u -. . ..-. ~._.~- y... .V A . . .' .a. . THE THIRTEEN-COLLEGE CURRICULUM FROGRAM: 3 5 i A STUDY OF TEACHERS’ ATTITUDINAL CHANGE , ‘ v- ‘f : : .;;:_ sis; .. . TOWARD AN INNOVATIVE SCIENCE CURRICULUM f ' f . Thesis for the'Degree ofOth. D. . 7_ _ .L' MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY; - WILLIAM MOLARK- * ' A : 1-972 : , j_ . C . 1 3 ; -\|‘ r m‘ ".m- ”(1%" :1 ' .' ' A . 1, , , , . , t .. A v . , . . " . 7. - v' 1.. :. _ .1 ,5. :‘ » . ; .I A v V 4 . . f4 ‘ I . ._ ,7 . I. Z‘ ' '1 hams This is to certify that the thesis entitled THE THIRTEEN-COLLEGE CURRICULUM PROGRAM: A STUDY OF TEACHERS' ATTITUDINAL CHANGE TOWARD AN INNOVATIVE SCIENCE CURRICULUM presented by William M. Ciark has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Education ____________.——-—Ph ' D ' degree in ._._.._—- W. 1"“ CVV/ Dr. T. Wayne TayIJr Majotptofeuor Date Max 19, 1972 0-7639 ABSTRACT THE THIRTEEN-COLLEGE CURRICULUM PROGRAM: A STUDY OF TEACHER ATTITUDINAL CHANGE TOWARD AN INNOVATIVE SCIENCE CURRICULUM BY William M. Clark The purposes of this study were to investigate science teachers' attitudinal changes toward an innova- tive science curriculum and to ascertain what variables were pertinent to these attitude changes. The popula- tion consisted of 55 college science teachers assigned to participate in the program beginning with the summer of 1971. The instruments used to measure attitudes, changes, and knowledge of science were: the Faculty Questionnaire, the Summer Assessment Questionnaire, and the Sequential Test of Educational Progress (STEP). The Faculty Questionnaire was administered near the beginning of the summer conference and again in January, 1972. The Summer Assessment and the Sequential Test of Educational Progress were administered only once: near the end of the conference for the assessment William M. Clark questionnaire and near the beginning for Sequential Test of Educational Progress. The pertinent findings of this study were: 1. There was a significant positive correlation between teachers' attitude scores and the amount of for- >mal science training. 2. There was no significant correlation between males and females and their attitude scores toward an innovative science curriculum. 3. The correlation between teachers' attitudinal scores and major teaching area was nonsignificant. 4. The number of years of teaching at the col- lege level and the teachers' attitude scores appeared to be nonsignificant. 5. The number of contact hours required of teachers in the program and their attitude scores were significantly positive correlated. 6. Teachers' knowledge of science and their scores on the attitudinal scale did not appear to be significantly correlated. 7. Attitudinal scores of the teachers and their chronological age were not significantly correlated. 8. Attitude scores toward the summer conference and attitude scores toward an innovative science curri- culum were found to be significantly positive correlated. THE THIRTEEN-COLLEGE CURRICULUM PROGRAM: A STUDY OF TEACHERS' ATTITUDINAL CHANGE TOWARD AN INNOVATIVE SCIENCE CURRICULUM BY 7ft], William MGiClark A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1972 ACKNOWLEDGMENT S The writer wishes to express his gratitude for the interest, guidance, and assistance afforded by his doctoral committee chairman, Dr. T. Wayne Taylor. The writer would also like to extend sincere thanks to the staff of the Institute For Services To Education and those of the Curriculum Resource Group who, without their permission, this study could not have been made. With further reference, the writer would like to give special appreciation to the associate directors of the Institute For Services To Education, Dr. Charles Goolsby and Dr. Leroy Colquitt. Gratitude is also extended to all the direc- tors and teachers of the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program whose participation was most vital to the out- come of this study. Finally, sincere appreciation is extended to all persons of the secretarial staff of the Science and Mathe- matics Teaching Department for their moral support during the course of this study. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. II. III. STATEMENT OF PROBLEM . . . . . . Need for the Study . . . . . . . Background of the Problem . Methodology of the Study . . Hypotheses of the Study . . Definition of Terms . . . . Delimitations and Assumptions of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . Organization of th Dissertation O 0 rt. 0 O 0 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE . . The Preparation of College Faculty Implementation of Innovations in Curriculum and Instruction . . for Some Ratioales and Psychological Bases for In-service Education in Curriculum Innovation and Implementation Teachers' Attitudes Toward Curriculum Changes 0 O C O I I O I O O O sumary I O O O O O O O O O O I DESCRIPTIVE FEATURES OF THE STUDY General Objectives and Design of the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program General program objectives . Institutional objectives . . Teacher objectives . . . . . Student objectives . . . . . Background of the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program . . . . . . Growth of the Program . . . Development of the Biological Science Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . iii 14 24 34 42 49 49 50 50 50 51 52 56 63 Chapter IV. Summer Conference . . . . . . . . . . . Pre-Conference Planning . . . . . . Site of the Summer Conference . . . Organization of Teachers . . . . . . Orientation of Teachers and Implementation of the Program . . Program A--The Teaching Clinic . . . Program B--Unit Writing Groups . . . The Conference as an Experimental Vehicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . Administration . . . . . . . . . . . Projections for the Future . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Development of the Physical Science Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pre-Conference Planning . . . . . . Summer Conference . . . . . . . . . Where We Are Now . . . . . . . . . . Methods of Assigning Participants to the Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sources of Participant Data . . . . . . Pre-Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . Post-Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . Sequential Test of Educational Progress Science Form 1 Series II . . . . . . Conference Assessment Questionnaire Procedures for the Analysis of Data Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . INTRODUCTION I O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Analysis of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . Results of Sequential Tests of Educational Progress . . . . . . . Demographic Data . . . . . . . . . . The Thirteen-College Faculty Questionnaire . . . . . Data Related to Testin of the Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . Testing the Hypotheses . . . . . . . Results of Major Science Area Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv Page 67 67 73 74 76 79 81 83 89 92 94 95 95 99 110 112 121 121 122 122 123 124 124 126 126 126 127 127 130 135 139 Chapter Results of Science Training Analysis . Results of Classload Analysis . . . . Results of STEP Test Analysis . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS . . . . . . . Hypotheses Tested . . . . . . . . . . . . Results and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . Educational Implications . . . . . . . . Some Dimensions of This Study Which Warrant Further Research . . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O APPENDICES O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O I O O O A. B. C. D. E. F. G. THE THIRTEEN-COLLEGES SUMMER CONFERENCE SCHEDULE.(Biological and Physical Science) INDIVIDUAL TEACHER'S STEP TEST SCORES, RAW SCORE DISTRIBUTION, MEAN, STANDARD DEVIA- TION, VARIANCE, STANDARD SCORE MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION, SUMMARY, ITEM ANALYSIS KEY, ANSWER KEY FOR BOTH PART I AND II FOR ALLTEACHERSN=55........... FACULTY QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . . . . . . . . FACULTY QUESTIONNAIRE INDIVIDUAL PRE-SCORES FACULTY QUESTIONNAIRE INDIVIDUAL POST-SCORES FACULTY ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . . . FACULTY ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE INDIVIDUAL SCORES . . . . . . . . . . . . FACULTY ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE: HOYTE RELIABILITY AND STANDARD ERRORS (Scale 1 and 2 ) O O C O C O O O O O O O O O O O 0 RAW REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS . . . . . . . . STANDARD ERRORS OF RAW REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS O O O O I O O O I O O O O O O CORRELATION MATRIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 139 140 140 142 147 149 149 156 157 159 165 165 176 189 207 210 213 223 225 226 230 227 Chapter L. M. N. STANDARDIZED REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS . . . . LETTERS OF CORRESPONDENCE . . . . . . . . . A LIST OF COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES PARTICI- PATING IN THE THIRTEEN-COLLEGES CURRICULUM P ROGMM O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O COMPARISON OF THE RETENTION STRENGTH BETWEEN PROGRAM STUDENTS AND A RANDOM SAMPLE OF REGULAR COLLEGE STUDENTS ENTERING TCCP COLLEGES IN THE FALL, 1967 . . . . . . . . COMPARISON OF GRADE-POINT-AVERAGES OF PROGRAM AND REGULAR STUDENTS ENTERING T HE S EN I OR YEAR 0 O O O O O O O I C O C 0 vi Page 231 232 237 238 239 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Major teaching area and method of assigning participants to the program . . . . . . . . 113 2. Major teaching area and highest degree held by participants . . . . . . . . . . . 115 3. Major teaching area and an estimation of data of each participant . . . . . . . . . 115 4. Major teaching area and professional rank held 0 O O O O O O O O O O I O O I O O O O 116 5. Major teaching area and participants' number of years teaching at the college level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 6. Major teaching area and number of years participants taught at the college or university he proposes to teach at beginning fall term, 1971 . . . . . . . . . 118 7. Major teaching area and number of years participation in the Thirteen-College Curriculum Programifiin l3-college, 8- college, and 5-college consortiums and extended lB-college consortium) . . . . . . 118 8. Major teaching area and assignment of participants to the selected groups . . . . 119 9. Major teaching area and the required number of contact hours with students per week . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 10. Major teaching area and amount of formal science training (in quarter hour credit) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 11. Table of Simple Significant Correlations . . 129 vii Table Page 12. Table of pre- and post-attitudinal mean scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 13. Table of attitudinal mean scores across both biological and physical science teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 14. Table of means and standard deviations of non-demographic variables across entire sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 15. Table of conditional variance and standard deviation . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 16. Table of correlation matrix with covariates eliminated . . . . . . . . . . . 137 17. Table of statistics for regression analysis with 10 covariates eliminated . . 138 18. Summary of findings . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 viii CHAPTER I STATEMENT OF PROBLEM The problem of this study is divided into three phases. Phase I of this study investigated the teachers' attitudes and attitudinal changes as to (1) students, (2) teachers, teaching and teaching methodologies, (3) col- leges/and universities, (4) institutions' policies and administrators, (5) curriculum and curriculum development, and (6) the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program* In-service Summer Conference. The second phase of this investigative study was to determine the relationships of the teachers' attitudes and attitudinal changes as to (7) amount of science train- ing, (8) teaching experience, (9) science competence, (10) class load (number of contact hours), (11) sex, and (2) science area. The final phase was a continuation of the second phase in that it sought to determine the relationships of the teachers' attitudes and attitudinal changes toward the (13) Thirteen-College Curriculum Program's In-service Summer Conference(s) and (14) the teachers' opportunities *Hereafter may be referred to as the TTCP. to implement the new teaching strategies and materials following the in-service summer conference. The study procedures elicited data used to study the following items: 1. Teacher attitudes and attitudinal changes as revealed by Part II of the 1971 Curriculum Development Summer Conference Faculty Questionnaire. 2. Teacher attitudes and attitudinal changes as related to amount of science training, teaching experience, class load (number of contact hours), sex and science area as obtained from Part I of the 1971 Curriculum Development Summer Conference Faculty Questionnaire. 3. Teacher science competence as measures on The Sequential Test of Educational Progress. 4. Teacher attitudes and attitudinal changes in relationship to the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program In-service Summer Conference and teacher Opportunities to implement new teaching strategies and materials following the in-service summer conference as reported from the Follow-up Thirteen-College Curriculum Faculty Questionnaire. Need for the Study A review of the literature reveals that little ef- fort has been exerted to determine quantitatively college teachers' attitudes and attitudinal change toward an inno- vated science curriculum and the effect of in-service training by subsequent implementation of the new curriculum. The literature regarding pre-service training in this area for college teachers is also minimal of research findings. Hare states, "Implementation of any new curriculum material depends upon the extent and quality of in-service education of teachers in the new material."1 Foshay wrote in the Foreword of Innovation in Education: Most reports of innovational activities have focused on content of change; they nearly always ignore or oversimplify the change process involved. We need to know much more about how educationalzinnovations are introduced and adopted--or rejected. Noda has described additional "blocks" to the imple- mentation of "new" curricula. This block arises out of the attitude of the teacher and the nature of teacher relation- ship with the administrators and with other teachers.3 According to Mayhew, while much learning has taken place through the traditional devices of books and abstract discussion, there has grown up the feeling that classroom experiences should be greatly enriched or changed if the .1 . . Kenneth Hare, On Un1ver31tijreedom (Toronto Publisher in association with Carleton University by the University of Toronto Press, 1968), p. 63. Arthur W. Foshay, Foreword in Innovation in Education, ed. by Matthew B. Miles (New York: TeaEHers College Press, 1971). 3Daniel S. Noda, "A Study of Successful Practice Used to Remove the Major Blocks to Curriculum Improvement in the Secondary School" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 1952), p. 78. optimum potentialities of a collegiate education were to be realized. This thesis presents the "extent“ of in-service training of college teachers relative to attitudes and atti- tudinal changes by analyzing the questionnaire response re- ceived from the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program teachers.4 Mayhew points out that a large number of American faculty members seem unaware of just how much innovation is in progress. Many institutions of higher education do not have adequate abstracting facilities nor bibliographic aids to keep informed of the many changes occurring. On the positive side is the existence of many innovations and the fact that faculties are interested, once they hear of them. The climate, then, seems right for innovation to become more important in all of higher education. Before this can happen several factors are needed for implementation to occur. -First, it can be assumed that the forces or condi- tions demanding innovation will not diminish in pressure. Numbers, cost, and changing society have become character- istic of the United States in the last half of the twenti- eth century. Thus the challenge remains. To what extent do teachers' attitudes reflect the effectiveness of an in-service program? 4Lewis B. Mayhew, Higher Education in the Revolu- tionary Decades (Mucutcher Publisher, Corp., 1967. The teachers education program exists also to help teachers change. What does assessing this Change and its relationship to the format of the teacher education pro- gram require? Data of this nature should be extremely valuable in the selection of teachers for innovative science education. Also, data of this kind should aid in determining the ex- tent to which the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program's educational training program fulfills its role as an in- fluence factor in bringing about changes in teachers' attitudes and their acceptance of an innovated science curriculum. Further, these data may be used as a source of feedback for revision of the teaching strategies and materials used in TCCP. Since TCCP is an experimental program, the data collected may be used for the purpose of improving the program. Background of the Problem Within the past decade widespread changes have taken place in the structure and function of American education. Hopes for "revolution" and "reform" are high, and action is not lagging. Innovations such as program- med learning, team teaching, educational television-set» theory--to name a few-~are being invented, recommended, and tried at an ever-increasing pace. During the past fifteen years we have witnessed changes in the teaching of science at all levels of education. Those changes are most prevalent in the secon- dary and elementary schools; relatively few are at the college level. We have moved from a didactic form of pre- sentation, where an accumulation of functional material was of utmost importance, to the inquiry approach, where the student learns science by participating in various experiments. However, for the most part, we find that at the college and university level there is still a great percentage of science courses being taught as a body of classified knowledge rather than an approach to problem- solving or an association of facts culminating in a con- cept as a principle. The type of teaching in vogue at the college and university level still results in students memorizing encyclopedic lists of facts completely divorced from a development of an understanding of the nature of science. Hurd, in describing the teaching and learning process at the college and university level, states: "teachers have been so concerned with the answers the students give, that it is forgotten that science is more a verb than a noun."5 Many of our colleges and universities have shown hesitancy to foster change or a departure from traditional practices. The fault cannot be in the lack of suitable 5Paul D. Hurd, "The Educational Concepts of Secondary School Science Teachers," School Science and Mathematics, 1954, 55:89-96. materials, for in the last decade the National Science Foundation and other groups interested in science educa- tion have developed a broad variety of instructional ma- terials designed to present science in a way that embodies contemporary thought on educational processes. There are those who feel that this hesitancy can be explained by the fact that most of the new programs in science have been deve10ped outside of the college or university set- ting, with support of Federal funds. Others object be- cause universal implementation of these new materials would in effect establish a national curriculum. Accord- ing to Uricchio, the real reason why there is a lag in the implementation of various new curricular materials is not the fact that they were born outside of the usual delivery room, but rather because they represent a sub- stantial departure from traditional instructional pro- cedures in the schools. To put it bluntly, their pedagogical discomfort index is high.6 If we are agreed that there has been a certain degree of hesitancy in adopting the new curricular mate- rials and thus changing the methodology of teaching science, what is our role as college or university faculty? There are many avenues that can be followed which can help 6William Uricchio, Innovation in Higher Education (Columbia Teachers Press, Columbia University, 1967), pp. 22-24. aid faculty members with the understanding of what al- ternatives exist and at the same time bring about im- provements in the current offerings. One such alternative is better pre-service and in-service training of teachers. This does not necessarily imply pre-service or in-service education should prepare teachers to teach a prescribed biology, physics, or chemistry curriculum, but rather that they be made aware of the underlying philosophy of modern day science courses and understand what is meant by the discovery approach, inquiry, the investigative approach, and open-ended type of activities. Methodology of the Study The major purposes of this study were: (1) to ascertain the attitude changes of science teachers toward an innovated science curriculum as a result of a summer conference training program implemented by the curricu- lum Resources Staff at Bishop College during the summer of 1971, and (2) to ascertain what variables are germane to attitudinal Changes of these teachers toward a "new" curriculum. Hypotheses of the Study This study encompassed the qualitative aspects of teachers' attitudes and attitudinal change toward the TCCP in science. 1. There is a significant correlation between teachers' attitudes and attitudinal Change due to sex. 2. There is a significant correlation between teachers' attitudes and attitudinal change due to major area of science. 3. There is a significant correlation between teachers' attitudes and attitudinal change due to the amount of science training. 4. There is a significant correlation between teachers' attitudes and attitudinal change due to amount of teaching experience. 5. There is no significant correlation between teachers' attitude and attitudinal change to chronological age. 6. There is a significant correlation between teachers' attitudes and attitudinal Change as related to Classload (number of contact) hours). 7. There is a significant correlation between teachers' attitudes and attitudinal change as related to teacher competence. 8. There is a significant correlation between teachers' attitudes and attitudinal change toward the TCCP Summer Conference. Definition of Terms The following are definitions, statements or assump- tions as they are used in this dissertation. The TCCP teachers were those teachers who partici- pated in the 1971 TCCP Summer Conference Workshop and taught the TCCP for at least one term following the summer confer- ence. Innovation, according to Miles, is deliberate, novel, specific change, which is thought to be more efficacious in 10 accomplishing the goals of a system. The element of novelty, implying recombination of parts or a qualitative difference from existing forms.7 In-service training was defined as any instruction received by any teacher having preconceived and intentions of implementing the methodologies and materials of the TCCP following the training period. Teachers' attitudes and attitudinal changes were defined as the teachers' score card changes in scores on the 1971 Curriculum Development Summer Conference Faculty Questionnaire. Teachers' competence was defined by the TCCP teacher's score on the Sequential Test of Educational Progress, Science 1A. Delimitations and Assumptions of the Study All phases of the study were carried out in connec- tion with 57 teachers representing 28 predominantly black institutions of higher learning; all except one is con- sidered to be geographically located in the south. The study did not attempt to: 1. assess the effectiveness of the TCCP science program by measuring changes in the students' attitudes as gains in knowledge 7Matthew B. Miles (ed.), Innovation.in Education (New York: Teachers College Press, 1971). 11 2. assess the science content acquired by the TCCP participants in the workshOp 3. assess difference in amount of administrative, consultative assistance or direct supervision received by the participants as provided by the TCCP staff 4. assess other areas of disciplines of the TCCP 5. assess or measure the rate of innovation 6. measure or assess the rate of attitudinal change. It was assumed that the instruments used in con- junction with the study were valid for the purposes intended, and the teachers of the population were intellectually honest in their responses to the instruments. Organization of the Dissertation The general organizational plan of the thesis is as follows: in this chapter is presented a statement of the problem, rationale for the investigation, purpose, objec- tives, and hypotheses to be tested, along with definition of terms, delimitations and assumptions which underlie the study. Chapter II contains a review of the related perti- nent literature. A history of the program, sources of data, selection and description of the pOpulation, specific instruments used, summer conference training, statistical tools used, and method of analysis is reported in Chapter III. Chapter IV contains results of data collected, tests 12 of hypotheses, and analysis of data. A general summary, the educational implications and suggestions as to needed areas of related research of the study are contained in Chapter V. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE In-service education has recently become one of the major concerns of the four-year college faculty, and for many of those institutions' faculty whose educational pro- grams extend beyond the four-year level, whereas in the past in-service education for college faculty was limited mainly to junior or community colleges. After interviewing college faculty throughout the country, Garrison1 discerned that administrators will find it necessary to devote additional attention and resources to the content of this concern. Literature pertaining to in-service training and education is very‘abundant.' Literature on the process of change and innovation is growing. Literature specific to preparation of college faculty for the implementation of innovation in curriculum and instruction is almost non- existent. Therefore the review for this study was done with the following purposes in mind: (1) to explore the lROger H. Garrison, Junior College Faculty: Issues and Problems. Washington, D.C.: American Association of Junior Colleges (1967), pp. 54-56. l3 14 in-service training of college faculty for the implementation of innovation in curriculum and instruction, (2) to ascer- tain some psychological bases for curriculum innovation, and (3) to explore teachers' attitudes and changes toward inno- vated curricula. The studies presented have been divided into three major subsections. The first subsection presents an exploratory review of the need for and the existence of in-service education. The second group of studies reveals some of the psychological bases for curriculum innovation and implementation. In the third, and final group of studies are revealed teachers' attitudes and Changes toward innovated curricula. ghg_greparation of College Faculty for the Implementatibn of Innovations in Curriculum and Instruction, A source for achieving effective college and univer- sity teaching, according to Walker, "resides in programs of an in-service nature."2 In-service education as defined by Bessent: is a term that can seem to include everything that happens to a teacher after he signs his first contract to teach. . . . 2Tom L. Walter, "More Effective College Teaching," Improving College and University Teaching (Winter, 1971), p. 201. 3E. W. Bessent, "Inservice Education--A Point of View," Designs for Inservice Education (Austin: The Univer- sity of Texas Printing Division, 1967), p. 4. 15 Corey4 wrote that the improvement of instruction through in-service education has been a part of the American education system for more than a century; therefore, the idea of in-service education for teachers is not novel. PrOpounding the philosophy further, Richey states, . . . No period in the past has been so poor as to have been without some qualified teachers, and no period, including the most recent, has been without some inept and poorly trained ones. . . . The nineteenth century saw in-service education as a way of overcoming the deficiencies of generally immature, poorly educated, and superficially trained teachers, wrote Corey.6 The program devised to most nearly correct these conditions was the teacher's institute. Richey7 observed that as early as 1845, there is documented evidence that in-service education was designed to instruct teachers in the way they were to instruct students. Close to the end and immediately following the close of the nineteenth century, the institute began to give way 4S. M. Corey, "Introduction,":hiIg-Service Education, the Fifty-sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 36. 5G. H. Richey, "Growth of the Modern Conception of In-service Education," in In-Service Education, the Fifty- Sixth Yearbook of the National Society for Ehe Study of Education (Chicago:‘ University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 36. 6Corey, op. cit., p. 2. 7Richey, op. cit., p. 39. 16 to other agencies developed for the purpose of in-service education. The agency activities included summer normal schools, extension courses, teachers' reading Circles, and supervisory practices. Supervision in one form or another came to be the most common instrument for the improvement of instruction. As Richey stated: . . . development of supervision as a function of administration, the organization of supervisory staffs, the empirical nature of professional knowl- edge, the generally conceded superior learning of administrators and supervisors, . . . helped shape the concept of teacher improvement as "bringing teachers up to a standard of performance contrived out of the superior knowledge of the specialist."8 Teaching and the classroom teacher were upgraded continuously. Large numbers of teachers were recognized as having increased expertness and capacity for self-direction. They began to demonstrate that their background, prepara- tion, and experience had made them specialists in areas that supervision had not reached. The teacher became a specialist to be consulted. As a specialist to be consulted, the Classroom teacher plays a role which makes him an asset to in-service education. Kinneck et a1.9 describes this role as including 8Richey, op. cit., p. 50. 9B. J. Kinneck, et al., "The Teachers and the In- Service Education Program," in In-Service Education, The Fifty-Sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 134. 17 identification of problems and the formulation of plans for working on these problems. These statements are made in view of the assumption that the existence of a growing array of curriculum innovations is one of the factors which creates problems. Greene stated, . . . Many university teachers have had no practice teaching or even courses in pedagogical principles. In-service education assists all teachers in profes- sional expansion. . . . In-service education helps both the novice and the experienced teacher keep abreast of increasing knowledge and developments. 0 Failure to emphasize the importance of quality instruction according to McCarthy, "neutralizes efforts to . . . 11 encourage 1n-serv1ce improvement." Eric Hoffer wrote, . . . It is my impression that no one really likes the new. We are afraid of it. It is not only as Dostoyeusky put it that "taking a new step, uttering a new word is what people fear most." Even in slight things the experience of the new is rarely without some stirring foreboding. After relating his own feeling involving changing jobs from picking peas to picking stringbeans, Hoffer 10Robert F. Greene, "Good Teaching and In-Service Education," Improving College and University Teaching, (1971) , p. 20f. 11Joseph L. McCarthy, "More Effective College Teaching," Improving College and University Teachigg, IX (Summer 1961), pp. 124-127. 12Eric Hoffer, The Ordeal of Change (New York: Harper and Row, 1964), pp. 1-2. 18 states that even this change produced feelings of fear. He continues: In the case of drastic change the uneasiness is of course deeper and more lasting. We can never be really prepared for that which is wholly new. We have to adjust ourselves, and every radical adjustment is a crisis in self-esteem: We undergo a test, we have to prove ourselves. It needs inordinate self-confidence to face drastic change without inner trembling.l3 Gardnerl4 associates change and innovation with crises and problems, indicating that effective innovations may well increase the chances of survival of a threatened system. He notes that crises put peOple in the mood to accept innovation and that innovators must be alert to take advantage of such situations. He finds a close relation- ship between creativity, innovation, and self-renewal, and suggests that certain traits are shared by individuals pos- sessing these characteristics. These include: openness, independence, flexibility, and capacity to find order in experience. Similarly, openness related with tendencies to innovate and closedness with rigidity and inflexibility, 15 according to Keuscher. He founded that innovative 131bid. 14John W. Gardner, Self-Renewal: The Individual and the Innovative Society (New York: Harper and Row, 1965), pp. 64-65. 15Robert E. Keuscher, "An Appraisal of Some Dimensions of Systems Theory as Indicators of the Tendency to Innovate in Selected Public Junior Colleges" (unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Los Angeles, University of California at Los Angeles, 1968), p. 89. 19 colleges exhibit Close contact with environment, expressed clearly defined goals, evidence adequate planning and pre- paration for change, expressed clearly defined decision- making procedures, and maintained open and functioning channels of communication. Frequently new methods or styles of teaching as well as new materials may be common with curriculum change and innovation. Certain teachers may find it more difficult than others to adapt to the changes evoked by innovation.16 Dale17 states that change is not sought by individ— uals or by universities. Change and innovations disturb the status quo, make waves, and may be troublesome and uncomfortable. Change involves taking risks and the possi- bility of failure. He cited outmoded machinery of curriculum development, lack of reward for curriculum innovation, failure to define.specific course objectives, ineffective methods of evaluation, and failure in the application of ideas as reason for the lack of change in colleges and universities. 