ABSTRACT AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF PROCEDURES FOR MEASURING AND MAPPING QUALITATIVE SYMBOLIC ORIENTATIONS BY Ronald K. Bass Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to determine the relative effectiveness of two methods for mapping the qualitative symbolic orientation (an aspect of cognitive style) of a selected sample of community college students. These methods were: 1) a series of tests developed by Oakland Community College, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan (primarily a paper and pencil test battery) and 2) a series of tests developed for this study (video-taped performance tests). The effectiveness of the student orientation mappings, determined by each method, was assessed by means of a rated performance of a task which was deemed by a panel of experts as requiring a major orienta- tion by the student in the element in question. Procedures The subjects utilized in this study were randomly se— lected from those students reporting for testing with the Oakland Community College test battery at Delta College, Ronald K. Bass University Center, Michigan on April 10, 1972. Twenty-one students were selected from the twenty-four accessible ele- ments. The Oakland Community College test battery designed to measure elements of cognitive style (approximately a four hour test battery) (see Appendix A) was administered to the stu- dents in the study on April 10, 1972. Later that same day two tests developed for this study and designed to measure selected qualitative symbolic orientations were administered to the same population. The two tests developed for this study (Bass tests) ‘were performance tasks which were recorded on video tape. On May 18, 1972 the qualitative symbolic orientations exhibited by students on the video tapes were mapped by a panel of ex- perts who viewed the video tapes. The Bass tests were designed to measure the following: Test 1: Qualitative Proprioceptive Kinematics Q(PK) Qualitative Code Synnoetics Q(CS) Qualitative Code Histrionics Q(CH) Test 2: Qualitative Proprioceptive Temporal Q(PT) Qualitative Audio Q(A) The Qualitative Code Synnoetics and Qualitative Code Histrionics portions of the Oakland Community College Test Battery were administered on a re-test basis during the week of April 10, 1972, to see if there was a change in scores on this test after the subjects had been exposed to the pro- cedures of the Bass tests. Ronald K. Bass The effectiveness of the test results (Oakland Community College Test Battery and the Bass Tests) was determined by comparing the results of the tests to performances in class- room situations requiring, according to a panel of experts, major orientations in the qualitative symbols under study. Eighteen null hypotheses were generated and tested. Each null hypothesis was tested using the Komolgorov-Smirnov Statistical Test Model. All hypotheses were tested at the .05 Alpha level. Conclusions The findings of this study indicate that: 1. Either the O.C.C. test or the Bass test can be used effectively as a predictor of classroom performance in qualitative code synnoetics. 2. Either the O.C.C. test or the Bass test can be used effectively as a predictor of classroom performance in qualitative code histrionics. 3. Either the O.C.C. test for qualitative proprioceptive- ness or the Bass test for qualitative prOprioceptive kinematics can be used effectively as a predictor of classroom performance in qualitative proprioceptive kinematics. 4. Either the O.C.C. test for qualitative proprioceptive- ness or the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive Ronald K. Bass temporal, or incidental observation of qualitative proprioceptive temporal during the Bass test for quali- tative prOprioceptive kinematics can be used effec- tively as a predictor of classroom performance in qualitative prOprioceptive temporal. The Bass test is more effective than the O.C.C. test as a predictor of qualitative auditory ability. Either the O.C.C. test or the Bass test can be used effectively for mapping qualitative symbolic orien- tation. AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF PROCEDURES FOR MEASURING AND MAPPING QUALITATIVE SYMBOLIC ORIENTATIONS BY Ronald K. Bass A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1972 DEDICATION To my wife Jenny and our children David, Honda and Mark ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express sincere appreciation to the Chairman of my committee, Dr. Paul W. F. Witt, whose advice, counsel, encouragement, and helpfulness have made success in my doctoral program possible and to Dr. Norman Bell, Dr. James Page, and Dr. Joseph E. Hill for their contributions and interest as members of my guidance committee. I wish to express special thanks to Dr. Hill who took time from his many responsibilities at another institution to serve on my committee and who has served, quite often under the cover of darkness, as advisor, statistician, and friend during the course of my study. Further gratitude and appreciation are expressed to Mrs. Crystal Lange of Delta College, Dr. Virginia Svagr of Oakland Community College, and Mr. James Hand, a fellow graduate stu- dent, who were always ready to go beyond the call of duty in helping me conduct this study. Appreciation is also expressed to the Faculty and Staff of the Instructional DevelOpment and Technology Department and to my fellow graduate students, many of whom have provided counsel and all of whom have shown understanding. PI I-‘y H o TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER I. II. III. IV. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . The Educational Sciences. Statement of Purpose. . . Method. . . . . . . . . Significance of the Study Questions to be Answered. Definition of Key Terms . Overview of Chapters. . . REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Cognitive Style . . . . . Educational Sciences. . . Cognitive Style in the Educational Sciences Summary . . . . . . . . . DESIGN OF THE STUDY. . . . . The Sample. . . . . . . . Instrumentation . . . . . Procedures. . . . . . . . Analysis. . . . . . . . . Research Hypothesis . . Operational Hypotheses. . Summary . . . . . . . . . ANALYSIS OF DATA . . . . . . Qualitative Code Synnoetics Qualitative Code Histrionics. Qualitative Proprioceptive Kinematics . . . Qualitative PrOprioceptive Temporal Qualitative Auditory. . . Additional Findings . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . iv Page vi viii 14 l4 18 28 33 35 35 37 42 45 48 48 53 55 57 63 69 74 80 84 87 TABLE OF CONTENTS--Continued CHAPTER Page V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lOO BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 APPENDICES A. MANUAL OF DIRECTIONS, COGNITIVE STYLE-- DIAGNOSTIC TEST BATTERY. . . . . . . . . . . 106 B. RATING SCALE QUALITATIVE AUDITORY, QUALITATIVE PROPRIOCEPTIVE TEMPORAL, QUALITATIVE PRO- PRIOCEPTIVE KINEMATICS . . . . . . . . . . . 156 C O TEACHER ' S RATING SCALE 0 O O O C C O O O C O C O l 5 8 D. OAKLAND COMMUNITY COLLEGE RETEST QUESTIONS. . . 173 E. TABLES OF CRITICAL VALUES . . . . . . . . . . . 176 F. RAW SCORES QUALITATIVE CODE HISTRIONICS . . . . 179 G. NEW QUALITATIVE AUDITORY TEST . . . . . . . . . 181 H o SEQUENCE PHOTO--BASS TEST 1 o o o o o o o o o o l 8 4 LIST OF TABLES Test Results Qualitative Code Synnoetics. . Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between April 10, 1972 O.C.C. Test Scores and O.C.C. Retest-- Qualitative Code Synnoetics . . . . . . . . . Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between April 10, 1972 O.C.C. Test Scores and Classroom Per— formance--Qualitative Code Synnoetics . . . . Komolgorov—Smirnov Test Between Bass Test Scores and Classroom Performance--Qualitative Code Synnoetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Test Results Qualitative Code Histrionics . . Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between April 10, 1972 O.C.C. Test Scores and O.C.C. Retest Scores--Qualitative Code Histrionics. . . . . Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between Bass Test Scores and Classroom Performance--Qualitative COde Histrionics O O O O O I O O O I O O O O O Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between April 10, 1972 O.C.C. Test Scores and Classroom Per- formance--Qualitative Code Histrionics. . . . Test Results Qualitative Proprioceptive Kinematics O I I O O O I O O O O O O I O O O O Komolgorov—Smirnov Test Between the O.C.C. Test Scores and Classroom Performance--Quali- tative Proprioceptive Kinematics. . . . . . . Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between Bass Test Scores and Classroom Performance--Qualitative Prdprioceptive Kinematics . . . . . . . . . . Test Results Qualitative Proprioceptive Temporal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi Page 57 58 59 6O 63 64 65 66 69 70 71 74 LIST OF TABLES--Continued TABLE Page Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between O.C.C. Test Scores and Classroom Performance--Qualitative PrOprioceptive Temporal. . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between Bass Test Scores Q(PT) and Classroom Performance--Quali- tative Proprioceptive Temporal . . . . . . . . 76 Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between Bass Test Scores Q(PK) and Classroom Performance--Quali— tative Proprioceptive Temporal . . . . . . . . 77 Test Results—-Qualitative Auditory . . . . . . 80 Komolgorov—Smirnov Test Between O.C.C. Test Scores and Classroom Performance—-Qualitative Auditory I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 81 Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between Bass Test Scores and Classroom Performance--Qualitative Anditory I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 82 All Elements of Cognitive Style Observed By a Panel of Experts During Bass Test Number 1 . . 86 Summary of Results--Qualitative Code Synnoe- tics I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 88 Summary of Results—~Qualitative Code Histrion— ics I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 89 Summary of Results--Qualitative Proprioceptive Kinematics I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 Summary of Results--Qualitative Proprioceptive Temporal I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 91 Summary of Results--Qualitative Auditory . . . 92 Raw Scores Qualitative Code Histrionics April 10, 1972 and April 11-14, 1972 (Bass Test Administered Between the Two Tests Reported) . 180 vii FIGURE 1. LIST OF FIGURES A cartesian product of sets representation of the educational sciences. . . . . . . . . . . Continuum of symbolic conditions of education- al taSksI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Cup and ball used in study. . . . . . . . . . Hypothetical distribution . . . . . . . . . . Sequence photo Bass test 1. . . . . . . . . . viii Page 21 40 46 185 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Education for a technological age must not only be flex- ible in terms of educational Opportunity and instructional programs, but in terms of personalization. At present there are a variety of efforts being made by educational institu- tions of the world to accommodate these demands. Although each aspect of flexibility in education, as listed above, 18 important to contemporary society, the aspect of personaliza— tion of education is a vitally important consideration for the realization of the flexibility goal. Therefore much more information about the individual, expressed in a variety of forms, is essential. Most endeavors dealing with measurement of educational achievement, aptitudes, and other dimensions of a student's education have been limited to paper and pencil tests. Such measurement does not satisfy the demands of the non—traditional education1 that is currently needed and most certainly will be required in the future. The current measurement situation can be greatly improved if the efforts of the field of instructional 1Samuel B. Gould, "The Prospects for Non-Traditional Study," AGB Reports (Nov./Dec., 1971), pp. 22-31. 1 technology can be expanded to include many of the activities presently required of specialists in data collection and measurement. The video tape recorder (VTR) can be used for recording specimens of behavior involving qualitative symbolic mediation and/or utilization2 as illustrative of these points. The VTR's capability of reproducing recorded situations which can be scored3 by a panel of observers provides it with an attribute that cannot be found in paper and pencil measuring instruments. Studies are needed to explore the possibilities and the limitations of selected technological devices for data collec— tion and educational measurement. Specifically, a pilot study of how the video tape recorder might be used to collect data that can be translated into qualitative symbolic orientations, i.e., elements of the individual's cognitive style, is needed. Several recent studies have been conducted in which a video tape recorder was utilized as a data collection device. These studies have been primarily in the areas of teacher edu- cation and counseling. Studies in the counseling area have indicated that the video tape recorder is of considerable value as a data 2See Chapter II for a discussion of these and other tOpics in the Educational Sciences. 3A score is a value assigned to an act or quality. collection device. Donohue,1+ for example, found the VTR a very effective device in critiquing non-verbal behavior in prospective counselors. LindbergS used the VTR effectively in investigation of students reactions to differing counseling styles. Hall6 used the VTR successfully in the perceptual evaluation of empathic communication. Hum7 found the VTR to be an excellent device for feedback in group counseling. Teacher education applications have been primarily in the areas of student teacher evaluation. DeGenaro8 found the VTR to be an excellent device for evaluation of student teacher performance in physical education. Harder9 showed considerable 1‘Stephen T. Donohue, "The Effects of Three Video Tape Critique In Practicum Upon Prospective Counselor's Nonverbal Behavior" (unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, New Mexico State University, 1969). 5Robert E. Lindberg, "An Investigation of College Student's Reaction to Two Different Styles of Counseling as Viewed on Video Tapes" (unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Arizona State University, 1969). 6William 0. Hall, Jr., "Analysis of Video Tape in the Per- ceptual Evaluation of Empathic Communication" (unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Kentucky, 1967). 7Sterling Pierce Creed Hum, "An Investigation of the Use of Focussed Video Tape Feedback in High School Group Counseling" (unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Southern California, 1969). 8Arthur Paul DeGenaro, "Experimental Use of the Video Tape ReCOrder as an Evaluative Instrument and Observational Tool in the Supervision of Student Teachers of Physical Education" (unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1969). 9Robert John Harder, "A Study in the Supervision of Social Studies, Student Teachers Utilizing Video-tape Techniques" (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Nebraska, 1968). success in the shaping of student teachers in social studies. Smith1° used the VTR as a device through which teachers and supervisors could evaluate the same instructional activity, to see if there were differences in the evaluations. The video tape recorder has also been utilized successfully for student teacher evaluation at many institutions including the Univer51ty of Georgia and Michigan State University. The Michigan State University Medical School and the Michigan State University School of Ostheopathic Medicine have also used the video tape recorder effectively as a data collec- tion device for evaluation and critique of student performance. The concept of differences in the cognitive style of individuals, as supported by Chapter II of this study, has been of concern to educators for many years. Attempts at the de- velOpment of a conceptual framework within which to deal with this problem are underway in many areas of the world. Prominent among them is the work of Donald Harry Britt11 at the Univer- sity of Cambridge, England. The framework he has developed is limited in that he classifies students into only three learner types. Another prominent activity in this area is being .¥°Robert Howard Smith, "A Comparison of Instructional Evalu- ations by Teachers and Supervisors Using Video Tape" (unpub- listed Doctoral Dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1969). 11Donald Harry Britt, "An Improved Method for Instruction- al Deve10pment,"’Audio-visual Instruction, Vol. 16, No. 4 carried out by the Portsmouth, Rhode Island, Public Schools.12 They too are developing a framework which could be classified as limited due to a small number of learner types identified. What appears to be a most promising work in this area is being conducted by Dr. Joseph E. Hill and his staff at Oakland Com- munity College in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. The framework developed by Hill takes into consideration many aspects of the individual and many learner types can be classified within the framework. It is within the framework deve10ped by Hill that the cur- rent study was conducted. A brief explanation of the educa- tional sciences follows. The Educational Sciences Hill, currently President of Oakland Community College, has, for thirteen years been developing what he refers to as the Educational Sciences. Efforts have been channeled in this direction due to an increasing awareness that existing educational systems are not adequately geared to meet the demands of a rapidly changing society and world. Attempts at effecting large-scale revision in curricula and activities which comprise the field of 12Lawrence T. Melo, Paula Tannenbaum, and Edward R. Camp- bell, "Project CAM: Reaching Objectives Through Learning Modalities," Audio-visual Instruction, Vol. 16, No. 5 (May, 1971), 30-31. education have been hampered because the field of education lacks a unifying, conceptual framework and language. Without a conceptual framework and language, the field of education does not lend itself to meaningful description and definition. Misinterpretation and misunderstanding are commonplace. The probability of precise discriminations and predictions is small.13 If education is considered to be the process of searching for meaning, where this process can be defined as a system composed of the generic elements of persons, processes, and properties, then these bodies of information (sciences) considered to be fundamental to this process can form the needed conceptual framework. If education is thought of as a social system involving the generic elements of persons, processes, and properties, and their interconnections, then analysis of this system shows that there are seven aspects of it that are fundamental to it's existence. Since each aspect includes factual descriptions, concepts, generalizations, and principles which can be employed to conduct rigorous, systematic observations and experimenta- tions in the field (education) to which they pertain, then each can be considered a science in its own light.M These sciences may be designated as: 13Joseph E. Hill, The Educational Sciences (Wayne State University, 1968), pp. 1-2. 