A 31mm 3F THE RELATEONSHIPS ', » "BETWEEN THE CRETICAL BEHAVIOR I 0FTEACHERS;RESULTS-0Fm: ’ I NATLONAL TEACHERS-EXAMINATION f_ ‘ TAND‘SELECTEDsocmconomcmm , ’ Dissertation for the Degree of Ph D MICHEGAN STATE UNWERSITY EDWARD L FRICKEY 1 97 3 LIBRAI-i. 7 ~ Michigan State ‘ University This is to certify that the thesis entitled A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE CRITICAL BEHAVIOR OF TEACHERS, RESULTS OF THE NATIONAL TEACHERS EXAMINATION AND SELECTED SOCIO-ECONOMIC DATA presented by EDWARD L. FRICKEY has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph. D. EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION degree in u\. 1327.,“ 127’ 7? 31a, fiajor professor July 26, 1973 Date 0-7639 ABSTRACT A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE CRITICAL BEHAVIOR OF TEACHERS, RESULTS OF THE NATIONAL TEACHERS EXAMINATION AND SELECTED SOCIO-ECONOMIC DATA By Edward L Frickey Purpose of the Study: The purpose of this study was to discover the relationships that exist between success in student teaching, certain socio-economic factors and the results of the National Teachers Examination. Population and Testingglnstruments: The population involved in this study consisted of one hundred ten education majors who had completed their professional education courses and their student teaching at Kansas State Teachers College in Emporia, Kansas. The study sample in this investigation completed the Kansas State Teachers College Personal Data Sheet, the National Teachers Examination and were observed during their student teaching experience by three independent observers who completed the Ryans Classroom Observation Record for each member of the sample. Statement of Hypotheses: This study was designed to test the following hypotheses: Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis III-A III-B IV-A IV-B < 58 VIHA VITB Edward L Frickey There is a significant relationship between age and the results of the National Teacher Examination. There is a significant relationship between age and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. There is a significant relationship between the sex of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher Examination. There is a significant relationship between the sex of the student teacher and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. There is a significant relationship between the size of high school from which the student teacher gradu- ated and the results of the National Teacher Examin- ation. There is a significant relationship between the size of high school from which the student teacher gradu- ated and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. There is a significant relationship between the high school grade point average of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher Examination. There is a significant relationship between the high school grade point average of the student teacher and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. There is a significant relationship between the educational level of the father of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher Examination. There is a significant relationship between the edu- cational level of the father of the student teacher and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. There is a significant relationship between the edu- cational level of the mother of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher Examination. There is a significant relationship between the edu- cational level of the mother of the student teacher and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. Edward L Frickey Hypothesis VII-A There is a significant relationship between the college grade point average of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher Examination. Hypothesis VII-B There is a significant relationship between the college grade point average of the student teacher and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. Hypothesis VIII-A There is a significant relationship between the grade point average on professional teaching courses of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher Examination. Hypothesis VIII-B There is a significant relationship between the grade point average on professional teaching courses of the student teacher and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. Hypothesis IX-A There is a significant relationship between the family income level of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher Examination. Hypothesis IX-B There is a significant relationship between the family income level of the student teacher and degree of success or failure in student teaching. Findings: Two of the areas that this study encompassed have been identified as being statistically significant. They were as follows: 1. There is a significant relationship between the high school grade point average and the results of the National Teachers Examination. 2. There is a significant relationship between the grade point average achieved in the professional education courses by the student teacher and the results of the National Teachers Examination. All other hypotheses were rejected on the basis of the data from the study. Edward L Frickey Implications for further study included the testing of a wide range of variables including personality.and behavioral factors. Additional implications included the development and testing of instruments to accumulate and evaluate data regarding the degree of success or failure in student teaching. A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE CRITICAL BEHAVIOR OF TEACHERS, RESULTS OF THE NATIONAL TEACHERS EXAMINATION AND SELECTED SOCIO-ECONOMIC DATA By Edward L Frickey A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1973 Ac ow 0 EM TS (a, KN LEG EN To Dr. George Myers, Dr. Clyde Campbell, Dr. C. C. Collier, and Dr. John Wagner who gave me the encouragement to succeed and the guidance to pursue. To my wife, my family and my friends who never lost faith nor failed to help. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page I. THE PROBLEM. . . . . .................. l Statement of Purpose. . . ............. l Background for the Study. . ............ 2 Procedures Used in The Study. ........... 7 Statement of Hypotheses . . . . . . . ....... 8 Organization of the Study ..... . . . ..... 9 II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ll General Factors as Predictors of Success in Student Teaching . . . . . . . ...... . . . . l2 Socio-economic Factors as Predictors of Success in Student Teaching . . . . ...... 20 The National Teacher Examination as a Predictor of Success in Student Teaching. . . 23 Various Instruments for the Observation of Student Teacher Behavior . . . . ........... 27 Summary . . . . . . . ............... 29 III. PROCEDURES USED IN THE STUDY ...... . ....... 30 Identification of Population ......... . . . 3O Instrumentation ............ . ..... 3l Hypotheses ..................... 35 Analysis ............... . ...... 39 Summary ................. . . . . . 40 IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA ............ . ....... 4l Hypothesis I-A ................... 42 Hypothesis I-B ................... 43 Hypothesis II-A .......... . ....... 44 Hypothesis II-B .................. 45 Hypothesis III-A. ................. 46 Hypothesis III-B. . . . ............ , . 47 Hypothesis IV-A ..... . ............ 48 Hypothesis IV-B .................. 49 Hypothesis V-A ................... 50 Hypothesis V-B ................... 51 TABLE OF CONTENTS-~Continued CHAPTER Page Hypothesis VI-A . . ................ 52 Hypothesis VI—B . ...... . .......... 53 Hypothesis VII-A ..... . ........ . . . . 54 Hypothesis VII-B. . ................ 55 Hypothesis VIII-A ................. 56 Hypothesis VIII-B . . . . . ............ 57 Hypothesis IX-A . ................. 58 Hypothesis IX-B .................. 59 Summary . . . . . ................. 60 V. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND IMPLICATIONS .......... 61 Summary ....... . ......... . . . . . 6l Discussion. . . . ................ 64 Implications for Research .......... . 7l APPENDICES. O O 0 O O O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 72 A. KANSAS STATE TEACHERS COLLEGE PERSONAL DATA SHEET. . . . 72 B. RYANS CLASSROOM OBSERVATION RECORD TEACHERS CHARACTER- ISTIC STUDY ............. . ...... 74 C. FLANDERS INTERACTION ANALYSIS ....... . . . . . . . 83 BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . . ...................... 