16Steven M. Barnes, "The Reactions of Selected Elementary Teachers to the Training for and the Implementa- tion of the Science Curriculum Improvement Study in Selected Schools in Michigan" (unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, East Lansing, Michigan State University, 1969), p. 32. l7Edgar Dale, "The Innovator and the Establishment," In Search of Leaders. Edited by G. K. Smith, L. Erhard, C. MacGuineas (Washington, D.C.: American Association for Higher Education, National Education Association of the United States, 1967). 20 Upton18 cited the necessity for strong presidential commitment to Change. Accompanying that must be a faculty interest in change, which may develop out of dissatisfac- tion with accomplishments in higher education or in the college. Together with interest there must be commitment and involvement in inquiry. He argues for the necessity to fully grapple with the issues, indicating that a hesitant or half-hearted approach would not create an adequate climate for change. He noted that restlessness, impatience, rancor, friction, and dissention accompany change, but that time and patience would prevent the develOpment of permanent schism within the faculty. Full involvement of faculty through the use of faculty committees and the use of outside consultants would be essential in promoting involvement; avoid ingrown characteristics, provide a stimulus to initia- tive and enthusiasm. In discussing educational innovation, Miles19 pro- posed that emphasis ought to be directed at consideration of the process of change, why innovations spread or fail to spread, and the causes of resistance. He suggested that 18'Miller Upton, "Acceptance of Major Curricular Change," In Search of Leaders. Edited by G. K. Smith, L. Erhard, C. MacGuineas (Washington, D.C.: American Association for Higher Education, National Education Association of the United States, 1967), p. 96. 19Matthew B. Miles, editor, Innovation in Educa- tion (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Cqumbia University, 1964), p. 38. 21 special Characteristics of educational systems and proposed innovations, conditions within a system which may facilitate or hinder change processes during change, characteristics of innovative persons or groups, the fate of innovation, and reasons for change in innovation rates are kinds of questions which anyone interested in the study of educational innovation must understand. Johnson20 reported that colleges and universities resist change rather than subject themselves to the up- heavals of innovation. HOpefully, he noted that planned changes are being made and that the junior college gives promise of being a leader in innovative developments.~ This he stated may be due to the rapid growth of junior colleges and relative lack of long-established tradition which en- courages change. Pressures to keep up with increasing demands of expansion, together with the demands of senior college and university requirements, lack of administrative- support, and poor communication can retard innovation and experimentation. The author emphasized that innovation is facilitated by providing financial assistance, involving those affected by change in its planning, encouraging creativity by faculty in devising new approaches to teaching, and allowing faculty the right to fail. 20Lamar B. Johnson, Islands of Innovation Expanding: Changes in the Community College (Beverly Hills, California, MacMiIlan Company, 1969)? p. 29. 22 Messell21 attributes most innovation to outside sources; however, he also states: I believe that innovation that is generation within the institution by faculty members themselves, is likely to be more significant in its effect, better tested, and longer-lasting than change that is imposed from without. He cited a committee on innovation and experimentation, involvement of students, adequate financial resources, and improved assessment techniques as of value to innovation efforts. Maintaining a high rate of production of good and new ideas, examining and evaluating proposed innovations prior to adoption or rejection, wise allocation of avail- able resources, and institutionalizing the process of change, according to Adelson raise the likelihood of adoption of innovations.22 Cooper23 concluded that complacency on the part of faculty, inadequate financial incentives, and the fatigue 21Nils Messell, "The Process of Innovation," in Improving College and University Teaching, edited by Ca v1n B. T. Lee, (WaSHington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1968). p. 205. 22Marvin Adelson, "Educational Ends and Innovational Means," Inventin Education for the Future. Edited by Merner Hirscfi (San Francisco: CHandIerPfiblishing Company, 1967). pp. 78-79. 23Russell M. Cooper, "Faculty Development Programs," In Search of Leaders. Edited by G. K. Smith, L. Erhard, CTTMaGuineas (Washington, D.C.: American Association for Higher Education, National Education Association of the United States, 1967), p. 74. 23 of young faculty as factors which delay advances toward more effective instruction in higher education. He related faculty involvement, improved methods of appraisal, adminis- trative support, and inter-institutional cooperation as contributing to faculty improvement. Gusfield,24 in his discussion of factors having implication for change and innovation in higher education, contended that students will become effective change agents and that the ideology of change would come more from stu- dents than from administrators, and more from administrators than from faculty. Regardless of the efficiency of any particular method for improving college and university teaching, the need, according to Eurich, is that each institution make a positive commitment to innovation in teaching and establish a program of research and development in the art of teach- ing.25 24Joseph Gusfield, "The Faculty Institute," paper presented at Workshop Conference to Foster Innovation in Higher Education, Union for Research and Experimentation in Higher Education, April 25-29, 1967. 25Alvin C. Eurich, "The Commitment to Experiment and Innovate in College Teaching," Educational Record, XXXXV (Winter 1964), pp. 49-55. 24 Some Rationales and Psychological Bases for In-Service‘Education'in‘Curricqum Innovation and Implementation The rationale for faculty in-service education pro- grams in the innovative institutions of higher education is related to the belief that faculty members ought to be provided an opportunity to become involved and have some input into ongoing "new" ways of doing things. It is legitimate to expect that faculty would wish to know the college's position on innovation, the measure the college takes to encourage and facilitate the process, conditions which may mitigate their efforts, and the opportunities and provisions for professional growth. The concerns expressed by faculty in Garrison's study are echoed by a large number of new faculty who participated in a study conducted by the American Associa- tion of Junior Colleges. The major problems these faculty identified, ranked in order of their frequency, difficulty, and persistence are: (1) lack of time for scholarly study, (2) adapting instruction to individual differences, (3) dealing with students who require special attention to over- come deficiencies, (4) acquiring adequate secretarial help, (5) understanding college policies regarding teaching load, (6) challenging superior students, (7) obtaining needed instructional materials, (8) grading or marking students' work, and (9) under- standing college policies to be followed in curriculum development and revision. 26Roger H. Garrison, Junior College Faculty: Issues --and-Problems (Washington, D.C.: American Association of Ennior Colleges, 1967), p. 26. 25 Schmidt,27 addressing community college nursing program administrators, contends that effective in-service programs and opportunities for personal and professional growth contribute to retaining faculty, and that adminis- trators have a responsibility of devising ways and means to interest and assist faculty members in the improvement of conditions for students learning and their own teaching. She continues: There must be a plan for this working together of the faculty, it cannot be left to chance. Regularly scheduled, frequent faculty meetings to work on our- riculum development are essential. Workshops for the department faculty before and at the end of the school year can be highly effective. A climate which permits faculty to introduce new ideas, try them out, admit either failure or success and proceed to revise their ideas for the next class will be rewarding and challeng- ing to those involved.28 The concern for human relations, attention to the process of change and its effects on faculty involved are crucial to the implementation of innovative practices. Johnson noted that: "drastic and rapid change make effec- tive human relations more essential at the same time that they become more complex and difficult."29 27Mildred Schmidt, Obtaining and Keeping Faculty in an Associate Degree Nursing Program, a paper presented at the fifth meeting of the Southern Regional ' Education Board Council on Collegiate Education for Nursing, October 21, 1965, Atlanta, Georgia. 28Ibid., p. 27. 29Johnson, op. cit., pp. 13-14. 26 Matson3o regretted the efforts of some to intro- duce innovations in higher education which emphasized the rational considerations but ignored the emotional factors, dynamics of change, and human behavior involved in the process. Likewise, Asher31 placed considerable emphasis on individual and group interactions, the problem-solving process, and communication. In a previous paper, the writer raised a question regarding the nature of change and innovation which made participation so important. Carpenter and Greenhill32 suggested that new media should stimulate students, represent reality, enable teachers to vary their patterns of instruction, and span time, space, and culture. New media require teachers to modify the traditional teaching relationship where the principal interaction is between the student and teacher. 30Goodwin Watson, "Innovation: Processes, Practices and Research," in Ippovations in Higher Education: Develop- ments, Research and Priorities, edited by SamueI'BaSkIn, New Dimensions in Higher Education, monograph 19, (Durham, N.C.: Duke University and U.S. Office of Education, 1967), p. 40. 31James J. Asher, "Inservice Education--Psychological Perspectives" (Berkeley, California: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and DevelOpment, 1967). 32C. R. Carpenter and T. M. Greenhill, "The New Media," in Higher Education, Some Newer Developments, Samuel Baskifi) editor TNew York: McGiaw-Hill Book Company, 1967), p. 6. 27 This may be in error and the principal interaction or trans- action should be between the learner and the materials to be learned. The writers placed considerable emphasis on well- prepared faculty with continuous training. Conditions favorable to the successful introduction of new media, cautions for its use, and urged research were also suggested. Cogen33 declared that if teachers are to be effec- tive as agents of change they must be encouraged to experi- ment with methods and materials, participate in curriculum planning, attend educational conferences, and be given time to plan creative activities. Teachers should be elevated to positions of shared authority and be given better in- service training. He cited the importance of having universities stress innovation, evaluation, and research as well as improving subject matter and methods courses, in an effort to assist students in accepting innovation and improving the overall quality of teachers. Westly34 discussed the implication of change for in-service education. She suggested that in-service 33Charles Cogen, "The Teacher and Educational Change," in InvertingEducation_for the Future, edited by Merner Hersch (San FranéISco: Chandler Publishing Company, 1967), p. 6. 34Dorothy Westly, "Inservice Education--Perspectives for Education," Berkeley, Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Review, 1967. 28 education programs should have defined objectives, focus on interested teachers, include visits to innovative centers, involve teachers in planning and evaluation of the innovations and in-service programs. Recommendations were made to the effect if innovation was a caste problem, accompanied by appropriate preparation, then adoption should be on a step by step basis. Garrison35 reported a widespread concern of faculty for their own professional refreshment and upgrading. Faculty cited the need for carefully planned and led in- service education programs. They recommend that such programs utilize the resources of the college and outside consultants, and should be more than causal or perfunctory business sessions. Faculty agreed that the dean of instruc- tion or his equivalent should be given the responsibility for the programs. Gardner and Sanford made statements which appear to summarize the rationales for in-service education in curriculum innovation and implementation. Gardner stated: Since we cannot really know what kinds of changes will prove useful, we must experiment. Or to put it more realistically, those of us who are tempermentally fitted for it must experiment, and the rest of us must tolerate it, even encourage it . . . A system that isn't innovating is a system that is dying. In the long run, the innovators are the ones who rescue all 35Roger H. Garrison, Junior College Faculty: Issues and Problems (Washington, D.C.: American Associa- tion of Junior Colleges, 1967), pp. 81-82. 29 human ventures from death by decay. So value them. You don't have to be one yourself, but you should be a friend of the innovators around you. And if you don't have any around you, you had better import some. Sanford stated: DevelOpmental change can occur at any time of life. All of us, at whatever age, have potentialities that have not yet been led forth. What actually happens depends on conditions-~conditions that can, to some extent at least, be controlled. Developmental changes take place when there is a Challenge--of such a nature or intensity that the individual cannot manage by behaving just as he did before but must evolve new ways of responding. The challenge must not, however, be too severe--beyond the adoptive capacities of the individua1--for in that case there will be a falling back upon primitive modes of adaptation.37 Perhaps in-service education programs provide those con- trolled Challenges and conditions. Sanford continues: It follows from this (the support, degree to which it influenced or was imitated by or became a model for others) that the benefits of educational experi- mentation may lie not so much in what can be found out from it as in the effects that it has on those who take part in it. Almost always an educational experi- ment interests and challenges the students who are its objects--they are touched by these signs of interest in them--and they respond by performing well and showing various signs of desirable change. And so with teachers who carry out experimental programs. Their desire to see these programs succeed leads to extra effort on their part and, most important, to a fresh interest in students; this makes them better teachers, and the students respond by behaving as the designers of the experiment predicted. Thus it is that processes which make scientific work in this field extraordinarily 36John W. Gardner, No Easy Victories (New York: Harper and Row, 1968), p. 49F 37Nevitt Sanford, "Implications for Education and for Adjustment of Curricula to Individual Students," in Universal Higher Education, edited by Earl J. McGrath (New York: McGraw-HiIl Book Company, 1966), p. 63. 30 difficult are the very ones that lead to immediate educational gains.38 Curriculum innovations reflect a change in phil- osophical orientation as well as a change in approach to instruction according to Butts.39 Brawer40 in discussing innovation and the indi- vidual, identifies the necessity to know who will accept or regret change, the conditions which existed before changes were implemented, and how the results of change may be evaluated. She suggested that teachers should be trained to recognize and develop creativity, be innovative in themselves, and be given freedom to experiment and express their creativity. Conditions which promote creative behavior and the development of innovative ideas are not well formulated. Caffey and Galden41 emphasized the interaction process. They state that in order for significant Changes 381bid., p. 53. 39D. P. Butts, "The Classroom Experience Model," in Design for Inservice Education, edited by E. W. Bessent, Research and Development Center for Teacher Education, The University of Texas, Austin. 40Florence B. Brawer, Personality Characteristics of College_and University FaculEy: Implications for the ' Communit Colle e (Washington, D.C.: American Association 0 Junior Co eges, 1968). 41H. S. Caffey and W. P. Galden, "Psychology of Change within an Institution," in In-Service Education, the Fifty-sixth Yearbook of the NatIOnal Society for the Study of Education (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957), pp. 75-76. 31 to take place certain types of relationships must exist which are "participative and cOllaberative" in addition to "two-way communication." This statement seems to establish justification for in-service education with groups faced with the responsi- bility of implementing prOgrams inherent with change. Bessent stated that: In-service education is aimed at individuals through group activities and takes place in the organizational context in which the individuals carry out their tasks.42 In addition Bessent proposed three admonitions for those who plan in-service programs and they are: 1. Thou shalt not commit in-service programs unre- lated to the genuine needs of staff participants. 2. Thou shalt not kill interest through in—service activities inapprOpriate to the purpose of the program. 3. Thou shalt not commit in-service on a shoestring. Research has reported specific techniques used for in-service where curriculum innovation has necessitated change.43 The laboratory approach, according to McIntyre, is an instructional system of procedure, a strategy for accomplishing certain learning ends. This approach attempts to make use of that which is known about the way people 42E. W. Bessent, "In-service Education: A Point of View," Desi ns for In-Service Education (Austin: The University of Texas Printing Division, 1967), p. 5. 43 Ibid., p. 8. 32 learn. For example, the rationale for the laboratory approach includes the idea that, . . . people learn better when they are actively involved in the learning process--when they do some- thing rather than have something done to them. Harris proposed demonstration as a technique for in-service education demonstrations to be used to bridge the gap between firsthand experience and just hearing about things. In defining demonstration, he perceived it as "a compromise between the need for realistic experi- ence and the disadvantages accompanying firsthand . "45 experience. A third technique for in-service education has been called the classroom experience model. According to Butts, the rationale for this technique relies heavily on the belief that, Teachers are not likely to be interested in change if they have no knowledge of either the change or its potential.46 According to Butts, three assumptions comprise the rationale for the classroom experience model which is 44K. E. McIntyre, "The Laboratory Approach," Designs for In-Service Education (Austin: The University of Texas Printing DiVision, 19677, p. 17. 453. M. Harris, "Teaching Demonstration Model," Designs for In-service Education (Austin: The University 5? Texas Printing Division, 1967). P. 41. 46D. P. Butts, "The Classroom Experience Model," in gesign for In-Service Education (Austin: The University of Texas Printifig Division, 1967), p. 36. 33 the in-service training program for elementary teachers using the innovative science program developed by the Commission on Science Education of the American Associa- tion for the Advancement of Science. The three assumptions are: 1. that knowledge of the innovation precedes and is essential to its implementation. 2. that commitment to the use of the innovative materials is essential to acceptance of the innovation. 3. that guidance in the use of the innovation is essential to its implementation. Brickell, in discussing the introduction of Change in schools, stated that the process may arouse feelings of insecurity and inadequacy which should be distinguished from outright resistance to change. He proposed that: the most successful innovations are those which are accompanied by the most elaborate help to teachers as they begin to provide the new instruction. Underlining the importance of preparation is Brickell's contention that the real source of rigidity is the ill-prepared, ill-informed, and ill-equipped teacher.49 McCormick stated that due to the impact of instruc- tional technology on higher education is becoming more and more pronounced as a spirit of innovation continues to 47Ibid., p. 38. 48Henry M. Brickell, Organizing Neinork State for Educational Change (Albany: State Education DepartmenE, I961) . 49Ibid. 34 emerge. Innovation, representing purposeful Change based upon experimental or empirical evidence of immediate or potential value, will continue to appear in the colleges and universities only as it is accepted by the professors as an integral part of the communicative process of higher education.50 Teachers' Attitudes Toward Curriculum Changes Implementing curriculum change requires a careful analysis of those factors which affect its use. The most important block to innovation is the attitude of teachers as was described by Noda when he noted that the important block to curriculum Change arises out of the attitude of teachers and their relationship to other teachers and administrators.51 Osgood conceptualizes attitudes as being, . . . how a person behaves in a situation depends upon what that situation means to him. . . . One of the most important factors in social activity is meaning and change in meaning--whether it be termed "attitude," or "value," or something else again. 50Frank L. McCormick, "Instructional Methodology," Improving College and University Teaching. 51Daniel S. Noda, "A Study of Successful Practice Used to Remove the Major Blocks to Curriculum Improvement in the Secondary School," unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1952, p. 78. 52C. E. Osgood, G. J. Suci and P. H. Tannenbaum, The Measurement of Meanipg (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1957). 35 According to the learning theorists attitudes mediate perceptions and these perceptions determine the 53 meaning of feedback from the environment. Feedback function purposely to guide intelligent direction of future actions.54 Then it would seem apprOpriate for those who are concerned with changing teachers' behavior should focus attention simultaneously upon their attitudes and attitude changes. Butts and Willson observed when teachers were involved in an innovative curriculum workshop, teachers did not demonstrate the same degree of change.55 A previous study by Butts and Raun, was concerned with the type of teacher with whom a teacher education program can expect to produce the greatest change in the perception of innovation as well as practice. Their study involved 60 elementary teachers from the Austin Independent School District and seven adjoining 53Winfred Hill, Learnin (San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Company, 1963). 54Norbert Miener, Cybernetics (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1948). 55David P. Butts, "The Classroom Experience Model," in Design for In-Service Education, edited by E. W. Bessent, Research and Development Center for Teacher Education, The University of Texas, Austin, 1967. S. C. Willson, "Teacher Education Through an Inservice Program," unpublished Master's Thesis, The University of Texas, Austin, 1967. 36 school districts. Teaching experience ranged from O to 34 years with a median of 7.75 years. Their course work in science varied from 0 to 30 hours with median of 11.5 hours. Grade levels were 1 through 6. The result of their findings indicated grade level made a relevant contribution to a positive change in attitude. Previous course hours in science was also a rele- vant contributor to a more positive attitude for those teachers who had few or no previous hours in.science. Previous teaching experience and the location of the school where the teachers taught did not appear to be relevant contributors to attitude change.56 Change is often perceived by individuals as a threat to their security, status, or challenge to their competence and involving a degree of uncertainty. For these reasons, they resist change. These reactions can, to a degree, be overcome by making certain that change is indicated, that there is careful planning of change, that the reasons for change are communicated to those affected, and probably most important, involving those affected in the entire process.57 56David P. Butts and Chester E. Raun, A Study_of Teacher Chan e, Science Inservice Project, Research Report, No. I, THe Science Education Center, The University of Texas, Austin, 1967. 57Mary E. Jensen, "The Role of Administrators in Facilitating Innovation in Community College," unpublished seminar paper, Los Angeles, University of California at Los Angeles, 1968. 37 Butts and Raun gave three factors which purport to enhance the desirability of change in teachers: . he becomes familiar with the innovation. 2. he acquires experience so he knows what to ex- pect from students' responses, and 3. he gains self-confidence in working with curriculum innovation. It is not readily discernible, due to the com- plexity of human behavior, to determine whether a teacher education program results in observable changes in a teacher's perception of a curriculum innovation and his or her subsequent practice of that innovation. Ryans described this when he said: Successful teaching, as well as successful partici- pation in most of the professional activities, is contributed to by many qualities of individual, intellectual and personal. Since teaching includes specific subject matter, the individual past preparation in a subject matter area might logically determine the impact of an in-service pro— gram. Ryans60 found special subject matter knowledge to be 58Butts and Raun, op. cit. 59David G. Ryans, Measuring the Intellectual and Cultural Backgrounds of Teaching Candidates; Analysis of the Results of Second Annual Administration of the National Teacher Examination, Cooperative Test Service of the American Councii on Education, New York, 1941, pp. 1-28. 601bid. 38 positiVely correlated with teaching effectiveness. Ellena,61 however, found that subject matter competence was not a major factor in the quality of teaching performance. In an earlier study Ryans62 reported that the amount of college training appeared to make little difference in effective teaching behavior. A second major component of the teacher education program is the involvement of the teacher with students. In curriculum innovation, the focus of attention is on the student and how he learns. Thus the more teaching experi- ence a teacher has, the more likely he would benefit from a teacher innovative education program that emphasizes per- ceptiveness of student responses. However, the contribu- tion of past teaching experience to Changing teaching behavior is not clear. Taylor's study of the relationships between growth of interest and achievement of high school science students and science teacher attitudes, preparation, and experience involved 28 Texas public school systems and 83 science teachers. The comparison of student gains with teacher factors such as attitude, background in professional 61W. J. Ellena, Who's A Good Teacher? (Washington, D.C.: National School Boards Association, 1961). 62David G. Ryans, "A Study of the Extent of Associa- tion of Certified Professional and PersOnal Data with Judged Effectiveness of Teacher Behavior," Journal of Experimental Education, 1951, 20:57-77., 39 education, background in science, and teaching experience. According to his findings, there were no significant dif- ferences.63 In a very early study Knight64 analyzed the con- tribution of age, experience, and I.Q. to success in teaching. He concluded that none of these factors are closely related to successful teaching. 65 Shortly after, Bathurst showed that teacher efficiency increased slightly with experience, but the increase was so slight as to be insignificant. In more recent times, however, Ryans66 did show an over-all nega- tive relationship between the amount of teaching experience and teaching effectiveness. He also found evidence of an increase in effectiveness with the early years. This find seems to be supported by that of Ellena67 who concluded 63Thomas W. Taylor, "A Study to Determine the Relationships Between Growth in Interest and Achievement of High School Science Students and Teacher Attitudes, Prepara- tion, and Experience," (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, North Texas State University, 1957), p. 77. 64F. B. Knight, Qualities Related to Spccess in Teachin , Columbia University contribution to Education, No. 126, 1922. 65J. E. Bathurst, "Relation of Efficiency to Experience and Age Among Elementary Teachers," Journal of Educational Research, 1929, 19:314-316. 66David G. Ryans, Prediction of Teacher Effective- ness, Engyclopedia Educational Research (The MacMillan Company, New York, 1960), 1486-1591. 67 Ellena, op. cit., 40 that teaching effectiveness seems to rise rapidly in the first years of teaching and level off at a fairly stable plateau. Years of experience may be another key contributor to securing change. 68 found that more experienced Willower and Jones teachers generally held conservative views, while less experienced teachers were more liberal and permissive. The more experienced teachers dominated the informal structure of sChool and did not hesitate to communicate their point of view to less experienced teachers. They favored the status quo and opposed Changes that were likely to result in a more permissive procedure. Butts and Raun69 studied four factors as contri- butors to the perception of innovation in their attempt to determine what type of innovated education program would produce the greatest change in both the perception of innovation and the practice of innovation. The sample studied included 19 teachers of predominately middle class Anglo. The years of teaching experience of the group varied from 0 to 34 years with a mean of 11.2 years. The previous 68D. G. Willower and Donald G. Jones, "When Pupil Control Becomes an Institutional Theme," Phi Delta Kappa, l963,‘45:107-109. 69David P. Butts and Chester E. Raun, A Studygin Teacher Chan e, Science Inservice Project, Research Report, No. I, The Science Education Center, The University of Texas, Austin, 1967. 41 preparation in science varied from 0 to 30 semester hours with a mean of 13.6 hours. The four factors were: (1) competency in science, (2) previous hours in science, (3) previous teaching experience, and (4) grade level taught. The results of the study indicated the greatest change in the perception of the innovation were with those teachers who had a number of years of teaching experience but who had few hours of previous science courses. Further analysis indicated that the competency in science of a teacher affected change in the teacher's practice of our- riculum innovation. 70 White, Raun and Butts made conclusions as a result of their study to determine what conditions affected the impact of an innovated teacher education program when its impact was described in terms of compe— tency in science and attitude toward curriculum innovation. Their findings indicated that the organization and location of the innovative teacher education program were relevant factors. Improvement in both competence in science and teacher attitude appeared favorable to the released-time format of teacher training. Previous science courses 7oMarjorie A. White, Chester E. Raun, and David P. Butts, A Stud of ContrastingtPatterns in Inservice Education, Sc1ence Inservice Project, Researéh Report, No. 3, The Science Education Center, The University of Texas, Austin, 1968. 42 appeared to have been a relevant condition for increased competence in science. Previous teaching experience and grade level taught did not appear to be related to compe- tence in science but did appear to be related to a teacher's attitude. Clintoh and House made a study to determine a set of attributes of innovations and also.to explore the extent to whiCh these attributes have general utility in accounting for acceptance of innovations. As a result of their findings, the conclusions reached were: "attributes accruing to innovations are perhaps as relevant to imple- mentation of innovations as are external factors--how a teacher perceives a new idea or thing being as important as the thing or idea itself."71 Summary Studies relevant to the preparation of college faculty for the implementation and innovation in curriculum and instruction pointed up many divergent opinions; how- ever, many lines of general agreements could be concluded. Therefore, the conclusions presented are drawn from each of the three areas reviewed. 71Alfred Clinton and John H. House,"Attributes of Innovation as Factors in Diffusionf'paper presented at American Education Research Association Meeting, Minneapolis, March 1970. 43 l. The purpose and function of in-service educa- tion beginning around the eighteenth century to about the close of the nineteenth century, involved changing from a way of overcoming deficiencies of a general educational nature to assume a more diverse ,role, that of training of supervisors, specialists, and consultants. Their primary functions were to identify problems and to formulate plans to attack problems in education according to Kinneck et a1. (9)* with the assumption that curriculum innovations created problems. A method for improving faculty instruction could be accomplished through in-service education as supported by studies of Walker (2), Corey (4), Richey (5), Greene (10), and McCarthy (11). In offering explanations for why many institutions of higher learning and faculties failed to become involved in curriculum innovations or changes varied, but some trends of agreement could be discernible. Curri- culum innovation and changes often initiate new methods or styles of teaching as well as new materials along with fear and anxiety, a feel of threat and insecurity. These explana- tions are in part supported by Hoffer (12) and (13), Dale (1?), and Johnson (20). Cooper (23) gave reasons such as complacency on the part of faculty, inadequate financial *The number in parentheses refers to previously cited references. 