1“Ibid., pp. 5-6. 1. Symbols and their meanings (S). 2. Cultural determinants of the meanings of symbols (E). 3. Modalities of inference (H). 4. Biochemical and electrophysiological aspects of the memory function (recognition, retention, recall, association) (Y). 5. Cognitive style of individuals (G). 6. Teaching, administrative and counseling style (TAC). 7. Systemic analysis decision-making (SAD).15 These sciences and their interrelationships, can be de- picted by the following cartesian products of sets. To illus- trate this point, the science of cognitive style is a cartesian product of four sets of information; symbols and their meaning (S), cultural determinants (E), modalities of inference (H), 16 and memory (Y). The labeling used above is also utilized in this graphic representation. S E 7 H Y X TAC (4) (6) V Figure 1. A cartesian product of sets representation of the educational sciences. 15Joseph E. Hill and Betty O. Setz, Educational Sciences at Oakland Community College (OLC.C. Press, 1970), p. 3. 16Vaughn Hoogasian, Cognitive Style: A Peek.Behind the Classicurtain (O.C.C. Press, 1971), p. 2. The particular elements of cognitive style of interest to this study are the qualitative symbols, i.e., those symbols which present and then represent to the awareness of the indi- vidual that which the symbols themselves are to the individual-- feelings, colors, values, musical tones, commitments. Qualita- tive symbolic orientations are currently being mapped, primarily, from student responses to paper and pencil inventories. The present study is based on the contention that qualitative sym- bolic responses may be quite different in a real situation as compared to what one thinks one might do in such a situation (paper and pencil test responses). Statement of PurpOSe The purpose of this study was to determine the relative effectiveness of two methods for determining the qualitative symbolic orientation (an aSpect of cognitive style) of a selected sample of community college students. The effective— ness of student orientation mappings, as determined by each method, was assessed by means of a rated performance of a task which was deemed by a panel of experts as requiring a major orientation by the student in the qualitative symbol under consideration. Method Specifically, the selected qualitative symbolic orienta— tions of a given student were first mapped on the basis of scores yielded by a paper and pencil instrumentality. These same qualitative symbolic orientations were then mapped on the basis of evaluations, by a panel of judges, of video taped performance behaviors requiring these symbolic orientations. The effectiveness of the mappings of selected qualitative symbolic orientations was determined on the basis of the degree to which they matched a performance criterion calling for a major capability in these dimensions. It was anticiapted that the viewing of video tapes and empirical mapping by a panel of judges of the qualitative symbolic orientations of the individual recorded thereon would have a higher validity and reliability than the map resulting from paper and pencil responses. This notion is derived from the fact that the video taped map was compiled from responses actually exhibited in a real-life situation rather than through written responses to constructed validity situations as pre- sented by paper and pencil tests. Significance of the Study The demands of contemporary society for diversifying and personalizing educational programs and approaches has caused increasing recognition, in educational circles, for the field of instructional technology. The field also has potential for contributing to data collection and, indirectly, measurement of educational achievement. This situation is emphasized with such developments in education as cognitive style mapping, 10 teaching style mapping, administrative style mapping, counsel- ing style mapping, and systemic analysis decision making. This study has significance for the increasing numbers of persons and educational institutions that are interested in and/or involved in the assessment of elements of cognitive style. This study should also provide new information which should lead to more accurate assessment of certain elements of cognitive style and more accurate matching of instructors, instructional settings, and instructional packages to students styles (needs), than is currently possible. Questions to be Answered In order to achieve the purpose of this study, answers to the following questions were sought: 1. Is the mapping of qualitative code synnoetics more effective by use of the Oakland Community College test battery or by use of the Bass test? 2. Is the mapping of qualitative code histrionic more effective by use of the Oakland Community College test battery or by use of the Bass test? 3. Is the mapping of qualitative prOprioceptive kinematics more effective through use of the Oakland Community College test designed to yield measures of qualitative proprioceptiveness or by use of the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive kinematic ability? 11 4. Is the mapping of qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability more effective through use of the Oakland Community College test designed to yield measures of qualitative proprioceptiveness or by use of the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability? 5. Is the mapping of qualitative auditory ability more effective through use of the Oakland Community College test battery or by use of the Bass test? 6. Is qualitative symbolic mapping by the Bass tests more effective than qualitative symbolic mapping by the Oakland Community College test battery? Definition of Key Terms The following definitions of terms are essential to the understanding of the current study. CARTESIAN PRODUCT--A particular type of space or set whose elements may be combined into profiles defined over that space. The "x" sign does not denote any algebraic or numerical operation but indicates that elements from each of the sets depicted must be com- bined to determine the exact reference points of each multi-element profile in space (see Figure l). COGNITIVE STYLE--A concept for describing an individual's mode of behavior in searching for meaning. It is identified by an individual's disposition to use cer- tain types of symbolic forms versus others; the derivation of meaning of symbols from roles the indi- vidual has found most satisfying; and the manner in which he reasons. An individual's cognitive style is determined by the way he takes notice of his total surroundings-- how he seeks meaning——how he becomes informed. Is he a listener or a reader? Is he concerned only with his point 0 View or is he influenced in decision- making by his family or by his group of associates? How does he reason? 12 COGNITIVE STYLE MAP-—A cognitive style map gives a picture of the way an individual derives meaning from his environment and personal experiences. Each map, like each individual, is different. A map of an indi— vidual's cognitive style provides a look at the way in which he derives meaning from his environment based upon his symbolic orientation, personal experiences, and ways of reasonings; i.e., drawing conclusions. EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES--A common structure within which inquiry of significance for the fundamental aspects of the applied field of education can be conducted. The educational sciences provide a conceptual frame- work and scientific language for the field that approaches the level of precision found in such de— rivative fields as medicine, pharmacy, engineering, law, and nursing. MAJOR ORIENTATION--When a student scores in the top 25% on a teSt for a particular element in cognitive style he is said to have exhibited a major orientation in that element. MINOR ORIENTATION--When a student scores in the middle 50% on a test for a particular element in cognitive style he is said to have exhibited a minor orienta- tion in that element. NEGLIGIBLE ORIENTATION--When a student scores in the lower 25% on a test for a particular element in cognitive style he is said to have exhibited a negligible orientation in that element. QUALITATIVE SYMBOLS--Symbols which present and then repre- sent to the awareness of the individual that which the symbols are (feelings, commitments, and values are examples). QUALITATIVE AUDITORY - Q(A)--The ability to perceive meaning through the sense of hearing. QUALITATIVE PROPRIOCEPTIVE KINEMATIC - Q(PK)--Programmatic in nature, a combination of qualitative symbols, deal- ing with combinations involving motor-skill ability. QUALITATIVE PROPRIOCEPTIVE TEMPORAL - Q(PT)-~Programmatic in nature, dealing with combinations involving timing. QUALITATIVE CODE SYNNOETICS - Q(CS)--Personal knowledge of oneself in all qualitative and theoretical symbolic forms in relation to ones environment. 13 QUALITATIVE CODE HISTRIONICS - Q(CH)--Staged behavior, or a deliberate exhibition of emotion or temperament to produce some particular effect on other persons. SYMBOLIC ORIENTATION-—Symbolic orientation refers to the ability of an individual to mediate either theoreti- cal or qualitative symbols into meaning; four theo— retical symbols, eighteen qualitative symbols. Overview of Chapters A frame of reference for this study is developed in Chapter I. Included are the introduction, the need for the study, statement of the purpose, significance of the study, and questions to be answered. In Chapter II a review of related literature is presented. The main areas of the review are: cognitive style, the edu— cational sciences, and cognitive style as defined in the edu- cational sciences. The design of the study and the procedures followed in the research are reported in Chapter III. Information in this chapter includes source of data, data collection procedures, and hypotheses to be tested. The analysis of data is presented in Chapter IV. In Chapter V, a summary of the study, conclusions, and implications for further research are presented. ‘i n 4‘ CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Since the study deals with the collection of data per- taining to the individual characteristics of students, the pertinent related literature lies generally in the broad areas of: l) cognitive style, 2) the educational sciences, and 3) studies of cognitive style as the concept is defined in the educational sciences. Cognitive Style From the late 1920's through the 1930's studies of con- sistency and predictability of personality were carried out by F. H. Allport,1 Hartshorne,2 Shuttleworth,3 May,“ and 1F. H. Allport, "The Influence of the Group Upon Associ- ation and Thought," Journal of Experimental Psychology, 3 (1920), 159-182. 2H. Hartshorne, M. A. May, F. K. Shuttleworth, Studies in the Nature of Character, Vol. III: Studies in the Organi- zatibn of Character (New York: Macmillan, 1930). 3Ibid. “M. A. May and H. Hartshorne, "A Summary of the Work of the Character Education Inquiry," Religious Education, 25 (1930), 607-619 and 754-762. l4 15 Lewin.s In the latter half of the 1930's, Gordon Allporte referred to "styles of life" and to "modes of adaptation" as a means of identifying distinctive personality types. In the 1940's, studies were initiated concerning concept formation, that process which occurs between perception and response. These researchers were interested in what they called cognitive processing. They considered a response to a stimulus, as Gardner et 31. stated, as: ... coerced not by stimulus alone, but also by the organizational dispositions of the reSponding system....7 Klein,8 in 1951, termed the organizational process used by Gardner as "cognitive control principles" and Gardner,9 in 1953, delimited the term "cognitive style" to only those control principles (diSposition of the responding system) within an individual. 5K. Lewin, R. Lippitt, and R. White, "Patterns of Aggres- sive Behavior in Experimentally Created "Social Climates," Journal of Social Psychology, 10 (1939), 271-299. 6Gordon W. Allport, Personality, A Psychological Inter- pretation (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1937), p. 47. 7R. W. Gardner et 31., "Cognitive Control: A Study of Individual ConsistenEIes in Cognitive Behavior," Psychological Issues, Vol. 1, No. 4 (1959), 3. 8G. S. Klein, "The Personal WOrld Through Perception," in Blake and Ramsey (Editors), Perception: An Approach to Personality (New York: Ronald Press, 1951), 328-355. 9R. W. Gardner, "Cognitive Styles in Categorizing Behavior," Journal of Personality, Vol. 22 (1953), 214—233. ...e \. 16 Broverman, in 1960, analyzed the work of Gardner and Klein and stated: ... cognitive styles seem promising parameters on which to order a perplexing array of individual differences in human behavior.10 Witkin,11 in 1954, termed cognitive style as a type of personality construct shown in the interaction between the events in a person's life history and that person's per- ceptual (cognitive) response system. The Educational Testing Service (ETS) has directed major attention to the concept of cognitive style. In November, 1951 ETS organized a conference to identify and select tests to measure established cognitive factors. As a result of these efforts, a kit containing tests to measure twenty-four different aptitude or achievement factors was deve10ped and published in 1954. A second such conference was convened in November 1958, and resulted in the develOpment and publishing of a second twenty-four element kit in 1963.12 While it is possible to assert with considerable confi- dence that people differ in their ability to learn, it is not 10D. M. Broverman, "Dimensions of Cognitive Styles," Journal of Personality, Vol. 38 (1960), 183. 11H. A. Witkin et a1., Personality Through Perception: An Experimental and Clifiical Study (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1959), pp. 495-500. 12John W. French, Ruth B. Ekstrom, and L. A. Price, Manual of Reference Tests for Cognitive Factors (Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service, 1963), pp. 2—3. 17 easy to assess or accurately describe the ways in which they differ. Gagné, in 1962, took the position that the least effec- tive individual difference measure is the aptitude or general intelligence score. He(jites as the most useful approach the concept of learning sets. He states: The major methodological implication of this paper is to the effect that investigation of productive learning must deal intensively with the kind of variable usually classified as individual differences. One cannot depend upon a measurement of general proficiency or aptitude to reveal much of the important variability in the capa- bilities people bring with them to a given task.... But, the measurement of their learning sets ... revealed a great deal about how they would behave.13 From Gagné's point of View, prior experience--the total- ity of an individual's being, must be the element of concern when dealing with individual differences. The research cited above (Allport, Broverman, Gardner, Gagné, Witkin) and other research similar in nature (Ames,11+ Blake and Ramseyls) supports the contention that man in his dealing with the complexity of the world deals with problems in varying ways. Cognitive behavior is considered a basic component of the socio-personal matrix and this cognitive 13Robert M. Gagné, "The Acquisition of Knowledge," Psychological Review, LXIX (July 1962), 365. 1"A. Ames, "Sensations, Their Nature and Origin," Transformations, 1 (1950), ll-12. 15R. R. Blake and G. V. Ramsey, Perception: An Approach to PersonaliEY_(New York: Ronald Press, 1951). 18 behavior is consistent enough in quality to be termed cog- nitive "style." Educational Sciences Hill, in his concept of educational sciences has defined cognitive style in a somewhat different way than it is defined above while relying heavily upon the work cited. It is within the framework deve10ped by Hill that this study was conducted. The concept of the educational sciences was developed in an attempt to create a conceptual framework and language for education and is composed of seven sciences, each of which is described below. Science S, Symbols and Their Meanings, also known as symbologosics is mainly an outgrowth of the work of Ernst Cassirer and John Dewey.16 Man deals with two types of symbols: Theoretical--That symbol which presents to the "awareness" or nervous system of the individual something different from that which the symbol itself is-- the word cat.17 Qualitative-—That symbol which presents and then represents to the "awareness" of the individual that which the symbol itself is to the individual-—a cat.18 16Laurence Wasser, The Educational Science of Cognitive Style (O.C.C. Press, 197I7, p. 3. 17Ibid., p. 6. 1°Ibid., p. 12. 19 The theoretical symbols can be both visual and auditory and deal with ideas both linguistic and quantitative. They therefore are subclassified as: A. Theoretical visual linguistic T(VL)--written word B. Theoretical audio linguistic T(AL)--sound of a word C. Theoretical visual quantitative T(VQ)--written number D. Theoretical audio quantitative T(AQ)—-sound of a number19 The meaning of qualitative symbols is derived from three sources; sensory stimuli, cultural codes (games), and program— matic effects of objects. There are eighteen (18) qualitative symbols. Five of them are associated with sensory stimuli. 1. Q(A)--auditory--the ability to perceive meaning through the sense of hearing. 2. Q(O)--olfactory--the ability to perceive meaning through the sense of smell. 3. Q(S)--savory—-the ability to perceive meaning by the sense of taste. 4. Q(T)--tactile--the ability to perceive meaning by the sense of touch. 5. Q(V)--visual--the ability to perceive meaning by the sense of sight2° Three of the qualitative symbols are programmatic in nature, and as such, can be thought of as "sixth senses." 19Joseph E. Hill and Derek Nunney, Personalizing Educa- tional Programs Utilizing Cognitive Style Mapping (O.C.C. Press, 1971), p. 5. 2°Ibid., p. s. 6I 7I 8. 20 Q(P)--proprioceptive--1ike the ability to type without consciously going through the steps. 1 Q(PK)--pr0prioceptive kinematic--a subset of Q(P). Q(PT)--pr0prioceptive temporal--a subset of Q(P). The remaining ten qualitative symbols are associated with cultural codes and are termed: 9. 10. ll. 12. l3. 14. 