85 iv TABLE LIST OF TABLES The average coefficients of correlation between six ob— servers over the 22 items of the Ryans Classroom Observation Record. . . . . . . . . . . . ......... HYPOTHESES TABLES Simple Correlation Between the Age of the Student Teacher and the Results of the National Teachers Examination. . . . Simple Correlation Between the Age of the Student Teacher and the Degree of Success or Failure in Student Teaching. Simple Correlation Between the Sex of the Student Teacher and the Results of the National Teachers Examination. . . . Simple Correlation Between the Sex of the Student Teacher and the Degree of Success or Failure in Student Teaching. . Simple Correlation Between the Size of High School from Which the Student Teacher Graduated and the Results of the National Teachers Examination ............... Simple Correlation Between the Size of High School from Which the Student Teacher Graduated and the Degree of Success or Failure in Student Teaching ........... Simple Correlation Between the High School Grade Point Average of the Student Teacher and the Results of the National Teachers Examination . . . . .......... . Simple Correlation Between the High School Grade Point Average of the Student Teacher and the Degree of Success or Failure in Student Teaching ................ Simple Correlation Between the Educational Level of Attain— ment by the Father of the Student Teacher and the Results of the National Teachers Examination ............ Page 34 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 LIST OF TABLES--Continued TABLE 10. 11° 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Simple Correlation Between the Educational Level of Attain- ment by the Father of the Student Teacher and the Degree of Success or Failure in Student Teaching ......... Simple Correlation Between the Educational Level of Attain— ment by the Mother of the Student Teacher and the Results of the National Teachers Examination ............ Simple Correlation Between the Educational Level of Attain- ment by the Mother of the Student Teacher and the Degree of Success or Failure in Student Teaching . . . ...... Simple Correlation Between the College Grade Point Average of the Student Teacher and the Results of the National Teachers Examination. . .......... . ....... Simple Correlation Between the College Grade Point Average of the Student Teacher and the Degree of Success or Failure in Student Teaching ................ Simple Correlation Between the Grade Point Average Achieved in the Professional Teaching Courses and the Results of the National Teachers Examination , .......... . . . . Simple Correlation Between the Professional Teaching Grade Point Average of the Student Teacher and the Degree of Success or Failure in Student Teaching ........... Simple Correlation Between the Family Income Level and the Results of the National Teachers Examination ........ Simple Correlation Between the Family Income Level of the Student Teacher and the Degree of Success or Failure in Student Teaching ...................... Simple Correlation of Each Hypothesis Tested ........ vi Page 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 6O CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM STATEMENT OF PURPOSE This study seeks to discover the relationship, if any, between student teacher behavior and certain socio-economic factors and results of the National Teachers Examination. A study of these relationships will provide more objective data for the design of teacher preparation programs. This data will enable college and university staff to better screen, counsel, and place education majors prior to their student teach- ing experience. Faculty members, charged with the supervision of student teachers, are searching for more effective ways to identify strengths and weaknesses of the potential teacher. If the data identified in this study prove to have predictive significance, then it will be possible to counsel prospective teaching candidates so that their experiences will enhance their professional competencies. The study can also serve as a. model for future research with the clinical experience used in the training of other professionals. The current emphasis on accountability, in all fields of endeavor, requires more valid predictors of success. The need for teacher prep- aration programs to maintain a high degree of accountability has never been greater. Public education must take a more sensitive attitude toward the attitudes represented by the tax-payer. It must also communicate ’Y. this sensitivity to laymen. It is within this motivational framework that this study was developed. BACKGROUND FOR THE STUDY The student teacher experience, like most other clinical experiences, has been perceived to be a most important part of the professional se- quence. This experience differs greatly between institutions and yet the basic objectives remain much the same. The objectives of student teach- ing have been identified by Errington as: 1. Provision of an opportunity to develop and refine teaching skills. 2. Provision of an opportunity to learn the role expectations of teaching. . Provision of an experience to cushion against the "reality-shock" of teaching. Provision of an opportunity to relate theory to practice. Privision of an opportunity to eliminate the unfit. Provision of an opportunity to identify those factors that lead to the development of excellence in student teaching.1 Ohm-b (A) Each of these objectives will be considered and receive some emphasis in this study. There is an increasing emphasis in teacher education upon the laboraw tory experience as a vital, perhaps the single most important part of teacher education. Student teachers, neophyte teachers, and experienced teachers endorse this judgment. The National Council of Independent Schools in 1969 indicated that "practice teaching is the part of profes- sional training most widely and vigorously approved by the independent 1Garth Errington, "An Analysis of Certain Factors Leading To The Predictability of Success and Failure in Elementary Student Teachers," Unpublished Ed.D. Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1970, p. 7. school teachers who have experienced it, even those who reported that they received little value from the rest of their training at schools of education."2 This study will view student teaching as an opportunity for students to examine their attitudes, expectations and practices with regard to the many roles of the teacher. This functional description of student teaching has relevance to most of the clinical experiences presently available for student teachers. In summary, the student teaching experience will be defined in this study as an opportunity to develop the life skills in the teaching role. These skills as described by the American Society of Curriculum Develop- ment follow: Inquiry Relating to Others Relating to Change Using Science and Technology . Mental.and Physical Health Communications Art Making Vocational Decisions Using Time3 mem-bOON-J o 0 These life skills, practiced in the classroom by the student teacher, will lead to the teaching behavior considered to be essential for the success- ful teacher. Students need and deserve proper guidance, placement, and evaluation of their endeavors. "The right of institutions and the profession to 2National Council of Independent Schools. Teacher Education Survey (1969), pp. 31. 3Louis J. Rubin, "New Skills for a New Day," American Society of Cur- riculum Development Yearbook, Life Skills In School and Society (l969), pp. 14-16. identify, select, or retain persons for teacher preparation and for its practice is seldom questioned today."1+ In 1967 the dimensions of student teaching was used in a different way when the Joint Committee on State Responsibility for Student Teaching developed the rationale for their existence. 1. Student teaching is almost universally accepted as the most important segment of teacher preparation. 2. Student teaching is the one part of professional preparation which is shared by the public schools and institutions of higher education without clear-cut lines of responsibility. 3. The new concept of student teaching is much more dynamic and inclusive than the old one. It includes not only practice, but diagnosis, analysis, and synthesis in new, complex clinical situations.5 It is still evident that guidance, placement and evaluation in teacher preparation programs have been based largely on untested assump~ tions. The lack of quality guidance and placement of student teachers coupled with a desire for personal, individualized programs has led to an anomaly. The need for assistance in predicting potential success or failure in teacher preparation programs is very much in demand today. The "mass production“ of teachers is no longer acceptable. The trend toward zero population growth will dictate that only quality teachers will be placed in the profession. Factors such as academic ability, socio-economic status, and training need careful research if they are to “Margaret Lindsey, Editor, "Report of the Task Force on New Horizons in Teacher Education," New Horizons for the Teaching Profession, Washington, D. C. (1961), p. 162. 