44 incentives and fatigueness on the part of young faculty as factors which delay advancement toward more effective instruc- tions in higher education. In a study of characteristics as traits associated.with changes and innovations, Gardner (14) found a close rela- tionship between creativity, innovation and self-renewal, and individuals possessing these characteristics exhibited certain other traits such as Openness, independence, flexi- bility and the capacity to find order in experience. Similarly, Keuscher (15) related Openness with tendencies to innovate and closedness with rigidity and inflexibility. He found that innovative colleges exhibited close contact with environment, expressed clearly defined goals, evidence adequate planning and preparation for change, expressed clearly-defined decision-making procedures, and maintained Open and functioning channels of communication. In discussing factors having implication for change and innovation in higher education, Upton (18) cited the necessity for strong presidential commitment along with faculty interest. Similarly, Messell (21) attributed most innovations to outside sources, but he believed innovations that was generated by faculty members within a given institu- tion would be more significant, more effective, and longer- lasting than when changes were imposed from without. Miles (19) proposed that emphasis should be placed on the process change itself. Johnson (20) found that colleges and 45 universities exhibited resistance to change and innovation, but however, noted promising leads among junior colleges. Gusfield contended that students would become effective change agents and the ideology of Change would come from students more than from administrators, and more from admin- istrators than from faculty, and according to Eurich (25) each institution should make a commitment to innovation in teaching and establishment of programs for this purpose. 2. The several rationales presented in this portion of the chapter seem to have indicated the most discernible is that of faculty concern for becoming involved in curriculum innovations. Those concerns were expressed in a study done by Garrison (26) for the American Association of Junior Colleges. Schmidt's (27) address to a group of community college nursing program administrators, expressed her concerns for providing opportunities for the personal and professional growth of faculty members. Also in the previous report by Garrison (35) similarly concerns were expressed by faculty members. Johnson (29) noted that human relation was essential in making drastic and rapid changes in curriculum. Watson (30), Asher (31), Carpenter and Greenhill (32), Caffey and Galden (41) all emphasized psychological factors such as human behavior, and group interaction as being very important in the change process. Reports by Cogen (33), Gardner (36), Sanford (37), and Brawer (40) all pointed out 46 the fact that certain opportunities provided the innovator, such as experimentation and creativity,had important psy- chological bearings on the outcome of a successful curricu- lum innovation and implementation. Butts (39) in discussing his classroom experience model, concluded how successful a curriculum innovation was dependent to a great degree on a change in philoSOphy concerning curriculum innovation and implementation. 3. Research finding involving teachers' attitudes toward curriculum innovations was reported by Noda (51). He noted that the most important block to curriculum change arose out of the attitude of teachers and their relation- ship to other teachers and administrators. Butts and Wilson (55) studied concerning the type of teachers that could best be expected to produce the greatest change through a teacher education program in terms of perceptions and practices of an innovation. Their study involved 60 elementary school teachers. Their finding indicated grade level and previous course hours in science contributed a positive Change in attitude for those teachers who had few or no previous hours in science. Previous teaching experience and the location of the school where the teachers taught did not appear to be relevant to attitudinal change. Ryans (60) found special subject matter knowledge to be positively correlated with teaching effectiveness, however, Ellena (61) found that subject matter competence was not a major factor in the 47 quality of teaching performance. Taylor's (63) study of the relationships between growth of interest and achievement of high school science students and science teacher attitudes, preparation, and experience involved 28 Texas public school systems and 83 science teachers. In a comparison of student gains with teacher factors such as attitude, background in professional education, background in science and teaching experience, no significant differences were found. In an early study, Knight (64) analyzed the contribution of age, experience, and I.Q. to success in teaching. He concluded that none of those factors were closely related to success- ful teaching. In a study done by Bathurst (65) shortly thereafter, indicated teacher efficiency increased slightly with experience, but the increase was so slight as to be insignificant. In a more recent study by Ryans (66) find- ings indicated an over-all negative relationship between the amount of teaching experience and teaching effective- ness. In this same study evidence indicated that an increase in effectiveness with early teaching years. This finding seems to support that of Ellena (67) who concluded that teaching effectiveness seems to rise rapidly in the first few years of teaching and leveled off at a fairly stable plateau. Willower and Jones (68) findings indicated that the more experienced teachers generally held conservative views, 48 while less experienced teachers were more liberal and per- missive. In studying four factors as contributors to the perception of innovation, Butts and Raun (69) in an attempt to determine what type of innovated education program would produce the greatest change in perception and practice of innovation among 19 teachers of predominately middle class Anglo background. The four factors investigated were: (1) competency in science, (2) previous hours in science, (3) previous teaching experience, and (4) grade level taught. Their findings indicated that teachers who had few hours of formal science training and a number of years of teaching experience showed the greatest change in the perception of innovation. Further analysis of the same study indicated that teachers' competency in science affected change in the teacher's practice of curriculum innovation. White, Raun and Butts (70) made conclusions from their study to determine what conditions affected the impact of an innovated teacher education program when the impact was described in terms of competency in science and attitude toward curriculum innovation. Their findings indicated that organization and location of the innovated teacher education program were relevant factors. Further indications were previous science training increased science competence. How- ever, previous teaching experience and grade level taught did not appear to be related to science competence but did appear to be related to teacher's attitude. CHAPTER III DESCRIPTIVE FEATURES OF THE STUDY Presented in this chapter are: (l) the general objectives and design of the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program under which this study was carried out, (2) a back- ground description of the program, (3) the development of the biological science curriculum, (4) the development of the physical science curriculum, (5) a description of the Summer Workshop, (6) a description of participants and the methods used to assign them to the program, (7) the pro- cedures for collection of data, and (8) the procedures for analysis of data. General Objectives and Design of the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program The study was designed to investigate teachers' attitudes and attitude changes toward the TCCP in science as was carried out in conjunction with the institute for Services to Education. This study began in the summer of 1971 and extended for one term (quarter or semester) of the 1971-1972 school year. ‘ 49 50 General Program Objectives The general objectives for the TCCP program fall into three areas: (1) changes in institutional goals, (2) changes in teacher objectives, and (3) changes in student Objectives. In each instance the institutions, the teachers, and the students will change if the program is successful; these changes are specified below: Institutional Objectives 1. To generate interest in curriculum reform on the campuses and to influence changes in the total curri- culum of the colleges. 2. To demonstrate the possibility of a reduction in attrition rate, particularly in the first two years of college. 3. To have a group of students enter their junior year with a level of academic preparation and positive at~ titudes toward learning that will improve the quality of work they do in their academic majors. Teacher Objectives 1. To increase skill in the development of new curriculum materials. 2. To broaden, and in some cases change or modify, instructional techniques or approaches to the presentation of material in the classroom. 51 3. To foster an attitude about the inadequate performance of students which leads to experimentation with materials and teaching improvement rather than com- plaints about student weaknesses. 4. To develop some leadership for curriculum re— form on each campus from among the teachers in this program. Student Objectives 1. To develop facility in the analysis and inter- pretation of qualitative and quantitative data from a variety of disciplines. 2. To develop a critical, skeptical, and question- ing attitude toward all sources of information, i.e., from authorities, from teachers, from the printed page. 3. To move students toward initiating their own learning activities over material which goes beyond or differs from that assigned in classes. 4. To have a high volume of verbal participation of students in classroom sessions based on an adequate knowledge of the topics under study. 5. To have the students capable of demonstrating, at the end of the freshman year, knowledge and skills in the four fields that will be acknowledged by their peers and their teachers as equal to or superior to those of the study's regular freshmen. 52 The vehicle to be used in achieving these broad- based Objectives was an active consortium for curriculum development and institutional change which became known as the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program (TCCP) in 1967. Background of the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program In the fall Of 1966 thirteen colleges in eleven states decided to form a consortium so that they might better avail themselves of resources needed to improve instruction in their institutions at the freshman and sephomore levels. The project began as a COOperative venture involving, in addition to the thirteen colleges, the Institute for Services to Education. The Institute for Services to Education was incor- porated as a non-profit organization in 1965 and received a basic grant for the Carnegie Corporation of New York. The organization is founded on the principle that educa- tion today requires a fresh examination of what is worth teaching and how to teach it. ISE undertakes a variety Of educational tasks, working COOperatively with other educational institutions, under grants from government agencies and private foundations. ISE is a catalyst for change. It does not just produce educational materials or techniques that are innovations; it develOps, in COOpera- tion with teachers and administrators, procedures for 53 effective implementation of successful materials and tech- niques in the colleges. The Institute for Services to Education, which in- cludes an academic staff called the Curriculum Resources Group, serves as a catalyst and a unifying force in moving separate institutions and separate funding agencies toward similar goals within a common framework. The professional staff consists of 16 people whose backgrounds and experi- ences are in academic scholarship, educational invention, and educational evaluation. The educational ideas in the program are further developments of those coming out of ISE's earlier work in develOping innovative materials for pre-college programs for high school students attending predominantly black colleges. From 1967 to the present, ISE has been working cooperatively with the Thirteen-College consortium in developing the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program. The curriculum staff is assisted in the generation of new edu- cational ideas and teaching strategies by teachers in the participating colleges and outside consultants. Each cur- riculum area has its own advisory committee, with members drawn from distinguished scholars in the field but outside of the program. With the aid of a grant from the National Science Foundation, the Curriculum Resources Group of the Institute for Services to Education sponsored the first of a series 54 of annual summer curriculum conferences for the teachers of the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program. At this time there was a feeling among the member institutions that they could turn out better students, students more able to meet the competition for jobs and thus survival. There has been a gap between the actual academic attainment of many high school graduates, especially those from rural areas, and the expected levels for such graduates; this gap is a tradition. The black college in particular has for decades found that it has had to engage in "gap- closing" activities in order to produce college graduates who could continue to meet the competition for jobs. Of course, as in any human endeavor, they were not able to achieve this 100 percent, nor did they feel that they were going about it in 100 percent the right way. It was a period, too, when the civil rights movement was spurring integration, including more widespread integration of public elementary and secondary schools as well as colleges in the south. The future of black colleges was being weighed, perhaps even without their permission. Some col- leges realized that it would be very desirable to improve the quality of their graduates. At the same time, although it may not have been admittedly a very direct cause, there was an increasing demand heard from students in colleges all over America. As the 1960's dawned, the "silent generation" became a 55 militant generation with confrontation politics its usual tool instead of debates in impotent student councils. Al- though there was only a vocal minority of students voicing protestations about teaching practices in American col— leges, including the predominantly black colleges, their points of view were apparently shared by the great "silent majority" of other students. These students were not con- tent just to sit and listen to the opinions of their teachers nor to the recitation of facts without the oppor- tunity to ask questions about the application and relevance of points of view to their lives. There was an increasing restlessness about administrative procedures as well and a growing insistence that the student be allowed to have a larger voice in the formulation of his educational plans. The Thirteen-College Curriculum Program in part represents a response to and recognition of the legitimacy of student protestations as well as the recognition by the colleges that the materials and methods of teaching this generation of students would represent an almost radical departure from the traditional means and aims of higher education in the United States. Furthermore, students in predomi- nantly black colleges were being faced with increasing competition for the jobs available to college graduates. A growing national pOpulation, a rapidly expanding tech- nology, the burgeoning of the value of the gross national product, and other factors, indicated that the quality of 56 education of the black college graduate had to be improved in order for these young people to gain and keep the jobs that mean economic survival. Being knowledgeable of these conditions and events, the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program began to outline objectives to mediate some of the educational problems of predominantly black college students. Growth of the Program In 1967, thirteen colleges introduced the program to their campuses. The colleges and universities were: Alabama A. & M. College Lincoln University Bennett College Talladega College BishOp College Jackson State College Clark College Tennessee State University Florida A. & M. University Southern University Norfolk State College Voorhees College North Carolina A. & T. State University Each of the colleges had a program staff consist- ing of one director, one counselor, and eight teachers (two for each of the four first year curriculum areas) with the exception of Bennett College, which had a pro- gram staff composed of one director, one counselor, and four teachers (one for each of the four first-year areas). Each college's program served one hundred students, with the exception of Bennett College which enrolled fifty students. In the second year, 1968, the sophomore courses, humanities and philosophy, were added to the program. The 57 program staff Of each college (Bennett was again excepted) was enlarged to fourteen persons, by the addition of two teachers, one for the humanities and one for the philOSOphy courses. Each program's student enrollment increased to two hundred students; one hundred students in the fresh- man courses and one hundred students in the SOphomore courses. In this same year, Mary Holmes Junior College be- came the fourteenth college to join the program. In the years 1969 and 1970, as the result of the program (re- ported elsewhere in this report) and the program itself became more widely known, the initial colleges began to implement the program. Greater numbers of freshmen stu- dents were permitted to enroll in the program's courses and a greater number of the college faculty were oriented to the program and began to utilize the teaching style of the program as well as its materials. Concomitantly, more colleges and universities became interested in the program and adopted it. In 1970, five colleges and universities, in the form of the Five College Consortium, adOpted the program. This year, nine more colleges adOpted the program. Eight, of these nine colleges formed the Eight College Consortium and one, Fayetteville State University, joined the Five College Consortium. 58 It is significant that the program over the short period of four years has grown from 13 to 28 colleges and universities, from 100 to 456 participating faculty mem- bers, and from 1250 to 8900 enrolled students. The pro- grams have attempted to achieve their objectives in public and state supported colleges as well as in private church affiliated colleges and other private colleges. The TCCP has been effective in colleges that have a rather select clientele as well as for those that have had a policy which closely approximates an Open-door admission. The educational development efforts of the TCCP have been aimed at (1) develOping course content in En- glish, mathematics, social science, physical science, biology, humanities, and philosophy that would be more germane to the student's experience than those materials traditionally in use; (2) defining current problems in the teaching of these courses, along with the ramifica- tions Of and possible solutions to those problems; (3) deriving a philOSOphy of education that would stimulate teachers to think of the need for altering their attitudes toward their role in the classroom and their students' academic problems and basic needs; and (4) develOping methodologies and techniques that would stimulate and improve students' learning processes, and motivate stu- dents to assume an active role in their own learning. 59 The materials and techniques that have been developed are based upon three assumptions. The first, and probably most important assumption is that students can be more effectively motivated to learn and to become involved in the learning process when they are placed in a student-centered academic environment in which pedagogy and curriculum materials combine to ignite their intellec- tual curiosity; encourage a free exchange and expression of their own life styles, ideas, reflections, private insights and experiences; and build more positive self— images. The second assumption is that optimum learning conditions are more apt to occur if teachers assume roles as student guides and curriculum innovators, than when they assume the stance of classroom arbiters, and presum- ably, sources Of all worthwhile knowledge. The final assumption is that teachers, when freed from the struc- tures of syllabi and rigid course content, become more creative and responsive to students' needs and thereby make their teaching more pertinent to the students and more enjoyable for themselves. With these aims and assumptions as guides, the teachers of the TCCP, along with the Institution for Services to Education staff, have exerted great efforts toward the development of the kind of curricular materials and teaching strategies that will hopefully promote the 6O desirable classroom atmosphere and academic results. The material core of the new curricula is as follows: A. English (5 themes) 1. Choice and Temptation 2. Responsbility 3 Love 4 Power 5 Self and Alienation Social Science (sequences) 1. The Basis of Community and Society 2. The Structure of Community Control 3. The Black Experience Mathematics (units) Experimental Mathematics Tools and Concepts Functions Similarity and Trigonometry Consumer Mathematics Sets and Logic Computer Science The Real Number System Probability and Statistics \DmflmmwaH Biology (units) 1. Nature of Science Evolution The Cell Metabolism and Regulatory Mechanism Reproduction, Growth and Development Nature of Living Things Genetics Ecology ooqowmeww Physical Science (units) . Nature of Science The Principle of Conservation Laws Gas Laws and Kinetic Theory Light Chemistry UTIbWNH IO. 61 F. Humanities l. Man--His Creative Awareness G. PhilOSOphy l. Epistomology 2. Social and Political Thought Within each of the themes or units, a number of techniques have been developed for engendering in students a positive self-concept which is coupled with a hearty thirst for knowledge, and critical thinking stemming from processes Of association necessary for making connections between life in general, one's own experiences in particu- lar, and the works one reads or creates; and a more posi— tive attitude toward writing, stemming from a desire to communicate one's creative thoughts with respect to science, mathematics, and humanities. The process used to devise curriculum and teach- ing materials has traditionally been limited. A small community of "recognized" professors-educators, either singly or in groups, carried the burden and received the accolades for develOping the materials used by the broader post-secondary educational community. Therefore, it be- came inherent in this process that unacclaimed faculty in untouted universities are less apt to be credited with membership in the community of curriculum developers. The TCCP, through the ISE, consciously rejected the traditional process and adapted a method of active 62 involvement of teachers. It is ISE's contention that only through such involvement would there be a strong possibi- lity to sustain the curriculum innovation initiated. Therefore, in its role of working with the colleges through the teachers, ISE serves as a model of a particu- lar teaching style, and as a generator of creative mate- rials. However, ISE has adamantly refused to develOp 311_ of the methods and materials. Instead, ISE has taken a stance which reflects a fundamental belief in the fact that, with half an opportunity, teachers working with students could develop materials which would inherently have the best approach to creating effective educational returns for their students. Granted, the traditional processes probably would have gotten the program further along the route to having completed sets Of materials. However, while the procedure used was slower; it is now known that it was essentially correct and justified. Representative materials of the group's curriculum developmental efforts are now ready for national publication. This material has been viewed and reviewed by curriculum develOpers, by educational materials publishing houses, by teachers not using pro- gram methods, and by reputable persons working with educational theories and practices. All of them agree that this material represents a new, exciting and substan- tive deviation from the more traditional content matter. 63 More important is the fact that this interest has produced a marked effect upon the new authors. That is, the involved teachers have developed a strongly positive attitude towards their merit as teachers and educators, and towards their capabilities to perform a far-reaching service. No longer will they accept the notions that their contributions to higher education can only serve a temporary function and that their role must always be minscule. Therefore, the TCCP will not be their only effort to keep education alive and functioning on the local and national level. Moreover, the upward trend in the number of speaking and method demonstrations invitations received by TCCP teachers from traditionally emulated universities indicates that they create a national resource which can no longer remain undiscovered or untapped. DevelOpment of the Biological Science Curriculum In 1967, the Curriculum Resources Group of ISE held the first summer conference for the teachers in the new curriculum development program. Among the several courses offered was a Natural Science course which at- tempted to teach chemistry, physics and biology as a single subject. The basic objective of such a lumping was not clear, but seemed to be rooted in the fact that many 64 college freshmen are weak in science and would like to complete a year of it, usually required for the bachelor's degree, with as little emotional trauma as possible. The early efforts to combine chemistry, physics and biology into a course acceptable to teachers in these areas, in addition to students, led to the division of the course into separate physical science and biological science components. Much of the effort in the ensuing three years was bent toward identifying the areas of in- terest to students, and building the teaching of biology around a rational series of tOpics of greatest interest to students. The years 1967 to 1969 were spent exploring the interests of students. In the summer of 1969 the experi— ences of those two years were reviewed and reduced to eight units of study (based on the main areas of study in biology). Four of these were tested by all teachers in the program for their teachability and learnability in the classroom, with the remaining four units being used in a less coordinated way. At the summer conference in 1970 the major efforts were to introduce the new teachers from the new Five College Consortium to the materials and methods of the course as then developed, and to revise the eight units in the light of the experiences of teachers during the previous school year. At that time teachers indicated in more detail the scope of the 65 headings in the unit outline, extending some topics and eliminating others, and added some other approaches to the presentation of concepts. During the school year 1970-71 the ISE biology staff, in the course of carrying out the editorial func- tion, undertook the task of rendering the outlines more readable and nonrepetitive, and seeing that the informa- tion was considered at a level equal to freshman year capabilities. In addition, some essays were written on the objectives and spirit of the curriculum reform effort, teacher self-concepts, motivation, and leading discussions. These were all published together by the Institute for Services to Education as the Teacher's Guide to Classroom Discussions for Biology. During the spring of 1970 a laboratory manual, requested by teachers at the 1969 summer conference, was assembled from the exercises suggested for the eight units of study, and rewritten. This manual was introduced at the 1970 summer conference. During the fall of the 1970— 71 school year 15 of the 20 teachers elected to use this manual in their courses. During the spring, all students in the TCCP and Five College Consortium used it in field tests. During the fall of 1970 a Teacher's Guide to Laboratory Activities for Biology was written by the ISE 66 staff to serve as a supporting platform for teachers using the laboratory workbook. This workbook or manual, Laboratory Activities for Biology, was revised in late spring 1971 to include teachers' suggestions for increasing its usefulness. This revised edition was being used during the 1971-72 school year. The three books in this series comprise a single integrated course, with Laboratory Activities for Biology serving as a student workbook. Although the 1970 summer conference has been very successful in fulfilling the objectives for which it was designed, it became apparent as the fall term passed that there were teacher needs which had not been fully met. Among these, the following were salient: 1. There was a definite need to extend explana- tions about the unit material, and to provide opportuni- ties to actually do many things, because some of the activities described or recommended had a "twist" to them that was somewhat unfamiliar to the teachers. 2. There was a need for teachers to be involved in the early steps of organizing and writing a unit of study in order for them to understand the process and to develop a personal relationship with all of the materials. 3. There was a need for teachers to know more of the background of forces and counter-forces acting in our- riculum change--that is, curriculum change is not limited to the teacher and student only. 67 To help overcome some of these difficulties, which lay beneath other problems teachers were having during the fall term, a group of five teachers was brought to Washington, D.C. during the week of January 4, 1971, for a reorientation. The approach was symptomatic or "clinical." That is, it dealt with the intellectual prob- lems of teaching style, and practical problems of discus— sion, of perception and of writing. Quite importantly, teachers were given the Opportunity to work through some of the exercises in the laboratory manual. The teachers felt that the experience helped them to approach their teaching with greater confidence, and the ISE staff con- cluded that the individualized help available in a small group of five or less could serve as a prototype for action during the summer conference for 1971. Summer Conference Pre-Conference.P1anning Below a diagram is presented which represents in graphic form the schedule of major activities by year and levels of complexity (degree of complexity ignored) as seen at the end of the summer conference in 1969. 68 Institute on more effective teaching Refinement of materials. Assemble lab. manual. Methods of most effect teaching. Test materials. Consolidate experience. Depts. begin Write units. to use materials. Period of exploration -_- - Depts. consider materials. 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 The 1970 summer conference report for biological sciences ended with the projection: "For the summer con- ference in 1971 we prOpose an institute-type activity with emphasis on teaching techniques and procedures, classroom organization, and the best use of materials developed so far in the Thirteen College Curriculum Program." By March, 1971, therefore, the needs seemed quite clear so that plans for the summer were started with at least five gen- eral Objectives in view. These were: 1. The orientation of new teachers into such areas as the philosophy, materials, teaching style, labora- tory activities, supply for discussions and laboratory. 2. Helping teachers to become more sensitive to the reactions of a class and to translate their impres- sions of classroom activity into writing. 69 3. Giving some teachers the experience of start- ing the organization, investigation, coordination and writing of some curriculum materials by working on new units which would be sequels to the units of study al- ready developed in biology. 4. Providing teachers with more background in- formation about the forces acting in curriculum change; and 5. Using the conference ISE staff) as an experimental vehicle for studying more effective methods of carrying out an institute-type conference, with atten- tion focused on group size, use of program associates as teachers and advisors, and the structuring of staff and participant time. It was recognized that it would be a terrific challenge to accomplish these objectives in a six-week summer conference; yet that seemed to be the task. The numbers of teachers participating would be greater than ever before, viz: Year No. of Teachers Full and Part- time Staff 1967 10 l 1968 10 7 1969 ‘12 8 1970 21 5 1971 32 5 The location (Dallas, Texas) would be distant from our base of operations (Washington, D.C.) and the staff would 70 have to be expanded for the summer without much real chance to give that staff the kind of indepth orientation that it really needed, even though they had been teachers in the program for several years. Nevertheless, it was the hOpe to complete the summer with a group of teachers who were prepared to teach the ISE biology course in the desired style, with a minimum of emotional insecurity about caring for (liking) students, and being willing to be open and frank about their discussions of the course content. We also wanted the teachers to have the oppor- tunity to work cooperatively together with a program associate in the development of a feeling of relatedness to the teaching materials. Our first evaluation was that we would not be able to do all of this for all teachers, so we develOped two programs. Program A would concentrate on the first objective and Program B, primarily for teachers who had some experience teaching in the program during the year, would concentrate on assembling and writing a unit of study. In each case we would deal with small groups of five or less most of the time, larger groups, sometimes, and arrange the schedule so that Program A would meet for half a day and work unassembled for half a day. Program B would work the other half day and work unassembled while staff was engaged with Program A. Although this meant a double conference after the first week, it would 71 allow any teacher who so desired to participate in all of the activities offered during the conference. The linear organization of the conference, then, was to begin with a week of orientation as to what the program was about and the methods used to achieve those Objectives, including the teaching style. This was to be augmented by demonstrations of teaching style, content organization, "student involvement," etc., both within the biology program and through four demonstration sec- tions arranged for the whole conference and put on by the staff in English, Mathematics, Social Science and Physical Science. The second part of the conference (weeks 2 to 6) consisted then of two separate activities, with a group of 19 teachers involved in a clinical treatment of the teaching and report-writing problems of each teacher in Program A. The other fourteen teachers were designated for Program B, where they attended a class on the basic units of study (Unit l--"Nature of Science," and Unit 3-- "The Cell") for two weeks, followed by the writing of preliminary versions of some new units of study. Several experiments were built into this organi- zational structure, the hypotheses for which might be most easily stated as questions to be answered. They were: 72 1. How can such a large group of teachers be given the kind of individualized help that the 1969 and 1970 summer conferences had demonstrated to be essential to even partial understanding of the program and for ade- quate productivity? 