I‘ .u-g AN ANALYSIS OF THREE FEE-STUDENT TEACHING EXPERIENCES IN THE PREPARATION OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL- TEACHERS TIIesIs Ior II'te Degree of DI'I. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY William Ward Sinclair 1961 '2 we 1-19 This is to certify that the thesis entitled AN ANALYSIS OF THREE PIE-STUDENT TEACHING EXPERIENCES IN THE PREPARATION OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHERS presented by I WILLIAM WARD SINCLAIR has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph- D. degree in Edugatigp Zazmzér Major professor Date February 17, L261 0-169 LIBRARY Michigan State University -’*. .— -.-——..~ “*‘.. ~w———_— ......_e __ ABSTRACT AN ANALYSIS OF THREE PRE-STUDENT TEACHING EXPERIENCES IN THE PREPARATION OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHERS by William Ward Sinclair This study is an attempt to determine which of three different pre—student teaching experiences best prepared the elementary student teacher for her full term of student teaching at Michigan State University. During the Fall Term, 1959, a random selection was made of the applicants for Winter Term, 1960 elementary student teaching which placed thirty students in a reading group, thirty—two in an observation group, and sixty-seven in a control group. Students in the reading group earned three term credits in the College of Education through independent reading in the field of education. Students in the observation group earned three term credits by observing three hours per week in an elementary classroom. Students in the control group were enrolled in normal classes in the College of Education. The Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Purdue Teachers Examination: How I Teach were administered to all of the students on three different occasions. The first occasion was a pre—test administered in September, 1959 to determine whether or not there was a significant difference among the William Ward Sinclair three groups. The second was administered during the first week of student teaching in the Winter Term, 1960 to deter— mine what changes, if any, occurred among the groups as a result of their different experiences during the previous term. The last testing session was held during the final week of student teaching to determine what influence, if any, student teaching had on the different groups. Each student in the reading and observation groups was interviewed twice during the Fall Term, 1959. Each student in these two groups also submitted an evaluation of her ex- periences as a member of one of the groups. The interviews, evaluations, and test results comprise the data used in this study. An analysis of variance was computed for each adminis— tration of the tests to determine what differences existed among the mean scores of the groups on the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Purdue Teachers Examination. It was found that no significant difference existed in the mean scores on the three groups of the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory at any of the occasions when the test was given during the two-term period of this study. Using the data of the Purdue Teachers Examination, it was found that a significant difference at less than the five per cent level of probability existed among the groups at the first testing session. Multiple t tests showed there was a signifi- cant difference at the one per cent level of significance William Ward Sinclair between the observation and control groups where t = 2.87. There was no significant difference between the reading group and either of the other two groups. No significant difference in the mean scores of the three groups on the Purdue Teachers Examination existed on the two subsequent administrations of the test. The interviews with the students in the reading and observation groups and the evaluations submitted by them indicate that, in the opinions of the students, there was a difference in their pre-student teaching experiences. All members of the observation group felt that they were better prepared for student teaching than were students in the other two groups. All students in the reading group felt they were better prepared for student teaching than students in the con- trol group, but twenty-eight of the reading group expressed the opinion that they were not as well prepared as the students in the reading and observation group. The opinions of the students in the reading and obser— vation groups are not supported by their scores on the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Purdue Teachers Examination. If there were differences among the groups, the testing did not reveal that these differences existed. AN ANALYSIS OF THREE PRE-STUDENT TEACHING EXPERIENCES IN THE PREPARATION OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHERS By William Ward Sinclair A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements ' forlthe.degree‘of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ~ College of Education 1961 (7 A6 35:3 7/2.,» /; / ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to express his gratitude to the members of his advisory committee: Dr. Wilbur B. Brookover, Dr. William K. Durr, and Dr. Harry W. Sundwall for their interest and helpful criticisms. To the chairman of his committee, Dr. William V. Hicks, the writer wishes to extend his grateful appreciation for the many hours spent in assisting the writer in bringing this study to completion. Special thanks are also extended to the students at Michigan State University with whom the writer worked, and also to the teachers in the East Lansing Schools who were so gracious in allowing students to take part in their class- room activities. To his wife, Jane, the writer is greatly indebted for her encouragement and patience. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii ‘LIST OF TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . V Chapter I. THE PROBLEM. 1 Statement of the Problem 1 Importance of the Problem . . 1 Assumptions on Which Study is Based. 5 Hypotheses to be Tested. . 5 Scope of the Problem. 6 Definition of Terms . . 7 Procedures Used in this Study. 8 Limitations of the Study 10 II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 12 III. METHOD OF PROCEDURE AND SOURCES OF DATA 42 Selection of the Groups. 42 The Reading Group. 42 The Observation Group 43 The Testing Program 44 Interviews . . ll5 Evaluations by Students. . 45 Testing During Student Teaching 46 Summary . . . . . . 47 IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA 48 Introduction 48 The Raw Scores. 49 The Reading Group. 49 The Observation Group 51 The Control Group. . 52 Statistical Analysis of Data 55 Summary . . . . 63 iii Chapter Page V. INTERVIEWS AND STUDENT EVALUATIONS . . . . 66 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . 66 Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Evaluations. . . . . . . . . . . 70 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . 75 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . 77 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 iv Table 10. 11. LIST OF TABLES Distribution of highest and lowest scores of reading group on Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. Distribution of highest and lowest scores of reading group on Purdue Teachers Examination Distribution of highest and lowest scores of observation group on Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. Distribution of highest and lowest scores of observation group on Purdue Teachers Examination Distribution of highest and lowest scores of control group on Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. Distribution of highest and lowest scores of control group on Purdue Teachers Examination Percentages of students in each group who showedl consistent improvement on the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Purdue Teachers Examination . . . . . Analysis of variance of observation, reading, and control groups on Minnesota Teacher _ Attitude Inventory before preparatory experi- ences for student teaching Analysis of variance of observation, reading, and control groups on Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory when they began student teaching . . . . . . . . . Analysis of variance of observation, reading, and control groups on Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory at the conclusion of student teaching Analysis of variance of observation, reading, and control groups on Purdue Teachers Examination before preparatory experiences for student teaching V Page SO 50 51 52 53 .54 Us: 54 56 57 57 58 Table Page 12. Means and variances of observation, reading, and control groups on the Purdue Teachers Examination before preparatory experiences for'sfiudent teaching . . . . . . . . . 58 13. Analysis of variance of observation, reading, and control groups on Purdue Teachers Examination when they began student teaching . 60 14. Analysis of variance of observation, reading, and control groups on Purdue Teachers Examination at the conclusion of student teaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 15. Data for the test of difference between means of the difference from September, 1959 to March, 1960 on the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 16. Data for the test of difference between means of the difference from September, 1959 to March, 1960 on the Purdue Teachers Examination. . . 