A STUDY OF ECONOMIC EDUCATION ADMINISTRATIVE AND , 1 . :“ lNST-RUCTiONAL PRACTICES IN SELECTED? OKLAHOMA SEMOR HIGH: SCHOOLS Thesis Mr iho Degas of Ph. D. MICHKGAN STATE UNEVERSWY 7 Ciay‘fcn Elake Miiiingfon i954- THESIS This is to certify that the thesis entitled A STUDY OF ECONOMIC EDUCATION ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES IN SELECTED OKLAHOMA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS presented by CLAYTON BLAKE MILLINGTON has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. d in Education / Major professor Date February 20, 1964 LIBRARY Michigan State University .. A. I 1!... .fi. ,. 2...} J. ,6. .. a? s.‘ A»! I .39? 1.4.x r.— . .h 1... 1 3.; -‘~ I- x . t _ _ .n, V ‘ V nIf. ,::;IHB instru"“~n .g'pere extenr. ;. I _ . ind :renvs hooperatiOn “1H I‘ t {the form of ' ~ L‘ d‘ t ' I prdcrimua : :, .‘é‘ne'fi ;; vistered In ‘l D: 0' 4: . V ”i 5 rue ; at more students. {he Im- — ..-. _- 4-145»: e «must: 7.3.. , . - 4 etndy.of all econOmtcs couz:c> ;“J: - ., -\‘;:fl 13 . 37‘ ‘ f :1. , . - J... “g, _\ ‘7 w.— w— .1 — Lquestionnaire study of all economics courses that were being offered in ABSTRACT A STUDY OF ECONOMIC EDUCATION ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES IN SELECTED OKLAHOMA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS by Clayton Blake Millington The Problem The purpose of this study was (1) to define the administrative and instructional practices that would be most important in developing an effective . economic education program; (2) to survey existing economic education adminis- trative and instructional practices in selected Oklahoma senior high schools; (3) to compare existing practices with evaluative criteria; (4) to determine the nature and trends of the separate economics course in all Oklahoma high schools; and (5) to make recommendations for improvement. Method and Procedures In cooperation with a jury, the investigator developed evaluative criteria in the form of recommended economic education administrative and instructional practices to be followed in integrating economic concepts into the various high school subjects. These (weighted) criteria were included in a questionnaire for principals and, in a separate questionnaire for teachers in all subject areas except art, music, and physical education. The question- naires were administered in 44 of the 46 Oklahoma high schools which had an average of 500 or more students. The investigation also included a separate Oklahoma high schools. i I I u at al. In has ’5 \l‘ i \ .. .au “Hail; Clayton Blake Millington Findings and Recommendations The consensus of the jury provided significant guidelines for developing an effective economic education program. Although the teachers and principals endorsed the importance of economic education, no school had established a co-ordinated economic education program. There was a considerable difference in performance both among and within the high schools. However, a number of practices, perceptions, and general background factors were most consistently associated with the high scoring educators. In general, the performance ratings of teachers were in direct relation to their academic qualifications in economics. In spite of a shortage of qualified teachers, there had been a discernible increase in the offering of the separate high school economics course. The major contribution to economic education was being made by the teachers of agriculture, economics, social studies, and basic business subjects. In general, the principals devoted little time to-curriculum development, and their supervisory practices had virtually no effect upon the economic edu- cation practices of their respective teachers. Based on the study findings, the following recommendations were made: (1) Principals should assume responsibility for developing a co-ordinated economic education program in their respective high schools. I (2) Principals should devote more time to curriculum improvement. (3) Special economic education workshops should be provided for school administrators. (4) Along with providing intensive in-service economic training programs, Oklahoma educators should work for the strengthening of economic requirements in teacher preparation programs. Clayton Blake Millington .‘wlpflcial effort should be made to enroll all students in a well- taught economics I (6) The qualified high school economics teacher should be utilized as i ~~ ~ ' an.cconomics consultant for other teachers. I (75 -The major emphasis on economics should be made in subject areas fibers economic concepts are most relevant. .(8) The high school economics program should be carefully articulated 1 ‘., . with the program in the lower grades. I J (9) Further studies should measure the economic understanding of i ; Ctudcnts-in the various high schools; evaluate economic practices in com- 5 .‘pltlble schools of other states; evaluate economic practices in the lower U n grades; analyze, in greater detail, the performance of teachers within .éirtain subject areas; and compare student learning in the separate econ- Eldca~course with learning from a co-ordinated economics program. Experi- .; 1:; llmtal studies should be conducted to develop optimum means of performing V, - .g;§.«"d thy practices recommended in the present investigation. A future-study should -" in“ ".IA . . A arm a tummy MWC‘IIGIA: :6. oatmeau --r . Claytmt ‘I . s u Copyright by CLAYTON BLAKE MILLINGTON 1964 ".m~~ ANS _~ Submitted 1. “'2 agntr- «seat... can mt ' ' la! fulfill-ant e! as :aif'wmu- sue the «was as A1130»! 0! ECWOHIC EDUCATIM ADMINISTRATIVE AND t" . ' . msmcnosn muons m smcm mom SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS I U '7 ' 'i' There are mm ' By with“ for assist-9* , Claytenvnleke Millingtcn ’ L1" ' Special ”4132' . “Sgt. for his er. “I". Dr. any I lb ‘1'! VI‘IuaMc are. The study :tc.-a.»-r. Mpmaissivr a“. 'r» MlflRTW'Pport was pr~ ; ME. ”’15 €“.\‘lf'r_\v- . . . l. .- Rh ”If?“ and PIC-"PS: :r«.. ‘9) i ”O mluative :r:' z» . are??? 0! econ-3m: -— 4"“ h”!!! in the ‘41. r, .; if?!“ ‘jurars e-d w.‘ 2 AM” k . fl. '2.“ ré'lfis‘ . ‘” ‘3; 5;.“ (lava bean yrs." I‘ Submitted to ieveramifllllhteiflnhetlily ‘pettial fulfillment ef the reguire-enta ittance M Illfllfl“ ‘0‘ 6.?” 'ife. Pat, and )ur ta: .‘~'- I: at "national Administration 19“ ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS There are many individuals to whom the writer owes a debt of gratitude for assistance in the preparation of this study. Special indebtedness is acknowledged to Dr. William H. Roe, thesis ;efivasér, for his encouragement and guidance during the preparation of the théiis. Dr. Mary Virginia Moore, Dr. Helen H. Green, and Dr. James E. Heald afio gave valuable assistance as members of the advisory committee. The study received the endorsement of the Oklahoma Curriculum Im- provemenftf Commission and the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education, and financiailisupport was provided by the Oklahoma State University Research Foundations This endorsement and financial support greatly facilitated the gathering and processing of the basic data. Theweyaluative criteria for the study were developed in cooperation “lilth eflury of economic education authorities recommended by Dr. M. L. Frankel and his 3'1??? in the Joint Council on Economic Education. Without the co- operatio‘li‘fg’lffihe‘fjurbrs and of hundreds of Oklahoma educators, the present study would his: haverbe'en possible. Wrinifrl‘tillsev'eral'years while the study was in progress, invaluable encouragemenfignidig'ssdstance was also received from many professional colleaguemg's‘fxibfirmy wife, Pat, and our two children, Phil and Eric. The RI}: The 3.01.6: The 1“'sza‘.c the Teschi::,: of ' _‘ The Ptepaz‘xza ‘v ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii mmor'coursms...........................111 LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Chapter I. THE PROBLEM 1 Statement of the Problem . 1 Hypotheses to Be Tested 1 Significance of the Study 2 Definitions of Terms . . 4 Scope and Delimitations of the Study . 5 Basic Assumptions . 8 Method of Procedure . 8 Developing the Evaluative Criteria . . . 8 ' Surveying the High School Economic Courses in Oklahoma . 9 Daveloping the Questionnaire for Surveying Economic Education Programs in Oklahoma High Schools . . . . . . . . 10 Administering the Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Procedures Followed . . . . . 14 The content and Role of Economics in the School Curriculum . . . 18 Historical Trends in Economic Education . . . . . . . . . 18 Early Emphasis on Personal Economics 1930- 1949 . . . . . . . 19 The Growing Concern for Societal Economics . . . . . . . 22 7 The Role of the Joint Council on Economic Education . . . . 24 ‘Iccnomic Education Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 , -The Problem of Content . . . . . . . . 28 ”!he Concern of the American Economics Association . . . . . 35 A Series of National Projects . . . . . . . . . . . 36 flags: Problems- and Issues in Economic Education . . . . . . . 39 wjhe Role of Personal and Societal Economics . . . . . . . . 39 The Isle of the High School Course in Economics . . . . . . 44 1““ The Integrated Approach to Economic Education . . . .-. . . 51 Th§‘-!éeching of Economic Education . . . . . . . . . . . 59 The Preparation of Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Per;:r:- AIIR.“ Summary 111 Chapter III. IV. Methods of Teaching . . . The Development and Use of Supplementary Materials. Value Judgments in Economic Education . . Organizing School and Community Resources for Economic Education . . . . . . . Related Aspects of School Administration . The Role of the School Administrator in Instructional Improvement . 9- . . . . The Organizational Structure of the School Supervision and the Instructional Program . . The Co-ordination of School and Community Resources . Developing the Economic Education Program . . . . THE EVALUATIVE CRITERIA . Introduction Developing the Evaluative Criteria Selecting the Evaluative Criteria . THE ECONOMIC EDUCATION PRACTICES AND PERCEPTIONS OF HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS . . Introduction . Over-A11 Performance on the Rated Practices . The Relationship Between Selected Background Factors and the Principals' Ratings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . School Size . . The Financial Base Workshop Attendance . . College Credit in Economics . Availability of Consultants . . Time Devoted to Curriculum Improvement Experience in Present Position Performance on the Major Aspects of Economic Education Use of Community Resources . Upgrading the Economic Understanding of the School Staff. Teacher Selection . . . The High School Economics Course General Administrative Practices . Providing for Economic Education Materials . The Interdisciplinary Approach to Curriculum Revision . Pre-Service Teacher Training . ':-Encouraging Teacher Attitudes and Instructional Practices . Practices, Perceptions, and Problems Considered Most Important by the High School Principals . . . . . Obstacles to Developing an Effective Economic Education Program . . . . ThewRalstionship Between Single Practices and the Total Score . . . . SATC9m99r13°n of the Performance of the High and Low Ranking ézincipals on Each Rated Practice . ormance on Single Items Related to Total Performance on eAll Rated Items in the Questionnaire . . . . . . . . 7 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 60 69 78 78 82 85 88 93 93 99 119 119 130 134 134 135 136 137 137 138 140 140 140 142 143 145 147 149 150 151 154 158 161 167 176 nghapter Page V. THE ECONOMIC EDUCATION PRACTICES AND PERCEPTIONS OF HIGH ' ' SCHOOL TEACHERS . . . . , . . 184 I Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 L The Teacher‘ 5 Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . 18S OvereAll Performance on the Rated Practices . . . . . . . . 191 Nonrespondents and the Interschool Ranking . . 194 School Size and School Finance Related to the Interschool Ranking . . . . . 197 Teaching Performance Within the Major Categories of the Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 Economic Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 Teaching Methods and Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 General Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 General Practices and Perceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 The Relationship Between the Schools' Rating on Single Practices and Their Total Scores . . . . . 223 Performance of A11 Teachers on Selected Single Items Compared with Their Total Performance on All Items . . . 227 Performance on Selected Items in Part C Compared with Total Performance on Part A . . . 228 The Relationship Between Various Types of Workshop Partic- ipation and Total Performance on Parts A and C . . . 232 Performance on Selected Items Compared with Total .Performance on Part C . . 234 ‘ "A Couparison of the Performance of Teachers by Subject and I -Suhject Area . . . 241 Performance of Agriculture Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . 246 Performance of "Economics" Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . 247 Performance of Social Studies Teachers . . . . . . . . . 247 Performance of Business Education Teachers . . . . . . . 248 Performance of Special Education Teachers . . . . . . . . 248 Performance of Public Speaking Teachers . . . . . . . . . - 249 Performance of Home Economics Teachers . . . . . . . . . 249 Performance of Industrial Arts Teachers . . . . . . . . . 249 Performance of Science Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 ,xPerformance of Language Arts Teachers . . . . . . . . . . 250 Performance of Drivers' Education Teachers . . . . . . . 250 Performance of Mathematics Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . 251 Performance of Foreign Language Teachers . . . . . . . . . 251 Summary . . . . . . . . .-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252 .VI- TEE SEPARATE ECONOMICS COURSE IN OKLAHOMA HIGH SCHOOLS . . . 263 Introduction to the Study‘. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263 The Responding Schools .‘. . . . . . . . . 264 Student Enrollments in the Economics Course . . . . . . . 266 Trends of Economic Courses in Oklahoma . . . . . . . . 267 General Characteristics of the Economics Course ... . . . 268 _The High School Economics Teacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271 V Chapter Page VII. A COMPARISON OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES . . 277 Introduction . . . . . 277 The Over-All Performance of Principals Compared with the Performance of Their Respective Teachers . . 277 A Comparison of the Performance of Principals and Teachers on Single Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282 VIII. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . 287 Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303 i. 1‘ Al‘s 111': vi Table 1. Essential Economic Education Practices Listed in Rank Order According to Their Weighted Average Rating 2. Worthwhile Economic Education Practices Listed in Rank Order According to Their Weighted Average Rating . . . 3. Unimportant or Undesirable Economic Education Practices Listed in Rank Order According to Their Weighted Average Rating. 4. Administrative Practices Cross-Classified with Related Evaluative Criteria . . . . . . . . 5. The Ranking of the High School Principals According to Their "Essential" and "Worthwhile" Economic Education Practices . 6. Performance in the Separate Categories of the Questionnaire . 7. Procedures Which the Principals Had Found Most Effective for Influencing Teacher Attitudes and Instructional Practices . 8. Economic Education Problems Ranked by the High School Prin- cipals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9. Rated Questionnaire Items Ranked According to the Percentage Difference in Performance Between the Upper and Lower Sub- grOups of Principals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. Performance of Single Practices Compared with Performance on All Rated Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. The Number and Percentage of Teachers Who Responded from the Various Subject Areas of Each School . . . . . ,12. Items in Part C of the Teachers' Questionnaire Cross-Classi- A tied with Items in the Principal's Questionnaire . . . ,13.7 Schools Ranked According to the Weighted Average Rating of Their Responding Teachers on the Three Major Categories of the Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90. ‘iumbex 14. ACunparison Between High School Ranking When Based upon LIST OF TABLES Responding Teachers Only and When Based upon A11 Teachers in the Subject Areas Surveyed . . . . vii Page 102 106 112 121 131 141 155 159 162 169 186 189 192 194 Table Page 15. Awerage Semester Hours of College Economics Courses Completed by Teachers in Each Major Subject Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 16. Percentage of Teachers Who Responded Affirmatively to "Essential," "Worthwhile," and Nonrated Items Regarding Their Economic Education Practices and Perceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214 17. Rated Items in Part A Ranked According to the Percentage Difference in Performance Between Teachers in the Upper and Lower Ranking High Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 18. Related Items in Part C Ranked According to the Percentage Difference in Performance Between Teachers in the Upper and Lower Ranking High Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226 19. Performance of Selected Practices Compared with Performance of All Rated Practices in Part C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 20. A Comparison of the Performance of Teachers by Subject and Subject Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242 21. The Frequency of the Economics Course in Oklahoma Senior High Schools of Various Sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 22. The Relation Between School Size and the Number of Economic Students Per Responding School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267 23. A Comparison of the Ranking of Administrative and of Instructional Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278 24. Principals' Performance on Single Rated Items Compared with the Related Performance of Their Respective Teachers on Part C . . . 280 25. The Jurors' Responses to Proposed Practices for an Effective Economic Education Program in the High School . . . . . . . . . 333 26. The Principals' Responses to the Survey of Administrative Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352 27. The Teachers' Responses to Part A of the Survey of Instructional Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 364 28. The Teachers' Responses to Part B of the Survey of Instructional Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365 29. The Teachers' Responses to Part C of the Survey of Instructional Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366 30. Number of Semester Credit Hours in Economics Earned by Teachers of Each Separate Subject . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371 viii LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A. The Open-Form Questionnaire with the Covering Letter and the First Follow-Up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Checklist with the Covering Letter and the First Follow- -Up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Responses to the Checklist Survey . The Questionnaire with the Covering Letter and the First Follow-Up for the Survey of High School Economics Courses . The Postal Card Follow- -Up for the Survey of High School Economics Courses . The Questionnaire with the Covering Letter for the Survey of Administrative Practices . . . . . . . . . . . 'Responses to the Survey of Administrative Practices . 'The Questionnaire with the Covering Letter for the Survey of Instructional Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Responses to the Survey of Instructional Practices . . Follow-Up Notices Regarding the Questionnaires on Administrative and Instructional Practices . . Semester Credit Hours in Economics Earned by Teachers of ' Each Separate Subject . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1815- ‘ ate-‘l u prograa: ix 318 333 336 340 341 352 356 364 369 371 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Statement of the Problem The purpose of this study was (1) to determine the nature and trends of the separate economics course in all Oklahoma high schools; (2) to define the administrative and instructional practices that are considered to be most important for an effective economic education program; (3) to survey existing administrative and instructional practices in the major subject areas of Oklahoma senior high schools having an enrollment of more than 500 students; (4) to compare existing practices with evaluative criteria; rand (5) to make recommendations for improving the administration of economic education in Oklahoma high schools. Hypotheses to Be Tested '1.‘ The selected public high schools of Oklahoma differ in ”'5‘ 3"" ‘: their provision for economic education and in relation '~d“ to the evaluative criteria. H19“. 2 ated with the most comprehensive economic education for-the na'i high school gamers»... adulation, and Welfaze W (Wash ingtcn. ,A: , ,.‘ .n V. ‘54.;7 v ' the assists: Significance of the Study principal Because of the increasing complexity of the American economy, the 11‘! lain“- reported economic illiteracy of most American citizens, and the pressing f“".L( .Lc‘ Li dhallenges to free enterprise and individual freedom, economic education has received increasing attention during the past 15 years Les.~1.'; The importance of providing economic education in the senior high school derives from the fact that 40 per cent of Oklahoma high school graduates will not go on to college. 1’ 2 L‘JEAJLH', all high school students ever enroll in the separate economics course, a Since only a small percentage of study to determine the incidence of teaching economics topics in other (high school courses was greatly needed. It was also recognized that the teaching methods and materials used in developing economic understanding :can be important determinants of student interest and learning Finally, '(hnr 71‘ the teachers' general practices, perceptions, and opinions regarding :: (h15 :1'1.: economics can result in the success or failure of a school's economic :‘r : rt-cr :-s.; education program. Consequently, all of the foregoing factors were in- The BELL.“ v 11': ‘ cluded in the survey of instructional practices among the major subject nzgr~. schocx 1: areas of the high school. An additional survey was completed to determine economic eC'Jlel; ‘f ' the nature and trends of the separate economics course in all Oklahoma the nation. Nevcrrn,su high schools. inventory of both .1 .V, Under the direction of the school superintendent, and perhaps with We the readinua, on so hilsggfil Stdte Regents for Higher Education. Oklahoma Higher ‘«-ts :nd Pro ections. Self- -Study of Higher Education in ’ oma ity: Oklahoma State Regents for Higher mm, Putnam”): P 16 °‘h“ "gi‘l'thl‘hiflhfiuas‘a ~wh61e it is estimated that 50 per cent of the or , , m:z:sduates will not enter college U. S. Department of Health, . its: Offiée of EducatiOn. Digest of Educational t.flalflh1ngton: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1962). :\. “ 3 tHEEEssistance of central office curriculum specialists, the high school principal is usually expected to serve as the instructional leader for his building. In this study, therefore, it seemed important to evaluate the practices and perceptions of the principal in relation to economic education and to consider the possible impact of these practices upon the scope of ' economic education in his high school. School systems interested in improving their economic education program should find helpful guidance in the evaluative hriteria that were developed in the form of a checklist of administrative and instructional practices. A select jury of economic education authorities considered these practices to be important determinants of a Successful economic edu- cation program. The analysis of practices in Oklahoma high schools revealed further guidelines for improvement and provided a benchmark against which further progress can be measured. From the data, analyses, and conclusions in this exploratory study, other investigators should find fruitful avenues for further research. The study was begun and carried out with the realization that no ‘high school in Oklahoma had yet attained such a degree of excellence in economic education that it could serve as a model for the other schools of thy nation.‘ Nevertheless, some good work had been accomplished; and an inventgry of both needs and accomplishments was considered necessary to L determine the readiness of specific high schools for a coordinated emphasis on economicjeducstion. A more complete knowledge of the present status of '°398:%¢,;;;ggfi;§ in the public high schools of Oklahoma shOuld prove vshslble~to~sehool administrators, curriculum directors, teachers, and other persons.intersstsd in increasing the general level of economic tor Research“ ~” . csspssssss. 31a appealing for research studies on the current status and .4 x o practices in economic education, Wagner has declared that ". . . the bulk of existing knowledge consists of impressions carried around in the heads of a handful of individual observers who have worked in this area . .“3 Only when responsible and interested persons have a thorough knowledge of the-many facets of existing programs, can they make changes with confidence. No similar study of economic education had been completed in Oklahoma. Definitions of Terms In order for the writer to convey to the reader a better under- standing of the terminology included in the content of this study, the following definitions of the terms are given. High School. For the purposes of this study, ”high school" was defined to include grades 10 through 12 in the public accredited secondary schools of OklahOma. i;12 Curriculum. The expression "K-lZ" or ”K-12 curriculum" was used to refer to the total school curriculum from kindergarten through grade 12. , Economic Education. "Economic Education" was defined as that phase of general education which deals with the societal and the personal ' problems of producing, distributing, and using scarce goods and services. Ehrsonal‘eCOnomics and societal economics were considered to be comple- mentsryfto the extent that personal economics can serve to motivate the students‘feoncern for a better understanding of the total economy. "15F écPéfsonal Edonomics. "Personal econOmics" was considered to be the studyioffguidelines’and concepts regarding such personal economic practices\ - 3Iswisgla'rl'sgner, "Some Comments on Economic Education as a Subject Esgssssspsih"£inauxisrk:, Joint Council on Economic Education, December, [93”?*f.D!Y¢1(limeographed) -_ o a- v-h . ‘3‘- _, as selecting a vocation, buying, borrowing, and saving. Societal Economics. ”Societal economics" was defined as the study of the economic principles, problems and institutions involved in the operation of the American economy and in its relation to other economic systems. In general, the term "societal economics" was considered to be synonymous with the discipline of "economics" as it is commonly defined and discussed in principles of economics textbooks. Thus, ”societal economics" is concerned with such matters as the problem of scarce resources, the flows of goods and services, and the role of economic systems. The ultimate objective of both Csocietal economics” and of "economic education" may be considered to be the development of the student's understanding and ability to comprehend objectively the probable results of alternative solutions to social economic problems.4 Economic Education Program. The expression "economic education progrmd' referred to the aggregate effort of the "high school" to increase the economic competency and understanding of its students. School System. The expression "school system" referred to all grade levels in a particular school district. Scope and Delimitations of the Study :‘This study has certain limitations which should be recognized. The exploratory survey of economic education programs in the major subject areas of Oklahoma public high schools was limited to those senior high school; which had an average daily attendance of 500 or more students Ii. a'gW/W: . during the behool year of 1962-63. Eorty-four of the 46 high schools of '41.:1‘ taf 4L1!!hin'i»' '..: ?"r'““‘9s&tiflfii1‘rdék Fbrce on Economic Education, Committee for Economic povelo t, conomic Education in the Schools (New York: Committee for mm“ {1961), p. 14. Putt“! judgment was 1.. this size participated in the survey. The student attendance in the 44 responding high schools represented 48.4 per cent of the total average daily attendance in all Oklahoma high schools. 1 The findings in this study can be applied only to the category of Oklahoma high schools included in the survey, although it is possible that many factors regarding administrative and instructional practices in economic education would apply to high schools of similar size in other states. Full-time teachers of art, music, or physical education were not included in the study. In general, the data for the study were confined to the completed questionnaires received from the principals of the 44 high schools and from 77 per cent of the 1,793 teachers who were surveyed. Completed question- naires were received from at least 70 per cent of the teachers in all subject areas surveyed except drivers education; and in only four schools, did fewer than 50 per cent of the teachers respond. In his work as executive director of the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education, the investigator had been privileged to visit many of the high schools that were included in the survey. ’ Statistical probability formulas were not used extensively because the 44 cooperating high schools and the 1,376 responding teachers represented the great majority of the population being surveyed. r In applying the evaluative criteria recommended by the cooperating jyry hf authorities, the investigator was forced to exercise a degree of 1"»ntial," '"worthwhile," or "unimportant" for the purpose of the study. Y. ht was necessary in determining which practices were to be 7 included in the questionnaires and in determining the weighting for rating the selected practices. 'zThe questionnaire studies were confined to existing practices and opinions as acknowledged by the high school principals and their teachers. A limitation of this research procedure is that general or summary state- ments which convey broad ideas may be interpreted differently, and mis- interpretation of a question or statement may arise because of multiple meanings associated with a word. However, in a "pretest" of the question- naires, the instructions were found adequate; and no respondent complained of not understanding the individual items. In his discussion of rating scales, such as were used in the present study, Best observed that positions on a rating scale cannot be assumed to be equally spaced and that equal scores obtained by several individuals .does not indicate equal favorableness toward all of the statements. More- xqover, it was felt that an individual could probably not react with great ._filli§ity_to a short statement in the absence of common extenuating circum- . stances in "real life." However, Best concluded that "in spite of these limitations, the process of opinion measurement has merit, and until more iaprfiszlisedmeasures of attitude are developed, this technique may serve a .duaeful‘purpose in social research."5 Tfln: of s§!,Eh§-P“‘P°S¢ Of the present investigation was to explore the many facets of economic education administrative and instructional practices in érééiifiafifi'highEIChools, the limitation of time and funds necessarily pre- w I 5:...1, ."' eludednfi mgre intensive depth analysis of selected practices. criteria to be use; :. .. . f4gg?& oge 3h fegearch in Education (Englewood Cliffs, N. J. mi” 1,1 5 ), 160. Basic Assumptions This study was based upon the following assumptions: 1. That Oklahoma educators, as fully qualified school admin- istrators or teachers,would provide accurate information in response to the questionnaire survey. 2. That a panel of selected authorities would be qualified to provide valid criteria for use in appraising economic education programs in Oklahoma high schools. 3. That economic education should be an integral part of the educational program of Oklahoma high schools. Method of Procedure In beginning the present study, the investigator reviewed the literature and research pertaining to the nature and role of economic education in the public school system and the administrative procedures for organizing school and community resources to impr0ve the instructional program.6 Oklahoma statistical data on senior high school enrollments, average daily attendance, teacher assignments, and the property valuation of school districts were secured from reports on file in the State Depart- ment of Education and in the Oklahoma Tax Commission. Developigg the Evaluative Criteria -,1 ‘. .sf‘r ‘» . h The second phase of the study involved the development of evaluative cE}F€¥?!£§é-b° used in appraising the economic education program in 1:73. e m: ”Ye 1“C‘£dfeview‘6f related literature and research is presented in Chapter II. .aanlk Detected Oklahoma high schools.7 With the assistance of Dr. M. L. Frankel and his staff in the Joint ionic Iron Economic Education, the investigator secured the cooperation of a jury of authorities who were school administrators or curriculum direc- tots with extensive experience in developing economic education programs.8 In developing and ranking the evaluative criteria for the present study, the investigator followed the research procedures which had been used by the Council for Advancement of Secondary Education in its 1954 "Study on Economic Education."9 Surveying the High School Economic Courses in Oklahoma In view of the significant contribution which the separate economics course could make to the high school economic education program, it was considered appropriate to investigate this particular course offering in some detail. Moreover, this preliminary study served as an index of the probable willingness of high schools to participate in a comprehensive \ survey of their entire economic education program. In April, 1962, questionnaires were developed and mailed to the principal of each of the 117 Oklahoma high schools which had reported, to the State Department of Education, that a high school economics course was to be offered during the school year 1961-6210 Responses were received from 88 ivatz‘ ._.,-_-ZTha forms—and correspondence used in developing the evaluative ’criteria ‘are presented in Appendices A and B. Chap: 5133 evaluative criteria and the procedures followed in their de- velopment have been discussed in Chapter III. a: . _ _ A 9CpUfl§}i'for'Advancement of Secondary Education, Ke Understandin s W (Washington 6, D. C.: Council for Advancement of Secondary cation, 1956), pp. 1-35. 13 . ' The ten: ‘ Egfiaga terials used in the survey of high school economics courses 3% n Appendices D and E. .3. ~» 10 schools.11 Develo in the uestionnaires for Surve in Economic Education Programs in Oklahoma High Schools The administrative practices which the jurors considered important for an effective economic education program were incorporated into a questionnaire form to be filled in by high school principals.12 The major purpose of this questionnaire was to determine the extent to which selected school principals were following the practices which the jury had considered important. The principal's questionnaire also provided a basis for appraising the possible impact of selected administrative practices upon instructional practices in Oklahoma high schools. A separate questionnaire form was developed for the teachers in the selected high schools.13 Along with information concerning the economic topics taught and the teaching methods and materials used, this questionnaire included a final section on the general practices, per- ceptions, and opinions of teachers. Almost all of the items included in this final section were directly related to the evaluative criteria and, thus, to comparable practices that had been itemized on the principal's questionnaire. It was possible, therefore, to compare a principal's practices and perceptions regarding economic education to the related practices and perceptions of his teachers. 11 7. The survey of high school economics courses is discussed in Chapter VI. 12The principal's questionnaire and covering letter are included in Appendix I. "3i58 teacher's questionnaire and covering letters are included Q‘s-Wine ,. a ' 11 is i “the“ estionnaires that coSeIessl approaches were made to secure the cooperation of the 46 high schoolsjhich had 500 or more students in average daily attendance duxugstherschool year 1962-63. First, the investigator secured endorse- .entmfi the-project from the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education, the Oklahomtfitatezflniversity Research Foundation, and the Economic Education Shhcmketeeiof the Oklahoma Curriculum Improvement Commission. Next, a wefion’eucdmversation with the curriculum director of one of the selected higlixdehudls .resulted in the agreement that on February 11, 1963, his Mbhould'c—Wperate in "pretesting" the questionnaires. After the 'Wfiesfi}'5.a¥few minor changes were made in the forms, and the revised instrumdfltsi\‘sferereproduced in Sufficient quantity for the remaining Mp:in:x;_; ”eunmyh't‘emnéicall and/or by personal visit, the investigator con- m lhdtlifieriintendent or the curriculum director of each school system mamas tindluded in the survey. The purpose of the study and the “alwlflie‘fquestionnaire forms were explained, and the investigator offered {inherits administer the questionnaires at a group meeting of the hflebdmhianultytorsto. send the form to the high school principal so “I, MMGWster them at his early convenience. Forty-four of the fiflea‘ldflkfih school's agreed to cooperate in the study. Most of the “hmwhfo stare contacted by telephone asked that the materials WWmmrhat they could make a. final decision about partici- ”'M6Wssrw220n1y three ofthe responding schools asked that the Wit Wm t—‘o administer the questionnaires. 12 form. The memorandum to the principal suggested alternative procedures that could be followed in administering the teacher's form and requested that a collect telephone call be made to the investigator if any diffi- culties were encountered in administering the questionnaires. No calls of this nature were received. Sufficient postage stamps for return mailing were included with the packet of survey materials sent to each school. For the convenience of the teacher who might prefer to mail his completed questionnaire individually, the investigator's return address had been printed on the back of the last page of the questionnaire. Thus, the teacher could simply staple and stamp the completed form and leave it in a mail box. In administering the teacher's questionnaire, most of the high school principals explained and distributed the forms at a regular faculty meeting and asked that they be completed and returned to the central office within a designated period of time. With but few exceptions, the forms were returned to the investigator within one month after their delivery to the schools in March, 1963. On April 15, a follow-up notice was sent to those few high schools which either had not returned the forms or had returned only a small per- centage of the number desired.14 In most cases this notice consisted of a letter reminder about the study and a suggestion that the questionnaires again be called to the attention of the teachers. Two of the selected high schools neither returned the survey materials nor responded to a separate query about their desire to participate in the study. Perhaps because of their many commitments, the high school principals 14, The follow-up letters are included in Appendix J. ._v' “ y- ‘5' l3 t slower in returning their own forms than were the teachers. empleted questionnaire on administrative practices was received .khr- 1 I hm school principal on July 10,1963. In general, the school the administrative practices and perceptions of Oklahoma high school I!!! ’mmls have been discussed in Chapter IV; the instructional practices ““3. c fie investigat. ;- eptions of high school teachers have been discussed in Chapter V, lathe _2____duc__at ~_:. mi of administrative and instructional practices has been made in I in the Oklar: 31322 :\ ~ 7 g}. and Chapter VIII includes the findings, conclusions, and literaturg 5;- tions of the study. ts, endb ooks rte . "f. wallowing chapter will review the professional research and Seulum and Hit , _¢ .1 " that yhave been related to the present investigation. the inve511,.atc:‘ I gm unpublishtu ... . tfli‘w h... “1 ttlues of DIS:(."_.__=,-'_“Uv . . , . V‘ _ ,. .. ‘- -._ '.' for relatei ;, '5 . *7mitional “gages :h. '1 .41. 1' '~. - . IV a _ ”lodicals team 19).; LL 1%, “1:, 1 "._ I£!;s_... ic education 5tI_JVIL:5. must L!.-",‘f1-£‘? ~ 1 1 :- lent-ans ‘ «Cindinga, coucluaimxn, ~71; :-.n:. ._1- 't-“' s periodicals. te studies which “and investa. -. .1 .. ,. ..-. 5-. ‘ "1' ttion‘, the Studies by Hocha .,.-. .»‘m .— ,.. ~. - V _ _. __-_- - .:\s,'." 1 If: . .' 'Irleeic Economic Conce :9. 91:21:!” ' 3‘“ u ., 19109)- 4‘; 2r" *5, - .32" N i 5.“: Analysis and Comparison 3! -. - ,9 m. a" 0 A1- 14 r— CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE I. PROCEDURES FOLLOWED the investigator reviewed all of the economic education literature listed in the Education Index and the Business Education Index that was lavailable in the Oklahoma State University Library for the period 1940 to 1963. The literature survey also included many additional articles, pamphlets, and books dealing with the role of economic education in the school curriculum and with related pedagogical and administrative procedures. In his capacity as executive director of the Oklahoma C0uncil on Economic Education, the investigator had direct access to a wide variety of both published and unpublished economic education materials. A All issues of Dissertation Abstracts for the period 1950 to 1962 were screened for related economic education research studies, and a record -uas made of additional studies that were referenced or summarized in the ' professional periodicals from 1940 to 1963. It was found that, after :completing economic education studies, most investigators have subsequently reviewed their findings, conclusions, and recommendations in one or more of :the professional periodicals. ~0f the graduate studies which had investigated various problems fifiéiehonomic, education, the studies by Moorman,1 Lebeda,2 UK. rffl’fi,‘ 5.11 ' llphm,fl. Hoorman, Basic Economic Concepts, Monograph 73: (Cincinnati: W Publishing Co. , 1949). Itunpgblishe-i " s Lebeda, "An Analysis and Comparison of Consumer-Economic . er' :' , ' ,;North s 14 r , qllege, F; 2 " w 15 Po:;ichowski,3 and Frankel4 were fOund to be most directly related to the 1:336 dbjeCtives of the present investigation. Moorman's study was secured in monograph form; and microfilm copies of the studies by Lebeda, Pom- nichowski, and Frankel were purchased. Other studies such as were completed by Dachner,5 Griffith,6 Clayton,7 Buckhold,8 and Overman9 were concerned only with a single aspect of the total economic education program. The studies by Griffith, Clayton, and Buckhold were available at Oklahoma State university; a mimeographed copy of the Dachner study was secured from the Northern California Council on Economic Education;10 and the Overman study Education Practices Among Subject Areas in the Iowa Public Secondary Schools" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1955). 3A1exander Sylvester Pomnichowski, "A Study of the Attitudes and Opinions of Administrators, Teachers of Business and Teachers of Social Studies Toward the Place of Economics in the Secondary School" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1961). l‘MoeiL. Frankel, "Achieving Curriculum Change Through Economic Educations-A Field Study of Selected Schools" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, Rutgers University, 1958). “: i5 , . . MdDOnaId Arthur Dachner, "A Study to Determine the Organization and Content of a Course in Economics for Senior High School Students" (un- published Master' 8 dissertation, Sacramento State College, 1961). -., , . ’#J‘7 6Bobbie B. Griffith, "Integration of Economic Concepts in Beginning Bookkeeping Classes" (unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, University of Nebraska, 1962). ‘Cru “‘ ‘L. 2' C'“CaGei'ald Dean Clayton, "Incidental Learning of Economic Concepts in BeginningJTypewriting Classes" (unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Oklahoma nonhuman. .1962) ~ gzfiest. A. Backhold, "Status and Trends of the Course in Economics iififlfllllflmi_AA§£edited Senior High Schools" (unpublished Master' 3 thesis, gallahome 1agricultural and Mechanical College, 1950). 09111101 :7". 22255295t§ndpb"0vérman, "Basic Economic Concepts About the American .W:,¢., .,y'§§g “hip h Business Executives Believe Everyone Should Know" «.1L ‘¥$.i3f h P adisssttation, Indiana University, 1954). 16 was available through an interlibrary loan as well as in monograph form from 11 ..'-._L..t the South-Western Publishing Company. T.‘ 12;; The review of related research also included those studies which had } —”;éen completed by university professors or professional research workers, .vusually with financial support from private or voluntary organizations. Two 'of the most significant of these studies were completed by the Brookings i ’Institution,12 in 1951, and by the Council for the Advancement of Secondary Education,13’14 in 1956. With financial support from the W. K. Kellogg Poundation, Lovenstein completed a study in 1958 on Economics and the Educational Administrator. 15 During the period 1951 to 1961, the Opinion Re- f.‘ search Corporation completed a series of studies to determine the opinions “of different categories of students on selected economic issues.16'17’18’19 ‘er 11Glenn D. Overman, Economic Concepts Everyone Should Know, Monograph m95 (Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing Company, 1949). ‘120. W. McKee and H. G. Moulton, A Survey of Economic Education , :jfiashington 6, D. C.: The Brookings Institution, 1951). 13Council for Advancement of Secondary Education, Key Understandings ‘ 3n Economics (Washington 6, D. C.: Council for Advancement o econ ary use on, 9!:.LC. ‘4 lacouncil for Advancement of Secondary Education, Economics in the "Press CWeehington 6, D. C. Council for Advancement of Secondary Education, gcncye 15Meno Lovenstein, Economics and the Educational Administrator, The Wiflhbbf‘flbmmunity Development Study, Monograph Series, No. 6 (Columbus, Ohio: College of Education, Ohio State University, 1958 ). inion Research Corporation, The Hi b School Market for Economic clqlggggsggg Princeton: Opinion Research Corporation, 19515 . .:7Opinion Research Corporation, Wh Too Man Colle e Students Are literates (Princeton: Opinion Research Corporation, I9CCS. éggL—é£'(filabpfnion Research Corporation, Teena era Jud e Bi Business and »' ' ' (Princeton: Opinion Research Corporation, I959}. . ' *2; 'J‘abfiififdflvnesearcb Cor oration, Teachin Hi h School Students the ,. , 1. Business Wor d (Princeton: CpInIon Research Corporation, In 1961, the Committee for Economic Development provided financial Support farraznational-Task Force on Economic Education which prepared an author- ititfivb statement on the role of economic education in the high school curriculum.20 This report received extensive nation-wide publicity and undoubtedly influenced the thinking of many teachers and administrators. The Joint Council on Economic Education, in cooperation with its affili- ated state Councils, has coordinated numerous research studies on various aspects*of-economic education.21 These materials were on file in the Field Office of the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education. 'In his review, the investigator found no single comprehensive sdflhfiry of the economic education literature which had appeared during the lastitwb decades. It seemed appropriate, therefore, that the present re- viéi‘3hou1d be more extensive than usual in order to provide a realistic pefifiictive bf those significant publications, since 1940, which have dealt with“tHE‘problems, issues, and trends in economic education. Although no crhih ¥s=msdé that the present chapter presents an exhaustive analysis of evfiipSEECBbmic education publication which appeared from 1940 to 1963, a serifififideffort was made to present the highlights of the most significant anflybifirépiéientative publications and to convey what appeared to be the gefiitiidféilingutoward'economic education during the significant historical peasduo ib‘éifirsa? - Thlnahgiyfiis bf related literature was developed around three major cliiaifféatiafiiq i(I) The Content and Role of Economics in the School i 1:011:35! CUNEC‘TC L-u at thidctlltttesLfortEconomic Development, Economic Education in the giggii‘ Claw York: Cmnmittee for Economic Development, 1961). 1.3.11: ' ,4-_;"122 “'Jbi§tq353néil on Economic Education, 2 West 46 Street, New York 36 h'flducation _. :lE-an Publish ; Fr curriculum, (2) The Teaching of Economic Education, and (3) The Organizing of School and Community Resources for Economic Education. 11. THE CONTENT AND ROLE OF ECONOMICS IN THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM Historical Trends in Economic Education It is generally conceded that the need for economic education de- veloped in direct relation to industrialization in the advancing, inter; dependent American economy. Prior to 1900, the self-sufficient farm family was the typical economic unit. Most of the economic facts of life could be learned through direct experience in the home and in the community. The citizen ". . . participated in discussions of public iSSues, and he often personally knew the legislators who enacted laws that influenced his economic life."22 By the end of the nineteenth century, however, the free land on the frontier had been filled; the industrial age became a reality; and the United States became a world power. At this juncture, economic opportunity for the individual became contingent upon growth and prosperity throughout the interdependent economy; and conversely, the future of the econo-y began to rest upon the decisions of millions of citizens who were called upon to make crucial economic decisions in the market place and in tfiiyvbtiig'Bobch. .1n the eleventh Yearbook of the National Council for the Social -1. 1" ’..']r.. , ,‘ . Sgudissl.Gooch reports that sporadic attempts were made after 1865 to adapt collage content materials in economics to the high school level; and it was l§fi¥fl§l time that the study of exchange and consumption was included with finanlii n J Assoc! 7 a. Derwood Baker, "The Business Educator' 8 Responsibility for gucation," Tenth Annual Delta Pi Epsilon Lecture (Cincinnati: 'zlt Publishing Co. , 1951), pp. 7- 8. 7'" fthe previous major economic areas, production and distribution. Although a 19 YEW-high schools began offering economics before the turn of the century, significant educational groups disapproved of this discipline as a separate course. Both "The Committee of Ten" in 1892 and "The Committee of Seven" in 1898 would concede only that economics might be taught in connection with united States history, civil government, and commercial geography. These groups did not believe that ”. . . economic or social facts should be emphasized at the expense of governmental or political facts.”23 This position was strongly contested by such prominent economists as Professors John R. Commons and Frank W. Taussig, and the National Education Associ- ation Proceedings of 1901 expressed the appropriateness of teaching economics 24 as a separate discipline. 3‘Since that time, no national educational con- ference or committee has frowned on the existence of economics as a separate subject in the high school curriculum.25 Early Emphasis on Personal Economics 1930-1949 Ironically, the depression of the 1930's failed to stimulate appre- ciable interest in societal economics. The misfortunes of that era seemed to-have shattered previous faith in finding workable solutions to societal economic problems. The concern of educators shifted to consumer education _._----23Wilbur I. Gooch, "Economic Education on the Secondary Level," Economichducation. Eleventh Yearbook. Edited for the National Council for the'Social Studies by Harold F. Clark (Washington, D. C.: National Education Association, 1940), pp. 19-23. 9 -b1 4G Derwood Baker, "Educating Citizens for Economic Effectiveness 1960-1980, " Citizenship and a Free Society: Education for the Future. Thirtieth:Yearbook. Edited for the National Council for the Social eat” Franklin Patterson (Washington 6, D. C.: National Education ”I? on, 1960), p. 123. Nationsksim . .g'- _. g‘. , zggfi-h; OB. Cit. ’ pa 23. 20 and tho persdnal economic problems of living efficiently within the given socidl ”economic, environment. Baker observed that: The traumatic effect of the depression was visible in discussions of economic education in the late 30's and the 40's, largely in utilitarian terms such as occupational adjustment, personal ,economic operations, and consumer and conservation education. The widespread demand for a more functional approach to economic education for the citizen gave special rise to the movement for consuygr education, which flourished particularly during the 40' s. Price found that ”although the expressed need for consumer educa- tiOn dates back to 1909, when the American Home Economics Association included education for consumption as one of the objectives of home- economics education, few schools inaugurated effective programs before 1930. "'27 In 1938, the Educational Policies Commission gave increased emphasis to personal economics when it proposed self-realization, human relationship, 5economic’efficiency, and civic responsibility as the four major objectives for education. 28 The Commission defined Economic Efficiency as involving competency in the following ten areas: work, occupational information, occupational choice, occupational efficiency, occupational adjustment, '1‘. occupational appreciation, personal economics, conSumer judgment, ef- 5:! 3,31 ‘A ficiency in buying, and consumer protection. 