . Ur hallonal ‘Ad\ rates in areas surrounding the schools, and by the greater.- difficulties of teaching students from disadvantaged back- grounds. The teacher supply is replenished by young college gradu- ates. Only a small percentage, twelve percent in the Grade Teacher survey, chose to teach in the inner-city. 5 Sixteen percent stated a preference to teach in the inner—city schools on an exploratory study of the attitudes of undergraduate education students at a large mid- western university. Teachers, reflecting the values of society, do hold negative perceptions of disadvantaged and minority students. Green writes, "There are teachers who perceive an assignment to an integrated school as an academic affliction. "7 He states that Negro and Caucasian teachers teaching in depressed areas are aware that their schools are perceived as being "low status" and "low prestige” 4United States Riot Commission Report, Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders (New York: The New York Times, March 1968), pp. 428-429. Opinion Research, op. cit. 6Ermon O. Hogan and Thelma Boca, "Undergraduate Education Students' Opinions Regarding Teaching in the Inner— City, " unpublished paper, Michigan State University, March, 1968. 7Robert L. Green, "After School Integration--What? Problems in Social Learning, " Personnel and Guidance Journal, March 1966, p. 706. schools which to disadvantag Tea Ci minority stude Ateacher whc transmit this be false. The Teachers fail could not mas and perpetuat. aspiration tha deprived pers An e; and descripm enrironm Ent, COmPIEXes as regard the tag tion as Impos Impossible, 5 \ 8 9 A Educall ' O . 5‘| schools which cause them to have lower self-esteems when assigned to disadvantaged areas. Teachers holding negative perceptions of disadvantaged and minority students will not expect successful student performance. A teacher who defines students as inferior and likely to fail, will transmit this perception to students even though the perception may be false. The definition brings about a series of consequences. Teachers fail to present learning tasks they perceive the students could not master. Children do not need teachers who may instigate and perpetuate failure. Children need teachers with a level of aspiration that will enable them to become more than just another deprived person. An enormous body of literature exists--impressionistic and descriptive--describing the life of the inner—city child and his environment. Many consider the problems of the metropolitan complexes as overwhelming. Yet, there are those who refuse to regard the task of improving the condition of the inner-city pOpula- tion as impossible and choose to teach there, or, viewing it as impossible, still choose to teach there for personal reasons not the 81bid., pp. 704-710. 9A. Harry Passow, ed. , Deve10ping Programs for the Educationally Disadvantaged (New York: Teachers College Press, 1968). pp. 5-11. least of which 1' situation. This graduate educa see if there ar tion. Inner lower Society has establish grams; 1) p( illiterateS’ 2 standard hOI cut \ middle- Cla c E R City Schoo‘ 9 3 least of which is the possible challenge that goes with such a situation. This study will focus on certain variables of those under- graduate education students who chose to teach in the inner-city to see if there are common and identifiable elements in this p0pu1a- tion. Definition of Terms Inner-city school refers to schools serving children from lower socioeconomic areas. The Office of Economic Opportunity has established criteria for eligibility of schools for poverty pro- grams: 1) percent of minority population, 2) percent of functional illiterates, 3) low family income, 4) male unemployment, 5) sub- standard housing, 6) property value, 7) overall crime rate. Suburban school refers to schools serving children from middle-class and upper middle—class areas. These schools are situated away from the core area of the city. Urban school is synonymous with inner-city school. Disadvantaged student refers to students attending inner- city schools from low income families. Deprived student is synonymous with disadvantaged student. Minorithtudent refers to ethnic groups other than Caucasian but primarily Negro. Ra ciallj student populatir hundred percent The pi general backgr education stud« those students also dESigned Certain var,“ leaching aSSig Racially integrated school refers to a school in which the student population is neither one hundred percent Negro nor one hundred percent Caucasian. Specific Statement of the Problem The purpose of this investigation is to determine the general background and characteristics of undergraduate teacher education students preferring inner-city school assignment and those students preferring other school assignments. This study was also designed to determine whether relationships exist between certain variables in the students' environments and their choice of teaching assignments. In order to determine this, the following hypotheses were tested: 1. There is no relationship between social-class compo— sition of students' home communities and desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city. 2. There is no relationship between social-class compo— sition of students' elementary schools and desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city. 3. There is no relationship between social-class compo— sition of students' secondary schools and desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city. The stu to at‘ ta th n: There is no relationship between racial composition of students' home communities and desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city. There is no relationship between whether students attended or did not attend racially integrated elemen- tary schools and their desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city. There is no relationship between whether students attended or did not attend racially integrated secondary schools and their desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city. There is no relationship between prospective teachers who desire to teach in the inner-city and those who do not on the basis of their college grade point average. There is no relationship between prospective teachers who desire to teach in the inner-city and those who do not on the basis of their high school academic stand- ing. There is no relationship between beginning education students and terminal education students attending their last education class on the variable of their desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city schools. ll. 12. 10. There is no relationship between students' perceptions of parental attitudes and student desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city. 11. The Opinions of education students who do want to teach in the inner-city will not differ significantly on an instrument designed to elicit Opinions about inner—city teaching from the opinions of education students who do not want to teach in the inner-city. 12. Students choosing to teach in the inner-city will not differ on a measure of importance attributed to media in the making of their decision from students not choosing to teach in the inner-city. Importance of the Investigation As previously indicated, the schooling of children living in the inner-city has become a critical problem in our country. The multiple causes of this problem make solutions difficult to find. Studies such as the Grade Teacher Survey, 10 the Coleman Report, 11 12 and the United States Riot Commission Report, all cite statistics 0Opinion Research Corporation, op. cit. 1Coleman, op. cit. ”United States Riot Commission Report, op. cit. concerning thc the exodus of i first year tea< Empirical evi presence in tl teachers who ttis study shr prospective i‘ A st prospective t SChOOlS shou Suggest scho retaining per Studied Shout dePaI‘iments tion and/0r E a desire to t Fin can be affECt experiences concerning the grave need for teachers in the inner-city schools, the exodus of good teachers to the suburbs, and the unwillingness of first year teachers to accept positions with inner-city schools. Empirical evidence is conspicuous more for its absence than its presence in the research literature concerning those prospective teachers who chose to teach in the inner-city schools. Therefore, this study should contribute to the research relevant to the nature of prospective inner-city teachers. A study of previous environments and perceptions of those prospective teachers who indicate a desire to teach in inner-city schools should contribute to the understanding of this group and suggest school policies that might be employed in attracting and retaining personnel. Further, understandings of the group to be studied should be suggestive to colleges of education and state departments of public instruction concerned with the initial selec- tion and/or assigning scholarship grants to those students indicating a desire to teach in the inner-city schools. Finally, there is the possibility that some of the variables can be affected by actual instruction or careful structure of student experiences so that the proportion of the population willing to under- take inner-city teaching assignments might be increased. may b problem limitati. 10 Limitations of the Study Generalizations derived from the conclusions of this study may be limited for the following reasons: 1. This study was conducted at a large midwestern uni- versity. The characteristics of the students attending this university may differ significantly from students attending other colleges and universities. The research questionnaire might be reconstructed to be more discriminating and measure more precisely factors that influence teacher education majors who perceive inner-city teaching as either desirable or undesirable. The population included all students enrolled in two separate education courses. The composition of this population, including race, sex, social-class back- ground, and educational interests, may differ from term to term. Organization of the Thesis In Chapter I the primary concern has been to define the problem being studied, to identify its importance and its major limitations . Twelve hypotheses have been stated. (313 general area C113 inthe Shldl'l mentation, d foranalyzine [the hypothesis is those ChCKJSiI choosing to ti I\ St presented in adered. 11 Chapter II contains a survey of literature relating to the general areas pertinent to this dissertation. Chapter III explains the methodological procedures utilized in the study including a detailed description of the sample, instru- mentation, description of the research instrument, and procedures for analyzing data. Analysis of the data is presented in Chapter IV. Each hypothesis is discussed separately. Ranking of reasons for both those choosing to teach in inner-city schools and for those not choosing to teach in the inner-city schools are presented. A summary of the findings and conclusions of the study are presented in Chapter V. Implications for further study are con- sidered. "m ‘3 "rm! '4'. Nuni Imwspapers, onthe conditi have been ap; lothe evidern individuals he kinds of rem, ()ne failUre of lhe imer‘C—ity in} orrelevant u the mm of d CitySchools: The that are . Chlk CHAPTER II SURVEY OF RELATED LITERATURE Numerous articles appear daily in professional publications, newspapers, p0pular magazines, and research journals expounding on the conditions of America' s inner-city areas. Commissions have been appointed to study and determine the factors contributing to the evident decay and disturbances. Both commissions and individuals have given suggestions of causes and have offered many kinds of remedies. One recurring point discussed in many reports is the failure of the school to provide adequate and relevant education for inner-city inhabitants. Schools cannot be psychologically adequate or relevant without effective teachers. The classroom teacher is the point of direct contact with the pupil. Frequently, the inner— city schools not only lack effectively trained teachers but substitute inadequately trained people as teachers. Kontos and Murphy state: The critical agent for breaking the vicious cycle of poverty that children are victims of, is the teacher. But teachers are not trained to meet the needs of large-city school children. Basically, teacher training institutions are 12 oriented Teacher youth and urban p01 tion" and tion. P: in the Op imperce] unless tl‘ educatio: A di of teacher is We need "pe: 'Style' to cl I Thr Successful t Pupils’ pare are Well doc 80 ' \ 1 w (New l3 oriented toward an academic, traditional school setting. Teacher training patterns do not emphasize the needs of urban youth and new strategies for their teachers. . . . Now that the urban poor have been discovered, such terms as "experimenta- tion" and "innovation" have become catchwords of urban educa- tion. Projects and experiments multiply, yet visible changes in the operation and quality of inner-city schools remain imperceptible. And that lack of visible change will continue unless the training of the ~classroom teacher--the real agent of educational change- -improves . A different training of teachers to produce a different kind of teacher is the common charge to teacher training institutions. We need "people who have the will and the skill, the appropriate 'style ' to change the 'unteachable ' pupil into an active learner. " The Influence of the Social-Class Background of Teachers and Prospective Teachers on Their Ability to Teach Disadvantaged Youth Successfully The effects of social-class orientation of the teacher on successful teaching of disadvantaged youth and on his attitude toward pupils, parents, and teaching assignment to lower-class urban areas are well documented in the literature of education, psychology, and sociology. 1Peter G. Kontos and James J. Murphy, Teaching Urban Youth (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1967), pp. 7, 73. 2Miriam L. Goldberg, "Teachers for Disadvantaged Children, " in The Schools and the Urban Crisis, A. Kerber and B. Bommarito, eds. (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1965), p. 231. Vat‘ic inner-city tea conducted in 1 five of every Havighurst 8; students pm; Variability 1;- Country and . a large grou Sional famil middle and 1 Ad Certain acar Class Emir high]y Sty 14 Various figures have been assigned to the number of inner-city teachers from certain social-class backgrounds. Studies conducted in the 1930' s and 1940's cited that approximately ninety- five of every one hundred teachers came from middle-class origins. Havighurst says that the studies of various groups of teachers and students preparing to be teachers show there is considerable variability in social-class origin according to the region of the country and the size and type of college attended. He concludes that a large group of teachers is still drawn from business and profes- sional families, but that, increasingly, more are coming from lower— middle and upper-working classes. Admission to college is dependent upon the possession of a certain academic standing which frequently is the result of middle- class environment. This environment rewards academic performance highly. Students have learned skills, both academic and social, which function best in an educated, professionally-oriented milieu. Most are deeply committed to the American tradition of viewing hard work and success as essential to their way of life. This view 3 W. Lloyd Warner, Robert J. Havighurst, and Martin B. Loeb, Who Shall Be Educated? (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1944), pp. 102 - 103. 4Robert J. Havighurst, Education in Metropolitan Areas (Boston: Allyn 8: Bacon, 1966), pp. 198-199. of living ditier inner-city sch often undergo Many (ne understar puzzled h instructo teachers ing high}; experien between most oft ment, In lidd behave and p enabling her lCng Experie 15 of living differs sharply from that of the majority of pupils in inner—city schools. Beginning teachers in situations with lower-class pupils often undergo an emotional trauma from which they never recover. Many (new and experienced) teachers find it impossible to understand the attitudes and values of these pupils; they are puzzled by the students' reactions to the material and to the instructor, and by their often sullen, resentful behavior. Such teachers, coming from middle-class backgrounds and possess- ing highly academic training from colleges and universities, experience a cultural shock owing to the great difference between their own training and academic goals and those of most of their students. The result in many caeses is bewilder- ment, followed by disillusionment and apathy. Eddy adds that the beginning teacher expects her pupils to behave and perform according to middle-class standards, thus enabling her to carry out what her professional training and her own long experience as a student have led her to believe student and teacher performance should be. The inner-city child does not 5Gertrude Downing, Robert W. Edgar, Albert J. Harris, Leonard Kornberg, and Helen F. Storne, The Preparation of Teachers for Schools in Culturally Deprived Neighborhoods (Flushing, New York: The BRIDGE Project, Cooperative Research Project No. 932, Queens College of the City University of New York, 1965), pp. 2-4. 