"' "' “WW-1‘ ‘ "L'W'v 'mxuxx‘ ' '

my.“ . .1
Nubian; -

   

-.
.h

 

“.1

 

2-7.

t

'l
,1; 9!.
J
' O

 

.-
.o.
, . . .
u.—

’ ,3

I"!

{3‘
{Ag-73“? 9+

civ
‘Qrv

 

 

   

'4‘

5:

 

r;

 

 

  
  
         

   

 

 

Th‘ESiS]' . 2 ‘ ._ :‘flf
mom - . if
RUNALDKHMB ‘ ‘ ‘ - ~

 

    

_-r:r«.54..i4
-~ "-anI'O

 
  

A
«um

T'r; .—. ,, :..’--:;¢::¢,.-_

" rm n

  

  

,.,, '3
~ ..." J.
I:

  
 
 

 
    
 

¢, w
' .E}q~av‘:"" ’Wz'i‘71r7”
,.,,. . .

’1 . as"; m
“MVM'

'1" I"

r
:0—
4

 
 
 
 
 
 
  

 
 
 

   
 

“loo-1.3a:
r

 
 

o.- ...:.‘.o~o\

32% .
Cl!‘ ’0’. ’Orh. -4‘nv‘ 'W)‘
—rnn Egg...» "‘ am ”7'7.

   

I‘hES‘.’

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled
HEIATITT VIII} 0 BETH BEN INDIRECT -DL TUL‘C”.'L‘
' TEACHIZ‘TG, TE‘xCT [EH CI‘TARACTL‘JRISTICS,
AND SCHOOL CITIIATE
presented by

Ronald K. Limberg

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Fifi—degree inMK/KM \ ,

////(/Zzz1 //\/” /(/«

Major profeSsorU

Date-[1,“,f(,///)(;7Z/)[)//)/j
J

 

 

 

 

Ll

 

 

T
(1) the r
intern te
beha‘lior,
rlizationa
their meg1
tionship
assignmer)
and (4) t

of inter:

"

intern tfli

 

lam)“ 0:1
Elementa:
rEgular CI

F“

 

with Vex:

ABSTRACT

RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN INDIRECT-DIRECT
TEACHING, TEACHER CHARACTERISTICS,
AND SCHOOL CLIMATE

BY

Ronald K. Limberg

The purpose of the study was to investigate:
(l) the relationship between the measured dogmatism of
intern teachers and their measured classroom verbal
behavior, (2) the relationship between the measured orga-
nizational climate in which interns were teaching and
their measured classroom verbal behavior, (3) the rela-
tionship between the grade level of interns' teaching
assignments and their measured classroom verbal behavior,
and (4) the relationship between the grade point average
of interns and their measured classroom verbal behavior.

The research sample was comprised of thirty-five
intern teachers randomly drawn from the entire popu-
lation of interns enrolled in Michigan State University's
Elementary Intern Program (EIP), who were teaching in
regular classrooms, grades one through six.

The general research model was one of correlation,

with verbal interaction designated as the dependent

 

variable
school c

teaching

of Hand

 

five ten-
ing of i}
accordinc
of dogma1
Rokeach g
Organizat
mate Sea]
for use i
intern te
Only the
of the co

theses.

F
statistic
fidenCe :
was 5916:

7

“19 Cone

 

Ronald K. Limberg

variable, and the independent variables of dogmatism,
school climate, grade point average, and grade level of
teaching assignment.

Data were obtained for verbal interaction by use

of Flander's Interaction Analysis, for the analysis of

 

five ten-minute taped segments of actual classroom teach-
ing of interns. The investigator analyzed the tapes
according to a detailed outline of procedures. Measures
of dogmatism of interns were obtained by the use of the

Rokeach Dogmatism Scale (Short FormeE). Measures of

 

organizational climate were obtained from the School Cli-
mate Scale, an instrument developed by the investigator
for use in this investigation. This was administered to
intern teachers and intern consultants for reliability.
Only the consultants' ratings were used in the computation
of the correlation coefficients for testing the hypo-
theses.

Multiple-regression techniques were employed in
statistical analysis of the data. The .05 level of con-
fidence for rejection or acceptance of the hypotheses
was selected.

Within the limitations of this study, the follow-
ing conclusions were drawn:

1. The measured dogmatism of intern teachers

were not related to their measured classroom

verbal behavior.

Ronald K. Limberg

The grade point average of intern teachers
earned at Michigan State University were not
related to their measured classroom verbal
behavior.

There was a "trend" for the grade level of
the teaching assignment of intern teachers
to be related to their measured classroom
verbal behavior, but not significantly so.
This relationship was in a negative direction.
The school climate in which interns were
teaching was found to be positively related
to their classroom verbal behavior. The
more open the measured school climate, the
more indirect the measured classroom verbal
behavior of the interns.

The set of four independent variables included
in the study was of higher predictive value
than any single variable.

The correlation coefficient (R) of the over-
all regression, or prediction rule, was not
sufficiently high to insure meaningful pre-
dictive information in regard to the class-
room verbal behavior of intern teachers.

The correlation coefficient (r) computed for
the ratings of school climate by intern

teachers and intern consultants, indicated

Ronald K. Limberg

that individual perceptions of the situation
in which the intern was teaching were quite
similar, considering the fact that the back-
grounds and professional experiences of these
two groups were considerably different.

The measurement of the dependent variable,
labeled Indirect-Direct Teaching Ratio (IDTR)
produced a distribution of scores with a
range of .25 to 1.62, a mean of .81 and a

SD of .38. Perhaps accurateestimates of
the correlations between IDTR and the other
variables were not obtained due to the
restrictive nature of the distribution of

the IDTR's.

' RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN INDIRECT-DIRECT
TEACHING, TEACHER CHARACTERISTICS

AND SCHOOL CLIMATE

BY

.Qv‘

\
Ronald KS’Limberg

A THESIS

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Elementary and Special Education

1971

 

t0 the [34
since so
The natu

0f perso.

of the E
versity,
Marquard
research
90 also

guidanci
members
Richard
my COmgh

It was I

 

Contin:
I
this re

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

It is indeed a difficult task to extend thanks
to the people who have contributed to this undertaking,
since so many offered support and constructive criticism.
The nature of doctoral research demands the involvement
of persons with expertise in a number of different areas.

First, I would like to thank the Center Directors
of the Elementary Intern Program of Michigan State Uni-
versity, and the Acting Director of the RIP, Dr. Richard
Marquard, without whose cooperation and approval this
research could not have been done. My sincere thanks
go also to the Intern Consultants of the EIP who served
as data gatherers for me.

Secondly, I want to recognize the assistance and
guidance afforded me by my Doctoral Guidance Committee
members, Dr. Charles Blackman, Dr. Bruce Cheney, Dr.
Richard Marquard, Dr. Ann Olmsted, and in particular,
my committee chairman and advisor, Dr. William W. Joyce.
It was Dr. Joyce's unselfish giving of his time and his
continued advice that made it possible for me to complete

this research.

ii

T four c
out th
T midabl
‘ fices,
4%
E
i
I
E

 

 

Last, sincere thanks to my wife, Margie, and our
four children for their support and understanding through-
out the year. Of itself, the doctoral program is for-
midable; without a family that is willing to make sacri-

fices, it would be impossible.

iii

‘ Chapter

I.'I

 

II. RE

 

III. p

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter
I. THE NATURE OF THE INVESTIGATION . . . .

Introduction to the Study
Need for the Study . .
Purpose of the Study. .
Research Hypotheses . .
Definition of Terms . .
Summary of Procedures .

Population Defined . . . . .
Instrumentation . . . . . . .

Data Collection and Analysis . . .
Organization of the Study . . . .
Limitations of the Study . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . .

II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND RELATED RESEARCH.

Inquiry-Centered Instruction and the
Related Role Demands for Teachers . .
The Role of the Teacher in Inquiry-
Centered Instruction. . . . . . .

Interaction Analysis. . . . .
Dogmatism and Its Relationship to
Teaching. . . . . . . . . . .

Organizational Climate . . . . . .
Elaboration of Selected Studies . .

Other Variables of Interest . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . .

III. PROCEDURES UTILIZED IN THE STUDY. . . .

The Population of Interest. . . . .
The Study Sample . . . . . . . .

iv

21

29
31

41
45

51

55
56

58

58
60

 

 

 

Ch
apter

IV

Pd;

 

 

 

Chapter Page
Intern Teachers . . . . . . . . 61
Instrumentation . . . . . . . . 63
Interaction Analysis . . . . . . 64
Dogmatism Scale . . . . . . . . 65
School Climate Scale . . . . . . 66

Design Elements . . . . . . 71
The Statistical Hypotheses of the Study . 72
Data Collection . . . . . . . . . 73
Statistical Procedures. . . . . . . 75
Statistical Limitations . . . . . . 76
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . 77
IV. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS. . . . . . . . . 79
Raw Data Obtained . . . . . . . . 79
Discussion of Range in Variables . . 83
Findings Related to Simple Correlations . 84
Hypothesis One . . . . . . . . . 86
Discussion of Results . . . . . . 86
HypotheSis Two 0 O O O O O O O O 86
Discussion of Results . . . . . . 87
.Hypothesis Three. . . . . . . . . 87
Discussion of Results . . . . . . 87
Hypothesis Four . . . . . . . . . 88
Discussion of Results . . . . . . 88
Findings Related to Multiple Correlation
Coefficients . . . . . . . . . . 88
Discussion of Results . . . . . . 89
Summary of Results . . . . . . . 91
Findings Relative to Over-all Regression. 93
v. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 94
Summary of Study. . . . . . . . . 94
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . 96
Recommendations for Future Research . . 98
Reconceptualization. . . . . . . . 102

V

U U
“FMS

' u'vvh.w

 

 

Chapter

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . .

APPENDI
Appendi
A.

B.

C.

CES
x

Personal Opinion Questionnaire.

Description of Flanders' Interaction

Analysis System . . . . .

School Situation Questionnaire.

vi

Page

105

111

113

122

fl

 

Table

2.1. E
2.2. E
3.1. D
3.2. D;
3.3. Ag
3-4. I:
35- OI
4.1. Dc
4'2» Sc
43 In
4-4- St
4'5- Si
4.5. Ar
4.7, ,.

 

 

 

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

2.1. Entrance Types for Persons Entering the Ele-
mentary Intern Program . . . . . . . 49

2.2. Exit Types for Persons Exiting from the Ele-
mentary Intern Program . . . . . . . 49

3.1. Distribution of Academic Majors and Minors

of Intern Sample, 1970 . . . . . . . 61
3.2. Distribution of Grade-Point Averages of

Intern Sample, 1970 . . . . . . . . 62
3.3. Age Distribution of Intern Sample, 1970 . . 63

3.4. Inter-Rater Reliability Ratings of The
School Climate Scale. . . . . . . . 69

3.5. Organizational Climate Types and Correspond-
ing Scores Obtained from the School

Climate Scale . . . . . . . . . . 70
4.1. Dogmatism Scale Scores . . . . . . . . 80
4.2. School Climate Scale Scores . . . . . . 81
4.3. Interaction Analysis Data . . . . . . . 82
4.4. Statistics on Transformed Variables. . . . 83
4.5. Simple Correlation Coefficients . . . . . 85
4.6. Analysis of Variances for Overall Regression. 89

4.7. Multiple-Correlation Coefficients . . . . 90

vii

CHAPTER I

THE NATURE OF THE INVESTIGATION

Introduction to the Study

 

Traditionally elementary schools have been con-
cerned with the product of their endeavor instead of the
process. Teachers in the skill subjects of reading,
mathematics and language arts have emphasized the develop-
ment of skills basic to each of these areas of the curric-
ulum, but they have been less willing to concentrate on
the more complete understanding of the behavioral and
physical sciences. Although instruction in the sciences
has supposedly been concerned with the development of
critical thinkers and investigators, in actuality it has
been more successful in helping children amass a factual
knowledge base. Due to the rapid obsolescence of knowl—
edge this is not adequate.

However, in the last two decades the realization
of the dynamic nature of the world in which the children
as future citizens will be living, and the many complex
domestic and international social problems which they
will face, has prompted change. There is widespread

agreement among educators that children should be

 

 

encoura
themsel'
activit
an enph

learnin

ing and
be thro:
in 1933
thinking
throngh

models c
well-knc
have bee
Bruner,

PIOblems

lefirnihg

\

 

tll‘?eS, :‘

‘?:r-1
T‘I‘QY C;
15 foun:
Stated;

Rand MC

1933).

 

York:

bridge,

encouraged to reflect critically on the ideas generated by
themselves and others, and to engage in problem-solving
activities at the higher cognition levels.1 This implies
an emphasis upon the process in learning instead of upon
learning material by rote.

One approach to the development of critical think—
ing and problemrsolving abilities in children appears to
be through inquiry-based teaching techniques. John Dewey
in 1933 was one of the earlier advocates of "reflective
thinking"2 and later, of the development of intelligence
through inquiry.3 Since then, many others have posited
models of inquiry which are generally similar to Dewey's
well-known five-step model. Among the most influential
have been the theoretical models of Jerome S. Bruner.4
Bruner, sharing Dewey's views, asserts that coping with
problems within a discipline is a productive way of

learning to think, and that inquiry is as important as

 

1Benjamin J. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objec-
tives, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain (New York: David
McKay Company, Inc., 1956). Additional discussion of this
is found in Frederick R. Smith and C. Benjamin Cox, New
Strategies and Curriculum in Social Studies (Chicago:
Rand McNally’and Co., 1969), pp. 27-39.

 

 

 

2John Dewey, How we Think (New York: D. C. Heath,

 

1933).

3John Dewey, Logic: The Theory of Inquiry (New
York: D. C. Heath, 1935), p. 104.

4Jerome S. Bruner, The Process of Education (Cam-
bridge, Mass.: Harvard Univeréity Press, 1961). ‘

 

a careful and logical appraisal of the subject matter's
elements.5

These models of inquiry assume much different
roles for the teacher than is commonly ascribed to him.
The range of these roles in promoting inquiry lies on a
continuum with the teacher and the learner functioning
as co-inquirers according to the Massialas and Cox6 model
at one extreme, and with the teacher as director of dis-
covery as assumed by Bruner's7 model, at the other extreme.
Formerly didactic in nature the teacher's role now assumes
dialectic dimensions with his primary responsibility
becoming the establishment of a classroom environment
that not only would allow for inquiry on the part of the
student but serves to encourage it.

Smith and Cox8 cite the intellectual climate of
the classroom as being critical to the conduct of inquiry,
and they suggest that the verbal performance of the
teacher is the primary ingredient in the development of

this type of classroom. The teacher's ability to engage

 

51bid., p. 92.

6Byron G. Massialas and C. Benjamin Cox, In ui
in Social Studies (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., I966),
p. 21.

 

7Jerome S. Bruner, Toward a Theory of Instruction
(Cambridge, Mass.: Belhanp Press, 1966).

 

8Smith and Cox, Strategies in Social Studies, p. 36.

 

E“

 

_.___‘
"A L! 731

 

 

(
"!|l"‘.. I. "Vs-Tr" 1

studen
relate
This 1
verbal
behavi
that “
involv
two pe
verbal
ence,

Often (

intera<

that re
ing") ,

action

 

 

students in meaningful investigatigations is closely
related to the verbal behavior of himself and the pupils.
This is often described or referred to as, "classroom

verbal interation." Meux and Smith write, "Teaching

9

behavior is primarily verbal." Storlurow and Pohl state

that ". . . teaching is fundamentally a social process

involving communication and interation between at least

two people, a teacher and a pupil."10 Flanders uses

verbal interaction as the primary mode of teacher influ-

ence, . . . a series of acts along a time line, most

often expressed as verbal communication . . . or verbal

interaction."ll

Flanders distinguishes between teachers' acts
that restrict students' freedom of action ("direct teach—
ing"), from those acts that increase students' freedom of

12

action ("indirect teaching"). Indirect influence

 

9Mi1ton Meux and B. O. Smith, "Logical Dimensions
of Teaching Behavior," in Contemporary Research on Teacher

 

Effectiveness, ed. by B. J. Biddle and W. J. Ellena (New
York: HoIt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1964), p. 129.

 

10
Harvard Educational Review (Summer, 1963), 384.

 

11Ned A. Flanders, Teacher Influence, Pupil Atti-
tudes and Achievement, Cooperative Research Monograph
No. I2, Office of EdfiCation, U.S. Dept. of Health, Edu-
cation and Welfare (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing
Office, 1965). PP. 1-23.

 

 

12Ibid., p. 111.

L. Storlurow and K. Pohl, "Letter to the Editors,"

.‘-'-'.‘1

v no.1,

,1...“

 

increa
such a
less 6
less I
to prc

most 1

this 5
center
Flande
indire:
classr<
t0 Opel

others

is a Se
a frame
ideas,

R0Reach“
tEm is .

dogmatig

a Scale

 

 

increases students' learning when goals are ambiguous,
such as is true of many inquiry-centered programs, because
less disabling dependence develops. Also, there may be
less response to authority and more attention directed
to problem-solving requirements, which again is true of
most inquiry-centered programs.

An indirect teaching style, for the purpose of
this study, is selected as being necessary to the inquiry-
centered classroom, and this is measureable using the

Flanders Interaction Analysis system. The use of an

 

indirect teaching style may indeed result in advancing
classroom inquiry, but what variables allow some teachers
to operate successfully in this indirect manner, while
others remain primarily direct in their style?

Dogmatism, a generalized personality trait, which
is a set of organized beliefs and expectancies, provides
a framework for the acceptance or non-acceptance of new
ideas, and for tolerance and intolerances toward others.

Rokeach13

asserts that the degree a person's belief sys-
tem is "open" or "closed" is measureable in terms of his
dogmatism. (His investigations led to the development of

a scale which is purported to measure this construct).

The present study is predicated on the assumption that the

 

l3Milton Rokeach, The Open and Closed Mind: Inves-
tigations into the Nature of Belief Systems and Person-
ality Systems (New York: Basic Books, 1960), p. 50.