29 -dlge. .y 1W4..1 A 1940 statement by the Commission recognized the importance of (“'CAIQI q; L‘" L. “W“?‘mag, 1... .1.” p. 124. Z’Qa dGmPrice, "Curriculum Practices in Consumer Education" (un- "js dissertation, University of Cincinnati, 1945), p 40. 3%aEducational Policies Commission, National Education Association of the Ufiiréd'States and the American Association of School Administrators, '9‘! of”Educa€ion in American DemOcrac (Washington, D. C. The '1‘19F3& Education Association, 1938), p. 47. och, o c t 29°1.I_1__¢1.', L. 21 certain aspects of societal economics in conjunction with consumer educa- tion: . . . education to increase efficiency of labor should not be conceived in narrow terms. The effective operation of enormous aggregations of labor and capital, characteristic of the con- temporary economy, demands high types of vocational and economic intelligence. The strongest endorsement of societal economics was expressed in a Commission statement on Learning the Ways of Democracy: . . . as long as economics and modern problems remain elective, it will unfortunately be possible for the majority of students to graduate from high school without any systematic instruction in the economic faundations of American life. Study of the economic aspects of our civilization shougd be required no less than study of the political and cultural. 1 Along with the effects of the depression, ineffective teaching of comparatively abstract concepts constituted the second great problem of societal economics during the 1930's and 1940's. Virtually every economic education article in the literature during the early 1940's made some reference to this problem. Gooch pointed up the significant trend toward consumer education and concluded that "The array of evidence offered against the efficacy of present materials of economics taught in the secondary school becomes impressive. . . . Present instruction in economics is largely limited to abstract theory. It is beyond the understanding of junioraand.eanior high school pupils."32 In another chapter of the same 3 0Educational Policies Commission, Education and Economic Well-Being %§2%§£££ggpiygggg£§gy (Washington, D. C.: National Education Association, 11?. ., .\1— F. ' L- 31 ,ucational Policies Commission, Learning the Waysuofibemocragy (Washingt _ as. C.: National Education Association, 1940), p. 90. 'OUCIinL I11 ~r Gooch, op. cit., p. 37. v- 22 Yearbook, Cassels made reference to a memorandum he had received from Dr. A. J. Stoddard who had just completed a five-year study of economic education. Dr. Stoddard's conclusions were that the teaching of economics was "overly abstract and not related to real-life problems." His committee proposed that schools adopt the consumer approach to the study of econom- ics.33 Throughout the war years, consumer education received major emphasis in the economic education literature. However, a few enterprising teachers of societal economics courses wrote about the classroom procedures they had found most effective; and, occasionally, a writer would venture forth with a statement similar to the following challenge for societal economics in the school curriculum: There has been much hedging as to whether or not a genuine attempt should be made to attain economic literacy. . . . Before it is too late, we must discover that no man can effectively discharge his duty as a citizen of this democracy until he sweeps away many of the half truths and prejudices and much ignorance concerning our economic life and strives for economic literacy. The Growing Concern for Societal Economics After the end of World War II, the emphasis in economic education gradually shifted to societal economics. According to Baker, "The failure 'of the [Eonsumei7 mavement to make a more profound impact on the curriculum ~ofitha secondary school can be attributed to the following factors:" - 33Jehn M. Cassels, "The Consumer Approach to Economics," Economic Educittoa. xEleventh Yearbook. Edited for the National Council for the Social Studies by Harold F. Clark (Washington, D. C.: National Education “liizzihfiafi:‘l940), p. 63. 35 Theodore L. Reller, "Roads Toward Economic Literacy," Education -muygpA§1xk(my, 1945), pp. 188-189. taxam A. :J Petroleum Today. 71 .Iiiiih‘ 23 il'lit was a depression-inspired movement, and the dramatic rise ‘ "i ‘family income and expenditures in the 50's deprived the ’_mbvement of its major motivating force. 1. 'Consumer education courses have been unable to supplant - ‘the established courses with which they compete. 3. The integration of consumer problems and information into _the required secondary school courses met with the compe- tition of equally valid and insistent demands from Other "life adjustment" areas. . . .35 The growing interest in societal economics reflected a widespread -uncertainty and concern about the probable performance of the American economy in the postwar years. Among the leaders in education and in other areas, there was a growing awareness that the average citizen was seriously deficient in economic understanding. References to "a nation of economic filliterates" appeared frequently in the economic education literature after 1950. 'The "peaceful coexistence” policy of world communism was generally recognized as an all-out economic and ideological'offensive and a crucial challenge to the growth and price stability of the American economy. No ‘longer could the economic competence of American citizenry be left to éefispce. ‘Although Ribicoff reported as recently as 1962 that "the average 'U.S.S.RJ high school student receives 10 to 20 times as much econOmic eduhation‘as his American counterpart,"36 extensive efforts have been Eunderway during the last 15 years to remedy this problem. The problem was hfifiméahat“complicated, however, because of the special interests of various Technomichgroups: ”SL‘PARS grassy business groups want the schools to teach the virtues of free enterprise, but they say little about the problems of contr‘ U'JtL‘. [1- L'. m. fighterL loc. cit., p. 125. “[1911 (figsember. . ' 3 Abraham A. Ribicoff, "We Can't Afford Economic Illiteracy!" - *,, Til (Spring, 1962), p. 8. 24 inflation, deflation, and unemployment and are often silent about the great responsibility which must necessarily follow upon the possession of economic power. Similarly, organizations of labor want economic education which is sympathetic to the Vrole of labor in our economy, but say little about the responsi- bility of powerful organizations of labor in relation to society as a whole or about undemocratic practices within labor organi- zations. In 1954, Overman reported that millions of dollars were spent an- nually by business groups alone ". . . to acquaint employees, students, and the general-public with the operation of the American business system." He recognized the possibility "that expenditures by business for economic education exceeds the total budget for all business training on the col- legiate level."38 The Role of the Joint Council on Economic Education Because of the recognized need for economic education and because so many different groups were proceeding to accomplish diverse and often conflicting objectives under the banner of economic education, the Committee for Economic Development agreed to provide the financial support for a pilot workshop to be held in 1948 at New York University. Representatives from 71 school systems and 23 states participated in the three-week program along with university conSultants and representatives of the major economic groups. The workshop sought to identify the appropriate economic content and the possible curriculum applications for including economics in the public school curriculum. In addition, the group was concerned with de- veloping an organization framework within which all interested groups might cohtribute to the advancement of economic education throughout the country. 336. Dorwood Baker, "Why Economic Education?" High School Journal, XXXVI! ICloieiber, 1953), pp. 49- 50 York: . 0'2 11: 38 Overman, Economic concepts Everyone Should Know, pp. 3- 4. 25 At the conclusion of the program, the participants petitioned for an organization which would make similar workshops available at the state and local level. In 1949 the Joint Council on Economic Education was organized in accordance with the following organizational principles, which also apply to some 40 state Councils that have affiliated with the Joint Council: 1. Membership consists of representative individuals from the schools, colleges and universities, and all sectors of the economy. 2. Programs are designed to stress the goal of objectivity, to be nonpartisan and nonpolitical. 3. Leadership, and the planning and development of programs lies in the hands of the teaching profession so that the special needs of the community and its youth are met. 4. Final responsibility for the programs resides with the state and local institutions and professional and lay boards of education. 5. Program emphasis is on improving the ability of teachers - to use the tools of economic analysis in attempting to solve economic problems. No one "package" or single text prescribes the right answers to economic problems. 6. Programs are local in character as reflected in their leadership, finances, community and teacher involvement. 39 The Joint Council is formally affiliated with the American Economic Asspciation and with major divisions of the National Education Association. Its Constitution and Bylaws provide that more than 50 per cent of the Témrdrhf Directors must be professional educators. "The Councils on Economih'Education, by serving as catalysts, bring together the varied resources to be found in any community so that all, working together, may agreelupOn‘and underwrite a dynamic, objective program for economic ”PM L‘.‘ and SUbEcC ml‘hmfi' l I ' Joint Council on Economic Education, The Right to Learn (New Ifilflh. Apint Council on Economic Education, 1962), pp. 5- 7. 0131' "l 26 edueat ion. "‘40 ’ 41 Since its organization in 1949, the Joint Council and the affiliated state Councils have expanded their services to include summer workshops on economic education, in-service education programs for public schools, experimental studies in curriculum development with "cooperating school systems," consultants for public school systems, curriculum materials for teachers, and support for improving teacher preparation in economics at the college and university level. In 1958, Frankel completed a study of economic education curriculum programs that had been developed in four different school systems in cooperation with the Joint Council. During the school year, 1962-63, the Joint Council co-sponsored the national television course, "The American Economy," and arranged for the develop- ment of standardized economics tests, which were made available to the public schools in the fall of 1963. The Joint Council also cooperated in the development and distribution of the National Task Force Report on Economic Education and the report of the Materials Evaluation Committee. In the educational literature since 1949, the Joint Council organization has been acclaimed more than any other group for its contribution to economic education.42 » I 7 , Econ ic Education Surveys In 1951, two research reports confirmed the previous convictions 11.121: : 4b. 5. 7 4.1” ' ‘ , The Oklahoma Council on Economic Education was organized in 1953 and sub? 1y established a Field Office in the College of Business, Oklaholl tare University, Stillwater, Oklahoma. “at.“ -Joint Council on Economic Education, loc. cit., pp. 8-12. 27 of manyqeducators that most public high schools were not teaching economic ~-understamdings effectively. The Opinion Research Corporation administered Oensgpjective-type test of economic information and attitudes to 1,280 high ;§chool seniors who attained a mean score of only 48.1. The report declared .that_the law of chance would have yielded a score of 45.7.43 , 3 A much publicized study of economic education in the high school wgstcpmpleted by McKee and Moulton for the Brookings Institution in 1951. From the questionnaires returned by 500 schools and from the responses of Ista§e_departments of education to a questionnaire on high school enroll- ”uppgs, McKee and Moulton arrived at the conclusion which has probably been Iquoted more often than any other economic education research finding during ”thepl§s§,twenty-three years: ". . . less than 5 per cent of all high school students take the equivalent of a semester course in economics."44 The ‘2i%vesr}§érdra also concluded that ". . . roughly 25 per cent of the students in American universities, colleges, and professional schools take OAK (, I 'i ‘. one or more courses in economics."45 (run .‘t Hus. ' In their review of the textbooks most commonly used, McKee and ‘3'; .‘IY'L‘RY‘I. .. .‘~ Houlton found that the economic material in the problems of democracy text- huV1L.L 1_ books was “. . . distinctly inferior in character and quality to that found td ' e‘vw .n . in thegspEcial texts devoted exclusively to economics." It was noted that Spggipssgpgye author of the problems texts was a professional economist.46 In 3the 1r Err? in the fiigi!§:§$§§ School Market for Economic Education, op. cit., p. 42. W" -- ._. Isles and Moulton, op. cit., p. 2. 67 4 lC hOW}r-. Ibid., pp. 15- l6. s and Haul ;, MU PP- 5- 7. , Vie- learns», “xi; 1"?ny (Decemhei; 28 In his review of the above study, Pomnichowski declared that ". . . the criticism of authors of textbooks devoted in part to economics "47 It would on the basis of their training in economics is unreasonable. seem,;however, that the author of a textbook for a course which is expected to develop certain economic understandings should feel obligated either to prove his own competence in economics or to secure the assistance of a qualified economist for the economic portions of his book. After reviewing the economic education programs of secondary schools, private business schools, institutions of higher learning, and other groups, McKee and Moulton made the recommendation that economics be a required subject in the high school and that more effective economic education be included in the pre-service education of teachers.48 The Problem of Content Economic education surveys in the 1950‘s made a significant contri- bution by vividly portraying the need for more effective teaching in this area.: However, educators were continually perplexed by the problem of economic content. Kearney had reported that prominent economists at the Hew'Ybrh University workshop in 1948 could not agree on any specific list of basic economicconcepts that should be included in the curriculum.49 ‘gtudlei by Hoorman and Overman In the introduction to his 1948 study of "Basic Economic Concepts in the_qigh School Curriculum," Moorman had declared: "That all students filPdmfiichowski, op. cit., p. 36- %? and Moulton, op. cit., p. 62- 559.9%: IKearney, "Can We Agree on Economic Education?" Nation's w, XLII (December, 1948), p. 44. 29 inrohr schools should be taught the basic concepts is not a question for dehhéef"3ut the subject matter that is fundamental has not been deter- ilhédf"5° Moorman tabulated the economic concepts which appeared in ten popular’higfi'school economics textbooks and found substantial disagreement with regard to the concepts which should be emphasized in a high school coarse; He found that 779 concepts were included in one or more textbooks, but only 21 concepts were included in all ten textbooks.51 In 1954 Overman completed a study to determine the economic concepts which business executives considered most essential for citizenship under- standing. Although a high percentage of the executives recognized the major inportance of the concepts which were developed, he concluded that "Business Executives are not in complete agreement as to what facts, con- cepts, or ideas about the American Business system everyone should under- stand" and that ". . . leaders of business have been more interested in presenting the point of view of business than in attempting to provide a complete knowledge of economic principles and practices." Overman recom- mended that studies of other economic groups be made to determine ";'1 :"specific concepts upon which there is agreement and disagreement byjthe various groups."52 in” llxl' Studies by the Council for Advancement of Sicondary Education "111’. 12',- 3an ' _ 1 major step toward defining appropriate economic education content fhiFfiig secondary schools was made in 1954 when the Council for the 53 ngfg‘g;c1t..,p 9. W Association Jew: gland.” . p. 14 W EC Overman, Economic Concepts Everyone Should Know, pp. 41-43. 30 AdVohcement of Secondary Education was organized under the co-sponsorship of the National Association of Secondary School Principals and the National Fetter Business Bureau, Incorporated. The Council's first project was to define key economic topics which the major occupational groups would acknowledge as important for every American citizen to understand. The anticipated outcome of the study was expressed by the Project Director: Our society has become so sensitive to the term "economics" that its very mention suggests a vast number of controversial matters and a multitude of conflicting interest groups. However, it is the belief of the council that agreement can be reached among the various groups, not on the highly controversial economic issues, but on the nature of that bedrock of economic informa- tion upon which judgments and opinions are built. A mailing list of 2,300 names was compiled in cooperation with representative organizations and agencies who were in a position to know the people who were "outstanding in their respective fields, and qualified .4. . to respond competently to the inquiry." Included on the mailing list were agriculture representatives, busineSSmen, economists, education pro- fessors and school administrators, labor leaders, and high school teachers of economics. The initial open-end inquiry, which was mailed during the spring of 1956, requested each group representative to list the ten economic topics he considered essential for every citizen to understand. After some 800 lists of topics were submitted by the respondents, a special committee ‘Lli‘e 1? 1,_ of six economists and educators translated the thousands of economic topics ”intolthe more concise and restrictive terms of a master outline of "LL L . categories-and subheadings.”54 This information was reworked and refined .1. . ‘. éécalen Jones, "A Study on Economic Education," National Education good-si'gggourg 1, XLIV (May, 1955), p. 305. il for Advancement of Secondary Education, Key Understandings g E; mppf 6-10. 31 still further until a "Composite List of Basic Economic Topics" finally emerged. The investigators made the following statement in support of their final list which consisted of 88 topics grouped under 14 main categories: It is our belief that the Composite List thus derived presents a comprehensive enumeration, equitably representative of the viewpoints of the pertinent economic and professional groups, of the basic knowledge necessary for economic literacy. . The services of the able economists and experienced educators who interpreted and coded the suggestions, and thus derived the list, provide further assurance that the Composite List is a compilation of basic economic topics. To further validate the "Composite List," the items were listed on a checklist evaluation form with a five-point numerical rating scale for each item. The rating form was then mailed to selected representatives of the six groups that had participated in the first phase of the study. Usable responses were received from 1,045 persons who were ". . . evenly dis- tributed throughout the 48 states and the several territories, while a few . . "56 re51ded in Canada. The categories on the rating scale were scored as follows: 0, unimportant; l, somewhat important; 2, important; 3, very important; and 4, essential and indispensable. On this scale, the 88 economic topics received an over-all average rating of 2.75; and even the topic in the bottom (88th) position had a rating of 1.72, which was only a quarter step below the point signifying "important" on the scale. The titles of the 14 main categories received an over-all average rating of 2.99 or "very important."57 55Ibid., p. 21. 56 Ibid., p. 22. 57Ibid., p. 26. 32 Thus, the six occupational groups did arrive at significant agreement on certain specific topics and areas in economies which the American citizen should understand. Although the individual groups varied somewhat with re- gard to the relative importance they attributed to certain items, this study, in conjunction with a companion study of economic terms appearing in printed news media,58 represented a significant accomplishment toward defining appropriate economic content for the high school curriculum. The Council for the Advancement of Secondary Education studies have received widespread recognition in the professional literature. Since the completion of its "ground-breaking" research, the Council has produced several economic education materials based upon the economic topics and terminology that were found important for economic literacy.59 These publications have been written at a reading level suitable for high school students and the general public. An Interlude for Science and Mathematics The growing enthusiasm and support for economic education was restrained somewhat by the launching of the Soviet "Sputnik" in 1957 and the resulting "crash program” to give students better education in science and mathematics. Numerous social scientists expressed a strong concern that 8 Council for Advancement of Secondary Education, Economics in the Press (Washington 6, D. C.: Council for Advancement of Secondary Education, 1956). 9Laurence E. Leamer and Dorothy L. Thomson, American Capitalism: An Introductigg (rev. ed.; New York: McGraw-Hill Co., Inc., 1961); Baldwin Lee, Capitalism and Other Economic System (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1959); Weldon Welfling, Money and Banking:in the American Economy (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1960); Laurence de Rycke and Alvin H. Thompson, Business Enterprise in the American Economy (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1961); Laurence de Rycke (ed.), Beginning Readings in Economics (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1961). 33 overemphasis on science and mathematics would produce an unbalanced cur- riculum, which would fail to meet the crucial educational needs of both the individual citizen and the nation. Frankel declared that because of a lack of economic understanding, the American people failed to see that the basic problem was one of economic policy rather than of science education: Scarcely heard in the din of invective raised by self-styled educational experts were the warning cries raised by many scientists and a few economists. Ignored was their assertion that the American failure to launch a satellite was not because of any lack of scientific knowledge, but because of a lack of appropriate funds. It is this frequent inability on the part of the citizen to appreciate the relationship between economic policy decisions and scientific and social problems that is a great indictment of past programs of economic education. The Report of the National Task Force on Economic Education Although the Council for the Advancement of Secondary Education studies has defined topics and terminology which major groups considered important, most educators felt the need of an authoritative statement which would more clearly define the objectives of economic education in operational terms. In July, 1960, the Committee for Economic Development and the American Economics Association co—sponsored the establishment of a National Task Force on Economic Education which was commissioned ". . . to describe the minimum understanding of economics essential for good citizenship and attainable by high school students, with the goal of providing helpful guidelines for high school teachers, administrators, and school boards."61 60Moe L. Frankel, "Education for Economic Challenge," Educating for Economic Competence (Washington, D. C.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, National Education Association, 1960), p. 3. 61Committee for Economic Development, Economic Education in the Schools, p. 4. 34 The Task Force, consisting of seven prominent representatives of economics and education, completed its work over a period of one year and the report was published in September, 1961. The first chapter of the report described the crucial need of improving the teaching of economics in the high schools. Chapter II discussed the nature of economic analysis and the importance of developing the student's ability to comprehend and analyze economic problems in an objective manner. The purpose of Chapter III was to ". . . suggest the institutions, facts, and analysis that are essential for a reasonable understanding of the modern economic system. . . ."62 Those topics and major areas considered essential for a minimal understanding of economics were explained in terms of their contribution to the circular flow of goods and services in the economic system. Occasionally, observations were made regarding the depth of understanding that should be expected and the pattern of presentation that would be most appropriate in the classroom. The final chapter included the following recommendations:63 1. That more time be devoted in high school curricula to the de- velopment of economic understanding. 2. That all students take a high school course in economics or its equivalent . . . and that in all schools of substantial size there be at least an elective senior-year course in economics. 3. That courses in problems of American Democracy devote a sub- stantial portion of their time to development of economic understanding of the kind outlined in chapters 11 and III. 4. That more economic analysis be included in history courses. 5. That all business education curricula include a required course in economics. 6. That economic understanding be emphasized at several other points in the entire curriculum. 621bid., p. 22. 631bid., pp. 64-77. 35 7. That central emphasis [be placegy on the rational way of thinking presented in Chapter II. . . . 8. That examination of controversial iSSueS be included, wherever appropriate, in teaching economics. 9. a. That teacher certification requirements in all states require a minimum of one full year (6 unit) course in college economics for all social studies and business education teachers. . . b. That school boards and administrators consider these certification standards as minimum requirements. . . . and that the high school economics teacher have at least a college minor in economics. c. That increased use lbs made oiy summer workshops, par- ticipation in the national television economics course, and college evening and Summer courses in economics. d. That colleges preparing teachers improve the economics courses offered for this purpose. 10. That steps be taken to provide for more effective high school teaching materials. 11. That professional economists play a more active part in helping raise the level of economics in the schools. 12. That [Ehere §§7 widespread public support, both private and governmental, for the improvement of economics in the schools. With but few exceptions, the Task Force Report was well received by both educators and laymen. In accordance with its basic design, the report dealt only with matters related to giving the high school student a better understanding of societal economics. It is significant that the report did not take the position that there should be no teaching of personal economics. Rather, the point of emphasis was that the ultimate and most vital objective of economic education should be to develop the minimal understanding of societal economics that is considered essential for effective citizenship. The Concern of the American Economics Association The participation of five prominent economists on the National Task 36 Force depicted the growing interest of the economics profession in the economic education programs of the elementary and secondary schools. At the annual meeting of the American Economics Association in 1952, the Association accepted a formal invitation of the Joint Council on Economic Education to establish an ad hoc Committee on Economics in Teacher Educa- tion.“+ At the 1954 meeting, the Committee was reconstituted as an ad hoc Committee on Economic Education. A standing Committee on Economic Education was established in 1955, and this Committee has continued to function. At the annual meeting in 1958, the Committee reported receiving $25,000 from the Ford Foundation to finance a study of high school textbooks; and in 1960, the Committee reported the establishment of the National Task Force on Economic Education. The economists on the Task Force continued to serve through 1962-63 as an advisory council for the national television course, The American Economy. In reviewing the increased interest of economists in the economic education movement, Swearingen concluded that "in ten years, we have come from a position in which a young economist had seriously to ask himself whether or not an active interest in economic education would hamper his career, over to a situation in which some of the nation's most respected economists are deeply involved and personally committed to this program."65 A Series of National Projects When plans were made for establishing the Task Force on Economic 64"Proceedings of the Sixty-Fifth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association," American Economic Review, XLIII, No. 2 (May, 1953), p. 570. 65Eugene Swearingen, ”The Current Revolution in Economic Education," Paper read before the Annual Conference of the Southern Economic Associ- ation, Atlanta, Georgia, November 9, 1962. 37 Education, it was anticipated that this project would be the first step of a four-part national program to stimulate more effective economic education. The second phase of the plan called for evaluating the vast quantity of supplementary reading materials that were available for student use at the high school level. The need for enrichment materials to sup- plement existing textbooks had been recognized by educators for many years, and this need was documented in the preliminary findings of the Textbook Study Subcommittee of the American Economic Association's Committee on Economic Education.66 The report of the Materials Evaluation Committee was published in October, 1951?7 It provided an annotated listing of some 97 recommended publications which were screened from nearly 7,000 items that had been submitted for consideration. Three criteria were used in selecting the items to be listed: 1. Were the materials genuinely concerned with economic matters, 2. Were they analytical in nature, and 3. Were they appropriate for high school use?68 The third phase of the national plan was the College of the Air television course on economics which appeared during the academic year 1962-63 and was scheduled to be shown in abbreviated form during 1963-64. 66The final report of this Committee appeared in the American Economic Review, LII, No. 1, Pt. 2 (March, 1963), and is available as a Supplement pamphlet from the American Economics Association, 23 pp. 67The Materials Evaluation Committee has been reactivated, and it is anticipated that the listing of recommended supplementary materials will be updated periodically. 68Committee for Economic Development, Study Materials for Economic Education in the Schools (New York: Committee for Economic Development, 1961), p. 4. 38 It was estimated that at least 1,000,000 persons viewed the program in 1962-63.69 The final phase called for the development of standardized tests of economic understanding to be used in the schools. The first "Test of Economic Understanding" was made available for high school use during the fall of 1963. A review of the historical trends leads one to believe that a firm foundation has been established for building better economic education in American schools. From the literature during the last 15 years, the investigator could have filled many pages with quoted appeals of prominent educators for more effective economic education. This general theme was forthrightly expressed by Melby at the New York University Workshop in 1948: Democracy will live if it works and it will die if it does not work. Moreover, regardless of what Democracy may do in the cul- tural and human relations area, if it fails on the economic front it will most certainly go down to defeat. If then, we are inter- ested in the survival of our way of life, there is no kind of education more important than that which seeks to make the aver- age American intelligent about our economic system and effective as a citizen in relation to it. The following sections review certain persistent problem areas and issues which were discussed in the literature and which must be resolved if the optimum development of economic education is to be attained. Joint Council on Economic Education, Newsletter (New York: Joint Council on Economic Education, February, 1963), p. l. 0 . . . . Ernest O. Melby quoted by Archie W. Troelstrip, "Economic Education: Requisite of Citizenship," Educational Leadership, XI (January, 1954). 39 Major Problems and Issues in Economic Education The Role of Personal and Societal Econpmics As the major objective of economic education seemed to shift from an emphasis on personal economic factors during the 1930's and 1940's to a central concern for societal economics during the 1950's and early 1960's, some educators were left with a feeling of uncertainty about the proper objective for their particular course, curriculum, or school system. It is probable that many educators vacillated toward teaching for whatever objective they felt most competent to attain. A teacher could marshal established arguments to fit his particular preference. It was alleged that personal economics was most appropriate to serve the immediate needs, the interests, and the intellectual level of high school students; and many teachers with a weak academic background in economics readily expressed a lack of confidence in their own ability to teach societal economic under- standings. On the other hand, leading educators in the 1950's insisted that societal economics was vitally needed in the preparation of future citizens for making the crucial decisions that would be necessary for continued economic growth and prosperity. Capable, enthusiastic teachers emphasized that societal economics could be made interesting to students at all levels of the elementary and secondary schools. Moreover, there were increasing opportunities for the teacher to upgrade his own under- standing of economics. Although statements such as "economics is common sense made difficult" 71 appeared repeatedly in the literature of the 1940's, policy statements by 1 Kennard E. Goodman, "A Plea for Consumer Emphasis in Economics," Fourteenth Yearbook, Eastern Commerce Teachers Association, 1941, p. 127. 40 leading educators revealed a concern also for including broader objectives.72 In "An Analysis and Comparison of Consumer-Economic Education Practices Among Subject Areas in the Iowa Public Secondary Schools," Lebeda included the fol- lowing societal economic areas among the understandingsreviewed in her study: federal social security; real and money wages; the effect of general business fluctuations upon society and the individual; the principles of taxation; con- servation of natural resources; the role of the federal, state, and local governments in the economy; international trade; and the separate roles of "big" business; of "small" business; of agriculture; and of cooperatives in the economy.73 Lebeda observed that "those interested in consumer education as well as those interested in economic education are striving for a solution to the same problem. The problem being one that teaches the high school student to be a more literate economic citizen."74 In several publications Dodd declared that concern about economics being "a dismal subject" had caused many courses and textbooks to become narrow and superficial.75 He warned that the study of personal economics would not result in an understanding of the "economic forces" which he considered to be the source of most social problems.76 At the same time, 72Cassels, op. cit., pp. 66-67; Joseph DeBrum and W. Harmon Wilson, The Status and Future of Consumer Education, Monograph 51 (Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing Co., May, 1941), p. 9. 73Lebeda, op. cit., p. 249. 741b1d,, p. 17. 75J. H. Dodd, "Economics for the Secondary School," Balance Sheet, XXVI (March, 1945), p. 250. 76J. H. Dodd, Economics in the Secondary Schools, Monograph 80 (Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing Company, February, 1953), p. 17. 41 he recognized a place for certain personal economic understandings within the framework of societal economics. Wagner pointed up the futility of superior knowledge about the techniques of budgeting and buying whenever a family's income becomes in- adequate to meet its minimum needs.77 He perceived a major problem involv- ing curriculum policies for the various "types” of economics--consumer economics, community economics, and social economics--and suggested that the problem be resolved by relating each of these three content areas to the major objective of economic education.78 No longer do educators seem to advocate the complete exclusion of either societal or personal economics. Wass recently emphasized that "Any well-rounded program of economic education has two facets--the economics of civic affairs and the economics of 'family finance.”79 In the Council for Advancement of Secondary Education study in 1956, it was found that economists frequently listed consumer economics as an area which should be included in a high school economic education program.80 When the economists and representatives of five other major occupational groups 77Lewis B. Wagner, What Are Economic Problems? A Primer of Economics, No. 1 (Iowa City: Bureau of Business and Economic Research, State Uni- versity of Iowa, 1955), p. 4. 78Lewis E. Wagner, Major Issues in Economic Education, Studies in Economic Education, No. 2 (Iowa City: Bureau of Business and Economic Research, State University of Iowa, 1955), pp. 9-10. 79Philmore B. Wass, "A Major Goal for the High School," Teacher Education Quarterly (Hartford, Connecticut: State Department of Education, Spring, 1962), XIX, p. 118. 80 Council for Advancement of Secondary Education, Key Understandings in Economics, p. 19. 42 were asked to rank fourteen major areas according to their significance for economic literacy, consumer economics was placed in tenth position. The researchers' interpretation of this ranking was that the judges considered economics important but inadequate to meet all economic education needs of future American citizens. It was emphasized that this finding should be a significant one for administrators of school systems where only consumer education was being provided.81 In a national policy statement on economic literacy, the Committee for Economic Development placed major emphasis on the need for societal economic understanding but also recognized the importance of competence in personal economics.82 Wilhelms suggests that two types of economic courses might be provided: "One, for the very able students, of the general economics type, leading to the study of economics as a social science; the other, for the larger mass of students, taking a less abstract approach, coming along the personal, consumer, and institutional approaches but moving as far as pos- sible toward the great principles."83 It would appear that less able students have a great need for economic understanding in preparation for their future role as voting citizens and, hopefully, as knowledgeable followers of their favorite political leaders. Drown reported rejuvenating student interest by combining formerly 811bid., pp. 32-33. 82Committee for Economic Development, Research and Policy Commission, Economic Literacy for Americans (New York: Committee for Economic Develop- ment, 1958), pp. 9-10. 83 Fred T. Wilhelms, "The Job Ahead," Educating for Economic Competence (Washington, D. C.: National Education Education Association, 1960), p. 72. 43 separate, one-semester courses in economics and in consumer economics into a full-year course with emphasis on societal economics the first semester . . 8 and on consumer economics the second semester.84 Both Wilhelms 5 and Baker86 recommended that economics in the high school should be a blend of personal economics, community economics, and social economics. Similarly, 88 Gordon,87 Keezer, and Frankel observed that personal economics could serve an important role in motivating student interest in societal economic issues. Unless we relate societal economic issues to the personal life and welfare of the student, we run a risk of inadequate motiva- tion. . . . On the other hand, in the study of personal economics, the student should realize that his individual de- cisions, multiplied by the personal decisions of millions of other free American consumers, vitally affect the direction of the entire economy. Although schools will undoubtedly continue to experiment with organizational procedures and with somewhat different emphases on personal economics and societal economics, the literature suggests that maturity in economic education has resulted in a complementary role for these two areas, Bayne W. Drown, "Economics--A Testimony of Revival," Business Education Forum, XVII (October, 1962), p. 23. 85Wilhelms, op. cit., p. 7. 86 G. Derwood Baker, "Education for Economic Competence,” National Association of SecondaryASchool Principals Bulletin, XXXVIII (April, 1954), p. 109. Leland J. Gordon, "A Consumer Approach to Elementary Economics," Education, LXXI (January, 1951), pp. 286«88. 88D. M, Keezer, "Importance of Economic Education in the Secondary School," National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, XLVI (May, 1962), pp. 222-23. 89 Frankel, Educating for Economic Competence, p. 5. 44 with personal economic considerations contributing to the motivation of students for further study of societal economic principles, problems, and issues. As more able teachers quickly bridge these two areas and direct their students as far as possible toward understanding the total economy, the ultimate objective of economic education should be achieved. The Role of the High School Course in Economics Because of extensive demands upon the crowded public school cur- riculum, the major emphasis of most educators and of the Joint Council on Economic Education has been upon procedures for integrating economic con- cepts within existing courses. However, developing the integrated approach has been a slow process in most school systems; and the problem of gaps and duplication in the learning process have posed formidable problems. The teachers of other subject matter areas have been hampered by a weak academic background in economics, and the effective integration of economic concepts within other subjects has often seemed to require an even greater organ- izational ability and teaching facility than would be necessary in the separate economics course. Thus far, it has seemed that the integrated approach has not eliminated the need for a separate course in which the high school student can synthesize and build upon previous economic under- standing. Educators have generally conceded that the ideal economic education would involve both the separate high school course and the inte- gration of relevant economic concepts into other subject areas. The case for the separate course has been effectively presented by Leppert: Obviously, the effective integration of economic facts and processes into existing social studies courses creates diffi- cult problems. In large measure, the treatment of economic materials tends to become descriptive rather than analytical. Students seldom, if ever, develop a "feel for the subject." Nor do they come to comprehend or appreciate the unity and logical structure of economics as a body of knowledge. 45 Moreover, considerably more knowledge and teaching skill are required to integrate essential economic concepts and under- standings in United States History and the other social studies courses if students are expected to develop an analytical frame of reference about the economy without impinging unduly on the materials of history, geography, or government. Without a Specific course offering in Economics it is extremely difficult to achieve a well defined consideration of economic understand- ings and concepts in the curriculum. The Task Force on Economic Education recommended that ”. . . wherever feasible, students take a high school course in economics or its equivalent under another title," but cautioned that "for most students, even a full course may prove insufficient unless a preliminary groundwork has been . . "91 laid in earlier courses. . . . In 1940, a chapter by Riley in the eleventh Yearbook of the National Council for Social Studies was devoted to arguments favoring the teaching of economics as a separate high school subject. In questioning the ability of the "fusionists, integrationists, and unificationists" to teach economics effectively in "piecemeal" courses, the author expressed the opinion that the integrated approach would leave economic facts and understandings so disjointed and unrelated as to have little value for students unless they were eventually enrolled in an economics course. It was his firm conviction that it would be impossible in an integrated course to give due consideration to the proper gradation and progression of the subject matter. Riley also contended that greater objectivity would be achieved in a separate course because the content would be based upon economic principles rather than Ella C. Leppert, "An Experimental High School Course in Economics,” The Councilor, XXI (March, 1960), pp. 57-58. 91Committee for Economic Development, Economic Education in the Schools, p. 65. .cl!-.I\‘Ia‘ 46 the pupils' personal interests. More recently, many other educators and laymen have emphasized the need for a separate high school course.93 In her study of consumer—economic education practices among high school subject areas, Lebeda found that economic objectives emerged as a part of many subjects and areas but that a student would also need the separate economic course. "Although he may learn this information from other subjects, it is more likely than not that he would have to pursue the entire secondary school curriculum“?4 Similarly, in an analysis of the economic topics taught in the various business education and social studies subjects, Pomnichowski found that although "incidental treatment" of economic problems was included in many subjects, the teachers of even identical courses varied greatly in the topics selected and in the thoroughness with which the topics were taught. He concluded that 92Eugene B. Riley, "The Case for Teaching Economics as a Separate Subject in the Secondary School," Economic Education. Eleventh Yearbook. Edited for the National Council for the Social Studies by Harold F. Clark (Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1940), pp. 53-59. 93The following publications are representative of printed state- ments emphasizing the need for a separate high school economics course: William.M. Polishook, "Economic Education Through Separate Courses," Educating Youth for Economic Competence, American Business Education Yearbook, XV (Somerville, New Jersey: Somerset Press, 1958), p. 157; John C. Gilliam, "Economic Education Problems Solved at the Source," Balance Sheet, XLIII (April, 1962), pp. 340-42; Wagner, Major Issues in Economic Education, p. 29; Milton C. Olson and Eugene L. Swearingen (eds.), Business and Economic Education for the Academically Talented Student (Washington, D.C.: United Business Education Association, 1961), p. 20; Policies Commission for Business and Economic Education, A Proposal for Business-Economic Education for American Secondary Schools (Washington, D.C.: Policies Commission for Business and Economic Education, 1961); Committee for Economic Development, Economic Literacy for Americans, p. 20. 94 Lebeda, op. cit., p. 132. 47 ". . . for real economic understanding, a course in economics seems neces- sary." Most of the teachers and principals included in his survey, of 37 Michigan high schools, favored making the economics course a requirement for all students.95 Enrollment Trends The Biennial Survey of Education for 1948-49 revealed that the percentage of American high school students enrolled in economics declined 96’97 Buckhold gradually from 5.1 per cent in 1928 to 4.7 per cent in 1949. found that from 1935 to 1950, there was a decrease in both the number and the per cent of Oklahoma high school students who enrolled in economics each year. The number of high school economics enrollments declined from 12,067 during the academic year, 1935-36, to 4,351 in 1949-50.98 Although the figures on current national enrollments were not available, the present investigation and the recent unpublished surveys conducted in Ohio, Kansas, California, and New Jersey suggest the likelihood of a small general in- crease in economic enrollments since 1949.99 95Pomnichowski, op. cit., p. 261. 960. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Biennial Survey of Education for 1948-49, p. 22. 97Some conflicting reports on enrollments seem to arise because of the failure to distinguish between economic enrollments in a particular year and the number of students who enroll in economics sometime during their high school experience. It can be assumed that if 5 per cent of the high school students enroll in economics each year, approximately 15 per cent of the high school students eventually take the course. 98Buckhold, op. cit., p. 22. 99A summary of these state surveys of economic enrollments can be secured from the Joint Council on Economic Education, 2 West 46 Street, New York 36, New York. 48 Problems and Progress Several problems seem to have been responsible for the slow growth in high school economic enrollments during the previous decade even though the importance of economic education received increasing attention from educators and laymen alike. In general, the textbooks and other teaching 100 materials have been considered inadequate; teachers have lacked adequate preparation in economics;101 the course, lacking clearly defined objectives, 102 has often‘covered wide expanses of poorly related information; inadequate d;103 and school administrators have evaluation procedures have been followe been inclined to depend solely on the integrated approach to economic education. It appears that textbooks and other teaching materials are being improved. New authors are in the process of completing textbooks which should be made available sometime during the academic year, 1963-64. The Council for Advancement of Secondary Education and another organization, Curriculum Resources, Incorporated, are continuing to develop supplementary materials on economics that are considered suitable for reading by high school students.104 Undoubtedly, countless and continuing appeals for 1006. Derwood Baker, "Educating Citizens for Economic Effectiveness 1960-1980," p. 137; Paul R. Olson, "Economics in the Schools," American Economic Review, LIII (March, 1963), p. 8. 101Committee for Economic Development, Economic Education in the Schools, pp. 10-11. 02 Haig Babian, "Economic Education," Challenge, XI (April, 1963), 103Committee for Economic Development, Economic Literacy for Americans, p. 13. 104CASE materials are now distributed by McGraw-Hill Publishing Co., and CR1 materials are now distributed by Webster Publishing Co. 49 better economic education materials will alert existing and potential authors. The reports and studies by the Special Textbook Committee of the American Economics Association, the Council for Advancement of Secondary Education, the National Task Force on Economic Education, and the Materials Evaluation Committee should serve as valuable guides to authors and pub- lishers. In addition to widespread efforts to upgrade the economic under- standing of all public school teachers, a trend seems to be developing toward special summer institutes for high school economics teachers. The initial six-weeks institute was held at the University of Illinois during the summer of 1963. Scholarships were provided by the National Science Foundation for 40 participants from cities throughout the country, and tentative plans were made for continuing and expanding the institute program in the summer of 1964. It has been recognized that the able high school economics teacher can make a significant contribution not only through his own classes but also through consulting with other teachers about developing economic understandings in their respective subject areas or grade levels. From the aforementioned national reports and studies and from pioneer thinking in the summer institute for high school economics teachers, better guidelines on course objectives and organization should result. At the same time, professional economists have been rethinking the organization and objectives of the elementary college course in economics. A common expression among educators is that "teachers teach as they have been taught," and many professional economists have been dissatis- fied with the elementary economics course as it is often taught. In the preface to the published proceedings of a national conference on "The 50 Teaching of Elementary Economics," the cmference director made the follow- ing observations: ". . . . Today, the most significant effort in popular economic education in the United States is the teaching of the college course in principles of economics. . . . No group is more dissatisfied than those actually teaching the course. . . ."105 The conference in- cluded detailed reports of many interesting variations in teaching pro- cedures and content organization. The standardized high school economics tests made available by the Joint Council on Economic Education, in 1963, have given the economics teacher and the school administrator one objective measure of the ef- fectiveness of the separate course. These tests and other evaluation procedures should provide helpful guidance for achieving established course objectives. In summary, professional educators and economists have recognized that the high school course can make a valuable contribution to the economic understanding of future citizens. Since educators and laymen seem to have acknowledged the vital importance of providing for economic education in the public schools, it would seem that curriculum priorities should be reassessed in terms of the need for a capstone economic course in the eleventh or twelfth grade. When either an elective or a required course is established, the recruitment of a capable teacher becomes of paramount importance. Recent national research and policy statements and the concern of professional economists augur well for the continual improvement of the introductory 105 Kenyon A. Knopf and James H. Stauss (eds.), The Teaching of Elementary Economics (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1960), p. 1.. 