2. While most new teachers would be placed in the Teaching Clinic (Program A), would this be as effec— tive for their orientation to the program as putting them into Program B? 3. Can such a conference, requiring many items of material, equipment, library resources, etc., be suc- cessfully operated far from the normal ISE base of Operation in Washington, D.C.? 4. Can teachers be oriented as effectively, or even adequately, in classes of 12 to 16, as in groups of 5 or less? 5. Is report-writing by teachers a matter of "finding the time" or is it a matter of not having skill in this area? 6. Can improvements in the writing of reports be handled in classes on reporting as well as in the smaller groups? 7. Does "intellectual" orientation to the course and to the program need to be augmented by "practical experience?" 73 8. Does participation in the writing of teaching materials (units of study) develop a deeper sense of com— mitment in the teachers involved than learning the teach- ing style? (Compare with 2 above.) Site of the Summer Conference It was verified in late February by ISE that for the first time the summer conference of 1971 would be held outside of the Boston area. Bishop College, Dallas, Texas, was selected as the site for the 1971 summer con- ference. This was also the first time for the summer conference to be held on a predominantly black college campus. The schedule, as finally evolved, appears in the appendix. No changes were made in the program itself, but there were changes in the room assignments for the various groups from time to time. In April we began to make a list of the labora- tory experiments that would probably be done at the con— ference. However, there was considerable uncertainty about the number of people who would be attending, so the supply orders could not be sent out until it became apparent that perhaps 50 per cent attendance would be achieved. This was about mid-June. Thus many supplies did not arrive before departure for Dallas. Some supplies were ordered for delivery in Dallas. However, the time-lag 74 for acquisition is more than four weeks. Supply houses in the Dallas area could not supply us on short notice; in addition, there was a problem concerning the credibi- lity of our purchase orders, so that supplies had to be ordered and sent from the Washington area. This all meant that many items needed for the second and third week did not arrive until the end of the conference. Since the teaching of the units was to be the primary program (Program A) for the summer, we set out in April to obtain as many complimentary copies of books on the reference list as possible. Publishers, however, were reluctant to send COpies except where it could be shown that the book was being used as a text in a course. The response to the appeals was small; thus books had to be ordered through regular purchasing procedures. An in- ventory of about 200 books was taken to Dallas; these served as a vital supplement to the rather restricted number of books in areas of biology of interest to the conference in Zale Library. Organization of Teachers During the orientation period all teachers met together all day. On Thursday of the first week, 19 teachers were designated for work in Group A and the re- maining 14 were assigned to Program B. The group for Program A assorted themselves into four groups of four 75 and one group of three; these were designated Groups A, B, C, D, and E. Each group was then assigned a program associate to guide and advise it. The first teacher on the list was designated the group teacher for the first week; the second person listed was designated group re- corder. The other two teachers were to be students, paying attention to the way that the teaching "came through." In the third week, Teacher #2, who had been recording, became the teacher-of—the-week and Teacher #3 on the list became recorder, and so on until the end of the conference. Five units of study were designated for familiarization during the conference in this program, Units 1, 3, 4, 5, and 8 ("The Nature of Science," "The Cell," "Reproduction, "Genetics, and "Ecology," respec- tively). The teacher-of—the-week was responsible for or— ganizing the discussions of the unit materials (using the Teacher's Guide to Classroom Discussions for Biology), including the use of teaching aids, assembly of laboratory material, and conduct of laboratory work on four days of the week. There was a half-hour teaching conference period to discuss with teachers the location of materials and teaching problems. Much of the evaluation of the teaching and the advisement of teachers about their ap- proaches and styles was done by the program associate assigned to each of the small groups. 76 Each teacher in each group was to serve as group recorder for one week. His task was to observe the group dynamics and try to identify any condition which was fol— lowed by evidences of interest, such as spirited discus- sion or activities expanding upon those presented in an exercise. For Program B, the tOpics on which new units were to be written were listed and teachers signed up for the ones most interesting to them, although membership was originally limited to four. The tOpics and relationship to other units were as follows: New Sequel to Program Unit No. Unit No. Title Associates 9 8 Water and Water Dr. Obasun and Pollution Mr. Banks 10 6 Animal Behavior Dr. Harris 11 3.6 Some Actions of Dr. Goolsby Common Drugs 12 4 Human Reproduction Mr. Anthony and and Its Control Mr. Banks Orientation of Teachers and Implementations-of.the Program For the orientation of teachers at the 1970 sum- mer conference, a series of lecture-type presentations were given by officers of the ISE and TCCP staffs, with no extended demonstration of the methods, approach or style of teaching desired. For the 1971 conference we 77 decided to only use inductive discussions of the topics. These dealt with such questions as "What is the TCCP, FCC and CC?," "Curriculum Change--Who's Concerned?," "Teacher Image Related to the Desired Teaching Style," and "Lead- ing and Participating in a Discussion." Xerox COpies of the orientation chapters for the Teacher's Guide to Class- room Discussions for Biology had been handed out and reading assignments made. The discussions were adequate. There seemed to be some uneasiness among the new teachers because they expected to be lectured about these topics. Experienced teachers from the Five and Eight College con- sortia participated freely and with ideas positively oriented toward the desired points. Gradually, new teachers began to join in the discussions. One teacher, however, felt that there were too many opinions being ex- pressed and not enough facts. That particular teacher did not seem to change from that viewpoint during the six weeks of the conference. Many teachers (from two larger schools, especially) had been told that their job at the summer conference was to write syllabi for new courses and that the ISE staff was at the conference for the pur- pose of helping them do this. Teachers from another school had received some information taken from an experimental brochure of the TCCP, October, 1968, and wondered why we did not seem to be plugging for the use of the textbook Biology by Helna Curtis. Almost all of the teachers from 78 the TCCP felt that the purpose of the conference was merely to discuss ideas, starting from scratch, instead of building on the experience of other teachers over the last four years. The discussion sessions were very good for bringing out this startling information. We could respons in part about what the summer had in store, but the best counsel was for teachers to wait another week until they would have a chance to see some of the curri— culum materials already developed before writing them- selves. A group of six or more teachers who came with instructions to write a new course were very much surprised to find that a laboratory manual and guide and teaching units had already been developed. By the time the conference demonstrations of the teaching methods were ready, so were the teachers ready to view them. A check sheet (see appendix) was handed out to teachers to help them analyze what they saw and to record their responses. The choices under each heading are polarized between the traditional, lecture method and the progressive, inductive method in the areas of teach- ing style, content organization, student involvement, etc. These notations became the basis for some post-demonstration discussions. The value of this approach was that it brought out the different ideas that teachers brought to the con- ference about what they were supposed to do, and it helped 79 us explain more specifically the things that would be expected in the program. Program A—-The Teaching Clinic Teachers seemed to have gained an intellectual understanding of what the program was about during the orientation week. In the second week the small groups began to function and teachers began to have an oppor- tunity to see if they were as good at discussion and laboratory teaching as they had supposed they were. These small groups continued into the sixth week. The biggest difficulty in successful discussion-leading was teacher weaknesses in the various subject-matter areas covered. (A teacher who is knowledgeable in anatomy may not be very knowledgeable in ecology or reproduction.) Since teachers did not have a choice of which units they would teach, a teacher often found himself leading dis- cussions in an area where he was not well prepared. Most teachers, however, seemed to accept the assigned unit and tried leading the discussion even though they themselves might have been quite weak on the topic. Teaching the unit was not only useful in getting the teacher-of—the- week to read the unit carefully, but also to get him to think about inductive approaches, needs for the laboratory work, etc., associated with the unit tOpic. The "stu- dents" at first were a little stand—offish, but after a 80 week or so became constructive critics of the teacher-of- the-week, along with the assigned program associate. A few teachers said, "We came to look on our program asso- ciate as our graduate advisor, and that relationship contributed to good morale and good productivity in the teaching groups. While the units offer a logical sequence and the laboratory manual has the kind of experiments that teachers picked out, there was latitude for injecting skills and information familiar to the teacher. For example, in the exercise on the titration of buffers (boric acid, tri- phosphate, etc.) one teacher wanted to know if milk were a good buffer. They tried titrating it and discovered pH (acidity) at which it curdled. They also found it to buffer slightly (as is well-known to biochemists). Later, when studying meiosis, rather than use the prepared slides of Ascaris eggs, another teacher went outside, caught some grasshOppers, and demonstrated how a squased preparation of grasshopper testes could be made and the chromosomes strained and studied. There was some interaction with Program B--Unit Writing. The lecture-demonstration arranged by the teachers writing the "Human Reproduction and Its Control" unit invited a representative from the Planned Parenthood Association to demonstrate birth control apparatus for all teachers; this fitted in well with the activities of the 81 groups when they studied Unit 4--"Reproduction," etc. Also, in this same vein, the group writing on "Water" invited Dr. Fred Humphries to give a lecture on the struc- ture of water for all the teachers; this tied in well with Exercise 9--"The Water Content of Some Cells and Tissues," done in Program A, as well. For the Ecology unit (Unit 8) some groups took field trips on the Bishop campus but these had to be abandoned because of the chigger infestation. Water sam— ples were taken from the Trinity River and from White Rock Lake for analysis (also done by the unit-writing group dealing with "Water"); they also studied plant succession at the lake. Several groups toured Animal World, a game preserve for trOpical beasts--rhinos, lions, etc., which roam in the Open while Spectators remained closed in air— conditioned cars. (Related to Unit 7-—"Variety of Living Things.") This experience gave them some different, first-hand feelings about these animals. So, in addition to being a familiarization exer- cise, the teaching clinic was also a device for increas- ing teacher knowledge and confidence. Program B--Unit-Writing Groupg Program B was composed of teachers in the Five College Consortium and some teachers from the TCCP schools. The teachers in the 5CC had experience teaching in the 82 program during this year, while new TCCP teachers were quite unfamiliar with the units. During the second and third weeks the teachers in this program were taught Unit 1 and Unit 3 by the ISE staff, with Dr. Obasun handling the discussions on Unit l--"The Nature of Science," and Dr. Goolsby taking Unit 3--"The Cell." Although discussions were used instead of lectures, it was our impression that these teachers did not do much reading in the subject matter of these units. They did, however, participate well in the laboratory activities and in general it was a learning experience for them. On Fridays of each week conferences were held to discuss the progress of each writing group in making an outline for the new unit each was writing. These confer- ences were held for participants in both Programs A and B so that all might share somewhat in feeling related to the material. The mornings of the fourth and fifth weeks were devoted to reading, discussions, and trying to write annotated outlines and approaches. This kind of writing was not easy for the groups to master. There was a great difficulty in summarizing reading assignments, difficulty in finding appropriate reading materials, and difficulty in achieving a feeling of commitment to pursue the intel- lectual tasks involved in researching the topics. In the 83 end the groups assembled information on the topics but few if any approaches to conveying concepts seemed to be achieved. It was the intent of the staff that the writing project extend through the school year, with teachers trying out the preliminary units and making suggestions for their improvement. It seems somewhat in contrast that teachers who have had successful years of teaching would not find it almost "second nature" to be able to think in terms of approaches. Some teachers have made comments on materials and techniques in their annual re- ports relating to the very things they were trying to put together in the units. It has been concluded, not only by the biology staff, but by other discipline staffs in the ISE that involvement in writing materials is one of the most effective ways to get teachers to commit them- selves to the program materials. The indications are, however, that we must give some study and thought to more effective ways of organizing group writing experiences. The Conference as an Experimental Vehicle- Question 1: How can such a large group Of teachers be given the kind of individualized help that the 1969 and 1970 summer conferences had demonstrated to be essential to even partial understanding of the program, and for adequate productivity? 84 The preconference estimate of the number of teachers that would attend was 33, as contrasted with 20 in 1970. The success of the writing conference in the summer of 1969 had rested upon small group theory. In the summer of 1970 there were discussions in groups of about six members and also with the group of 20, mostly carried on without the participation of a program asso- ciate during either the review phase (which also sup- posedly introduced new teachers to the materials) or during the unit revisions. In January 1970, a group of five teachers was asked to come to Washington for a week of work on teach- ing. At this time orientation was individualized, and the problems dealt with symptomatically. These experi- ences pointed to the greater effectiveness of small groups advised by a program associate. In order to deal with 45 teachers at one time would have required a staff of 10 program associates. We were allotted four, but this was raised to five, enough to handle 19 teachers, for a half-day of assembled acti- vity. The other half-day was to be spent in preparation for the next day's activities. This group was designated in the schedule as Group A because its work was the pri- mary work of the summer conference. This arrangement was very effective for giving each teacher a chance to contribute or try to understand 85 the material in the unit outlines, and to work with any problems in the related laboratory exercises. Perhaps one of the most significant events in this regard was the admission by a few teachers that they did not know enough biology to teach this course. Most teachers revealed in their teaching that they needed to know more but would not voluntarily admit this. Question 2: Can such a conference, requiring many items of mate- rial, equipment, library resources, etc., be Operated successfully far from the normal ISE base of Opera- tion in Washington, D.C.? In preparation for the conference many chemicals, items of glassware, and preserved biological materials were ordered from our usual East Coast suppliers. Be- cause the attendance list was late in being confirmed, orders could not be placed with confidence until mid- June. When materials arrived, a good many items were marked as back-ordered. The attempts to get supplies in Dallas were unsuccessful because credit had not been established, and also because these firms could not supply large quantities of items on short notice. (They had to be ordered from manufacturers by the suppliers.) Even grocery store items were generally not available because of the distance to the grocery stores and the lack of transportation. 86 About 200 volumes of books were carried to Dallas with us. There was practically no library support for. our activities in Zale Library. Ihe inter-library loan service with neighboring institutions can only be de- scribed as "virtually nonexistent." In addition to supply problems there were space proglems for teaching activities. Despite these difficulties, and because of the energy and enthusiasm of the teachers and the undaunted spirts of the ISE program associates, we were able to do about 75-80 per cent of the projected program activities. Overall, the ISE staff was unable to offer model experiences during the summer because of being far from normal base of operations, supply, and library resources. However, the laboratory experiments offered did present challenges to teachers (both with regard to technique and information), so it was considered a learning experience well worth the effort. Question 3: Which was more effective for the introduction of teachers new to the program, Program A or Program B? By the end of the third week it began to be ap- parent that the class approach to teaching styles (as demonstrated by the staff for Program B) was less effec- tive in bringing about a change in teacher attitude toward the material and the teaching style than was the small 87 group method. The teachers in Program B attended the conference because most of them (not all of them) had taught in the program during the past year. The presump- tion was that they needed the teaching clinic less. This was not entirely true as was revealed. The SCC teachers will return for another summer to participate in the teaching clinic activities. While the unit-writing ex- perience seems essential to develOping teacher-relatedness to the materials, it appears to be less effective than the teaching clinic in caring for the individual problems of teachers and for dealing with the conduct of the course . Question 4: Can teachers be oriented as effectively, or even adequately, in classes of 12 to 16, as in the group of five or less? No (see preceding question). Question 5: Is report-writing by teachers a matter of "finding the time" or is it a matter of not having skill in this area? During the past year only about 25 per cent of the teachers responded to our requests for descriptions of class activity or "enlightenment" in the classroom. Teachers in Program A spent a week as group recorder during the conference and each was charged with watching the group and recording events which resulted in bursts of interest (as indicated by lively discussion, extended 88 laboratory work, etc.). During the second and third weeks the recorders consulted their group program asso- ciate, but the hour set aside on Fridays of each week for evaluation rarely dealt with the problem of reporting in the desired framework. In the fourth, fifth, and sixth weeks, the re- ports were discussed in detail by the program associates in the small group, and a more personal approach to the reporting problems was made. Some teachers wrote fairly well, while a few had serious problems with understanding what they were to do and how they should write. It took two or three conferences and the same number of rewrites to even begin to get present the spirit of the encounters in the report. Experience with reports that summer would indicate that perhaps nine of ten teachers can write re- ports in the desired form and style with explanation and help. "Time,' therefore, seems to have been the inhibit- ing factor. The group of teachers reoriented in January, 1970, wrote good year-end reports. We therefore look forward to reports from this group of teachers that will reflect a sensitivity for the reactions of students to the teaching done. Question 6: Can improvements in writing reports be handled in classes on reporting as well as in the smaller group? 89 Perhaps with a different approach, report- writing in classes will be effective. Question 7: Does "intellectual" orientation to the course and to the program need to be augmented by "practical experience?" There seemed to be little doubt that the under- standing of what it was that should be done in Class was intellectually understood. Teachers improved in teaching style as they went through their teacher-of—the-week experiences. They could not perfect the style in one week, but they became conscious of the ways in which they individually needed to improve during the school year. Question 8: Does participation in the writing of teaching mate- rials (units Of study) develop a deeper sense of commitment to the teachers involved than learning the teaching style? The teaching clinic develOped a greater commitment to the teaching style; the writing experience, a greater commitment to the materials. Writing units, however, did not develop teaching style, this depends upon the teacher having a firm grasp of the teaching style concepts. Administration During the summer there was communication with a number of visitors interested in what the group was doing. 90 Among the more formal contacts were the conferences with teachers and directors about the coming ykar's budgets. Another was when Dr. H. K. Wood, Chairman of the Depart— ment of Biology at Tennessee State University visited with two of his staff, his five teachers participating in the conference, and Dr. Colquitt (Senior Program Associate for Physical Science) to talk about a combined biology and physical science course at their school. The biology outline of units presented was essentially the same as the outlines prepared by the program teachers, so that there did not appear to be any conflicts. The teachers were using the biology laboratory manual for laboratory work and some units from among those available. The group of eight teachers from Southern Univer- sity in Baton Rouge were under the impression that they were to write a new course that summer with the help of the ISE staff. In the light of the fact that the mate- rials of the course had been revised, the coordinator agreed that the teachers would use the laboratory manual in 1971-1972, instead of writing a new one and would work from the available units of study before diverging to the writing of new curricular materials. Dr. Stanton Hoegermann from the Department of Biology at Lincoln University was a participant of the conference in the teaching clinic. He felt that he would like to use the ISE course for the 150 students in his 91 "regular" biology classes this year, thus constituting an implementation in biology at Lincoln University. All teachers, except the groups from Tennessee State University and from Southern University, Baton Rouge (these had to get the approval of their staffs at home) filed prOposed schedules for teaching the units and accompanying exercises from the laboratory manual. These schedules not only show the various ways in which teachers may sequence the units and activities, but serve as their declaration that they will be teaching the ISE course this school year. The kind of teaching and advisement dispensed in the small group required the full attention of the assigned program associate. In the future, the senior program asso- ciate, who handled administration, and the program asso- ciate who handled supply and laboratory preparations, shall devote their time to these activities and the administrative meetings (Orientation, Teaching Conference, Evaluation, and Administrative Conference in the schedule). In addition, for succeeding conferences, one program asso- ciate should be provided for each ten teachers. This would mean that to handle a group of 50 teachers next year there should be seven program associates, a labora- tory helper and two typists (one of which serves as librarian). 92 Projections.for the Future This fall an editing and corrections project lies before the ISE biology staff with regard to the four new units started this summer before these can be sent to participating teachers for classroom trials this year, 1971-1972. There is need for computer storage of information about the materials and equipment needed for demonstra- tion and laboratory exercises in the various units of study, and directors need to know the cost of the course. Since teachers select exercises from a range of exercises, select units from among those available, etc., the cost of each item, a supplier, and the quantity required is needed for determining costs. During the year it is hoped to develop this information and a program for its retrieval so that the cost of the course selected by teachers may be quickly estimated. The experiences this summer have helped to make a projection for the summer conference in 1972. When we look at the problems, the results, and at what is believed to be most—needed items, it may be concluded that the teacher is the key person in the improvement of the edu- cation of students, and their efforts to improve the quality of the information that is taught, and the style in which it is taught, depend upon the level of anxiety that teachers feel about their information. 93 During the summer of 1971, as during the summer of 1968, graduate credit was made available to teachers who wished to pay the tuition and fees assessed by Brandeis University (1968) or by North Carolina A & T State University (1971). During the summer of 1971 a total of six credit hours could be accrued in two three- hour courses. ISE proposed that money be provided in the budgets Of all participating colleges for the tuition and fees for three credit hours of graduate work in biology to be pur- sued as a graduate course (in addition to other activities) during the 1972 summer conference. The course, entitled "Graduate General Biology," or some other suitable and acceptable title, would be a detailed, critical study of the several areas of biology and the scientific method. The course would be designed and taught by members of the ISE staff, or acquired for the ISE staff, as adjunct faculty members Of the North Carolina A & T University Graduate School, with examinations and grades determined in accordance with the regulations of that university. During the five weeks following orientation a half day each week could be devoted to this course, during which time the equivalent number of hours of discussions, lec- tures and reports, and of laboratory work could be accom- plished. The other half day would be devoted to teaching 94 and writing projects which could be used for graduate credit at the participating teacher's own expense. Summary The project of biological science curriculum development that began in 1967, was resolved into eight units of study during the summer of 1969, has been re- vised and rewritten during the past school year. Also, the laboratory manual, Laboratory Activities for.Biology, has been compiled and tested by some 1500 students during 1970-71 school year in addition to a teacher's guide. During the coming school year, 1971-1972, more than 100 teachers and over 6500 students will be using ISE biology materials in their courses. While these materials have probably reached a developmental plateau for the time being, four new units of study have been started. The program of the 1971 summer conference attempted to deal with several questions--orientation of almost 40 teachers who had not taught in the program prior to the 1971-1972 school year in the philosophy and aims of the program, to familiarize them with the content, style, laboratory activities, and supplies of the course. For other teachers who had had previous teaching experience in the program, there was an emphasis on the development of new materials for teaching. 95 Throughout the conference activities we tried to find a better way of doing things. It was the ISE biology staff's Opinion that during this summer more teachers had been oriented more successfully, and in less time, than ever before. Although we can look on the activities of this summer with considerable satisfaction, there is still room for improvement. Nevertheless, this summer confer- ence will produce more effective teaching in the partici- pating schools this coming school year, 1971-1972. Development of Physical Science Curriculum The physical science post curriculum development was much like that of the biological science curriculum post development. During 1967 to 1969, time was Spent exploring the interests of teachers and students, but very little progress was made in terms of compiling any effective or useful physical science units. The physical science curriculum development has not quite kept pace with the biological science curriculum development. Some progress has been attained; but much more is desired. Pre-Conference Planning At the end of the 1970 summer conference, there was a general consensus of the teachers and the CRG staff concerning the logical steps in the development of the physical science program. Consensus was strongly in 96 favor of a good foundation for a physical science course in accord with the philosophy and techniques of the pro- gram but the ISE units had not been developed or or com- pleted at that time. Secondly, students' problems had not adequately been met, especially those students who were not able to follow even the simplest algebra in the ext. Some students would not do this kind of work out of lack of interest or motivation while for others the prob- lem was a lack of basic mathematical skills. Thirdly, the ISE evaluation materials were discussed at the 1969 summer conference but nothing definite had been develOped along this line. Finally, a set of teaching techniques and a laboratory approach built around the "student- centered" approach and a "laboratory-oriented" physical science course was used, but no set of descriptive mate- rials had been develOped that would convey to a teacher outside the program a feeling for what the program was trying to accomplish, nor its successes and difficulties in doing so, nor the rationale behind the techniques be- ing used. It was decided at the end of the 1969 summer con- ference that in addition to the two general meetings held in Atlanta which were designed to discuss the progress of the course and the difficulties that had arisen, there should be two additional regional meetings. These con- ferences were designed to discuss uncompleted tOpics. 