 

 

 

 

 

 

degree c
instrune
ambiguom
that th
attitude
must wit
search 1

class."

the orga
intern t
teacher

attEmpt

SChOOl s
in? as t.
Write, ""
conform,

have fOr

 

 

 

degree of a teacher's open-or-closed-mindedness may be
instrumental in his ability to teach in the more
ambiguous, inquiry style, because of the tolerance
that the teacher must display towards the feeling and

attitudes of others. Smith and Cox14

write that, "He
must withstand the temptation to interfere in the pupil's
search for the solutions to issues, which are before the
class."

In this study the writer is also concerned with
the organizational climate of the schools in which the
intern teachers are working. It may well be that a
teacher is markedly open and inwardly encouraged to
attempt inquiry methods in his classroom, but that the
school situation in which he is working is so constrict-
ing as to make this untenable. Corman and Olmsted15
write, "It is abundantly clear that the pressures to

conform, exerted by other teachers and/or the principal,

have forced many new teachers to a state of acquiescence."

 

14
pp. 37-38.

Smith and Cox, Strategies in Social Studies,

 

15Bernard Corman and Ann G. Olmsted, The Intern-

ship in the Preparation of Elementary School TeaChers (East
Lansing, Mich.: Bureau of EducatIonal Research, M.S.U.
These authors conducted a study of pre-teachers occupying
intern roles in the Michigan State University Student
Teacher Experimental Program (STEP).

 

 

Need for the Study

 

Clearly there is a need for study of the relation-
ship between the classroom verbal performances of "begin-
ning teachers" and the variables of dogmatism and organi—
zational climate. That there is a discrepancy between
how teachers are taught to teach in most teacher prepar-
ation programs, and their actual classroom performance is
a recognized fact. Presumably, empirically based infor-
mation will provide possible reasons for this phenomenon.

Also a look to the future provides credence for
this study. Joycel6 in his review of the more recent
social studies projects, states, ". . . most tend to
possess several common characteristics, including . . .
extensive reliance upon instructional activities involving
inquiry-centered teaching methods, in which pupils are
encouraged to attack problems. . . ." Many teachers in
,the near future will have to assume new roles in order
to accomplish the stated goals of these programs, since
they will have to be less concerned with information-

giving and more concerned with process-oriented teaching.

Purpose of the Study

 

The purpose of the study was to investigate two

basic questions:

 

16William W. Joyce, Robert G. Dana, and W. Robert
Houston, Elementagy Education in the Seventies (New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970), p. 246.

 

 

 

 

‘v I“...

also 5

ature

mentary
chPris
are not
they ar
r”* be

Cla55r:

dSsistE

emplOYQ

 

1. Is the degree of a teacher's dogmatism
related to his classroom verbal behavior?

2. Is the organizational climate of the school
in which a person is teaching related to
his classroom verbal behavior?

Information concerning two other variables was
also sought since the investigators' search of the liter-
ature yielded contradictory findings. These were:

1. What is the relationship between the grade
level of the teaching assignment and the
classroom verbal behavior of the teacher?

2. What is the relationship between a teacher's
undergraduate grade point average and his
classroom verbal behavior?

These questions, based on the rationale and need cited
above, were central to this investigation of the teacher's
ability to teach in an inquiry, or indirect style.

Intern teachers (interns) enrolled in the Ele-
mentary Intern Program (EIP) of Michigan State University
comprised the research population of this study. These
are not to be confused with student teachers, but rather
they are teachers who as students with senior college
rank have assumed the major responsibility for their own
classrooms for an entire school year. They are intensively
assisted by a consultant who is an experienced teacher

employed by the local school district and working under

the direction of an off-campus Michigan State University
Center director. The rationale for the use of interns
as subjects in the present study is included in Chapter

III.

Research Hypotheses

 

This study was designed to test the following
four hypotheses:
1. There will be a relationship between the
dogmatism of intern teachers as measured by

Rokeach Dogmatism Scale, and the verbal

 

behavior of intern teachers as measured by

Flander's Interaction Analysis; this relation-

 

ship will be that the higher the dogmatism of

17 the teacher's

the teacher, the more direct
verbal behavior.
2. There will be a relationship between the

social-psychological, school climate as

measured by the School Climate Scale, and

 

the verbal behavior of intern teachers as

measured by Flander's Interaction Analysis;

 

 

17The terms direct and indirect used in the
description of teaching styles were terms suggested by
Flanders. They were used similarly in this study referring
to the degree of controlling influence exerted by the
teacher.

10

this relationship will be that the more open18

the organizational climate of the school, the
more indirect the intern teacher's verbal
behavior.

3. There will be a relationship between the
undergraduate Grade Point Average of intern
teachers as earned at Michigan State Uni-
versity, and the verbal behavior of the intern

teachers as measured by Flander's Interaction

 

Analysis; this relationship will be that the
higher the GPA, the more indirect the intern
teacher's verbal behavior.

4. There will be a relationship between the
grade level of the intern teachers' present
teaching assignments and the verbal behavior
of the intern teachers as measured by

Flander's Interaction Analysis; this relation-

 

ship will be that the higher the grade level
of the teaching assignment, the more indirect

the verbal behavior of the intern teacher.

 

180 en and closed are the extremes of a continuum
on which t e construct organizational climate is measured.
These terms which are explained in Chapter II, refer to
the feeling or working environment of schools.

 

 

.“ -:

specie

below.

receix
from t
evant
logica
extren

is mea

Organi:
dimensi
of the

this CC

repress.

Cllmate

 

11

Definition of Terms

 

Several terms require definition owing to their
specialized use in this study. These terms are defined

below.

Dogmatism.--The extent to which a person can
receive, evaluate, and act on relevant information received
from the outside on its own merits, unencumbered by irrel-
evant factors in the situation.19 Levels of this psycho-
logical construct are ordered on a continuum with the
extremes represented by Open--and Closed--Mindedness. This

is measured by the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale.

 

School Climate.--A construct representing the

 

organizational atmosphere of a school, viewed on the
dimensions of participant involvement, characteristics

of the group, and behavior of the leader. Levels of

this construct are ranked on a continuum with the extremes
represented by Open and Closed, measured by the School

Climate Scale.

 

Elementary Intern Program.--A four-year teacher
preparation program of Michigan State University, which
features a one-year teaching internship in which the

intern has full responsibility as the teacher of a

 

19Rokeach, Investigations into Systems, p. 50.

 

 

classr:

aoprox;

above.

to sup:
mally a
working

basis.

PrObler
number-
conclus

diSCOVe

has as
(and (:9
SOlUtio

The has

 

the lee

 

which 5

knowled

 

12

classroom, and is assisted by an intern consultant for

approximately five hours per week.

Intern Teacher.--A person occupying the role cited

 

above.

Intern Consultant.--An experienced teacher assigned

 

to supervise intern teachers on a full-time basis. Nor-
mally a consultant spends about 85 per cent of his time
working with five or six intern teachers, on an individual

basis.

Inquiry.--A process in which pupils focus on a
problem and in their search for a solution go through a
number of steps ranging from hypothesizing to formulating
conclusions. This is sometimes referred to as a type of

discovery learning.

Inquiry--centered instruction.--Instruction which
has as its basic strategy the involvement of the learners
(and teacher) in a searching process, one in which
solutions to problems are sought, tested and evaluated.
The basic purpose of this instruction is to develop in
the learners the ability to systematically search for,
and evaluate ideas. This can be contrasted to instruction
which seems to have for its objective, the acquisition of

knowledge.

 

 

l .
Ponu <

ters i
cation
educat
(4) sp.
lation

were te

nst

1
‘ Ia__

3
i

Selecte.
0f the .

Dogmati

 

 

13

Summary of Procedures

 

Population Defined

 

The population consists of all intern teachers who
had been teaching since the beginning of the school year,
fall, 1969, in the eleven Elementary Intern Program cen-
ters in the state of Michigan. The following classifi-
cations were exempted from this study: (1) special
education, (2) kindergarten, (3) junior high school, and
(4) special assignments such as art and music. The popu-
lation, therefore, consisted of those intern teachers who
were teaching in "regular" classrooms, grade one through
six. (N=208)

A random sample of thirty-nine intern teachers,
was drawn from the population of interest. Four were-

lost from the sample leaving an N of thirty-five.

Instrumentation

 

20

The Dogmatism Scale, developed by Rokeach, was

 

selected to measure the degree of open-and-closed-mindedness
of the sample intern teachers. The short form of the

Dogmatism Scale used in this study was developed by

 

201bid.

 

 

tratic

halves

was se
in mea

invest.

invest;
as set
SChools
the org

continu

”A Shor
SCCial I
laStrUTf
Son-51 nr
\i

 

 

14

Troldahl and Powell.21 It was selected over other instru-

ments because of its high reliability and ease of adminis—
tration. (Reliability = .79 computed using the split-
halves technique.)

Interaction Analysis,22 developed by Flanders,

 

was selected on the basis of its high reliability (.84)
in measuring direct and indirect teaching styles, and the

investigator's knowledge of the system.

23

The School Climate Scale was developed by the

 

investigator, using the organizational climate dimensions

as set forth by Haplin24

in his study of elementary
schools, and their leaders. Its purpose was to measure
the organizational climate of schools, ranking them on a

continuum with the extremes represented by Open and Closed.

 

21Verling C. Troldahl and Frederick A. Powell,
"A Short Form Dogmatism Scale for Use in Field Studies,"
Social Forces, XLIV, No. 2 (December, 1965), 211-14. This
instrument appears as APPENDIX A, under the title: Per-
sonal Opinion Questionnaire. '——_

 

22Flanders, Influencey Attitudes and Achievement,
p. 20. The categories of verbal interaction and accompany-
ing descriptions are found as APPENDIX B.

23This instrument appears as APPENDIX C, under the
title: School Situation Questionnaire.

24Andrew W. Halpin, Theory_and Research in Adminis-

tration (New York: The MacMiIlan Company, 1966), pp.

 

 

 

were <
the ir

ants,

of thr
instrt
Due to
twenty
ten-mi

Ratios

t0 Obta
had no

which u
that th
selecte;
Was to !

recOrded

  
 
  

StUdies,
ities be

tigaCOr
me Fla:

plotted

 

15

Data Collection and Analysis

The Dogmatism Scale and the School Climate Scale

 

 

were completed by intern teachers under the supervision of
the intern consultants. In addition, the intern consult-

ants, independently completed the School Climate Scale.

 

Interaction Analysis was employed in the analysis

 

of three twenty-minute taped segments of classroom
instruction of each intern teacher included in the sample.
Due to the capacity limit of the IBM-1130 Computer these
twenty-minute taped segments were converted to five- to
ten-minute segments. Since the Indirect-Direct Teaching
Ratios obtained for each of these segments were averaged
to obtain a single IDTR for each intern, this conversion
had no effect on the results. Restrictions on this taping
which was done by the respective intern consultants, were
that the weeks during which the taping was done were
selected by the investigator, and that the consultant
was to "randomly" pick the particular instruction to be
recorded. The consultants were instructed that social
studies, science, language arts, and some reading activ-
ities be the areas of instruction from which to gather
the tapes.

The analysis of the tapes was done by the inves-
tigator who had extensive training and experience with
the Flander's system. The resultant tallies were then

plotted and matrices constructed by means of an IBM-1130

16

Computer program,25 and scores of indirect and direct
teaching obtained.

The general research model was one of correlation,
with Yerbal Interaction as the dependent variable, and the
independent variables of Dogmatism, School Climate, Grade
Point Average, and grade Level of Teaching Assignment.

V = reg (D, SC, GPA, G)

Multiple-regression techniques were employed in
the statistical analysis of the data. The 5 per cent
level of confidence for rejection or acceptance of the
hypotheses was selected in advance as being sufficient

for testing the hypotheses of this study.

Organization of the Study

 

Chapter II provides a summary of the related
literature and research. It focuses on: (1) dogmatism
and its relationship to teaching, (2) inquiry-centered
instruction, (3) Classroom verbal interaction, and (4)
the influence of organizational climate on beginning
teachers.

Chapter III deals with the design of the study.

It describes the population, research sample, instruments,
and procedures for collection, analysis, and presentation

of data.

 

25Developed by Douglas Fairbanks, doctoral

student, Michigan State University, 1970.

follow

 

 

17

The analysis and statistical treatment of the

data are reported in Chapter IV, in testing the four

hypotheses set forth in the study. Chapter V summarizes

the findings, and reports the implications for teacher

education, inquiry—centered instruction, and future

research.

Limitations of the Study

 

The results of this study are subject to the

following limitations:

1.

Due to the nature of the population from which
the research was drawn, the results of this
study pertain only to intern teachers of the
Michigan State University Elementary Intern
Program, teaching in regular classrooms,

grades one through six, 1969-1970.

This study is limited to the extent to which
the instrumentation employed produced valid

and reliable results. In one instance an
instrument was developed for use in the present

study. This instrument, the School Climate

 

Scale, was subjected to the usual initial

tests of validity and inter-rater reliability.
However, any instrument used in measuring a
variable as nebulous as the organizational
climate of schools probably should be sub-

jected to more extensive testing and refining.

18

3. The nature of two of the variables of
interest and the instruments employed for
their measurement may have limited the esti-
mation of relationships. Verbal interaction
was measured using a content-free analytic
system, and dogmatism was measured using a
scale which was content-oriented.

4. The size of the research sample (N=35)
required that strong relationships be found
before they could be termed significant at
the .05 level. Increasing the size of the
N could have made it easier to obtain signif-

icant results.

Summary

Chapter I presents the rationale and the need for
the study. The purpose of the study was to investigate
two basic questions:

1. Is the degree of a teacher's dogmatism

related to his classroom verbal behavior?

2. Is the organizationa1_climate of the school

in which a person is teaching related to his
classroom verbal behavior?

The major working hypothesis was that the patterns
of classroom verbal interaction used by intern teachers

was related to the successful conduct of inquiry-centered

19

instruction, and that these patterns would be indirect

as defined and measured by Flander's Interaction Analysis.

 

Four variables were designated as independent
variables for the purposes of this study. These were:
(1) the dogmatism of interns, (2) the organizational cli-
mate of the schools in which they were teaching, (3) their
undergraduate grade point averages, and (4) the grade
level of their teaching assignments.

The research procedures and data collection and
analysis procedures were presented in Chapter I. Limi-
tations of the study are presented in the final section'

of the chapter.

 

school

his abi

SElecte
centere
(2) Cla
teachin
IElatio
lationa
(5) the

tEacher

 

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH AND LITERATURE

This review attempts to develop a conceptual
frame of reference for the study of inquiry-centered
teaching. The writer assumes that factors such as the
degree of open-mindedness of a teacher and the type of
school climate in which he is working will be related to
his ability to teach using an inquiry approach.

Specifically this review provides a summary of
selected research and literature related to (1) inquiry-
centered instruction and related role-demands for teachers,
(2) classroom verbal interaction and its importance in
teaching, (3) the personality trait, dogmatism, and its
relationship to teaching, (4) the influence of organi-
zational climate on intern or beginning teachers, and
(5) the relationship of the academic achievement of

teachers with their particular teaching behavior.

20

21

Inquiry:gentered Instruction and
the Relate§_Role Demands
for TeaEhers

 

 

 

The literature revealed many definitions of
inquiry in teaching. Manson and Williams suggest that
perhaps inquiry defies defining because, "the nature of

the word itself suggests continual redefining."l

They
go on to say that there is widespread agreement that if
inquiry were placed on a continuum of teaching methods
ranging from expository-didactic to hypothetical-
heuristic, it would approximate the latter.

For the purposes of this study inquiry is viewed
as a process in which pupils focus on a problem and in
their search for a solution, go through a varied number
of steps usually labeled hypothesizing, evidence gather—
ing, evaluating, and formulating conclusions. The major
point of agreement to be extracted from the many defi-
nitions of inquiry is that, "the focus is not on estab-
lished generalizations but on the building and testing
of theories."2

Sagle states that the basic difference among

inquiry, discovery, and problem-solving were semantic

 

1Gary A. Manson and Elmer D. Williams, "Inquiry:
Does It Teach How or What to Think?", Social Education,
XXXIV, No. 1 (January, 1970), 78-81.

 

2Helen Sagle, "Problem Solving, Inquiry, Dis-
covery?" Childhood Education, November, 1966, p. 139.

 

22

in nature. Admittedly, minor differences probably exist,
but in terms of this study these terms were considered
as being synonymous.

Arguing for inquiry, Turner asserted, "Individual-
ization of instruction can be more easily attained by

means of inquiry methods."3

He felt that unlike subject-
centered instruction, the goals of investigation-oriented
teaching are designed to reach the Child as an individual
learner rather than as a member of a large instructional
group.4

Rogers also asserted that inquiry in the social
studies, enables the learner's more traditional passive
role to become a more individualized and active role.
He envisions the learning act as, "an interaction between
the learner and his world . . . that the understanding of
1a subject comes through a self-directed activity of the
children, an activity of inventing and discovery."5

Further support for inquiry may be found in the

rationale of the majority of the newer programs in the

sciences and the social studies, in which the inquiry

 

3Thomas N. Turner, "Individualization Through
Inquiry," Social Education, XXXIV, No. 1 (January, 1970),
72-730

 

41bid., p. 73.

5Vincent R. Rogers, “A Macrocosmic Approach to
Inquiry," Social Education, XXXIV, No. 1 (January, 1970),
74-77.

 

23

process is a dominant feature. Gagné's theoretical base
served as a guide in the development of "Science--A
Process Approach,"6 a series of materials prepared by the
AAAS Commission on Science Education. Gagné maintains
that successful inquiry required that students have a
suitable background of broad generalized knowledge usable
in solving problems. Also, that they have incisive
knowledge, which allowed them to discriminate between
good and bad ideas.7
Other science programs such as the Science Curric-
ulum Improvement Study,8 and the questioning strategies

developed by Suchman9

utilized the inquiry method. None
of the above mentioned programs advocate the elimination
of learning concepts or other content considerations;

however, they each posited inquiry, or the process, as

being an important feature.

 

6Robert M. Gagné, "The Learning Requirements for
Enquiry," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, I, No. 2

 

71bid., pp. 147-48.

8Robert Karplus, "The Science Curriculum Improve-
ment Study," Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
II, No. 4 (1964), 293-303.