51 economics course at both the high school and college levels. An effective high school economics course should be deserving of full support from the school administration and the entire faculty. When a school adminiStrator accepts the mandate for economic education in his school, it is important that he concurrently provide for an evaluation program to determine relative degrees of success in attaining defined objectives. Both nationally standardized economic tests and locally developed measures should have an important part in any evaluation program. If the school-wide, integrated approach to economic education is adopted (with the inherent problems of gaps and duplication in learning), evalu- ation procedures become even more essential. The Integrated Approach to Economic Education Throughout the history of economic education, the major attention in the literature has been focused upon the integration of economic under- standings into other subject areas. This integrated approach has seemed essential because considerably less than half of all high school students have ever enrolled in a separate economic course. It has also been alleged that integrated social science courses provide for greater unity in learning through emphasizing the interrelation of various disciplines. The important role of economics in the integrated course has been acknowledged for many years. In 1940, Marshall declared that: . . .economic phenomena can be given no dependable meaning except in terms of all social phenomena. . . . But there is more to the matter. The other social studies, which also deal with cultural human living, can have no ade- quate meaning unless economic phenomena are included. 106Leon C. Marshall, "The Case for Including Economics in an Inte- grated Course in the Social Studies," Economic Education, Eleventh Yearbook. 52 Integration at all Grade Levels During the last decade, the emphasis on integrating economics into high school courses has been complemented by many promising experiements in the elementary school. In support of this approach The Opinion Research Corporation found that children's basic attitudes toward economic issues 107 Perhaps the most were formed before they reached the seventh grade. prominent work in the elementary school was completed at Elkhart, Indiana, under the general guidance of a consultant who has sharply criticized the economics Task Force for concerning itself with economics only at the high school level. Having ignored the learnings and intellectual conditioning which do and could take place in the elementary and junior high schools, and having isolated the high school program from the rest of the curriculum, the National Task Force had no other choice but to limit the objectives of economic education to minimum understand- ings for citizenship. Irrespective of Senesh's criticism, the Task Force had commended experiments in teaching economics at the elementary level and recom- mended ". . . adoption of these techniques in the earlier grades as soon as possible."109 As the teaching of economics becomes more effective in the elementary grades, educators will undoubtedly be challenged to build a Edited for the National Council of the Social Studies by Harold F. Clark (Washington, D. C.: National Education Association, 1940), p. 72. 107 Opinion Research Corporation, How Children Form Their Views of the Business World (Princeton: Opinion Research Corporation, 1961), p. 2. ‘ 108 Lawrence Senesh, The Economic World of the Child. Reprint Series No. 54 (Lafayette, Indiana: Graduate School of Industrial Adminis- tration, Purdue University, March, 1963), p. 2. 109 Committee for Economic Development, Eggngmic Education in the Schools, p. 71. 53 more advanced sequence of economic understandings for the high school program. Along with recommending a high school economics course, the economics Task Force also called for greater attention to relevant economic under- standings throughout the school curriculum. The following courses were cited as especially fertile areas for the teaching of economic concepts: problems of democracy, history, geography, mathematics, civics, and the basic business courses.110 The economic education literature has been replete with discus- sions of economic understandings that are recommended for specific courses. 0f the authors in all subject areas, business educators have been most prolific in producing professional articles and publications regarding the integration of economic understanding into particular courses. During the last 15 years, many business education authors have called for a major shift in emphasis in the high school business curriculum. In general, the appeal has been for more emphasis on providing the economic and the socio- 111 Several business understandings needed by all high school students. authors have contended that the business teacher is better qualified than teachers in other areas to direct the economic education program of a 110 Ibid., pp. 65-71. 111 See for example, the articles by Paul S. Lomax, "Cooperative Leadership in Economic Education--Responsibility of All," Journal of Business Education, XXXVI (January, 1961), pp. 146-47; R. DeMont Bell, "Economic Education and the Malady of Indifference," Business Education Forum, XVI (March, 1962), pp. 12-14; Gerald A. Porter, "Competencies Needed by a Business Teacher," National Business Education Quarterly, XXXI (May, 1963), pp. 5-11; John C. Gilliam, "Economic Education--A Challenger to Business Educators," The Balance Sheet, XLIII (December, 1961), pp. 151-53. 54 school system.1 Integration in Business Education In addition to their many articles in the professional periodicals, business educators, during the last five years, have devoted their Fifteenth Yearbook to economic education, prepared a national policy statement on the need for economic education in the high school, co-sponsored both a teacher's guide to economic education and a publication devoted to meeting the economic education needs of academically talented students, and co-Sponsored a . . 11 national workshop on economic education. 3 Recent experimental research studies have confirmed the effectiveness of integrating economic education into certain business subjects. Clayton developed timed writings containing economic content and found that when experimental classes of beginning typewriting students used his materials, they made significant gains in understanding the selected economic concepts as well as equivalent gains in typewriting Speed and accuracy when compared ___‘ 112Enos C. Perry, "Economic Illiteracy, Not Russia, Is Our Greatest Threat," Balance Sheet, XLII (September, 1960), p. 19; Rodney Felder and J. Curtis Hall, "Economic Understandings--The Challenge to the Business Teacher," Journal of Business Education, XXXV (January, 1960), pp. 181-83; Lloyd V. Douglass, "Social'Economic Competencies," American Business Education Yearbook, Vol. 6 (Somerville, N. J.: Somerset Press, 1949), pp. 175-78. 113Eastern Business Teachers Association and the National Business Teachers Association. Educating Youth for Economic Competency. Fifteenth Yearbook (Somerville, N. J.: Somerset Press, 1958); Policies Commission for Business and Economic Education, A Proposal for Busines§;Econogig Education for American Secondary Schools. Sponsored by United Business Education Association and Delta Pi Epsilon (Washington, D. C.: Policies Commission for Business and Economic Education, 1961); Milton C. Olson, g;_gl,, A Teachers Guide to Economics in the Business Education Curricu- Inn (New York: Joint Council on Economic Education, 1963); Business and Economic Education for the Academically Talented Student. 55 with a control group.114 Orpin found that experimental classes of typewriting students gained significantly in economic understanding when they typed ma- terial from the "Student Economic Handbook.“1]f5 Griffith found that when economic concepts were integrated into the high school bookkeeping course, students in experimental groups attained a significant increase in economic understanding along with equivalent gains in bookkeeping knowledge and skills when compared with control groups.116 Of all the business education curricula, the ”General Business" or "Introduction to Business" course has received the most criticism for 117 Textbooks for this inadequate treatment of economic understandings. ninth or tenth grade course have traditionally devoted considerable attention to personal matters such as how to write a check, how to keep a perSonal budget, how to operate coin or dial telephones, and the like. The most caustic observation has been made by Senesh, who declared that if the content of the present course is not changed, it should be given a new n . I.118 label such as Much Ado About Nothing. In spite of exhortations in the business education literature for 114Clayton, o . cit., pp. 93-95 115Carol E. Orpin, "An Experimental Study for Improving Economic Literacy Through Typewriting" (unpublished Master's thesis, San Francisco State College, 1960), quoted by Griffin], op. cit., p. 15. 116Griffith, op. cit., p. 58 117Eugene L. Swearingen and Lloyd L. Garrison, "General Business," A.Teachers Guide to Economics in the Business Education Curriculum (New York: Joint Council on Economic Education, 1963), pp. 39-53. 118 ' Lawrence Senesh, "Desired Outcomes in the Development of Economic Literacy," New Perspectives in Education for Business. National Business Education Yearbook (ed.), Doris H. Crank and Floyd L. Crank (Somerville, N. J.: Somerset Press, 1963), p. 130. ll 56 that group to exercise leadership in economic education, it appears that most business teachers have not yet made a determined effort to meet this challenge. Moreover, it seems that the major burden of the system-wide approach to economic education must be borne in the social studies curriculum because of its continuity from kindergarten through grade 12. In his survey of principals, business teachers, andvsocial studies teachers in 37 Michigan senior high schools, Pomnichowski found that the majority of respondents in gash of the three groups indicated that a social studies teacher should teach the separate economics course. Although the business teachers in the survey had taken more college work in economics than any other group, not one of the responding principals expressed a preference for the business 119 If Pomnichowski's findings are applicable teacher to teach this course. throughout the country, it follows that business teachers must disassociate their curricula from exclusive emphasis on vocational training if they are to assume a major responsibility for economic education in the high school. CooperatiOn Among Subject Areas Since an optimum economic education program would necessarily in- volve the cooperation and participation of all academic areas as well as endorsement by the major economic groups, the need for unity in the purpose and process of economic education becomes obvious. One prominent business educator recently warned that "the ship of economic education has not floundered, but it is not making any significant headway. The reason, of course, is obvious. We are pulling in different directions."120 119 Pomnichowski, op. cit., p. 226. 120 Herbert A. Tonne, "Too Many Captains in Economic Education," Journal of Business Education, XXXVII (February, 1962), p. 180. 57 In spite of the hopes which educators have held for the integrated approach to economic education, surveys continue to suggest that most schools are doing an inferior job in this area. Without a carefully co- ordinated program in economic education, it appears that most students will graduate with a low level of economic understanding. The studies by 122 reveal that teachers of identical courses in Pomnichowski121 and Lebeda the same school differ in the degree to which economic topics and under- standings are taught. Gaps and duplication in content result. Wagner has emphasized that the new “social science” discipline, epitomizing the ideal of integration, has not yet been developed.123 Along with other educators, Baker has acknowledged that an unco- ordinated curriculum may result from improper application of the integrated approach. In the 1960 social studies Yearbook, he observed that no school system had yet developed a model economic education program. The reasons cited included difficulty of defining economics in behavioral terms, in- adequate preparation of teachers, the difficulty of allocating appropriate phases of economics to the various grade levels and curriculum areas, and the "school-subject" orientation in the secondary school. While acknowl- edging that there is no single approach to economic effectiveness, he called for a team of economists and curriculum specialists to resolve the scope and sequence problem. Schools need a framework that combines scholarship and creative imagination and is accompanied by suggested learning units, activities, and teaching resources at various maturity levels and in the various subject fields . . . . 121Pomnichowski, op. cit., p. 89. 122Lebeda, op. cit., p. 131. 123Lewis E. Wagner, ngor Issues in Economic Education, pp. 19-21. 58 . . . . Developing the scope and sequence, with appropriate guides to classroom experiences, content, and instructional resources, could well be the major contribution to economic education in the next decade.12 Baker commended the workshops, in-service programs, conferences and pilot projects for preparing the leadership and establishing the mandate for needed curriculum revision during the next decade. He emphasized, however, that more than enthusiasm will be required to do the job because of the bonds of tradition which restrain course materials and administrative policy. It [Ehe curriculu§7 is not significantly changed by personal enthusiasms or by individual pilot projects. It yields only to a massive assault, an unmistakable mandate, or to a clearly enunciated directive, as in time of war or crisis. When the mandate is clear--as recently in the case of science education, mathematics, and the teaching of modern 1anguages--experiments are encouraged, and new programs and procedures are approved, even ordered; and so changes take place. The difficulty of the task makes it even more important that school administrators and teachers concern themselves with the integrative approach to economic education. Clearly, major efforts should be concentrated in the social studies, the basic business courses, and those other subject areas which inherently benefit when econOmic concepts are included.126 124 G. Derwood Baker, "Educating Citizens for Economic Effectiveness, 1960-1980," pp. 134-135. 125 Ibid., pp. 135-36. 126 Harold J. Bienvenu, "Economic Education and Curriculum Policy," Educating for Economic Competence (Washington, D. C.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, National Education Association, 1960), pps 26'270 59 III. THE TEACHING OF ECONOMIC EDUCATION The Preparation of Teachers The teacher's understanding of economics is probably the most es- sential requirement for the development of economic understanding in the classroom. From his experience with teachers in economic workshops, Wagner concluded that ". . . at least for this group, the major reason for ineffec- tual teaching of economics was ignorance with respect to subject matter."127 In their national policy statement on economic literacy, the Committee for Economic Development urged citizens and organizations to help teacher preparatory colleges secure competent economists on their staffs.128 Recent experiements with various class sizes for the elementary economics courses suggest that administrative arrangements could be made whereby a capable professor could teach a large number of students.129 The concern of professional economists in improving the introductory college course has been discussed, and the recommendation of the Task Force concerning the pre-service preparation of teachers have been listed in previous sections of the present chapter. In addition to the concern for improving the traditional principles course in economics, a few colleges and universities have developed a special course for prospective teachers. Some guidance on methods of teaching economics is usually included with the economic 127 Wagner, loc. cit., p. 29. 128 Committee for Economic Development, Economic Literacy_for Americans, p. 24. 129 Wallace B. Nelson, "Experiment with Class Size in the Teaching of Elementary Economics" Educational Record, XL (October, 1959) pp. 330-41. 60 content in these special courses.130 Most of the in-service training programs discussed in the literature have been in the form of workshops, conferences or other special programs conducted by the Joint Council on Economic Education and its affiliated state and regional councils. The entire March, 1950 issue of the Journal of Educational Sociology_was 31 devoted to these programs.1 Methods of Teaching Because of the extent to which economic principles and issues touch the daily life of every person, economists and other adults who are well educated in economies are quick to emphasize the inherent motivation which the subject should present to high school students. In recommending the 1962-63 television course in economics, President John F. Kennedy stated: "I doubt that any series on television this year will take up more matters . . 132 of more immediate concern to more Americans than this one. Nevertheless, eXperience has indicated that high school teachers must not attempt to teach economic principles in the abstract manner of the usual college economics class. Even in earlier periods when high school students were a more select group, the abstract approach was not Eugene L. Swearingen and Lloyd L. Garrison, "Economics as a Functional Part of General Education," Balance Sheet, XL (October, 1958), pp. 56-58; Gerald M. Torkelson and Monroe Newman, "Teacher Training in Economics: Coordinating Content and Methodology," Social Studies, L (January, 1959), pp. 19-21. 131 The Journal of Educational Sociology, XXIII (March, 1950); See also Arnold B. Cheyney, "Educating Teachers in Economics," Ohio School, XXXVI (October, 1958), pp. 16-17. 132 John F. Kennedy (statement in the preface) Study Guide for the American Economy by John R. Coleman and Kenneth 0. Alexander (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1962). 61 successful and the subject dwindled out.133 Many years ago Dewey declared that the instructor must know his subject so well that he can center his attention upon the attitude and response of the pupil. "Hence, simple scholarship is not enough. In fact, there are certain features of scholarship or mastered subject matter--taken "134 On another by itself--which get in the way of effective teaching. occasion, Dewey criticized the "new education" for expecting the child to develop knowledge and truth without assistance and guidance. He is told to think things out, or work things out for himself, without being supplied any of the environing conditions which are requisite to start and guide thought. Nothing can be de- ve10ped from nothing; nothing but the crude can be developed out of the crude.13 Similarly, one writer has criticized the economic Task Force for not giving greater recognition to the fact that basic knowledge must precede and serve as the basis for analysis and judgment. "When the Task Force states that 'First, the most important step toward understanding in economics . . . is the replacement of emotional unreasoned judgments by objective, rational analysis,‘ it is putting the creaky cart before the unborn workhorse."136 One of the most vivid and concise expressions of the psychology of learning has been presented by Kilpatrick: Each child learns what he lives; he learns it as he accepts it in his heart to act on it; he learns it in the degree that it 133Wilhelms, op. cit., p. 69. 134John Dewey, Democragy and Eduation (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1916), pp. 214-215. 135John Dewey, The Child and the Curriculum (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1902), p. 25. 136Austin S. Murphy, "Center Stage for Economic Education," The Journal of Business (December, 1962), p. 5. .9. 62 is important to him and that it has meaningful connections with what he already knows; and, finally, what he learns he builds at once into character. It necessarily follows that in economic education, the student must be both interested in the subject and deeply involved in the learning process if the desired results are to be achieved. Thus, variations in effective teaching procedures and in learning situations become essential.138 In the economic education literature, a vast number of teaching techniques, devices, and procedures have been recommended. In a 1941 Yearbook, Murphy admonished teachers against reliance on lectures, textbooks, or community visits alone to accomplish the objectives of economic education. She called for a combination of these procedures as well as the introduction of other methods and recommended an extensive list "139 of "teaching tools. Although Murphy and other writers have denounced the requiring of extensive memorization, it appears that the practice has been continued over the years. Pond advocated the educational maxim of pro- ceeding from simple to complex economic understandings as rapidly as possible through concrete experiences wherein the student can "learn to do by doing."140 137William H. Kilpatrick, "Philosophy of Education from the Experi- mentalist Outlook," Philosophies of Education. Forty-first Yearbook, National Society for the Study of Education, Part I (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1942), p. 44. 138Business and Economic Education for the Academically Talented Student, op. cit., p. 58; Wagner, loc. cit., pp. 5-6. 139Mary E. Murphy, "Problems and Issues With Reference to Teaching Procedures in Economics," Seventh Yearbook of The National Business Teacher Association (Somerville, N. J.: Somerset Press, 1941), pp. 281-82. 140 A. Smith Pond, "Economics in Business Education," Journal of Business Education, XXXIV (April, 1959), p. 294. 63 Wolfson emphasized the importance of helping the student seek his own solution to important economic problems.141 Likewise, the Economic Task Force con- sidered the first and paramount objective of economic instruction to be the development of "a rational way of thinking about economic problems."142 Additional recommendations have been made by other authors who have explained their own procedures and called for needed improvements in the effective use of classroom techniques, current supplementary reading ma- terials, community resources, audio-visual aids, and evaluation. Most authors recognized the need of avoiding excessive abstraction and of applying economic understandings to life situations. There was, however, an occasional criticism of overemphasis on amusing visual devices and "play activities" that might stimulate class interest in lieu of learning.143 Special units or projects have most frequently involved a study of the stock market; the establishment of model corporations; and the planning, completing, and reporting of field trips and studies. Some of the stock market projects appeared to dominate the study of economics.144 A major project on the establiShment of a hypothetical company was followed in one 141Martin Wolfson, "How to Teach Economics in the High School," High Points, XXXVII (February, 1955), p. 73. 142Committee for Economic Development, Economic Education in the Schools, p. 14. 143J. H. Dodd, "Economics for the Secondary School," Balance Sheet, XXVI (January, 1944), p. 250. 144Frederick E. Bauer, Jr., "Students Invest in the Stock Market," Social Education, XV (October, 1951), pp. 271-72; "Lesson in Finance: Nyack, New York High School Seniors Purchase a Share of Stock," Burropghs Clearipg House, XL (June, 1956), pp. 12-13. 64 graduate methods class.145 Perhaps the most unique student corporation was reported by the Skokie Junior High School in Winnetka, Illinois, where the students actually raised and sold pets along with other commodities.146 The effective teaching of economic understanding in the high school requires imaginative, interested teachers who can imbue student enthusiasm for the subject and who can apply those teaching procedures and materials which will make the greatest contribution to the learning process. Such a teacher will constantly evaluate previous experience in an effort to enhance his effectiveness. Corey has made the further point that the process of thinking, planning, and gathering of new materials for instruc- tdonal improvement is deserving of some "free" time during the regular school day. "When teachers are expected to do all of these things on their own time, while carrying a teaching load originally designed to consume all of their energy, little happens."147 Although funds in many school systems are extremely limited for this purpose, perhaps it would be possible to provide some free time for a few selected teachers who are most interested and productive in instructional improvement. When new teaching procedures and materials are developed in usable form they could then be passed on to the other teacherS. 145Bernadine‘Meyer, "The Teacher Know-How of Economic Understanding,‘ Aggrican Business Education, XVIII (December, 1961), pp. 104-06. 1468. R. Logan, "Economics in Action at Skokie," Clearing House, XXI (December, 1946), pp. 201-3; Simon R. Logan, "Economic Enterprise for High School Students," Curriculum Journal, XII (November, 1941), pp. 301-4. 147Stephen-M. Corey, "Research as a Method of Self-Improvement," Infogggl Bgsegrch by the Classroom Business Teacher, American Business Education Yearbook, Vol. 18, (ed.) Earl A. Dvorak (Somerville, N. J.: Somerset Press, 1961), pp. 15-16. 65 The Development and Use of Supplementapy Materials This chapter has made reference to the trend toward improving both textbooks and supplementary reading materials in economic education and to the contribution of such groups as the Council for Advancement of Secondary Education; Curriculum Resources, Incorporated; the Materials Evaluation Committee; and the Textbook Study Committee. During the last 15 years, the Joint Council on Economic Education has developed teaching guides for many subject areas in the high school.148 The Joint Council'also publishes an annual bibliography, which is the only comprehensive guide to current economic education materials that have been produced by all organizations.149 Periodically, the Committee for Economic Development has prepared thought-provoking policy statements on current economic problems; a school library can order up to ten free copies of these interesting statements, which are written at a level suitable for reading by high school students.150 Materials in the area of personal economics can be secured from such organ- izations as the National Committee for Education in Family Finance.151 In addition to securing the foregoing materials, school libraries have been urged to subscribe to newspapers and periodicals which specialize in 148Joint Council on Economic Education, Material for the Teacher (New York: The Joint Council on Economic Education). 149Joint Council on Economic Education, Annotated Bibliography of Materials in Economic Education, 1962-63 (New York: The Joint Council on Economic Education, 1960). 150Committee for Economic Development, Publication Order Form (New York: Committee for Economic Development). 151National Committee for Education in Family Finance, 488 Madison Avenue, New York 22, New York. 66 reporting and analyzing economic events. Also recommended have been the popular books on economics such as The Worldly Philosophers152 and The Affluent Society.153 . ., Very seldom has any attempt been made to determine the availability of economic education materials in high school libraries. However, an exploratory study of 46 Illinois high schools revealed that their libraries were "sadly deficient" in basic reference materials and that faculty and students were making very little use of the limited materials that were available. Interestingly, several librarians indicated an intention to order many of the references that had been listed in the questionnaire.154 In 1947, Cocking complained that "there are still too many libraries operating where the chief concern seems to be the possible loss of materials . . . much remains to be done to integrate the library of the secondary school into the entire program.155 While Baker acknowledged an abundance of materials in 1960, he felt the average school was not equipped to make them available to teachers in the quantities needed; and he chal- lenged the educational leadership to resolve this problem in the 1960's and 1970's.156 In spite of the problems involved, there is reason to believe 152Robert L. Heilbroner, The Worldly Philospphers (rev. ed.; New York: Simon and Schuster, 1961). 153 John Kenneth Galbraith, The Affluent Sociepy (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1958). 154Lewis E. Wagner and James E. Nixon, "A Survey of Economic Reference Materials in Illinois High School Libraries," The Councilor, XXI (Chicago: Illinois Council for the Social Studies, March, 1960), p. 69. 155Walter B. Cocking (An Editorial), The School Executive, LXVII (October, 1947), p. 5. 156Baker, loc. cit., p. 138. 67 that many school systems would provide more supplementary materials if teachers would define their needs.157 Perhaps at least one person in the school could become familiar with all of the major sources of economic education materials and with the significant new materials that are published. Developing Supplementary Materials It is generally recommended that teachers develop their own resource units, teaching guides, and the like when satisfactory published materials are not available. However, there appears to be a definite point at which the teacher with little or no background in societal economics should secure the assistance of an economist and, if practicable, a curriculum specialist. In this manner the teacher could surely avoid developing misinformation or illogical analyses about economics and the American economic system. Ap- -propriate staff members in nearby colleges or universities would provide valuable guidance for the high school teacher or department during the development of an economic unit or a course syllabus. Baker emphasized that "school systems, in cooperation with community organizations, should develop their own texts and pamphlet materials to support units on local history, resources, institutions, and problems." However, on the problem of scope and sequence, he called for the resources of a national organization to help define ". . . what instructional ma- terials are needed, in what form, and for what levels of maturity."158 Wagner was extremely critical of the "mediocre resource and teaching units" which had often resulted from teachers' work during the two-or three- 157Eileen F. Noonan, "A Librarian Challenges Business Teachers to Use Library Materials," Business Education Forum, XV (December, 1960), p. 38. 158 Baker, loc. cit. 0.... ... ’5. H. ... so a... v ,v 68 'week economic education workshops: It is simply asking too much of high school teachers with little or no training in economics, to acquire in a couple of weeks time a knowledge of content sufficient to do a respectable job. This task demands the combined services of a highly trained economist, sensitive to the difficulties of teaching economics at the secondary level, and an equally well trained educator with a sincere concern for content and disciplined thinking.159 One of many applications of the approach recommended by Wagner has been followed in developing case histories of certain business organizations for study by junior high school students in Newton, Massachusetts. Harvard business school professors worked with local teachers during the summer of 1962 to develop the materials, which were used experimentally the follow- ing year in all three grades of the junior high school. The cases were revised somewhat during the summer of 1963 for further use during the academic year 1963-64.160 Using Supplementary Materials In a few instances, teachers have taken the comparatively extreme position of discarding the textbook and of proceeding without any planned sequence for the economics course or unit. Wolfson has insisted that "the daily newspaper is a complete textbook” and that the best study ma- terial consists of ”the newspaper, the magazine, the radio, the visit to the economic institutions for observations for study, the school firm, and the lecture by the business and/or trade leader."161 Although this 159Lewis E. Wagner, "Testing Economic Knowledge and Attitudes," National Association of Secondary_§chool Principals Bulletin, LX (May, 1956), pp. 120-32. 160"Economics for Teen-Agers," The Lamp, LXV (Spring, 1963), pp. 22-24. 161Martin Wolfson, "Economics in 1951: The Day's News Is the Text," Clearing Housg, XXV (February, 1951), p. 356. 69 approach should result in animated student interest, its successful appli- cation would appear to demand the guiding hand of a clearly outstanding teacher. The merit of a teaching procedure or resource material must ultimately hinge on the measurable increase in economic understanding which results. According to Merrifield, the use of supplementary materials along with the regular textbook will provide for (l) more current information; (2) enlivened student interest in the subject; (3) experience in critical analysis of new or contradictory evidence; and (4) a means of tapping 162 It would individual differences and special talents among students. appear that the proper use of supplementary materials should enhance the teaching-learning process in economic education. Value Judggents in Economic Education Although the discipline of economics is based upon firm principles and laws which have been developed and refined over a Span of several centuries, it is not a predictive science. Moreover, the degree of emphasis on certain economic goals and the preferred solutions to many policy issues depend to a large extent upon the system of values and the special interests which are cherished by the individual and the various socio-economic groups to which he may belong. Because of the inherent controversy associated with most economic issues, it becomes essential that the American citizen possess the requisite competency to analyze economic problems and the alternative courses of action in a logical manner. The literature suggests two major areas of controversy that involve 162 C. W. Merrifield, "Economic Competence: New Frontier in Civic Education," Social Education, XXIII (February, 1959), p. 73. 70 value judgments in economic education. The first area relates to the proper role of education in perpetuating a democratic society and a basically free enterprise economy, while providing for complete freedom of inquiry into its weaknesses and problems. The second area relates to the conflicting objectives of special interest groups within the economy. Teaching About the Democratic Society It has been conceded that public education in a democratic society should seek the optimum development of each person for his many responsi- bilities in adult life. The concept of the worth and dignity of the in- dividual in a free society has been a significant heritage of the American citizen. Whereas the very existence of democracy has depended upon the decisions and the initiative of the individual citizen, American education has generally avoided indoctrination and has sought to develop in students the requisite knowledge and the inclination to make good decisions in an independent manner. The advent of totalitarian societies and their accompanying edu- cational indoctrination have often led to a reassessment of how American education could best advance its own supporting society. Usually, political and economic freedoms have been viewed as_part of the same social process. A few educators have emphatically declared that a school dedicated to the principles of scientific inquiry could not logically teach the virtues of freedom and democracy as self-evident truths. According to Wagner, Whether a society organized on the basis of free inquiry is more desirable than one organized on the basis of dogma depends upon the kind of society in which we want to live. Obviously not everyone in the world wants to live in a society characterized by free inquiry. To "teach" one view as opposed to the other is to indoctrinate. 71 However much we may deplore the fact, economics cannot make ethical pronouncements and, at the same time, nestle snugly under the protective wing of science and objective inquiry. The economist does not, and cannot, in his role as economist indicate which alternative is "best" in any ethical sense . . .163 Although Drucker recognized that there are peculiar problems in de- veloping the voluntary qualities of loyalty and morale in a democratic society, he criticized the schools for barely teaching value systems re- garding the basic premises to our society and challenged teachers to con- sider the authority image they present to students. In suggesting that pupils be given many successful experiences in civic action, Drucker emphasized: "There is much to the idea that attitudes and values are caught or that 'what you do is much more revealing than what you say!"164 Melby declared that "totalitarian societies demonstrate what a powerful instrumentality of social policy education can become. Now we, in the free world, must make education an equally powerful instrumentality for the preservation and growth of freedom."165 Halsted presented four "musts" in preparing Americans to function in their international setting: 1. They must know precisely what they believe and why they believe it. 2. They must be able to explain and discuss effectively the ' aims, ideals, and accomplishments of American democracy. 163Lewis E. Wagner, Majpr Issues in Economic Education; pp. 14-17. 164 Peter F. Drucker, "The American Economy in the Next Twenty Years," Citizenship and a Free Society: Education for the Future, Thirtieth Year- book. Edited for the National Council for the Social Studies by Franklin Patterson 22jWashington 6, D. C.: National Education Association, 1960), PP 165 Ernest 0. Melby, Administering Community Education (Englewood, Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1955), p. 16. 72 3. They must have a clear and accurate understanding of world Communism. 4. They must revive their faith in the democratic ideal and in themselves.1 Oliver suggested a "dual approach" as a compromise solution to the inevitable conflict of teaching inherent cultural values and developing the "inquiring mind." In the primary grades, he would utilize dramatic narrative history to give the young student a concrete image of the courage, suffering, and initiative in early America. Upon this foundation he would proceed into a critical analysis of the institutions in the present society}67 This general procedure has been followed in school systems for many years. From the present investigation and from the review of literature, it has appeared that most educators feel an inherent obligation to develop student appreciation for the democratic society and its inherent freedoms. The approach, however, would not be one of rote indoctrination. Rather, major emphasis has been placed on making the school and community better examples of "living democracy." Not as an economist or as a scientist, but as an American citizen, it would seem that the educator should be prepared to support the values inherent in the democratic society. At the same time, American education must remain free to analyze accomplishments of other societies as well as persistent problems “at home." Only after objectively 166Henry M, Halsted, A Paper read before the National Association of Educational Secretaries, National Education Association, Atlantic City, New Jersey, February 15, 1959, quoted by William C. Kvoraceus, ”Tomorrow's Youth and Tomorrow's Citizens," Citizenship and a Free Society; Education for the Future. Thirtieth Yearbofik} EditEd’for NationaIFCounéil for fhe Social Studies by Franklin Patterson (Washington 6, D. C.: National Education Association, 1960), p. 27. 167Donald W. Oliver, "Educating for Responsible Individualism," Citizenship and a Free Society: Education for the Future, Thirtieth Yearbook. Edited for the National Council for the Social Studies by Franklin Patterson, (Washington 6, D. C.: National Education Association, 1960), pp. 201-227. 73 defining existing problems and the available alternatives, can the most desirable policy decisions be made. Teaching About the Objectives of Special Interest Groups Since the early 1940's, no article in the economic education litera- ture has expressed opposition to the discussion of controversial economic issues. Both educators and laymen generally recognize that in their adult life, the present students will be bombarded by appeals and exhortations from special interest groups. The school can provide beneficial guidance for interpreting these materials and statements. The problems of preserving individual self-hood, integrity, and initiative in the modern society demand that students learn to respond to group actions in a reflective and creative manner. According to Kvaraceus, organization membership is likely to control one's attitudes and decisions on public policy issues--thus nullifying the ideal of freedom to think and act for oneself: Many studies report that the adolescent would prefer to be wrong with his gang or his peers rather than right with his parents and the adult world from which he has been detached. . . . There is great danger of a future citizen (the signs are already visible in adult citizenship behavior) who will make important decisions based more on pressure-group demands than on the issues per 33; or who will react to proposed legislation more out of fear of group opinion than in terms of the meaning and implications of the proposal for local, national, or international benefit.168’169 It has been repeatedly asserted that emphasis in economic education must be neither indoctrination in a particular point of view nor 168William C. Kvaraceus, "Tomorrow's Youth and Tomorrow's Citizen," Citizenshipiand a Freej§gcietyp Education for the Future. Thirtieth Year- book. Edited for the National Council for the Social Studies by Franklin Patterson (Washington 6, D. C.: National Education Association, 1960), p. 21. 169Also see William H. Whyte, Jr., The Organization Man (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1956). 74 ". . . analysis without reference to the goals of American life. Economic education must be raised above the struggle of interest-group partisan- ship--or disguised partisanship. . .that pretends to be patriotism."170 Only Shrough open discussion and a high level of economic understanding can all points of view he recognized in the best democratic tradition. Hancock has complained that "few leaders in business really comprehend the American economic system and if they do, they are seldom vocal about it."171 Surely the same conclusion could be reached about other economic groups. A recent editorial in the American Banker compliments the Joint Council on Economic Education for bringing together an unbiased list of reading materials on economic issues. The conclusions were that a company could use these materials without appearing to "brainwash" its employees and that ". . . business has little to fear from an unbiased picture of our economy. . . ."172 The same editorial reported a relevant conclusion of Elmo Roper from his many public surveys: It has been my observation that when the public has enough of the facts to judge the probable result of any given action, it is likely to steer just as pigs and fair a course as that plotted by any of its leaders. A survey by the Opinion Research Corporation in 1960 concluded that college graduates who had taken college courses in economics were much more 17OJ. Cameron Thomson, ”The New Attack on Economic Illiteracy," paper read before the Southern California Research Council, Claremont, California, p. 8 (Mimeographed). 171John Hancock, "Objectivity--the Key to Economic Understanding," Journal of Sociology, XXIII (March, 1950), p. 412. 172American Banker (November 26, 1962), p. 4. 173 Ibid. 75 likely to View the American economic system within a value framework that would be acceptable to business executives. These findings prevailed even though the textbook most widely used by the students had been "the one most criticized by businessmen."174 Because of controversial economic issues, many educators would probably agree with Briggs in including economics along with sex and religion as the "three dangerous subject areas in education."175 However, in addressing the thirty-eighth Annual Convention of the National Association of Secondary School Principals in 1954, Baker emphasized the schools' responsibility for dealing with economic issues. They IEhe schoolg/ must deal with the problems objectively and with the broader social interest in view. If they maintain an objective point of view, they will command the respect and the support of both labor and business management and of all other responsive elements of the community. The responsibility for both objectivity and leadership lies with the schools.17 Educators have endorsed the appropriateness of using supplementary reading materials which collectively express the various viewpoints on economic issues. It is generally agreed, however, that the teacher has an important responsibility for analyzing the available materials to determine their educational value.177 174Why Too Many College Students Are Economic Illiterates, op. cit., 175Thomas H. Briggs, "The Growing Demand for Unbiased Economic Materials," The School Executive, LXXII (May, 1953), p. 57. 176G. Derwood Baker, "Education for Economic Competence," p. 108. 177Tommy Lou Smith, "Dynamic Teaching of Business-Economic Courses," Business Education Forum, XVII (December, 1962), p. 21; John W. Kennedy, "Free and Inexpensive Materials--A Challenge to High School Teachers of Economics," Balance Sheet, XLI (February, 1960), pp. 250-53; Eileen F. Noonan, "Instructional Materials," Business Education Forum, XVII (March, 1963), pp. 15-16; Business and Economic Education for the Academically_ Talented Student, op. cit. 76 The Proceedings of the 1954 Riverdale Conference on economic education expressed an appeal for the teacher of economics to "._. . serve as an ef- fective antidote to the business, labor, and farm ideology groups which analyze economic problems from the viewpoint of their interests. . ."178 The teacher is challenged to ". . . distinguish between areas where'scien- tific' economic answers are possible, areas where such answers are impossible because necessary information or data are absent, and areas where only value judgments are called for and possible."179 In making a similar recommendation, the Economic Task Force observed that too often teachers either insert their own value judgments on economic issues or completely ignore the value of impartially analyzing contro- versial issues in the classroom.180 Coleman emphasized that "The American Economy" television course was backed financially by over 100 corporations because they agreed that the economy ". . . needed and could stand an objective examination." After observing that ". . . an antiseptic approach to economics must be both dull and unreal in the high school," he expressed the firm conviction that teachers can develop the ability to lead student discussion of economic issues in a lively, but objective and penetrating manner.181 178Economics in General Education, Proceedings of the Riverdale Conference, ed. James Gemmell, Seymour E. Harris, and S. P. McCutchen, (New York: Joint Council on Economic Education, 1954), p. 39. 179Ibid., p. 28 1 80Committee for Economic Development, Economig Education in the Schools, pp. 9, 11. 181John R. Coleman, "A New Chance for Economic Literacy," a paper read at the National Meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, February 14, 1963, Chicago, Illinois. 77 In the rare case where a minority group has objected to the teaching of economic issues, it has appeared that the school and the community had not worked closely together in developing the economic education program.182 Over the years much criticism of the total educational program has stemmed from inadequate communication and cooperation between school and community. In 1955, Melby observed that "if . . . we had worked more closely with the people of our community . . . we would now be in a far stronger positflni"183 Wagner emphasized that adult education in economics may be necessary in certain communities. We are convinced that getting businessmen, laborers, farmers, and educators to come together and focus their attention on some aspect of economics goes far toward creating mutual respect and breaking down common misconceptions about members of other groups. The economic education literature has provided continuing testimony to the valuable support which communities have given to the teacher of economics. The many examples have included field trips and comprehensive community studies by students, special student companies producing products in a local plant, special summer employment and orientation of teachers in business organization, the development of economic education materials, the use of community leaders as Special speakers in the classroom, and lay advisory committees for the economic education program.185 182"Hell Breaks Loose in Paradise," Life (April 26, 1963), pp. 73-82. 183Melby, Administering Communipy Education, p. 71. 184Wagner, loc. cit., p. 30. 185Frances Hall Adams, "Economic Education in the Senior High School," Educating for Economic Competence (Washington, D. C.: National Education Association, 1960), pp. 59-67; N. D. McCombs and George W. Hohl, "Business Can Help Teach Economics," The School Executive, LXXII (February, 1953), pp. 80-82; Ralph P. Gallagher, "Industry-Public-School 78 In summary, it seems clear that impartial analysis of controversial issues can become an important vehicle for motivating student interest and for developing significant economic understandings. It is of vital importance, however, that analyses be based upon a conceptual framework of the economic principles and concepts which underlie the operation of the American economic system. Moreover, the analysis must penetrate in significant depth to preclude any superficial perception that one view- point is as good as another. If positive community support is to be expected for economic education in general and for the discussion of controversial issues in particular, it is important that educators work closely with community leaders in developing the economic education program. IV. ORGANIZING SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY RESOURCES FOR ECONOMIC EDUCATION Related Aspects of School Administration The Role of the School Administrator in Instructional Improvement The administrator's responsibility for economic education stems from his concern for the total instructional program of the school. Continual improvement of the school staff and the school curriculum should be the central objective of the school superintendent and his building principa13,186 However, because of their administrative responsibilities Exchange Program and Effective Economic Education," School and Society, LXXVII (May, 1953), pp. 295-87; Glenn Macomber and Albert L. Ayars, "Home Town Becomes a Classroom," The School Executive, LXXIV (August, 1956), p. 41; Peter H. Dyksterhouse and Carl Lord, Economic Education in Kalamazoo (Kalamazoo, Michigan: Kalamazoo Public Schools, 1962), pp. 15-24. 186Walter A. Anderson and Richard C. Lonsdale, "Learning Adminis- trative Behavior," Administrative Behavior in Education, ed. Roald F. Campbell and Russell T. Gregg (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1957), p. 437. 79 for many supporting and peripheral functions and because of their feeling of greater competence in these other areas, school administrators often devote only a small percentage of their time to the instructional program.187 Thus, curriculum revisions are often accomplished through "crash programs" to meet pressing public demands. Uncoordinated, piecemeal improvements by individual teachers fail to serve the needs for planned progression and sequence in the broad curricular areas. Without aggressive guidance from the school adminis- tration, many teachers will remain uncommitted to professional development and curriculum improvement.188 Because of the school administrator's major responsibility for in- structional improvement, Hurlburt has recommended that certification re- quirements provide for at least three years of teaching experience and a thorough understanding of both elementary and secondary school curricula.189 Several authors have recommended that administrators learn about the edu- 190 Irrespective cational programs in selected schools other than their own. of the techniques used, it is of paramount importance that the administrator provide for the faculty organization, the communication channels, the in- service training, the evaluation procedures and the general direction which will contribute to a creative staff and a dynamic curriculum. Cooperative 187Clyde M. Campbell, "Never Forget: Teaching Comes First," The Nations Schools, LXII (September, 1958), pp. 51-52; Walter D. Cooking, "The Educational Program" The School Executive, LXXII (August, 1953), p. 7. 188Grant Venn, "Superintendents' Role in Improving Instruction," The School Executive, LXXII (September, 1957), pp. 21-23. 189Allan S. Hurlburt, "Let's Make Administrator Certification Meaningful," The School Executive, LXXIX (September, 1959), p. 61. 190 ' ' ' John H. Fischer, "What Can Be Learned from Visiting Other Schools?" The School Executive, LXXI (October, 1951), p. 66. 