62 vi CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Statement of the Problem This study is an attempt to determine which of three different pre-student teaching experiences best prepares the elementary student teacher for her full term of student teaching at Michigan State University. Importance of the Problem The world today exists only because men have refrained from launching the destructive capabilities which they possess. If mankind is ever going to know peace and ser- enity, all peoples must learn to understand, accept, and trust all others. Since no nation can, at the present time, forceably impose its doctrine on another without fear of swift and violent reprisal, each nation that wishes to change the behavior and attitudes of others must do so through precept and example. It follows, then, that the nation which presents the finest ideal before the world will be more apt to attract others to its position than a nation whose ideals are found wanting. The ideals, aims, and aspirations of any nation can be furthered only by preparing the children and youth to advance toward these goals in future years. This preparation of the children and youth to carry on the cultural heritage is an educative process. Thus, education becomes one of the most important functions of any government. In each country formal institutions have evolved through the centuries charged with the primary responsibility of educating the nation's children. Our nation, like any other, must provide as strong an educational system as possible in order to give to children the opportunity to grow and develop under a system of government which we believe to be better than others. Strong educational systems do not just happen. They are based on an intelligent, well- qualified, dedicated teaching profession. Therefore, the training of teachers may well be considered the keystone in the development of a strong educational system. The preparation of teachers is a complex task involving knowledge of many disciplines. In addition, understanding of the teaching—learning process must be mastered. Consequently, students in colleges and universities who are preparing to become teachers are faced with a very broad curriculum. However, one phase of this total program stands out in bold relief. For many years student teaching has been considered the most important part of a student's preparation for the teaching profession.1 Any attempt which seeks to increase the readiness of students for such an important phase of their professional training should be encouraged. By being better prepared to enter the student teaching phase of their educational program, it is assumed that students will be able to gain more worthwhile experiences which, in turn, will make the student teaching experience itself an even more important and more valuable experience than it has been in the past. Efforts to improve student teaching programs are not new. In recent years many significant changes have been wrought in student teaching programs as a result of the almost constant experimentation and evaluation which has been and is being conducted. One of the most comprehensive studies was started in 1934 by the faculty of Central Michigan University, Mt. Pleasant, Michigan in cooperation with the State Board of Education and the State Department of Public Instruction. The purpose of this project was to achieve three closely related objectives, one of which was lKate L. Boyce, "What Is The Most Important Part of Teacher Training?" Ohio Schools, 30:162-163, April, 1952. Chester W. Harris (ed.), Encyclopedia of Educational Research (New York: The Macmillan Company, 19607: p. 1473. Clarence A. Newell and Richard H. Byrne, "Field Ex- periences in Education," The Journal of Teacher Education, 10:435—38, December, 1959. ‘ Florence B. Stratemeyer and Margaret Lindsey, Working With Student Teachers (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1958), p. 4. "the development of a program of teacher preparation more adequate to the present needs of Michigan." The project involving thirty-five students and seven faculty members centered around the needs of the individual student. The needs of each student were determined after a thorough self—appraisal with the assistance of a faculty member. Adjustments in the curriculum were made in an effort to provide each student with the experiences necessary to meet his pre—determined needs. In the 1940's “Michigan State University made signifi- cant revisions in the professional preparation of teachers ”3 of agriculture and home economics. Students in these areas originated the full-time off campus student teaching program at Michigan State University. Special methods courses were offered in the field which enabled the students to earn sufficient credits during the term to maintain their class standing. Since that time the College of Education of Michigan State University has developed the full-time off campus student teaching program for all prospective teachers. The State of Michigan, generally, and Michigan State University, in particular, have traditionally been alert to new ideas in teacher education. It is in keeping with this 2Kenneth L. Heaton and G. Robert Koopman, A College Curriculum Based on Functional Needs of Students (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1936), p. l. 3Charles E. Prall, State Programs for the Improvement of Teacher Education (Washington: American Council on Edu— cation, 1946), p. 72. tradition that the present study has attempted to evaluate and analyze different methods of better preparing the future teachers of the state and nation. Assumptions on Which Study Is Based The assumptions underlying this study are: 1. Different kinds of experiences prior to student teaching are related to success in student teaching. 2. The greater the success of students in student teaching, the better prepared they will be to enter the teaching profession. Hypotheses to be Tested 1. Students in the reading, observation, and control groups will have different attitudes and knowledge about teaching before and after student teaching. 2. Students in the observation group will achieve the greatest gain of the three groups in attitudes and knowledge as measured by the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Purdue Teachers Examination. 3. Students in the reading group will achieve more gain than the control group and less gain than the obser- vation group in attitudes and knowledge as measured by the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Purdue Teachers Examination. 4. Students in the control group will achieve the least gain of the three groups in attitudes and knowledge as measured by the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Purdue Teachers Examination. Scope of the Problem This study has dealt with all elementary female student teachers at Michigan State University for the Winter Term, 1960 who were enrolled in the University during the previous term. These students were divided at random into a reading group, an observation group, and a control group. During the term prior to student teaching, the students in the reading group were placed in an experimental reading section in the College of Education, the students in the observation group were assigned to an experimental observation section, and the students in the control group continued in the normal courses. A pre-test was administered at the beginning of the Fall Term, 1959; a second test was given at the beginning of student teaching in January, 1960; and a final test was administered at the conclusion of student teaching in March, 1960. An attempt was made by the use of these test scores to determine what differences, if any, occurred among the three groups as they prepared for and participated in student teaching. Each student in the reading and observation groups was interviewed at least twice during the term prior to student teaching. In addition, each of the students in these two groups submitted an evaluation of her experiences as a member of one of the groups. The selection factors, specific experiences, and eval- uation procedures which were used are described in detail in Chapters III, IV, and V. Definition of Terms For the purpose of this study certain terminology is defined as follows: 1. Student teachers are the students from Michigan State University who have been assigned to spend full time for one term in a public school where they practice teach under the guidance of a supervising teacher. 2. Supervising teachers are full time teachers in public schools who supervise the student teaching activities of Michigan State University students who are attempting to earn a State Elementary Provisional Certificate. 3. College coordinators are faculty members in the College of Education, Michigan State University who act as liaison between the University and public school personnel and student teachers in the centers (or communities) where students do their student teaching. 4. The reading group consisted of those Winter Term, 1960 elementary student teachers who were in an experimental reading section of the Teacher Education Department course number 424 during the Fall Term, 1959. 5. The observation group consisted of those Winter Term, 1960 elementary student teachers who were in an experi- mental observation section of the Teacher Education Department course number 424 during the Fall Term, 1959. 6. The control group consisted of the remainder of the Winter Term, 1960 elementary student teachers. Procedures Used in This Study In the spring of 1959 a count of the applicatiOns for Winter Term, 1960 student teaching showed that 108 students in elementary education had completed their applications. A random division of these applications placed forty students in the reading group, forty students in the observation group, and the remaining twenty—eight in the control group. Subse- quent applications were added to the control group which eventually totaled seventy—two students. A memorandumbr was sent to all students in the reading group requesting their presence at a meeting in the College of Education Building which was held before the students left the Campus for the summer. .A similar memorandum was sent to the members of the observation group.5 Separate meetings were held for each.group. In each of the meetings the students were asked to enroll in their respective sections of Teacher Education 424 during the Fall Term, 1959 after a brief outline of the proposed course was described. In the Fall Term, 1959, thirty students, of the forty who had been chosen, enrolled in the reading section of “Appendix A. 5Appendix B. Teacher Education 424, and thus became the reading group used in this study. In a like manner thirty-two students enrolled in the observation group used in this study. The remaining seventy-two students formed the control group as was mentioned above. During the first week of the Fall Term, 1959, two tests were administered to the entire 134 students. These tests were the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Purdue Teachers Examination: How I Teach, Form A. In the Winter Term, 1960, when these students were doing their student teaching, these two examinations were administered two additional times; once at the first seminar meeting, and again, at their last seminar meeting. Thus the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory was administered three times, while Form A of the Purdue Teachers Examination: How I Teach was administered twice; the first time in September, 1959 and the second time in March, 1960. Form B of this examination was used in January, 1960. An analysis of variance was computed from the mean scores of each group on both tests in order to determine: (1) the difference among the groups at each administration of the tests, (2) the differences within each group over the two-term experimental period. The students who were enrolled in the reading section and those in the observation section were interviewed at least wice, and in addition, they were required to write an evaluation of their experiences in their respective classes. 