 

9Richard J. Suchman, "Rebuilding the Science
Program Inquiry Teaching in the Elementary School," The
Science Teacher, XXVII (November, 1960), 42-49.

 

24

Ausubel differs in his assessment of the relation-
ship between knowledge and inquiry, in that he states
that,
There is no need to wait for the child to acquire a
background of accumulated knowledge and skills before
incorporating inquiry approaches in the classroom.
Not only is the primary-grade child mature enough to
gather data, and to evaluate it, but under the proper
guidance of an adept teacher, he can make inferences
and develop, analyze, and evaluate hypothesis.lo
An examination of the new social studies curricula,
as cited in Chapter One, revealed that most of these pro-
grams tended to place heavy reliance upon inquiry-centered
teaching methods. In fact, some supplemental type pro-
grams such as the SRA, Social Science Laboratory Units,11
are almost completely concerned with the process of

inquiry, to the exclusion of any form of recognized con-

tent, other than certain affective considerations.

Selected Research Related to Inquiry
In a review of research focusing on inquiry,

Kersh,12 reported that studies have shown that concepts

 

10David O. Ausubel, Educational Psychology: A
Cognitive View (New York: H6It, Rinehart and Winston,
Inc., I968), pp. 175-224.

 

11This program was designed by Ronald Lippitt,
Robert Fox, and Lucille Schaible.

12B. Y. Kersh and M. C. Wittrock, "Learning by

Discovery," Journal of Teacher Education, XIII (May, 1962),

25

can be effectively learned through inquiry. In addition,
inquiry method tends to heighten motivation, long term
retention and transfer.

Following the Suchman inquiry training technique,

Butts and Jones13

attempted to help 109 sixth grade
children develop their problem-solving behaviors. To do
this they used a planned guidance program based on Such-
man's program, and evaluated the students by means of the
TAB Inventory of Science Processes, which is a test
designed to evaluate the child as an inquirer. They
found a relationship between inquiry training and positive
changes in problem-solving behavior.

In the area of social studies, Hardyl4 found
that sixth-grade pupils who actually participated in an
archaeological dig out-performed conventionally taught
pupils on a final exam designed to measure knowledge of
concepts, generalizations, and principles of anthropology.

Also, in support of inquiry-centered instruction, Lee15

 

13D. P. Butts and H. L. Jones, "Inquiry Training
and Problem Solving in Elementary Science Children,"
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, IV (March, 1966),
2I-27o

 

14Donald W. Hardy, "Inland Valley Elementary School
Archaeology Project: An Experimental Comparison of Two
Teaching Approaches," Dissertation Abstracts, XXIX (July,
1968), 6l-A.

 

15Martha A. Lee, "Development of Inquiry Skills in
Ungraded Social Studies Classes in a Junior High School,"
Dissertation Abstracts, XXVIII (March, 1968), 3,367-A.

 

26

concluded that students could be taught problem-solving
skills without the loss of factual achievement. In this
study, forty-five seventh-, eighth-, and ninth-graders
were taught social studies for one semester employing a
method which was based on an eight-step, problem-solving
model, and then were matched against a group receiving
factual instruction.

David,16 on the basis of his study of character-
istics of learning situations that generate and develop
children's ability to generalize, reported that signifi-
cant growth in the ability to generalize, was developed
in situations where problem-solving skills were emphasized.

A significant, and closely related study was per-
formed by Wadtke and Wallen,l7 who investigated the effects
of teacher control on pupils' creativity-test gains. For
the study, nineteen teachers in grades two through five
were selected from a group of seventy-seven teachers on
the basis of Q-Sort techniques, sorting for high and low
controlling teachers. Two high and two low controlling

teachers (three high controlling teachers in grade five)

 

16David W. David, "Conditions that Foster Growth
in Children's Ability to Generalize in Elementary School
Social Studies," Dissertation Abstracts, XXIX (December,
1968), 1,805-A.

 

17Kenneth H. Wadtke and Norman E. Wallen, "The
Effects of Teacher Control in the Classroom on Pupils'
Creativity-Test Gains," American Educational Research
Journal, II (March, 1965), 75-SIT

 

27

were selected for each grade. The subjects for the study
then, became the students in these teachers' rooms,
approximately 100 at each grade level. 1.0. and creativity
measures were given on a pre- and post-test basis. (No
adjustment for 1.0. was needed.) Analysis of variance
techniques were used to obtain F-ratios for comparison

of the test scores.

The results of Wadtke and Wallen's study supported
the hypothesis that an extensive degree of controlling
behavior by the classroom teacher had a detrimental
effect on verbal creativity. Apparently, the high con-
trolling teacher prefers an ordered classroom, and flex-
ibility in pupil behavior is eliminated; whereas, the
low-controlling teacher may positively reinforce flexible
behavior by her pupils.

Crabtree18

studied the effects of structuring on
the productiveness of children's thinking by designing
and utilizing two instructional programs with differing
degrees of teacher imposed structure. Structuring was
limited to two influences: communicating to children
and prearranging the learning environment. Tests of

divergent and convergent thinking were used as criterion

measures in this small, but carefully controlled study.

 

18Charlotte Crabtree, "Effects of Structuring on

the Productiveness of Children's Thinking," Journal of
Experimental Education, XXXVI (Fall, 1967), 1-13.

 

28

The author reported results confirming her hypothesis
that higher structuring aided convergent thinking, and
lower structuring aided divergent thinking. Teacher
influence seemed to be more important than teaching
materials in accounting for the differences found.

The particular studies Cited above, provide
support for the inquiry method. But collectively, the
research findings tend to be somewhat contradictory. In
a number of studies reviewed by the writer, but not
reported here since they offered no empirically based
support for inquiry, no significant gains in achievement
occurred as a result of either the inquiry or the con-
ventional method. In most instances, however, these
researchers did indicate motivational advantages and
improved interest and attitudes on the part of the sub-
ject students in inquiry settings. Controlling and
structuring, forms of direct teacher influence, tended
to discourage divergent thinking on the part of the pupils,
which clearly is a necessary element in most inquiry-
centered instruction.

The writer offers this final argument for inquiry,
provided by Goldmark:

It is doubtful that we can predict exactly what
kinds of knowledge our children will need in the
future. It is even possible that the storage-of-
knowledge function will be taken over by computers.
However, children will probably always need a method

for making judgments about problems--for evaluating
alternatives and making decisions.

29

But perhaps even the equipping of children with
methods for making judgement will not sufficiently
prepare them for future problems. Perhaps a more
basic requirement is that children be educated to want
to cope with problems. If the children are apathetic,
they will not even care to recognize problems; there
would be no inquiry, no solutions. A sort of vacuum
would be created into which the few could move to con-
trol the many. Thus education must have as its first
objective a commitment to inquiry, and it must provide
methods for inquiring into problems and for recon-
structing the tools of inquiry. This is the education
demanded in our society.1

The Rgle of the Teacher in
InguiEy-Centered
Instruction

 

 

 

Certain facets of the teacher's role in inquiry-
centered instruction have been implicit in the section
above. But since this study was based on the assumptions
that inquiry places new demands on the teacher, and that
the classroom verbal interaction developed by the teacher,
is probably instrumental in achieving the necessary intel-
lectual climate to foster inquiry, some related consider-
ations are explained below.

Smith and Cox20

wrote that a democratic concept of
control is most conducive to this inquiry climate, and
that this implies that the teacher and pupils will share
much of the policy-making and planning. The teacher's

primary task becomes one of helping the pupil become

 

19Bernice Goldmark, Social Studies--A Method of
InquiEy (Belmont, California: Wadsworth PubliShing Com-
pany, Inc., 1968), p. 43.

 

20Smith and Cox, Strategies in Social Studies, p. 37.

 

30

self-directed, self-disciplined, self-motivated and will-
ing to accept responsibility for his own decisions. The
pupil is taught to express his own beliefs and views,
knowing that these views, and the views of others will be
open to analysis and evaluation, not ridicule and belittle-
ment.

Participants of the Tri-University Project in Ele-
mentary Education at the University of Washington have
depicted the teacher's role in conducting inquiry as
follows:

In providing motivation and direction, the teacher
through questions and discussion guides the pupils

to the identification of the problem. Throughout

the motivational activity, the primary role of the
teacher is directing pupil interest, while remaining
flexible enough to deal with unanticipated questions
and interests that might be pertinent to the study.21

These writers suggest that in planning, one of the
most crucial areas is that of questioning techniques and
strategies.22 Inquiry begins with a question so it is
imperative that the teacher ask appropriate questions and
serve as a model of the inquiring mind for the students.

The teacher should be well prepared in the content of the

study--but should not, however, be limited to the prepared

 

21Dorothy J. Skeel and Joseph G. Decaroli, "The
Role of the Teacher in an Inquiry-Centered Classroom,"
Social Education, XXXIII, No. 5 (May, 1969), 547-50.

 

221bid., p. 549.

31

questions to the extent that he cannot adjust to the pupil
responses and line of inquiry that they may logically be
pursuing.

Tucker delineates the essential behaviors of the
inquiry teacher:

1. He must be consistent and intellectually honest
with the students.

2. He must give them ample opportunity to develop
their powers of systematic analysis.

3. He must allow them to make mistakes and work
their way out of these mistakes.

4. He must be willing to admit to not knowing all--
he must be part of the inquiry, not apart from it.

5. Finally, and most importantly, he must be willing
to demonstrate in appropriate instances that he
is committed to a value system based upon a
rational systematic analysis. Logically then,
he must reject, in an inquiry Classroom, the tra-
ditional role of the social studies teacher as a
neutral observer of the social, economic, and
political scene--but he must be careful that this
involvement is predicated upon the open-minded
characteristics of true inquiry. . . . It is a
short step from involvement to indoctrination.23

Interaction Analysis

 

During the 1940's and 1950's, a growing number of
researchers turned their attention to developing systematic
ways of analyzing selected dimensions of the teaching act.
"Classroom climate," and its importance to the teaching-
learning process became a commonly recognized term refer-
ring to, "the generalized attitudes toward the teacher and

the class that the pupils share in common despite.

 

23Jan Tucker, "A Classroom Challenge: Teaching A

Method of Inquiry," California Social Science Review,
IV, No. 3 (May, 1965), 28-30.

32

individual differences . . . these common attitudes color
all aspects of classroom behavior, creating a social

atmosphere, or climate, that appears to be fairly stable,

once established."24 For the most part, this work was

25

based on the findings of H. H. Anderson and his col-

leagues, whose studies focused on the observation of
"dominative" and "integrative" contacts. Most of the
observational techniques developed since then for the
analysis of teaching behaviors, have been based on simi-
lar behavioral distinctions.

The findings of Anderson were based on the obser-
vational data obtained on five teachers and extending
over several years. The most significant of these were:

1. The dominative and integrative contacts of the
teacher set a pattern of behavior that spreads
throughout the classroom.

2. The behavior of the teacher, more than any other
person, sets the climate of the Class.

3. A climate of domination incites further domi-
nation, and one of integration stimulates further
integration.

4. The pattern a teacher develops one year is likely
to persist in his classroom the following year
even with different students.

5. When a teacher has a higher proportion of integra-
tive contacts, pupils show more spontaneity and
initiative, more voluntary social contributions,
and more acts of problem-solving.

 

24
pp. 5-60

Flanders, Influence, Attitudes and Achievement,

25H. H. Anderson, "The Measurement of Domination

and of Socially Integrative Behavior in Teacher's Contact
with Children," Child Development, X, No. 2 (June, 1939),
73-89.

 

33

6. When a teacher has a higher proportion of domina-
tive contacts, the pupils are more easily dis-
tracted from schoolwork, and show greater compli-
ance to, as well as rejection of teacher
dominations.26
Shortly after Anderson started his work, Lippitt

and White,27

working with Kurt Lewin, studied the effects
of adult leaders' influence on boys' groups. Since this
was done in a laboratory setting, the contrasting patterns
of leader behavior were able to be more clearly defined,
and the effect of the pattern of leader behavior was
intensified. Lippitt and White's "authoritarian leader-
ship" was largely dominative, and their "democratic
leadership" largely integrative.

The findings reached by Lippitt and White con-
firmed and extended the findings of Anderson that the
teacher's behavior was instrumental in the development
of the classroom social climate, and that this was

28

largely done through verbal acts. Withall and

 

26Ibid., p. 75.

27Ronald Lippitt and Robert White, "The 'Social
Climate' of Children's Groups," in Child Behavior and
Develgpment, ed. by R. G. Baker, J. Sf_iounin, and H. F.
Wright YNew York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1943),
pp. 458-508.

 

28J. G. Withall, "The Development of a Technique
for the Measurement of Social-Emotional Climate in Class-
rooms," Journal of Experimental Education, XVII (March,
1949), 347F61.

34

29 conducted studies which were also mainly concerned

Hughs
with the verbal behavior of the teacher and pupils in
classrooms.

Defining "teaching as interaction," Hughes and
her associates looked at the classroom interactive situ-
ation as a superior-subordinate relationship. That is
to say, they considered the teacher-student relationship
in the classroom to be of a reciprocal character. In
this light, the teacher and students in the classroom
were actually partners or objects in a situation that
acted upon each other.

This reasoning was based on two assumptions:

(1) the teacher's influence in a classroom is directed
toward some conscious end which is intended to instruct
or to aid the student in his learning, and (2) that the
child or group in direct interaction with the teacher has
influence that is guided by a search for competence, a
reach for his own identity and his defenses or protection
of himself. The teacher's intent to instruct in such a
manner as to change the behavior of the student and the
student's response in terms of his own idiosyncratic

system then, form the dynamics within which the

 

29Marie Hughs, "Development of the Means for the
Assessment of the Quality of Teaching in Elementary
Schools," in Handbook of Research on Teaching, ed. by
N. L. Gage (New York: Rand McNaIly, 1963), pp. 269-271.

35

interaction in the Classroom takes place. These two
concepts--Teacher Power and Teacher Responsiveness to
student's actions--constitute the basis for Hughes' sys-
tem of categorization of classroom interaction.

The data of the study were classroom records ob-
tained by two observers who checked with one another and
collated their records. Most of the records were
30-minute duration. Thus continuous sequential records
of certain events occurring over a known period of time
were secured. The "certain" or selected class of events
was the teacher's verbal (and nonverbal to the extent
that it could be reliably obtained) behavior and the
response of the child or group to whom the behavior was
addressed. Children's initiatory actions directed
toward the teacher were also included. After securing
extensive specimen records of teacher behavior in this
manner, they developed a means for categorizing the acts
performed by a teacher.

Hughs, 3E_21., divided their material for analysis
into units of teacher behavior according to the "function"
it performed for the child or group. The function was
inferred from the context in which it occurred and did
not necessarily conform to any conventional language
unit. They described teaching then in terms of functions
the teacher behavior--verbal and nonverbal--performed for

the individual or group to whom the teacher was directing

36

his influence. They then arranged the teaching acts into
seven broad categories: Controlling, Imposition, Facili-
tating, Development of Content, Personal Response, Posi-

tive Affectivity, and Negative Affectivity.30

Medley and Mitzel,31

added to the scientific
study of teaching by designing and field testing a sys-
tematic approach to analyzing teaching. Although their
system (OSCAR) has not proven as useful as Flander's
I.A., their findings have proven useful to other investi-
gators. These findings showed that the most influential
aspect of teaching was the patterns of verbal interaction
in the classroom.

B. 0. Smith,32

one of the first and most verbal
advocates of analysis of classroom interaction, classified
teaching acts according to certain logical characteristics,

such as defining, classifying, comparing, contrasting,

evaluating, directing, and admonishing. His findings

 

30The description of Hugh's research and system
of analysis was taken from: Judith Henderson and Ted
Ward, Research on_Instruction (East Lansing, Michigan:
Learning Systems Institute, MSU, undated), pp. 5665A-
56653.

31Donald M. Medley and Harold E. Mitzel, "The

Scientific Study of Teacher Behavior," in Theory & Research
in Teaching, ed. by Arno Bellock (New York: Teachers
CoIlege, Bureau of Publications, 1963), pp. 85-88.

 

32B. O. Smith, "A Concept of Teaching," Teachers
College Record, VI, No. 5 (February, 1963), 229-2I4.

 

37

were consistent with the findings of Medley and Mitzel,
Flanders, Hughs, and Anderson, and others, in that as
the teacher was engaging the class in one or more of
these logical operations, he was mainly directive (domi-
native), or supportive (integrative) and that once again
the verbal transactions of the classroom were the most
cogent factors in setting the stage for learning.

Interaction Analysis, (IA), the analytic system
used in the present study, was developed by Flanders,33
using the studies of Anderson, and Lippitt and White as
a base. Flanders set out to explore two questions left
unanswered by this earlier research: (1) Since both
integrative and dominative types of statements are used
by all teachers, what are the consequences of these dif-
ferent types of statements used under different con-
ditions? and (2) What is a typical balance of integra-
tive and dominative acts found in the classroom?

Flanders' project was based on several theoretical
ideas about the relationship between teacher influence
patterns and the achievement and attitudes of students.
The relationship was tested under two conditions of stu-
dent goal perception: goal Clarity and goal ambiguity;
in two subject areas; geometry and social studies. The

hypotheses of the study were concerned with the effect

 

33Flanders, Influence, Attitudes and Achievement,

 

p. 126.

38

of direct and indirect teacher influence and various con-
ditions of goal perception on student achievement.

Testing of these hypotheses involved the use of
two general kinds of concepts. Teacher behavior was
described as direct or indirect teacher influence, and
student goal perception as either ambiguous or clear.

During the first year of the study, the concepts
of teacher influence and goal perception were tested in
a laboratory situation and these four treatments were
created: (1) direct influence with goal Clarity, (2)
direct influence with goal ambiguity, (3) indirect influ-
ence with goal clarity, and (4) indirect influence with
goal ambiguity. In each subject area a teacher role-
played both direct and indirect teacher influence. The
second year of the research project involved a field
study that tested the same relationships as those tested
in the first-year laboratory experiment.