80 planning by the school and community should result in an operational definition of the school philosophy and objectives.191 The Building Principal In all but the smallest schools, the superintendent must rely heavily on his building principals to implement the broad curriculum and instructional policies of the school system. The principal is also ex- pected to engage in separate experimentation to better serve neighborhood and societal needs. According to Hull, ”the school principal is the key to the future in American education. Any improvements in local schools are 192 Cross not going to be made unless he leads his staff in making them.” reported the results of a survey in which high school history teachers indicated that ". . . the help they needed most could come from their own building principal.”193 In discussing trends in supervision, Burton and Bruckner observed a growing recognition of the individual school as "the unit of supervision” and the principal as 'the natural status leader."194 However, in spite of the principal's major role in the educational process, his work is vitally affected by the supervision he receives from the superintendent: 191Robert 8. Fish, "The Task of Educational Administration," Administrative hphnvior in Education, eds. Roald F. Campbell and Russell T. Gregg (New York; Harper & Brothers, 1957), pp. 201-227. 192 J. Don Hull, ”The Principal as an Educational Statesman," The School Executive, LXXII (September, 1952), p. 88. 193Richard Gross, ”Teachers Want Supervision,” The School Executive, LXXII (August, 1953), p. 52. 194William H. Burton and Leo J. Brueckner, Snpervision (3rd, ed.; New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1955), p. 20. 81 If major duties assigned to teachers and principals are largely those of bookkeepers and custodians, then the professional staff will become most concerned with those areas. If the major as- signment is to be teachers and leaders of teachers then the results will be quite different. The Qgggnizational Structure of the School The traditional line-and-staff organization of the school system provides for direct lines of communication between the principal and the superintendent and for direct functional communication between the principal and the superintendent's central office staff. The principal thus has direct control over the faculty in his building while central office curriculum consultants serve in an advisory or resource capacity.196 In all but the largest school systems, this organizational framework pro- 1 vides for aEclose working relationship between the principal and the school superintendent. Although the line-and-staff organization has been criticized as inappropriate for professional educators, administrators have found it extremely difficult to abolish line authority without making the organ-' ization chaotic.197 Until organizational theory is further advanced and until a faculty gains considerable maturity in the experiences of group- centered leadership and other democratic processes, it is likely that the line authority will be prominent in most school organizations. Partially in an effort to be consistent with the goals of democratic administration, administrators have often diffused decision making responsibilities among 195David B. Austin, "Improving Instruction in Secondary Education," The School Executive, LXXV (April, 1956), p. 79. 196Edgar L. Morphet, Roe L. Johns, and Theodore L. Reller, Educational Administration (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1959), p. 285? 197ibid., p. 57. 82 the faculty and have also included provisions for the "team approach” with "teachers councils, lay advisory councils and administrative cabinets."198 Supervision and the Instructional Program Wiles has concluded that in the 1910's and 1920's, supervision took the form of "directing and judging;" whereas in the 1930's the expression "democratic supervision" often implied "manipulation" in democratic pro- cedures. In the 1940's, there was a considerable trend toward group- centered leadership with ". . . all the people in the school system super- vising each other."199 Numerous authors called for emphasis on sharing rather than delegating authority, and for supervisors who could work effectively "within groups" to foster the creative development of each participant toward the accomplishment of common goals. Increasing emphasis was placed on "general rather than specific supervision," "authority of the group over itself," and the "group "200 attack upon self-defined problems. Through participation in "shared leadership," it has been assumed that staff members will better understand and accept the objectives and plans of the school system and that they will feel a greater responsibility for the success of the school program.201 198Richard Wynn, "What's New in Administrative Organization?" The School Executive, LXXVI (October, 1956), pp. 71-73. 199Kimball Wiles, Supggvision for Better Schools (2nd. ed.; Engle- wood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1955), pp. 5-6. 200See Harold P. Adams and Frank G. Dickey, Basic Principles of Su ervision (New York: American Book Company, 1953), Burton and BruecEner, op. cit., p. 20; Wiles, op. cit., pp. 16-22. 201Russell T. Gregg, "The Administrative Process," Administrative Behavior in Education, eds. Roald F. Campbell and Russell T: Gregg (New York: Harper& Brothers, 1957 . 311; Vivienne Anderson and Daniel R. Davies, Pa terns of Educationa Leadership (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1956), pp. 13- 15. A‘y- s.. ‘O 5s :- an. I. b‘. 83 Concurrently with the emphasis on group centered leadership, many authors were careful to distinguish between the democratic and the laissez- faire approach. An employee lacking direction or purpose under laissez- faire leadership may be even less free than if he were under autocratic 1.202 contro The democratic approach to administration is more demanding of the official leader than is any other form of leadership.203 Dickey and Adams cautioned that ". . . encouraging members of a group to participate in the planning does not mean that the supervisor can turn them loose to do as they choose."204 Melby found that teacher committees and study groups often do not liberate the creativity which is ". . . a clear responsibility and an 205 obligation of administration." Through a binding majority vote, group immaturity can serve to restrain the most creative individual and also prevent the recruiting of outstanding people for a faculty.206 Holland has condemned the interpretation of democratic leadership which calls for a timid, lackadaisical approach to directing the school staff. He declared, "the dying Spasm of this loose bundle of ideas is "Kenneth D. Benne and Bozidor Muntyan, Human Relations in Cur- riculpm Chpnggp (reprint from Leland P. Bradford and Ronald Lippett, "Building a Democratic Work Group," Personnel, XXII, November, 1945 pp. 142-148), New York: The Dryden Press, 1951, p. 120. 2QBRay T. Wilcox, "Authoritarianism and Educators' Expectations of Leadership," Educational Administration and Supgrvisioni XLIII (November, 1957), pp. 418-428. 204Adams and Dickey, op. cit., p. 57. Melby, Administering Community Education, pp. 107-08. 206 Ibid., pp. 227-28. 84 likely to be one cause of poor administration today."207 According to Holland, some school supervisors following the "gentle guide" theory ". . . would never approach a teacher. The teacher had to come to them."208 Similarly, Monahan has criticized the tendency of some school principals to maintain their status through professional concealment behind a veneer of "affability and niceness."209 In economic education as in other areas, strong leadership is essential to a coordinated program of instructional and curriculum improvement. In many schools, the administrator's serious proposal for curriculum revision may well be the essential first step toward whole- hearted endorsement by the faculty and the community. At the same time, he must be prepared to recommend an operational plan including provision for the organizational framework, the time, the facilities and materials, and the consultant assistance that may be necessary to carry out the program. It is essential that the staff proceed with a sense of purpose and a feeling of confidence that their recommendations will receive careful consideration. "The specific function of administration is to develop and "210 not to make all the decisions. regulate the decision-making process, Democratic leadership requires democratic participants, and this requisite group maturation is a gradual process even with the most 207Howard K. Holland, "Democratic Leadership--Does It Abrogate Executive Responsibility?" The School Executive, LXXIX (November, 1959), p. 76. 2081bid., pp. 76-77. 209William G. Monahan, "Portrait of the Administrator as an Old Zuni," Overview, IV, No. 7 (July, 1963), pp. 34-35. 10 Daniel E. Griffiths, Administrative Theory (New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts, Inc., 1959), p. 73. 85 skillful leader. Benne and Muntyan have emphasized that the educational leader should have a working knowledge of social-psychology, the group process, and the problem solving method along with the ability to incorpo- rate democratic ideas and values.211 The Co-ordination of School and Community Resources School administrators have long recognized the many benefits of utilizing appropriate community resources in the school program and of school community cooperation in local civic activities. The effective use of community resources can be particularly important for the school's economic education program. In 1938 the Educational Policies Commission recommended that school boards invite the cooperation of parents, organized 212 The educational groups, and other citizens throughout the community. philosophers repeatedly emphasized the need of making each school "an embryonic community life," which would evolve gradually out of home life and the larger society.213 Similarly, Rudman pointed to the critical importance of intergroup communication in a democratic society. "When groups share a common set of values but prohibit or destroy any communi- cation among themselves, they cease to be a group in the democratic sense, and become a gang."214 211 Benne and Muntyan, op. cit., p. 12. 212Educational Policies Commission, The Structure and Administration of Education in American Democracy (Washington, D. C.: Educational Policies Commission, 1938), pp. 58-68. 213John Dewey, School and Sociegy (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1900), p. 27. 214 Herbert G. Rudman, "The Gang, America, and the Individual,” Progressive Education (January, 1957), p. 22. 86 The National Citizens' Commission, established in 1949, reported being in direct communication with some 2,500 state and local committees by 1955. Melby observed that the membership on a board of education is usually too small to communicate adequately with the community.215 Since the board of education is the only legal policy making body for the community, it is generally recognized that the separate Citizens' committees should function only in an advisory capacity and in close cooperation with the official board. In his seven guides for harmonious working relationships with citizen committees, Bretsch emphasized that committees should be free to operate within a policy framework acceptable to the Board.216 Numerous advisory committees have been described in the literature, and several of these groups have been commissioned to assist and support economic education programs.217 A 1950 study of 44 lay committees across the country revealed that 68 per cent of the groups were formed temporarily to solve a special problem; however, the temporary committees often proved so valuable that they achieved permanent status. Representatives of the many community organizations were included on these advisory groups, which in no way replaced the Parent-Teacher Association.218 In view of the administrator's important role in the community, 215Melby, loc. cit., pp. 115-116 Howard S. Bretsch, "Boards and Citizens at Cross Purposes?" The School Executive, LXXIX (October, 1959), pp. 75-77. 21 7Paul W. Coons, "Focus on the Committee," The School Executive, LXXII (February, 1953), pp. 76-77. 218 J. H. Hull, "How to Organize Lay Advisory Committees," The School Executive, LXX (December, 1950), p. 49. 87 a few writers have recommended that at least 25 per cent of his college program for a bachelor's degree ". . . be in courses using the community as a laboratory."219 Melby concluded that "this would not be adequate but would constitute a beginning."220 Anderson and Lonsdale observed a shift in emphasis "from a school-centered to a community-centered approach to educational administration," and they proposed a more fitting title of "superintendent of education" rather than ”superintendent of schools" for the chief school official.221 The over-all effectiveness of education in attaining predetermined objectives should be greatly improved through closer cooperation and co- ordination among the schools and the many other organizations which contribute either directly or indirectly to the education of all American citizens. Moreover, the role of the school in "community development" has received considerable attention. The 1956 issue of The School Executive described outstanding community improvement projects that had been completed in 22 cities with considerable assistance from each local school staff.222 In describing the work of a Connecticut Fact-Finding Commission on Education, Melby concluded that "the most important outcome was increased understanding of community problems by hundreds of citizens and professional people."223 When local citizens labor together for 219 Melby, loc. cit., p. 258. Also see Walter B. Cocking, "Educational Leadership," The School Executive, LXVIII (August, 1948), p. 7. 22 QMelby, loc. cit. 221Anderson and Lonsdale, op. cit., p. 441 222 The School Executive, LXXIV (September, 1956), pp. 81-111. 223 Melby, loc. cit., p. 301. 88' solutions to common problems, cultural fragmentations are at least . temporarily mended and all age groups gain a greater appreciation for democracy at work. Melby expressed the great hope that renewed faith in cooperative accomplishments may yet extend the conception of "community" to include "world brotherhood."224 Close school-community cooperation should serve as the optimum public relations program wherein well-informed citizens can better understand and appreciate the "well-taught child." Developing the Economic Education Program Frankel has completed the only study on the process of organizing . 2' an entire school system for curriculum change in economic education. 25 From_the eleven schools which had completed experimental curriculum work under the general guidance of the Joint Council, Frankel selected for his study the following four school systems, which were "the farthest advanced in effecting curriculum change: "Akron, Fort Dodge, Kalamazoo, and Ridgewood."226 Each of the schools committed itself to following the basic guidelines proposed by the Joint Council: They agreed to appoint a committee of cooperating teachers, a coordinator, and a local adviSory group. Each agreed to analyze what they were already doing about economics in the curriculum, the scope of economics that would be practical to cover in their curriculum, where different economic understandings could be introduced into the classroom, and how they might develop ma- terials and teaching projects. The Joint Council, in cooperation with its affiliated regional and state councils, agreed to provide 224 Ibid., pp. 54-58. 225 Moe L. Frankel, "Achieving Curriculum Change Through Education-- .A Field Study of Selected Schools (unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Rutgers ‘University, 1958). 226 Ibid., p. 29. 89 consultants, workshop assistance, financial aid, and materials.227 In each of the schools, the initial impetus toward a school-wide commitment for curriculum change came from a different source. In Kalamazoo, it was a curriculum director; in Fort Dodge, university staff members; in Ridgewood, the superintendent; and in Akron, a group of enthusiastic teachers. The commitment was made after numerous group dis- cussions in which the proposed project was explained and all viewpoints expressed. As the final step, the Board of Education endorsed the project and requested periodic progress reports. Interested citizens representing the entire community were contacted to serve on an advisory committee and arrangements were made for consultants from a college or university. Along with a provision for experimentation, evaluation, financing, and organi- zational procedures, a firm commitment was made to appoint a coordinator 228 II' who would be responsible for implementing the study." " curriculum surveys were made In each of the "cooperating schools, to determine what economic concepts were already being taught in each of the grade levels and subject areas. From this inventory, many teachers found they were already giving passing attention to economics; and their fears of a foreign-sounding curriculum area were considerably allayed. Moreover, teachers were placed in a better position to perceive additional understandings that could be included as well as new avenues for replacing pure description with an analytical approach to economic problems.229 227Ibid., pp. 10-11. 2281bid., pp. 29-36. 229 Ibid., pp. 51-53, 59-60. 9O Frankel reported that the elementary teachers were considerably more responsive than high school teachers in recognizing appropriate places for infegrating economic concepts into the curriculum. Other writers have also recognized the static nature of the secondary curriculum. Since the high school teacher and supervisor may know little about subject areas other than their own, additions and deletions of courses are often made without a careful "rethinking" of the entire secondary school curriculum and its contribution to established objectives.230 Each school deve10ped a library of economic education materials,_ including teaching guides and resource units from the Joint Council. To insure proper consideration of all phases of the school curriculum, all the elementary schools and the major subject areas of the secondary schools were represented on a curriculum steering committee. In each case the teachers contributed to the decisions that were made.231 Each of the school systems provided an in-service education program to upgrade the economic understanding of the staff and to provide guidance in instructional methods. Some of the sessions provided for teacher de- velopment of resource materials or teaching plans for use in the classroom. The teachers earned in-service credits for subsequent salary increments. To insure an active program, each school defined pilot projects to be completed by the teachers who were moat interested in economic education. The enthusiastic cooperation of pupils, parents, and community advisory groups provided valuable assistance and support for the program. General 230Ibid., p. 50. See also Burton and Brueckner, op. cit., pp. 143- 145; F. Eugene Miller, "Teachers Mbetings for the Entire System," Th5 School Executive, LXVII (October, 1947), pp. 45-46; G. Robert Koopman, "New Developments in the Curriculum," The School Executive, LXXV (January, 1956), pp. 89-90. 231Frankel, loc. cit., pp. 54-59. 91 guidance and direction emanated from the school co-ordinator, who, in turn, received assistance from university consultants.232 From several internal evaluation indices, Frankel arrived at the "preliminary" conclusion that each of the projects had been considerably successful. He indicated that a scientific analysis of these programs would probably be completed in the future by some organization special- izing in evaluation.233 Frankel concluded his study with a detailed discussion of "Suggested Steps in Achieving Curriculum Change” in economic education. According to Frankel, an effective program for curriculum improvement should pro- vide for the democratic approach; administrative approval; funds to do. the job; released time during the school day to do the necessary planning; special allowance for the particular needs and environment of each school system; specific assignment of responsibility, with provision for a full- time co-ordinator of economic education; involvement of the teacher, administrator, pupil, parent, and the community; an expectation of uneven advances among schools even in the same system; a reasonable schedule permitting requisite growth and learning by the participants; initial concern with problems the teacher deems most important; an early definition of the scope of the program; emphasis on teachers' guides rather than courses of Study; in-service programs concerned with both method and content; a library containing the current literature in the field; assistance from qualified consultants; the use of multiple materials and dynamic project-research in the classroom; effective communication 232 Ibid., pp. 63-94. 92 channels, freedom for objective analysis of controversial issues, simulta- neous action research in the classroom to test the efficacy of curriculum proposals; and continuing evaluation of learning objectives and outcomes.234 Although no school system has yet developed a model economic program for grades one through twelve, or for all subject areas of the high school, those schools which have made a co-ordinated, planned effort to accomplish this objective are considerably more advanced than other systems which have depended solely on unrelated and isolated efforts of individual teachers. Economic education should not be a "crash program" for the American school system. However, if a minimum level of economic understanding is to be developed, it appears that school administrators and teachers must make a concerted effort to integrate appropriate economic concepts. Experimental projects have provided significant guidelines for the enterprising school system which will accept the crucial challenge of economic education. Textbooks and supplementary materials are being improved. Along with the efforts of existing organizations, there is need of aggressive economic education leadership frOm the United States Office of Education and the various professional organizations. 234 ' Ibid.,_pp. 132-157. }‘ ‘9 hbv- .. .1 3? is 1—0 I (I'- p sg| O. . a "I I: a“ ". s CHAPTER III THE EVALUATIVE CRITERIA Introduction Before the questionnaires could be constructed for surveying economic education administrative and instructional practices in Oklahoma high schools, it was necessary to establish basic criteria for evaluat- ing existing programs. The literature had included much discussion and many exhortations about the need for improving economic education, but there was no composite list of practices which a group of authorities had considered essential for a successful economic education program. Although the investigator gleaned many recommended practices from the literature, it-was only through the cooperation of a panel of economic education authorities that a defensible, composite listing of evaluative criteria was developed. In support of the jury approach, Best recommended that "outside criteria" be used in addition to comparisons that might be made within the group being surveyed. Group performance could then be related to "outside criteria" by means of score cards, rating scales, or frequency counts. Among the possible sources of "outside criteria," he suggested composite listings of "what experts believe to constitute best conditions or practices."1 . 1 John W. Best, Research in Education (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1959), pp. 190-91. 93 94 These experts may comprise a specially selected panel, chosen for the purpose. A group of practitioners in the field who are as- sumed to be most familiar with the characteristics under consid- eration, or the survey staff itself, may constitute the body of experts. Similarly, Good and Scates observed the appropriateness of "survey appraisal procedures" wherein "an investigator may secure the cooperation of a number of persons known as 'judges' or a ‘jury, who rank or rate in some way the objects under consideration."3 In discussing the general weakness of appraisal instruments, Good and Scates observed that "a question arises concerning the isolation of elements that are crucial ones [End thaEI . . . makers of . . . appraisal schedules may have omitted certain crucial intangibles.” Moreover, ". . . there is still a question as to whether any mathematical function (such as a weighted sum) of the separate ratings will yield a relative value that corresponds well with one's reaction to the object or situation as a whole."4 .Nevertheless, the authors acknowledge that these obstacles need not preclude the careful use of appraisal instruments: The question of losing elements of organization or pattern through dividing things may be answered, at least in part, by including in the schedule elements of varying generality, some very detailed and some rather broad, so that a hierarchy of levels is repre- sented. . . . . . . . An ideal instrument probably would be so cumbersome and expensive in terms of effort and time that its use could hardly be justified. Possibly a combination of ratings on appraisal instruments and general judgment will be found more desirable for practical purposes than the research worker's dream of a perfect instrument. 2Ibid. 3Carter V. Good and Douglas E. Scates, Methods of Research (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1954), p. 680. 4 Ibid., 683. 51bid., 683-84. 95 Similarly, after discussing problems associated with the use of various kinds of rating scales for opinion measurement, Best concluded that "in spite of these limitations, the process of opinion measurement has merit; and until more precise measures of attitude are develOped, this technique may serve a useful purpose in social research."6 'In developing the criteria for the present study, considerable effort was made to avoid omitting any "crucial intangibles" which might have a significant determinative effect upon economic education administrative and instructional practices in Oklahoma high schools. After reviewing practices which had been recommended in the related research and literature, the investigator secured additional lists of recommended practices from a selected jury of economic education authorities. The criteria selected included elements of "varying generality" so that a "hierarchy of levels" was represented. Where the exercise of personal judgment was essential, the investigator attempted to make this process as objective as possible by following consistent procedures in interpreting the quantitative and qualitative data. The procedures in securing, rating, and selecting criteria for the present study were essentially the same as those which had been utilized successfully by the Council for Advancement of Secondary Education, in 1954, when it completed a national study to define important economic concepts.7 6Best, op. cits, p. 160. 7Council for Advancement of Secondary Education, Key Understand- ings in Economics (Washington 6, D. C.: Council for Advancement of Secondary Education, 1956), pp. 1-35. 9. an an an. o'v- : v 'h‘ s.‘ Ir- :4- 96 Developing the Evaluative Criteria In November, 1960, the names of twenty-seven possible jurors were recommended by Dr. M. L. Frankel and his staff in the Joint Council on Economic Education. As a result of his doctoral study on "Achieving Cur- riculum Change Through Economic Education" and his many years of experi- ence as Director of the Joint Council on Economic Education, Dr. Frankel was intimately acquainted with the outstanding economic education programs across the country. Since its establishment in 1949, the Joint Council had directed successful experimental curriculum projects in many city school systems. On April 27, 1961, a form letter and an open-form questionnaire in two parts were mailed to the jury.8 The form letter explained the im- portance of the study and sought the cooperation of each selected juror. The open-form questionnaire requested each juror to list the five to ten administrative practices and the five to ten instructional practices that he or she considered most essential for a successful economic education program. Follow-up letters were mailed August 7, 1961. Of the twenty-seven authorities who had been recommended by Dr. Frankel for the jury, five did not reply; two declined because of other pressing commitments; and in three cases where Dr. Frankel recom- mended more than one person in the same school system, one person was designated to respond for the school. Thus, sixteen authorities provided the information requested on the open-form questionnaire. Except for an associate superintendent in a State department of public instruction, each of the jurors was serving either as superintendent or as curriculum 8The open-form questionnaires, with the covering letter and the first follow-up letter, are included in Appendix A. I A\q 0.! 5&- my. Lu: A'vk '.~V in; r“ u ‘1 'v_. 7N: . 97 director of a large school system in one of the following states: Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Texas, New Mexico, Florida, or Indiana. The administrative and instructional practices recommended by the jury on the open-form questionnaire were combined with a few additional practices recommended in the literature and then arranged in checklist form. Finally, a few items were added to enhance the discriminatory power of the instrument. The checklist provided a means whereby each juror could quickly report his opinion as to the degree of importance of each practice.9 On April 9, 1962, the checklist form was mailed with an explanatory letter to the jurors who had completed the open-form questionnaire. A follow-up letter was mailed July 19, 1962. Fourteen checklist forms were eventually completed and returned.10 Each juror evaluated the importance of each practice on the check- list by indicating whether he considered it essential, worthwhile, unimportant, or undesirable for developing an effective economic education program in the high school. These ratings were defined in the introduction to the checklist as follows: 1. Essential-~an economic education program is not likely to succeed unless this practice is followed. 2. Worthwhile--this practice is important and should be followed whenever practicable. 3. Unimportant--while this practice is not undesirable, it will have little effect upon the success or lack of success of an economic education program. 9The Checklist, with the covering letter and the first follow-up letter, is included in Appendix B. 10The responses to the Checklist survey are tabulated in Appendix C. 98 4. Undesirable--this practice would be detrimental to an economic education program. After the completed checklists had been received from the first nine jurors, the pattern of responses to the various items was well established. At this point, the follow-up letter was mailed; and five additional jurors submitted completed checklists. The responses from the first nine jurors had been tabulated in red ink, and the responses from the last five jurors were tabulated in black ink. A visual comparison of the responses from the first and second group of respondents revealed no significant differences in the pattern of ratings given each of the check- list items. Although the jury seldom agreed unanimously on the specific degree of importance of a particular administrative or instructional practice, most of the responses did tend to cluster in the essential and/or worthwhile categories. Thus, the vast majority of the practices on the checklist were given a high order of importance by most of the respondents. This favorable evaluation was not unexpected because almost all of the listed practices had been recommended either by the jurors, from their experience with economic education programs, or by other educators whose views had appeared in the professional literature.11 Several factors serve to substantiate the careful attention which the jurors obviously devoted to formulating and subsequently evaluating each criterion. The very length of the twelve-page checklist is ample evidence of the extensive contributions that were made on the completed A few items had been included to determine the preference of the jury for implementing a particular practice. For example, the jury was asked not only to evaluate the importance of a system-wide "co-ordinator" for the school's economic education program but also to indicate a pref- erence regarding the official who should be selected to perform this function. 99 open-form questionnaires. The fact that no juror gave the same rating to a long sequence of items on the checklist suggested that each separate item was carefully read and rated. A cross-check of each juror's rating of certain related items that appeared in different sections of the check- list confirmed a logical consistency in almost all of the responses. Selecting the Evaluative Criteria The checklist responses served to identify those criteria which the jury considered most important for an effective economhceducation program. Nevertheless, the investigator was forced to exercise personal judgment in classifying each listed practice as essential, as worthwhile, or as an item to be excluded from further consideration during the study.12 The decision was made that items which had been checked as worthwhile or essential by ten or more of the fourteen jurors and which had a weighted average rating of .50 or higher should be retained as criteria for appraising economic education programs in Oklahoma high schools. In numerically rating the checklist reSponses, the investigator assigned a specific weighted score to each response according to the category that was checked. The weighted positive or negative score for each response in each category was as follows: 12 With regard to the theory and interpretation of index numbers, Good and Scates have observed that "in many instances of weighting, the problem is primarily one of judgment." The authors emphasize that re- search workers do not relieve themselves of all responsibility for judg- ment when they reduce all factors to equal weighting. ". . . equal weighting may be less justifiable than material weighting or some other arbitrary weighting." See Good and Scates, op. cit., p. 686. so 5. \ .1 ~ ' l lOO Category Weighted Score Essential + 2 Worthwhile + 1 No Response 0 Unimportant - l Undesirable - 2 The weighted average rating of each checklist item was determined by summing its weighted scores and dividing the total by fourteen, the number of respondents. An advantage of this rating scheme was that the relative position of a checklist item on the essential-undesirable continuum could 13,14 be easily comprehended. This scheme for weighting the responses and then computing a weighted average rating is essentially the same as was followed in the CASE study except that positive and negative weightings were given to responses on opposite sides of the rating scale in the present investi- gation; whereas, in the CASE study, a positive numerical sequence of 0-5 was used for weighting responses on the rating scale. See Council for Advancement of Secondary Education, "Key Understandings in Economics," p. 26. 14The following quotation from Best further substantiates the appropriateness of weighted ratings: When data are arranged in rank order, weightings may be used. A first rank is worth more than a second, a second more than a third, etc. For example, if five items are to be scored, it is customary to assign weightings as follows: lst 5 points 2nd 4 points 3rd 3 points 4th 2 points 5th 1 point Using this inverse system of weightings, preferences or other types of data to be ranked may be quantitatively handled, with total weighted values describing composite positions. See Best, op. cit., pp. 188-189. 101 An item was designated essential if it had been given this rating by at least seven of the fourteen jurors and if its weighted average rating was 1.20 or higher. An item not satisfying the foregoing require- ments was designated worthwhile if it had received this rating or better from at least ten of the fourteen jurors and if its weighted average rating was .50 or higher. Thus, in determining whether an item should be designated essential or worthwhile, for the purpose of the present study, the investigator applied a combination of two related measures: (1) the number of respond- ents who checked an item as being essential and/or worthwhile, and (2) the weighted average numerical rating of the item. As a result, certain items were considered to be essential even though their weighted average numerical ratings were less than the numerical rating of certain other items that were ultimately defined as worthwhile. Within the defined limitations imposed by the numerical rating, it was felt that the number .9; respondents who had checked an item as essential and/or worthwhile should have some overriding influence on the final rating.15 In the following tables, the economic education practices are listed in rank order according to their weighted average rating. Table 1 contains the practices evaluated as essential; Table 2 contains the worth- while practices; and Table 3 contains the practices which received such low ratings that they did not qualify for designation as a worthwhile practice. 15The writer conferred with several statisticians at Oklahoma State University about the appropriateness of the foregoing procedures for weighting and rating the various practices; and there was unanimous agree- ment that the procedures were satisfactory. 102 TABLE l.--Essential economic education practices listed in rank order accord- ing to their weighted average ratinga ==—__====: Item No. b Item Weighted Rating 1-03 2-48 2—45 2-50 2-51 1-07 2-44 2-47 1-23 1-55 2-03 2-12 2-32 Identify the purposes and objectives of the economic education program in the high school. . . . . . . . . . . Teachers develop student understanding of the distin- guishing characteristics of competing economic systems. . . Teachers carefully determine the educational value and the degree of objectivity in supplementary materials before designating these materials for class use. . . . . Teachers agree that the major objective of economic edu- cation is to develop the students' ability and incli- nation to analyze economic issues objectively and to carefully weigh the probable results of alternative action. Teachers agree that economic understanding is a vital requisite for good citizenship. . . . . . . . . . Develop a policy supporting the objective classroom discussion of controversial economic issues . . . . . . In reading economic materials, teachers continually strive to improve their own ability to discriminate between fact and value judgment and between scientific elucidation and the subtle suggestion of propaganda . . . . . . . . . . . . . Without requiring memorization of countless concepts and institutional details, teachers develop student under- standing of the operation of the American economy and of the economic principles involved therein. . . . . Encourage periodic staff revisions of course syllabi to provide for more effective economic education . . . . . . . . Provide for continual evaluation and improvement of the SChOO]. Curriculum 0 O O I O I O O O O O O O O O O O C 0 Encourage teacher training institutions to establish one or more economics courses which will meet the unique needs Of teachers 0 O C O 0 O O O O C O O O I O O O O O O O 0 O O 0 Provide for local in-service training programs in economics for teachers and administrators whenever needed . . . . . . . Each teacher is aware of the specific economic understandings that can be taught effectively in his own course or grade . . 2.000 2.000 1.928 1.928 1.928 1.857 1.857 1.857 1.786 1.714 1.714 1.714 1.714 TABLE 1.--Continued Item No. b Item 103 Weighted Rating 2-42 2-46 1-14 1-16 1-24 1-27 1-59 1-74 1-79 2-38 1-75 Teachers are familiar with sources of current economic data and resource materials. Through classroom analysis of selected "special-interest- group" publications, students are expected to develop an understanding of the diverse viewpoints which prevail and an ability to discriminate defensible, objective statements from those that are biased and illogical. . Periodically, survey what economics is being taught in the different subjects and on the different grade levels. Encourage class projects whereby students make analytical comparisons of competing philosophies Administrators and supervisors seek to improve their own competence in the area of economics Administrators, supervisors, and teachers have essentially the same perception regarding the proper role of economic education in the high school curriculum . Provide for the necessary communication channels and other mechanics to transform recommended changes into action programs immediately. Recognize the school system's responsibility for developing economic education materials when the desired materials are not available elsewhere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Carefully articulate the economic education program in the high school with the economic education program in the lower grades. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Develop a firm and rational policy regarding the selection of textbooks and supplementary materials that are to be used in the economic education program of the school. Provide films, filmstrips, and other effective audio and visual aids for use in economic education . . Teachers emphasize the significance of economics in the daily life of pupils. . . . . . . . . . . Select well-written materials which, collectively, represent the diverse viewpoints of the major special-interest groups in the economy. . . . . . . . 1.714 1.714 1.643 1.643 1.643 1.643 1.643 1.643 1.643 1.643 1.643 1.643 1.571 104 TABLE 1.--Continued m: _:==== Item No.b Item Weighted Rating 1-76 Provide funds for the purchase of economic education ma- terials that are requested by the teacher . . . . . . . . . . 1.571 1-80 Provide necessary facilities and materials for the effective performance of economic education curriculum production committees. O 0 O O O O O O O I O O O I I O O O O O O O O 0 O 1.571 2-08 Employ no social studies or business education teacher who has not completed at least one college course in economics. . 1.571 1-25 Encourage the continual use of an instructional materials center and its resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.500 1-51 Secure the interest and cooperation of local leaders of business, labor, agriculture, and government. . . . . . . . . 1.500 2-18 Encourage universities to offer special summer classes or workshops for the teacher of a high school economics course . 1.500 2-49 Teachers develop student allegiance to the American free- enterprise system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.500 1-40 Encourage private publishers, foundations, and others to provide good high school teaching materials in economics. . . 1.428 2-37 Teachers devote some class time to the analysis of relevant economic issues that appear in the current news media . . . . 1.428 1-13 Maintain noticeable evidence that the school board is aware of the need for economic education. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.357 1-38 Include a representative of each major segment of the economy in the membership of the lay advisory committee on economic education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.357 1-53 Seek the service of the consultant employed by the State Council on Economic Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.357 1-56 Through "vertical articulation" curriculum committees, study and devise approaches to spiralling economic learning throughout the school system. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.357 2-14 Simultaneously involve principals, supervisors, and teachers in economic education in-service training programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.357 105 TABLE 1.--Continued --——r -————_-———_—-- b Weighted Item No. Item Rating 2-54 The teacher maintains a list of specific local and/or state representatives of business, labor, agriculture, and government who are eXcellent classroom speakers and who are enthusiastic "contacts" for arranging field trips or field studies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.357 1-42 Grant some released time from other duties for the system- wide co-ordinator of economic education . . . . . . . . . . . 1.286 1-22 Recognize that economic circumstances affect events and problems studied in all courses; i.e., a number of the problems in math and the assigned readings in English deal with inherent economic problems and issues . . . . . . . 1.286 1-54 Determine the extent to which the subject-centered curric- ulum, broad-fields curriculum, core curriculum, or experience curriculum is followed in the school and follow the existing curriculum philosophy for the economic education program. . . 1.286 1-11 Recognize that effective curriculum change results from democratic planning by the teachers, pupils, and other community representatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.214 1-35 Develop a policy clarifying the use of resource persons from the various economic groups in the community . . . . . . 1.214 aFor the specific ratings given each practice by the fourteen jurors, see Appendix C. bThe first digit of the item number refers to the card number on the original questionnaire. See Appendix B. (The First half of the question- naire was designed to be included on punched card 1, and information from the second half was to have been punched on card 2.) 106 TABLE 2.--Worthwhi1e economic education practices listed in rank order accord- ing to their weighted average rating8 Item No.b ‘ Item Weighted Rating 1-26 Provide a centrally located economic education library of teaching aids, texts, free and inexpensive supple- mentary materials, government publications, periodicals, and other current reference publications. . . , . . . . . , 1.428 2-25 Through college courses, in-service study, individual reading, and other beneficial programs, all teachers constantly seek self-improvement in their understandings and teaching of economics . . . . , , , . . . . , . . . . . 1,428 2-30 Teachers vary assignments in economic education to provide maximum learning experiences for students of different aptitudes and interests , , . . , , , , , , , , , , , . , . 1.428 1-04 Continually seek information about important economic education developments in school systems of other cities. . 1.357 1-32 Participate actively in the planning, promotion, and evaluation of various programs of the State Council on Economic Education (affiliated with the Joint Council on Economic Education) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.357 1-49 Develop a community resource file of people, places, and other characteristics of the local community which could be used in economic education , . . . . . , . . . . . . . . 1.357 1-62 Provide all teachers with study guides and resource units which emphasize selected economic concepts, , , , . . . . . 1.357 2-15 Give in-service merit credit to staff members who satis- factorily complete in-service training programs in economic education 0 O O O O O O O I O O O O O O C C O C O O O O O O 1.357 2-29 Each teacher periodically evaluates student achievement in economic education and uses the findings to further improve his teaching effectiveness, , , . . . . , . . . . . 1.357 1-06 Help the staff clarify the varying goals and concepts of such organizations as the Farm Bureau, the Farmers Union, the AFL/CIO, the National Association of Manufacturers; the Consumer Finance Association, the Foundation for Economic Education, and the Joint Council on Economic Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.286 107 TABLE 2.--Continued Item No.b . Item Weighted Rating —— 1-09 Encourage classroom exercises in which teachers and pupils evaluate the objectivity of published statements and materials in the area of economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,286 1-21 In regular school news releases, include information about economic education activities or practices in the local SChOOl SyStem Q C O O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O C O O O O 1.286 1-28 During the school year, give selected supervisors and teachers some released time to study the total economic program of the school . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.286 2-20 Consultant economists and curriculum specialists are hired to conduct in-service training programs. . . . . . . . , 1.286 2-24 The teacher who has completed the specific minimum require- ments of academic course work in economics-~but still con- siders himself incompetent in this area--engages in self- improvement activities to increase his level of economic understfihding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.286 2-33 Each teacher is aware of the specific economic under- standings that are being taught in other courses and other grade levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.286' 2-39 Economics is taught in the vivid setting of life situ- ations through role playing, student panels, and other animated techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.286 2-52 Relevant understandings in family finance and consumer economics are taught along with basic social economic principles and issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.286 1-66 The separate high school course in economics serves as a capstone experience to synthesize and build upon previous economic learning from other subject areas and lower grade leveIS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.214 2-23 Teachers who do not already have a specified minimum back- ground in economics are pursuing academic work to upgrade their qualifications . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.214 2-40 Teachers make classroom use of the radio and/or TV in the study of current economic problems . . , . . . . . . . . . . 1,214 2-41 Teachers de~emphasize the basic textbook through use of current supplementary materials in economic education. . . . . 1,214 108 TABLE 2.--Continued w: _- v“.— Item No.13 Item Weighted Ratings 2-55 1-10 1-20 1-30 1-31 1-61 1—72 During the school year, give selected supervisors and teachers some time to develop economic education cur- riculum units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.143 Assign to some one person the responsibility for coordi- nating economic education activities throughout the school system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.143 Pinpoint the specific economic concepts which should be taught at the various grade levels and in the various subject areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.143 A high school course in economics is offered in the adult education evening program of the school . , . . . 1.143 The teacher carefully selects guest speakers who have a thorough knowledge of economic concepts and who can effectively communicate this knowledge to the student . , , 1,143 The teacher carefully plans and directs field trips which give the student a more vivid conception of the application of economic principles in the local economy , . 1.143 Publish "curriculum bulletins" which illustrate class- room procedures for dealing with economic issues, . . . . . 1,071 Make certain that high school students are counseled concerning professional opportunities in the field of economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.071 Hire selected supervisors and teachers during the summer months to study and refine the school's economic educa- tion program. 0 O O O C O C O O O O O I I O I O O O O O O O 1.071 Encourage experimentation in the teaching of economics via large group instruction, small group discussion, independent study, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . 1,071 Develop local "scope and sequence charts" as a means of determining which economic concepts are already being taught at the various grade levels and in the various subject areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.071 When possible, a high school course in economics is included as part of the summer program of the public school (regardless of whether the course is offered during the regular school year) , , . . . , , , , . . . . . 1,071 109 TABLE 2.--Continued Item No.b Item Walghted Rating 2-21 Reimburse teachers and administrators for a portion of the expense they incur while attending a summer workshop in economic education at a university . . . . . . . . . . . 1.071 2-36 On bulletin boards and in other classroom displays, the teacher creates interest in economic topics . . . . . . . . 1.071 2-43 Teachers make use of the Economic Report of the President, the Survey of Current Business, and other U. S. Government publications for supplementary readings about current economic problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.071 2-58 In some class, the teacher develops a class project wherein the economics of the local school system is analyzed. . . . 1.071 1-33 Promote the establishment of a local council on economic education in cooperation with the State Council on Economic Education C O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O I O O O O 1.000 1-50 Survey community enterprises and economic groups (e.g. labor groups, farm groups, factories, banks, and retail stores) to determine their willingness to cooperate in the economic education program of the school. . . . . . . . 1.000 2-04 Encourage teacher training institutions to require every teacher candidate to take one or more courses in economics. 1.000 2-22 Reimburse teachers and administrators for a portion of the expense they incur as a result of attending a graduate seminar in economic education at a university . . . . . . . 1.000 2-56 The teacher carefully arranges and directs student studies of the various elements of the local community economy. . . 1.000 2-09 Employ no social studies or business education teacher who has not completed at least the equivalent of six semester hours of college course work in economics . . . . . . . . . 0.928 1-19 Establish in the school guidance program a concern for economic education. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.928 1-52 Hire economics and curriculum specialists to develop needed economic education materials and to assist teachers in the use of these materials. . . . . . . . . . . 0.928 110 TABLE 2.