10 The analysis of the test results, the interviews, the student evaluations, and the review of related literature form the basis for this study. Limitations of the Study Since the student teachers from Michigan State University are assigned to teaching centers throughout a large geographical area, it was impossible for one examiner to administer all of the tests in January and March, 1960. Although detailed instructions6 were given to each college coordinator, there is little one can do to determine how closely these directions were followed. Thus the fact of different examiners for two of the three testing situations may limit the results of this study. It must also be remembered that this study deals only with one group of students in one university. All of the students in this study were girls, all were seniors except six who were in the junior class, and all were working toward a bachelor's degree and a Michigan Elementary Provisional Certificate. The group of students in this study were selected only because they had applied for student teaching during the Winter Term, 1960. Since no other factors were involved in their selection, it can be assumed that they were a typical group of students enrolled in a college of education at a large mid-western university. 6Appendix D. 11 Therefore, the findings here may or may not be appli— cable to other students in other situations. In any study of this nature, local conditions and regulations should be carefully considered before any far—reaching implications are drawn. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Since the early days of the Republic, many national leaders have been concerned not only with education in a broad sense, but also in the training of teachers specif- ically. At a convention of the Plymouth County Association for the Improvement of Common Schools in 1838, Daniel Webster expressed concern about teaching methods when he said, "We teach too much by manuals, too little by direct intercourse with the pupils' mind; we have too much of words, toolittle of things. For example, geology must be taught by excursions in the field . . . Teachers must teach things!"l At this same convention, John Quincy Adams, who had only recently supported the normal school idea, stated that he was proud that Massachusetts should be the first state to consider public normal schools. The next year saw the opening of the first state sup- ported normal school at Lexington, Massachusetts, quickly followed by two more; one at Barre, the other at Bridgewater. 1Charles A. Harper, A Century of Public Teacher Edu— cation (Washington: National Education Association, 19393, p. 23. 21bid., pp. 23-24. 12 13 The State Board of Education adopted certain standing regu— lations for the three schools: To each Normal School, an Experimental or Model School is attached. This School is under the control of the Principal of the Normal School. The pupils of the Normal School assist in teaching it. Here, the knowledge which they acquire in the science of teaching, is practically applied. The art is made to grow out of the science, instead of being empirical. The Principal of the Normal School inspects the Model School more or less, daily. He observes the manner in which his own pupils exemplify, in practice, the principles he has taught them. Sometimes, all the pupils of the Normal School, together with the Principal, visit the Model School in a body, to observe the manner in which the teachers of the latter, for the time being, conduct the recitations or exercises. Then, returning to their own schoolroom, in company with the assistant teachers themselves, who have been the objects of inspection, each one is called upon to deliver his views, whether commendatory or otherwise, respecting the manner in which the work has merits and defects, the Principal of the Normal School presides. After all others have presented their views, he delivers his own; and thus his pupils, at the threshold of their practice, have an opportunity to acquire confidence in a good cause, of which they might otherwise entertain doubts, and to rectify grrors which otherwise would fossilize jinto habit. From the modest beginning in teacher training in Massachusetts has evolved a complex, highly organized system of teacher education. Throughout this entire development there has been a constant awareness of the importance of the student teaching experience in the total preparation of teachers. However, before 1948 relatively little had been written about professional laboratory experiences for 3Henry Barnard, Normal Schools and Other Institutions, Agencies, and Means Designed for the ProfessionaI Education of Teachers (Hartford, Connecticut: Cape, Tiffany, and Com- pany, 1851I, p. 57- 14 prospective teachers prior to their student teaching assign- ments. In fact, this investigator was not able to find the phrase "professional laboratory experiences” used in the literature until it appeared in the report of the Sub-Commit- tee of the Standards and Survey Committee of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education where it was published in the First Yearbook of that organization.4 Since the issuance of this report, many articles have appeared which are related to this subject. The report, referred to as Standard VI, formulated a number of basic principles pertaining to the development of professional laboratory experiences. Its importance has been summarized by Isabel Jones when she stated "the study made by the Sub—Committee of the American Association of Teachers Colleges constituted the most significant single contribution to the development of professional laboratory experiences in the pre—service education of teachers that has been made during the entire history of teacher education in the United States."5 The full text of Standard VI may be found in Appendix M of this study. “American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, First Yearbook (Oneonta, New York: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 1948), p. 88. 5Isabel Fleming Jones, "A Study of the Relationship of Various Types of Pre-Student Teaching Experiences to Success in Student Teaching" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Univer- sity of Virginia, 1955), p. 32. 15 A review of the literature before this time indicates that professional laboratory experiences other than student teaching were not typical procedures in the teacher training institutions across the country. The amount of time that is required of a student to prepare for teaching has been in- creased from eleven weeks in the earliest normal schools to our present four-and—five—year curricula in teacher training institutions, but there has not been a comparable increase in the amount of time devoted to professional laboratory experiences. In Michigan a study was inaugurated by the State Association for Student Teaching in April, 1948, which, in part, attempted to identify the "working conditions and facilities for student teaching"6 which existed in Michigan at that time. One conclusion reported in 1953 was that the elementary schools and, ”especially the secondary, are limited in laboratory experiences prior to student teaching."7 Several attempts have been made in recent years to provide students with additional laboratory experiences of many types. One such effort was launched by Clark College,8 6Mary Frances Gates and Donald M. Currie, "Survey of Supervision of Student Teaching in Michigan," Journal of Educational Research, 46:497-511, March, 1953. 71bid., p. A99. 8Pearlie Craft Dove, "An Exploration of Planned Obser- vation—Participation Experiences Prior to Student Teaching in Conjunction With Children's Literature," Educational Ad- ministration and Supervision, 44:27-36, January, 1958. 16 Atlanta, Georgia in which thirty—five pupils enrolled in a Children's Literature course were given an opportunity for observation-participation experiences prior to student teaching. The experiences were confined "to informal educational agencies since the seniors were engaged in student teaching at the majority of the available public schools."9 Two nursery schools, the children's wards in two hospitals, a kindergarten, and a library were the centers which the stu- dents used. Although the students were not involved in classroom situations similar to those in which they would be expected to do their student teaching, the evaluations which were submitted by students, agency heads, and college co- ordinators were favorable enough that continued and increasing numbers of observation-participation experiences were being contemplated.lO Andrewsll has stated that "the extreme variety and com- plexity of the demands made on beginning teachers today also serve to focus attention on the needs for extensive pre- service experience of a broad and functional type."l2 91bid., p. 29. lOIbid., p. 36. 11Leonard 0. Andrews, "Experimental Programs of Labora- t01?y Experiences in Teacher Education," The Journal of Teezcher Education, 1:259—67, December, 1950. 12Ibid., p. 260. 17 Visiting classrooms and passively observing the proceedings are not adequate laboratory experiences, according to Andrews. A report13 from the State Teachers College at Geneseo, New York, emphasizes the need for careful preparation with students before they begin their observation. While, at first, the students may only be observing, their observations are carefully scheduled to coincide with the regular class sessions. Discussions of their observations with their instructor, the grade supervisor, and other students help to induct each student into the responsibility of working inde— pendently with children. This is the initial step in a four year program which not only provides, but requires, that stu— dents spend a portion of each year in professional laboratory experiences. It should be pointed out, however, that even such a carefully designed program as the one described above could conceivably degenerate into a series of requirements to be hurdled for graduation and certification unless the faculty works closely together so that the needs of the individual students are met. Hunsicker is quite emphatic regarding this point. He stated that laboratory experiences ”must be more than mere contacts with children. They must be care- fully planned, each based on those that have gone before, 13H. D. Behrens, "A Functional Program of Teacher Edu- caISion," The Journal of Teacher Education, 2:185—88, September, 1951. 