ASSESSING TEACHERS' mamas
UNDER THE IMPACT or
A CLINICAL cunmwu DESIGN

Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
NANCY W. BAUER
1 9 7 l

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled
ASSESSING TEACHERS' PERCEPTIONS
UNDER THE IMPACT OF
A CLINICAL CURRICULUM DESIGN

presented by

Nancy W. Bauer

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph. D d . Curriculum
egree 1n __,___

JRQ CAGE/L?

Major professor

Date October 5, 1971

0-7639

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

W
Clinic
teachers a
ihile In,
Clinical .
diaEnosis
and evalu:
Clinical .
subjects, ;
imp SI
'1“ diff.
The i:
lhich VOuQ
teaching
curricula

 

ABSTRACT

l
j ASSESSING TEACHERS' PERCEPTIONS
UNDER THE IMPACT OF
A CLINICAL CURRICULUM DESIGN
BY

Nancy W. Bauer

The Problem
Clinical teaching behaviors are among those that help

teachers adjust to the variety of differences in students,
while maintaining in a common motif definite objectives.
Clinical teaching includes recognition of objectives,
diagnosis of student needs, selecting alternative strategies
and evaluating the results in relation to the objectives.
Clinical teaching style is particularly helpful in those
subjects in which problem analysis and resolution require
a group setting for the interaction of different individuals
with different skills and differing values and perceptions.
The investigator had developed (1965) a curriculum design
which would give teachers continuing support in clinical
teaching in social science, including the values area. The

curriculum design was based on twelve specified criteria for
clinical behavioral teaching style and was published as the
Teacher's Edition of The Social Sciences: Concepts and Values,

(Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1970).

The study sought answers to the following questions:

1- How clinical are teachers' perceptions?

2- Are there demographic factors (age, grade level taught,

 

 

 

 

 

year:
vhicl
3. lhen
Editl
4. Can 1
do 01

lnpu1

level
!flgm

5 sur
Question:
EsalPle.
thhu
PeSponse
clinical
c"980m

clinical

figfi

In .0
that “re
068 g
°“the v1
is! teich
inatmcti
Chase in
”pas t

lUflctions

Nancy W. Bauer

years of experience, socio-economic setting of the school)
which bear on a teacher's degree of clinical perception?

When teachers use the curriculum design of the Teacher's

3.
Edition do changes in perception occur?

4. Can these changes be classified to determine whether they
do or do not relate to the criteria and objectives of the
input, 1.6. the concept of the clinical curriculum design?

5. Can clinical behavioral perception be measured by low

level simulations?

Methodology
A survey technique was used involving an open-ended

questionnaire administered at three points in time to a large

The test items measured perceptions which were coded
Each

sample.
to the twelve criteria for clinical behavioral style.

response was scored as clinical or not clinical; each
clinical response was classified according to predetermined
categories and coded to one of the twelve criteria for

clinical behavioral style.

Findings

In most categories the proportion of teachers' perceptions

that were classified as clinical was small. Distribution of

choices among possible clinical categories differed depending
on the viewpoint required by the questionnaire item. Although
few teachers had a coordinated view of the factors in the

instructional environment, the posttests reflected some in-

crease in the clinical direction and a redistribution of

choices that more closely approximated the clinical teaching

functions of a teacher.

 

 

 

ASSESSINC
UNI
A CLINI€

lichi
In partial £ng

DOCI

Depar

ASSESSING TEACHERS' PERCEPTIONS
UNDER THE IMPACT OF
A CLINICAL CURRICULUM DESIGN
By

Nancy W. Bauer

A THESIS

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Education

1971

 

 

 

@Copyright by
NANCY W. BAUER
1972

 

 

 

To

STEVEN. vh
confide flea

and

EVAN and D

To

STEVEN, who supplies continual insight,
confidence and the humor of the long view

and
EVAN and DAVID, who understand and care.

11

 

 

 

the need for she

thin: the coarse of
acknowledge those Ih
lid judgment.

Dr. Ted l. Iard,
of the learning Syat
pnctltioner of clin
philosophical builds
llvieory dialogues w
Itudy and the equili
Illyed both econony
that in the student
15 too late. Iith d
Inaccupation, he sh:
to conceptualize and
Icholerehip.

The original idol
Where one from D:
Center for the Study
“race Jonnovich, In
“phoned hen the bi
lhlt could "orchestr
Ilillhlting the “3'”

learning experiences

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The need for shared expertise was met by several people

during the course of this project. It is my privilege to

acknowledge those who so graCiously gave of their time
and judgment.

Dr. Ted W. Ward, Professor of Education and Director
of the Learning Systems Institute, is a remarkably skilled

practitioner of clinical teaching behaviors as well as a

philosophical builder of theory. In seminar and in the

advisory dialogues which maintained the objectives of the

study and the equilibrium of the investigator, he dis-

played both economy and style. I am grateful for his

trust in the student's ability to ask questions before it
is too late. With dispatch, which was never tinged with
preoccupation, he shared both his extraordinary ability
to conceptualize and synthesize and his commitment to
scholarship.

The original idea for focusing curriculum research on
teachers came from Dr. Paul F. Brandwein, President of the
Center for the Study of Instruction (a division of Harcourt

Brace Jovanovich, Inc.). It was he who recognized and
supported from the beginning the need for a Teacher's Edition
that could "orchestratd'an ideal into objectives by
eliminating the usual three way separation of people,

learning experiences and materials.

iii

 

 

In support of this

view that a publilhe
mt include a cell
mlution.

Dr. Howard 8. Te
Ike the criteria an
Ind petiently uneuv
statistical proced
“108198. 318 opti
Illa hunnities can q

The very young
e“lonely detailed c
“8 Diane Giebel , so
shim Institute.
Imotion before the a

his study involv
“d Procedures. The
Wired absolute acc
‘0 "do it all over" I
In developing the pro
Molded over by lari
Itnlc, ignoring the 1
Iorit.

The painstakins ‘
lldoonunicatins 1‘“

Ilcllltnted by both I

 

His support of this project is only one aspect of the Center's
view that a publisher has educational responsibilities which

must include a commitment to research beyond formative

evaluation.
Dr. Howard S. Teitelbaum, research consultant, helped

make the criteria and implications of the study explicit
and patiently maneuvered the investigator through the
statistical procedures with a never-ending supply of verbal

analogies. His optimistic view that even those trained in

the humanities can quantify their priorities was heartening.
The very young woman who managed the nation—wide,

endlessly detailed communications with good humor and care

was Diane Giebel, secretary to the project at the Learning

Systems Institute. She learned to sense the need for a

question before the answer became too difficult.
This study involved a great deal of refining of criteria

and procedures. The secretarial and clerical activities

required absolute accuracy and the courage and good will

to "do it all over" many, many times. The work involved

in developing the proposal and initiating the study was

presided over by Marian J. Sonke. She was never able to

Panic, ignoring the investigator's ability to create cause

for it.
The painstaking work of reporting statistical analyses

and communicating results clearly was enormously

facilitated by both the mathematical and secretarial skill

iii-a

 

oi Elizabeth J. lord
for being able to ty
Indenxgeet a better
«131th consultant
I. Steven Bauer,
therefore, to the p
research design and
erperience in resent
In education and C11
phnmcology share t
Mole in real Betti
Intereneee was inpu-
constraints of the
history of the easy
lnndequacies and
skilled guidance and
moonsibility of tht

Ioptenber, 1971

 

 

of Elizabeth J. Ford. She possessed the unusual talent

for being able to type, edit copy, warn against pitfalls

and suggest a better way simultaneously. She was a

sensitive consultant on the uses of the English language.
E. Steven Bauer, married to the investigator and,

therefore, to the project, gave invaluable assistance in

research design and interpretation of data out of his own

experience in research in the life sciences. Field research

in education and clinical trials in medicine and

pharmacology share the difficulties of research on real

people in real settings. His own caution in making

inferences was imparted with understanding of both the
constraints of the data and the investigator's pre-research
history of the easy generalization.

Inadequacies and errors which occurred in Spite of
the full

skilled guidance and assistance are, of course,

responsibility of the investigator.

September, 1971

iii-b

 

 

 

 

 

“MIDI! B

“PEEK C
"MIDI! 1)

WM! E

RENE!) C
PARTICII

FOB! L31
PRELIIII

ANALYSIS
AND P081

REDISTBJ
FOR 933':

mama]

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

CHAPTER
I
II
III
IV
V
VI

FOOTNOTES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D

APPENDIX E

THE PROBLEM
RELEVANT RESEARCH 18
METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN 33
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 80
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 136
CONCLUSIONS 167
178
179

BSTEP PROPOSAL: MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
(IN-CLASS TEACHING BEHAVIORS)

TEST INSTRUMENTS

RECORD OF DISTRIBUTION OF TESTS TO
PARTICIPATING SCHOOL SYSTEMS

FORM LETTERS TO SCHOOL SYSTEMS
PRELIMINARY RUNS OF TEST INSTRUMENTS

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLES FOR PRETEST
AND POSTTEST l

REDISTRIBUTION OF CLINICAL CHOICES:
FOR PRETEST, POSTTEST l, POSTTEST 2

TABLES

ADDITIONAL TABLES FOR POSTTEST 2

 

1.

3'-

gas

5‘

“a?

.9

._.

16.
ll.

18.

 

(haracteriatica
as Discipline P

Adjutant of Tea
Discipline Proble

lot Describe Phys
malt.

Factors in Stude
Observable.

Goals in Social
Social Science

. Evidence for Eval

Evidence for Bval
I[lechniome .

hanging Studen
Investiga tion .

Social Studies 00
Investigation.

Disappointing Out
the Process of In

- hacker Connects

Evaluation in lieu
Need for lndividu
Key rectors I Con
Resources I Use:

Evidence for thl
lentioned.

ldjustinc Touch“

 

10.

11.

12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.

18.

 

LIST OF TABLES

Characteristics of Students: Behavior Not Seen Only
as Discipline Problem.

Adjustment of Teaching: Behavior Not Seen Only as
Discipline Problem.

Not Describe Physical Characteristics Without Behavioral

Result.

Factors in Students Requiring Adjustment of Teaching:
Observable.

Goals in Social Science are Observable Behavior.
Social Science Result is Observable Behavior.
Evidence for Evaluation: Describing Behavior.

Evidence for Evaluation: Uses Observation as a
Technique.

Changing Students: Skilled in the Process of
Investigation.

Social Studies Goals: Skilled in the Process of
Investigation.

Disappointing Outcomes in the Children: Skilled in
9 Process of Investigation.

Thacher Connects Learning to Behavior.

Evaluation in New Situations.

Need for Individual Behavioral Evaluation.

Key Factors I Control: Adjusting Materials.
Resources I Use: Other Materials Toward Same Goals.

Evidence for Evaluation: Goals of Concepts and Values
Mentioned.

Adjusting Teaching.

Page

87

87

88

89
90
91
93

93

94

95

96
96
98
98
100
102
102

103

 

Connects lbachin
of Students.

Key Factor: I Co
Experience: to I

- hat I Etta-pt t

hat I itteapt t

"M I itteapt t
or DisCilllinaria

Key Factors 1 Ce
Reinforce Concep

Adjustnnts Need
to “St and Rain

Ah“ I Attelpt t
Key “01:05 I CC

Adjustfints Th;
1
Ohmstic Quest

25193 Overt Beha
”lo-Econouc .

Checkin
8 Instr .
Applicability :2

Saleem,
8 Next

Selecting Next ,1

 

Page
9. Connects Teaching Strategy to the Characteristics
of Students. 104
m. Key Factors I Control: Selecting Lesson Ideas or
Experiences to Meet the Needs of Students. 104
n. What I Attempt to Be: Encourager. 105
m. What I Attempt to Be: Prescriber for Differences. 105
e. What I Attempt to Be: Did Not Mention Authoritarian
or Disciplinarian. 106
M. Key Factors I Control: Using Other Content to
Reinforce Concepts or Ideas. 107
:5. Adjustments Needed in My Teaching: Using New Content
to Test and Reinforce Concepts. 108
e. What I Attempt to Be: Questioner. 109
W. Key Factors 1 Control: Questions for Diagnosis. 109
w. Adjustments That Should Be Made in My Teaching:
Diagnostic Questioning. 110
Using Overt Behavior for Evaluation. Category:
Socio-Economic. 111
Checking Instructional Materials for Validity and
Applicability to Children. Category: Years of
Experience. 112
Selecting Next Teaching Strategy By Diagnoses and
Towards Objectives. Category: Years of Experience. 113
Selecting Next Teaching Strategy By Diagnoses and
Towards Objectives. Category: Age. 114
Use of Open—Ended Questions for Diagnostic Purposes.
Category: Years of Experience. 115
Using Alternative Examples of Content to Reinforce
or Test Concepts. Category: Years of Experience. 116
Inter-Item Correlations, Cluster I (Pretest). 119
Inter-Item Correlations, Cluster II (Pretest). 121
Inter-Item Correlations, Cluster III (Pretest) 123

Inter-Item Correlations, Cluster IV (Pretest: Negative),125

vi

 

Inter-Rea Corral
Inter-Ital Correl
Inter-Ital Corral
Inter-Ital Corral

8ilple Correlatio
Totals.

Change iron Prete
Characteristics 0

' ““89 Iron Prete

ChM‘ilcteristics a

Chance iron pm.

chm“ II‘OI Prete
Requiring Adjust.

Change iron Preu
Trying to Change

0‘)

g

Page
Inter-Item Correlations, Cluster V (Pretest: Negative) 125
Inter-Item Correlations, Cluster VI (Pretest: Negative) 127
Inter—Item Correlations, Cluster I (Posttest 1), 123
Inter-Item Correlations, Cluster II (Posttest l), 129

Simple Correlations of TWO Simulations and Questionnaire
Totals. 131

Change from Pretest to Posttest l: The Most Important
Characteristics of My Students. 133

Change from Pretest to Posttest 2: The Most Important
Characteristics of My Students. 139

Change from Pretest to Posttest 1: Factors in Students
Requiring Adjustments in My Teaching. 142

Change from Pretest to Posttest 2: Factors in Students
Requiring Adjustments in My Teaching. 143

Change from Pretest to Posttest 1: Ways You Are
Trying to Change Your Students. 145

Change from Pretest to Posttest 2: Ways You Are
Trying to Change Your Students. 146

Change from Pretest to Posttest 1: Categories of
Social Science Goals. 148

Change from Pretest to Posttest 2: Categories of
Social Science Goals. 149

Change from Pretest to Posttest 1: Categories of
Disappointing Outcomes in Social Science. 151

Change from Pretest to Posttest 2: Categories of
Disappointing Outcomes in Social Science. 152

Change from Pretest to Posttest 1: Adjustments That
Should Be Made in My Teaching in Order to Reach Goals. 154

Change from Pretest to Posttest 2: Adjustments That
Should Be Made in My Teaching in Order to Reach Goals. 155

Change from Pretest to Posttest 1: What I Attempt
to Be. 157

Change from Pretest to Posttest 2: What I Attempt
to Be. 158

 

 

 

58. Change tron P
in the Inatruc

59. (.‘nange tron P
in the Inetruc

to. Change fans P
Use in Social

61: Gauge tron P
Use in Social
lmndix D:

01: Analysis of Va
Socio-Econonic

02. Analysis of Va
Years of Expo

03. Analysis of Va
Age.

94- Analysis of Va
Years of Expo

D5- Analysis of Va
Years of Exper

D6. Analysis of Va
Years of Exper

07. Sllple Correla
Queetionna ire

93- Sinple Correla
Questionnaire

139. Bilple Correla
Sort, and Ques

D10. Silple Correla
10 Itevs. P08

”11- The lost Inpor

013- Factors in ly
Teaching - Q.

D13- In [hat lays A
Q. IaBa

 

 

Page
58. Change from Pretest to Posttest 1: Key Factors
in the Instructional Environment I Control. 159
59. Change from Pretest to Posttest 2: Key Factors
in the Instructional Environment I Control. 160
60. Change from Pretest to Posttest 1: Resources I
Use in Social Studies. 161
61: Change from Pretest to Posttest 2: Resources I
Use in Social Studies. 162
Appendix D:
D1: Analysis of Variance. Posttest l. Criterion l:
Socio—Economic.
D2. Analysis of Variance. Posttest l. Criterion 2:
Years of Experience.
D3. Analysis of Variance. Posttest 1. Criterion 4:
Age.
D4. Analysis of Variance. Posttest l. Criterion 4:
Years of Experience.
D5. Analysis of Variance. Posttest l. Criterion 5:
Years of Experience.
DS. Analysis of Variance. Posttest 1. Criterion 12:
Years of Experience.
D7. Simple Correlations of Card-Sort Task Scores with
Questionnaire Total Scores. Posttest 1
D8. Simple Correlations of Picture Task Scores with
Questionnaire Total. Posttest 1.
09. Simple Correlations of Analysis of Picture, Card-
Sort, and Questionnaire Total. Posttest 1.
D10. Simple Correlations Between Questionnaire and Last
10 Items. Posttest 1.
11‘ The Most Important Characteristics of My Students
Q. I.A
12. Factors in My Students Requiring Adjustment of My
Teaching - Q. I.C.
13.

In What Ways Are You Trying to Change Your Students?
.3.

viii

 

 

Bl.

Adjust-ent-
Order to Bet

D11. Key rectors
Control - Q-

01 Ihat I Atte

01.

no

Resources 1
or Social Sc

 

D14.
D15.

D16.

D17.

D18.
D19.

The Goals in Social Sciences - Results - Q. IV.

Categories of vDisappointing Results in Social
Studies — Q.

Adjustments That Should Be Made in My Teaching in
Order to Reach Goals — Q. 111.

Key Factors in the Instructional Environment I
Control - Q. II.A.

What I Attempt to Be - Q. II.C.

Resources 1 Use With My Students in Social Studies
or Social Science - Q. 11. B.

 

 

ix

 

 

Educational

behaviors which In
this edit has been
and classification
teachers do.
Coupled with
on leaning which
task of nesting th
the ways in which
activation, conun
scononic backgroun
enacted to adjust
differences in stud
colon aotit defini
standing, cognitive
and problen resolui
How can teachei
(or all students an
ho aajor ways have
individual student:
[thy identifying ‘
Ihich help the. to

learning experienci

 

—’3

Chapter I
THE PROBLEM

Educational research has focused on identifying those
ahaviors which make up the "art of teaching". Much of
nis work has been empirical, using systematic observation
nd classification or coding schemes to record what
eachers do.

Coupled with this has come the application of research
1 learning which has caused educators to face up to the
hsk of meeting the needs of individual children. Many of
as ways in which children differ are now known (among them:
)tivation, communication skills, peer group ties, socio-
conomic background, attitudes, values). Teachers are
xpected to adjust teaching behavior to the variety of
fferences in students, while still maintaining in a
mmon motif definite objectives in conceptual under-
anding, cognitive processes and skills of interaction

d problem resolution.
How can teachers both maintain behavioral objectives
r all students and meet a variety of individual needs?
major ways have emerged: by designing materials which
ividual students can use on their own without a teacher
by identifying and developing strategies for teachers
ch help them to recognize individual needs and structure

rning experiences to meet them.

 

 

 

 

‘

‘l'he ntariala :
couidenhle succel
”skill areas": I1
etc. Etch of these
skills and these he
hut conprehensive E

Individualized
not suited to those
end resolution requ
individuals with d1
Ind perceptions. T
or investigative sc
They need children
they need adults Ih
bin-lens to intense
hov to Iodiiy or ch:
in interactive subJ
go, vhile the probl
resolving is in P”
these subjects is
udaiiective learn
"Pirated. Probla
result of both the

ma selecting of *1

Predicted effects 0

 

The materials for independent study have had
considerable success in those disciplines known as
'skill areas": mathematics, reading, spelling, grammar,
etc. Each of these areas has been broken down into sub—
skills and these have often been arranged into an arbitrary
but comprehensive sequence.

Individualized instruction of this sort is obviously
not suited to those subjects in which problem analysis
and resolution require the interaction of different
individuals with different skills and differing values
and perceptions. These interactive subjects are laboratory
or investigative science, social science and the humanities.
They need children who work and discuss with other children;
they need adults who can diagnose snags in understanding and
Darriers to interaction and make on-the—spot decisions on
10w to modify or change the learning experiences. Teachers
Ln interactive subjects must ”tune” the curriculum as they
p, while the problem analysis, discussion and problem-
esolving is in progress. Adjusting the curriculum in
hese subjects is particularly intricate as the cognitive
nd affective learning experiences cannot and should not be
eparated. Problem-resolving in social science is the
asult of both the application of concepts and the generating
ad selecting of alternative solutions because of their

redicted effects on values.

 

 

'i'he long-range
behavioral style 1
recognizing hypoth
diagnosing the att
each child as he 3
vith differences b
the responses and
exercises to help
points of view and
to deter-ins the n.
to the objectives;
Idvisable.

Such a "clinic:
in specified direc
learning to use so«
There is consideral
nine of clinical l
and expertise on h

ihe mediate
this study were as
1. to acquire a c

orientation of

each of the s

coapose clinic

2. to assess any

the initill ill

 

design vhich P

   

The long—range problem is the development of clinical
ohavioral style in all teachers; this style includes
acognizing hypotheses and objectives of the curriculum;
Lagnosing the attitudes, values and past experiences of
och child as he generates alternatives and is confronted
Lth differences between himself and his friends; accepting
1e responses and using questioning strategies and alternative
:ercises to help the children explore their own and other's
>ints of view and choices of action; evaluating continually
> determine the nature and degree of distance from the child
J the objectives; revising strategies and hypotheses when
ivisable.

Such a "clinical behavioral style" can operate effectively

 

ospecified directions with groups of children who are
iarning to use social science to resolve social problems.
are is considerable agreement on the nature and positive
lue of clinical behavioral style. There is less agreement
d expertise on how to achieve it in teachers.

The immediate problems which constituted the focus of
is study were as follows:

to acquire a clearer description of the present
orientation of a wide range of teachers toward

each of the specific strategies which together
compose clinical behavioral teaching style; and

to assess any change in teachers' perceptions under
the initial impact of a social science curriculum

design which promotes clinical behavioral style,

 

—

particularly in 1
social problem 1
social science cl
This study aimed
perceptions, classifi
visa, assessed at lee

oi a clinical curric

  
   
  
    
  

closing such a deal
on school year in
to clearly unders
one any anong seven
clinical. lb be 1191
Ind engineered to in
01 the broadest deii

In order to see

Insertions need to b

._.

- Clinical teachin

taught to teache
The Learning Sys

University has ident
Ityle and created a
f0roseservice train
stunned.” cum
"it in detail, both
India specific DON
Winn end after tel
lseries oi decisiot

dMelons, and the :

 

4 I

particularly in the values-laden area of resolving

social problems in a group setting in the elementary

social science classroom.

This study aimed at a detailed description of teachers'
rceptions, classified from a clinical behavioral point of
ew, assessed at several points in time: before the use
Ta clinical curriculum design, after the initial impact
fusing such a design and after the completion of two—thirds
Ta school year in which such a design was used. It must

clearly understood that curriculum materials constitute
e way among several to help teachers become increasingly
inical. To be helpful the materials must be designed
d engineered to include the people—to-people dynamics
'the broadest definition of curriculum.

In order to see the problem area clearly, several

ertions need to be made and supported:

Clinical teaching behaviors can be identified and

 

 

taught to teachers.

The Learning Systems Institute of Michigan State
versity has identified elements of clinical behavioral
la and created a model.1 From this model a methodology

preservice training of elementary teachers has been
uctured.2 Clinical behavioral style has been spelled
in detail, both as propositions for skilled teaching
as specific behaviors which must be utilized before,
ing and after teaching. The focus is on teaching as

ries of decisions, analysis of results of those

sions, and the making of new decisions on the basis

   
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

 

oi the relationship
, iheclinical teachi
the teacher's hehavi
ieedhacknutiliud t
and to prescribe he
Ind hypotheses for
2. Clinical teachi
each learner.
Other research
liking behavior th
(Subaru, 1968) in
center, storing a
trend bin. The to
Iodels or organize
feedback. Through c
feedback to lake dec
leaning. In this a
the sequence and dis
oiiuchaan's 1021: he
touches uses inqui
teaches the child t
Physical environ-en
The conunica t1
u11!!in to Nether

hill careful to a!

hosed (in learning

“halos-response I!

 

e relationship between the goals and what has happened.

linical teaching model is cyclical. The results of

eacher's behavior are not considered end—products but

mck—-utilized to diagnose the problems of the learner

n prescribe new approaches and/or to modify the goals

typotheses for which the original action was taken.

ginical teaching behavior assumes a complex view of

oach learner.

Wher research has also highlighted in—class decision—

Lg behavior through a communications or inquiry model

[man, 1968) in which the child is seen as a control

or, storing a variety of ways of organizing the data

id him. The teacher uses words to retrieve stored

s or organizers. Whatever is retrieved constitutes

ack. ThrOugh continued interaction the teacher uses
ck to make decisions, prescribe and engineer the
‘ng. In this way the teacher continually influences
quence and direction of the child's activity. Much
hman's work has been applied in science in which the
r uses inquiry into the control center while he

s the child to inquire into the raw data of his

a1 environment.

a communication or inquiry model is similar in

ays to Norbert Wiener's cybernetic model in which
careful to explain that when information is pro-
(in learning--by the student) it is not a simple

s—response mechanism, but that information has been

 

 

subjected to the per

n tsaperature of the s
‘ to intonation as it
theory of assiailati
The child processes

The iaplications
cannot be expected t

 

input of intonation
therefore, full of
to analyze it and a
the instructional s
lisner (1954) neatl
the positive resul
“If, hovever, the i
the perioraance is
littern of performs

be called learning i

3- Teaching for val
'Iluig reguire hot]

The circu-stanco
teachers and physio:
Pnctice. Physician
for one patient at 2
he has a problem an
teacher lust serve
“to need help most
°fable to articula

The work of Rat

 

—
I
6

cted to the perceptions, concerns and even the body
rature of the student. Wiener's view of what happens
formation as it is processed corresponds to Piaget's
7 of assimilation, accommodation and equilibrium.

ild processes and interprets his environment.

e implications for teaching are clear. Feedback

 

n
i be expected to be a simple repetition of the

of information. It has been processed and is,

re, full of meaning for the teacher who is able

‘yze it and act on it. Feedback is "fed back" into
Etructional system or the interaction in the classroom.
(1954) neatly describes what happens and delineates
sitive results of cybernetic or clinical processes:
>wever, the information which proceeds backward from

rformance is able to change the general method and

n of performance, we have a process which may well

 

ed learning (p.61)."3

ching for value-seeking, reflective thinking and

 

require both a group setting;and clinical teaching.
circumstances surrounding the clinical process for
s and physicians is widely different in day to day
5. Physicians are able to diagnose and prescribe
patient at a time and that patient usually knows
problem and has asked for the appointment. A
must serve as clinician to 35 at a time and those
help most may not know it or may not be willing
to articulate that need.

vork of Baths and Simon (1966) has highlighted the

 

 

illierence beheen

undeotunlly doing
toned by then vain
it.

Inessig (1970),
loomed on reflecti
business school can

Brnndwein (1969
fronted by differin
order to define one
the process is sini
uith his peers will
enhnnced by each :1
elch end evaluate 0
individual wishes
Inst be followed by
tlhlng to determine
results rellly occu,

The investige to
in this process as ,
the sources of thei
to themelves and 0
(Bauer, 1970). T0
behavioral style.

Obviously such
lhd pencil program

| classroom (Olive!

 

 

brence between knowing about values and value conflicts

actually doing something about them. Taking a stand is

ed by them valuing, prizing something enough to act upon

Fuessig (1970), Hunt and Metcalf (1971) and others have

h
Fed on reflective thinking which is also the key to many

h . .
ness school courses in management and decrsnon-making.

h
frandwein (1969) has called the process of being con-
ted by differing alternatives and differing values in

h to define one's own--value-seeking. In each of these

 

 

hrocess is similar: faced with a problem the child
his peers will generate alternatives, note the values
ced by each alternative, predict the consequences of
and evaluate each according to the value which the
idual wishes to enhance the most. Value-seeking

as followed by va1uing-—rea1 or simulated action-

; to determine whether the predicted and hoped for

:8 really occurred (Bauer, 1966).

he investigator has outlined both the teacher's role
5 process as one of confronting the children with
urces of their differences and with the consequences
mselves and others of the alternatives they choose

, 1970). To be able to do this requires clinical
>ral style.

riously such confrontation cannot happen with a paper-
ncil program, but is only real in the interaction of

room (Oliver and Shaver, 1966). Children, however,

 

ere not skilled in 1

lane of a values-con
help then clarify th
privacy, guide the-
thinking and confron
recognition of their
their on actions be

the issue

 

Each of these
criptive research;
not easily use clin
the values area for
lountains and state
It is ironic that 11
Ire considered by II
This kind of ohjecti
Ire considered objec
the social studies a
Plrticularly those 1
theerience, are no
Vttsial.

Curriculu- supe

education and teach

tor tn-service trai

 

 

 

ot skilled in forcing themselves to reason in the

of a values-conflict. Only a clinical teacher can
them clarify their own values without probing into
:y, guide them through the logic of reflective

.ng and confront them realistically yet fairly with
nition of their own values and the consequences of
own actions based on them.

E22

ch of these three assertions is supported by des-
ve research; and yet teachers in the classroom do
sily use clinical behavioral style and often avoid
iues area for the objectivity of studying about
ins and state capitals and produce of nations.
ironic that dead Americans and live foreigners
nsidered by many authors and teachers to be objective.
.nd of objectivity is in reality remoteness. They
sidered objective or remote enough to be part of
ial studies classroom. Social issues, however,
larly those issues prevalent in the child's own
nce, are avoided as either irrelevant or contro-
riculum supervisors blame preservice teacher

>n and teachers blame the lack of time and money

service training.

 

 

 

In 1965, the

design which would
clinical teaching
tree. The guide
served that functi
the developsent of
-aost school s
in-service ed
-changing tea
requires a p
support to t
~teachers as
uhile doing;
-the teachers'
~they need to
are learning
for the child
of the child:
rationale to
theories of
actual class
diagnosis of
prescriptio

can best be

nautical inte

 

n 1965, the investigator developed a curriculum
n which would give teachers a day by day guide to
cal teaching in social science, including the values
The guide replaced the usual Teacher's Manual but
d that function as well. The assumptions underlying
.evelopment of this curriculum design were as follows:
‘most school systems cannot afford major, continuing
in—service education;
-changing teacher behavior from didactic to clinical
requires a practical day by day on-the-job means of
support to the teacher whose behavior is being changed;
iteachers as all learners, also learn by doing and
while doing;
the teachers' time is severely limited.
they need to see the immediate relevance of what they
are learning to the success of the daily lesson plan
for the children. Their concern for success in front
f the children is real and must be respected. The
ationale for the clinical curriculum design and the
heories of learning are best interrelated with the
ctual classroom program and practice for most teachers.
iiagnosis of children's behavior and alternative
>rescriptions for tuning the curriculum to the child
:an best be taught while teaching is in progress (cf.

wdical internship or residency).

 

 

 

A design was

in number of Be
These were done b
could not influen
responses the fol
aere built into t

oi corresponding

 

 

10

curriculum design

 

h design was developed through formative evaluation
number of school districts throughout the nation.

e were done by the publisher so that the designer

d not influence the responses. Because of these

onses the following twelve dimensions or criteria
built into the design, each with the expectation

orresponding manifestations in teacher behavior.

 

 

 

H0060 £8fi3 ECHOEQKE

.IHGQH HdUCOQ US!
.UGOOGOO H0 GOdaflNfiHOEQE how MCfiHQQH
QGSH HOSHCN UHdfiO one 3G6 EJHJOARRSO
088 HO ”£0005“ 0:8 mflfiuflddfi>0 RON
UCSHOS UOHHOHOHQ G I! “@503 HO k80fihfi>
-H
6:9

C Gd H0fi>fl£0£ BHQPO Q.G®hUHfiSU 0m:
H Hans? Lao-#0590.

unsavfinv and! “0.“ fl Fund:
.1. ldtqhvhfi> IQQNMVE!

eHOfilarfiflqnvMu waifinoaoefl :fi
lel‘fi. n Until! .11 5‘0 saris

.ufifis £059 HON UGQ QOQQOH #060 RON
AUO>HQQQO @D 09 WOOQQflHOQKO fiOfiflflS
IHG>QV QCOfifl USN-990 HQHOfistQQQ 5.9.3.3
UOSUHNE MQflMQQWIGDHfl> 33¢ NfifiMQQQ
tHQQOQOO Qfl Q0>fi900530 HNH°H>NQQQ

loansfisonufi mu..N0n~Unu@.H. ulna nus. QJWQH

awh‘a‘flvu Afl'HU

H Nevin: +410 no.0..fi

 

 

 

 

osms ..qu .soa>oaa>oe modem panacea: .mossa> ens mnemocoo ummoaoaom Haaoom mass

.oososdom one ma
moaufi>fiuoa massamoa no macapmosu
Osmaoomm ow mannedwoa m.ceanaaso

0p wsfipaooom zmopaupm maasoaou
as mowqmso sow mnofipapsossooom

 

.mo>Hpoonno esp passe»
vow esp ad
omouwmfin on» ow mnfipaoooa mono: .
mmmopahum mcfinoaop axon ms: one» so uooamm v

.v

.mo>Hpoonno onv .oonowuomxo mo Ho>oH

«on as non Hans Hasufi>wnnfi m.vHHso may we commoH scan «0 wsoow

ospowwflmwn one uses” momonwahn uses mosaa> use Haspnoonoo one ow copaaep
omWownoHWomxo cannonmasn une>oaoa mm: .m moonowuodxo usumonwawn sheposcoapnn .m

.msoaw .vmoosoo « Ho moaasaxo can some

omens o p omsaoon nouooaom one some who was»

1 peasoauhmm esp “Hanwmuwwmwammoaamme 6mm muonsfiEou Hasnfivnoo .pmooaoo an

1 mo pnosnowwwwww moosaoumHsWfim .Apflnsas> nomanawuo was snowsoo esp use memoso

spwaflnmme 5w .Ampmn use mnodpaNHHaaosom one? mpmoonoo can an; sfisaexo
.mmmwonowvcmwaahopas Hanosposupmnfi sowso .N 0» soaaomoa uneven mo assassm .a

a Roman sass woamsaxo

.mpmop HfiquQnWchnaaosos you weapmop .an5 some new use nommoa sous new

psopnoo we passe on» use asasoflaaso Ano>aomno on 0p moononuomxo soaps:

asap aosw mmooosm esp mnfipasfla>o mom sHa>ov mucupasaa>o Haaos>asen spas

was who one a ma memos Ho mpoaae> cocoons wnHMoomnosHa> one mnaxoom
cospoanmomoawasmn pao>o m.:osesaso ems .H sonoonoo as mo>asoonno Husoa>aaom .H

a .

“HHHB Renown». can.

 

lac uh firefly-V‘FQL. Cu. "va'+¢sl+nl
.IH0>0H .OOQOQQOR

O>fi¢duboo udflhowudv a! Io>dvlakovfls HOOHHOO Odo and? Hwnvdh monuonnoh
find IOIEOQIOH Odndvflsfi BGI>OH0h HO udd>0u0h hfldfl HdOdHO 09 UGdeDOfi

flOdHIfiOflGM OHOEOHQ 09 IflOdvIOSU H0 on: .0 0h! AOdn? QOfiMOvINHM UGfiflOfiHUOdU .@
. W0>fi900fifio

0:”. our GOHH'fioefl and” 3°51.qu
'
“Val ”afiflvn‘paofivfl: a.“ ”OHUHwflnv
u'-|°flnul5hl OHH'Oqu‘HnV 0:"! 0s”- Onion: n'nVIoAnuNIJAl Ola”..°l.u.l.flu
uHAVH |I°d9'-5flw U-~UaI-ul-h-Q° NO -I: :0 LuQN “'Ihlnfllou 'Lnl. studs-.3? Iafllflvnfia|'-J’ -‘D

 

 

 

 

 

12

.mo>Apoonno

emu wswsocoa aw onoHu mflmsnfi>anafi nus»
o>fipoommo ohos ma mesonm :H aofiuoenopnfl
scans as omonp_mxmaw macaw mu pooHom
use masonw mo genomes use moNfim omnmso

.>Ho>spoommo mo>apoonno nausea

nounafiso mmon» Honcmso mass as momnommoa
opoamsooafl use Haflpsommmp .owpospasm
.oHHpmos Ho momsao omosmafin 0o House as
moonowaomxo wnwnuaoa so mnOwwmosd omsaso

.mHo>oH

o>apfinwoo psohommfin we mo>suanhopaa
use noncommon oHanHss ana>oHoh Ho
sowpmnonom ouOEOHQ o» msofipmosu Ho om:

.waafixm m.noun~«:o

nu moonoaommflp msamfiafip: HO\Unm
mo>wpesuouam waspmaonom .msowpmooaon

.w mmflaanm hem cosmopanpm madmsOHU

.pxop m.noanHHso

who as «asp esp Bony nonconoo

mo soapssa0m on» passes mHHflxm

o>HpHnmoo Ho oonosuom a wsHBoHHOH
.momcommou Hefipnommo can canammom Co

.> nofipeaon as meamouaapm mcflnOapmosG

.omsommoa

poohuoo one easy Rosana momnommoa

usa>oHoA mans pHOfiHo Op nonmfimon

.m one moans mofimowahpm msfinOHuwoso

a DD} .1) \JDRJ!’