15. l6. l7. Q(CEM)--code empathetic--the ability to identify with, or have a vicarious experience of, another persons feelings, ideas, volitions. Q(CES)--code esthetic--the ability of the individual under consideration to View with enjoyment the "beauty" and "pureness" of a resulting product, situation, or idea. Q(CET)--code ethic--a commitment to a set of values, a group of moral principles, obligations, and/or duties. Q(CH)--code histrionic--staged behavior, or a delib- erate exhibition of emotion or temperament to produce some particular effect on other persons. Q(CK)--code kinesics--the ability to communicate by means of non-linguistic functions such as blushing and motions of the body; such as shrugs, smiles, gestures. Q(CKH)--code kinesthetics—-motor skill ability. Q(CP)--code proxemics--the ability of an individual to judge the acceptable "critical" physical and social distance between himself and others as perceived by the other person. Q(CS)--code synnoetics--personal knowledge of one- self in all qualitative and theoretical symbolic forms in relation to ones environment. Q(CT)--code transactiona1--the ability to maintain a positive communicative interaction which significantly influences the goals of the persons involved in that interaction.22 21Ibid., p. 5. 221bid., p. 6. 21 18. Q(CTM)--code tempora1--proper social timing. Theoretical symbols are used in ordinary language to communicate ideas in a connected, consecutive manner according to a principle of common logic. Qualitative symbols are used to convey feelings, commitments, values and to provide particu- lar types of insights into the domain of self.23 The relationship between theoretical symbols and quali- tative symbols can be explained in terms of a four part con- tinuum. Each part of the continuum represents a symbolic con- dition. The four conditions are theoretical predominance (TP), reciprocity (REC), qualitative predominance (QP), and qualita- tive independence (QI).2“ Figure 2. Continuum of s olic conditions of educa- tional tasks.2 The drawing "continuum of symbolic conditions" should be considered as a solid cylinder except for the hollow cone contained therein. 23Hill and Setz, gp. cit., p. 18. 2“Ibid., p. 21. 25Wasser, gp._cit., p. 21. 22 (QI)--qualitative independent--where symbolic utiliza- tion is entirely in the qualitative realm. An original music presentation by a person who can neither read nor write music. (QP)--qualitative predominant--where symbolic utiliza- tion is in both the theoretical and qualitative realms, but predominantly qualitative; A music lesson in which theoretical symbols are used by the teacher, but the predominant activity (student performance) is qualitative. (REC)--reciprocity--theoretical and qualitative symbolic utilization in approximately equal portions. A music lesson in which musical selections are played (qualitative) to explain (theoretical) certain aspects of appreciation. (TP)--theoretical predominant--where symbolic utiliza- tion is in both the theoretical and qualitative realms, but predominantly theoretical. A music lesson--predominantly lecture mixed with occa- sional renditions.26 Science E1 Cultural Determinants, also known as deter- mantics, has been designed on the premise that education (for that matter all human behavior) cannot be completely analyzed and understood unless it is interpreted in the social context in which it exists. Man's perceptions influence and are influenced by his culture. Relatively stable social relationships are, there- fore, significant factors in the development of the percep- tions which an individual has of his world. The main cultural influences at work on the individual throughout life are his family, his associates, and his indi- viduality.27 26Ibid., pp. 21-22. 27Joseph E. Hill, The Educational Sciences (Wayne State University, 1968), p. 7. 23 Individuals are predisposed to solve problems on their own (individuality), to seek aid from their family (family), to seek aid from friends (associates), or to deal with prob- lems in combinations of these with one factor being predomi- nant. These influences are either positive or negative.28 Science H, Modalities of Inference, also known as infer- ensics. One quality distinguishing man from other animals is the uniqueness of the inference processes employed by him in his search for meaning. The educational science of modalities of inference deals with the diverse methods of mediating into meaning theoretical and qualitative symbols.29 The process of statistical inference is used as the model for establishing the modalities of inference attributed to man, and shows that man is limited to four inductive inference processes for drawing probability conclusions (magnitude, dif- ference, relationship, appraisal). The magnitude inference process is a form of categorical thinking and utilizes norms categorically classified, and attitudes accepted as true by the individual as a basis for acceptance or rejection of advanced hypotheses.30 28Wasser, gp. cit., p. 39. 291bid., p. 44. 30Hill and Nunney, op, cit., p. 5. 24 Difference deals with hypotheses of difference such as one to one contrasts or comparisons of selected characteris- tics of measurement.31 Relationship is a process of comparing relationships be- tween two or more characteristics or measurements.32 The appraisal type of inference considers, with equal weight, hypotheses of all the previous three categories (magnitude, difference, relationship) in arriving at a prob- able conclusion.33 While an individual may at different times employ all of the types of inductive reasoning processes, preferential use of one type over the others emerges as an element of the indi- vidual's cognitive style.3” Science X; Biochemical and Electrophysiological Aspects of Memory Function. This is an educational science which is not well developed. A great deal is not known in this area, and although research is being conducted in the area, this science is virtually not utilized in the Oakland Community College program. Much additional research must be done before this educa- tional science becomes a functional part of an on-going pro- gram. 311bid., p. 5. 32Ibid., p. 5. 33Ibid., p. 5. 3"Hill and Setz, gp, cit., p. 6. 25 Science G, Cognitive Styles of individuals as can be seen in Figure 1 (Chapter I), is composed of the cartesian product of S, E, H, and Y. The construct of cognitive style is a vehicle which can be used to diagnose individual styles and prescribe activi- ties which provide the high probability of the student's accomplishing successfully the educational task confronting him. The determination of an appropriate style for an indi- vidual demands that the diagnostician analyze the student 329 the substance of the educational task to be considered since the cognitive style provides a means of analyzing, interpreting, and evaluating educational endeavors in a manner relatively different from those usually employed.35 This procedure leads to the formulation of strategies for the matching and augmentation of styles to increase the probability of a student's successful performance in the myriad of educational tasks he faces daily. Cognitive style not only expresses the idiosyncratic nature of students as persons engaged in meaning-seeking behavior but allows teachers to communicate this uniqueness precisely and accu- rately within the realms of education.36 35Hill, op. cit., p. 15. 36Wasser, op. cit., p. 59. 26 Science TAC, Teaching Style, Administrative Style, and Counseling Style. These three elements have been found to be significant as fundamental aspects of the educative process in addition to cognitive style. Teaching, administrative and counseling styles quite often are entirely different than cog— nitive styles.37 Teaching style may be used to analyze and develOp general- izations about student-teacher relationships and are classified in three categories: authoritarian, adjustive, and flexible.38 Administrative styles are classified in major/minor two- element categories of the following: dominant, adjusting, c00perative, and passive-custodial.39 Counseling style takes into consideration, in addition to cognitive style, the counselor's attitude toward who should set goals and determine the approaches to the goals. Counselors are classified as directive, situational, and non-directive (the situational style changing from directive to non-directive on the basis of the situation).#0 Science SAD, Systemic Analysis Decision-Making. The ultimate aim of systemic analysis is that of deriving optimal decisions. An optimal decision is one that is best for all 37Hill and Setz, op, cit., p. 9. 38Ibid., p. 10. 391bid., p. 10. “°Ibid., p. 10. 27 elements included in the system. The systemic approach accommodates both broad-scale and in-depth evaluative decision- making regarding changes and modifications in an arbitrarily defined set of elements and their interconnections considered over a specified period of time.H These seven sciences have been proposed as a conceptual framework for the applied field of education. They provide bodies of information composed of descriptive facts, concepts, definitions, generalizations, laws, and theories that have significance to fundamental aspects of the applied field of education. Any element in education can be analyzed in terms of one of the sciences or by a combination of two or more of them. The proposed educational sciences should also provide an articulation which is unique to those activities called edu- cation. This articulation should provide a vehicle to counter- act, among others, misinterpretation, difficulties that now occur because of inadequate communication between scholars and professional persons, fragmentation, and lack of closure and completeness for the system. The educational sciences do not identify disconnected and isolated realms but are inter- related and complimentary aspects of the field of education. Although the framework as presented above is extensive and well-defined, it is an evolving concept. Many studies are l”Hill, op, cit., p. 20. 28 presently being conducted which will add to, delete from, or modify practice within the framework. Effort is constantly being made toward more accurate assessment of elements of cognitive style, more accurate mapping of these elements, and more accurate matching of in- structors, instructional packages, and instructional setting to students based upon their cognitive style maps. Many educational institutions and organizations are be- coming both interested and involved in cognitive style map- ping and personalization of instruction based upon the frame- work developed by Hill (the University of Tennessee at Martin, a seven community college consortium in Florida, The East Lansing Public Schools, Tulane University, a six community college consortium in Georgia, the University of Wisconsin- Parkside, Delta College, and more). Increased interest in and reliance on the framework of the educational sciences makes additional research in all areas of the framework not only desirable, but imperative. Cognitive Style in the Educational Sciences Recent findings by researchers working within the frame- work developed by Hill have added significantly to the evolu- tion of the concept. Examples are: ‘1‘ 29 Symbolic Orientation Shuert,"2 in his study of the cognitive styles of success- ful mathematics students, found that the following elements of symbolic orientation were unique to the successful group. 1. Major theoretical visual quantitative (TVQ). 2. Major theoretical auditory quantitative (TAQ). 3. Minor theoretical auditory linguistic (TAL). Dehnke's"3 findings indicated that there is a pattern of symbol mediation among successful English teachers. Wasser“” discovered that teachers of mathematics, language, health, social studies, science, reading and spell- ing tended to give higher grades to students who made use of auditory 229 visual theoretical symbols. 5 Robinson,“ investigating the changes that occurred in the cognitive style of participants in a "Higher Opportunities “zKeith L. Shuert, "A Study to Determine Whether A Selec- ted Type of Cognitive Style Predisposes One to do Well in Mathematics" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Wayne State Uni- versity, 1970). ' “3Ronald E. Dehnke, "An Exploration of the Possible Iso- morphism of Cognitive Style and Successful Teaching of Second School English" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Wayne State University, 1966). I"'Laurence Wasser, "An Investigation into Cognitive Style as a Facet of Teachers' Systems of Student Appraisal" (unpub- lished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1969). 1”Richard L. Robinson, "A descriptive Study of Specific Achievements and Aptitudes of the High Risk Students in Oak- land University's Higher Opportunities Program in Education" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Wayne State University, 1969). 30 Programs in Education," found increases in theoretical visual and quantitative orientation can be related to certain quali- tative codes. Zussman"6 identified "collective" cognitive styles among groups of public-school and community-college administrators. Both groups of administrators exhibited theoretical visual and auditory orientations as well as qualitative code empa- thetic and kinesthetic orientations. Cultural Determinants of the Meanings of Symools Shuertl+7 observed the minor, positive associates deter- minants (a(+)) to be characteristic of unsuccessful mathe- matics students in his study. Zussman"a found major individuality and minor positive associates determinants to be common elements among both public school and community college administrators. Cotter's"9 study demonstrated a trend in which students who possessed a major individuality (I) most frequently l+6Steven P. Zussman, "A Pilot Study Exploration of Cogni- tive Style and Administrative Style as Defined in the Educa- tional Sciences” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Wayne State University, 1968). “7Shuert, op. cit. “8Zussman, op. cit. l'S’Jude T. Cotter, "The Affects of the Educational Science of Cultural Determinants of the Meanings of Symbols on Curricu- lar Choice" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Wayne State Uni- versity, 1970). 31 selected community-college curricula which stress fundamental disciplines (i.e., Science and Liberal Arts curriculum) as opposed to Applied Sciences and Arts curriculum. Cotter notes, however, that while this trend and others were indicated, the hypothesis of a significant difference between the cultural determinants of students in the two groups could not be sup- ported. Modalities of Inference Rankinso delineated the modalities of inference in terms of models, isomorphism, and hypotheses and added data to sup- port the behavioral description of the symbols attached to this (modalities of inference) set. The model theory to which Rankin refers is based upon the property of isomorphism associated with set theory in mathematics. In mathematics, a set is considered to be a carefully defined collection of elements. If two sets are examined, and if (a) there is found to be a one-to-one corre- spondence between the elements included in the sets, and (b) that certain structures are preserved, then the two sets are said to be "isomorphic." If two sets are isomorphic to each other, then either set can serve as a model for the other. soStuart C. Rankin, "A Theory of an Isomorphism-Model- Hypothesis Method of Thought" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Wayne State University, 1964). 32 Dehnke51 observed isomorphism between modalities of in- ference and successful English teaching. Shuert52 found the major appraisal and major deductive inferential processes to be elements unique to successful math students. 3 study Community college administrators in Zussman'sS possessed the modalities of appraisal, major difference and minor relationship. There were no common modalities of in- ference among the public school administrators. Other investigations utilizing the educational science of cognitive style include the works' of DeLoach,5” Fragale,SS and Wyett.56 DeLoach found that similarity of administrator and instructor cognitive style acts as a significant variable in the administrator's evaluation of the instructor. He also 51Dehnke, op. cit. 52Shuert, 92; cit. 53Zussman, op, cit. 5"Joseph F. DeLoach, "An Analysis of Cognitive Style Dis- parity as an Antecedent of Cognitive Dissonance in Instruc- tional Evaluation: An Exploratory Study in the "Educational Sciences" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Wayne State Univer- sity, 1969). 55Marvin Joseph Fragale, "A Pilot Study of Cognitive Styles of Selected Faculty Members and Students in a Community College Setting" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Wayne State University, 1969). 56Jerry L. Wyett, "A Pilot Study to Analyze Cognitive Style and Teaching Style with Reference to Selected Strata of the Defined Educational Sciences" (unpublished Ph.D. disserta- tion, Wayne State University, 1969). 33 noted that similarities of teaching style between administra- tors and instructors were significant to the evaluation process. Fragale identified "collective cognitive styles" among teachers and students included in his sample. Wyett identified a general cognitive style orientation for each teacher who participated in the "Teacher Education Experimental Project" at Wayne State University. His study also implied that certain teaching tasks are related to cer- tain cognitive styles. Summary Selected research related to cognitive style, the educa- tional sciences, and cognitive style as defined in the educa- tional sciences was reviewed. The literature indicates that contemporary work toward definition and assessment of cognitive style has been con- ducted by many prominent psychologists during the past twenty- five years. Their work indicates that cognitive style is a complex concept which when adequately defined and assessed can lead to a far greater understanding of how individuals learn and how instruction should be carried out. The educational sciences (symbols and their meanings, cultural determinants, modalities of inference, biochemical and electrophysiological aspects of memory function, cognitive style, teaching, administrative and counseling styles, and 34 systemic analysis decision making) were deve10ped in an attempt to provide a conceptual framework and language for the field of education. The detailed descriptions of the educational sciences provided in this chapter indicate the current state of the concept. The literature covering cognitive style as defined in the educational sciences indicates that much work of an exploratory nature has been conducted in this area. study adds significantly to what is known about the but no set parameters have been formed. Many other not reported here, are currently underway. As work pleted, the findings are quickly utilized to modify evolving concept. Each area, studies, is com- the CHAPTER III DESIGN OF THE STUDY The effectiveness of two series of tests, designed for mapping qualitative symbolic orientation, was assessed in this study by comparison of the mappings resulting from each of these series to performance by the students in the study in classroom situations. One series of tests was developed by Oakland Community College and for the most part, is of the paper and pencil variety. The other series was developed by this author and consists of the performance of selected tasks by students in the study and the recording of these perform- ances on video tape. The video taped performances were viewed by a panel of experts and the orientations exhibited were mapped by them. The effectiveness of each of the series of tests was determined by use of the Komolgorov-Smirnov statistical test model. The Sample The subjects for this study, in an attempt to avoid undue Oakland Community College influence, were selected from nurs- ing students at Delta College, a comprehensive community college located in University Center, Michigan. 