5Joint Committee on State Responsibility for Student Teaching, A New Order in Student Teaching, National Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards, National Education Association (1967), p. l. serve as evidence for the selection, guidance, placement, and evaluation of the student teacher. Educators, legislators and laymen are asking for and even demanding a higher degree of accountability. This involvement will invariably lead to greater need for improved practice in the guidance, placement, and evaluation of the student teacher. Many recommendations have been made that teacher education institutions accept more responsibility in all phases of their preparation programs. As early as 1946, several committees of the Council on Education considered the following: 1. Each institution engaged in teacher education has therefore the responsibility of selecting from among students who wish to prepare for the profession only those who show reasonable promise of developing into satisfactory teachers. 2. Selective judgements need to be guided by a clear and broad concept of the characteristics of good teacher with due allowance for individual differences and the advantages of variety by a careful consideration of what college is capable of contributing to the development of such characteristics, and by a wide spread of information regarding each candidate, his history, his present status and his promise. 3. In judging a candidate, various factors need to be taken into account, including physical and mental health, vitality, intel- ligence, academic accomplishments, other abilities, breadth and character of interest, human qualities.... 4. The selective process should be a continuous one, with a wide range of reliable evidence available when the candidate is first admitted to teacher education. However, cases should be reconsidered periodically in the light of accumulated facts and insights.6 These considerations have been the concerns of many groups since then. The National Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards during their national meeting at Bowling Green (1958), at Kansas (1959) and again at San Diego (1960) expressed similar concerns. 6American Council on Education, The Improvement of Teacher Education, Washington, D. C. (1946), p. 74. Dr. James B. Conant in The Education of American Teachers directs the following remarks to existing teacher training programs: There are certain basic procedures and policies in all types of institutions that could be improved and it is in this area that colleges and universities should be attempting to raise their standards.. For example, I should like to register my dissatisfac- tion with the way I have seen subjects studied in both colleges that train few teachers and those exclusively concerned with Teacher training.7 Another outspoken critic of the education of teachers is James D. Koerner. A succinct statement which typifies the Koerner point of view towards teacher education can be excerpted from his book: when Professional education suffers very greatly from a lack of con- gruence between the actual performance of its graduates and the training programs through which they are put. There is what can only be called an appalling lack of evidence-to support the wisdom of this or that kind of professional training for teachers.‘8 G. K. Holdenfield and To M. Stinnett emphasized this need in 1963 they wrote: There must be early identification of prOSpective teachers, selec~ tive recruitment and admission standards, and effective guidance policiesaathis means weeding out the incompetent as well as attracting the most able.9 We find these concerns voiced by Arthur Combs who suggests that: Some of the improvements we seek in education can be brought about by spending more money, by building better schools, by introducing new courses of study, new standards, or new equipment. But the really important changes will only come about as teachers change. Institutions are made up of people, and it is the behavior of 7James B. Conant, The Education of American Teachers (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1960), pp. 77478. °James D° Koerner, The Miseducation of American Teachers (Boston: HoughtonuMifflin Company, 1963), p. 16. 96. K. Holdenfield and T. M. Stinnett, The Education of Teachers, Conflict and Consensus (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1963), p. 43. teachers in classrooms that will finally determine whether or not our schools meet or fail to meet the challenges of our time. It is at the source of supply--in our teacher education programs-- that review and innovation are most critically called for if we are to bring about improvements we need in education.1° This brings us then to the present desire to develop more and better techniques for the guidance, placement and evaluation of student teachers. This study will be devoted to that purpose. PROCEDURES USED IN THE STUDY This study will compare some available, factual, socio-economic data about a given population with their observed behavior during the student teacher experience. One hundred ten college seniors, engaged in their student teaching experience at Kansas State Teacher College, Emporia, Kansas, will constitute the population. These students were enrolled in student teaching during 1966-67 or 1967-68. Members of the study sample in this investigation were given the National Teacher Examination,11 and the independent observers used the Ryans Classroom ObservationRecordl2 to evaluate the performance of the student teachers in the sample. The results were then compared to the following socio-economic data: 1. Age. 2. Sex. 3. Size of High School 4. Grade Point Average-~High School. 1°Arthur W. Combs, The Professional Education of Teachers (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1965). 11National Teacher Examination (Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Servite, 1964). 12David G. Ryans, Ryans Classroom Observation Record, Teachers Characteristic Study, The American Council on Education, 1955, p. 18. LomVOSU'I . Education of Father. . Education of Mother. . Grade Point Average--College. . Grade Point Average--Professional Teaching Courses. . Family Income Level. The significance of these comparisons were then analyzed and reported. The methods of analysis used in this study are described in Chapter III. Hypothesis I-A Hypothesis I-B Hypothesis II-A Hypothesis II-B Hypothesis III-A Hypothesis III-B Hypothesis IV-A Hypothesis IV-B Hypothesis V-A STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESES There is a significant relationship between age and the results of the National Teacher Examination. There is a significant relationship between age and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. There is a significant relationship between the sex of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher Examination. There is a significant relationship between the sex of the student teacher and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. There is a significant relationship between the size of high school from which the student teacher gradu- ated and the results of the National Teacher Examina- tion. There is a significant relationship between the size of high school from which the student teacher gradu- ated and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. There is a significant relationship between the high school grade point average of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher Examination. There is a significant relationship between the high school grade point average of the student teacher and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. There is a significant relationship between the educa- tional level of the father of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher EXamination. Hypothesis V=B There is a significant relationship between the educational level of the father of the student teacher and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. Hypothesis VIaA There is a significant relationship between the educational level of the mother of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher Examination. Hypothesis VI=B There is a significant relationship between the educational level of the mother of the student teacher and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. Hypothesis VIImA There is a significant relationship between the college grade point average of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher Examination. Hypothesis VII~B There is a significant relationship between the college grade point average of the student teacher and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. Hypothesis VIII=A There is a significant relationship between the grade point average on professional teaching courses of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher Examination. Hypothesis VIII=B There is a significant relationship between the grade point average on professional teaching courses of the student teacher and the degree of success or failure in student teaching. Hypothesis IX=A There is a significant relationship between the family income level of the student teacher and the results of the National Teacher Examination. Hypothesis IXuB There is a significant relationship between the family income level of the student teacher and degree of success or failure in student teaching. ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY This study will be organized and reported in five chapters. The chapter headings and a brief description are listed below. 10 Chapter one includes a description of the need for the study with a statement of the purpose, the hypotheses, and an overview of the thesis. Chapter two focuses on a review of related studies. A more general review is given to studies not directly related to this problem. A third section in this chapter discusses the implications of previous studies. Chapter three contains a detailed description of the operational phase of the research. Descriptions of the sample, the instrumentation used, the statistical hypothesis, the experimental design and analysis, are presented. Findings from the research are identified and analyzed in Chapter four. This is achieved by remstating the hypotheses and analyzing each one in the light of the data. Chapter five is devoted to a summary of the findings and a discus— sion of the conclusions growing out of these outcomes. This chapter closes with some considerations of the implications of these findings for further research and action. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE This chapter represents a recent review of the literature relating to the process of predicting the degree of success attained by the student teachers involved in the research sample. This review includes several studies using socio—economic factors as the basis for the pre~ diction. Related studies are also cited in this review in order to develop background information. The implications of these studies are varied and demand a clear analysis by the reader. Several investigators have identified the difficulty of predicting 2 and others describe the effective teacher behavior. Medley,1 Cheong, importance of searching for those desirable characteristics that seem to produce good teachingmlearning relationships. Arnold Henjum further indie cates the importance of defining, measuring, and evaluating teacher traits and teacher effectiveness; Burgeoning school enrollments and demands for an everwincreasing level of educational achievement have precipitated an unprecedented need for effective teachers in American secondary schools. However we are still uncertain how to select, educate, and assign the cone stant flow of personnel entering the teaching profession. One reason 1Donald M. Medley, “The Language of Teacher Behavior: Communicating the Results of Structured Observations to Teachers,“ Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 22 (1971), 157-165. 2George S. C. Cheong, "Can Successful Teaching Be Empirically Deter~ mined?" Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 20 (1970), 185-188. 11 12 for this uncertainty is the difficulty in defining, measuring, and evaluating teacher traits and teacher effectiveness. This difficulty has limited the establishment of objective predictive criteria in an area considered to be of paramount importance for providing quality education for the pupils of our schools.3 Student teachers, prior to their first professional course, are identified and recruited in a number of different ways. These range from an expressed desire by the individual to some very complex programs designed to eliminate the incompetent. Some schools use very formal inflexible entrance level criteria followed by individualized courses. Other schools utilize informal and flexible criteria fofllowed by inten- sive, formal experiences. Criteria for predicting student teaching success and ultimate success in the classroom, tend to complicate the process. The very nature of man tends to negate predictability. The individual, according to Combs: ". . . behaves as he thinks and feels. This can be described as meaning, and meaning affects how a person behaves."" This concept provides for predictability in the student teacher process. GENERAL FACTORS AS PREDICTORS OF SUCCESS IN STUDENT TEACHING The role of clinical experience in teacher education has changed considerably over the years. Based on European antecedents, as is much of our educational heritage, learning to teach by working with a teacher 3Arnold Henjum, "A Study of the Significance of Student Teachers' Personality Traits," Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 20 (1969), pp. 143-147. L’Arthur Combs, "Seeing Is Behaving," Educational Leadership, Vol. 16 (1958), pp. 21-26. 13 in an apprenticeship capacity was quite generally accepted in the early days of this country. This concept was known as practice teaching. Practice teaching was based on the premise that the prospective teacher was taught theory in the college classroom, then introduced to the school classroom to try the theory in practice. This philosophy persisted until the middle of the twentieth century when the practice teaching concept gave way to that of student teaching. The Joint Committee on State Responsibility for Student Teaching describes this changing concept: The new student teaching should be a creative, fulfilling experi« ence and at the same time provide for critical analysis in order to make student teacher and their supervisors scholars of teaching. It should not be confined to a block of time at the end of the senior college year. It should range from simple observation, to brief exposures with learners, to the development of skills in disu crete elements of the teaching act . . . to analysis of personal skills and insights, all the way to the teaching of regular classes under the analytical eye of a professional mentor.5 This changing concept concerning the classroom assignment of the prospective teacher implies several things. In order for the student teaching experiences to be successful, much more information and knowlw edge about the student teacher was needed. The student teaching assign- ment involved proper placement of the individual so his interests and abilities could best be served. Several studies by H. C. Hunt6 in 1935 indicated that the personal qualities of the employee led to 90 percent of the job separations. 5Joint Committee on State Responsibility for Student Teaching, A New Order in Student Teaching (Washington, D. C.: National Education Assoc1= ation, 1967), p. 2. 5H. C. Hunt, "Why People Lose Their Jobs or Aren"t Promoted,” Personnel Journal, Vol. 14 (1935m1936), p. 230. 14 George Watson,7 in summarizing some educational implications reported by Roethlisberger and Dickson in 1939, concluded that improved interw personal relations would result in marked improvement in the teachern learner relationship. A. S. Barr,8 reporting on research done in predicting teacher efficiency, found that personal characteristics affected almost all criteria for teacher efficiency. Judson Shaplin, writing in the Harvard Educational Review, alluded to the student teacher and his need for effective guidance when he reported: It is inefficient and unrealistic to expect the student teacher to achieve his own synthesis of the many disciplines contributing to teaching, and to analyze and improve his own teaching behavior.9 Shaplin further supports the need for additional information available to the college or university supervisor as he attempts to guide the stun dent teacher. The newer concepts of student teaching which stressed increased visi- bility and accountability, promoted fulletime student teacher experiences. In 1968, Johnson10 reported that 65 percent of the institutions having elementary student teaching programs offer fullmtime teaching experience, 7George Watson, ”The Surprising Discovery of Morale,“ Progressive Education, XIX (1942), p. 39. 