6Allison Davis, "Society, the School and the Culturally Deprived Student, " in Improving English Skills of Culturally Dif- ferent Youth in Large Cities, Arno Jewett, Joseph Mersand, and Doris V. Gunderson, eds. (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1964), p. 15. respond in we play. The schools by hi "inability to problems of not accepted oriented, la below EXpec‘ Se). stantiany fr have diffi cu middle-clas reaching th. reward S v‘b \ v-y intQ the Inn “Omani“ D1,; College Pr 8 in Educatir Rm .9 16 respond in ways supportive to this view of the role teachers should play. 7 The high rate of rejection of appointments to depressed schools by beginning teachers is suggested by Haubrich as the "inability to comprehend, understand, and cepe with the multiple problems of language development, varying social norms, habits not accepted by the teacher, behavior which is often not success— oriented, lack of student cooperation, and achievement levels well below expectancies of teachers. "8 Sexton writes that middle-class culture does differ sub- stantially from the lower-class culture. The lower—class child does have difficulty adjusting to these differences as exemplified in his middle—class teacher. She states, "We must learn new ways of reaching these groups, provide rules to which they can adjust and rewards which will stimulate their interest in school. " 7Elizabeth M. Eddy, "The Beginning Teacher' 5 Induction into the Inner-City School, " in Deve10ping Programs for the Educa- tionally Disadvantaged, A. Harry Passow, ed. (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1968), p. 238. 8Vernon F. Haubrich, "Teachers for Big City Schools, " in Education in Depressed Areas, A. Harry Passow, ed. (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1963), p. 246. 9Patricia Sexton, Education and Income (New York: The Viking Press, 1961), p. 79. A stuc career condUCi and intensity 0 the pupils. Th teach, uncontr morallyr unacc the spheres of better neighiir') taught, easy t moral level. 1 The ' class school é soon as possi change in the administratix nicer school. C011 tne View s of mg and their 10H Treachers " 1352), 47$ 11 I' \ 17 A study of the typical Chicago public school teacher' 8 career conducted by Becker found that teachers felt that the nature and intensity of problems vary with the social-class background of the pupils. The lower-class pupil is perceived as ". . . difficult to teach, uncontrollable and violent in the sphere of discipline and morally unacceptable on all scores, from physical cleanliness to the spheres of sex and 'ambition to get ahead. '” Children from better neighborhoods were viewed as ". . . quick learners, easily taught, easy to control and most acceptable" to teachers on the moral level. The new teacher typically begins her career in the lower— class school and either applies for a transfer to a better school as soon as possible or adjusts resignedly over the years. A further change in the ethnic composition of the neighborhood or in the administrative structure finds the teacher seeking a transfer to a nicer school. 11 Gottlieb' 3 report on the differences and similarities between the views of 36 Negro and 52 Caucasian teachers toward their teach— ing and their students in six inner-city elementary schools found that 10Howard S. Becker, "Career Patterns of Public School Teachers, ” The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 57 (March 1952), 472. 11113101., pp. 474-476. the Negro semned h: asygnnicr shortconii rnore ofte; flirty-thin whehrnos revealed t fun-loving observes; The ir a part beha‘fl and 50 the SC] Work, “CUItu; School ls areas to dE' beliefs Whl (i, \ l2 \’ L Summer 195 13 It \ 18 white teachers were generally raised in middle—class families and the Negro teachers in lower-class families. The Negro teachers seemed less likely to voice dissatisfactions with their teaching assignments. Those they did state were factors associated with the shortcomings and deficiencies in the system. The white teachers more often criticized the students or their parents. When a list of thirty-three adjectives was given to both groups, selection of those which most accurately described their pupils in the inner—city schools revealed the white teachers most frequently selected the adjectives fun-loving, happy, cooperative, energetic,and ambitious. 12 Gottlieb observesn The individual whose own educational experience included being a part of a middle—class culture where children were "well- behaved, " and sophisticated in handling of educational tasks, and socialized by parents who not only played an active role in the school and saw to it that their children did their school work, would no doubt experience the greater feeling of "cultural shock" when placed in the setting of the inner-city school. Israel studied effective teachers in disadvantaged urban areas to determine if they would express attitudes, opinions, and beliefs which reflect more favorable dispositions toward minority, 12David Gottlieb, ”Teaching and Students: The Views of Negro and White Teachers, " Sociology of Education, Vol. 37, Summer 1964, 345—53. 131bid., p. 349. ethniC, and r least effectiv orleast efth opinionsand and home en‘ understandin more aware these pith g: recommends who show a ; Oi pOVC‘I‘ty b( Pas teacher for } “"111 probabi; the emphasi; Class CUItUrt CUIture that \ 14 D J ESSed A thnlc and P L eachel‘s in (unlebhshed Epr 15 Thelnnep_ Sll‘om A Ci 19 ethnic, and racial groups than do their colleagues who were judged least effective. The principals rated those teachers most effective or least effective. He found that many of the teachers' attitudes, Opinions, and beliefs are directly related to the teachers' childhood and home environments. The competent teachers reflected a better understanding of the culture of the disadvantaged child. They were more aware of the patterns of living in the sub-culture and viewed these with greater empathy than did the less effective teachers. He recommends that those prospective teachers of disadvantaged youth who show a more positive attitude and an understanding of the culture of poverty be assigned to disadvantaged area schools. 14 Passow states that it is useless to belabor the middle-class teacher for having middle-class values as the majority of teachers will probably continue to be provided by the middle-class. Instead, the emphasis must be on knowing about and understanding the lower- class culture, especially to know where and when it collides with the culture that permeates our schools. 15 14‘B. L. Israel, "The Relationship Between Teachers' Expressed Attitudes, Opinions and Beliefs Regarding Minority, Ethnic and Racial Groups and Their Effectiveness as Classroom Teachers in Elementary Schools in Disadvantaged Urban Areas” (unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1967). 15A. Harry Passow, "Diminishing Teacher Prejudice, " in The Inner-City Classroom: Teaching Behaviors, ed. Robert D. Strom (Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Books, Inc., 1966), p. 106. lt-l Ano teachers and orientation. recnuhnent ness of teac children, I - . . ti substai Negrog chiefly some 1 from V the pa grams Puertt T devehpme the lié-‘thi ll. . $1 \i e lOr Advé 20 The Genesis and Influence of Racial Attitude of Teachers and Prospective Teachers on Their Ability to Teach Disadvantaged Youth Successfully Another area of concern is the racial attitude instilled in teachers and prospective teachers that come from a middle-class orientation. Unhealthy racial attitudes act as a barrier to both the recruitment of teachers for inner—city schools and to the effective- ness of teachers assigned to classes consisting of minority group children. Phillip Freedman asserts that: . . the Caucasian population of the United States harbors a substantial amount of racial prejudice directed against Negroes. . . . The teaching staffs of our urban areas, drawn chiefly from the Caucasian, middle-class reservoir, share in some measure, the negative racial attitudes of the communities from which they spring. . . . These negative attitudes impede the participation of the middle-class Caucasian teachers in pro- grams for the deprived child, who is usually either Negro or Puerto Rican. There is considerable evidence describing the genesis, the development, and the nature of racial attitudes. Goodman, during the 1940's, studied how and why race attitudes begin by observation of 103 New Dublin children. (New Dublin is a fictitious name for an existing area located in the northeast part of the United States.) The 16Phillip I. Freedman, "Racial Attitudes as a Factor in Teacher Education for the Deprived Child, " in Studies in Depriva- tion, Vernon Haubrich, ed. (Washington, D. C. : National Institute for Advanced Study in Teaching Disadvantaged Youth, forthcoming). chfldren, all Eity-severxxx of their home tightly in two .letropolis a: Data lb) participai ofdollsuac. SChool' 8 Sta In F85p< Contact COntae: nursery aCFOSS nquer} tarian a By Page giYe E\r Charact Such ex \ 17. (NEW ‘York :. 18. 19 u 21 children, all four years old, attended one of three nursery schools. Fifty-seven were Negro and 46 were white. The racial composition of their home area was mixed but the Negro population was clustered tightly in two areas. Two nursery schools were located in the Black . . . . . l Metropolis and one was 1n a predominantly White area. Data were gathered through (a) nonparticipant observation, (b) participant observation, (c) interviewing, (d) testing with four sets of projective materials--a set of jigsaw puzzles, a doll house and doll families, a set of pictures, and a collection of several types of dolls-—access to school records and incidental assistance from the school's staff. Some of the findings reported follow: In respect to racial orientations, frequency of inter—racial contact is probably of less significance than is type of contact. Contacts incidental to a generally pleasant situation, like the nursery school, are certainly conducive to friendly acceptance across the color line. . . . For a majority of our children, the nursery school is the most important stimulus toward equali- tarian and friendly cross-racial orientations. By age two, or two and a half, children are likely to begin to give evidence of consciousness of own and others' racial characteristics. Mothers of some New Dublin children reported such evidence. 1 7Mary Ellen Goodman, Race Awareness in Young Children (New York: Collier Books, 1964). 18Ibid., p. 206. 19Ibid., p. 252. Bythe ag' minimall} and many orientatir found to h direction manfiest insecurit children r tion that "I status. White we; concern \ The chil and prej ltwas ob was larg 'HHnistak diced att Were a r race auq recedes immEGiz Soc Q; ~-‘ .udmg ml phenomenor sanctions t . .EXt of SOC“ 13 a Q Origir {017111 \ r < 22 By the age of four nearly all normal children will be at least minimally and occasionally aware Of the physical marks of race and many will have developed distinct in-group/out-group orientations or incipient race attitudes. The Negro child was found to be basically out-group oriented, sharing a ”sense Of direction" away from Negroes and toward whites, which was manifest in friendliness but inferiority toward the out—group and insecurity with respect to their own racial status. The white children displayed growing race awareness and in—group orienta- tion that brought a greater sense of security in their racial status. Their basic orientation was within the orbit of the white world and quite without the racial self-doubt and self— concern which was evident in the Negro children. 20 The children clearly sensed a "taboo" around the topics of race and prejudice that were not to be explored or discussed Openly. It was observed repeatedly, that children whose public behavior was largely free Of racism provided, in private sessions, unmistakable evidence of race awareness and incipiently preju— diced attitude. Inferred reasons for this difference in behavior were a reticence about public expression relating to race and race awareness which may be evident in dolls and pictures recedes from the perceptual fields under the impact of live and immediate persons. Social psychologists, sociologists, and anthropologists studying negative racial attitudes view it as a social and cultural phenomenon and contend it is mainly sustained by social usages and sanctions. Clark adds that prejudice needs to be studied in the con- text Of societal, rather than individual, problems or pathologies. The problem of middle-class striving for status and success is a context in which one should seek for an understanding Of the origin and nature Of hostile (intergroup) attitudes. . . . Con- formity to and success in this competitive striving Or in other 20lbid., pp. 253-258. 211bid., p. 265. e -< 6.7- patterned rewards I persons l Amr- children are the invalid or prejudiced ch to conclusion problems to and generall and by intol. He adOlescentg tion) 18 Sen iheir Parcr A cities in g \ 2 BeaCOn P1 2 elated Wit 7’ 1E 23 patterned life-ways, brings such psychological advantages and rewards that the wonder is not that there are many prejudiced persons but that there are a good many relatively unprejudiced. Among second-graders, Kutner Observed that prejudiced children are not only less capable of producing valid conclusions but the invalid ones they do produce are dogmatically held. He found prejudiced children less able to form concepts, more ready to jump to conclusions, more easily discouraged and perplexed in the face Of problems to be solved, less likely to show insight and understanding, and generally, functioning cognitively in a fashion marked by rigidity and by intolerance Of ambiguity. Helfant reports in a study Of sociopolitical attitudes that adolescents tend to adopt an attitude which (when in the same direc- tion) is somewhat more extreme or emphatic than the attitude of their parents, especially their mothers. 24 A study by Galtung Of 2, 000 American youngsters from 21 cities in grades 9 through 12, found prejudice towards Negroes, 22Kenneth B. Clark, Prejudice and Your Child (Boston: Beacon Press, 1955), pp. 71-74. 3Bernard Kutner, "Patterns of Mental Functioning Asso- ciated with Prejudice in Children, " Psychology Monographs, Vol. 72, N0. 7, 1958. 24 K. Helfant, "Parents' Attitudes vs. Adolescent Hostility in the Determination Of Adolescents' Sociopolitical Attitudes, " Psychology Monographs, Vol. 66, No. 13, 1952, 1-23. lav-'5’ and the 19"81 0 not below ‘ C spectiV’e te Prospecttiv being aces] tolez‘ant in teacheI‘S' ' ship would dices Me n basic Part ( interchang‘3 A : Center (N01 studied effe Negro and is through inte adults. Th 24 Jews, and Catholics (in that order Of intensity). He concludes that the level Of prejudice among these high school students is at least not below current levels in the adult p0pulation. Children mature and become adults. Many become pro- spective teachers. Grambs Obtained evidence Of attitudes held by prospective teachers with a social—distance scale. Future teachers, being acceptably tolerant in viewing the teaching situation, were not tolerant in the personal living situation. As individuals these future teachers' rejection of minority groups in a personal-living relation- ship would cancel Out the professed classroom tolerance. "Preju- dices are not deposited outside the classroom door, but being a basic part of the personality will inevitably influence all human interchange that occurs within the schools. "2 A survey conducted by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC), University of Chicago, during the summer of 1966 studied effects of defacto school segregation and desegregation upon Negro and white adults in northern cities. Data were collected through interviews, 1, 624 with Negro adults and 1, 309 with white adults. These data suggest a variety of benefits for later life 25Johan Galtung, What High School Students Say . . . , Anti-Defamation League, New York, 1961, 24 pp. 26 Jean Grambs, "Are We Training Prejudiced Teachers?" School and Socigty, 71 (1950), 196-198. deriving fI‘O adult contaC attitudes. ing conclusi Prior d white A with Ne a child that the status ( To a le. probabi attitude The €111 adults I connect to the e lo more Presum Were SC hood, . be a film Childrer \ 2H . ’c in the Public 1's Office, 1 28 l': 25 deriving from schooling with Negroes--benefits ranging from more adult contact with Negro Americans to more favorable adult racial attitudes. 27 Analysis Of the NORC national data suggests the follow- ing conclusions: Prior desegregated schooling enhances the probability that white Americans will have had and will continue to have contact with Negro Americans. Or, negatively, school segregation as a child acts as a cumulative process and makes it less likely that the white American will experience other types of equal- status contact with Negroes. To a lesser extent, prior desegregated schooling enhances the probability that white Americans will express more positive attitudes toward interracial contact and Negro rights. The effects of prior school desegregation upon white American adults run in a reasonably direct fasion from that most closely connected to the interracial experience to that least connected to the experience. Childhood contact leads to later contact and to more favorable attitudes toward contact. Presumably, those who attended biracial schools as children were somewhat more likely to have lived in a biracial neighbor- hood. This means the school desegregation effects may in part be a function of more general experience with Negroes as children. 