35 36 Seventeen nursing students at Delta College were tested in June of 1971 as to their cognitive styles, using the Oakland Community College (O.C.C.) test battery. These stu- dents were scheduled to be retested, and others to be tested for the first time, using the O.C.C. test battery on April 10, 1972 and the additional tests required by this study were added to the scheduled testing. The June, 1971 test data, although all aspects of the O.C.C. battery were not adminis- tered, provided valuable base-line data. The sample used for this study consisted of students who reported for this testing on April 10, 1971. This sample then would be termed what Hill and Kerber refer to as a judg- ment or purposive sample and is defined as follows: When the selection of a sample is based upon human judg- ment, it is called "purposive" or "judgment" selection. Such selection is determined on the basis of what the research worker might consider from his past experience to be a typical or representative sampling unit. It may also be based upon the findings of an analysis of the statistical population relative to physical, psychologi- cal, sociological, or economic characteristics. Sometimes it is a haphazard selection of accessible population e1ements--persons who pass a particular corner in a cer- tain city, for example. Frequently, "purposive" selec- tion is considered "segmental" selection, to the extent that the selection is restricted to certain segments of the total statistical population.1 Specifically, twenty-one of the twenty-four students who reported for testing on April 10, 1972 were selected for this 1Joseph E. Hill and August Kerber, Models, Methods, and Analytical Procedures‘in Educational Research (Wayne State I University Press, 1967), pp. 43-44. .— I: h I I‘l‘A 37 study. The choice of these students was slightly more selec- tive than taking an accessible pOpulation, as defined above. The sample was obtained through random selection2 from the accessible population which reported for testing during the testing period. Instrumentation The tests used in this study were composed of a battery designed at Oakland Community College to determine cognitive style, a mini-battery (Bass tests) designed for this study to assess certain qualitative symbolic elements of cognitive style, and a set of classroom tasks, judged by a panel of experts as requiring major orientations in certain of the qualitative elements. The Oakland Community College Battegy The Oakland battery is divided into two parts. The first part is a selection of 12 theoretical tests requiring 2-1/2 hours to complete, the first six of which represent aptitude testing. All of the tests have item validity.3 The second six 2Gene V. Glass and Julian C. Stanley, Statistical Methods in Education and Psychology_(Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970), Table of Random Digits, pp. 510-512. 3Item analysis was conducted and empirical validity estab- lished through the dissertationscfoerry L. Wyatt, Joseph DeLoach, Laurence Wasser, Arlin Schroeder, Glenn McAdams, and extensive work by personnel associated with the O.C.C. Diag- nostic Test Center. <- w .u ... . ...... .. -g b .. n. a n... ‘ I Div-u ~.. .. (I) (I) 38 tests of the first part are inventories which give both quali- tative and theoretical information about a student. The second section of the test is a qualitative non-written test requiring 90 minutes to complete. This section is composed of performance tests of sensory accuity. A complete test battery can be found in Appendix A. The characteristics described by particular instruments are: Theoretical Test-- Test Test #1: #2: Test #3: Test Test Test #4: #5: #6: Verbal Reasoning--TVL Listening--TAL (Recording) Numerical Reasoning--TVQ Reading--TVL (Gates) Numerical Listening--TAQ (Tape) Grammar--TVL Qualitative Tests (written)-- Test Test #7: #8: Q(CEM), Q(CES), Q(CET), Q(CH), Q(CK) Q(CKH), Q(CP). Q(CS), Q(CT) Inventory #9 and #10: Cultural Determinants--IAF Inventory #11: Modalities of Inference-~MDRL Inventory #12: Personal Code Inventory Qualitative/Non-Written-- Test Test #1: #2: Qualitative Auditory Qualitative Olfactory The battery is descriptive in nature at the present time and, as such, provides information about the student being tested. Items are taken from a variety of instruments, such 39 as the Iowa Tests of Educational Development, the Gates Read- ing Tests, the Vineland Social Maturity Scale, and the Science Research Associates Batteries. Attitudes, interests, and values are measured by inventories and check-lists em- ployed to provide information about specific vocational in- terests, social activities and such broad fields of interests as mechanical, electronic or computational devices.“ The Bass Tests The second battery of tests (the Bass tests) was designed to assess selected qualitative elements of cognitive style. The tests were designed to have the student perform a task which was recorded on video tape. The tapes were later viewed by a panel of experts and the students.performance was evalu- ated with reference to the qualitative elements exhibited. The tasks in the Bass series and the method of data col- lection and mapping were discussed at great length with Dr. Hill and Dr. Virginia Svagr, Director of the Oakland Community College Diagnostic Testing Center, as to their validity in providing measures of the desired qualitative symbolic orien- tations. These experts agreed that the tests, data collection methods, and mapping procedures of this series would provide measures of the desired elements. 1'For a more complete description of the test described in this section, see Appendix A. 40 Figure 3. Cup and ball used in the study. BASS TEST 1: Qualitative Proprioceptive Kinematics Q(PK), Qualitative Code Synnoetics Q(CS), Qualitative Code Histrionics Q(CH). Students were presented with a plastic cup-like object with an elastic string attached to it on the end of which was a light-weight plastic ball (see Figure 3). They were shown that a person in a standing position could hold the cup in his hand with the ball on the string hanging below the cup and could swing or flip the ball up (by use of only one hand) and catch it in the cup (see Appendix H). Each student was given one (1) attempt to perform this task. After that trial, the student was asked how many times he would catch the ball in 41 ten (10) attempts Q(CS). The student then took his ten (10) attempts, and this activity Q(PK) was recorded on video tape. The student's reaction, staged behavior (histrionics) to performing this task before the television camera provided a look at his Q(CH) orientation. BASS TEST 2: Qualitative Proprioceptive Temporal Q(PT) and Qualitative Audio Q(A). Students were asked to play a pinball machine. Their responses to the movement of the balls within the machine, with the flippers, was indicative of Q(PT). Since this flipper action was also a reSponse to the pings, rings, pops, etc., of the pinball machine, it also provided a measure of Q(A). The students responses to this test were also recorded on video tape. Classroom Tests The third battery of test was deemed by a panel of ex- perts as “containing classroom activities requiring major orientation in Q(A), Q(PK), and Q(PT) respectively. The classroom activities are described below.5 goalitative Auditory--Apica1 Pulse: The student and the instructor listened (at the same time), with a teaching stethoscope, to a patient's heart beat at the apex of the heart. Both student and instructor counted the number of heart beats and recorded the results. 5The form on which this information was collected is included in Appendix B. 42 Proprioceptive Temporal--Blood Pressure: A blood pres- sure cuff was applied by the student to the upper left arm of a patient. The student listened for the first pulse sound, with a teaching stethoscope, and read the column of mercury on the Aneroid needle (blood pressure gauge) at the same time. The instructor and student listened and read the blood pressure simultaneously. The readings of both were recorded (one attempt). Proprioceptive Kinematic--Binder Application: A binder was applied by a student to a body part. The student pulled the two edges of the binder together and secured the edges by pinning or hooking (coordinates pulling action and seeing-- eye and muscle coordination). Qualitative Code Synnoetics Q(CS) and Qualitative Code Histrionics Q(CH), as exhibited in a classroom situation were assessed through an evaluation form filled out by the instruc- tor covering several classroom activities.6 Procedures On April 10, 1972, twenty-one (21) students were random- ly selected for this study from a group of students at Delta College, University Center, Michigan, who were scheduled to be tested by use of the Oakland Community College Cognitive Style Test Battery. These students had previously been tested 6The form on which this information was collected is included in Appendix C. 43 by use of this battery in June of 1971. The Oakland test battery (a four hour long testing procedure) was administered to the twenty-one students and then later in the same day two short Bass tests (approximately five minutes in length), de— signed to measure elements of cognitive symbolic orientations as previously measured by the O.C.C. battery were administered to the same twenty-one students. The Bass tests, as described previously in this chapter, were recorded on video tape and were later evaluated by a group of experts as to the orientations exhibited by each student. A re-test of Qualitative Code Synnoetics Q(CS) and Qual- itative Code Histrionics Q(CH), using questions taken from the Oakland Community College Test Battery, was administered to each of the students in the study during the remainder of the week of April 10, 1972. The re-test procedure was on a catch- as-catch-can basis throughout the week (no specific date). The re-test was conducted to see if there was a change in O.C.C. test scores after the students were exposed to the Bass tests. There was approximately a two week delay between the administration of the tests designed for predictive mapping (O.C.C. tests, Bass tests) and the performance of the previ- ously described classroom tasks. This delay was necessitated by l) a term break at Delta College during which the students. were not available, and 2) the need to wait for an appropriate time in the new term for the tests to be administered. 44 The video tape recordings of the Bass tests were evalu- ated on May 18, 1972 at the Oakland Community College Test Center on the Orchard Ridge Campus by a panel of experts with extensive experience in observing scoring and mapping of qualitative symbolic orientations. The panel was composed of: 1. Dr. Virginia Svagr, currently Director of the Oakland Community College Diagnostic Testing Center and Learn- ing Systems and a certified consulting psychologist in Michigan. Dr. Svagr has a Ph.D. in clinical psy- chology and before joining the O.C.C. staff was a school psychologist and reading consultant for the Oakland County Intermediate School District. She is also a registered nurse (R.N.) Dr. Arlin Schroeder, currently Associate Professor of Foundational Studies, Oakland Community College. Dr. Schoreder holds a doctorate in the educational sciences from Wayne State University and has done extensive work in test construction and assessment with many public school systems in Michigan. He Spent six months in revision of the inventories and oral examinations designed to measure both cognitive styles and teaching styles which are currently uti- lized by O.C.C. 3. Mr. James Hand, currently a doctoral candidate in Instructional Development and Technology at Michigan State University. Mr. Hand has been working in the 45 educational sciences on an intern basis for the past year. He has been involved in cognitive style map- ping of students at O.C.C., Spartan Village School in East Lansing, Michigan, and Marble School in East Lansing, Michigan. He was vitally involved in plans for implementation of cognitive style mapping pro- grams with colleges in both Florida and Georgia. 4. Dr. Joseph E. Hill, currently President of Oakland Community College and the originator of the framework within which this study was conducted. Dr. Hill is author of a book on statistics and research design and for sixteen years taught evaluation and measure- ment courses at Wayne State University. The video taped performance of each student was played back for the panel of experts and evaluated by them as to the orientation under scrutiny and any other orientations which were readily discernible from the video tape. The panels' evaluation, both individually and collectively, was recorded on paper and then the video taped recording of the next stu- dent was reviewed and evaluated, etc. Analysis The data gathered from the tests described above were analyzed by use of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov analysis technique. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov Statistical Test Model is described by Hill and Kerber as: 46 ... The two-sample test is concerned with the degree of agreement between the two cumulative distributions of the relative frequencies observed in the respective samples. If the two samples have actually been drawn from the same pOpulation, or pOpulations having the same distribution, the cumulative distribution Of both samples should be reasonably close to each other over the range of values involved. If the two-sample cumulative dis- tributions evidence too much divergence at any point, there is a given probability that the sample might come from different populations. If the deviation between the two cumulative distributions at any point is so great that it would occur, according to the appropriate Kolmogorov-Smirnov probability distribution, less than 5 percent, or 1 percent of the time, due to chance factors alone, the null hypothesis (no difference between the re- spective cumulative distributions) is rejected in favor of the statistical alternative hypothesis (H1).7 The level of significance selected for rejecting the null hypotheses was at the .05 Alpha level. An example of how this technique was employed in the study is shown in Figure 4. GROUP DISTRIBUTION RATED MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE TOTAL GROUP A 11 8 2 ll 12 3;, 21 21 21 21 GROUP B 21 0 0 El 31. £1 21 21 21 21 ABSOLUTE DIFFERENCE l2_ _£ _2 BETWEEN 21 21 21 GROUPS Figure 4. Hypothetical distribution. 7Hill and Kerber, op. cit., p. 311. 47 In this hypothetical distribution, the 11 in the upper left hand corner of the Group A - Major block indicates that eleven subjects in Group A were mapped as major, the 8 in the upper left hand corner Of the Group A - Minor block indicates that eight subjects in group A were mapped as minor, and the 2 in the upper left hand corner of Group A - Negligible block indi- cates that two subjects in group A were mapped as negligible. The %%-in the Group A - Major blocks indicates that eleven Of the twenty-one subjects in Group A were rated major. The %% in the Group A - Minor block indicates a cumulative distribu- tion (11 major and 8 minor) showing that nineteen out Of the twenty-one subjects were rated as either major or minor. The 21 21 distribution showing that twenty-one of the twenty-one sub- in the Group A - Negligible block is also a cumulative jects in Group A were rated as either major, minor, or neg- ligible. The distribution in Group B shows that all twenty-one Of the subjects in the group were mapped as major. The largest absolute difference in each Komolgorov-Smirnov table is tested. In Figure 4 the largest absolute difference of %%-is shown in the major category (the absolute difference between %% and %%). The testing amounts to comparing this dif- ference to a table listing the critical values for the Komolgorov-Smirnov test.8 8See Appendix E. 48 Comparison to the table shows that either the absolute difference between two distributions indicates that the distribution are significantly different or that they are not significantly different. A significant difference leads to rejection of the null hypothesis. A difference that is not significant leads to non-rejection of the null hypothesis. The Komolgorov-Smirnov, a nonparametric statistic designed for analysis Of variance, was chosen for this study because: ... it is sensitive tO any kind of difference in the distribution....9 When compared with the t test, the Komolgorov-Smirnov test has high power-efficiency (about 96 percent) for small samples ... seems to be more powerful in all cases than either the x test or the median test ... for very small samples ... is slightly more efficient than the Mann-Whitney test....10 Research Hypothesis Mapping by use Of the Bass tests will be more effective as a predictor of classroom performance than mapping by use of the Oakland Community College battery when the elements to be mapped are in the qualitative symbolic mediation realm. Operational Hypotheses The Operational hypotheses generated to effect the test- ing Of the research hypothesis are as follows: 9Sidney Siegel, Nopparametric Statistic for the Behavior- al Sciences (New York: McGraw Hill Book Co., 1956), p. 127. 1°Ibid., p. 136. l. 49 There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative code synnoetics between the Oakland Community College battery administered April 10, 1972 and a re-test, using the same questions, after the subjects have been through the Bass test for qualitative code synnoetics. There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative code synnoetics between the Oakland Community College test battery and a classroom scale on which such activity is mapped. There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative code synnoetics between the Bass test for qualitative code synnoetics and a classroom scale on which such activity is mapped. The Bass test will be more accurate than the Oakland Community College test battery as a predictor of classroom performance in qualitative code synnoetics as mapped by classroom teachers. There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative code histrionics between the Oakland Community College test battery administered April 10, 1972 and a re- test, using the same questions, after the subjects have been through the Bass test for qualitative code histrionics. There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative code histrionics between the April 10, 1972 Oakland Community College test battery and a classroom scale on which such activity is mapped. 