Analysis of the data indicated that the results
of the first and second year studies were essentially
the same. The results indicated that all types of stu-
dents learn more working with the more indirect teachers.
They also found that indirect teachers act most indirectly
when goals are being clarified and when new content
material is being introduced, and act most directly after
goals have been clarified and work is in progress. In

addition, they found that teacher flexibility was more

 

39

predictive of teaching success than was the concept of
direct-indirect influence. It was found that the teachers
of classes in which achievement was above average differed
from the teachers of below average Classes in their
ability to shift their behavior as it was necessary. This
ability, which was rarely found among teachers categorized F‘

as direct, meant that the teacher had the capability to

VV,_-.

make his own behavior (direct or indirect) appropriate

to the requirements of the class situation at the moment.

 

In the Flanders' system of interaction analysis,
observations of all teacher statements are Classified
first as either indirect or direct. This classification
gives central attention to the amount of freedom the
teacher grants to the student. In a given situation,
therefore, a teacher has a Choice. He can be direct,
that is, minimizing the freedom of the student to respond,
or he can be indirect, maximizing the freedom of the stu-
dent to respond. His choice, conscious or unconscious,
depends upon many factors, among which are his perceptions
of the situation and the goals of the particular learning
situation.

To make total behavior or total interaction in
the classroom meaningful, the Flanders' system also pro-
vides for the categorizing of student talk. A third
major section, that of silence or confusion, is included

in order to account for the time spent in behavior other

40

than that which can be classified as either teacher or
student talk. All statements that occur in the class-
room, then, are categorized in one of three major sections:
(1) teacher talk, (2) student talk, and a separate cate-
gory, (3) silence or confusion, used to handle anything
else that is not teacher or student talk. r]
The larger sections of teacher and student verbal T
behavior are subdivided in order to make the total pattern

of teacher-pupil interaction more meaningful. The two

 

subdivisions for teacher verbal behavior, indirect and B
direct teacher talk, are further divided into smaller
categories. Indirect influence consists of four obser—
vation categories: (1) accepting feeling, (2) praising
or encouraging, (3) accepting ideas, and (4) asking
questions. Direct influence is divided into three cate-
gories: (5) lecturing, (6) giving directions, and (7)
criticizing or justifying authority. Student talk is
divided into only two categories: (8) responding to
teacher, and (9) initiating talk. All categories are
mutually exclusive, yet totally inclusive of all verbal
interaction occurring in the classroom.

After the recording data have been obtained, the
sequence of events in a classroom is entered into a ten-
row by ten-column table, called a matrix, for analysis.
After the observer has tabulated the matrix, he is then
able to develop a description of the Classroom inter-

action. The total percentages of teacher and student

41

talk can be found. The observer can focus on the relative
number of indirect and direct teacher statements and the
kind of emphasis given to motivation and control in the
classroom can be determined. These and other observations
concerning the teacher-pupil interaction are conveniently
. . . 34 F5
summar1zed 1n the matr1x.
This writer believes that the foregoing has demon-

strated the importance of the establishment of a suppor-

tive classroom climate, especially if inquiry on the part

 

of students is to be fostered. Furthermore, that the H,
verbal interactions of the classroom.were shown to be the

single most reliable dimension for study when engaged in

an investigation which requires definitive knowledge of

teaching styles of the subjects in the study.

Dogmatism and Its Relationship to Teaching

 

Rokeach, basing his research on the concept of the
authoritarian personality, developed the general theory

of dogmatism, and an instrument, the Dogmatism Scale,

 

which was designed for measuring the degree to which a
person's belief system is open or Closed. Being open
or closed is defined as "the extent to which the person

can receive, evaluate, and act on relevant information

 

34The categories of verbal interaction and accom-
panying descriptions are found as APPENDIX B. The
description of Flander's research and system of analysis
taken from Henderson and Ward, Research, pp. 5465-A-
5465C.

42

received from the outside on its own intrinsic merits,

unencumbered by irrelevant factors in the situation

arising from.within the person or from the outside."35
Other writers, in keeping with the main thrust of

Rokeach's argument, have suggested that certain behavior

characteristics are evidenced by people who are perceived I“?

to be closed-minded. Ausubel and Tenzer36 write that the

attributes of dogmatism include unwillingness to examine

new evidence after an opinion is formed; a tendency to ‘:

 

view controversial issues in terms of blacks and whites, #’
and a need for early, typically premature, closure in
reaching conclusions about complex issues.
The rationale for the hypothesis pertaining to
the relationship between closed-mindedness and direct
teaching styles, in the present study, comes from this
body of research. A teacher attempting to operate his
Classroom in a manner consistent with the goals of
inquiry, instead of the goals of the traditional class-
room, would find it necessary to overcome the anxiety

generated in such a situation. As a teacher allows for

 

35Rokeach, Investigations into Belief and Perso-
nality Systems, p. 57}

 

36David P. Ausubel and Amy G. Tenzer, "Components
of and Neutralizing Factors in the Effects of Closed-
Mindedness on the Learnings of Controversial Issues,"
American Educational Research Journal, VII (March, 1970),
267-73.

43

greater student choice and is less able to predict and
control successive events in the teaching-learning situ-
ation, flexibility (or adaptability) is imperative.
According to the conclusions reached by Kingsley,37 stu-
dents who were high in dogmatism found it more difficult
to adjust to new situations. EB?
It is possible that the dogmatism of a teacher i

might cause him to reject the use of inquiry-centered

 

instruction if inquiry is viewed as somewhat innovative. i
Bridges and Reynolds38 using a sample of 262 elementary 3
teachers tested for teacher receptivity to change. The
hypothesis that elementary teachers with Open belief sys-
tems would be more receptive to the trial of innovation
than elementary teachers with closed belief systems was
confirmed by their findings. The number of years of
teaching experience was not found to be a significant
factor.
A number of studies have been reported which dealt

specifically with relationships between dogmatism of

 

37Ruth W. Kingsley, "Commitment to Teaching and
Open-Mindedness of Teachers in Training" (unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, University of Arizona, 1966).

38Edwin M. Bridges and Larry B. Reynolds, "Teacher
Receptivity to Change," Administrators Handbook, February,
1968.

 

44

teachers and inquiry type teaching. McCollum39 obtained

dogmatism scores, Education Set Scale scores and scores
from areas of the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule
for prospective social studies teachers. His conclusions
as to predictions of success using the reflective teach-
ing method were: (1) that the two groups of students
with a factual set would find it difficult to test hypo-
theses, conceptualize, and generalize. He also concluded
that the high means achieved by all three groups of stu-

dents on the Dogmatism Scale indicated that they would

 

encounter many problems in the use of the reflective
method in teaching.

40 concluded that cultural-institutional

Kardatzke
and teacher characteristics had relatively little effect
on most teacher practices. He did find that teachers

who scored below the mean on RokeaCh's Dggmatism Scale

 

showed a tendency to take a more moderate position on
controversial issues than teachers who scored above the

mean on the Dogmatism Scale.

 

 

39Robert E. McCollum, "A Study of the Relationship
Between Selected Personality Characteristics and the
Reflective Method," Dissertation Abstracts, XXIX (Septem-
ber, 1968), 762-A.

 

40H. H. Kardatzke, "Cultural-Institutional and
Teacher Influences upon Social Studies Curriculum and
Instruction: An Exploratory Study," Dissertation
Abstracts, XXIX (December, 1968), 1824.

 

 

 

45

Piele compared the results of his investigation
into the relationships between classroom teaching behavior
of teachers and dogmatism, with the results of a study
which researched simulated teaching and dogmatism. He
concluded that:

1. Closed minded teachers, as compared with Open
minded teachers, appear to use more of a variety
of verbal behaviors and to monopolize talk in the
classroom more under actual teaching conditions
than they do under simulated teaching conditions.

2. Open minded teachers, as compared with Closed
minded teachers, tend to use indirect influence
more under simulated teaching conditions than they
do under actual teaching conditions.

3. Under both simulated and actual teaching con-
ditions, students of open minded teachers appear
to talk more in the classroom than do the students
of closed minded teachers.41
The foregoing studies indicate that dogmatism may

be related to a teacher's ability to function in the more
indirect style that is necessitated by inquiry-centered
instruction. In most of these studies teaching was
measured with rating-type scales, not with analytic sys-
tems. Piele's did actually analyze teaching performance

and compare it with a measure of simulated teaching.

Organizational Climate

 

One of the first researchers to recognize the

importance of the organizational setting in which an

 

. 41Philip K. Piele, "The Relationship of Teacher
Open and Closed Mindedness to Classroom Verbal Behavior"
(unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Oregon,
1968).

 

46

individual is teaching was Cornell,42 who used the term
"organizational climate" in his study of socially percep-
tive administration. He defined the term as "a delicate
blending of interpretations by persons in the organization

of their jobs or roles in relation to others and their

 

interpretations of the roles of others in the organization." In
One of the major findings of Cornell's four-year

study of four school systems was that the environment of

administration, or organizational climate of the organi- F”

zation, may be more important than specific administrative

activity.43

In other words, the generalized tone of a
building was considered as having a lasting effect on
individuals working in that building, and that this tone,
or atmosphere, of a building may be more significant for
the participants than single actions of the administrator.
A study emphasizing the relationship between the
principal's behavior and the type of climate found in his

44

school, was conducted by Halpin and Croft. This major

contribution to the study of organizational Climate was

 

42Francis G. Cornell, "Socially Perceptive Adminis-
tration," Phi Delta Kappan, XXXVI (March, 1955), 219-23.

 

43Ibid., p. 222.

44Andrew W. Halpin and Don B. Croft, The Organi-
zatiopal Climate of Schools (Chicago: Midwest AdminIStra-
tion Center, University of Chicago, 1963). Citation for
the original study.

 

47

prompted by the phenomena of how greatly schools differed.
Halpin, who continued the study wrote:

Anyone who visits more than a few schools notes
quickly how schools differ from each other in their
'feel.‘ In one school the teachers and the principal
are zestful and exude confidence in what they are
doing. . . . In a second school the brooding discon-
tent of the teachers is palpable; the principal tries
to hide his incompetence and his lack of a sense of
direction behind a cloak of authority. . . . A third
school is marked by neither joy nor despair, but by
hallow ritual. Here one gets the feeling of watching
an elaborate Charade in which teachers, principal,

and students alike are acting out parts. . . . And so,
too, as one moves to other schools one finds that each
appears to have a 'personality' of its own. It is
this 'personality' that we described here as the 'Orga-
nizational Climate' of the school. Analogously, per-
sonality is to the individual what Organizational Cli-
mate is to the organization.4

It is this "feel" of the school in which the intern
teacher is teaching that is of interest to this study.

Will a teacher be markedly influenced by the setting in
which he is teaching?

Peterson46 writing about group behavior in general,
discussed the effect that climate has on the group mem—
bers. Since pupils can be viewed as members of a group,
Peterson's views are included here. His view was that
effort and effectiveness of group was either enhanced or

stifled, depending on the type of organizational climate

 

45Andrew W. Halpin, Theory and Research in Admin-
istration (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1966), p. 131.

 

 

46O. F. Peterson, "Leadership and Group Behavior,"
Leadershipin Action No. 2 (Washington, D.C.: National
Training LaboratorIes, 1961), p. 29.

 

48

present. Lonsdale47 wrote that organizational Climate was
an interaction between needs-satisfaction, and task-
achievement within an organization.

Some of the findings of Corman and Olmsted's48
six-year study of the Student Teaching Experimental Pro-

gram (STEP) of Michigan State University, bear particular r?

importance to the present investigation. A portion of h

the STEP study was an investigation of the influencing

 

factors during the training period of the students as .g‘
student teachers and later as intern teachers. On the a
basis of interviews and the results Obtained from a
fifty-six-item instrument designed to allow for the
"typing" of people on the basis of certain attitudinal
and perceived behavioral characteristics, the subject
students were categorized at entrance into the program,
at exit from the program, and at one-half-year intervals
in between. Four entry types and seven exit types were
identified. These are represented in the following

tables.

 

47Richard Lonsdale, "Maintaining the Organization
in Dynamic Equilibrium," Behavioral Science and Educa-
tional Administration, Sixty-third Yearbook, NSSE, ed. by
Daniel E. Griffiths TChicago: University of Chicago Press,
1964), p. 166.

 

48Corman and Olmsted, Internship of Teachers.

 

49

TABLE 2.1.--Entrance types for persons entering
the elementary intern program.a

 

 

Types Percentage

of Group
Security Seekers 37%
Authority Seekers 15%
Achievement Seekers 17%
Self-Actualizing Seekers _31%
Total 100%

 

aAnn Olmsted, Lecture, Michigan State
University, April, 1970.

TABLE 2.2.--Exit types for persons exiting
from the elementary intern program.a

 

Percentage
Types of Group

 

Time Servers
Contented Conformists 31%

Task Focusers

Pragmatists

Child Focusers 50%

Ambivalents

Alienated 19%
Total 100%

 

 

aAnn Olmsted, Lecture, Michigan State
University, April, 1970.

50

The fact that certain entrance types had a higher
incidence of occurrence in certain exit types is really
not of significance here. Of major importance to the
present study are the findings concerning the influences
in this change process. Corman and Olmsted concluded
that in the context of the student teaching experience,
the style of the supervising teacher seemed to be a
stronger influence than the type of school building.
Once in the intern position, the type of school and the
influence of other teachers was a stronger influence
than the intern consultants.49 In order to type schools

a School Characteristic Questionnaire and the Tightness

 

of School Scale (TOS Scale) which was developed by the

 

researchers, were used to obtain data. The "tightness"
of the schools as measured by this instrument was similar
to organizational climate of specific interest to this
study.

Halpin and Croft's studies were the source of
many of the doctoral dissertations reviewed. Most of
these were attempts at replication of the earlier work,
or determining relationships between teacher perceptions ~
and leadership types. No studies were reviewed that
attempted to find relationships between actual measured
teaching performance and the contextual organizational

climate, as is done in the present study.

 

491bid.

 

51

Replicative studies by Morris,50 Brown,51 and

Berends,52

have tended to support the findings of Halpin
and Croft. The specific dimensions which Halpin and
Croft identified for measuring organizational climate

were found to be valid dimensions on which to measure

organizational climate.

Elaboration of Selected Studies

 

The studies of Halpin, and Corman and Olmsted
were used specifically in the development of a criterion
instrument used in the present study. Because of this,
some elaboration of their work is included here.

The instrument which was developed by Halpin and
Croft to measure organizational Climate, was a sixty-four-
item questionnaire called the Organizational Climate

53

Description Questionnaire (OCDQ). The behaviors upon

which each of the subtests are based are listed below:

 

50Derek V. Morris, "Organizational Climate of
Canadian Schools," The CSABulletin, III (June, 1964), 3-7.

 

51Robert J. Brown, "Identifying and Classifying
Organizational Climates in Twin City Area Elementary
Schools" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of
Minnesota, 1964).

52Eugene Berends, "Perceptions of the Principal's
Personality; A Study of the Relationships to Organizational
Climate" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1969).

53Halpin, Theory in Administration, p. 149.

 

52

OCDQ SUBTESTS
Teacher's Behavior

1. Disengagement indicates that the teachers do not
work well together. They pull in different
directions with respect to the task; they gripe
and bicker among themselves.

2. Hindrance refers to the teachers' feeling that
the prifiCipal burdens them with routine duties,
committee demands, and other requirements which
the teachers construe as unnecessary busywork.

3. Esprit refers to "morale." The teachers feel that gTT.

 

 

e1r social needs are being satisfied, and that
they are, at the same time, enjoying a sense of
accomplishment in their job.
4. Intimac refers to the teachers' enjoyment of
friendIy social relations with each other.54

Principal's Behavior

5. Aloofness refers to behavior by the principal
whiCh is characterized as formal and impersonal.
He "goes by the book" and prefers to be guided by
rules and policies rather than to deal with the
teachers in an informal face-to-face situation.

6. Production Emphasis refers to behavior by the
principal whiCh is characterized by close super-
vision of the staff. He is highly directive and
task-oriented.

7. Thrust refers to behavior marked not by close
supervision of the teachers, but by the principal's
attempt to motivate the teachers through the
example which he personally sets. He does not
ask the teachers to give of themselves any more
than he willingly gives of himself; his behavior,
though starkly task-oriented, is nonetheless
viewed favorably by the teachers.

8. Consideration refers to behavior by the principal
which is characterized by an inclination to treat
the teachers "humanly," to try to do a little
something extra for them in human terms.55

 

 

 

 

54Ibid.. pp. 150-51.

55The paraphrasing of these behaviors, and the
descriptions of school climate types taken from Berends,
"Perceptions of Personality: Organizational Climate,"
pp. 12-15.

53

Six types of organizational Climates were then

identified by the construction of profiles and factor

analysis based on data from the OCDQ. It was found that

these types could be ranked in respect to Esprit. The

six climates are described below:

1.

The Open Climate describes an energetic lively
organizatibn WHICh is moving toward its goals, and
which provides satisfaction for the group members'
social needs. Leadership acts emerge easily and
appropriately from both the group and the leader.
The members are pre-occupied disproportionately
with neither task achievement nor social-needs
satisfaction; satisfaction on 55th counts seems

to be obtained easily and almost effortlessly.

The main characteristic of this climate is the
"authenticity" of the behavior that occurs among
all the members.

The Autonomous Climate is described best as one

in whiCh leaderShip acts emerge primarily from

the group. The leader exerts little control over
the group members; high Esprit results primarily
from social-needs satisfaction. Satisfaction from
task achievement is also present, but to a lesser
degree.

The Controlled Climate is characterized best as
impersonal andihighly task-oriented. The group's
behavior is directed primarily toward task accom-
plishment, while relatively little attention is
given to behavior oriented to social-needs satis-
faction. Esprit is fairly high, but it reflects
achievement at some expense to social-needs satis-
faction. This climate lacks openness, or "authen-
ticity" of behavior, because the group is
disproportionately preoccupied with task
achievement.

The Familiar Climate is highly personal, but
undercontrolIed. *The members of this organization
satisfy their social needs, but pay relatively
little attention to social control in respect to
task accomplishments. Accordingly, Esprit is not
extremely high simply because the group members
secure little satisfaction from task achievement.
Hence, much of the behavior within this climate
can be construed as "inauthentic."