--Continued Item No.b Item Weighted Rating 2-34 Teachers continually develop and improve their own resource units in economic education and share these units with their colleagues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.928 1-15 Each year plan for one or more faculty meetings in which the important role of economics in the K-12 curriculum will be stressed . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.857 1-48 When securing a person to co-ordinate the economic education program in the high school, select any capable staff member who is well qualified in economics . . . . . . 0.857 2-16 In-service training programs include provisions for co- operative work on modified curriculum units in economic education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.857 2-19 During the school year, the school system sponsors occa- sional adult education evening forums on current economic problems. These forums are attended by the general public as well as by teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.857 1-58 Provide for a high school economic education curriculum steering committee (composed of key subject area and school administration representatives) to facilitate the interdisciplinary approach to economic education. . . . . . 0.786 2-05 Seek the establishment of a statewide committee, within the framework of accrediting associations and the State Department of Education, to evaluate and recommend minimum certification requirements in economics for teachers in the state . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.786 2-26 Each teacher attends at least one economic education workshop during his teaching career . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.786 2-35 Teachers develop, use, and improve visual aids to accompany economic education resource units . . . . . . . . 0.786 2-57 In at least one class, the teacher develops an extensive unit of study of the'costs, profits, and services of a few local enterprises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.786 2-59 In some classes the teacher will use current market reports to simulate in class the operation of the stock market--with brokers, purchasers, sellers, and book- keepers over a period of time . . . . . . . . .‘. . . . . 0.786 111 TABLE 2.--Continued Weighted Item No.b Item , Rating 1-12 Use a visiting speaker or panel to present the importance of economic education to the local school board and PTA . . 0.714 1-17 Give special recognition to teachers who have made out- standing accomplishments in economic education . . . . . . 0.643 1-36 Utilize a lay advisory committee on economic education in planning the economic education program . . . . . . . . 0.571 1-45 One person is responsible for securing and organizing economic education materials for use in the high school . . 0.571 2-60 A few teachers direct the cooperative purchase of a small amount of stock; then follow fluctuations in price over a period of time-~ana1yzing the reasons for the various fluctuations. The stock is then sold and the profit or loss is shared by the students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.571 1-78 In general, a committee of teachers and/or the school administration must approve an economic education publi- cation before it can be used in the classroom by any teacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.500 2-28 Every teacher and school administrator will view the national CBS "College of the Air" TV course in Economics during the 1962-63 school year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.500 8For the specific ratings given each practice by the fourteen jurors, see Appendix C. bThe first digit of the item number refers to the card number on the checklist. See Appendix B. TABLE 3.--Unimportant or undesirable 112 economic education practices listed in rank order according to their weighted average rating8 Item No. b Item Weighted Rating 1-63 1-68 1-44 2-27 1-47 1-67 2-10 1-39 1-57 2-07 1-37 2-31 1-34 Provide for the production or purchase of economic ma- terials which can be put into the hands of students and used as standard "textbooks". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An elective course in economics is provided in the high school. C I C O O O O O O O O .V I O O I C 0 Both the system-wide co-ordinator and the high school co- ordinator of economic education activities are allowed some released time for these duties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Each teacher attends an economic education workshop at least once every five or six years. . . . . . . . . . When securing a person to co-ordinate the economic education program in the high school, select a high school teacher. The separate course in economics is required of all high school students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Employ no social studies or business education teacher who has not completed at least the equivalent of nine semester hours of college course work in economics . . . . . . . To launch an effective economic education program, the school 0.714 0.714 0.500 0.286 0.214 0.214 0.214 superintendent (with school board support) decrees that greater emphasis on economic education will be made at all grade levels, that certain in-service training sessions will be held, and that certain resource units and other curriculum materials will be developed. . . . . . . . . . . Establish curriculum subcommittees of teachers and supervisors in each of the subject areas or departments of the high school Hire no teacher who cannot produce evidence of some specified minimum qualification in economics. . . Utilize a lay advisory committee on economic education in carrying out the economic education program . All teachers participate on economic education scope and sequence committees . . . . . . . . Exercise great care not to overemphasize economic education . 0.143 0.071 0.071 0.000 -0.071 -0.071 113 TABLE 3.--Continued —======= Weighted Item No.b Item , Rating 2-13 Conduct in-service training in economic education for principals and supervisors before involving the teachers in these programs 0 e o o e o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o -00 143 2-11 Consider evidence of economic competence in handling personal business affairs as a criterion for employee selection and, for subsequent determination of tenure status. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -O.357 1-46 When securing a person to co-ordinate the economic education program in the high school, select a high school principal or assistant principal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -0.428 1-18 Present Junior Achievement Awards to students who complete outstanding projects in economic education. . . . . . . . . . -0.428 1-77 In addition to materials that are purchased by the school, permit the teacher to secure--at her own discretion and expense--any other economic education materials to be used for student reading assignments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -0.928 1-71 A separate course in economics is provided for the academically talented students exclusively. . . . . . . . . . -1.135 a The weighted average rating of these practices was considered insuf- ficient to qualify them as either essential or worthwhile for developing an effective economic education program. bThe first digit of the item number refers to the card number on the checklist. See Appendix B. 114 Almost all of the practices listed on the checklist were checked as essential by at least one of the jurors. The only practices considered essential by every juror were identifying the objectives of the economic education program and developing student understandings of competing economic systems. Most of the jurors clarified their viewpoints on dif- ficult items by writing comments in the margins of the checklist. A few practices were so closely related as to necessitate their being analyzed together. On items 1-36, 37, and 38, most of the jurors favored a representative lay advisory group for the economic education program, but opposed the lay group's assuming responsibility for operational 16 Although the jurors acknowledged the need of exercising decisions. initiative in organizing the staff for curriculum development, item 1-39 revealed a significant preference for democratic procedures in lieu of administrative decree. The responses to item 1-43 were not tabulated be- cause of an inadvertent typing omission in this item. Several jurors were reluctant (on item 1-44) to endorse released time for both a system-wide and a high school co-ordinator of economic Education; but on item 1-42, released time for a system-wide co-ordinator vms considered essential for an optimum program. On items 1-46, 47, and 48: the jurors held different preferences regarding the most desirable background of the person who should co-ordinate the economic education program in the high school; but most of the jurors shared the belief that the Person.best qualified should be selected, irrespective of his particular \ The first digit of the item references in this chapter refers to Ege Punched card division on the checklist. See Appendix B. A reference 1 ditQUI1a36, 37, and 38 would be to statements 36, 37, and 38 in the card ivision of the checklist. 115 supervisory or teaching experience. Although the group gave considerable emphasis to the need of developing and using supplementary materials in economic education, several jurors (on item 1-63) were somewhat skeptical of replacing the textbook with these materials in present classes. Moreover, on items 1-76, 77, and 78, the jurors expressed the opinion that the school administration or its designated committee should reserve the right to approve or dis- approve the use of certain economic education materials in the classroom. On item 1-66, all but one of the jurors recognized the valuable contribution of the separate high school course in economics; however, on items 1-67 and 68, the group was considerably divided in opinion as to whether the course should be required or elective. There was almost complete agreement that a separate course should not be provided for academically talented students exclusively. Whilerecognizing that the pre-service education of teachers should include one or more courses in economics, the jurors, in items 2-3 and 4, expressed a definite preference for special economic courses that would meet the unique needs of teachers. On item 2-5, most of the jurors favored state teacher certification requirements in economics. With regard to appropriate practices in the selection of teachers, the jurors were torn between consideration of the ideal practice and the realities of present qualifications of teacher applicants. On item 2-7, most of the jurors commented that teachers with a minimum qualification in economics are often not available. Nevertheless, on items 2-8, 9, and 10, a majority of the group favored the practice of hiring no social studies or business education teacher who lacks the equivalent of nine semester hours of college economic courses. An even larger majority of the jurors 116 considered it important to expect teachers in these areas to have at least six semester hours of college economic courses. The responses to items 2-13 and 14 revealed a strong preference for involving administrators and teachers simultaneously in economic education in-service training programs. 0n item 2-15, the group further recognized the importance of merit credit for staff members who satisfactorily com- plete in-service training programs. 0n item 2-28, the group recognized the value of the 1962-63 television course on economics; but several jurors felt it would be impracticable to expect every educator to view the course. While the group acknowledged in items 2-32 and 33 that each teacher should be aware of relevant economic topics appropriate for his course and for other courses and grades, the jurors were skeptical, on item 2-31, of involving every teacher on a scope and sequence committee. This position was especially interesting in view of the strong group response, on item 1-11, in favor of democratic planning by teachers, pupils, and other community representatives. Responses to items 1-5 and 59 called for periodic surveys of economic education practices and for carefully articulating the high school program with the economics taught in the lower grades. Moreover, in item 1-56, the group strongly endorsed "vertical articulation" curriculum committees that would develop approaches to spiralling economic learning throughout the school system. The hesitancy to involve every teacher directly in curriculum committee work suggests that school supervisors should concern themselves with selecting the few outstanding teachers, in each subject area, who are the most interested and qualified in economic education. These select teachers could spearhead the program by developing the plans and illustrating the effective procedures for accomplishing the objectives of economic education. 117 On items 2-44, 45, 46, 47, and 50, the jurors strongly endorsed the discussion and analysis of controversial issues in the classroom. The use of the various community resources also received strong support in item 2-54. Some of the jurors had recommended specific class projects, and these pro- posals were considered important by a majority of the group in items 2-56 to 60. Although the jurors placed major emphasis on developing societal economic understandings, the responses in item 2-52 also acknowledged the importance of developing relevant understandings in family finance and consumer economics. It was necessary to include a few questions which involved answers in other than the general pattern for the checklist. 0n item 1-64, one- half of the jurors were of the opinion that economic concepts should re- ceive both general emphasis throughout the high school curriculum and also concentrated emphasis in special supplementary economic units which might be developed for the various courses. The rest of the jurors were fairly evenly divided in their preferences for the separate unit versus the more generalized integrative approach. 0n item l~65, the group acknowledged that there are fewer opportunities for economic education in art, music, and physical education than in other subject areas of the high school. On item 1-69, twelve of the fourteen jurors indicated that the high school economics course should be offered in grade twelve. Eight jurors indicated, on item 1-70, that the social studies teacher should teach the separate economics course while five jurors felt that a generalization could not be made on this issue. In view of the extensive experience of the jurors with economic education programs, they were asked to indicate the degree to which the practices they considered essential and worthwhile were being followed in 118 their respective high schools. On item 2-61, none of the jurors felt that a high school in their system was following as many as 90 per cent of the practices they considered essential to a successful economic education program. Six jurors were of the opinion that their high school was follow- ing 40 per cent of the essential practices, and another group of six jurors reported following 65 per cent of these practices. These twelve schools were therefore following an average of 52 per cent of the economic edu- cation practices which their respective representatives on the jury would consider essential. Thus, a model economic education program has not yet been developed even in the most advanced schools. On item 2-62 it was reported that 40 per cent of the worthwhile practices were being followed in three high schools; 65 per cent, in eight high schools; and 90 per cent, in one high school. Paradoxically, worthwhile practices were being followed to a larger extent than were essential practices. Inadequate teacher preparation in economics, a lack of qualified leadership, and a lack of necessary funds were mentioned most frequently by the jurors as the primary reason for not following all of the economic education practices they would consider essential or worthwhile for an optimum program. CHAPTER IV THE ECONOMIC EDUCATION PRACTICES AND PERCEPTIONS OF HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS Introduction The study included the high school principal because of his responsi- bility as the professional leader of his building. Senior high schools with an average daily attendance of 500 or more students were selected be- cause the 46 schools of this size enrolled one-half of the Oklahoma high school students in 1962-63. Moreover, it seemed that the curriculum in these large high schools would be least hampered by lack of funds and/or by inadequate staff. As responses were received from 44 of the 46 Okla- homa high schools which had at least 500 students and as the findings and conclusions were related only to these 46 schools, the extensive use of statistical probability formulas was considered unnecessary. In 1962-63, the student attendance in the 44 responding high schools represented 48.4 per cent of the total average daily attendance in Oklahoma high schools. In order to handle individual responses in strict confidence, each cooperating school was assigned an identifying numeral which was used con- sistently throughout the study to refer to the principal and/or the teachers in that school. All high schools were rated separately even though the Oklahoma City and Tulsa school districts included several separate high schools. From the jury ratings of the checklist criteria described in 119 120 Chapter III, certain administrative and instructional practices were designated as either "essential" or "worthwhile.“ A selected group of the administrative practices was then incorporated into a questionnaire form for the high school principal. As it was intended that the questionnaire should take no longer than 45 minutes to answer, some selectivity was exercised whenever the checklist criteria tended to overlap or when it was known that a particular practice was not being followed in Oklahoma high schools. 0n the other hand, a few items were added to provide the back- ground information which seemed important.l Table 4 identifies the "essential" and "worthwhile" items that were included in the principal's questionnaire and relates each practice to the appropriate criterion in the checklist.2 It should be emphasized that in each case the principal's rating in this study was based solely on the practices which he reported following; and in general, no attempt was made to determine the degree to which he was actually engaged in the reported practices. The ratings were undoubtedly affected by the tendency of a principal to be either liberal or conservative O O I O l O 3 in reporting his economic education practices. The questionnaire form is included in Appendix F. 2See Appendix G for the tabulated responses to each questionnaire item. 3 Through a comparison of the rating of the principal with that of his teachers the study did provide an indication of the impact of the principal upon the economic education instruction in his school. This relationship is discussed in Chapter VII. 121 TABLE 4.--Administrative practices cross-classified with related evaluative criteriaa I Item Checklist No. Item RatingC No.d General Administrative Practices 6. 10. ll. 12. l3. 14. 15. 16. Have you identified the objectives of an economic education program in your high school? If so, has this information been communicated to your teachers? Is one person responsible for securing and organ- izing economic education materials for use in your high school? Do you make a special effort to secure infor- mation about important economic education de- velopments in other school systems? Do you acknowledge that economic problems, issues, and concepts are relevant to the subject matter of all high school courses? Each year do you plan for one or more faculty meetings in which the important role of economics in the high school curriculum will be stressed? Have you surveyed your high school teachers to determine what economic understandings are being taught in the different subject areas or grade levels? If so, when was the last survey conducted? Does your office publish "curriculum bulletins” which, on occasion, illustrate effective class- room procedures for dealing with economic problems? Do you have a policy supporting the objective classroom discussion of controversial economic issues? Do you utilize visiting speakers who can ef- fectively present the importance of economic education to the local PTA? E I-3 * w 1-45 w 1-4 E 1-22 w 1-15 E 1-5, (1-61)8 * w 1-10 E I-7 w 1-12 TABLE 4.--Continued 1 Item No.b Item 122 t m Checklist No.d 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. Do you feel that your school board and school superintendent are aware of the need for economic education? If so, do you communicate this awareness to your teachers? Do you give special recognition to teachers who have made outstanding accomplishments in economic education? During the current school year, have you had any publicity in the local newspaper about economic education activities in your high school? In your guidance and counseling program, is at- tention given to the importance of economic education? Are high school students counseled concerning professional opportunities in the field of economics? Do you help your staff clarify the varying goals and concepts of such organizations as the Farm Bureau, the Farmers Union, the AFL/CIO, the National Association of Manufacturers, the Foundation for Economic Education, and the Joint Council on Economic Education? Approximately what per cent of your time do you devote to curriculum improvement in your high school? Have you read the National Task Force Report (1961), Economic Education in the Schools? Use of Community Resources 26. 27. Do you make use of a lay advisory committee in planning the high school economic education program? If so, is a representative of each major segment of the economy included in the membership of the lay committee. I-13 I-17 I-21 I-19 I-20 I-6 (I-l4) I-36 I-38 (I-51) 123 TABLE 4.--C0ntinuefi Item Checklist No. Item RatingC No.d 28. Have you surveyed community enterprises and economic groups (e.g. labor groups, farm groups, factories, banks, and retail stores) to de- termine their willingness to cooperate in the economic education program? W 1-50 29. If so, have you developed a file of such co- operating individuals and/or groups? W I-49 30. Have you developed a policy on the proper class- room use of local resource persons? E 1-35 31. Do you encourage the establishment of a local Council that would be affiliated with the Okla- homa Council on Economic Edutation? W 1-33 Interdisciplinary Approaches to Currigglum Revision 32. Do you provide for continual evaluation and improvement of your high school curriculum? E 1-55 33. Have you taken steps to insure the necessary com- munication channels and other organizational procedures whereby recommended curriculum changes can be approved and transformed into action programs? E I-24 34. Do you acknowledge that effective curriculum change results from democratic planning by the teachers, pupils, and other community repre- sentatives? E I-ll 35. In developing the economic education program, do you follow the guidelines of the existing curriculum philosophy in your school? E I-54 36. Do you encourage periodic staff revisions of course syllabi to provide for more effective economic education? E I-23 37. Do you strive to articulate the economic edu- cation program in the high school with the economic education program in the lower grades? E I-59 124 TABLE 4.--Continued : _= Item Checklist No.b Item Ratingc No.d 38. Have you made an effort to pinpoint the specific economic concepts which should be taught at the various grade levels and/or subject areas of the high school? B I-6O 39. Have you provided for a high school curriculum steering committee to facilitate the inter- disciplinary approach to economic education? W I-58 40. Do you provide high school teachers with study guides and resource units which facilitate the teaching of economic ccncepts? W I-62 The High School Economics Course 41. Is a separate economics course offered in your high school? W I-66 If a separate economics course is not offered, please indicate below why this offering is not considered appropriate. Check one. 42. not enough students would elect the course. * 43. ‘ no qualified teachers are available for this assignment. * 44. unnecessary curriculum fragmentation would result. * 45. other. (If you consider some other reason more important, please specify.) * 46. Does your school offer formal classes for high school students during the summer? * 47. If so, is an economics course offered during the summer? W I-72 48. In your adult education program, do you occasion- ally sponsor classes or evening forums on current economic problems? W I-73, II-l9 125 TABLE 4.--Continued _: I Item Checklist b , . c No. Item Rating No. Economic Education Materials 49. Have you developed a firm policy regarding the selection of textbooks and supplementary ma- terials that are to be used in the economic education program? E 1-74 50. Do you provide a centrally located library of economic education teaching aids, textbooks, periodicals, selected government publications, and other current reference materials? W I-26 51. Do you encourage the selection of well-written materials which, collectively, represent the diverse viewpoints of the major special-interest groups in the economy? E I-7S 52. Do you provide funds for the purchase of economic education materials that are requested by the teacher? E I-76 53. In general, must a committee of teachers and/or the school administration approve an economic education publication before it can be used in the classroom? W I-78 54. Do you provide films, filmstrips, and other effective audio and visual aids for use in economic education? E I-79 55. Do you acknowledge the school's responsibility for developing desired economic education materials when they are not available elsewhere? E I-27 56. Have you deve10ped any such materials within your high school during the last two years? * 57. Do you provide necessary facilities and materials for committees that are appointed to develop teaching guides and other aids? E I-80, (I-25) 58. During the school year do you give selected super- visors and teachers some released time to: 59. study the total economic program of the high school? W I-28 126 TABLE 4.--Continued M W Item Checklist No.b Item _ _ RatingC No.d 60. develop economic education curriculum units? W 1-29 61. During the summer months do you hire selected Supervisors and teachers to study and refine the high school's economic education program? W 1-30 62. Does your school hire university specialists to develop needed economic education materials and to assist teachers in the proper use of these materials? W I-52 63. Does your school ever hire university specialists to perform this function in other curricular areas? * 64. Do you encourage private publishers, foundations, and others to provide better high school textbooks and teaching materials in economics? E 1-40 Pre-Service Teacher Training 65. Do you encourage teacher training institutions to establish one or more economics courses which will meet the unique needs of teachers? E II-3 66. Do you encourage teacher training institutions to require every teacher candidate to take one or more courses in economics? W II-4 67. Do you believe that some specified minimum of course work in economics should be required for teacher certification in Oklahoma? W II-S 68. Do you believe that pre-service teacher education should include training in the specific methods of teaching economic concepts? * 69. Do you encourage pre-service teacher training which places emphasis upon case study, problem solving and decision-making learning activities? E II-6 127 TABLE 4.--Continued W m Iteg Checklist No. Item Ratingc No.d __4—4 Upgrading the Economic Understanding of the High School Staff 76. Do you provide for local in-service training programs in economics for teachers and adminis- trators whenever needed? E II-12, (II-l4) 77. If so, do you hire consultant economists and cur- riculum specialists to conduct these programs? W II-ZO 78. Do you award special merit credit to staff members who satisfactorily complete in-service training programs in economic education? W II-lS 79. Do you conduct in-service training programs which include provisions for coooerative wonk.on cur- riculum units in economic education? W 11.16 80. Do you encourage universities to offer special summer classes or workshops for teachers of the separate high school econOmics courses? E II-l8 81. Do you reimburse teachers for a portion of the expense they incur while attending a summer workshop or graduate seminar in economic education at a university? W II-21, II-22 82. Have you viewed ”The American Economy," the national television course in economics this year? W II-28 If so, pleaSe check ONE of the following to indicate the frequency with which you watch the course. 83. .___ view more than 75% of the sessions * 84. ___ view more than 50% of the sessions * 85. ___ view less than 50% of the sessions * 86. view less than 25% of the sessions * 87. If you have recommended the television course to your teachers, please describe briefly how this was done. * TABLE 4.--Continued Item No. Item Teacher Attitudes‘and Instructional Pracgices 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. DO YOU ENCOURAGE YOUR HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS TO: continually improve their competency in pro- viding for economic education in their respective courses? pursue academic work to upgrade their formal qualifications in economics when they lack the academic background which you consider important? become aware of specific economic understandings that can be taught appropriately in their own courses? and in other high school courses? develop and improve resource units in economic education? develop effective visual aids to accompany economic education resource units? make use of role playing, student panels, and other animated learning activities? make use of the radio and/or TV in the study of current economic problems? emphasize the significance of economics in the daily life of the pupil? become familiar with sources of current economic data and supplementary reading materials? de-emphasize the basic textbook through effective use of current supplementary reading materials? help students evaluate the logic and objectivity of published statements and materials? 128 W Checkéist No. 11-29, 11-25, II-26 II-23,(II-24) II-32 II-33 11-34 (II-57, II-S8) (II-59, II-60) II-3S,(II-36) II-39, (II-30) II-4O II-38 (II-52,II-37) II-42,(II-37) II-4l,(II-37) I-9, II-44 II-45, II—46 129 TABLE 4.--Continued 1 Item Checklist No.b Item Ratingc No. lOl. develop in the student an analytical understand- ing of the operation of the American economy and of the economic principles involved therein with- out requiring extensive memorization of detail. E II-47 102. develop student understanding of the distinguish- ing characteristics of competing economic systems? E II-48 103. consider economic understanding a vital requisite for good citizenship? E 11-51 104. develop student allegiance to the American free- enterprise system? E 11-49 105. recognize that the major objective of economic education is to develop the student's ability and inclination to analyze economic issues objec- tively and to weigh carefully the probable results of alternative courses of action? E II-SO 106. direct field trips and field studies which give the student an understanding of applied economic principles in the local economy? w 11-56,11-55 107. develop a file of local community enterprises and resource people that could be utilized effectively in special class activities or projects? E Il-S4,(II-53) a a The evaluative criteria were discussed in Chapter III. bEach item number refers to the respective practice in the principal's questionnaire in Appendix F. CIn this column an asterisk indicates an item which was included to clarify administrative practices, but which is not a rated item from the check- list criteria. A "W" indicates a "worthwhile” practice, and an "E" indicates an "essential" practice. The first digit in this column refers to the punched card division of the checklist in Appendix B. e The number enclosed in parentheses indicates a checklist item which is only similar to the respective practice on the questionnaire. 130 Over-All Performance on the Rated Practices The principals' questionnaire included 35 "essential" practices and 42 "worthwhile" practices. With a weighting of two points for each desig- nated "essential" practice and one point for each ”worthwhile" practice, a principal could attain a possible rating of 70 points for his "essential" practices and 42 points for his "worthwhile” practices. In Table 5, each principal is ranked according to his total score; and the ratings for his "essential" and "worthwhile” practices are specified. A review of the data in this table reveals considerable variation in the number of reported practices among the 44 schools. For their reported "essential" and "worthwhile" practices, the 44 principals attained a combined score of 2,764 points or 56 per cent of the possible 4,928 points. On "essential" practices, they scored 2,030 or 66 per cent of the possible 3,080 points; but on "worthwhile" practices, they attained only 734 or 39 per cent of the possible 1,848 points. The highest single rating for "essential" practices was 66, representing 94 per cent of the possible score; whereas the highest single rating for "worthwhile" practices was 29, representing only 69 per cent of the possible score. The lowest single rating for '’essential" practices was 14, representing only 20 per cent of the possible score; and the lowest rating for "worth- while" practices was 2, representing only 5 per cent of the possible score. The comparatively better performance on "essential” practices might have been anticipated because the jury of authorities had recognized the greater significance of these particular practices.4 Thus, in reporting 4 The role of the jury in the present study is discussed in Chapter III. TABLE 5.--The ranking of the high school principals according to their "essential" and "worthwhile" economic education practicesa 131 Rating ”Essential” ”Worthwhile" Rank Order School No. Practices Practices Total 1.5 XXI 66 23 89 1.5 XLVII 62 27 89 3.0 XLVI 64 23 87 4.0 XXX 56 29 85 5.0 XX 56 28 84 6.0 XLIV 58 24 82 8.0 III 58 23 81 8.0 X 62 19 81 8.0 XVI 58 23 81 10.0 XI 58 20 78 11.0 XV 58 19 77 12.0 XXVIII 50 26 76 13.0 XXIX 56 19 75 14.0 XXXVIII 52 22 74 15.0 VII 52 20 72 16.0 XLIII 50 21 71 17.5 IV 54 16 70 17.5 XLI 52 18 70 20.0 VIII 50 19 69 20.0 XIII 50 19 69 20.0 XXXIX 50 19 69 22.0 IX 52 16 68 24.0 XL 48 18 64 24.0 XLVIII 44 20 64 24.0 XXII 52 12 64 26.0 XXXV 44 18 62 27.5 I 44 17 61 27.5 V 50 ll 61 29.0 XXXIII 46 14 60 30.0 XLV 44 14 58 31.5 XXXI 42 15 57 31.5 XXVII 38 19 57 33.0 XXIII 44 10 54 34.0 VI 40 13 53 35.0 XXIV 32 15 47 36.0 XXXIV 36 10 46 37.0 XXVI 34 10 44 38.0 II 32 ll 43 39.0 XXV 28 8 36 TABLE 5.--Continued 132 "Essential” ”Worthwhile" Rank Order School No. Practices Practices Total 40.0 XVIII 28 7 35 41.0 XXXVI 22 9 31 42.5 XXXII 22 4 26 42.5 XIX 22 4 26 44.0 XLII l4 2 l6 a This table should be read in the following manner: The principals of Schools XXI and XLVII each attained a total score of 89 points for their rated economic education practices and thus tied for first place in the The principal of School XXI made the top score of 66 on his reported "essential" practices while the principal of School XXX made the top score of 29 on his reported "worthwhile” rank-order distribution of scores. practices. 133 their own perceptions and practices regarding the administration of economic education, the Oklahoma principals may have simply reflected a general consensus among educators about the significance of certain adminis- trative and curriculum practices. Presumably, a consensus would be most pronounced on practices which the jury had considered most significant. Another contributing factor may have been the tendency for the rated "essential" items to include the more general administrative practices and perceptions; whereas the rated "worthwhile” practices tended to include a greater proportion of specific applications of economic education that would require the active participation and/or direct involvement of the principal. In order to determine the extent to which the principals' ratings on "essential" practices were accompanied by comparable ratings on "worth- while" practices, the product-moment coefficient of correlation was com- puted according to the following formula.5 = u[zx" +£Y’“ -£(x - ml] - 2(ZX)X (a) 24/ [Nzxz - (zXF-j [NzY’v- (230") r The coefficient of correlation between the principals' "essential" and "worthwhile" practices was found to be .84, which is significant at the .01 level of confidence.6 Thus, there was a significant tendency for the principals who ranked highest on their "essential" practices to rank high also on their "worthwhile" practices. Similarly, the principals who 5 Henry E. Garrett, Statistics in Psychology and Education (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1958), p. 146. 6 Ibid., p. 201. 134 made low ratings in one category tended also to make a comparatively low rating in the other category. Table 2 reveals that the total scores attained by the 44 principals varied from 89 to 16. Except for the lowest ten scores, the drop from highest to lowest score tended to be gradual and involved several tied ranks. A comparison of the twelve highest ranking principals with the twelve lowest ranking principals revealed that the high subgroup scored as well or better than did the lower subgroup on every rated practice. The Relationship Between Selected Background Factors and the Principals' Ratings Ordinarily, it is expected that certain background or external factors will affect the educational practices of the school administrator. Among these factors are the size of school, the financial base of the school, the educational background and experience of the principal, the percentage of time he can devote to curriculum improvement, and the availability of curriculum specialists to assist him. In the present study an attempt was made to determine the possible relationship between each of these factors and the scores attained by the principals for their economic education practices. School Size The average daily attendance in the reporting high schools varied from 500 to 2,204 students.7 After the schools were arranged in rank order according to attendance size, their order was compared with the rank order 7The attendance figures were secured from copies of the "Annual Statistical Report to State Department of Education for the Year Ending June 30, 1963," which were on file in the Finance Division of the Oklahoma State Department of Education. 135 of the principals' scores. A rank-difference correlation coefficient was computed in accordance with the following formula to determine the possible relationship between school size and the scores made by the principals.8 1 z 1- 6X£D p N(Nz - 1) The resulting correlation coefficient was only .21 which was not significant at the .05 level of confidence. Therefore, the relationship between school size and the economic education practices of principals was not significant. The Financial Base Among the school districts included in the present study, the valuation of property per student in average daily attendance ranged from $39,260 in the wealthiest district to $7,338 in the poorest district. After the schools were arranged in rank order according to the property wealth in their district, a rank-difference correlation coefficient was computed to determine possible relationship between this variable and the principals' scores. Interestingly, a negligible negative correlation of minus .19 indicated a tendency for principals in the comparatively wealthy districts to follow no more of the important economic education practices than is done by principals in the less wealthy districts.9 8 Garrett, Op. cit., p. 372. In computing the property valuation per student, the investigator first secured the assessed valuation of each district from the Finance Division of the State Department of Education. Then from a "Real Estate Ratio Study for 1963," provided by the Ad Valorem Division of the Oklahoma Tax Commission, figures were obtained which showed the computed relation- ship of assessed valuation to market valuation of property in each county. With this ratio, it was possible to determine the estimated market valu- ation. For instance, when the assessed property value was reported to be .2112 of actual market value in a particular county, this figure was 136 Workshop Attendance Although 11 principals reported that they had attended an economic education workshop, the dates and locations of these programs indicated that only three principals had attended more than a two- or three-day conference. 0n the rated practices in the questionnaire, the performance of these three principals was appreciably better than the performance of the other respondents. Whereas the combined practices reported by the three principals represented 80 per cent of the possible "essential" practices and 50 per cent of the possible "worthwhile” practices, the combined rated practices of all other principals represented only 65 per cent of the "essential" practices and 39 per cent of the "worthwhile" practices. Thus, the three principals were collectively following 15 per cent more of the "essential” practices and 11 per cent more of the "worthwhile" practices than were the other respondents. On the other hand, the other eight principals who had attended various short conferences on economic education were following no more of the rated economic edu- cation practices than were the principals who had attended no conferences on economic education. Although this data is too limited to serve as the basis of a broad generalization regarding the effectiveness of various types of economic education programs, it does at least raise a question concerning the ultimate impact of only one- to three-day conferences or forums. Obviously, the task of providing for economic education in the high school curriculum is not a simple process; and many high school divided into the assessed valuation of property in a school district of that county to determine the estimated market value of property in that district. This computation served to correct for variations in assess- ment practices among counties. The number of students in average daily attendance was then divided into the estimated property valuation to secure the property valuation per student in each district. 137 principals may feel the need of a firm background in economic education concepts along with a working knowledge of effective procedures for cur- riculum revision before exercising leadership in this area. Collegg Credit in Economics As the various principals had completed from zero to 60 semester credit hours in economics, it was expected that those principals with the most extensive economics background would be most inclined to follow important economic education practices. However, when the hours of economics credit were related to the rated economic education practices, no significant relationship appeared to exist between these two variables. The following tabulation reveals that principals who had completed 12 or more hours of economics were following only a slightly higher percentage of the rated practices than were the other respondents. Percentage of Percentage of No. of Credit Hours "Essential" "Worthwhile" Principals in Economics Practices APractices 8 None 60 42 12 l - 4 69 41 12 5 - 8 65 36 2 9 - ll 63 40 7 12 or more 71 43 3 No response 65 34 ,éygilability of Consultants Among the reporting schools, the number of consultants available to assist the principal varied from zero to twelve; and several schools located near a university reported making considerable use of faculty fI‘Om that institution. In general, there appeared to be very little re- lationship between the availability of consultant specialists and the econmmic education practices of the high school principal. Only those principals who reported the availability of "many” or of ten or more 138 consultants were consistently following a slightly larger number of the rated practices. Perhaps only areas other than economic education tend to be represented when a lesser number of specialists are available. It would seem that in the sizes of schools included in the present study, it should be possible to secure at least one teacher qualified to serve as a specialist in economic education for the school program. In revealing the comparatively high percentage scores of principals who either reported using no specialist or who failed to respond to this question, the follow- ing tabulation indicates that the relative availability of curriculum specialists had only a negligible influence upon the administration of economic education in most of the high schools. Percentage of Rated Practices Followed by Principals Percentage of Percentage of No. of "Essential" "Worthwhile" No. of Specialists Practices Practices Principals Available Followed Followed 9 None 66 39 10 l - 3 60 33 5 4 - 6 61 37 4 10 - 12 71 51 6 "Many" 74 44 10 No Response 68 42 Time Devoted to Curriculum Improvement It was anticipated that those principals who devoted the most time to general curriculum improvement in the high school would also attain the highest ratings on their economic education practices. The following tabulation indicates that this general relationship did exist, but with two notable exceptions. 139 Percentage of Time on Percentage of Rated Practices Followed by Principals No. of Curriculum Principals Improvement "Essential" Practices ”Worthwhile" Practices 15 No Response 58 33 2 l - 9 77 57 9 10 - 19 67 38 8 20 - 29 74 48 2 3O - 39 77 48 l 40 - 49 83 57 7 50 64 37 The lowest percentage scores were attained by the 15 principals who elected not to estimate how much of their time was devoted to curriculum improvement. Interestingly, the two principals who reported devoting less than 10 per cent of their time to curriculum improvement had been actively interested in economic education; and it was the opinion of the investi- gator that these two principals were more conservative than other respond- ents in their answers to this particular question. Thereafter, the percent- age scores steadily increased as each succeeding category of principals reported devoting a larger percentage of time to curriculum improvement. However, the trend was reversed in the last category of principals who reported devoting 50 per cent of their time to the curriculum. It is possible that some of the principals in this last category were consider- ably more liberal than were the other respondents in estimating the time they devoted to the curriculum. Even with the responses as given, there appears to be an appreciable direct relationship between the amount of time the principals devoted to curriculum improvement and the number of important economic education practices they tended to follow. The rank- difference correlation between these variables was .33, which was signifi- Cant at the .05 level of confidence. Certainly, if the principal is to Serve as the professional leader of his school, he must delegate many of the administrative details in his office. 140 Experience in Present Position The principals who scored highest in their reported economic education practices had either one year of experience or from six to ten years of experience in their present position. However, the following tabulation of responses suggests no general relationship between years of experience and performance of important economic education practices; and the differences among categories were not large. Years in Percentage of Rated Practices Followed by Principals No. of Present Principals Position "Essential" Practices "Worthwhile" Practices 7 1 67 38 16 2 - 5 63 36 11 6 - 10 72 44 10 11 or more 63 42 Performance on the Major Aspects of Economic Education Analysis of the principals' responses revealed a considerable varia- tion in the extent to which they were following specific categories of administrative practices. In Table 6 the combined rating of the principals is listed for their "essential" and their "worthwhile" practices in each of the major categories in the questionnaire. Use of Community Resources When expressed as a percentage of the possible score in each cate- gory of the questionnaire, the principals' weakest combined rating was found in their limited use of community resources. According to their reported practices, few of the principals were making a deliberate effort to involve the community in the economic education program of their schools. Only with regard to developing a policy for the proper classroom use of local resource persons did as many as 50 per cent of the principals report taking an active role. Weakness persisted in this area in spite of the 141 TABLE 6.--Performance in the Separate Categories of the Questiannairea 1————— "Essential" "Worthwhile" Combined Practices Practices Practices 0.) U 0) U U u .-4 c: r-d c: H c: .o F. m .o .4 o .o .4 m -.-4 co o -v-1 m U H m U m s m s m a U) U H U) U H m U H o c) m o u m o o w Categories a. < cu 9. <1 o. o. <: a. 1. General Administrative Practices 440 234 53 484 212 44 924 446 48 2. Use of Community Resources 176 46 26 176 30 16 352 76 22 3. Interdisciplinary i ‘ Approaches to Curricu- lum Revision 616 414 67 l 88 24 27 704 438 62 4. The High School Economic Course 0 O 0 { 132 47 35 132 47 36 5. Economic Education Materials ! 616 420 68 264 75 28 880 495 56 i 6. Pre-Service Teacher Training 1 176 114 63 88 51 57 264 165 61 7. Teacher Selectionb - - - - - - - - - 8. Upgrading the Economic Understanding of the High School Staff 176 58 31 220 40 18 396 98 24 9. Teacher Attitudes and J Instructional Practice 880 744 85 396 255 64 1276 999 78 TOTALS - 3080 2030 66 1848 734 39 4928 2764 56 aThis table should be read in the following manner: 0n the rated "essential" items regarding their general administrative practices, the prin- cipals attained a total score of 234 which represented 53 per cent of the possible 440 points. On the "worthwhile" items they attained 212 points, representing 44 per cent of the possible 484 points; and on the combined "essential" and "worthwhile" items their score of 446 represented 48 per cent of the possible score of 924. bResponses in this section indicated that administrators seldom, if ever, required teacher applicants to have more than the minimum economics courses specified by the State Department of Education. 142 fact that the effective use of community resources had been widely advocated in the literature of both economic education and school administration.10 The attained score of 76 represented only 22 per cent of the possible 352 points in this section. Upgrading the Economic Understandinggof the School Staff None of the recommended practices for upgrading the economic under- standing of the school staff were being followed by more than 40 per cent of the principals, and their combined score of 98 represented only 24 per cent of the possible 396 points in this category. Only on the simple practice of encouraging universities to offer special economic classes or workshops for teachers were as many as 16 of the 44 principals making a positive effort. Only 15 principals reported recommending the national television COUrse in economics for their teachers. Twelve schools provided for in-service training programs in economic education, and ten schools awarded merit credits to staff members who participate in these programs. Unfortunately, teachers lacking previous training in economics will probably not have the desire, the confidence, or the ability to integrate economic understandings into their respective subject areas until an adequate in- service program is provided. The Oklahoma Council on Economic Education is dedicated to assisting school administrators with this type of program, and economic education curriculum guides are being planned by the Curriculum Division of the State Department of Education. When and if Oklahoma is 10 See Chapter II, pp. 77-78 and 85-88. 11 Two points were allowed for each "essential" practice and one point for each "worthwhile” practice. The checklist of evaluative criteria is presented in Appendix B and is discussed in Chapter III. 143 successful in reorganizing and upgrading its present system of intermediate units, specialized assistance might be available also from some of these agencies. Teacher Selection The principals were asked to indicate how many semester hours in economics they required of applicants for teaching positions in the follow- ing subject areas: economics, business, social studies, home economics, and "other teaching areas." Although the responses in this section were somewhat incomplete, it was clear that no more than six of the principals would require applicants in at least one teaching field to have quali- fications in economics beyond the minimum requirements specified by the State Department of Education. Since the State Department required only that the social studies teacher responsible for a separate economics course had to complete six semester hours in economics and that the home economics teacher had to complete three hours in economics, the teachers in other areas--including business-~could find employment without having completed any college work in economics. Admittedly, in their selection of teachers, school administrators are limited by the qualifications of applicants who happen to be available. Fortunately, most of the teacher preparation programs in the state do provide at least some economic education for all prospective social studies and business teachers. It would appear, however, that provision should be made in every teacher preparation program for developing an ac- ceptable minimum level of economic understanding for all teachers. More- over, it seems reasonable to expect that prospective teachers in the business and the social studies areas should complete at least six semester 144 hours of economics and that a more comprehensive background in economics should be required of the person who teaches the separate economics course. The responses of the principals in this section confirm that teachers with a strong background in economics cannot be hired until they become avail- able from the teacher preparation institutions. In view of the great dependence upon the minimum economics requirements of the State Department of Education, some strengthening of these requirements could have a beneficial effect upon any teacher preparation program which may be weak in economics. The High School Economics Course Some form of high school economics course was offered by 34 of the 44 responding high schools.12 One respondent expressed the opinion that the separate course represented the only reasonable means of assuring that students will attain a defensible minimum level of economic understanding. As their reason for not offering the course, seven principals reported a lack of student interest in economics; and two principals indicated that no qualified teachers were available to teach the course. Although 29 of the schools offered summer classes in various subjects, only 6 of these schools had offered a summer course in economics. Seven schools had pro- vided some form of adult education programs in economics. Thus, a large majority of the schools were offering the separate economics course during the regular school year although only a few schools were offering economics during the sumer or for adult groups. Obviously, the school-year offering could make the most significant contribution to economic education. 