97 A conference on evaluation was then agreed upon. In ad— dition, the teachers expressed an interest in exploring the possible uses of the computer in meeting some of the needs of the course. It was prOposed that the computer might help in dealing with those students who had matema- tical problems, perform some tutoring activities, and could stimulate some physical or chemical situations. Conse- quently, it was agreed that the second regional confer- ences should be used to explore the possibilities of using the computer in the course. At the Regional Conference on Computers, held in Huntsville, Alabama, in April, 1971, there were demon- strations of programmable calculators, analog computers, and digital computers. The participants visited the Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville and observed how computers were used in the laboratory. Discussions were held during the two days with Dr. J. Castle of the University of Pittsburgh Learning Laboratory on the use of the computer in various educational projects ranging from computer assisted instruction (without a teacher) through various combinations of teacher-student-computer interactions. It became clear that the computer did offer many possi- bilities for application in this course. Therefore, it was decided to have a computer terminal (G.E. Timeshared Teletype Terminal) available at the summer conference and that attempts would be made to develOp units using it. 98 The regional conference on evaluation was held. in Norfolk, Va. The main item of discussion was the standardized-style test develOped by the physical science group in March, 1971. A careful discussion of the test, its structure, and what information could reasonably be expected from it, indicated that although it was useful for some purposes, it certainly did not provide teachers with all the information they really needed. It was agreed upon that new forms for the test should be ex- plored: a test that would attempt to probe at student attitudes, and that ways should be explored as how to better test the student's ability to deal with abstract analytical and synthetic questions. Also discussed and agreed upon was the importance of tests in the classroom. The kind of test a teacher gives will determine to a great degree the material that the students will try to master and the way they will try to deal with it. Consequently, it is important that the tests given in the classroom reflect the philosoPhy of the program. It was decided that it would be useful for the group to develop model chapter tests that would exhibit the kinds of questions that would best test the skills the program wished to examine. It was thus established that the 1971 summer con- ference would be devoted to developing units of laboratory exercises to supplement the text for both advanced and 99 poorer students to use; in addition, work on the computer would be devised. It was also decided that the group should devote some time to the development of more ad- vanced instruments of evaluation to supplement and replace the one developed by the physical science group in the spring of 1970. Finally, it was decided that some time should be devoted to the question of what sort of mate- rials should be produced to convey to others information about the program and to facilitate implementation of the course on campuses now involved and those to be in- volved at a later data. The Summer Conference It was discovered at the beginning of the summer conference that there would be available to the group a number of freshman students who would be entering Bishop College in the summer. Ways were immediately incorporated: to make good use of the presence of these students for the summer program (while at the same time providing them with high quality education). The group decided that having these students in classes would allow the new teachers in the program to gain some feeling for what the original TCCP teachers had been doing and to give the new teachers an Opportunity to try out these techniques for themselves. In addition to the classroom activities, there was the Opportunity to work with these students in the laboratory-- 100 observing their reactions to the laboratory experiments, trying out new experiments, and modifying old ones. Also experimented with were some of the early computer mate- rials. The conference was staffed in physical science by Lee Colquitt, of the CRG staff, a full-time summer con- sultant from the University of Kansas, and Ralph Turner, a part-time summer consultant from Florida A & M Univer- sity. Typing and some laboratory help were provided by Mrs. Barbara Edwards of the CRG staff and Mrs. Donna Russ. The major responsibilities for the summer's work were assumed by Colquitt and Turner. The teachers were divided into roughly two groups with one staff member working with each group. The group with Mr. Colquitt worked primarily on developing units for use with the computer together with some on evaluation, while the group working with Mr. Turner discussed problems of teaching techniques and the laboratory portion of the course. The initial structure of the summer's work allowed about 15 hours/week for group meetings, discussions, and individual work on group projects. About five hours/week were allotted to participation in the class or observation of it, and about five hours/week were allotted to discus- sion of the class after it occurred. Finally, about four hours/week were allotted to the reporting of the progress 101 made by one group to the other groups. The teachers felt at the beginning of the summer that those time allotments would allow them to work effectively-~with the proviso that they could be changed during the summer if experi- ence warranted it. The computer group began the summer with an evalu- ation of the possibilities offered by the computer for attacking some of the persistent problems in mathematics and physical science encountered by the students. Among the students' difficulties were a lack of experience and training in thinking a problem through to its solution, poor mathematical skills, an unwillingness on the part of many to go through computations involved in reducing laboratory data to a form required for interpretation, and a poor grasp of the functional relationships between physical quantities. Over the course of the summer, the computer group decided that the computer could deal effectively with all of these problems if it were used in a variety of ways. The main emphasis would be on getting the student to do his own programming. This would force him to think through a problem to the degree required to program the computer (thereby exercising logical skills in a context in which they were not an end in themselves). By freeing the student from some of the drudgery involved in working with the laboratory data, he could concentrate on physical 102 interpretation of the measurements and the meaning of the data. It was also decided that the computer should be preprogrammed at times to handle the laboratory data so that the students could get the results of their experi- ments immediately. Finally, the computer could be pro- grammed to simulate some physical relationships (e.g., the gas laws); a student would input data and observe the output. He could then develOp some abstract ideas (to complement the concreteness of the laboratory) of the functional relations between physical quantities. The teaching techniques group was interested in the following questions: (a) What is it that the group is trying to do in teaching physical science and how could an ideal class be described? (b) How may the degree of success be best mea- sured? (0) Once these desirable characteristics and techniques employed on the program had been identified, how may they best be formalized so that they may be com- municated to others? This group began by trying to develop a framework within which the analysis of teaching techniques and teaching situations could be carried out. They initially focused on the details and mechanics of the methods of teachers in the group. They hoped to develop an analysis of what 103 a perfect teaching situation would be, including teacher- student relations, and an Optimal ratio between discus- sion and lecture, between laboratory and classroom, between drawing students into the work and requiring that they do it, etc. It was also intended that the framework developed by the group would serve as a basis for conduct- ing an analysis of the classroom activities during the summer conference using BishOp College freshman students. The framework, and the information obtained by using it in analyzing the course, would then become part of the materials of the physical science course and would serve to orient new teachers as well as to provide those people already involved in the course some measure of what they had done or were doing. It was thought that it might even suggest new directions for techniques or materials. The laboratory group had available to them two 1aboratories--one primarily a physics laboratory and the other primarily a chemistry laboratory. Since the teachers involved had taught the course and were very familiar with the experiments, this group began with some of the modifications that had been tried during the school year. Their purpose in developing new activities and in modifying the Old was to get some of the bugs out of the old ideas and find new ways to better communicate what was desirable for the students to adsorb. The most important factor, however, was that the majority of the 104 experiments develOped over the years in this program and in other curriculum projects lacked the "Open-ended" quality that the group thought necessary. The "cookbook" style experiments common to colleges for many years were definitely not suitable for actually involving the student in a physical or chemical investigation--to the point where he is able to abstract for himself certain aspects of the system that are physically or chemically relevant. It has been demonstrated by past experience that such "open-ended experiments" required much more careful plan— ning and development than the "cook-book" style. No evaluation group was formed at the beginning of the summer. It was planned that the functions of evaluation would be coordinated by Lee Colquitt and that the whole group would participate in the develOpment of a test—item pool to develop new kinds of questions that would effectively test for the skills the group was try- ing to develop. Most existing tests were oriented too heavily toward remembered information and not enough toward analytic and synthetic conceptual abilities. It was planned that James Mayo, head of the physics depart- ment at Morehouse College, would work with the group one week during the summer on the problems of develOping an overall evaluation of the program. In the course of the summer's work, some problems in the initial conception of the summer began to emerge. 105 The after-class, self-analysis sessions, of the teachers were not as successful as had been hoped. The classes were well-attended at the beginning of the summer by teacher-observers, but since they sometimes outnumbered the students, the teacher responsible for the class often felt inhibited. Furthermore, the class did not reSemble an ordinary class at one of the colleges in that it was six weeks rather than 14 or 15 weeks long and the teachers responsible for the class were changed approximately once a week. The most helpful aspect of the class was the opportunity it gave new teachers to try out methods of the program in a supportive context. Another of the difficulties in the teaching tech- niques group, as in the computer group and the evaluation group, was that at the beginning of the summer it was not clear precisely what was being sought. As the summer progressed, this did become clear; but finding the sought- for materials in a given class was a matter of chance. Furthermore, it seems to have been the case that most of the teachers were not sufficiently secure professionally or with each other to engage effectively in much deep public criticism of each other. This problem is expected to decrease to some extent, as it has every summer, as time goes on. For these reasons, attendance at the classes dropped off during the course of the summer, and the results derived from the class and discussion were 106 moderate--worth the effort but not as much as had been hoped. The computer group got off to a reasonably fast start in learning the computer language BASIC. The main problem this group encountered was the development of a rationale and direction for the units; a rationale did come out during the summer as the units were being devel- oped. Another problem was the 1ow rate at which good quality computer units could be produced. Those that were produced were only prototypes of potentially good units. Each would need thorough revision and expansion before it would be ready for publication. In addition, the units did not completely cover those areas of the course that the group wanted to have covered. Conse- quently, additional units will have to be written. Whether the existing units will be useful in the class- room--and whether the teacher will be able to improvise computer work as he goes along (this was the underlying thrust of the work in the computer section)-—remains to be seen. Success seems likely at this stage. The laboratory group collected and processed some new experiments as well as working on the old experi- ments. They were able to test a few of these during the summer on the students. These experiments will be used and tested by everybody during the fall and winter (1971- 1972) to check their effectiveness. 107 The evaluation work began after the middle of the summer when James Mayo presented a format to be used to collect evaluative techniques. His presentations were followed by the collection and discussion of new test questions. This provided additional items for out test— item pool. Some discussion of additional kinds of ques- tions was begun and some questions making use of photographs taken in the laboratory were examined, along with questions involving students taking data in the laboratory at specially prepared stations. It was de- cided by the group to develOp a second generation of examinations for the physical science group. This would complement the first generation examinations (these re- sembled in many respects the ACT standardized examination). Computer use was also considered as a possibility for developing examinations, but this has not yet begun. During the last third of the summer, the teachers decided to devote a good part of their time to working out the background material, philOSOphy, and a discussion of the units produced by the physical science group. This was part of the overall conception of the course developed during the summer. There was a consensus among the teachers that they had developed a strong physical science course centered around the PSNS textbook. It was now felt that they could continue using the previous course as a base, develOping their own unique materials 108 and bringing additional aspects into the course. Among these, of course, was the computer. The work on this "curriculum package" primarily occupied the last two weeks of the summer and brought it to a hectic close. These materials will now be edited, revised, and expanded by the CRG staff with additional inputs from the teachers. This material will serve as an effective introduction to the course and help prepare people to use the materials effectively. The relations between the teachers and the CRG staff were generally very successful. One of the main reasons for this was that the summer conference activi- ties were those the teachers themselves had opted for during the previous summer and at the regional conferences. Teachers were also free to choose the area which most in- terested them, to change if they desired, and to work in more than one area if they wished to do so. The few dif- ficulties that did occur were centered mostly around the new teachers; one had some difficulty understanding what was done, and two others were impatient with the way in which it was being done. It should be added that three other new teachers experienced no difficulty at all and fitted in very well into the program. The work on the computer, in the laboratory, and in the teaching techniques groups was successful. This was primarily because, as pointed out above, the teachers 109 were interested in these activities; also it was due to the fact that there was available to the teachers mate- rials, resource personnel, a laboratory, a library of CRG books, an efficient typing staff, and the freedom teachers had to develop their units in their own ways. The work was structured in the sense of definite time allotments and definite deadlines, but the develOpment of a unit was left to the individual teacher. The structure and the format of a unit were not agreed upon until a good part of the summer had passed when they could be carefully examined. The most unsuccessful aspect of the summer was the failure to integrate some new peOple, who did not understand or were not sympathetic to our approach, into the program. Near the end of the summer, as things fell into place, these teachers did begin to realize what the program was about and what they had in fact learned. Treating old and new teachers equally had both advantages and disadvantages. New teachers were made to feel a part of the group and on an equal footing with everyone else, but they did suffer from their ignorance of the history of the program. In particular, some of the issues that they were wrestling with had been dis- cussed at great length at the preconference. For the future, new teachers should be exposed to the new "cur- riculum package" and given other materials related to the 110 history of the program prior to the conference. This should help them get oriented more quickly than was the case this summer (1971). The relationship between the old teachers and the new teachers was basically good; the old teachers easily accepted the new teachers and the work they produced. The old teachers did express some impatience when one of the new teachers objected to the direction the group was taking for reasons that had been considered by the group long before and rejected. It was felt that this new teacher should have waited to comment until he better understood the work that the group had done previously. Where We Are Now By the end of the 1971 summer conference, the physical science group had completed the preliminary ver- sions of its "curriculum package." This package includes the history of the physical science group, its evolution, its educational philosophy, methods Of evaluation, a flow chart for proceeding through the course, some computer and other units, and some additional laboratory exercises. All of the material is in preliminary form and needs thorough editing before it will be acceptable even as a preliminary version of the work. Among the materials developed during the summer were several units centered around chemical concepts 111 including "organic Chemistry," "Classification According to Chemical PrOperties," and "The Chemical Balance" (a unit involving evaluating chemical formulas by balancing weights representing the elements in such a way that only the correct valences are accepted; this is coupled with a computer tutoring program which checks the student's work and allows him to further investigate possible com- pounds). There are several units on conservation of momentum, the energy in a pendulum (with related computer activities), the kinetic theory of gases, geology, wave- length, motion, and others. Most of these involve computer activities as an integral part, although some of them can be used either with or without a computer. In addition to these units directly related to the materials covered in the course, there are units relating to the background of the course and of physical science in general. "The Relevance of Science" and the "Place of Geology in the Physical Science Program" are among these. There is also a set of materials describing over 20 ex- periments--some old and some new--and discussions. It is anticipated that during the fall and winter, 1972, the teachers and CRG staff will finish developing the computer and other units to complete the course in accord with the overall conception of previous units. The group also hopes to make progress on the evaluation materials and the laboratory materials. If this takes 112 place satisfactorily, then at the beginning of next sum- mer, the summer of 1972, the group will be in a position to make final corrections and final additions to the curriculum package. The group hopes to then turn its attention to the question of implementing the course at participating schools as well as new ones. The organization and a schedule of the Physical Science Summer Conference can be found in Appendix I. Methods of Assigning Participants to the Program Participants of the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program in science for the most part had been previously employed by the college or university at which they now teach. All entries into the program were based on four methods: of the 55 participants in the science area, 37 were assigned with prior consultation; only four were assigned without prior consultation. The following table (1) shows each participant's major teaching area and the Inethod of assignment to the program. Participants in the TCCP, in science, constituted two major areas of science: biology and physical science, thirty-two in the area of biological science and 23 in the area of physical science. Racially, 32 of the par- ticipants were black, 15 white, one Indian, six oriental and two did not indicate a classification. Of the 55 113 mm m H ma m OOGOHOm HOOflmhnm mm e m am e OOCOHOm mooaoflm mucmmI Immoaaou Goa m Dmco Goa U Emco A. 2. new. 0 new. 0 RES. Ifluuom Dowmuso DDOEDHS nua3 HO comm Honmz mo .02 Eoum pmcmawm4 pocmmmmfl COHODDGSHO> HODOB pmuflsuoom . . map .Emumoum OD mucomflOfluumm ocacoflmmm mo Donuma CCU mono asasommu Homo: .H DHQOB 114 participants, 22 were females and the rest were males. Four females were in the area of physical science compared with 20 males. Eighteen females were in the area of bio- logical science as compared to 15 males. All the participants assigned to the program were college graduates who had attained at least a bachelor's degree: four held bachelor's degrees, thirty-five held master's degrees, and sixteen held Ph.Ds. Table 2 shows the participants' major teaching area and the number of de- grees held in each category. Participants' ages were estimated on the basis of their date of birth. The largest number of participants were born between the years of 1936 and 1940; none were born before the year 1910. Table 3 shows the participants' major teaching area and an estimation of year of birth in each category. Twenty-one of the participants held the rank of instructor which made up the largest group; one was a graduate student without rank, and one had no rank desig- nated. Table 4 shows participants' major area of teaching and rank. Seven participants had not taught on the college level prior to assignment to the program. The majority (17) had taught on the college level from three to five years. Only one had taught more than 20 years. Table 5 shows the participants' major teaching area and an 5 l 11— Docmwom mUcmflUm mva mv ow mm om mm ON ma OHOMOQ mwmd HOflmz Hmumd Iaema lemma Iamma lemma IHNmH Imama IHHmH HO Gama .DCDQHOADHUQ sumo Mo EDHHQ mo Dump mo coflumeflumo so can mono asanomou Hommz .m OHQUB o m o NH m OOCDfiom HmOflmmsm o m 0 mm a mocowom HcOfimOHOHm ODOOHMHDAOO pospo .o.sm no macadfio .m.s .m.m mesa uoflmz HOCOHmmmmOHm .mucomHOfluumm he paws Doumoo umonmfln paw mono mcHCOUOD uOnmz .m magma 116 OOCOHom o G m a o a m Hmoamssm OOGOHOm DAMON om whom» mummy mummy m mm mm Oco OOH Homo cane Duos omuHH OHIG mum A A m p w H z a . z .HD>OH TmOHHOO may no mcHnoomu whom» mo HOQEDC .musmmHOHuumm can mono mcHsommp Homo: .m OHQUB COCOHom o H H m m m e HOUHmmnm DOCDHom O O O m m m PH HMOflOOHOHm HDCDO poopsum CODUCOHDOQ HOmmmmOHm “Ommmmoum HOmmomoum HouosnpmcH moms Homo: Dumoomuu xcom oz ODUHOOmmd DCUDMHmm¢ .pHon xcmu HUCOHmmmmon poo comm OCHEOUOU nOnUz .v OHQUB 117 estimation of the number of years taught on the college level. Ten participants had not previously taught at the college or university at which they were to teach begin— ning fall term, 1971. Eleven participants had taught two years at the college they were to teach at the beginning of fall term, 1971. Eight had taught ten years or more at the college they were to teach beginning fall term, 1971. Table 6 shows participants' major teaching area and the number of years taught at the college or univer- sity in which he proposed to teach at the beginning of fall term, 1971. Of the 55 participants,48 were beginning their first year in the program. None had been in the program from the beginning. The following table (7) shows partici- pants' major teaching area and number of years in the program. Within the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program there were six adjunct groups to which participants were assigned. Twenty-three participants composed the original Thirteen-College Curriculum Group; seven were in the Five— College Consortium. Table 8 shows major teaching area and the assignment of participants to the selected college or university group. 118 OOCOHom o H o H Hm HUOHmhnm OOCDHom o o H 4 km Hmonmoaoflm ummw sum snow sue HUD» cum MOON CON Hmow OOH comm Henmz .AESHDH0chO DOOHHOOImH popcmuxm CCU mEoHuH0mcoo omOHHOOIm CCU .DmOHHOOIm .OmOHHOOImH :Hv Eouoonm EOHDOHHHDU DmOHHOU ICOODHHCB on» CH COHDUQHOHDHUQ whom» Mo gonads pom mono ocHCOOOu HOnoz .5 OHQUB OOCOHom e m m m m e e HUOHmazm DocmHom v e m e m m m HOOHmOHOHm thmno>HCD Duo: mummw new» snow HUOM HOD» HO omOHHOU pond “Ono: no OH mum gum ape ppm cam on zoz .Han Sump HHUM msHGCHmOQ um Comma Op monomoum Us muHMHD>Hcs HO OOOHHOO OED um usmsmp musmmHOHuHmm munch mo Hones: paw mono OCHnommu Henmz .m OHQUB 119 OOCOHOm Hmoamsnm TUCGHUW WHDOS mH man—"SOS WHSOS WHDOS mHSOS mHSCQ MHSOQ “THAN .HOfimz GOSH OHOE mH mH NH . OH m m . .xOOB mom mucmosum QDHS muson Domucoo mo Hogans DOHHDOOH on» pcm mono oanomou Homo: .m OHQUB OOCOHom OOGDHom o o a o a N ma Hmoamoaonm HO m mH huHmno>HCD OOOHHOU mmOHHOU OOOHHOU Cuo upmocmuxm nompcmuxm um um um ImH comm HOnUE mmsouo CODOOHOm .mmsoum CDDOOHOM on» O» mucmmHOHuHmm mo ucoficmHmmm can mono OCHCOUOU uoflmz .m DHQUB 120 OOCDHom HH 4 a m N o o HOOHmsnm OOCOHOm on m m m m m o HUOHmOHOHm OHOE DMOH HO HO mH omIHm omnme meumm mmumm eNImH Munoz m comm HOnmz .ADHOOHO upon Hmuumoo CHV OCHCHUHD OOCOHOO HUEHOM mo us:oEo can mono mGHsomDu HOnoz .OH OHQUB 121 Sources of Participant Data Data were collected by means of questionnaires and tests. Each of these sources of data collection is discussed in the following paragraphs. Pre-questionnaire The pre-summer questionnaire was administered at the beginning of the second week of the summer conference, July 12, 1971. This questionnaire was constructed by the investigator with the aid of two staff members of the Curriculum Resource Group (CRG), a component of the In- stitute for Services to Education (ISE). The question- naire was designed to measure teachers' attitudes and attitude changes toward the TCCP in science. 1-4, five- 1evel response scale from 1 to 5, and seven-level scale, 1 to 7. This was done for all items, except for items on the four-level scale: 46, 49, 52, 54, items 55-60, 62, 64-66, and item 69; on the five-level scale, items 21, 23, 40-46, 49, 51-61, 64 and 65; on the seven-level scale, items 80-84. The highest level (4) on the four-level scale, (5) on the five-level scale and (7) on the seven- level scale were found at the right. For those exception items, the ranking was reversed. Item 20 was a "yes" or "no" type of response. This questionnaire had been used in succeeding years beginning with the summer of 1967 by the evaluation 122 staff of ISE; however, no reliable information was avail- able prior to the conference held in the summer, 1971. The reliability established on the instrument was obtained from the 1971 TCCP summer conference parti- cipants' responses. The reliability coefficients on the six scales, employing the Hoyte method of estimating the internal consistency, range from .54 to .71. Copies of the questionnaires and the analysis of questionnaires for each group of items can be found in Appendices F and G. Post-qgestionnaire The post-questionnaire was mailed to each parti- cipant of the biological and physical science groups near the end of the first teaching term (quarter or semester) a participant had taught on January 11, 1972. The post- questionnaire was the same as the pre-questionnaire in design and structure, except for the addition of one item (item 22--requested an estimation of the number of quarter hours of formal science training). Sequential Test of Educational Pro ress Science Form.l Series II The Sequential Test of Educational Progress, Science Form 1, Series II was administered near the be- ginning of the summer conference on July 22, 1971. This published test was a 75-item multiple-choice test designed 123 to measure the ability of the participant to use scienti- fic knowledge to solve problems. The Technical Report gives a reliability score of .80 and a standard error of measurement of 3.2. Raw score distribution and an item analysis of the test can be found in Appendix B. Conference Assessment Questionnaire The Conference Assessment Questionnaire was ad- ministered three days prior to the end of the summer conference, August 10, 1971. The questionnaire consisted of 78 items. Of these 78 items, 14 asked for personal information, such as age, sex, etc. These 78 items were divided into two categories: category 1 assessed the summer conference's effectiveness toward teachers' attitudes toward curricu- lum development, teaching strategies, implementation, attitudes toward consultants' help and responsibilities, and category 2 assessed the teachers' attitudes toward support personnel and the mechanics of the conference operations. An analysis of this questionnaire completed by the participants is reported in Chapter IV; a COpy of the questionnaire may be found in Appendix C. 124 Procedures for the Analysis of Data All data were coded and placed on data coding forms by the writer. The coding transformed all responses into numerical form. Personnel of the research consulting center and computer laboratory services employed at Michi— gan State University aided in the transfer of coded data to keypunch cards and verification of the results. Specialists in application of computer programs adapted existing programs to the needs of the researcher and sub- mitted the data to the Control Data Corporation 3600 and 6500 computers for tabulation and analysis. The STEP test administered about the second week of the summer conference was scored. Raw scores were converted to percentile rank and standard scores. Items were analyzed for difficulty and discrimination at the Michigan State University Scoring Service. The results of item analysis can be found in table form in Chapter IV. The faculty pre- and post-conference assessment question- naires were scored and double-checked by hand. Summary Data relevant to teachers' attitudes and attitude changes toward the TCCP in science were collected via pre- and post-questionnaires. Also the questionnaire collected personal information. Data used to measure teachers' com- petency was collected via the STEP test. Teacher 125 assessment of the summer conference was via the Conference Assessment Questionnaire. The study of the 55 teachers began with the TCCP Summer Conference in July, 1971, and continued through January, 1972. All data were coded by the writer, transferred to keypunch cards by trained keypunch operators, and tabula- ted and analyzed by Control Data Corporation 3600 and 6500 computers. CHAPTER IV INTRODUCTION The major prupose of this chapter is to present the results obtained from the instruments used to collect teacher data as described in Chapter III, as well as the results of the hypotheses tested. The results of STEP test, part one and part two, are presented first. Pre- sented second are the results of the faculty questionnaire administered near the beginning of the summer conference and the same questionnaire administered in January, after one term of implementing the innovative science curricu- lum. Next are presented the results of the faculty assessment of the summer conference, administered near the end of the summer conference, and finally the results of thetesting of the hypotheses. Analysis of Data Results of Sequential Tests of Educational Progress This test was administered only once, near the beginning of the summer conference. The test was divided into two parts. Part one consisted of 40 items and part 126 127 two contained 35 items with an overall total of 75 items. The mean score for part one was 31.2 and a standard devi- ation of 8.1; part two mean score was 19.6 and a standard deviation of 6.2 for the entire population. Mean scores, standard deviations for each group separately, and means and standard deviations across the entire population sample are given along with scoring keys for both parts in the appendices in addition to in- dividual raw, percentile, and standard scores. Demographic Data Data pertaining to the teachers' age, sex, teach- ing experience, Classload and science training were obtained from the faculty questionnaire. Data concerned with age range and teaching experi- ence were reported in Tables 3 and 5 of Chapter III. From the sample population of 55 teachers, twenty-two (22) were females, and thirty-three (33) were males. Class- load (number of contact hours per week with students) means was ten (10) contact hours per week, and formal science training mean range was 61-90 quarter hours. The Thirteen-College Faculty Questionnaire The pre-questionnaire was administered at the conclusion of the second week of the 1971 summer confer- ence. The instrument was designed to sample teachers' attitude toward the teaching-learning process and other 128 factors related to education. The measurement of teachers' attitudes was based on six sub-scales, each was rated from one to seven, with a few exceptions, seven being the highest. Those exceptions are described in detail in Chapter III. Table 9 contains thirteen (13) significant cor— related variables obtained by employing the Pearson Product-Moment of correlation. A simple correlation matrix across the total fifteen variables is listed in Appendix K. Possible range of scores for scale one, Teachers' Attitudes Toward Students, was from a minus one hundred and fifty-five to a plus one hundred and fifty-five. The second scale, Teachers' Attitudes Toward Teachers and Teaching Methodologies, ranged from a minus two hUndred and eight to a plus two hundred and eight. Teachers' Attitudes Toward the College Where They Taught, the third scale, had a possible range of from a minus sixty-four to a plus sixty-four. The fourth scale, Teachers' Attitudes Toward the TCCP Summer Conference, due to some confusion subsequently resulted in a very low response, the writer decided not to report the scores for this scale in se- quence in this section of the study; however, those scores are reported as scores obtained from the teachers' assessment of summer conference which follows this report. Teachers' Attitudes Toward Curriculum Innovations, 129 mchHmuu DOGOHOD HUEHOM mo ucsOE¢ Axmos mom ucoosum CDHS Munoz uomucoo mo HOQEDCV CUOHmmoHO mono Hmuumfilnsm muoumHDMHCHEOU pumsou OpsuHuud EDHDOHHHEO oumzou DosuHuu< DomHHOO ouozou OpsuHuu< mcHsommu Unczou DosuHuud MOHCOCOOS Docmnowsoo “Deena c o o o o o c u—INMQ'LOKOBCD mo. w a pm Gm.o u > . .mmamvm.ou zmaHOm «ommemm.c .mevamm.o aaoqqo .kaamam.o mmampm .mmmovv.o «Hamvsv.e snaaea .meoaom.o .meemmv.o .mmH~me.c mousse .Gmmqmm.o qooaaa .oeHHk~.o moeeea .GHSGHm.o omzzpm mousse mousse mosses osmaaa omszpm seesaw m mmam H mmem II ili «.mCOHumHOuHOU ucmOHMHcmHm OHQEHm mo mHnme .HH Danae 130 possible scores ranged from minus sixty-nine to plus sixty- nine, and Teachers' Attitudes Toward Administrators, possible scores ranged from a minus fifty-eight to a plus fifty-eight, with a total score across the five scales ranging from a minus four hundred and forty-seven to plus four hundred and forty-seven. The mean scores for both pre-and post-question- naires along with the change scores on each of the six scales are listed in Tables 10 and 11. Scores for each individual teacher on both the pre- and post-questionnaire across the six scales are listed in Appendix D and B. Data Related to Testipg of the Hypotheses The hypotheses tested were related to the two (2) major purposes of this study. The first was to ascertain the science teachers' attitude change toward an innovative science curriculum. The second major purpose was to as- certain what variable might be germaned to teachers' attitude change toward an innovative science curriculum. The results of the analysis are presented after the statement of the hypothesis for each section. A dis- cussion and summary of the findings are presented at the end of the chapter. Each of the hypotheses are stated in the null form. Possible range of scores for scale one (1), teachers attitude toward students, was from a minus one 131 amouo Hmuoe mMoOI mfiofl mHOoO MNoOH mmom HON mmHOUm magmgo . . . . . mumsomoa NH Hm we mm mH mm om mmH mo HOH cocoaom Hmoammnm . . . . . muosomma Hm mm mm mm mm em mm eNH om mm cocoaom HUOHOOHOHm mmuoom umom . . . . . muonoooe mo Hm mm mm mm oe mo mHH mm mm Docoaom Hmoamhnm . . . . . muonomoa Hm mm Hm mm mo mm mm eHH mm mm oocmaom HOOHOOHOam mouoom mum IMMMNUHM ESHDOHHHDU OOOHHOU OCHCOUDB mucopspm owoswm oumzou pum3ou cameos OHU3OD opsuHuum OOSDHDDH OpouHuum DosuHuud OpsuHuu< .mouoom CUTE HUCHpsuHuuolumom Cam IOHQ mo DHQOB Ilvi illi .NH OHQUB 132 mh.mm Hw.hm 5N.hm mH.mNH om.ooH mmuoomlumom mH.om NH.mm mm.