 

 

£0
k0d>lnon cud uudfinlulhovns OH unedkkan
val Iovsufiuvu filafld>dfifld no usnDflMuaU
EON idOfiIISOOdU I05HI> flu! OOSUHGSOOO
UGABIHQIOHOR .iflOdfllsvdl EOHDORQ DID

. AUQflu—‘Elflnvfi IdUOU

«was. U§d>H°I0HIEIHD°HQ NOV Hlflu—fldflfl
a.“ “HdfidINa No 0-0“k5n 0‘9

.OH

 

«£5. fa! :Fofilfu-‘Vd.’sale ‘(dl
OH whodkhsn can wndvadvuhwvafl

H0 Gounov .movspfivua m.fl0HVHdfl0

N0 udIOfimddv HON huddcdndownn
uflOdHCSvdm EOHQORQ NO flOHPdPflOQOHQ

. AIQflMOH HRH-W OWGOQUOH |

.OH

 

 

13

.mme Bo: >9 Son»
0 wnsumop mo means
no o>apanuopae om:

mn«OH0mnHoh Ho mpmoono
ma pnounoo mo woamse

.mo>apoonno

o>spoomma one o>Hanwoo .Hmspeoonoo

one scene 0» amuse :H mo>ausnaoaflm

seem mo nodaooaom on» new moon who

90 oonoufi>o weapon .moonofiaomxosnoapom
haaeaoonmo .moosoaaoexo o>wwmnhopam on:

.omnaso

hoH>mnon one meannmpmhonns ow mandnhan
one mopspfipua Hasna>fivnw Ho mfimonmmfiu
How mso«mmsomfin mosas> pad mosuannoop
unahmHQIoHOA .maoflpaspfim soH90hn om:

.AwnfixmssnoHMaoo
one wna>aomohssoqnoun so, nzuaueuw

.nOspeosHmma mom mnofipmowwsm

one mcoflpmosd so possessooos
.moonouuom massa0mspmoonoo me use
.NH one as moamsexe pnepsoo so: no em:
.usns some mo mo>apoohno on»

0» noasom unannonmoa use mnssuaofi

mo memos econommsn new moonoaaemxe
mmflnnaoa o>suanaopas spas moansoo
mo>apoonno poamaoodm on» paaBoa
>am>fipoommo massaos was moamopsapm
seasoHuaso esp seasons opasae>m

on new: emu mo madam commma

.HH on» nfiswfia neapaunomoam Hascfiuqoo

.eonoflaomxo nonopnoo
snasso ow mammocoo mo sofipsoflamma
one as mHaaHsoapaam .owsaso aofl>ason
0p maeaaaan use wnfinsapmuovn:
womwmmmmu wmoesuappa m.:oaeaaso
. on «an no s so
0H mnoflpaspwm seasons HM nwmauwmwmwmm

.NH

.HH

.oH

 

 

twists
Given that clin

   
     
  
 

teachers and that g
children; and given
have not been able
to that the teacher
utility to transie
setting; and given
inetructioaal late
to seek answers to
1. her clinical a
2- Are there done

vhich bear on a
3. then teachers it

Edition do char
4- Can these chans

they do or do u

of the input, 1

design?

In addition to
Iaethodological 01
detail in Chapters
5- Gan clinical bl

level simulati‘

 

—
t

14

sstions
ren that clinical behavioral style is desirable in
rs and that group value—seeking is desirable for
an; and given that preservice and in—service training
st been able to guarantee daily support to the teacher
: the teacher must often rely solely on his own
r to transfer these behaviors to the daily classroom
;; and given that there is need for self—correcting
:tional materials for teachers, research was needed
:answers for these questions:
rclinical are teachers' perceptions?
there demographic factors identified in the study
ch bear on a teacher's degree of clinical perception?
n teachers use the curriculum design of the Teacher's

tion do changes in perception occur?

 

these changes be classified to determine whether
y do or do not relate to the criteria and objectives
the input, 1.9. the concept of the clinical curriculum
ign?
addition to these substantive questions there was
iological one which was raised and developed in more
in Chapters 11 and III:

clinical behavioral perceptions be measured by low

:1 simulation?

 

 

   
  
  
   
  
  
 

The twelve cri
broken dovn furthe
hearse there were
levels of progress
this study, the or
acquire such info
and the degree to
perceptions.
0v_er_v_ie_a

The second cha
vhich contributed
underlying the in
curriculun design.
to the basic idea
designed to help 1
behaviors as well
behavioral objecti
concerns of teache
questions on chili
Present study in 1
Of interest of th‘
the investigation

hon a method
than to systemt
noting their sini

established as 01‘

 

l5

l6 twelve criteria for clinical teacher behavior were

1 down further into expected changes during the study.
re there were no precedents for establishing predicted
n of progress for each of the short time periods within
study, the criteria were used as ways to quantify and
re such information on types of teachers' perceptions
no degree to which they can be classified as clinical
stions.

g!

e second chapter reviews the results of research
contributed to both the assumptions and the structure
ying the investigator's clinical social science

ulum design. These research findings contributed
basic idea that curriculum needs to be specifically

ed to help teachers to develop clinical teaching

 

are as well as to enhance the development of particular
oral objectives in children. Other research on

is of teachers and the influence of analytical

>ns on children's thinking are contrasted with the

t study in an effort to delineate the specific field
srest of the study and to make clear the focus of
restigation.

»m a methodological point of View consideration is

o systematic observation of teaching strategies,

their similarities and differences to those strategies

shed as criteria for clinical behavioral style.

—

Ieunrennt of tea
questionnaires and
the need to measur-
relation to specif
is thought necessa
end discussions of
end providing supp
The third chap
in designing inst
serve as valid nea
coaparing then to
of arranging for
scoring systen a
investigation corn
The pretest a
in school aystews
traphic data Iade
research at three
list of the twelve
The focus of i

in two nodes:

 

1- How clinical ‘
points in tin
initial inpac
a built-in cl
quantified in

clinical beha

 

 

16

urement of teachers' attitudes and uses of both
Ltionnaires and simulations are considered in light of
need to measure these attitudes as perceptions in
Ition to specific clinical criteria. Such measurement
:hought necessary for accurate assessment of the size
dimensions of the task of training clinical teachers
providing supportive clinical curriculum designs.

The third chapter outlines the steps that were taken
esigning instruments which, although disguised, would
a as valid means of assessing teachers' perceptions and
aring them to the clinical teaching model. The stages
rranging for the sample and developing a quantitive

Lng system are presented as a case study of a field
:tigation conducted in nine American school systems.
fhe pretest and split—half posttest design carried out
:hool systems which could provide a variety of demo-
ic data made it possible to effect descriptive

rch at three points in time against a grid or check-
of the twelve clinical criteria.

be focus of the investigation is therefore descriptive
p modes:

bw clinical were teacher's perceptions at these three
hints in time, just before and during the period of
itial impact of a new social science curriculum with
built-in clinical design? These are described and
antified in the framework of the twelve criteria for

inical behavioral style in Chapter IV of this report.

—

2. lhat other stat
priorities can
These additiona
of the twelve c
treated in Chap

The final chapt
these descriptive

research, curricul

training and asses

 

What other statements about teachers' perceptions and
priorities can we make as a result of this investigation?
These additional data and inferences beyond the frame

of the twelve clinical criteria drawn from them are

treated in Chapter V.

The final chapter summarizes the findings in both of
se descriptive modes and suggests directions for continued
earch, curriculum design, pre-service and in-service

ining and assessment, and personnel policy.

Chapter II rev
strategies, uses 0
and group dynalics
oi the curriculum ,
clinical sequence
gave inpetus to t
on research on tea
on children. Thea
needed research in
clinical behaviora
about teachers is
the choice of a d
development of sin
Ptrception.

Prior finding

lost of the re
bten empirical and
teaching or or to:

Investigators
Wing of teacher
”1080, however, h:

llthine such items

1088011" .

 

Chapter II
RELEVANT RESEARCH

Chapter 11 reviews relevant research on teaching
.tegies, uses of curriculum design, child development
group dynamics which contributed strands to the fabric
he curriculum design. The absence of focus on a total
ical sequence by the studies reviewed in Chapter II
impetus to the present study. This chapter also focuses
esearch on teacher attitudes and the effect of teaching
nildren. These studies, too, delineate the area of
ad research in teachers' perceptions relevant to
.cal behavioral teaching style. Methodology for studying
L teachers is considered, particularly as rationale for
hoice of a disguised open-ended questionnaire and the
opment of simulations for assessment of teachers'
ption.

findings

ost of the research on clinical behavioral style has
empirical and descriptive, as has the work on the

ing of or for values.

nvestigators have used systematic observation and
L of teacher behavior in a number of studies. None of
however, has focused on the detailed behaviors

such items as "uses student reSponses to carry on the

18

 

 

 

 

Clinical teaching

periorlance, but a
dish the lesson
the student respo
standing and to hi
observation do no
diagnoses, prescr
Eb;

Perhaps the
veil as the frequ
by Tilda Tabs and
stuff after her
questions and stu
coded. However,
and eiaulated soci
the teacher in the
studies. The soci
list teacher quest
WEE levels i
labeling, asking i
curriculum design
to use clinical be
the questions, re:
fashion. The seQI
in anticipating a!

values area . Her

lieu of cognitive

 

 

inical teaching behaviors require not only teacher
rformance, but also the perception of the direction in
ich the lesson was designed to move and the diagnosis of
9 student response as clues to barriers to his under-
anding and to his performance. Many statements for
servation do not require perception of hypotheses,
agnoses, prescriptions and continual evaluation.

135

 

Perhaps the most detailed recording of the quality as
11 as the frequency of teaching behaviors was initiated
Hilda Taba and carried on by Norman Wallen and the Taba
nff after her death. The cognitive levels of both teacher
nstions and student responses were carefully analyzed and
led. However, Taba was not focusing on values discussions
[simulated social problem-solving so that the role of

teacher in these experiences does not figure in these
dies. The social studies curriculum she directed did
t teacher questions but usually on a single track of
nitive levels (observing, gathering data, classifying,
sling, making inferences, predicting, etc.). Her daily
riculum design did not deal with the need for the teacher
use clinical behaviors with children who miSunderstood
questions, refused to answer or answered in a hostile
lion. The sequence for teachers proceeded without aid
nticipating and dealing with complex responses in the
es area. Her concern was more single-mindedly in the

of cognitive skills.

 

    
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
    

 

hba'a work di
relevant to this s
-that lost tea
-that children
through care:
-that response:
different lev

iron differen

 

teacher at an
response; and
-that curricul
strategies re

curriculul i

The need for a

as the setting to!
of the child is a
trail of his work 11
either by Piaget h
“Don his theories.
Skills of consenst

Inch work has
(Dirticulerly in a
liking through cor
been carried forvi

thaitel in role-

influenced curric

 

 

Taba's work did, however, focus on four major points
vant to this study:

-that most teachers will be teaching in group settings;
-that children in a group can be treated as individuals
through careful questioning strategies;

-that responses to the same question will come at
different levels of depth, breadth and abstraction
from different children and can be accepted by the
teacher at each cognitive level of questioning and
response; and

-that curriculum design should include questioning
strategies relating to reaching the goals of the
curriculum in a group setting.

gg_peer group confrontation: Piaget

he need for action—centered, peer group confrontation

6 setting for the intellectual and moral development

e child is a factor in the theory of Jean Piaget. This

of his work has not had the benefit of follow-up studies

r by Piaget himself or those whose research is built

sis theories.

5 of consensus

 

nch work has been done in social psychology on the need
.cularly in a multi-ethnic democracy) for group decision-
' through consensus. This work, begun by Lewin, has
arried forward by Lippitt and others. The work of

l in role-playing for social problem-solving has

nced curriculum design, although her approach to the

 

    
  

 

role of the teache

Melt the (1081!“ o

    
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 

variable and the c
the teacher the do

One study of t
children's ability
iicant results (11
acre deliberately
and responses we
each child to 8118
use of clinical b
thus no one used
standing or other
could be used or I

Concerns of teacht

 

One study (Fill
and both a group 3
teachers are 108t
student-teachins ‘

Is the teachers bi

 

 

1e of the teacher does not precisely follow the clinical

del.

rriculum design and behavioral change

 

The investigator has been unable to locate research in
ich the design of the curriculum was the independent
riable and the classroom behavior and perceptions of
a teacher the dependent variables.

One study of the influence of analytical questions on
leren's ability to think critically reported no signi-
:ant results (Hunkins, 1970). In this case teachers
m deliberately kept from participation; the questions
[responses were handled in a workbook, thereby requiring
m child to answer in writing. This method prevented the
lof clinical behaviors, because no teacher was available,

5 no one used the responses for diagnosis of misunder-

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

nding or other need for help. No follow-up strategies

Id be used or alternate experiences planned.

 

erns of teachers: measuring them and affecting them
One study (Fuller, 1969) reports a survey of research
both a group and a written test to determine what
hers are most concerned about as they begin their
eat-teaching and to describe how those concerns change

he teachers become increasingly experienced.

 

 

 

h dichotoly wa

concern with pupil
teachers not one s
classified as:

ire pupils lea

how does what

Experienced s
"to focus" on pup
vith personal gai
concerns obse
stand pupils' can
to assess their
to pupils' diffic
tom of pupil gs
as an inplication
Can changes toward
treat-ant?"4 Tree
iervice courses at
treataent was the
tu‘mfl

The research 1
teachers for "cone
students and of te
areas in which and;

rtbolted in Chant!

Perceptions teach

 

 

fl

22

A dichotomy was reported between concern with self and
:ern with pupils. In the written test of 29 student-
:hers not one expressed a single concern that could be
:sified as:
Are pupils learning?
How does what I do affect their gain?
Experienced superior teachers were reported as seeming
focus" on pupil gain and self-evaluation as contrasted
personal gain and evaluations by others. "The specific
srns ... observed are concerns about ability to under-
1 pupils' capacities, to specify objectives for them,
ssess their gain, to partial out one's own contribution
1pils' difficulties and gain and to evaluate oneself in
s of pupil gain." The Fuller study raises the question

a implication for research, "Are concerns manipulable?

  
  
  
  
   
  
  
  
  
  

hanges toward concern with pupils be encouraged by
ment?"4 Treatment in Fuller's case referred to pre-

ce courses at the university level; in this investigation
ment was the use of a clinical curriculum design.

r
6 research reported in this dissertation did not ask
rs for "concerns" but did ask for descriptions of the
ts and of teaching strategies and, in several contexts,
in which adjustments needed to be made. The results

ed in Chapter IV and V indicate what kinds of

tions teachers displayed under a seemingly more open

 

 

  
   
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 

questioning etrate
ethical perceptio
teachers was also
letbodolm
Research diffs
lysteltic ohserva
iiiierent iron at
recognize the dif
practice. Sinula
increasing use in
objective evaluat
t teaatic ohserv
Recent reeea
has utilized sys
video-tape and ran
tens of trained r
of twenty-six claa
Boyer, 1967) show:

are part of the c3

entire cycle in r1
Objectives of the

discussed below.
The Honigaaan 1
Classroom Interac

tour categories 0

Student behaviors

 

 

stioning strategy which assumed the importance of

nical perceptions. Age and years of experience of

:hers was also explored.

nodology

Research differs in methodology depending on the focus.

ematic observation reflects recognition of behaviors as

erent from attitudes. Questionnaires and interviews

gnize the difference between a sense of purpose and a

tice. Simulation, both video-taped and live, has had

easing use in focused observation, often without

ctive evaluation, however.

gmatic observation

decent research aimed at describing teaching strategies

utilized systematic observation through audio-tape,

>-tape and randomized direct observation by two or more
of trained or randomly selected observers. The survey
enty-six classroom observation instruments (Simon and

5 1967) shows several that identify behaviors which

art of the clinical cycle, but none that include the

e c cle in relation to the content and process

tives of the curriculum. Those that seem closest are

ssed below.

he Honigman System 5 (Multidimensional Analysis of

room Interaction) which is based on the Flanders system:

categories of teacher behavior and four of the five

t behaviors are relevant to the clinical model:

 

 

 

 

Teacher behaviors:
Uses etudents'
Uses students'
Solicits (resp
Seeks expansio

Student behaviors:
Gives an "orig
Digresses; giv'
Expresses feel
lisbehaves; sh:
This last its:

this code to the c

bahvioral style in

Iisbehivior, in ad

Stntegy used is I
The Tab: syste

oiconunicetion 1;

serves a specific

it deals Iith what

”Indication and

These thought lave

thinking skills at

"is of diagnosini

Insuring clinical

 

 

cher behaviors:

Uses students' ideas

Uses students' emotional contributions
Solicits (response optional)

Seeks expansion or elaboration of students' contributions

but behaviors:

Gives an "original" contribution
Digresses; gives a contextually irrelevant contribution
Expresses feeling (emotions)

Misbehaves; shows hostility

This last item indicates the difficulty in applying

code to the clinical model. To teachers with clinical
rioral style hostility in the student is not simply
ahavior, in addition, it is a clue that either the

:egy used is wrong or the original goals need adjustment.
fie Taba system6 measures ”thought units"--whatever length
mmunication that expresses a fairly complete idea and

S a specific function. This system is useful in that

als with what the teacher and pupils do with each other's
nication and also with the thought level of the students.
thought levels are related to the major Taba concern-
ing skills and do not allow for the greater variety of

3f diagnosing a reSponse which would be necessary for

ring clinical teaching-

 

 

 

me oscun 4V 1
does focus on in___te
chlnze is defined
scathing to the 1
systel codes the th
something a pupil
supports, approves
pupil's col-ant.

It would be p0
Is categories but
as seen in Chapter

Such systelati
lost often for tra
service. Only the
0! teacher behavic
curriculum. One c
Iorh to the study
the goals of her I
the clinical and c
continually neediu
netleet the stat:
fore, in its final
”hunters, in st:
|"fixed" factor.

be on logical gro

ticul inference (

 

 

 

The OSCAR 4V system of Medley,

Impelliteri and Smith7

oes focus on interchanges as well as statements. An Inter—
_____________

hange is defined as "an episode in which a pupil says

amething to the teacher and the teacher reacts". This

ystem codes whether the teacher first responds directly to
Jmething a pupil has said and then whether the teacher
upports, approves, criticizes or neutrally rejects the
mil's comment.

It would be possible to develop a checklist with these
categories but with specific clinical observation items
seen in Chapter III.

Such systematic observation checklists have been used
it often for training of teachers, pre-service and in—
rvice. Only the Taba program has included measurement
teacher behavior as part of the evaluation of the
rriculum. One of the difficulties in applying Taba's
k to the study described in this dissertation is that

goals of her work were cognitive and linear, whereas

 

Clinical and cybernetic models are cyclical and
tinually needing to be revised. The Taba evaluation did
meet the statistical requirement of randomness. There-

9. in its final report is the statement:

arefore, in statistical tests teachers were considered
fixed" factor. Generalizations to other teachers must
)n logical grounds rather than on the basis of statis-

8
tl inference (p.207)."

 

 

The liner-lien
responsiveness to
helpful in its syr
using two coders 1
amount is the 1
codings of both cc
Questionnaire

The use of que
of subjects is wid
correlation betvee
Program and pract
behavior need both
Perceptions and a1
diegnoses and prov

Loree, (1971)
Ihich atteapts to
particular propert
the difference bet
their actual efiec
Ililure or a scale
'5 "not really sur
bShaviorel coupons

thl‘ough reinforced

 

 

26

The Miller-Hughes System9 deals with teacher

espousiveness to the pupils' train of thought and may be

elpful in its system of observer reliability procedures,

sing two coders and audiotapescript. The formula for

greement is the proportion of agreement over total
edings of both coders.

restionnaire
___________

The use of questionnaires to determine the

perceptions

There is no assumption of a

T

,subjects is widespread.

rrelation between perception and actual classroom practice;
ograms and practices which involve changing teacher

havior need both measures of practice and analyses of
Pceptions and attitudes in order to make accurate

Ignoses and provide effective presctiptions.

Loree, (1971) has recently reported a survey of research

.ch attempts to assess teachers' attitudes or "measure a

Ticular property of an attitude". He, too, emphasizes

difference between measuring what teachers report and

ir actual effectiveness. He attributes much of the

lure of a scale such as MTAI to predict teacher behavior

"not really surprising", because ”one would expect the
Ivioral component of an attitude to be strengthened

>Ugh reinforcement".

 

 

 

 

Lem describe
developing in tea
notes, however, th
to finding ways of
orientation to the
attitudinal object
instructional proc
both the belief an
Mile

To date a revi
siaulation has dis
teacher training a
criterion levels c
not spelled out wi
reporting then. 'i
find one such silo
ior testing teache
any other Iodel .
studies which have
to assess its eff:
exDeriaentul sinu]
ls experinent and

in the Cruicku
although teaching

by questionnaire I

Euherrrising teach

 

27

Loree described the Michigan State University model for
veloping in teachers a clinical behavioral style. He
tes, however, that ”no research attention has been devoted
finding ways of inducing in teachers a scientific
Lentation to their work....Yet it may be that for certain
:itudinal objectives in teacher education programs,
:tructional procedures should be directed toward shaping
h the belief and the behavioral components of an attitude."10
ulation

To date a review of the literature in educational
ulation has disclosed numerous uses of simulation for
cher training which imply, of course, that there are
terion levels of teacher performance, although they are
spelled out with a quantitative or profile system of
)rting them. The investigator has not been able to

lone such simulation to date that has used simulation

 

testing teacher effectiveness using the clinical or
other model. The exceptions, of course, are those

195 which have used simulation in an experimental way
ssess its effect on teacher behavior; some of the
rimental simulation studies have used simulations both
xperiment and as criterion measure.

[n the Cruickshank and Broadbent study, (1969) however,
Jugh teaching was done by simulation, testing was done
uestionnaire and interview of beginning teachers and

'vising teachers.

 

 

 

Turner and rat

problea—solving sk
reading and arith
Siaulation for
both by the 0.8.8.
In 11 and after a
years, particularl
Shell Oil and othe
up by social psych
deteraine which pe
to aauagerial posi
The aaneger o
prograa, Ir. D. P.
iuterview in lay,
observation beca
-the observers
~it was both e
job and then
hr. 110er else
siauletion of the
inconvenient and <
icoutrived settir
nuager-possibilii
The choice of

Isolate the behav:

and strategies the

 

—
I
28

Turner and Fattu (1960, 1967) report measurement of
blem-solving skills on simulated teaching tasks in
ding and arithmetic.

Simulation for assessment of personnel has been used
h by the 0.8.8. in the selection of spies during World
11 and after and by industry during the past fifteen
rs, particularly the Bell System and more recently IBM,
ll Oil and others. These assessment programs were set
)y social psychologists and industrial psychologists to
ermine which personnel would be low risks if promoted
mnagerial positions.

The manager of the Michigan Bell System's assessment
:ram, Mr. D. F. Hoyle, stated to the investigator in an
urview in May, 1970 that Bell had given up Systematic
rvation because:

-the observers interacted with the situation.

-it was both expensive and clumsy to put a man in a
job and then to evaluate whether he can do it.

fr. Hoyle also stated that setting up a laboratory
Lation of the actual managerial situation was
uvenient and observers could not generalize from such
utrived setting to the real one and to the real
sr-possibilities.

he choice of government and industry has been to
te the behaviors which they feel are part of the skills

trategies they want in their personnel, create limited,

 

 

    
  
  
    
   
   
  
  
  
 

 

iiv_e situations w
for those sane be
group situations.
Clinical teachi

Decision-naki
teaching nodal ha
Institute and by
of the curriculun
variable in the s
developnent of th
by lard, (1967) on
variables.

33!!!!

Several sepa
the subject of re
for cognitive deve
pupil interaction
been done in theor
action of children
these trends, hove
unified theory Oi
Oi clinical teach:
such development .

Prior studies

been based on need

the clinical mode

 

 

29

live situations which are not like the real ones but test
for those same behaviors in more easily controlled small
group situations.

Hinical teaching behaviors

 

Decision-making behaviors associated with the clinical
eaching model have been spelled out by the Learning Systems
nstitute and by the writer at the time of the development
f the curriculum design which became the independent
ariable in the study. The empirical methodology for the
evelopment of the LSI list of behaviors has been explained
y Ward, (1967) and provides a specific set of dependent
ariables.

1121921

Several separate facets of clinical teaching have been
w subject of research, particularly questioning strategies
tr cognitive development, concerns of teachers and teacher-
pil interaction and degree of openness. Much has also
en done in theory and in practice to promote the inter-
tion of children in social problem-resolving. Neither of
ese trends, however, has been combined into research on a
ified theory of teaching nor related to the development
clinical teaching or the effect of curriculum design in
:h development.

Prior studies of teachers' perceptions and behavior have
en based on models of teaching that are more limited than

Iclinical model (e.g. Flanders) or without the dimensions

 

 

 

darned necessary by
olgronpa in value-s
social sciences (e4
The idea of cyst
intonation and atuc‘
oped in any studies
directedness and adj
investigator's work
hunvledge neither do
behavior nor system
the triangular relai
attitudes and cancel
teaching-learning s
Ire identical with
the classroom It
social science clean
that in the focus 0
The purpose of
Identity perception
terching, particular
lent through curric
Win-service train
diiferent points in
The questions
The Leaning Syste

101' classroom teac

 

30

med necessary by the investigator for clinical teaching
groups in value-seeking and problem-resolving in the
ial sciences (e.g. Taba).

The idea of systematic observation of teacher—student

eraction and student-student interaction has been devel-

 

d in many studies but without the dimensions of goal-
ectedness and adjustment of the curriculum on which the
astigator's work has been based. To the investigator's
vledge neither descriptions of clinical teaching

nvior nor systematic classroom observation has dealt with
triangular relationship of 1) diagnoses of children's
.tudes and concepts, 2) development and selection of
hing-learning strategies and 3) curricular goals which
identical with behavioral goals for the children outside
classroom. It is this triangular relationship in the

al science classroom within a clinical teaching model

is the focus of the investigator's work.

Fhe purpose of the investigator's research has been to
hify perceptions relating to the stages of clinical

hing, particularly in social science, provide reinforce-

 

through curriculum design rather than through preservice
-service training and assess those perceptions at three
rent points in time.

he questionnaire used in this study was developed at
earning Systems Institute of Michigan State University

lassroom teachers using a systems analysis approach to

 

 

analyzing children
instructional proc
questionnaire for
tests the teacher‘
role in relation 1
viliingness or a 1
responses are, of
style.

In an effort 1
challenge system
teacher behavior 1
author investigat
oi personnel. It
develop and test
that could be adI:
under the conditie
and anonylity in 1
lev-level case den
developed and use

In Chapter II
for the develop-e
siaulations. Inc
ldainistration at

Chapters IV E
halve criteria :
distribution of n

 

 

31

mlyzing children as input and the teacher as part of the
structional process. This was considered an appropriate
wstionnaire for the purposes of this study because it

sts the teacher's perception of his and the curriculum's

 

la in relation to the students' real problems. The
llingness of a teacher to accept and use the students
sponses are, of course, part of the clinical behavioral
yle.

In an effort to control for the rival hypotheses which
allenge systematic observation as a valid measure of
acher behavior (Hawthorne effect; reactive setting), the
thor investigated the use of simulation for assessment
personnel. It was beyond the scope of the study to
relop and test live simulations or video-taped simulations
pt could be administered as tests by local school systems
[er the conditions established as necessary for objectivity

anonymity in a study of perceptions. For these reasons
-level case descriptions of teachers' decisions were
elaped and used as a possible substitute.

In Chapter III is the description of the methods used

the development of both the questionnaire and the
ulations. Included also is the case history of the
nistration and scoring of the test instruments.
Chapters IV and V describe perceptions according to the
ve criteria for clinical teaching behavior and the

ribution of clinical perceptions into categories.

 

 

Chapter VI pr
teachers' percent
the effectiveness
level simlations

of teachers over :

 

 

 

32

Chapter VI provides summaries and inferences relating
teachers' perceptions to the clinical model and assessing
the effectiveness of both the questionnaire and the low—
level simulations as test instruments for large numbers

of teachers over a widely separated area.

 

 

 

 

Chapter III dea
the study. The 0°”
necessary for effec
videly separated a:
of tine. Sumriefi
development, admiral
continuation and/on
Discussion of the <
idetailed yet obje
set forth in this i
for the study, has:

fellow:

1' That a nationa'

DOSSible. In
eXpenditures e
local samples
remains that c
does not gener
ourriculuui.
Biblisbed curr
Vicinity to cc
That the natui

such that 1an

 

EIIIT_______________________________________________________________________—
I

 

Chapter III

METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN

Chapter III deals with the methodology and design of
study. The conditions are described which were deemed
assary for effective administration of the tests in

31y separated areas of the country within a short span
time. Summaries of procedures and timetables for test
alopment, administration and scoring to make practicable
tinuation and/or replication of the study are included.
:ussion of the criteria to make possible development of
etailed yet objective set of scoring criteria is also
forth in this chapter. Several criteria were established

the study, based on some assumptions. The assumptions

   
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

ow:
That a national representation should be obtained if

possible. In order to maintain control and limit

 

expenditures educational research has often used small
local samples in university communities. The concern
remains that curriculum research done in this manner
does not generalize to the population using such
curriculum. Most schools use nationally distributed,
published curriculum with no one in the immediate
vicinity to control its daily use.

That the nature of on-site evaluation in schools is

uch that individual teachers could not be isolated

33

as part of the
supervision of
This would at
cause contaain
School system
follow-up of t
outside resear
month Study cc

contamination.

3. That most teat

to Participate
Professiona1 1
mm their co:
Oil-gong eXpe;
1“ the buildip
. That the test:
similar condi

t0 Control f0

 

34

as part of the study unless the administration and
supervision of tests were carried out by the researcher.
This would make a random sample possible but might
cause c0ntamination because of experimenter bias.
School systems vary greatly in preparation and
follow-up of the programs they purchase. To have an
outside researcher on hand to monitor even an eight-
month study could produce either Hawthorne effect and/or
contamination.

L That most teachers would sustain the effort necessary
to participate only if they felt it was within their
professional role, and that they would not be isolated
from their colleagues. No one teacher could be in an

on—going experiment without contamination from others

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

in the building who offer their advice and curiosity.

That the tests had to be given in each location under

 

similar conditions within a short span of time in order
to control for rival hypotheses: such as Hawthorne
effect, time, maturation, history, validity, attempts
by teachers to block change or promote it by contrived
answers.
tablishing criteria and selecting the sample
Most curriculum research is formative and, therefore,
distributed piecemeal and often in mimeographed form to
achers who volunteer to pilot it. The investigator was

ncerned that this research be carried out under actual

conditions of the

providing for effi

Because of the she

it was decided:

I. Only school sy
(no pilots) we
teachers my in
Program they 1
The study neec‘

2' The number won
items and hypc
necessary to i
1‘esenrch.

3' The tests Wu;

by the suPeril

by all the ten
w0u1d be part

respons um i t:

The task was

of the “11001

levels in any

same time and

Only “1089 126

Edition “ery

be Part Of th

“SIS WOuld h

 

 

35

conditions of the majority of classrooms, while still

Jroviding for efficient administration of the tests.

Because of the above assumptions about field conditions,

:t was decided:

” Only school systems which had adopted the program
(no pilots) would be invited to participate. Pilot
teachers may have a vested interest in promoting a
program they like or condemning one they do not like.
The study needed openness of attitude.

. The number would be large because the number of test
items and hypotheses were sizeable and because it is
necessary to plan for the natural attrition in field
research.

The tests would be administered as officially sanctioned
by the superintendent and principals and on agreement
by all the teachers in a school, so that the project
would be part of the teacher's regular professional
responsibilities during regular meeting time.

The task was to be a part of the accepted faculty role
of the school. All teachers at the approximate grade
levels in any one school had to participate at the
same time and under the same circumstances.

Only those teachers who agreed to use the Teacher's
Edition every day they taught social science would

be part of the study. It was decided that two sets of

items would be added to the posttests which would

 

 

 

 

provide a) a

Edition was
training the
study. These
[bout teacher
guide and the

presently nos

a-

le atteapt 10
or to control
lhntever cond
parts of the l
introduced. ‘
choice. Text
teacher's par
school and (it
to the pretes
included book
max number,
autuln testin
and nthenati
science until
It is of inte
strike until late
“like vote. Ann
Ihich resulted in
“Staff and non

"3 “Ported by 1

 

 

36

provide a) a self-report on when and how the Teacher's
Edition was used and b) what kinds of in-service
training the teacher had during the period of the
study. These might make possible clearer inferences
about teacher attitudes toward the new form of published
guide and the usefulness, as well as direction, of the
presently most common forms of in—service training.

a. No attempt would be made to provide for ideal conditions

or to control conditions within the school system.

Whatever conditions prevailed were considered real

parts of the environment into which curricula are

introduced. The teacher may or may not have had a

choice. Texts were adopted probably without that

teacher's participation in the decision-making. The

school and district had no in-service training prior

to the pretest. Other conditions which existed

included books arriving late and schools ordering the

wrong number, programs beginning weeks late because of

autumn testing schedules or the introduction of reading

 

and mathematics first (thereby postponing social

science until December or January).

  
  
  
  
   
 

It is of interest to note that one school system was on
trike until late autumn but took the pretest prior to the
trike vote. Another suffered a serious millage setback
ich resulted in a move for less money for curriculum
d staff and more for teachers' salaries. Teachers' morale

5 reported by the local administrator as at an all-time low.

ll J

 

 

 

 

 

6. lbs task was

in teachers 1
Edition in is
These were th
of the input
behavioral at
The school sy
who had aade adop
Mines, Earco
school systems Ia
during its first ,
has been videly d
contaminated pret
school system, p
chore adoption is
selected from bot
variety or geogra
suburban, rural a
developed as a re
Systems; busing 1
1Insane to cla
graphical methods
ltrue random sal
“ministration a!
the use or whole
districts, The 1

by the large sizc

 

 

l

6. The task was to be limited to measuring perception
in teachers who had no treatment except the Teacher's
Edition in levels 3, 4, 5 or 6 of the curriculum.
These were the Teacher's Editions which contained all
of the input based on the twelve criteria for clinical
behavioral style.
The school systems were selected from a list of those

who had made adoptions of The Social Sciences: Concepts

 

1nd Values, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1970. Not all
xchool systems make their decisions to adopt a new text
luring its first year, yet a study begun after a program
as been widely distributed could never include an un—
ontaminated pretest. This limited the number of available
chool systems, particularly in the south and far west
here adoption is regulated by state calls. Fifteen were
elected from both public and parochial schools in a
riety of geographical locations, representing urban,
uburban, rural and mixed locations. This last category
eveloped as a result of discussion with the school
VStems; busing for racial integration has also made it
npossible to classify some schools by the usual geo-
mphical methods for socio-economic status. This was not
true random sample but the mechanics of decision—making,
lministration and prevention from contamination required
e use of whole schools within widely distributed school
stricts. The problems of sampling were mostly overcome

the large size of the sample.

 

 

 

 

 

line also lads poa

ntionvide elenen
socio-econoaic set
and years of one

Establishing a
school systeas ha
In order to loan
Superintendent of
northvhile use of
participation nus
and/or a central 5
Research.

A personal lei
curriculun projeci
research and devel
letter ecknovledgt
curriculum, descr:
the Teacher's Edi
Staff to particip
0!! the usefulness
[Egg to your to
conditions for oil
teacher, the echo
findings of the 1

The purpose 1
‘Pprovsl of the a

°fflcia11y appoi:

 

 

38

Size also made possible a sample generalizable to the

 

nationwide elementary teacher population in regions,
socio-economic settings, age, sex, grade level taught
and years of experience.

Establishing and maintaining communication with the
school systems had to be carefully managed and timed.
In order to insure the support of a school system, the
Superintendent of Schools must consider participation a

worthwhile use of teacher time. In some districts

 

participation must be agreed upon by the Board of Education
Ind/or a central staff member designated as Director of
tesearch.

A personal letter was sent from the director of the
:urriculum project, who was also a senior executive of
wsearch and development for the publishing company. The
.etter acknowledged the school district's adoption of the
:urriculum, described the formative evaluation on which
:he Teacher's Edition was built and requested ”you and your

\
‘taff to participate in a study to gather further information

   
  

n the usefulness of the Teacher's Edition of Concepts and

alues to your teachers". The letter described the 4
onditions for participation and promised anonymity to the

eacher, the school and the district and a report on the

indings of the whole study to all who participated.

 

The purpose of the letter was to acquire top level
Pproval of the study and to have the superintendent

fficially appoint someone to head the project for the

 

 

 

 

lichigan State Un

no included whic
negotiate between
indicated who in
for the project.
01 the fifte
responded. dine
replied tavorabl
giving a reason.
failed to respon
to the person s
to set up a sche
several long dis
secure this info:
During July I
nulbered and pacl
nil distributior
Shipped right at
Those school
school by school
lost, tine was 1
10o: distance te
inahich all pac

inter who was a

 

 

 

school system. The letter also indicated that all further

communication would come from the researcher through
Michigan State University. A form (Appendix B) for reply
was included which was in the form of a contract to
negotiate between the district and the university and
indicated who in the district was to be held responsible
for the project.

0f the fifteen districts invited to participate, ten

responded. Nine (including all the large districts)
replied favorably. One small district refused without
giving a reason. Five small rural and suburban districts
failed to respond. A follow-up letter from the investigator
to the person Specified by the school system was designed

to set up a schedule and mailing list; in every case

everal long distance telephone calls were necessary to
ecure this information.

During July and August the test packets were produced,
umbered and packed. Because of the difficulty of summer
ail distribution in school systems, the packets were
hipped right after the Labor Day holiday.

Those school systems to which packets were sent
chool by school turned out to be a problem. Packets were
ost, time was lost and need for continual follow-up by
ong distance telephone was much greater than with those
n which all packets were sent to a central staff adminis-

rator who was responsible for distribution, administration

 

 

 

 

and collection 1

iolloaed in all

A letter exp
procedures went
A letter explain
teacher's packet

hot one sch
role to nest any
deldline was set
hard to locate a
person). Bach t
Studies Supervis
vaa given the re
accuracy of the
vithin which he
minded by tele
deadline. It we
of the study to
once more to re!
at once.

It is inpori
sisters who inc:
that, at best, :
conunications :

Iachinery neces:

Ibsolute accura

Selves.

 

 

 

 

nd collection in his own district. This procedure was

ollowed in all districts for both posttests.

A letter explaining rationale, anonymity and specific
>rocedures went to each designated school administrator.
. letter explaining rationale and anonymity went in each
;eacher's packet.

Not one school system or school, large or small, was
ble to meet any of its own promised deadlines. Each
eadline was set personally by telephone (supervisors are
ard to locate and therefore, had to be called person-to-
erson). Each time the project leader, usually a Social
tudies Supervisor or Director of Elementary Education,
as given the reasons for limiting the time period for
:curacy of the research and given three to four weeks

lthin which he could set his own deadline. He was then

   
  
  
  
 
 
   
 
  

minded by telephone and by mail at least once before the
adline. It was necessary in every case for each phase
the study to call the local project leader at least

co more to request that the test packets be returned
once.