8A. S. Barr, I"The Measurement and Prediction of Teaching Efficiency: A Summary of Investigations,“ Journal of Experimental Education, XVI (1948), pp. 203=283. 9Judson T. Shaplin, “Practice in Teaching,” Harvard Educational Review, 31 (1961), p. 46. 1°James A. Johnson, A National Survey of Student Teaching Programs. (Washington, D. C.: U. S. Office of Education, research report, 1968). 15 while 60 percent of the secondary programs were reported as having full- time assignments available. These data, based on a nationwide study, also call attention to another need for effective prediction of student teacher behavior. One can easily see the dilemma of the public schools when several colleges place students in the same district. The several patterns of student teaching vary greatly with resultant frustration and confusion in the minds of those public school personnel who try to cope with a variety of programs from the colleges. The shift toward a more analytical approach to student teaching has resulted in a corresponding change in objectives. Student teaching is no longer a ”black box" approach to teaching. The newer objectives are more sophisticated and rely on the various characteristics of the student teacher. Hilliard and Durrance listed the purposes of student teachers in this way: The student teaching experience, if it occurs in a clinical climate, does provide valuable means for guiding the student teacherfis growth through a carefully planned sequence of activities which enable him tome Clarify his understandings of the purposes, development, programs and administrative organization of the American system of public education. Broaden his understanding of curricular practices. Deepen his understandings of the principles of human growth and development and the learning process. Become sensitive to the social patterns of a school community and discover through firsthand experiences ways of improving curriculum for pupils by effective use of community resources. Develop wholesome professional attitudes toward members of the teaching profession. Identify his strengths and weaknesses in the wide spectrum of competencies associated with effective teaching. 16 Become increasingly resourceful and creative in planning, develop» ing and evaluating effective learning experiences for and with the pupils.11 Another statement of objectives that points a need toward more and better guidance, placement and evaluation is that used by Indiana University. This statement is illustrative of purposes listed by many teacher preparation institutions in their handbooks prepared for co— operating teachers. The Indiana University statement suggests that the student teaching experience should attempt: 1. 2. To provide for professional development of young teachers through integration of theory and practice. To help students achieve a realistic understanding of the individual child as a developing human being. To help the student see more clearly the relationship of the school to the community it serves. . To promote the growth of student teachers by encouraging them to read and to become familiar with professional books, magaw Zines, resource units, audio visual aids, and other materials related to their teaching experiences. To guide the beginning teacher in understanding the total organization of the modern school. To develop certain important abilities involved in planning teacher=learning activities; in organizing materials of ina struction to provide for the individual needs, interests, and capacities of youth; in handling routine elements of classroom management; and in evaluating pupil growth. To continue the development of essential personality character- istics of teaching such as breadth of interest, curiosity, dependability, and cooperation.12 11Pauline Hilliard and Charles L. Durrance, "Guiding Student Teachw ing Experiences,“ Association for Student Teaching, Bulletin No. 1 (1968), p. 2. 12A Guide for Student Teaching." (Bloomington: Indiana University School of Education, 1964). 17 One could conclude that the most important outcome for student teachers is the development of one”s self image. Self-confidence and a sense of security should be developed to the point where the student teacher can enter his first classroom with a feeling of competence. This self=confidence is the result of the many and varied activities in which the student teacher participates in the wellmplanned and well» developed program. Another significant outcome of student teaching is the development of an awareness to the concepts of good teaching. This should enhance the desire to develop good teaching habits. The attainment of this objective is further complicated by the fact that good teaching has been difficult to define and yet we can all recognize it when we are exposed by the good teacher. Current research concerning the nature of teaching and the efforts being made to analyze teaching behavior are beginning to shed much light on the teaching role. In 1954. A. B. Carlile reported the results of a study relating academic and intellectual achievements to success in student teaching. Carlile”s study led him to conclude: The frequencies of high grades in student teaching reveals a tende ency toward high intelligence scores as measured by the Detroit Intelligence Test. The comefficients of correlation are positive; statistically significant but low with its forecasting efficiency at four percent. The correlation with scores of the HinmanmNelson Test of Mental Ability is too low to be significant. Whereas, rela- tionships between grades in student teaching and the measures of scholastic achievement as represented by the college gradeepoint a fairly high positive relationship with a forecasting efficiency of twelve percent.13 13A. B. Carlile, "Predicting Performance in the Teaching Profession,” Journal of Teacher Education, XLVII (1954), pp. 642~652. 18 Brothers supported this research, A correlation of .42 exists between the gradeepoint in the major field and success in student teaching, and a correlation of .30 exists between grade-point and all university work_prior to student teaching and student teaching effectiveness. “ Several other research studies support similar theses. Perry15 found that the cumulative college grade-point average was the single most significant item out of forty-three predictor variables. Additional support comes from Lycia Martin.16 Ms. Martin studied 124 college seniors at Columbia University. She found that the single, most predictable criterion of success in student teaching was the college grade-point average. Other researchers have found dissimilar results. Darrow was very definitive when she said: Point hour ratio for all college work, up until student teaching, shows a correlation of .28 with the criterion of student teacher effectiveness as determined by the supervising teacher's rating. Thus, student teaching effectiveness cannot be predicted for single cases with any degree of accuracy when based only on college grade-point.17 11+W. L. Brothers, "The Relationship of Certain Factors of Effective- ness in Student Teaching in the Secondary Schools" (Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Indiana University, 1950), 15James 0. Perry, "A Study of a Selective Set of Criteria for Deter- mining Success in Secondary Student Teachers at Texas Southern University” (Unpublished Ed.D. Dissertation, University of Texas, 1962). 16Lycia Martin, "The Prediction of Success for Students in Teacher Education" (Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1966). 17Harriet D. Darrow, "The Relationships of Certain Factors to Perform- ance of Elementary Student Teachers with Contrasting Success Records in Student Teaching" (Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Indiana University, 1961 . ' 19 Shaw18 examined the effectiveness of certain criteria as predictors of success in student teaching. He concluded that high school percentile rank was not statistically significant as a predictor. C. L. Major19 supported this position in his research with two hundred secondary teach- ing majors in ten different fields. He also discovered that academic ratings above a certain critical point have no significance when used as criteria for predicting the success of student teachers. Several other studies are available that tend to support this point of view in the use of achievement and academic ability as predictors of success in student teaching. Magee,2° Lins,21 Bach,22 and Dove,23 all found moderate significance as they related college gradeapoint averages to success in student teaching. These researchers did not agree on the same level of significance but each conducted their research in just a little different way. In order to clarify and organize the conclusions, 18Jack Shaw, “Functions of Interview in Determining Fitness for Teacher Training" Journal of Educational Research, VL (May, 1952), pp. 667w68l. 19C. L. Major, ”The Influence of Academic Standing Upon Success in Student Teaching,“ Educational Research Bulletin, XXXII (March, 1953), p. 66. 