27United States Civil Rights Commission, Racial Isolation in the Public Schools (Washington, D. C. : U. S. Government Print- ing Office, 1967), pp. 211-241. 281pm, p. 224. 2 9Ibid. 30Ibid . 3 1Ibid. Thes experienced 1 Proper early racial attituc institutions c will allow p1 perceptions programs : Proposals Cation pI‘O‘ which dEp: booksend 26 These studies demonstrate that prospective teachers and experienced teachers cannot escape some degree of racial feeling. Proper early childhood interracial experiences may modify the racial attitudes of adults in the future. Meanwhile, teacher training institutions can provide the kinds Of educational experiences that will allow prospective teachers Opportunities to Obtain more realistic perceptions Of their teaching role and Of the inner-city child. A Review of Recent Innovative Training Programs for Prospective Teachers of Disadvantaged Youth All the available data suggest different kinds of training programs for prospective teachers Of inner-city children. Many proposals have been made prescribing ingredients for the new edu- cation programs. A few colleges have instigated special studies which depart from the traditional course of study, that Of lectures, books,and isolation from children and schools. The new programs are usually located within the inner-city core area and provide direct experience with disadvantaged students within the school setting. Though few in number, these programs are attempting to prepare prospective teachers for successful teaching experiences. Teachers who are satisfied and successful with their teaching assignments will be less likely to ask for transfers. One expe would be transfers side the c more sun. desire to pertainir. of the ext SOITH evaluated stu have relevant Free teachers, om Harlem and ] did not VOlUn lite procedu SO unyi,K OI teach be Wort One suc Still-Se of infor SElthh 27 One expected and observable consequence of program impact would be a reduction in the frequency Of teachers' requests for transfers from schools in disadvantaged areas to schools out- side the disadvantaged area. Presumably, teachers who are more successful and satisfied with teaching here would not desire to transfer out of these schools as frequently. Records pertaining to teacher turnover rate would afford direct evidence Of the extent these teachers fulfill this expected consequence. Some Of the innovative teacher training programs have evaluated student attitudes and teaching behaviors. These results have relevance for this study. Freedman and Langberg compared two groups of prospective teachers, one group composed entirely Of those who volunteered for Harlem and Bronx schools, the other group made up of those who did not volunteer but were assigned according to regular administra- tive procedures. SO unyielding have been the problems of administrative selection Of teachers to schools serving disadvantaged areas that it may be worthwhile to consider alternative proposals for staffing. One such alternative is recruitment based upon volunteer or self-selected applicants. . . . there is virtually a complete lack of information concerning the consequences Of such a self- selection procedure. 2Michael Usdan and Frederick Bertolaet, eds. , Teachers for the Disadvantaged, The Report of the School-University Teacher Education Project (Chicago: Follett, 1966), p. 236. 33Philip I. Freedman and George Langberg, "Self-Selection Of Student Teachers, " Integrated Education, August—November 1965, pp. 39-40. 34Ibid., p. 40. Both 22 Gough—Sanf selected from: a self—rating characteristit tions of stude in depressed- relative impo volunteer to r The a group, les noUvolunt e e r iSllCS’ the I: Charactemzl of Childhood Signs Of (llf Fr EtCComph-Sh llCUlar SCh many Stud. child, the] DOSitinve Q] 28 Both groups were evaluated using the F Scale, the 22 Cough-Sanford Rigidity Scale, a thirty item scale randomly selected from the final E Version of the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale, a self-rating scale that pertained to personal history and trait characteristics, a projective scale designed to gauge the percep- tions of student teachers with respect to the difficulties of teaching in depressed-area schools, and a scale designed to measure the relative importance of those factors that induced student teachers to volunteer for special school assignments. The significant test results show that volunteers were, as a group, less authoritarian, less dogmatic, and less rigid than the nonvolunteers. Examination of personal history and trait character— istics, the pattern of volunteer responses indicated a background characterized by strivings for autonomy, for the early acceptance of childhood challenges, and by a relative freedom from symptomatic signs of diffidence and fearfulness. Freedman and Langberg conclude that self-selection can accomplish the fitting of student teachers to the demands of a par- ticular school and school situation. They also indicated that although many students are attitudinally ill-equipped to teach the disadvantaged child, there were many among the nonvolunteers who did present positive characteristics and who were distinguishable from volunteers primarily by s 35 situation. Anot':. Teacher Educ: prospective te d‘E'felOmeIlt (: PTOblems of t memo 8e experience ir. Eigt regarding th D Scale, a r TeaClllng Si rank altern being in ar Inlt’entCer SEmamiC reSpOnde 29 primarily by superficial fearfulness of the special school situation. Another self-selective program, the Cooperative Urban Teacher Education Program (CUTE), was instituted to provide prospective teachers with a general set of concepts pertinent to the development of teaching skills, with special attention given to the problems of teaching in the inner-city. During the fall of 1967, twenty—two seniors in teacher education began a sixteen week field experience in Kansas City. 36 Eight instruments were incorporated to obtain the data regarding the classroom teaching behaviors of CUTE students: the D scale, a measure of openness of one' s belief-disbelief; the Teaching Situation Reaction Test which requires the examinee to rank alternative solutions to various classroom situations posed as being in an inner-city classroom setting; the Bown Self Report Inventory which yields attitude scores on eight distinct factors; the Semantic Differential which yields information about the meaning respondents attach to various topics; the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory to sample opinions about teacher-pupil relationships; the 35Ibid. 6Grant Clothier and James H. Lawson, Innovation in the Inner-City (Kansas City, Missouri: Mid-Continent Regional Educa- tional Laboratory, 1969). Cultural Attit compatibility Z-Seale, a R personal autc A C( semester. .1 CUTE 51 more ob group. A favor; Attitude and alsc testing 1 than the more cc Results CUTE 5' Control Was grg Pr program we under cont 1‘ A next fiVe y prograrn O: ServiCe tea \I 3» 30 Cultural Attitude Inventory to estimate an index of teacher compatibility in culturally deprived schools; the Pensacola Z-Scale, a forced-choice questionnaire designed to measure personal autonomy; and the McREL Interaction Analysis (MIA). A comparison group of students was established the second semester. A summary of important findings follows: CUTE students were more indirect, more pupil-oriented, more objective, and more experimental than the comparison group. A favorable change reflected by the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory gave evidence that CUTE students improved and also scored significantly higher from middle semester testing to end semester testing and also significantly higher than the comparison group. This indicated CUTE students were more compatible with teaching in culturally deprived schools. Results of the "McREL Interaction Analysis" indicated the CUTE students were less direct in statement and classroom control than the comparison group. The amount of pupil talk was greater in the CUTE students' classrooms. Probably the most convincing evidence that the CUTE program was a success is the fact that 31 of 40 graduates taught under contract in urban settings during the 1968-69 school year. A recent program proposal to be implemented within the next five years in the Chicago inner-city schools is a coordinated program of curriculum development, cooperative pre- and in- service teacher training and community involvement whose purpose 37Ibid., pp. 44-45. 31 is the improvement of achievement for youngsters of the inner- city. 38 The Continuous Development—-Mastery Learning program will require teachers with special capabilities. Teachers already possessing the necessary abilities will be identified. Others will need to be recruited and trained. Teacher recruits not capable of using Continuous DevelopmentuMastery Learning approaches will be given special training in a summer internship prior toplacement in the classroom. Internship, a combination of the El? internship model with a Hunter College type inner-city emphasis, developed jointly with a large number of midwestern universities and colleges, could supply one thousand recruits a year. The students serve as assistant teachers during the first internship year and are then responsible for a regular elementary school classroom during the second year. This group of teaching interns would not require a transition into the unique instructional patterns when hired as degree teachers as they would have had two years of training in the new approaches. Haubrich discusses another promising program for prepa- ration of personnel for the disadvantaged youth. Teacher Corps 38William‘W. Farquhar, Lee S. Shulman, and the Chicago Public Schools Committee, Learning and Instruction in Chicago Inner-city Schools, a position paper, June 1968. 32 candidates are college graduates who are not trained in teaching. The two-year program places heavy emphasis on experience with the disadvantaged. A paid internship may be an added inducement. The importance of the program is its major thrust in the direction of the education of disadvantaged youth. 39 Summary The review of literature in this chapter has been concerned with three general areas. The first area discussed was the relation— ship between the social-class orientation of teachers, prOSpective teachers and the indubitable difficulties in teaching disadvantaged youth. The reluctance of teachers to accept assignments in the inner—city schools and the reasons why so many leave can be partially attributed to the middle-class background of most teachers. Research conducted by Havighurst, Adair, Becker, Gottlieb, and Israel40 illustrated the social- class influence on the inner-city teacher' 8 performance. 39Vernon F. Haubrich, "The Teacher of the Disadvantaged, " in Racial Crisis in American Education, Robert L. Green, ed. (Chicago: Follett Publishing Co. , forthcoming). 40Havighurst, op. cit.;Adair, op. cit.; Becker, op. cit.; Gottlieb, op. cit.; Israel, op. cit. 33 The second section illustrates the genesis, the development, and the nature of racial attitudes. This was documented by the studies of Goodman, Kutner, Galtung, Grambs, and the National Opinion Research Center. 41 Grambstl2 concluded that prospective teachers do hold negative racial attitudes. Teachers and prospec- tive teachers cannot escape some degree of racial attitude as it is sustained by social usages and sanctions within our culture. Three innovative training projects were discussed in the third general area. Freedman and Langberg43 and the Cooperative Urban Teacher Education Program44 both demonstrate the effective— ness of a different approach to teacher training. Though limited in the number of students participating, these programs are examples of successful endeavors. Both were based on self- selection or the volunteer concept. The kinds of teaching behaviors delineated as successful in teaching disadvantaged youth were less authoritarian, less rigid, more objective, more pupil-oriented, and less direct in statement and classroom control. The Chicago 41Goodman, op. cit.; Kutner, op. cit.; Galtung, op. cit.; Grambs, op. cit.; National Opinion Research Center, op. cit. 42Grambs, op. cit. 43Freedman and Langberg, op. cit. 44CUTE Program, op. cit. 34 proposal45 was discussed briefly. Though not yet implemented, it is designed to recruit and train prospective teachers in the use of Continuous Development--Mastery Learning approaches with dis- advantaged youth. The Teacher Corps as another way of preparing personnel for teaching disadvantaged youth was briefly discussed. In conclusion, the literature and research illustrate that different approaches are needed for recruitment, identification of suitable candidates (both attitudinal and valuational), and training of prospective teachers of disadvantaged youth. 4 5Farquhar, Shulman, et a1., op. cit. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURE The purpose of this investigation was to determine the general background and characteristics of undergraduate teacher education students preferring inner-city teaching and those prefer— ring other school assignment. This study was also designed to determine whether relationships exist between certain variables in the students' environments and their choice of teaching assignments. The Sample The undergraduate education majors included in the sample were enrolled in two required education classes at a large mid— western university during the summer of 1968. The coordinators of the two courses granted approval for the study. Questionnaires were distributed to students in both classes. All responses were anonymous. Respondents answering 50 or more of the 61 items were included in the analysis. Only one respondent failed to answer 11 items. Others failed to answer 1-5 items. 35 36 This accounts for the variation in totals found in the tables. Five hundred and six questionnaires were analyzed. Two hundred and twenty-seven students were enrolled in the first required education course, "The Individual and the School, ” offered to sophomores and juniors. Two hundred and seventy-nine students were enrolled in the final education course, "School and Society, ” required of seniors after student teaching assignments were completed. Table 3. 1 presents descriptive data of the students included in this study. Table 3. 1. -- Summary of the Characteristics of the Sample. Individual School Total and School and Society Number 22 Enrolled 7 2 7 9 5 06 Male 66 7 7 143 Female 161 202 363 Negro 7 6 1 3 Caucasian 220 273 493 Instrumentation A preliminary form of the final questionnaire was administered to a group of 80 sophomore education majors in an 37 exploratory study during February, 1968. The study did reveal weaknesses in the questionnaire. A final form of the questionnaire was expanded and edited with the assistance of the Office of Research Consultation. 1 The first section was designed to collect descriptive data. This section was based on the National Principal' 3 Study questionnaire from the Harvard Principal' 8 Study. 2 Another section added to the final questionnaire was designed to obtain reasons for either wanting to teach in the inner-city or reasons for not wanting to teach in the inner-city. In addition, ten sources that might have influenced the prOSpective teachers' decisions of teaching or not teaching in the inner-city were listed. The students were asked to mark a five level scale from very important to very unimportant for each separate source that might have influenced their decision. The last section contained twelve opinion statements about inner-city teaching that students were asked to mark on a scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The statements were ers. Kay Bettinghaus, Office of Research Consultation, Michigan State University, assisted in the deve10pment of the ques— tionnaire. 2Robert E. Herriott and Nancy Hoyt St. John, Social Class and the Urban School (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1966), pp. 271- 273. 38 based on a short form teacher questionnaire developed for the Unified School District, Racine, Wisconsin. 3 The questionnaire may be found in Appendix B. Statistical Hypotheses and Analysis Procedures The initial analysis of the raw data was made with the Control Data Corporation (CDC) 3600 Computer using programs developed by the Agricultural Experimental Station. Analyses of the data for the following ten hypotheses were conducted by means of the chi square test for independence. 4 The chi square test for independence is used to determine if observed frequencies differ significantly from expected frequencies. In this analysis the major variable was student desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city. The research hypotheses tested by means of the chi square test for independence follow: 1. No relationship will be found between social-class composition of students' home communities and 3Milton Hillery, Director of Research for the Unified School District, Racine, Wisconsin, Unpublished Teacher Questionnaire. 4Sidney Siegel, Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. , 1956), p. 104. 