12See Chapter VI for a complete discussion of the economics course in Oklahoma high schools. 145 General Administrative Practices In their general administrative practices, the principals attained a combined score of 446, which represented 48 per cent of the possible 924 points in this category. Their highest ratings were attained on general recognition of the significance of economic education. Eighty per cent or more of the principals acknowledged that economic concepts are relevant to the subject matter of all high school courses and reported that in their counseling program, students were made aware of the importance of economic education and of the professional opportunities in the field of economics. All but 5 of the principals felt that their school board and school super- intendent recognized the need for economic education; and 33 principals (75 per cent of the group) had followed the practice of communicating this administrative concern to their teachers. However, the principals scored less well on their more specific practices. Only 11 principals reported devoting one or more of their faculty meetings each year to the role of economics; and only 6 published ‘bulletins which, on occasion, illustrated effective economic education pro- cedures. Seventeen principals gave special recognition for outstanding economic education accomplishments of teachers; and during the year, 18 schools had received publicity in the local newspaper about economic education activities. In general, fewer than 50 per cent of the principals were utilizing these Specific methods to build appreciation and understand- ing of effective economic education practices. A majority of the principals had not taken an active interest in evaluating the economic education program in their school. Only six principals had made an attempt to determine what economic understandings were being taught in the different subject areas or grade levels of their 146 own school; whereas 16 principals reported they had made a special effort to learn about economic education developments in other school systems. Twenty- three of the principals had not yet identified the objectives of an economic education program. Although in the fall of 1961, the National Task Force Report on Economic Education had been distributed to every high school in the country, only 14 of the principals had read this publication.13 Only 18 of the schools had a policy supporting the objective class- room discussion of controversial economic issues; and perhaps more seriously, only 16 of the principals attempted to help their staff clarify the different backgrounds and goals of various economic groups. It would appear to be especially important that both the administrator and his teachers understand the objectives of organizations which publish supplementary reading mate- rials for the classroom. While some organizations, such as the Joint Council on Economic Education, attempt to consider the problems and viewpoints of all major economic groups, other organizations, such as the Foundation for Economic Education, represent only one major interest group. Certain general guidelines for the treatment of controversial issues can be quite helpful to all teachers in the system. Twenty-nine principals indicated the percentage of their time that was being devoted to curriculum improvement. Computation of the responses revealed that curriculum development was receiving an average of 26 per cent of the time of this entire group but no more than 50 per cent of the time of any single principal. In view of the principal's responsibility as the instructional leader for his building, it would seem appropriate that much 3 National Task Force on Economic Education, Committee for Economic Development, Economic Education in the Schools (New York: Committee for Economic Develfipment, 1961). 147 of the routine office work occupying his time should be delegated to an assistant principal or other persons so that his major attention could be devoted to better accomplishing the ultimate educational objectives of his school. Providigg_for Economic Education Materials In providing for economic education materials, the principals attained a combined score of 495, which represented 56 per cent of the possible 880 points. The principals' scores in this category represented 68 per cent of the possible 616 points on "essential" practices, but only 30 per cent of the possible 264 points on "worthwhile” practices. An apparent strength in this section was the general willingness to make necessary economic education materials available to teachers. Thirty- six of the schools provided funds for the purchase of visual aids and other materials that were requested by teachers. Thirty-one schools reported having a library of economic education materials. Although 39 of the principals acknowledged their school's responsibility for developing the desired economic education materials that are not available, only ten of these schools had developed any such materials within the last two years. In spite of the shortage of adequate materials, only 24 principals have followed the practice of encouraging various publishers to provide better high school textbooks and other economic education publications. Whereas 27 schools encouraged the use of selected materials from the major special-interest groups, only 22 schools had developed a policy regarding the use of these materials; 24 schools required some form of review of economic education materials before they were used in the class- room. 148 While a general policy recommending the objective, analytical dis- cussion of controversial issues seems important, many teachers may feel needlessly restricted by a requirement that every material used in the classroom must first be approved by one or more persons. The incidence of objective discussion and analysis is determined far more by how a reading material is used in the classroom than by the inherent nature of the material itself. However, to preclude the redundant use of the same book in several grades or subject areas, some co-ordination of the use of materials becomes necessary as a school-wide economic education program develops. Of the 32 schools which used teacher committees for developing cur- riculum materials, 26 reported making a special effort to provide the facil- ities and materials needed by these committees in their work. Only eight schools had hired university consultants to help develop economic education materials, although 20 schools had hired university specialists to perform this function in other areas. Only five of the schools had given released time to enable a staff member to work on economic education and only four schools had employed staff members during the summer for this purpose. In general, although they expressed a strong willingness to make the necessary economic education materials available to teachers, the principals were much more inclined to purchase published materials than to commit resources for the development of these materials locally. Obviously, the commercially developed textual materials would usually be of higher quality than locally produced materials. In fact, locally produced materials have often been completely inadequate when a person qualified in economics has not been involved in their development. On the other hand, when essential materials are not otherwise available, educational efficiency would seem to demand that the best possible materials be developed at the local level 149 within the limitations of available resources. Where a school staff does not include a person qualified in economics, the quality of locally produced economic materials might be improved greatly by the consultant services of a qualified economist who would also have a strong interest in the public school program. In some instances it might be feasible for several schools to share the cost of the development of some material for which a common need exists. The Interdisciplinary Approach to Curriculum Revision In their interdisciplinary approaches to curriculum revision, the principals attained a score of 438, which represented 62 per cent of the possible 704 points in this section. Forty-two principals indicated that their curriculum was being con- tinually evaluated and improved; and this group acknowledged the appropriate- ness of involving teachers, pupils, and other community representatives in planning for curriculum change. Thirty-seven principals indicated that they had established the necessary communications channels for transforming recom- mended changes into action programs immediately, and thirty-six principals were following the existing curriculum philoSophy of their high school in developing the economic education program. In spite of the seemingly optimistic nature of the foregoing general practices, only 24 principals encouraged periodic staff revisions of course syllabi to provide for economic education; only 15 principals were making an effort to articulate economic education in the high school with the program in the lower grades; and only 12 principals had made an effort to pinpoint the specific economic concepts that should be emphasized at the various grade levels. Moreover, only three principals had provided for a 150 high school curriculum steering committee to facilitate the interdiscipli- nary approach to economic education. Thus, the more specific, applied practices of the principals seemed almost inconsistent with the positive 'nature of their more general practices reported in this section. It would appear, therefore, that most of the principals supported the general concepts concerning the interdisciplinary approach to curriculum revision but had taken little or no action to implement this approach effectively in economic education. Pre-Service Teacher Training The pre-service section of the questionnaire sought only to determine the perceptions and the promotional efforts of the principals with regard to the most appropriate provision for economics in the teacher preparation program. Thirty-three of the principals were of the opinion that some specified minimum of course work in economics should be required for teacher certification in Oklahoma, and 36 principals felt that the pre-service education should include training in the Specific methods of teaching economic concepts. On the other hand, only 18 principals reported that they had actually encouraged teacher training institutions to require every teacher candidate to take one or more courses in economics; whereas 25 principals llad encouraged the development of one or more economics courses which would meet the unique needs of teachers. Thus, many of the principals had recog- nized the need for including economics in all teacher preparation programs but had not actively promoted this idea. Several principals seemed to share the belief that adequate provisions for economics in the pre-service train- ing programs would be assured only if specified in the teacher certification requirements of the state. Thirty-two of the principals had encouraged more 151 teacher preparation in the use of case study, problem solving, and decision- making activities. Encouraging Teacher Attitudes and Instructional Practices Among the several categories on the questionnaire, the principals' highest combined rating was attained in the section on encouraging teacher attitudes and instructional practices. The principals' score was 999, representing 78 per cent of the possible 1,276 points. Although the ultimate accomplishment of the economic education practices and perceptions listed in this section would depend on the teacher, the degree of encourage- ment from the high school principal could have a considerable influence on the teacher's actions. At least 50 per cent of the principals encouraged their teachers to engage in each of the listed practices except that of developing visual aids for economic education. Only 19 principals encouraged this particular practice. There may have been a fear that teachers would spend a dis- proportionate amount of time in developing visual aids although the value of such aids has long been recognized by educators generally. Perhaps the ideal facility would be an audio-visual department that could develop ef- fective aids for the teacher. Only 22 of the principals had encouraged their teachers to develop and improve economic education resource units. Several of the uncommitted principals may not have become sufficiently involved in the teaching-learn— ing process to recognize the need for resource units, and others may have feared that the units would result in blocks of time being reserved exclu- sively for economics in the various subject areas. However, the teaching plans and materials in a carefully developed economic education resource 152 unit could greatly facilitate the integrating of economic concepts either at appropriate points throughout a course or in separate periods of time that might be allotted to economics during thé school year. In either approach, the objective could be to include only those economic concepts that are relevant to the particular subject area. Therefore, if it is conceded that relevant economic concepts should be integrated into other subject areas, it would seem important that the teacher should carefully plan how this some- what difficult task is to be accomplished; and a good resource unit should be a valuable reference tool for use in the teaching process. Interestingly, 42 of the 44 principals reported that they encouraged teachers to develop student allegiance to the American free-enterprise system. Thus, in spite of the extent to which this practice might border on pure in- doctrination, it was endorsed by more principals than was any other practice in this section of the questionnaire. This particular endorsement tends to label as groundless the occasional criticism that public schools are not attempting to develop student appreciation for the American political and economic system. At the same time, 38 principals encouraged their teachers to develop student understanding of the distinguishing characteristics of competing economic systems; and 40 principals agreed that the major objec- tive of economic education is to develop the student's ability to comprehend and analyze economic issues objectively.» Therefore, along with developing a basic appreciation and belief in the American heritage, the principals recognized the need of also helping the student develop a basic under- standing of economics and of the operation of the American economic system in contrast to procedures followed in competing systems. The students would have frequent experience in analyzing both the accomplishments and the problems of the American economy. With this educational background, the 153 future citizen should not be embarrassed when challenged to explain or defend the merits of the American system. Thirty-nine principals encouraged teachers to emphasize the signifi- cance of economics in the daily life of the pupil although a somewhat smaller number concurred in the specific procedures which should be followed to accomplish this objective. Thirty-five principals encouraged teachers to become familiar with sources of current economic materials and to help students evaluate the logic and objectivity of published statements. Thirty- two principals called for the use of the radio and/or TV; and 28 principals encouraged the use of role playing, student panels, and other animated techniques. Only 31 principals encouraged teachers lacking a minimum background in economics to upgrade their qualifications in this area. Thirty-seven principals encouraged teachers to determine the appropriate economic under- standings for their own courses, and 30 principals further encouraged teachers to become aware of the economic understandings that were being taught in other school courses. Forty principals considered economic understanding to be a vital requisite for good citizenship. The principals attained their highest percentage and absolute rating in this section of the questionnaire; whereas the weakest rating was in the section on the use of community resources. A review of performance on all categories of the questionnaire revealed that the principals tended to score highest on general practices wherein they recognized and endorsed the need for economic education. In general, progressively fewer principals reported being involved when a designated practice became specific in application and necessitated their direct participation. 154 Practices, Perceptions, and Problems Considered Most Important by the High School Principals In the final section of the questionnaire, an attempt was made to identify the economic education procedures and problems which the principals considered most important. Three open-ended questions were posed for the purpose of giving each principal an opportunity to describe his favorite administrative procedures and to explain his conception of the proper role of economic education in the high school. First, the principals were asked to explain their most effective procedures for influencing teacher attitudes and instructional practices. Among the 33 principals who responded to this question, the most common practice was that of cooperative planning through individual conferences and small group or committee discussions. Other practices considered important by five or more of the principals included providing in-service training programs, developing awareness of need for change, and using special consultants. The categorized responses are listed in Table 7. When asked to explain the procedures they had found most effective for introducing and improving economic education in the high school, several principals reported good results from establishing a formal economics course and staffing it with a capable teacher. Seven principals made this recommendation; whereas five favored in-service training programs, and three suggested cooperative development of curriculum materials. Three principals Simply acknowledged the need to provide economic education within the various Subject areas. Although three principals reported no previous efforts to include economics in the curriculum; two of them pledged immediate attention to this objective. Other favored practices of individual principals in- cluded use of daily newspapers, workbooks, films, and the supplementary 155 TABLE 7.--Procedures which the principals had found most effective for influencing teacher attitudes and instructional practices “— f T Favorite Procedures for No. of Principals Recommending Influencing Teacher Attitudes Each Procedurea Arrange conferences with individuals and with small groups 12 Provide in-service training programs 8 Develop awareness of need for change 6 Use special consultants 4 Provide curriculum materials 4 Express interest in classroom activities 2 Provide time for teacher planning periods 2 Miscellaneous 3 No response 11 8The total in this column is greater than 44 because some of the principals recommended more than one practice. materials published by the Council for the Advancement of Secondary Edu- cation. One principal had generated interest by testing the economic understandings of the student body, and another had periodically "released" economic materials through departmental lines. Thirty-one principals declared that economics should be included in the general education program of the high school; and, significantly, no one expressed an objection to this procedure. However, six principals emphasized the need of a separate course in economics; and three declared that the course should be required of all students. In general, therefore, a majority of the respondents relied on 156 in-service training and conferences with individuals or small planning committees as favorite procedures for influencing teacher attitudes and instructional practices.. All of these practices would seem to necessitate the principal's working closely with his staff. For introducing and improv- ing economic education, the two practices receiving the most emphasis were the provision of in-service training programs and the establishment of a properly staffed economics course. Presumably, the economics course has helped develop general staff awareness that economics is an important area of learning. The fact that in-service training was mentioned frequently serves to substantiate the need of reinforcing teacher self-confidence in a new area before moving directly into curriculum change. The principals confirmed the important role of economics in the general education curriculum; however, several emphasized the need of a separate economics course in addition to the integrated approach. The fact that at least 25 per cent of the 44 principals failed to respond to all of the open-ended questions may suggest that several principals had not given much previous thought to these matters. The following question was included to determine the principal's perception of economic education progress in his school: "Of those practices which you would consider essential to a successful economic education program in the high school, approximately what per cent do you believe is generally followed in your school?" The individual responses to the listed options have been itemized on the following page. 157 Percentage of "Essential" No. of Principals Practices Followed 3 10 7 20 10 4O 10 6O 2 80 l 90 11 No response Although there was considerable variation in the attitudes of the individual respondents, 20 of the 33 responding principals felt that their schools were following fewer than 50 per cent of the practices which they would consider essential for a successful program. According to these responses, an average of only 43 per cent of essential economic education practices were being followed in the 33 schools. Interestingly, this average percentage approximated the principals' reported performance of 39 per cent of the rated "worthwhile" practices in the questionnaire; but it was considerably less adequate than their reported performance of 66 per cent of the "essential" practices. It is possible that the principals were most concerned with the kind of specific applications that were emphasized in the weighted "worthwhile" items. In view of the fact that the jury ofauthorities had reported that their schools were following only 52 per cent of the practices which they would consider essential, it is possible that the self-ratings by the Oklahoma principals were somewhat optimistic.14 It is perhaps also significant that eleven principals 4 See page 118, Chapter III. 158 were unprepared to even hazard an estimate of the adequacy of their economic education program. Obstacles to Developing an Effective Economic Education Program From a list of commonly reported problems, the principals were asked to rank only the three most significant obstacles to their developing a more effective economic education program. These problems were to be ranked according to the following scale: 1. Most Significant 2. Secondly Significant 3. Thirdly Significant However, a few respondents inadvertently assigned a code number to every enumerated problem on the questionnaire. Therefore, as a means of ranking the problems in their order of significance to the respondents, a weighting of "4" was assigned to each item which a principal had not checked. This procedure resulted in eachitem being given one of four possible ratings of significance. Interestingly, every item received a rating of "1" from at least one principal. In Table 8, problems are ranked in the order of their total numerical ratings. In addition to the itemized problems, space was provided for prin- cipals to list other obstacles that might have seemed even more important to them. However, most of the responses in this section simply reinforced the significance of certain problems in the prepared list. The problems receiving special mention included inadequate pre-service teacher training, community pressures, lack of public awareness of either the importance or the true nature of economics, the difficulty of teaching economics objectively, lack of student interest, the need of released time and of increased scholarships for teachers, the need of a coordinator for the total program, and the need of scope and sequence guides correlated with other subject areas. 159 TABLE 8.--Economic education problems ranked by the high school principals W m Economic Education Problems Ratinga Inadequate pre-service teacher training in economics 103 Lack of understanding of the importance of economic education and how to get the program started 107 Lack of funds 124 Lack of appropriate leadership personnel for this program 130 No released time for an economic education co-ordinator for the high school 137 Lack of interest from the high school teachers 139 Failure to secure the commitment of all teachers for the economic education program 147 Problems of communication in a large high school 151 Community pressures to teach certain points of view 152 Lack of support from the board of education or from local citizens 157 Lack of support from the school superintendent 160 8A low numerical rating indicates a high order of significance. One principal declared: "So much to teach the child and so little time. Just what is most important to teach? Science? Math? Language? Economics? Reading? What should the curriculum in the high school include?" Another interesting observation was "Much of your questionnaire is ahead of the times. It wasn't until a few years ago (6-8) that the vast majority of Oklahoma high schools offered even a single course in economic education."15 v 15 O O O I O O , The emphasis in the questionnaire was on integrating economics into other subject areas, not on adding a series of economics courses. 160 A principal who placed strong faith in the separate economics course made the following observation: "Since approximately three-fourths of our students . . . take a course in economics and since we are planning eventually to require it of all students, we do not beliEve that any of the above listed factors are applicable." In general, therefore, the principals considered the major problems of implementing economic education to be a lack of leadership personnel, inadequate teacher preparation in economics and a lack of funds for neces- sary in-service training. Because of the competing demands on the high school curriculum, it appeared that some of the principals were having difficulty in determining how economics could be included. Although most educators would tend to disagree with the one principal who felt that the separate economics course would provide the complete solution to the problem of economic illiteracy, the separate course could undoubtedly provide for more economic understanding thanrmnw'students are now securing in the public school. Certainly, the separate course could be more comprehensive if students had experienced properly integrated economic education in their previous classes. It would appear that school administrators interested in economic education should strongly recommend that an adequate preparation in economics be included in pre-service teacher education. In view of the need for eco- nomic education leadership in each high school, it would appear that a valu- able contribution could be made by a person qualified both to teach the separate economics course and to serve as economic consultant for teachers in other subject areas. With regard to the crowded high school curriculum, it does appear that school administrators should give careful consideration to the over-all objectives of education and assign curriculum priorities 161 accordingly. In this respect, the need for economic education has been widely recognized by educators and laymen alike. The Relationship Between Single Practices and the Total Scores Each rated practice was analyzed separately to determine whether its performance would tend to distinguish the highest rated principals from those making the lowest total scores and to determine whether principals following a single practice were likely to follow the other recommended practices. A Comparison of the Performance of the High and Low Ranking Principals on Each Rated Practice As item analysis procedures often call for comparing the performance 16 this was one of the two of the upper and lower 27 per cent of examinees, procedures used to determine the extent to which single questionnaire items discriminated high ranking principals from low ranking principals. Although performance regarding the rated practices listed in the questionnaire was not completely analogous to the right/wrong dichotomy of answers to an objective examination, the pattern of responses to a particular item did reveal the extent to which that item distinguished the upper twelve prin- cipals from an equal number of principals who received the lowest ratings.17 There was a considerable difference between the total scores of the high and the low subgroups. For their rated "essential" practices, the low subgroup attained a score of 354, representing only 50 per cent of the 706 points attained by the high subgroup. On "worthwhile” practices, the low subgroup scored 103 points, which represented only 36 per cent of the high l6 Garrett, op. cit., p. 366 17Twelve principals represented approximately 27 per cent of the total group. 162 subgroup's score of 284. When the scores on all rated practices were com- bined, the low subgroup achieved only 46 per cent of the 990 point score of the high subgroup. To determine the extent to which each rated item distinguished the top twelve principals from the bottom twelve principals in the rank-order distribution, the investigator first determined the percentage of the prin- cipals in each subgroup who were following the respective practice and then computed the absolute difference between the two percentages. This percent- age difference served to indicate the extent to which a single item discrimi- nated the top ranking twelve principals from an equal number in the lower extremity of the distribution. In Table 9, each rated item is ranked according to the percentage difference which it derived. TABLE 9.--Rated questionnaire items ranked according to the percentage difference in performance between the upper and lower subgroups of principalsa m Percentage Percentage of High of Low Difference Item No.b Subgroup Subgroup 1351c 100 8 92 E64 92 '8 84 E65 92 8 84 E49 72 17 75 E80 75 0 75 W9 67 O 67 E36 75 8 67 W40 75 8 67 E107 100 ‘33 67 E37 67 O 67 W93 75 8 67 W94 67 8 59 W66 67 8 59 E6 75 17 58 W88 100 42 58 W89 100 42 58 E91 100 42 58 W8 83 33 50 163 TABLE 9.--Continued Percentage Percentage Rated of High of Low Difference Item No.b Subgroup Subgroup W16 75 25 50 W23 67 17 50 E35 100 50 50 W53 83 33 50 W76 75 25 50 E97 100 50 50 E98 100 50 50 W99 83 33 50 W95 83 33 50 W14 42 O 42 W50 92 50 42 E52 100 58 42 E54 100 58 42 E57 75 33 42 W62 50 8 42 E69 92 50 42 W78 50 8 42 W92 75 33 42 E101 92 50 42 E105 100 58 42 E18 92 58 34 W48 42 8 34 W77 42 8 34 W79 42 8 34 W20 50 17 33 W22 100 67 33 E33 100 67 33 W41 100 67 33 E55 100 67 33 W61 33 O 33 W96 75 42 33 E102 100 67 33 E103 100 67 33 W11 33 8 25 E15 50 25 25 W21 92 67 25 W26 25 0 25 W28 33 8 25 E30 58 33 25 W31 25 O 25 W59 25 0 25 W106 67 42 25 W29 17 O 17 W39 17 O 17 W47 17 O 17 164 TABLE 9.--Continued m _L ___.“ Percentage Percentage Rated of High 1 of Low Difference Item No.b Subgroup Subgroup W60 17 O 17 E100 75 58 17 E104 100 83 17 W19 33 l7 16 W25 33 l7 16 E10 100 92 8 E27 8 O 8 E34 100 92 8 W82 25 17 8 E12 l7 l7 0 E32 100 100 0 E38 25 25 0 W67 75 75 0 W8ld o o o aThis table should be read as follows: One hundred per cent of the 12 principals receiving the highest total scores were following the practice recommended in Item 51; whereas only 8 per cent of the 12 principals re- ceiving the lowest total scores were following the practices recommended in this item. The difference between the percentage scores of the upper and lower subgroups was 92 per cent. bEach number in this column relates to the list of items in Table 4. cAn "E" or "W" signifies that an item was rated "essential" or "worthwhile," respectively, by the jury described in Chapter III. All responses to this item were negative. The figures in Table 9 reveal that the low subgroup of principals never scored higher than the high Subgroup on a single rated item. The top discriminating item in Table 9 involved a difference of 92 per cent between the affirmative responses of the two subgroups, whereas there was no difference between subgroup responses to the last 5 items. On these last 5 items, the responses of both subgroups ranged from a 100 per cent affirmative response on Item 32 to a 100 per cent negative response on 165 Item 81. On each of the 38 items ranking in the upper half of the table, the percentage of affirmative responses fnnnthe high subgroup exceeded the per- centage of affirmative responses from the opposite subgroup by at least 42 per cent. The distribution of the 38 best discriminating items among the major categories of the questionnaire is illustrated in the following tabulation. No. of No. of Major Category Discriminating Rated Items Items Per Catggory General Administrative Practices 6 16 Use of Community Resources none 6 Interdisciplinary Approaches 4 9 The High School Economics Course none 3 Economic Education Materials 9 13 Pre-Service Teacher Education 3 4 In-Service Provisions for Upgrading the Staff 3 7 Recommended Teacher Attitudes and Practices 13 12 Total 38 77 The 38 best discriminating items included more than 50 per cent of the rated practices in the following 3 categories: encouraging teacher attitudes and instructional practices, providing economic education ma- terials, and encouraging emphasis on economics in pre-service education. The category on teacher attitudes and practices included 34 per cent of the discriminating items; whereas none of the best discriminating items were found in the categories on the high school economics course or, the use of community resources. 166 As fewer than 12 principals reported following the recommended prac- tices:for using community resources, the separate items in this category were comparatively weak in discriminating the high and low subgroups. Similarly, although 34 of the 44 principals had provided for a high school economics course, there was not a distinct variation in performance between the opposite subgroups in this category. Except for these two categories, the 38 best discriminating items were considerably more effective than the entire series of 77 items in distinguishing the high and low subgroups of principals. This superior performance is illustrated in the following tabulation which expresses the low subgroup score as a percentage of the high subgroup score; first, on all 77 rated practices and then, on just the 38 discriminating items. A low percentage ratio represents more efficient item discrimination than does a higher ratio. Low Subgroup Score Expressed as a Percentage of High Subgroup Score on Major Categories All Rated Items Best Discriminating_Items General Administrative Practices 51 22 Interdisciplinary Approaches 56 22 Economic Education Materials 36 33 Pre-Service Teacher Education 39 29 In-Service Provisions for Upgrading Staff 20 12 Recommended Teacher Attitudes and Practices 53 43 Whereas the questionnaire included 42 rated "worthwhile" items and 35 "essential" items, there were 21 "essential" but only 17 "worthwhile" items among the 38 best discriminating items. Thus, after the rated 167 questionnaire items had been ranked in terms of their power to distinguish the high subgroup from the low subgroup of principals, a larger number of the "essential" practices were included among the 38 best items than would have been expected solely from the proportional incidence of "essential" and "worthwhile" items on the questionnaire. Performance on Single Items Related to Total Performance on All Rated Items in the Questionnaire In order to determine the extent to which a single item discriminated high scoring or low scoring principals from the total group, the total, com- bined scores were computed for the principals who responded affirmatively and, who responded negatively to each item. These scores were then expressed as a percentage of the possible total score for the affirmative and the nega- tive groups. In this manner, it was possible to establish the extent to which principals following a single practice were likely also to follow the other rated practices. As the questionnaire included items which were rated "essential" as well as items rated "worthwhile," separate computations were made for each of these two categories.18 .For example, computations of all responses re- vealed that the 42 principals who responded affirmatively to Item 104 had attained a score of 997 for their "essential" practices and 728 for "worth- while" practices. The remaining 2 principals attained a score of 18 for "essential" practices and 6 for "worthwhile" practices. To facilitate meaningful comparisons between the various categories, each score was expressed as a percentage of the possible which might have 18As this analysis was exclusively in terms of the percentages of "essential," "worthwhile," and total rated practices being followed, the "essential” items were not given a double weighting. Therefore, all "scores" discussed in this section are unweighted and represent an actual count of practices being followed. 168 been attained.19 For example, the 42 principals who responded affirma- tively to Item 104 also responded affirmatively to 68 per cent of all rated "essential" items and to 41 per cent of all "worthwhile” items in the questionnaire. On the other hand, the 2 principals not following the practice described in Item 104 responded affirmatively to only 26 per cent of all "essential” items and to only 7 per cent of all ”worthwhile" items. There- fore, the 42 principals who responded affirmatively to Item 104 were fol- lowing 42 per cent more of the ”essential" practices and 34 per cent more of the "worthwhile” practices than were the 2 principals who responded negatively.20 When their rated "essential" and "worthwhile" items were combined into one group, the principals who responded affirmatively to Item 104 were following 37 per cent more of the total rated practices than were the principals who responded negatively. Hence, the figure "37” served as the performance index for Item 104. Since this performance index represented the difference between the combined practices of the affirmative and the negative respondents, it did not necessarily represent the performance of a particular individual within either of these groups. In Table 10, the total responses to each rated item were listed along with the percentage of the possible "essential" and ”worthwhile" 19Each principal could have reported following a maximum of 35 "essential" practices and 42 "worthwhile" practices. Therefore, these re- spective figures were simply multiplied times the number of affirmative and negative respondents to each item in order to obtain the possible "essential" and "worthwhile" combined scores which could have been attained by the affirmative and by the negative respondents. 20 For the purpose of this computation, a nonresponse was considered equivalent to a negative response. w a: 3 2 mm mm we i 2 «N 3 3 .1 «0H mH ow mm «m ma «n ma om mm m «0H ma om mm on as on mm mm mq m «0H NH 0N mm mm ms nu cu «N on m «0H ma «H mm Ho Hm mu mm ca m 3 kma ma am on me me On a mm HOH m «NH ma NH mm mm on NB 0H mm mm 3 «ma ma NH om am no as ma Hm mm 3 «ma ma «H mm ac Nm mm mm 0H ow m ma 0H NH om mo mm ow om w mm 3 *wH NH ma mm mm om um om ma co 3 sma NH am on am he mu ad mm mm m st ma Hm mm as No On m cm an m sma Hm ma mm mm we as mH Hm mm 3 ma ma Hm «N Na Na me n mm mm m ma ma ma mm mo om Hm mm o No 3 «ma NH Hm am am am ow mm ma mm m ma 0H mm mm me He so m He am m ma wH om mm 80 em aw oq a on 3 «ma Om ma mm mo mm . Hm mm o «H 3 «am ON mm mm «m on mm Cu «N co m Hm om NH mm no mo Hm on a He 3 emu ma mm mm an no on NH mm Hm m NN 0H om mm mo mm am no H NN m mm ma mm mm Ho No On 0 mm NoH m emu Hm mm mm on «a an m mm mm m «mm «m mm ma as we we a co mod m smm Hm mm mm me «a an m on mm m sum NN am am on ma an 5 mm Hm m «mm on em ma .mq no Om m mm mm m «m Hm om NH mm me me q es mod m mm am Nu m cm _ Ha we N Na «OH m umommumwmwn :mHH£3:uuo3:1yzfimwucvmmm: :mawssnuuo3:. :Hmwuccmmm: :mfiwnazuu03: :Hmfiucommm: oz mow p.02 EooH cmcHoEoo moconcodmmm mucmvcommwm m>Humwmz mocwvaoammm o>HumEuwmw< m>Hummmz can m>wum5uwmm< comauwm mocmEuomuom CH mucouommwa owmucmuuom nmaofiaoh moowuomum Hooch mo owmucooumm m nonfiuooua moody Ham co.oocmauomuod now? voummEoo mooauomua MHwan mo mocmauouuomnu.oH mnmHumwmz mucowaomwmm o>HumEuHmmHumwmz can m>HumEuHmm< comsuom ouomauomuom aH oucmummeO omwudoouom all :4 OmonHom nooHuooum Hmuoa mo ammucuouum E ovuscHucooau.OH mqm<9 171 .O memH cH mEoOH OcHumcHEHuumHO ummn OO mnu OcoEm OmvsHocH omHm mm3 EmuH cm umzu mmumoHOGH GEDHoo mHso :H meHOumm :4 u .H mHan CH mEmuH mo umHH mfiu Ou mmumHmu sasHoo mHsu :H Honfisc nommn .mochcoamou m>HumOmc Ocm m>HumEuHmOm muH cmo3umn mucoumOwHO mommEuoOumO HHmuuo>o unpumouw any Oono>ou uH mmomo non mHOmu mHLu GH :oHuHmoa umuHO CH Omxcmu mono OOH m EmuH .NO was mocmwcoamou o>HumOmc Ocm o>HomEuHmwm may ammsu upn mocmEuouumO GH oucmummeO owmuamuuma m5“ .wmoHoomuO :mHHcazuuoz: vow :HmHucmmmm: OmcHOEoc “Nona co .mmoHuomuO :mHstnouosz :0 OO Ocm mmoHuomuO :HmHocmmmm: so NO mm3 mummwcoammu i>HomOmc mam OSHomEunOm may cmmzumn moCmEpcOumO cH vocwuvaHO mOanhoumO mnu .uuommumnH .mouwuomua :mHH.3£uu03: HHm mo Ocmo pom N Ocm maoHuomuO :HwHucwmmm: HHm up new) umO ON NHdo OJHSQHHOO mums mucmOCOOmmu o>Homwmc N mLu mmmuoxs mmEmuH :mHHISOuLLB: HHm mo ucmc pom HO Ocm mEmuH :HmHusmmmm: Onumu HHm mo uzmo uma OO OGHSOHHOO mums mucmmcommmn m>HumEcHwOm NO mLH .OaHacHHoO mums mHmaHocHua OO wzu man mo NO noan OOHuumuO :HmHOCmmmm: Omumu m O0 OoumHmcou OOH m .02 EmOH "m3oHHom mm cmmu we OHDOOO mHnmu mHnHw u- nu nu .: u: a: :1 OO HO 3 OH- OH- OH NO NN NO NO N NO NO m N O O OO OO HO OO HH OO NO 3 N N. N OO NO OO OO OO O NH O O N O OO OO HO OO HO OH NO 3 O OH O: OO OO NO OO HO O OO 3 O O OH OO OO NO ON NO NH OO m O O OH OO HO HO HN NN NN OO m N O O OO OO OO ON HO O OO 3 N O N OO OO OO ON NN NH OH 3 N O O NO NO OO HN ON OH OH m O O N NO OO OO HN HO OH ON 3 O O O OO OO OO ON OO O ON 3 O N NH OO OO HO OO N NO NN 3 oooamumOOHc :mHHLzsuuo3: :HmHOcmmmm: :mHanzuuo3: :HmHusmmmm: :mHHc3suuo3: :Hmmqummm: 02 no» p.02 EwuH OmcHOEoo mummOcoamom mocovaommum o>HumOmz mucoOcommom o>HumEunO< w>Hqumz Ocm m>HumEuHmO< amo3umm OwsoHHom monuomum Hmuoe mo OOOOCOUHOA mocmEuomumm :H mucouowwHO owmucouumm g «OmscHucooun.oH mAmuao noon. ocean:- ozu cH guano-cu onu HHc mo ucou uon NN nausea-anon guano-cu Oachonuou ONO.H can o.Hoo:uo uonu No ucuu you 0O concenounou H Hoonum souu uuosucou Ochconoou NH mo H-uou ugh vaucooouuuu ouonu-uu coHudosvu unocHosn uchconuou osu ecu val H-uoso-ou ouauHsoHuma on can) ouonu .H Hoosum an .Nuomouqu vouacuHoov can 6H cocoon-cu on) uuosoc0u No ouuuuoouon asks .Nuouou-u vouccaHoov emu aH ouonuc0u OaHvaOO-ou no use-5: QAHA .uHoonoo .chosuso OaHoA use». and ad nuance-u .HoOOuu :OH: scan a« chose-cu aoHuuuavo ouoaH-an HH- No once you NO "usoHHou on noon on OHsoc. oHO-u anH- NN ONOH NO O OO NNN OO OOH ON NOH ON ONH ON OO ON OO HN OON OOH On OO OH HO OOH NN OH oHouou .3 2 2: H 3 m on n 8 n 3 n 3 N 2: N on N 2: n 8 a on n 8 o 2:3 HO Om OO O OOH O OOH N OOH O OOH O OOH N OO o OOH O OOH N OOH H OO O OO o HH>HN OO OO OO O OOH OH OO O OO O OOH O OOH O OOH O ON HH OOH H OO O OO O OO O H>Hx ON ON OO O OOH O OOH O NO N ON H OOH H oO O OO O OOH N OO O OOH O OO O >Hx OO On OO O OO O OO O OO O OOH O OO H NO O OO O OO O OO O OO O OO O >HHN ON OO OO O OO O OOH OH ON O OO O NO O OO O OO OH OOH N 00 O OOH HH OO O HHHHN OOH OO OO O OOH O OOH N OOH N OOH O OOH O OOH H OOH O OOH N oo o OOH O 00 o HHHK OO NH OO O OO O OO H OO H NO N OOH H OOH N OO O OO o OO O OOH N OO O HAN OO ON OO O OO O OOH O OOH O oo O OOH H OO H ON O OO O OO O NO N OOH H Hx NO On OO O OOH O OOH O OOH O OOH O OOH H OOH O ON O OOH H OO O OO O OOH H xHxxx OOH ON OO O OOH O OOH O OOH N OOH H OOH H OOH H OOH O OO o OOH H OOH O OOH H HHH>MKN OO NO OO O OOH O OO O ON N OOH O OOH H OOH O OO HH OOH H OO O OOH OH OO O H>xxx HO ON OO O OOH O OOH N OOH N OOH N OOH H OO O OOH O OO O OO O NO N OOH H >xxx ON HO OO O NO O ON O OO O OO O OOH N OOH N OO N OOH O OO O OOH O OOH H >Hxxx OO NH 00 O OOH O OOH O OO O oo O OO o OOH H OO O OOH H OO O OO H OO O HHHxxx OO OH OOH H OOH N OOH N OO H NO N OOH H OO H OOH O OO O OOH H OOH O OO O HHxxx OOH NO OOH H OOH O OOH O ON O OOH O OOH O OOH N OOH N OOH H OOH H OOH O 06 O Hxxx OO NO OOH H OOH OH NO O OO O OO O OOH O ON N OO OH OOH H OOH H ON O OO O xxx ON ON OO O mm H OOH O NO H OOH O OOH N OO H OOH O OO o OO O OOH O Oo O xHxN OOH NO OOH H OOH N OOH N OOH O OOH O OOH N OOH O OOH O OOH H OOH H OOH O OOH H HHH>NN ON O OO O OOH O OO O mm H OO O OO O OO O OO O OOH H OO O OO O Oo o HH>xx HO ON OO O OO O NO O OO O OO N on H OO H OO O OOH H OOH H OO O oo O H>NH NO HO OO O ON N OO N NO O OO N ON O OOH N OO O OOH H OOH H OOH N OO O >xx HN ON OO O OOH O NO N NO N ON O OOH N OOH N OO O OOH H OO O ON O OO O >Hxx OO ON 00 O OOH O OOH O OOH O OO N OOH N OO o OOH O OOH H OOH H OOH O OO O HHHKN OO OO OOH N OO N NO O OOH O OO OH OOH N OOH O ON NH OO o OOH N OOH O OO o HHKN ON OO 00 O OO O OO N NO O OO H OOH H ON O OOH OH OOH N OO H OO O OOH H Hun NO OO OO o OOH O OO O HN O ON O OOH N OOH O OO NH OOH H OOH H OOH O OOH H xx OO OO OO O OOH OH OOH O HN O OO O OOH N OO O OO O OOH H OO H OOH N oo 0 Huh OO ON OOH H OOH O OOH O OOH O OOH N OO O OO H OO O OO o OO O OOH O co 0 HHHDN OO ON OO O OOH O OOH O NO N OOH N OOH H OOH N OOH O OOH H OO o OOH O Oo o H>u OO OO OO O OOH O OOH N OOH O OO O NO N OOH O OOH OH OOH N OOH N OO OH OOH H bu OO OH OO O OOH N mm H OOH N OO O OOH H OO O OO N OOH H OO O OO H 00 O HHNn OO On 00 O OO O OO O OO O OO N OO O OO O OO O OOH H OO o NO O Oo 0 Nu HO ON OO O OOH N ON O OOH O OOH O OOH N OOH O OO O OOH H OO O OO N OOH H N OO HH OO O OO N OOH N ON H 00 O OO O OOH H OO O OO O OO o NO N OO o NH NO NO OOH H OOH O ON O OO O OOH O OOH H OOH O OOH N OOH H OO O OO O OOH H HHHp ON OH OO O OOH N OOH N NO N .OOH N OO o OOH H OO O OOH N OOH H ON n OOH H HH> ON OH 00 O OOH N OO H OOH N OOH N OO O OOH N OOH O OO o OO O OOH N oo o H> OO OH 00 O OO N OoH N NO N OOH H OO H OO O OO O OO O OO o OO H Oo o 3 HO NO 00 O OOH OH OOH O OOH O OOH O OOH N OO O OO O OO o OO O OOH N oo O OH OOH NN OO O OOH O OOH O OOH O OOH N OOH H OOH O OOH N OO o OO o OOH n 00 o HHN NO On OO O OOH O OOH O OOH O OOH N OOH H OOH O ON N OO O OO H OOH O OOH H NH OO NH O: o OOH O OOH N OOH N OO O OO H OOH H OO O. Oo o oo O NO N oo o H H .o- H .o: H .0: N .0: H .o: R .0: fl .02 H .62 H .0: u .0: N .0: x .0! on 5.0: m. l.. was 31.. o I”... m A. u alwl 3.. o. w". H. mm mu .4 u m 3 mp ... m u w m .. .... u u m m n a .. .. I I .l I n I fl 1. fl 0 I v! 1' I 3 n. a I. o 3 m I.“ s m. I a I w m 1: m .. .. . n u a a .. m. m ... a 0 I I I I n w I u o .4250- .Ho: no one». no.3... 2.3:» .5 Iowa vegan-cu on: 9.3.0:» no once-.09»!— vsc his 05.-.: mg 187 economic topics; in Part B, the teacher reported the extent to which he was utilizing designated teaching methods and materials to develop economic understanding; and in Part C, the teacher reported his practices, percep- tions, and opinions regarding economic education. The coding for Part A had been used successfully by Lebeda in a study 4 After the responding of consumer education in Iowa high schools in 1955. teacher had listed the course in which he felt he was making the greatest contribution toward economic education, he was asked to indicate the degree of emphasis he was giving to each of 27 designated economic topics, which were presented in checklist form. A checkmark under the coded response, "Have a Planned Unit," indicated that at least one class period was being devoted to a particular economic topic; whereas the alternative coded re- sponses represented lesser emphasis as follows: "Planned as Part of Other Unit," "Little or No Planned Effort," and "Does Not Apply to the Course I Teach." The economic topics listed in Part A were carefully selected from the recommendations made by the National Task Force on Economic Education in 5 and from the results of the study by the Council for the Advancement 1961 of Secondary Education in 1956.6 All of the 14 major categories of economic understanding recommended by the latter study were included because the 4Agnes Lebeda, "An Analysis and Comparison of Consumer-Economic Education Practices Among Subject Areas in the Iowa Public Secondary Schools" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1955). 5Committee for Economic Development, Economic Education in the Schools (New York: Committee for Economic Development, 1961). 6 Council for Advancement of Secondary Education, Key Understandings in Economics (Washington 6, D. C.: Council for Advancement of Secondary Education, 1956). 188 authors had considered ". . . the omission of any one of these categories [E0 bé7 an unconscionable neglect of a basic area that would be incompatible with the demands of an-education for economic literacy.”7 The general format of Part B had been used successfully by the Joint Council on Economic Education for a national survey conducted in 1958. The over-all purpose of this section of the questionnaire was to determine the extent to which teachers were varying teaching methods and materials to develop economic understanding. Many educators had emphasized that such variation was very important.8 Part C of the teacher's questionnaire included general informational items along with a selection of the rated "essential" and "worthwhile" items that had been recommended by the jury of authorities and that were subse- quently used in the principal's form of the questionnaire.9 Table 12 identifies those rated items that were included in Part C and relates each of these items to the same or similar criterion that had been listed in the principal's form.10 7Ibid., p. 10. 8 Methods of teaching in economic education were discussed in Chapter II, pp. 60-64. 9The economic education practices rated by the jury of authorities were discussed in Chapter III, and the questionnaire form for the principals was discussed in Chapter IV. 10 In order to provide for the aforementioned Parts A, B, and C in a questionnaire that teachers would be able to complete in no longer than 30 to 40 minutes, the investigator found it necessary to include only represent- ative items from the principal's form. Nevertheless, almost every rated item in the principal's questionnaire was at least represented in the teacher's questionnaire. In general, the rated practices regarding economic content or economic teaching methods and materials were included in Parts A and B, respectively. 189 TABLE 12.--Items in Part C of the teacher's questionnaire cross-classified with items in the principal's questionnairea Teacher's Principal's Item No.b ' Item Ratingc Item No.d’e 7. Have you read the 1961 National Task Force Report entitled Economic Education in the Schools? W 25 8. Have you viewed 20 per cent or more of the sessions of the 1962-63 CBS television course, "The American Economy"? W 82 10. 11. 12. 13. l4. 16. 17. 18. 19. Do you participate in curriculum planning in your school? Are you aware of any significant economic edu-' cation developments in other school systems across the country? Do you know what economic concepts are being taught in other teachers' courses in your high school? Have you analyzed your course to determine what and where economic concepts can be taught best? Do you feel that your textbook effectively pre- sents the economic topics that are related to your course? For classroom use, do you select supplementary reading materials which, collectively, present the viewpoints of business, labor, and agricul- ture groups? Do you help your students evaluate the logic and objectivity of economic statements? Can you distinguish the different economic view- points of such organizations as The Farm Bureau, The Farmers Union, The AFL/CIO, and The National Association of Manufacturers? Have you developed a file of local community enterprises and resource people that can be utilized effectively in special class projects? Do you know of differences between the edu- cational philosophy of the Joint Council on Economic Education and that of the Foundation for Economic Education? (32, 34, 36) 92 (12) 91 (38) (99) 51 100 23 107 (28, 29) 23 190 TABLE 12.--Continued Teacher's Principal's Item No.b Item Ratingc Item No.d’e 23. Do you agree that economic problems, issues, and concepts are relevant to the subject matter of all high school courses? W 10 (92) 24. Do you feel that your principal and your school superintendent support the viewpoint that eco- nomic concepts can be taught in all courses? E (10, 33) 25. Do you feel that an elective economics course, should be offered in the high school if there are enough interested students to justify staffing the course? W (41, 47) 26. Do you consider economic understanding a vital requisite for good citizenship? E 103 27. Do you believe that the major objective of economic education should be to develop the student's abil- ity and inclination to analyze economic issues objectively and to weigh the probable results of alternative courses of action? E 105 (15) 29. Should colleges and universities develop one or more special economics course(s) to meet the particular needs of prospective teachers? E 65 31. Do you believe that one person should be desig- nated "Coordinator of Economic Education" for all subject areas of the high school? E 117 32. Do you feel that your high school principal is seriously interested in the effectiveness with which economic topics are taught in your course? E (18, 6, 10, ll) aThe principal's questionnaire was discussed in Chapter IV. bThe numbers in this column refer to the respective items in the teacher's questionnaire, included in Appendix H. The item numbers missing from the series represent nonrated items that were included only for pur- poses of general information and clarification. Most of the nonrated items were also related to specific items in the principal's questionnaire. CIn this column, a "W" indicates an item rated ”worthwhile," and an "E" indicates an item rated "essential" in cooperation with a jury of author- ities described in Chapter III. dThe item numbers in this column refer to the respective items in the principal's questionnaire, included in Appendix F. eIn this column, a number enclosed in parentheses is similar, but not identical to the designated item on the principal's questionnaire. 