The Paternal Climate is characterized best as one
in whiCh the prinéipal constrains the emergence

of leadership acts from the group and attempts to

 

 

 

 

 

Olmsted

57

54

initiate most of these acts himself. The leader-

ship skills within the group are not used to

supplement the principal's own ability to initiate

leadership acts. Accordingly, some leadership
acts are not ever attempted. In short, little
satisfaction is obtained in respect to either
achievement or social needs; hence, Esprit among
the members is low.

The Closed Climate is characterized by a high
degree ofIapathy on the part of all members of
the organization. The organization is not "mov-
ing": Es rit is low because the group members
secure ne1ther social-needs satisfaction nor the
satisfaction that comes from task achievement.
On the whole, the members' behavior can be con-

strued as "inauthentic"; indeed, the organization

seems to be stagnant.56
In the second closely related study, Corman and

investigated the influence of the particular

types of schools in which the student teachers and the

intern teachers were working. They developed a fifteen-

item instrument called the TOS Scale which sought to dif-

ferentiate between "Tight" and "Loose" school types.

These types closely paralleled the two extreme rankings

of Halpin's six climate types, the "Closed" and "Open."

Using certain items and procedures from the Corman

and Olmsted instrument, and the climate dimensions

developed by Halpin and Croft, this writer then developed

an instrument for measuring school climates for use in

 

56Halpin, Theory in Administration, pp. 174-81.

S7Corman and Olmsted, Internship of Teachers, p.

 

57:

and personal interview with Dr. Ann Olmsted, Spring, 1970.

 

55

the present study. A detailed account of procedures and

description of the instrument is included in Chapter III.

Other Variables of Interest

 

The review of the literature produced no studies
concerned with the grade level of teaching assignment and
its relationship to classroom verbal performance. Appar-
ently, the possible variation in verbal performance from
grade to grade has not been viewed with interest.

This review does not report the literature per-
taining to the possible relationship between teacher
verbal performance and the grade-point average of the
teacher, since the research that has been done has pro-
duced contradictory findings, and none of this research
has been investigating the relationship between GPA and
verbal performance of teachers, specifically. GPA has
not been found to correlate significantly with levels of
teaching performance, measured by evaluation type check-

lists.58

Actual teaching is measured on the verbal
dimension in the present study.
The writer's decision to include the variables of

GPA and grade level of teaching assignment, was prompted

by four years of experience as a consultant working in

 

58Gene L. Lavender, "The Prediction of Social
Studies Teachers' Success through the Use of Credentials,"
Dissertatioq Abstracts, XXIX (December, 1968), l717-A. In
this study GPA was found to be negatively correlated to
evaluations of success in teaching.

 

 

56

classrooms at grades one through seven. The subsequent
observations of the writer have produced this "intuitive,
logical, leap," concerning the need to study these var-

iables.

Summagy

The review of literature focused on four major
topics germane to this study. These were: inquiry-
centered instruction, verbal interaction in the classroom,
dogmatism and its relationship to teaching, and organi—
zational climate.

The first section reviewed the contributions of
a number of writers, to establish the conceptual frame-
work on which this study was based.

The second section sought to establish the impor-
tance of verbal interaction to teaching in general, and
its importance, specifically, to inquiry in the classroom.

The research and subsequent analytic systems of a number

of researchers were reported. Despite several limitations,

Flander's Interaction Analysis, the system used in this

 

investigation, was shown to be one of the more reliable
systems available.

The third section reported selected studies of
dogmatism and its relationship to teaching. Studies were
selected that were concerned specifically with the rela-
tionships between dogmatism and inquiry-centered

instruction. The results of six studies were reported

 

57

that indicated that the dogmatism of a teacher may be
related to his ability to function using an inquiry
approach.

Organizational climate was the final major section
of this chapter. Literature relating to the influence
of organizational climate on teachers was cited. The
research of Halpin, and Corman and Olmsted was reported
in detail because of the significant relationship of
their studies to the present investigation, and because
instrumentation develOped for use in this study was

based on their earlier work.

_.ar-nm-A-‘fl
V —-4-"'

 

' ,
[tau _ -_

CHAPTER III

PROCEDURES UTILIZED IN THE STUDY

The purpose of this chapter was to report the
design, data-collection process, instrumentation, and

statistical procedures of the study.

The Popplation of Interest

The subjects of this study were intern teachers
enrolled in the Elementary Intern Program (EIP) of
Michigan State University. Interns were selected because
they were serving in roles similar to regular beginning
teachers, and it was desired, for the purposes of the
study, to gather data on this type of pOpulation. The
data were gathered in May, near the end of their first
year of teaching, exclusive of student teaching.

Other considerations which prompted the use of
intern teachers as the research population of interest
were:

1. The EIP has, as a part of its design, a

supervisory-type role--the intern consultant,
and because of the nature of this role the

occupants could be utilized as data-gatherers

58

‘n'

'u._ _.-v._al

 

j

59

for the study without the usual interjection
of a "strange" Observer in the classroom.
This allowed for the assumption that the
actual observations (taped) were representa-
tive of the teaching style of the intern
teacher.

2. Intern consultants, because of their gene-
rally high level of elementary teaching

expertise, interest in the improvement of

 

education, and high level of cooperation
demonstrated in past research efforts, were
expected to be conscientious participants in
this research.

3. In many studies of classroom teaching per-
formance reported in the literature, syste-
matic differences have initially been present,
in that the subjects have received quite dif-
fering types of college preparation for teach-
ing from different institutions. In using
intern teachers this difference was held to a
minimum. Some differences existed in the
programs among various EIP Centers, but these
differences were assumed to be small when
compared to the similarities across centers.

The population of interest was the total number

of intern teachers who had been teaching in regular

60

classrooms, grades one through six, in the eleven EIP
centers since the beginning of the school year, 1969-1970
(Population N=208). This excluded all interns who were
teaching at grades other than one through six, or who
were teaching in special assignments such as special
education, art, physical education, or music. (Forty-
five interns were excluded on the basis of being in one

of these categories.)

The Stugy Sample

 

The study sample consisted of thirty-five intern
teachers, randomly drawn from the population of interest.
Thirty-nine intern teachers were originally drawn for the
sample, with two interns refusing to participate and the
recorded data of two interns being unusable due to faulty
recording techniques. This number (N=35) was considered
sufficient for the purposes of the study, and yet man-
ageable in terms of expense and time. Maintaining an N
greater than thirty allows for the use of the z-test sta-
tistic instead of the less powerful t-test.

Randomization allowed for the results of the
study to be generalized to the population of interns in
the eleven EIP Centers of Michigan State University
teaching in grades one through six. Presumably, the
findings could be applicable to the universe of intern

programs similar to EIP.

 

61

Intern Teachers

 

Data were gathered for description of the sample
subjects. Table 3.1 includes a description of the intern
sample by major and minor areas of academic preparation,
exclusive of elementary education which was the desig-
nated major curriculum of all subject interns. The
majority of interns majored in social science with minors
in English and Science.

Table 3.2 describes the interns' Michigan State
University grade-point average (GPA) accumulated to
March, 1970. The average GPA was 2.92 on a scale with
4.0 representing an "A."

TABLE 3.1.-~Distribution of academic majors and
minors of intern sample, 1970.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Majors
. Social . Math Fine
Subjects Science Engl1sh Science Arts
Number 18 7 5 3
Percentage* 51 26 14 9
Minors
English English Social Math-
Sub'ects and and Science Science and
3 Science Social and Social
Science Science Science
Number 17 9 8 1
Percentage 48 25 23 3

 

*
Approximate percentages are given, rounded-

off to two places.

 

62

TABLE 3.2.--Distribution of grade-point averages of
intern sample, 1970.

 

Grade Point Average - 4.0 Scale

 

 

. 1.50- 2.00- 2.50- 3.00- 3.50
SUbJeCtS 1.99 2.49 2.99 3.49 4.00
Number 0 1 20 12 2
percentage 0 3 5 7 34 6 Ft».

 

Nineteen, or more than 54 per cent of the sample

interns indicated that they were married. Sixteen, or

 

approximately 46 per cent were single. Of the nineteen ' h}
married interns, twelve had no children. The remaining
seven interns had an average of three children each.

Table 3.3 contains a description of the intern
sample by age distribution. Approximately 65 per cent
were in the age group of 21-25. This appeared to be con-
sistent with the approximate average ages of past intern
groups.

The intern sample was comprised of thirty-three
females and two males. Randomization procedures did not
accurately sample the factor of sex, since this per cent
of males--approximately 6 per cent, is not truly reflec-
tive of the number Of males typically enrolled in EIP.
Since the beginning of the program, the average percentage

of males in the program has been approximately 19 per cent.

63

TABLE 3.3.--Age distribution of intern sample, 1970.

 

Subjects 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 40- +

 

 

Number 23 6 3 2 1
Percentage 65 17 9 6 3
Instrumentation

 

 

The specific questions to be answered by this

study demanded that instruments be selected that could

 

objectively measure: (1) Classroom verbal behavior of ii '
the teacher and students, (2) the personality trait- 9
dogmatism, and (3) the organizational climate of schools.
A search of the literature produced positive results,
insofar as the first two variables were concerned. No
instrument was found, however, that would adequately
measure the third variable--organizationa1 climate, and
yet be usable in this study. Therefore, an instrument
called the School Climate Scale1 was developed by the
investigator.
The first part of this section explains the
rationale for the selection of the two existing instru-
ments. The second part provides the rationale for devel-
opment of the investigator's instrument, and details the

procedures employed.

 

1This instrument appears as APPENDIX C, under
the title: School Situation Questionnaire.

64

Interaction Analysis2

 

This system.which is sometimes referred to as the
"Minnesota System," developed by Flanders,3 was selected
because it appears to be one of the most reliable and
adequate systems available for the measurement of Class-
room verbal behaviors, or interaction. Medley and Mitzel, ".
developers of OScAR, a similar analytic system, made a I-T
comparative study of a number of these systems. They

state:

 

Flanders (1960) has developed the most sophisticated L;
technique for observing climate (or classroom verbal
interaction). Thus far, one which is unique in that
it preserves a certain amount of information regard-
ing the sequence of behavior.4

Selection of Flander's IA was based on this type
of recommendation, consultation with a number of persons
who had first-hand knowledge of various systems and the
investigator's personal knowledge of the system. Its

reported reliability is .84.5

 

2The complete description of this instrument
appears as APPENDIX B, under the title: School Situ-
ationgQuestionnaire.

3Flanders, Influence, Attitudes and Achievement.

 

4Donald M. Medley and Harold E. Mitzel, "Measuring
Classroom Behavior by Systematic Observation," in Handbook
of Research on Teaching, ed. by N. L. Gage (New Yor :
Rand McNally, 1963), pp. 248-314.

 

5
p. 111.

Flanders, Influence, Attitudes and Achievement,

65

The need for determining the investigator's com-
petence in using IA posed a problem, in that.it was dif-
ficult to find a person with demonstrated knowledge of
the system who could attest to the proficiency of the
investigator. There is always the chance when a compari-
son is made between the "untried" and the "proven," that
the untried is really measuring more accurately than the
proven. At any rate, two university faculty members at
professional ranks (Dr. John Masla at Michigan State Uni-
versity and Dr. Robert Oana at Central Michigan University)
did verbally attest to the investigator's ability to use
the system. Also, an inter-rater reliability Check was
made between the investigator and an intern consultant
who had knowledge of the system. This reliability coef-
ficient was .91. This was obtained using an ANOVA tech-

nique suggested by Ebel.6

Dogmatism Scale

 

This scale developed by Milton Rokeach7 appeared
to be the only reliable instrument for the measurement of
open- and closed-mindedness, one of the more important

variables of interest in the present investigation. None

 

6William A. Mehrens and Robert L. Ebel, eds.,
Principles of Educational and Psychological Measurement
IChiEago: RandiMcNaIly and Co., I967), pp. 120-21.

7Rokeach, Investigations into Belief and Person-
ality Systems.

 

 

66

of the other instruments reviewed had reported reliability
ratings that were sufficiently high. Furthermore, the

ease of administration (especially of the Short Form E,8
which was employed here), provided further justification
for its use when compared with other instruments which

were purported to measure similar constructs. The reported

reliability of the Short Form E is .79.

School Climate Scale9

This instrument was developed by the investigator
after a search of the literature failed to produce an
adequate instrument for use in the present study. An
instrument developed by Halpin and Croft10 was only usable
when the total staffs of the sample schools reacted to
their scale. This was not manageable since the subject
interns were located in thirty-five different schools
representing twenty-one different school districts.

Another instrument the TOS Scale developed by

Corman and Olmstedll forced the results into a dichotomy

 

 

8Rokeach, Investigations into Belief and Person-
ality Systems, p. 50.

9This instrument appears as APPENDIX C, under the
title: School Situation Questionnaire.

10The complete description of this instrument was
contained in Chapter II.

1Corman and Olmsted, Internship of Teachers.

 

 

67

which was deemed unadvisable from a statistical standpoint
for the purposes of this study. After consultation with
Dr. Ann Olmsted, one of the developers of the TOS Scale,
and member of this writer's doctoral guidance committee,
the writer developed an instrument for the measurement of
organizational climate.

The research of Halpin and Croft resulted in the
identification of the behaviors on which to measure orga-
nizational climate. (These are listed on pp. 26-27, Chap-
ter II.) Using these dimensions the writer then con-
structed a series of items, which obtained information
relative to these behavioral dimensions. The items were
submitted to a panel of judges (four intern consultants)12
to be rated as to the relationship between specific items
and behaviors. This procedure was followed a number of
times with items being added and deleted until all items
were deemed appropriate by the panel.

This fourteen-item instrument was then used to
rank eight different schools with two raters independently
ranking each school. These results were subjected to an

analysis of variance technique13 used to determine the

 

12This panel consisted of Robert Babcock, Joyce
Putnam, Pam Schuler, and Eileen Suber, Port Huron EIP
consultants.

13Mehrens and Ebel, Principles of Measurement,
pp. 120-21.

 

 

68

reliability of ratings with an inter-rater reliability
coefficient obtained of .87. This was deemed adequate
considering the global nature of the variable-organizational
climate. These results appear as Table 3.4.

In order to increase the objectivity of the instru-
ment, numerical weights were assigned to each response q
category, ranging from 1 for "Rarely Occurs" to 4 for "Fre-
quently Occurs." The responses to the items were then

summed with items 7, 10, and 11 being scored negatively.

 

This resulted in a scale with a lower limit of -l, and b,
upper limit of 44. The "pure" type; Closed is represented
by -1, and the "pure" type Open by +44.

Since this study sought to determine the strength
of relationships of selected variables, it was not
necessary to equate a particular score obtained with
the School Climate Scale with one of the six organi-
zational climate types. An arbitrary determination was
made by the writer, and it is offered here for the
reader's benefit. No claim is made that these intervals
are precise. As a part of the reliability determination
process the results from the School Climate Scale obtained
on the eight selected schools were examined by the same
panel of judges referred to earlier. They unanimously
agreed that six schools were appropriately categorized
by the scale, and that two schools were within one climate

of the true situation. It appeared that this scale did,

69

TABLE 3.4.--Inter-rater reliability ratings of
The School Climate Scale

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rater 1 Rater 2 Sum Sum2
School 1 39 39 78 6084
School 2 38 38 76 5776
School 3 30 31 61 3721
School 4 33 34 67 4489
School 5 32 32 64 4096
School 6 39 40 79 6241
School 7 24 30 54 2916
School 8 41 44 85 7225
Sum 276 288 564 40548
Sum of Squares "Rating" 564 = 20298
Product of Sum and Means 564 x'TZ‘ = 19881
Sums of Squares
For Raters Egg - 19881 = O
For Schools 40348 - 19881 = 393
For Total 20298 - 19881 = 417
For Error 417 - 393 = 24
Mean Square
For Schools 3%; = 56‘14
For Error g;x = 3‘43
Reliability of Ratings
56.14 - 3.43 = .866

 

56.142=II (3.43)

 

70

in fact, provide for fairly meaningful and accurate
typing of schools. These score intervals and corres-
ponding types are described in Table 3.5

TABLE 3.5.--Organizational climate types and corresponding
scores obtained from the school climate scale.

 

 

 

’“1
Climate Types Score Interval 1
Open 32 and higher
Antonomous 28 - 31 .
Controlled 25 - 27 Z:
Familiar 22 - 24 [J
Paternal 20 - 23 ;
Closed 19 and lower

 

For the reader's benefit the climate types14 are
loriefly described below:

1. The Open Climate describes the energetic orga-

 

nization which is moving towards its goals.
Leadership acts emerge easily from the group.
Task achievement and social-needs satisfaction
are balanced. The group members behave authen-
tically.

2. The Antonomous Climate is described as one in

 

which the main leadership comes from the group.
High Esprit results primarily from social-

needs satisfaction.

14See Chapter II pp. 53-54 for a more complete
description of these Climate types.

71

3. The Controlled Climate is Characterized best

 

as impersonal and highly task-oriented. This
climate lacks openness because of the pre-
occupation with task achievement.

4. The Familier Climate is highly personal, but

 

under-controlled. Esprit is not very high
because group members secure little satis-
faction from task achievement.

5. The Paternal Climate is one in which the

 

 

principal constrains leadership actions from
the group. Little satisfaction is obtained
from task achievement and socializing; hence,
Esprit among the members is low.

6. The Closed Climate is characterized by a high

 

degree of apathy. The organization is not
"moving." Esprit is low because the group

members secure no satisfaction.

Design Elements

 

The population of the study consisted of intern
teachers teaching in regular classroom assignments, grades
one through six. From this population a random sample of
thirty-nine interns was drawn. The loss of four subjects
left a sample size of thirty-five.

The experimental unit was the intern teacher with

the criteria of independence between units ensured because

72

of the respective teaching assignments. All interns
were assigned to different buildings.
The Indirect to Direct teaching ratio (IDTR)

obtained from Interaction Analysis was designated as the

 

dependent variable. The Dogmatism Scale score (DS),

 

School Climate Scale score (SCSS), Grade Point Average
(GPA), and Grade Level of Teaching (GLTA) were designated
as independent variables. There was a complete set of
data obtained for each subject intern in the study.