39 their desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city schools. No relationship will be found between social-class composition of students' elementary schools and their desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city schools. No relationship will be found between social-class composition of students' secondary schools and their desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city schools. No relationship will be found between racial compo- sition of students' home communities and desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city schools. No relationship will be found between whether students attended or did not attend racially integrated ele- mentary schools and their desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city schools. No relationship will be found between whether students attended or did not attend racially integrated secondary schools and their desire or non-desire to teach in the inner— city 3 chools . 40 7. No relationship will be found between prospective teachers who desire to teach in the inner-city and those who do not on the basis of their college grade point average. 8. No relationship will be found between prospective teachers who desire to teach in the inner-city and those who do not on the basis of their high school academic standing. 9. There is no relationship between beginning education students and terminal education students attending their last education class on the variable of their desire or non-desire to teach in the inner—city schools. 10. No relationship will be found between students' per- ceptions of parental attitudes and their desire or non- desire to teach in the inner-city. Analyses of the data for hypotheses 11 and 12 were con- ducted by means of the F test, an analysis of variance. This is a statistical test of significance of the differences between the means obtained from two groups. 5Fred N. Kerlinger, Foundations of Behavioral Research: Educational and Psychological Inquiry (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc., 1966), p. 309. 41 11. The mean scores of students who choose to teach in the inner—city will not differ on a measure of opinion about inner-city teaching from the mean scores of students who do not choose to teach in the inner-city. Symbohcally: Ho: M1 = M2 Legend: M = opinions of students choosing to teach in the inner-city M = opinions of students choosing not to teach in the inner-city 12. The mean scores of students choosing to teach in the inner-city will not differ on a measure of importance attributed to media in the making of their decision from the mean scores of students not choosing to teach in the inner-city. Symbolically: H : M = M o 1 2 Legend: M1 = students influenced by media in making their choice to teach in the inner-city M = students influenced by media in making their choice not to teach in the inner-city The level of significance (0L ) chosen for all hypotheses was the . 05 level of statistical significance. In addition, this study will determine reasons students give for their choice of teaching in the inner-city or for not teaching 42 in the inner-city. These reasons will be ranked and reported in Chapter IV. Summary The purpose of this investigation was restated and the data collecting procedures were discussed. The population consisted of all undergraduate education majors enrolled in two required educa- tion courses at a large midwestern university. Five hundred and six questionnaires were analyzed. Twelve hypotheses were stated with a description of the appropriate statistical measures that were applied. These were the chi square test of independence and the F test, an analysis of variance. A ranking of reasons for choice of either teaching or not teaching in the inner-city will be reported in Chapter IV. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE DATA This study was designed to determine the general back— ground and characteristics of undergraduate teacher education students preferring inner-city school assignment and those students preferring other types of school assignments. In addition, twelve hypotheses were established to determine whether there were any relationships between certain variables of the students' environ- ments and their choice of teaching assignments. These hypotheses are evaluated in the order of their presentation in Chapter III. A discussion of the findings appears in Chapter V. The data presented in this chapter were collected by a questionnaire administered to all the undergraduate education majors enrolled in two required education courses. Respondents answering 50 or more of the 61 items were included in the analysis. Five hundred and six questionnaires were analyzed. There is variation found in the totals of the tables because a few students failed to answer some items. 43 44 General Background and Characteristics of Students Participatig in the Study The following descriptive data present the frequency distributions and percentages of the total population of those students who prefer other types of school assignments and of those students who prefer inner-city teaching assignment. Table 4. 1. -- Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign- ment and Predominant Ethnic Background of Head of Student's Household. Inner-city Other School School , Total Choice Choice Afro-Arnerican 9 ( 1. 8%) 4 ( 0. 8%) 13 ( 2 . 6%) French 4 ( 0. 8%) 18 ( 3. 6%) 22 ( 4. 4%) Anglo-Saxon 41 ( 8. 2%) 168 (33. 6%) 209 ( 41. 8%) Germanic 25 ( 5. 0%) 109 (2 1. 8%) 134 ( 26. 8%) Irish 6 ( 1. 2%) 38 ( 7. 6%) 44 ( 8. 8%) Jewish 2 ( 0. 4%) 19 ( 3. 8%) 21 ( 4. 2%) Italian ‘ 2 ( 0. 4%) 10 ( 2 . 0%) 12 ( 2 . 4%) Polish 5 ( 1. 0%) 31 ( 6. 2%) 36 ( 7. 2%) Spanish 0 ( 0.0%) 7 ( 1.4%) 7 ( 1.4%) Latin American 1 ( O. 2%) 1 ( O. 2%) 2 ( O. 4%) Total 95 (19. 0%) 405 (81. 0%) 500 (100. 0%) 45 The heads of students' households were predominantly Anglo-Saxon and Germanic (68.6%). A majority of students preferring other types of school assignments came from homes in which the head of the household was either Anglo-Saxon or Germanic (55.4%). A majority of students preferring inner-city teaching assignment also came from homes in which the head of the household was either Anglo-Saxon or Germanic (13.2%). Thirteen Afro-American students (2. 6%) participated in the study. Four students (0.8%) chose other types of school assignments and nine students (1.8%) chose inner-city school assignment. A majority of the students came from homes where heads of the households' occupations were managerial, executive pro- prietor of a large business, commissioned officer (20. 8%); skilled worker or foreman, noncommissioned officer (16. 7%); profes- sional, other than education, or scientific (16. 3%); or small business owner or manager (15. 5%); a total of 69. 3%. Students preferring other school assignments comprised 56. 5% of this total and students preferring inner-city assignment, 12. 8%. 46 Table 4. 2. -- Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign- ment and Major Occupation of Head of Students' Households. Inne r - city Other School School Total Choice Choice Education 8 ( 1.6%) 26 ( 5.2%) 34 ( 6.8%) Professional (Other than Education) or 15 ( 3.0%) 67 (13. 3%) 82 ( 16. 3%) Scientific Managerial, Execu— tive Proprietor of Large Business or 19 ( 3.8%) 86 (17.0%) 105 ( 20.8%) Commissioned Officer Small Business Owner or Manager 13 ( 2.6%) 65 (12. 9%) 78 ( 15.5%) Farm Owner 3 ( 0. 6%) 34 ( 6.8%) 37 ( 7.4%) Clerical or Sales 5 ( l. 0%) 29 ( 5. 8%) 34 ( 6. 8%) Skilled Worker or Foreman, Noncom- l7 ( 3.4%) 67 (13.3%) 84 ( 16.7%) missioned Officer Semi-skilled Worker, Unskilled or Farm 14 ( 2. 8%) 30 ( 6.0%) 44 ( 8. 7%) Laborer Unemployed 1 ( 0.2%) 4 ( 0.8%) 5 ( 1.0%) Total 95 (19. 0%) 408 (81. 0%) 503 (100. 0%) 47 Four hundred and six students (81%) attended public elementary schools and 95 students (19%) attended either private or parochial elementary schools. Table 4. 3. -- Frequency Distribution for Choice of Student Assign- ment and Type of Elementary Schools Students Attended. Inner - city Other School School Total Choice Choice Public 82 (16. 4%) 324 (64. 6%) 406 ( 81. 0%) Parochial 13 ( 2. 6%) 75 (15. 0%) 88 ( 17. 6%) Private (Other than Parochial) 1 ( 0. 2%) 6 ( 1. 2%) 7 ( 1. 4%) Total 96 (19.2%) 405 (80. 8%) 501 (100. 0%) Four hundred and thirty-two students (85. 9%) attended public secondary schools. Seventy-one students (14. 1%) attended either private or parochial secondary schools. 48 Table 4. 4. -- Frequency Distribution for Choice of Student Assign- ment and Type of Secondary Schools Students Attended. Inner—city Other School School Total Choice Choice Public 85 (16.9%) 347 (69.0%) 432 ( 85. 9%) Parochial 10 ( 2. 0%) 55 (10. 9%) 65 ( 12. 9%) Private (Other than Parochial) 0 ( 0. 0%) 6 ( 1. 2%) 6 ( 1.2%) Total 95 (18. 9%) 408 (81. 1%) 503 (100. 0%) Three hundred and thirty-six students (66. 7%) spent the major part of their youth in villages or towns, small cities, cities (50, 000—500, 000), or suburban areas near cities. Two hundred and twenty~four students (44.4%) preferring other school assign- ments came from villages or towns, small cities andlarger cities (50, 000-500, 000). Fifty-eight students (11.6%) preferring inner—city school assignment lived in population areas of 50, 000 or more. 49 Table 4. 5. -- Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign- ment and Type of Community in which Students Spent the Major Part of Their Youth. Inner - city Other School School Total Choice Choice Farm 10 ( 2.0%) 51 (10.1%) 61 ( 12.1%) Village or Town (under 10,000) 15 ( 3-0‘70) 91 (18.0%) 106 ( 21.0%) Small City (10, 000-50, 000) 12 ( 2-4‘70) 67 (13.3%) 79 ( 15.7%) City 27 ( 5 4%) 66 (13 1%) 93 ( 18 5%) (50,000-500,000) . . . Suburban Area Near City 3 < 1-6%> 50 ( 9.9%) 58 ( 11.5%) Metropolis (500,000+) 16 ( 3.2%) 45 ( 8.9%) 61 ( 12.1%) Suburban Area Near Metropolis 7 ( 1'47") 39 1 7-7%) 45 ( 9. 1%) Total 95 (19. 0%) 409 (81. 0%) 504 (100. 0%) Ninety-six students (19%) participating in the study pre- ferred inner-city school assignment. Four hundred and ten students (81%) preferred other types of school assignments. 50 Table 4. 6. -- Frequency Distribution for the Kind of School in Which Students Prefer to Teach. Number Percent Inner-city 96 ( 19%) Outer City 42 ( 8%) Suburban 159 ( 32%) Rural 27 ( 5%) Small City or Town 83 ( 16%) College 40 ( 8%) No Preference 59 ( 12%) Total 506 (100%) One hundred and sixty-nine students (33. 8%) chose to teach in the elementary grades while 233 students (46. 5%) chose the high school grades. One hundred and ninety—two students (38. 3%) preferring other school assignment chose senior high while 129 students (25‘. 8%) chose the elementary grades. The students preferring inner-city teaching assignment were almost equally divided between elementary grades (8%) and senior high (3. 2%). 51 Table 4. 7. -- Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign- ment and Grade Level Students Prefer to Teach Inner- city Other School School Total Choice Choice Egg Elementary 21 ( 4.2%) 70 (14.0%) 91 ( 18.2%) figmememar)’ 19 ( 3.8%) 59 (11.8%) 78 ( 15.6%) )1:fo High 8 ( 1.5%) 47 ( 9.4%) 55 ( 10.9%) ffgfig)fligh 41 ( 8.2%) 192 (38.3%) 233 (46.5%) ggtafpglzvelDoes 7 ( 1.3%) 37 ( 7.5%) 44 ( 8.8%) Total 96 (19.0%) 405 (81.0%) 501 (100.0%) One hundred and thirty-seven students (28. 2%) selected social studies as their teaching major. English and Speech was selected by ninety-five students (19. 5%) as their teaching major. These two majors were also selected most frequently by both groups, those preferring other school assignments and those pre- ferring inner-city school assignment. 52 Table 4. 8. -- Frequency Distribution for Student Choice of School Assignment and Elected Teaching Major. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice Arts & Crafts 3 ( 0. 6%) 11 ( 2.4%) 14 ( 3. 0%) Business— Industrial Arts 5 ( 1. 0%) 19 ( 3. 9%) 24 ( 4. 9%) English 8: Speech 25 ( 5. 1%) 70 (14.4%) 95 ( 19. 5%) Foreign Languages 4 ( 0. 9%) 17 ( 3. 5%) 21 ( 4. 4%) Mathematics 6 ( 1.2%) 43 ( 8. 8%) 49 ( 10. 1%) Music (Vocal & Instrumental) 5 ( 1.0%) 26 ( 5. 3%) 31 ( 6. 4%) Physical Education 2 ( 0. 4%) 27 ( 5. 6%) 29 ( 6. 0%) Science 7 ( 1. 4%) 52 (10. 7%) 59 ( 12. 1%) Home Economics 0 ( 0. 0%) 27 ( 5. 6%) 27 ( 5. 6%) Social Studies (Economics, History, Government, Geog- 36 ( 7. 4%) 101 (20. 8%) 137 ( 28.2%) raphy, Sociology, Psychology) Total 93 (19.0%) 393 (81.0%) 486 (100.0%) Social-class composition of students' home communities, elementary schools, and secondary schools revealed that approxi- mately 400 students (80%) of the population studied lived in 53 middle—class communities, attended middle-class elementary schools, and approximately four hundred and twenty-one students (84%) attended middle-class secondary schools. Tables 4. 9, 4. 10, and 4. 11 give the frequency distributions for students' home communities, elementary schools, and secondary schools. Racial composition of students' home communities, elementary schools, and secondary schools revealed that two hundred and fifty-five students (50. 6%) lived in racially segregated home communities, three hundred and forty-three students (69. 1%) attended racially segregated elementary schools and two hundred and nineteen students (43. 1%) attended racially segregated secondary schools. Tables 4. 12, 4. 13, and 4. 14 list frequency distributions for the racial composition of students' home communities, elementary schools, and secondary schools. Analyses of the Hypotheses Analyses of the data for the twelve hypotheses follow. 1 Results can be applied only to this population. The statistical hypotheses were stated in the null form. A chi square statistic was computed for the first ten hypotheses to determine whether er. David Wright and Mr. William Loadman, Office of Research Consultation, Michigan State University, assisted the investigator in computer programming and interpretation of the data. 54 relationships exist. The acceptance level of significance ( (X. ) for all hypotheses was the .05 level. Hypothesis 1 55 Ho: There is no relationship between social-class composition of students' home communities and desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city. Table 4. 9. -- Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign- ment and Social-Class Composition of Students' Home Communities. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice Predommamly 2 ( 0.4%) 14 ( 2.8%) 16 ( 3.2%) Upper-Class Combination Upper-Middle 12 ( 2.4%) 85 (16.7%) 97 ( 19. 1%) Class Predominantly Middle-Class 32 (6.3%) 144 (28.5%) 176 (34.8%) Combination Middle-Working 33 (6.5%) 98 (19.4%) 131 (25.9%) Class Predominantly Working-Class 12 ( 2.4%) 48 ( 9.4%) 60 ( 11.8%) Combination Middle-Lower 2 ( 0.4%) 16 ( 3.2%) 18 ( 3.6%) Class Predommantly 3 ( 0.6%) 5 ( 1.0%) 8 ( 1.6%) Lower-Class Total 96 (19.0%) 410 (81.0%) 506 (100.0%) X2=9.104 d.f.=6 O(.=.05 56 According to Siegel, 2 the X2 value with six degrees of freedom (0:. = . 05) is 12. 592. An X2 value of 12.592 or more indicates that there is a significant difference in the frequency distribution of responses to this item. Since X2 < 12.592, the null hypothesis was accepted. There is no relationship between social— class composition of students' home communities and choice of teaching assignment. 2Siegel, op. cit. , p. 249. All X2 values cited in the analyses of the data were read from the same X table. Hypothesis 2 Ho: 57 There is no relationship between social—class composition of students' elementary schools and desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city. Table 4. 10. -- Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign- ment and Social—Class Composition of Students' Elementary Schools. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice Predominantly Upper_CIaSS 1 ( 0.2%) 6 ( 1.2%) 7 ( 1.4%) Combination Upper-Middle 5 ( 1.0%) 39 ( 7.7%) 44 ( 8.7%) Class Predominantly Middle-Class 34 ( 6.7%) 142 (28.2%) 176 ( 34.9%) Combination Middle-Working 31 (6.1%) 135 (26.8%) 166 (32.9%) Class Predominantly O Working-Class 16 ( 3.2%) 68 (13.5%) 84 ( 16.7/0) Combination Middle-Lower 6 ( 1.2%) 14 ( 2.8%) 20 ( 4.0%) Class Predominantly Lower-Class 3 (0.6%) 4 (0.8%) 7 ( 1.4%) Total 96 (19.0%) 408 (81.0%) 504 (100.0%) X2=5.941 d.f.=6 06:.05 58 2 Since X < 12.592, the null hypothesis was accepted. There was no significant difference in the frequency distribution of responses to this item. No relationship exists between the social- class composition of students' elementary schools and their choice of teaching assignment. Hypothesis 3 Ho: 59 There is no relationship between social—class composition of students' secondary schools and desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city. Table 4. 11. -— Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign- ment and Social—Class Composition of Students' Secondary Schools. Inner—city Other School School Total Choice Choice Predominantly 04 Upper_C1aSS 3 ( 0.6%) 13 < 2.6%) 16 ( 3.2%) Combination Upper-Middle 6 ( 1.2%) 58 (11.5%) 64 ( 12.7%) Class Predominantly Middle-Class 29 ( 5.7%) 130 (25.7%) 159 ( 31.4%) Combination Middle-Working 40 ( 7.9%) 133 (26.3%) 173 ( 34.2%) Class Predominantly 0 0 Working_ClaSS 11 ( 2.2%) 45 ( 8.9/0) 56 ( 11.10) Combination Middle-Lower 4 ( 0.8%) 22 ( 4.4%) 26 ( 5.2%) Class Predominantly 0 Lower-Class 2 (0.4%) 9 ( 1.8%) 11 ( 2.2%) Total 95 (18.8%) 410 (81.2%) 505 (100.0%) x2 = 6.098 d.f. = 0!. .05 60 2 Since X < 12.592, the null hypothesis was accepted. There was no significant difference in the frequency distribution of responses to this item. No relationship exists between the social- class composition of students' secondary schools and student choice of school assignment. 