18 and keep in mind the readiness of the student for certain types of experience."14 15 writing for the Committee on Student Lindsey, Teaching of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, reported that admission to student teaching assign- ments was more or less automatic as long as the student had fulfilled certain prescribed courses. The findings of the Committee on Student Teaching show that the individual needs of students and their readiness to profit from student teaching are rarely considered when admitting students to the student teaching program. Writing ten years later, Stratemeyer and Lindsey state that "some colleges are not yet ready to implement fully the principle of individual differences as it applies to the work of the student teacher."16 Hildreth has stressed the need for individual direct experiences for students who are preparing to teach in order for them "(1) to understand children through a wide age \ 14Clarence L. Hunsicker, "Developing a Suggested Pro— gram of Professional Laboratory Experiences Prior to Student Teaching for Prospective Elementary Teachers at Mansfield State Teachers College" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, 1955), p. 25. 15Margaret Lindsey, "Major Findings and Recommendations 111 the Study of Professional Laboratory Experiences," First Ykfitrbook (Oneonta, New York: The American Association of ColJleges for Teacher Education, National Education Association, 19463), pp. 197—212. l6Florence B. Stratemeyer and Margaret Lindsey, Working Witkl Student Teachers (New York: Bureau of Publications, TeaCIiers College, Columbia University, 1958), p. 433. 19 range; (2) to know how learning takes place as a social, co- operative, interactive process; (3) to understand the culture of which the school is a part; (4) to recognize the teacher's own problems of living and how to deal with them."17 There is considerable evidence, however, that certain colleges and universities are attempting, and have been trying for many years, to provide the kinds of experiences which Lindsey, Stratemeyer, Hildreth, and others deem so essential. Such experiences have been required at North- western University for some years in the "100 hours" pro- gram.18 All students in teacher education are required to spend 100 hours in field laboratory work with children and youth in schools, camps, religious education, or other pre- approved centers before they are allowed to enter student teaching. The City College of New York has established a plan "to strengthen students' educational insights prior to student teaching."19 This plan includes the following: 1. A systematic supervised schoolvvisiting program in conjunction with the first course in professional Education sequence (Contemporary Educational Thought —w l7Gertrude Hildreth, "The Role of Experiential Learning in the Education of Teachers,” The Journal of Teacher Edu— cation, 2:180—84, September, 1951. 18Harold G. Shane, Mary Aline Collis, and Howard V. Imaredith, "Improving Instruction in Elementary Education," IUKDroving Instruction in Professional Education, Thirty- setnenth Yearbook of The Association for Student Teaching in CC>C>1peration with the National Society of College Teachers of EdUUEation (Cedar Falls, Iowa: The Association for Student Tea<3hins. 1958). pp. 33-46. 19Ibid., p. 36. 20 2. A required supervised group—work field assignment in a community center or school in conjunction with the first course in psychological foundations in Education (Child and Adolescent Development). 3. Additional credited or voluntary assignments in schools, including assignments as non-teaching school aides. 4. Observation and participation in a full- blown childO guidance clinic (The City College Educational Clinic).2 Andrews21 has pointed out quite emphatically that colleges and universities can not provide the necessary ex— periences for prospective teachers within their own laboratory schools. Consequently, public schools, with their experienced members of the teaching profession, must provide the settings in which a major portion of professional laboratory experi- ences, prior to and including student teaching take place. The public school and the college or university with which it becomes associated must wholly understand and accept the fact that, great as the need is for these various experiences for prospective teachers, "the needs of the boys and girls in the school must come first in every instance." In a report of an experimental program at North Texas State Teachers College, Griffiths23 has shown how quickly 20 Ibid., p. 37. 21L. 0. Andrews, "Teacher Education and the Classroom Teacher," Ohio Schools, 29:392-93, December, 1951. 22Ibid., p. 393. 23Ne11ie L. Griffiths, "Some Pre -Student- -Teaching EXIDeriences," Educational Administration and Supervision, 35:.489—95, December, 1949. 21 sophomores will respond to an opportunity to work in a public school room even when no college credits are involved. Teachers were asked to permit the college sophomores an op— portunity to come to the classroom and help by washing black— boards, telling stories, taking part of a class for a walk while the rest were being tested, indexing books, et cetera. The students’ participation was on a voluntary basis, with no connection to any course or grade. Griffiths stated that "it could not be said that they quarrelled over who should have the jobs, but they did contend for them1"2u A few years later Toulouse25 reported a study dealing with the students' attitudes toward teaching at North Texas State College. His findings revealed that before their laboratory experience many students are in education for insurance or because they have not thought of anything else. After their laboratory experience they are convinced they want to teach or they are just as positive that they are aiming toward the wrong profession. He also found that early contacts with children helped to erase the fear of student teaching that many students had. A technique or plan which has successfully been used at Villa Maria College has been reported by Rowland.26 At ‘ 24Ibid., p. 490. 25Robert B. Toulouse, "Student Evaluation of Labora— lery Experiences in Education," Educational Administration anti Supervision, 39:155-60, March, 1953. 26Leo J. Rowland, "Co-operation in the Education of TeEichers," Catholic School Journal, 58:23-24, June, 1958. 22 Villa Maria College the students are placed in many differ- ent situations where they can observe and work with children in both public and parochial schools. An annual conference is held between the college faculty and the school teachers and administrators (public and parochial) who have been co- operating with Villa Maria College during the year. At this annual meeting, methods of improving the professional labora- tory experiences are explored, general topics of concern to specific groups are discussed in group meetings during the day, and, in general, better ways of working together are investigated. The results of these meetings have been summarized by Rowland as follows: 1. The planning of more dynamic teacher—education courses at the college for pre-service teachers as well as summer courses for in-service teachers. 2. More stimulating experiences between master teacher and apprentice teacher in the elementary and secondary school classrooms where student teaching programs are carried out. 3. The incorporating into their membership beginning, elementary, and secondary teachers of the area school systems who have graduated from the Villa Maria College teacher-education programs. 4. The developing of professionally sound ways and means of supplying competent beginning teachers for the children of Pennsylvania and neighboring states.27 Another experimental program has been described by Le\zine28 in which fifty freshman students were placed in SChool offices for one-half day per week where they gave K 27Ibid., p. 24. 28Madeline S. Levine, "Extending Laboratory Experiences," Ifli‘kgficurnal of Teacher Education, 9:379-82, December, 1958. 23 assistance in as many ways as possible. The schools which cooperated in the experiment agreed to provide a wide range of experiences, short of actual classroom participation; to supervise the students' work; and to evaluate the students in reports which were written at the end of the term. The students reported their experiences and raised questions during an accompanying college class on campus which afforded all students an opportunity to hear and compare their own personal observations and questions with those of the other members in the class. The wide distribution of the cooper— ating schools made this particularly valuable. One of the reasons behind this experiment, according to Levine, was to provide the students with the opportunities for becoming acquainted with the large variety of problems which a teacher must face. Also, according to Levine: To increase both the scope and duration of preservice education is in line with the growing tendency to stress the value of diversified professional laboratory experi— ence in teacher preparation. . . .Laboratory experience should therefore include first-hand acquaintance with as many of the facets of school and activities as possible as well as with the educational needs and resources of the community. She added that the program is in its developmental Stage, but according to theorists and students, it is a worth— while experiment. Levine concluded that many more students VHNlld have to become involved and longitudinal studies con- ducrted before definite comparisons between students with and Stbuflents without these laboratory experiences could be deter- min (fled . x 291bid., p. 380. At 24 3O Another survey conducted by Rucker pointed out cer- tain trends in student teaching during the twenty year period 1932 to 1952. He found that there was a trend toward: (a) Student teaching as a full—time experience; (b) the use of more laboratory experiences in teacher education; (0) more off-campus experiences in student teaching including community experiences in the locale where the teaching is performed; (d) increasing the time allotment given to student teaching and to other laboratory activities of teacher education; (e) increasing the amount bf academic credit awarded for student teaching; (f) the use of laboratory activities, including student teaching, as a reference point of the whole curriculum in teacher edgiation; and (g) student teaching on more grade levels. In connection with the third point mentioned above which is concerned with non-school laboratory experiences, Harris32 has described four advantages which may accrue to the studentvdk>participates in them. First, the student may develop a better understanding of the fact that the school is only one of many educational agencies which affect child- ren; second, the student may gain a better understanding of the interactionznmnmggroups in a community; third, the student may learn how other agencies define their objectives and establish procedures to obtain them; and fourth, the student ‘ 3OW. Ray Rucker, "Trends in Student Teaching--1932 to 1952," The Journal of Teacher Education, 4:261—63, December, 1953. 