The basic statistic was one of multiple correl-
ation. The arrangement of the variables in this way
allowed for the estimation of relationships between the
dependent variable and the set of independent variables.

Data were obtained to determine if there was
variation in the teaching styles between interns, and to
determine to what extent each of the independent variables
included in the study attributed to this variance. This
provides estimates of the strengths of relationships

between these variables.

The Statistical Hypotheses of the Study

 

The nature of a correlational study does not
demand that statistical hypotheses be formulated, but in
order to address the question of predictability, a hypo-
thesis, in the null form, is posed. The basic question
to be answered is, "What proportion of the observed

variance in the dependent variable (IDTR) is accounted

 

73

for by each of the independent variables (DS, SCSC, GPA,
and GLTA"? On the basis of the study, those variables
found to relate significantly would remain in the pre-
diction rule, and those that do not would be deleted.

Hypothesis in null form (To be used with each

 

independent variable).*
Xi does not account for any of the variation
in the IDTR above that accounted for by the
remainder of the independent variables and the
mean of the dependent variable.

Where: Xi represents each of the independent
variables, 1 through 4.

Symbolically: Hoi = bi = 0

Where: b. = any of the beta weights, or regression
coefficiehts of the independent variables.

*
This is the same as testing that R = 0, which.

appear as individual hypotheses in the next Chapter.

Data Collection

 

In February, 1970, the writer presented a research
proposal at a monthly meeting of EIP Center Directors,
and received tentative approval to use intern teachers
as the subjects of the study. Final approval for this
research was granted in April, 1970.

A cover letter was sent to the nine centers rep-
resented in the random drawing of interns, scheduling
meetings between intern consultants involved in the study
and the researcher. Materials and recording equipment

were delivered, and brief instructional sessions were

 

J

74

held for the purpose of establishing uniformity of data-
gathering across centers.
The consultants then arranged for their respective

interns to complete the Dogmatism Scale, the School Cli-

 

mate Scale, and demographic questionnaire. The consul-
tants reacted to the School Climate Scale, independently
of the interns.

Specific "blinds" were built into the study to
ensure that the data would be as free from contamination

as possible. The Dogmatism Scale, and the School Climate

 

Scale were administered under pseudo-type titles, and

three items (items 1, 3, + 5) were added to the Dogmatism

 

Sgglg_in an effort to further disguise it. Neither the
interns nor consultant knew the exact nature of the study
nor that Interaction Analysis would be employed to analyze
the taped samples of teaching.

The audio-taping of three twenty-minute sessions
of classroom instruction of each intern, was accomplished
by the consultants. Restrictions were imposed to the
effect that the particular sessions to be taped be non-
systematically selected by the consultant. Also, the
taping was to be done in one or more of the instructional
areas of social studies, science, language arts, and
reading (at the primary grades).

The questionnaires and scaled instruments were

hand-scored by the researcher with results verified by

 

75

an assistant hired by the researcher. These data were
placed on IBM cards by a skilled key-punch operator.

The tapes were analyzed by the researcher and the
resultant tallies placed on IBM cards. These data were
,then plotted and matrices constructed by means of an
IBM-1130 computer program and IDTR's obtained; with these
data being transferred to IBM cards.

The data were obtained from five of the centers
during the first two weeks in May, 1970. Data from the
remaining four centers were gathered during the later
part of May, and extending into the first week of June
in two instances. This was necessitated by availability
of recording equipment, and the distances between the
center locations. It was assumed by the investigator that
the verbal patterns of the interns would not markedly
change from one week to the next. The data from the
first five centers were compared with the data from the

last four, and no systematic differences were observed.

Statistical Procedures

 

Multiple-regression techniques were employed in
the statistical treatment of the data. This routine,
sometimes referred to as the Least Squares (LS) routine,
allowed for the estimation of the relationships between
the dependent variable and a set of independent variables.

Linearity between variables do not have to be

assumed in order to employ this technique; however,

 

76

assumptions concerning linearity between the coefficients
are necessary. Because of the nature of the distributions
of the variables, the assumption of linearity was con-
sidered to be met.

The LS routine as operated on by the IBM - 3600
computer allows for the reporting of significance at 1*”:
intermediate levels, in addition to the .01 or .05 levels.
These results were reported so that the exact levels of

the relationships, as well as the strengths of the rela-

 

tionships are provided the reader.

The intercorrelations between the independent
variables, and the correlations between each independent
variable and the dependent variable (IDTR) are reported.

The Fisher r to z transformation is applied to
the data due to the fact that the distributions of r

that are produced are skewed distributions.

Statistical Limitations

 

The simple correlations, or r's, can be considered
as meeting the necessary assumptions. This is not the
case with the intercorrelations. As Hays has pointed out,

One often finds an experimenter testing the signifi-
cance of each one of the intercorrelations, as if
they were each based on a different sample. The
resulting significance levels are largely meaningless,
for the reasons much like those making t-tests for

all differences among a set of means a dubious

77

procedure . . . in particular one should ordinarily

expect some of these tests to show significance by

chance alone.15

Another limitation of the design of this study is

the size of the N in the research sample. It remains
unknown whether this N of 35 is large enough so that the
beta weights for each of the independent variables, and
the resultant F-tests were meaningful and inclined to
hold constant in replicative studies. It is likely that

studies with larger N's might find differing beta weights

for the prediction rule, and stronger relationships.

Summary

Chapter III presented the procedures utilized in
the study. The population of interest and study sample
of intern teachers were defined, with selected demographic
information reported.

The rationale was stated for the choice of the
instrumentation employed and for the development of one
instrument, the School Climate Scale. The reported inter-

rater reliability of the Flander's Interaction Analysis

 

‘was .84. The Short Form E of the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale

 

‘was reported as .79 reliable. On the basis of information
gathered in this study, it was concluded that the School

Climate Scale had reliability ranging from .74 to .86.

. 15William Hays, Statistics (New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston, 1963), pp. 576-77.

 

 

78

These reliability ratings were sufficient for the pur-
poses of this study.

The final sections of Chapter III focused on the
data gathering and statistical procedures employed in
the study. Certain restrictions that incorporated in
the basic research design were discussed. The justifi- FT
cation for the use of multiple-regression statistical

techniques, and limitations imposed by their use, were

enumerated. .-

 

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

This chapter is divided into three major sections.

Successive sections report and discuss (1) raw data

obtained as measures for each variable, (2) findings

 

relative to the simple correlations between variables
and decisions regarding the four hypotheses, and (3)
findings relative to the multiple-correlations and the
regression equation for the prediction of classroom

verbal behavior.

Raw Data Obtained

 

The traditional style of presenting the raw data
in appendices has not been followed here. Instead, the
data appear in a series of tables with accompanying dis-
cussions. .The reason for including the data in this
chapter was that the range in a sample can directly
affect the size of the obtained r's in a study of rela-
tionships. It is highly unlikely that meaningful rela-
tionships will be found between variables that are

restricted in range. When there is a restricted group

79

80

small changes on one variable may be accompanied by
large changes on the other variable resulting in lower
r's.

The scores obtained from the three instruments
used in the study are presented in tables 4.1, 4.2, and
4.3. Table 4.4 contains the description of the sample
parameters measured on each of the variables including
those measures obtained from inspection of the demo-

graphic data. Following the tables is a discussion of

 

the obtained ranges in each of the variables.

TABLE 4.1.--Dogmatism scale scores.

 

 

Mean - 58.029 SD - 12.62

Intern No. Score Intern No. Score
01 71 23 63
02 55 24 54
03 46 25 56
04 69 26 70
05 44 27 69
07 44 28 59
08 37 29 50
10 26 30 43
11 48 31 57
13 75 32 57
14 58 33 55
16 65 34 8O
17 65 35 56
18 82 36 58
19 68 37 60
20 73 38 75
21 51 39 45
22 47

N = 35 (No.'s 6, 9, 12, 15 dropped from sample. Intern
No. 6 refused to participate, and interns no. 9, 12, and
15 were unusable due to faulty tape recordings.

 

81

TABLE 4.2.--School climate scale scores.

 

 

Mean - 26.34 SD - 8.09

Intern Intern's Consultant's Intern Intern's Consultant's
No. Rating Rating No. Rating Rating
01 23 25 23 34 33
02 26 37 24 19 18
03 13 12 25 24 24
04 21 25 26 37 37
05 l6 17 27 33 37
07 16 27 28 22 22
08 35 35 29 25 27
10 24 23 30 21 25
ll 31 40 31 37 25
13 06 13 32 27 25
14 13 19 33 16 15
16 30 26 34 36 25
17 29 28 35 35 37
18 39 40 36 18 21
19 32 42 37 19 15
20 24 30 38 36 21
21 20 19 39 30 29
22 36 28

N = 35

Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient (r) = .74

for Intern and Consultant Ratings.

This r of .74 computed to further demonstrate the relia-
bility of the School Climate Scale. Only the ratings

of consultants were used for computing the between -
variables correlation.

 

 

82

TABLE 4.3.--Interaction analysis data.

 

Intern No. No. Sessions Mean I.D. Ratio Mean Length

 

01 6 .3421 200
02 6 .7788 171
03 5 .4393 139
04 5 1.0865 136
05 2 .8638 158
07 6 .9072 181
08 5 1.2008 138
10 6 1.0707 148
ll 6 1.1569 162
13 4 .6942 139
14 6 .7055 206
16 5 .7237 188
17 5 .6113 180
18 6 1.4437 189
19 5 1.6171 202
20 6 1.1681 174
21 5 1.3905 178
22 3 .4025 177
23 6 .4247 216
24 6 .4781 194
25 6 .5624 187
26 6 .6464 181
27 6 .7795 199
28 6 .3118 168
29 5 .6211 192
30 6 .2783 190
31 5 .7822 187
32 5 .2469 179
33 4 .4659 150
34 5 .5903 206
35 5 1.0348 193
36 4 .6975 179
37 6 1.5325 167
38 6 .7677 186
39 4 1.4504 198

N = 35

Mean ID Ratio - .8080 SD - .38

Mean No. Sessions - 5.2 Mean Session Length - 178*

Due to the capacity limits of the 1130 computer,
the three taped sessions were at logical points, split
into five or six sessions. An attempt was made to hold
these to a fairly uniform length of about 8 to 10 minutes.

 

 

*
Number of observations, or tallies, recorded at
three-seCond intervals.

83

TABLE 4.4.--Statistics on transformed variables.

 

 

Variable Minimum Maximum Mean Standard
Value Value DeV1ation
Dogmatism* 26.00 82.00 58.03 12.62
School Climate 12.00 42.00 26.34 8.09
Grade Point Aver 2.30 3.52 2.92 .34
Gr Level Tch Assign 1.00 6.00 3.14 1.68 F-
Indirect-Direct
Tch Ratio .25 1.62 .81 .38

 

*

The Dogmatism Scale scores are interpreted with
low scores representing open-mindedness thus resulting
in negative values for positive r's. pg

 

 

Discussion of Rapge in Variables

 

Dogmatism.--The range of this variable, as indi-

 

cated by the minimum and maximum scores of 26.00 and 82.00
respectively, and SD of 12.62, shown in Table 4.1 appeared
to be adequate for a correlation study. With approxi-
mately 33 per cent of the scores falling above or below
the scores of 46 and 70, enough deviation was found so

that meaningful relationships could be detected.

School Climate.--With a range of thirty points

 

(from 12.00 to 42.00), and SD of 8.09 the deviation in
this variable was deemed adequate for correlational pur-

poses. Table 4.2 describes these data.

Grade Point Average.--The deviation in this

 

variable with SD of .34, probably was restrictive in

nature. The effect of this was to make it more difficult

84

to obtain meaningful estimates of the relationships
between this and other variables, even if they really

existed.

Grade Level of Teaching Assignment.--The varia-

 

bility in the sample as measured on this variable (range-
l.0 to 6.0; SD - 3.14) was considered adequate for the
purposes of this study. Due to the sampling techniques
an almost equal number of subjects were observed at each
grade level, and the mean was close to the true mid-point

of the scale. This variable was not normally distributed.

Indirect-Direct Teaching Ratio.--The obtained

 

scores ranged from very direct (.25) to very indirect
(1.62). However, the SD of .38 suggested that the vari-
ance of the subjects' teaching styles, as measured by
Flander's IA was not sufficient for the study of corre-
lations. This restriction probably reduced the corre-
lation coefficients obtained, thereby serving as a rather
serious limitation of the study. Table 4.3 contains the

description of these data.

Findings Related to Simple Correlations

 

Relative to the hypotheses to be tested, the
correlation coefficients were obtained fOr inter-corre-
lations between independent variables, and correlations
between the independent variables and the dependent

variable, Indirect to Direct Teaching Ratio (IDTR).

-9

 

85

Table 4.5 contains these r's which were used in the hypo-
theses testing.

The reader is reminded that the inter-correlations
which are also found in Table 4.5 are somewhat meaningless
Since, as Haysl suggests, that one should expect to find
some spurious, significant relationships due to chance
alone, roughly one out of ten times. These inter-
correlations between independent variables have been
presented for the benefit of the reader. No conclusions
will be reached in this study on the basis of these par-

ticular data.

TABLE 4.5.--Simple correlation coefficients.

 

 

Variables 1-5

 

03 (IV)* 1.0000

 

SCS (IV) .1547 1.0000

GPA (IV) -.2243 .1069 1.0000

GLTA (IV) -.1857 .1064** .3010 1.0000

IDTR (DV) -.0012 .3328 .0059 -.2307 1.0000
DS SCS GPA GLTA IDTR

 

*
The notations (IV) and (DV) indicate the inde-
pendent and dependent variables.

**
Significance at the .05 level of confidence.

 

lHays, Statistics, pp. $76-77.

 

86

The following section reports the tests of the

hypotheses.

Hypothesis One

 

There is no relationship between the dogmatism
scores of intern teachers of Michigan State
University's Elementary Intern Program as
measured by Rokeach's Dogmatism Scale, and the
verbal behavior of intern teachers as measured
by Flanders' Interaction Analysis.

 

 

Symbolically: Hol : RDS, IDTR = 0

Tested by: z-test z = gr (Tabled Values)

r

Where: r = -.0012

Discussion of Results

 

On the basis of the obtained r of -.0012 Hypo-
thesis One was not rejected. There was close to a zero-
order correlation found between the dogmatism scores of
intern teachers and their IDTR's. This suggests that the
dogmatism, or degree of open-mindedness, of an intern
teacher is not related to the degree of directness of his

verbal behavior.

Hypothesis Two

 

There is no relationship between the social-
psychological, school climate as measured by the
School Climate Scale, and the verbal behavior

of intern teachers as measured by Flanders'
Interaction Analysis. '

 

Symbol1ca11y: Ho2 : RSCS, IDTR = 0

 

87

Tested by: z = SE'
r

Where‘ rSCS, IDTR = '3328*

*
Significant at the .05 level of confidence.

Discussion of Results

 

On the basis of the z-test Hypothesis Two was
rejected. A positive relationship between school climate
as measured by the School Climate Scale, and verbal
behavior of intern teachers as measured by Flanders'

IA was found. This correlation was significant at the
.05 level. This suggests that the school climate in
which the intern is teaching is related to his verbal

behavior in the classroom.

Hypothesis Three

 

There is no relationship between the Grade
Point Average earned at Michigan State Uni-
versity of the intern teachers, and the verbal
behavior of intern teachers as measured by
Flanders' IA.

Symbolically: H03 : RGPA, IDTR = 0
Tested by: z ='§L

r
Where: rGPA, IDTR = .0059

Discussion of Results

 

On the basis of the obtained r of .0059, Hypo-

thesis Three was not rejected. This near zero-order

 

88

correlation suggests that there is no relation between
the grade-point average of interns earned at Michigan
State University and their verbal behavior as measured

by Flanders' IA.

Hypothesis Four

There is no relationship between the Grade Level
of Teaching Assignment of intern teachers, and
the verbal behavior of intern teachers as
measured by Flanders' IA.

Symbollcally: Ho4 : RGLTA, IDTR = 0
Tested by: z = g;

r
Where: = -.2243

rGLTA, IDTR

Discussion of Results

On the basis of the obtained r of -.2243, Hypo-
thesis Four was not rejected. In fact, this correlation
which is approaching significance at the .05 level, is in
a negative direction, whereas it was hypothesized that if
a relationship existed, it would be in a positive direction.
This indicates that the grade level at which an intern is
teaching may be related to his verbal behavior as measured
by Flanders' IA, but only slightly so and in an inverse
way.

Fipdings Related ppMultiple
Correlation Coefficients
In an effort to arrive at a "prediction rule,"

the Least Squares (LS) technique was employed. Data

 

89

obtained were: (1) overall regression statistics, (2)
multiple correlation coefficients, and (3) estimations
of the amount of variance in the dependent variable,
IDTR, that could be attributed to each of the indepen-
dent variables.

In table 4.6 the analysis of variance for over-
all regression is shown. The obtained F value is sig-

nificant at the .15 level of confidence.

TABLE 4.6.--Analysis of variance for overall regression.

 

 

 

Sum of Deg of Mean F Si
Squares Freedom Square 9.
Regression
(about mean) .9657 4 .2414 1.823 .15
Error 3.9724 30 .1324
Total
(about mean) 4.9381 34

 

Also, this section describes the statistics
related to the multiple-correlation for the independent
variables under study. The multiple-correlation, R, for
this set of independent variables was .4422.

Table 4.7 contains data regarding multiple-
correlation, as well as data concerning the value of

each of the independent variables in the prediction rule.

Discussion of Results
The resultant R of .4422 suggests that the set

of variables used to predict IDTR is a better, or more

90

TABLE 4.7.--Mu1tiple-corre1ation coefficients.