It is important for educational researchers and school
stems who increasingly want evidence of research to note
t, at best, school systems do not have the internal
unications systems and long-range implementation
hinery necessary for the business-like procedures and
olute accuracy necessary to carry out the testing them-

ves .

 

 

more are large a

Research Directo:
rhich this was ac
are ineffective .
W

it the tile
validating instr

statelents of or

 

It way be be
following had be
1. Itelizing th

which were

 

behaviors .

no

. latching to
teaching beh
style. Thea
criterion 1e
study of the
field of res
purposes of
in time was
behaviors 1;!
Clinical cr:

tiles. The fin

the use of ding:
thereby providi

   

 

 

here are large school systems that have their own

esearch Director, but in the one case in this study in
hich this was so, distribution and follow-up for returns
vas ineffective.
instrumentation
At the time the preliminary pilot locations for
alidating instrumentation were being arranged,the expanded
tatements of criteria were developed and refined.
It may be helpful to recall from Chapter I that the
ollowing had been accomplished:
Itemizing the specific inputs of the Teacher's Edition
which were designed to produce specific teaching
behaviors.
Matching to each input the predicted manifestations in
teaching behavior as criteria for clinical behavioral
style. These were stated in behavioral terms without
criterion levels of performance. In a pretest-posttest
study of the first few months of treatment in a new
field of research all that could be predicted for
purposes of description and assessment in three points
in time was that each teacher would display these
behaviors to increasing degrees of frequency or quality.
Clinical criteria were developed and revised several
es. The first revision refined the items by separating
use of diagnostic experiences from diagnostic questioning,

reby providing a more detailed description of what the

 

 

 

 

author want by

In the secon
for diagnostic
use of problem-s
thinking.

Three of the
behaviors were
used for the u
when The
increasing conce
says but without
expressed later
further in Chapt
Using role-playi
shy? The predic
criteria in this
teachers should
of recognition 0
diagnosis, and p
children reach s

The actual 1
sequences of ope
Siaulteneously .
of 1970:

1. Developing !

changes whic

 

 

 

author meant by diagnostic teaching behavior.

In the second revision the use of problem-situations
for diagnostic teaching purposes was separated from the
use of problem—situations for student practice in reflective
thinking.

Three of the statements describing criteria for teaching
behaviors were revised to specify that the behaviors were
used for the purpose of reaching the objectives of the
curriculum. These revisions reflected the researcher's
increasing concern that teachers often perform in approved
ways but without any objective in mind. This view was
expressed later by W. J. POpham, (1971) and is discussed
further in Chapter VI. Asking questions-—but what for?
Using rOIe—playing--to what end? Varying the lesson plans—-
why? The predicted behaviors derived from the twelve
:riteria in this study are in a clinical context, i.e. the
teachers should consciously choose their behavior because
>f recognition of the objectives, careful observation and
liagnosis, and purposeful prescriptions selected to help
:hildren reach specific observable objectives.

The actual timetable required several simultaneous
eQuences of operation which obviously cannot be reported
imultaneously. Running concurrently during the summer
f 1970:

Developing statements of the behavioral and perceptual

Changes which would serve as bridges between predicted

 

 

 

 

behaviors am

reporting in:

. Piloting and

u

. Correspondim

as

. Setting up t‘

operations a

u-

. Developing a
training of
The first tee

translate the tw

into precise pre
vithin the tines

These would then

valents in test

perception relat
Testing for
situations and c
rill be a subje
vhich it was he
light was wheth
clinical teachi
design) presup

0! the clinical

chsnged practic

 

 

 

behaviors and perceptions to be assessed through self-

reporting instruments.

. Piloting and revising the instruments.

Corresponding with the school systems.

. Setting up the personnel and precise order of
operations at the university.
. Developing a scoring system and selection and

training of scorers.

The first task in developing the instrumentation was to
anslate the twelve criteria for clinical behavioral style
Ito precise predictions about the development of teachers
thin the time period of the use of the curriculum design.
ese would then become the precise bridges to verbal equi-
lents in test instruments which would indicate clinical
rception relating to each cluster of clinical behaviors.

Testing for behaviors in actual classrooms or simulated
tuations and correlating those behaviors with perceptions
ll be a subject for further study. One major question on
ich it was hoped that this research might begin to shed
{ht was whether clinical perceptions accompany or follow
inical teaching practice. The treatment (curriculum
i1811) presupposes the need to practice and be made aware
the clinical rationale as one practices, reSulting in

. . 10
inged practice and development of clinical perception.

 

 

 

Following are

MN were origin:
M is described 1
this list.
Hillotheses about t

Criterion 1--Use e

a

The teacher will I

- increased focu
situations as
achievement is

conferences , :

a-

- Increased accc

other than wr:

n

- Increased recu
and response :

response ;

.‘2‘

Use of observ:
specific goal
-in situatio
the content
-in situation
that are ap

emotional a

l- Increased ti

investigatio

 

 

44

Following are the twelve criteria in their final form.
ire were originally ten; the decision to revise and split
>is described in a brief chronological review following

5 list.
otheses about development during the study:

terion l--Use childregfs overt behavior for evaluation.
teacher will show:

Increased focus of observation of children in planned
situations as the preferred method of evaluation of
achievement in social science for report cards, parent
conferences, files;

Increased acceptance of a variety of modes of responding,
other than written, as valid evidence for evaluation;
Increased recognition of the child's level of experience
and response in determining the child's output or

response;

 

Use of observable and replicable behaviors relating to
specific goals as evidence for evaluation:

-in situations on the same concept but different from
the content examples of the text;

-in situations which use the same concepts and processes
that are applicable to the child's own level of
emotional and social development and his experience;
Increased time spent teaching children the process of

investigation and student-managed learning;

 

Criterion 1--Use g

 

f. Increased frer
to aid indiviv

3. Increased ava
teacher as ac
prescriber, e
curriculum to
and

b. Increased use

awareness of

9.91
The teacher Will
a. Increased awe
and the ratir
for (icing so
Increased re«
COncept.f°m
Increased “8‘
validated co
subject Matt
Increasw Us
community an

and
E

 

45

terion l-—Use children's overt behavior for evaluation,
nt'd).

Increased frequency of adjustment of teaching strategies
to aid individual children in reaching behavioral goals;
Increased awareness of and activity reflecting role of
teacher as active, positive and clinical (diagnostician,l
prescriber, evaluator) and as responsible for tuning
curriculum to help children reach the behavioral goals;
and

Increased use of a variety of teaching strategies and

awareness of them as goal-directed.

:erion 2: Check instructional materials for validity
and applicability.

teacher will show:

Increased awareness of the way materials are organized

and the rationale of the authors or curriculum developers
for doing so;

Increased recognition of the relationship of facts to
oncept—forming;
ncreased use of significant (generalizable to a
alidated concept) rather than trivial or traditional
ubject matter;
ncreased use of here-and—now examples (e.g. in the
ommunity and in the school) for concept-application

nd concept-testing; and

 

..—.._.'

name:

an
e. Increased 1e
for children

the curric ul

w Us
d1
The teacher Will
a. Increased re
at the chirc
Increased us
Purposes;
Increased IX
Skills, att:
Increased m
Increased 61

0f “Maven.

Criteri
o .
\“L

If!)

.t.
The teaCher W11

a.

 

46

iterion 2: Check instructional materials for validity

 

and applicability (cont'd).
Increased learning experiences which are both pleasant
for children and applicable to the conceptual goals of

the curriculum.

iterion 3: Use relevant diagnostic experiences and make
diagnoses.

a teacher will show:
Increased recognition of the need to introduce learning
at the child‘s level of experience;
Increased use of learning experiences for diagnostic
purposes;
Increased positive reSponse to differences in children's
skills, attitudes and achievements;
Increased acceptance of differences among children; and
Increased expectation of different responses and levels

of achievement for any activity.

erion 4: Select or tune next teaching strategy according
to diagnoses toward objectives.
teacher will show:

Increased preplanning of alternative teaching strategies;

 

 

tc
Increased us

of diagnosis

. Increased re

success of a
PrOgress of
Increased at
and/or curr:

reaching th«

Cri .
w y

E

The teacher ‘11

a.

b.

Increased u
Increased I
more than 0
Increased a
Specific gc
Increased a
diagnosis <
InorgaSGd a
and reSpout

With the S:

 

b.

 

47

Criterion 4: Select or tune next teaching strategy according

to diagnoses toward objectives (cont'd).
Increased use of alternative strategies as the result
of diagnosis from previous responses;
Increased recognition of the need to evaluate the
success of a learning experience by the observable
progress of the children toward the objectives; and
Increased acceptance of the responsibility of teacher
and/or curriculum for the success of children in

reaching the objectives.

Iriterion 5: Use of open-ended questions for diagnostic

purposes.

he teacher will show:

 

Increased use of Open—ended questions;

Increased recognition that productive questions produce
more than one answer;

Increased awareness of the need to match questions to
specific goals;

Increased awareness of self as responsible for continuing
diagnosis of children's learning patterns; and

Increased awareness of teacher as personally accepting
and responsible for achievement at the same time and

with the same teaching strategies.

 

 

Criterion 6: Hg

1‘!

The teacher will

Increased rt
questions tr
levels;

Increased 1'!
the ways in
Increased at

as evidence

0' .
3830.11 c

‘

0

The teacher W11

3.

Increased r
are not dir
for changes
Increased 1
have to be
to PrOduce
IncreaSed E
”Denguees
With PPIOr
hemmed 1

Objective S

 

 

iterion 6: Use of questions to promote generation of

relevant multiple responses at different levels.

a teacher will show:

Increased recognition of the use of different kinds of

questions to produce increasingly complex cognitive

levels;

Increased recognition of logical thinking processes and

the ways in which concepts are formed and tested; and

Increased ability to recognize a response to a question

as evidence of cognitive level.

Iterion 7: Change teaching strategies to diagnose causes
of particular responses.

3 teacher will show:

Increased recognition that children's responses that

are not directly related to the objectives are cues

for changes in the teaching strategy;

Increased recognition that objectives do not necessarily
have to be changed because a teaching strategy failed
to produce the desired behavior;

Increased selection or planning of new learning
experiences to uncover the causes of observed difficulty
with prior learning experiences; and

Increased treatment of each child's progress toward
objectives (or lack of it) as data in selecting the

necessary variety of alternatives.

 

.. m._n _

Criterion 8: Q

11

The teacher will

8.

Increased 1‘:
change indi'
just tovard
Increased u
ship to pro
nation; and
Increased u
Ship for di

by groups ,

Crite .
W 1

i

The teaCher Vi]

8.

IncI‘ensed 1
proper Dlar
defisionw
Increased :
situations
Social Sci.
IncreaSSd

cognitWe

problem?e

 

 

Change and select groups and group tasks

in order to reach objectives more effectively.

6 teacher will show:

Increased recognition that group tasks are designed to
change individual behavior toward the objectives, not
just toward socialization or conformity;

Increased use of groups of different sizes and member—
ship to promote different degrees and kinds of partici—
pation; and

Increased use of groups of different sizes and member—
ship for different purposes and tasks best achieved

by groups.

iterion 9: Use problem situations for value-seekingZ

 

problem-resolving and decision-making.
teacher will show:
Increased recognition and use of the classroom as a
proper place for training in problem-resolving,
decision-making and action-taking;
Increased recognition and use of problem-resolving
situations and discussions as a regular part of the
social science learning sequence;
Increased awareness of the need for practice in those
cognitive levels necessary for problem analysis and

problem—resolving;

 

 

#—

WP:

p_:

d. Increased 31
for confron'
logical att.

e. Increased w
objectives

variety.

c ' .
W

The teacher Wil
" Increased I
aPproaches
Problem;

Increased r
Values disc
Child Perce
inromum

 

50

iterion 9: Use problem situations for value-seeking,
problem-resolving and decision-making (cont'd).
Increased acceptance of the teacher's responsibility
for confronting children with appropriate problems and
logical attempts to resolve them; and

Increased use of role—playing for progress toward the

objectives rather than solely for socialization or

variety.

iterion 10: Use problem situations, role-playing and
values discussions for diagnosis of attitudes
and barriers to progress in objectives.
a teacher will show:
Increased recognition and acceptance of a variety of
approaches and responses by students to any real social
problem;
Increased use of problem situations, role-playing and
values discussions for finding out what each individual
child perceives, what attitudes he holds and what
information he uses in deciding what the problem is
and how he prefers to resolve it;
Increased recognition that a problem-resolving learning
experience has a degree of success if the teacher learns

more about a child's barriers to understanding and other

objectives; and

 

W ;

d. Increased w
contrast an
and in vain

01‘ making 0

Cr' ' .
W

The teacher '11
a. Increased u
reaching or
Increased r
acManic te
forming anc
Incl‘ensed 1
in additio,
real Prom

aItermtim

and

 

 

51

riterion 10: 086 problem situations, role-playing and
values discussions for diagnosis of attitudes
and barriers to progress in objectives (cont'd).

Increased willingness to let the children compare,

contrast and evaluate their differences in actions

and in values without the teacher forcing closure

or making own value judgments.

riterion 11: Use alternative action experiences to reach

objectives.
re teacher will show:

Increased use of action-applications as means of

reaching objectives;
Increased recognition that action-experiences are
academic teaching—learning strategies in concept—

forming and problem-resolving;

Increased recognition of and use of action—experiences
in addition to verbalization as evidence of a child's

real progress toward the objectives;
Increased recognition of the teacher's role to select

alternative strategies to reach the objectives if needed;

and
Increased recognition that understanding in one experi—

ence may not necessarily mean internalizatiOn of

Objectives in other experiences.

 

 

 

3!!

The teacher will :
a. Increased rec
in the plane

In Increased an
forming and c

or validating

c. Increased use
rather than u
Studied exam;
Verbal equiva
for each of the 1
the inStl‘llments.
in statements abc
to the teaching 1
to now than One

behaliors

W

The deciSion
which would be r
heparuany dis

language [101. ref

QGSign. In thi
S

 

52

.terion 12: Use alternative examples of content to test

and reinforce concepts.
teacher will show:
Increased recognition of the need to use added content
in the planned conceptual frame of the curriculum;
Increased awareness of concept-forming as hypothesis-
forming and concept-application as hypothesis-testing
or validating; and
Increased use of new data for reinforcement of concepts
rather than memorization of data from previously
studied examples.
Verbal equivalents acceptable as evidence were specified
each of the twelve criteria prior to the development of
instruments. The first attempts to do this resulted
:tatements about clusters of verbal behaviors relating
.he teaching behaviors. Some of these seemed to relate

bre than one type of predicted behavior and were a clue

he need for further revision of the predicted teaching

viors.

tion and development of instruments.

he decision was made to use an open—ended questionnaire
would be recognized as relevant to teachers but would

rtially disguised, in that it would not use clinical

age nor refer in any way to the published curriculum

    
 

n. In this way the questionnaire would not be reactive

 

 

 

by suggesting to

do all or help
he questio
Indposttest to
relationship of
The response
classified first
the criteria of
responses would
relevant descrip
I questionna
The Learning Sys
for teacher-tram
education as a 11
Isa partner to ‘
feedback are user
of the child in :
The original
vocabulary of sy.
Evaluation; Outp
Inxiety and pose
instrument.
The question
the teacher's ro

lf teaching soci

 

 

—_——_‘)

53

suggesting to teachers ways in which they would either
well or help or hurt the reputation of the new curriculum.
The questionnaire would be used on all subjects, pretest
lposttest to determine the teacher's perceptions of the
ationship of his role to the students' and the curriculum.
The responses on these questionnaires would be coded and
ssified first according to those categories which represent
criteria of the curriculum design for teachers. Other
ponses would be sorted to determine the need for other
avant descriptive classifications.
A questionnaire was selected that had been developed by
Learning Systems Institute of Michigan State University
teacher—training. It was designed to help teachers view

'ation as a learning system. The learning systems approach

  
  
  
  
  
  
   
 
  

partner to teaching as clinical practice; analysis and
back are used to tune learning experiences to the needs
he child in relation to the objectives of the system.
The original questionnaire had major subheads from the
bulary of systems theory: Input; Processing; Feedback;
uation; Output. These terms were viewed as causing

ty and possible hostility in a self-administered

ument.

e questions could uncover a scientific perception of
eacher's roles, the students and their needs, the goals

aching social studies and the uses of a curriculum.

 

 

 

Ito questions 1:-

teachers) the pi:

 

hypotheses and t
behavioral obje
misty of obss
prescribing for
evaluating obse
(still toward
The questio
than a clinical
the teacher (in
limit as s to
curriculum on
oi evaluation 0
Silulations
Lon level (
required the t6
skill in than:
responses and 1
One of the:
reading, the 0‘
Both could be t
The whole
longer than 45
ministered 1!
“cups using 1:

 

 

54

The questionnaire items matched (without saying so to the
teachers) the phases of clinical teaching: recognizing
hypotheses and teaching within these as a framework toward
behavioral objectives; diagnosing student needs from a
variety of observable student behavioral characteristics;
orescribing for those different needs toward the objectives;

evaluating observable results and revising prescriptions

 

[still toward the objectives) when evidence warranted it.
The questionnaire followed a teaching sequence rather
ban a clinical planning sequence. The questions required
he teacher (in this order) to focus on his students,
himself as a teacher, his goals for the social science
:urriculum, evaluation of student achievement, his methods
i evaluation of curriculum and the child.
imulations
Low level (i.e. to be read or observed) simulations
equired the teacher to display degrees of awareness and
kill in diagnosing, prescribing and evaluating student
esponses and teacher decisions relating to the criteria.
One of these simulations, a card-sort task, required
eading, the other, a picture task, used a visual mode.
oth could be easily administered without special observers.
The whole testing procedure was designed to take no
anger than 45 minutes. The instruments were to be self-
dministered within the school system in small or large

oups using time already set aside for curriculum meetings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The iornt

used in pre-se
psychology. Th
descriptions, 6
criteria. Ioul
The picture
verbal stereot
being (as in th
teaching clinic
behavior of stu
objectives) an
evaluation of
responses were
Three of th
assortment of u
nevspaper photc
project. Writt
obtained. The
achildren's e1
Initial integral
Prediction:
were originall:
were attempted
0f responses ti
yet been made

interpretive d

 

 

The format of the card—sort task was drawn from one

ed in pre-service training of teachers in educational
ychology. The investigator wrote the case decision
scriptions, each representing one of the original ten
iteria. Would teachers respond clinically?
The picture task was designed to test teachers for

rbal stereotypes about classroom behavior. The assumption
'ng (as in the card—sort task) that teachers who perceived
ching clinically would recognize the need to connect
avior of students and teachers to both hypotheses (or
‘ectives) and to observable evidence for diagnosis and
aluation of prescribed activity. Specific clusters of
sponses were predicted to be related to each criterion.
Three of the pictures were selected from a large
:ortment of unpublished photographs taken by a professional
rspaper photographer of a federally funded summer school
Iject. Written releases for use of the photographs were
ained. The fourth photograph was an advertisement for
hildren's encyclopaedia.

tial interpretation of responses to the two simulations
Predictions about the picture task and card-sort task
6 originally approached descriptively; interpretations
e attempted of the significance of possible combinations
eSponses to the specific tasks. The decision had not
been made for dichotomous scoring and the path of

rpretive descriptions operating as predicted verbal

 

 

 

    
  
  
  
  
   
 
   
 
  

 

behaviors beoale
defining the res
The verbal e
the study really
specific possibl
Predicting clue
to criteria nee
prediction of
The problem
diagnose and th
valents were up
responses game
the instruments
predicted respo
than one hypothe
The investi:
vhich criterion
decision for die
this helped by :
Possible respon:
either the scar
The criteria we
Sole oi the loo?
criterion. As

“In two of th

 

 

56

shaviors became too muddy to be efficient.
afining the responses

The verbal equivalents to criteria for change during

 

re study really needed to be tied to every one of the
ecific possible responses to each of the three tests.
edicting clusters of responses which would be related
criteria needed to be accomplished along with item
diction of responses to each item of each instrument.

‘ The problem was difficult for the investigator to
agnose and the problem persisted until the verbal equi-
lents were approached backward from the classified verbal
sponses garnered from the preliminary (or pilot) runs of
a instruments. It then became clear that many of the
adicted responses to test items were overlapping more

in one hypothesized teaching behavior.

The investigator then had to specify more precisely to
ch criterion each category of response would relate. The
ision for dichotomous scoring was made at the same time;
s helped by requiring the investigator to refine the
sible reSponses so that there was no question abOut
her the scoring or the interpretation of results.

criteria were reviewed to determine, if possible, why
a of the looked-for responses applied to more than one
terion. As a result of this review, the investigator

it two of the ten criteria, leaving the final number

 

 

 

 

 

in the study at

diagnostic exper
itea; separated
teaching strateg
tovard the objec
the second c
action experienc
alternative exa
iniorcing conoe
The rennin
apply to each c
the factors tha
investigator's
W
The task of
tests of each ti
coahination of
responses for d
perceptions to
precise.
Planning for dc
Although 1:)
us actually c:
data-prooessin:
so that the co

could do terlin

 

 

57

the study at twelve. The first split made using
gnostic experiences and making diagnoses a discrete
m; separated from it was "selecting or tuning the next

ching strategy according to the diagnoses as well as

 

 

 

ard the objectives".

,The second change was to separate the use of "alternative
ion experiences for reaching objectives" from "using
ernative examples of content as means of testing or re-
orcing concepts".

The refining of criteria caused fewer test items to

by to each criterion, but there was an advantage in that
factors that make teaching behavior clinical (by the
astigator's standards) had been clarified.

aging test items to the criteria

The task of determining the verbal equivalents on the

:s of each teaching behavior became clear as the

aination of refining the criteria and refining the item
ponses for dichotomous scoring made the relationship of
:eptions to behaviors and responses to perceptions

Lise.

ining for data-processing

Although this account is sequential in form, the project
actually carried out on several concurrent tracks. The
.-processing cards had to be mapped out by the investigator
:hat the computer prOgrammer and statistical analyst

.d determine whether the questions being asked by the

 

 

 

test its: and

part of the st
Preliaina ru

There were
questionnaire
task. Bevisio
after the firs
Iade during an
contains descr
M

During and
the teachers tc
to each item 11
runs was recon
to the criteria
vhich the tone]
clinical percey
responses were
rho had descrih
referred to in

Those type

teaching were

 

 

 

udy could indeed be answered using the data in the form

was to be collected.
Planning the computer cards, refining scoring procedures,
ining of scorers, final clarification of criteria and
t items and communicating with and organizing the field
t of the study all proceeded at one time.
aliminary runs
There were four pilot or preliminary runs of the
nstionnaire and the card-sort task, three for the picture
k. Revisions of wording were made in the test instruments
:er the first three runs. Revisions of directions were
e during and after the fourth run as well. Appendix C
tains descriptions of the preliminary runs.
ring
During and after the preliminary runs the responses of
teachers to each item were classified. Every response
ach item in the questionnaire in the four preliminary
was recorded and classified by type and then compared
he criteria for clinical teaching. Other responses
h the teachers had not made, which would reflect
ical perception were also classified. These additional
onses were identified by the investigator and others
had described clinical teaching. (e.g. BSTEP categories
rred to in Chapter 1).
Those types of responses which are part of clinical

hing were classified for scoring only if they were

 

 

specifically st
perception. la
indicated teach
or without clin
receive a score
as clinical. "
idea in a new 5
investigator de
teacher to stat
ence to classif
The experience
toward the Spec
It iS not GDOug
Must be baSed c
The I'eslions
investigator 's
inwhich teache
“terminal! that
Clinical Staten
lere to “Ceive
reflected Clinj
“iteria'
ions of Why the
to actual clini
my teachers a
decisions in pt

 

59

ecifically stated in such a way as to show clinical
rception. Many responses in the preliminary runs

dicated teaching strategies which might be used with
without clinical perceptions. These responses did not
:eive a score, e.g. "showing a film strip" was not scored
clinical. "Showing a film strip to illustrate the same

la in a new setting" was scored as clinical. The
estigator determined that it was not enough for a

cher to state that he used a particular learning experi-
e to classify the teacher's perception as clinical.
experience must be seen by the teacher as directed

ard the specific objectives of the curriculum as well.

is not enough to make a diagnosis; what is done next

t be based on that diagnosis.

The responses on the preliminary runs increased the
astigator's concern for clear descriptions of the ways
‘hich teachers actually perceive what they do. It was
rmined that the scoring would hold strictly to expressed
ical statements. So—called "good teaching practices"
to receive no score unless the statements explicitly
ected clinical perceptions as established by the twelve
eria. The question was raised that teachers‘percept—
of why they do what they do may be even more crucial
3tual clinical behavior than previously thought. How
teachers actually perceive their daily actions as
iions in pursuit of objectives based on recognizable

:heses?

l

 

 

 

In order to
yardstick attack
through 5) to pa
responses were I
in the subjectii
addition to expe
difficult to tr:
standards.
W

0den-ended l
reliability if
the subject mg
good teaching 0
liter trying Se
or WeiShts to i
minimize subjec
to the J"liiglneut
scored as there

cedure Wild re

 

60

In order to classify responses by a strictly clinical
rdstick attaching graded or scaled values (e.g. from 1
rough 5) to particular responses was avoided. Some
sponses were much more significant to clinical perception
the subjective view of the investigator, but, in
lition to experimenter bias, it would be extremely
?ficult to train other scorers in such subjective
ndards.
hotomous scoring
Open—ended questionnaires can have problems of
iability if the scorers are asked to determine ”what
subject might have meant" or to make judgments about
d teaching or degrees of a particular characteristic.
3r trying several kinds of scales and different values
veights to items, dichotomous scoring was chosen to
Lmize subjectivity of scoring—-leaving very little
:he judgment of the scorers. All items were to be
ed as there or not there, 1 or O. This scoring pro—
;re would reduce the number of judgments made by the
ers and, therefore, increase the reliability of the
y. The individual raw scores were expected to be low.
es were to be achieved only by the accumulation of
le points; each identified by an impartial observer.
Fhe key clinical perceptions were approached by more
one question and clusters of questions relating to
of the twelve criteria were identified for inter—

correlation. Each possible scoring point was also

 

 

 

broken down into
to try to under:
perceptions. I‘
emphasis that It
periods in vhicl
design in sociai
classifications
teacher trainin;
Following are t
Questionnaire .

for example, IA
itself, "Varie
In the three 5p
ial use to resp
all three allot
chose to men t 10
tips of charact
the chamcteris
there Variety?

lulu; if not,

that this item

for Critermn E

 

61

oken down into categories of clinical reSponses, in order
try to understand more precisely what makes up clinical

rceptions. It was also possible to measure any shift in

ahasis that might have occurred within the limited time

riods in which the teachers used the clinical curriculum

:ign in social science. The investigator’s decisions for

.ssifications were checked by several colleagues in

cher training for both clarity and comprehensiveness.
lowing are the scoring criteria established for the
stionnaire. Read the following lists in this manner:
example, IA is the statement from the questionnaire

elf. "Variety" (a.) is the criterion for the scorer.

the three spaces on the questionnaire which the subject
use to respond to this questionnaire item (some used
three allotted spaces and gave three responses, others

se to mention only one or two)~-is there more than one

a of characteristic mentioned, for example: are all
characteristics physical or all socio-economic or is

e variety? If there is variety, the scorer gives it

"; if not, the scorer gives it a ”0”. "CB" indicates

this item is one of the cluster of items that tests

Criterion 3: Uses relevant diagnostic experiences and

s diagnoses. ”Categories" indicates the classifications

asponses which are considered clinical in the study.

>ther responses are not scored and, therefore, not

iified.

 

 

Ll. The lost
a. Varie
b. Obser

as be
or ge
0. Categ
1. S
2- C
3. C
4. l
5.r
6.1
7..
out;
resu
disc
\
There We
the Que:
mentIOn
of my 81

 

 

 

62

estionnaire: Scoring Criteria

l. The most important characteristics of my students:

a. Variety-—more than 1 kind of characteristic C3
b. Observable—-for each item, evidence stated
as behavior rather than a hunch or a feeling
or generalized description Cl
c. Categories
1. Socio-economic background CS
2. Child's attitude toward himself C3
3. Child's motivation C3
4. Intellectual behavior C3
5. Behavior displaying emotion C3
6. Behavior toward others 03
7. Specific learning skills CS
d. Not mentioned - physical without behavioral
results (e.g. race, size) CB
6. Not mentioned - behavior seen only as a
Cl

disciplinary problem

 

There were three spaces allotted to this item on

the questionnaire, i.e. a teacher could choose to

mention as many as three "important characteristics

of my students".

 

 

W

LB. In whatve
l. Cognii

2. Effec
DIObll

3. Inpro*

4. lotiv:

5. Self-

5. Indep

7. Skill

8. Effec

(Not

\

to this j

 

 

63

:ionnaire: Scoring Criteria

 

 

In what ways are you trying to change your students?

1‘
2.

WKIO3UIAOO

Cognitive goals

Effective use of information in solving
problems

Improved skills of social interaction
Motivational goals

Self-concept goals

Independent learner with new ideas
Skilled in process of investigation
Effective handling of values differences

(Not just "communicates”or "discusses")

C6

09
C8
C7
C7
C7
C1

C9

 

There were four spaces for responses allotted

to this item (1.8.) on the questionnaire.

 

 

Questionnaire :

I.C. The part1
special a
procedure
a. Varie
b. Obser

as be
or ge
c. Categ
l. E
2. c
3. c
4.
5. l
6. 1
7. ;
i on.
resu
diSC
f- Did
\
Thare We

to this

 

rtionnaire:

 

Scoring Criteria

The particular factors in my students that require

special accommodation or adjustment of my teaching

procedure:
a. Variety—-more than I kind of characteristic
b. Observable—-for each item, evidence stated
as behavior rather than a hunch or a feeling
or generalized description.
c. Categories
1. Socio-economic beckground
2. Child's attitude toward himself
3. Child's motivation
4. Intellectual behavior
5. Behavior displaying emotion
6. Behavior toward others
7. Specific learning skills
d. Not mentioned - physical without behavioral
result (e.g. race, size).
e. Not mentioned - behavior seen only as a
disciplinary problem.
f. Did not miss the point of "adjustment"

C3

C1

C3
C3
C3
C3
C3
C3
C3

C1

C1
C4

 

There were four spaces for responses allotted to

to this item (I.C.) on the questionnaire.

Questionnaire :

ILA. Key fact

I contro
l. Ques
2. Ques
3. Grou
4- Adju
chil
5. Sale
meet
5. Usiz
or 1
(NO‘
\

this it

 

 

65

tionnaire: Scoring Criteria

. Key factors in the instructional environment

I control:

1. Questions for diagnosis C5
2. Questions for thinking skills C6
3. Grouping of children C8
4. Adjusting the materials to the child or

children C2
5. Selecting lesson ideas or experiences to

meet the needs of the child or children C4
6. Using other content examples to reinforce

or test concepts or main ideas 012

(Not just "hold discussions")

 

 

There were four spaces for responses allotted to

this item (II.A.) on the questionnaire.

 

ILB. Resource:

studies 1
l. 0the
achi
rein
2. Acti
illu
3. Chil
0the
4. Pare
5. The
6. 01d.
7. 0th.
8~ Tea
Sta
9' Tea
m
\
There ‘

this 1.

 

 

 

66

.onnaire: Scoring Criteria

 

Resources that I use with my students in social

studies or social sciences:

1. Other materials which present data for

achieving same goals or for testing or

reinforcing concepts. C2
2. Action opportunities to gather data or
illustrate concepts C11 1

3. Children seen as resources for each

other 08
4 Parents and/or community Cll
5. The child's own experiences Cll
6. Older children Cll
7. Other teachers C11
8. Teacher's own questions and/or under-

standing C6
9. Teacher's Edition of Concepts and Values CS

 

(Not just "film stripS")

 

There were four spaces for responses allotted to

this item (II.B.) on the questionnaire.

 

 

Questionnaire: _S_
___._____.

Ht. What I att

l. Goal-s
2. Diagnc
3. Quest:
4. Presc:
5. Evalu
5. Perso
7. Encou
8- Guide
discr
9~ Hana:
t0 hi
10. E23;
(m
\
There We

0n the c

67

nnaire: Scoring Criteria

What I attempt to be:

1. Goal-setter Cl
2. Diagnostic C3
3. Questioner CS
4. Prescriber for differences C4
5. Evaluator of progress Cl
5. Personally warm, friendly, accepting, etc. C7
7. Encourager C4

3. Guide in problem-solving and values

discussion C9
9. Manager of role-playing, problem situations

to help children overcome barriers to change C10
). Not mentioned - authoritarian, disciplinarian

(Not just "guide to learning on their own".)

 

Fhere were four responses allotted to this item (II.C.)

>n the questionnaire.

 

 

 

ILD. lays in '
particul
l. Conn

of s
2. List
rear
3. LiS‘
nen‘
4- Use:
cha
5. Use
chi
\
There 1

(II.D,:

 

68

.onnaire: Scoring Criteria

 

Ways in which my teaching is adjusted to the

particular characteristics of my students:

1. Connects teaching strategy to characteristics

of students. For each item. C4
2. Lists more than one teaching method of

reaching goals. C4
3. Lists a technique for diagnosis or

mentions the need to diagnose. CB
4. Uses group work for a purpose linked to

characteristics of students. CS
5. Uses alternative experiences to help

children reach objectives. C11

 

There were three responses allotted to this item

(II.B.) on the questionnaire.

 

 

Questionnaire :

HI.

Specific
teaching
the goal
1. Need
reas
2. Neec
rear
3. Nee:
and
4. Nee.
chi
5» Nee
to
6' Nee
tea
7' Nee
391
8. Nee
8V2
9‘ Net
\
There .

(III) .

 

69

onnaire: Scoring Criteria

 

Specific adjustments that should be made in my
teaching in order to make it more apt to reach

the goals.

1. Need for more diagnostic questioning to find

reasons for differences among children. C5
2. Need for more diagnostic experiences to find

reasons for differences among children. C3
3. Need to diagnose causes of hostility, apathy

and lack of motivation. C7
4. Need for more action-experiences for

children. Cll
5. Need for more role—play and values discussion

to diagnose barriers to change. C10
6. Need for more flexibility or variety in

teaching-planning. C11
7. Need to use new content for testing,

applying and reinforcing concepts. C12
8. Need for more individualized behavioral
evaluation. C1

9. Need for less teacher-forcing of students. C7

 

 

 

There were three responses allotted to this item

(III) on the questionnaire.

 

Questionna ire :
IV. The goal
a. Goal

b. RES]

0. Res:

d. Cat-

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

\
There .

this 1

 

 

 

70

onnaire: Scoring Criteria

 

The goals in social sciences—-results

a. Goal is observable behavior Cl
b. Result matches the goal Cl
0. Result is observable behavior Cl

d. Categories of goals
1. Cognitive CG

2. Effective use of information in

solving problems C9
3. Improved skills of social interaction C8
4. Motivational goals C7
5. Self—concept goals C7
6. Independent learner with new ideas C7
7. Skilled in process of investigation Cl

8. Effective handling of values

differences. C9

 

there were six pairs of responses allotted to

:his item (IV) on the questionnaire.

 

Qmstionnaire:

____——-———

Vi. What ev

success

1. Its

i 2. Use
1 3. Cur
4. Rel

5. Gil

lea

6- Di:

There

(V.A.)

 

 

71

onnaire: Scoring Criteria

 

What evidence do I use for evaluation of the

success of the curriculum and each child?

1. Item describes behavior Cl '
2. Uses observation Cl
3. Curriculum goals mentioned C2
4. Relates behavior to academic goals Cl

5. Gives new opportunities for use of
learnings. Cl

6. Diagnostic questions C5

 

There were three responses allotted to this item

(V.A.) on the questionnaire.

 

V.B. Which r

of myg

Questionnaire :
l
a. Ite
‘ beh
‘ b. Cat
l

1.

2|

The re

(V3,:

 

 

 

72

rnaire: Scoring Criteria

ihich real outcomes in the children fall short

»f my goals in social studies or social science?

Item connects social science learning to
behavior of children. For each item.
. Categories
1. Cognitive goals
2. Effective use of information in

solving problems.

3. Improved skills of social interaction
4. Motivational goals

5. Self-concept goals

6. Independent learner with new ideas
7. Skilled in process of investigation
8. Effective handling of values

differences.

C1

C6

CQ
08
C7
C7
C7

C1

C9

 

rere were three responses allotted to this item

'.B.) on the questionnaire.

 

 

 

Selecting scorers
Teachers at
scorers because t
notions about the
judgments about "
Undergradu
university hiring
intended to be a
“”0108? course
slecial interest
Pilotices.
W
The score
design and the I‘
Vell lime time
to feel an impox
important that 1
teachers’ but t}
lemons“, mate]
“i 1° (to for e,
on the question,
“this allowed
The Scor
distilltuism beh

learning SYSteu

73

' scorers
achers and former teachers were ruled out as possible
ecause they are thought to have too many preconceived
bout the meaning of terminology and too many value
about "good” and "bad" teaching practice.
dergraduates were employed as scorers because of
y hiring policy. One of the two sophomores selected
to be a teacher and had had the introductory educational
y course; the other was in Interior Design with no

nterest or training in educational principles or

scorers

a scorers were told the purpose of the curriculum

1 the rationale behind the design of the instruments.

le time was spent on this beyond motivating them

1 important part of an ongoing group effort. It was
that they did not try to become experts in judging

but that they would only know enough to observe
match them to the score sheet and record a yes (1)
for each item and then categorize the ”yes" responses
stionnaire according to the descriptive classifi—
lowed for the appropriate questionnaire items.
scorers were first trained in being able to

h behavioral from non—behavioral statements.

used for this were developed by members of the

ystems Institute for an undergraduate course in

 

 

 

educational psych
session held in N
language of the 3
specific. The nc
scorers was the i
actually stated a
light have been i
A separate
scorer after sec]
The scorers exch:
Scorer reliabili
tenth instrument
the first check
Subsequent Check
0n the fj
”training. The
rare p08itiue it
their reSDOnses
sistency When i'
separated times
the Questionnai:

«intern , Was 9

W

The data

demographic ca 12

‘ e

 

 

a1 psychology (Henderson, 1971). The first training

eld in November resulted in adjustments in the
of the scoring sheets so that criteria were more
The most difficult point to transmit to the

as the importance of judging just what the response
stated and not reading into the response what

e been meant by it.

eparate session of this kind was held with each 5
ter each had completed five sets of instruments. l
s exchanged instruments and checked for inter-

iability after every fifth instrument. Every
trument was also checked by the investigator. On

check reliability was .82 to .93 on the pretest.

t checks of the pretest ranged from .91 to .98.

the first posttest the scorers showed need of
5. They were slipping into judging whether teachers
:ive in their attitudes rather than clinical in
)onses. Maintaining scorer motivation and con—

rhen it is needed intensively at three widely

times in the year is difficult. Reliability of
onnaire, which had been the investigator's greatest

as .98 at the time of scoring of the first posttest.

data on the twelve criteria were reported for the
0 categories described earlier in this chapter.

gories were determined to be the most crucial to

 

 

the design of our
teacher-training
The desigu
posttest design 2
design was alteru
control for poss:
change in percep
limited. The sp
school systems a
would Produce in
contamination .
test results; th
scored and pI‘OCE

were included it
anall’Sis.