>m om.eHH me.em MOHOOMIOHO m 0 Immcwwmw EDHDOHHHSU DmOHHOU OCHCOUOB mucmospm owmsou oum3ou pumsou ouc3ou UHUBOD opppflppa weppappa weppfippa messappa mesDHDDa 3 in .mnmnommu DOGOHOM HUOHmmam paw HUOHmoHOHQ suon mmouoo mmuoom CODE HUGHCDDHDDU mo OHQUB .mHOOHnoB 133 hundred and fifty-five (155) to a plus one hundred and fifty-five. The second sub-scale, teachers attitude toward teaching and teaching methodologies, had a possible range from a minus two hundred and eight (208) to plus two hundred and eight. Teachers attitudes toward the the college where they taught, the third scale, had a possible range from minus sixty-four (64) to plus sixty- four. The fourth scale, teachers attitudes toward the TCCP Summer Conference, because of much confusion and a, very low response on this subscale, as originally designed, a separate scale was constructed to measure teachers' at- titude for this section of the study. The faculty con- ference assessment questionnaire used was composed of two subscales. Subscale one (1) was designed to measure teachers' perceptions of their interaction with one an- other, the consultants and the equipment and materials. Subscale two (2) was designed to obtain the teachers' reactions to the actual operation or mechanics of the summer conference. Detail information concerning the instrument was reported in Chapter III. Mean scores for one subscale were 87.32, standard deviation 19.3 for part 1; part 2 mean score was 42.0 and a standard deviation 10.3. Scores for each individual teacher, the percentage and mean scores for each item are listed in Appendix F. 134 The statistical model of analysis employed in this study involved a multivariate, multiple regression analysis predicting five (5) dependent variables from a combination of ten (10) independent variables. The means range scores for the six demographic variables are listed in Chapter III. Table 14 gives the means and standard deviations of each non-demographic variable across the entire sample of the 55 teachers involved in the study. The model for the multiple regression is: Y = X B + E. E is assumed to be distributed in the fol- lowing manner: E ~ N (l 0 0; I 0‘2). Thus B could be Obtained by the following formula: 13 = (x' x)"1 X' Y. For the particular computer program employed in this analysis, the B is determined based on mean deviation scores. The raw regression coefficients (3 are listed in Appendix I. The standard errors associated with the raw re- gression coefficients are listed inHAppendix J. These standard errors indicate how precisely the B coefficients have been measured. Totals of the standardized regres- sion coefficients--independent X dependent variables are listed in Appendix L. Table 15 gives the conditional variance and standard deviation of the dependent variables. These are 135 Table 14. Table of means and standard deviations of non- demographic variables across entire sample. Variable N = 55 Means S.D. Attitude toward summer conference-1 87.32727 9.3113 Attitude toward summer conference-2 42.05455 10.3770 Attitude toward student 5.89091 14.6587 Attitude toward teacher 10.25455 13.2024 Attitude toward college 0.01818 8.8097 Attitude toward curriculum innovation 1.49091 7.6712 Attitude toward administrators -0.38182 9.1722 the variance estimates after the ten (10) independent variables have been partialed out. Tahle 16 gives the matrix of correlations after the effect of the ten (10) covariants have been partialed out. Table 17 gives the regression analysis with the ten covariates eliminated. These are the variance estimates after the independent variables have been partialed out. The result of the Chi Square test for the hypo- theses of no association between dependent and independent 136 Table 15. Table of conditional variance and standard deviation. Variable Variance S.D. Attitude toward student 190.978534 13.8195 Attitude toward teacher 159.384312 12.5851 Attitude toward college 80.696425 8.9831 Attitude toward curriculum innovation 57.843363 7.6055 Attitude toward administrators 91.399301 9.4603 variables was overall nonsignificant. X2 = 56.86, d.f. = 50, P S 0.23. To accept a probability of less than .23 as an unlikely event, a further investigation of the data would include examination of the multiple-regression correla- tion coefficients. These are presented in Table 15. It will be noted from Table 17 that the indepen- dent variables are best able to predict attitude toward student, teaching, and curriculum, and somewhat less 15:; toward college and administration. Mentioned previously, the Chi Square test for hypothesis of no association between dependent and inde- pendent variables was nonsignificant; however, in examin- ing the stepwise contribution of each independent variable resulted in several significant relationships. 137 MHODUHHMHCHEOO oooooo.H oomHmm.o wommmm.o mommeH.o mmmmeH.o OHUSOH OODUHupd oooooo.H hmmmmm.o Homome.o nnmnmm.o EDHDOHHHSO pumSou OpouHuu¢ . . . mmOHHOO oooooo H mmHooo o mevmmm o cumsou opsuHuud . . OCHzomOu oooooo H mmnHmo o cum3ou OpsuHuud . musmosum oooooo H eumzop mpspHupa IMMMNWHD EDHDOHHHDU DmDHHOU OCHCOUOB mucmosum Fowmsom< puozou onmzou oumsou whosou DosuHuum DosuHuud mosuHups OpsuHuud OpsuHuud .pmuUCHEHHD mouoHHo>oo squ xHHuUE COHumHOHHOO mo OHQOB .mH OHQUB 138 Table 17. Table of statistics for regression analysis with 10 covariates eliminated. . Square Variable Mult. R Mult. R Attitude toward student 0.5252 0.2758 Attitude toward teacher 0.5095 0.2596 Attitude toward college 0.3909 0.1528 Attitude toward curriculum innovation 0.4462 0.1991 Attitude toward administrators 0.3388 0.1148 Testing the Hypotheses This study involved the analysis of five depend- ent variables and ten covariates using the multivariate, multiple regression analysis model. H0 The computed Chi square value was 0.75, d.f. Results of Sex Analysis score associated with this value was thesis was not rejected. There is no significant correlation among teachers' attitude scores toward an innovated science curricu- lum due to whether they were male or female. :5, The null hypo- 139 Results of Major Science Area Analysis H02: There is no significant correlation between teachers' attitude score changes and their major teaching area. Of the total fifty-five (55) participants, twenty- three (23) of them had science training backgrounds in the physical science and thirty-two (32) indicated training in the biological science area. The Chi square value which resulted from the analy- sis of these data was x2 = 4.87, d.f. = 5, P s .43. This value was too large to allow rejection of the null hypothe- sis. Results of Science Training Analysis H03: There is no significant correlation in teachers' attitude scores change as related to the amount of formal science training. The mean range for the total fifty-five (55) teachers relative to the number of years of teaching at the college level was from three to five years. This hypothesis was rejected as a result of analysis using the Chi square test. X2 = 12.97, d.f. = 5, and P < .02. In examining the univariate F's associated with the science training variable, it was found that most of the relation— ship was primarily between attitude toward college and in a lesser degree attitude toward curriculum innovation with science training variable. 140 H04: There is no significant correlation between teachers' attitude score change due to the number of years of teaching. The results of analysis of this variable indicated no significant correlation; therefore, the null hypothesis was accepted. Results of Classload Analysis H05: There is no significant correlation between teachers' attitude score changes due to the number of contact hours per week with students. The results of the analysis of this variable in- dicated a significant correlation. Using the Chi square test, X2 = 9.58, d.f. =,5, P s 0.08. This was small enough to allow for the rejection of the hypothesis. Results of STEP Test Analysis H06: There is no significant correlation between teachers' attitude scores change due to their knowledge of science. Mean score of fifty-five (55) teachers for part one (1) of the STEP test was 31.2 and part two (2) mean score was 19.6. The Chi square test for part one (1) was x2 = 5.18, d.f. = 5, P s 0.39, and for part two (2), x2 = 1.94, d.f. = 5, P s .85, the significant level 0.2367 at .05 percent. This being the case, the hypothesis was accepted. The scores for each individual of the popula- tion are listed in Appendix B. 141 H07: There is no significant correlation between teachers' attitude score change relative to age. Teachers mean age ranged as indicated on the faculty questionnaires, were thirty-six to forty years. Using step-wise regressing analysis indicated a Chi X2 = 4.46, d.f. = 5, P i 0.48. This value was too large to reject this hypothesis. H08: There is no significant correlation between teachers' attitude change as a result of having participated in 1971 summer conference. The summer conference attitudinal scale was divided into two subscales. Subscale one (1) was actually designed quantitatively to predicate the teachers' percep- tions of their interaction with one another, the consults, the materials and equipment, and the philosophy of TCCP. Part two (2) had to do only with the operation or mechanics of the summer conference. Applying the Chi square test, x2 = 14.4, d.f. = 5, P s 0.01 was significant for part one (1) of the attitudi- nal scale which measured the most important aspect of the summer conference relative to the teachers of science. On the other hand, the Chi square test for part two did not indicate any significant relationship, and as mentioned earlier was only used to measure the teachers' perceptions of the summer conference operations which the writer felt of relatively little importance. On the basis of Chi square test results and significant level of 0.05 percent 142 the hypothesis was rejected. Observing the univariate F, the variable that seems to have contributed most to the correlation is that of attitude toward college, having a P < 0.15. Summary The Sequential Test of Educational Progress and the Summary Conference Assessment Questionnaire were administered once during the study. The STEP test was administered near the end of the second week of the sum— mer conference and the Summer Conference Assessment Questionnaire was administered near the end of the last week of the summer conference. The scores on both were utilized as teacher attitudinal data for the correlations run to test the hypotheses. The results of the Faculty Questionnaire from the second week in June near the beginning of the summer conference and late January administering, mean scores indicated a gain across five (5) scales, and one scale, attitude toward administrators, indicated a loss in scores of -0.381. The greatest gain in scores was ob- served on the Attitude Toward Teaching scale with a gain of 10.25. The hypotheses tested involved in this study are divided into two (2) areas: (1) the relationship of teachers' attitude changes toward student, teaching and 143 teaching methodologies, toward the college or university which they taught, institutions' policies and administra- tors, curriculum and curriculum development, and toward the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program In-Service Summer Conference, and (2) the relationship of demographic vari- ables and teachers' attitude changes. These variables included the amount of formal science training, teaching experience, science knowledge, Classload (the number of contact hours per week), sex and major teaching area. Table 18 shows a summary of all the pertinent findings of this study. 144 .mumsch paw .Hm>oa mmmaaoo mcu um mcflnommu mo whom» mo Hmhadc may 6cm Evacuauuso mocmflom m>Hum>occfl mach :H pmnmumficfiapm mnflmccoflpmmso .mmfianOHuoamu cw pumzop monoom mpsufiuum mm H z pancamwcmflm oz .mnmcommu cmmzumn QHSmcowumamm .v .mocmoHMHcmHm on» no umoE pmusn Iauucoo mamomQSm Edasownuso pumBou mpsufluum co mmHoom mcu pmumoapcfl m mumflHm>Hcs one .mcwCflmnu mocmwom .mocmflom ca mcwcwmnu Hmfiuom mo unsoam on“ cam Enaso Hmfiuom mo ucsoem may 0cm IHHHDU mocmflom m>flum>occw cm pumzou Esasoflunso mocmfiom m>wum>occw mmuoom mopsuwuum .muwsoomu cmmsumn cm pnmzou.mmuoom mmpsufiuum cowumHmHHoo MOM unavamwcmflm mpaommm ucooHMHcmHm .mumcommu cwm3umn mflcmcowumamm .m .Aamowmacm paw .mumocmo paw HMOHOOHOflQV ovum mcflnommu mean Ga pmumpmwcflapm mnflmccoflummso wocmaom Momma mama“ paw «mm H z Edasofinuso mocmaom m>apm>occw tmm u z .mmflanOHumeH cm pnmzou mmuoom mOUSpHuum mm H z ucmoHMHcmHm oz .mumgommu cmmzumn mflnmcowumHmm .m .xmm paw ESHDUHHHSU mocmflom m>fluo>occfl .mmflnchHumHmu cm pumsou mmuoom mpoufluum mm H z unmoHMflcmHm oz Honommu :mm3umn mflanOHumHmm .H mo. n a com: ucmfifioo pmmmm muazmmm map Hem pmpmma .mmcapcflm mo unmeaom .mH OHQMB 145 o.H~ .m puma mnoom cam: N.~m .H puma whoom com: ttmm fl Z m.hH .m puma mnoom cmmz m.mm .H uumm whoom cows 2 2 «mm mm .wumscmo pom mach cw comma IchHEpm mHflMGGOflummso .oocmoam IMmem umoE pmusnfluucoo .mucmpoum pntou mpsufluum .mamomnsm on» so mmuoom map pouncepcw m mumaum>wcs was .mucmpsum nufl3 x003 “mm muooz uomucoo mo Hogans paw ESHDOHHHSU mocmflom pmgm>OCCH cm pum3ou mmuoom mopsuwuum .mumnoomu cmm3umn soap .mQASmcoHumamu ucMUHMHcmHm oz .mmwnmcoquHmH ucmoHMHcmwm oz .mmm HmowmoHocouco Hamsu cam Edasowuuso mocwflom m>wum>occfi cm pum30p monoom mopsufluum .mnmnommu cmm3umn mflnmcowumHmm . l‘ .Esasoanuso mocmflom 0>Hum>occH cm oumsou mmuoom mpsuwuum Hams» pom Aozp can moo uuwmv ummu mmsm so mmuoom .mnmcommu cmmzumn magmGOHumHmm . \D .xmm3 mom mason uomucoo mo Hones: pmoammmao cam Edasofluuso m>wum>occw ImHmHHoo How uGMOHMHcmHm muadmmm .mmwanOHumamH am pumsou mmuoom mpouwuum mm H z ucmoflmwcmflm .mumcommu cmm3vmn mwnmcowumamm .m mo. u a com: uswfifiou pmmmm muHSmmm may now emumme .emssausoo .ma magma 6 4 l .muocommg mocmwom Havammcm mmumoflchts .mumnommu mocmflom HMOHOOHOHQ mmumowchs mmtsuauum mm 2 .ommaaoo pumBou mos» prum .mamomnom on» so monoom may Eonm maumofi mcflEoo coauonflnucoo emumoaesa usmuamasmem maze puma .mmuoom mpsufluum mocmummcoo Hmfifiom paw Edasoflnuso moswflom m>aum>occw cm pumzou mmuoom .mumcommu cmmBqu soap Imamnnoo now unmoflmflcmflm muaommm .H .ESHSOHHHDU mocmflom m>Hum>occfl cm pumBou mmuoom mopsufiuum can mocwnmmcoo Hmafism may mo mmuoom mopsuwupm unmoflmacmflw .mumcoomu cmm3umn QHQmGOflgmamm .m ucmEEou mo. n a com: pwmmm muadmmm ocu How pmumwa .pmscHuGOU .mH magma CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS The purpose of this study was to determine the possible relationships of a selected group of attitudinal and demographic variables, exhibited among a selected group of college teachers, toward an innovative science curriculum. Review of the Literature An exhaustive search of pertinent literature re- vealed a lack of research involving college teachers; this search underlies a need for such research. Design of Study The study involved fifty-five (55) college teachers assigned to the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program. Data obtained from these teachers began with the summer conference training program, the summer of 1971. The attitudinal variables selected for this study were: (1) attitude toward teaching, (2) attitude toward the college or university in which they taught, (3) attitude toward curriculum innovations, (4) attitude toward school policies and administrators, (5) attitude 147 148 toward students, and (6) attitude toward the TCCP Summer Conference Training Program. The demographic variables were: (1) age, (2) years of college teaching experience, (3) sex, (4) subject-matter area, (5) knowledge of science, and (6) class load (number of contact hours per week). The instruments utilized to collect the data were: (1) STEP test, science (parts I and II), (2) Faculty Questionnaire, and (3) Faculty Summer Conference Assessment Questionnaire. The Summer Conference Training Program was designed to acquaint the participants with the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program, an innovative science curriculum. Following the training program, the teachers taught the innovative science curriculum during the 1971-1972 school year. The Faculty Questionnaire and STEP tests were admin- istered during the second week of the summer conference. The same faculty questionnaire was administered again in January, after the teachers had taught the curriculum for one term (quarter or semester). The faculty assessment questionnaire was administered only once, near the end of the summer conference. Analysis of the data involved tabulation, the appli- cation of multivariate multiple regression, and the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient. All computations were carried out on the Control Data Corporation 3600 and 6500 computers. 149 Hypotheses Tested The hypotheses tested were that there would be no significant correlations between teachers' attitude change scores and the selected six (6) demographic variables. Data for each hypothesis tested were required to show significance at the .05 level for rejection of the hypothesis. Results and Conclusions Employing the Chi Square test for significance, including a composite treatment of all the variables, the results indicated no significant correlation. But in examining each covariate separately, using the step- wise method indicated several significant relationships. Hypothesis HOl was concerned with the correlation between males and females and their attitude toward an innovated science curriculum. This hypothesis was accepted, indicating that attitude scores were not con- tingent upon sex. In Hypothesis HO2 the relationships between teachers' attitude scores and major teaching areas were investigated. The results indicated no significance. Again, the hypothesis was accepted. The areas repre- sented were biological and physical science. There were thirty-two (32) biological science teachers and twenty-three (23) physical science teachers. 150 The amount of formal science training and its rela- tionship to the teachers' attitude scores was investigated with hypothesis H03. A significant positive correlation of this variable indicated that the univariate F weighed heavily toward attitude toward curriculum. The hypothesis was rejected. The mean scores for teachers' formal science training ranges from 61-90 quarter hours. Biological and physical science teachers' composite mean scores differed by only 1.5. Hypothesis HO4 was used to analyze the teachers' attitude scores and the number of years of teaching at the college level. The results indicated no significant relationships. The mean range was from three to five years of teaching at the college level. The results of the analysis of the teachers' at- titude scores toward an innovated science curriculum and the number of hours they spent in contact with the stu- dents was the subject for investigation of H05. The re- sults revealed a significant positive correlation at the .05 level. The univariate F for this variable indicated the subscale, attitude toward students, was the greatest contributor. The difference between mean group post scores of biological and physical science teachers was 1.79 points. The use of hypothesis HO analyzed the teachers' 6 attitude scores toward an innovated science curriculum and their knowledge of science. Results indicated no significant relationship and the hypothesis was accepted. 151 However, in analyzing the STEP test scores both groups, biological and physical science teachers, had a compara- tively high mean score on both part I and part II of the test. Mean scores for the physical science teachers was higher than the mean scores of the teachers of biology both on part I and part II. The relationship between teachers' attitude scores and chronological age was tested through hypothesis H07. The results revealed no significant relationships. The hypothesis was not rejected. Mean age ranges were from thirty to thirty-five years. Hypothesis HO8 was used to analyze the correlations between teachers' attitude scores of the summer training program and their attitude scores toward an innovated science curriculum. Results indicated a positive signi- ficant correlation for part I. Part I was more pertinent to the study than part II. Part II had to do with only the mechanics of the summer conference, involving such things as cashing checks, changing linen, mailing let- ters, etc. The univariate F subscale, attitude toward college, seemed to have been most influential. This study indicated that the teachers' sex did not have any significant influence in terms of their perception of an innovated science curriculum. With the composition among female and male being not too unevenly divided, the males dominated the physical science 152 discipline and the females the biological science dis- cipline. Of the total sample pOpulation the females con- stituted thirty-nine percent of the group. Even though there were no significant relation- ships between teachers' attitude toward an innovated science curriculum and their perception of their major teaching area, this may be due in part to their multiple former training. Several teachers indicated their teach- ing areas as being in two or more of the science areas. It may be concluded that the amount of formal science training played a significant role as to how teachers perceive an innovated science curriculum. This study indicated a significant relationship between these two variables. A comparatively high number of these teachers held a doctorate degree, precisely twenty- nine percent, which is somewhat unique of small predo- minately black college faculties. Sixty percent held a master's degree and less than one percent held only the bachelor's degree. Most of them possessed sixty- one or more quarter hours of science training. The majority of the teachers involved in this study were black with initial educational backgrounds from predomi- nately black institutions located in the southern half of the United States. Also, one may infer, until recent years, due to the operation of dual systems of education among institutions of higher education throughout the 153 south, black teachers were encouraged with such govern- mental support as the National Science Foundation, to seek advanced training in the sciences. This may account for the relatively large number of advanced degrees in this area and the number of people in college level positions. This study did not seek information relative to the total amount of teaching experience of the sample population. The mean ranges were for the number of years teaching at the college level which was three to five years. Several negative observations were made; however, these were not significant at the .05 level. There may have been some significant relationships in- dicated if the questionnaire had not been designed to exclude the other levels of teaching experience. Most of the faculties of small predominately black institutions of higher education experience monu- mental class loads. ,Teachers of this study's population sample indicated a very high significant relationship between their perception of an innovated science cur- riculum and the number of contact hours per week were indicated by most of them. This number of contact hours was a reduction for most of them compared with the number required outside the program as regular program. This reduced number of contact hours required by the program 154 seems to have produced a more favorable attitude of perception toward students. The results of this study help to support those of other studies concerning teachers' knowledge of science and how they perceived innovations in science. The results of this study's findings indicated no sig- nificant relationships. Both groups scored comparatively higher than the norms on the STEP test. The test wasr designed to determine knowledge of science of freshman and sophomore students in college. The mean item diffi- culty and discrimination may not be valid for the sample population of this study. The faculties of the sample population were rela- tively young, with a mean age from thirty to thirty-five years. The findings of this study showed age not to be insignificant. The youngest of faculties may indicate a high turnover rate,.which is usual for a small college. Further indication of this were the mean number of years of teaching at the college level and mean number of years taught at the same college, which were three to five and one to two years, respectively. Many educators express the theory that when teachers are involved in curriculum innovations, a work- shop of some type becomes an important acitivity in en- hancing a positive perception of teachers in the change process. The teachers' attitudinal findings in this 155 study indicated a significant relationship toward the summer conference training. Their attitudes toward the college also were influenced by being involved in the training program. It may be inferred that the teachers were made aware of their freedom to attempt changes or modification in teaching which theretofore did not exist or they were not aware of the existance. In concluding this study, the writer would like to make reference to a segment of the program in which this study was not designed to investigate. Students selected for participation in the Thirteen-College Curriculum Program were selected on a random basis on each college campus. This sample pOpulation included one hundred students for each of the thirteen college campuses. The students selected were students who had been accepted for admission by the registrar offices of each of the thirteen colleges prior to selecting them for the program. The students selected for the program were granted a major portion of financial support toward cost for one school year including tuition, room and board, books and materials, and a stipend of five dollars per week. Thirty-four percent of these students came from families with incomes less than three thousand dollars 156 per year. Seventy-eight came from families with incomes of less than six thousand and two hundred dollars a year. More than sixty percent of the program students who entered college in 1967 approach graduation or have graduated as compared to approximately forty-five percent of the regular college students. A comparison of the program students' retention strength with the regular student pOpulation is listed in Appendix 0. In terms of college grade performance, the program students have done generally better than their peers. A comparison of grade point averages of the program students and the regular students are listed in Appendix P. By presenting this brief data on students in- volved in the program, it is hoped that a better insight of the overall program may be conceptualized. Educational Implications In View of the findings of this study, the follow- ing conclusions seem justified. 1. There is a positive correlation between teachers' attitude and the amount of formal science train- ing relative to a "new" or modified science curriculum. Therefore, the adequacy of formal science training should be examined closely when selecting teachers to implement an innovated science curriculum. 157 2. When implementing an innovated science cur- riculum, a reasonable number of contact hours with stu- dents should be given consideration. 3. When employing workshops to diffuse and implement an innovation in science, the interactions of teachers among themselves, consultants, materials and equipment should receive priority attention. Some Dimensions of This Study Which Warrant Further Research There should be a replication of this study with a control group, one which does not assign teachers to attend a summer conference but were assigned to implement the innovation. The results of an investigation of this kind would supply additional data related to the percep- tions of college teachers toward an innovated science program. Further research of college science teachers using other attitudinal scales might reveal further insights into which variables are the major factors for acceptance or rejection of science innovations. A replication of this study using beginning fresh- men students' achievement in science courses may prove to be a factor of whether teacher attitude toward an inno- vated science curriculum has validity. 158 There should be a replication of this study involving a greater number of teachers, to inclue the mathematics and chemistry teachers. Increasing the pOpulation sample would increase the validity of re- sults. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Adelson, Marvin. "Educational Ends and Innovational Means." Inventing Education for the Future. Edited by Merner Hirsch. ‘San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Company, 1967. Caffey, H. S. and Galden, W. P. "Psychology of Change within an Institution." In In-Service Education, the fifty-sixth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957. Carpenter, C. R. and Greenhill, T. M. "The New Media." In Higher Education, Save Newer Developments. Ed. by Samuel Baskifi. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1965. Foshay, Arthur W. Foreward in Innovation in Education. Ed. by Matthew B. Miles. New York: Teachers College Press. 1971. Gardner, John W. Self-Renewal: The Individual and the Inngyative Society. New York: Harper and Row, 1965. . No Easy Victories. New York: Harper and Row, 1968. Hare, Kenneth. On University Freedom. Toronto Publisher in association with Carleton University by Uni- versity of Toronto Press, 1968. Hill, Winfred. Learning. San Francisco: Chandler Pub- lishing Company, 1963. Hoffer, Eric. The Ordeal of Change. New York: Harper and Row, 1964. Johnson, Lamar B. Islands of Innovation Expanding: Changes in the CommunityyCollege. Beverly Hills, California: MacMillan Company, 1969. 159 160 Kinneck, B. J., et al. "The Teachers and the In-Service Education Program." In In—Service Education, the fifty—sixth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957. Mayhew, Lewis B. Higher Education in the Revolutionary Decades. Mucutcher Publisher Corp., 1967. Miener, Norbert. Cybernetics. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1948. Miles, Matthew B., Editor. Innovation in Education. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1964. Richey, G. H. "Growth of the Modern Conception of In- Service Education." In In-Service Education, the fifty-sixth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957. Ryans, David G. "Prediction of Teacher Effectiveness." Encyclgpedia Educational Research. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1960. Sanford, Nevitt. "Implications for Education and for Adjustment of Curricula to Individual Students." In Universal Higher Education. Edited by Earl J. McGrath. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1960. Uricchio, William. Innovation in Higher Education. Columbia Teachers Press, Columbia University, 1967. Articles and Pamphlets Bathurst, J. E. "Relation of Efficiency to Experience and Age Among Elementary Teachers." Journal of Educational Research, 1929, 19:314-316. Bessent, E. W. "Inservice Education--A Point of View." Designs for Inservice Education. Austin: The Ufiiversity of Texas Printing Division, 1967, p. 5. 161 Brawer, Florence B. PersonalityyCharacteristics of Col- lege and University Faculty: Implications for the Community College. Washington, D.C.: Ameri- can Association of Junior Colleges, 1968. Brickell, Henry M. Organizing New York State for Educa- tional Change. Albany: State Education Depart- ment, 1961. Butts, D. P. "The Classroom Experience Model." In Design for Inservice Education. Ed. by E. W. Bessent, Research and Development Center for Teacher Edu- cation, The University of Texas, Austin. . "The Classroom Experience Model." In Desi n for In-Service Education. Austin: The Univer- sity of Texas Printing Division, 1967. and Raun, Chester E. A Study of Teacher Change. Science Inservice Project, Research Report No. 1. Austin: The Science Education Center, The Uni- versity of Texas, 1967. Cooper, Russell M. "Faculty Development Programs." £2 Search of Leaders. Ed. by G. K. Smith, T. Brhard, C. MaGuineas. Washington, D.C.: American Asso- ciation for Higher Education, National Education Association of the United States, 1967. Corey, S. M. "Introduction." In In-Service Education, the fifty-sixth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957. Dale, Edgar. "The Innovator and the Establishment." In Search of Leaders. Ed. by G. K. Smith, L. Erhard, C} MacGuineas. Washington, D.C.: American Asso- ciation for Higher Education, National Education Association of the United States, 1967. Ellena, W. J. Who's A Good Teacher? Washington, D.C.: National school boards Association, 1961. Garrison, Roger H. Junior College Faculty: Issues and Problems. Washington, D.C.: American Associa- tion of Junior Colleges, 1967. Greene, Robert F. "Good Teaching and In-Service Educa- tion." Improving_College and University_Teaching. 1961. 162 Harris, B. M. "Teaching Demonstration Model." Desi ns for In-Service Education. Austin: The Univer- sity of Texas Printing Division, 1967. Jones, Donald G. and Willower, D. G. "When Pupil Control Becomes an Institutional Theme." Phi Delta Kappa, 1963, 45:107-109. Knight, F. B. gnalities Related to Success in Teaching. Columbia University Contribution to Education, No. 120, 1922. McCarthy, Joseph L. "More Effective College Teaching." Improving College and University Teaching, IX McCormick, Frank L. "Instructional Methodology." Inf pnoving College and University Teaching. McIntyre, K. E. "The Laboratory Approach." Designs for In-Service Education. Austin: The University of Texas Printing DiVision, 1967. Messell, Nils. "The Process of Innovation." In Improv- ing College and University Teaching. Ed. by CalVin B. T. Lee. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1968. Ryans, David G. Measuring the Intellectual and Cultural Backgrounds of Teaching Candidates; Analysis of the Results of Second Annual Administration of the National Teacher Examination. Cooperative Test Service of the American Council on Education. New York, 1941. "A Study of the Extent of Association of Certi- fied Professional and Personal Data with Judged Effectiveness of Teacher Behavior." Journal of Experimental Education. 1951, 20:67-77. Upton, Miller. "Acceptance of Major Curricular Change." In Search of Leaders. Ed. by G. K. Smith, L. Eihard, C. MacGuineas. Washington, D.C.: Ameri- can Association for Higher Education, National Education Association of the United States, 1967. Walker, Tom L. "More Effective College Teaching." In: proving College and University Teaching. Winter, 1971, p. 201. 