10. ll. 12I 50 There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative code histrionics between the Bass test for qualita- tive code histrionics and a classroom scale on which such activity is mapped. The Bass test will be more accurate than the Oakland Community College test battery as a predictor of classroom performance in qualitative code histrionics as rated by classroom teachers. There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative proprioceptive kinematics between the Oakland Commun- ity College battery designed to measure qualitative proprioceptive ability and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative proprioceptive kinematic ability. There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative proprioceptive kinematics between the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive kinematics and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative proprioceptive kinematic ability. The Bass test will be more accurate than the Oakland Community College test battery as a predictor of classroom performance on a task requiring a major orientation in qualitative prOprioceptive kinematic ability. There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative proprioceptive temporal between the Oakland Community College battery designed to measure qualitative l3I 14. 15. 16. 17. 51 prOprioceptive ability and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability. There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative proprioceptive temporal between the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive temporal and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability. There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative prOprioceptive temporal between incidental Observation Of qualitative proprioceptive temporal during the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive kinematics and per- formance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure Of qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability. The Bass test will be more accurate than the Oakland Community College battery as a predictor Of classroom performance on a task requiring a major orientation in qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability. There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative auditory between the Oakland Community College test battery and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative auditory ability. There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative auditory between the Bass test and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualita- tive auditory ability. 52 18. The Bass test will be more accurate than the Oakland Community College battery as a predictor of classroom performance of a task requiring a major orientation in qualitative auditory ability. In order to employ statistical inference in the process of deciding to accept, or reject, an Operational hypothesis, it is necessary to map the Operational proposition into two related forms of a statistical hypothesis. The Operational hypothesis (for example: number 16 above), stated in non- mathematical terms, is analyzed into a simple mathematical statement known as the statistical alternative hypothesis (H1) which in the case of Operational hypothesis 16 is: H1: CRFO # CRFC (where CRF means cumulative relative frequency, the aspect of the distribu- tion which is Of concern in the Komolgorov-Smirnov statistical test model, the subscript O means the Oak- land Community College test, and the subscript C means classroom performance) After the statistical alternative has been stated the statistical null hypothesis (H0) is formulated. The null hypothesis in this case would be the opposite of the statis- tical alternative hypothesis, or: Ho: CRFo = CRFC (same abbreviations utilized) It is the null hypothesis which is submitted to test by the statistical inference process. Appropriate statistical hypotheses were generated and tested (Chapter IV) for each Of the Operational hypotheses presented. 53 The steps in testing each hypothesis were as follows (example 16 used): 1. State Null Hypothesis Ho: CRFO = CRFC State Alternate Hypothesis H CRFO # CRF l: 2. State level and sample size a = .05; N1 = 2 3. Employ Komolgorov-Smirnov Two-Tailed Test Of Max D = C N = 21 /sl(x) - 82(X)/ 4. Determine value of KD (Appendix E) 5. Decision, Reject HO and accept H or Not Reject HO 1 Summary Twenty-one (21) students at Delta College, University Center, Michigan were randomly selected from a group Of stu- dents scheduled for testing by use of the Oakland Community College Cognitive Style Test Battery on April 10, 1972. In addition to the O.C.C. test battery these twenty-one students were tested on two tests deve10ped for this study and designed to assess qualitative symbolic orientation in the areas of qualitative code synnoetics, qualitative code histrionics, qualitative proprioceptive kinematics, qualitative proprio- ceptive temporal, and qualitative auditory. Students' per- formances in these tests were recorded on video tape and were evaluated by a panel Of experts as to orientations exhibited. The effectiveness of the test results was determined by comparing the mappings resulting from the Oakland Community battery and the Bass tests to rated performances by the 54 twenty-one students in classroom situations requiring, accord- ing to a panel of experts, major orientations in the qualita— tive symbols under study. Eighteen Operational hypotheses were generated to effect the evaluation and comparison Of the tests utilized. The hypotheses were tested through use of the Komolgorov-Smirnov Statistical Test Model, and the level of significance selected for rejecting the null hypotheses was the .05 Alpha level. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA An analysis of the data is reported in this chapter. The hypotheses are presented and subjected to statistical test in the order of their presentation in Chapter III, and appro- priate test results are reported. Test results for each qualitative symbolic orientation under consideration are presented preceding the hypotheses and statistical treatments dealing with each orientation. The test results (Tables 4.1, 4.5, 4.9, 4.12, 4.16) are presented in the following manner: 1. The labels used within the table (see Table 4.1), O.C.C. test 6/71, O.C.C. test 4/72, Bass test, O.C.C. re-test, Classroom, indicate the various tests which were administered to the students. 2. The A, B, C mappings under each test indicate major, minor or negligible orientations for the student (numbers 1-21) based upon each test. For example (Table 4.1), student number 1 was mapped as major (A) on the O.C.C. test of 6/71, major (A) on the O.C.C. test of 4/72, minor (B) on the Bass test, major (A) on the O.C.C. re-test, and majOr (A) on the classroom test. 55 56 Student number 10 was mapped as major (A) on the O.C.C. test of 6/71, major (A) on the O.C.C. test of 4/72, negligible (C) on the Bass test, major (A) on the O.C.C. re-test, and major (A) on the classroom test. The Komolgorov-Smirnov tests of the hypotheses utilized the data from the test result tables and these data are pre- sented as indicated in Chapter III of this study (see Figure 4, page 46). The abbreviations utilized in headings Of the test result tables are utilized within the Komolgorov-Smirnov tables (see Table 4.2). In the sample SO the 0 indicates 2 2 O.C.C. test 4/71 and in the sample SO3 the 03 indicates O.C.C. retest. opalitative Code Synnoetics 57 Table 4.1. Test Results Qualitative Code Synnoetics Ol 02 B 03 C STUDENTS O.C.C. O.C.C. BASS O.C.C. CLASSROOM TEST TEST TEST RETEST 6/71 4/72 1. A A B A A 2. A A A A A 3. A A A A A 4. A A B A A 5. A A A A B 6. A A C A A 7. A A B A B 8. A A A A A 9. A A A A A 10. A A C A A 11. A A A A A 12. A A A A 13. A A A A A 14. A A A A 15. A A B A A 16. A A A A 17. A A B A A 18. A A B A A 19. A A A A A 20. A B A A 21. A A B A A A=MAJOR, B=MINOR, C=NEGLIGIBLE 58 Operational Hypothesis l--There will be a difference in mappings Of qualitative code synnoetics between the O.C.C. battery administered April 10, 1972 and a retest using the same questions after the subjects have been through the Bass test for qualitative code synnoetics. Statistical Hypotheses l H : CRF = CRF H : CRFo o 02 03 1 # CRF 2 O3 (Null) (Statistical Alternative) Table 4.2. Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between April 10, 1972 O.C.C. Test Scores and O.C.C. Retest--Qualitative Code Synnoetics SAMPLES MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE n 802(X) 21 %% o %% o %%. 21 SO3(X) 21 %% o %% o g; 21 1502(X)-so3(X)|=MAx D 0* o I o The largest absolute difference in Table 4.2 is 0. According to the Komolgorov-Smirnov table Of critical values this value indicates that no significant difference exist between the two distributions being compared. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis CRF02 = CRFo3 cannot be rejected, and the Alternative Hypothesis CRF02 # CRFo cannot be accepted. 3 Since the Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived 59 directly from Operational Hypothesis 1 the Operational Hypothe- sis cannot be accepted. Operational Hypothesis 2--There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative code synnoetics between the O.C.C. test battery and a classroom scale on which such activity is mapped. Statistical Hypotheses 2 HO: CRF02 = CRFC H1: C (Null) (Statistical Alternative) CRF02 # CRF Table 4.3. Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between April 10, 1972 O.C.C. Test Scores and Classroom Performance-- Qualitative Code Synnoetics SAMPLES MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE n 21 21 21 SOZ(X) 21 2T 0 ‘2I 0 2T 21 19. 21 21 SC(K) 19 fi- 2 2T 0 ‘2T 21 x s (X) -MAx D 2* 0 0 [$02( )- c l— “2‘1” The largest absolute difference in Table 4.3 is 5%. According to the Komolgorov-Smirnov table of critical values, this value indicates that no significant difference exists between the two distributions being compared. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis CRF02 = CRFC cannot be rejected, and the Alternative Hypothesis CRF02 # CRF cannot be accepted. C Since the Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived 60 directly from Operational Hypothesis 2 the Operational Hypothe- sis cannot be accepted. Qperational Hypothesis 3--There will be a difference in mappings Of qualitative code synnoetics between the Bass test for qualitative code synnoetics and a classroom scale on which such activity is mapped. Statistical Hypotheses 3 H : CRF = CRF H : CRFB # CRF O B C 1 C (Null) (Statistical Alternative) Table 4.4. Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between Bass Test Scores and Classroom Performance--Qualitative Code Synnoetics SAMPLES MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE n 11 19 21 194 21 21 Sc(x) 19 SI 2 2T 0 2T 21 Is (X)-S (x)|=MAx D —§f —3- o B c 21 21 _§_ 21’ According to the Komolgorov-Smirnov table of critical values, The largest absolute difference in Table 4.4 if this value indicates that no significant difference exists between the two distributions being compared. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis CRFB s CRFC cannot be rejected and the A1- ternative Hypothesis CRFB # CRFC cannot be accepted. Since 61 the Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived directly from Operational Hypothesis 3 the Operational Hypothesis can- not be accepted. Qperational Hypothesis 4-—The Bass test will be more accurate than the O.C.C. test battery as a predictor Of class- room performance in qualitative code synnoetics as rated by classroom teachers. HO: [CRFC - CRPO[ i [CRF - CRFBI (Null) C : CRF - RF > "RF - RF S ' ' A - Hl I C C OI [C C C B1 (tiizistlcal lterna The analysis of the data in Table 4.3 showed that there was no significant difference in mappings of qualitative code synnoetics between the O.C.C. test and classroom performance. The data in Table 4.4 dealing with the Bass test as compared with classroom performance indicates that no significant dif- ference exists between the two distributions. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis [CRFC - CRFO} : [CRF - CRFBI cannot be re- C jected and the Alternative Hypothesis [CRF - CRFOI > [CRF - C C CRFBJ cannot be accepted. Since the Statistical Alternative was derived directly from Operational Hypothesis 4 the Opera- tional Hypothesis cannot be accepted. .The findings of this aspect of the study indicate that there is no significant difference between the predictive ability of the O.C.C. test for qualitative code synnoetics and the Bass test for qualitative code synnoetics. 62 Although there was no significant statistical difference, the test results (Table 4.1) indicate that the O.C.C. test is not as discriminating as it might be. There was consistency over the three administrations of the O.C.C. test, but in all three cases every student was mapped as having a major orien- tation in qualitative code synnoetics. This result is pos- sible but not probable based upon population norms. Variance was exhibited in both Bass test mappings and classroom mappings. Qualitative Code Histrionics 63 Table 4.5. Test Results Qualitative Code Histrionics Ol 02 B 03 c STUDENTS O.C.C. O.C.C. BASS O.C.C. CLASSROOM TEST TEST TEST RETEST 6/71 4/72 1. B A B B B 2. B B B B B 3. A A A B A 4. B B A B A 5. A B C B B 6. B B C B B 7. B B C C B 8. C C B C A 9. C B B B B 10. B B B C B 11. B B A B A 12. B C B B 13. B B B C B 14. B A B A 15. B B A B A 16. A A B A 17. B A B B B 18. A B B B B 19. B B C B B 20. B B B B 21. B B A B A A=MAJOR, B=MINOR, C=NEGLIGIBLE 64 Operational Hypothesis 5--There will be a difference in mappings Of qualitative code histrionics between the O.C.C. battery administered April 10, 1972 and a retest using the same questions after the subjects have been through the Bass test for qualitative code histrionics. Statistical Hypotheses 5 H: CRFO =CRF H: CRF0275CRFO O 2 03 l 3 (Null) (Statistical Alternative) Table 4.6. Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between April 10, 1972 O.C.C. Test Scores and O.C.C. Retest Scores-- Qualitative Code Histrionics SAMPLES MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE n 4 20 21 802(X) 4 2T. 16 51- 1 51- 21 O. 17 21 S03"" 0 ‘2‘1‘ 17 2f 4 2‘1‘ 21 ISO m-so (x) I=MAx p .53." .3. o '2 3 21 21 _4_ 21' According to the Komolgorov-Smirnov table of critical values, The largest absolute difference in Table 4.6 is this value indicates that no significant difference exists between the two dietributions being compared. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis CRFo = CRFO cannot be rejected and the 2 3 Alternative Hypothesis CRF02 # CRFO cannot be accepted. 3 Since the Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived 65 directly from Operational Hypothesis 5 the Operational Hypothe- sis cannot be accepted. Operational Hypothesis 6--There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative Code histrionics between the Bass test for qualitative code histrionics and a classroom scale on which such activity is mapped. Statistical Hypotheses 6 HO: CRF = CRF H : CRFB # CRF B C 1 C (Null) (Statistical Alternative) Table 4.7. Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between Bass Test Scores and Classroom Performance--Qualitative Code Histrionics SAMPLES MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE n 7 16 21 53"“ 7 2T 9 n 5 2'1’ 21 8 21 21 SCOO 8 71- 13 71- o 71— 21 _ 1 5* ISB(X) SC(X) I—MAX D —l- 71- o _5_ 21' According to the Komolgorov-Smirnov table Of critical values The largest absolute difference in Table 4.7 is this value indicates that no significant difference exists between the two distributions being compared. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis CRFB = CRFC cannot be rejected and the Alter- native Hypothesis CRFB # CRFC cannot be accepted.. Since the 66 Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived directly from Operational Hypothesis 6 the Operational Hypothesis cannot be accepted. Operational Hypothesis 7--There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative code histrionics between the April 10, 1972 O.C.C. test battery and a classroom scale on which such activity is mapped. Statistical Hypotheses 7 H : CRF = CRF H : CRF02 ¢ CRF o 02 C l C (Null) (Statistical Alternative) Table 4.8. Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between April 10, 1972 O.C.C. Test Scores and Classroom Performance-- Qualitative Code Histrionics SAMPLES MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE n so2 (X) 4 2i‘ 16 i}?- 1 2%- 21 sC (x) I 8 7‘1}- 13 .g o :3— 21 [502(X)-SC(X)|=MAX D 5%* 5% o .11. 21’ According to the Komolgorov-Smirnov table of critical values, The largest absolute difference in Table 4.8 is this value indicates that no significant difference exists be- tween the two distributions being compared. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis CRF02 = CRFC cannot be rejected and the 67 Alternative Hypothesis CRF02 # CRF cannot be accepted. C Since the Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived directly from Operational Hypothesis 7 the Operational Hypothe- sis cannot be accepted. Operational Hypothesis 8--The Bass test will be more accurate than the O.C.C. test battery as a predictor of class- room performance in qualitative code histrionics as rated by classroom teachers. Statistical Hypotheses 8 Ho: [CRFC - CRFOI _<_ [CRFC - CRF (Null) B l I (Statistical Alterna- H - ICRFC - CRFOI > ICRPC - CRF . tlve) 1' B The analysis Of the data in Table 4.8 showed that there was no significant difference in mappings of qualitative code histrionics between the O.C.C. test and classroom performance. The data in Table 4.7 dealing with the Bass test as compared with classroom performance indicates that no significant dif- ference exists between the two distributions. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis ICRF - CRFOI i [CRFC - CRF 1 cannot be re- C B jected and the Alternative Hypothesis [CRFC - CRFOI > ICRFC— CRFBI cannot be accepted. Since the Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived directly from Operational Hypothesis 8 the Operational Hypothesis cannot be accepted. The findings of this study indicate that there is no Significant difference between the predictive ability Of the Oakland Community College test for qualitative code histrionics and the Bass test for qualitative code histrionics. 