191 Over-A11 Performance on the Rated Practices For his response to each of the 27 economic topics listed in Part A, the teacher was requested to check one of the following categories, which were given a weighting of 3, 2, 1, and 0, respectively: Have a planned unit Planned as part of other unit Little or no planned effort Does not apply to the course I teach In the instructions for Part A, a "planned unit" was defined as one class period or more in length. A teacher could thus attain a score of 81 on Part A if he devoted at least one class period to each of the 27 topics.11 Each item in Part B was coded so that the teacher could simply check either "frequently," "occasionally," or "seldom" to indicate the extent to which he was utilizing the designated economic education teaching procedures or supplementary materials. With a weighting of 3 points for each practice followed "frequently;" 2 points for, "occasionally;' and 1 point for, "seldom;" a teacher could attain a possible score of 69 in Part B for max- imum use of the designated teaching methods and materials. Part C of the teacher's questionnaire included 11 rated "essential" practices and 9 "worthwhile" practices. With a weighting of 2 points for each "essential" practice and 1 point for each "worthwhile" practice, a teacher could attain a possible score of 31 for the practices and perceptions he reported on this section of the questionnaire. 11The weighting of responses in Parts A and B provided only a rough approximation of performance on the individual items and on each of these major sections of the questionnaire. It should not be assumed, for instance, that having "a planned unit" for teaching an economic topic is necessarily worth precisely one point more on a four-point scale than is planning for teaching an economic topic incidentally in conjunction with a unit on some other topic. However, the coded responses to each item did represent dis- tinct, progressive degrees of emphasis which would, in turn, deserve in- creased numerical ratings. The reader may prefer simply to interpret the function of each individual or combined score as that of establishing the relative degree(s) of performance on the given continuum. 192 As Parts A, B, and C of the teacher's questionnaire represented dis- crete areas which could not be combined logically into a single rating, weighted average ratings were computed separately for each section. By dividing the total number of teachers into the sum of the individual scores, it was possible to derive a weighted average rating for each high school or other specified group for its performance on Part A, on Part B, and on Part C. In this manner, it was possible to rank responding high schools according to their respective weighted average score in each section. The ranking of the teachers--by high school--is revealed in Table 13. To insure that responses from the individual schools would be handled in strict confidence, each cooperating school was assigned an identifying numeral which was used consistently throughout the study to refer to the over-all performance of teachers in that school. For purposes of comparison, all high schools were rated separately even though the Oklahoma City and Tulsa school districts included several separate high schools. TABLE 13.--Schools ranked according to the weighted average rating of their responding teachers on the three major categories of the questionnaire8 W Methods and General Practices Topics Taught Materials Used and Perceptions Rank Rank Rank School Orderb W.A.R.",d School Order W.A.R. School Order W.A.R. XXVII 1 46.6 XXVII 1 40.3 I 1 18.7 I 2 33.2 XLII 2 37.1 XLII 2 18.6 XLII 3 32.6 XIII 3 37.0 XIII 3 18.4 XIII 4 28.6 I 4.5 35.7 XVI 4 18.1 VII 5 28.3 XXXIII 4.5 35.7 XXV 5 18.0 II 6 27.9 X 6 35.4 XXVII 6 17.3 XVIII 7 27.3 XXV 7 35.1 XXXIII 7 17.1 IX 8 26.1 XXIII 8 34.3 X 8 16.6 VIII 9 25.7 VIII 9 33.2 XXIII 9 16.4 VI 10 25.6 XX 10 32.6 VII 10 16.3 X 11 25.3 XLV 11 32.2 VI 11 16.0 XVI 12 25.1 VII 12 a 32.1 XX 12.5 15.5 XXIII 13 24.9 ,XXXV 13.5 31.5 XVIII 12.5 15.5 XXXIX 14 24.8 XLI 13.5 31.5 IX 14.5 15.4 193 TABLE 13.--Continued I; Methods and General Practices Topics Taught Materials Used and Perceptions Rank b c d Rank Rank School Order W.A.R. ’ School Order W.A.R. School Order W.A.R. XXV 15 24.7 XVIII 15 31.3 XXXVIII 14.5 15.4 XXXV 16 23.9 IX 16 31.1 XL 16.5 15.2 IV 17 23.4 XXVI 17 30.8 XLVIII 16.5 15.2 XLV 18 23.2 XL 18 30.3 II 18 15.1 XXIV 19 22.3 XXXI 20.5 30.2 XXXV 19 15.0 XXXVI 20 22.2 XXXIX 20.5 30.2 XLVII 20 14.9 XXXIII 21 22.1 XLIII 20.5 30.2 XXIV 21 14.8 XXX 22 22.0 XXII 20.5 30.2 XXXVI 22.5 14.5 XXXVIII 23 21.9 XXXII 23 30.1 XLIII 22.5 14.5 XXII 24 21.6 IV 24 29.6 1 IV 24.5 14.3 XLVIII 25.5 20.8 II 25 29.5 XXXIX 24.5 14.3 XXI 25.5 20.8 XXIV 26 29.4 'VIII 26 14.2 XLI 27 19.9 XXXVIII 27 29.2 XLV 27 14.1 XX 28 19.4 XXXVI 28 28.7 XXXII 28 13.7 XXXII 29 19.3 XV 29 28.4 III 29.5 13.6 XXXI 30 19.1 XLVIII 30.5 28.0 XXI 29.5 13.6 XI 31 19.0 XLVI 30.5 28.0 XLVI 31.5 13.3 III 32.5 18.8 VI 32 27.9 XV 31.5 13.3 XLVI 32.5 18.8 XXI 33 27.6 XXVI 33 13.2 XLIII 34.5 18.4 XVI 34 27.2 XXXI 34 13.1 XLVII 34.5 18.4 XXX 35 26.9 XXX 35 12.7 XXVI 36.5 17.7 III 36 26.7 XIX 36 12.6 XXXIV 36.5 17.7 XXIX 37.5 25.4 XXII 37.5 12.5 XL 38 17.6 XXVIII 37.5 25.4 XXIX 37.5 12.5 XV 39 16.8 XIX 39 24.5 XLIV 40 12.1 V 40 16.5 XXXIV 40 23.1 XI 40 12.1 XXVIII 41 15.9 XLVII 41 22.6 XXVIII 40 12.1 XXIX 42 15.8 XI 42 21.8 V 42 11.9 XLIV 43 15.1 XLIV 43.5 21.2 XLI 43 11.0 XIX 44 14.6 V 43.5 21.2 XXIV 44 10.9 8This table should be read in the following manner: The responding teachers from school XXVII attained the highest weighted average rating for their reported practices on all three major sections of the questionnaire. Their first- place score on topics taught was 46.6; on methods and material used it was 40.3; and on general practices it was 18.7. bThe ranking of high schools in this table is based upon the weighted average rating computed in terms of the total number of respondents from each high school. cThe abbreviation W.A.R. signifies the weighted average rating of the respective school. dSince the possible score was different for each of the three major categories, the weighted average ratings are comparable only within each category. 194 Nonrespondents and the Interschool Ranking Although a response was received from 77 per cent of the teachers who were surveyed in the 44 cooperating schools, the percentage of responses from a few of these schools was comparatively low. If it is assumed that the teachers who returned a completed questionnaire were generally more interested in economic education than were the teachers who did not respond, one would further conclude that a school's weighted average rating (per responding teacher) probably overstates its emphasis on economic education if a comparatively small number of its teachers responded to the survey. The data in Table 14 reveal the ranking of the high schools when (1) weighted average ratings were based on the number of responding teachers only, and (2) when weighted average ratings were based on the total number of teachers being surveyed in the respective high schools. TABLE l4.--A comparison between high school ranking when based upon responding teachers only and when based upon all teachers in the subject areas surveyed General Methods and Practices and Topics Taught Materials Used Perceptionsc School No. (1)8 (2)b (1) (2) (1) (2) I 2 2 4.5 6 1 4 II 6 3 25 12 18 6 III 32.5 16 36 14 29.5 8 IV 17 15 24 21 24.5 22 V 40 44 43.5 42.5 42 42 VI 10 13 32 27 ll 18 VII 5 10 12 20 10 16 VIII 9 5 9 2 26 15 IX 8 36 16 39 14.5 39 X 11 12 6 7 8 10.5 XI 31 39 42 42.5 40 43 XIII 4 31 3 34 3 33 XV 39 24 29 11 31.5 17 XVI 12 4 34 15 4 2 XVIII 7 6 15 13 12.5 12 XIX 44 34 39 29.5 36 27.5 XX 28 21 10 9 12.5 8 XXI 25.5 29 33 33 29.5 32 195 TABLE 14.--Continued W m General Methods and Practices and School No. Topics Taught Materials Used PerceptionsC (1)"=1 (2)b (1) (2) (1) (2) XXII 24 18 20.5 17 37.5 27.5 XXIII 13.5 11 8 4 9 5 XXIV 19 27 26 29.5 21 29.5 XXV 15 28 7 26 5 23.5 XXVI 36.5 43 17 38 33 40 XXVII 1 41 l 44 6 44 XXVIII 41 25 37.5 18 40 19 XXIX 42 37 37.5 35 37.5 34 XXX 22 19 35 25 35 29.5 XXXI 30 14 20.5 3 34 14 XXXII 29 23 23 16 28 21 XXXIII 21 38 4.5 36 7 35 XXXIV 36.5 33 40 37 44 37 XXXV 16 9 13.5 8 19 8 XXXVI 20 17 28 22 22.5 20 XXXVIII 23 8 27 5 14.5 3 XXXIX 13.5 7 20.5 10 24.5 13 XL 38 35 18 28 16.5 31 XLI 27 32 13.5 31.5 43 38 XLII 3 l 2 l 2 1 XLIII 34.5 32 ' 20.5 24 22.5 25 XLIV 43 40 43.5 40 40 36 XLV 18 20 11 19 27 26 XLVI 32.5 26 30.5 23 31.5 23.5 XLVII 34.5 22 41 31.5 20 10.5 XLVIII 25.5 42 30.5 41 16.5 41 aThe columnar heading "(1)" signifies the high school ranking when the weighted average rating was based on the number of responding teachers only. bThe columnar heading "(2)" signifies the high school ranking when its weighted average rating was based on all teachers in the subject areas surveyed; i.e., the school's combined score for reported instructional practices was divided by the total number of its teachers—-inc1uding nonrespondents--in the areas surveyed. The figures in this column were based upon the assumption that nonrespondents were contributing little or nothing to the economic education program. cThis table should be read as follows: when the weighted average rating of the instructional practices in SchooI I was based upon the number of re- sponding teachers, School I ranked in second position on "topics taught;" in 4.5 position (tied with School XXXIII) on "methods and materials used;" and ' in first position on "general practices and perceptions." When the weighted average rating was based upon the total number of its teachers in the areas surveyed, School I ranked in second, sixth, and fourth positions, respectively. 196 The question regarding performance characteristics of nonrespondents is inevitable whenever responses are received from fewer than 100 per cent of the persons included in a survey, and it is particularly important that this problem be recognized in interschool ratings whenever there is variation in the percentage of teachers who respond from the respective schools. The comparison in Table 14 suggests that an overly optimistic weighted average rating may have been computed for those schools from which a less-than-average percentage of teachers responded. The investigator was especially interested in the finding that School XXVII attained a comparatively high weighted average rating even though completed returns were received from only 20 per cent of the teachers being surveyed in that school. It appeared, therefore, that possible selectivity of respondents may have given an upward bias to the weighted average rating of School XXVII. Such a bias would serve, further, to penalize the comparative rating of schools from which more than 90 per cent of the teachers responded to the survey. Since follow-up procedures beyond those described in Chapter I were not feasible in the present study, the data in Table 14 were included to identify those few schools which may have attained a comparatively high weighted average rating because a possibly select group of their teachers responded. Such selectivity may have re- sulted quite indirectly and unintentionally in the extent to which the principal encouraged all teachers to complete a questionnaire. With regard to "topics taught," Table 14 reveals that Schools XXVII, IX, XIII, XXXIII, and XLVIII would have suffered an appreciable drop in rank-order standing if their weighted average rating had been computed on the basis of all teachers in their respective subject areas rather than on the basis of only the responding teachers. On their teaching "methods and 197 materials," Schools XXVII, XXXIII, XIII, IX, III, XXXVIII, and XXVI would have suffered an appreciable drop in rank order; and on the ”general practices and perceptions" category, Schools XXVII, XIII, XXXIII, XLVIII, IX,III, and XXVIII would have had an appreciably lower rank-order position. School Size and School Finance Related to the Interschool Ranking Ordinarily, it is expected that certain background or external factors will affect the educational practices of teachers. Among these factors are the size of the school and the financial base of the school. The rank-difference correlation of minus .29 between school size and the weighted average ratings on Part A was not statistically significant. Neither was the rank-difference correlation of minus .29 between school size and school ratings on Part B significant. However, there was an interesting rank-difference correlation of minus .34 between school size and the school ratings on Part C of the question— naire. This correlation was significant at the .05 level of confidence. In general, therefore, the teachers in the smaller schools tended to follow more of the recommended practices than did the teachers in the larger schools. As the larger high schools were generally found in the wealthier school districts, it was expected that similar rank-difference correlations would be found when school ratings were related to property valuation per child in the respective districts. The rank-difference correlation on Part A was minus .23; on Part B, it was minus .08; and on Part C, it was minus .20. None of these correlations were significant at the .05 level of confidence Thus, it appeared that the wealthier school districts were not making effective use of their greater financial resources to develop effective economic education programs. The consistent negative correlations, both 198 here and in the comparison involving school size, suggest that certain problems, such as that of inadequate communication, may be handicapping the development of economic education in the larger schools.12 Teaching Performance Within the Major Categories of the Questionnaire The sum of the weighted average ratings of all 44 schools represented 28 per cent of the possible (combined) score on Part A; 43 per cent, on Part B; and 47 per cent, on Part C. A further breakdown of the scores on Part C revealed that the teachers attained 51 per cent of the possible points for their "essential" practices and 35 per cent of the possible points for their rated "worthwhile" practices. The average of the 44 schools' weighted average ratings was 22.5 on Part A, 29.8 on Part B, and 14.6 on Part C. On Part A, the best school rating represented 58 per cent of the possible score; whereas the lowest rating represented only 18 per cent of the possible score. 0n Part B, the ratings among the individual schools ranged from 58 per cent to 31 per cent of the possible score; whereas the range on Part C was from 60 per cent to 35 per cent of the possible score. Although the best individual school rating on each of the three major parts of the questionnaire represented about the same percentage of the designated practices, most schools sccred less well on Part A than on Parts B and C. This trend would be expected as the questionnaire survey included teachers of most subjects in the high school. Thus, teachers in many 12When teachers' performance was compared with the average size of their classes in each of the 44 high schools, the rank-difference coefficient of correlation was minus .06 on Part A; .16 on Part B; and .11 on Part C. None of these correlations were statistically significant at the .05 level of confidence. In general, therefore, the relationship between class size and teaching performance was not significant on any part of the question- naire. 199 subject areas were less inclined to teach a majority of the designated topics than they were to follow a majority of the other recommended practices. Occasionally, a teacher would indicate that none of the economic topics were relevant to his course; but he would then complete those items in Part C which related to general practices and perceptions regarding economic education. Product-moment coefficients of correlation were computed to determine the degree of relationship between the schools' scores on different parts of the questionnaire. All of the coefficients of correlation between parts were significant at the .01 level of confidence. The correlation was .74 between scores on Parts A and B; .74 between Parts A and C; and .72 between Parts B and C. Therefore, a school which scored high on one part of the questionnaire usually scored high on the other parts; or, conversely, a low score on one part was usually accompanied by comparatively low scores on the other parts. Similarly, the coefficient of correlation between scores for rated "essential" and ”worthwhile" practices on Part C was .94, which was highly significant at the .01 level of confidence. Economic Topics In Part A, the teacher was first asked to write the name of the one course in which he felt he was making the greatest contribution to economic education. Then he was asked to indicate, in the coded response columns, the emphasis he was giving to each of the 27 designated topics. Although 54.3 per cent of the responses were checked in the coded section, "Does Not Apply to the Course I Teach;" 7.9 per cent of the responses were in the section, "Have a Planned Unit;" 17.6 per cent were in the section, "Planned as Part of Other Unit;" and 20.2 per cent were in the section, "Little or no Planned Effort." Therefore, 25.5 per cent of the 37,152 responses in Part A 200 were found either in the section, ”Have a Planned Unit," or in the section, "Planned as Part of Other Unit."13 In responding to each of the 27 desig- nated topics, from 39 to 274 teachers reported having a separate unit for the study of a particular topic. Personal economic topics received the greatest attention; whereas, surprisingly, the topics on international economics received the least attention. The extent to which various topics were emphasized in exclusive economic units is shown in the following tabu- lation of the 8 most popular and of the 8 least popular topics. Rank No. of Teachers with Order Topic a Planned Unit 1 Choosing a Vocation 274 2 Personal Money Management 201 3 Money, Credit, and Banking 186 4 Conservation of Natural ResourCes 183 5 Forms of Business Organization 180 6 Communism, Socialism, and Capitalism 175 7 Principles of Taxation 160 8 Planning for Personal Economic Security 151 20 Economic Analysis--A Science 70 21 The Problem of Economic Scarcity 66 22.5 Economic Growth . A _ 50 22.5 ‘Fiscal Policies 7 50 24 Determinants of National Income 45 25 Trends and Components of GNP 43 26.5 Underdeveloped Countries 39 26.5 International Trade 39 As would be expected, the teachers generally preferred to teach economics as a part of other units rather than in separate units devoted exclusively to this subject. The extent to which instruction in various economic topics was planned as part of other units is shown in the follow- ing ranking of the 8 most popular and the 8 least popular topics that were taught in this manner. 3The number of responses to all items in the teacher's questionnaire are listed in Appendix I. 201 Rank No. of Teachers Including Order Topic Topic with Another Unit 1 Choosing a Vocation 416 2 Conservation of Natural Resources 312 3 Incentives, Competition, and Markets 307 4 Characteristics of the American Economic System 276 5 The Distribution of Income 271 6 Money, Credit, and Banking, 265 7 Communism, Socialism, and Capitalism 260 8 Principles of Taxation and Kinds of Taxes 258 20 Forms of Business Organization 209 21 Underdeveloped Nations 207 22.5 Economic Analysis--A Science 199 22.5 Trends and Components of GNP 199 24 Determinants of National Income 197 25.5 Government Fiscal Policies 192 25.5 International Trade 192 27 Monetary Policies of the Federal Reserve System 172 It appeared that an appreciable contribution to economic education was being made only by those teachers who were teaching economic topics either in a separate "planned unit" or as part of other units in the respec- tive courses. Therefore, the responses in these two categories were combined in the following tabulation to provide a broad view of the extent to which the 1,376 responding teachers were giving this much emphasis to each of the 27 topics.14 Teachers Emphasizing Topic Rank » Either in Special Unit or Order Topic as Part of Other Units 1 Choosing a Vocation 690 2 Conservation of Natural Resources 495 3 Money, Credit, and Banking 451 4 Communism, Socialism, and Capitalism 435 5 Personal Money Management 425 6.5 Principles of Taxation 418 6.5 Incentives, Competition, and Markets 418 8 Planning for Personal Economic Security 402 9 Forms of Business Organization 389 10 Fundamental Characteristics of the American Economic System 375 14 The entire discussion and analysis in Lebeda's consumer economic study was based upon this method of tabulating the responses. Lebeda, op. cit., p. 33. 202 Teachers Emphasizing Topic Rank Either in Special Unit or Order Topic as Part of Other Units 11 Composition, Trends, and Problems of the Labor Force 356 12 Labor Unions 351 13 Distribution of Income 344 14 Economic Concentration and Monopoly Issues 339 15 Government Regulation Issues 331 16 Economic Fluctuations 323 17 The Farm Problem 317 18 Savings and Investment 316 19 The Problem of Economic Scarcity 310 20 Economic Growth 271 21 Economic Analysis--A Science 269 22 Monetary Policies of the Federal Reserve System 257 23 Underdeveloped Nations 246 25 Trends and Components of GNP 242 25 Determinants of National Income 242 25 Government Fiscal Policies 242 27 International Trade 231 Although 690 teachers reported a deliberate effort to include some instruction on the choice of a vocation, only 375 were making an appreciable effort to help students understand the composition and trends of the national labor force. In view of increasing technological change and the resultant shifts in employment opportunities, it would seem that a discussion of voca- tions would hardly be sufficient without considerable attention being devoted to significant trends among the major areas of employment. Similarly, 451 teachers planned for instruction in money, credit, and banking; but only 257 teachers were including instruction in the monetary policies of the federal reserve system. The influence of the federal reserve system upon the supply of money in the economy is of such significance that complete omission of its vital role could result in a superficial understanding and even mis- information regarding the function of money, credit, and banking. Although 418 teachers were including instruction about taxation, only 242 teachers were including a study of the closely related functions of government fiscal policies regarding taxing and Spending. Probably no economic 203 topic appears in the news media more frequently than does "gross national product;" yet, this tOpic ranked near the bottom of the list; and, along with such vital, related topics as economic growth, savings and investment, and determinants of national income. In spite of the continuing volatile economic and political climate in the underdeveloped countries of the world, this area of economics was receiving attention from comparatively few of the responding teachers. Similarly, the great challenges of the European Economic Community and of similar international organizations did not prevent the topic on inter- national trade from ranking in bottom position. More positively, a comparatively large minority of teachers were planning for the study of personal economic topics and for what appeared to be a fairly general treatment of societal economics. The continuing emphasis upon conservation of natural resources has resulted in this topic being discussed in many textbooks. Separate units on communism have been strongly encouraged, and teaching guides have been developed to help social studies teachers plan for instruction in this area. The many teachers who reportedly emphasize a study of incentives, competition, and markets could make an important contribution toward a basic understanding of economics and the operation of the American economy. While study of the personal economic topics should be commended, it is perhaps true that many severe personal economic problems could best be solved by a prosperous economy. Moreover, it seems reasonable to expect that optimum national prosperity can exist only when the voting citizenry have a basic understanding of important economic concepts--including those which ranked at the bottom of the list in the foregoing tabulation. Certainly, better balance is needed in the study of significant economic 204 topics. Nevertheless, it should be acknowledged that every teacher in the high school need not have a planned unit for teaching each of the 27 designated economic topics. A carefully co-ordinated economic education program should make it possible to assign to specific subject areas the primary responsibility for developing only those facets of economic education which are most relevant to the respective areas. Perhaps, only in this manner can the optimum contribution be made to economic education. Fulfillment of the lines of responsibility should preclude both gaps and excessive duplication in the progressive spiralling of economic education throughout the curriculum. Teaching Methods and Materials In Part B, the teacher was asked to indicate the extent to which he was following certain practices in teaching economics in the course he named in Part A.15 On the 23 rated practices in Part B, 16.5 per cent of the responses were checked in the "frequently" category; 22.3 per cent were checked as being followed "occasionally;" 32.7 per cent were in the "seldom" category; and 28.5 per cent were tabulated as "nonresponses." The number of teachers indicating frequent use of a designated economic education method or material ranged from 25 to 660 among the various items. The greatest tendency to follow the designated procedures "frequently" was found in the section titled "Use of Supplementary Materials; _A‘ 15It would probably be unwise for every teacher to make extensive use of all the teaching procedures and materials listed in Part B. Nevertheless, considerable variation in teaching procedures has been recommended for the purpose of enlivening and enriching the study of economics. The function of Part B was to provide an index of the extent to which various groups of teachers were varying their instructional procedures for developing economic understandings. 205 28.05 per cent of the responses were checked in this category. This response suggested that teachers will usually make effective use of good supplementary materials when they are available. Conversely, the "Use of Community Re- sources" represented only 3.47 per cent of the responses. This weak response also indicated that most student research studies were probably based on assigned readings rather than an interpretation of primary or "first-hand" data. The extent to which variations in teaching methods and materials were being followed within the major categories of Part B is shown in the following tabulation. Percentage of Responses Category Frequently Occasionally, Seldom No Response Use of Supplementary Materials 28.05 28.79 21.53 21.63 Use of Classroom Techniques 18.13 21.26 34.18 26.43 Use of Audio-Visual Aids 14.51 21.47 31.29 32.73 Student Research Studies of Economic Problems 9.34 19.22 41.02 30.42 Use of Community Resources 3.47 17.56 46.10 32.87 The following rank-order listing reveals the number of teachers who were making either "frequent” or "occasional" use of the designated teaching methods and materials. Rank Order IggchinggMethod or Material No. of Teachers 1 Class Discussion 1,029 2 Lecture 910 3 A Supplementary Books 860 4 Supplementary Periodicals 849 5 Supplementary Booklets and Pamphlets 823 6 Newspapers 768 7 Bulletin Board 753 8 Films 728 9 Charts 692 10 Government Publications and Documents 611 ll Filmstrips 498 12 Individual Student Research Studies 456 13 Student Committees 441 14 Guest Speakers 430 15 Radio and/or TV 401 16 Student Panel Discussions 373 17 Research Studies by Student Groups 330 206 Rank Order Teaching_Method or Material No. of Teachers 18 Slides 315 19 Field Trips 257 20 Student Role-Playing 256 21 Student Debate 243 22 Field Studies 181 23 Flannel Board 79 Although traditional class discussion and lectures were being utilized by more teachers than were other procedures, all of the designated methods and materials were being used by some teachers. The use of radio and/or television appeared to be growing in popularity inasmuch as 30 per cent of the teachers reported making considerable use of these particular aids. The comparatively infrequent use of field studies probably reflected the time consuming problems associated with scheduling and properly conducting such projects even though some teachers have developed efficient procedures for directing these activities. Likewise, materials for the use of a flannel board or a slide projector must often be prepared by the individual teacher. As would be expected, the Speech teachers most commonly reported the teaching of economic concepts through student debates. Each year the national debate topic usually involves a major economic issue which is analyzed and discussed in some detail by most speech classes. At the end of each major section of Part B, the teachers were asked to list any additional procedures they had found effective for teaching economic concepts. Although most of the teachers who responded in this category simply described applications of practices which were already listed in the coded sections of Part B, considerable information was provided in response to the request for titles of any supplementary materials which had been most useful. The six most commonly used publications have been ranked below according to the number of teachers who recommended them. 207 Name of Publication No. of Teachers U. 8. News and World Report 26 Newsweek 21 Time 18 Consumers Guide and/or Consumers Report 9 Life 8 Changing Times _8 Total 90 Two important findings are obvious in the foregoing tabulation. First, as the publications most commonly mentioned were designed for popular read- ing, societal economic information and analysis was presented only inciden- tally, if at all. Secondly, there was very little agreement among the 1,376 respondents as to the particular economic education supplementary reading materials which had been most helpful. It appeared that many of the teachers were not aware of many of the better materials, and the 632 teachers who had completed fewer than 3 semester hours of economics would probably need considerable assistance in the selection and evaluation of available publications. A qualified school coordinator for economic education could provide a valuable service in this area. Assistance in the selection of materials would be provided also by the education or economics departments of the various colleges and universities and by the field office of the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education.16’17’18 16 The Field Office of the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education is located in the College of Business, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma. 17A recently revised materials evaluation report should provide help- ful guidance. Committee for Economic Development, Study Materials for Eco- nomic Education in the Schools (New York: Committee for Economic Develop- ment, 1961). 18Ten teachers expressed appreciation for materials from the Oklahoma Council. The investigator's experience with teacher requests prompts the recommendation that when writing for assistance, teachers would be well advised to explain at least the planned use of supplementary materials rather than simply to request "everything available." 208 Although there was very little agreement on the specific materials that had been found most helpful, 257 different items were mentioned by the various teachers. Among these items were the publications of the federal reserve banks; the Committee for Economic Development; Curriculum Resources, Incorporated; the Council for Advancement of Secondary Education, the Joint Council on Economic Education; the various consumer economic groups; various agencies and departments of the federal government; and the various business, labor, and agriculture organizations. Among the listed newSpapers and magazines with a strong economic orientation were included the Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Business Week, and Challenge. Numerous supplementary books were mentioned. In general, it was clear that few teachers have exploited the possibilities for optimum use of free and inexpensive supplementary materials in economic education. It is perhaps significant that several of the school librarians responded to the present study although thgy were not requested to do so. These responses, which were not formally tabulated in the present study, reflected the librarians' strong interest in economic education. In each case, the statement was made that the necessary mate- rials would be secured if the teachers would simply express their needs. In the final section of Part B, a series of items were included in an effort to determine the relative depth of economic understandings which teachers were attempting to establish. Although knowledge of content must necessarily constitute the first level of understanding, it was hoped that teachers were seeking more advanced levels of learning. Within subject areas, the percentage of respondents who reported testing student develop- ment of critical thinking in economics was greatest among five major groups as follows: social studies, 86 per cent; economics, 85 per cent; speech, 209 74 per cent; home economics, 69 per cent; and science, 68 per cent.19 The following tabulation of responses in the designated categories reveals that the "development of critical thinking” closely followed ”knowledge of content” as major teaching objectives in economic education.20 Percent of LearnipgrObjectives Responding Teachers Knowledge of Content 68.75 Development of Critical Thinking 61.92 Development of Skill 48.98 Attitude Change 36.04 Other 6.03 General Background Part C, the final section of the questionnaire, served to provide general background information as well as an over-all performance rating on certain practices and perceptions regarding economic education. Previous Teaching Experience The years of experience of 1,245 teachers responding to this question varied from 1 to 44. The first quartile included teachers who had 4 or fewer years of experience; the median was 11 years; and the upper quartile included only teachers who had more than 22 years of experience. Thus, 75 per cent of the responding teachers had taught more than 4 years; and the average experience was 13.6 years. 19The subject area of economics was tabulated to include teachers of both personal and societal economics courses. Ninety-four per cent of the 17 teachers of societal economics courses reported that their examinations include items which serve to measure the students' development of critical thinking in economics. 20 As the teachers were asked to check each student achievement which they "test for," the sum of the percentage column is greater than 100. 210 College Credits Earned in Economics The responses from the 1,376 teachers indicated that 632 (46 per cent) of the teachers had completed from 0-2 semester credit hours of work in college economics courses;21 282 (20 per cent) of the teachers had completed 3-5 hours; 337 (25 per cent) had completed 6-11 hours; and 125 (9 per cent) had completed 12 hours or more of economics. For the entire group, an average of 4.2 credit hours had been earned. In Table 15, the major subject areas are ranked in order according to the average number of hours which the teachers in those areas had completed. TABLE 15.--Average semester hours of college economics courses completed by teachers in each major subject area Average Number of Subject Area Semester Hours of Teachers Economics Agriculture 1 Economics Business Social Studies Drivers Education Home Economics Speech Industrial Arts Science Mathematics English Foreign Language Special Education CO... DO‘WMCDWO‘CDVOUCDO‘UI HHNNNwwwmoouoo No attempt was made to define the title or content of the economic courses which had been completed; however, several of the agriculture 21The figures in the category of "0-2" were based on the assumption that the 576 teachers who did not respond to this question had not com- pleted any formal courses in economics. 211 teachers mentioned taking courses in agriculture economics, and some of the respondents had undoubtedly taken a course in consumer economics. The average semester hours completed by high school ”economics" teachers would have been greater if this category had not included the teachers of consumer economics, economic geography, family finance, and international problems as well as the teachers of societal economic courses. Although 2 of the 17 societal economics teachers had not taken a single college economics course, this latter subgroup had completed an average of 11.2 semester credit hours in economics.22 When asked whether they believed their academic background in economics had been sufficient for their needs in teaching economic concepts in their particular course, 545 teachers checked the no response while 291 did not respond to the question. In general, the 540 "yes” respondents included both the teachers who had a strong background in economics and the teachers with little or no economics course work who rationalized that eco- nomics could not be taught appropriately in their course. A few teachers emphasized that they were upgrading their economic competency through wide reading of economic education materials. Participation in Economic Education Workshops The teacher was asked to indicate where and in yhgpflygag he had attended an economic education workshop. With this information, the inves- tigator was able to determine the number of teachers who had attended various types of programs, including the “live-in" workshops that had been 22 The hours in economics that were completed by teachers of each subject are categorized in Appendix K. 212 conducted by state councils on economic education.23 From zero to 74 per cent of the teachers in each school reported having attended some form of economic education workshop. However, the "workshop” to which these 188 teachers re- ferred varied from a single lecture on an economic topic to the multi-week programs held on one of the university campuses. After a careful review of the listed programs, it appeared that only 19 of the respondents had actually attended a "live-in" workshop conducted by the Oklahoma Council or by a sim- ilar organization in another state. These 19 respondents consisted of 8 business teachers, 2 mathematics teachers, 1 science teacher, 7 social studies teachers, and 1 special education teacher. Study of the National Task Force Report In 1961, the National Task Force report on economic education was mailed to all but the smallest high schools throughout the nation.24 How- ever, only 148 (or 11 per cent) of the responding teachers indicated that they had received information about this important publication. Interestingly, of this group, 121 reported having read the report. It would appear, there- fore, that the report would have been read by many more teachers if it had been routed to them. Participation in the National Television Course When asked whether they had viewed 20 per cent or more of the sessions of the 1962-63 CBS television course, "The American Economy," 160 (or 12 per cent) of the respondents replied affirmatively. This program had been given 23 The term "live-in workshop" is often used by economic educators to refer to workshop arrangements whereby the participants reside at a university campus during the entire program. 24Committee for Economic Development, Economic Education in the Schools (New York: Committee for Economic Development, 1961). 213 considerable publicity within the state, and several colleges and univer- sities offered special classes to complement the TV course. Some teachers were not within receiving distance of the cooperating television stations, and others reported that the early morning and late evening programs were not convenient for them. Almost any teacher interested in developing economic understanding would have benefited from viewing the outstanding lectures and studying the assigned readings in this course. General Practices and Perceptions A review of teacher performance on the 11 rated "essential" practices in Table 16 reveals that the fewest teachers were following the practice that had been listed in Item 18 on the questionnaire. This practice, which called for maintaining a file of local community enterprises and resource people that could be utilized effectively in special class projects, was being followed by only 13 per cent of the 1,376 responding teachers. On Item 31, only 24 per cent of the teachers were in favor of designating one person to serve as economic education coordinator for all subject areas in the high school, and many teachers complained that there were "already too many coordinators." Part of this objection may have stemmed from the teacher's fear of direction by a person in some other subject area; however, it was clear that many teachers had developed a disturbingly negative image of the role of the curriculum coordinator. This problem may be deserving of special attention from school administrators. Some teachers undoubtedly consider almost any form of curriculum coordination or supervision to be an unnecessary infringement upon their academic freedom. However, a coordinator should be in a position to view curriculum objectives from a somewhat broader prospective than would be possible for many classroom teachers. Especially in economic education, 214 TABLE 16.-~Percentage of teachers who responded affirmatively to "essential," "worthwhile," and nonrated items regarding their economic education practices and perceptions8 "Essential" Itemsb "Worthwhile" Items Nonrated Itemsc Affirmative Affirmative Affirmative Responses Responses Responses Item No. (Percentage) Item No. (Percentage) Item No. (Percentage) 18 13 19 6 15 9 31 24 ll 26 20 18 14 31 10 32 21 28 9 41 13 4O 22 38 12 43 17 41 33 56 16 47 23 66 28 61 24 6O 25 82 32 6O 29 74 26 81 27 81 8This table should be read as follows: Thirteen per cent of the 1,376 responding teachers responded affirmatively to the rated "essential" Item No. 18 in the questionnaire; 6 per cent responded affirmatively to the rated "worthwhile" Item No. 19; and 9 per cent responded affirmatively to the nonrated Item No. 15. b The rated "essential" and "worthwhile" items are listed in Table 12. cThe nonrated items are listed in Part C of the questionnaire in Appendix H. where no series of formal courses exist, it would appear that coordination is essential if excessive gaps and duplications in learning are to be avoided. Item 11 revealed that only 26 per cent of the teachers felt they knew what economic concepts were being taught in other teachers' courses. Certainly, the coordinator should work closely with classroom teachers and supervisors in defining those economic concepts which are most relevant to 215 the subject matter of specific high school courses.25 On Items 9 and 12, respectively, only 41 per cent of the teachers reported that they participate in curriculum planning in their high school; and only 43 per cent had analyzed their own course "to determine gpgg and .ghggg economic concepts could be taught best." It is possible that a teacher will be less concerned about varying or enriching the traditional content of his particular course if he does not somehow participate in curriculum planning to attain the over-all educational objectives of his high school. That most teachers had given comparatively little attention to national trends and developments in economic education was obvious in the finding (in Item 10) that only 32 per cent of the respondents were "aware of any significant economic education developments in other school systems across the country." Moreover, in Item 19, only 6 per cent of the teachers felt they could distinguish between the educational philosophy of the Joint Council on Economic Education and that of the Foundation for Economic Education. Undoubtedly a larger percentage of teachers would have been able to explain the objectives of only the Joint Council on Economic Education. However, if students are to develop an objective understanding of economic principles, problems, and issues, it seems important that their teachers be aware of the dissimilar background and philosophy of the many service associations which attempt to provide various forms of economic education assistance to the public schools. As an example, the Foundation for 25 In his study of the role of business education and social studies teachers in economic education, Pomnichowski reported that "teachers are not as aware of the contents of the school curriculum as they should be" and that teachers' perceptionsci the extent to which economic topics are taught in other courses "are not very reliable." Pomnichowski, op. cit., p. 255. 216 Economic Education represents only one major economic group; whereas the Joint Council on Economic Education represents all major economic groups and is thus dedicated to complete objectivity in all of its programs. In spite of the continuing work of the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education during the last decade, Item 20 revealed that only 18 per cent of the teachers were aware of the objectives and services of this organization. In Item 13, 60 per cent of the teachers acknowledged that their textbook did not effectively present economic topics that were related to their respective courses; whereas in Item 21, 28 per cent reported that their school would fill a teacher's request for supplementary reading materials on economic topics. However, it appeared that most teachers were not aware of the many sources of recommended materials. On Item 15, only 9 per cent of the teachers had seen a copy of the 1961 publication, EEEQX Materigls for Economic Education in the Schools, which had been developed to help the teacher select appropriate materials for his course.26 On Items l4, l6, and 17, 31 per cent of the teachers reported selecting supplementary materials which, collectively, present the view- point of business, labor, and agriculture groups, and 47 per cent reported helping students evaluate the logic and objectivity of economic statements. However, only 41 per cent of the teachers reported that they could dis- tinguish the different economic viewpoints of the agriculture, business, and labor groups. It appeared, therefore, that a majority of the teachers will need considerable assistance in the selection of supplementary reading materials if they are to avoid developing biased viewpoints in the classroom. Committee for Economic Development, Study Materials for Economic Education in the Schools (New York: Committee for Economic Development, 1961). 217 Moreover, some in-service training would seem essential for giving teachers a better orientation for analyzing these issues. In Item 22, 38 per cent of the teachers reported that they would be willing to develop economic education teaching aids for themselves and their colleagues if some re- leased time from other duties could be arranged. It is possible that the teachers most interested in economic education would be found in this group. The teachers scored highest on the more general practices and per- ceptions regarding economic education. On Items 24 and 32, 60 per cent felt that both their principal and their school superintendent agreed that eco- nomic concepts could be taught in all courses; and 60 per cent believed also that their high school principal was seriously interested in the effectiveness with which economic topics were taught in their particular course. It is perhaps true that many teachers are not likely to make the extra effort to integrate economic concepts into their course if this approach is not fully endorsed by their principal and superintendent. The responses to the foregoing questions would seem to indicate the possibility either of ineffective communication in certain instances or of a principal's reluctant acceptance of the integrated approach to economic education. On Items 26 and 27, 81 per cent of the teachers considered economic understanding a vital requisite for good citizenship and 81 per cent acknowledged that the major objective of economic education should be to develop the student's ability and inclination to analyze economic issues objectively. On Item 28, 61 per cent of the teachers expressed the belief that pre-service teacher education should include training in the specific methods of teaching economic concepts although a few respondents expressed a negative reaction against "just another methods course." On Item 29, 74 per cent of the teachers expressed the conviction that colleges and 218 universities should develop one or more special economics course(s) to meet the particular needs of prospective teachers. Several respondents included a special note of commendation for this type of course. Thus, the great majority of teachers acknowledged the importance of economics in the public school curriculum and the need of formal education in economics as part of the pre-service program for prospective teachers. For their response to Item 30, the teachers were asked to indicate the minimum number of semester credit hours in economics that they believed ‘gyggy prospective teacher should complete during his college work. The 851 teachers who responded to this question recommended an average of 6.9 semes- ter credit hours. The 131 business teachers in this group recommended an average of 8.3 hours; the 190 social studies teachers recommended an average of 8.1 hours; and the 530 teachers in other subject areas recommended a surprisingly high average of 6.1 hours. It should be acknowledged that these averages would probably have been somewhat lower if the 525 nonrespond- ents had answered this question; nevertheless, it is significant that at least the 851 respondents strongly endorsed the need for economic education within the collegiate teacher preparation programs. On Item 25, 82 per cent of the teachers felt that an elective course in economics should be offered in the high school; and several respondents included statements supporting a required course. Thus, the practice of offering a separate economics course received a stronger endorsement from the teachers than did any other ”essential" item in this section of the questionnaire. Part of the support for the separate course came from several teachers in other subject areas who would prefer not to concern themselves with integrating economic understanding into their particular course. In general, the teachers in this latter group had a very weak 219 background in economics and would undoubtedly feel insecure in teaching economic concepts without some further education in this discipline. Obstacles to Teaching Economic Concepts From a list of commonly reported problems, the teachers were asked to rank only the three most significant obstacles to their more effective teaching of economic concepts. These three problems were to be ranked according to the following scale: 1. Most Significant 2. Secondly Significant 3. Thirdly Significant A few respondents inadvertently assigned a code number to every enumerated problem on the questionnaire. Therefore, as a means of ranking the problems in their order of significance to the teachers, a weighting of "4" was assigned to any individual items which a teacher had not checked. This procedure resulted in each item being given one of four ratings of significance.27 Every item received a rating of "1" from 28 or more teachers and a rating of "4" from 433 or more teachers. In the following tabulation, the problems are ranked in the order of their total numerical ratings. A low numerical rating indicates a high order of significance. Economic Education Problem Rating Not enough time to cover all that is included in the curriculum 3,081 My inadequate training in economics 3,390 Pupil disinterest and resistance to economic analysis 3,854 Inadequate textbook and supplementary reading materials 4,008 Not enough time for lesson planning 4,081 Difficulty of the subject 4,274 Community pressures to teach certain points of view 4,609 27 The 133 teachers who failed to check any of the designated problem areas were excluded from the tabulation. 