 

 

N=35 R2=.l956 R=.4422 S=.3639
. Partial 2
. Beta Std Errors Sig. R
Variables Weights of Betas FB of FB Corr Deletes
Coefs
IDTR .8886 .353
DS -.1086* .1728 .3949 .535 -.1140 .1850
scs .3783 .1685 5.0403 .032 .3793 .0604
GPA .0312 .1757 .0317 .860 .0325 .1947
GLTA -.3006 .1741 2.9815 .095 .3001 .1156

 

*The LS routine operates with absolute values,
therefore whether a number is positive or negative in
sign makes no difference in the determination of the
statistics.
accurate predictor than any one of the individual var-
iables.2 Two of the selected variables served as fairly
potent predictors in the rule--SCS, and GLTA. Further
inspection of the data reveals that the variables GPA,
and DS were not of predictive value in the rule. The
exact contribution of each of these variables to the
variance in the constant IDTR, is shown by the respective
beta weights (Table 4.7) produced by the LS program.

In replicative studies theSe beta weights
should remain fairly constant; therefore, the variables

GPA and DS, should probably be deleted from the rule

and other more potent predictors added. The addition

 

2Agricultural Experimental Station, Stat Routine
No. 7 - Least Sguares, Michigan State University, 1966.

 

 

 

91

of one or two such variables could serve to reduce the
amount of measurement error. This error term is shown in
the table as S or Standard Error of Estimate. The S for
this prediction rule was .3639, which is too high for

meaningful use, according to Borg.3

The R2 Deletes data has been included in the above
table for possible use in future studies. This statistic
is an estimation of the proportional gain in the pre-
diction equation if a particular variable is deleted.

For example, the data suggest that if dogmatism (DS) was
dropped from the equation, there would be approximately
an 18 per cent improvement in the accuracy of the pre-
diction. If school climate (SCS) was deleted, a much

smaller increase (6 per cent) in the accuracy of the

prediction might result.

Summary of Results
Four hypotheses were tested using the z-test in
this study, and an equation for the possible prediction
of future verbal teaching performance of intern teachers

was formulated. The results were as follows:

 

3Walter R. Borg, Educational Research (New York:
David McKay Company, Inc., 1963), pp. 282-83.

 

 

92

Hypothesis Results

 

1. There is no relationship between
the dogmatism scores of intern
teachers of the Elementary Intern
Program of Michigan State Uni- Fail to reject.
versity as measured by the Rokeach
Dogmatism Scale, and the verbal
behavior of intern teachers as
measured by Flanders' Interaction
Analysis.

 

 

2. There is no relationship between
the social-psychological, school
climate as measured by the School Rejected.
Climate Scale, and the verbal
behavior of intern teachers as
measured by Flanders' Interaction
Analysis.

 

 

 

3. There is no relationship between
the Grade Point Average earned at
Michigan State University of the Fail to reject.
intern teachers, and the verbal
behavior of intern teachers as
measured by Flanders' IA.
4. There is no relationship between
the Grade Level of Teaching Assign-
ment of intern teachers, and the Fail to reject.

verbal behavior of intern teachers
as measured by Flanders' IA.

The variables, Dogmatism of intern teachers, Grade
Point Average of intern teachers, and Grade level of
teaching assignment of intern teachers were not found to
relate significantly to their classroom verbal behavior,
tested at the .05 confidence level. Of these only Grade
Level of Teaching Assignment approached significance.

A fourth variable, School Climate (of the

schools in which the interns were teaching) was found

93

t1) ‘be related to their classroom teaching behavior, sig-

nigficant at the .05 per cent confidence level.

Findings Relative to Over-all Regression

The obtained R of .44 indicated that the set of
four independent variables was more highly correlated
with the classroom verbal behavior of intern teachers,
than any one of the independent variables. Dogmatism,
Grade Point Average, and Grade Level of Teaching Assign-
ment were of low predictive value, whereas School Climate

was of average predictive value in the prediction rule.

 

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Chapter V is divided into three parts. The first

section summarizes the study. The second section reports
conclusions drawn from the findings, and the third

section presents recommendations for further research.

Summamy of the Study

The purpose of the study was to investigate (1)
the relationship between the measured dogmatism of
.intern teachers and their measured classroom verbal
behavior, (2) the relationship between the measured
Organizational Climate in which interns were teaching
arui their measured classroom verbal behavior, (3) the
relationship between the grade level of interns' teaching
asSignments and their measured classroom verbal behavior,
anfii (4) the relationship between the grade-point average
of? interns and their measured Classroom verbal behavior.

The research sample was comprised of thirty-five
jJTtern teachers randomly drawn from the entire population

‘Df interns enrolled in Michigan State University's

94

A“!

 

95

Elementary Intern Program (EIP), who were teaching in
regular classrooms during 1969-1970, grades one through
six.

The general research model was one of correlation,
with Verbal Interaction designated as the dependent
variable, and the independent variables of Dogmatism,
School Climate, Grade Point Average, and Grade Level of
Teaching Assignment.

Data were obtained for verbal interaction by use
of Flanders' Interaction Analysis, for the analysis of
five ten-minute taped segments of actual classroom
teaching of interns. The investigator analyzed the tapes
according to a detailed outline of procedures. Measures
of dogmatism of interns were obtained by the use of the

Rokeach Dogmatism Scale (Short Form-E). Measures of

 

organizational climate were obtained from the School
Climate Scale, and instrument developed by the investi-
gator for use in this investigation. This was adminis-
tered to intern teachers and intern consultants for reli-
ability. Only the consultants' ratings were used in the
computation of the correlation coefficients for testing
the hypotheses.

Multiple-regression techniques were employed in
statistical analysis of the data. The .05 level of
confidence for rejection or acceptance of the hypotheses

was selected.

 

96

Of the four relationships investigated, only

school climate was found to be correlated with the

classroom verbal behavior of interns, significant at

the .05 level of confidence.

The set of four independent variables was found

to be more highly correlated with classroom verbal

behavior of interns, than any single independent var—

iable. The obtained R of .44 for the set of variables

was not sufficiently high to serve as a meaningful rule

for predicting classroom verbal behavior.

Conclusions

 

Within the limitations of this study, the follow-

ing conclusions were drawn:

1.

The measured dogmatism of intern teachers
was not related to their measured classroom
verbal behavior.

The grade-point average of intern teachers
earned at Michigan State University was

not related to their measured classroom
verbal behavior.

There was a tendency for the grade level of
the teaching assignment of intern teachers
to be related to their measured classroom
verbal behavior, but not significantly so.

This relationship was in a negative direction.

 

97

The school climate in which interns were
teaching was found to be positively related
to their Classroom verbal behavior. The
more open the measured school climate, the
more indirect the measured classroom verbal
behavior of the interns. F3:
The set of four independent variables
included in the study was of higher predic-

tive value than any single variable.

 

The correlation coefficient (R=.44) of the a)
overall regression, or prediction rule, was
not sufficiently high to ensure meaningful
predictive information in regard to the
classroom verbal behavior of intern teachers.
The correlation coefficient (r-.74) computed
for the ratings of school climate by intern
teachers and intern consultants, indicated
that their individual perceptions of the
situation in which the intern was teaching
were quite similar, considering the fact that
the backgrounds and profesSional experiences
of these two groups were considerably dif-
ferent.

The measurement of the dependent variable,
labeled Indirect-Direct Teaching Ratio (IDTR),

produced a distribution of scores with a range

98

of .25 to 1.62, a mean of .81 and a SD of

.38. Perhaps accurate estimates of the cor-
relations between IDTR and the other variables
were not obtained due to the restrictive

nature of the distribution of the IDTR's.

Recommendations for Future Research
The following recommendations for future research
are based, specifically, on the conclusions drawn from
this investigation:

1. Other studies should be undertaken using
information, such as the "R2 Deletes"l
obtained in this study to develop a prediction
rule with a sufficiently high correlation
coefficient. This should be in the range of
.60 or higher for useful prediction.

2. The system to be used for analyzing teacher
verbal performance should be modified so that
anyvariation in teaching style will be
detected. It may be useful to magnify dif-
ferences by forcing the variable into a
dichotomy, or by other design modifications.
No recommendations for these modifications
are offered here, due to the lack of precise

information.

 

lR2 Deletes are-estimates of the proportional gain
in the prediction rule if a particular variable is deleted.

 

99

3. School climate should be the focus of future
studies, especially as it concerns intern
or beginning teachers. Is it primarily the
actions of the principal that determine the
working climate, or is it the actions of the
teachers, or a combination of both? Could
the School Climate Scale, developed for use
in the present study, be modified to increase
its internal reliability? It may well be
that some important dimensions of school cli-
mate were not included in this instrument.

4. If the assumption is valid that the verbal
behavior of teachers is instrumental to
inquiry-centered instruction, then the type
of school climate may be related to successful
inquiry in classrooms. More information is
required about this relationship.

Below are potential lines of inquiry that may be

pursued by future researchers.

1. More study of school climate seems warranted
so that consultants of the Elementary Intern
Program might work more effectively with
interns with added knowledge of the school
climate in which the interns are teaching.
Perhaps consultants could adjust their method

of working with interns due to differing school

 

100

climates. The study of other Closely related
influences, such as parents and community,
might produce useful information.

A considerable amount of information was gen-
erated by the computer program used in the
analysis of the taped data. Much of this was
not used, due to the design characteristics
and scope of the present study. Other studies
could be designed to take advantage of this
data. Specifically, studies might focus on
single categories of verbal interaction so
that, for example, the motivational aspects
of a teacher's verbal behavior could be iso-

lated and studied.

It may be that a specific program of instruction

in the use of some type of analytic observa-
tional system, should be included in the pro-
fessional course preparation of elementary
teachers. Or it might be that this training
should come during the individual's first
year of teaching.

Due to the extensive reliance of questioning
in inquiry-centered instruction, some
instruction pertaining to questioning stra-
tegies possibly should be included in the

pre-service education of teachers. In

 

101

particular there is need for understanding
the function of higher order questions in
the classroom.

5. The Elementary Intern Program should make
extensive use of the available observational
systems,2 so that hard data relative to the
usefulness of these could be gathered. The
EIP is suggested as a vehicle for this because
of its unique organization, in that it has as
a feature, a sizable group of competent prac-
titioners, the intern consultants.

6. Possibly, the questioning strategies, and the
experience with an analytic, observational
system, as mentioned above, may help to
develop teachers that are willing and able to
use an inquiry-centered approach. On the
other hand, it may be that the particular ele-
ments of inquiry should be subjected to
in-depth studies. These should be of the
type that are transacted in typical classrooms
so that the results will be widely applicable.

7. The concept of "clustering" interns in a
fewer number of schools might provide for

more meaningful comparative studies of factors

 

2Representative systems would be those of Hughs,
and Flanders which were described in Chapter II. Others
have been developed by Medley, Mitzel, and B. O. Smith.

 

102

such as school climate, because comparisons
could then be made between, and within
schools.

8. Since the research population was comprised
of intern teachers enrolled in the Elementary
Intern Program of Michigan State University, rm_
replicative studies could be undertaken to .
confirm and extend the findings of the

present study pertaining to the relationship 1

 

between school climate and verbal behavior LJ

of teachers, using other populations.

Reconceptualization

 

Four years of experience as an intern consultant
in the Elementary Intern Program working with beginning
teachers prompted this research. A basic unanswered
question was what are the factors that account for the
differences in the teaching styles of teachers. Some
teachers are significantly more direct or indirect in
their teaching approach than others.

So that future studies might be more fruitful by
focusing on specific areas of teacher development, var-
iables were chosen in the present design that were related
to the following aspects of this development: (1)
selection, (2) training, and (3) placement. In regard
to the selection of teachers, a personality variable,

dogmatism, was chosen. The grade-point average of a

103

teacher during his pre-teaching period was Chosen as an
intellectual variable to study, and the variables,
school climate and grade level of teaching assignment
were selected as sociological variables, related to the
placement aspect of teacher development.

The researcher hoped that a rule for predicting
teachers' patterns of classroom verbal interaction might
be constructed. This prediction rule was comprised of

the four independent variables included in the research

 

design.

Given the findings of this study dogmatism as a
personality variable and grade-point average as an intel-
lectual variable do not tell us very much about how teachers
act in the classroom. These variables were of little value
in the prediction rule, whereas School Climate and grade
level of teaching assignment were of value. (Partial cor-
relation coefficients were .38* and .30 respectively.) It
appeared that the situation or context, in which a teacher
was working was related to his verbal behavior.

If indeed the results of this study are represen-
tative of the way things really are, then it is the situ-
ational factors that shape teaching behaviors. This would
suggest that the selection aspect might not be as decisive

in the development of teachers as the placement aspect.

 

*
Significant at the .05 confidence level.

104

Unanswered here is the question of the interactive

process between these variables, although the predictive
rule, or overall regression rule, had a correlation
coefficient of .44 with verbal classroom behavior. This
was higher than that of any single variable. It may be
that some combination of two or three of these variables
would produce even higher correlation coefficients.
Future research should move to looking at the interactive
process of various sociological variables as they impinge

upon the behaviors of teachers.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, H. H. "The Measurement of Domination and of
Socially Integrative Behavior in Teacher's
Contact with Children." Child Development,
X, No. 2 (June, 1939).

 

Ausubel, David 0. Educational Psyghology: A Cognitive
View. New York: Holt, Rinehart andVWinston,
Inc., 1968.

 

Ausubel, David 0., and Tenzer, Amy G. "Components of and
Neutralizing Factors in the Effects of Closed-
Mindedness on the Learnings of Controversial
Issues." American Educational Research Journal,
VII (March, 1970)}

 

Berends, Eugene. "Perceptions of the Principal's Person-
ality: A Study of the Relationships to Organi-
zational Climate." Unpublished Ph.D. disser-
tation, Michigan State University, 1969.

Bloom, Benjamin J., ed. Taxonomylof Educational opjec-
tives, Handbook_I: CognitiVe Domain. New
York: David’McKay Company, Inc., 1956.

 

Borg, Walter R. Educational Research. New York: David
McKay Company, Inc., 1963.

 

Bridges, Edwin M., and Reynolds, Larry D. "Teacher Recep-
tivity to Change." Administrators Handbook,
February, 1968.

 

Brown, Robert J. "Identifying and Classifying Organiza-
tional Climates in Twin City Area Elementary
Schools." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
University of Minnesota, 1964.

Bruner, Jerome S. The Process of Education. Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1961.

 

. Toward a Theory of Instruction. Cambridge,
Mass.: Beihamp Press, 1966.

 

 

105

 

u, ‘.

106

Butts, D. P., and Jones, H. L. "Inquiry Training and
Problem Solving in Elementary Science Children."
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, IV
(MarCh, 1966).

Corman, Bernard, and Olmsted, Ann G. The Internshlp in
thefiPmeparation of Elementagy School Teachers.
East Lansing, Mich.: Bureau of Educational
Research, MSU, 1964.

 

Cornell, Francis G. "Socially Perceptive Administration."
Phi Delta Kappan, XXXVI (March, 1955).

Crabtree, Charlotte. "Effects of Structuring on the
Productiveness of Children's Thinking." Journal
of Experimental Education, XXXVI (Fall, 1967).

David, David W. "Conditions that Foster Growth in Chil-
dren's Ability to Generalize in Elementary
School Social Studies." Dissertation Abstracts,
XXIX (December, 1968).

 

Dewey, John. How We Think. New York: D. C. Heath, 1933.

. Logic:r The Theory of Inquiry. New York:
D. C. Heath, 1935.

 

Flanders, Ned A. Interaction Analysis in the Classroom:
A Manual fOr Observers. Ann Arbor, Mich.:
University of Michigan School of Education, 1966.

. Teacher Influence, Pupil Attitudes and Achieve-
ment. CooperatiVe Research Monograph No. 12,
Washington, D.C.: Office of Education, U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
1965.

Gagné, Robert M. "The Learning Requirements for Enquiry."
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, I,
No. 2 (Mardh, 1963i.

Goldmark, Bernice. Social Studies--Amgthod of Inquimy.
Belmont, CaIif.: WadswortH'Publishing Company,
Inc., 1968.

Halpin, Andrew W. Theory and Reseagch in Administration.
New York: The MacMillan Company, 1966.

Halpin, Andrew W., and Croft, Don B. The Orggnizational
Climate of Schools. Chicago: Midwest Adminis-
tration Center, University of Chicago, 1963.

 

 

107

Hardy, Donald W. "Inland Valley Elementary School Arche-
ology Project: An Experimental Comparison of
Two Teaching Approaches." Dissertation Ab-
stracts, XXIX (July, 1968).

 

Hays, William. Statistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart,
and Winston, 1963.

 

Henderson, Judith, and Ward, Ted. Research on Instruction.
East Lansing, Mich.: Learning Systems Insti-
tute, Michigan State University, undated.

 

Hughs, Marie. "DevelOpment of the Means for the Assessment
of the Quality of Teaching in Elementary Schools."
Handbook of Research on Teaching. Edited by
N. L. Gage. New York: RanndNally, 1963.

Joyce, William; Oana, Robert; and Houston, W. Robert.
Elementary Education in the Seventies. New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970.

 

Kardatzke, H. H. "Cultural-Institutional and Teacher
Influences Upon Social Studies Curriculum and
Instruction: An Exploratory Study." Disser-
tation Abstracts, XXIX (December, 1968).

 

Karplus, Robert. "The Science Curriculum Improvement
Study." Journal of Research in Science Teach-
ing, II, No. 42(1964).

Kersh, B. Y., and Wittrock, M. C. "Learning by Discovery."
Journal of Teacher Education, XIII (May, 1962).

Kingsley, Ruth W. "Commitment to Teaching and Open-
Mindedness of Teachers in Training." Unpub—
lished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Arizona,
1966.

Lavender, Gene L. "The Prediction of Social Studies
Teachers' Success Through the Use of Credentials."
Dissertation Abstracts, XXIX (December, 1968).

 

Lee, Martha A. "DevelOpment of Inquiry Skills in Ungraded
Social Studies Classes in a Junior High School."
Dissertation Abstracts, XXVIII (March, 1968).

 

108

Lippitt, Ronald, and White, Robert. "The 'Social Climate'
of Children's Groups." Child Behavior and
Develgpment. Edited by R. G. Baker, et al.

New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, I943.

 

 

Lonsdale, Richard. "Maintaining the Organization in
Dynamic Equilibrium." Behavioral Science and
Educational Administration. Sixty-third Yearbook,
NSSE, Edited by Daniel E. Griffiths. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1964.