68 Findings also indicate an apparent lack of ability on the part of most of the students to respond accurately to the hypothetical situation concerning qualitative code histrionics. This study was designed to deal with only the three mapping categories (major, minor, and negligible) as the variables were evaluated. Using just these three categories, quite a considerable change in responses to the Oakland Community College (paper and pencil) questions was affected by having the students exposed to the Bass test (real life) for qualitative code histrionics. There were seven changes (Table 4.5), all downward, between the April 10, 1972 Oakland Community College ratings and Oakland Community College ratings (re-test) using the same questions during the week of April 10, 1972. This compared to the virtally no change between the June 1971 and April 10, 1972 Oakland Community College ratings (three up, two down) would indicate that the intervening Bass test (for Q(CH) between the April 10, 1972 O.C.C. test and the O.C.C. retest during the week of April 10, 1972 (exposure on a real- life situation) gave the students a more realistic view of themselves as they responded to the retest. Further support for this contention was gained from analysis of raw scores for students in this study (Appendix F) which showed that eighteen out of the twenty-one students had a change in raw score between the April 10, 1972 O.C.C. test and the O.C.C. retest during the week of April 10, 1972 (using the same ques— tions), seventeen raw scores went down (away from major) and only one went up. 69 Qualitative Proprioceptive Kinematics Table 4.9. Test Results Qualitative Proprioceptive Kinematics STUDENTS O.C.C. Tgst 4/72 BASSBTEST CLASSROOM 1. C B A 2. A A A 3. A A A 4. B C A 5. A A A 6. B A B 7. A C B 8. A B C 9. A B A 10. B A B 11. B A B 12. B B A 13. A A A 14. B A A 15. B C A 16. C A A 17. A A A 18. A C A 19. B B A 20. B C A 21 B B A =MAJOR, B=MINOR, C=NEGLIGIBLE 70 Operational Hypothesis 9--There will be a difference in mappings Of qualitative prOprioceptive kinematics between the O.C.C. battery designed to measure qualitative proprioceptive ability and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative proprioceptive kinematic ability. Statistical Hypotheses 9 HO: CRFO = CRF H : CRFO 75 CRF C l C (Null) (Statistical Alternative) Table 4.10. Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between the O.C.C. Test Scores and Classroom Performance--Qualitative Proprioceptive Kinematics SAMPLES MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE n SO(X) 9 §§- 10 %§ 2 %%. 21 sC(x) 16 %% 4 %% l %% )21 ISb(X)-SC(X)|=MAX D 21*. ' 3% o The largest absolute difference in Table 4.10 if 7%. According to the Komolgorov-Smirnov table of critical values, this value indicates that no significant difference exists between the two distributions being compared. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis CRFo = CRF cannot be rejected and the Altern- C ative Hypothesis CRFo ¢ CRF cannot be accepted. Since the C Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived directly from 71 Operational Hypothesis 9 the Operational Hypothesis cannot be accepted. Operational Hypothesis 10--There will be a difference in mapping of qualitative proprioceptive kinematics between the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive kinematics and per- formance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative proprioceptive kinematic ability. Statistical Hypotheses 10 HO: CRF = CRF H : CRFB # CRF B C 1 C (Null) (Statistical Alternative) Table 4.11. Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between Bass Test Scores and Classroom Performance--Qualitative Proprio— ceptive Kinematics SAMPLES MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE n SB(X) 10 % 6 %—§— 5 % 21 SC(X) 16 92:;- 4 -§—% 1 2—1 21 ISB(X)-SC(X) l =MAX D If? 5% o .5; 21' According to the Komolgorov-Smirnov table of critical values, The largest absolute difference in Table 4.11 is this value indicates that no significant difference exists between the two distributions being compared. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis CRFB = CRFC cannot be rejected and the 72 Alternative Hypothesis CRFB # CRF cannot be accepted. C Since the Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived directly from Operational Hypothesis 10 the Operational Hypothesis cannot be accepted. Operational Hypothesis 11--The Bass test will be more accurate than the O.C.C. test battery as a predictor Of class- room performance of a task requiring a major orientation in qualitative prOprioceptive kinematic ability. Statistical Hypotheses ll (Null) H: ICRF -CRF|<|CRF-CRF O O— 6 Bl -CRF|>ICRF -CRF O C C H : ICRF 1 (Statistical Altern- | B ative) C Analysis of the data in Table 4.10 showed that there was no significant difference in mappings of qualitative prOprio- ceptive kinematics between the O.C.C. test for qualitative proprioceptiveness and a classroom performance in qualitative proprioceptive kinematics. The data in Table 4.11 dealing with the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive kinematics as compared with classroom performance in qualitative proprio- ceptive kinematics indicates that no significant difference exists between the distributions. Therefore, the Null Hypothe- sis ICRF - CRF01 _<__|CRFC - CRFBJ cannot be rejected and the C Alternative Hypothesis ICRF - CRFOI > |CRF - CRF cannot be C C Bl accepted. Since the Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived from Operational Hypothesis 11 the Operational Hypothe- sis cannot be accepted. 73 The findings Of this study indicate that there is no significance difference between the predictive ability of the Oakland Community College test designed to measure qualita- tive proprioceptive ability and the Bass test designed to measure qualitative proprioceptive kinematic ability, the ability required in the classroom activity for which the pre- diction is intended. The Oakland Community College test battery currently has only a test for qualitative proprioceptiveness and no separate test for qualitative proprioceptive kinematics. The Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive kinematic ability according to Svagr, Hill, Schroeder and Hand provides a look at a much more practical aspect of proprioceptiveness, the coordination of musculature (motor-skill ability) with sight, than the Oakland Community College qualitative prOprioceptiveness test, which deals with the coordination of motor-skill ability and touch. 74 Qualitative Proprioceptive Temporal Table 4.12. Test Results Qualitative PrOprioceptive Temporal 0 Bl Bo C STUDENTS O . C . C . TEST BASS TEST BASS TEST CLASSROOM 4/72 Q(PT) Q(PK) \DCDQQU'IDDJNH I [.1 O H H H H H H H H KO oo \1 0‘! U1 .5 on N I I I I I I I I N H o H w to w a» P r) w u1:P cits w 3’ P as w a» w 3» > (1 wowwwwwrrwwrvwwwrwwow wOGJOCD'II’OII’II’UJPD’WWOII’D’OIDIDw ZP'II’D’IIJUJwOS’ID‘OS’wS’wD’S’D’D’OOD’ N 5.: A=MAJOR, B=MINOR, C=NEGLIGIBLE 75 Operational Hypothesis 12--There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative prOprioceptive temporal between the O.C.C. battery designed to measure qualitative prOprio— ceptive ability and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure Of qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability. Statistical Hypotheses 12 H:CRF=CRF H:CRPO;£CRF O o C l C (Null) (Statistical Alternative) Table 4.13. Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between O.C.C. Test Scores and Classroom Performance--Qualitative Proprioceptive Temporal SAMPLES MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE n 9 19 21 SO(X) 9 ‘21 10 ET 2 2—1- 21 12 17 21 SC(X) 12 EI' 5 ET. 4 ‘ff 21 - _ _3_* 2 o ISO(X) SC (X) I—MAX D 21 H 3 The largest absolute difference in Table 4.13 is 2I’ According to the Komolgorov-Smirnov table Of critical values, this value indicates that no significant difference exists between the two distributions being compared. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis CRFo = CRFC cannot be rejected and the Altern- ative Hypothesis CRFO # CRF cannot be accepted. Since the C 76 Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived directly from Operational Hypothesis 12 the Operational Hypothesis cannot be accepted. Operational Hypothesis l3--There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative prOprioceptive temporal between the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive temporal and perform- ance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of quali- tative proprioceptive temporal ability. Statistical Hypotheses 13 H : CRF = CRF H : CRFBl # CRF O Bl C l C (Null) (Statistical Alternative) Table 4.14. Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between Bass Test Scores Q(PT) and Classroom Performance--Qualitative Proprioceptive Temporal SAMPLES MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE n SBl(X) 9 5% 10 %% 2 %% 21 sc(x) 12 % 5 é-Z— 4 % 21 ISBl(X)-SC(X)|=MAX D 5%? ..§% 0 The largest absolute difference in Table 4.14 is 5%. According to the Komolgorov-Smirnov table of critical values, this value indicates that no significant difference exists~ between the two distributions being compared. Therefore, the 1--‘ II ' I 0.. .n c... 77 Null Hypothesis CRFBl = CRFC cannot be rejected and the Alternative Hypothesis CRFBl # CRF cannot be accepted. C Since the Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived directly from Operational Hypothesis 13 the Operational Hypothesis cannot be accepted. Operational Hypothesis l4--There will be a difference in mappings Of qualitative proprioceptive temporal between incidental Observation of qualitative proprioceptive temporal during the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive kinematics and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability. Statistical Hypotheses 14 H : CRFB o = CRF H : CRFB2 # CRF 2 C l C (Null) (Statistical Alternative) Table 4.15. Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between Bass Test Scores Q(PK) and Classroom Performance--Qualitative Proprioceptive Temporal SAMPLES MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE . n SI32 (X) 10 210‘ 6 g: 5 3%— 21 SC(X) 12 %% 5 %1. 4 %% 21 ISBZ(X)-SC(X)1=MAX D 5%} §%- 0 _E 21' According to the Komolgorov-Smirnov table Of critical values, The largest absolute difference in Table 4.15 is 78 this value indicates that no significant difference exists between the two distributions being compared. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis CRFB2 = CRFC'cannot be rejected and the Alternative Hypothesis CRFB2 # CRF cannot be accepted. Since C the Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived directly from Operational Hypothesis 14 the Operational Hypothesis cannot be accepted. Operational Hypothesis 15—-The Bass test will be more accurate than the O.C.C. battery as a predictor of classroom performance Of a task requiring a major orientation in quali- tative proprioceptive temporal ability. Statistical Hypotheses 15 H : ICRFC - CRFOI' _<_ I'CRF - CRF J (Null) 0 C B -CRF|>|CRF -CRF O C Bl (Statistical Altern- H: [CRF ative) l C Analysis of the data in Table 4.13 showed that there was no significant difference in mappings of qualitative proprio- ceptive temporal ability between the O.C.C. test for qualita- tive prOprioceptiveness and a classroom performance requiring qualitative prOprioceptive temporal ability. The data in Table 4.14 dealing with the Bass test for qualitative prOprio- ceptive temporal ability as compared with a classroom per— formance requiring qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability indicates that no significant difference exists between the distributions. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis [CRF - CRFOI i C ICRF - CRFBI cannot be rejected and the Alternative Hypothesis C (D LJ‘ It; An... N I.“ ~~n dun . I'A ..,v “I V...‘ (I) [n (1) AC,‘ ‘wl n ...; 1“ \ u“ u is U s 79 [CRFC - CRFOI > [CRF - CRFBI cannot be accepted. Since the C Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived directly from Operational Hypothesis 15 the Operational Hypothesis cannot be accepted. The findings of this study indicate that there is no significant difference between the predictive ability for qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability, between the Oakland Community College test designed to measure qualitative proprioceptive ability and the Bass test designed to measure qualitative prOprioceptive temporal ability. The Oakland Community College test battery currently has only a test for qualitative proprioceptiveness and no separate test for qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability. The Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability was developed to fill this void. Hill in a discussion session in 'which the current Oakland Community College test was being discussed termed student performance on this test as theo- retical tactile quantitative rather than qualitative proprio- ceptive. A valuable finding in this area of study was that inci- dental observation Of qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability by a panel Of experts viewing the Bass test for quali- tative prOprioceptive kinematics proved just as effective as a predictive device for classroom performance in this area as did the Bass test which was designed to measure qualitative prOprioceptive temporal ability. 80 Qualitative Auditory Table 4.16. Test Results--Qualitative Auditory Students O.C.C. TEST 4/27 BASSBTEST CLASSROOM l. B A B 2. B C A 3. C A A 4. B B A 5. A A A 6. C B A 7. B A B 8. C B A 9. B A A 10 C B A 11: C A A 12. B C C 13. A A A 14. C A A 15. B C A 16. A B A 17. A B A 18. B B A 19. B A A 20. C A A 21. C A A A=MAJOR, B=MINOR, C=NEGLIGIBLE ”‘1- 1"“w I“; vu‘ h, 81 Operational Hypothesis l6--There will be a difference in mappings of qualitative auditory between the O.C.C. test bat- tery and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative auditory ability. Statistical Hypotheses l6 HO: CRFO = CRFC Hl: CRFO # CRFC (Null) (Statistical Alternative) Table 4.17. Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between O.C.C. Test Scores and Classroom Performance--Qualitative Auditory SAMPLES MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE n 4 13 21 so“) 4 2T 9 n- 3 '2'1‘ 21 18 20 21 SC(X) 18 2T 2 2T 1 21 21 _ 14* 7 |so(x) SC(X)I-MAX D 2T 21 o The largest absolute difference in Table 4.17 is %%. According to the Komolgorov-Smirnov table Of critical values, this value indicates that a significant difference exists be- tween the two distributions being compared. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis CRFO = CRFC can be rejected and the Alternative Hypothesis CRF0 # CRFC can be accepted. Since the Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived directly from Operational Hypothesis 16 the Operational Hypothesis can be accepted. D'r . rws . (I) ”I” 'h *4 82 Operationalqupothesis l7--There will be a difference in ratings of qualitative auditory between the Bass test and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure Of qualitative auditory ability. Statistical Hypotheses 17 H : CRF = CRF H . CRFB ¢ CRF O B C 1° C (Null) (Statistical Alternative) Table 4.18. Komolgorov-Smirnov Test Between Bass Test Scores and Classroom Performance--Qua1itative Auditory SAMPLES MAJOR MINOR NEGLIGIBLE n sB(x) 11 %% 7 %§, 3 oy 21 s¢(x) 18 %§ 2 '%% 1 %%_ 21 ISB(x)-SC(X)|aMAx D 51* 52 o _Z 21' According to the Komolgorov-Smirnov table Of critical values, The largest absolute difference in Table 4.18 is this value indicates that no significant difference exists be- tween the two distributions being compared. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis CRFB = CRFC cannot be rejected and the Alternative Hypothesis CRFB # CRF cannot be accepted. Since C the Statistical Alternative Hypothesis was derived directly from Operational Hypothesis 17 the Operational Hypothesis can- not be accepted. a‘q- - uv‘v- (a!) (1) V 83 Operational Hypothesis 18--The Bass test will be more accurate than the O.C.C. battery as a predictor Of classroom performance Of a task requiring a major orientation in quali- tative auditory ability. Statistical Hypotheses 18 HO: ICRFC - CRFOI i ICRFC - CRFBI (Null) H1: ICRFC - CRFOI > jCRFC — CRFBI (Statistical Altern- ative) The analysis of data in Table 4.17 showed that there is a significant difference in mappings on qualitative auditory between the O.C.C. test and classroom performance. This result means that performance Of the task in question was con- trary to expectations that might have been placed on perform- ance as a result of the O.C.C. test. The results of the test based upon data included in Table 4.18 dealing with the Bass test as compared to classroom performance shows an absolute difference that is not statistically significant. The Bass test can therefore be considered a more accurate predictor Of classroom performance than the O.C.C. test bat- tery when dealing with performance demanding qualitative audi- tory symbolic mediation. Taking these results into account, collectively, the null hypothesis ICRFC - CRFOI : ICRFO - CRFBI can be rejected and the Alternative Hypothesis ICRF - CRFOI > C ICRFC - CRFBf can be accepted. Since the Statistical Altern- ative Hypothesis was derived directly from Operational Hypothe- Sis 18 the Operational Hypothesis can be accepted. ‘ I" 0" r— y .\w ‘I MA I . ‘v-n I‘OII I iii ran 5" bet. A\h a, "N 84 As the result of this test the predictive ability Of the Oakland Community College test for qualitative auditory abil- ity is being questioned and a new qualitative auditory test (see Appendix G) has been deve10ped which will be tried out in the testing Of incoming students at Oakland Community College this fall. It is now suspected that the current Oak- land Community College qualitative auditory test (see Appendix A) is one in which students succeed by use Of a counting pat- tern rather than mediation into meaning Of qualitative audi- tory signals. The new test seeks to more accurately measure this mediation ability. Additional Findings Each Of the Bass tests which were five minutes or less in length were recorded on video tape. During the evaluation period, by a panel of experts (Svagr, Schroeder, Hand, Hill), Of the Bass test designed to measure qualitative prOprioceptive kinematics, qualitative code synnoetics, and qualitative code histrionics, the members of the panel of experts were asked not only to provide ratings fOr each Of the qualitative symbols that the test was designed 113 assess but to rate any other element Of cognitive style Wflich they saw exhibited by the students. The results Of Illese ratings are provided in Table 4.19. The information contained in Table 4.19 is presented in the following manner: ‘3 0“ It ' r‘f 85 l. The first three columns, labeled Q(PK), Q(CS), Q(CH), are the elements which Bass test number 1 was designed to assess. The A, B, C mappings indicate major, minor, or negligible orientations by the students involved in each of the three areas. 2. The fourth column presents a listing Of the addition- al cognitive style elements Observed during the view- ing of the video tape. Major orientation is indicated by symbols alone Q(CEM). Minor orientation is indi- cated by a symbol with a prime indicator--Q'(CEM). Negligible orientations are indicated by the symbol followed by (NEG)-Q(CEM)(NEG). For example, student number 4 (Table 4.19) was mapped as negligible (C) in Q(PK), minor (B) in Q(CS) and major (A) in Q(CH). The additional elements mapped during the viewing of the video tape were a major in Q(CEM), a major in Q(CET), a major in Q(CK), a negligible in Q(CKH) a major in A, and a negligible in Q(PT). The additional findings listed in Table 4.19 proved ex- tremely accurate when compared to ratings, by classroom teachers, of classroom performance by the students. The fact that as many as thirteen elements of cognitive style were accurately assessed during a less than five minute video tape has tremendous implications for future testing programs. Table 4.19. 