163 Willson, S. C. "Teacher Education Through an Inservice Program." Unpublished Master's Thesis. Austin: The University of Texas, 1967. Other Sources Consulted Asher, James J. "Inservice Education--Psychological Perspectives." Berkeley, California: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Develop- ment, 1967. Cogen, Charles. "The Teacher and Educational Change." In Inverting Education for the Future. Ed. by. Merner Hersch. San Francisco: Chandler Publish- ing Company, 1967. Gusfield, Joseph. "The Faculty Institute." Paper pre- sented at the Workshop Conference to Faster In- novation in Higher Education, Union for Research and Experimentation in Higher Education, April 25-29, 1967. Osgood, C. E.; Suci, G. J.; and Tannenbaum, P. H. The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana: University of Iilinois Press, 1957. Schmidt, Mildred. Obtaining and Keeping Faculty in an Associate Degree Nursing Program. A paper pre- sented at the fifth meeting of the Southern Regional Education, Education Board Council on Collegiate Education for Nursing. Atlanta, Georgia: October 21, 1965. Watson, Goodwin. "Innovation: Processes, Practices and Research." In Innovations in Higher Education: Envelopments, Research and Priorities. Ed. by Samuel Baskin. New Dimensions in Higher Educa- tion, monograph 19. Durham, N.C.: Duke Univer- sity and U.S. Office of Education, 1967. Westly, Dorothy. "Inservice Education--Perspectives for Education." Berkeley, Calif.: Far West Labora- tory for Educational Research and Review, 1967. 164 Unpublished Materials Barnes, Steven M. "The Reactions of Selected Elementary Teachers to the Training for and the Implementa- tion of the Science Curriculum Improvement Study in Selected Schools in Michigan." .Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1969. Clinton, Alfred and House, John H. "Attributes of Innova- tion as Factors in Diffusion." Paper presented at American Education Research Association meet- ing, Minneapolis, March, 1970. Eurich, Alvin C. "The Commitment to Experiment and Inno- vate in College Teaching." Educational Record. XXXXV, Winter, 1964, 49-55. Garrison, Roger H. Junior College Faculny: Issues and Problems. Washington, D.C.: AmeriCan ASSOCiation of Junior Colleges, 1967. Jensen, Mary E. "The Role of Administrators in Facilitat- ing Innovation in Community College." Unpublished seminar paper. Los Angeles: University of Cali- fornia at Los Angeles, 1968. Keuscher, Robert E. "An Appraisal of Some Dimensions of Systems Theory as Indicators of the Tendency to Innovate in Selected Public Junior Colleges." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Los Angeles: University of California at Los Angeles, 1968. Noda, Daniel S. "A Study of Successful Practice Used to Remove the Major Blocks to Curriculum Improvement in the Secondary School." Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Ohio State University, 1952. Taylor, Thomas W. "A Study to determine the Relationships Between Growth in Interest and Achievement of High School Science Students and Teacher Attitudes, Preparation, and Experience." Unpublished doc- toral dissertation. North Texas State University, 1957. APPENDIX A THE THIRTEEN-COLLEGES SUMMER CONFERENCE SCHEDULE (Biological and Physical Science) INSTITUTE FOR SERVICES TO EDUCATION Biology Summer Institute and Writing Conference BISHOP COLLEGE Dallas, Texas July 6 to August 13, 1971 SCHEDULE Programs A and B lst Week Tuesday, July 6 9:30 Plenary Session 1:30 Biology Meeting, Room 219 Science Registration Discussion: "What is the TCCP, the FCC, and the ECC?" Biology Staff Wednesday, July 7 9-10:20 Discussion: "Curriculum P1anning--Who's Con- cerned?" Discussion Leader, Dr. C. M. Goolsby 10:30-12 Discussion "Teacher Self-Image Related to the Desired Teaching Style." Biology Staff 1:30-3:10 Discussion: "Leading and Participating in a Discussion." Discussion Leader, Dr. D. A. Obasun 3:30-5 Discussion: "Evaluating Students in the Pro- gram." Biology Staff Thursday, July 8 9 Organization for Succeeding Weeks 10 Program A_Conferences 11 Program B Conferences 1:30-5 Conference Demonstrations PROGRAM B PROGRAM A Friday, July 9 9-10 Group Discussions 9 Conference (Place 10-11 Unit 1 TBA) Group Room A 217 Science B 104 " C 107 " D 214 " E 219 " 1:30-5 Conference 1:30 Conference Demonstra- Demonstrations tions 165 166 SCHEDULE, Biology Summer Institute and Writing Conference BISHOP COLLEGE Dallas, Texas July 6 to August 13, 1971 PROGRAM B PROGRAM A 2nd Week Monday, July 12 and Tuesday, July 13 9-11 Lab. Room 107 Sci. 9-11 Lab. Unit 1 Unit 1 Group Room (Taught by teacher A 217 Sci. for Group C, assis- B 104 Sci. ted by Staff.) C 107 Sci. D 214 Sci. E 219 Sci. 11-12 Discussion, Unit 1 Teaching Conferences Dr. Obasun, Rm. 214 Room 219 and Reading Area Sci. Conference Demonstrations 1:30-5 Conference 1:30-5 Conference Demonstrations Demonstrations Wednesday, July 14 and Thursday, July 9-11 Lab. Room 107 Sci. 1:30-2 Biology Staff 2-3 3-5 11-12 Discussion Unit 1 Dr. Obasun Room 214 Sci. Friday, July 16 9-10 Discussions 11-12 10-11 Evaluation 11-12 Conference on New Unit Outlines 1:30-2 2-3 3-4 3rd Week Monday, July 19 through Thursday 22 9-11 Lab. Room 107 Sci. 1:30-2 Discussion--Unit 3, 2-3 Dr. Goolsby 3-5 Friday, July 23 Same as Friday, July 16 Same as 15 Teaching Conferences Rooms 214 and 219 Discussions Laboratory Group Room A 101 Sci. B 104 " C 107 " D 214 " E 219 " Conferences on New Unit Outlines (Program B) Teaching Conferences Discussions Evaluation Teaching Conferences Discussions Laboratory Room assignments same as July 14 Friday, July 16 167 SCHEDULE, Biology Summer Institute and Writing Conference BISHOP COLLEGE Dallas, Texas July 6 to August 13, 1971 4th Week Monday, July 26 to Thursday, July 29 9-9:30 Administrative Con- 9-9:30 Administrative Con- ference - Room 219 ference - Room 219 9:30-12 Assembled work on l-l:30 Teaching Conferences, new units Rooms 214 and 219 Unit Room 2-3 Discussions: Units 9 107 4, 5, and 8 PROGRAM B PROGRAM A 3-5 Laboratory Unit Room Group Unit Room 10 214 A 4 214 11 219 B 4 219 12 104 C 5 101 D 5 104 E 8 107 Friday, July 30 9-9:30 Administrative Con- 9-9:30 Administrative Con- ference ference 9:30-12 Report from writing 9:30-12 Reports from writing groups, Room 219 groups (Program B) 1-1:30 Teaching Conference 2-3 Discussions 3-4 Evaluation 5th Week Monday, August 2 to Friday, August 6 Same as the 4th week Same as the 4th week Group Unit Room A 5 101 B 5 104 C 8 107 D 8 214 E 4 219 6th Week Monday, August 9 Monday, August 9 to Wed., 9-9:30 Administrative August 11 Conference 9-9:30 Administrative Con- 9:30-12 Assembled work on ference units 1-1:30 Teaching Conference 2-3 Discussions 3-5 Laboratory 168 SCHEDULE, Biology Summer Institute and Writing Conference BISHOP COLLEGE Dallas, Texas July 6 to August 13, 1971 Tues., Aug. 10 and Wed., Aug. 11 9-11 New Unit Discus- Group Unit Room sions and Labora- 8 104 tories B 8 107 11 Administrative C 4 214 Conference, Room 219 D 4 219 E 5 101 Thursday, August 12 1:30 Colloquium for Pro- 9-10 Discussion grams A_and B, 10-11 Evaluation Room 219 BIOLOGY STAFF Dr. Charles M. Goolsby, Senior Program Associate, ISE, Biology Conference Director: Room 232 Science Building Dr. Dan A. Obasun, Program Associate, ISE, Assistant Director: Room 238, Science Building Dr. Jonathan T. Harris, Norfolk State College, Program Associate, ISE, Room 238 Science Building Robert J. Anthony, MS., M. Sc.Ed., Jackson State College, Program Associate, ISE, Room 236 Science Building Harold E. Banks, M.Sc., Program Associate, ISE, Room 236 Science Building Miss Lucinda Johnson, Secretary, Biology Office - Ext. 286 169 BIOLOGY SUMMER CONFERENCE AND INSTITUTE, BISHOP COLLEGE, DALLAS, TEXAS July 9, 1971 Program A Group A . Mrs. Dorothy Exum, Tennessee State University 2. Mrs. Barbara E. Frisby, Southern University, Baton Rouge 3. Dr. Bhebium B. Subramanyam, Florida A & M University 4. Mrs. Katherine S. Brossette, Southern University, Baton Rouge Group B 1. Mrs. Rachel D. Hargrove, Virginia Union University 2. Robert L. Woods, North Carolina A & T State University 3. Mrs. Verna L. Spinks, Alcorn A & M College 4. JoAnn Vicks, Mary Holmes College Grou C 1. Mrs. Linda P. Lipham, Grambling College 2. Glen M. Sponholtz, Florida A & M University 3. Dr. Stanley B. Boertje, Southern University, New Orleans 4. Jackie A. Myster, University of Maryland 5. Mrs. Rose W. Burke, Bishop College Group D 1 Benny M. Miles 2 3 Ehsan A. Syed, Bishop College . Mrs. Euphoria Higginbotham, Southern University, Baton Rouge 4. Raymond H. Alexander, Norfolk State College Grou E I. Dr. Wasi M. Siddiqui, Bishop College 2. John F. Johnson, Jarvis Christian College 3. Dr. Senka Yaden, Jarvis Christian College 4. Havord C. Bishop, LeMoyne-Owen College 170 BIOLOGY SUMMER CONFERENCE AND INSTITUTE, BISHOP COLLEGE, DALLAS, TEXAS July 9, 1971 PROGRAM B Unit 9--Water: Its Pnysical Chemistry, Biology, Sociology and Politics 1. Mrs. Lauree F. G. Lane, Tennessee State University 2. Mrs. Portia Hubbard, Southern University, Baton Rouge 3. Thaddeus V. Beasley, Elizabeth City State University Unit 10--Animal Behavior 1. Dr. Mahendra Singh, Southern University, Baton Rouge 2. Harold W. Toliver, Langston University 3. Mrs. Rebecca Anderson, Southern University, Shreveport, La. Unit 11--Some Actions of Common Drngs 1. Rather G. Brown, Alabama A & M College 2. Mrs. Eva B. Landers, Tennessee State University 3. Dr. Murthy V. L. N. Pinapaka, Fayetteville State University Unit 12-—Human Reproduction and Its Control 1. Marshall B. Pitts, Fayetteville State University 2. Mrs. Gertrude Wilson, Southern University 171 m oo ooum "coaumooa ou ummnm coauoouumcfl ooum Hocwpaflsm mocmflom means .m.3 mom“ TOGOHOMCOU ngm ooum Hmsecaasm mocmflom mufisz .m.z mom. scan Imucmfiuo Hmumcmo Hafiommm omm_ on» no 3mfl>um>o mmcaummuo mocmummcou cowu mocmummcoo soap mcflummz mcmummz H Imucmflno Hmnmcmw Imucmfiuo Hmumcmo mocmwom Hmowmwcm mocmwom Havamwcm 3 omuH omua omua omna no oouma oouma oouma oouma I Hmsaeaasm s mocmflom muflnz L .m.3 moma mmuuoo H mmflmmumuum mocmflom Haven V mcwcomma Hmcfloaflom Iwcm may mo oceauso .Q I oouaa mocmwom muwnz mmflm rmmsm mmmwoo .m.3 memt Avenue» -mumuum meauomflho I mvuoa Icoov coaumucmano .wnm0moafinm Emnmonm .m 0 mommmau mcflummz mcflummz Hammmsu mocmwmu N coaumnpchEmo mocmflom HMOflm%Mm mocowom Hmowmwnm coammmm >Hmcmam ooum ooum ooum omum ampflum anomusne hmpmmcpmz HI.H.m.m wash «o the on the maopmnom mafimmwocmummcoo HwEEdm Huma mocmflom HMOHmNam anommsa .coz 172 NI.H.m.m were rhea . sumamy manpmnomemeo mocwummcoo Hmsfidm anma mocmflom Hmowmmnm ooum ooum ooum ooum ooum muommoum co muomnoum co mcwummz msouo mcflummz moonw _cowumooH H m ummcm omum omum coauosuumcH Hafioomm mmm_ mocmumm mocmumm msfluwuz ucmfimoam>mo mcHUHuz Icoo cowumu Icoo coaumu Hospfi>flch can noummmmm Hospw>wch Icmfluo Hmumcmw Icflmno Hmumcmw omua omua omua omua omua oouma oouma oouma oouma oouma mumpmmq mmwmmumuum mcwummz mmflmmumuum pomnoum mmwmmumuum anaconda Hmnmcmw anaconda sues mosmuomcoo anaconda oouaa oouaa oouHH oouHH oouaa xmmum mommou xmmum mommoo xmmum mmmmoo xmmum mommou mvuoa mvuoa mvuoa mvuoa dogmxnoz cofiumucmEmHmEH oouoa mommmHO mommmHU mommMHU cowumuumcofima Hmcwamm coaumuumGOEmo msfiuomz Hmumcmw coaumuumcoemo ooum ooum ooum ooum ooum mopflum mmpmusca mmpmmcpmz mmpmmsa mmpcoz Huiillllllfill 173 ooum ooum ooum ooum ooum muomnoum co muommonm co mgomnoum co mcwummz muonw mcflummz msouo mcflummz macho omum omum omum mcflufluz ucmfimoam>mo mcflufiuz ucmEQOHm>mQ mcfiuwna Hmspfi>flch tam sonmmmmm HMSUH>HUQH paw coummmmm Hmopfi>flch omua omua omua omua omua oouma oouma oouma oouma oouma mafl I>Hom Emanoum mca>aom mcfl>aom I ammumuum Emanoum pcm Emanoum pan mcwsomma pcm cowumuumGOEmo coflumuuchEmo coaumuumcosmo mo coflmmoomflo mcflummz Hmumcmw mo scammoomflo mcflummz Hmumcmw mo cowmmoomflo oouHH oouaa oouaa oouHH oouaa xmmum mommoo xmmum mmmmoo xmmum mommou xmmum mommou xmmum mommou meuoa mwuoa mwuoa mvuoa mvuoa mmmmmau mommmHU mommmao coeumuumcoamo umcflsmm coaumuumcoemo Hmcflamm coaumumeOEmo ooum ooum ooum ooum ooum mmpwum hmpmHscB ampmmcpmz mmpmmsa mmpcoz MH umsmsd I ma mash waspmcom memo mocmnmmcou Hmafism mI.H.m.m mocmwom Hmowmmcm 174 P.S. 14.]. PROJECT ASSIGNMENTS I. Development of Chemistry Experiments to Augment Chemistry Unit Ralph Turner (Leader) Newtie Boxd Kumar Chatterjee Walter Floyd Melvin Gadson L. Lin Charlie Scott Adell Mills James Fennessey Thomas Williams omooqoxmwaI-J I—l II. Computer 1. Army Daniel (Leader) 2. James Fennessey 3. James Tyson 4. Donald Volz 5. Charles Phillips 6. Melvin Gadson III. Measurement Lee Colquitt (Leader) R. K. Mathur Larry Mattrix James Tyson Donald Volz Leon Punsalan mU'lubUJNH IV. Extensions to Interdisciplinary Bio-Chemical Problems 1. R. Mathur (Leader) 2. Cynthia Huff 3. Lydia Cummings V. Special Projects in Chemistry 1. Margaret Knighton 2. Curtis Higgenbotham VI. VII. 175 Extensions in Physics 1. Lee Colquitt (Leader) 2. Adell Mills 3. Leon Punsalan 4. Thomas Williams Video Tape 1. Lee Colquitt (Leader) 2. Charlie Scott 3. Adell Mills 4. Cynthia Huff 5. Babu Jain PoSol4-2 APPENDIX B INDIVIDUAL TEACHER'S STEP TEST SCORES, RAW SCORE DISTRIBUTION, MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION, VARIANCE, STANDARD SCORE MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION, SUMMARY, ITEM ANALYSIS KEY, ANSWER KEY FOR BOTH PART I AND II FOR ALL TEACHERS N = 55 176 w Teacher Raw Percentile Standard Number Score Rank Score 1 32 48 50.8 2 29 35 47.1 3 38 80 58.1 4 24 14 41.0 5 23 10 39.7 6 40 88 60.6 7 28 28 45.9 8 36 66 55.7 9 35 61 54.5 10 18 5 33.6 11 30 39 48.3 12 29 35 47.1 13 35 61 54.5 14 23 10 39.7 15 5 1 17.6 16 28 28 45.9 17 37 74 56.9 18 37 74 56.9 19 30 39 48.3 20 18 5 33.6 21 26 21 43.4 22 32 48 50.8 23 42 94 63.0 24* 30 39 48.3 25 25 18 42.2 26 33 53 52.0 27 24 14 41.0 28 37 74 56.9 29 25 18 42.2 30 28 28 45.9 Teacher Raw Percentile Standard Number Score Rank Score 31 33 53 52.0 32 31 43 49.5 33 34 57 53.2 34 43 97 64.3 35 36 66 55.7 36 39 85 59.4 37 41 91 61.8 38 28 28 45.9 39 31 43 49.5 40 28 28 45.9 41 5 1 17.6 42 33 53 52.0 43 39 85 59.4 44 44 99 65.5 45 19 7 34.8 46 25 18 42.2 47 32 48 50.8 48 36 66 55.7 49 39 85 59.4 50 28 28 45.9 51 41 91 61.8 52 38 80 58.1 53 36 66 55.7 54 37 74 56.9 55 37 74 56.9 *Indicates 1 through 23 are physical science teachers and 24 through 55 are biology teachers. 178 1 Teacher Raw Percentile Standard Number Score Rank Score 1 18 31 48.2 2 23 66 56.3 3 19 45 49.8 4 16 30 45.0 5 18 37 48.2 6 21 59 53.1 7 20 53 51.4 8 23 66 56.3 9 23 66 56.3 10 32.1 11 32.1 12 30.5 13 20 53 51.4 14 12 13 38.6 15 30.5 16 32.1 17 26 84 61.1 18 14 22 41.8 19 21 59 53.1 20 7 2 30.5 21 19 45 49.8 22 24 72 57.9 23 26 84 61.1 24* 18 37 48.2 25 16 30 45.0 26 27 93 62.7 27 13 17 40.2 28 27 93 62.7 29 15 26 43.4 30 20 53 51.4 31 20 53 51.4 179 Teacher RaW> Percentile Standard Number Score Rank Score 32 27 93 62.7 33 18 37 48.2 34 26 84 61.1 35 26 84 61.1 36 24 72 57.9 37 28 98 64.3 38 19 45 49.8 39 18 37 48.2 40 26 84 61.1 41 8 8 32.1 42 l3 17 40.2 43 24 72 57.9 44 28 98 64.3 45 16 30 45.0 46 15 26 43.4 47 14 22 41.8 48 23 66 56.3 49 26 84 61.1 50 20 53 51.4 51 26 84 61.1 52 26 84 61.1 53 13 17 40.2 54 25 76 59.5 55 22 62 54.7 *Indicates 1 through 23 are physical science teachers and 24 through 55 are biology teachers. 180 Part I, 45 Items ===3 352:. 0:223:32: P54221818 “222:? 44 1 l 99 65.5 43 1 2 97 64.3 42 2 4 94 63.0 41 2 6 91 61.8 40 1 7 88 60.6 39 3 10 85 59.4 38 2 12 80 58.1 37 5 17 74 56.9 36 4 21 66 55.7 35 2 23 61 54.5 34 2 25 57 53.2 33 3 28 53 52.0 32 3 31 48 50.8 31 2 33 43 49.5 30 3 36 39 48.3 29 2 38 35 47.1 28 6 44 28 45.9 26 1 45 21 43.4 25 3 48 18 42.2 24 2 50 14 41.0 23 2 52 10 39.7 19 1 53 7 34.8 18 2 55 5 33.6 5 2 57 1 17.6 Mean = 31.33 Standard Deviation = 8.15 Variance = 66.48 Standard score has mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10. 181 Part II, 30 Items _: i ‘——-— r“ Raw Cumulative Percentile Standard Score Frequency Frequency Rank Score 28 2 98 64.3 27 3 93 62.7 26 8 13 84 61.1 25 l 14 76 59.5 24 3 17 72 57.9 23 4 21 66 56.3 22 l 22 62 54.7 21 2 24 59 53.1 20 5 29 53 51.4 19 4 33 45 49.8 18 5 38 37 48.2 16 3 41 30 45.0 15 2 43 26 43.4 14 2 45 22 41.8 13 4 49 17 40.2 12 1 50 13 38.6 4 54 8 32.1 3 57 2 30.5 Mean = 19.07 Standard Deviation = 6.21 Variance = 38.67 Standard score has mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10. 182 m vmm . N “Gmfimhfimmwfi m0 HOHHG UHMUGMHm same. one muaaaemaamm someumsoam smear am coflumcflEHHomHU Emuw new: em suasuammae smua sums o oo cusp mmmq e ea . ee e ea I ee e on I Ha e N em . Ha m H em u Hm em a em . Hm em a es . Hm mm ea ee . Hm ea m em . He mm a on . He mm ea em I am e N em . Hm ea m ee . Hm m H on . He me e em . an e em u an e ea . Hm o em I am e oea . am e eeH . Ha mmmucmonmm MOmWMM%dz wwmucmoumm mommwmmdz mwowch coflumcwEAHomwo mo cowusnfluumao mwoeesH muasoammae smua mo soaussauumee ! I II‘ II H uumm .mumn mnmfifidm 183 momhoN “Gmemhflmmme HO HOHHO CHMUGMUW name. ems mpaaanmeamm somesmsoam smear av cowumcwafiuomflp Emuw smmz om mquUHMMHp Emufl com: o oo can» mmmq v m ca I oo o oa I oo Ha m om I Ha ma m om I HA 5 m cm I am ow ma on I am mm ma ow I am Hm ea ow I am ma m cm I He 5 m om I He mm oa om I am e m om I an o v on I am o on I am N a cm I an o cm I an o cm I am 0 cm I am o ooa I am 0 ooa I am omepcmoumm mommwmwsz mmmusmoumm momMMMWBZ meowch cowumcflaflnomwo mo cowusnwuumflo mmowpsH >UH50HMMHQ EmuH mo coausnfluumflo | [III 7|l|1ll '1 lHII' HH uumm .mumo mumEEdm 184 i no ma 0 o o o o o o o o mm o 0 mm mm ooa ma 0 o om e o m 0N om ow o o o o e o o o o b n o mm mm mm he NN n ma NH 0 m ma ow mm o o o o v o h o ma ma v o ow mo om 0N ma h om NH O m ma ow Nv o o o o o o o o n he ma ma ma HH o mm mm me n h h N NH he mm o o o o h o h o o ma o h n ma 0 oe on em mm b h N ma mm ma 0 o o o o o h v o n b o no mm ooa ON e o o o o m ma mm mm o o o o e h o v o ma v o ON 5 o hm ma 0 ov hm mm H ea mm MN o o o o o o 0 Ha o ma v o he Hm ooa ma v o bN o o m ma we mm o o 0 ma 5 o h v o h e o n ma 0 he mm mm ON NH 5 N NH ow ma c o 0 ma 0 o o o 0 ma 5 o o e o ma 0 o om mm OOH H Ha mm mm o o o o v o h o 0 ON C n ma NH O ow we no ON n o N oa mm cm 0 o o o o o h v 0 AN om n h o o n e o om mm mm a m em mN o o o b o o o v 0 ON ma 5 ma w 0 mm en mm b w h N m ov me o o o o v o n o o n o o ow ev om 5N Ha ma 0N av b m n we mm o o o n o 0 ma 0 0 ma NN 5 ON e o be mm mm o HH 0 N m ow NH O o o h o o n o 0 ma 0 o o h 0 ma 5 o om mm ooa a m ON ma o o o o o o o v 9 mm Hm mm ma 5 o n v o u w b e v mm ma 0 o o o o o o o 0 ON v o h e n om mm ma ma o o N m be mN o o o o o o h o n ma e 0 mm HH 0 ow mm mm b o n N N we HN o o o o -o o b o o i h h o be mm mm 0N o. m cm v o A m H omwo mafia Houum uflEo m e m N mom EmUH A whm Hm3oq .wmv OHGUHE .wa HmmmDIImmmmucoonm H puma .mEmuH me .mammamce smuH 185 3” ON om be NO mm no we mm mm 3. em vm Om MH ON ON ON mm om mm ow mm mm ov me om Hm mm 3 mm Hm mm ow mm mm mm mm mm mm mm OH mm mm mm mm om mm 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 ma ma MH ON ma ma I-l 50000 5555M VV'Q‘OV‘ F! 050500 OV'V‘OV' H0005 00¢05 00000 00000 00000 05000 00005 55050 M5005 00000 50000 000555 0000fi‘ 0000V fi'0‘fl'00 00000 V'Q'OOO 50000 50000 00005 00005 00000 mm mm ma mm ON be ma ON ma mm mm om m.” mm ow m._.. h .3 .3” mm 2. OH mm mm mm Vb mm. ma mm on mm. Ha O ma mm. mm OOH. mm mm om OOH ma 0 mm on ON ON ON ON MH mm m...” ma ma ON ON ma ma :4 hm ma mm .3 .3 mm ma ma Om ms. ma ma .2 ma .3” OH vb ma \0 \0 05500 05050 05000 50555 N coco 05005 cm on ma mm mm ma mm hm :4 m2... ON ma ma om ON MH cm he on ON .3” mm ma ma ON ON on ma 3‘ ON ma ma ON ON ON mm ON hm mm ma 5v ma ON NO ON ON ON ON OOH ON co...J I-IQ‘I-II—IN Q‘r-Id'mm NQ‘Nr-l'd‘ MVV‘MN r-IMNQ‘Q' mv 3V me me He ow mm mm mm mm mm on mm mm Hm om mm mm ON ON mm em mm mm Hm 186 OO Oe O O O O e O O O OH ON OH OH oe OH O OH O O OH OO OO H ON OO me O O O OH e O O HH O O e OH Oe O O O OO OO ON OH O N OH OO OH O O O O O O O O O Oe OO OOH ON O O O. e O OO O O e OH OO OO O O O O e O O O O Oe OO OO ON e O O O O ON OH OH e OH OO HN O O O O O O O e O oe OO OOH ON e O ON O O O e O e OH Oe ee O O O O O O O O O ON HH O OO NN O oe Oe OO O HH O N OH Oe ON O O O O O O O e O ON O O Oe OO OO OH O O OH e O O eH oe ON O O O O O O O e O OO OO OOH ON OH O O e O OH O O e OH OO OO O O O OH O O O O O OO OH O O e O OH O O ON OO mm H NH OO ON O O O O O O O e O O O O ON e O OO HO Om OO e O N HH OO oe O O O O O O O HH O O O O Oe ee OOH ON NN O ON OH O O OH OO OO O O O O e O O O O O e O OO OO OOH ON NN O ON O O O O eO HO O O O O e O O e O ON O O OH ee OO OO O O OO Oe OO H O oe ON O O O OH e O O e O O e O OH O O OO OO OO O HH O N O oe OO O O O O O O O e O OH OH O Oe OO OO ON OH O O O O O O OO OO O O O OH HH O O O O ON O O OH HH O O O O Oe OO OOH H O eO eO O O O O O O O O O OO He OO ON OO ON ON HH O O HH OH e e OO OO O O O O O O O HH O O e O O O O oe HH O oe eO OO H O ON me O O O O O O O O O ON OO OO ON OH OO ON HH O OO e O e N oe OH O O O O O O O e O ON e O OO Om Om ON O O O O O O H omHa MMHQ Houum UHEO O e O N H wax EwuH / OON meson .mme mHeeHS .OON umddaunmmmmucmouma HH used .mEmUH om .mHmOHmce amuH 187 OO OO Oe Oe oe OO OO OO OO OO Oe ON OO Oe OO oe OO OO OO 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 ON OH OH ON ON ON OH OH OH ¢5¢¢5 0Q‘055 00000 00000 5050") 05555 0V55V 05m00 00000 00000 ON OH ON N 50050 N 00500 00005 OH ON Oe OH ON ON ON OO HH OO HH OO OO OH OO OOH OH OH ON OH ON oe OH ON ON HH Oe NN OO OO HH OHe Oe Oe OH OO OH ON Oe ON ON HO OO OO OH OH OO HH O OOH OO OH OH OH OOH Q‘MI-II-lm MNHMN OO ON ON ON ON ON eN ON NN HN 188 Ii F3233 Item “£22.? Number I I I Number I I I 1 C C 26 A D 2 B D 27 D C 3 B A 28 A A 4 D D 29 A A 5 A A 30 B C 6 B C 31 D 7 C B 32 A 8 B A 33 D 9 A C 34 C 10 B C 35 C 11 A B 36 B 12 B A 37 D 13 C D 38 B 14 A C 39 A 15 C B 40 D 16 B D 41 C 17 B D 42 D 18 C D 43 D 19 C B 44 C 20 C A 45 B 21 A C 46 22 C B 47 23 B A 48 24 D C 49 25 D B 50 APPENDIX C FACULTY QUESTIONNAIRE 1. Marking Instructions: Please circle the number of the response most apprOpriate. Name or Number In which particular program are you participating: . 13 College Program 5 College Program 8 College Program 3 Universities Program An extended program in the 13 College group . An extended program in the 5 College group \IONU'IIwaH . Other (please indicate) If you are part of the 13 College Program, how long have you been with the program? 1. new this summer 2. 2nd year 3. 3rd year 4. 4th year 5. 5th year How long have you taught at the college in which you will be teaching this fall? 1. new to the college 5. 5th year 2. 2nd year 6. more than 5 years, but less than 10 7. more than 10 years 3. 3rd year 4. 4th year 8. graduate student How many years have you taught at the College level (except as a graduate student assistant)? 1. None 5. 6 - 10 years 2. 1 year 6. 11 - 20 years 3. 2 years 7. more than 20 years 4. 3 - 5 years 189 5. 6. What is your subject area? 1. 2. 3. 4 190 English math humanities history \lmm 8. social sciences physical science biological sciences philosophy 9. Other (please indicate) At which college will you teach this fall (or attend, if you are a graduate student)? 1. 2. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. Alabama A & M University Alcorn A & M University Atlanta University Bennett College Bethune-Cookman College Bishop College Clark College Elizabeth City College Fisk University Florida A & M University Grambling College Jackson State College Jarvis Christian College Langston UniVer- sity LeMoyne-Owen College 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Lincoln University (Penn.) Mary Holmes College Memphis State Univ. Norfolk State Univ. North Carolina A & T University St. Augustine College Southern University (Baton Rouge) Southern University (New Orleans) Southern University (Shreveport) Talladega College Tennessee A & I Univ. Texas Southern Univ. University of Maryland Eastern Shore Virginia Union Univ. Voorhees College 31. Other (pleas indicate) 191 7. How was your participation in your program deter- mined? 1. volunteered or applied 2. was assigned with prior consultation and agreement 3. was assigned without prior consultation 4. recruited from outside the college especially for the program 8. At the time you were assigned to teach in the pro— gram, were you satisfied with the assignment? 1. I looked forward to teaching in the program 2. I was reasonably satisfied with the assignment 3. I had serious reservations 4. I did not want to teach in the program 9. How do you presently feel about teaching in the program? 1. I am very pleased to teach in the program 2. I am reasonably satisfied to teach in the program 3. I still have serious reservations about teach- ing in the program 4. I would rather not teach in the program 10. What is your present rank? 1. Instructor 2. Assistant Professor 3. Associate Professor 4. Professor 5. No ranks designated 6. Graduate Student Other 11. 12. 13. 14. 192 What is the highest academic degree you now hold? 1. Bachelor's degree Master's degree Professional diploma or certificate , Doctor's degree Other Are you at present working actively toward any of the following? 1. About spend Bachelor's degree Master's degree Professional diploma or certificate Doctor's degree Other how many contact hours are you required to with students per week? 3 5. approximately 15 approximately 6 6. 18 approximately 10 7. more than 18 approximately 12 If you taught outside the program last term, how many students, on the average, were enrolled in each of your non-program courses? 1. taught only in 6. 100 - 149 the program last term 7. 150 - 250 under 25 8. more than 250 25 - 49 9. did not teach last term 50 - 74 75 - 99 193 15. Please indicate your agreement or disagreement with each of the following statements. 1. Strongly agree 2. Agree with reservations . Disagree with reservations 4. Strongly dis- 5 agree Most undergraduates are mature enough to be given more responsibility for their own education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 My department (program or department) has taken steps to increase undergraduate student participation in its decisions . . . . . . . . l 2 3 Some genuinely interested students drOp out because they do not want to "play the game" or "beat the system" . . . . . . . . . . .5. . 1 2 3 A person can be an effective teacher without personally being interested in his students . . 1 2 3 Most faculty at my institution are strongly interested in the problems of undergraduates . 1 2 3 Most colleges reward conformity and crush student creativity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 More "remedial" undergraduates should be admitted to my institution even if it means relaxing normal academic standards of ad- mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 Any institution with a substantial number of Black students should offer a program of Black Studies if they wish it . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 Any special academic program for Black students should be administered and controlled by Black people . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 Undergraduate education in America would be improved if: a) all courses were elective . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 b) grades were abolished . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 c) course work were more relevant to contemporary life and programs . . . . . 1 2 3 194 15. (continued) Strongly agree Agree with reservation Disagree with reserva- tion Strongly disagree LUMP o o o .5 o 6 d) more attention were paid to the emotional growth of students . . . . . . 1 2 3 e) students could obtain credit for a year in community service at home or abroad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 f) colleges and universities were governed completely by their students and faculty 0 O O O O I O O I O I O O O O l 2 3 9) there were less emphasis on speciali- zed training and more on broad liberal education . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 All students should be required to attend Class O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O l 2 3 There is a body of information in my disci- pline which should be systematically presented 0 O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O l 2 3 All students should choose a major early in their freshman year . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 First year courses should cover the prere- quisites for the departmental majors . . . . . 1 2 3 The majority of material in my course can most effectively be covered by lecture . . . . 1 2 3 Student discussion in class is most effective when directed toward a teacher's previous presentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 A teacher should encourage a broad range of student discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 Course materials should be tightly organized and presented according to that organization . 1 2 3 195 15. (continued) 1. Strongly agree 2. Agree with reservations 3. Disagree with reservations <{;—4. Strongly disagree Many student learning opportunities are lost by allowing too much student freedom in the course . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 Students should play a role at least equal to that of the teacher in determining the content of the course . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 The content of a course should be re- examined every year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 Every effort should be made to cover pre- determined course content . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 Greater effort should be made to provide remedial work in the context of regular classroom work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 Teachers should direct student discussion . . . l 2 3 The teacher should have a clear sense of what is important in the course . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 The teacher should grade closely according to a set of objective standards . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 Students are generally not prepared to work at the level demanded by my course (courses) . 1 2 3 Based upon your previous experience, did you find: a) students were very passive . . . . . . . 1 2 3 b) students wouldn't do the required reading I O O I O O I O I O I O O O O O O l 2 3 c) student homework assignments were rarely completed on time . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 d) students were unwilling to speak up in Class O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O l 2 3 e) increased student participation in class would result in less student learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 196 15. (continued) 1. Strongly agree 2. Agree with reservations 3. Disagree with reservations (fig-4. Strongly disagree f) students did not appear interested in my course content . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 g) classroom discussion rarely developed facts or interpretations that sur- prised me O I I I O I O O O O O I I O O O l 2 3 4 h) students rarely engaged in additional outside reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 Colleges should raise their admission Standards 0 O O O I O O O O O O O O O I O O O O l 2 3 4 Written examinations are the most effective means of assessing individual student learning 0 O O C O I O I O I O O O O O O O O O 1 2 3 4 16. Do you feel that the administration of your institu- tion is: 1. very autocratic 2. somewhat autocratic 3. somewhat democratic 4. very democratic 17. Do you feel that the administration of the program or department in which you taught last year is: 1. very autocratic 2. somewhat autocratic 3. somewhat democratic 4. very democratic 197 18. How much opportunity do you fee you have to influence the policies of: b) your department . . . . . . . . c) your institution . . . . . . . . 5 6‘ apply a) your program . . . . . . . . . . 1. A great deal . Quite a bit . Some . None . Does not 19. What do you think of the emergence of radical student activism in recent years? 1. unreservedly approve 2. approve with reservations to . disapprove with reservations 4. unreservedly disapprove 20. Has your campus experienced any student protests or demonstrations during the past academic year? 1. yes 2. no 21. What role do you believe undergraduates should 4 [5 play in decisions on Faculty appointment and promotion . . . . the following: 3 Assignment of faculty to courses . . Undergraduate admissions policy . . . . . Granting of tenure to faculty members . . Provision and content of courses . . Control Voting power on committees Formal consulta— tion Informal consul— tation Little or no role . 1 2 3 4 5 . l 2 3 4 5 . 1 2 3 4 5 . 1 2 3 4 5 198 Control Voting power on committees Formal consultation Informal consultation S5. Little or no role Student discipline . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 21. (continued) Iwal'" O I Bachelor's degree requirements . . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 Below are a number of questions about the way teachers sometimes act in their classrooms. Each question is fol- lowed by a continuum moving from "Almost Never" to "Almost Always." Please check (/) in the apprOpriate space on each continuum the degree to which the corresponding ques- tion represents how you act in your classroom. Do you organize and interpret subject matter for the students? Almost ’ Almost Never _I I I I I I Always Sometime Do you ask students to suggest additional or alternative answers? Almost Almost Never I I I I I I Always Sometime Do you have the students decide when questions have been answered satisfactorily? Almost Almost Never I I I I I I Always Sometime Do you assign different tasks for different students (or groups) at one time? Almost Almost Never I I I I I I Always Sometime Do you immediately reinforce students' answers as "right" or "wrong"? AlmOSt‘ Almost Never I I I I I I Always Sometime 199 Do you encourage self-discipline on the part of the stu- dents? Almost Almost Never I I I I I I Always Sometime Do you make yourself the center of class attention? Almost Almost Never I I I I I I Always Sometime Do You feel that you must impose your own disciplinary control over the class? Almost Almost Never I I I I I I Always Sometime Do you have all students working on the same tasks at the same time? Almost Almost Never I I I I I I Always Sometime Do you accept one answer only as being correct? Almost Almost Never I I I I I I Always Sometime Do you have the students make their own organization and interpretation of subject matter? Almost Almost Never I I I I I I Always Sometime Do you tend to ask questions which demand student inter— pretation? Almost Almost Never I I I I I I Always Sometime Do you make students the center of class attention? Almost Almost Never I I I I I I Always Sometime 200 Do you tend to ask mostly factual questions? Almost Almost Never I I I I I Always Sometime H Please circle the apprOpriate answer. l. I strongly agree 2. I agree a little 3. I neither agree nor disagree 4. I disagree a little (:{""5. I strongly disagree I feel that I should teach as I was taught . 1 2 3 4 5 I am optimistic about new methods of teaChing I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l 2 3 4 5 I feel hostile to those who suggest that I change the way I teach . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 I would feel secure in changing my methods Of teaChing I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l 2 3 4 5 I hesitate to make changes in the way I teach because I fear failure . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 I feel that my educational training is adequate for the kind of teaching I would like to do I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l 2 3 4 5 I prefer the didactic (lecturing) method of teaching as compared with an inductive methOd I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l 2 3 4 5 I am accepted professionally by other teaChers I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l 2 3 4 5 I do not have enough experiences to do the kind of teaching I would like to do . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 My personality is not suited for all the changes the administration expects of teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 I feel I should teach the ideologies and behaviors of the majority race in this country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 201 1. I strongly agree 2. I agree a little 3. I neither agree nor dis— agree 4. I disagree a little 5 <:§F—— . I strongly disagree I feel it's difficult to be at ease teaching when another teacher is in the classroom With me I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l 2 3 4 When I try something new I feel frustrated l 2 3 4 I am accepted socially by other teachers . l 2 3 4 I seem to lack the incentive I need to do a better job of teaching . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 I feel I should teach the ideologies and behaviors of the minority race in this country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 I feel that I would receive strong support from my superiors if I attempted any significant teaching changes . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 The president is concerned with the real instructional problems in the institution . l 2 3 4 Other teachers are helpful to me as I work with new ideas . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 I have no desire to improve my teaching methods because the department chairman if fault finding . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 Other teachers are critical of one's new ideas I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l 2 3 4 The teachers who plan and make the cur- riculum have a lot of reckless ideas . . . l 2 3 4 The older teachers with tenure always seem to get their ways . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 There is so much continual petty bickering among our teaching staff that one does not care to do anything . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 202 I strongly agree 1. 2. I agree a little 3. I neither agree nor disagree 4 I disagree When I try out new ideas, I never talk to the department chairman about them, because he seems to care less . . . . . . . . . . . There are too few administrators who be- lieve in the adage, "Let well enough alone" Teachers should be expected to try out new teaching methods only when the students' abilities are known . . . . . . . . . . . . Students should have some influence in the involvement of curriculum changes . . . . . I do not feel that I can try out new teach- ing methods, because of the large number classes I have to teach . . . . . . . . . . You cannot expect a teacher to try out new ideas when most of the students are behind in their SUbjeCt-matter o o o o o o o o o 0 One should not waste time trying out new ideas when most of the students are ad- verse to learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . The institution's policy toward student- teacher ratio is not realistic . . . . . . With all the time that teaching consumes, teachers should not be expected to be able to keep up with the new trends . . . . . . Teachers should not be expected to parti- cipate in making curriculum changes when they have to make too many subject matter preparations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Faculty meetings in which curriculum im- provement is discussed are of value to me . a little (f;-5. I strongly disagree 1 2 3 l 2 3 1 2 3 l 2 3 l 2 3 l 2 3 l 2 3 l 2 3 1 2 3 l 2 3 l 2 3 203 l 2 3 disagree 4. I disagree 5. Cf No one bothers to inform teachers in their department of new teaching materials and methodologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The institution's policy toward student- teacher relation is not realistic . . . . . The institution's administrators should discourage membership in groups like the MUP I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The outstanding teacher does not have much incentive when his salary is fixed to a rigid schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teachers should avoid active participation in local political affairs . . . . . . . . I cannot make any changes in my teaching until the institution provides sufficient supplies and materials . . . . . . . . . . The institution has enough money if it were spent wisely . . . . . . . . . . . . . I have all the equipment I need to teach effectively . . . . . . . . . . . . . The equipment I need never seems to be in Operational order . . . . . . . . . . . There is a lack of classroom space . . . . I would use more films if they were available when I want them . . . . . . . . My institution seems to have a warm inviting atmosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . My institution seems to be designed for the type of teaching I prefer to do . . . . . I strongly agree . I agree a little . I neither agree nor a little I strongly disagree 1 2 3 l 2 3 1 2 3 l 2 3 1 2 3 l 2 3 l 2 3 l 2 3 l 2 3 l 2 3 l 2 3 l 2 3 l 2 3 204 l. I strongly agree 2. I agree a little 3. I neither agree nor disagree 4 I disagree a little (fg—S. I strongly disagree If this is your first TCCP Summer Conference participa— tion, please omit this part of the project. My participation in the TCCP Summer con- ferenc(s) have greatly increased my know- ledge of new strategies and approaches . . l 2 3 4 The TCCP have made available persons very helpful in developing curriculum materials 1 2 3 4 The TCCP is realistic about teaching problems at my college . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 The TCCP provides an opportunity of freedom in develOping curriculum materials . . . . 1 2 3 4 The TCCP provides adequate opportunities for communication between groups within my own discipline . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 The TCCP provides adequate opportunities for communication between individuals within my own discipline . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 The TCCP provides a well balance of freedom between individual teachers and a structure for effective group work . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 The TCCP provides adequate communication between individuals across the entire conference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 The TCCP provides an adequate blanace be- tween the discussion of teaching strate- gies and content materials . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 The TCCP provides consultants who are helpful in my teaching discipline . . . . . l 2 3 4 205 Since my participation in the TCCP summer conference(s) I have been able to solve some of my instructional problems . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 My perceptions of student's learning have changed since my participation in the TCCP summer conference(s) . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 I am willing to try new teaching strate- gies and materials since my participation in TCCP summer conference(s) . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 The TCCP summer conference(s) have in- creased my desire to learn more about teaChing I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l 2 3 4 5 22. How many quarter hours of formal training have you had in science (if semester hours, multiply by 1-1/2, for example, 30 semester hours are equivalent to 45 quarter hours). Quarter hours 1. 9 or less 2. 18 - 24 3. 25 - 32 4. 33 - 45 5. 46 - 6O 6. 61 - 90 7. 91 or more 23. What is the date of your birth? 1. 1910 or before 6. 1931-1935 2. 1911-1915 7. 1936-1940 3. 1916-1920 8. 1941-1945 4. 1921-1925 9. 1946 or later 5. 1926-1930 24. 25. 26. 206 Your sex: 1. Male 2. Female Your race: 1. White/Caucasian 2. Black/Negro/Afro-American 3. Indian 4. Oriental 5. Other Your marital status: 1. Single 2. Married 3. Other APPENDIX D FACULTY QUESTIONNAIRE INDIVIDUAL PRE-SCORES 207 Ham mm mm mm voa NHH om mum ma mm mm vHH mm ma mam mm hm 5v moa mm ma mom mm mm mm mma mm ha «mm mm mm Hm «NH ow ma cam mm mm mm oHH hm ma mum mm mm mm moa an . wa mmm mm Hm mm mmH mNH ma vom mm mm mm Hma om NH mmm ha mm mm mad mm Ha mmm mm ov mm Add mm OH mmm me me me ooa mm m mmm mm mm om maa Hm m mam mm mm mm moa mm 5 5mm mm we mm HNH moa m mmm mm we mm vma moa m «cm me «V we mma woa v mmm ov me om mma aoa m mvm Hm mm mm ooa mm m mmm mm as av mma moa H muoumuu coaum>occH mmmaaou mcaaommfi mucmooum mnoom Imacaeom Esasoanuoo . Honfioz Hmuoa owmwou oumsou cumsou oum3ou onm3ou Hmcomme mwsufluum mwsueuua masseuse H I ll! Ill \I‘ I mcsufiuua mwsufluua 208 0mm mom Hmm mmm mvm mam Nam mom mmm hom Hmm Hom Ham mmm ham mom mam oom mmm mmm mmm mmm mmm mmm mbN mm mm mm mm mm NV mm om mm mm Hm om mm Hm mm Hm mm mm 3 mm mm vm NN vm mm vm Nm am pm me mm Hm mm mm mm vm Hm mm mm Hm mm mm mm .3 mm Nat Hm mm mm mm mm vm Nv he :4 av mm mm ow mm mm mv mm mm mm 3 ow ow mv ov mv hm mm mm mm moa .35.. mNH Hma Boa mad mmH mad mNH we...” moa NHH 0.: mNH maa mo.” mHH 0.: MNH «NH Hma HHH moa 0.3.. mm om hm mm HQH mad mm moa mm mm mm .3 mm Hm woa om om vm mm MHH boa n.3,. mm mm OCH «5 mv g mv Nv aw ov mm mm mm mm mm on mm mm Hm om mm mm 5.0. mm mm vm mm mm Hm 209 mmm Hv mv vv HMH HOH hm 5mm mm mm 0v 00H mm mm 5mm hm mm mv mNH MOH mm Ham NM om ow FHA mm #m mam mm mm mv mm mm mm mom mm mm ¢¢ MHH mm mm mvm mm mm vv NNH wm Hm NhN mm VN mw 60H Nb om ham mm mm 5% mOH OOH av 0mm ma mm mm ONH hm mv mmm mm bv Hv mOH mHH bv va mm mm mm moa mm mv new .. .. mum. in. film. .2... mwsufluua menueuua «bananas mwsuflup< musufluua 1' I’ \l‘ [I APPENDIX E FACULTY QUESTIONNAIRE INDIVIDUAL POST SCORES 210 mom mm mm mm omH mm om H m m m m o m w m m m H m m 3 emm mm mm om HNH Hm wH oom mm om He maa mm 5H omm mm He Hm HHH NHH ma mmm mm ow ow oma hm ma Hom em Hm mm eHH noa ea mam mm mm mm HNH moa ma mem mm ow mm mma moa NH mmm am we mm mNH mHH Ha wem mm He me baa moa ca mwm mm we me ama ooa m Hmm om we mm wma mm m chm ma mm mm mma mm b omm mm me me mwa mm m mmm mm me mm mma em m hmm mm oe mm Hea mm w mom Hm mm mm baa boa m mmm mm me mm NNH boa N Ohm Hm om mm mma mHH H muoumup coeum>occH mm... was. Enema Mme”. fin. .mwfi. n... mesufluuw mwsufluue mwsufluue mwsufluua menufluue 211 mmm eem mmm mmm eom mom mmm mmm mmm mem mmm mem omm mmm mmm mmm mem mam mmm mmm omm mmm mem emm mom Hm mm em om om mm He oe mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm Hm mm mm mm mm mm Hm me oe mm mm mm we we mm mm me hm hm em mm me mm um mm mm mm mm em ee Hm om mm oe oe mm mm Ne hm hm me ee mm oe mm me He me He oe Ne em mm mm ee mm Ne oma HeH HNH 0.: sea oma ma." hNH MNH emH mHH oea NNH mNH NNH HMH on...” NHH mma mNH mma NHH mNH HNH mo.” am am eoa NOH 5.: 9: 9: am ooa Hm moa mm HOH NHH hm em moa mm mm o2” eHH HOH mm mm 50. me ee me me He oe mm mm mm mm mm em mm mm Hm om mm mm mm mm mm em mm mm Hm 212 Hmm mm mm mm HNH mOH mm hem om me me mNH mOH em emm mm oe He mNH mm mm 0mm mm me He mNH em mm HNm mm mm ee NHH moH Hm Hem Hm mm mm eeH om om mem oe mm me mNH HOH me NHm mm mm me mHH mm me 0mm em om oe HmH mOH be mNm om mm mm OHH OHH we a... -Mmmwww “mwwmmmw .338 2...... 3...... 3...... Hmuoe cumzou pumsou ounBou Unmzou oum3ou umcomme o o a m d A m o a mpDuHuud mosuHuud o u.uu¢ o u.uu¢ o u.uu¢ ll“ i‘ APPENDIX F FACULTY ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE Marking Instructions: Please circle the number of the response most appropriate. In which particular program are you participating: 1. 13 College Program 2. 5 College Program 3. 8 College Program 4. 3 Universities Program 5. An extended program in the 13 College group 6. An extended program in the 5 College group 7. Other (Please indicate) If you are part of the 13 College Program, how long have you been with the program? 1. new this summer 4. 2. 2nd year 5. 3. 3rd year 4th year 5th year How long have you taught at the college in which you will be teaching this fall? 1. new to the college 5. 2. 2nd year 6. 3. 3rd year 7. 4. 4th year 8. 5th year more than 5 years, but less than 10 more than 10 years graduate student How many years have you taught at the College level (except as a graduate student assistant)? 1. None 5. 2. 1 year 6. 3. 2 years 7. 4. 3-5 years 213 6-10 years 11-20 years more than 20 years 214 What is your curriculum area? 1. English 6. physical science 2. math 7. biological sciences 3. humanities 8. philosophy 4. history 9. counselors 5. social sciences At which college will you teach this fall (or attend, if you are a graduate student)? 1. Alabama A&M Univ. 18. Mary Holmes College 2. Alcorn A&M Univ. 19. Memphis State Univ. 3. Atlanta University 20. Norfolk State Univ. 4. Bennett College 21. North Carolina A&T University 5. Bethune-Cookman College 22. St. Augustine College 6. Bishop College 23. Southern University (Baton Rouge) 7. Clark College 24. Southern University 8. Elizabeth City (New Orleans) College 25. Southern University 9. Fayetteville State (Shreveport) Univ. 26. Talladega College 10. Fisk University 27. Tennessee A&I Univ. 11. Florida A&M Univ. 28. Texas Southern Univ. 12. Grambling College 29. University of Maryland 13. Jackson State College 30. Eastern Shore l4. Jarvis Christian 31. Voorhees College 15. Langston Univ. 32. Other (Pleas indicate) 16. LeMoyne-Owen College 17. Lincoln Univ. (Penn.) 10. 215 How was your participation in your program determined? I. volunteered or applied 2. was assigned with prior consultation and agree- ment 3. was assigned without prior consultation 4. recruited from outside the college especially for the program At the time you were assigned to teach in the pro- gram, were you satisfied with the assignment? 1. I looked forward to teaching in the program 2. I was reasonably satisfied with the assignment 3. I had serious reservations 4. I did not want to teach in the program How do you presently feel about teaching in the pro- gram? 1. I am very pleased to teach in the program 2. I am reasonably satisfied to teach in the program 3. I still have serious reservations about teaching in the program 4. I would rather not teach in the program What is your present rank? 1. Instructor 2. Assistant Professor 3. Associate Professor 4. Professor 5. No ranks designated 6. Graduate Student 7. Other 216 Based upon your experience this summer, please indi- . Strongly agree 2. Agree with reserva- cate your agreement or tions disagreement with the 3. Disagree with re- following statements: servations (:5r——4. Strongly disagree The summer conference was effective in increasing my knowledge of new strate- gies or approaches to teaching . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 I was exposed to a usable body of curriculum materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 Conference activities realistically focused on the teaching problems at my cellege O O O O O O O O I O O O O O O I O O O O l 2 3 4 Usable classroom materials for the school year were develOped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 I had the Opportunity to enlarge on the stated objectives in my curriculum area . . . . l 2 3 4 There was an atmosphere of freedom to develop whatever materials I wanted to develop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 I had the opportunity to become personally involved in determining the goals of my curriculum area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 All of the materials or supplies I needed were readily available . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 When the materials or supplies I needed were not on hand, I was easily able to get them 0 O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O l 2 3 4 The conference effectively developed materials to fill gaps discovered in previous materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 Communication among participants in my discipline was good . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 Communication among participants across different disciplines was good . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 217 . Strongly agree . Agree with reservations . Disagree with reservations <:§-—- Strongly disagree Communication among the program staff from my college was good . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 abWNH The conference provided an effective balance between freedom for individual teachers and a structure for group work . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 The conference accommodated itself to teachers with different backgrounds . . . . . l 2 3 4 The conference accommodated itself to teachers with different numbers of years of experience in the program . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 I found the ISE probram associates responsive to my needs . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 I found the ISE secretarial services responsive to my needs . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 Teaching strategy in relation to specific content or materials was always discussed adequately in my curriculum area . . . . . . l 2 3 4 The short-term consultants (as opposed to the ISE staff) provided in my curriculum area were very helpful . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 I am looking forward to using the classroom materials developed in my area . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 In my curriculum area, in preparation for teaching this fall: a) the choice of content is good . . . . . l 2 3 4 b) the choice of content represents a break with the usual selection . . . . l 2 3 4 c) the choice of methods is good . . . . . l 2 3 4 d) the choice of methods represents a break with usual teaching practices . . l 2 3 4 218 l. Strongly agree 2. Agree with reservations 3. Disagree with reservations {(:;--4. Strongly disagree I was allowed to contribute to the selection of content and methods . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 All in all, the oals of the conference were specified Wlth sufficient clarity . . . . l 2 3 4 I was able during the summer program to help develop further the specification of goals . . l 2 3 4 All in all, the roles of conference partici- pants were defined With sufficient clarity . . l 2 3 4 I was able during the summer program to help define participant roles further . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 The conference was personally productive . . . l 2 3 4 The conference was personally enjoyable . . . . l 2 3 4 I have sufficient understanding of the materials to start teaching them with confidence this fall . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 I have sufficient understanding of the teaching strategies to start using them with confidence this fall . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 The conference was different from my previous educational experiences . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 Please indicate approximate emphasis by a check mark (/) on the continuums below. In your curriculum area, the relative emphasis was too heavily on content? on method? was just right? Content Just Right Method How much of your course this coming school year do you expect to devote to materials and ideas developed during the present and previous summer conferences? I I I I I I I I None Half All 219 On the continuums below, indicate the relative posi- tion by a check mark (/) of the ISE program staff in your curriculum area. I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I Rigid Flexible I ------- I----—--I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I Democratic Authoritarian I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I Knowledgeable Not so Knowledgeable I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I ------- I Not So Helpful Helpful Please indicate your feelings 1. Excellent about the conference facilities 2. Good and arrangements by circling 3. Adequate 4. Poor 5. Terrible the appropriate response to the areas indicated below: 56 The living accommodations were . . . . . . 1 The food was . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 The food service (including hours) was . . 1 The recreational facilities were . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 Organized recreational activities were . . l 2 3 4 5 The mail service was . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 The telephone and message service was . . . l 2 3 4 S The facilities for group meetings were . . 1 2 3 4 5 The facilities for individual study were . l 2 3 4 5 The facilities for laboratory or studio work were . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 For purposes of the conference, the college library was . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 Financial arrangements with your college concerning the conference were . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 220 1. Excellent 2. Good 3. Adequate 4. Poor (:;F——5. Terrible Check cashing arrangements were . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 Security arrangements were . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities for social interaction were 0 O O O O O O O O O O I O I O O O O l 2 3 4 5 IN THE SPACE BELOW, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ADD CLARIFICATION TO THE ABOVE RESPONSES OR TO ADD ANY OTHER COMMENTS ABOUT ARRANGEMENTS OR FACILITIES (use the back of the page if necessary). 221 What did you expect out of this conference with respect to: a) curriculum materials? b) teaching strategies? c) amount of freedom to "do your own thing"? d) other ....? To what degree were these expectations fulfilled? 222 response. Please circle the number corresponding to the appropriate] What is the data of your birth? 1. 1910 or before 6. 2. 1911 - 1920 7. 3. 1916 - 1920 8. 4. 1921 - 1925 9. 5. 1926 - 1930 Your sex: 1. Male 2. Female Your race: 1. White/Caucasian 4. 2. Black/Negro/Afro- 5. American 3. Indian Your marital status: 1. Single 2. Married 3. Other 1931 - 1935 1936 - 1940 1941 - 1945 1946 or later Oriental Other APPENDIX G FACULTY ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE INDIVIDUAL SCORES 223 Teacher SummeEICofiference Summer Conference Number Assessment Scores Assessment Scores Part I Part II 1 118 58 2 81 42 3 74 43 4 41 25 5 87 57 5 70 48 7 74 38 3 46 4o 9 81 41 1° 52 36 11 59 52 12 98 38 13 105 30 14 102 30 15 112 34 16 104 31 17 92 41 18 97 37 19 102 37 20 96 36 21 113 42 22 104 35 23 95 29 24* 71 47 25 130 52 25 102 51 27 101 49 28 37 63 29 73 42 3° 89 57 Summer Conference Summer Conference Efigggir Assessment Scores Assessment Scores Part I Part II 31 30 39 32 55 44 33 69 41 34 72 44 35 53 36 36 51 24 37 86 27 38 33 45 39 97 47 40 100 42 41 119 61 42 31 51 43 108 62 44 81 33 45 101 48 46 69 35 47 73 53 48 93 51 49 75 30 50 55 15 51 94 39 52 109 40 53 95 37 54 105 49 55 100 49 *Indicates 1 through 23 are physical science teachers and 24 through 55 are biology teachers. APPENDIX H FACULTY ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE: HOYTE RELIABILITY AND STANDARD ERRORS (Scale 1 and 2) 225 moo + onemomnmo.m mnmm Hmaoa ooo + moo + womomomHmm.H momnvmmmom.m omHm mommm Hoo + Hoo + moo + mmmmonmoH¢.m Hommmvmmhm.m mmommoomnH.m mm mzmaH ooo + ooo + moo + vonm.n nmmo.o mmmmomHmvn.m vvmwmmmm>¢.¢ Hownvmmhom.m om ozH m m H m o m moo + mwvmmommoo.m mon Hmeoa ooo + moo + mmomvonoH.H mmnmmommvm.~ mHoN mommm Hoo + Hoo + moo + mmmmowvva.H ovaomvonm.H momwommmmm.v om mzmeH ooo + ooo + moo + Hmov.o mmHh.o mmmmomnvmm.m HmmonmonH.v mmwnommmHm.m om ozH H m H m o m Hounm mumEHumm mumsvm monmsvm pumwmmum wuHHHQMHHmm m cams mo Esm ma muusom APPENDIX I RAW REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS 226 mooomH.on mmvmmm.o| vaom¢.o ~vmmov.o HvNHmm.~| mom Hmovmw.ou hmmmmm.H| nmmhmn.mu mmmnvn.ml Hhommo.o mmum nomflnsm . . . . . mostHmmxm mmommm on omommm on vhmmmo o mmommo on ommHmH on mcHnommB moohmm.o| ooohno.o mommoH.o mmvmmo.m mohmmm.ol xmm Hommmm.ol mmmmvm.HI ommoom.ol ommHm~.~| Hummmm.o osHsHmuu mocmHom nmvmmm.o mmmmn~.H monmH.o mehvo.o| Hmvmmm.~ omonmMHo ohmmmm.o| moome.ou oommmo.o movHoH.o mvmlo.oI mlummu mmsm HonomH.o oHmeH.o HHmmno.o mummHm.o hmHBNm.o Hlummu mmam mlmocm mummho.o ommmHN.o hmmmHo.o| vmmhmm.o momHmm.o lummcoo Hmafism oum3ou mGDUHuum Hnmosm mmoHoo.o mnmmmo.ol noommH.o| NvaHH.oI omohmo.o nummsoo HmEESm oumsou moduHuum Iwmmwmnw EUHDOHuuso mmmHHoo msHsommB mnemosum owmmwm oum3ou oumzou onmzou oumsou moduHuum mosUHuum moduHuum mostuum munguum “E APPENDIX J STANDARD ERRORS OF RAW REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS 227 Hmommm.o vmmth.o mmmonm.o nonnmw.H hmHmvm.H mom HoomHH.m mHHmwv.~ homomm.~ omoooH.¢ mommom.v mono nommnsm . . . . . mosmHnmmxm mvnoHH H oovmwm o mmmmvo H mooobv H momoHo H manommB momHmo.m momovH.m Hhhmmm.m vmnmvm.m mmmomm.m xmm vmovmo.o movvom.o mbhmmm.o moovmm.o Hmmon.o mchHmue mocmHom monom>.o memmm.o mHmHmo.o NHNmom.o mhmvoo.H cmonmMHU mmhmmm.o mHNom~.o Hmommm.o mHomhv.o mooomm.o «tummy mmam omonm.o mHmHmN.o omvmhm.o vonmm.o Hmoom¢.o Hnummu mmam mimosm momva.o mommNH.o mHmmVH.o nommom.o mommmm.o Inmmcoo umEEDm oum3ou wosuHuum Humocm nnmmho.o nmnnmo.o omHmmo.o ovmmmo.o HHmvoH.o Inmmcoo HmEEsm oumzou monuHuum mnoumuu Imasafiom EsHSOHuuso momHHou mcHnommB mucmosum owmwou oumsou ,oumzou oum3ou cumsou monuHuum moduHuum mosuHuum moouHuum mcsufluum APPENDIX K CORRELATION MATRIX 228 STEP 1 STEP 2 SUMATT SUMMEC STEP 1 1.000000 STEP 2 0.733651* 1.000000 SUMATT -0.175093 -0.153506 1.000000 SUMMEC -0.132418 0.003850 0.316416* 1.000000 ATTSTD 0.112001 0.000378 0.078761 0.119103 ATTTCH 0.253260 0.271140* -0.148216 0.039907 ATTCOL 0.145325 0.112700 -0.324956* -0.173815 ATTCUR 0.081456 0.071530 0.007396 0.119929 ATTADM 0.051497 -0.007l98 0.144787 0.023181 SUBJAR 0.156523 0.279747* 0.010647 0.241099 SEX -0.055083 0.159483 -0.017366 -0.045684 TCHEXP 0.113715 0.018841 0.039417 0.145587 CLLOAD -0.087199 0.009038 0.016536 -0.081312 SCITRN -0.334003 -0.343462* 0.033379 0.144889 *Correlation significant at + .05. 229 .mo. + no unmoHMHcmHm QOHuMHmHH008 mNMVHN.0I mNNomN.0I omvmmo.o: «ommmmm.ol HmOHMH.o szHUm Nmmmmo.o homomH.o oomhoo.o hmHmMH.0I «mvobmm.o DdOHHU momhho.0I mmmNHo.OI mvmmHo.0I Hmmmvo.0I momme.o mxmmua Hmwmmo.0I mmommo.ou mmmmoo.o ovHomo.o Nmmmmo.0I xmm mmmhmo.o vavmo.o mvmomH.0I mumMHo.o NmmBOH.o mflmem oooooo.H «mmmovv.o *Hmmvvv.o HmNmFH.o NOHmmH.o Eadaam oooooo.H «awesom.o *mvvmmv.o «mmHva.o MDUBB¢ oooooo.H HNHmmo.o mmommH.o HOURBfi oooooo.H ommmmo.0I 308894 oooooo.H namaad Endaam mouaem HOUBBG muaaad DBmBBfi 230 oooooo.H ommmmm.o HHoovo.o ommmho.o mmHhom.oI szHUm oooooo.H mmmHmH.0I HmHmho.o HmhomH.o QdOHHU oooooo.H mhommo.o mNommH.OI mxmmUB oooooo.H HMHNhH.o xmm oooooo.H Mdbmbm szHum DflOHHU mxmmUE xmm Mdbmbm APPENDIX L STANDARDIZED REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS 231 Nmmmmo.ol vmmmmo.OI mMHHOH.o oovmmo.o Hmmmmm.0I mam H¢9¢NO.OI thmHH.OI homNHN.0I hmbmHN.OI momeH.o mmhmsm mNmNmo.0I hmmHmo.0I 5mm0Ho.o HHomho.0I hmmomo.0I mxmmUB mmNHNo.OI mvmmvo.o wmmOHo.o mHmmNH.o mNmNHo.OI xmm mommhm.0I mammHv.0I huhhmO.OI thmm¢.OI ooommH.o szHUm mvmomH.o HMOHmm.o OHmHvo.o mmmmoo.ou mmmmwm.o QdOHHU hthmH.OI HNhHhH.OI Mmemo.o mmmmvo.o mommam.o: N mmBm thHmH.o OHMHmH.o omwmmo.o hmvaH.o omomN¢.o H mmem mmmHmo.o mvmhmm.o mmmHNo.oI vthmm.o vHHth.o omzzam NmmmNH.o Hmeho.OI mmmnmN.OI MONMNH.OI hmmmoo.o BBdSDw zamead mbuaem HOURBd moaaem QBmEB¢ APPENDIX M LETTERS OF CORRESPONDENCE INSTITUTE FOR SERVICES TO EDUCATION Incorporated 2001 S Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20009 January 27, 1972 Mr. Willie M. Clark 1308B University Village East Lansing, Michigan Dear Mr. Clark: I received your letter last week and was very glad to hear from you. Apparently you are getting along very well if you are ready to consider thesis topics. I am sure that there are a number of interesting things to investigate further in the ISE related programs. How- ever, I do not know where your research interest lie. If you could tell me in what aspects of either teaching or of educational research you are most interested, we would be better able to identify a problem which might be of interest to you. I hope that you and your family are enjoying the year at East Lansing and I will look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, Charles M. Goolsby Senior Program Associate CG/gb 232 233 1308B University Village Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan May 14, 1971 Dr. Frederick S. Humphries Director Curriculum Resources Group Institute for Service to Education Dear Dr. Humphries: I am at the stage of my doctoral program of selecting and implementing a research proposal. Since having ex- perienced some of the problems of implementing the 13- Colleges Curriculum Program as a teaching participant, I have tentatively selected a researchable problem relevant to the philosophy and practices of this innovated project. In a personal conversation some weeks ago with Dr. Parameter, while he was here at Michigan State, he im- pressed me of being very optimistic of the possibility of me securing your approval and some financial support in carrying out this task. Also it's been rumered that there will be eight addi- tional colleges to the program this summer and that this summer conference will be ehld at Bishop College, Dallas, Texas. Formally, I would like to request your approval to carry out the research study stated with the l3-Colleges Curriculum Program and also know whether the amount of financial aid stated in the cooperative research budget worksheet will be granted. In addition I would like to know the total number of colleges at present, the total number of teachers, the total number of teachers in science, the total number of new colleges to be added, total number of new teachers, and the total number of new science teachers. In addition I would like your verifica- tion as to where the summer conference is to be held and the beginning date for participants. Since the development of instruments are so compli- cated and such a long drawn out task, it is urgent that I receive your reply at your most earliest convenience in order to precede in the development of instruments and other pertinent materials. All efforts exhausted toward this matter will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Willie M. Clark Enclosed: Copy of proposal 234 August 3, 1971 Dr. Tom Parameter, Evaluator I.S.E. 13-Colleges Curriculum Program Bishop College Dallas, Texas 75241 Dear Dr. Parameter: I have enclosed the list of numbers for the physical and biological sciences that were used for the test answer sheets and also on the questionnaires. I would appreciate your passing them on to the science coordinators, Dr. Goolsby and Dr. Colquitt so each participant who responded to the STEP Test and ques- tionnaire may select and record the same number to be used on the post questionnaire. Will be looking forward to seeing you this week- end. Sincerely, W. M. Clark 235 December 8, 1971' Dr. Charles M. Goolsby Senior Program Associate for Biology Institute for Services to Education Washington, D.C. Dear Dr. Goolsby: Relative to our last telephone conversation con- cerning the biology participants' names and addresses. At the moment I am in the process of finalizing the Post-Questionnaires to be sent out the first week of December. The questionnaires will be the same format as the Pre-Questionnaires including the same items with the addition of one item, "The number of hours of science training." I have already received the names and addresses of the Physical Science participants from Dr. Colquitt. I would appreciate your forwarding the names and addresses of the Biological Science Participants and also a copy of your program schedule of past Summer Conferences at your most earliest convenience. Sincerely, Willie M. Clark 236 INSTITUTE FOR SERVICES TO EDUCATION Incorporated 2001 S Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20009 January 28, 1972 Mr. Willie M. Clark Science and Mathematics Teaching Center McDonel Hall Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan 48823 Dear Willie: I was glad to receive your letter of January 25, because I can see from it that you are still at work collecting data. However, if you mailed questionnaires on January 11 it is much too soon to expect any response. Most schools were still on vacation until January 11, then went into final exam periods. We mailed requests for reports on December 15 and as of today we have re- ceived responses from 4 out of 14. What I suggest is that you write to the non-respondents every week until they respond. Of course, a few may never respond. But, if a concerted effort is made we find that most will answer. Let me know how you are doing about February 15. Sincerely yours, Charles M. Goolsby Senior Program Associate for Biology CMG;jtf APPENDIX N A LIST OF COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES PARTICIPATING IN THE THIRTEEN- COLLEGES CURRICULUM PROGRAM 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Alabama A&M University Alcorn A&M University Atlanta University Bennett College Bethune-Cookman College Bishop College Clark College Elizabeth City College Fisk University Florida A&M University Grambling College Jackson State College Jarvis Christian College Langston University LeMoyne-Owen College 237 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Lincoln University (Penn.) Mary Holmes College Memphis State Univ. Norfolk State Univ. North Carolina A&T University St. Augustine College Southern University (Baton Rouge) Southern University (New Orleans) Southern University (Shreveport) Talladega College Tennessee A&I University Texas Southern University University of Maryland Eastern Shore Virginia Union Univ. Voorhees College APPENDIX 0 COMPARISON OF THE RETENTION STRENGTH BETWEEN PROGRAM STUDENTS AND A RANDOM SAMPLE OF REGULAR COLLEGE STUDENTS ENTERING TCCP COLLEGES IN THE FALL, 1967 238 .mmmomusm usmEmmmmmm mcHscHu Isoo How pmuomHHoo cmmu mm3 GHQEMm Eopcmu AmmmHHoo ago omHMHumnum unmonmm mm m “musmosum mmmHHoo HMHsomu ooom can» whoa co mama mcHumucm pmuomHHoo mmH«« .mHusmosmmmonH Ham» momw How maHssHusoo hogan: may coma ommmm« 3.8.3 8.3 8.8 83 2: 8823308 a 5 8.8 8.8 8.8 .3: HESEEEW D. I van N3 mmv mmH Ham mwm «.mmm umngsz mm.~m w>.mm Em.mm mooa .Amo mcflscfiucoo d I 8 8.3 8.3. .2: HEMSEEm I 2 >8 8 OS SN :3 8H 2.: nmnsszm soup msaumucm smuo madam zmuo . . ucm mcHnmucm 8335 ..EE LEE LEE 88.28 Mum» MOHsom Hmmw MOHcdb ummw muofiommom Hmmw smenmmum :H mosmscHusoo APPENDIX P COMPARISON OF GRADE-POINT-AVERAGES OF PROGRAM AND REGULAR STUDENTS ENTERING THE SENIOR YEAR 239 .Emanoum many an Hmmao HHH3 mumfluomcmuu Mo annum < .mmmucwoumm may Umumamna m>mn awe mHmEMm map oucfl mcfl3on mmm Hmaflmflno may Scum uanGMMHc manomm mEom .mmmmaaou 050m ca mcflmmmx choomu on mac mumm> “50m smzousu Havapcmwfl mcflmn mm mucmusum mmm may no cowumoaMHHm> may ca mEmHnoum wsowumm Umnm>oomfiv m>mn m3 .mumEHpmwum>o cm ma was» mummmmsm mnoumnumflcwevm mo Haom ¢*«« .Ho. can» mama Em mocmnmmmflc EamoflmflcmHmEE .mo. can» mmma Em moconmmmfln unmeamflcmHmE Aoo.vuflu m>flu Emmy . mow cmanmmum amenmmnm :mEnmmnm w>wu Imaseso Imadaso .nmom a m Imadaso . _ * mmmmum>duucwomlmGMHw mcflscaucou 8' " “Ill! 1" l" R” E" V” M"| U" l 1293 03046 5169 llHlWHINIIMIWI