61 Hypothesis 4 Ho: There is no relationship between racial composition of students' home communities and desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city. Table 4. 12. -- Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign- ments and Racial Composition of Students' Home Communities. Inner- city Other School School Total Choice Choice Racially Integrated Home Communities 45 (8’97") 210 (41'70/0) 255 (SO-6%) Racially Segregated ( 0 Home Communities 51 (10.1%) 198 (39.3%) 249 (49.4%) Total 96 (19.0%) 408 (81.0%) 504 (100.0%) H H X =.6566 d.f. (x=.05 Since X2 < 3. 841, the null hypothesis was accepted. There was no significant difference in the frequency distribution of reSponses to this item. No relationship exists between whether students' home communities were segregated or racially integrated and their choice of school assignment. 62 Hypothesis 5 Ho: There is no relationship between whether students attended or did not attend racially integrated elementary schools and their desire or non—desire to teach in the inner-city. Table 4. 13. -- Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign— ments and Students' Attendance or Non—Attendance in Racially Integrated or Segregated Elementary Schools. Inner- city Other School School Total Choice Choice Racially Int egrat ed Elementary schools 56 (11.3%) 287 (57.8%) 343 (69.1%) Racially Segregated Elementary Schools 39 ( 7'9%) 114 (23'00/0) 153 ( 130-9070) Total 95 (19.2%) 401 (80.8%) 496 (100.0%) X2=6.246 d.f.=1 (X.=.05 Since X2 > 3.841, the null hypothesis was rejected. There was a significant difference in the frequency distribution of responses to this item. A relationship does exist between the racial composi— tion of the elementary schools students attended and their choice of teaching assignments. Students who have attended racially integrated 63 elementary schools are more likely to choose inner-city school assignment. 64 Hypothesis 6 Ho: There is no relationship between whether students attended or did not attend racially integrated secondary schools and their desire or non—desire to teach in the inner-city. Table 4. 14. -- Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign- ments and Students' Attendance or Non-Attendance in Racially Integrated or Segregated Secondary Schools. Inner- city Other School School Total Choice Choice Ra cially Int egrat ed . 1 , . 0 Secondary Schools 36 ( 7 2%) 83 (35 9%) 219 ( 43 1/0) Racially Segregated 0 Secondary Schools 60 (11'90/0) 226 (45.0%) 286 ( 56,9/0) Total 96 (19.1%) 409 (80.9%) 505 (100.0%) X =1.480 d.f.-:1 (1:.05 Since X2 < 3. 841, the null hypothesis was accepted. There was no significant difference in the frequency distribution of responses to this item. No significant relationship exists between whether students attended or did not attend racially integrated secondary schools and their choice of teaching assignment. 65 Hypothesis 7 Ho: There is no relationship between prospective teachers who desire to teach in the inner—city and those who do not on the basis of their college grade point average. Table 4. 15. -— Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign— ment on the Basis of Students' College Grade Point Averages. Inner — city Other School School Total Choice Choice 3.5-4.0 4 ( 0.8%) 25 ( 5.0%) 29 ( 5.8%) 3.49-3.0 13 ( 2.6%) 86 (17.2%) 99 ( 19.8%) 2. 99-2. 5 39 ( 7. 8%) 152 (30.5%) 191 ( 38.3%) 2.49-2.0 34 ( 6.8%) 132 (26.5%) 166 ( 33.3%) Under 2.0 5 ( 1. 0%) 9 ( 1. 8%) 14 ( 2. 8%) Total 95 (19. 0%) 404 (81. 0%) 499 (100. 0%) X =5.745 d.f. = (X .05 2 Since X < 9. 488, the null hypothesis was accepted. was no significant difference in the frequency distribution of There responses to this item. No significant relationship exists between prospective teachers who desire to teach in the inner—city and those who do not on the basis of their college grade point average. Hypothesis 8 Ho: 66 There is no relationship between prospective teachers who desire to teach in the inner-city and those who do not on the basis of their high school academic standing. Table 4. 16. -- Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign— ment on the Basis of Students' High School Academic Standings. Inner—city Other School School Total Choice Choice Far Above Average 29 ( 5. 8%) 118 (23.4%) 147 ( 29.2%) Above Average 47 ( 9.2%) 214 (42.5%) 261 ( 51.7%) Average 15 ( 3.0%) 59 (11.7%) 74 ( 14.7%) Below Average 4 ( 0. 8%) 15 ( 3.0%) 19 ( 3. 8%) Far Below Average 0 ( 0. 0%) 3 ( 0. 6%) 3 ( 0. 6%) Total 95 (18. 8%) 409 (81 . 2%) 504 (100. 0%) X2=1.050 d.f. =4 (X .05 . 2 . Since X < 9.488, the null hypothe31s was accepted. There was no significant difference in the frequency distribution of responses to this item. No significant relationship exists between prospective teachers who desire to teach in the inner-city and those who do not on the basis of their high school academic standing. Hypothesis 9 Ho: 67 There is no relationship between beginning education students and terminal education students attending their last education class on the variable of their desire or non-desire to teach in the inner-city schools. Table 4. 17. —- Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign- ment for Beginning Education Students and Terminal Education Students. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice Individual and School Course 49 ( 9.7%) 178 (35.2%) 227 ( 44.9%) (Beginning Students) School and Society Course 47 ( 9.3%) 232 (45.8%) 279 ( 55.1%) (Terminal Students) Total 96 (19.0%) 410 (81.0%) 506 (100.0%) X2=1.829 d.f.=l OL .05 2 Since X < 3.841, the null hypothesis was accepted. There was no significant difference in the frequency distribution of responses to this item. No significant relationship exists between prOSpective teachers who desire to teach in the inner—city and those who do not on the basis of their college level of education. 68 Hypothesis 10 Ho: There is no relationship between students' perceptions of parental attitudes and their choice of school assignment, inner-city or other schools. Table 4. 18. —- Frequency Distribution for Choice of School Assign- ment and Students' Perceptions of Parental Attitude Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice Very Good Idea 18 ( 3. 7%) 17 ( 3. 4%) 35 ( 7. 1%) Good Idea 20 ( 4. 0%) 56 (11.3%) 76 ( 15.3%) Unaffected 29 ( 5. 9%) 154 (31. 1%) 183 ( 37.0%) Bad Idea 22 ( 4. 4%) 139 (28.1%) 161 ( 32.5%) Very Bad Idea 6 ( 1. 2%) 34 ( 6. 9%) 4O ( 8.1%) Total 95 (19.2%) 400 (80. 8%) 495 (100. 0%) X2=30.885 d.f.=4 0L=.05 Since X2 > 9.488, the null hypothesis was rejected. There was a significant difference in the frequency distribution of responses to this item. There was a relationship between students' percep— tions of parental attitudes toward student desire to teach in the inner-city and their choice of teaching assignment. Students pre— ferring inner-city school assignment did perceive parental attitudes to be more favorable toward their desire to teach in the inner-city. 69 Analyses of the data for hypotheses 11 and 12 were conducted by means of the F test, an analysis of variance. This is a statistical test of significance of the difference between the means obtained from two groups. 70 Hflothesis 1 1 Ho: The mean scores of students who choose to teach in the inner-city will not differ on a measure of opinion about inner-city teaching from the mean scores of students who do not choose to teach in the inner-city. Table 4. 19. -- Analysis of Variance of Mean Scores of Opinions of Inner-city Students and of Opinions of Non-Inner-city Students. Means Inner-city = 25. 546 Other = 27. 083 Source of Sum of d 1‘ Mean F Variation Squares ° ' Square Value Between. 185.196 1 185.196 6. 211* Categories Wlthm . 15057. 222 505 29.816 Categorles Total 15242.418 *Significant at the (X. = .05 level. The findings presented in Table 4. 19 show that the mean scores of students choosing inner-city assignments do differ on a measure of opinion from the mean scores of students choosing other school assignments. The students choosing inner-city assignment 71 tended to disagree more often with the statements3 than students choosing other teaching assignments. The null hypothesis was rejected. The twelve opinion statements, frequency distributions and means can be found in Appendix A. 72 Hypothesis 12 Ho: The mean scores of students choosing to teach in the inner-city will not differ on a measure of importance attributed to media in the making of their decision and the mean scores of students not choosing to teach in the inner—city. Table 4. 20. -- Analysis of Variance Between the Mean Scores of Students Choosing to Teach in the Inner—city on a Measure of Importance Attributed to Media in the Making of Their Decision and the Mean Scores of Students Choosing Other Teaching Assignments. Means Inner-city Students = 9. 093 Other Students = 7. 568 Source of Sum of d 1‘ Mean F Variation Squares ' ' Square Value Between. 182. 304 1 182.304 9. 230* Categor1es Wlthm . 9974.753 505 19.752 Categor1es Total 10157.057 *Significant at the (X. = .05 level. The findings presented in Table 4. 20 show that the mean scores of students choosing inner-city assignments do differ on a 73 . . . 4 . . . measure of importance attributed to media 1n the making of the1r decision from the mean scores of students choosing other assign- ments. The null hypothesis was rejected. 4A comparison of percentages and frequency distributions for the media are located in Appendix A. 74 Reasons Students Give for Choice of School Assignments Students were asked to select from a list of ten statements the major reason, the second most important reason, and the third most important reason for their choice of teaching assignment. Tables 4. 21 and 4.22 give the rankings. Students preferring inner-city assignment selected as their first and second most important reasons for teaching in the inner— city as teaching where they could make a real contribution in helping children learn. Good teachers are needed more in the inner-city received a high ranking on the choice of their major reason for the type of school assignment they prefer. The students also considered important the statements that teaching in the inner-city would be more personally rewarding, more challenging, and more profes- sionally satisfying. Students preferring other teaching assignments selected as their first and second most important reasons for not teaching in the inner-city the statement that discipline problems would be more frequent in the inner-city schools. Other reasons that received a high ranking were statements that teaching in the inner-city is too difficult for beginning teachers, it is dangerous, values of the children would conflict with teachers' values, and teaching would be more difficult because of parents' attitudes. 75 .coHHanaom H33 05 no 00002 0.8 H80 m0m0£80uma 0:“ :H G0>Hw 0.8 m0mmE0000nH 0.88 0.83003 Gem .3 H A659 .3 0 H650 .3 o .8 0.8020 08. 0860850 38-0088 05 CH m80umnH . . . .mHoonom 4381.885 Assm 3 H 360 3 o 360 3 o 05 8 808008960. .8.H 38580on 0.88 3 080:9 Hoem .3 H 3.6 .3 0 $6 .3 o 8080806 0.88 0n :2» 0.85000» BoHH0m H630 .3 o 36¢ .3 m 3.6 .3 o 8.82 on. 0:380 0.88 0.8 808330 58-808: 36H .Hv m 2qu .3 N 1.4% .3 H 8.8.08 3 803 cam 1361.88: 05 808m 80 H . . . .Hm0H00um 2 000: 05 000:? Gem 3 mH 36m 3 pH Askew. H3 N. 9830003. 8 203080300 88300398 0.88 3 0.8059 . . . @8000308 $6 3 cm $1. H3 w $60 3 0H hHHmcomu0Q 0.88 09 HHHB emu—H0508: 05 8 «880009 15.3 cm 1.8.3 mm 1.5.8 2 0505285 6.88 8. 83 56-62:: 65 5 05580. 1.5m .3 2 E; .2 2 15.3 mm $5-565: 2: 5 6.88 886: 88 26568 860 . . . 8.83 809330 9:30: 8 Gem HV m E5 3 mm $60 3 H5 803528800 H008 .0 0x08 :00 H 0.833 £0.00“ 3 8.03 H comw0m condom condom 0.8:. H8000m 8.2m $801.88: 05 :H £0009. 3 9:803 .83 0:0000m .080cgm Ho magnum u- .HN .HV 0309 76 808803808 H0808 088 80 00008 080 080 0000880808 088 88 803% 080 00w0880080nH . . . .0080H08 H0808 80H 8082880 H.050 o v m 3% o v H 1.80 o v m 0883 80000. 38080 H H00H 080 08m0z 0 80 H ob . V o . o . 888808 A m m 0H Com H v N. :00 o v m 08 8803 808 00 080 38080888 088 808 80 H . . . .08 808808 3803 35H 0 3 0H go o v m $8.0 H v p 080800 83.808088 5 8083880 .80 0008 08H. . . . .m8H8800H 038008.80 80H 8380808 38;. m 3 pH 3% m v HVH 3? H. V cm 8030H 0 0>08 080800 380180888 88 8083880 . . . .M8H80008 808 8008088880 0 .8080008 3% m 3 0H. 3.00 m V Hm 1x; 0 3 mm 0 8088000 08 00808 58080888 088 88 m8H8000H . . . 00038880 .0880808 H0 0080008 8808.880 390 mHV mp 1.me mHv mm 3cm 0 3 mm 0808 0H 080800 838080888 88 m888000H c . o .. o . .008H0> %8 888.3 Com m 3 mm COH N. v «m Cam 0 v 00 808.8800 88 080 808380 5808085 .80 008H0> €me .OHV om A0\co .OHV was Aokm .NHV Hm .mSOhmmfldU Mw huwolhmgw ma: Cw mawnommhl . . . .08080008 w8888w08 HOE. HHV Hum 33 HHV pm $00 0H3 mm 808 880580 008 08 580180888 08..— 88 880008. . . . 080800 38080888 3..” m: S 3% 08 $8 $8 08 a: 5 83.8.8 0.88 80 080388 2888020 80000m 80000m 80000m 0.888. 02800 80.88 3380:8085 088 88 80009 08 m8380>> .802 80.8 080000m .0880H03m H0 M8H880m 1.. .mm .HV 0H80.H. 77 Summary Descriptive data of the population studied were presented. Twelve major hypotheses were stated and analyzed. Rankings of reasons for choice of school assignments were discussed. The majority of the heads of students' households were Anglo-Saxon and Germanic. Most of the students spent the major part of their youth in suburban or population areas of under 10, 000 pe0ple. Over 80% of the students attended public elementary and secondary schools. The majority of the students lived in predomi- nantly middle—class, white communities and attended predominantly middle-class, white elementary and secondary schools. Ninety-six students (19%) preferred inner-city school assignment while 410 students (81%) preferred other types of school assignments. More students chose to teach senior high (10-12 grades) than the elementary grades. Social Studies, and English- Speech were elected most frequently as students' teaching majors. The first three hypotheses were concerned with social- class composition of students' home communities, elementary, and secondary schools. Social-class composition of students' home communities, elementary schools, and secondary schools did not have any significant relationship to students' choice of teaching assignments. The null hypotheses were accepted. 78 Racial composition of students' home communities did not have a significant relationship to their choice of teaching assign- ments. The null hypothesis was accepted. Students' attendance or non-attendance in racially integrated elementary schools did have a significant relationship to student choice of school assignment. The null hypothesis was rejected. Students who attended racially integrated elementary schools were more likely to choose inner-city school assignment. Students' attendance or non-attendance in racially integrated secondary schools had no significant relationship to the students' choice of school assignments. The null hypothesis was accepted. College grade point average had no significant relationship to students' choice of school assignments. The null hypothesis was accepted. Students' high school standings had no significant relation- ship to their choice of school assignment. The null hypothesis was accepted. Students attending their first course in the education sequence did not differ in their choice of teaching assignments from terminal students attending their last course in the education sequence. The null hypothesis was accepted. 79 Students preferring inner-city school assignment did perceive parental attitudes to be more favorable toward their decision to teach in the inner-city schools than did the students preferring other types of school assignments. The null hypothesis was rejected. The F test conducted to determine the significance of the differences between the mean scores of the two groups, students preferring inner-city teaching assignment and students preferring other types of teaching assignments, on a measure of opinion yielded an F statistic of 6. 211 which was significant at the .05 level. The mean score was lower for students choosing inner-city teaching assignment. They tended to disagree more often with the opinion statements than students choosing other teaching assignments. The null hypothesis was rejected. The F test conducted to determine the significance of the differences between the mean scores of the two groups, students preferring inner-city teaching assignments and students preferring other types of teaching assignments, on the importance attributed to media in the making of their decision of teaching assignments yielded an F statistic of 9. 