311bid., p. 263. 32Fred Harris, ”The Case for Student Experience With Nerl-School Agencies," Thirty-third Yearbook of the Association IQELJStudent Teaching (Lock Haven, Pennsylvania: The Associ- ati<>n, 19547. pp.IH6-53. 25 has an opportunity through his work assignment for individ- ual growth. Shortly after the turn of the century a report by Holmes, Seeley, and Keith33 was published which describes the type of laboratory experiences that were prevalent during the first three or four decades of this century. During his time in the training school, the student was expected to grow "in tact, in judgment, in sympathetic understanding of children, in sense of the teacher's respon- sibility, and in all other personal qualities that make for n 34 success in teaching. Nowhere in this report was it men- tioned that students should have any other laboratory experiences than their practice teaching. No evidence is available which suggests that laboratory experiences were anything but the reSponsibility of the schools of education. It was not until the report of the Sub—Committee of the Standards and Survey Committee of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education35 that professional lab- oratory experiences which were related to non-education or So-called academic courses have been mentioned with any regularity in the literature. ¥ 33Manfred J. Holmes, Levi Seeley, and John A. Keith, "TPhe Relation of Theory to Practice in Education," The fLBcond Yearbook of the National Society for the Scientific Efisudy of Education, Part II, Edited by Charles A. McMurry UZhicago: University of Chicago Press, 1903), pp. 9- 39. 3ulbid., p. 29. 35Supra, p. 14. 26 36 Since that time, however, several writers have strongly urged that professional experiences be integrated with subject matter classes as well as with the courses offered in the education departments. While not belittling the need for professional laboratory experiences related to academic courses, McAuley and Tanruther37 found in a survey of fifty teacher training colleges that "all fifty colleges agree it is the responsibility of the education department to organize, direct, and fulfill the introduction of new professional laboratory experiences."38 McGill39 surveyed 146 colleges of teacher education in forty-eight states in order to learn what kind of lab- oratory experiences they provided for their students. He found that about two—thirds of them provided both on—campus and off—campus laboratory experiences for their students. 36LeRoy Bowman, "Community Experience in Teacher Training: Values and Limitations," The Education Forum, 21:453-60, May, 1957. Donald P. Cothrell (ed.), Teacher Education for a Free People (Oneonta, New York: The American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 1956), p. 202. L. L. Love and Others, Student Planning in College (Columbus: The Ohio State University, 19417, p. 141. Florence B. Stratemeyer and Margaret Lindsey, op.cit., pp. 35-36. 37J. D. McAuley and E. M. Tanruther, "The Introduction Of New Professional Laboratory Experiences," Thirty-third fififigrbook of the Association for Student Teaching:ILock Haven, Ehrnnsylvania: The Association, 1954): pp. 224-29. 38Ibid., p. 224. 39E- C~ MCGill: "Laboratory Experience in Programs of fgégcwmm'Education,” The Educational Forum, 16:361-77, March, 2% 27 The pattern these experiences usually followed was to have closely supervised observation periods on campus followed by a more complete experience off campus which eventually reached a full-time student teaching experience. This same survey also showed that most of the labora- tory experiences for students began in the junior year, but that about twenty-five per cent of the colleges started their programs during the freshman year. Not all educators are as enthusiastic about the need for professional laboratory experiences as are others. How— ever, even such a strong advocate of increased general edu- cation for prospective teachers as former President Maaske of Eastern Oregon College of Education has conceded a point when he stated, "The first two years of the college program should consist of general education, but may include some acquaintanceship experiences with professional problems designed to maintain the interest of prospective teachers in their chosen profession."41 In a later article, Maaske42 has explained what he means regarding a general education for all teachers. He stated that general education for prospective teachers should —_ 40Roben J. Maaske, "Theses for the General Education of Teachers," Educational Administration and Supervision, 35:19- 242, January, 1949. 41 Ibid., p. 20. ueRoben J. Maaske, "Some Basic Problems for Solution in lealczher Education," Education, 70:142—46, November, 1949. 28 "give to the teacher competence and confidence in the subject materials and resource backgrounds of his teaching area a broad social and humanitarian understanding of life and its attendant social, economic, political, and moral, problems; a functional knowledge of procedures in identifying community problems; and a sound psychological understanding of himself and of other individuals."L‘L3 While few people would disagree that a general edu- cation is not only good for teachers, but is highly desirable, there are some who would take exception to Maaske's position that general education should occupy a student's full time for two years allowing only for enough of an acquaintance with professional problems "to maintain the interest of pros- pective teachers in their chosen profession."uu One such person is CoreyLL5 who has identified as the central issue regarding teacher education the controversy between those who advocate that anyone who knows enough about what he is going to teach and can make children behave can be a successful teacher, and those who believe that to be a Successful teacher one must be able to recognize the differ- ences among children, to take into account their variable —¥ “31bio., p. 144. 44Supra, p. 27. uBStephen M. Corey, "Controversy in Teacher Education: 263 Central Issue," Eleventh Yearbook of the American Associ- éfiéggn of Colleges for Teacher Education (Chicago: American égsscaciation of Colleges for Teacher Education, 1958), pp. “335. T .—v . .v ._‘ .7. I. . .. nu A 29 backgrounds, to provide the necessary motivations, and to meet the needs of the pupils. He firmly believes that pro— fessional education courses provide the latter kind of teachers, and further, that the student can best acquire the necessary skills and understandings when ". very early in his training he gets back into public school classroom situations where he can practice making observations and assessments and inferences regarding what is going on."46 One additional benefit according, to Corey, that accrues to the interested student who participates in pro— fessional laboratory experiences other than student teaching is the opportunity these experiences give him in learning to get along well with others. Obviously his ability to relate Ito others will be noted during his student teaching program, 'but in almost all teacher training institutions, student teaching comes toward the end of the student's professional training. If the student should be one who finds it diffi- cult to get along with others and this fact is not discovered until the student teaching experience, a great deal of money, time, and energy has been wasted. In reviewing data collected at Stanford University, HearnLI7 found that successful teachers were those who could 46Ibid., p. 29. ——.—- u7Arthur C. Hearn, "Case Studies of Successful Teachers,H Edllcational Administration and Supervision, 38:376-79: Octnsber, 1952. 3O relate well to other people. He pointed out the following implications for those concerned with the selection, training, and placement of teachers: (1) Serious attention should be given to the appraisal of effectiveness in human relationships early in the professional program of teaching candidates. Self— appraisal by the candidate should be an important aspect of this process. (2) The practice-teaching experience should provide the setting whereby the‘candidate might participate in a wide variety of situations involving person—to—person interaction. This implies a much broader scope than that which characterizes the usual practice teaching program. (3) The competence of the candidate in the many human relationships involved in the profession of teaching should be observed often, regularly, and by several observers, to the end that the validity and reliability of appraisal might be raised and that the training and placement of candidates might become increasingly more effective from the standpoint of tfig institution, the employer, and the teacher himself. Thus, by providing opportunities for each candidate to meet and work with children and adults who are working with youngsters, it would become more apparent earlier in his professional training whether or not he has chosen the proper profession. According to Toulouseug the public should demand lab- oratory experiences for teachers just as they do for physi- Cians. The laboratory experiences for teachers must contain a Scope and sequence which provide for their needs and do not: ignore the concept of growth and development for teachers. 48Ibid., pp. 378-79. 49Robert B. Toulouse, "Providing Essential Experiences 1? ’Ikeacher Training," Educational Administration and Super- 31352521: 37:436—40, November, 1951- is 31 "Although maturation and readiness are terms usually associated with elementary school learning, teacher training requires a readiness for certain types of experiences involving children. Some experiences have significance to 'the neophyte teacher only if they are a part of a total sequence."50 In a corroborating statement Sister Mary Lucina5 cieescribes three factors which determine a student's readi— .rieass to profit from laboratory experiences. These are: (l) the ability to observe and comprehend the rela- tionships between principle and action expressed in the behavior of children, (2) the possession of a suitable vocabulary for self—expression and communication of the observation and reaction, and (3) the acquisition of desirable attitudes toward the learning situation.52 The need for students to attain a certain degree of Ireaeidiness or maturity in order to profit from their profes- 53:i_c>nal laboratory experiences has been vividly portrayed by Be auchamp . 