86 All Elements Of Cognitive Style Observed By a Panel of Experts During Bass Test Number 1 ADDITIONAL COGNITIVE STYLE ELEMENTS NOTED-- Q(PK) Q(CS) Q(CH) SAME VTR 1. B Q'(CEM), Q'(CET), Q'(PT) 2. A A B Q(CEM), Q(CET), Q'(CK), Q(CKH), Q'(CP), A, I, Q(PT) 3. A A A Q'(CEM), Q'(CET), Q(CKH), Q(CP)(NEG), A, I, D. Q(PT) 4. C B A Q(CEM), Q(CET), Q(CK), Q(CKH)(NEG), A, Q(PT)(NEG) 5. A Q(CEM), Q(CET), Q'(CK), Q(CKH), Q(PT) 6. A C Q(CEM)(NEG), Q'(CET), Q'(CK), Q'(CKH), I, Q(PT) 7. C B C Q'(CET), Q(CK)(NEG), Q(PT)(NEG) 8. B A B Q(CEM), Q(CET), Q(CK), Q'(CKH), A, Q'(PT) 9. B A B Q(CET), Q'(CK), A, Q'(PT) 10. A C B Q(CEM). Q'(CET), Q(CK), Q(CKH), Q(PT) 11. A A A Q(CEM), Q(CET), Q(CK), Q(CKH), I, Q(PT) 12. B A C Q(T), Q'(CET), Q(CK), Q(CKH)(NEG), Q'(PT) 13. A A 8 Q(CEM), Q(CET), Q'(CK), Q(CKH), Q(CP), A, F, I, M. Q(PT) 14. A A A Q'(CEM), Q'(CET), Q(CK), Q'(CKH), A, M, Q(PT) 15. C B A Q(CEM), Q(CET), Q(CK), A, F, Q(PT)(NEG) 16. A A A Q(CEM), Q(CET), Q(CK), Q(CKH), I, M. Q(PT) 17. A B B Q(CEM), Q(CET), Q'(CK), Q(CKH), I, Q(PT) 18. C B B Q(CET), Q(PT)(NEG) 19. B A C Q(CEM), Q(CET), Q'(PT) 20. C B B Q'(CET), Q(CK)(NEG), Q(PT)(NEG) 21. B B A Q(CET), Q(CK), Q'(CKH), Q'(PT) _‘ A=Major, B=Minor, C=Negligible 87 Summary Eighteen null hypotheses were generated and tested. Each null hypothesis was tested using the Komolgorov-Smirnov Statistical Test Model. All hypotheses were tested at the .05 level of significance. Four hypotheses were formulated dealing with qualitative code synnoetics. Four hypotheses were formulated dealing with qualitative code histrionics. Three hypotheses were formulated dealing with qualitative proprioceptive kinematics. Four hypotheses were formulated dealing with qualitative prOprioceptive temporal. Three hypotheses were formulated dealing with qualitative auditory. A summary of results of the statistical analysis is presented in Tables 4.20, 4.21, 4.22, 4.23, and 4.24. Table 4.20. 88 Summary of Results--Qualitative Code Synnoetics Operational Hypotheses Results of Statistical Test There will be a difference in ratings on qualitative code synnoetics be- tween the O.C.C. Test Battery adminis- tered April 10, 1972 and a retest using the same questions after the subjects have been through the Bass test for qualitative code synnoetics. There will be a difference in ratings on qualitative code synnoetics be- tween the O.C.C. Test Battery and a classroom scale on which such activ- ity is rated. There will be a difference in ratings on qualitative code synnoetics be- tween the Bass test for qualitative code synnoetics and a classroom scale on which such activity is rated. The Bass test will be more accurate than the O.C.C. test as a predictor of classroom performance in qualita- tive code synnoetics as rated by classroom teachers. Null not rejected Null not rejected Null not rejected Null not rejected 89 Table 4.21. Summary of Results--Qualitative Code Histrionics Results of Operational Hypotheses Statistical Tests 5. There will be a difference in ratings Null not rejected on qualitative code histrionics be- tween the O.C.C. battery administered April 10, 1972 and a retest using the same questions after the subjects have been through the Bass test for qualitative code histrionics. 6. There will be a difference in ratings Null not rejected on qualitative code histrionics be- tween the Bass test for qualitative code histrionics and a classroom scale on which such activity is rated. 7. There will be a difference in ratings Null not rejected on qualitative code histrionics be- tween the April 10, 1972 O.C.C. test battery and a classroom scale on which such activity is rated. 8. The Bass test will be more accurate Null not rejected than the O.C.C. test as a predictor of classroom performance in quali- tative code histrionics as rated by classroom teachers. Table 4.22. 90 Kinematics Summary of Results--Qualitative Proprioceptive Operational Hypotheses Results of Statistical Tests 9. 10. III There will be a difference in ratings on qualitative proprioceptive kinema- tics between the O.C.C. battery de- signed to measure qualitative proprio- ceptive ability and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative prOprioceptive kinematic ability. There will be a difference in ratings on qualitative prOprioceptive kinema- tics between the Bass test and perform” ance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative pro— prioceptive kinematic ability. The Bass test will be more accurate than the O.C.C. test as a predictor of classroom performance of a task requiring a major orientation in qualitative proprioceptive kinematic ability. Null not rejected Null not rejected Null not rejected Table 4.23. 91 Temporal Summary of Results--Qualitative Proprioceptive Operational Hypotheses Result Of Statistical Tests 12. 13I 14. 15. There will be a difference in ratings on qualitative proprioceptive tempor- al between the O.C.C. battery designed to measure qualitative proprioceptive ability and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative prOprioceptive temporal ability. There will be a difference in ratings on qualitative proprioceptive tempor- al between the Bass test for qualita- tive prOprioceptive temporal and performance on a classroom task de- signed tO yield a measure of qualita- tive proprioceptive temporal ability. There will be a difference in ratings on qualitative proprioceptive tempor- al between incidental observation of qualitative proprioceptive temporal during the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive kinematics and perform- ance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative pro— prioceptive temporal ability. The Bass test will be more accurate than the O.C.C. test as a predictor Of classroom performance Of a task requiring a major orientation in qualitative prOprioceptive temporal ability. Null not rejected Null not rejected Null not rejected Null not rejected Table 4.24. 92 Summary of Results--Qualitative Auditory Operational Hypotheses Results of Statistical Tests 16. There will be a difference in ratings 17. 18. on qualitative auditory between the O.C.C. test battery and performance on a classroom task designed to yield a measure of qualitative auditory ability. There will be a difference in ratings Of qualitative auditory between the Bass test and performance on a class- room task designed to yield a measure Of qualitative auditory ability. The Bass test will be more accurate than the O.C.C. test as a predictor of classroom performance of a task requiring a major orientation in qual- itative auditory ability. Null rejected Alternative (Operational) Accepted Null not rejected Null rejected Alternative (Operational) Accepted CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The purpose of this study was tO determine the relative effectiveness Of two methods for mapping the qualitative symbolic orientation (an aspect of cognitive style) Of a selected sample of community college students. These methods were: 1) a series of tests developed by Oakland Community College, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan (primarily a paper and pencil test battery), and 2) a series of tests developed for this study (video-taped performance tests). The effectiveness Of the student orientation mappings, determined by each method, was assessed by means of a rated performance of a task which was deemed by a panel of experts as requiring a major orienta- tion by the student in the element in question. Summary Review of the literature indicates that psychologists have for many years been seeking to understand differing cognitive styles. These efforts have taken many directions, some of the most recent Of which are efforts at the University "of Cambridge, England, the Portsmouth Rhode Island Public 93 94 Schools, and Oakland Community College, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. This study was conducted within the framework developed at Oakland Community College. The cognitive style mapping procedure deve10ped by Oakland Community College has proven to be an excellent tool for use in personalization of education. Successful use of the video tape recorder as a data collection device is also supported by numerous studies. The subjects utilized in this study were randomly selected from accessible elements Of the population (those students reporting for testing with the Oakland Community College test battery at Delta College, University Center, Michigan on April 10, 1972). Twenty-one students were selected from the twenty-four accessible elements. The Oakland Community College test battery designed to measure elements of cognitive style (approximately a four hour test battery) (see Appendix A) was administered to the students in the study on April 10, 1972. Later that same day two tests developed for this study and designed to measure certain qualitative symbolic orientations were administered to the same population. The two tests developed for this study (Bass tests) were performance tasks which were recorded on video tape. On May 18, 1972 the qualitative symbolic orienta- tions exhibited by students on the video tapes were mapped by a panel Of experts who viewed the video tapes. 95 The Bass tests were designed to measure the following: Test 1: Qualitative PrOprioceptive Kinematics Q(PK) Qualitative Code Synnoetics Q(CS) Qualitative Code Histrionics Q(CH) Test 2: Qualitative Proprioceptive Temporal Q(PT) Qualitative Audio Q(A) The Qualitative Code Synnoetics and Qualitative Code Histrionics portions of the Oakland Community College Test Battery were administered on a re-test basis during the week Of April 10, 1972, to see if there was a change in scores on this test after the subjects had been exposed to the pro— cedures Of the Bass tests. The effectiveness of the test results (Oakland Community College Test Battery and the Bass Tests) was determined by comparing the results of the tests to performances in class- room situations requiring, according to a panel of experts, major orientations in the qualitative symbols under study. Eighteen null hypotheses were generated and tested. Each null hypothesis was tested using the Komolgorov—Smirnov Statistical Test Model. All hypotheses were tested at the .05 Alpha level. A summary of the results of the statistical analysis was presented in Tables 4.20, 4.21, 4.22, 4.23, and 4.24. 96 Conclusions The findings of this study indicate that: 1. Either the O.C.C. test or the Bass test can be used effectively as a predictor Of classroom performance in qualitative code synnoetics. Either the O.C.C. test or the Bass test can be used effectively as a predictor of classroom performance in qualitative code histrionics. Either the O.C.C. test for qualitative propriocep- tiveness or the Bass test for qualitative proprio- ceptive kinematics can be used effectively as a predictor of classroom performance in qualitative proprioceptive kinematics. Either the O.C.C. test for qualitative proprioceptive- ness or the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability or the incidental observation Of qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability during the Bass test for qualitative prOprioceptive kinemat- ics can be used effectively as a predictor of class- room performance in qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability. The Bass test is more effective than the O.C.C. test as a predictor of qualitative auditory ability. Either the O.C.C. test or the Bass test can be used effectively for mapping qualitative symbolic orien- tations. 97 Implications The scope Of the present study is limited, however, it has several implications beyond its present scope. These implications are relevant to the cognitive style mapping program at Oakland Community College, cognitive style mapping wherever ii: is carried out, and the educational process in general. lI The following implications are suggested. A need for students to be exposed to real situations for evaluation rather than just to hypothetical situ- ations is indicated. The fact that most of the students in this study changed their own evaluation of their qualitative code histrionics ability after exposure to the Bass test for qualitative code histrionics indicates that paper- pencil responses to hypothetical situations as pre- sented in writing may be quite different than responses to real life situations. The fact that most Of the students in this study changed their evaluation of their own qualitative code histrionics ability after exposure to the Bass test for qualitative code histrionics implies that the, students either did not know themselves when presented with the qualitative code histrionics questions on April 10, 1972 (qualitative code synnoetics) or know- ingly provided inaccurate information. Since students 98 were informed that their responses were not for grad- ing purposes and that one response was not better than another the first contention is probably accurate. There is a lack of discrimination in the current Oakland Community College test for qualitative code synnoetics (all students tested were rated as having major orientations in qualitative code synnoetic on all Of the three tests). These two points seem to imply that qualitative code synneotics is not accur- ately assessed by the Oakland Community College bat- tery. These points also indicate that perhaps none Of the paper-pencil responses by students as to how they think they might reSpond to a hypothetical Situ- ation (qualitative symbolic orientation) can be accurate if their knowledge of self (qualitative code synnoetics) is not major in scope. This further sup- ports the need for students to be exposed to real situations for evaluation rather than just to hypothe- tical situation. The fact that as many as thirteen elements of cogni- tive style were accurately assessed, during a less than five minute video tape, by a panel Of experts who had not previously been exposed to such a video taped situation, has tremendous implications for future testing programs. The current Oakland Community Col- lege Test Battery is one which takes about four hours 99 for completion by the student. A need to develOp a shorter testing procedure is indicated and in the light of findings from this study seems quite practi- ool. Successful development of such a shortened pro- cedure should significantly enhance the possibility Of other institutions adopting this procedure which has been key to successful develOpment of a personal- ized educational program at Oakland Community College. The fact that the Oakland Community College test for qualitative auditory ability pgoved extremely inaccur- ate as a predictor Of classroom performance in the qualitative auditogy realm indicates that the develOp- ment of a more accurate assessment instrument is needed. The Bass test for qualitative auditory as administered in this study was a more accurate pre- dictor of classroom performance but was limited in that other elements of cognitive style could not be Observed and rated from the same video tape. The finding of no significant difference between the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive temporal ability and incidental Observation Of qualitative pgoprioceptive temporal abilityyduring the Bass test for qualitative proprioceptive kinematics indicates that two test may not be needed tO deal with these two orientations. Skilled Observers, as were the members of the panel of experts utilized in this 100 study, showed outstanding ability in rating both ele- ments in the video tape in which both were observable. Recommendations The following recommendations are based on the analysis of the findings in this study and the insights gained during the course of this study. The recommendations for future research follow: lI Future research in this area should include larger samples which may provide more definitive results than the present study provides. The population of this study consisted of students enrolled in the nursing program at Delta College, only. It may prove beneficial for future research to examine populations in other programs and students across programs (nursing and business and liberal arts and/or others). Research across programs as indi- cated should provide a broader basis for formulating more comprehensive conclusions regarding the effec- tiveness of varying methods of mapping qualitative symbolic orientation. Further research should examine the effectiveness of varying methods Of mapping qualitative symbolic orien- tation with a primarily male population as opposed to the primarily female population utilized in this study. Some difference may exist between mapping \l o \ 101 effectiveness for the two groups. Further research shOuld examine the effectiveness Of varying methods of mapping qualitative symbolic orientation with a primarily black population as Op- posed tO the primarily white population utilized in this study. Some difference may exist between mapping effectiveness for the two groups. It may prove beneficial for future research to examine the use Of the techniques utilized in this study with populations at other educational levels such as elementary, junior high, senior high and upper division college. Research at these levels should provide a broader basis for formulating more compre- hensive conclusions regarding the effectiveness Of varying methods of rating qualitative symbolic orien- tation. The findings of this study show that a single video taped activity by a student (five minutes in length) can serve as a source of information leading to the rating of many cognitive style elements. Future research should seek to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of one video taped activity (perhaps ten to fifteen minutes in length) for assessment of most elements of cognitive style. A more comprehensive study should be undertaken in the future that would include replication Of this study across comparable groups. 10. BIBLIOGRAPHY Allport, F. H. "The Influence of the Group Upon Associ- ation and Thought." Journal Of Experimental Psychology, III (1920), 159-182. Allport, Gordon W. Personality, A Psychological Inter- pretation. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1937. Ames, A. "Sensations, Their Nature and Origin." Transformation, I (1950), ll-12. Blake, R. R. and Ramsey, G. V. Perception: An Approach to Personality. New York: Ronald Press, 1951. Britt, Donald H. "An Improved Method for Instructional Development." Audio-visual Instruction, XVI, NO. 4 (April, 1971), 14-15. Broverman, D. M. "Dimensions of Cognitive Styles." Journal of Personality, XXXVIII (1960), 167-185. Colter, Jude T. "The Affects of the Educational Science Of Cultural Determinants of the Meanings Of Symbols on Curriculum Choice." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1970. Dehnke, Ronald E. "An Exploration of the Possible Iso- morphism of Cognitive Style and Successful Teaching of Second School English." Unpublished doctoral disserta- tion, Wayne State University, 1966. DeGenaro, Arthur Paul. "Experimental Use of the Video Take Recorder as an Evaluative Instrument and Observa- tional Tool in the Supervision of Student Teachers Of Physical Education." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1969. DeLoach, Joseph F. "An Analysis Of Cognitive Style Dis- parity as an Antecedent of Cognitive Dissonance in Instructional Evaluation: An Exploratory Study in the Educational Sciences." Unpublished doctoral disserta- tion, Wayne State University, 1969. 