The data
immune!“ corn
to test items g
u'lcted by the i
with a“ 34 x 84

COrrelat
the questionnai
usefulness 0f ‘
substitutes £0]

for tethErs

 

75

ign of curriculum materials for teachers, in-service
-training and implementation of new curricula.

The design originally was to be a simple pre-and

t design accomplished in September and May. The

was altered to include a split half posttest to

for possible Hawthorne effect; the expectation of
in perceptions from September to January was obviously

The split was made by random selection of the

systems as random selection of individual teachers
roduce insurmountable difficulties in controlling for
ration. This study examined the pre—and first post-
:ults; the second posttest results, which were not
.nd processed for the computer until mid—August,

:luded in Appendix E and will be part of a continuing

'he data were analyzed in four ways. Tetrachoric

em correlations were used to determine if responses
items grouped along the a priori clusters as pre—

y the investigator. Factor analysis was not possible

84 x 84 questionnaire matrix using dichotomous

arrelation matrices among the two simulations and
tionnaire scores were computed to determine the

as of the card-sort and picture tasks as possible
tes for the questionnaire in future clinical testing

181‘s .

 

 

 

i

An analys
there vas a diff
to their clinics

Percenta
distribution of
clinical) in th
were also conpu
shifts on any 0
of the number 0
tenchers on eac

The coup
for first menti
etc.: each pos
For reporting 0
With the assump
able to think 0
lilestion.
ism

Criteria
and administrm
tOslffesel; the 1
0f randomly sei
0f natural att

Attitudes of s

"0113 teachers

 

76

An analysis of variance was employed to determine if
was a difference among demographic categories relative
ir clinical perceptions.

Percentage counts were determined to explicate the
bution of the teachers' perceptions (non—clinical and
al) in the sample. Percentage counts by category
lso computed for all clinical responses. The percentage
: on any one item were also calculated as the average
2 number of responses which could be mentioned by
ers on each of the Open-ended questionnaire items.

The computer was programmed to calculate group scores
.rst mentioned responses, second mentioned responses,

each possible mentioned response was scored separately.
porting of overall percentage shift, averages were used
he assumption that a highly clinical teacher would be

0 think of more than one clinical response to a
on.

X
Criteria were established for selection of the sample
ministration of the tests. A large sample was selected
set the decision to use whole school faculties instead
domly selected individual teachers and in anticipation
ural attrition in the total number of test subjects.
des of school personnel toward research, relationships

teachers and rigid calendars in school systems were

 

 

i

considered in
in widely sap:
oi tine. Only

    
  
   

The Social 8c
tor the study
uttendnnt upo

were selected

their teacher
gnphic data
age, sex, gr:
experience.
it the teeche
Iith any of t
should be hel
curriculum de
Idlinistrator
development.
Criteria
developed ane
character-lat
chlnges in t
lthrived; tes
Perceptions
“1‘6 three 1
‘En Open—em

descriptio:

 

 

77

sidered in setting up requirements for uniform meetings
widely separated school districts within a short span
time. Only schools which had adopted the curriculum,

Social Sciences: Concepts and Values were selected

 

the study in order to avoid any of the rival hypotheses
andant upon evaluation of a pilot project. Schools
a selected which had had no in—service training prior
:he pretest.
The size of the school systems and the variation in
.r teacher population made it possible to secure demo—
ehic data relating to regions, socio-economic settings,
sex, grade level taught and years of teaching
trience. In this way it would be possible to determine
:he teachers' degree of clinical perception correlated
. any of these demographic factors. This information
lld be helpful to pre-service and in-service trainers,
iculum designers and personnel policies of school
nistrators interested in balanced staffs and staff
lopment.
riteria for clinical behavioral teaching style were
oped and refined, resulting in twelve discrete
cteristics. From these criteria hypotheses about
as in teachers' behavior during the study were
ed; test items were developed which would measure
ptions to match the hypothesized behaviors. There
three tests:
pen-ended disguised questionnaire which asked for

riptions of students, of teaching and of goals for

 

 

i

students and
-s card-sort
tesching doc
different c
-s picture
adjectives
room situat
pictured ev
of the crit
The card
simulations;
questionnai
tasks as n f
The scar
responses we]
lists of chi
dichotomous
01' not clini
lied accordi
Possible cli
criteria to:
m was brii
were not be:

clinical pe

‘ere being

 

 

78

[dents and for the social science curriculum.

:ard-sort task which required teachers to judge ten
ching decisions. Each card—sort decision matched a
'ferent criterion for clinical behavior.

>icture task which required teachers to decide which
ectives applied to each of the four pictured class-

m situations and which could not be determined by the
tured evidence. The decisions were matched to some
the criteria for clinical behavior.

The card-sort and picture tasks were low level

 

lations; scores on these were to be correlated with the
tionnaire scores to determine the usefulness of these i

s as a fast and easy way to assess clinical perceptions.

 

The scoring procedures involved determining what
anses would be considered clinical and developing check-
5 of objective items for impartial observers to use in

ptomous scoring of each mentioned response as clinical
i

ft clinical. Each clinical response was to be classi-
according to predetermined categories. Each of these
.ble clinical responses was coded to one of the twelve
-ria for clinical behavioral style. In this way the
vas bridged between clinical teaching behaviors which
not being measured in this study and degrees of

cal perception relating to those behaviors which

being measured.

 

i

The data on
for the denogra
years of teachi
questionnaire
correlations ,
shifts from p
the two sinula
computed to de
the questionna

The timeta
nut and four
cation with s
bution of tee
September, th

school systems

 

79

The data on each of the twelve criteria were reported
the demographic categories of age, sex, school district,
us of teaching experience and grade level taught. The
stionnaire data were analyzed by tetrachoric inter-item
relations, analyses of variance, percentage counts and
Ets from pre— to posttest. Correlation matrices among
two simulations and the questionnaire scores were

Juted to determine their usefulness as substitutes for
questionnaire.

The timetable before the school year involved develop-
; and four preliminary runs of the instruments, communi—
.on with several levels of school personnel and distri—
.on of test packets. The pretest was given late

:ember, the first posttest in late January in half the

'01 systems and late April in the other half.

 

Chapter IV
posttest only.
independence 0
clinical behav
Teacher's Edit
ME and on
third section
to criteria 1,
mtteet 1; th
analysis of va
found to be 51
section presen
troupe and the
m- to postte
Presents inter
first posttesi
better. Sini]
Ailwudix E ant
“10 last secti
three instrnm
silulntions.
kit for inde

The test

“’9 tlelve cr

 

Chapter IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

hapter IV presents data from the pretest and first
est only. Reported are results of the tests for
endence of items relating to the twelve criteria for
cal behavioral style. Information on use of the

er's Edition of The Social Sciences: Concepts and

g and on in-service training are also included. The
section of this chapter deals only with data relating

iteria 1, 2, 4, 5 and 12 of the period from pre- to

 

est 1; these were the clusters of items in which the
sis of variance scores for the first posttest were
to be significant at a level of .05. The fourth

on presents mean scores by category for the demographic

 

3 and the direction of the shift in their scores from
to posttest 1. The fifth section of the chapter

its inter-item correlations from the pretest and
posttest which were reported at approximately .68 or
‘ Similar data from the second posttest are found in
lix E and will be the subject of a continuing study.
Lst section reports correlations among totals on the
instruments, the questionnaire and the two low-level
rtions.

'Or independence

0 test items on teachers' perceptions were coded to

elve criteria for clinical behavioral style.

80

 

these teelve c1
of one another

oeeded .24.

     
    
  
   

flee oi the Tea

in order
Iould not use
in the poettee

It is no
teachers to in
Edition been
doing so, as
curricula: a1
unhappy with t
to coeplain eh
they never use
found it nnnec

The teache
to hoe often 1
M99.- 1
everyday; 2, 1
“it; 4, less
this itel on |
°U°Itteet 2
therefore did
T'Icher'e Edii

 

81

e twelve clusters of items were found to be independent
ne another as the correlations between them never ex-
ed .24.

3f the Teacher's Edition during the study.

P.

n order to control for the possibility that teachers
1 not use the Teacher's Edition, items were included

ie posttest relating to this point.

it is noteworthy that there would be no reason for

rers to falsify their reports on use of the Teacher's
.on because they were to receive no special credit for
I so, as they had been guaranteed anonymity and the
culum already had been adopted. If teachers were

py with the program, they might have used these items
mplain while remaining protected, by asserting that
never used the Teacher's Edition and, therefore,

it unnecessary or useless.

he teachers were given a multiple-choice item relating
u often they used the Teacher's Edition of Concepts
glggg. The numeral 1 indicated that it was used

lay; 2, that it was used almost every day; 3, half the
4, less than half the days; 5, never. The mean for
.tem on posttest 1 (given in late January) was 2.08,
Ittest 2 (given in late April) it was 2.05. Teachers,
Tore did report regular and frequent use of the

it's Edition.

 

 

 

 

0n the it
used, dichoto
choices and
The mean sco
(posttest 1)
(posttest 1),
(posttest 1),

These no

the inquiry

i.e. describ

 

The postt
of five types
and the postt
and, therefor
university co
first posttes
0r presents ti
0-646; for p0
Presentation
Ind 0.354 for
School or sch
0.172 for pos
or system-spa
Sciences: Co

\———-—-
“id 0.2025 f0

 

82

On the items which asked when the Teacher's Edition was

red, dichotomous scoring was employed for each of the three

hoices and teachers could choose as many as they wished.

18 mean scores on each of these was: before teaching 0.887;

msttest 1) and 0.86 (posttest 2); while teaching 0.789

osttest l), and 0.746 (posttest 2); after teaching 0.443

osttest l), and 0.354 (posttest 2). ;
These mean scores for the two posttests indicated that ;i

e inquiry into perceptions of teachers was, as planned,

 

e. describing perceptions of regular users of the
inical social science curriculum.
—service trainigg

The posttests also asked teachers if they had had any

five types of in-service training between the pretest

 

i the posttest. The mean score (out of a possible 1.00

I, therefore to be read as percentages) for at least one
.versity course in new social studies was 0.203 on the

st posttest and 0.202 on the second; for one workshop
presentation by a consultant from the publishing company,
46; for posttest 1 and 0.493 for posttest 2; for a
sentation by one of the authors, 0.135 for posttest 1
0.354 for posttest 2; for a workshop given by their own
301 or school system on new social studies in general,

72 for posttest l and 0.2025 for posttest 2; for a school
system-sponsored workshop specifically on The Social
ances: Concepts and Values curriculum, 0.270 for posttest 1

0.2025 for posttest 2.

 

Certainly ‘
little outside
appearance of
inferred that
result of spe
This provides
inpleaentatio
other profess
teachers‘ ski
publisher in
than the sch
the universit
Data relating

This secti
criteria 1, 2
oi the diffen
level of .05.
inphic categ<

For each .
teachers were
The open-ende
out shat teac

thinking or g
to the invest
research of t
lists or atti

about what th

 

 

83

Certainly teachers who used this program received very
ttle outside help during the study beyond the single
pearance of a consultant from the publisher. It can be
ferred that any changes in perception were not the
sult of special training between pretest and posttest.
Ls provides an additional insight into the burden of
alementation of a new curriculum. Compared to all
rer professional agencies responsible for updating
rchers' skills in social studies or social science, the
elisher in this case had assumed more of the responsibility
.n the school systems or the postgraduate departments of
I universities.

a relating to the statistically significant criteria

 

This section of Chapter IV deals with the data on

teria 1, 2, 4, 5 and 12 in which an analysis of variance
the difference scores were found to be significant at a
el of .05. These data were generated according to demo-
phic categories and are reported in Appendix D.

For each of the questionnaire items (see Appendix A)
chers were given space for several possible responses.
open-ended questionnaire items were designed to find
what teachers perceived without structuring their
nking or giving clues to the clinical model. This was,
the investigator's knowledge, the first descriptive
earch of this kind and care was taken to avoid check-
ts or attitudinal scales which made a priori judgments

it what the teachers might be thinking.

 

 

 

Bach res
separately.
teacher "lhat
spaces in vhi

m was
eeteblished b
scorers. If
given first a
then the spec
sheet) vas re
the coapu
whet percenta
“0" (i.e. a n
and what perce
the computer a
clinical class
These per:
He reported 1

02 the resEns
responses (the
that questioner
recorded in th
rworried in til
it is noted by

 

84

Each response mentioned by a subject was scored
separately. For example, if the questionnaire asked the
teacher "What I attempt to be" and gave the teacher three
spaces in which to respond to that item, each mentioned
response was compared with the clinical classifications
established by the investigator and given only to the
scorers. If it fit one of those classifications it was
:iven first a "l" for being on the clinical list, and
:hen the specific classification number (from the scoring
:heet) was recorded separately.

The computer was programmed to report frequency and
hat percentage of the teachers taking the test scored
‘0" (i.e. a non—clinical response or no response at all)
nd what percent scored ("1"). Of those who scored ("1")
he computer also reported what percentage chose which
linical classification.

These percentages of the total group taking the test

re reported in the following tables according to the order

 

E the response, e.g. percentage of all first mentioned
esponses (those recorded in the first space allotted to
rat questionnaire item), then the percentage of responses
Icorded in the second space, etc. If no responses were
:corded in that space for that category by any teacher,

his noted by N.R.

 

 

 

   
 
    
      

as a preferre
Chi-aqua

those teache

percentages
"lentioned i
in the first

A coaposi
prilarily to
either in the
my from it
Percentage 81
included to e
shift. No re

Upon usir
found ELIE

1 to be sign:
“I one resp

(91‘s and pos

 

85

It is important to note that the teachers were not
asked to list their responses in preferential order or
to number them in order of importance or told that the
more responses they gave the better it would be. These
percentages are recorded and reported in the order in
which teachers thought of them, which is not the same
as a preferred first choice.

Chi—square tests were made on individual data of
those teachers who took both tests, whereas the percentages
represent group scores of all the teachers who took that
particular test. To observe the direction of shift, the
percentages for each reSponse should be noted, i.e. compare
"mentioned in the first place" for the pretest to "mentioned
in the first place" for the posttest.

A composite average percentage shift is also given,
)rimarily to record overall movement from pre— to posttest

either in the direction of clinical perception (%) or

 

rway from it (—). In most cases this is lower than the
vercentage shift of first mentioned responses but is
.ncluded to give a simplified check on direction of the
:hift. No responses (N.R.) are averaged as non-clinical.
Upon using the chi-square test of homogeneity, one
ound all the shifts reported here from pretest to posttest
_tg_be significant at the .05 level. That is to say the
fly one responded is related to the times he took the test

pre and post). In some cases on questions on which

 

hooters lore
respond, the

to respond as
such cases th
sectioned, e

posttest vas

esterisk. A1
It .05 level.
order of teac
shifts iron 1:

responses is

test?

Criterion l:

‘--——__._

The following

scoring purpol
Behavior in r«

To a clin
behavior are 1
Such a teache
l’elxavrior as 3

teachers in t

“HOW contex

 

 

86

teachers were allotted three to six opportunities to
respond, the percentage shift on one of the opportunities
to respond was not significant but the others were. In
such cases those responses (first mentioned, second
mentioned, etc.) in which the shift from pretest to that
posttest was found to be nonsignificant are noted by an
rsterisk. All other choices not so marked were significant
rt .05 level. This provides additional data on the rank
order of teachers' perceptions in relation to percentage
:hifts from pre- to posttest, e.g. which of a teacher's
esponses is most likely to reflect the times he took the

,est?

riterion 1: Using overt behavior as evaluation.

he following subtopics are classifications developed for

coring purposes by the investigator:

ahavior in relation to discipline

 

To a clinical teacher verbal responses and overt
ahavior are perceived as diagnostic data and/or feedback.
rch a teacher would, therefore, not describe a child's
Ihavior as simply a discipline problem. Most of the
achers in the study did not see behavior simply in the

rrow context of discipline and control.

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 2: Adjur
As D‘

   

Pro tes t

 
   

Rafimuses m1
Clinical Crit

 

 

 

87

During the first 3 months of this study on the two items
irectly related to this factor the percentage increased
.89% on the item relating to "the most important character—
stics of my students" and 3.17% on the item relating to

factors in the students requiring adjustments in my teaching".

 

gBLE 1: Characteristics of Students: Behavior Not seen

 

Only As Discipline Problem.

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest 1
Responses Fulfilled Responses Fulfilled
Clinical criterion? Clinical Criterion?
=_Xg§7 No Yes No
94.10% 5.90% 96.99% 2.26%

 

 

 

 

Average change: / 2.89%

eBLE 2: Adjustment of Teaching: Behavior Not Seen Only

 

As Discipline Problem.

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest l
esponses Fulfilled Responses Fulfilled
linical Criterion? Clinical Criterion?
Yes No Yes No

 

3.82% 6.18%

 

“M4"
aw...

I
96.99% [V 3.01% i

Average change: / 3.17%

 

Pence tion of

mne-
In clinicai
typing students
achild's phys:
for his age, 0:
‘0 Perform or 4
lost teache
of the children
ellil'acteristicr
0r correlated ‘
for long",
During the
“in relating

“Sing Physical

m Not

 

 

 

?erception of physical characteristics of students in relation

:0 behavior.

In clinical teaching it is important to avoid stereo-
;yping students, particularly avoiding the assumption that
child's physical characteristics (e.g. that he is large

or his age, or that he is black) are evidence of his ability

0 perform or characteristic of the way he performs.

Most teachers did not use the physical characteristics
f the children as description without attaching to such
naracteristics what they felt were behaviors resulting from
r correlated to them e.g. "little and unable to sit still
or long".

During the first three monthe of this study on the single
:em relating to this factor the percentage of those not

dng physical characteristics alone increased 3.36%.

BLE 3: Not Describe Physical Characteristics Without

Behavioral Result

 

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest l ]
asPonses Fulfilled Responses Fulfilled
linical Criterion? Clinical Criterion?
Yes No Yes No
3.13% 7.87% ' 95.49% 4.51%

r

 

 

 

 

Average change: / 3.36%

 

W

In clinical
continually the
study, therefor
students' helm
of the clinicai

The first <
“Quire the to:
”1' Phase of t1
0” Prescriber

teachers descr

1% Fact,

89

)escribingfiobservable student behavior

In clinical teaching it is important to maintain
continually the roles of observer and evaluator. This
study, therefore, focused on teachers' ability to describe
students' behavior in observable terms in each of the phases
of the clinical process.

The first of these dealt with factors in students which
require the teacher to make adjustments in his teaching.
The phase of teaching is on-going diagnosis and evaluation
of a prescribed teaching strategy. What percentage of

teachers described factors that are observable?

TABLE 4: Factors in Students Requiring Adjustment

 

Pretest Posttest 1

Responses Fulfilled Responses Fulfilled
Clinical Criterion? Clinical Criterion?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

____A Yes I No Yes I No
llst mentioned 53.37% 46.35% 69.17% 30.08%
32nd mentioned 37.64 62.36 54.89 45.11
i3rd mentioned 27.25 72.75 35.34 64.66
L4th mentioned 12.92 87.08 19.55 80.45

 

L

 

Composite average change: / 11.94%

0n the pretest the average percentage on four possible
mances to respond was 32.80%. On the first posttest the

rverage was 44.74%. Although less than half of the teachers

 

responded in a
in the number e
first posttest

The phase t
curriculum goa
goals of a cur
observable beh
that the goals

A clinical
the soul of th

to average
first posttest
Souls for Socj
bShavior, The
TI“ °°IDOSite
Posttest 1 war
M

Goa
\

 

90

responded in a clinical manner, there was an 11.94% increase
in the number of teachers doing so between the pretest and
first posttest.

The phase of clinical behavior which either sets
curriculum goals based on specific hypotheses or recognizes
goals of a curriculum also requires a teacher to perceive
observable behavior of students. Clinical teaching assumes
that the goals of teaching are changed behavior in students.

A clinical teacher should set or recognize behavior as
the goal of the curriculum, in this case social science.

An average of only 9.5% on the pretest and 12% on the
first posttest of the teachers were able to express their
goals for social studies or social science as observable
behavior. They were given six opportunities to do so.

The composite average percentage increase from pretest to

posttest 1 was 2.5%.

TfiBLE 5: Goals in Social Science are Observable Behavior

 

Pretest Posttest 1

Responses Fulfilled Responses Fulfilled
Clinical Criterion? Clinical Criterion?

 

Yes 1 No Yes I No
lst mentioned 12.64% 87.36% 18.80% 81.20%
12nd mentioned 14.33 85.67 21.05 78.95
3rd mentioned 10.96 89.04 10.53 89.47
4th mentioned 6.74 93.26 11.28 88.72
5th mentioned 7.02 92.98 7.52 92.48
6th mentioned 5.34 94.66 3.01 96.99

~.--__ ‘_

 

 

Composite average change: % 2.5%

 

It seems 1
teachers in re
of observabil:
day to day ad,
questionnaire
social studio:

The obser
is reinforced
on what resul
slltcified goa
Percentage of
behavior was
”mung. do
mm is also
"Montage in

reStilts .

My

\

91

It seems noteworthy that the clinical perception of
nachers in relationship to the curriculum on this point
f observability is so much less than in relation to the
ay to day adjustments teachers make. According to this
uestionnaire item, 88% of the teachers did not perceive
ocial studies curriculum goals as observable behavior.

The observation on teachers' perception of curriculum
5 reinforced by the responses to the questionnaire item
u what results are ordinarily obtained for each of the
pecified goals of social studies. The composite average
ercentage of teachers who described results as observable
ehavior was extremely close to the composite average
ercentage described above as observable behavior in goals.
here is also similarity in the 3% composite average

ercentage increase in the case of perceiving observable

°
I
hBLE 6: Social Science Result is Observable Behavior

 

 

Pretest Posttest 1
i Responses Fulfilled Responses Fulfilled
9 Clinical Criterion? Clinical Criterion?
Yes I No Yes i, No
.St mentioned 15.45% 84.55% 31.58%* 68.42%
md mentioned 14.89 85.11 20.30* 78.95
Frd mentioned 9.27 90.73 13.53 86.47
th mentioned 7.02 92.98 5.26 93.98
th mentioned 4.49 95.51 2.26 97.74
th mentioned j 3.93 96 .07 0.75 , 99.25

 

ercentage change of first and second mentioned responses
r0m pretest to posttest 1 was nonsignificant.

Composite average change: ¥ 3.0%

 

 

then teacl
evaluating the
they alaost ai
students. ’l‘h
test instrurae

The data
behavior and
evaluation.
teaching stra
behavioral ch
were designed
by observatio
theY saw or v

The row]
V”? differ-er
0f teachers a
de”mung tr
increase was
“achers to a
described Obs
but the Shit
test percent,
“their“ the;
the difficul

themsepve,s a:

 

92

When teachers were asked for the evidence they used in
valuating the success of students and of the curriculum,
hey almost all focused their responses on evaluating the
tudents. This focus was evident from reading the actual
est instruments.

The data on this item were scored both for describing
ehavior and for using observation as a technique for
valuation. These are two approaches to the same clinical
eaching strategy of observing for overt evidence of
ehavioral change or response. The two ways of scoring
are designed to give teachers full credit for evaluation
w observatiou, whether they worded it according to what
hey saw or what they did.

The results of the two ways of scoring this item were
ery different from each other, both in total percentage
f teachers and in the shift from pre- to posttest. When

escribing the students' behavior, the average percentage

 

ncrease was 16%, from a pretest percentage of 44% of the
eachers to a posttest percentage of 60%. A great percentage
ascribed observation as a technique they uSed for evaluation,
ut the shift from a pretest percentage of 89.61% to a post-
est percentage of 87.22% was a negative shift of -2.39%.
[though there was such a high percentage to begin with,

re difficulty in helping other teachers to begin to see

mmselves as observers is clear.

 

An intere
teachers' per
for evaluatic
observable be
to evaluate E
evaluates stt
clinical a te
have become.
perceives or
Possible to I
clinical prol

in a nonclin

“\BLELEV

~

 

93

An interesting point is the great difference between

teachers’ perception of themselves as users of observation

for evaluation and the much smaller percentage who describe

observable behavior when they are asked for evidence used

to evaluate

students.

Analysis of the way a teacher

evaluates students may be a major key to determining how

clinical a teacher's perceptions, and even his behavior,

have become.

perceives or uses a clinical curriculum design.

It is also a clue to the way in which a teacher

It may be

possible to undo much of the improvement in behavior a

clinical program hopes to accomplish by evaluating students

in a nonclinical way.

TABLE 7:

Evidence

for Evaluation:

Describing Behavior

 

 

Pretest
Responses Fulfilled
Clinical Criterion?

Posttest 1
Responses Fulfilled
Clinical Criterion?

 

 

 

 

Yes No Yes | No
lst mentioned 54.49% 45.51% 75.94%* 24.06%
2nd mentioned 44.38 55.62 60.15 39.85
3rd mentioned 32.87 67.13 43.61 56.39

 

Composite average change:

*Percentage change on first mentioned response was nonsignificant.

/ 16.0%

 

 

Responses Fulfilled
Clinical Criterion?

TABLE 8: Evidence for Evaluation: Uses Observation as a
Technigue.
Pretest Posttest 1

Responses Fulfilled
Clinical Criterion?

 

v.5 No Yes No
89.61% 10.39% in 87.22% 12.78% I

 

 

Composite average change:

 

—2.39%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

cumin
11mm
In this
ant to discc
and who ther
curriculum,
to display 1
One of 1
relation to
"In what way
the total pe

We:

 

94

Behavioral goals and hypotheses: students as skilled
investigators.

In this first phase of clinical perception it is import—
ant to discover whether teachers recognize behavior as goals
and whether they realize that to evaluate students and the
curriculum, the students must be given continuing opportunities
to display that behavior.

One of the categories for which teachers could score in
relation to this hypothesis was in answer to the question,
"In what ways are you trying to change your students?" In
the total percentage of those responding this was not a high

priority item.

TWBLE 9: Changing Students: Skilled in the Process of

Investigation.

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest 1
jlst mentioned 2.25% 4. 51%
y2nd mentioned 1.69 1.50
53rd mentioned 0.84 N.R.
14th mentioned 0.28 0.75

 

 

[l
I!
l Composite average change: / 0.42%
:l
‘1
1 Very few teachers recognized social science as a

LScientific or inquiry type of school subject. Behavioral

‘Objectives and behavioral evaluation by observation have a

ilong way to go with teachers who do not perceive the need

 

 

 

95

for investigative skills in the study of man.

In the professional literature "inquiry" and "discovery",
'independent study" and "research" seem to be long-established
values. In this study, given free rein to cite their goals
for students, these teachers did not reflect that priority
luring the time period before the first posttest.

This same category was possible as a way of scoring
:linically on two other questionnaire items. The rank order
ind percentage of total subjects were similarly low in
nnswer to the question: "What are your goals in social

studies?"

MBLE 10: Social Studies Goals: Skilled in the Process of

Investigation.

 

 

 

 

 

}, Pre test Posttest 1
st mentioned 1.97% 2.26%
Ind mentioned 1.40 2.26

1rd mentioned 1.69 2.26

:fih mentioned 0.56 N.R.

Vb mentioned 1.40 N.R.

Eh mentioned N.R. N.R.

i

l

u Composite average change: -0.04%

H Even when teachers were asked for "which outcomes in
l . .
ne children fall short of my goals in social studies or

scial science?", those who scored clinically chose other

flinical categories.

 

 

 

 

 

96

Skilled in the process of investigation barely received
attention at all:
ThBLE 11: Disappointing Outcomes in the Children:

Skilled in the Process of Investigation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest l
lst mentioned 0T56% 0.75%
2nd mentioned 0.84 N.R.
3rd mentioned N.R. N.R.

 

Composite average change: -0.22%
Connecting learning to behavior and to academic goals.

There is a triangle within the clinical teaching strategy:
the child, subject matter and newly—learned behaviors. Many
teachers, however, do not perceive the subject matter as a
vehicle toward new behavioral goals; the subject matter be—
‘comes a goal in itself. Three items on the questionnaire
'were related to this triangular perception. In answer to
the question, "which real outcomes in social science fall
short of my goals?":

IfiBLE 12: Teacher Connects Learning to Behavior.

 

  
   

Pretest Posttest 1
Responses Fulfilled Responses Fulfilled
Clinical Criterion? Clinical Criterion?

 

Yes I No Yes
lst mentioned 9.83% 90.17% 35.34
2nd mentioned 4.49 95.51 18.80
3rd mentioned 2.81 97.19 8.27*

 

 

l‘Percentage change of 3rd mentioned responses from pretest
to posttest was nonsignificant.

Composite average change: ¥ 16.0%

 

 

 

 

97

Although the percentage shift on the third choice was
nonsignificant, the shift of the two choices that were
significant was sizeable. When reporting anonymously about
lack of achievement, the statements of teachers are increas—
ingly behavioral; although 84% of the teachers do not link
social science learning to behavior, even within this more
comfortable questioning framework.

When this same triangular relationship was pursued from
the point of view of another question, i.e. "what evidence
do I use for evaluation of the success of the curriculum
and each child?”, only 13.53% of the teachers on the first
posttest received a clinical score for relating behavior
to academic goals.

If most teachers do not evaluate students with academic
goals related to behavior, then do they at least evaluate
them by "giving them new opportunities for use of learnings”?

Piaget and Bruner have long written of ability to transfer

l

to new situations as a sign of cognitive development.

in mathematics and reading children are always tested with
gew examples of content. Between the pretest and posttest 1
the percentage of teachers scoring on this item more than
loubled; ninety percent of the teachers, however, failed

;0 score.

I

 

 

 

98

TRBLE 13: Evaluation in New Situations.

 

Pretest

Responses Fulfilled
Clinical Criterion 7

Yes I No _ Yes

Posttest 1

Responses Fulfilled
Clinical Criterion?

No

 

l
[14.21% [5 95.79% J 10.53%

89

 

.47%

 

 

Average change: # 6.32%

The teacher's role and behavioral evaluations.

Do teacher’s perceptions of their own role include the

responsibility to evaluate? Does the giver of report cards

and interpreter of the child to the parent hold these

functions in high priority?

0n the questionnaire item "adjustments that should be

made in my teaching in order to reach my goals", the need

for more individualized behavioral evaluation was a low

priority and dropped during the time period before the first

posttest.

TnBLE 14: Need for Individualized Behavioral Evaluation

 

 

 

 

 

Pretest l Posttest 1 V_X
E 1st mentioned 4.21% 1.50%
‘2nd mentioned 1.97 0.75
33rd mentioned 2.25 N.R.

 

Composite average change: —2.06%

 

 

The social science curriculum design provides unit-by—

unit behavioral objectives and lesson—by-lesson evaluation

ut teachers at this point apparently did not perceive this

function as important. The redistribution of teachers'

hoices within the range of possible clinical responses will
e discussed in Chapter V.

When teachers were asked simply "what I attempt to be",
he role of goal-setter was among the lowest priority items.
he curriculum design was built on the assumption that it

s the responsibility of the curriculum designer to select

ypotheses and goals from current research. The clinical

pacher, however, should certainly be the "evaluator of
Irogress". Teachers in the study did not perceive themselves
n this manner. Only two individuals perceived themselves

5 evaluators on the pretest; there were no responses in this

ode on the first posttest.

riterion 2: Checking instructional materials for validity
and applicability to children.

Teachers who function clinically must be aware of the
potheses inherent in the materials they use, as well as
ing sensitive to the teacher's role in matching materials

students based on valid criteria and diagnostic data.
e questionnaire items relating to this criterion were

signed to evoke the ways in which teachers perceive

rriculum materials.

 

 

 

100

This focus is separated both in the development of the
iteria and in scoring from selecting lesson ideas (Criterion
such as classroom activities, and was also separated from

e specific use of content (Criterion 12). Although this
paration meant that there were fewer test items related

reach of these criteria, it was possible to achieve a
ire detailed description of teachers' perceptions of the
.e of alternate prescriptions to reach objectives.

3 teacher's control of the instructional environment:

gustingrmaterials.

 

When asked for "key factors I control", a great
rcentage of teachers chose physical factors, like the room
rangement, or general factors, like the atmosphere or the
hedule. Approximately 85% of the teachers did not perceive
ntrolling the instructional environment in a clinical way
all. This might have been a problem of usage of language,
t the interview on the preliminary runs showed no difficulty
communicating the meaning of the question.

On the pretest this item was the first ranking response
ong those that scored clinically. On the first posttest
e percentage had shifted downward.

BLE 15: Key Factors I Control: Adjusting Materials

 

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest 1
t mentioned 6.46% 2.26%
i mentioned 6.18 2.26
1 mentioned 3.37 2.26
I mentioned 3.09 N.R.

 

 

Composite average change: —3.08%

 

 

101

This should be compared later in this chapter to the
udistribution of scores, noting the sizeable rise in
:electing lesson ideas" (Criterion 4).

It would seem that the phrase "adjusting materials"
uant finding another book to most of the teachers. The

nrriculum design of The Social Sciences: Concepts and

 

ulues is deliberately constructed to provide ways of
ljusting the materials through the alternate strategies
pr lesson ideas in the Teacher's Edition.

:ing other materials towards the same objectives.

 

A clinical teacher adjusts materials with the hypotheses
1d objectives of the curriculum in mind. In traditional
bcial studies teachers often have used an easier reading
10k on the topic,e.g. George Washington, without judging
:s conceptual emphasis, the use of the facts in relation
~ decision-making, and the ease of transition to the planned
oblem-resolving activities. Multi—text users often have
w criteria for deciding that the texts are interchangeable
ven if they each have a chapter on George Washington).

There were parts of the study relating to Criterion 2
at were directed at discovering what percentage of the
achers would express explicitly the use of alternate
terials toward the same goals as the curriculum. Another
em measured whether they perceived the goals of the
blished curriculum as part of their criteria for evidence

r evaluation.

 

 

 

 

102

TABLE 16: Resources I Use: Other Materials Towards the

Same Goals.

 

 

Pretest Posttest 1
lst mentioned 2.53% 3.76%
2nd mentioned 1.69 3.76
3rd mentioned 3.37 3.76
4th mentioned 2.81 3.76

 

 

 

 

 

Composite average change: ¥ 1.16%
This average percentage increase of 1.16% will be seen
in Chapter V in the light of the redistribution of the make-
up of the clinical score on resource use from pre- to post-
test. Over 80% of the teachers saw "resources" as film
strips, films, library books, outside speakers and field trips.

The goals of Concepts and Values would not be expected

 

to figure in the pretest. The study did aim to discover how
many teachers would become aware of them at the two posttest
points in time.

‘TABLE 17: Evidence for Evaluation: Goals of Concepts and

 

Values Mentioned.

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest 1
Responses Fulfilled Responses Fulfilled
Clinical Criterion? Clinical Criterion?

___Xes No Yes No
1.97% 98.03% 12.03% 87.97%

 

 

 

 

 

 

Average change: K 11.06%

 

 

 

103

Criterion 4: Selecting or tuning the next teaching

strategy towards objectives.

When a teacher makes a lesson plan, it is a decision
)perating in a time span. That moment in clinical teaching
tccurs after recognizing the hypotheses and diagnosing the
lOOdS of the children and before the goals are reached.
his is prescribing. In a sense, the items relating to
his criterion explored teachers' perceptions of their
esponsibility to change their teaching if the children
isplay differences or are not responding to the last
caching strategy used.

To what extent did teachers recognize the point of

djusting their teaching?

ABLE 18: Adjusting Teaching

 

 

[ ;
Pretest I Posttest l
lesponses Fulfilled f Responses Fulfilled
Ilinical Criterion? Clinical Criterion?
Yes No . Yes i No
5.06% 94.94% 14.29% 85.71%

 

Average change: % 9.23%

 

ThBLE 19: Connects Teaching Strategy to the Character-

 

istics of Students

 

' Pre test Posttest 1

Responses Fulfilled
Clinical Criterion?

Responses Fulfilled
Clinical Criterion?

 

 

 

i a
Yes i No f Yes i No
1 I ‘7
lst mentioned 21.63% 78.37% 7 41.35% 58.65% 1
2nd mentioned 16.01 . 83.99 I 22.56 1 77.44 ;
3rd mentioned 8.99 g 91.01 g 12.78* 87.22 i

 

*Percentage change of third mentioned responses from pre—
test to posttest 1 was nonsignificant.

Composite average change: ¥ 7.35%

This was not even half of the teachers and the shift
in the third choice was nonsignificant, but the average
percentage increase shows an increase in purposefulness.

As was described in the discussion of items relating
to Criterion 2 in this chapter, the idea of the Teacher's
Edition providing a bank of goal-directed alternative
lesson ideas was new.

TflBLE 20: Key Factors I Control: Selecting Lesson Ideas

or Experiences to Meet the Needs of Students.