53 Her description of "Operation Manhattan," a coopera- tifi.\7e project among the National Conference of Christians Etrjiil Jews, the Center for Human Relations and Community StIi‘leies of the New York University College of Education, and \ 50Ibid., p. 436. I; 51Sister Mary Lucina, "Readiness for Professional :LEEIchrgjory Experiences," The Journal of Teacher Education, = 3310-14, September, 1959. 52Ibid., p. 314. Si. 53Mary L. Beauchamp, "Field Participation and Profes- C>19Lal.Education," The Journal of Educational Sociology, 31: 2 1S9“-32, February, 1958. 32 the University Settlement, has pointed out the acute needs of students to learn more about communities in which they might teach. This is particularly important when these com- munities are very different from the average middle class back- gground of most teachers. The students who had spent a year vwith this project before doing their student teaching in the :sexme area, a fifteen square block area of New York's Lower Eflalst Side, seemed better able to relate effectively to the cxriildren, and therefore, were able to prepare lessons more j_r1 keeping with the children's needs. In his description of the internship program being Llisilized by ten California colleges and universities, 54 has shown that this is but one of many programs of He stated that in ES‘tuone t3€3€lcher education in each institution. C31?Cier to meet the different needs and varying degrees of 31"”eadiness of students, colleges and universities must provide Cilipfferent paths to teaching competence. Many colleges and universities, however, find it eJCisremely difficult to arrange observation-participation ex- F3€31?1ences in the public schools near them when these schools EPIEGB already accommodating a full complement of student t“Jeanners. In order to provide students with an opportunity 13<> \risit and work in public schools prior to their student tea-<3hing, a plan of "September field experiences"55 was Ed 54James C. Stone, "The Internship Concept of Teacher LlClationults Essential Elements," California Journal of s: ‘iéigisgndary Education, 32:486-90, December, 1957. Eki 55Dorothy M. McGeoch, Direct Experiences in Teacher quIPLCIation: A Story of Three Programs (New York: Bureau of Pub- TICSEETELEEONS: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1953), pp. 33 devised. While varying in details in different institutions, the September experiences have certain common characteristics. In the spring of their freshman year students are in- ;formed of the possibilities that await them in the following :fall. During the two or three weeks in September when public sschools begin their classes before the colleges begin theirs, tzhe students visit public schools in or near their homes. fl?key have the opportunity to assist the teaching staff in nmany ways, such as collecting fees, distributing books and rneaterials, arranging bulletin boards, moving furniture, (Disserving teachers and children, correcting papers, and so (Dru with an infinite variety of experiences. Some colleges Elrid universities help students arrange their visits, others iléeeave it up to the students; some colleges and universities 8;fi;ve credit for September experiences, others do not; and ESCDrne colleges and universities provide supervisory personnel qulca visit schools where students are located, others make r1<3 provision for this. Students are encouraged to repeat their September f'Ii.eld experiences each year before they return to their own C33L2asses. Here again the policies of different teacher t31?£iining institutions vary. Some colleges and universities ESIFEInt credit each year while some only grant credit for one 276363.32; some colleges and universities require students to EDElI‘ticipate in a September field experience-once, others do r1C>13 require any participation at all, while still others re— CllJSiJPe participation from the sophomore through the senior B’7'53‘53.rs. 34 To some it may seem that colleges and universities are imposing upon the public schools to an alarming degree. While it is true that public schools are being used more and :more often for professional laboratory experiences by teacher training institutions, the fact is that the help of the public 56 :schools will be needed increasingly in the future. The University of Texas has developed a course for ezlementary teachers, "Methods and Materials of Teaching,"57 vvrnch.illustrates the need for continuing and increasing co- cxperation between public schools and teacher training insti- ‘tiltions. In this course, which carries six semester hours c>i? credit, the laboratory approach is utilized whereby the Estiudent is assigned to a particular class for six hours per vveaeflc for one semester. Usually taken during the junior year, fzfiea course has given students an opportunity to see how eDCperiences are provided for children and how children are E§Iqxided into these experiences over a relatively long period C31? time. If a public school were cooperating in this or any E3Tirnilar program, it would not be long before a school IEDIJJIlding or school system would reach the saturation point. :Iirl this event, other schools would have to help the teacher tr’aining institutions by providing professional laboratory \ 6 . 5 Association for Student Teaching, The Supervising The W. Thirty-eishmearbook, (Cedar Falls, Iowa; EDSC>ciation for Student Teaching, 1959), p, lx. pq 57Harold G. Shane, Mary Aline Callis, and Howard V. EEZEYideth, op. cit., pp. 36-37. 35 experiences, including student teaching, for the soon—to-be members of the teaching profession. How far a college or university can effectively expand its off-campus activities,and how much responsibility for lielping to prepare teachers public schools are willing and sible to assume are two areas needing further research. The assumption that student teaching alone is a suffi— c:jent experience for students was refuted over thirty years ago by Charters and Waples.58 A check list of 559 items which described the activi- ‘t:ies of classroom teachers was given to student teachers and €33bserve their various abilities in an effort to determine ‘vrho should or who should not be admitted into the profession. The above survey substantiated an earlier opinion which VVEiS expressed by a group of representatives of teachers <3c>lleges at the Bennington Planning Conference for the Co- CDEDerative Study of Teacher Education62 at Bennington, '\TE3rmont. The representatives at this conference listed tSkieir three most pressing problems in teacher education. '33I1e two which received at least fifty per cent of the vote ‘ATeare these: \ 60Robert W. Richey, Planning for Teaching (second edi— n° New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1958), pp. 13 61M. Margaret Stroh, Ida A. Jewett, and Vera M. Butler, iffijiter Selection of Better Teachers (Washington: The Delta a~Dpa Gamma Society, 1943), p. 98. C) 62Commission on Teacher Education, Bennington Planning erence for the Cooperative Study of Teacfier Education CDIII ‘Zjaréfghington:.American Council on Ecuation, 1939), pp. 16917. 37 1. Selection and guidance of student personnel (53%) a. Means of encouraging the right young people to enter the teaching profession b. Admission criteria-initial selection, deferred selection c. Organization and staffing for guidance-- personal and educational d. The guidance process e. Records-types (anecdotal, statistical) and uses 2. Type and distribution of professional education, (education, psychology, and student teaching) on undergraduate and graduate levels (57%) a. Integration of theory and practice and of academic and professional material b. Ratio of professional to academic content c. Kind and amount of student teaching and internship d. Selection and arrangement of experiences for professional growth, especially experiences with children e. Time for beginning educational experiences63 At the conclusion of the conference, Love delivered an EiCidress in which he said he had not met anyone at Bennington VVP1<3 questioned the value and necessity of field laboratory 64 e Xperiences . The report of another workshop at George Peabody C3<>Illege for Teachers contains the statement that the pros- F3€3<3tive teacher in his college years "should have many ex— FDGECPiences with children of different ages in varied E3iirtuations.”65 In spite of the overwhelming evidence of the desir- E3Sbility of professional laboratory experiences, an important \ 63Ibid. 64Ibid., p. 227. 65Pre-Service Education of Elementary Teachers (Nash— 3.1e, Tennessee: Division of Surveys and Field Studies, EEC>I‘ge Peabody College for Teachers, 1944), p. 47. \7fL C} 38 caution or condition pertaining to these experiences has been made in a report published by the American Council on Edu— cation. It states, "However, because learning by direct (observation and participation must, lose in perspective what it gains in vividness and in the nature of the czase, hncoleness, we insist that it must be combined with thorough cilass discussion and as much supplementary reading of s<3ientific materials as can be fitted into the undergraduate's 66 s<3hedule." Borrowman67 has reported that a poll of the American [kissociation of Teachers Colleges brought a consensus con- c3earning the threefold function of laboratory experiences: "ZIjnplementing theory by giving the student a chance to check irtns pragmatic value and his own understanding, (2) helping ESTSIAdents to become conscious of personal and professional r1EEeds, and (3) giving them an opportunity for guided experi- esrlcse in actual teaching."68 He elaborates further by E3C>inting out that the laboratory experiences should be C=3L<3sely integrated with the guidance program.so that the i'l'lciividual needs of each student are considered, and further t3kléit these experiences should be with children of different \ 66W. Earl Armstrong, Ernest V. Rolls, and Helen E. The College and Teacher Education (Washington: Ila~Vis, n Council on Education, 1944), p. 305. America 67Merle L. Borrowman, The Liberal and Technical in £§§3§3§2her Education (New York: Bureau of Publications, ESEiczhers College, Columbia University, 1956), pp. 223-28. 68Ibid., p. 227. ~UA. L. F v. A, ‘f. v'. 