220 Greatest emphasis was given to the problem of insufficient time to cover everything that is already in the curriculum. Because of this problem, many teachers would contend that they are so fully occupied that it would be futile to accept "additional" responsibility for teaching eco- nomic topics. It can also be argued that courses in most other subject areas have some major objective other than that of teaching economics; and, in fact, a teacher may consider economic concepts to be wholly irrelevant to his particular course. This teacher will therefore argue that economics should be taught as a separate course or as a part of other courses which have major objectives more closely allied with economics. No one will seriously question the fact that there are many competing demands upon the school curriculum. There is, however, a more basic question regarding the role of the high school in preparing students for citizenship in American society; and on this point, the vital importance of economic understanding is widely recognized. Some reassessment of curriculum priorities among and within high school courses will be necessary if the integrated approach to economic education is to result in a satisfactory level of economic understanding. It is obvious that opportunities for integrating relevant economic concepts vary widely among the many high school courses. In general, leading authorities in economic education have never requested that high school teachers inject separate economic units into their courses solely for the sake of teaching economics per se. However, experimental projects con- ducted in school systems throughout the country have indicated that certain economic concepts are inherently related to sertain topics and units covered in various high school courses and that the effective integration of selected economic concepts into these courses will serve to stimulate 221 rather than detract from student learning of the basic course content. Thus, if carefully selected economic education reSponsibilities were properly served in the various subjects and subject areas, it should be possible to develop a satisfactory level of economic understanding in high school students without seriously detracting from other vital areas of the cur- riculum. The effective integration of economics into other courses requires that teachers have at least a basic understanding of economics; however, the teachers in the present study listed "inadequate training in economics" as the second major problem area. Continuing efforts must be made in both pre-service and in-service programs to upgrade teacher understandings of economics and to develop stimulating instructional procedures for reducing the frequently mentioned problem of ”pupil disinterest" in this dynamic subject. Textbooks, supplementary reading materials, and teaching guides are being constantly improved; and these developments should help reduce the time that is necessary for planning effective lessons involving economic concepts. In spite of the attention often given to "community pressures to teach certain points of view," most of the teachers indicated that this was not a major problem. Other Comments When asked to list any other problem which they considered more important than the ones designated in the checklist, 174 teachers responded; but 30 in this group simply reaffirmed their conviction that provision should 8Recent achievements in teaching economics in the elementary schools offer promising possibilities for developing a basic framework of economic understanding before students reach high school. 222 be made for economic education in the high school curriculum. Almost all of the other comments emphasized the importance of certain problems that had already been included in the checklist. Eighteen teachers declared that there was insufficient time to teach economics along with all of the other objectives in their particular course, and 60 teachers emphasized that the study of economics did not apply to their course. This latter group con- sisted mostly of teachers of biology, physics, chemistry, algebra, geometry, foreign language, business skill subjects, and (surprisingly) English. The other problems mentioned and the respective number of responding teachers were as follows: inadequate economic education materials, 10; low ability students, 8; unqualified teacher, 5; pupil disinterest, 5; teacher disinterest, 6; student prejudice, 5; parent prejudice, 3; difficulty of scheduling field trips, 3; and difficulty of correlating economics with a particular subject, 4. Widely varying miscellaneous comments were received from the remaining 17 teachers. A summary of the results of the study was requested by 606 teachers, and 287 teachers made final comments in the space provided at the end of the questionnaire. These comments ranged from commendation and enthusiasm about emphasizing economic education to utter shock and dismay at the thought of including economics in the teacher's "already-full" course. Many of these teachers were obviously not aware of the philosophy of the integrated approach to economic education. Many teachers explained that they had taken no economics course during their pre-service education. Five teachers in- cluded a brief explanation of their favorite economic education teaching procedures. Several social studies teachers expressed the hope that economics would not be overemphasized in their area; whereas several business teachers emphasized the need for including more economic concepts in skill building 223 materials for shorthand and typing classes. The Relationship Between the Schools' Rating on Single Practices and Their Total Scores As a means of analyzing the discriminatory power of each rated item in Part A and Part C of the questionnaire, the investigator compared the separate item ratings of all teachers in the 12 highest ranking schools with 29 Although the ratings of all teachers in the 12 lowest ranking schools. performance regarding the rated practices listed in the questionnaire was not completely analogous to the right/wrong dichotomy of answers to an objective examination, the pattern of response to a particular item did reveal the extent to which that item distinguished the collective perform- ance of responding teachers in the 12 highest ranking schools from that of the respondents in the 12 lowest ranking schools. Obviously, the total rating of a school did not necessarily represent the performance of any individual teacher within that school. On Part A, it was considered that a teacher would be making an appreciable effort toward economic education if he taught a designated economic topic either as a separate, "planned unit" or as part of another unit.30 Therefore, the responses in these two categories were combined and computations were made to determine what percentage of teachers in the "top" and, in the "bottom" 12 schools were giving this much emphasis 29 The ranking of the 44 schools on Part A and on Part C has been presented in Table 13. 30 It should be acknowledged that responses within these two categories represent various degrees of emphasis in teaching the respective economic topics. 224 to each of the 27 designated topics.31 The absolute difference between these two percentages served to indicate the extent to which a single item discrim- inated the high subgroup of schools from the low subgroup. In Table 17, each rated item in Part A is ranked according to the percentage difference which it derived. The figures in Table 17 revealed that the low subgroup never scored higher than the high subgroup on a single item although the percentage dif- ference between subgroups ranged from 27 to zero on the various items. The best discriminating item involved understanding economic analysis as a science while the least discriminating topic was "Choosing a Vocation." A review of the data in Table 13 will reveal that the schools which ranked in the "top” and "bottom" subgroups on Part C were not always the same schools which ranked within these respective subgroups on Part A. The 283 teachers in the "top" 12 schools on Part C were following 56 per cent of the rated "essential" and "worthwhile" practices; whereas the 410 teachers in the "bottom" 12 schools were following 39 per cent of these rated practices. In Table 18 each rated item in Part C is ranked according to the percentage difference which it derived. As a group, the teachers in the highest ranking schools consistently scored higher than the teachers in the lowest ranking schools although the difference on some items was not large. The best discriminating item in Table 18 related to the teachers' perception of the attitude of their principal and superintendent toward economic education. In the "top" 12 31 In their combined performance on all 27 items, the 257 teachers in the "top" 12 schools attained 34 per cent of their possible score for teach- ing the designated topics either in a "planned unit" or as part of another unit. The 428 teachers in the "bottom" 12 schools attained 21 per cent of their possible score. 225 TABLE 17.--Rated items in Part A ranked according to the percentage difference in performance between teachers in the upper and lower ranking high schools8 ___. ___—— Percentage Percentage RatEd of High of Low ItemNo.b Subgroup Subgroup Difference 1 42 15 27 12 35 15 20 27 44 24 20 13 43 25 18 10 37 20 17 15 42 25 . 17 21 43 26 17 22 42 25 17 ll 28 12 16 3 38 23 15 26 30 15 15 6 34 20 14 7 33 20 13 2 29 17 12 5 32 20 12 8 38 26 12 17 32 20 12 18 31 19 12 23 31 20 ll 14 25 , 15 10 16 24 14 10, 4 38 29 9 24 25 16 9 19 44 36 8 25 21 14 7 9 23 22 l 20 48 48 O 8This table should be read as follows: Forty-two per cent of the teachers in the 12 highest ranking high schools were making an appreciable effort to teach Topic No. l in Part A of the questionnaire; whereas only 15 per cent of the teachers in the 12 lowest ranking schools were teaching this topic. The difference between the percentage scores of these upper and lower subgroups was 27 per cent. Each number in this column refers to a numbered economic topic in Part A of the teacher's questionnaire. See Appendix H. 226 TABLE 18.--Rated items in Part C ranked according to the percentage difference in performance between teachers in the upper and lower ranking high schoolsa i, “2' _ F Rated Percentage Percentage . b c of High of Low Item No. ’ Subgroup Subgroup Difference E24 77 50 27 W23 78 56 22 E16 62 4O 22 E14 43 23 20 E12 55 36 19 E32 72 54 18 E31 35 18 17 E26 88 73 15 E29 82 68 14 E9 51 38 13 W10 42 29 13 E27 86 _ 75 11 W25 85 76 9 W13 46 38 8 E18 18 10 8 W17 43 38 5 W7 12 8 4 W8 14 10 4 W19 9 6 3 W11 26 25 l 8This table should be read as follows: Seventy-seven per cent of the teachers in the 12 highest ranking high schools were following the practice recommended in Item 24; whereas only 50 per cent of the teachers in the 12 lowest ranking high schools were following this practice. On this item, the difference between the percentage scores of the upper and lower subgroups was 27 per cent. bEach number in this column relates to the respective item in Part C of the teacher's questionnaire. See Table 12. An "E" or a "W" signifies that an item was rated "essential" or "worthwhile," respectively, by the jury described in Chapter III. schools, the teachers more readily recognized that their administrators support the integration of relevant economic concepts into all courses. There was also a considerable difference between subgroups with regard to the readiness of the teachers themselves to accept this objective. In 227 general, the items which were least effective in discriminating the upper and lower subgroups had elicited a comparatively small number of affirmative responses from the teachers.32 The rated “essential” items tended to dis- criminate the two subgroups more effectively than did the items rated "worthwhile." All but one item in the upper half of Table 18 had been rated "essential." Performance of A11 Teachers on Selected Single Items Compared with Their Total Performance on All Items In order to determine the extent to which selected single items dis- criminated high scoring or low scoring teachers from the total group, the combined scores on all items were computed for the teachers who were and who were not following each of the selected practices. The items selected for analysis according to this procedure included only those practices, perceptions, or general background factors which would seem to be the most important determinants of the over-all economic education performance of teachers. For the purposes of this analysis, the teacher's performance on Part A was considered satisfactory for those topics that were being taught either in a special unit or as part of some other unit.33 Thus, each teacher could have attained a possible score of 27 for satisfactory performanCe on all 27 items. To facilitate meaningful comparisons between the various categories, all combined scores were expressed as a percentage of the possible scores By chance, the differences between the percentage scores of the upper and lower subgroups on Part C were quite similar to the differences on Part A. The coded response categories in Part A had been used successfully by Lebeda, who also considered that performance was satisfactory if a listed topic were being taught either in a special unit or as part of another unit. Lebeda, op. cit., p. 33. 228 which might have been attained. Performance on Selected Items in Part C Compared with Total Performance on Part A For the first comparison, the total scores on Part A were computed separately for teachers who were classified into the various categories according to their teaching experience. The investigator became interested in the possible significance of teaching experience after reading Pom- nichowski's contention that teachers with less than two years of experience 34 As generally concern themselves only with teaching the textbook. Pomnichowski made no attempt to prove or disprove this contention, it seemed important that the present study should measure the relationship between teaching experience and the over-all economic education performance of teachers. The following tabulation reveals that the teachers with no more than two years of experience scored almost as well on Part A as did their more experienced colleagues; whereas the teachers who failed to answer this question tended to score considerably less well on Part A. With better teacher preparation in economic education, the newly certified teacher may soon have a major advantage in teaching economic concepts. Years of No. of Percentage of Possible Score for Planned _Experience Teachers Teaching of Economic Topics 1 - 2 187 25.1 3 -~6 271 28.4 7 or more 787 27.9 No Response 131 6.2 It was anticipated that those teachers who had completed the most course work in economics would also tend to give the greatest emphasis to 4 Pomnichowski, op. cit., p. 60. 229 economic concepts in their respective subjects. Pomnichowski referred to the importance of pre-service economic education, but he made no attempt to measure the relationship between a teacher's background in economics and his teaching performance.35 However, Hillier's study was concerned with this very issue, and he reported: "The findings indicate that the economic education of the teacher does make a difference in the number of economic concepts taught.”36 In his final conclusion he declared: "It is possible that the greatest improvement in economic education in the high school would come from the requirement that all teachers teaching courses in social studies have six hours of economics."37 In the present study, a close re- lationship was found between the economic education background of teachers and their performance on Part A of the questionnaire. 35Ibid., p. 61. Hillier's follow-up study included teachers in the primary, inter- mediate, and secondary grades who had graduated from Oklahoma State Uni- versity and received teaching certificates in 1956 and 1957. Kenneth Lynn Hillier, "The Effect of the Economic Education of Teachers on the Number of Economic Concepts Reported Taught" (Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, Okla- homa State University, 1959), p. 42. 37 Ibid., p. 46. 230 Semester Hours No. of Percentage of Possible Score for Planned in Economics Teachers38 Teaching of Economic TOpics39 0 - 2 632 15.8 3 - 5 282 24.8 6 - 11 337 35.1 12 or more 125 50.1 The economic education performance of the designated groups of teachers was directly and consistently related to the semester hours of economics which they had completed. It appeared, therefore, that the extent of course work in economics was a significant determinant of the extent to which most teachers in the various subject areas provided for the development of economic understanding. In a related item, the teacher was asked to indicate whether he felt his academic background in economics had been sufficient for his needs. The following tabulation reveals that there was very little difference be- tween the scores of the negative and the affirmative respondents, although the nonrespondents scored considerably less well than did the other two groups. Teachers' Perceptions Percentage of Possible Score Regarding Their No. of for Planned Teaching of Economics Background Teachers Economic Topics Adequate 540 27.7 Not adequate 545 30.3 No response 291 12.5 38There were 576 teachers who failed to indicate how many semester hours of economics they had earned. As it seemed reasonable to assume that these teachers had completed little or no work in economics, they were tabulated in the same category with teachers who reported completing from zero to two hours of economics. 9The weighted average ratings for the categories were as follows: 0-2, 14.4; 3 5 1 9; 6-11, 27.3; 12 or more, 39.6. Thus, these ratings increased significantly from the first to the last category. 231 Some of the teachers felt that their lack of training in economics was no handicap because they were not interested in becoming involved in economic education. Conversely, other teachers with several hours of economics felt their background was inadequate. Except for the nonrespondents, there was no distinct pattern of teacher perceptions regarding the adequacy of their present background in economics. The 160 teachers who viewed 20 per cent or more of the national television course, "The American Economy," attained 48.1 per cent of the possible score for planned teaching of economic topics in Part A; whereas all other teachers attained only 24.1 per cent of the possible score. The select group of viewers were obviously more concerned about teaching economic topics than were their colleagues who responded from the various schools. The 593 teachers who had analyzed their course to determine EEEE and 'ghggg economic concepts could be taught best attained 38.9 per cent of the possible score on Part A; whereas all other teachers attained only 15.4 per cent of the possible score. Within this latter group, the 138 nonrespondents attained 7.2 per cent of the possible score on Part A; the 629 teachers who gave a negative response attained 17.1 per cent of the possible score; and the 16 teachers who were uncertain about their practice on this point at- tained 21.3 per cent of the possible score. The 520 teachers who expressed a willingness to use released time for developing special economic education materials attained 39.2 per cent of the possible score on Part A; whereas all other teachers attained only 17.2 per cent of the possible. Interest in developing supplementary economic education materials appeared to be a significant factor which discriminated the high scoring teachers from those who made comparatively low scores for the economic education practices. 232 Different reasons prompted 1,123 teachers to recommend that an elective course in economics be offered in the high school. A few teachers wanted no part of an economic education program and recommended the separate course as the complete solution to the problem of economic illiteracy. Other respondents felt that the separate course should provide a capstone learning experience which would build upon previous economic understandings developed by teachers in other subject areas. Several teachers commented that the course should be required of all students. The 1,123 teachers favoring the separate course attained 28.5 per cent of the possible score on Part A; whereas all other teachers attained an average of 12.6 per cent of the possible score. However, there was considerable variation within this latter group. The 50 negative respondents attained 21.9 per cent of the possible score on Part A; the 15 respondents who were undecided attained 28.1 per cent of the possible score; and the 188 nonrespondents attained only 8.8 per cent of the possible score. Thus, except for the nonrespondents, this item did not effectively discriminate the high and low scoring teachers. The 831 teachers who felt that their principal was seriously interested in their teaching economic topics attained 31.7 per cent of the possible score on Part A; whereas all other teachers attained only 16.2 per cent of the possible score. Significantly, the lowest scoring teachers tended to feel that their principal was not particularly interested in their developing economic understanding. The Relationship Between Various Types of Workshop Participation and Total Performance on Parts A and C With information regarding EEEEE and in 3233.1225 the teachers had attended an economic education workshop, it was possible to compare the economic education performance of teachers who had attended "live-in" 233 campus workshops (such as had been conducted by the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education) with the performance of teachers who had attended other forms of economic workshops. It was also possible to compare the performance of these respective groups with that of all other teachers who had not attended any form of economic workshop. This entire analysis was considered especially important because, over the years, a majority of the directors of the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education had arrived at the conclusion that the campus workshop involved an excessive cost per teacher participant and that funds could be better expended for programs such as community lecture-forums on economic education. As a considerably greater number of both teachers and laymen could be ”reached" by these local programs, the Council directors had felt that the "pay-off” in improved economic edu- cation would be greater than had been possible from the "live-in” campus workshops. The weighted average ratings for reported performance on Part A and Part C of the questionnaire were computed separately for the 19 teachers who had attended "live-in" campus workshops, for the other 169 respondents who had reported attending other workshops, and for the remaining 1,188 teachers who had attended no workshop. Workshop No. of Part A Part C Participation Teachers Rating Rating "Live-in" campus workshop 19 50.8 26.0 Other workshops 169 28.5 17.8 No workshop 1,188 19.7 15.5 On both Parts A and C, the combined weighted average rating of the 19 teachers who had attended a "live-in" economic education workshop was considerably higher than the rating of the teachers in the other two categories. A similar performance pattern was found when the responses 234 were converted to percentage scores. Percentage of Possible Score WorkshopiParticipation Part A Part C "Live-in" campus workshops 78.2 80.8 Other workshops 36.2 54.5 No workshop 23.1 46.2 The teachers who reported attending campus "family finance" workshops attained 43.1 per cent of the possible score on Part A and 58 per cent of the possible on Part C. The teachers who reported commuting to the various campus workshop sessions that were held during the summer of 1960 attained 52.9 per cent of the possible score on Part A and 65 per cent of the possible on Part C. It should be acknowledged that the participants in the "live-in" eco- nomic education workshops might have made a better-than-average contribution to economic education even if they had not attended a workshop. Moreover, the 19 respondents in this category were such a small group that broad generalizations based upon their reported performance would be hazardous. Nevertheless, these findings do suggest the impact of the "live-in" workshop tends to be much greater than that of less intensive programs which must compete with many distracting demands on the participants' time and attention. However, intensive in-service programs may be quite effective. In one school system, a weekly lecture series had been attended by every teacher during a full semester; and it appeared significant that--on each part of the question- naire--these teachers ranked among those in the top twelve high schools. Performance on Selected Items Compared with Total Performance on Part C After computing the total scores on Part C for the affirmative and the negative respondents to six selected items, further computations were 235 made to determine what per cent of the possible score had been attained in each case by these two subgroups. The resulting percentage scores served as performance indices, and the difference between the percentage scores of the affirmative and the negative respondents served to indicate the extent to which each respective item had discriminated high scoring teachers from low scoring teachers. As Part C included items which were rated "essential" as well as items rated "worthwhile," separate computations were made for each of these categories.40 In Table 19, the total Part C percentage scores on all "essential" and ”worthwhile" items are shown for the affirmative and the negative respondents to each of the 6 selected items. Significantly, the affirmative respondents to each item attained an appreciably higher percentage of the possible score on Part C than did the negative respondents. The responses to Item 23 served to highlight the importance of the teacher's perception of the proper role of economic education in the school curriculum, and the responses to Item 25 re-emphasized the significance of the school adminis- tration's position on this issue. Those teachers who acknowledged the relevance of selected economic concepts to all high school courses scored 30.4 percentage points higher on Part C than did the negative respondents. Similarly, the teachers who felt that their principal and school superin- tendent supported the integration of economic concepts into all courses scored 28.7 points higher than did the negative respondents. Thus, it was much less likely that a teacher would follow the recommended economic education practices if he did not agree to the appropriateness of the As this analysis was exclusively in terms of the percentages of "essential," "worthwhile," and total rated practices being followed, the "essential" items were not given a double weighting. Therefore, all "scores' discussed in this section are unweighted and represent an actual count of practices being followed. .m Navaoaa< mom .ouwwcaowumosv m.uo£oemu oau mo 0 uumm so smug as nowwwuaova aasaoo awnu ow panes: noun A 236 .muoovoommou o>wummmc was o>aunaufimmm mum amosuon mucouowwfiu mocsauomuma Haauuo>o uuouwouw one vo~eo>ou aw museums cacao wasp ow coauwmoa umuHm cg voowan mes mm auuH .¢.om was muoomaoamou o>Huwwoo was o>Hueauammm one awesome monusuomuom ca mocmuoumwv owaucoouoa may .uocwnaoo mums muowuowum :oawnssuuosz use :wauaommo: so mouoom ecu can: .mooauomum :oaans unuuos: co ¢.o~ vow mooauomun :Hwauooumo: so w.mm was muaowooammu o>auwwos can o>wum8uwmwu one awesome moawsuowuom a“ moowumwmww mwmucoouon ecu .ouomouona .msoua :oflanssuuosz ecu mo memo “on «.ma can maoum :Hwauommmm: osu mo memo mom m.m~ kaao magsoHHow mums mucovoomwmu o>fiumwoa 05¢ may .maouH :oawnsnuuosz mouse Ham «0 uooo use w.m¢ new 0 uumm a“ macaw :Hawuoommo: mouse can mo uaoo use H.~o weasoHHow onus muammaoamou o>aumauwmmw com onH .woasoaaom mums muonuwou o~m.~ osu mo com scans mowuomna a mo vmumwmaoo mu souH "msoaaow as moon on masons manna macaw m.sa ~.a m.m~ a.~m w.es H.o¢ c m.we aeo.a man an m.mH o.¢~ N.©H m.m~ o.o¢ ¢.Nm ~.~o «Ho.a mom 1 Ha ~.Hm m.c~ m.¢~ ¢.w~- m.aq m.m¢ o.co onw own a «N m.¢~ ¢.m «.mm m.on w.m~ m.oq o.mo Cam com a a.w~ a.o~ ~.nm m.- s.aN ohms o.se can a sum «N e.om q.o~ w.mm «.ma m.w~ w.m¢. H.~o 05¢ coo . mu , . a mucouommwn :oawsssuuoz: :Hmwuammmm: .:mHH;3£uu03: :Hmwuommmm: :maagsnuuoz: xmwwfiucommm: 02 wow . .oz Eoww woawnaoo _ - n n announcemem . muumvnoemmm m>Hummmz muconoommmm o>wumauwww<. # A o>Humwoz was o>HumEuHmm< coosuom nosoaaom moowuomum Heuoa mo owmuaoouom _ coauauowuom aw conouomwwa ammuamowom so uumm ow moowuomnm mouse Haw mo monmauomuom cues vmummaoo moowuowua wouooaow mo monmfiuomuomnu.mH m4m__11_; <3)_2_; <4>__2_6_. 116. <1) _1§_; <2) 7; (3)____§_; (4)__1_4_. 117. (1) 8; (2) 5; (3)__5_; (4)__Z6_- 118. <1>_12_; <2)__9_; <3>__§_; <4>__14_. 1See Appendix F for a statement of the practices to which the items in this tabulation refer. 2Items 108-110 were open-ended questions. The responses to these items were discussed on pp. 154-158. 3The response categories for Items 112-122 were as follows: (1) Most Significant; (2) Secondly Significant; and (3) Thirdly Significant. Nonresponses were given a weighting of "4" to indicate that a designated item had been considered comparatively insignificant by the number of principals who failed to check the item. Item No. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. (1) 6 ; (1) 2 ; (1) 1 ; (1) 3 ; Responses (2) 12 ; (3) (2) 4 ; (3) (2) 7 s (3) (2) 5 s (3) ; (4) 22 10 ; (4) 28 8 ; (4) 28 10 ; (4) 26 355 were discussed on pp. 158-159. 4Item 123 was an open-ended question. The responses to this item APPENDIX H THE QUESTIONNAIRE WITH THE COVERING LETTER FOR THE SURVEY OF INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES 5‘ 11.3713qu ahl 51"»: HBT'IHJ .wzsvoiu am HTIW :mmmonasm m DMOIT‘LH'HTEW ‘10 Yavsuz ) » 3.3111171.qu ‘ .- .1; uf. I ~ .0 _ ,- _'. j 356 OKLAHOEAA STATE UNIVERSITY ° STILLWATER College of Business FRontier 2-6211, Exl. 258 Spring Semester, 1963 TO: High School Teachers FROM: Clayton Millington, College of Business, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma SUBJECT: Survey of Economic Education Instructional Practices Your high school has been selected for participation in a study of economic education instructional practices (in grades 10-12). Much has been said about the role of economic education in the various subject areas of the high school, but relatively little research has been undertaken to determine the manner and extent to which economic topics are actually taught. This study is supported by the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education, the Oklahoma State University Research Foundation, and the Economic Education Committee of the Oklahoma Curriculum Improvement Commission. Information from the study will provide a significant base for further defining the proper role of economic education in the high school. An objective analysis of present instructional practices and viewpoints will help establish guidelines for pro- viding better economic educational assistance to Oklahoma teachers. Almost every question on the survey form can be answered with a simple checkmark, and it should take you no longer than 30 to 40 minutes to furnish the desired information. The questionnaire is designed to gather certain accurate information about the background, practices, attitudes, opinions, and problems of teachers with regard to economic education. Therefore, there are no ”right" or ”wrong” answers. Your cooperation in answering each item frankly is essential to the validity of the study. If you feel that you do not cover any of the economic topics, please indicate this information along with the names of the courses you teach, and return the questionnaire as you would if it were completely filled out. If an Oklahoma State University representative is not present to give you the questionnaire, please fill in the desired information, fold the form in two parts, and then tape or staple it closed. Your principal will explain how the completed questionnaires can be mailed in one package from his office. However, if you prefer, postage will be provided so that you can drop the form in the nearest mailbox. The back of the questionnaire is already addressed so an envelope is unnecessary. You will want to notify your principal that you have completed the form so that he can check your name from his list. Your cooperation is deeply appreciated. arm II 357 ECONOMIC EDUCATION INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES IN OKLAHOMA HIGH SCHOOLS (GRADES 10-12) The following questionnaire seeks to determine existing economic education prac- tices in the various subject areas of Oklahoma high schools. This instrument will provide an inventory of (1) economic topics that are being taught, (2) teaching methods and materials being used, and (3) general practices and views of teachers concerning economic education in the high school. Your information will be treated in strict confidence, and no teacher or school system will be identified in rela- tion to any one or more of the practices considered in this study. .Your frank an- swer to each question is of vital importance. ** ' *‘k ** *‘k A. INVENTORY OF ECONOMIC TOPICS BEING TAUGHT IN VARIOUS SUBJECT AREAS In the blank provided below, write the name of the one course in which you feel you are making the greatest contribution toward economic education (for example, American Literature, Algebra, Economics, American History, Biology, General Busi- ness, or some other course). Then, in the check columns, mark your practice re- garding the teaching of each economic topic in the one course you designate. A "planned unit“ is considered to be one class period assignment or more in length. Please mark one practice for every topic. NAME OF THE COURSE YOU TEACH Check the length of your course: One semester; V Two semesters u c H u >4 2 33:: o E '3.3 c: I: Z'H can m a: 1H 4:: H m HM 8 .94 H O U '66 “O O .6 m 0.1:: mo :00 Eu Fig .11-m mu 0 1: man: >1?! m u m o is m : FHH wi—a a 0 ID no as. UH ECONOMIC TOPICS 1, Economic Analysis--A Science. 2. The Economic Scarcity Problem and the Function of Economic Systems. 3. Fundamental Characteristics of the Qperation of thé American Economic System. 4. The Role of Incentives, Competition, and Markets. 5. Modern Business, Economic Concentration, and ‘ Monopoly Issues. 6. The Cdmposition, Trends, and Problems of the American Labor Force. ECONOMIC TOPICS 358 Have a Planned Unit Planned as Part of Other Unit Little or No 'Planned Effort Does not Apply to the Course I Teach l 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. Labor Unions (history, function, problems, and significant legislation). Forms of Business Organization-~proprietorship, partnership, corporation, and cooperative. Gross National Product--measurement, components, and trends. The Distribution of Income. The Major Determinants of National Production and Income. The Role of Savings and Investment in the Formation of Capital. The Role of Money, Credit, and Banking. National Monetary Policies (of the federal reserve system) to Promote Economic Growth and Price Stability. Principles of Taxation and Kinds of Taxes--federal, state, and local. Government Fiscal Policies (via. taxing and spending) to Promote Economic Growth and Price Stability. Government Regulation of Private Enterprise--problems end issues. The Farm Problem--Surpluses, Subsidies, Controls, and Low Income. Conservation and Use of Natural Resources. Choosing a Vocation. Personal Money Management. Planning for Personal Economic Security. Economic Pluctustions--the Ups and Downs of Business. ECONOMIC TOPICS 359 4U 'o H u >\ w a: .8 ~: 0. g s :21H m.u m 92:) 1H 4:: H m Lat-:1 8 94 La o u '60 'u- o m 0.1: Q10 no a u .d c .n m u c<3 u d m u >~H m u m 0 m c —1w1 ~4uu lg o 33:: mo 1.194 U I Teach 24. 25. 26. 27. The (local, regional and/or national) Problems of Economic Growth in the U. S. The International Allocation of Resources-- International Trade. The Economic Problems of Underdeveloped Nations. Communism, Socialism, and Capitalism. B. TEACHING METHODS AND MATERIALS The questions in this section relate exclusively to your practices in teaching economic concepts in the one course you named in Part I.of this questionnaire. Please check each item. Use of Classroom Techniques l. 2. Lecture Class Discussion Student Committees Student Panels Student Debate Student Role-Playing Other (Please describe) Frequently Occasionally Seldom Use of Supplementary Materials 8. 9. 10. ll. NeWSpapers Periodicals Booklets or Pamphlets 0.8. Government Publications Frequently, Occasionally Seldom 360 Use of SupplementaryyMaterials (continued) Frequently Occasionally Seldom 12. Books 13. Other (Please describe) 14. Please list the titles of any supplementary materials which you have found especially helpful: Use of Community Resources Frequently Occasionally Seldom 15. Field Trips 16. Field Studies 17. Guest Speakers 18. Other (Please describe) Use of Audio-Visual Aids Frequently, Occasionally, Seldom l9. Flannel Board 20. Charts 21. Films 22. Filmstrips 23. Slides 24. Radio and/or T.V. 25. Bulletin Board 26. Other (Please describe) Student Research Studies of Economic Problems Frequently Occasionally Seldom 27. Done Individually 28. Done by Student Groups 361 Student Evaluation Please check each of the following student achievements which you test for: 29. Knowledge of content 30. Attitude change 31. Development of skill 32. Development of critical thinking 33. Other (Please specify) 34. Approximately how many students in this course do you usually teach during a single class period? C. GENERAL BACKGROUND, PRACTICES, AND OPINIONS OF TEACHERS After filling in the general background information, please consider the remain- ing questions in relation to the one course you named 13 Part I. Feel free to write comments between the lines or on the back of the respective pages. 1. What is your major teaching field? 2. How many years have you been a teacher? 3. How many semester credit hours in college economics courses have you earned? 4. Do you feel that this academic background in economics has been sufficient for your needs in teaching economic concepts in your course? yes no -5. If you have ever attended an eConomic education workshOp, please specify where and in what year: 6. Have you received any information about the 1961 National Task Force Report entitled ECONOMIC EDUCATION IN THE SCHOOLS? yes no 7. If so, have you read this report? “yes no 8. Have you viewed 20 per cent or more of the sessions of the 1962-63 CBS Tele- vision Course, THE AMERICAN ECONOMY? yes no General Practices, Perceptions, and Opinions Please check (5’) the appropriate blank Yes No 9. Do you participate in curriculum planning in your high school? 10. Are you aware of any significant economic education developments in other school systems across the country? 11. ’Do you know what economic concepts are being taught in other teachers' courses in your high school? 12. Have you analyzed your course to determine what and where economic concepts can be taught best? General Background, Practices, and Opinions of Teachers (continued) 13. 14. 15. l6. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 25. 26. 27. Do you feel that your textbook effectively presents the economic tOpics that are related to your course? For classroom use, do you select supplementary reading materials which, collectively, present the vieWpoints of business, labor, and agriculture groups? Have you seen a c0py of the 1961 publication, STUDY MATERIALS FOR ECONOMIC EDUCATION IN THE SCHOOLS? Do you help your students evaluate the logic and objectivity of economic statements? Can you distinguish the different economic vieWpoints of such organizations as The Farm Bureau, The Farmers Union, The AFL/CIO, and The National Association of Manufacturers? Have you developed a file of local community enterprises and resource peOple that can be utilized effectively in special class projects? Do you know of differences between the educational philosophy of the Joint Council on Economic Education and that of the Founda- tion for Economic Education? Are you aware of the objectives and services of the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education? Does your school purchase economic education materials which you request to supplement the textbook in your course? If you could be given some released time from other duties, would you be willing to devote this time to develoPing economic education teaching aids for yourself and other teachers? Do you agree that economic problems, issues, and concepts are relevant to the subject matter of all high school courses? 24. Do you feel that your principal and your school superintend- ent support the viewpoint that economic concepts can be taught in all courses? Do you feel that an elective economics course should be offered in the high school if there are enough interested students to justify staffing the course? Do you consider economic understanding a vital requisite for good citizenship? Do you believe that the major objective of economic education should be to deve10p the student's ability and inclination to analyze economic issues objectively and to weigh the probable results of alternative courses of action? Yes 362 413'!th III-IA General Background, Practices, and Opinions of Teachers (continued) 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. Should pre-service teacher education include training in the specific methods of teaching economic concepts? Should colleges and universities develop one or more special economics course(s) to meet the particular needs of prospec- tive teachers? What is the minimum number of semester credit hours in economics that you believe every prospective teacher should complete during his college work? Do you believe that one person should be designated "Coordinator of Economic Education” for all subject areas of the high school? Do you feel that your high school principal is seriously interested in the effectiveness with which economic tOpics are taught in your course? In general, do you enjoy teaching economic concepts in your course? 363 After considering the list below, please rank your three greatest problems in teaching economic concepts according to the following scale: 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. _ Further Comments 1, Most Significant 2, Secondly Significant 3, Thirdly Significant my inadequate training in economics difficulty of the subject inadequate textbook and supplementary reading materials community pressures to teach certain points of view pupil disinterest and resistance to economic analysis not enough time for lesson planning than the three most significant items in this list) not enough time to cover all that is included in the curriculum other (please name any other problems which you consider more important Do you wish a summary of the results of this study? Yes Name of Your High School No Your Name (please print or type) Individual Responses Will Be Treated in Strict Confidence Professor Clayton Millington College of Business Oklahoma State University Stillwater, Oklahoma T H I R D C L A S S APPENDIX I RESPONSES TO THE SURVEY OF INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES TABLE 27.--The teachers' responses to Part A of the survey of instructional practices8 'o 1‘. .3 >. a) mu 14 HQ) U {.1 p.44 00 (La: u: a 1: Z!“ o.u m (U 01:) ‘H <13 m P1 m Hid o c 04 H O HO O '00) 'O O .c: CL m 6.: o m z m o m Cu HG .cm a) o u a<3 u c m u m u >~H m u m m £4 E . . b m c .41“ ~Hv4 o o 0 Economic Topics 21:: m o .404 c: 141-4 z: 1. 70 199 263 628 216 2. 66 244 286 571 209 3. 99 276 259 542 200 4. 111 307 287 471 200 5. 107 232 273 563 201 6. 113 243 276 558 186 7. 117 234 231 611 183 8. 180 209 228 570 189 9. 43 199 296 626 212 10 73 271 323 513 196 11 45 197 296 629 209 12 95 221 263 599 198 13 186 265 236 503 186 14 85 172 232 685 202 15 160 258 257 526 175 16 50 192 274 656 204 17 89 242 259 592 194 18. 85 232 260 607 192 19. 183 312 249 444 188 20. 274 416 297 233 156 21. 201 224 293 473 185 22. 151 251 324 465 185 23. 73 250 283 564 206 24. 50 221 306 590 209 25. 39 192 299 635 211 26. 39 207 337 588 205 27. 175 260 304 444 193 aThis Table should be read as follows: With regard to the first economic topic, 70 teachers checked "Have a Planned Unit;" 199 teachers checked "Planned as Part of Other Unit;" 263 teachers checked "Little or No Planned Effort;" 628 teachers checked "Does Not Apply to the Course I Teach;" and 216 teachers did not respond to this item. b . . . . . The economic topics are listed In Part A of the question- naire in Appendix H. c In analyzing the data in this section of the study, the investigator interpreted a nonresponse as equivalent to a coded response "Does Not Apply to the Course I Teach." 364 TABLE 28.--Teachers' responses to Part B of the survey of instructional practices8 U >5 a: H G) a "a; 2 2 8 a Teaching g '3 g 3 Methods apd 8‘ 3 3 *5 Materials ,1: 8 g; 2 1 510 400 209 p 257 2 660 3691 117 230 3 105 336 540 395 4. 92 281 602 401 5. 59 184 702 431 6 71 185 652 468 8 366 402 - 314 294 9. 423 426 243 284 10. 401 422 262 291 11. 196 415 438 327 12. 544 316 224 292 15. 44 213 660 459 16. 36 145 695 500 17. 63 367 548 398 19. 25 54 694 603 20. 305 387 291 393 21. 277 451 298 350 22. 164 334 443 435 23. 83 232 559 502 24. 138 263 521 454 25. 406 347 '208 415 27. 159 297 521 399 28. 98 232 608 438 365 aThis Table should be read as follows: their practices with regard to Item 1 on Part B, 510 teachers checked "Frequently;" 400 checked "Occasionally;" 209 checked "Seldomg" and 257 did not respond. b . See Part B of the questionnaire in Appendix H for a statement of the Teaching Methods and Materials to which the item numbers in this column refer. cIn analyzing the data in this section of the study, the investi- gator interpreted nonresponses as equivalent to nonperformance of the respective practices described in Part B. In reporting the extent of TABLE 29.-~The teachers' responses to Part C of the survey of instructional a practices m Item No.b Yes No Uncertain NonresponsesC 4 540 545 291 5. 188 1188 6. 148 1074 154 7 121 403 852 8 160 1038 178 9. 566 650 20 140 10. 440 784 4 148 11. 362 866 8 140 12. 593 628 17 137 13. 550 538 43 245 14. 421 722 18 215 15. 117 1089 3 167 16. 642 510 8 216 17. 567 619 6 184 18. 179 1013 11 173 19. 77 1118 3 179 20. 246 947 7 176 21. 381 547 66 382 22. 520 569 27 260 23. 906 240 27 203 24. 826 100 50 400 25. 1122 50 17 187 26. 1121 77 13 165 27. 1121 50 15 190 28. 842 257 40 237 29. 1016 139 21 200 31. 335 682 39 320 32. 831 151 34 360 33. 770 212 61 333 42. 606 523 247 aThis Table Should be read as follows: 540 teachers responded affirmatively to Item 4 on Part C; whereas 545 teachers responded negatively, and 291 teachers did not respond to this item. See Part C of the questionnaire in Appendix H for a statement of the teaching practices and perceptions to which the item numbers in this column refer. CIn analyzing the data in this section of the study, the investi- gator interpreted a response as negative whenever a teacher did not check a particular item or whenever he indicated some uncertainty as to whether he was following the practice described in the reSpective item. 366 367 RESPONSES TO THE SURVEY OF INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES WHICH WERE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE STANDARD ANSWER CODING1 PART A One-semester courses 127 ; Two-semester courses 1,123; Nonresponses 126_2 PART B l££fl.§2° .EEEEEEEE 7, 13, 14, 18, 263 29. Affirmative _24§_; Nonresponses _439_. 30. Affirmative _ggg_; Nonresponses _§§Q_. 31. Affirmative _614_; Nonresponses _Zgg_. 32. Affirmative 852 ; Nonresponses _224_. 34. Average class size per school: 25 - 29 students, 25 schools; 30 - 34 students, 14 schools; 35 - 39 students, 4 schools; More than 40 students, 1 school. PART C 2. l - 2 years 187 ; 3 - 6 years 271 ; 7 or more 787 ; Nonresponses 131 . 3. 0 - 2 hours 632 ; 3 - 5 hours 282 ; 6 - 11 hours 337 ; 12 or more hours 125 . 30. O - 3 hours 747 ; 4 - 6 hours 374 ; 7 - 9 hours 98 ; 10 - 15 hours 129 ; 16 or more hours 28 . 1 . . . See Appendix H for a statement of the practices to which the items in this tabulation refer. 2 An introductory informational item in Part A. This item was not numbered on the questionnaire. 3 These items were all open-ended questions, and they were discussed on pp. 206-208. 368 RESPONSES TO THE SURVEY OF INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES WHICH WERE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE STANDARD ANSWER CODING (Continued) Item No. Response 34.4 <1)__§_§3__; <2) __1_§_g_; <3) __29_S___; <4) __§_z§__. 35. (1) __QLI; (2) __l§_1_; (3) __122—3 (4) _élL- 36- (1) _lL; (2) __1_§2_; (3) __2_1_C)__; (4) __Z,2_Q__ 37. (1) __g§__; (2) ___{+_2_; (3) __l_2_§__; (4) ___27_8___ 38. (1) __1_7_Z_; (2) __1_96___; (3) __1_9_§__; (4) _QLS__- 39. (1) __41122__; (2) __2_1_7___; (3) __L§_1_; (4) __é;3__- 40. (1) __1_2_2__; (2) __1_5_9___; (3) __2_Q7__; (4) _Z_5_§_- 41.5 I; The response categories for Items 34-40 in Part C were as follows: (1) Most Significant; (2) Secondly Significant; (3) Thirdly Significant; and a "4" indicated that a particular item had been considered comparatively insignificant by the designated number of teachers who checked the item. An additional 133 teachers failed to check any of the items in this particular group. Item 41 was an open-ended question. The responses to this item were discussed on pp. 221-22. APPENDIX J FOLLOW-UP NOTICES REGARDING THE QUESTIONNAIRES ON ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES (Lg/SHEA »~L. :40 EERIAWM r2377.) :4.» \IHHXALJE asnrron fill-m 1v ‘- 2’51"? Jf-EHWIIWHHIJ‘VW' GM HVIIAXTZIKIMA .1‘ 369 kg. 17'3" GKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY ' STILLWATER Lil-‘14. 7";3“? College of Business 5:“ % FRonnor 2-6211, Ext 253 In checking the responses of schools to the economic education survey, I notice that no forms have been received from your high school, According to our records, the survey materials should have arrived at your school several weeks ago along with enclosed postage for return mailing of the completed forms. On , I talked with about the survey and the materials were mailed to , As I indicated in the letter to , I would be willing to administer the survey at a meeting of your teachers if you feel it would be important for me to do so, Since the instructions are fairly easy to follow, 90 per cent of the high school principals have administered the question- naires to their own teachers, It may be that the survey materials have been inadvertently placed to one side during the rush of other business, I am writing you now with the realization that you will probably want to complete the survey before the rush of end-of—school activities, Copies of the form for the principal and the form for the teacher are enclosed, I will be glad to send more if your packet of materials has been misplaced or if it has never arrived at your school, On behalf of the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education and the Oklahoma Curriculum Improvement Commission, I can say that your coopera- tion on this important study will be greatly appreciated, Sincerely, M Cl on Millington Executive Director of the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education CM:s Enclosures . I. 1.1I .111 I‘ll! ll‘llllll ll‘ll'lhlllll'l‘l‘l llt]|\11|1:.l Ill 370 OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY ° STILLWATER College of Business FRontier 2-6211, Exl. 258 We were glad to receive completed copies of the economic education survey form from your teachers. Perhaps a follow-up announcement from you at this time would result in an even better response. Completed questionnaires from the remaining teachers would make a significant contribution toward validating the total study. You might ask that teachers (outside of the art, music, and physical education areas) return the completed form within the next two weeks if they have not already done so. It takes only 30~4O minutes to complete the teacher's form, and I believe they will want to do this before the rush of end-of—school activities. I am enclosing a few extra copies of the teacher's form and more are available if you need them. On behalf of the Oklahoma Council on Economic Edu— cation and the Oklahoma Curriculum Improvement Commission, I can say your cooperation is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, tive Director, 0k ahoma Council on Economic Education CM:b Enclosure 4 It: .l a. In" APPENDIX K SEMESTER CREDIT HOURS IN ECONOMICS EARNED BY TEACHERS OF EACH SEPARATE SUBJECT 371 TABLE 30.-~Number of semester credit hours in economics earned by teachers of each separate subjecta No. of Credit Hours in Economics Subjects Teachers 0 - 2b 3 - 5 6 - ll 12 or more Voc. Agriculture 13 0 l 7 5 Basic Business 9 l O 4 4 Bookkeeping 23 3 7 8 5 Business Arithmetic 12 2 7 3 0 Business English 5 3 l l 0 Business Law 6 O 3 1 2 Business Machines 6 2 l 3 0 Business Skills 5‘~ 2 O 1 2 Business Subjects 4 0 l 2 l Co-operative Training 3 O O l 2 Distributive Education 10 3 2 3 2 Diversified Occupations 12 4 4 3 1 General Business 26 8 6 9 3 Office Practice 16 9 2 3 2 Salesmanship 1 O O 1 O Shorthand l9 7 3 8 l Typing 29 13 5 9 2 Drivers Education 18 9 0 6 3 Consumer Economics 9 l 1 1 6 Economics 17 3 2 5 7 Economic Geography 1 l 0 O 0 Family Economics 10 4 3 2 1 International Problems 2 O O l 1 English l7 13 O 3 1 American Literature 52 36 5 8 3 Composition and Grammar 4 1 1 l 1 English I 30 17 4 4 5 English II 64 34 17 10 3 English III 23 13 6 3 1 English IV 19 11 4 3 1 English Literature 29 16 6 6 1 Grammar 1 O 0 l 0 Journalism 13 4 4 4 1 Language Arts 4 3 O l 0 World Literature 5 4 1 O 0 Foreign Language 1 0 0 l 0 French 24 15 4 4 1 German 1 1 O 0 0 Latin 27 15 7 5 0 Spanish 45 31 3 10 1 372 Table 30.--Continued j w No. of Credit Hours in Economics Subject Teachers 0 — 2b 3 — 5 6 - 11 12 or more Clothing 8 3 3 1 1 Foods 5 l l 2 1 Family Relations 3 2 1 0 0 Interior Design 1 O l O 0 Homemaking 12 2 5 4 1 Home Economics 24 ll 8 4 1 Interior Decorating 8 5 2 O 1 Vocational Homemaking l 1 O O 0 Vocational Tailoring 2 0 O 2 O Drafting and Drawing 21 9 4 1 Auto Mechanics 19 ll 2 5 1 Electronics 12 4 5 3 0 General Shop 1 O O l 0 Machine Shop 16 10 4 2 0 Graphic Arts (Printing) ll 6 2 2 1 Radio and TV Repairs 1 1 O O O Woodworking 18 11 l 4 2 Industrial Arts 21 12 3 6 0 Mathematics 7 7 O O 0 Algebra 44 22 12 10 0 Algebra, Adv. (SMSG) 4 3 1 O 0 Algebra, Intermediate 7 4 l 2 O Calculus 1 0 0 1 0 College Alg. and Trig. 3 3 O O 0 Geometry 21 14 4 3 0 Geometry, Plane 13 6 4 3 0 Geometry (SMSG) 2 2 O 0 0 Geometry, Solid 2 1 0 0 1 Applied Math 39 17 10 12 0 Math, Intermed. (SMSG) 4 2 2 0 0 Biology 103 57 23 19 4 Chemistry 31 17 5 7 2 Earth Science 5 2 l 2 0 Geology 2 O O l 1 Physics 12 6 4 2 0 Science 7 2 4 l 0 Social Studies 1 O O 1 0 American Government 11 l 1 5 4 American History 120 33 21 45 21 Am. Hist. & Govt. 1 l O 0 0 Am. History & Geog. 2 O l l 0 Civics 3 3 O 0 0 373 Table 30.--Continued 1 J I ‘ Credit Hours in Economics Subjects Teachers 0 - 2b 3 - 5 6 - 11 12 or more Civics, Advanced 1 O 0 l 0 Oklahoma History 4 O 2 1 1 Problems in Democracy 18 5 3 5 5 Psychology 8 4 3 1 O Sociology 7 l 2 3 1 World Geography 3 1 2 O 0 Ancient and Medieval Hist. 4 O 1 3 0 World History 43 15 9 15 4 Latin Am. Hist. l l 0 O 0 Debate 11 2 2 1 Drama 2 1 1 O 0 Speech 21 13 3 4 Special Education ”Social Studies” 2 1 O l 0 "Language Arts" 7 5 2 O O a This table should be read as follows: None of the vocational agriculture teachers had earned fewer than 2 hours of credit in economics; whereas, 1 had earned from 3-5 hours; 7 had earned from 6-11 hours; and 5 had earned 12 or more hours. For purposes of analysis, it was assumed that the (576) teachers who failed to respond to this question had completed no more than 0-2 credit hours in economics.