102 ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. l6. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 103 Donohue, Stephen T. "The Effects Of Three Video Tape Critique Methods in Practicum Perspective Counselors Nonverbal Behavior." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New Mexico State University, 1969. Fragale, Marvin, J. "A Pilot Study of Cognitive Styles of Selected Faculty Members and Students in a Community College Setting.? Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1969. French, John W., Ekstrom, Ruth B., and Price, L. A. Manual Of Reference Tests for Cognitive Factors. Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service, 1963. Gagné, Robert M. "The Acquisition of Knowledge.“ Psychological Review, LXIX (July, 1962), 355-365. Gardner, R. W. "Cognitive Styles in Categorizing Behavior." Journal of Personality, XXII (1953), 214-233. Gardner, R. W. "Cognitive Control: A Study of Individu- al Consistencies in Cognitive Behavior." Psychological Issues, I, No. 4 (1959), 3-4. Glass, Gene V. and Stanley, Julian C. Statistical Methods in Education and Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc., 1970. Gould, Samuel G. "The Prospects for Non-Traditional Study." A.G.B. Reports, Association for Governing Boards of UfiIversIEies and Colleges (November-December, 1971), 22-31. Hall, William 0. Jr. "Analysis of Video Tape in the Per- ceptual Evaluation Of Empathic Communication." Unpub- lished doctoral dissertation, The University of Kentucky, 1967. Harder, Robert John. "A Study in the Supervision of Social Studies, Student Teachers Utilizing Video Tape Techniques." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Nebraska, 1968. Hartshorne, H., May, M. A., Shuttleworth, F. K. Studies In the Nature of Character. Vol. III: Studies in the Organization 5? Character. New York: Macmillan, 1930. Hill, Joseph E. The Educational Sciences, Wayne State University, 1968. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27I 28. 29I 30. 31. 32. 33. 104 Hill, Joseph E. and Kerber, August. Models, Methods, and Analytical Procedures in Educational Research, Wayne State University Press, 1967. Hill, Joseph E. and Nunney, Derek. Personalizing Educa- tional Programs Utilizing_Cognitive Style Mapping, Oakland Community College Press, 1967. Hill, Joseph E. and Setz, Betty O. Educational Sciences at Oakland Community_COllege, Oakland Community College Press, 1970. Hoogasian, Vaughn. Cognitive Style: A Peek Behind the "Classicurtain." Oakland Community College Press, 1971. Hum, Sterling Pierce Creed. "An Investigation of the Use Of Focussed Video Tape Feedback in High School Group Counseling." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Southern California, 1969. Klein, G. S. "The Personal World Through Perception." In Blake and Ramsey (Editors), Perception: An Approach to Personality, New York: Ronald Press (1951), 328- 355. Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., and White, R. "Patterns of Aggressive Behavior in Experimentally Created "Social Climates." Journal Of Social Psychology, X (1939), 271- 299. Lindberg, Robert E. "An Investigation of College Stu- dent's Reactions to Two Different Styles of Counseling as Viewed on Video Tape." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, 1969. May, M. A. and Hartshorne, H. "A Summary of the Work of the Character Education Inquirey." Religious Education, XXV (1930), 607-619 and 754-762. Melo, Lawrence T., Tannenbaum, Paula, and Campbell, Edward R. "Project CAM: Reaching Objectives Through Learning Modalities." Audio-visual Instruction, XVI, NO. 5 (May, 1971), 30-31. Rankin, Stuart C. "A Theory of an Isomorphism-Model- Hypothesis Method of Thought." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1964. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39I 40I 41. 42. 105 Robinson, Richard L. "A Descriptive Study of Specific Achievements and Aptitudes of the High Risk Students in Oakland University's Higher Opportunities Program in Education." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1969. Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics for the Be- havioral Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1956. Shuert, Keith L. "A Study to Determine Whether a Selected Type of Cognitive Style Predisposes One to DO Well in Mathematics." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1970. Smith, Robert Howard. "A Comparison of Instructional Evaluations by Teachers and Supervisors Using Video Tape." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minne- sota, 1969. Wasser, Laurence. "An Investigation Into Cognitive Style as a Facet of Teacher's Systems of Student Appraisal." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, 1969. Wasser, Laurence. The Educational Science of Cognitive Style. Oakland Community College Press, 1971. Witkin, H. A., Lewis, H. B., Hertzman, M., Machover, K., Britnal, P. and Wapner, S. Personality Through Percep- tion: An Experimental and Clinical Study. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1954. Wyett, Jerry L. "A Pilot Study to Analyze Cognitive Style and Teaching Style with Reference to Selected Strata of the Defined Educational Sciences." Unpublished doc- toral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1969. Zussman, Steven P. "A Pilot Study Exploration of Cogni- tive Style and Administrative Style as Defined in the Educational Sciences." Unpublished doctoral disserta- tion, Wayne State University, 1968. APPENDICES APPENDIX A MANUAL OF DIRECTIONS COGNITIVE STYLE DIAGNOSTIC TEST BATTERY 106 COGNITIVE STYLE DIAGNOSTIC TEST BATTERY MANUAL OF DIRECTIONS OAKLAND COMMUNITY COLLEGE TEST ADMINISTRATION 107 108 T(VL) ALGORITHM Score tests 1, 4, and 6. GO to Step 2. Establish majors and minors for test 1 and 6 at the same grade level. GO to Step 3. Is test 1 or test 6 negligible? NO: GO to Step 4 YES: GO to Step 8 Establish entry level equal to grade level of test 1 and 6. GO to Step 5. Are there two majors? NO: GO to Step 7 YES: Go to Step 6 Record T(VL) as major. GO to Step 11. Record T(VL) as minor. Go to Step 11. Set entry level equal to reading level + .5. GO to Step 9. Substitute test 4 for the negligible test. Go to Step 10. If test 4 is negligible, lower entry level by l and set test 4 equal to major. GO to Step 11. End Of procedure. 11/4/71 109 TEST I TEST I ANSWER KEY 1. B Double Raw Score 2. D 3. B 12th Grade Level 4. C 30 - 50 Major 5. C 20 - 29 Minor 6. A 0 - 19 N/S 7. E 8. B 11th Grade Level 9. B 29 - 50 Major 10. A 19 — 28 Minor 11. A 0 - 18 N/S 12. C 13. A 10th Grade Level 14. A 25 - 50 Major 15. E 16 - 24 Minor 16. E 0 - 15 N/S 17. D 18. D 9th Grade Level 19. A 20 - 50 Major 20. D 13 - 19 Minor 21. A 0 - 12 N/S 22. D 23. E 8th Grade Level 24. A 16 - 50 Major 25. B 11 - 15 Minor 0 - 10 N/S 11/4/71 110 TEST II TEST II MAY I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION. LISTEN CAREFULLY. I'M GOING TO READ YOU A BRIEF SHORT STORY. IMMEDIATELY AFTER I AM FINISHED, YOU WILL BE GIVEN TEST SHEETS ON WHICH YOU ARE TO WRITE YOUR ANSWERS TO A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT THE STORY. YOU ARE NOT TO WRITE OR PICK UP YOUR PENCILS WHILE THE STORY IS BEING READ. PAY CLOSE ATTENTION. "COKE AND CHIPS IN THE CARIBBEAN" ON A WARM DAY WHEN THEY'RE THIRSTY, CARIBBEAN KIDS SHINNY UP TO THE COCONUTS AT THE TOP OF A COCONUT PALM TREE. THEY FIND THE RIPEST OF THE BUNCH, CUT IT LOOSE, AND LET IT FALL TO THE GROUND. THEN THEY FIND AN OPENER (MOST OFTEN JUST A BIG ROCK) AND SMASH, SMASH, SMASH AT THE OUTER SKIN UNTIL THEY GET TO THE INNER SKIN. (THE ONE WITH THE MONKEY FACE.) THEN THEY SMASH, SMASH, SMASH.SOME MORE. UNTIL THEY REACH THE FRUITS OF THEIR LABOR. DELICIOUS COCONUT MILK. CRISP COCONUT MEAT. IT'S "COKE AND CHIPS" IN THE CARIBBEAN. 11/4/71 111 ANSWER KEY TEST II Warm Caribbean Coconut Shinny up the tree, Climb the tree Drop it, let it fall to the ground Monkey Smash with a rock Coek and chips Boys and girls 7 - 8 Major 2 - 6 Minor 0 - 1 N/S 11/4/71 112 TEST III TEST III ANSWER KEY 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 1. B 2. A 3. E 4. C 5. B 6. D 7. D 8. D 9. A 10. B 11. C 12. E 13. C D D D E A E B Double Raw Score 24 - 40 Major 18 - 23 Minor 0 - l7 N/S 11/4/71 TEST IV 1. C 2. B 3. A 4. C 5. B 6. C 7. A 8. D 9. A 10. B 11. A 12. D Raw Score Reading Grade 0 ---------- 2.0 1 ---------- 2.2 2 ---------- 2.4 3 ---------- 2.5 4 ---------- 2.7 5 ---------- 3.0 6 ---------- 3.4 7 ---------- 3.9 8 ---------- 4.2 9 ---------- 4.5 10 ---------- 4.8 11 ---------- 5.3 12 ---------- 5.8 113 ANSWER KEY l3. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. EDUOS’UWUIP‘UUOUJ GRADE NORMS Raw Score Reading Grade 13 ---------- 6.1 14 ---------- 6.3 15 ---------- 6.5 16 ---------- 6.8 17 ---------- 7.1 18 ---------- 7.4 19 ---------- 7.8 20 ---------- 8.2 21 ---------- 8.6 22 ---------- 9.1 23 ---------- 9.9 24 --------- 10.6 TEST IV 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. OD’IPUOCIJOWID‘UOW Raw Score Reading Grade 25 --------- 11.0 26 --------- 11.3 27 --------- 11.4 28 -------- 11.5 29 --------- 11.6 30 --------- 11.7 31 --------- 11.8 32 --------- 11.9 33 --------- 12.0 34 --------- 12.1 35 --------- 12.2 36 --------- 12.3 11/4/71 114 TEST V TEST V MAY I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION. LISTEN CAREFULLY. I'M GOING TO READ YOU SOME BRIEF ARITHMETIC PROBLEMS. YOU ARE TO WRITE YOUR ANSWER TO THE PROBLEM IMMEDIATELY AFTER IT IS READ. THERE WILL BE A PAUSE OF 15 TO 20 SECONDS FOR YOU TO DO YOUR CALCULATIONS, THEN THE NEXT PROBLEM WILL BE READ. PAY CLOSE ATTENTION FOR THE PROBLEMS WILL BE READ ONLY ONCE. LISTEN CAREFULLY. 1. A newsboy collected 90¢ from each of 3 customers. The total amount he collected was... 2. How many inches are in 3 1/2 feet? 3. How many "cokes" can you buy for 88¢ if cokes cost 11¢ each? 4. How many hours will it take to drive 300 miles at 60 miles per hour? 5. How much change will the clerk give you from $1.00 if you purchase 15 cards at 5¢ each? 6. A chick with $8.00 spends $3.50. How much does she have left? 7. Ball point pens are two for 49¢. How much will one dozen cost? 8. A cat bought a second-hand motor bike for $400.00 which was 2/3 of what it cost new. How much did it cost new? 9. A teacher's salary is $200.00 per week. 5% of it is withheld for retirement. How much does he have left? 10. Four women can knit a blanket in two days. How many will be needed to finish it in 1/2 day? 11/4/71 TEST V 1. $2.70 2. 42" 3. 8 4. S 5. 25¢ 6. $4.50 7. $2.94 8. $600 9. $190 10. 16 115 ANSWER KEY Boys & Girls TEST V 8 - 10 Major 7 - 5 Minor 4 - 0 N/S 11/4/71 TEST VI 1. D 2. C 3. B 4. D 5. A 6. B 7. C 8. D 9. E 10. C 11. B 12. C 13. C 14. D 15. E 16. B 17. E 18. E 19. C 20. B 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. > > C7 u: 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 38. 49. 50. 116 TEST VI ANSWER KEY Boys & Girls 35 - 50 Major 23 - 34 Minor 0 - 22 N/S SCORE PERCENT COURSE 0-22 0-44 ENG 052 23-34 46-68 ENG 131 35-43 70-86 ENG 151 44-50 88-100 ENG 152 NORMS FOR GRADES 8 - 12 FOR TEST VI GRADE M M' N/s 12 35-50 23-34 0-22 11 30-34 18-29 0-17 10 25-29 13-24 0-12 9 20-25 8—19 0-7 8 15-19 3-14 0-2 11/4/71 “E M a: A. NJ TEST VII A = 3 B = 2 C - 1 D=¢ 1. chm 2. chs 3. cht 4. Qch 5. Qck 6. chm 7. chs 8. cht 9. chm 10. Qck ll. Qch 12. chm 13. chm 14. cht 15. chs 16. Qch 17. cht 18. Qch 19. cht 20. chm 117 24 - l4 - 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. TEST VII 15 Major 8 Minor 0 N/S Qch chs Qck chm Qch Qck cht cht Qck chs Qck chm Qch chs Qck chs Qch chs Qck cht 11/4/71 TEST VIII A = 3 B = 2 C = l D=¢ 1. Ockh 2. Qcp 3. Ocs 4. Qct 5. ch 6. Ockh 7. ch 8. Qct 9. Ockh 10. Qckh ll. ch 12. Qckh l3. Qct l4. Qckh 15. Qcp 16. Qcp 118 24 - 14 - 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. TEST VIII 15 Major 8 Minor 0 N/S Qct Qckh ch Qckh ch QCP Qct QCP QCP Ocs Qct ch QCP Qct QCP Qct ll/4/71 119 TEST IX TEST IX SCORING KEY F = Family A = Associates I = Individual A. F. 1. F 16. I 2. A 17. F 3. I 18. A B. G. 4. A 19. F 5 I I 2 0 I I 6. F 21. A C. H. 7. I 22. A 8. F 23. F 9. A 24. I D I I I 10. F 25. F 11. I 26. I 12. A 27. A E. J. 13. F 28. I 14. A 29. A 15. I 30. F WEIGHTED SCORING METHOD KEY 1. Score Most as 3 30 - 21 Major 2. Score Least as 1 20 - 14 Minor 3. Score Blank as 2 l3 - 0 N/S 11/4/71 120 TEXT X TEST X SCORING KEY M = Magnitude KEY D = Difference 75—? 37 Major R = Relationship 36 - 22 Minor L = Appraisal 21 - 0 N/S I IV VIII 1. R 13. L 29. M 2. M 14. M 30. L 3. D 15. D 31. R 4. L 16. R 32. D II V IX 5. M 17. L 33. M 6. L 18. R 34. L 7. R 19. M 35. R 8. D 20. D 36. D III VI X 9. R 21. M 37. R 10. M 22. R 38. D 11. D 23. D 39. M 12. L 24. L 40. L VII 25. R 41. C 26. M 42. C 27. D 43. C 28. L 44. C 45. C WEIGHTED SCORING METHOD Questions 41 - 45 1. Score A as 7 If the student has 3 out of 5 answers 2. Score B as 3 correct and at least a minor in T(VQ); 3. Score C as 2 Print® . 4. Score D as 1 11/4/71 121 Instructions for Raven Matrices Survey Turn on the tape recorder. Wait for instructions to be completed: (On tape) PLEASE LOOK AT THE FIRST PICTURE IN FRONT OF YOU. YOU SEE IT IS A PATTERN WITH A PIECE CUT OUT OF IT. EACH OF THE PIECES AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PICTURE IS THE RIGHT SHAPE TO FIT THE SPACE, BUT ONLY ONE OF THEM IS THE RIGHT PATTERN. #2 IS NOT A PATTERN AT ALL. #3 IS QUITE WRONG. #6 IS REALLY RIGHT BUT IT IS WRONG WITH THE WHITE PIECE IN IT. ONLY #4 IS QUITE RIGHT. Turn off the recorder. The testor says: I WOULD LIKE YOU TO DETERMINE THE COR- RECT ANSWER FOR EACH OF THE PUZZLES AND WRITE THE CORRECT ANSWER IN THE SPACE PROVIDED. YOU WILL HAVE FROM 15 TO 20 SECONDS FOR EACH PUZZLE. GO AHEAD. 11/4/71 122 Q(V)-—Qua1itative Visual Recording of Results for Raven Matrices Survey The students record their answers on the self-scoring check- list VISUAL A. __ E. __ B. __ F. __ c. __ G. __ D. H Scoring for Raven Matrices Use the weights as indicated. Score WRQEE answers only. Answers Weights A 4 E 4 A 5 E 3 B 5 F 3 B 7 F l C 5 G 4 C 2 G 4 D 2 H 5 D 6 H 8 Add the total score and compare to the following chart. 0 - 11 Major 12 — 18 Minor 19 - 36 N/S 11/4/71 123 Mueller Auditory Survey THIS IS AN AUDITORY REASONING TEST. YOU ARE ABOUT TO HEAR A SERIES OF SOUNDS WITH A DEFINITE PATTERN. YOU ARE TO WRITE THE NEXT SOUND OF THE PATTERN WHEN REQUESTED. FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU HEAR "BA BA BA, BB BE BE, BA BA BA" YOU NOTICE AN ALTERNATING PATTERN AND PREDICT THE NEXT SOUND AS "BE BE BE". SIMILARLY, IF YOU "BA BB, BA BE BE, BA BE BE BE", YOU SHOULD NOTICE THAT IN EACH GROUP THERE IS ONE MORE "BE" THAN IN THE PREVIOUS GROUP, AND YOU SHOULD PREDICT "BA BE BE BE BE" OR ONE "BA" AND FOUR "BE'S". (pause) NOW LISTEN TO THE SOUNDS, FIGURE OUT THE PATTERN, AND WRITE THE NEXT SOUND IN THE SERIES ON YOUR ANSWER SHEET. 1. BE BE BE BE, BE BE BE, BE BE 2. BA BB BE BA, BE BA BA BE, BA BE BE BA, BB BA BA BB 3. BE BE BA BB BE BE, BE BE BA BA BE BE, BE BE BA BA BA BE 4. BE BA BE BE, BE BE BA BB, BE BE BE BA, BA BE BE BE 5. BA BA BA, BA BB BA, BE BE BE, BE BA BE 11/4/71 124 Scoring for Mueller Auditory Survey The following weights have been assigned to the answers in the Mueller Auditory Survey as follows: 1. 3 2. 4 3. 5 4. 6 5. 7 Answers to the Mueller Auditory 1. BE 2. BA BE BE BA 3. BE BE BA BA BA BA 4. BE BA BE BE 5. BA BA BA Score the weighted right answers as follows: IF SCORE IS: CHECK 0 — 3 N/S 4 - 7 Minor 8 + Major 11/4/71 125 Q(O)--Qualitative Olfactory Instructions for the Olfactory Cards The testor shows the students a packet of six olfactory cards. THESE ARE OLFACTORY CARDS. YOU ARE TO SCRATCH THE TAPE LIKE THIS. (Here the testor demonstrates the proper way to scratch the cards.) THEN SNIFF THE TAPE. ON THE BACK OF THE CARD YOU WILL FIND FIVE CHOICES LABELED A THROUGH E. YOU WILL ALSO NOTICE THAT EACH CARD IS NUMBERED. THESE NUMBERS CORRESPOND TO THE NUMBERED BOXES ON YOUR SELF-SCORING CHECKLIST. PLEASE WRITE YOUR ANSWERS IN THESE BOXES. GO AHEAD. The students do this test at their own pace. 11/4/71 126 Recordingiof Results for Olfactory Survey OLFACTORY Correct Answers 1. C 2. C 3. B 4. C 5. B 6. D 5121 4 - 6 Major 2 - 3 Minor 0 - l N/S 11/4/71 (1) ONION Parsley Seed Pepper Onion Celery Chocolate (4) CHERRY Root Beer Coke Cherry Grape Coffee 127 KEY SHEET (2) CHOCOLATE Coke Cinnamon Chocolate Banana Strawberry (5) SMOKE Wood Smoke Bread Pizza Charcoal (3) EO_CQN_U'£ Burnt Sugar Coconut Chocolate Toasted Almond Vanilla (6) CINNAMON Peppermint Nutmeg Cloves Cinnamon Coke 11/4/71 128 Q(T)--Qualitative Tactile Q(P)--Qualitative Proprioceptive Seat the student at the table in front of the curtain. PLEASE PULL YOUR CHAIR UP AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE. THANK YOU. BEHIND THIS CURTAIN YOU WILL FIND TWO PEG BOARDS: ONE FOR YOUR RIGHT HAND AND ONE FOR YOUR LEFT. IN THE CENTER OF EACH OF THESE BOARDS IS A MASTER PEG. PLEASE PUT YOUR HANDS THROUGH THE CURTAIN AND FIND THE TWO MASTER PEGS. (Pause while the student does this.) FEEL HOW THOSE PEGS ARE DIFFERENT FROM THESE PEGS (Testor is to show student regular pegs) IN THAT THEY HAVE RAISED RIDGES OR GROOVES IN THEM. I AM GOING TO MAKE A PATTERN ON THE LEFT BOARD USING THE MASTER PEGS AND ADDITIONAL PEGS LIKE THESE. THEN I WILL GIVE YOU SOME PEGS AND ASK YOU TO DUPLICATE THAT PATTERN ON THE RIGHT BOARD WITH- OUT LOOKING. PLEASE REMOVE YOUR HANDS. THIS FIRST ONE IS A SAMPLE AND CONSISTS OF THE MASTER PEG AND ONE ADDITIONAL PEG AND YOU WILL HAVE THIRTY SECONDS TO DUPLICATE IT. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU. NOW, I AM GOING TO MAKE A PATTERN USING TWO PEGS AND THE MASTER PEG AND YOU WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE TO DUPLICATE THE PATTERN. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU. THIS LAST PATTERN WILL CONSIST OF THE MASTER PEG AND THREE ADDITIONAL PEGS AND YOU WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES TO DUPLICATE THE PATTERN. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, THAT IS ALL. The testor is to record the student answers on the guide Checklist. 11/4/71 129 Recording of Results for the Nottus Pattern The number of pegs placed correctly in each of the tests should be recorded. The sample is recorded only as a yes or no to indicate whether the students did the sample pattern correctly. The testor is to indicate, by circling the matrix on the score sheet, the dots that indicate the actual design of the test. The testor is to indicate the student's response by placing an "X" over the dot where the student actually placed each peg. NOTTUS PATTERN x = Subject Response 0 = Example 1. Correct 2. Correct Scoring for the Nottus Pattern Score the third pattern as follows (Number 2): Correct Pegs 2 - 3 Major 1 Minor 0 N/S 11/4/71 TEXT X 130 DIRECTIONS TEST X In this test there are ten (10) situations in which you are asked to imagine yourself. Each situation has four (40 alternative responses. You are to decide which response you would "most likely" make as the first or best solution, then the second best, the third best, and the fourth best. Remember YOU MUST RANK ALL FOUR RESPONSES for each situ- ation. READ ALL FOUR (4) RESPONSES BEFORE YOU MAKE YOUR SELEC- TIONS. EXAMPLE If you had to organize a baseball team, you would: AWN.“ Fififiiv O