 

 

 

 

i I Pretest Posttest l f
I I
I
let mentioned { 2-81% 13 g;% f
2nd mentioned ‘ 4.78 7'52
3rd mentioned F 4-78 3.01
4th mentioned f 0.84 , °

 

/ 2.72%

Composite average change:

 

105

What are the teachers' goals for themselves? Do they

Int to be clinical in any of the ways that would be open

3 the needs of children with whom the last strategy was

at Successful?

or fitting the

ABLE 21: What

Would they see themselves as responsible

learning experience to the child?

I Attempt to Be: Encourager

 

 

 

 

.7
Pretest 1 Posttest l ;
Lst mentioned 1 3.65% E 2.26%
2nd mentioned ; 4.21 , 3.01
3rd mentioned } 2.53 i 1.50
1th mentioned 1 2.25 I N.R.
i I
Composite average change: -1.47%

|BLE 22: What I Attempt to Be: Prescriber for Differences

 

 

 

 

7‘T

Pretest I Posttest l j

,1, 4

st mentioned N.R. 5 N.R. !

md mentioned 1.12% f 0.75% f

rd mentioned 0.84 ; N.R. {

th mentioned 0.56 3 1.50 f
Composite average change: —0.27%

The responsible clinical role of prescriber was one of

3 lowest priority items at the beginning and decreased

ring the first time period. The highest priority item

ad "encourager" may have been seen in this light) was

 

 

 

 

106

that related to Flanders—style, "warm and friendly".

Clinical teachers need to be warm and friendly, too, but

they must be so for a purpose, using observable evidence

and planned alternative strategies.
TABLE 23: What I Attempt to Be: Did Not Mention

Authoritarian or Disciplinarian.

Posttest 1

.....L

Pretest

Responses Fulfilled Responses Fulfilled}
Clinical Criterion? Clinical Criterion?]
6

Yes No

.1. in.-.

Yes No _kj

88.48% 11.24% 3 96.99% I 3.01%
. ' I

I

 

Composite average change: / 8.51%

The general perception of most teachers about their

yrole is an open and friendly one. It was not seen as
purposeful or responsible for success, although the idea
of selecting new ideas showed a shift in the clinical

direction.

 

 

 

 

 

 

107

Criterion 12: Using alternative examples of content to

test and reinforce concepts.

The two questionnaire items relating to this criterion
were both asked in the context of the teachers' perceptions
of what they do and what they think they should do. To
score on either of these items they had to be aware of
the nature of concepts or generalizations as goals and
the relationship of content to them. This criterion is
closely related to both criteria 2 and 4; the data is,
therefore, presented at this point rather than in the

numerical or clinical sequence.

TABLE 24: Key Factors I Control: Using Other Content

to Reinforce Concepts or Ideas.

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest l 1
lst mentioned 0.28% 0.75% 1
12nd mentioned I 0.84 1.50 1
‘3rd mentioned ; 0.56 0.75 ,
4th mentioned f 0.28 ' 1.50 '

 

Composite average change: % 0.65%

When one considers how long it has been since concept-
:entered mathematics was introduced and the amount of
triting and speaking on the rearrangement of facts in
yew social studies, it is important to note how little

3f these insights have become part of the perception of

 

 

 

 

 

108

these elementary teachers when they focus on social

studies.

TWBLE 25: Adjustments Needed in My Teachipg: Using

New Content to Test and Reinforce Concepts

 

 

1 7
j Pretest Posttest 1 f
I 1
1st mentioned 5 0.84% 4.51% /
2nd mentioned 1 1.40 3.76
3rd mentioned 1.12 0.75 f

 

 

Composite average change: ¥ 1.89%

Once again, the percentage shift showed increase, although
the non-clinical priorities were much greater than clinical
ones; some of the categories among the clinical ones in which
the ghift was not statistically significant were more
important to teachers as shown by percentages. This descriptive

information will constitute the bulk of Chapter V.

Criterion 5: Using open—ended_guestions for diagnostic
purposes.
Teachers use questioning for many different purposes;
inquiry questioning strategies for cognitive and conceptual
evelopment have become particularly familiar phrases among
ducators. The clinical teacher and the clinical curriculum

resign of the Teacher's Edition of Concepts and Values

 

 

 

 

109

tails open—ended questions, a wide range of possible and
sential types of responses and the use of those responses
r diagnostic purposes.

Three questionnaire items particularly related to
Lterion 5 and diagnostic questioning. Doctors and lawyers
a diagnostic questioning frequently. How high a priority
:h teachers is this skillful use of questions which helps

,ldren reveal their snags to understanding?

LE 26: What I Attempt to Be: Questioner

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

j Pretest Posttest l
t mentioned [ N.R. N.R.
i mentioned E 1.12% N.R.
1 mentioned ; 0.56% N.R.
1 mentioned § N.R. 0.75%
Composite average change: -0.33%

.E 27: Key Factors I Control: Questions for Diagnosis

 

 

‘7 A

, Pretest : Posttest 1 l

A; 1 e

} ?

mentioned 1 N.R. i 0.75% .
mentioned f N.R. i 0.75 }
mentioned ' N.R. ’ 0.75 I
mentioned N.R. , N.R. *

r

Composite average change: # 0.56%

 

 

110

ABLE 28: Adjustments That Should Be gage in My Teaching:

 

Diagnostic Questioning

 

 

 

 

!
} Pretest Posttest 1 p]
.
Lst mentioned § 0.28% N.R. g
3nd mentioned 2 0.28 0.75%
3rd mentioned , 0.28 N.R. é
iiJ
Composite average change: -0.12%

This ability was not seen by teachers as a high priority
d the average percentage shift decreased during these
rst few months of use of the clinical curriculum design.
apter V will report on percentages in Criterion 6; the
1ft was nonsignificant but the items focus on using
astions for another purpose, i.e. thinking skills, and
a distribution of responses among categories within the
.nical framework.
pgraphic categories and the shift from pretest to post-
t_l.

The subjects were grouped demographically in several
8: the shifts in their group scores on items relating
each of the twelve criteria were determined. Following

the data on those criteria and the categories within
group where the shift from pre- to posttest was found

3e significant at the .05 level.

 

 

 

 

111

he reports on analysis of variance for each of these are

0 be found in Appendix D.

ABLE 29: Statistics for Each Category Posttest 1
ependent variable Criterion 1: Using overt behavior for

 

 

 

 

 

evaluation.
ategory: Socio—economic
Standard
Category Frog. Mean Deviation (1)
64 26.108 447.434
.ddle-mixture 11 -26.18 414.03
Iburban 13 -ll5.08 403.91
Lral 6 481.33 423.21
ban 34 106.12 411.62

 

fference scores were statistically significant at .048

) The figures recorded here reflect exceptionally wide
dispersion of scores on a test that required
dichotomous scoring.

 

112
TABLE 30: Statistics for Each Categorprosttest 1
Dependent variable Criterion 2: Checking instructional

pgterials for validity and applicability to children.

Category: Years of experience.

 

 

Standard

Category F323. Eggp_ Deviation
129 4.364 40.883
1 year 1 59.00 0.00
2 years 7 -25.29 22.90
3 - 4 years 3 19.33 36.20
5 - 9 years 27 -6.48 40.54
10 - 14 years 32 20.28 40.53
15 - 19 years 25 11.24 35.68
20 - 24 years 12 —2.92 42.06
35 — 34 years 8 —20.63 41.65
:5 - 44 years 9 —12.33 40.28
5 or more years 5 35.80 31.75

ifference scores were statistically significant at .009.

 

113

ABLE 31: Statistics for Each Category Posttest 1
apendent variable Criterion 4: Selecting next teaching

Erategy py diagnosis and towards objectives.

itegoryi Years of experience.

Standard
Category F533. Eggp Deviation
129 -0.155 37.909
1 year 1 52.00 0.00
2 years 7 -24.57 42.48
3 - 4 years 3 20.00 47.16
5 — 9 years 27 —6.96 35.67
3 - 14 years 32 -9.50 38.68
5 - 19 years 25 21.92 35.38
) - 24 years 12 3.00 33.90
5 - 34 years 8 ~10.00 31.64
5 - 44 years 9 0.00 25.77
S or more years 5 5.60 46.87

.fference scores were statistically significant at .033.
Note that the mean score of groups representing 20 — 24

1d 35 — 44 years of experience do not shift in the same

rection on items relating to Criterion 4 that they did on

ose relating to Criterion 2.

 

 

 

114
ABLE 32: Statistics for Each Category Posttest 1

ppendent variable Criterion 4: Selecting next teaching

trategy accordipg to diagnosis and toward§ objectives.

ategbry: Agg

Standard

Category £523; £212 Deviation
124 —0.155 37.909
Under 25 15 -l3.87 41.12
5 - 29 26 -10.31 31.33
0 - 34 19 14.53 40.62
5 — 39 7 8.00 21.66
0 - 44 10 4.00 36.99
5 - 49 16 20.25 37.42
0 - 54 6 16.67 27.76
5 - 59 12 -19.33 39.66
D - 64 10 6.00 33.15
5 or more 3 4.00 22.27

ifference scores were statistically significant at .014.

 

115

TABLE 33: Statistics for Each Category Posttest 1
)ependent variable Criterion 5: Use of open-ended questions

for diagnostic purposes.

Iategory: Years of experience

 

Standard
Category £523; Eggp_ Deviation (1)
129 40.868 452.840
1 year 1 -752.00 0.00
2 years 7 —291.42 392.97
3 — 4 years ' 3 424.00 428.50
5 - 9 years 27 59.55 309.29
0 - 14 years 32 -63.25 468.51
5 - 19 years 25 195.81 471.39
0 — 24 years 12 -46.00 437.24
5 - 34 years 8 —135.00 394.46
5 - 44 years 9 254.22 403.12
5 and over 5 331.20 683.65

.fference scores were statistically significant at .018.

The figures recorded here reflect exceptionally wide
dispersion of scores on a test that required
dichotomous scoring.

 

r $le [11L

 

116

ABLE 34: Statistics for Each Category Posttest l
apendent variable Criterion 12: Using alternative examples

E content to reinforce or test concepts.

Ltegogy: Years of experience

Standard
Category 3593; £333 Deviation
129 -4.031 38.391
year 1 —44.00 0.00 1
years 7 11.43 52.43
- 4 years 3 —30.67 16.65
- 9 years 27 —6.67 37.83
- 14 years 32 -l6.25 36.21
— 19 years 25 -4.00 38.04
- 24 years 12 28.33 32.96
- 34 years 8 10.50 21.48
- 44 years 9 10.67 43.54
or over 5 —4.80 29.18

Eference scores were statistically significant at .040.
Increase in experience does seem to be correlated to
>ring clinically on this criterion. Those three groups

so scores were raised are three of the most experienced

nups.

 

 

 

117

 

pter—item correlations

Inter-item correlations were determined among the eighty—
Our possible responses on the questionnaire. Each of the
ossible responses had been coded to one of the twelve
riteria for clinical behavioral style; the high correlations
ere to determine if any of them clustered along the pre-
icted lines of the clinical criteria. In addition, the
lusters of items with high correlations were reviewed for
ther possible inferences.

The inter—item correlations alone would not be strong
vidence for explication of teachers' perceptions, but they
lded dimension to the study by highlighting particular
:pects of those perceptions.

On the pretest there were a number of possible responses
. the questionnaire with correlations for the most part
ove .68. Most of these high correlations did not relate
‘any particular criterion for clinical teaching style
cept for those on the topic of observable behavior
riterion 1). There were some high negative correlations

well (from —.68).

The following tables present clusters of responses to
a questionnaire. 0n the pretest there were five positive
usters, i.e. items which correlated at .68 or greater.
are were four negative clusters, i.e. items which correlated
-.68 or greater. The clusters are identified by the

Pie or description of the item, i.e. what it was about

 

 

118

and are coded in parentheses to show of which of the
clinical criteria it was designed to be an example (e.g.
evaluation describes behavior Criterion or C1).
Following the presentation of each of the clusters of
possible responses is a brief discussion or description
of what might have tied them to each other. These must

be considered only as inferences in the absence of factor

analysis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

oo.H . 1 .

so I noa>enon
mosfihouou sOeuasue>m
_

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

as. oo.H . M II 1 mo I mofiosum Heaoom as Heomfl
_ . a me sofiuoshopsa Heaoom
sh. . mm. W oo.H . . , H _ 1 so I msfiOHON mmofiJ
w . . H “msauwsnee memes maesoaee
mm. _ mm. 1 mm. oo.H 3 v0 I muaoosum mo weaved
, Iaepoehaso on swepahuw
fl . masseuse mucossoo
M no. 1 ee. H Ho. m on. H84 1 w H 1

so I saoeoana
, H 1 _ h I 1 can sue? wsfiem

mm. M Na. . vb. W on. ”on. Woo.H W

 

 

119

HHO I eonsomoa
we nuance mafia:

 

mu. m mm. m mm. N no. “mm. “mm. loo.aw . , HHU I ooasoeeu

. , . M . we nuance mean:
_ u h .. a“ . I
we. , mm. M mm. m mm. .wm. How. ”vb. H oo.H

 

 

HMO I ooszomea
we nuance mean:

on. w mm. m be. _ mm. H.8. ”ms. was. _ as. .oo.H H so I weupooaom
, _ . . M w w ”mesosumsnee masses

.

 

om. me. N ew. M as. me. am. mm. mm. em. loo.a mo I wqaasoaw
1 _ 1 ”mpnosuusnea masses .

 

 

HO mo

 

 

 

 

 

 

to #0 ho LHHO HHO HHO W #0 1 mo.»

 

 

 

 

 

e \JDDB’1II I IIIIIII e

 

 

120

luster I (Pretest: Discussion)

This group of items related to six out of the twelve
linical criteria. Perhaps the most important data were
he missing criteria, those relating to diagnosis and to
he values dimensions of clinical perception. Teachers
n the study might have been aware of a number of practices
5 worthwhile, but they were described as having been
ractices on all the students without protesting and
lagnosing student needs and without determining the use-
Jlness of the practices to students in solving problems or
1 values situations, beyond the vague formulae of getting
.ong with others or fighting less.

The items in Cluster I indicated perception of behavior
:a generalized goal but not as one toward which the
Iacher diagnoses, prescribes and evaluates strategies.
Le teacher's role was seen Flanders-style, warm and friendly,
Imbined with varying the classroom activities. The
rception of the teacher as a purposeful decision-maker

S conspicuously absent from the items in Cluster 1.

 

 

 

 

M Ho I u0a>eson ow measusoa

oososom Heaoow muoessoo

 

 

._ ... ,4 __ .-....1 .._.-..._...__a

oo.H

Ho I sodpasaa>e
sow no«pe>uemno new:

 

mm.

Ho I ease>aomno
ma washes oosoaom Heaoom

 

hm.

Ho I cana>uemno
ma pasmou eoseaom Hauoom

_
1
J

 

vm.

Ho I oase>aomno
ms uasmon ooqowom Hafloom

 

121
to
b

 

on.

m
p
H
Q
C
O
H

no I UHwno
Ho HOa>eson HesuooHHOpsH

 

JoIAeqeq 03 But
-uaee[ eoueros
{execs sioeuuoo

30; not

norienIeAe
—ieAaesqo seen

31 itnssi
pIIuo

JO JOIAquq

IBN13°II°1UI

eouetos tetoos
st itnsex

saueros 181009
51 itnssa

etqenxeeqo
etqenxesqo
etqexiesqo
eouetos tetoos

 

 

«PQOPOHNJ d4 HDundd)

.334JI404433 EDJJIabzli .t) IIIII

 

 

 

 

122

Cluster II (Pretest): Discussion

 

From reading the instruments it was observed that the
description of the child-as—intellect was correlated to
particular kinds of observations, e.g. whether the child
recites facts, can read the text, express information

verbally and use maps and globes.

 

 

 

 

123

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

oo.H m 1 . Ho I a0a>eson Ou weasaaea
m M W a eoseaom Heeoom mucossoo.
_ 1 i w
_ t . _ 1
cm. M co.H m .. H . Ho I o~na>aomnoM
i m M i , H ma oasmou ooaeaom HeaoomM
. 1 n r ,
1 mm. M as. woo.H 1 . 20 I oaneenomno
. w n ma pasmoa eoeoaom Hadoom
M me. me. .ee. oo.a In IIw _ so I oane>nomnow
m M e i as uHsmoa oonoaom Heaoowi
e w, VI VII IIL
mm. as. Hm. as. loo.H H H HUI mason noses mpasmoMJ
i U H .
mu. m cm. em». «0. _mw. oo.H W HUI maeom nouns muasmeMJ
H mm. . as. www. Nb. .mw. mm. oo.H . HUIoHne>aomno one maeoo
mm. as. mm. vs. .sw. Hm. Imam. Iwoo.a HoIoaneetomno one dance
He. Ho. «8. no. Moe. on. ”we. Mme. oo.a aoIoHoeeaomoo one mseomg
e w _ m L
WI. . I 2
0.10 os 08 Osman sea.W osmos one _.
9 8 O 0.. Q. QC 1 O 8 0 9 m “HO M "HO 0.0
"as u s S s S s S Wes a s“ s a i s e s e ”
Bin 9. 9. 9. “In Ten”, 9T.” OI. 9T. fl
A u a J H J J M 3.1 s IN I S w J S J s 1
75.1.0 A...— WAJ AI“ 1. 0+. A WA . A g
o u.+ e e w e e e e i s s e a e 1 e e . e u _
133 Ge WQs an 1 QJW QJU Q; ,
Tl“ "In In". m w“ {9119” I9 “
1+8 OI .eI at". M a _9 A. o
O . 1 1 1 M 1 4_ h M _ .
S . O O 1
. I I T 1 q q
s _ s s . a w i

 

 

 

 

 

 

a#movmhmv HHH kuwsHU .maOfipaHOHhOO EmsdlhouflH "hm WAQ<B

 

124

Cluster III (Pretest): Discussion

All of these items were among those related to Criterion
1, using overt behavior for evaluation. They were the items
that indicated a teacher's sense of teaching and learning

social science for a behavioral purpose

 

 

125

TBBLE 38: Inter-item Correlations, Cluster IV (Pretest:

Negative Correlations -.68 or greater).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m a mI m

a e H > u e

-H J H HQ
mo 0 H00 50H
36»: 823 9V3
Aan was Maw
Less forcing by teacher - C4 1.00 -.70 -.68
Goal is observable - Cl 1.00 -.78
Result matches goal - Cl 2 1.00

} 1L

 

Cluster IV (Pretest): Discussion
There was a high negative correlation between the teachers'
perceived desire to push children less and their clear

Perception of observable goals and matching results. A

 

clinical approach does not perceive a dichotomy between
holding to specific objectives and being kind to the children.
This correlation may indicate that "letting up" was seen as

being "goal-less".

 

 

 

TABLE 39: Inter-item Correlations, Cluster V (Pretest:

Negative Correlations)

 

 

 

 

 

e
A
E I s
u i F4“ s
I a o
0 I‘ H 0-H
m-e I 0 0+»
- :I f use
e-w » >»o s
I-I-I-I‘H , u'dI—I
HPI-I ; .s-I-Ia
s+ao I o>~>
o a w i m o o
F
Child's attitude toward self - c-3 1.00 -.69
Behavioral evidence for I i
evaluation — C1 é I 1.00

 

Cluster V (Pretest): Discussion

The high negative correlation between perception of the

child's self concept and evaluation of his behavior seems

to be further evidence of a fragmented or uncoordinated

Perception of the various teaching and learning tasks.

 

 

 

r T+++ : {ii-L

on >33
.ouoB manpnooumn .whonoaop pampmwquOQH no Soonun Boa vouaofiusw

Hafioow mnwpooaqoo can mawoawafiu o» wnHUHooou maommoa waspooaom

.pH monasfla>o on so: one us meet

.wooo Honoaou « panB nooauon «ova msfiuoosaoo a Mo oomova>o on on o» oesoom muons

.noH>anon Ow macaw ooaoaom

.uofi>anon mp weavesaa>o one

wuasmoh mowvspm Hafioow oana>nowno mcflnmfianapmo qooBaon scapeaouaoo o>fivawos swan one

 

aofimwsowan ”uwopoumv H> Hopmsao

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n . t l j
“ oo.H W ” ”vulmooon osmosum AOH mnommoa unawooaom
TI\ M _ w \1Illlir
m on.l i oo.H w uoa>anon ow
i . W mnadaaoa ooqowom amaoom muooqaoo
. h i
* an. mb.l W oo.H M Ho I uofi>anon monwuomov noauasaa>m
m i m
m ..1 H W
l Hm.| ow. M 05.: w oo.H Ho I uofi>anon mana>aowno ma pasmom m
Hm.l , mm. M mb.| mo. oo.H Ho I uofi>anon oa2a>~omno mu pasmom
i
g.T.S q M m
4: sum .1 mwu mmw mmw
nsI Hen “ “83 use “as
9.8 e 9.1 u n a o I a a n a e n
e o.u A u.e _ Ayah A 1.1 A J.L
uul Ito ” Ila 1A1 In1
1.5 I o u.+ n o 0.1 o e o a
u 7‘3 s w 1 e.+ 1 Q.+ J Q.§
ans 4s “ sm us as
e... o. M
e S _
P .
s ‘

 

M.._.u.c-w...

 

 

 

AuuofiuaHOHkoo o>fiuamoz

"meHOHAV H> Ho¢ms~0

.mnofiuaaohuoo EOHH

IHOHflfi

n3$ 33d.

 

128

TfiBLE 41: Inter-item Correlations, (Posttest 1)

 

Child's Observable
Motivation Characteristics
of the Child

 

Child's Motivation - C3 1.00 .69

 

 

Observable characteris-
tics of the child - CB 5 . 1.00

 

 

 

 

Cluster I (Posttest 1): Discussion

The combined focus on observation of the child and his
own desire to learn reflected a more sensitive diagnostic
approach to the learner. These items were possible

responses to the same question.

 

 

129

TABLE 42: Inter-item Correlations, Cluster II (Posttest l)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

F
; Variety of Observable Child's
g Factors Factors Attitude
5
¥
Variety of factors g
requiring adjust- g
ment in teaching 03 g 1.00 .74 .74
(
Observable factors ‘ ;
requiring adjust- ;
ment in teaching Cl 1.00 i .69
Child-'1 attitude .
toward self C3 , g 1-00 g
l
g V J

 

Cluster II (Posttest 1): Discussion

These items reflected awareness, both a more objective
Perception of teaching as a strategy coupled with aware-
ness of the child as more than a display of intellectual
behavior.

There were no negative correlations of —.68 or greater on

the first posttest.

 

 

 

130

Without careful consideration of the second posttest
correlations (see Appendix E) it is difficult to make
inferences about the change. Only three and one—half
months transpired between the pretest and the first post-
test.

The patterns exhibited in the pretest have been inter—
rupted. The absence of negative correlations, the few high
positive correlations and the emphasis all differ from the
pretest. Whether the interruption resulted from less
anxiety over taking the tests, greater familiarity with
the test questions, or from the initial impact of an
obviously totally new curriculum design cannot be determined.

Card-sort and picture tasks: Correlations to questionnaire

 

totals.

In spite of the extensive testing of the two low-level
simulations during the interview after the preliminary runs,
the scores on these tasks did not correlate with the question-
naire scores on either posttest.

It is well to recall that it was hoped that these short,
easily scorable tests could be used in the future as a rapid
test of degree of clinical perception. It is possible that
these two tests could be developed into an open-ended,
OXplanatory written instrument and then scored with a check-
list in a manner similar to the questionnaire. As long as
the Questionnaire produced as much data as it did, another

Open-ended test seems unnecessary and unwise.

 

 

 

 

131

These simulations can be useful in in-service or pre-
service training and counseling or as bases for development
of video-taped or role-played simulations on which systematic

observation can be used for evaluation

TABLE 43: Simple Correlations of Two Simulations and

Questionnaire Totals

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Card-sort Questionnaire Picture-
Total Total task
Total
Card-sort total 1.00000
Questionnaire total —0.07252 1.00000
Picture—task total . -0.00047 0.28085 é 1.00000

 

Summary

It was recorded in Chapter IV that a large percentage of
teachers in the study reported use of the Teacher's Edition
of The Social Sciences: Concepts and Values before,
GSpecially during and even after teaching of lessons every
day or over half the days social science was taught. During
the period between the pretest and first posttest most of
the in-service training was provided by the publisher in the

form of a presentation by a consultant and/or an author.

 

 

 

E

132

Other data in Chapter IV were derived from the pretest
and first posttest results from the questionnaire. The
card—sort and picture task results did not correlate with
questionnaire totals. The data from the questionnaires on
percentage of teachers responding clinically and categories
into which those clinical perceptions were classified were
reported in clusters relating to the clinical criteria first
presented in Chapter 1. Those clusters of data presented
in Chapter IV were those in which the change from pretest
to posttest was statistically significant at a level of .05.
In most categories a large majority of the teachers'percep—
tions were not clinical. During the three and one half
month period from the pretest to the first posttest most of
the responses showed some increase in the clinical direction
in a range from an average of less than 1% to as high an
average as 16%. Those responses that showed a decline
during the period ranged from an average of less than —1%
to an average of as much as —3.08%.

From a descriptive point of View which is the mode of

 

the study, those perceptions relating to Criterion 1: Using
overt behavior for evaluating showed the greatest clinical
strength in describing the behavior of children and

refraining from stereotyping behavior as either related to
physical characteristics or solely as a problem for discipline.
More teachers connected students' learning to behavior, but

few teachers saw behavior as a means of evaluating either

 

 

 

 

 

133

students' progress or the curriculum. Teachers showed
almost no recognition of skills in investigating social
behavior as any part of the learners role in social science.
If students do not have opportunity to behave, they cannot
be evaluated in relation to their behavioral changes.

During this period of the study there was considerable
increase in describing students in observable terms. There
was little or no negative impact on perceiving the student's
observable role of investigator or perceiving observation
as a key evaluative technique.

Data relating to Criterion 2: Checking instructional
materials for validity and applicability to children
indicated that most of the teachers did not perceive them-
selves and the children as resources. Most teachers did
not perceive themselves as controlling the instructional
environment in a clinical way. Their experience in adjusting
materials seemed to mean finding another book on the same
topic that was easier to read. The greatest increase during
this study in data relating to Criterion 2 was in perception
of the goals of the social science curriculum design as
goals by which students were evaluated.

The greatest statistically significant increases in
clinical perception during the study, were related to
Criterion 4: Selecting or tuning the next teaching strategy
towards objectives. Items relating to adjusting teaching

strategies to students showed the greatest increase, but

 

 

 

 

 

 

134

even the strongest of the mentioned responses represented
less than half of the teachers in the study. The sizeable
increases in perception of selecting strategies toward
objectives was not matched by teachers' perceptions of
themselves as in control through selection.

Most of the teachers saw themselves as non-authoritarian
and this percentage showed a sizeable increase. Very few
saw themselves in a clinical role, particularly as a pre—
scriber for differences; this was in spite of their
recognition of selecting and tuning the curriculum. They
showed the least clinical perception when they described
their own roles. They did not describe themselves as having
clinical types of control. This lack of clinical perception
also showed itself in teachers' descriptions of using new
content to reinforce and test concepts (Criterion 12).
Although there was a slight increase, it was a low priority
in the teachers' perceptions of themselves.

The lowest number responding clinically in any of the
categories reported in Chapter IV were in response to items
relating to using open-ended questions for diagnosis. The
percentage was negligible to begin with and the increases
and decreases less than 1%. Prescribing without diagnosing
seemed to be an accepted way of perceiving the teacher‘s
role.

The data were reported demographically. Except for a

correlation between years of experience and using alternative

 

 

 

135

examples of content to reinforce or test concepts (Criterion
12), the investigator is not sure what organizing theory or
relationship accounts for the group scores. In every other
statistically significant demographic category relating to
criteria, the group means that were raised and those that
were lowered do not seem to follow a pattern in age, socio-
economic setting of the schools or years of experience in
relation to other criteria.

Some of the inter-item correlations bear out the differ-
ences noted in the analysis of percentages. Teachers in
the study did not see themselves as clinical. They per-
ceived children either as intellectual behaviors or reading
skills in the classroom on the one hand and as in need of
improved democratic social behaviors, but separate from the
academic scene. The curriculum is not perceived clinically
as connecting students to objectives. Teachers are not
seen as responsible for reaching objectives besides being
warm and friendly.

Although progress was made toward clinical perceptions,

the uncoordinated view of the factors in the instructional

 

 

environment still prevailed for most teachers. The greatest

Progress was made in perception of observing children and
selecting learning experiences toward objectives. The
greatest difficulty was in perceiving evaluation and the
teacher's role as prescriber and evaluator in a clinical
way and perceiving students in social science as active

investigators of social behavior and social problems.

Chapter V

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Chapter V presents findings generated by the study in
addition to those related to the five statistically signifi-
cant clinical criteria which were reported in the preceding
chapter. It was possible for a teacher to receive a
clinical score in any of several classifications on each
questionnaire item.

Chapter V explores the rank order of choices among
those responses which were judged to be clinical. The
preferential order was descriptive of the priorities held
by the teachers in the study.

The classifications of the clinical responses are re-
ported as comparisons between the data derived from the
pretest and each of the posttests. Sets of subjects were
given either the first or second posttest; no subject was
tested three times. The actual statistics for each clinical
choice of each questionnaire item are detailed in Appendix
D (Posttest l) and Appendix E (Posttest 2).

The data are presented in three clusters representing:
1. The teachers' view of the students: all related to
Criterion 3--making diagnoses. The categories or
classifications represent the kinds of data a clinical
teacher would have gathered from the use of diagnostic

experiences.

136

 

 

 

137

2. The teachers' view of goals: these were perceived in
three frames of reference—-for students, for social studies
and for the teachers' own behavior.

3. The teachers' view of teaching: these relate to
perception of self and several ways in which teaching can
reach goals-—through control of the instructional environ-
ment, through use of resources, and adjustment of teaching
strategies.

In the following tables the titles indicate the question-
naire item to which the teachers responded. The composite
average percentages were computed from the total group
percentages of each mentioned response, divided by the
number of possible responses that could have been mentioned.
This was ordinarily a lower percentage than if only the first
and/or second responSes had been used. The percentage of
clinical first responses is given; some teachers were able
to give one clinical response but not sustain it thrOugh
all the possible choices which make up the composite average.

The horizontal lines dividing the classifications
represent sizeable differences in the percentages of those
classifications above and below the line. If the order of
a classification in the posttest list was the same as the
order in the pretest, that posttest classification is
designated "same". If the percentage of teachers who chose
that "same" reSponse is, however, considerably greater on
the posttest, it is designated ”same ¢". If the percentage

who chose that ”same" response is, however considerably

 

 

 

 

 

 

138

smaller, it is designated "same -".

l. The teachers' view of the students.

TABLE 44: Change from Pretest to Posttest l. The Most
Important Characteristics of fly Students

(Criterion 3).

Pretest (September) Posttest 1 (January)

of clinical responses 49.91% 55.89%
Percentage of clinical

1
Composite average percentage 3
§
l
i

first responses 55.62%: 69.92%
i

Rank order among clinical choices
..... j

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Intellectual behavior ? Same i
Child's motivation Same %
Behavior toward others Same

Specific learning skills Same

Behavior displaying emotion Same -
Socio-economic background Same ~
Child's attitude toward himsel‘ Same —

Horizontal lines indicate great differences in percentages.

# : considerably larger percentage of the total responses
than on the pretest.

- a considerably smaller percentage of the total responses
than on the pretest.

Note: These responses relate to Criterion 3, making diagnoses.

 

139

TABLE 45: Change from Pretest to Posttest 2. The lost

Important Characteristics of My Students.

Pretest (September) t Posttest 2 (April)

Average percentage of i
clinical responses 49.91% 49.79%

Percentage of clinical I
first responses 55.62%] 59.49%
2

Rank order among clinical choices

 

 

 

 

 

 

Intellectual behavior Intellectual behavior %
Child's motivation Child's motivation —
Behavior towards others Behavior displaying

emotion /
Specific learning skills ‘ Socio-economic back-

Aground /
Behavior displaying emotion

Behavior towards others -

Socio—economic background Specific learning skills -
Child's attitude toward Child's attitude toward
himself ; himself -

 

The teachers were primarily concerned with standard

learning behaviors (test performance, bright or slow, above

 

or below grade level) and the childrens’ eagerness, or lack
of it, to pursue learning tasks without having to be motivated
by the teacher. On the first posttest, there occurred a
decline in the low priority items and strengthening of the
high priority items with a sizeable increase in perception

relating to motivation.

140

Those tested on the second posttest displayed increased
perception of intellectual behavior and of both socio-
economic background and emotional behavior of the children.
To what extent the awareness of socio—economic background is
related to outside community factors, such as busing to
achieve racial balance, would have to be checked school
by school. There was an increase in perception of behavior
displaying emotion and a decrease in the percentage per-
ceiving reading (the usual "specific learning skill" referred
to) as a priority on describing children.

The percentage of teachers who were particularly aware
of signs of a healthy self-concept or one that needs
bolstering was very small. The entire diagnostic aspect of
clinical teaching and the degree of openness to varieties
of honest responses from children would seem to be closely
linked to internalizing the psychological theory of self-
concept.

The patterns of responses on this item of those teachers
who took the first posttest reflect a shift upward in
recognition of a child's motivation; other than that there
was less difference between the pretest and first posttest
than between the pretest and the second posttest.

It is also worthy of note that the percentage of first
reSponses which are within the clinical range was considerably
higher than those who could sustain clinical perceptions to
raise a high average percentage over all the possible

reSPOnses on this questionnaire item.

 

 

141

The teachers in the study exhibited an increase in the
already high percentage of those who did not mention
physical characteristics or stereotypes without indicating
what behaviors were perceived as attached to them:
from a pretest percentage of 95.51% to a posttest 1 percentage
of 97.74% (/ 2.23%). 98.73% scored in the second posttest
(v‘ 3.22%).

Another aspect of the teachers' View of the student was
revealed in response to the item "factors in my students
requiring adjustments in my teaching". This item also
probed the diagnostic dimension but in a less disguised
manner. The item assumed in its wording that a teacher

has to adjust to the conditions of the student.

 

 

142

TABLE 46: Change from Pretest to Posttest 1. Factors in

My Students Requiring Adjustments in My Teaching.

Pretest (September) Posttest l (Januagy)

 

Average percentage of
clinical responses 33.85% 37.41%

Percentage of clinical
first responses 54.78% 60.15%

Rank order among clinical choices

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Specific learning skills Intellectual behavior %
Intellectual behavior Specific learning skills -
Socio—economic background Socio—economic background %
Child's motivation Behavior toward others #
Behavior toward others Child's attitude toward

self ¥
Behavior displaying emotion Behavior displaying

emotion — i

Child’s attitude toward self Child's motivation.

 

 

 

TABLE 47: Change from Pretest to Posttest 2. Factors in

Students Requiring Adjustments in My Teaching.

Pretest (September)
Average percentage of
clinical responses 33. 85%

1
Percentage of clinical !
first responses 54. 78%!
i
i

Posttest 2 (April)

37.76%

68.35%

Rank order among clinical choices

Specific learning skills
Intellectual behavior
Socio-economic background
Child's Motivation

Behavior towards others

 

 

Behavior displaying emotion

Child's attitude toward self

 

 

Intellectual behavior /
Specific learning skills -
Socio—economic background #
Child's motivation -

Behavior displaying
emotion —

Behavior toward others -

(Child's attitude toward
self not chosen by anyone).

The teachers' great preoccupation with a specific learning

Skill, usually reading, dropped as a major factor for both

Posttest groups. Teachers

' concern over intellectual behavior,

e.g. verbalizing and discussing, increased—-more in the second

group than the first.

Redistribution of choices was considerable over the two

time periods.

dropped in percentage.

In the second group all items except two

 

 

 

The focus in this question on the teacher's having to

adjust produced decidedly different rank order of choices
from the previous question which asked for descriptions

of students without mentioning teacher adjustment. When
the teacher had to adjust, the perceptions were not of
children's psychological needs. There was greater concern
with: can he read?; is he naturally bright?; where does
he come from?

The priorities described here do not reflect on
perception of teaching as helping growth through diagnosis
and prescription. The first posttest did show an increase
in variety of factors (% 10.40%); the second posttest,
however, reflected less variety and more concentrated
views (-4.53%).

2. The teachers' view ofpgpals.

Four items on the questionnaire generated data on what
these teachers perceived about goals. Many of the possible
Clinical responses related to criteria for which change in
the related items was statistically nonsignificant and there-
fore, not reported in Chapter IV.

The first of these questionnaire items asked, "in what
ways are you trying to change your students?" Each of the
possible clinical responses relates to a specific criterion
and is so coded (e.g. C8).

It is of interest at this point to note that the shift
from pre- to posttest 2 was statistically significant for

items relating to Criteria 1, 4 and 5 (as was true for post-

145

test 1) and, in addition, for

Criterion 9: using problem

situations involving differences in values for the purpose

of training in problem-resolving. Items relating to

Criteria 2 (checking materials) and 12 (using alternative

content) which were statistically significant in the first

posttest were nonsignificant in the second.

TABLE 48: Change from Pretest to Posttest 1. Ways You

Are Trying to Change Your Students.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pretest (September) Posttest 1 (January)
Average percentage of
clinical responses 53.16% 60.72%
Percentage of clinical
first responses 64.89% 78.20%
Rank order amon clinical choices
Improved skills of social
interaction (08) Same
Self-concept goals (C7) ; Same /
1

Independent learner with
new ideas (C7)

Cognitive goals (C6)
Motivational goals (C7)

Skilled in process of
investigation (Cl)

Effective handling of values
differences. (C9).

 

Effective use of information
in solving problems (making
choices (c9).

Cognitive goals %

 

 

 

Independent learner —

Motivational goals

Same K

Effective use of inform—
ation in solving problems
(making choices)(C9) %

Effective handling of
values differences (09)

 

 

146

TABLE 49:

Change from Pretest to Posttest 2.

Ways You

Are Trying to Change Your Students.