230 which was significant at the .05 level. The mean score of the students preferring inner-city teaching assignment was higher than the mean score of students preferring 80 other teaching assignments. Students choosing inner-city schools attributed more importance to media' 8 influence on their decision to teach in the inner-city than the students choosing other teaching assignments. Students were asked to select from a list of ten statements the major reason, the second most important reason, and the third most important reason for their choice of teaching assignment. Students preferring inner-city assignment selected teaching where they could make a real contribution in helping children learn as their first and second reasons for teaching in the inner—city. Stu- dents preferring other teaching assignments selected as their first and second reasons for not teaching in the inner—city the statement that discipline problems would be more frequent in the inner-city schools. CHAPTER V SUMMARY , CONC LU SIGNS, AND RE COMME NDATION S Summary and Findings The purpose of this study was to determine the general background and characteristics of undergraduate teacher education students preferring inner-city school assignment and those students preferring other types of school assignments. Twelve hypotheses were formulated to determine whether relationships exist between certain variables of the students' environments and their choice of teaching assignments. A review of the literature supported the assumption that there was a relationship between social-class orientation of teachers and prospective teachers and difficulty in teaching disadvantaged youth successfully. Teachers are reluctant to accept assignments in the inner-city and if assigned there, frequently refuse the assignment or leave after a short teaching experience. 81 82 Another postulate supported by the review of the literature was that prospective teachers and teachers hold some degree of negative racial attitudes which are sustained by social usages and sanctions. These attitudes impede the teacher—student relationship. Both literature and research illustrate the need for dif— ferent approaches in recruiting and identifying suitable candidates with positive attitudes and the understanding to work with lower- class and minority subcultures. A more careful selection of teacher candidates and different teacher training for education majors willing to teach disadvantaged youth are necessary to insure a higher rate of success for both teacher and learner. Data collected by questionnaire from 506 undergraduate education students revealed that 19% (96 students) chose teaching assignment in an inner-city school. Eighty-one percent (410 stu- dents) chose teaching assignments in other types of schools. More students chose to teach senior high (10—12 grades) than the elemen- tary grades. Social Studies, and English and Speech were elected most frequently as student's teaching majors. The majority of the heads of students' households were Anglo-Saxon and Germanic. Most of the students spent the major part of their youth in suburban or population areas of under 10, 000 people. Over 80% of the students attended public elementary and 83 secondary schools. The majority of the students lived in predominantly middle-class, white communities and attended predominantly middle—class, white elementary and secondary schools. follows: A summary of the major findings of the twelve hypotheses Social—class composition of students' home com— munities had no significant relationship to their choice of school assignment. Social-class composition of students' elementary schools had no significant relationship to their choice of school assignment. Social-class composition of students' secondary schools had no significant relationship to their choice of school assignment. Racial composition of students' home communities had no significant relationship to their choice of school assignment. Racial composition of students' secondary schools had no significant relationship to their choice of school assignment. 10. 11. 84 Racial composition of students' secondary schools had no significant relationship to their choice of school assignment. High school academic standing had no significant relationship to students' choices of school assignment. College grade point average had no significant rela- tionship to students' choices of teaching assignment. Beginning education students did not differ in their choice of school assignment from terminal education students. Racial composition of students' elementary schools did have a significant relationship to their choice of school assignment. Students who attended racially integrated elementary schools were more likely to choose inner-city school assignment. Students did differ significantly in their perception of parental attitudes toward their decision of choice of teaching assignment. Students preferring inner—city assignment perceived parents as being more favorable toward their decision. Students choosing inner—city teaching assignment dis- agreed more often with Opinion statements on a " measure of Opinion than students choosing other teaching assignments. 12. Students choosing inner—city school assignment attributed more importance to media' s influence on their decision to teach in the inner-city than students choosing other teaching assignments. Students were also asked to select from a list of ten state- ments the major reason, the second most important reason, and the third most important reason for their choice of teaching assignment. Students preferring inner-city school assignment selected as their first and second most important reasons for teaching in the inner- city as teaching where they could make a real contribution in helping children/learn. Students preferring other teaching assignments selected as their first and second most important reasons for not teaching in the inner-city the statement that discipline problems would be more frequent in the inner-city schools. Discussion of the Findings The recruitment and training of the teacher supply for schools serving disadvantaged youth has been the responsibility of teacher education departments. Relatively few teacher candidates volunteer to teach disadvantaged youth. The few prospective \ 86 teachers that do prefer to teach in the inner-city are handicapped by the inadequacy of college preparation, their usual middle-class orientation, and some degree of negative racial attitude. One finding of this study suggests there is a population indicating a desire to teach disadvantaged youth. Nineteen percent of the population examined chose inner-city teaching assignment. Previous studies found 12% of the 1967 graduates would accept inner— city positions. 1 Sixteen percent of the undergraduates participating in a preliminary study stated they would accept inner-city teaching assignments. The findings which emanated from the statistical analyses of the hypotheses formulated during the investigation indicated there are some significant. statistical distinctions between students desir— ing inner-city teaching assignment and students desiring other types of school assignment. Students preferring inner-city assignment perceived their parents agreeing with their expressed desire more frequently than students preferring other types of teaching assignments. This could not be attributed to anything specific, but might be considered as an important variable in selection of students for inner-city 1Opinion Research Corporation, op. cit. Hogan and Boca, op. cit. 87 teaching assignment. If the parents express extreme displeasure about their son or daughter accepting an inner—city teaching assign- ment, this will have some influence on the student' 8 final choice. The findings of this study suggest that students preferring inner-city teaching assignment disagree more often with the opinion statements. The student preferring inner-city assignment may be more optimistic in nature and hopeful about the abilities of dis— advantaged youth. This is a necessary condition to effect some degree of success for both teacher and learner. Evidence in this study suggests that students preferring inner-city school assignment attributed more importance to media in making their decision than students preferring other kinds of school assignments. T. V. including the news was the most important media in their decision to teach in the inner—city. Com- munication through media more frequently reveals the need of volunteers and professional staff for inner-city improvement programs. This may have positively influenced the student's preference of assignment to inner-city schools. Another positive relationship resulting from the statistical analysis was concerned with students who had attended racially integrated elementary schools and choice of teaching assignment. Students who had attended racially integrated elementary schools 88 more frequently chose inner-city teaching assignment. The real significance of this correlation can only be determined through further empirical study. The variable of social-class had no influence on the preferences of prospective teacher's school assignment. As social-class background of prospective teachers and teachers is relatively homogeneous, this variable did not distinguish that part of the student population studied that was inner~city oriented from those not so oriented. Evidence of no significant relationship between preference of teaching assignment and prior racial contact will not be helpful either except for the finding that students who attended racially integrated elementary schools more frequently chose inner-city teaching assignment. Students' high school and college academic standings had no effect on their preference of school assignment. This study suggests that beginning and terminal education students did not differ in their preference of school assignments. Terminal education students have completed their student teaching assignments. Objectives of student teaching provide for the oppor- tunity in a real situation to develop teaching style and skills. The I 5|. I.) \It 89 student teaching experience may also influence perception of future school assignment but this was not assessed. The reasons students gave for their preference of either accepting or rejecting inner-city teaching assignment suggest that student perception, whether realistic or unrealistic, is consistent with their preference of teaching assignment. Students who view the inner-city schools as teeming with discipline problems and dangerous would not be able to teach successfully and should not be assigned to inner-city schools. Students who feel they could make a real contribution in helping children learn and feel that there is greater need for good teachers in the inner-city schools have greater potential for successful careers teaching disadvantaged youth. Implications of the Study The problem of providing sufficient numbers of teacher candidates for inner—city school assignment has become increasingly evident. A number of approaches have been suggested. Establishment of different kinds of social-action programs to change the character of the inner-city are not achieving change easily or quickly. Systematic improvement in the educational environment of the inner-city may be partially realized through the 90 elimination of one of many adverse conditions--the acute shortage and unwillingness of qualified teacher candidates to accept assign— ment in the inner-city schools. One alternative involves the identification of education majors willing and desiring to serve as teachers in the inner-city environment. Willingness to teach in the inner—city is not a single sufficient condition for improving the education of inner-city youth or providing the numbers of qualified teachers needed, but it is desirable and necessary. There were real differences within the prospective teacher population studied. The students have definite preferences about their future school assignment. Significant statistical distinctions between the two groups were found which distinguished the student who is inner-city oriented from the rest of the population. This study has several cogent implications for teacher education departments, curriculum constructors, and college pro- fessors. 1. The immediacy of providing teachers for disadvantaged youth suggests that the most relevant thought and action would be to provide an applicable education for the teacher education population willing to teach in the inner-city. $11 2. A greater effort should be excited to identify students preferring inner-city teaching assignment. 3. Strategies should be developed to modify student resistance toward teaching in the inner-city through more compre— hensive coverage of minority peoples by courses in urban sociology, anthropology, and behavioral psychology. Hopefully, this will eliminate the myths and stereotypes attributed to minority and lower—class students and schools. 4. The significant statistical differences between those students preferring inner—city school assignment and students pre— ferring other types of school assignments should be recognized. There is a possibility that tests may be constructed for the purpose of selective recruitment and these variables could be recognized as important distinguishing components. The major implication of this study is the finding that there is an identifiable group of teacher education majors who are willing to teach in the inner-city. They are being educated in the same manner as all other education students. It seems probable that something more needs to be done to provide more teachers for inner-city schools and to improve the survival rate of teachers employed in the inner-city. 92 Recommendations 1. This study should be replicated at colleges and universities of varying sizes and types to determine the size of the p0pulation preferring inner-city school assignment. 2. Identification of common, salient features and traits that may be present within the undergraduate education population preferring inner-city school assignment needs initiation. 3. A longitudinal study identifying students preferring to teach inner—city youth should be considered with a follow-up study to determine actual school assignment, years of teaching, and possible definition of teaching problems, and areas of success. 4. ln-depth investigations are urgently needed to determine relationships between early school and community interracial experiences and adult racial attitude. 5. An effort to develop tests for the purpose of selective recruitment of prospective teachers for disadvantaged youth should be initiated. 6. An investigation of the effect of positive media pro- ductions about inner-city conditions and the "need for help programs, " e. g. , Teacher Corps, on the decisions of education student's choice of school assignment, warrants consideration. APPENDIX A ADDITIONAL DATA Frequency Distributions and Means for Individual Opinion Statements and Choice of Teaching Assignment Frequency Distributions of Importance Attributed to Specified Sources by Students in Making Their Decision of the Type of School Assignment Preferred APPENDIX A ADDITIONAL DAT A Frequency Distributions and Means for Individual Opinion Statement 3 and Choice of Teaching Assignment Table A. 1. --Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Generally Speaking, school achievement is negatively influenced by the home environment of the students in the inner-city while it is positively influenced for children in other schools. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice 1. I strongly disagree 4 25 29 29. 2% 23. 2% 2. I disagree 24 7O 94 3. I am neutral 10 47 57 4. I agree 49 211 260 60. 4% 65. 4% 5. I strongly agree 9 57 63 Total 96 410 506 Inner—city School Mean = 3. 4 Other School Mean = 3. 5 93 04 Table A. 2. --Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Parental plans for the future of the child have a significantly more positive influence for outer— eity children' 3 school achievement than such plans do for inner-city children. Inner—city Other School School Total Choice Choice 1. I strongly disagree 1 14 15 (7 2. I disagree 19 20' 84’ 48 15' 1% 67 3. I am neutral 12 6O 72 4. I agree 47 244 25H 66. 7‘70 6?), 79,0 5. I strongly agree 17 44 61 Total 96 410 506 Inner-city School Mean = 3. 6 Other School Mean 2 3. 6 Table A. 3. --Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Generally speaking, children in the inner- city schools are characterized by shorter attention spans than children attending other schools. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice 1. I strongly disagree 8 14 22 . 32.3% 23.3% 2. I disagree 23 80 103 3. I am neutral 21 123 144 4. 41 165 206 45. 8% 46. 4% 5. I strongly agree 3 23 26 Total 96 405 501 Inner-city School Mean = 3. 1 Other School Mean : 3. 3 95 Table A. 4. --Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Values of inner-city children are in conflict with teachers' values. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice 1. I strongly disagree 7 } 11 18 30.2 1 . 2 2. I disagree 22 07° 49 5 % 71 3. I am neutral 28 126 154 4. I agree 33 190 223 40. 7 53. 1 5. I strongly agree 6 % 20 % 26 Total 96 396 492 Inner-city School Mean = 3. 1 Table A. 5. ~-Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Generally speaking, children in inner- city schools are characterized by a lower potential for effective learning than are other children. Other School Mean = 3. 4 Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice 1 I strongly disagree 38 89 127 _ 68. 8% 58. 0% 2 I disagree 28 148 176 3. I am neutral 8 64 72 4 Iagree 21 } 91 112 22.90 26.400 5 I strongly agree 1 /O 17 / 18 Total 96 409 505 Other School Mean 2 2. 5 Inner—city School Mean : 2. 2 96 Table A. 6. --b‘requency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Appropriate learning experiences can sig— nificantly raise the I.Q. level of inner-city children. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice 1. I strongly disagree 4 16 20 2. I disagree 4 8' 4% 26 10' 3% 30 3. I am neutral 17 68 85 4. I agree 43 195 238 74. 0% 73. 0% 5. I strongly agree 28 102 130 Total 96 407 503 Inner-city School Mean 2 3. 9 Other School Mean = 3. 8 Table A. 7. --Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: It is generally true that it is necessary for those who teach inner-city children to spend more time in motivating the student. Inner- city Other School School Total Choice Choice 1 I strongly disagree 2 18 20 . 1 1. 5% 11.2% 2 I disagree 9 28 37 3. I am neutral 4 42 46 4 I agree 41 213 254 84. 4% 78. 5% 5 I strongly agree 40 108 148 Total 96 409 505 Inner-city School Mean == 4. 1 Other School Mean : 3.9 Table A. 8. --Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion 97 Statement: Most teachers in the outer-city fear teaching in the inner-city. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice 1. I strongly disagree 4 15 19 12. 50 15.4 2. I disagree 8 /° 48 % 56 3. I am neutral 27 121 148 4. I agree 44 197 241 59. 3% 55. 0% 5. I strongly agree 13 28 41 Total 96 409 505 Inner—city School Mean 2 3. 6 Other School Mean 2 2. 5 Table A. 9. "Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Because of the nature of the problem and the nature of intelligence, there is little that can be done to raise the I.Q. level of inner—city children. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice 1. I strongly disagree 55 184 239 _ 85.4% 83. 1% 2. I disagree 27 146 173 3. I am neutral 6 49 55 4. I agree 1 13 14 8. 3% 4. 6% 5. I strongly agree 7 5 12 Total 96 397 493 Inner-city School Mean 1. 7 Other School Mean -- 1. 8 98 Table A. 10. -— Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: School tends to be a happier experience for outer-city children than for inner-city children. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice 1. I strongly disagree 8 20 28 41. 0% 21. 5% 2. I disagree 31 68 99 3. I am neutral 16 112 128 4. I agree 33 166 199 42. 1 51. 2” 5. I strongly agree 7 7° 44 /° 51 0 Total 95 410 505 Inner-city School Mean = 3.0 Other School Mean : 3. 4 Table A. 11. -- Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Discipline problems are more frequent in inner—city schools as compared with outer—city schools. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice 1. I strongly disagree 4 13 17 , 15.7% 8. 1% 2. I disagree 11 20 31 3. I am neutral 14 48 62 4. I agree 58 249 307 69.8% 80. 1% 5. I strongly agree 9 77 86 Total 96 407 503 Inner-city School Mean : 3. 6 Other School Mean : 3. 9 5)!) Table A. 12. —- Frequency Distributions and Means for Opinion Statement: Generally, inner-city children have little desire to learn in school. Inner— city Other School School Total Choice Choice 1. I strongly disagree 17 33 50 64. 6% 18.7% 2. I disagree 45 157 202 3. I am neutral 16 113 129 4. I agree 17 92 109 46. 7% 25. 5% 5. I strongly agree 1 12 13 Total 96 407 503 Inner-city School Mean = 2. 4 Other School Mean = 2. 7 100 Frequency Distributions of Importance Attributed to Specified Sources by Students in Making Their Decision of the Type of School Assignment Preferred Table A. 13. -- Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Conversations with School Personnel Students Knew in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to Teach In. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice No importance at all 28 143 171 Very unimportant 4 38 42 Unimportant 22 86 108 Important 30 1 13 143 Very important 12 28 40 Total 96 408 504 101 Table A. 14. -— Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Conversations with Friends in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to Teach In. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice No importance at all 15 109 124 Very unimportant 8 35 43 Unimportant 22 113 135 Important 40 128 168 Very important 11 21 32 Total 96 406 502 Table A. 15. -- Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Personal Experience in Making Their Decision of the Type of School Chosen to Teach In. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice No importance at all 14 113 127 Very unimportant 9 54 63 Unimportant 11 86 97 Important 33 1 17 150 Very important 26 36 62 Total 93 406 499 102 Table A. 16. -- Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Lectures in Education Courses by Students in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to Teach In. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice No importance at all 51 255 306 Very unimportant 4 31 35 Unimportant 22 87 109 Important 15 30 45 Very important 3 7 10 Total 95 410 505 Table A. 17. -- Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Reading Materials in Education Courses by Students in Making Their Decisions of Type of School Chosen to Teach In. Inner— city Other School School Total Choice Choice No importance at all 39 226 265 Very unimportant 9 39 48 Unimportant 27 94 12 1 Important 19 47 66 Very important 2 3 5 Total 96 409 505 103 Table A. 18. -- Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Conversations with Student' 3 Family in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to Teach In. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice No importance at all 28 143 171 Very unimportant 6 22 28 Unimportant 33 124 157 Important 24 93 1 17 Very important 5 25 30 Total 96 407 503 Table A. 19. - - Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed to Articles in Magazines in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to Teach In. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice No importance at all 13 116 129 Very unimportant 3 32 35 Unimportant 23 1 10 133 Important 46 136 182 Very important 1 1 15 26 Total 96 409 505 104 Table A. 20. -- Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed by Students to Articles in Newspapers in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to Teach In. Inner- city Other School School Total Choice Choice No importance at all 16 93 109 Very unimportant 4 30 34 Unimportant 24 12 1 145 Important 43 143 186 Very important 9 23 32 Total 96 410 506 Table A. 21. -— Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed by Students to Television Programs Including the News in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to Teach In. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice No importance at all 13 88 101 Very unimportant 5 24 29 Unimportant 13 99 112 Important 5 1 166 2 17 Very important 13 3 1 44 Total 95 408 503 105 Table A. 22. -- Frequency Distribution of Importance Attributed by Students to Radio Programs Including the News in Making Their Decisions of the Type of School Chosen to Teach In. Inner-city Other School School Total Choice Choice No importance at all 21 111 132 Very unimportant 4 32 36 Unimportant 32 126 158 Important 34 118 152 Very important 4 22 26 Total 95 409 504 APPENDIX B INSTRUMENT: GENERAL EDUCATION SURVEY APPE NDIX B INSTRUMENT: GENERAL EDUCATION SURVEY What is your sex? 1. 2. Male Female What is the predominant ethnic background of your father or other person who is the head of your family? pn- W O 10. mxlcnUii-bOONH Afro-American (Negro) French Anglo-Saxon Germanic Irish Jewish Italian Polish Spanish Latin American What is the major occupation of your father or other person who is the head of your family? (If you are the head of your family, then specify your father's major lifetime occupation.) 1. 2. 3. CDCbNICDUIrP education professional (other than education) or scientific managerial, executive, proprietor of large business, or commissioned officer. small business owner or manager farm owner clerical or sales skilled worker or foreman, noncommissioned officer semi-skilled worker, unskilled or farm laborer unemployed 106 107 In what type. of community did you spend the major part of your youth? dampnwmw farm village or town (under 10, 000) small city (10, 000-50, 000) city (50, 000-500, 000) suburban area near city metropolis (500, 000+) suburban area near metropolis What is the social-class composition of your immediate home community? 1. predominantly upper-class 2. predominantly middle-class 3. predominantly working-class 4. predominantly lower-class 5. combination upper-middle class 6. combination middle-working class 7. combination middle-lower class What is the racial composition of your immediate home com- munity? «10:01»:an 100% nonwhite 7 5 - 9 9% nonwhit e 50 — 75% nonwhite 5 0% nonwhit e- 5 0% white 50-75% White 75 - 99% white 100% white In what type of school did you receive most of your elementary education? 1 . public 2. parochial 3. private (other than parochial) 10. 11. 12. 108 What was the social-class composition of your elementary school? predominantly upper-class predominantly middle-class predominantly working-class predominantly lower— class combination upper- and middle-class combination middle- and working-class combination middle- and lower-class «10301.5me What was the racial composition of your elementary school? 100% nonwhite 75-99% nonwhite 50-75% nonwhite 50% nonwhite-50% white 50-75% White 75-99% White 100% white «ImmerNp—A In what type of school did you receive most of your secondary education? 1. public 2. parochial 3. private (other than parochial) What was the social-class composition of your high school? predominantly upper-class predominantly middle—class predominantly working—class predominantly lower-class combination upper- and middle-class combination middle- and working-class combination middle- and lower-class 405019me What was the racial composition of your high school? 1 00% nonwhit e 7 5 - 9 9% nonwhit e 50 -7 5% nonwhite 5 0% nonwhit e - 5 0% whit e 50-75% white 75 - 9970 white 100% White donuts-comm 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. H 109 In general, what was the quality of your work when you were in secondary school? 019me far above average above average average below average far below average What was the income position of your family at the time of your graduation? 1. 2. 3. 4 highest 25% of our community second highest 25% of our community third highest 25% of our community lowest 25% of our community What is your present college grade point average? 019me 3.5-4.0 3.0-3.49 2.5-2.99 2.0-2.49 under 2.0 What is your teaching preference? (nuwaH early elementary (K-3) late elementary (4-6) junior high (7—9) senior high (10-12) grade level does not apply in my major What is your teaching major? OCDm-JODUIv-bOOND—i Arts and Crafts Business-Industrial Arts English and Speech Foreign Languages Mathematics Music (vocal and instrumental) Physical Education Science Home Economics Social Studies (Economics, History, Government, Geography, Sociology, Psychology) 18. 19. 20. 21. 110 In what kind of a school do you prefer to teach? inner city outer city suburban rural small city or town college no preference «103019me What is the desirable social-class composition of the school you prefer to teach in? predominantly upper- class predominantly middle-class predominantly working- class predominantly lower—class combination upper- and middle-class combination middle- and working-class combination middle- and lower-class no preference concaviaeoomhs What is the desirable racial composition of the school you prefer to teach in? 100% white 75-99% White 50-75% white 50% white-50% nonwhite 50-75% nonwhite 7 5-99% nonwhite 100% nonwhite no preference CDQODU‘rbDONI—A If, afier signing a contract in a school district, you were assigned to an inner-city school, would you 1. accept the assignment with certainty 2 accept the assignment with uncertainty 3. refuse the assignment 4 accept the assignment only if you were promised a school in a better neighborhood in the near future 22. 23. 24. 111 If you expressed a desire to teach in an inner-city school, would your parents (firth-WNH think it was a very good idea think it was a good idea be unaffected think it was a bad idea think it was a very bad idea If you expressed a desire to teach in an inner-city school, would your friends (those you talk with openly) mph-CON)— think it was a very good idea think it was a good idea be unaffected think it was a bad idea think it was a very bad idea Think about a friend in teacher education. In what kind of school would you perceive this friend would choose to teach? QQU‘ADONH inner-city outer city suburban rural small city or town college no preference READ CAREFULLY IF YOU SELECTED THE INNER-CITY AS YOUR TEACHING PREFERENCE IN QUESTION 18, PAGE 110, PLEASE TURN TO PAGE 115 AND ANSWER QUESTIONS 25 THROUGH 37. THEN GO ON TO PAGE 118. IF YOU DID NOT SELECT THE INNER—CITY AS YOUR TEACHING PREFERENCE, PLEASE GO AHEAD TO PAGE 112, ANSWER QUESTIONS 25 THROUGH 37, AND THEN GO ON TO PAGE 118 112 ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS ONLY IF YOU CHOSE NOT TO TEACH IN THE INNER-CITY IN QUESTION 18 (Page 110). Below are ten statements that are often listed as reasons for not wanting to teach in the inner-city. Please use these statements in answering questions 25, 26, and 27. 25. 26. 27. 28. l. 2. 10. Teaching in the inner-city tends to destroy a teacher' 5 enthusiasm for teaching. Discipline problems are more frequent in inner—city schools. Teaching in inner-city schools is more difficult because of parents' attitudes. Values of inner-city children are in conflict with my values. Teaching in the inner-city is dangerous. Teaching in the inner-city is too difficult for beginning teachers. The race of children in inner-city schools would bother me. I am from the inner-city and do not want to return. I am a Negro and feel I should teach white children for racial balance. Children in inner-city schools have a lower potential for effective learning. Select from the statements given above the single major reason you do not want to teach in the inner-city. Select from the statements given above the second most important single reason you do not want to teach in the inner— city. Select from the statements given above the third most important single reason you do not want to teach in the inner- city. How important was personal experience in your decision not to teach in the inner-city? 1. 01.50.13: no importance at all very unimportant unimportant important very important 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 113 How important were lectures in education courses in your decision not to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2. very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important How important were reading materials in education courses in your decision not to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2. very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important How important were conversations with school personnel you know in your decision not to teach in the inner—city? 1. no importance at all 2. very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important How important were conversations with friends in your decision not to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2. very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important How important were conversations with your family in your decision not to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2. very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important 114 34. How important were articles in magazines in your decision not to teach in the inner-city? no importance at all very unimportant unimportant important very important U'er-WNH 35. How important were articles in newspapers in your decision not to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2. very unimportant 3 . unimportant 4. important 5. very important 36. How important were television programs including the news in your decision not to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2. very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important 37. How important were radio programs including the news in your decision not to teach in the inner-city? no importance at all very unimportant unimportant important very important 0'19me CONTINUE ON PAGE 118, QUESTION 38, PLEASE. DO NOT ANSWER QUESTIONS ON PAGES 115, 116, AND 117. 115 ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS ONLY IF YOU CHOSE TO TEACH IN THE INNER-CITY IN QUESTION 18 (Page 110). Below are ten statements that are often listed as reasons for wanting to teach in the inner-city. Please use these statements in answering questions 25, 26, and 27. 25. 26. 27. 