20Robert M. Magee, "Admissioanetention in Teacher Education,“ Journal of Teacher Education, XII (March, 1961), p. 85. 21Leo J. Lins, "The Prediction of Teaching Efficiency," Journal of Experimental Education, XV (September, 1946), pp. 2-60. 22Jacob O. Bach, "Practice Teaching Success in Relation to Other Measures of Teaching Ability," Journal of Experimental Education, XXI (September, 1952), pp. 57=78. 23Pearlie C. Dove, "A Study of the Relationships of Certain Selected Criteria and Success in Student Teaching Program at Clark College, Atlanta, Georgia“ (Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Colorado, 1959 . 20 it may be said that college gradempoint averages that are not extreme can be used as predictors of success in student teaching. This general agreement does not exist for most other factors related to achievement and academic ability. SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS AS PREDICTORS OF SUCCESS IN STUDENT TEACHING Little attention has been given by researchers to the relationship of socioueconomic factors to success in student teaching. This has occurred for a number of reasons. The most prominent seems to be the inability of the investigator to acquire the information. The few studies that have been conducted in this area seem to indicate some relevance between these factors and the success of the student teacher. Some of the earliest work in this area was done by Florence “ She used a national sample of nine thousand public school Greenhoe.2 teachers. Among other things, her sample showed that 38 percent of the public school teachers” fathers were farmers, 26 percent were engaged in small business, 18 percent were daymlaborers and only 4 percent were professional men. She found no significant relationship between occu- pation of the father and success of the student teacher. Two other studies, prior to Greenhoe, attempted to correlate first year teacher's success as determined by their supervisors rating and several other variables. Ullman25 presented these data: . .ZiFlorence Greenhoe, Community Contacts and Participation of Teachers (Hashington, D.C.: American Council on delic Affairs, 1941), pp. 1954. 25R. R. Ulman, "The Prediction of Teaching Success," Educational Administration and Supervision, XVI (November, 1930), pp. 608~612. 21 FACTORS CORRELATED CORRELATION Intelligence and Supervisors rating .15 Socio-economic status and supervisors rating .19 Academic scholastic average and supervisors rat- ing .30 Professional education scholastic average and supervisors rating .3026 Earlier, Madsen,27 in trying to develop a set of criteria for the prediction of successful teaching behavior, found that out of 223, thirty-one teachers were observed as failures. Thirty of these thirty— one were among the lowest 10 percent in intelligence and achievement as measured by tests given on their entrance to teacher education institu- tions. 8 working Then, ten years after the research by Greenhoe, Sims,2 with 726 public school teachers who were attending summer school at the University of Alabama, asked these teachers to classify themselves into “various social classes and socio-economic strata that they best repre- sent." It is interesting to note that none of the individuals in the study classified themselves in the “uppermupper class" nor in the "lower— class". Two percent indicated “upper class," thirteen percent affiliated themselves in the ”uppermlower” (working class) and eightymfive percent divided themselves between the middle and upper-middle classes in a ratio of two to one. The classification was not significant when related to success in teaching. 26Ibid., p. 609. 271. N. Madsen, "The Predicting of Teacher Success," Educational Administration and Sppervision, XIII (January, 1928), pp. 39-47. 28Verner M. Sims, "The Social Class Affiliations of a Group of Public SCINJOl Teachers," School Review, CIX (September, 1951), pp. 331-338. 22 John Best, in a study conducted in 1948, questioned 261 college seniors who were planning to teach. He found that: 1. Both men and women who had chosen teaching as a career tend 'U) come ‘from the cities rather than the farm. 2. Both men and women came from homes that are above average in economic status, as judged by the occupations of their fathers. 3. A large percentage of the group has had a rather close associ~ ation with teaching and the life of a teacher. Seventy-eight percent state that close friends or relatives have been or are teachers.29 Only item 3 was significant when related to success in student teaching. Warner, Havighurst and Loeb30 found that in some parts of the country, teachers are from upper-middle social origins. In other parts of the country teachers from the lower-middle class predominated the sample. The class origin of the teacher was not significant when related to suc- cess. In a later study, Havighurst and Neugarten31 indicated that it is important to know something of the social origin of any teacher in being able to understand, guide and evaluate his performance in the classroom. This however does not seem to affect success as a teacher. They added that educators must look at the socio-economic origin in relationship to the personality of the teacher. The authors further state that 29John Wesley Best, “A Study of Certain Selected Factors Underlying the Choice of Teaching," Journal of Experimental Education, XVII (March, 1948), pp. 201-259. 3°Lloyd W. Warner, Robert J. Havighurst, and Martin B. Loeb, WD9_ iflill Be Educated (New York: Harper Bros., 1944), pp. 1-232. . 31Robert J. Havighurst and Bernice L. Neugarten, Society and Educa- lfl£ul (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1957), pp. 355~375. 23 "although a given teacher's social origin may have an important influence upon his or her personality, it is virtually impossible to cite general- ized effects that would be true for all teachers of any single origin."32 THE NATIONAL TEACHER EXAMINATION AS A PREDICTOR OF SUCCESS IN STUDENT TEACHING A great number of research studies have been conducted using the National Teacher examination. These studies have ranged from simple reports like l'The 1948 National Teacher Examination" done by David G. Ryans33 to very complex research studies done by the Education Testing Service.3“ Few studies have been generated to study the relationships of proficiency tests in predicting success of student teachers. One such study led to a conference on proficiency testing for teachers. This conference was sponsored by the American Council on Educa- tion in 1959. The conference report indicates that: Proficiency examinations are least useful in the most important part of teacher training: the skills and insights that a future teacher needs as a teacher. They come only from a combination of theory and practice and cannot be tested by paper and pencil. . . . Many educators favoring proficiency examinations may wish to use them only for certification or for improvement of college programs. But there are other forces in society that will use them to support pet schemes of their own. . . . It would not be the first time in the history of American education that the road to bad policy was paved with good intention.35 32Ibid., p. 364. 33David G. Ryans, "The 1948 National Teachers Examination," Journal Of Experimental Education, XVII (March, 1948), pp. 169~178. 3"Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey, 1964. 35Newsletter of the Council on Cooperation in Teacher Education. American Council on Education (July, 1959). 24 In favor of such examinations were certain other arguments: Present arrangements make it hard for able college graduates to enter teaching in the public schools without going through programs ill-adapted to their age or ability. The use of examinations in lieu of courses would go a long way toward opening a new source of supply of teachers. Furthermore, the existence of this route to teaching would meet the wide-spread criticism of "certification requirements that keep Einsteins out of teaching." It might even show that such a group of frustrated teachers is more imaginary than real. . . . The use of proficiency examinations by colleges and universities will lead to more flexible programs and to the encourage- ment of student initiative and self-directed work. Program for teachers especially need this development.36 John S. Diekhoff, in the Saturday Review, described the situation in the following manner. While there are valid arguments against external examinations as predictors of competence, they are not so persuasive as are those in favor of the intelligent use of such examinations. Educational decisions rely on a body of evidence that is the sum of many inde- pendent parts. External teacher examinations, intelligently interpreted, provide a perspective otherwise unavailable.37 More specific research has been conducted relating the results of the National Teacher Examination with success of the student teacher. Lewis38 found that there was a positive correlation of .40 between success- ful teaching, as rated by the supervising teacher, and knowledge related 9 to teaching (National Teacher Examination). Spalding3 and Booze‘+0 36Ibid. 37John S. Diekhoff, "The Last Encyclopedists," Saturday Review (September, 1962), pp. 62-63. 