39 ages, from different socio-economic backgrounds, and for long enough periods of time for the student to observe the development of growth patterns. Hill69 and his associates reviewed the activities of ccertain workshops of the North Central Association of Colleges 51nd Secondary Schools over an eight year period, 1948—1955, One series of workshops was concerned with im- :iriclusive. pxrpving the professional education, as distinguished from ggeaneral education, of teachers. One predominant trend which tvaas noticed among the member colleges of education was the Ireavision of content in professional education courses toward :Laarger blocks of experiences. "Much of this was done to rnezke possible more extensive laboratory experiences."7O From Ball State Teachers College, Beyerl 1 has de— EScribed a program where students in their sophomore year F1€L\7e the opportunity to work one afternoon or one evening E3631? week in the Boys‘ Club of Muncie, Indiana, while enrolled in One of a campus course in human growth and development. t3k1€3 advantages he described is that students get a chance PEElatively early in their college careers to find out whether The students (335‘ not they have chosen the proper profession. Ea5t‘63 assigned to the Club for an entire term which seemingly \ 69George E. Hill and Others, Improving Teacher Edu— on through Inter-College Cooperation (Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. EE“‘-- - I3rown Company, 1956), pp. 111-52. 701bid., p. 130. 71M. C. Beyerl, "A Boys' Club and A Teachers College P gr::C>\Jide Laboratory Experiences for Prospective Teachers," The (L13?rml.of Teacher Education, 8:393-98, December, 1957. \ 40 is sufficiently long enough for them to gain some insights into the needs and interests of youth. All of the various programs which different colleges and universities have developed are attempts to provide students with skills and understandings necessary for suc- kzessful teaching. Each of the programs of recent years vvhich was reviewed by the writer dealt with increased time Ifor professional laboratory experiences of one type or Elnother. Nowhere in the literature, since 1948, was this in- xrestigator able to find a report or description of any plan c>r idea which tried to find a comparable substitute for pro- fkessional laboratory experiences. A good professional education program has been de- sczribed by Lindsey as follows: To provide for students a professional education program in which they will learn through direct experi- ence the significance of sound and accepted principles in human growth and development and in the psychology of the learning process calls for a sequence of activi- ties planned cooperatively with students to meet their needs as citizens and as members of a profession; a program with flexibility; extensive and intensive ex- periences related directly to the job to be done by 72 teachers today; guidance based upon sound principles. The better the teachers we have in our schools, the betiterthe education our youth will enjoy. Perhaps no one IIELES spoken more eloquently on the need for good education in cykll? country than did Daniel Webster over a century ago at a Peeeption in Madison, Indiana, June 1, 1837: \ 72Margaret Lindsey, "What They're Saying in Teacher IAc:ation--Opinions of Important People," Education, 70: E <1 3‘ 3 5 ~41, November, 1949- 41 On the diffusion of education among the people rest the preservation and perpetuation of our free insti- tutions. I apprehend no danger to our country from a foreign foe. . . . Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence, I must confess that I do apprehend some danger. . . . Make them intelligent, and they will be vigilant; give them the means of detecting the wrong, and they will apply the remedy.73 \ E3c> 73The Works of Daniel Webster (seventeenth edition; 244:>§jfton: Little Brown and Company, 1877), Volume I, pp, 403_ CHAPTER III METHOD OF PROCEDURE AND SOURCES OF DATA Selection of the Groups This study began during the Spring Term, 1959 when a czount in the Student Teaching Office of the applications for Vflinter Term, 1960 student teaching showed that 108 students riad completed their applications. A random division of tunese students placed forty students in the reading group, fRDrty students in the observation group, and the remaining ‘btventy—eight in the control group. Subsequent applicants tveare added to the control group. The Reading Group A memoranduml was sent to the forty students in the IFeuading group requesting their presence at a meeting in the College of-Education Building. This meeting was held while tSPlee students were all present on the campus. At the meeting the students were told for the first time what their role was to be. The forty students in the befending group were informed that they had an opportunity to €311I“oll in Teacher Education Course 424, Section A, "Problems j‘r‘~ iEducation" in the Fall Term, 1959. The following infor- rTLEiTSion was presented to them: \ l A pendix A. 2 p 2 43 1. They would be free to read as widely as they chose in the field of education. 2. They would have to keep a written account of what they had read. 3. They would be interviewed by this researcher at least twice during the term. 4. They would be provided with a suggested bibliography2 which they could use at their discretion. 5. They would earn three term credits. 6. They would not have to write a term paper nor a final examination. Thirty—four students agreed to enroll in this class in ‘trie Fall Term, 1959, but only thirty actually did enroll. The Observation Group In a similar manner the forty students who had been Iseundomly selected for the observation section were summoned t3C> a different meeting.3 They were told that they had an CXFUDortunity to enroll in Teacher Education 424, Section B. :I‘t 'was further explained to them that they would have an op— po12tunity to observe and participate in a classroom in one of IZEIEB elementary schools in the East Lansing school system. The féC)3.lowing information was presented to them: 1. They would spend three hours per week in the public school classroom. 2Appendix C. 3Appendix B. 7. 44 They would be able to indicate their first three choices of the grade in which they wanted to be assigned. They would observe and participate in the class- room activities to the extent that they and the classroom teacher would decide. They would be interviewed by the writer twice during the term. They would keep a written account of their activities in the classroom. They would not have to write a term paper nor a final examination. They would earn three term credits. Thirty-eight students agreed to enroll in this class in ‘tlae Fall Term, 1959, but only thirty—two actually did enroll. The Testing Program In the evening of the second day of classes, of the I?6111.Ierm, 1959, all students who had applied for Winter 'IRBInm, 1960 student teaching were called together. This group C301’1sisted of the thirty student reading group, the thirty-two 531311dent observation group, and the seventy-two student con- tr’01group. The Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Purdue 3362 -~li§gchers Examination: How I Teach, Form A were administered t3C) the entire assembly of 134 students. The students in the observation group were instructed t3c> remain after the other students were dismissed at the 45 completion of the examination period. At this latter meeting, the assignments to classrooms in the East Lansing Public Schools were given. Each of the students was placed in either her first or second choice of grade levels at this time. Interviews Interviews with students in both sections began with the fourth week of the term and continued to the final week. INOtes were kept of each interview with the sixty-two students in both experimental groups. These notes were amplified by the writer after each interview in order to preserve as much of the expressed feeling of the subject as possible. Evaluations by Students During the last week of the term, the students turned :in the written accounts of their readings or of their experi— eances in the classroom. In addition, the students submitted exn evaluation of their experiences. This evaluation was an eadditional paper which was agreed upon during the interview Sessions . Each student was asked to include in her evaluation two IDCDints: (1) whether or not she thought her experience (reading (DZE‘ observation-participation) had been valuable to her and ‘V’}3Qy; (2) whether or not she would recommend such a class as trksaéacher Education 424, Section A or B to other students and ‘VJlflly. Beyond these two directives, each evaluation was to ITEE’JTlect the opinions concerning the pre-student teaching ii; 46 experience of each student. In an effort to obtain as objec- tive an answer as possible, each student was given her letter grade for the course before she submitted her evaluation. In this way the student knew that what she said about her experi- ence in Teacher Education 424 would not be used in determining her grade for the course. Each student was also told that her 11ame need not appear on her evaluation. The structure of aarranging for the anonymity of each student and of giving eaach her grade before her evaluation was received, made it {possible for her to express herself free of reprisal through ggrades or knowledge of her identity. Testing During Student Teaching When the students began their student teaching during ‘the Winter Term, 1960, all were given the same two tests. TPhe Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Purdue fDeachers Examination: How I Teach, Form B, at their first 8 eminar session . Each college coordinator was sent a packet of test ITuaterials with instructionslI for their use. After adminis- TSEiring the tests, these were returned to the University VVPhere the scoring was completed. Again, at the end of the Winter Term, 1960, all of t:k163 elementary student teachers were given the same two tests I?<:,1? a third time. Form A of the Purdue Teachers Examination hJEi_sg used in this session. The tests were administered by the \ lIAppendix D. 47 college coordinators who were sent the same test packets and instructions as they had received at the beginning of the term. Once again the tests were returned to the University for scoring. Summary One hundred thirty—four of the 1425 elementary student teachers for the Winter Term, 1960 were the subjects of this study. These students were divided into three groups; reading group, observation group, and control group. Two instruments, the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Purdue Teachers Examination, were administered to the three groups on three separate occasions: first, at the beginning of the Fall Term, 1959; second, at the beginning of their student teaching experience; and third, at the conclusion of their student teaching experience. The basic data for this study have come from the test results of the 134 elementary student teachers of Winter Term, 1960; from the interviews with the sixty-two students in the reading and observation groups; and from evaluations submitted by the same sixty—two students. 