Pretest (September)

 

Average percentage of

Posttest 2 (April)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

clinical responses 53.16% 56.01%
Percentage of clinical
first responses 4.89% 67.09%
Rank order among clinical choices
Improved skills of social
interaction (C8) Same /
Self—concept goals (C7) Same /
Independent learner with f
new ideas (C7) ; Same
T7
Cognitive goals (CG) i Motivational goals -
Motivational goals (C7) % Cognitive goals -
Skilled in process of ; Effective handling of
investigation (Cl) 3 values differences -
I
Effective handling of values i Skilled in process of
differences (C9) investigation.

 

Effective use of information
in solving problems (making
choices ) (C9)

The average percentage of

Effective use of inform-
ation in solving problems
(making choices).

(En responses in this
category).

clinical responses was much

higher on this questionnaire item which did not require

teachers to view themselves.

Perceptions of goals in terms

They were asked for their

of their students.

 

 

, if- »1......

147

On all the tests the teachers' overwhelming choices of
a goal was improved skills of social interaction. They
expressed this, in spite of their perception noted earlier
that their view of the student was of his intellectual
behavior, his reading ability, etc. What they wanted for
him, however, was his ability to interact peacefully and
be tolerant and respectful of the differences of others.

The order of priority on this item remained nearly
the same for all three tests, with the major shift occurring
in the strengthening of the percentage choosing self-concept
goals within the same rank order.

These perceptions required less evidence on the part
of teachers and, perhaps, they represent the degree to which
these teachers verbalize some of the more recent theoretical
goals of the new social studies of the literature and
speeches. The desire for more democratic behavior was
perceived here as a goal for students. The next tables
report on these same categories of choices when the teacher
is asked for his goals, not in; the students but 23 the

social science Curriculum.

 

 

 

148

TABLE 50: Change from Pretest to Posttest 1. Categories

of Social Science G

Pretest (September)

Average percentage of

oals.

Posttest 1 (January)

 

 

clinical responses 18.96% 19.17%

Percentage of clinical

first responses 36.80% 43.61%
Rank order amon clinical choices

Improved skills of social

interaction (08) Same —

Cognitive goals (C6) Same

 

Self-concept goals (C7)
Skilled in process of
investigation (C1)
Motivational goals (C7)

Effective handling of
values differences (C9)

 

Independent learner with
new ideas (C7)

Effective use of information
in solving problems (09)

Effective handling of
values differences /

Self—concept goals

Skilled in process of
investigation.

(Effective use of inform—
ation in solving problems

Motivational goals

Independent learner with
new ideas.

 

i ; Art.5\_

149

TfiBLE 51: Change from Pretest to Posttgnt 2. Categories

of Social Science Goals.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pretest (September) Posttest 2 (April)
Average percentage of
clinical responses 18.96% 18.78%
Percentage of clinical
first responses 36.80% 35.44%

Rank order among clinical choices

Improved skills of social
interaction (C8) Same %
Cognitive goals (06) Same —
Self-concept goals (C7) Same
Skilled in process of Effective handling of
investigation (Cl) values differences.
Motivational goals (C7) , Effective use of inform-

? ation in solvingnproblems /

Effective handling of

values differences (C9). Motivational goals

Independent learner

Independent learner with
with new ideas

new ideas (C7)

Effective use of information Skilled in process of
in solving problems (C9) 5 investigation.

The percentage of teachers who perceive social science
curriculum goals clinically is very much smaller than those
who take a clinical view of goals for students. The absence
of substantial connections between what was taught and what
was expected reflects the incomplete theory of teaching and
the uncoordinated perception of the tasks which were deli—
neated in Chapter IV by analysis of the pretest inter-item

correlation.

 

150

Being an independent learner with new ideas was among the
top three goals for students, but it was viewed as totally
unimportant as a goal of learning social studies in school.

0n the rank order in the posttests improved skills of
social interaction was still the overwhelming first choice
and was up over its percentage in the pretest. The
considerable rise in rank (in the posttests) of effective
handling of values differences as a curriculum goal is
noteworthy. It had been among the lowest priorities for
individual goals in the pretest. Coupled with use of
information in problem—solving there is some recognition
that the curriculum can be a bridge between information
and making choices. These two items reflect the uses of
social science knowledge, rather than ”knowing about"
famous men, the location of places and map and globe skills
which represented by far the majority of curriculum goals
of the greatest percentage of people.

A third way in which the study elicited teachers'
perceptions of goals was to give them the opportunity to
report on "real outcomes in the children which fall short
of my goals in social studies or social science". The
wording of this questionnaire item makes the clinical
connection between children's behavior as a goal of social
science curriculum, but in a negative frame of reference.
In this framework, as was noted in Chapter IV relating to

Criterion 1, teachers showed greater percentage increases

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

151

in clinical responses than in dealing with social science

curriculum goals from a positive point of view.

TABLE 52: Change from Pretest to Posttest 1. Categories

of Disappointing Outcomes in Social Science.

Pretest (September)

Average percentage of
clinical responses 15.95%

Percentage of clinical
first responses 28.65%
Rank order among

Improved skills of social
interaction (C8)

Motivational goals (C7)

gngnitive goals (C6)

Effective handling of
values differences (C9)

Independent learner with
new ideas (C7)

Self—concept goals

Skilled in process of
investigation (C1)

Effective use of information
in solving problems (C9)

 

Posttest 1 (January)

25.56%

44.36%

clinical choices

Motivational goals /

Improved skills of
social interaction ¥

Cognitive goals #

Effective handling of
values differences

Effective use of inform—
ation in solving problems /

Independent learner with
new ideas

Self-concept goals -

Skilled in the process
of investigation -

 

 

152

TABLE 53: Change from Pretest to Posttest 2. Categories

of Disappointing Outcomes in Social Science.

Pretest (September) Posttest 2 (April)

Average percentage of
clinical responses 16.95% 27.85%

Percentage of clinical
first responses 28.65% 48.10%

Rank order among clinical choices

Improved skills of social

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

interaction (C8) Same %
Motivational goals (C7) Same /
Cognitive goals (C6) Same %
Effective handling of Skilled in process of
values differences (09) investigation /
Independent learner Use of information in
with new ideas (C7) solving problems %
Self-concept goals (C7) Independent learner
with new ideas
Skilled in process of
investigation (C11) Self-concept goals
Effective use of information Effective handling of
in solving problems (C9) values differences —

The posttests showed strengthening of initial
perceptions as well as the added strength of several of the
here-and-now responses which represent classroom activities
and discussion. Teachers showed increased clinical
perception in five and six of the eight possible categories.

The self—concept of the child remained a low priority

and the acceptance of values differences and problem-

 

 

153

resolving as articulated concerns remained minimal and
erratic.

On this item teachers in the study showed a greater
variety of strengthened clinical responses and, therefore,
a greater awareness of what might have been. It is
perhaps natural that people are most willing to admit to
goals in a context which is personally non-threatening
and does not call for a personal commitment to responsibility,
even within the protection of an anonymous response.

There was more concern over lack of motivation in the
context of results than there was in the other questionnaire
items which focused on diagnoses or on alternate strategies
for creating motivation.

The fourth item in the cluster of those that show the
teacher's view of goals was somewhat different from the
other three and was scored according to different classifi-
cations. It asked the teachers to consider ways in which
their teaching should be adjusted in order to reach their
goals. The item is less disguised, assuming in its wording
that teaching can be adjusted and should be adjusted and
that doing so would increase the chance of reaching the
goals. The question is goal—directed, but probes for the
teachers's perception of responsibility through clinical

teaching strategies. The scoring categories are needs for

3Pacific clinical strategies.

 

154

TABLE 54: Change from Pretest to Posttest l. Adjustments

That Should Be Made in My Teaching In Order to

Reach Goals.

Pretest (September)

Average percentage of
clinical responses 17.04%

Percentage of clinical

first responses 24.44%;
I
i

Posttest 1 (January)

23.81%

38.35%

Rank order amongnclinical choices

Less teacher-forcing of I
students (C7) E

More individualized 3
behavioral evaluation (C1)
More action experiences
for children (C11)

More flexibility for
handling differences (Cll)

.1.” ...\.r.‘...,._... .. ,.

New content for testing i
concepts, etc. (012) I

More diagnostic
questioning (05)

More role— —p1ay and values
discussion for diagnosis (C10)

More diagnostic experiences

Diagnose causes of hostility
?pa;hy and lack of motivation
7

More flexibility for
handling differences /

Less teacher-forcing
of students —
Same /

New content for
testing concepts.

More individualized
behavioral evaluation -

More role-play and
values discussion

More diagnostic
experiences /

More diagnostic
questioning

Diagnosing causes of
hostility, apathy and
lack of motivation.

 

 

 

155

TABLES 55: Change from Pretest to Posttest 2. Adjustments
That Should Be Made in My Teaching in Order to

Reach Goals.

Pretest (September) Posttest 2 (Qpril)

Average percentage of

clinical responses 17.04% 27.00%
Percentage of clinical
first responses 24.44% 44.30%

Rank order among clinical choices

Flexibility in handling

Less teacher—forcing of
differences /

students (C7)

 

More individualized é Less teacher-forcing
behavioral evaluation (C1) i of students.

7
More action experiences 2 Same

for children (C11)

New content for testing

More flexibility for
concepts, etc.

handling differences (Cll ,
New content for testing g More individualized
concepts, etc. (C12) ‘ behavioral evaluation -

More diagnostic More diagnostic
Questioning (C5) questioning.

More role-play and values Diagnose causes of
discussion for diagnosis (C10) hostility, apathy, etc.

 

More diagnostic experiences More diagnostic
experiences.
More role-play and values

Diagnose causes of hostility
discussion for diagnosis.

apathy and lack of motivation,

(C7)
Note: Neither of the

last two received any
responses at all.

The rank order in the pretest is in sharp contrast to

the concern for motivation as a goal.

 

 

 

 

 

156

Diagnosis is the way in which a clinical teacher finds
out the causes of lack of motivation so that he can then

prescribe for it. All the diagnostic teaching behaviors

ranked very low and involved a very small percentage of
teachers in the study. Those responses which were most
popular were those that were the most general; the first
fitted into the Flanders-style pattern of warm and

encouraging. The concern for evaluation was not matched
by equal perception of willingness to take responsibility

for securing evidence for evaluation. Perhaps the teachers
recognized the need for evaluation and yet perceived them-
selves as inadequate or reluctant in the role of evaluator.

The posttests indicated sizeable increases in perception
of need for flexibility in handling differences among
children. The importance of diagnosis to guarantee
purposeful flexibility has not been established with very
many of the teachers in this study.

3. The teachers' view of teaching.

A cluster of questionnaire items probed for clinical
responses from the vantage point of teachers viewing them-

selves; one on what their preferred roles are in teaching

and three on their teaching strategies.

 

 

157

TABLE 56: Change from Pretest

Attempt to Be.

Pretest (September)

Average percentage of

to Posttest 1. What I

Posttest 1 (January)

 

 

 

clinical responses 20.65% 18.05%*

Percentage of clinical

first responses 26.12% 24.06%*
Rank order among clinical choices

Warm, friendly (C7) Same —

Encourager (C4) Same —

Guide in problem—solving &

values discussion (C9) Same %

 

Prescriber for differences (C4)
Goal-setter (Cl)

Questioner (C5)

Diagnostic (CS)

Evaluator of progress (Cl)

Manager of problem situations
to help children overcome

Manager of problem
situations

Prescriber for differ-
ences.

Goal—setter
Questioner

Diagnostic

Evaluator of progress

 

barriers (C4).

*Percentage change of first and

from pretest to posttest l was

(Not one response)

second mentioned responses

nonsignificant.

 

 

 

 

 

158

TABLE 57: Change from Pretest to Posttest 2. What I

Attempt to Be.

Posttest 2 (April)

Pretest (September)

Average percentage of

clinical responses 20.65% 22.47%
Percentage of clinical
first responses 26.12% 25.32%

i’
.

Rank order among clinical choices

 

 

 

 

Warm, friendly (C7) Same /
Encourager (C4) Same
Guide in problem-solving &

values discussion (09) Same %
Prescriber for differences (C4) Diagnostic ¥

Goal-setter (Cl) Prescriber for differences
Manager of problem-

Questioner (05)
situations /

 

Diagnostic (CB) Questioner

Evaluator of progress (Cl) Goal-setter

Manager of problem situations Evaluator of progress
to help children overcome

barriers (C4).

 

Note: There was no
response from any subject
for these last two.

Teachers were certainly not aware that a "clinical

answer" scored. The teachers in this study perceived
handling of differences as the greatest need for adjustment
in their teaching, but prescribing for differences was not

at all high on their list of ideal roles.

 

 

 

 

159

Both posttests showed an increase in the role of guide
in problem-solving and discussions involving differences
in values. The second posttest showed an increase in
diagnosing and prescribing for differences. The con-
comitant role in evaluation which must accompany a pro-
fessional's skill and right to diagnose and prescribe was
not part of the perception of teachers in the study.

How do the teachers perceive their role from a

strategic rather than an ideal view?

TABLE 58: Change from Pretest to Posttest 1. Key Factors

in the Instructional Environment I Control.

Pretest (September) Posttest 1 (January)

Average percentage of
clinical responses 11.58% 13.15%

Percentage of clinical
first responses 15.45% 13.53%

5

Rank order among clinical choices

Ad ustin the materials
tthhe cgild (C2) Select lesson ideas #

Selecting lesson ideas and

learning experiences (C4) Grouping children /

Grouping of children (08) Adjusting materials -

thinkin
g:§ff:°?56for g Using other content %

Using other content examples
to reinforce concepts (012)

Questions for thinking

nosis
Questions for diag skills _.

(Not one response)

 

 

Questions for diagnosis /

 

 

 

TABLE 59: Change from Pretest to Posttest 2. Key Factors

in the Instructional Environment I Control.

Pretest (September) Posttest 2(April)

Average percentage of
clinical responses 11.58% 8.23%

Percentage of clinical
first responses 15.45%: 10.13%

Rank order among clinical choices

Adjusting the materials Grouping children %
to the child (02)
Selecting lesson ideas
Selecting lesson ideas and
learning experiences (C4) Adjusting materials -

Grouping of children (C8)
Questions for thinking No reSponse at all on:

skills (06)
Questions for diagnoses

 

 

Using other content examples Questions for thinking
to reinforce concepts (C12) skills.

Using other content
Questions for diagnosis . examples.

(Not one response). ‘

D

4

Much of this data related to statistically significant
criteria and was reported in Chapter IV. Additional
information here focuses on the rise in rank and percentage
of the choices grouping children and selecting lesson ideas
and the decreased percentages in adjusting materials.
Although few teachers (8 - 13%) in the study saw themselves
in control by clinical teaching standards, the posttests
reflected a redistribution of choices that closely approxi-

mates the clinical teaching functions of teacher and Teacher's

Edition of the curriculum.

161

The questionnaire item on "resources I use in Social

Studies" did not specify in the scoring in every case for

what the resources were used. Consequently the reported

data showed what the teachers recognized from the input

into the Teacher's Edition of Concepts and Values. It will

be recalled that each of the inputs was designed to promote

clinical teaching behavior. This question, however, elicited
data on recognition of resources.
TABLE 60: Change from Pretest to Posttest 1. Resources I

Use in Social Studies.

 

 

 

Pretest (Snptember) Posttest 1 (January)
Average percentage of
clinical responses 17.14% 19.55%
Percentage of clinical §
first responses 14.61% g 21.05%
Rank order among clinical choices
Parents and/or community (Cll Same -

 

Other materials for same goals
(CZ) Same %

Action opportunities to gather Children as resources

data or illustrate concepts (C11) for each other /

The child's own experiences (Cll) Action opportunities /

Children seen as resources for

Child's own experiences
each other (C11)

Other teachers (C11) Other teachers ¥

 

Teachers own questions and/or : Teacher's Edition /
understanding (C6). ‘

Teacher's Edition of curriculum j Teacher's own questions,

etc.
Older children

 

 

 

162

TABLE 61: Change from Pretest to Posttest 2. Resources I

 

Use in Social Studies.

 

Pretest (September) I Posttest 2 (April)

 

 

Average percentage of
clinical responses 17.14% 22.78%

Percentage of clinical
first responses 14.61% 22.78%

 

Rank order among clinical choices

 

 

 

 

 

Parents and/or community (C11) § Same /
T

Other materials for same goals é

(CZ) Action opportunities #
Action opportunities to gather Children as resources
data or illustrate concepts (011) for each other /
The child's own experiences (C11) Other materials -
Children seen as resources for The child's own experi-
each other (Cll) ences -
Other teachers (C11) Other teachers ¥
Teachers own questions and/or , Teachers own questions
understandingi(C6) and/or understanding #

 

 

 

 

Teacher's Edition of curriculum Teacher's Edition /

 

Older children
(Not one response)

Older children

., .....- ...... 1......11

\

From the overall percentages and first choice percentage
it can be seen that most teachers perceive resources as
things and places. The major increases were in the
perception of action opportunities and child-to-child
interaction as resources in social science. It is the
Perception of the classroom, the school and the community

as a learning laboratory in using information of human

 

 

 

 

163

beings for human problem—solving that makes the clinical
teaching of social science effective: goals, diagnoses,
prescription and evaluation. The students are also part
of the subject matter and of the goals in a clinical
teaching approach to social science.
Summarz

In the cluster of items reflecting the teacher's view
of the students the data showed a prime concern with
standard learning behaviors: above or below grade level,
bright or slow, and whether they were already motivated
before they came to class. The first posttest showed an
increased perception of motivation. The second posttest
showed an increased interest in intellectual behavior
b.g. verbalizing and discussing), in socio-economic back-
ground and emotional factors. There was very little aware-
ness of self-concept as a significant characteristic of a

student.

 

The teacher's view of the student in the context of the
teacher's having to make adjustments was not of the student's
psychological needs but of his reading ability and his back—
ground; is he naturally"bright"? During the study the first
posttest group showed an increase in the variety of their
responses; the second group showed a consolidation of views
about intellectual behavior and background. The pre-
occupation with reading lessened. The teachers' priorities,

however, did not reflect perception of diagnosis and pre-

164

scription as ways in which teachers help children grow and
change.

The cluster of items which highlighted the teacher's
view of goals indicated that many more teachers responded
clinically about goals when asked about them in reference ’
to the students than when asked about goals for the
curriculum or goals for themselves. The overwhelming
choice among clinical goals for children was improved
skills of social interaction, in spite of their perception
of the student in terms of his intellectual behavior and
his reading ability.

The absence of substantial connections between what was
taught and what was expected reflects an incomplete theory
of teaching and an uncoordinated perception of instructional
tasks. For example, being an independent learner with new

1 ideas was among the top three goals for students, but was

viewed as totally unimportant as a goal of learning social

. studies in school. During the study there was a considerable
rise in priority of effective handling of values differences
as a curriculum goal. When coupled with use of information
in problem-resolving, there is some recognition that the
curriculum can be a bridge between information and making
choices.

Teachers showed greater percentage increases in clinical

 

responses when asked for disappointing results of social
studies than when asked for their own positive view of

curriculum goals. The posttests indicated strengthening

 

%;.5 iii 4 “14..., 71—

165

of initial perceptions as well as the added strength of

several choices dealing with using information and

 

practicing behaviors here—and-now. There was more concern
over lack of motivation in the context of results than
there was in the other questionnaire items which focused
on diagnoses or on alternate strategies for creating
motivation.

When teachers were asked about their goals in terms of
adjustments they ought to make in their teaching in order

to reach those goals, their clinical responses were

 

primarily the general one of forcing children less. They
showed concern also about evaluating children individually.
The concern for evaluation was not matched by equal

perception or willingness to take responsibility for

 

securing evidence for evaluation. All the diagnostic
teaching behaviors ranked very low and involved a very
small percentage of teachers in the study. The posttests
indicated sizeable increases in perception of need for
flexibility in handling differences among children; the
importance of diagnosis to guarantee purposeful flexibility
\ was not established with many of the teachers in the study.
A The cluster of items which focused on the teachers'
view of teaching showed a major emphasis on the personal
qualities of warmth, friendliness and encouragement to

i children. Both posttests showed an increase in the role

0f guide in problem-solving and discussions involving

166

differences in values. The second posttest showed an
increase in diagnosing and prescribing for differences,
but without the concomitant role of evaluator. There

was a rise in rank and percentage of the choices grouping
children and selecting lesson ideas with a decrease in
having to adjust materials by finding others outside of
the curriculum. Most teachers did not perceive "use of
resources" as in school people—to-people activities.

The major increases during the study were in the perception
of action opportunities and child-to—child interaction as
resources in social science.

There was a low percentage of clinical responses to
most of the questions in the study in both pretest and
posttests. The percentage of teachers whose perceptions
could be classified clinical ranged from item to item
from 2% to somewhat over 25%. The shift between pretest
and first posttest was statistically significant on five
of the twelve criteria and from pretest to second posttest

on four of them. The shift was in the predicted clinical

 

1 direction on most items, averaging approximately 3% but
ranging to as much as 16% on some.

Although few teachers (8 - 13%) in the study saw

themselves in control of the instructional environment

by clinical teaching standards, the posttests reflected

a redistribution of choices that closely approximates the

clinical teaching functions of the teacher and Teacher's

Edition of The Social Sciences: Concepts and Values.

 

Chapter VI
CONCLUSIONS

One of the underlying assumptions in the study was
that clinical behavioral teaching style can help children
reason and make decisions in the face of values conflicts
within and among groups. It was also assumed that class-
room teachers do not easily use clinical style and often
avoid the values area; there was, therefore, a need for
daily support for the teacher in the form of self-correcting
instructional materials.

The use of the clinical social science curriculum made
it possible for teachers to move daily through the planned
strategies based on twelve clinical criteria. As they used
the Teacher's Edition of The Social Sciences: Concepts and
Values, without coaching or use of a reactive test or
interview, their perceptions could be tested in relation
to the clinical criteria and from various points in a
systems analysis sequence.

The study reported that the Teacher‘s Editions were
used almost every day by most of the teachers and were
used as planned, both before and during teaching. This
practice affirmed the acceptability of a detailed daily
clinical lesson sequence with banks of alternative learning
experiences; it also made it possible to assess perceptions
without having to discount the previously heard complaint

of teachers that they would teach differently or feel

167

 

 

 

168

differently about their teaching if they had materials
which matched the objectives.
The study was designed to answer several questions.

How clinical were teachers' perceptions? When using a

 

clinical curriculum design will changes in perception occur?
Will any changes he in the direction of the clinical
criteria on which the curriculum design was constructed?
Do these changes relate to specific demographic factors?
What other information will be generated? What implications
can be derived from the findings?

There will be no attempt here to summarize in detail
the results of each aspect of the study. These data have
been reported and summarized in Chapters IV and V. The
focus of this chapter is on implications derived from
findings related to the questions.
How clinical were teachers' perceptionnz

Although teachers have not heard a great deal about

 

clinical teaching as a coordinated theory and set of
practices, they do call themselves professionals, thereby
comparing themselves to other professionals who have been
consciously trained in clinical strategies. Teachers have
been exposed to many of the aspects of clinical teaching
as separate factors (e.g. meeting individual needs; self—
concept in relation to motivation). Some of the practices
built into the curriculum and probed in the study are
considered clichbs by teachers as well as by teachers of

teachers. It would seem that a unified, not uniform, clinical

169

approach to teaching supported by a unified, not uniform,
supportive curriculum design and program for continued
staff development are necessary for helping teachers
internalize the clinical philosophy and practice.

There are teachers performing individual behaviors
used by clinical teachers but these teachers may not plan
or use the results of these behaviors clinically. In
teaching it is beginning to seem that self—conscious
awareness of a theory or model may be essential to the
teacher's continuing and purposeful use of clinical
behaviors.

It was hoped that the pinpointing for this research
of types of behavior and perceptions in verbal equivalents
in each phase of a clinical teaching cycle might help
teachers of teachers, designers of curriculum and directors
of implementation to determine what correlations there
are between the various phases of clinical behavior, nn

teachers perceive it.

 

The fact that no more than 15% of teachers responded
clinically to most items in the study makes it clear; it
is important for colleges, school systems, curriculum
designers and teacher associations to know how far we must
go before most teachers perceive their teaching of social

studies or social science clinically.

 

 

170

To what extent were teachers' perceptions within the
clinical frangnnrk?

One conclusion is certain. The degree to which teachers
perceived clinically and the type or classification of their
clinical perceptions are related to:

—the phase of the clinical sequence (hypothesizing, diagnosing,
prescribing, evaluating)
and
-the stance or viewpoint from which the perception occurs
(view of students, goals or teaching).

Although each detailed phase should be looked at
separately to understand the shadings of clinical perception,
it is possible to conclude that those teachers who did
adjust, adjusted most readily to various alternate pre-
scriptions or classroom strategies other than reading and
to observation of overt behavior of students. They have
the most difficulty with maintaining a sense of purpose,
diagnosing from those observations and evaluating the
effects of the prescribed strategies on the students.

Whenever the clinical sequence required the teacher to
take the ultimate responsibility for students, i.e. in
diagnosis of need and evaluation of results, for most of
the teachers those responses were very low among their
priorities. It is no wonder that teachers have felt so
threatened by behavioral objectives, performance contracting,

differential staffing, evaluation, etc. They avoided the

responsible roles whenever they were presented in this

 

 

171

study and from whatever stance.
Popham, (1971) has stated:

One needs only to speculate on the typical
intentions of most public school teachers.

They wish to cover the content of the course,

to maintain classroom order, to expose the
student to knowledge, and so on. Rarely does
one find a teacher, who prior to teaching,
establishes clearly stated instructional
objectives in terms of learner behavior and
then sets out to achieve those objectives.

Only recently, in fact, do we find many teachers
who are even familiar with the manner in which
instructional objectives are stated in measurable
form.

Lest this sound like an unchecked assault on the
teaching profession, it should be pointed out
that there is little reason to expect that
teachers should be skilled goal achievers.
Certainly they have not been trained to be;
teacher education institutions rarely foster
this sort of competence. Nor is there any
premium placed on such instructional skill after
the teacher concludes preservice training. The
general public, most school systems, and
professional teachers' groups rarely attach
special importance to the teacher's attainment
of clearly stated instructional objectives.

The study brings detailed descriptive evidence to bolster
Popham's discussion. The teachers had serious difficulty in
connecting child psychology to student behavior and student
behavior to a curriculum area which has as its subject human
beings. Motivation, self-concept and recognition of
emotional behavior were not mentioned as factors requiring
adjustment of teaching strategies, lesson ideas or kinds of
evaluation. When those psychological factors were mentioned,
it was as if they were fixed factors which came with the
child or were hoped for results, but without planned

strategies for reaching them. When asked about goals for

 

 

172

children, they described democratic human interaction.
When asked for goals for social studies curriculum,they
described understanding differences and knowing famous
names,places and geographic skills. When asked for a
description of the children as they are, they described
intellectual behavior and reading skills.

Social studies was not easily seen as a behavioral
science. There was little positive recognition that the
study of human behavior (as different from simply studying
descriptions about people) and the classroom teaching
strategies had the same objectives, i.e. changing the
behavior of children. The teachers showed more clinical
perception when asked about goals for children than when
asked about goals for social studies. They put the two
kinds of goals together best when they were asked for
disappointing outcomes in social studies. Then they were
better able to cite behavioral change as a hoped for result
which was not as certain as they wished. Even in that
context, the teachers had difficulty linking teaching
to goals of any sort.

Were any of the changns in a clinical direction?

This study was primarily descriptive at three points in

time. It was interesting to note significant movement in

a clinical direction of even 3 - 10% in most perceptions.

 

 

 

 

173

Demographic factors and implicatious

It was not possible in this study to attribute clinical
perception to demographic factors. Many accepted conclusions
about either recency of training, years of experience or the
ease of teaching in a suburban school as opposed to an urban
or rural setting have been shown not to be applicable to
clinical teaching perception. Perceiving teaching in a
clinical manner was much more an individual matter; personnel
offices, colleges of education, staff development administra-
tors, school principals, student teachers and teachers them-
selves will need to develop a more analytical approach to
assessing teaching potential and ability than use of demo-
graphic data and a general interview.

Teacher associations would be wise to establish assess-
ment and counseling services of their own as the individual's
approach to himself and to responsibility are keys to his
acceptance of children and his clinical use of clinical
materials. As teacher associations move for more decision—
making power, they will need to be able to guarantee that
academic freedom and negotiated contracts are in the hands of
professionals who recognize standards of practice. They must
be able to screen for those who may love children but are not
skilled and perceptive enough to be clinical practitioners.
Even skilled trades set their own examinations and grant their
own tenure. Since college courses, years of experience and
district salaries were shown to have little obvious

correlation to this model of professional excellence, a pro-

 

 

174

fessional organization will have to set standards and keep
them if it is not to be criticized for bargaining equally
for excellence and mediocrity. Teachers' associations
should sponsor assessment before and during tenure and
could do much more to sponsor their own in-service training
to maintain up-to-date standards of clinical practice.

The focus on self-assessment of Education 200
(Educational Psychology) at Michigan State University is,
indeed, to be a model, hopefully not just for one
introductory course. It includes self-assessment, analysis
of personal and professional objectives both individually
and in small groups, strategies and evaluation. Such a
philosophy and practice ought to be established for a
student's whole experience with opportunity to "hold" or
postpone the decision to become a teacher or to "abort"
the plan if it seems advisable. Not everyone has the ego
strength to take the responsibility to evaluate and revise
and adjust.

If demographic factors cannot be counted on for results,
then curriculum producers should be pressured to engineer
their materials and state their objectives, strategies and

evaluation as a total system. School systems can help by
Planning, implementing and evaluating continual building
level feedback.
The burden for success in the twelve behaviors (from which
Perceptual hypotheses were developed) certainly at this time

rests with the curriculum design and, hopefully, with

 

 

 

 

carefully planned preservice and in-service training.

This study revealed that most of both burdens in this case
were being carried by the publisher through its Teacher's
Edition and its consultant staff.

What kinds of training? Training in both theory and
practice that will bring teachers' perceptions and concerns
out into a supportive, sharing environment. The common-
alities of present perceptions reflects a lack of a unified
theory. Training should be geared to focus on feelings and
adult—to—adult support within the school, between schools
in a system and within the community.

Future research

Longitudinal research is needed: how many years does
it take for a teacher's classroom experiences to reinforce
theory? To what extent does clinical perception accompany
or follow clinical practice? In the study teachers' per-
ceptions seemed both to accompany and follow practice. The
reinforcement—through-curriculum hypothesis should be tested

in other subject areas as well as extending this study in

 

time. Research is also called for in measuring comparatively
the long-term effects of different curriculum materials and
no curriculum materials on teachers' behavior and perception.
Other research is needed on the effect of different
combinations of preservice and in—service training in in—
ducing teachers to evaluate materials clinically. What
combinations of training in theory, in practical use of

the specific curriculum in the schools, in self—assessment

 

 

and in building of support systems will provide the surest

rewards and, therefore, have the greatest opportunity for
helping teachers become more diagnostic, more flexible, yet
goal—directed?

The failure of the low level simulations leaves the
problem of development of clinical testing through simulation.
Guidance and evaluation of college students and teachers
could be enhanced. Such simulation-testing for other
parameters is now in use in industry. With the detailed
description available from this study, teacher assessment
could be much more effective.

Curriculum design and research

This study reaffirmed the investigator's belief as a
curriculum designer that field research should be an on-
gOing part of a continuing cycle of designing, developing,
measuring, feeding back into design, development, pre-
service education and in-service staff development.

School systems must be helped to become learning systems.

The clinical process can apply to curriculum design as
well as to classroom strategies. Through a clinical process
of curriculum designing, curriculum design becomes engineer-
ing of the instructional environment and classroom teaching
takes on the purposeful dimensions of design.

Curriculum design is needed to develop clinical teaching
on a mass scale. There should be no fear of giving teachers
too much help. Curriculum design can not only convey

experiences to students, it can replace text-writing Wlth

 

177

aids to goal—setting, diagnosing, prescribing, evaluating
and revising. In conjunction with clinical college teaching
and in-service training much can be done to individualize
education in the social interaction subjects in which
students must be taught in groups.

The percentage change over the short time periods in
this study, as well as the redistribution of clinical
choices established the existence of the link between
clinical curriculum design of materials and clinical
perception.

The design of curriculum materials can induce better
teaching; it provides some of the conditions which reward
teachers through increased success for children and,
therefore, for themselves. Curriculum design, in company
with the design and implementation of adult-to—adult support
toward the same objectives, can become a continually updated
learning system. Such a learning system can both increase
achievement of performance objectives and enhance the

humane factors for which education in a democracy exists.

 

 

10.

 

 

FOOTNOTES

Ward, T. W. Professional integration and clinical
research. The Supervisor: Agent for Change in Teaching.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Washington, 1966.

 

The work of the Learning Systems Institute, Michigan
State University is summarized in the Final Report,
Behavioral Science Elementary Teacher Education Program,
October,’l§68, Michigan State University, Project
#8—9025, Contract #0EC-0—8—089025-3314 (010), Vol. 1.

 

Wiener, N. The human use of human beings. Cybernetics
and society. Garden City: Doubledayglnchor, 1954.

Fuller, F. F. Concerns of teachers: a developmental
conceptualization. In American Educational Research
Journal Vol. VI Number 2 March, 1§69, p. 221,’223.

Simon, A., Boyer, E. G., Mirrors for Behavior, Research
for Better Schools, Inc., Philadelphia, Penna. Under
Provisions of Title IV ESEA of 1965 in cooperation with
the USOE, Research Contract #OEC 1-7—062867-3053. 1967.
System 8.

Mirrors for Behavior, System 23.

 

Mirrors for Behavior, System 13.

Wallen, N. E., et al. The Taba Curriculum Development
Project in Social Studies. Menlo Park: Addison-Wesley,
267.

T§39, p.

Mirrors for Behavior, System 14.

Loree, (1971) raises the question of the application of
reinforcement theory to changing the concerns of teachers.

178

 

BBBBBBBBBB

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Clinical Tbaching Behavior

Bauer, N. W., The Social Science Teacher as Clinician:
The Role and the Curriculum. Learning Systems Institute,
Michigan State University, Papers of the Institute #75.
Journal of Teacher Education, Volume XXII, 179 - 184.

Behavioral Science Elementary Teacher Education Program,
Michi igan State UniverSity. Vol. I of Three Volumes,
Final Report, Project No. 8-9025, Contract No. OEC-O-
8-089025-3314 (010). October, 1968. Section III,
Clinical Experiences.

Cookingham, F., Review and Definition of Clinical
Teaching Style. Learning Systems Institute, Michigan
State University.

Henderson, J. E., Williard, S M., Barnes, H. L. &
Prawat, R. 8., (Ed. ). Individual and the School

(Handbook for Education 2005. Michigan State University:
Winter, 1971.

Cybernetic Model

Wiener, N. Cybernetics or Control and Communication in
the Animal and the Machine. Cambridge, Mass.: The
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 1948.

 

 

Wiener, N. The Human Use of Human Beings: Cybernetics
and Society. Garden City: Doubleday, l930.

Piaget

Flavell, J. E., The Developmental Psychology of
Jean Piaget. Princeton: Van Nostrand, 19

Sigel, I., & Hooper, F., Logical Thinking in Children.
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Ha11,1§70.

179

 

 

Methodology
Encyclopedia of Educational Research. 4th Edition, 1969.

Gage, N. L., (Ed.). Handbook of Research on Teaching.
Rand McNally, 1967.

Hunkins, F. P. Analysis and Evaluation Questions:
Their Effects upon Critical Thinking. Educational
Leadership, ASCD, Volume 3, April, 1970.

Justiz, T. B. A Reliable Measure of Teacher Effective—
ness. Educational Leadership, ASCD, Volume 3,
October, 1969.

Oliver, D. W., & Shaver, J. P. Teachin Public Issues
in the High School. Boston: Houghton-%ifflin, 1966.
Review of Educational Research. Volume 39, Number 3.

washington, D. C}: American Educational Research
Association, June, 1969.

Shaver, J. P., & Berlak, H. Democracy, Pluralism and
The Social Studies. Boston: Houghton—Mifflin, 1963.

Walbesser, H. H., & Carter, H. Some Methodological
Considerations of Curriculum Evaluation. Educational
Leadership, ASCD, Volume 2, October, 1968.

Ward, T. W. Professional Integration and Clinical
Research. The Supervisor: Agent for Change in Teaching.
ASCD Eleventh Curriculum Research Institute.

Washington, D.C. 1965-66.

 

Ward, T. W., & Henderson, J. E. Guidelines for Building
Teacher-Behavioral Research Instruments. lLearning
Systems Institute. Papers of the’IEstitute #25.
Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 1966.

Simulation and Situatioual Testing

American Behavioral Scientist. Volume 10, Number 2,
c 0 er, an um er , ovember 1966.

Carlson, E., Games in the Classroom. Saturday Review.
April 15, 1967.

Coleman, J. 8., Learning Through Games. NEA Journal.
January, 1967.

180

   

 

Educational Technology, October, 1969. Review of
research on several simulation studies, 43 — 70.

 

Jaffee, C. L. Assessment Centers Help Find Management
Potential. Bell Telephone Magazine. Volume 44,
Number 3, 1965.

 

James, R. E., Jr. Model community design involves
entire project. Upward Bound application of game
theory. Idea Exchange, April 1969. ll - 13.

Kraft, I. Pedagogical Futility in Fun and Games.
NEA Journal. January, 1967.

Moses, J. L. The Personnel Assessment Program Variables.
A talk to an assessment staff in training. Personnel
Research Section of the American Telephone and Telegraph
Co.

 

Simulation: The Game EXPLOSION Series of Articles in
Social Education, February, 1

 

Thoeny & Horton, Simulation Games as a Teaching Technique:
A Preliminary Review. United States Air Force Academy.

Wollowich, H. B., & McNamara, H. B. Relationship of the
Components of an Assessment Center to Management Success.

Journal of A lied Ps cholo 1969, Volume 53, Number 5
343 - 352. Eew York, 1969.

Systematic Observation and Coding

 

 

Simon, A., & Boyer, E. G., Mirrors for Behavior.
Research for Better Schools, Inc., Philadélphia, Penna.
Under provision of Title IV ESEA of 1965 in cooperation
with the USOE, Research Contract #OEC 1—7—062867-3053.
1967.