38d. N. Lewis, "Test for Teachers,“ Journal of Teacher Education, XX (March, 1970), pp. 103-107. 39H. G. Spalding, "National Teachers Examination: Why You Should Take The Test," Scholastic Magazine, Vol. 67 (January, 1956), pp. 16-23° l*°H. R. Booze, “External Examinations as Predictors of Competence," Mm of Teacher Education, XVI (June, 1965), pp. 210-214. 25 tended to support these conclusions, but with a much lower correlation of significance. Shea,"1 on the other hand, found that scores on the National Teacher Examinations were not related to the success of student teachers as determined by their grade in student teaching. Morsh and Wilder42 found that correlations between intelligence test scores and teacher effectiveness measures were both positive, negative and nonsig- nificant without any apparent pattern. From these studies it seems un- likely that there is a strong, consistent association between general measures of cognitive ability and achievement on one hand and ratings of teacher success by the supervising teacher. The literature on the predictability of National Teacher Examination scores, on the basis of scholastic aptitude and grades in high school and college, is limited. Pitcher“3 found a mean correlation of .57 between the National Teacher Examination scores and cumulative, four year grade— point averages in eleven teacher training institutions. The correlations had a range across institutions from .38 to .74. Another study by Walberg““ l+1Joan A. Shea, "The Predictive Value of Various Combinations of Standardized Tests and Subtests for Prognosis of Teaching Efficiency," Educational Research Monograph, Washington, D.C., Catholic University of America, Vol. 6 (1955), pp. 19-21. “2John E. Morsh and Eleanor W. Wilder, "Identifying the Effective Instructor: A Review of the Quantitative Studies, 1900-1952," Research Bulletin (1954), No AFPTRC-TR-54-44, USAT Personal Training and Research Center. “3Barbara Pitcher, "The Relationship of Academic Success in Teacher Preparatory Curricula to Scores on the National Teachers Examinations," Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey (1962). “”Herbert J. Walberg, "Scholastic Aptitude, the National Teacher Examinations, and Teaching Success," The Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 61 (November, 1967), pp._129e131. ' 26 indicated that grades in high school and college as well as scores on nationally standardized tests of scholastic aptitude and professional knowledge (National Teacher Examination) do not predict rated success in teaching, but that scholastic aptitude and achievement do predict scores on the National Teacher Examination. Many of these researchers are quite pessimistic regarding the possibility of establishing reliable criteria by which to judge teaching effectiveness. Don Hamachek,“5 reporting on “Characteristics of Good Teachers and Implications for Teacher Education" is much more optimistic. In his review of the recent literature regarding the effectiveness of teachers he found that the good teacher tended to reflect some of the following behaviors: 1. Willingness to be flexible, to be direct or indirect as the situ- ation demands. 2. Ability to perceive the world from the students point of view. 3. Ability to "personalize" their teaching. 4. Willingness to experiment, to try out new things. 5. Skill in asking questions (as opposed to seeing self as a kind of answering service). 6. Knowledge of subject matter and related areas. 7. Provision of well-established examination procedures. 8. Provision of definite study helps. 9. Reflection of an appreciative attitude (evidenced by nods, comments, smiles, etc.). 10. Use of conversational manner in teachingmuinformal, easy style. “sDon Hamachek, "Characteristics of Good Teacher and Implications for Teacher Education," Phi Delta Keppan, 50 (February, 1969), pp. 341-345. 27 In conclusion, Dr. Hamachek cites four implications for teacher education: 1. If it is true that good teachers are good because they view their teaching as primarily a human process involving human relationships and human meanings, then this may imply that we should spend at least as much time exposing and sensitizing teacher candidates to the subtle complexities of personality structure as we do to introducing them to the structure of knowledge itself. . . . If it is true that good teachers have a positive view of them— selves and others, then this may suggest that we provide more opportunities for teacher candidates to acquire more positive self-other perceptions. . . . If it is true that good teachers are well informed, then it is clear that we must neither negate nor relax our efforts to provide them with as rich an intellectual background as is possible. . . . If it is true that good teachers are able to communicate what they know in a manner that makes sense to their students, then we must assist our teacher candidates both through example and appropriateuexperiences to the most effective ways of doing this. . . . One can conclude from these studies that no conclusive evidence is available to clearly predict student teacher success. It seems clear that more research is needed. VARIOUS INSTRUMENTS FOR THE OBSERVATION OF STUDENT TEACHER BEHAVIOR Several research studies have been conducted where the observation of student teachers was required to complete the study. Most of these studies utilized observation records unique to that particular study. Two observation records were used more extensively than the others, they 1+6Ibid., p. 344. 28 were the Ryans Classroom Observation Record"7 and the Flanders Inter- action Analysis.“3 The Ryans Classroom Observation Record was developed by Dr. David G. Ryans from the Teacher Characteristics Study sponsored by the American Council on Education.“9 The Classroom Observation Record was designed to assess four dimensions of pupil behavior and eighteen dimensions of teacher behavior. The assessment ranged over a seven dimension scale. Specific behaviors can be described on each of the twentywtwo behavior measurements (See Appendix B). The Flanders Interaction Analysis Formso has been utilized in many studies to discover the relationship of verbal interaction between teacher and pupil. All teacher-pupil interaction is divided into ten categories; seven of teacher talk, two of student talk, and one of silence or confusion. Amidon and Hough describes the analysis as follows: Teacher talk is recorded under one of two major headings: (a) in- direct influence, and (b) direct influence. Indirect influence contains four, and direct influence three categories. Included under the classification of indirect teacher influence are those types of teacher statements which increase student freedom to respond. Direct teacher influence refers to statements which reStrict response by students. 1”David G. Ryans, Characteristics of Teachers: Their Description, Cpmparison, and Appraisal (Washington, D.C.: American Council on Educa- tion, 1960), p. 4. 1”Ned A. Flanders, Interaction Analysis in the Classroom: A Manual fer Observers (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1960), pp. 16~34. ”9Ryans, op. cit., p. 36. soFlanders, op. cit., p. 78. 