5The eight students who comprise the difference between CINE total number who did their student teaching in the Winter Telmn, 1960 and the 134 students included in this study are Stleents who were not in school during the term immediately Ppeaceding their term of student teaching. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA Introduction The design of this study included three testing sit- uations. The first was to determine whether or not the three groups, selected at random, were equal. This test was administered during the first week of the Fall Term, 1959. The second battery of tests was administered during the first week of student teaching in the Winter Term, 1960. The objective of this testing session was to determine what changes, if any, occurred among the groups as a result of different experiences during the previous term. The third and last battery of tests was administered during the final week of student teaching. This testing session was designed to measure the influence of student teaching on the different groups. If each group was differ- ent from the other at the beginning of student teaching, this battery of tests was to measure whether these differ- ences increased, stayed the same, or decreased. If there were no differences at the beginning of student teaching, this battery of tests would show whether or not the groups IHEre still alike at the completion of student teaching. 48 49 The Raw Scores A superficial look at the raw scores in Appendices G—L show many variations among individuals. For example, subject number ten in the reading group achieved a higher score each time she took the Purdue Teachers Examination, but she achieved a lower score each time on the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. In the control group subject number eleven achieved an opposite pattern; on the Purdue Teachers Examination she achieved a lower score each time while achieving a higher score each time on the Minneosta Teacher Attitude Inventory. Individual variations of scores on both instruments are not limited to any one of the groups, but rather are present in all three. This is illustrated in the following sections which present a more detailed picture of the distribution of raw scores for each of the three groups. The Reading Group The distribution of lowest and highest scores of the reading group on the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory is shown in Table 1. Of the five students who achieved their lowest scores in September, 1959, three achieved succes- sively'higherscores at their next two testing sessions. Thus, ninety per cent of the students in the reading group did not show consistent improvement in the development of attitudes as measured by the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. 50 Table 1. Distribution of highest and lowest scores of reading group on Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. September January March Total Score 1959 1960 1960 No. Lowest 5 15 10 30 Highest l2 6 ll 29* *Subject 13 achieved the same high score in September and March. The distribution of lowest and highest scores of the reading group on the Purdue Teachers Examination is shown in Table 2. Of the eight who achieved their lowest scores in September, 1959, four students improved on each successive examination. A fifth student (number 21) achieved her low score in September, 1959 and the same higher score on the two subsequent tests. Thus, 83.3 per cent of the students in the reading group showed no consistent improvement in their understanding of the needs, interests, age character— istics, or personality problems of boys and girls as meas- ured by the Purdue Teachers Examination. Table 2. Distribution of highest and lowest scores of reading group on Purdue Teachers Examination. September January March Total Score 1959 1960 1960 No. Lowest 8 l2 9 29* Highest l6 6 7 29** *Subject 26 achieved the same low score in January and March. **Subject 21 achieved the same high score in January and March. 51 The Observation Group The distribution of lowest and highest scores of the observation group on the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory is shown in Table 3. Of the seven students who achieved their lowest scores in September, 1959, four achieved succes- sively higher scores at their next two testing sessions. A fifth student, number 17, achieved the same higher score on the January and March tests. Thus, 84.4 per cent of the stu— dents in the observation group did not show consistent improvement in the development of attitudes as measured by the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. Table 3. Distribution of highest and lowest scores of observation group on Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. September January March Total Score 1959 1960 1960 No. Lowest 7 l2 13 32 Highest l4 8 9 31* *Subject 17 achieved the same high score in January and March. The distribution of lowest and highest scores of the observation group on the Purdue Teachers Examination is shown in Table 4. Of the seven students who attained their lowest scores in September, 1959, four achieved successively higher scores at their next two testing sessions. Thus, 87.5 per cent of the students in the observation group did not show consistent improvement in their understanding of the needs, 52 interests, age characteristics, or personality problems of boys and girls as measured by the Purdue Teachers Examination. Table 4. Distribution of highest and lowest scores of observation group on Purdue Teachers Examination. September January March Total Score 1959 1960 1960 No. Lowest 7 8 16 31* Highest 18 6 8 32 *Subject 20 achieved the same low score in January and March. The Control Group The distribution of lowest and highest scores of the control group on the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory is shown in Table 5. Of the twenty students who achieved their lowest scores in September, 1959, fifteen achieved successively higher scores at their next two testing sessions. One addi- tional student, number 21, achieved the same higher score on the January and March tests. Thus, 76.1 per cent of the students in the control group did not show consistent improve- ment in the development of attitudes as measured by the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. However, it should be noted that the percentage of students who did show consis- tent improvement in this group was more than twice that of the reading group and one and one-half times that of the observation group. 53 Table 5. Distribution of highest and lowest scores of control group on Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. September January March Total Score 1959 1960 1960 No. Lowest 2O 23 23 66* Highest 26 12 27 65** *Subject 16 achieved the same low score in January and March. **Subject 21 achieved the same high score in January and March and subject 35 achieved the same high score in September and March. The distribution of lowest and highest scores of the control group on the Purdue Teachers Examination is shown in Table 6. 0f the twenty students who attained their lowest scores in September, 1959, six achieved successively higherw scores at their next two testing sessions. In addition to these students, two others, subjects 6 and 57, attained a low score in September, the same score in January, and a higher score in March. Thus, 88.1 per cent of the students in the control group did not show consistent improvement in their understanding of the needs, interests, age characteristics, or personality problems of boys and girls as measured by the Purdue Teachers Examination. The percentage of students in the control group who did not show consistent improvement from September, 1959 to March, 1960 on the Purdue Teachers Examination was similar to the percentages of students in the reading and observation groups on this test. 54 Table 6. Distribution of highest and lowest scores of control group on Purdue Teachers Examination. September January March Total Score 1959 1960 1960 No. Lowest 2O 12 28 60* Highest 24 27 15 66** *Subject 6 and 57 achieved the same low score in September and January. Subjects 17, 44, 46, and 47 achieved the same low score in January and March. Subject 62 achieved the same low score in September and March. **Subject 67 achieved the same high score in September and January. The percentage of students in the different groups who showed consistent improvement from September, 1959 to March, 1960 on each test is shown in Table 7. Table 7. Percentage of students in each group who showed consistent improvement on the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Purdue Teachers Examination. Group MTAI Purdue Reading Group 10.0% 16.7% Observation Group 15.6% 12.5% Control Group 23.9% 11.9% With the exception of the control group on the Minne- sota Teacher Attitude Inventory where nearly one-fourth of the students showed consistent improvement, the preponderance n-\ 55 of students in this study do not appear to have gained many of the skills, knowledge, and attitudes which are measured by the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Purdue Teachers Examination. This is the case in spite of the fact that the two-term period covered in this study included a term of full time student teaching for all of the students and another term for two of the groups (reading and obser- vation) where specific attempts were made to prepare these students for a better experience with children during their student teaching. Statistical Analysis of Data After the cursory examination above, a more refined analysis of the data is warranted. An analysis of variance was made to determine (1) whether or not the three groups were alike in the beginning of this study; (2) what changes, if any, resulted from the different experiences of the three ggroups during the term prior to student teaching; and (3) Inhat differences, if any, existed among the groups at the Clonclusion of the student teaching experience. It was assumed that the three groups were alike in tiheir mean scores on the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory Eirri Purdue Teachers Examination before their preparatory ex— IDEBriences for student teaching. In order to determine whether C31? not this assumption was correct, an analysis of variance W€3.53 used. By this analysis it was found (see Table 8) from t:}1