 

Wallen, et al, The Taba Curriculum Development. Project
in Social Studies. 'MEnlo Park,‘California: Addison-
Wesley PuBlishing Co. October,1969.

Values in Teaching and Social Problem-Solving in the Classroom

 

Bauer, N. W. Can You Teach Values? Instructor, Aug.-Sept.

Bauer, N. W. Guaranteeing the Values Component in
the Elementary School Social Studies. Social Education,
Volume 31, January, 1967.

181

 

 

 

Bauer, N. W. A Sequence of Learning and Teaching as a
Curriculum Model, unpublished paper prepared for the
Center for the Study of Instruction (a division of
Harcourt Brace and World), 1966.

Bauer, N. W. The Teacher's Role in Value—Seeking:
The Creative Conspiracy of Teacher and Curriculum.
Teacher's Notebook. New York: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich, 1970.

Brandwein, P. F. Toward a Discipline of Responsible
Consent, Harcourt,’Brace and World, 1 .

Hunt, M. P., & Metcalf, L. E. Problems Approach--Theory.
In Gross, R. E., & Muessig, R. H. Problem-centered
social studies instruction. Washington: National
COunciI for the SociEl Studies Curriculum Series,

Number Fourteen, 1971.

Lippitt, R., & Fox, R. Role-Playing. Chicago: S.R.A.
1966.

Muessig, R. H. Social Studies Education. The Teacher's
Handbook, Allen and Seifman, (Ed.). (in press).

Raths, L. E., & Simon, S. B. Values and Teaching.
Charles E. Merrill, 1966.

Shaftel, F. R. Role-Playing for Social Problem-Solvigg.
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1 8.

Research on Teacher Attitude and Performance.
Fuller, F. F. Concerns of Teachers. A Developmental
Conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal,
Volume 6, Number 2. LMarch, 41969T7p. 207 — 226.

Loree, M. R. Shaping Teachers' Attitudes. In
Smith, B. 0. (Ed.), Research in Teacher Education: A

S m osium. For the Afierican Educational RESearch
Association. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice—Hall, 1971.

Popham, W. J. Performance tests of teaching proficiency:
rationale, development, and validation. American
Educational Research Journal. Volume 8, Number 1.
January, 1971, 105 - 117.

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX A

 

 

 

’ , 1

BSTEP Proposal: Michigan State University

In—Class Teaching Behaviors (Prescriptive & Evaluation)

Substantive Dimensions

A.

Changing subjects--adjusting and adapting selected
subject matter to unanticipated pupil reaction
(e.g., dislike, emotional tension, and interest).

Changing sequence (reorganize)--a1tering anticipated
sequence of content units to either (a) allow
additional time for remediation and/or reinforcement
or (b) eliminate attention to areas already known

by pupils.

Changing tasks--modifying planned pupil tasks
(e.g., assignments) to fit readiness level of
individuals and/or small or large groups.

Changing pace-—a1tering pace of content activities
on basis of unforseen pupil reaction (e.g., over-
stimulation) and/or time problems.

In-Class Teaching Behaviors Behavioral Dimensions

A.

Questioning pupils regarding subject matter—~providing
verbal stimuli to initiate desired pupil response.

Explaining subject matter to pupils-~interpreting
terms, meanings, motives, in language that readily
communicates to pupils.

Acknowledging pupil contributions-—responding to
pupils' answers and suggestions, using their contributions
for illustration, contrast, and comparison.

Assessing pupil grasp of content, products and
operations--testing (could be by listening, watching,
reading, etc.) for pupil ability, problems, and
self—satisfaction.

Extinguishing undesirable pupil behaviors--applying
deviancy control techniques.

 

 

 

PLEASE CIRCLE THE APPROPRIATE DATA:

 

Male Female
593 Grade level teaching this Total years of full—time
school year (1270-21)‘__, Teaching Experience includ-

Under 25 igg present year.
25-29 3
30-3h one year
35-39 A two years

+4 4.
h5—h9 5 5-9
50-5h 10*1A
55-59 6 15-19
60-61. 20-21.
65 or more 25—3h

3

h5- or more years

CARD - SORT TASK

In the small envelope are ten cards and three labeled "Lents". Each card describes
one teaching situation and a teaching decision. You are asked to juigo each teaching
decision.

Set up the labeled tents in front of you.

Sort the cards into piles in front of the appropriate tents.

 

After ypu have sorted all the card5,please record your decisions b-low.

List the number of each card in the column which represents your judgment.

 

Right Wrong
Decision Decision Uncertain

Order is not important

 

 

 

 

 

Questionnaire (Page 1)

_———-

This will give you a chance to describe yourself and your students. Fill in as
many of the items in each section as you can.

I. The items in Section I focus on the students as thg come to flu, your OM“?!-
ives for them and the influence or the student. crux-actuation on your plane
for teaching.

A. The most important characteristics or w students:
For maple! (1.) // ' , 2 1: / /M
(2.) [fig/(1 2‘11; 141’”; ”’4)
1. / /

 

 

2.
3.

 

 

B. In what ways are you trying to change your Itudontc?
I want my students to learn to be
For oxamplox(l) more Ajz/éz-/ xflf %4%in 4°71.) ”((2 'iLZKZK/I7XK‘K/4/C;
/ .7 / V //

 

 

 

 

 

1. more
2. more
Porcxamplel(l)1eu flfl-dct’é ,{3/ d/flfl/gffl/
/ /
1. less
2. 1...

 

(list here only your most important I. objectives)

 

c. The particular factors in cw students that require special accommodation
or adjustment of w teaching procedure:

“Temple: (1.) My. Aéij [KM

1.

 

2.

 

3.
A.

 

 

 

 

Questionnaire (Page 2)

II. The items in Section II focus on your daily classroom procedures.
A. Key factors in the instructional environment I control:

For example: (1.)

 

5. Resources that I use with my students in social studies or social science:

For example: (1 wémasz/i’émmy. 43249.46 x317»

1. n—.—m.——>—c-u—a—u——y—b--——-——>->uv---. W~—-_

-_..,.___._--._,.._.-—.__._..._....-_.-.-__,--__..__..__._......_.-.....-.-—

C. What I attempt to be:

For example: (1.1Wfl)n._/wrgfigwr~_

——-.._o-. .

 

 

2.

 

3. W.._*__~--i-_..-__._.-----_.-...-s.”an..-“ ‘
\

h.

“m-_—m-.__ mwgh-.__‘ ...._.. ,. _. ...... -... . ~. . .... t.._. . . -

D. Hays in which my teaching is adjusted to the particular character— ‘

istics of my students:

For example: (1 . )WMMZfl/Q’Qfiy/K7 ‘

1.

 

 

 

 

 

 

III.

For example :

IV.

For example:(l. l . 2&4 I (115%! dmfiM-DUJZ'fi-LZ 12:1 I£z§(;/_wbbz[£{,-_Z,,7 * _

1.

2.

3.

h.

5.

 

Questionnaire (Page 3)

The item in Section III focuses on your View of the results of your

weed es _in_rp_19.t.1gn._t9.ypsr.aafl_s~
Specific adjushnsnts that should be made in w teaching in order to make

 

it more apt to reach the goals.

  

 

 

The items in Section IV focus on two overview questions, relating to
your experience in teaching social studies or social science.
MY GOALS IN IEACHING SOCIAL FOR EACH 0? YOUR GOALS AT THE LEFT,

STUDIES 0R SOCIAL SCIENCE REALIS'I‘ICALLY, WHAT USUALLY HAPIVENS
IN TERMS OF ACTUAL ACHIEVEMENT?

 

 

 

 

._ .. ...i-------.-.-.i.__..__ 3. ____________.____.__..-_.-._ --.-

lo.

 

5.

 

 

 

 

For example:

For example:

V.

 

Questionnaire (Page h)

The items in Section V focus on your evaluation oLygur students. .13; social

 

studies orflgpgisl science.

 

 

What evidence do I use for evaluation of the success of the curriculum and

 

each child? (For report cards, for the school files and/or for your own
records):
(1.) J £2.ng aé: 6W ~-__fl__,r______
(2.) J W Ax W

7 /
1.

—._.....~..—-. . m.“ ...-.....u _.-- . -.,.,._. ..fim-_______._~__,_

2.

 

3.

 

 

Which real outcomes in the children fall short of my goals in social

studies or social science? .
(1.) 2&7/57Wfi7W1/W1fl14/44 Wj/ZZ

1.

 

2.

 

3.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N
N
N
N
.Islll pIIIIIIIII.
N
"II’
N
fl
IIIII. IIIIIIIIII
I'll! .IIIIIIIII
IJIII .IIIIIIIII
N
* I'll!
f
N
ll’l'
N
N
l’ll'l
N
I
N
[I’ll
N
I]!
..I:«.. .pnnuunnuuunl
N
«lull! .Ilrltuanunl
.IIII: .||||1|:|11.
muwHu menu
flaws opuuoosv
u . GNU you O08

 

l

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N

 

N

 

N

 

K

Ill/Ill}!

I

 

nouwdnmuonwn
vouc>wuor
o>unnum

uuauvnu<
an«NUHm
vUHHOHuaoo
o>wuauuuseH
Hauanonusm
u>«u:ouu<
vapouuounuosunoy
vouuouwvlnonunoh

>wnm

 

kuwuumuowwn
vuua>auoz
u>ammom

oaswenue
canaxoam
voaaouucou
o>auaouuccH
quomoousm
«>«scusu<
venouaaonuonusoa
vouuouuvinononoh

hwsn

 

 

 

m wusuowm

 

< Nuauowk

 

 

 

I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N
N
N
N
x
x
IIIIIIIII
N
JIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIII
N
IIIIIIIIII!
N
x
Illllllll
K
an
N
N
N
Illllflll
mmmHu musu
Haws caduceus
o.:wo uos moon

mono: may we some new

I

nonficnwhomao
woun>wuoz

o>wmmmm

 

x umaovmu<

 

espexuso

 

N codaouucou

 

w>wucwuumCH

 

Howwmoausm

 

K o>wucouu<

 

noowuawoluocumwk

 

x uwuosuawlownuooh

 

x mmon

 

oouazmwuomwc

I

K wouw>auox

 

o>fimmmm

 

oflsovmu<

I

manqxwam

I

voHHOHucoo

I

w>wucouum:H

I

Hawomomoam
IIIIIIIIJ
N m>wucouu<
IIIIIIIIIII
noooucoolomnomww
IIIIIIIIIII
kuuwufinuaozomoh
IIIIIIIII.
x >wsm
mweau mwzu
unwouwov
moon

savaou ounauoouaac wzu xoaco

 

 

 

 

a wozuowm

 

o wusuofim

 

Card-Sort Task

 

Card-sort 1 (Criterion 1):

You teach in a school system in which you must give
You have a child

letter grades in all subject matter areas.
in class who can answer social science questions by drawing

pictures or acting out his answers in a skit but he cannot
read the text or write answers on written tests as well as
any of the other children who are getting "B"'s.

You decide to give him a C and write a detailed and
complimentary comment about his work for his parents and

his cumulative file.
How should your action be judged?
Card-sort 2 (Criterion 2):

The faculty has met and decided democratically that they
should all teach the same course content within each grade

 

level.

In the faculty curriculum committee two teachers are in
considerable disagreement over whether China or Latin America
should be the focus of the sixth grade curriculum. Two
primary teachers are discussing whether holidays or Indians

should be the topics of the second grade.

You are chairman and are asked by the faculty to settle
the arguments.

You put each topic in a different semester since all are
important.

How should your action be judged?

Card-sort 3 (Criterion 3):

The children in your class have good verbal skills, but
in a group they act as if school were a big bore.

Your next social science unit is on members of groups
and their similar behaviors and values.

To find out what your class' group values are and at
the same time introduce the new unit, you have the children
read a story about an Indian tribe and its values and write
or tell about it.

How should your lesson plan be judged?

 

 

Card—sort 4 (Criterion 5):

You want to find out what the children in your class
know about cultural traits or behavior.
'Why do all groups of people have accepted
ways of behaving?"

You ask:

Among the children's responses are the following:

'Because they need them."
"Who cares anyhow."

"That's how they adapt to their environment."
'Because they do."

"Things would be in a mess if they didn't."

How should your question be judged?

Card-sort 5 (Criterion 6):

In order to help the children learn problem-solving you
ask:
"Should a person who lives in a democracy
be fined for not voting?"

How should your question be judged?

Card-sort 6 (Criterion 7):

Your social science class has been studying about
different groups in different societies around the world.

One child without raising her hand says:
"I wouldn't join any group that's got
niggers (or honkies) in it."

You smile understandingly at her and calmly call on
someone else whose hand is raise .

How should your action be judged?

Card-sort 7 (Criterion 8):

The children in your class need to learn how to partici-
pate in making decisions in groups in which there are many
strong differences in views.

You decide to divide the class into groups for their
next research report; each group will have to present one
report on the way of life in another country.

How should your decision be judged?

 

 

Card-sort 8 (Criterion 9):
One of your objectives is to help the children in your

class value and work for peace. The social science text
explains how the Hopi Indian society values peace.

You design a project in which the children make the
classroom into a Hopi Indian village and have the children
role-play a typical day in the life of the Hopis.

How should your lesson plan be judged?

Card-sort 9 (Criterion 10):

Seven children in your class volunteer to be participants
in a role-play. The role—play calls for only three children
to plan ways of helping a shy girl in the neighborhood make
more friends. Among the volunteers in your class is a girl
who always plays by herself.

You decide not to choose her for the role-play.
How should your action be judged?

Card—sort 10 (Criterion 12):

You assign your social science class a research topic:
read in the library to find out about the ways different

people adapt to their environment.

Two of the children bring in detailed reports on ways
people live but say nothing of how these ways show adaptation

You let it go this time but next time you use films and
filmstrips with those two instead of books.

How should your action be judged?

 

 

POSTTESTS ONLY

USING THE TEACHER'S EDITION

As you see it, the Teacher's Edition of Social Sciences:
Concepts and Values is primarily useful to: (Circle one)

1. help me understand the book

2. help me to work with children of different abilities
and attitudes.

3. train me to use the book effectively

How often have you used the Teacher's Edition? (This is
important. Please be frank.) (Circle one)

1. Every day that I taught Social Studies

2. Almost every day that I taught Social Studies (more
than half the time).

3. Half the days that I taught Social Studies.
4. Less than half the days that I taught Social Studies.
5. Never

When have you used the Teacher's Edition? (Circle as
many as you wish.)

1. Before teaching
2. While teaching
3. After teaching

How you used the Teacher's Edition? (Circle the one
that applies best.) Generally, have you used:

1. lost of the lesson ideas in the Teacher's Edition.

2. Just those lesson ideas in the Teacher's Edition that
I choose ahead of time.

3. I have no standard way of using the Teacher's Edition.

 

INSERVICE TRAINING

 

Please check any and all of those that apply.

1. I have had at least one university course
in new Social Studies methods and materials
in the past two years.

 

2. I have had one workshop or heard one
presentation by the Harcourt consultant.

3. I have heard a presentation by one of the
authors of the series.

4. Our school (or school system) has had its
own workshop on new Social Studies in
general.

 

5. Our school (or school system) has had its
own workshop on this Harcourt Social
Science program.

 

APPENDIX B

 

.opaa wxooB h connnpoh mpmoe .oonomnm Ho o>aoa soon nonmomom mo pepoonaa .m
.oonownm Ho o>moa x00» souaomom mo nepoonan .N
.nosaomom we acuoonfin wasp Hang a cm: .H

 

 

 

 

me mm mNH omm wmm
om om an on
ma ma NH MN
mm mm OOH maa
o
no mm $0
mm mm mm Ne
w w OH ma
0 o OH mm
N
Amanda
mm mm mama spas em
hfisov mm Hm
an an Nb mm
honssz ponnspom conuspom oonanpom umoponm hem poem a
Hanan nonasz nonsnz Honsnz sopmmm Hoonom hm
N “monumom H pmopwmom umopohm copmosuom Honsnz

 

maopmhm Hoonom mnfluadaoaphmm ow momma Ho neapnneupmfin no phenom

masses

0

come.

Hm

<

sopmmm

Hoonom

 

 

 

Dr. Paul F. Brandwein, President
Center for the Study of Instruction
Polk and Geary Streets

San Francisco, California 94109

I agree to participate in the initial phases of the study,
at least. I hope to be able to participate in the entire
study.

I have designated the staff member listed below as the one
who is responsible to negotiate with

Nancy Bauer

Research Associate, Center for the
Study of Instruction, and

Fellow, Michigan State University

Staff member

 

signature

 

T0: Mrs. Nancy W. Bauer
Fellow, Learning Systems Institute

Return form from Administrators

The research instruments will be administered in the
following building (s) on the date noted.

Building Name Time Date Number of Teachers*

 

Please send evaluation packets to me at this address.

 

Name, Title

 

School Name

 

School Address

 

City, State Zip Code

*Using Teacher's Edition Levels 3, 4, 5, 6 of The Social
Sciences: Concepts and Values daily.

 

 

   

FROM: Nancy W. Bauer

Fellow, Learning Systems Institute
Michigan State University

To the administrator:

Dear

You have been designated by your school district to administer
curriculum research instruments to the teachers in
school (s).

As you know, the purpose of this research is to evaluate the
effects of the Teacher's Edition of the social science series,
The Social Sciences: Concepts and Values (Harcourt, Brace
and World, 1970), and ultimately to bring you information

applicable to strengthening the performance of your teachers
within this curriculum.

The teachers to be involved in this study are those teaching
Levels 3, 4, 5 and 6. They should agree to use the Teacher's
Edition daily and participate in two sessions for evaluation

of the materials, one in the fall, the other in mid—winter
93 in late spring.

To conform to the requirements of the research, the adminis-
tration of these instruments should be:

1. Given to all teachers in a single building at one time.

2. Given during a regular faculty meeting time, so that the
task is viewed as a bona fide professional responsibility,
not an added burden or a casual favor.

3.

Given between September 14 and October 9. As early in
the time period as possible.

Your role in planning, setting up the room and creating the
PrOper atmosphere is crucial.

l. The room should allow each teacher desk or table space
so that his/her responses are not easily seen by others.
Teachers cannot do these tasks on their laps.

2. Coffee and cigarettes will make the task pleasanter for
those who wish them, particularly if this is at the end
of the school day.

3‘

Pencils with erasers should be available.

 

 

 

 

 

-2-

4. All teachers using The Social Sciences: Concepts and

Values Levels 3, 4, 5, 6 in any oneibuilding should
participate.

5. You will note on a form which we will send with the
packets of instruments which teacher received which
numbered envelope. This is necessary so that the results
of the first evaluation session can be correlated with
the results of the second evaluation to be given in
either January or early May.

As you know all individual responses will be coded.
Individuals, schools and school districts remain
anonymous.

You will collect sealed packets from the teachers and
have them mailed to the university immediately after the
session, along with the form containing the list of
names and numbers.

There are three tasks, each of which is self—administered by
each teacher and needs only a pencil. The entire time needed
will not exceed 45 minutes. If a teacher needs help in
understanding the directions, you may give it individually.

May we suggest that you emphasize the following points:

 

1. That this is a unique opportunity for teachers to be
part of a nation-wide curriculum research and development
program.

2. That the information the teacher gives will help in
determining the usefulness of the Teacher's Editions.

3.

That teachers will remain absolutely anonymous; all
responses will be coded. Teachers, schools and school
districts will not be identified in the findings of the

study. Each packet envelope should be sealed b the
teacher before being turned in to the administrator.

Many thanks for your aid in making it possible for teachers
to participate in what we trust will be a meaningful pro—
fessional experience.

If you have other questions at any time, please write me
202 Erickson Hall, Michigan State University, East Lansing,
Michigan, or call (313) 642-2149 or 626-5790

 

 

 

 

To the Administrator:

Enclosed is:
numbered packets

Form for listing teachers and
number of packet each received.

A copy of the letter you received
earlier for your quick reference.

Mailing label - please send sealed
packets and list registered, lst.
class mail.

At the end of this evaluation session, please ask each
teacher to put the card-sorts in the small envelope, enclose
all materials in the large envelope.

After packet envelopes are sealed, please collect all packets
and mail immediately to:

Mrs. Nancy W. Bauer

Fellow, Learning Systems Institute
Michigan State University

E. Lansing, Michigan 48823

 

 

 

 

 

 

District

Teacher's Name

 

Building Name

Date

Number of Packet

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FROM: Nancy W. Bauer
Fellow, Learning Systems Institute
Michigan State University

 

To the teacher:

Your school will use The Social Sciences: Concepts and Values1
as your social science curriculum. As you know, it comes in
two interwoven parts. The children's text is essentially a
laboratory book and the Teacher's Edition is the basic
structure of the total teaching-learning experience.

 

The Teacher's Edition was developed with continual feedback
from school systems and schools throughout the nation.

The purpose of this research is to gather further information
on the usefulness of the Teacher's Edition of The Social
Sciences: Concepts and Values to teachers. You have been
selected to participate with other teachers in other schools
in different parts of the country.

 

 

 

You are asked to use the Teacher's Edition daily and to
participate in two sessions for administering instruments

such as these, at this time and once more in either mid-winter
or late spring.

As you will notice the top half of the first page is a data
sheet. Your identity remains anonymous and your individual
responses are only seen by the research staff. The number
on the instruments identifies the region, size of community
and school district in which you teach.

There are four tasks in this study:

1. Data about you (Page 1 - upper half)

2. Card-Sort task in small envelope
Record data on page 1 - lower half

3. Questionnaire (4 pages)

4. Picture Analysis (2 pages)

Directions are on each task. Findings for the entire study
will be reported back to the staffs of participating schools
early in the school year 1971 - 72.

Thank you for your cooperation.

If you have any questions or suggestions related to these

materials, please feel free to communicate them to me at the
above address.

1Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc. 1970

—_ i

FROM: Nancy W. Bauer
Fellow, Learning Systems Institute
202 Erickson Hall
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan 48823

Dear

Enclosed are the post-test instruments for those teachers who
completed the pretest in the fall.

As you know, the purpose of this research is to evaluate the
effects of the Teacher's Edition of the social science series,
The Social Sciences: Concepts and Values (Harcourt, Brace
and World, 1970), and ultimately to bring you information
applicable to strengthening the performance of your teachers
within this curriculum.

 

The teachers involved in this study are those teaching levels
3, 4, 5 and 6. They have agreed to use the Teacher's Edition
daily and participate in two sessions for evaluation of the
materials, one in the fall, the other in mid-winter or in
late spring. *-

To conform to the requirements of the research, the administ—
ration of these instruments should be:

1. Given to all teachers (who took the fall pretest) in a
single building at one time.

2. Given during a regular faculty meeting time, so that the
task is viewed as a bona fide professional responsibility,
not an added burden or a casual favor.

3. Given between January 11 and February 12. As early in
the time period as possible.

4. EACH TEACHER RECEIVES THE SAME PACKET NUMBER THAT HE
RECEIVED IN THE PRETEST. You wIII find the packet number
on the form which we are sending with the packets of
instruments for each building. This is absolutely
necessary so that the results of the first evaluation
session can be correlated with the results of this second
evaluation. EACH TEACHER SHOULD INITIAL THE FORM NEXT TO
HIS NAME TO VERIFY RECEIVING THE CORRECT PACKET NUMBER.

 

-2-

As you know all individual responses will be coded.
Individuals, schools and school districts remain anonymous.

Your role in planning, setting up the room and creating
the proper atmosphere is crucial.

l. The room should allow each teacher desk or table space
so that his/her responses are not easily seen by others.
Teachers cannot do these tasks on their laps.

2. Coffee and cigarettes will make the task pleasanter for
those who wish them, particularly if this is at the end of
the school day.

3. Pencils with erasers should be available.

4. You will collect sealed packets from the teachers and
have them mailed to tHe university immediately after the
session, ALONG WITH the form containing the list of names
and numbers.

 

 

There are five tasks, each of which is self-administered

by each teacher and needs only a pencil. The entire time
needed will not exceed 1 hour. If a teacher needs help in
understanding the directions, you may give it individually.
Teachers may use more time if they wish, but they should not
take the test packets out of the room. They should finish
before leaving, without consulting each other.

May we suggest that you emphasize the following points:

1. That this is a unique opportunity for teachers to be part
of a nationwide curriculum research and development program.

2. That the information the teacher gives will help in
determining the usefulness of the Teacher‘s Editions.

3. That teachers will remain absolutely anonymous; all
responses will be coded. Teachers, schools and school
districts will not be identified in the'findings of the
study. Each packet envelope should be sealed by the teacher

 

before being turned in to the administrator.

Many thanks for your aid in making it possible for teachers
to participate in what we trust will be a meaningful pro—
fessional experience.

If you have other questions at any time, please write at
202 Erickson Hall, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Or call (517) 353-6417 and ask for Diane Giebel, Secretary
to the Social Science Curriculum Research Project.

September 25, 1970

Dear

This is just a reminder to you as administrator of the research
instruments to your Social Studies teachers that:

1.

The week of October 12 — 16 is the deadline for adminis-
tering the instruments.

These are pre- tests and obviously must be completed
before the teacEers are well into the program. If the
Teacher‘ 5 Editions have not arrived, so much the better
for a valid pre-test.

If your teachers are having in-service training or demon-
strations from Harcourt, please try to have the pre—tests
taken before those sessions.

When you return the sealed packets, be sure you also return
the form which records teachers names and packet numbers.
There should be one form for each place in which the tests
were administered. When the post-tests are given in the
second semester, we will send the test packets to the correct
building and each teacher will also receive the same number
he had in the pre-test.

If you have any questions or problems, please call the
Learning Systems Institute at Michigan State University:
(517) 353—6418. The secretary to this project is

Miss Diane Giebel.

Please return the packets immediately. Be sure none are
lost.

 

Please continue to remind teachers that this study requires
their use of the Teacher's Edition every day that they
teach Social Studies.

Many thanks to you and your teachers.

Sincerely,

Nancy W. Bauer
Fellow, Learning Systems Institute

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX C

 

 

 

Preliminary Run I Notes
N . 8

Testing time: 10 to 45 minutes

A summer session of experienced teachers from an urban
school system and student teachers from the university.
Another person came with this investigator to observe and
take notes on the comments and behavior of the teachers.
Setting: A faculty lounge. Teachers could sit anywhere
they liked. Atmosphere informal. The teachers were tired
at the end of their teaching day and some were very anxious
to get home.

Some wording on the instruments was not clear, reflected
in such statements as "is this what you want?" Questions
were answered by this investigator as they worked.

Teachers were interviewed as they finished.

Some of the student teachers found it difficult to
concentrate. They had not known their students long enough

to answer some of the questions and they had no previous

experience to which to refer. Two of the student teachers

became flustered; one was not willing to complete the task,

he said he was hungry.

Some of the test questions about adjustment of teaching
seemed repetitive, reflecting lack of clear communication
understanding that adjustments in teaching that are actually
made may differ from adjustments which should be made.

The question on classroom procedures needed to be cued

Specifically to social studies.

 

 

 

 

Preliminary run I (cont'd).

Some terms were unclear, e.g. the term ”factors" needs to
be changed to "goals" in the list of "ways you are trying
to change your students".

One teacher wanted clarification of what was meant by
"evaluation of your students".

There was some concern over having to create one's own
answers in an open-ended questionnaire. Several Openly
wished they could discuss these items in the group rather
than commit themselves.

The Card—Sort game

Two teachers were reluctant to commit themselves to
card-sort decisions. They wanted to use the cases for a
take-off point for discussion with others.

Conclusions drawn from Preliminary Run I.

It is obvious that the setting and instructions need to
be more businesslike. These teachers do not see any positive
value of the task to themselves. Of course, they are right.
The actual task must be a contract between the teacher and
the research project for a reason involving self—interest.

Several of the card-sorts need redesigning to focus
only on the hypothesis under consideration. The teachers
recorded their reasons for making each decision; in some
cases it was possible for them to find or request alternatives
to the original set—up of the situation rather than recognize

that those conditions were fixed. In each of these cases the

description was redesigned,

 

 

 

 

e.g.

H2 "In a faculty curriculum committee two teachers
are in a curriculum disagreement”-—
was changed to
"The faculty has met and decided democratically
that they should all teach the same course
content within each grade level"--

This change took care of the tangential (for purposes
of this study) concern over who tells teachers what they
should do.

The card—sort decisions were redesigned several times,
using an elementary school principal and a supervisor
of student teachers to:

1. estimate from the case story what the hypothesis
was (for validity).

2. predict the reactions of teachers to the decisions--
would the teachers recognize each decision as a
supportable one, even though they might disagree.

In addition to being a test for clinical perceptions,
each card.sort must be supportable for non—clinical reasons
as well. (Standard norms of behavior for the role of
teacher as explainer, disciplinarian, umpire and giver of
grades). If there is gain in clinical perception and

standards, many of these decisions should move from seeming

right to seeming wrong-

 

 

 

 

 

After Preliminary Run 1, the questionnaire was revised:
To include examples which indicate the meaning or
range of the questions without guiding the answers.
To make the examples slightly amusing and in
handwriting so that the subjects will take note

of the examples and become more aware of the focus
of the questions but not be overguided into
particular types of answers as preferred or
expected.

The term "evaluation" was broken down into several
specific ways of assessing student progress.

Preliminary Run II

 

N - 12
This was the first run for the picture test.
Setting: An integrated day workshop of volunteers from
a wide variety of schools, many from independent and
parochial schools.
These teachers had been in the workshop for almost
two weeks and were extremely enthusiastic about "letting
children express themselves", "the teacher's role as guide",
"The curriculum must meet the needs of each child as he sees
them". An initial prediction would be that presumably in
some areas of the instruments these teachers should score

well.

 

 

 

 

 

Preliminary run 11 (cont'd).

Card-Sort

The card—sort responses were still falling into the
uncertain category which may reflect ambiguity in the
focus of the cases.

The card-sort involving a bully so involves teachers
in either punishing the bully or protecting the other

children from him that the issue of diagnosis of the

reasons for being a bully never came up. This (#3a)

 

card-sort had to be eliminated.
The card-sort dealing with class discussions was

too complicated. The connection between selecting the

groups and the kind of topic under discussion was not
clear.

Questionnaire

The greatest difficulty was encountered over the
question (IV) on goals and realities in teaching social
science.

The directions would have to be spelled out for each
question so that there will be no need to ask for help

when the instruments are being administered by a school

principal or coordinator.

The range of answers is broad but on the point, which
was a sign that teachers were being themselves when they
answer. This was important for validity.

This group of teachers wrote in great detail and

seemed to take the task more seriously than the first.

 

 

 

 

 

They are volunteers; many of them know the researcher
personally and seem anxious to help. Their detailed
responses helpto give insight into the usage of the
language in the questionnaire by teachers.

When asked for goals in social studies they became
both specific on rote memory items and vague. The lack
of goals in social studies beyond "finding latitude and
longitude", "knowing the great men of history" and a
generalized "understanding others" will make this item
a helpful measure of change (if any) in teacher attitudes
toward the use of the curriculum.

These preliminary runs indicated that even very "Open",
"innovative" teachers may have little sense of what the
curriculum should do or is doing.

Picture Test

The picture test was run for the first time using photo-
graphs. Loose photographs are not as business-like a
format as is needed. The lack of enough table space is
still evident. When a teacher has to use chairs as easels and
his lap for a desk, part of the spell of "this is
professional" cannot help but dissipate——even with this
seemingly highly motivated and enthusiastic group.

The directions for half the group were to circle the
letter of the pictures that apply. Each page must be
carefully identified so that there is no confusion about

"which picture am I on?" or "Do I have to do them in order?"

 

 

 

 

 

 

Preliminary Run II (cont'd).

The directions for the other half of the group had a
second column for checking "items that can't be answered
at all”. Subjects seemed to like the second column as
it gave them a more realistic and complete choice.
Card-Sort

Each subject was interviewed after deciding and
recording reasons for their decisions. Recording the
reasons for decisions took a great deal of time.

The card—sort responses seemed on the point, although
some of the items still seem to be falling into the

uncertain category.

Preliminary Run III
N = 4 on Card-sort
N : 7 on Questionnaire

Setting: Suburban summer school. Four male teachers who
are hired for summer school because they have both prestige
and seniority.

They worked at desks in a more formal setting and the
task was described as "a professional one in which their
participation was crucial". There was some concern that
”the others have the same task I do".

The data sheet has been redesigned to include I.D.
information and card—sort answers on one page. This would
save space. People tend to overlook the six I.D. informa-

tion as it is placed on this sheet.

 

 

 

Prelimiggry Run 111 (cont‘d).

Card-sort directions were spelled out in chronological
order. It has been decided that the teachers should record
the numbers rather than simply put a check next to a
printed number in order to avoid confusion if the cards are
not in numerical order. The teacher may think more
carefully about each decision if its number is to be recorded.

The responses are more clearly right or wrong, fewer
in the uncertain column.

Picture test seemed to have no difficulty and provoked
considerable interest.

"Teacher-centered" was added to the list of adjectives
describing each picture in order to clarify perception of
the teacher's role, "teacher-directed" and "teacher-centered"
being different. This investigator was concerned that the
appearance of the two items constituted an obvious value
judgment, that teacher—directed is "good" and teacher-
centered is "bad". The subjects, however, seemed to feel
more comfortable with the distinction, because the two items
clarified each other.

Card—sorts had been rewarded for simplicity and brevity.
The final ten cases seem satisfactory. No difficulty in
interpretation of the single point left open for judgment.

Easily scorable as clinical or not.

 

 

 

Preliminary Run IV
N - 8

Setting: A summer session for inner city children from
low socio-economic families. The director of the summer
school said that the teachers were selected for the

summer session "because they were from the community,

used to "slow learners" and were willing to make the

place comfortable, even for those children with discipline
problems".

These teachers were not aware of new teaching
strategies or new social studies curricula. They had
difficulty reading some of the directions and asked for
a good deal of help in what to do.

All interpretations of directions that were needed
were recorded and included in the final revision of the
questionnaire and the answer sheets for the two simulatiOn
tasks. There were no questions or problems in answering the
actual test items on any of the three instruments.

The answer sheet for the Picture Task had been changed
to a check list in which one check had to be made for each
adjective. This eliminated any difficulty in combining
two sets of directions, e.g. circling words and checking
off items.

The Card-Sort decisions seemed to be worded more clearly
as fewer teachers listed items in the uncertain column.
Their reasons for making decisions reflected the issues

for which the cards were designed.

 

 

 

Preliminary Run IV (cont'd).

The I.D. data sheet seemed easy to fill out. Only

the male—female item seemed to be overlooked. Spacing

and size of letters will be changed on the final form

to make the item more obvious at first glance.

 

 

 

APPEND I X D

 

 

 

 

 

wNH

 

 

wvmmmuwm.mmmama vNH
mvo.o Nomuv.m mmmmsoas.wmambw e
.umpm m ofipmapapm museum use: sooooam
no spaaanunoam a no .mmon
mosaoamaanm.xonnoc
oasosooolofloom ”msowopmo

mbwmwoww.mwmmflmmw deuce

morombmo.b®bmmbmm moshomopdo

 

 

canvas

awesomew.enmmmwa moaaowopao
noospom

moamsdm mo Bum consana>

mo coasom

 

nofiumsam>o Hem n0a>anon pno>owwama

 

a pmopumom consens> no mamsaen<

"H memospOQmm manaaam> unbecomwa

u HQ gamma.

 

 

 

 

 

 

wNH mmwmmmsm.ammmam
mwsvmmmb.ooma mHH ouvmmomv.mmnwsa
moo.o hssam.m wmmwmmab.wmmm m msmsmmav.wmmmm
.papm m ospmflpapm oassum use: aoooonm mosassm Ho snm
«0 333.38g a «o .mweo
ooneofluwswam.xosoo<
monofiuonxm Ho mummy ”mnemopso

 

maeauopms Hasoaposapmna monoono

H umopvmom moonwas> mo mathan<

“N mwmonwoahm manafium>.wnopnonon

Na mqmflfi

Hauoe
moasowopso
canvas

moasowoueo
noospom

monswaa>
mo consom

 

 

 

 

wNH mmmmmmmw.wwmme

 

wmmmsmmm.mmmH mHH HebvN>H>.svmmmH
mmo.o mmeH.N wwmmmmmm.mwwm m vwmsmeH.Hova
.pmpm m oHumHuaum ohanwm smmm socooam moamswm «0 Sum
no 333,283 a mo .mmos
eonaOHanmHm.xoson<

 

monoHaooxm no when»

mo>Hpoonno mouatou one mHmonmep ms hwopsapm puma manooHow

 

H pmoppmom ooanas> mo mHthas<

”mnemouao
"w mHmonpomhm oHnaHsa>

VD ”mHm<B

Hspoe
moHnowouao
anpHs

moHnomopao
nooBuom

 

eonsHaa>
mo ooasom

usoonodon

 

 

 

 

wNH momohmmb.umuwvwmm

 

 

 

Haves
smoonmm.ommst mHH mwmhmomo.wmmowmmm moHsomopmo
ansz
wHo.o mmvmm.m bmomovov.mowo¢v a Howommoo.wmmsomm moHaowouso
soosuom
.peam h oHumeepm museum use: sooooam moaanum we saw oosaHna>
mo huHHHnanoam h we .mon we oousom
oosaOHmHanm .xosoa<
monoHsooxm we when» ”Nsowouao
momonano UHHmonwaHu so“ mnonwosw pocnuunomo no on:

 

H wuoumed oossHsa> Ho mHthsnc

"m mHmoneomhm oHnaHas> “noonomon

0Q mqmcfi

-..-.v-...