28. $.me 0301 .q 10. I am from the inner-city and want to return. Good teachers are needed more in the inner-city. Teaching in the inner-city will be more challenging. Teaching in the inner-city will be more personally rewarding. Inner-city children are more anxious to learn. There is more opportunity for advancement in the inner- city schools. Fellow teachers will be more dedicated. There is more professional satisfaction in teaching where the need is greatest. Parents in the inner-city appreciate the efforts of teachers more. I want to teach where I can make a real contribution in helping children learn. Select from the statements given above the major reason you want to teach in the inner-city. Select from the statements given above the second most important single reason you want to teach in the inner-city. Select from the statements given above the third most impor- tant single reason you want to teach in the inner-city. How important was personal experience in your decision to teach in the inner-city? 1. museum no importance at all very unimportant unimportant important very important 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 116 How important were lectures in education courses in your decision to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2 very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5 very important How important were readirg materials in education courses in your decision to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2. very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important How important were conversations with school personnel you know in your decision to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2 . very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important How important were conversations with friends in your decision to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2. very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important How important were conversations with your family in your decision to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2. very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important 117 34. How important were articles in magazines in your decision to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2 . very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important 35. How important were articles in newspapers in your decision to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2. very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important 36. How important were television programs including the news in your decision to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2. very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important 37. How important were radio programs including the news in your decision to teach in the inner-city? 1. no importance at all 2. very unimportant 3. unimportant 4. important 5. very important CONTINUE ON PAGE 118, QUESTION 38, PLEASE. 118 Below are statements concerning teaching in inner-city schools. For each statement you are to a. state whether or not you agree with the statement and b. if this statement were true, would it cause you to accept or reject a position in an inner-city school? Generally speaking, school achievement is negatively influenced by the home environment of the students in the inner—city schools while it is positively influenced for children in other schools. 38. I strongly disagree I disagree I am neutral I agree I strongly agree ml-POONH 39. If this statement is true-- 1. I would accept an inner-city assignment. 2. I would be uncertain about accepting an inner-city assign- ment OR this statement would have no effect on my accepting an inner-city assignment. 3. I would reject an inner-city assignment. Parental plans for the future of the child have a significantly more positive influence for outer-city children's school achievement than such plans do for inner—city children. 40. 1. I strongly disagree 2. I disagree 3. I am neutral 4. I agree 5. I strongly agree 41. If this statement is true-- 1. I would accept an inner-city assignment. 2. I would be uncertain about accepting an inner-city assign- ment QR this statement would have no effect on my accepting an inner-city assignment. 3. I would reject an inner-city assignment. 119 It is generally true that it is necessary for those who teach the inner-city children to spend more time in motivating the student. 42. 43. mgthI—I I strongly disagree I disagree I am neutral I agree I strongly agree If this statement is true-— I would accept an inner-city assignment. I would be uncertain about accepting an inner-city assign- ment 9E this statement would have no effect on my accepting an inner-city assignment. I would reject an inner-city assignment. Most teachers in the outer-city fear teaching in the inner-city. 44. 45. 01$me I strongly disagree I disagree I am neutral I agree I strongly agree If this statement is true-- 3. I would accept an inner-city assignment. I would be uncertain about accepting an inner—city assign- ment OR this statement would have no effect on my accept—fig an inner-city assignment. I would reject an inner-city assignment. Generally speaking, children in inner-city schools are characterized by a lower potential for effective learning than are other children. 46. (fit-POONH I strongly disagree I disagree I am neutral I agree I strongly agree 47. 120 If this statement is true-- 1. 2. I would accept an inner-city assignment. I would be uncertain about accepting an inner—city assign— ment OR this statement would have no effect on my accept-fig an inner-city assignment. I would reject an inner-city assignment. Appropriate learning experiences can significantly raise the I.Q. level of inner—city children. 48. 49. 01.50053»— 1 strongly disagree I disagree I am neutral I agree I strongly agree If this statement is true-- 3. I would accept an inner-city assignment. I would be uncertain about accepting an inner-city assign- ment OR this statement would have no effect on my accepting an inner-city assignment. I would reject an inner-city assignment. School tends to be a happier experience for outer-city children than for inner-city children. 50. 51. 04>me I strongly disagree I disagree I am neutral I agree I strongly agree If this statement is true-- I would accept an inner-city assignment. I would be uncertain about accepting an inner-city assign- ment OR this statement would have no effect on my accept—i—ng an inner-city assignment. I would reject an inner-city assignment. 121 Discipline problems are more frequent in inner-city schools as compared with outer-city schools. 52. 1. I strongly disagree 2. I disagree 3. I am neutral 4. I agree 5. I strongly agree 53. If this statement is true-- 1. I would accept an inner-city assignment. 2. I would be uncertain about accepting an inner-city assign— ment OR this statement would have no effect on my accept-i—n-g an inner-city assignment. 3. I would reject an inner-city assignment. Generally, inner-city children have little desire to learn in school. 54. 1. I strongly disagree 2. I disagree 3. I am neutral 4. I agree 5. I strongly agree 55. If this statement is true-- 1. I would accept an inner-city assignment. 2. I would be uncertain about accepting an inner-city assign— ment OR this statement would have no effect on my acceptiTi—g an inner-city assignment. 3. I would reject an inner-city assignment. Generally speaking, children in the inner-city schools are charac- terized by shorter attention spans than children attending other schools. 56. I strongly disagree I disagree I am neutral I agree I strongly agree macaw:— 122 57. If this statement is true-- 1. I would accept an inner-city assignment. 2. I would be uncertain about accepting an inner-city assign— ment 93 this statement would have no effect on my accepting an inner-city assignment. 3. I would reject an inner-city assignment. Values of inner-city children are in conflict with teachers' values. 58. 1. I strongly disagree 2. I disagree 3. I am neutral 4. I agree 5. I strongly agree 59. If this statement is true—- 1. I would accept an inner—city assignment. 2. I would be uncertain about accepting an inner-city assign- ment QRthis statement would have no effect on my accepting an inner-city assignment. 3. I would reject an inner-city assignment. Because of the nature of the problem and the nature of intelligence, there is little that can be done to raise the I.Q. level of inner-city children. 60. 1. I strongly disagree 2. I disagree 3. I am neutral 4. I agree 5. I strongly agree 61. If this statement is true-- 1. I would accept an inner-city assignment. 2. I would be uncertain about accepting an inner—city assign— ment OR this statement would have no effect on my accept-fig an inner-city assignment. 3. I would reject an inner-city assignment. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Adair, John W. "A Study of Job‘Factors That Affect Teacher Morale. " Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Cornell University, 1967. Becker, Howard S. "Career Patterns of Public School Teachers. " American Journal of Sociology, 57 (March 1952), 470-477. Bernstein, Abraham. The Education of Urban Populations. New York: Random House, 1967. Bloomgarden, C. R.; Furedi, E. D.; Randolph, L. W.; and Ruth, E. D. Learning to Teach in Urban Schools. New York: Teachers College Press, 1965. Cheyney, Arnold B. Teaching Culturally Disadvantaged in the Elementary School. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Books, Inc., 1967. Clark, Kenneth B. Dark Ghetto: Dilemmas of Social Power. New York: Harper 8!. Row, 1965. Clark, Kenneth B. Prejudice and Your Child. Boston: Beacon Press, 1955. Clothier, Grant, and Lawson, James. Innovation in the Inner City. Kansas City, Missouri: Mid-Continent Regional Educa- tional Laboratory, 1969. Combs, Arthur W. The Professional Education of Teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1965. Conant, James B. The Education of American Teachers. New York: McGraw-Hill Company, 1963. 123 124 Crow, Lester; Murray, Walter I. ; and Smythe, Hugh M. Educating the Culturally Disadvantaged Child: Principles and Programs. New York: David McKay Company, 1966. Cushman, Edward L. , and Keith, Damon J. Report of the Detroit High School Study Commission. Detroit: The Board of Education, June 1968. Davis, Allison. "Society, the School and the Culturally Deprived Student. ” Improvingfinglish Skills of Culturally Different Youth in Lagge Cities. Edited by Arno Jewett, Joseph Mersand, and Doris V. Gunderson. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1964. Downing, Gertrude; Edgar, Robert W. ; Harris, Albert J. ; Kornberg, Leonard; and Storne, Helen F. The Preparation of Teachers for Schools in Culturally Deprived Neighborhoods. Flushing, New York: The BRIDGE Project, C00perative Research Project No. 932, Queens College of the City University of New York, 1965. Eddy, Elizabeth M. ”The Beginning Teacher' 8 Introduction into the Inner-City School. " Developingjrcgrams for the Educationally Disadvantaged. Edited by A. Harry Passow. New York: Teachers College Press, 1968. Eddy, Elizabeth M. Walk the White Line: A Profile of Urban Edu- cation. New York: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1967. Farquhar, William W. ; Shulman, Lee S. ; and The Chicago Public Schools Committee. Learning and Instruction in Chicagg Inner-City Schools. A Position Paper, June, 1968. Featherstone, Richard L. , and Rudman, Herbert C. Urban School-— i_ng. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World Company, 1968. Freedman, Philip I. "Racial Attitudes as a Factor in Teacher Edu— cation for the Deprived Child. " Studies in Deprivation. Edited by Vernon Haubrich. Washington, D. C. : National Institute for Advanced Study in Teaching Disadvantaged Youth, in press. 125 Freedman, Philip 1., and Langberg, George. "Self-Selection of Student Teachers. " Integrated Education, August- November 1965, pp. 39-40. Frost, Joseph, and Hawkes, Glenn R. The Disadvantaged Child: Issues and Innovations. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1966. Galtung, Johan. What High School Students Say . . . . New York: Anti-Defamation League, 1961. Gittell, Marilyn. Educating an Urban Population: Implications for Public Policy. Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publica- tions, 1967. Goldberg, Miriam L. "Teachers for Disadvantaged Children. ” The Schools and the Urban Crisis. Edited by A. Kerber and B. Bommarito. New York: Holt, Rinehart 8: Winston, 1965. Goodman, Mary Ellen. Race Awareness in Young Children. New York: Collier Books, 1964. Gottlieb, David. "Teaching and Students: The Views of Negro and White Teachers. " SociologLof Education, 27 (Summer 1964), 345-353. Grambs, Jean. "Are We Training Prejudiced Teachers?" School and Society, 71 (1950),'196-198. Green, Robert L. "After School Integration- -What? Problems in Social Learning. " Personnel and Guidance Journal, March 1966, pp. 704-710. Green, Robert L. Racial Crisis in American Education. Chicago: Follett Publishing Company, in press. Greene, Mary F. , and Ryan, Orletta. The School Children: Growing Up in the Slums. New York: Pantheon, 1965. Groff, Patrick J. ”Dissatisfaction in Teaching the CD Child. " Phi Delta Kappan, 45 (November 1963), 76. 126 Haubrich, Vernon, editor. Studies in Deprivation. Washington, D. C. : National Institute for Advanced Study in Teaching Disadvantaged Youth, in press. Haubrich, Vernon. "The Culturally Different: New Contexts for Teacher Education. " Journal of Teacher Education, 14 (June 1963), 163. Haubrich, Vernon. "The Teacher of the Disadvantaged. " Racial Crisis in American Education. Edited by Robert L. Green. Chicago: Follett Publishing Company, in press. Havighurst, Robert J. Education in Metropolitan Areas. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1966. Havighurst, Robert J. The Public Schools of Chicago: A Survey for the Board of Education of the City of Chicago. Chicago: The Board of Education, 1964. Helfant, K. "Parents' Attitudes vs. Adolescent Hostility in the Determination of Adolescents' Sociopolitical Attitudes. " Psychology Monographs, 66 (1952), 1-23. Herriott, Robert W. , and St. John, Nancy Hoyt. Social Class and Urban Schools: The Impact of Pupil Background on Teachers and Principgls. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1967. Hillery, Milton. "Teacher Questionnaire. " Unpublished and undated. Hogan, Ermon O. , and Boca, Thelma. ”Undergraduate Education Students' Opinions Regarding Teaching in the Inner-City. ” Unpublished paper, Michigan State University, 1968. Howe, Harold. "Where Teachers Are Needed the Most. " Grade Teacher, May/June 1967, pp. 102-103. Hunter, David R. The Slums: Challenge and Response. New York: The Free Press, 1968. Israel, B. L. "The Relationship Between Teachers' Expressed Attitudes, Opinions and Beliefs Regarding Minority, Ethnic and Racial Groups and Their Effectiveness as Classroom 127 Teachers in Elementary Schools in Disadvantaged Urban Areas. " Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1967. Keach, E. T.; Fulton, Robert; and Gardner, William E. Education and Social Crisis: Perspectives on Teaching Disadvantaged Youth. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. , 1967. Kerber, August, and Bommarito, Barbara. The Schools and the Urban Crisis. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1965. Koerner, James D. "How Not to Teach Teachers. " Atlantic, February 1963, p. 59. Kohl, Herbert. 36 Children. New York: New American Library, 1967. Kontos, Peter G. , and Murphy, James J. Teaching Urban Youth: A Source Book for Urban Education. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1967. McGoech, Dorothy, et al. Learnipg to Teach in Urban Schools. New York: Teachers College Press, 1965. Miller, Harry L. , editor. Education for the Disadvantaged: Current Issues and Research. New York: The Free Press, 1967. Moore, G. Alexander. Realities of the Urban Classroom: Observa- tions in Elementary Schools. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, 1967. Opinion Research Corporation. ”Where New Teachers Would Most Like to Teach. " Grade Teacher, May/June 1967, pp. 102- 103. Passow, A. Harry. Developing Programs for the Educationally Disadvantaged. New York: Teachers College Press, 1968. Passow, A. Harry. Education in Depressed Areas. New York: Teachers College Press, 1963. 128 Passow, A. Harry; Goldberg, Miriam; and Tannenbaum, Abraham J. Education of the Disadvantaged: A Book of Readings. New York: Holt, Rinehart 8: Winston, 1967. Reiss, Albert J. Schools in a Changing Society. New York: The Free Press, 1965. Rivlin, H. N. "New Teachers for New Immigrants. " Teachers College Record, 66 (1965), 707-718. Rivlin, H. N. Teachers for the Schools in Our Big Cities. New York: City University of New York, 1962. Roberts, Joan I. School Children in the Urban Slum: Readings in Social Science Research. New York: The Free Press, 1967. Sexton, Patricia. Education and Income. New York: Viking Press, 1964. Sheldon, Eleanor B. , and Glazier, Raymond A. Pupils and Schools in New York City. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1965. Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. , 1956. Smith, Charles R. "Let' s Get Teacher Education on Target. " The Journal of Teacher Education, 17 (Winter 1966). Taba, Hilda, and Elkins, Deborah. Teaching Strategies for the Culturally Disadvantaged. Chicago: Rand McNally & Company, 1966. U. S. Civil Rights Commission. Racial Isolation in the Public Schools. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967. U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Equality of Educational Opportunity. Washington, D. C. : U. S. Govern- ment Printing Office, 1966. 129 U. S. Riot Commission Report. Report of the National Advisogy Commission on Civil Disorders. New York: The New York Times, 1968. Usdan, Michael, and Bertolaet, Frederick, editors. Teachers for the Disadvantaged: The Report of the Schools and University Teacher Education Project. Chicago: Follett Publishing Company, 1966. Warner, Lloyd W. : Havighurst, Robert J : and Loeb, Martin B. Who Shall Be Educated? New York: Harper & Brothers, 1944. ggfluq .1. E1111. . w. u. .. . 1- IV INE.U.#~ . . .14. - i4 1 . w... m" MM!5 Hug " “”2 ml EH5 V”o Ims WHO E“3 1,1111 31 1111111