 

 

Manson, Gary A., and Williams, Elmer D. "Inquiry: Does 9
It Teach How or What to Think?" Social Education,
XXXIV, No. 1 (January, 1970).

 

- ‘l . . M's) 6‘. .1.“ ‘-5 .4

Massiales, Byron G., and Cox, C. Benjamin. In uir in
Social Studies. New York: McGraw-Hill BOOE Co., .
1966. 3)

 

 

McCollum, Robert E. "A Study of the Relationship Between "
Selected Personality Characteristics and the
Reflective Method." Dissertation Abstracts,
XXIX (September, 1968).

 

Meux, Milton, and Smith, B. 0. "Logical Dimensions of
Teaching Behavior." Cpppemporary Repparch on
Teacher Effectiveness. Edited by B. J. Biddle
and W. J. Ellena. New York: Holt, Rinehart,
and Winston, Inc., 1964.

Morris, Derek V. "Organizational Climate of Canadian
Schools." The CSA Bulletin, III (June, 1964).

 

Medley, Donald M., and Mitzel, Harold E. "Measuring
Classroom Behavior by Systematic Observation."
Handbopk of Research on_leaching. Edited by
N. L. Gage. New York: Rand McNally, 1963.

. "The Scientific Study of Teacher Behavior."
Theoryland Research in Teaching. Edited by
Arno BelloCk. New York: Bureau of Publications,
Teachers College, 1963.

 

 

Mehrens, William A., and Ebel, Robert L., eds. Principles
of Educational and ngcholggical Measurement.
Chicago: RandiMcNaIly Co., 1967.

 

 

Michigan State University. Stat Routine No. 7--Least
S uares. East Lan§ing, Midh.: Agricultural
Exper1menta1 Station, 1966.

 

109

Peterson, 0. F. "Leadership and Group Behavior." Leader-
ship in Action No. 2. Washington, D.C.:
Natibnal Training Laboratories, 1961.

 

Piele, Philip K. "The Relationship of Teacher Open-and
Closed-Mindedness to Classroom Verbal Behavior."
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of
Oregon, 1968.

Rogers, Vincent R. "A Macrocosmic Approach to Inquiry."
Social Education, XXXIV, No. 1 (January, 1970).

 

Rokeach, Milton. The Open and Closed Mind: Investigations

 

into the Nature of Belief Systems and Personality

 

Systems. New York: Basic Books, 1960.

Sagle, Helen. "Problem Solving, Inquiry, Discovery?"
Childhood Education, November, 1966.

 

Skeel, Dorothy J., and Decaroli, Joseph G. "The Role of
the Teacher in an Inquiry-Centered Classroom."
Social Education, XXXIII, No. 5 (May, 1969).

 

Smith, B. O. "A Concept of Teaching." Teachers College
Record, VI, No. 5 (February, 1963).

 

Smith, Frederick R., and Cox, C. Benjamin. New Strategies
and Curriculum in Social Studies. ChiCago:
Rand McNally and Co., 1969.

 

 

Storlurow, L., and Pohl, K. "Letter to the Editors."
Harvard Educational Review, VII (Summer, 1963).

 

Suchman, Richard J. "Rebuilding the Science Program of
Inquiry Teaching in the Elementary School." The
Science Teacher, XXVII (November, 1960).

 

Troldahl, Verling C., and Powell, Frederick A. "A Short
Form Dogmatism Scale for Use in Field Studies."
Social Forces, XXXXIV, No. 2 (December, 1965).

 

Tucker, Jan. "A Classroom Challenge: Teaching A Method
of Inquiry." California Social Science Review,

IV, No. 3 (May, 1965i?

 

Turner, Thomas N. "Individualization Through Inquiry."
Social Education, XXXIV, No. 1 (January, 1970).

 

Wadtke, Kenneth H., and Wallen, Norman E. "The Effects
of Teacher Control in the Classroom on Pupils'
Creativity--Test Gains." Ameriggn Educational
Research Journal, II (March, 1965).

 

 

 

1.3

' '.\-

110

Withall, J. G. "The Development of a Technique for the
Measurement of Social-Emotional Climate in
Classrooms." Journal of Experimental Education,
XVII (March, 1949).

 

“var."

0|

 

 

APPENDICES

 

 

APPENDIX A

PERSONAL OPINION QUESTIONNAIRE

 

 

NAME

 

DATE

 

PERSONAL OPINION QUESTIONNAIRE

The following is a study of what the general public thinks and feels about a
number of important social and personal questions. The best answer to each
statement in this inventory is your personal gpinion. An attempt has been
made to cover many different and Opposing points of view. You may find
yourself agreeing strongly with some of the statements, disagreeing just as
strongly with some of the Others, and perhaps uncertain about others.
Whether you disagree with any statement or not, you can be sure that many
people feel the same as you do.

 

Mark each statement in the left margin according to how much you agree or
disagree with it. Please mark evepy one. write +1, +2, +3, or -1, -2, -3,
depending on how you feel in each case.

 

+1: I agree a little -1: I disagree a little
+2: I agree on the whole -2: I disagree on the whole
+3: I agree very much -3: I disagree very much

1. The automobile manufacturers have made an effort in the 1970
models to control for air pollution.

2. In this complicated world of ours, the only way we can know
what is going on is to rely on leaders or experts who can be

trusted.

3. Publishers of school text books are reluctant to include
racial minorities for fear of white boycott of their
materials.

4. My blood boils whenever a person stubbornly refuses to

admit he's wrong.

5. The current financial difficulty in which schools find
themselves is due to a taxpayers' revolt.

6. There are two kinds of people in this world: those who
are for the truth and those who are against the truth.

7. Most people just don't know what's good for them.

8. Of all the different philosophies which exist in this
world, there is probably only one which is correct.

111

 

112

PERSONAL OPINION

QUESTIONNAIRE
Page -2-
9. The highest form of government is a democracy and the highest

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

form of democracy is a government run by those who are most
intelligent.

The main thing in life is for a person to want to do something
important.

I'd like it if I could find someone who would tell me how to
solve my personal problems.

Most of the ideas which get printed nowadays aren't worth the
paper they are printed on.

Man on his own is a helpless and miserable creature.

It is only when a person devotes himself to an ideal or cause
that life becomes meaningful.

Most people just don't give a "damn" for others.

To compromise with our political opponents is dangerous because
it usually leads to the betrayal of our own side.

It is often desirable to reserve judgment about what's going on
until one has had a chance to hear the opinions of those one
respects.

The present is all too often full of unhappiness. It is only
the future that counts.

The United States and Russia have just about nothing in common.

In a discussion I often find it necessary to repeat myself
several times to make sure I am being understood.

While I don't like to admit this even to myself, my secret
ambition is to become a great man, like Einstein, or Beethoven,
or Shakespeare.

Even though freedom of speech for all groups is a worthwhile
goal, it is unfortunately necessary to restrict the freedom
of certain political groups.

It is better to be a dead hero than to be a live coward.

 

 

APPENDIX B

DESCRIPTION OF FLANDERS' INTERACTION

ANALYSIS SYSTEM

APPENDIX B

DESCRIPTION OF FLANDERS' INTERACTION

ANALYSIS SYSTEM

t t
was ,
(Taken from: W and m

u as developed by Dr. Behind Alddon based on
the work of Dr. Ned Flanders)

Wet

Bar a detailed discussion or interaction analysis, tallying proce-
dures, category definition, and matrix interpretation, the observer
mm m WWWM- mo roman:
brief description of tabulation procedure is being presmted for the
convuiiamce of the observer.

All teacher-pupil interaction is divided into ta: categories, seven
of teacher talk, two of student talk, and one of eilmce or conmsion.
Hermes to the chart listing the ten categories will assist the reader
in obtaining the over-all picture of the categories described in this
section.

Teacher talk is recorded mder one of two major headings: (l) in-
direct influmce and (2) direct influence. Indirect influence contains

113

 

114

four catqorles and direct influence three. Included under the classi-
fication of indirect teacher influence are those types of teacher state-
ments that increase student freedom to respond. Direct teacher influunce
refers to statments that restrict response by students.

A closer look at the categoris e of indirect influence reveals the
exact types of teacher statuents. included here. Category 1, acceptance .
of feeling, contains teacher statenents commicating acceptance by.the Eh?
teacher of both positive and negative student feelings. Statuaents that. I
Judge the “goodness" or appropriateness of pupil behavior comprise Cate- L.
gory 2. These may be either praise or encouragement. Category 3, accept- 3' ‘

 

ance of ideas, is made up of teacher statements that reflect, smarise,
or clarity student ideas. Teacher questions that require children's re-

sponse are assigned to category In.
Categories of direct teacher influence reveal a contrasting type

of teacher behavior. lecture, giving information, and expressing opinion
are recorded in Category 5 and Category 6 is used for the teacher's direc-
tions to pupils. In Category 7 are placed both statements of criticism .
and those in which the teacher Justified his authority. Such statmts
are usually designed to change pupil behavior.

Student talk is divided into only two categories -- Category 8,
which is student talk in response to the teacher, and Category 9, which
is stuth talk initiated by the student.

In the runaining category are recorded periods of silence or conni-
sicn. Pauses, short periods of silence, and periods during which the ob-
server cannot deterndne who is talking are included in this category. Such
a category is necessary because it allows the person Mac is doing the re-

cording to account for every minute of the time spant in systanetic observa-
tion.

115

A enmmany of the ten categories of interaction analysis with brief
definitions can be found on the following pages.

 

Use of the interaction analysis systen involves an observer's spending
several hours in a classroom observing various kinds of classroom interaction.
The most typical procedure for observing classroom interaction is presunted F
in this section. i w

The observer enters the classroom and seats himself in a place where

his presence will cause the least amount of distraction to the teacher and

‘ II
‘I

 

the class. he then spends from five to ten minutes observing without re- t .1]
cording. During this time he is getting oriented to the classroom, acquiring

a "feeling" for the total situation. This accomplished, he begins to record.
Approximately every three seconds, or whenever a change in category occurs

(See Rule L), he writes the category number of the teacher or student verbal

behavior he is observing at that moment. These numbers are recorded in
sequence in a colnmm. Since the observer writes approximately twenty
numbers per minute, at the end of an observational period of fifteen or
twenty minutes he will have recorded several long columns of numbers.
Accuracy of observation and recording is of prime importance, of course,
but evenness of taupe is also vital. While the observer is recording the
appropriate category numbers, he often records marginal notes explaining
unusual happenings in the classroom. These are helpful later in inter-
preting the material gathered .

The observer always notes the type of class activity being observed,
since obviously interaction will vary from one activity to another. then-
ever the classroom activity changes so that observing in inappropriate, as,

116

for example, when there are various groups working around the classroom,

when the class members are worldng at their seats on individual work, or

when silent reading is taking place, the observer stops recording. He than
draws a line under the recorded numbers, makes a note of the new activity, and

begins categorizing again when the total class interaction resunes.

 

 

117
TABIE (NE

CATEGORIES FOR INTERACTION ANAIXSIS

 

TEACHER TALK

um mrimmcs

 

INDIRECT INFLUENCE

l.* AC 3 FE : accepts and clarifies the feeling tone of
the studmts in a nonthreatening manner. Feelings may be
positive or negative. Predicting or recalling feelings is
included.

2.* PRAISES OR ENCOURAGES: praises or encourages student action
or behavior. Jokes that release tension, but not at the ex-
panes of another individual; nodding head, or saving ”um hm"
or "go on" are included. '

3.* ACCEPTS OR USES IDEAS OF STUDgIS: clarifying, building, or
developing ideas suggested by a student. As teacher brings
more of his own ideas into play, shift to Category 5.

h.* ASKS ngSTION : asking a question about content or procedure
with the intent that a student answer.

 

j.

5.* m: giving facts or opinions about content or proce-
dures; expressing his ovm ideas, asking rhetorical mentions.

6.* EVING DIRECTIQQ: directions, comands, or orders with which
. a student is expected to comply.

OR JUS NG : statunents intended to
change student behavior from nonacceptable to acceptable
pattern 5 bawling someone out ; stating why the teacher is
doing what he is doing; extrane self-reference.

IA)..-
,Ie

 

 

WTAIX

8.* 339m TAIKuRESPONSE: talk by students in response to
teacher. Teacher initiates the contact or solicits student
statement.

9.* flQDI'NT Tgygumggrxou: talk by students, which they ini-
tiate. If "calling on" student is only to indicate who may
talk next, observer must decide whether studmt wanted to
talk. If he did, use this category.

 

 

lO.* fiLENQE OR CONFUSION: pauses, short periods of silance, and
periods of confusion in which commnication cannot be under-
stood by the observer.

 

* There is NO scale implied by these numbers. Each number is classificatory; it
designates a particular kind of commnication event. To write these numbers
down during observation is to enumerate - not to judge a position on a scale.

It'-

 

_ 118
W

Clearly the classification of every statement into one of the categories is
not always accurate. Many questions arise concerning whether a statement
belongs in one category or another. Ground rules about classifying state-
ments, although not completely eliminating disagreement among observers,

have been found helpful and necessary in many cases. Certain of these rules,
which appear to apply to a great number of teaching situations, are discussed

here.

Ell-Ll

EEEE

A When not certain to which of two or more categories a statement

belongs, choose the category that is numerically farthest from
Category 5. This is advisable except when one of the two cats-
gories in doubt is Category 10, which is never chosen if there
is an alternate category under consideration.

If the primary tone of the teacher's behavior has been consistently
direct or consistently indirect, do not shift into the opposite
classification unless a clear indication of shift is given by the
teacher. The trained observer who is observing a particular action
is in the best position to judge whether or not the teacher is
restricting or ecpanding the freedom of action of class members.

The observer must not be concerned with his own biases or with the
teacher's intent. Rather, he must ask himself the question, "What
does this behavior mean to the pupils so far as restriction or
expansion of their freedom is concemed?"

If more than one category occurs during the three-second interval,
then all categories used in that interval are recorded; thus,
record each change in category. If no change occurs within three
seconds, repeat the previous category number.

Directions are statements that result (or are expected to result)
in observable behavior of children. Examples of direction are:
"Go to the board, read Qnestion 3, go to your seat, etc.” Some
teacher statenents sound like directions, but will not be followed
by observed student compliance. These statenents often precede
the actual direction. For example, "Let's get ready now to go to
recess (orientation a 5), now, How 5, get your costs."

Hhen the teacher calls on a child by name, the observer ordinarily
records a In.

If there is a discernible period of silence (at least 3 seconds),
record one 10 for every three seconds of silence, laughter, board
work, etc.

when the teacher repeats a student answer, and the answer is a
correct answer, this is recorded a 2. This tells the student he
has the right answer and therefore functions as praise.

When the teacher repeats a student idea and commicatee only that
the idea will be considered or accepted as something to be dis-
cussed, a 3 is used.

 

 

EH: J --

119

If a student begins talking after another student (without the
teacher's talking), a 10 is inserted between the 9's or 8's to
indicate the change of student.

Statements such as "uh, uh, yes, yes, all right, okay." which
occur between two 9's, are recorded as 2 (encouragement). These
statements function as encouragement (the student continues
talking after the 2) and are therefore classified as 2.

A teacher joke, which is not made at the expense of the children,
is a 2. If the Joke makes fun of a child, then it is coded as a 7.

Rhetorical questions are not really questions; they are merely
part of lecturing techniques and should be categorized as 5's.

A norrow question is a signal to expect an 8. If the student
gives a specific predictable answer, this is an 8. If the child
wands documents , or Justifies his answer, the observer should

begin tallying 9's.

 

 

120

TALEYING‘HOIISHBIT

101.
102.
103.

0—. O~ .* MO—m
.b a: a. e.
1. 1. 1. s.
._ C‘ ._ .—
11 a; .s “x
a. a. a.

2.. C~ 2.— 2.—
sa .4 .5 .e

27.

105.

a. e‘ a. e‘
5 6 7 8 .
5 5 s 5

 

107.

e . e
all '.o .aa
a 8 .

”ee_ a. e. . 0*
m 1 2 3

3 3 3
e— a. O. o—
s 6 7 a

x w a a a M w u .64 a w m n n n M

a n u n a n w n M u u u M M a u m
.* I— O_ C. ._ O— 0‘ U. ._ O“ .— .— ._ ._ .— 0‘ O“

9 m u n n u u... m, n u u m a u u u u

 

110.
111.
112.
114.
115.
116.
111.
118.
119.
121.

::::::t...:

’1. e
100.

75.

'121
WORK MATRIX

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

caco-uasen-s-wm-d

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mix 1

10 1....
TOTAL

0

/. j
l/D Ratio = Extended 3-3 Cell =

indirect =
Revised = 9-9 Cell =
i/d Ratio .E’éfiiggfd =
Extended Vicious

i/d Row 8 = i/d = Circle =

 

 

i/d Rows8 & 9 = ____._._‘

APPENDIX C

SCHOOL SITUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

 

 

APPENDIX C

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SCHOOL SITUATION QUESTIONNAIRE Name No.
Would you please indicate the extent to which
each of the following statements characterizes
the school in which you are teaching? Please
check the particular category that you feel
most closely corresponds to your particular
teaching situation.
Rarely Some- Often Frequently
Occurs times Occurs Occurs
Occurs
l. The teachers enjoy a sense of
accomplishment in their jobs.
2. The teachers, as a group, seem
to be working together.
3. The principal is regarded as
assisting the teachers.
4. The teachers enjoy friendly
social relations with each
other in school.
5. The teachers socialize together
outside of school as well as in
school.
6. The teachers are mainly concerned

with doing a good job.

 

The principal engages teachers
in busy work.

 

The principal offers strong lead-
ership in improving the education
of the students.

 

The principal demonstrates
sincere consideration for the
feelings of the staff.

 

10.

The teachers reflect an attitude
of just getting the job done.

 

11.

The principal closely supervises
the teachers.

 

12.

The principal has demonstrated
his willingness to do the things
he expects of his staff.

 

13.

Leadership acts emerge from the
group in the solution of building
problems and concerns.

 

14.

The principal encourages leader-
ship by others.

 

 

 

 

 

 

122

 

G T

”“il'iilux‘gfifiififigmjuflfifimfgfiflhwjmlif