 

 

wNH

 

 

 

mmmommmm.mmmme

 

 

Hmmmmmom.mbmH mHH onHmbvm.mhmmoH
ovo.o mmmeo.N «ammomomw.womm m mmommmmo.owmmm
.pspm m oHpmHasMw oaandm use: aoooonm monasmw «0 saw
no apasananoan a no .mwos
mosaonHanm .xosoo<
oonoHaooxm mo muses "Nnowopao

 

dapooosoo who» no

Haves
moHHowouao
anaHs

moHsomopso
nooavom

 

monaHua>
mo monsom

 

oonownHoa o» psopnoo mo monssxo o>HussaopHs mnHmD

 

H unopened ooaaaaa> no mamsnaqc. u on sauce

“NH mHmonvoomm oHnsHHs> pneumonoo

 

 

 

.HOBIG OHImIU mlmlu wlmlo hlwlo mlmlo mimio Vlwuo mumlo Nlmlo Hlmlo

ooooo.H wbmoo.OI mebo.o memo.OI NmHoH.OI vvvmo.on mwNHo.o VHmmo.o hHmwo.OI HHmoo.OI mHmoH.OI.HOBIO

ooooo.H Nmowo.o wbflmo.o mmmmH.o mmomN.o hvwmo.o ommoo.01 wwvmo.o hoHoo.o mmwmo.o onIO
ooooo.H owwvo.01 vaho.o ooomH.o mommo.OI wHHNo.o wHoHH.o mwmmo.OI meHo.OI m mlo
ooooo.H bHNbo.o mvaO.OI mmmuH.o hwvvo.o hmoHo.OI mwNoo.OI Nvao.o w mlo

oocoo.H OHNMH.O mowoo.o mmmoc.o anhN.o HboHo.o nmmmo.c

b mlo

ooooo.H mHhNo.o Hmmno.o wwmoo.o wmmvo.o mmomo.o w MID
ooooo.H mwooo.o vwwHo.o oovoo.o mmvvo.OI m mlo

ooooo.H whwvo.OI moomH.o mwhHH.OI v mlo

ocooo.H vmmno.ou ONHNH.o m mIU

ooooo.H hhHmo.o N mlo

ooooo.H H wlo

 

H pmouumom

 

H.308 oaHassOHumoso :9; moaoow swan. ”Bowl—undo Ho mnofi—«Hoauoo oHQEHm “ Nb mama.

TABLE DB : Simple Correlations of Picture Task Scores

 

With Questionnaire Total

 

 

 

 

POSTTEST l

Var

No.
Picture A 180 1.00000
Picture B 182 0.04181 1.00000
Picture C 183 0.12882 0.41280 1.00000
Picture D 184 0.03914 0.33189 0.30338 1.00000
Q—Tot. 179 0.46676 —O.12232 0.05554 -0.05827 1.00000

Pic-A Pic-B ' Pic—C Pic-D Q-Tot

180 182 183 184 179

 

TABLE D9 : Simple Correlations of Analysis of Picture,

Card-Sort, and Questionnaire Total

POSTTEST l
Card-Sort Total 1.00000
Questionnaire Total -0.07252 1.00000
Picture Task Total —0.00047 0.28085 1.00000

C-S Tot. Q-Total P-Total

 

 

. “'—

 

ooooo.H

«mMHN.o
ooooo.H

 

«mmoo.o
womoH.o
ooooo.H

 

mmomo.o vonno.OI hvmwo.OI bmhmH.o
moHoH.OI mmoHo.o mHmNo.o Hmeo.o
bmmwo.o meNH.o ®N>HO.OI mommH.OI
oooco.H mmbHo.OI wflmoH.o omwno.o
ooooo.H nvwwo.o whomo.OI
ooooo.H mmHNo.OI

ooooo.H

H Bmmfifimom

Obme.o
monoc.cl
moomo.OI
nNHwH.c
ommMH.OI
mowmo.OI
NwHNm.o

ooooo.H

thmo.o
mmumo.o
momoo.o
NNva.c
houoo.c
omono.o
HmOFN.o
wwme.o
coooo.H

MHVHH.OI «homo.o

bmHmo.OI

knGMH.o
mmwmo.c
mambo.o

mommfl.o

mmwmu.cl
mmmmm.o1
NowbH.OI

ooooo.H

 

msouH oH you: one onHannoHumosd monsoon mnoHpaHoaaoo QHNEHm

mammH.o

wnmoo.o

m¢¢OH.OI

mhmHH.cl

OHvHo.o

vaom.o

buwhu.o
mambn.¢

owmbo.OI

coooo.H

” OHQ mam<fi

nblo
vblo
MbIO
Nblo
Hblo
chic
molo
wmlo
bmlo
owlo

no 0

 

 

 

REDISTRIBUTION OF CLINICAL CHOICES:

PRETEST, POSTTEST 1, POSTTEST 2

 

Note: Blank spaces ( ----- ) indicate
no response.

 

 

 

 

 

mm.b Q

“"1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

om.m mm.m eo.m mm.ma em.n sm.n em.ve

eo.m w mm.e em.» ms.mm ow.m . sm.a mm.e sm.me a pmopumo

ow.m W ow.m mm.e mw.sm ma.oa I--- l mH.on sm.sm M
1w l w m

no.e M ss.m nu:u mm.eH M an.» m I--- W om.H om.oe w

ea.m W No.e mm.m Hm.mm a eo.mH W om.H W oe.m mm.ae H smmpamon

su.m l mo.m om.m om.o~ . Hw.em I--- W ea.m mo.om

Hm.e _ sm.m me.m mm.m ma.e oe.a sm.m H em.ue

as.w mo.s mo.s sm.eH so.oa mn.~ . mm.m em.me pmmpoan

mn.e _ mm.m Ne.m ms.om mm.m mm.o Hw.m W mm.ee l

a e m e m :w H a o

 

.<.H.G I monoonpm a: mo mOHpmHaopoasano pampaomsH one: och

HHQ flamse

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H- H s, -H
w sm.H m sm.H . aN.H oo.m .......... om.m t em.sm

ew.m sN.H w EN.H mm.m mm.m ..... W ow.m M om.ms

W m unopened

mo.m mm.m w mm.m mH.mH ow.m ..... om.w mo.me
W we.ua --- m mm.m mm.em . om.m ..... l ee.mH m me.Hm
. l : l.

om.H om.H i --- No.e W ----- mm.m m Ho.m Hs.mm w
H i H _
W ss.e Ho.m om.H mm.» m om.H ms.o m Ho.m l em.me . i
m w l . H unopened
M we.mH om.m om.m eo.mH W om.H om.H ms.mH sm.we . _
n ow.Hm em.m om.H ow.mH l om.H ms.o m wa.mH mm.em M w
_ _ H b m
l w w M ”
W Hm.e mm.m em.o mm.m . mm.u NH.H oe.H se.mw H _
W Hs.w mm.m mu.m H>.m mm.m sm.H m sm.H me.Hs W _
l W m pmoposm.
W em.mH mo.m mm.m mw.m l me.e ew.o eo.m wo.me m w
l M _
W mm.sH NH.H mm.H me.Hm mm.m NH.H mm.w em.ee l l
l r- - u

a e m e m a H o

 

.o.H .0 I manoaoB A: no anospmnno< msHHHnuoz mpnoospm nH unecomh

nNHQ mdmifi

 

 

 

\LN.H

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_

mH.mH mn.m w mH.oH ----- sm.H mo.se
,

---------- mm.n mm.om sm.H m ve.mm --- sm.H Hm.mm
_ a ommnpmon

sm.H --- mm.s mH.oH mm.“ M mm.om --- mo.m vo.me
----- --- ew.m om.w mm.o W vu.mm --- M om.m Hm.mm .
. . 1
--- ms.o em.m mm.5H ea.m M mm.MH ----- on.H om.oe w

m

ms.o ----- Hm.v so.>m es.m so.>m ----- Ho.m mw.mm
H anonymon
ms.o om.H es.m mm.mH mo.m om.om om.“ eo.mH ew.em _
ms.o Hm.e an.» ss.m Hm.e mm.sm _ om.H mm.mH om.om “
--- mm.o Hw.~ no.uH mm.a we.mH _ --- W sm.H Ho.ee .

em.o vw.o Hm.e so.Hu Hw.m ww.mu --- M oe.H mu.me
W pmouoam

NH.H ee.H me.m sm.m mm.» W oe.em . --- . no.5 mm.He

em.o mu.m mm.s mm.s me.e M wm.um m oe.H W me.m HH.mm

-_ , l
m e e n e m N H o

 

m.H .0 I «musoonpm use» owsuno o» msHmwB no» one use: pant nH

” MHQ mam”;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l . H. {
sm.H m ---l ---M s~.H ---. sm.H m -- -- om.emm M
--- sm.H W ---m --- su.H eo.m W -- -- Hv.umw
--- ---M ---w --- --- an.» w -- mm.~ “ sm.mm.
sm.H sm.H M ---w sm.H ---. mo.~Hw sm.H mm.~ m ms.ms
sm.H ---w sm.H M om.m ea.H mm.om . mm.m eo.m m em.eem M
mm.m _ ----- s«.H w om.m sm.H mm.mH M sm.H mm.e l en.eom
. l - i l. t
ms.o ---m ms.o * ----- m ms.o ms.o -- ma.o m em.om
on.H ---M ---i ms.o m ms.o es.m . om.H -- m>.Hm
ms.o ---i --- ---M ma.o ss.e h -- me.o ma.om H anonymon
Ho.m ea.m w ms.o ms.o w -- mN.HH % ms.o Ho.m om.ms _
Ho.m e~.m w me.o Ho.m -- ss.m m om.H em.m l me.Hs M
om.H eu.u ms.o Ho.m e~.m Hm.em _ ms.o mo.m ee.mm M
n l
-- -- em.o mm.o _ em.o sm.H -- sm.m H mm.mm
m~.o oe.H l -- ew.o l -- me.e mm.o mm.« W eH.om
me.H em.o W m~.o ov.H m om.o No.5 wa.o sm.m M mm.em Hmmpoan
em.o ee.H W me.H sm.H em.o we.» NH.H Hm.~ w es.Hm
me.H oe.H M em.o mo.H ve.o sH.mH em.o ms.v w Hm.ms
oe.H sm.H W em.o mo.m ov.H oe.mm mm.o we.e m mm.me m
m s o m e m m H . o n
.>H .e mpHsmom - mmonoHom HaHoom aH mHaoo one ”eHn mange

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n1 . H‘ ..l1 w ... .
--- m oo.m ----- sm.H mm.m mm.m W ----- w ----- w He.wm
_ l H m a Hmoppmon
--- A --- mm.m ---_ mm.o mm.s em.H W mm.o M mm.ms
i w. i.
eN.H --- --- ---_ um.mH ms.um su.H W ew.m M om.Hm
-‘ m IIIl ”4.4? wt
ms.o --- om.H --- ms.o em.m o>.o ma.c ma.om
A H iH pmopumom
--- --- ms.o ms.o mm.HH em.m me.o W es.m W ee.se w
eu.m ms.o ms.o w --- om.wH mm.eH om.H H ss.o M mm.em
w w
oe.H --- m~.o W --- mm.m i mm.m ---. oe.H mH.mm
m M snowman
--- ew.o mm.o W mm.o mo.m wH.e w~.o mm.m mw.vm
em.o em.o ov.H m NH.H mm.m mm.HH mm.o sm.m mm.Hs
.
m a e .- m 1w Im.-. a H o -
.m.> .0 I moHvaMW HaHoom sH mpHnmoMIwprnHOQNsmHQ mo moHsomoaso "mHoanm<9

 

—~».-A—-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l H H- II;
om.m -- sm.H W ow.m M --- mm.m . ----- l ----- -- He.mm
. M a w _
co.m sm.H om.m . mH.on ----- m om.m . sm.H m ---m -- we.es a Hmopamon
eo.m . mm.m mo.m me.mml --- mo.m W ---_ ---M em.H o>.nm
W . W l .
W H m - Jr
om.H -- ms.o l es.m M ms.o es.m W ----- W ---. -- se.mm
m . W
Ho.m m>.o ee.m ss.m W -- . em.m ms.o W om.H ms.o e¢.ss H unopened
mm.HH om.H Hm.¢ mm.mH om.H No.0 -- . -- -- me.He .
I- II. N. L”
ma.m mm.m «H.H em.o -- w me.H mm.o -- , em.o M Ho.Hm
om.s em.H ov.H Hm.m em.o W Hw.~ mm.o w~.o mm.o ‘ mo.mm Hmopoanl
em.uH Hm.v em.o mo.m mu.o m mo.m --- mm.o mm.o M em.mu
i I
m m a e m e m m H o

 

HHH .0 I mHaoc modem 09 House sH mmwnosoe m: nH one:

mm eHsonm page mucospmsnee

HQHQ WHmSH.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--- mm.m --- mm.m --- ----- em.em .
----- om.m sN.H co.m --- --- em.mm _
a unopened;
----- om.m mm.m sm.H --- --- He.mm .
--- om.m eN.H eo.m --- --- sm.aw l
om.H Ho.m -- --- l ms.o ms.o mm.mm
me.o mm.s e~.m Hm.e W ----- ms.o Hm.ew
. M H unopened
om.H mm.oH W ou.m em.m m ----- me.o Hs.mm y
ma.o Ho.m m em.m an.» M --- --- se.em
, w r
mm.o em.o W mo.m ew.o M mm.o ----- ee.em
em.o we.e l sm.m oe.H mm.o ----- l He.mm
pmowoam
ew.o ms.e mH.o mm.m em.o ----- mm.em
wa.o Hm.~ ee.o we.e oe.H --- sm.ew
e m e m m H o
.< .HH .0 I Hospsoo H psossosH>sm HmsOHpoanmnH on» sH msouosh mom

”5H9 mHmSH.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

sm.H -- -- mH.oH --w --- ----- sm.H --- em.sm
--- sm.H mo.m mm.HH. --m sN.H -I- sm.H --- ne.ms
l m Hmoupmon
em.H mo.m mm.m mm.Hm -- su.H --- ---h --- mm.me
--- sm.H ow.m mm.mH --m --- sm.H ---. ---l mo.es
ms.o om.H -- Hm.¢ --m om.H ms.o ---. --- mm.om
--- ms.o om.H mm.HH I-I-W --- --- ---. me.o mH.ms
M H unopened
em.a Ho.m Ho.m eo.nH --m ms.o ----- ms.o w --- mH.ms
l
III-I om.H om.a om.om --W --- III-I ---W --- em.ms
wu.o em.o mm.m no.» III-m em.o --- ---W ew.o om.mw
--- ew.o mm.m mm.m w«.ow em.o om.o mm.o mm.o sm.em
w pmopoam
--- oe.H H«.e so.Hm --w NH.H NH.H ---. mm.o ms.o>
--- sm.H mo.m em.mH wa.ow --- --- mm.o ma.o oe.ms
m m a e I.m -- e m a H mm
.0 .HH .a - .mm 09 panache H Hans "wHo mamas

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_
s«.H --- I-I-L. mm.mH mm.o mn.m M om.m mw.os
----- --- >N.H mm.HH ow.m om.m m sm.H mm.ss. “
m . Wm unopened—
--- ----- sm.H mm.o mm.m oo.m M sm.H w em.mml .
n w M l
--- ----- sm.H me.eH sm.H ow.m W ----- H mm.ss ’
W F ,
.7, i .
--- ms.o om.H om.m mm.m om.H M es.m Hm.ewi
_ N
--- --- em.m ss.m em.m Hm.e M es.m mo.esw
w W H pmoppmoa
om.H ----- om.H ss.m om.u on.“ M os.m mm.Hwi
h M
_ om.H ----- sm.H mm.s o>.m om.H m es.m mm.wsw
M1 m ....I
. l
. ----- mm.o mm.m mH.w me.H mm.~ w Hm.m om.um_
* ---------- mm.u mw.m oe.H . mu.m l sm.m me.owm
. l umopoam
o _ om.o --- sm.H mH.m mo.H sm.H I mo.H mH.mw
-I-- mm.o _ mm.o --- om.o mm.s me.H mo.H m mm.m mm.mm
Ib-
m m s e m e m a H o

 

.m .HH .0 - moaoHom HaHoom no moHespm HaHoom =H mpqoesum N: apHs mm: H mooasowos ana msm<e

APPENDIX E

 

 

 

Nu NonNMNH.hwom®mmH

 

 

 

 

mwmeHNm.ommth mo momwmmwm.HombmmHH
omo.o oHHmH.N mmmmoovm.bvmmwm m Hmowmmsw.mwvHHmN
.papm h OHHmHuapm museum can: sonoouh moanndm Ho Sam
Ho HHHHHnanoaa a Ho .mmon
oonaOHHHsmHm .xoaomd

 

Ho>oq mocha "anomopao

soHuasHm>o How H0H>mnon vao>o wnHmD

m anonymoa monuHau> Ho mHmaHaua “ Hm mamas

Hapoe
onaomopso
anpHs

moHHowopso
noonom

 

oossHHs>
no ooanom

"H mHmon90dmm oHnsHHs> pnoosomon

A—fi

TABLE E2 : Statistics for Each Category Posttest 2

Dependent variable Hypothesis 1: Using overt behavior for

 

 

evaluation.
Category: Grade Level
Standard
Category Freq. Mean Deviation
69 40.109 440.471
Grade 3 28 -18.86 377.82
Grade 4 22 22.91 406.99
Grade 5 12 —44.00 522.73
Grade 6 7 64.00 468.92

 

 

 

 

 

 

as bwsemomm.ommm>
ommmommm.omoH mo momsmmbH.omHHn
Hmo.o movH>.N wanmeH.wmsm m mmvhmsvm.vmmw
.uapm m UHHmeapm osmsdm use: someonm moaundm «0 anm
«0 thHHnsnoam m mo .mwon

oossoHMHanm .xonon<

 

oHaonoooIoHoom "haemopmo
.mo>Huoonno

mousse» use meonmch he hwopsspm pxon manooHom

 

a Hmoupmon 8525» Ho mHmsHafi. " we sang

Haves
moHHomopao
anpHa

moHHomopao
nooBaom

oonaHne>

Ho condom

"v mHmonpoomm oHnsHHm> unopswmon

TABLE E4 : Statistics for Each Category Posttest 2

Dependent variable Hypothesis 4: Selecting or tuning the

 

 

next teaching strategyytowards the objectives.

 

Category: Socio-economic

 

Category Freq. Mean Standard
Deviation
73 0.273 .
Middle-mixture 25 8.80 26.51
Suburban 6 24.00 41.26
Rural 5 -2.40 31.70
Urban 37 -8.97 34.05

 

 

Nb mmowmomw.mwavaH H6909

 

 

 

 

 

mmmommmm.¢vvmvH mm mmvowmvm.mHmmmwm moHHOMOpao

anpHs

mmo.o MHmom.N hnwmoomm.mmommm o mmoooovm.owHwbmH onHowovso

nooapom

.uaum h oHpmHuaum oaasdm use: someonm mosssem we saw eonsHsa>

we huHHHnanoaA h we .mon we condom
consOHHHanm.onaom<

 

Ho>oq comma ”snowopmo

 

.wstmsInOHmHooo use msH>HomoH

 

IaoHQOHQ sH wanHsaw mo omoahnn map How mosHm>

sH moonoaommHu mnH>Ho>sH mnoHpsspHm EoHnosd wnHmD "m mHmonHOQ>m oHnsHsa> unaccomoa

 

m unopened confine, Ho mHmsHafi. " mm mamfi.

 

TABLEiEG: Statistics for Each Category Posttest 2

Dependent variable Hypothesis 9: Usingproblem situations

 

involvingdifferences in values for the purpose of training
in problem-resolving and decision-making.

Category: Grade Level

 

 

 

 

 

Standard

Category Freq. Mean Deviation
69 -120.877 405.543
Grade 3 28 -251.l43 396.65
Grade 4 22 -181.45 357.82
Grade 5 12 136.67 349.32

Grade 6 7 88.00 435.69

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

as mmmHOHeo.HomomomH
Howmmomw.moomoH No Nvmwvemm.vmmumNoH
mwo.o wasvo.n mmoomwvo.mmwmmm oH wmwmmo¢¢.ommmmmm
.aapm h ospmHusHm, osanvm scum someonh woaandm mo saw
no HHHHHnanoan a no .mmon
oonaoHanmHm .xosmn<
oonoHHomxm we when» "maowouao

Haves
moHaomopao
anpHB

moHHomopao
sooapom

 

looanHa>
mo connom

 

.momoauno oHpmommaHn sou unoHpmonw coonOInoao-wnHmD

 

N vacuumed oosuHHa> no mamMHan<

"m mHmonpoomm oHnanm> unconomoa

hm MHmSH

 

TABLE IE8: Statistics for each category Posttest 2

Dependent variable Hypothesis 5: Using open-ended questions

 

for diagnostic purposes.

Category: Years of Experience

 

 

 

 

Standard

Catggory Freq. Mean Deviation
72 16.77 436.06
1 year 3 378.67 327.93
2 years 8 -102.00 325.71
3 — 4 years 8 207.00 393.84
5 - 9 years 6 -78.67 473.54
10 -14 years 9 ~136.89 559.81
15 -19 years 6 42.67 408.29
20 -24 years 6 238.67 421.42
25 -34 years 8 -34.00 413.28
35 -44 years 11 —296.73 310.32

45 or more years 7 321.14 351.32

 

 

 

.poe-o

oH-m-o m-m-o m-m-o s-m-o e-m-o m-m-o
ooooo.H meHuo.o mmowH.o eHmvo.o mmHmo.o mesHH.o mammo.o
ooooo.H omoHH.o evon.o- memMH.o memoH.o eeHoo.o

ooooo.H uono.o- memeo.o- mHme~.o meeeo.o
ooooo.H mmuao.o HesHo.H- smnoH.o-
ooooo.H msHeo.o ommMH.o-

ooooo.H smnoH.o

ooooo.H

a pmopumom

vIMIO

mmwm0.0

Nmbmo.OI
HoomH.o
nmmmo.o
mHHmN.OI
mummo.OI
cowm0.0I

ooooo.H

MImIO

moon.o

HmomH.o
memo.o
mmmwo.o
vOMNH.o
ovva.o
mowNH.o
omomo.OI

ooooo.H

Nlmlo

mHhmH.o

mmvbo.o
MHmwo.o
hNhMN.o
¢H¢¢O.OI
mammo.0I
onoo.OI
Otho.OI
vawo.OI

ooooo.H

 

H.309 oaHasnoHu—mon0 nuHB wohoom swan. anomlohao no mnoHaaHosuoo oHoaHm "mm

HImIU

mmmHo.OI HOBIG

NONwH.o
oH¢MH.o
mMHNm.o
mnmoH.o
mwaH.o
meOH.OI
wowoo.o
whowo.o
QHNOH.O

ooooo.H

.

mam<F

onlo

a

w

h

IDQD

HNO‘JV‘

mlo
mlo
mlo
mlo
mlo
mlo
mlo
mlo

mIU

TABLE E10: Simple Correlations of Picture Task Scores

With Questionnaire Total

 

 

 

POSTTEST 2

Var

No.
Picture A 180 1.00000
Picture B 182 0.04878 1.00000
Picture C 183 0.08398 0.50411 1.00000
Picture D 184 -0.00870 0.42493 0.49094 1.00000
Q-Tot. 179 0.42642 -0.11536 -0.00149 -0.14461 1.00000

Pic-A Pic-B Pic-C Pic-D Q—Tot.

180 182 183 184 179

TABLE Ell: Simple Correlations of Analysis of Picture,

Card-Sort, and Questionnaire Total

POSTTEST 2
Card-Sort Total 1.00000
Questionnaire Total 0.22208 1.00000
Picture Total 0.13014 0.19842 1.00000

C—S Tot. Q — Tot. P-Tot.

 

 

ocooo.H

 

 

vwva.o boHNo.o Nommc.cl nmeo.OI NHMNH.OI hmHNo.o bbwwo.OI
ocooo.H boHNo.c wmooo.o Nnmmo.o mmwwo.OI vavo.OI hhmwo.OI
ooooo.H mmmoo.o womwN.o whomH.o vvmoH.OI NMQHH.OI

ooooo.H N@NQH.OI obhmo.OI Hmwwo.o owmwo.OI

ooooo.H HmHNo.o thNo.o hwmoo.o

ooooo.H owmoo.o mvhHN.c

ooooo.H OVHmv.o

OOOOO.H

 

N Hmmfihmoa

 

nNOho.OI

mmono.o
anVH.o
whhhH.o
mwNON.o
thvm.o
Home.o
wr¢mm.o
OOOOO.H

use": 0H «ma-H one ouHannOHamosa noobaom 93338.30 0H le

anmo.o movwc.OI
Hwamo.o mowwo.ou
hmHno.o hwva.o
VbNmH.o Hwovo.o
vmowo.OI mammn.o
mhwwv.o owHON.o
onv¢.Ol wvac.o
mhwbH.Ol mhmom.o
ounmw.o «hoov.o
ocooo.H OMNQH.O

ooooo.H

 

u«Hm m4m<8

mblo
vhlo
mmlo
NhIo
Hblo
ohIU
amlo
QOIO
bwlo
owlo
molo

 

 

TABLE E13: Behavior Not Seen Only As Discipline Problem

C1 "QOIOAn

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest 2
Responses fulfilled Responses fulfilled
clinical criterion? clinical criterion?

Yes No Yes 4L No
I

 

 

 

 

94.10% 5.90% 100%* l o J

 

*Change from pretest to posttest 2 nonsignificant.
Average change: % 5.90%

TABLE E14: Behavior Not Seen Only As Discipline Problem

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C1-Q.I.C.

Pretest Posttest 2
Responses fulfilled Responses fulfilled
clinical criterion? clinical criterion?f

Yes No Yes No j
lj
93.82% 6.18% 94.94%* 5.06% l

 

 

 

 

Average change: / 1.12%

TABLE E15: Not Describe Physical Characteristics Without

Behavioral Result. Q.I.C.

 

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest 2
Responses fulfilled Responses fulfilled
clinical criterion? clinical criterion?

Yes Nb Yes No
‘71
92.13% 7.87% 95.49% 4.51%

 

 

 

 

 

Average change: % 2.81%

 

TABLE E16: Factors in Students Requiring Adjustment of

My Teaching: Observable - Q.I.C

 

Posttest 2
Responses fulfilled

clinical criterion?

Pretest
Responses fulfilled
clinical critgrion?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes No Yes No g

—_I

I

lst mentioned 53.73% 46.35% 70.89%* 29.11%

2nd mentioned 37.64 62.36 41.77 58.23
3rd mentioned 27.25 72.75 22.78* 77.22
4th mentioned 12.92 87.08 I 8.86* 91.14

' l

 

Cbmposite average change: # 3.29%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE E17: Goals in Social Studies Are Observable Behavior

' Pretest Posttest 2

_ Responses fulfilled Responses fulfilled

E clinical criterion? _clinical criterion?

I Yes No PYes ‘7 ‘_No

I

‘ist mentioned 12.64% 87.36% , 21.52%* 78.48% ,
2nd mentioned 14.33 85.67 I 20.25* 79.75 E
3rd mentioned 10.96 89.04 i 20.25* 79.75 I
4th mentioned 1 6.74 93.26 11.39* 88.61 .
5th mentioned I 7.02 92.98 7.59* - 92.41 I
6th mentioned I 5.34 94.66 2.53* I 97.47 i

L. ' - 11 in

' Composite average change: 3'3.40%

TABLE E18: Social Studies Results is Observable Behavior - Q.IV.

I . 7'

I , Pretest Posttest 2 a

I I Responses fulfilled ; Responses fulfilled-

; ; clinical criterion? ' clinical criterion? §

;_ L Yes No Yes No _1

i. r .7
lst mentioned 15.45% 84.55% , 22.78%* 77.22% '
2nd mentioned 14.89 85.11 22.78* 77.22
3rd mentioned 9.27 90.73 13.92* 86.08 '
4th mentioned 7.02 92.98 10.13* 89.87
5th mentioned 4.49 95.51 3.80* 96.20
6th mentioned , 3.93 96.07 2.53* 97.47

I

 

 

 

 

 

Compos ite av'erage change:

Jf3.66%

TABLE E19: Evidence for Evaluation: Describing Behavior

Q. V.A.

 

Pretest Posttest 2
Responses fulfilled ‘ Responses fulfilled

I

 

I
I
I
clinical criterion? I clinical criterion?
L

 

Yes No Yes No
lst mentioned 54.49% 45.51% 77.22%* 22.78%
2nd mentioned I 44.38 55.62 69.62* 30.38
3rd mentioned I 32.87 67.13 . 54.43* 45.57

 

 

I
Composite average change: J 23.09%

TABLE E20: Evidence for Evaluation: Uses Observation As

A Technique - Q. V.A

 

 

 

I Responses fulfilled I Responses fulfilled
I clinical criterion? I clinical criterion?
Yes No ‘ Yes No

 

: I

I Pretest I Posttest 2
I
I

. —Hf—~ .
, 89.61% 10.39% , , 88.61%* 11.39%

 

 

 

Average change: I—l.00%

TABLE E21: Disappointing Outcomes in Social Studies:

Connecting Learning to Behavior - Q. V.B

 

Pretest Posttest 2
Responses fulfilled I Responses fulfilled
clinical criterion? 5 clinical criterion?

 

 

 

, Yes No ‘ Yes No

I I

'lst mentioned . 9.83% 90.17% l 49.37%* 50.63%
i2nd mentioned 5 4.49 95.51 I 26.58* 73.42

I3rd mentioned ' 2.81 97.19 I 11.39* 88.61

Ik

 

 

‘Composite average change: ‘7 23.45%

 

TABLE E22: Evaluation in New Situations - Q. V.A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest 2
Responses fulfilled Responses fulfilled
clinical criterion? clinical criterion?

YES No ’Yes - No
4.21% 95.79% 10.53%* 89.47%
I

 

 

 

Average Change: J 13.5117

TABLE E23: Evidence for Evaluation: CAV Goals Mentioned —Q.V.A

 

 

 

 

Pretest I Posttest 2
I Responses fulfilled I Responses fulfilled
, clinical criterion? I clinical criterion?l
Yes I No 1 Yes No
. 1.97% 98.03% 1 12.03%* 2 87.97% I
‘ I

 

 

Average change: £715.75%

 

TABLE E24: Adjusting Teaching - Q.I.C.

 

1
r

fl

Posttest 2
Responses fulfilled’
clinical criterion?

Yes ‘ No I
7

I

I

I Pretest
'Responses fulfilled
; clinical criterion?
I Yes . No

 

 

I
I
I
5.06% 94.94% I 7.59%* ' 92.41%

I

Average change: ¥ 2.53%

HABLE E25: Connects Teaching Strategy to Characteristics
Sf’Sfudents — Q. II.D

 

 

Pretest Posttest 2 .
Responses fulfilled Responses fulfilled
clinical criterion? clinical criterion?

 

 

 

Yes 4_;> No Yes I No.
lst mentioned ' 21.63% I 78.37% 45.57% I”54.43% “I
2nd mentioned 16.01 I 83.99 25.32* I 74.68 ?
_gpd mentioned 8.99 , 91.01 10.13* 89.87

 

Composite average change: % 8.80%

TABLE E26: Not Mentioned

 

What I Attempt to Be:

Authoritarian - Q. II.C.

Pretest
Responses fulfilled .
clinical criterion? I

 

I Posttest 2
ReSponses fulfilled
clinical criterion?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes fNo Yes No I
. ‘I
I 88.48% 11.24% 96.20%* 3.01%
TABLE E27: The Most Important Characteristics of My Students

 

 

Q. I.A.

 

 

. Pretest
ReSponses fulfilled
clinical criterion?

Posttest 2 .
Beeponses‘ffilfllled i
clinical criterion?_j

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES No YES *No ‘;
f lst mentioned 55.62% 44.38% 59.49%*t 40.51%
5 2nd mentioned 56.46 43.54 54.43* I 45.57
' 3rd mentioned . 37.64 62.36 35.44 64.56
' 1.

 

I
Composite average change: -0.12%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE E28: Factors_in My Students RequiringyAdjustment in
Teaching - Q.I.C.
I Pretest I Posttest 2
I Responses fulfilled : ReSponses fulfilled
clinical criterion? I clinical criterion?
L Yes No 1 Yes No _,
I Hi
lst mentioned I 54.78% 44.66% ' 68.35%* 31.65%
2nd mentioned i 37.92 61.80 I 37.97* 62.03
3rd mentioned a 28.37 I 71.63 I 24.05 75.95
4th mentioned 1 14.33 85.67 I 12.66* 87.34

 

‘Composite average change:

{#1.

1%

TABLE E29: Ways I Am Trying to Change My Students - Q.I.B.

 

' I

Pretest I Posttest 2
Responses fulfilled ; Responses fulfilled
clinical criterion? I clinical criterion?

 

I
I

 

 

 

 

I Yes No I Yes I‘No 4’?

I I I "I
lst mentioned I 64.89% 35.11% I 67.09%* 32.91% I
2nd mentioned I 58.99 41.01 1 56.96* 43.04
3rd mentioned I 54.78 , 45.22 ' 67.09* 32.91 I
4th mentioned I 33.99 66.01 j 32.91* 67.09 I

- I
Composite average change: J 2.85%

 

TABLE E30: Categories of Social Studies Goals - Q.IV.

 

I

Pretest I Posttest 2

Responses fulfilled ‘ Responses fulfilled;
clinical criterion? ' clinical criterion?I

 

 

 

I
I__ I fes I No Yes No
I 4T

 

 

 

I 'I I
. lst mentioned I 36.80% I 62.92% 35.44%* 64.56%
I 2nd mentioned I 26.69 I 73.31 35.44* 64.56
I 3rd mentioned 5 17.98 I 81.74 20.25* I 79.75
I 4th mentioned 15.17 84.83 10.13* 89.87
3 5th mentioned ‘ 10.11 : 89.61 7.59* I 92.41
I 6th mentioned 7.02 ' 92.98 3.80* f 96.20
- I
Average composite change: —.18%

TABLE E31: Categories of Disappointing Outcomes in Social
Sfudies - Q. V.B.

 

 

Pretest Posttest 2

1 Responses fulfilled Responses fulfilled

, clinical criterion? I clinical criterion?‘

Yes No I Yes I No 7
- I

lst mentioned 28.65% 71.35% I 48.10%* I 51.90%

2nd mentioned 14.61 85.11 24.05* I 75.95

3rd mentioned I 7.58 91.85 11.39* , 88.61

Composite average change: ¥ 10.90%

I

’ I

I I

r“ I
I

 

TABLE E32: Adjustments That Should Be Made in My Teaching
to Reach Goals - Q. III.

 

 

I Pretest Posttest 2
I Responses fulfilled Responses fquilled I

clinical criterion? _glinical criterion?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

k; YES No Yes ; No

[ lst mentioned 27.44% 75.56% 44.30%* a 55.70%

. 2nd mentioned 17.70 82.30 I 25.32* I 74.68

I 3rd mentioned 8.99 90.73 I 11.39 88.61
I I

 

 

Composite average change: % 9.96%

TABLE E33: Key Factors I Control - Q. II.A.

 

 

Pretest I Posttest 2 :
Responses fulfilled I Responses fulfilled 3
clinical criterion? I clinical criterion?

 

 

 

 

L Yes .J No ##‘ers *7 ‘NS’ I
I f if I
I lst mentioned 15.45% I 84.27% 10.13%* . 89.87% :
; 2nd mentioned 15.17 I 84.83 _ 7.59* 92.41 I
I 3rd mentioned 10.39 I 89.61 10.13* 89.87
‘ 4th mentioned , 5.34 I 94.66 5.06* 94.94

’ I
Composite average Change: -4.92%‘

 

TABLE E34: What I Attempt to Be. - Q. II.C

 

Pretest Posttest 2
Responses fulfilled Responses fulfilled
clinical criterion? ‘glinical criterion?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes I“ No Yes ‘T_* No
5 I
lst mentioned 26.12% I 73.88% I 25.32%* , 74.68% I
- 2nd mentioned 29.49 I 70.51 2 31.65* g 68.35 ‘
f 3rd mentioned I 15.73 I 84.27 I 20.25* 79.75
4th mentioned . 11.24 . 88.76 . 12.66* L 87.34

 

Composite average change: % 1.82%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE E35: Resources I Use in Social Studies - Q. II.B.

Pretest Posttest 2 ‘

Responses fulfilled ReSponses fulfilledi

clinical criterion? clinical criterion?1

Yes No Yes A No f

l ‘ s

lst mentioned ‘ 14.61% 85.39% 22.78% I 77.22% .
2nd mentioned § 16.85 83.15 16.46* I 83.54
3rd mentioned ‘ 19.38 80.62 m 22.78* , 77.22
4th mentioned I 17.70 82.30 [ 29.11* I 70.89

composite average change: a? 5.63%

 

 

TRBLE E36: Inter-item Correlations - Cluster I - Posttest 2

 

 

Observable
Characteristics

 

Intellectual behavior .75

 

 

 

Note: Both from Q.I.A: Most important characteristics of
my students.
TABLE E37: Inter—item Correlations — Cluster II —Posttest 2

Observable
Characteristics

 

Intellectual behavior .80

 

 

 

Note: Both from Q. I.Az Most important characteristics of
my students.

 

TABLE E38: Inter-item Correlations - Cluster III-Posttest 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

j
Intellectual
Variety Observable Behavior
Variety 1.00 .88 .83
Observable 1.00 .79
1:
Intellectual
Behavior ; 1.00
l

 

 

Note: All from Q. I.C: Factors requiring adjustment of
teaching.

TABLE E39: Inter—item Correlations — Cluster IV —Posttest 2

Observable
lCharacteristics

Intellectual behavior .69

 

 

Note: Both from Q. I.C: Factors requiring adjustment of
teaching.
TABLE E40: Inter-item Correlations - Cluster V -Posttest 2

 

More Than One Method
For Reaching Goals
Connects Teaching Strategy To .70
Characteristics of Students

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M—

TABLE E41: Inter—item Correlations — Cluster VI-Posttest 2
. Result Result f Result Result Result
' Matches Matches Matches Matches Matches
Goal Goal Goal Goal Goal
ReSult
Matches Goal 1.00 .76 .69 .42 .33
Result hi
Matches Goal 1.00 .74 .55 .32
Result
Matches Goal 1.00 82 .50
Result 00 57
Matches Goal 1. .
Result , 5
Matches Goal l l f 1.00
Note: All from Q. IV.
TABLE E42: Inter-item Correlations — Cluster VII—Posttest 2

Improved Skills of
Social Interaction

Connects Social Science Learning
to Behavior of Children

Note:

Both from Q. V:

.72

Disappointing outcomes in Social
Studies.

 

 

 

 

    

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

, \IHIHIHIHHIIWIHHH"NWHIIWHHHIIHIWHIHIH