29 Student talk is divided into only two categories. The first is student talk in response to the teacher and the second is student talk initiated by the student.51 (See Appendix C.) SUMMARY This chapter has dealt with a presentation and review of studies that relate various factors to the degree of success and failure in student teaching. The initial group of studies dealt with such general factors as predictors of success in teacher education. The next group of studies focused on socio-economic factors as predictors of success in teacher education. The third section dealt with the National Teachers Examination as a predictor of success in teacher education. The fourth group of studies reviewed the development of classroom observation records for identifying student teaching behavior. One can conclude from this survey of the related literature that con- siderable research has taken place concerning nearly all factors of the hypotheses of this study. Little has been done in utilizing the specific data available from such studies. ’2 51Edmond J. Amidon, John B. Hough, Interaction Analysis: Theory, —_Si§flégrch and Application (Palo Alto, Calif.: Addison=Wesley, Company (1 967), pp. 291-.294. ¥ CHAPTER III PROCEDURES USED IN THE STUDY The need for concrete evidence as a basis for planning teacher preparation programs has motivated this analysis of factors affecting the degree of success and failure in student teaching. Presently there are few commonly accepted techniques to identify, recruit, and place teacher education candidates prior to their assignment as a student teacher. The college grade-point average has had the widest usage. There seems to be little general acceptance of other objective or subjective data. Aptitude tests such as the National Teachers Examination have received limited acceptance in connection with the placement of the student in his student teaching experience. The lack of general accept- ance of predictive criteria points up the need for additional research. IDENTIFICATION OF POPULATION The students constituting the population of this study were selected during the second semester of their sophomore year. The initial list was (Xaniled from those students whose college record indicated: (1) that theey would enter the teacher education curriculum the following September, d'1ci (2) that they had taken no professional education courses previous to their entry into the research program. 30 ¥ 31 Approximately two hundred students met the criteria and letters were sent asking them to schedule an interview with the investigator. In the interview, the student was briefed on the nature of the research project and asked to indicate his willingness to serve in the program. One hundred and seventy-eight students agreed to participate in the pro- gram. The names of these students were written on slips of paper and drawn at random from a basket. The first one-hundred and twenty names were assigned to the project. During the twelve months of the project, 6 students either withdrew from college or asked to be withdrawn from the project. Four additional students were withdrawn from the project by the investigator because of their failure to take the National Teacher Examination. This was neces- sary because the test was administered on a National Testing date and no other opportunity was available for testing. One hundred and ten students with complete sets of data remained in the project until its completion. INSTRUMENTATION The design of the investigation was to collect factual data from the described population and compare these data with the individual results of the National Teacher Examination and success in student teach- irng as measured by the Ryans Classroom Observation Record. The data were deerjved from: (1) The Personal Data Sheet, (2) The National Teachers Examination - Report of Scores, and (3) The Ryans Classroom Observation ReCord. Both the instruments and the procedures used to collect the data are described in the following sections. ¥ 32 The Personal Data Sheet.1 Each student entering Kansas State Teachers College is required to complete a Personal Data Sheet. The information becomes a part of the record of the student while enrolled in the College. The data is organized into three general classifica- tions: 1. Specific data regarding residence, place and date of birth, and educational choices. 2. General data on individual interests and experience. 3. Specific data on family and educational attainment. Data from the Personal Data Sheet is on file in the Professional Education Research Office and receives confidential status. The Ryans Classroom Observation Record. The Ryans Classroom Observa- tion Record was developed by Dr. David G. Ryans during the Teacher Charac- teristics Study sponsored by the American Council on Education.2 The Classroom Observation Record attempted to assess four dimensions of pupil behavior and eighteen dimensions of teacher behavior. This assessment employs a seven point scale. Specific behavior is identified and described in the glossary of the Record. Three Classroom Observation Records were completed for each member of the sample during his student teaching experience. The Records were completed for each student at approximately three week intervals. The independent observers were instructed to enter the classroom when the student was instructing, to observe the entire class period, to hold minimum conversation with either the student teacher or the supervising 1Kansas State Teachers College, Personal Data Sheet. Professional Education Research Office, 1968. (Mimeographed.) ‘— fins- ZIbid., p. 48. 33 teacher. They were further instructed to complete the Observation Record immediately upon leaving the classroom. The observers were selected on the basis of the following criteria: No association with the project. No association with the college or cooperating public school. 1. 2. 3. Holders of advanced degrees. 4. Demonstrated competence in instruction. The independent observers were selected and brought to the campus of Kansas State Teacher College for three training sessions. The initial training session was of two days duration. The observers were acquainted with the Record and the Glossary. They were instructed in the proper usage of the Record and they were given several opportunities to practice on video tapes of teaching situations after which they compared their observations. The observers were instructed never to use the record with- out having the Glossary before them and to limit their observations to those descriptions contained in the Glossary. At the conclusion of the three training sessions, the observers were shown four video tapes which they had not seen before. They were asked to complete an Observation Record for each teaching situation. Each video tape had a duration of twenty to fifty minutes. Correlations were computed between the observers on the four observations-~the results are reported in Table I. A high degree of correlation was found between the observers on the four video tapes. The high correlation between observers 1 and 5 (.94) and the lower correlation between observers 3 and 6 (.79) were considered irl—l HZMUC—‘IM [7102111er STUDENT TALK-RESPONSE: talk by students in response to requests or narrow teacher questions. The teacher initiates the contact or solicits student's statement. STUDENT TALK-EMITTED: talk by students in response to broad teacher questions which require judgment or opinion. Student declarative statements emitted bUt not called for by teacher questions. ‘ STUDgNT QUESTIONS: questions concerning content or pro- NON- FUNC- TIONAL cedure that are directed to the teacher. DIRECTED PRACTICE OR ACTIVITY: non-verbal.behavior requested or suggested by the teacher. This category is also used to separate student to student response. SILENCE AND CONTEMPLATION: silence following questions, periods of silence interspersed with teacher talk or student talk and periods of silence intended for the purpose of thinking. DEMONSTRATION: silence during periods when visual materials are being shown or when non-verbal demonstra- tion is being conducted by the teacher. CONFUSION AND IRRELEVANT BEHAVIOR: periods when the noise level is such that the person speaking cannot be understood or periods of silence that haVe no relation to the purposes of the classroom. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY £92.19 Amidon, Edmond J. and Hough, John B. Interaction Analysis: Theory, Research and Application. Palo Alto: Addison-Wesley, Company L967). Combs, Arthur W. The Professional Education of Teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1965. Conant, James B. iThe Education of American Teachers. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1960. Flanders, Ned A. Interaction Analysis in the Classroom: A Manual for Observers. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan (1960). Getzels, J. W. and Jackson, Philip W. "The Teacher Personality and Characteristics," Handbook of Research on Teaching. American Educa- tional Research Association, 1959. Havighurst, Robert J. and Neugarten, Bernice L. Society_and Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1957. Holdenfield, G. K. and Stinnett, T. M. The Education of Teachers, Conflict and Consensus. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice- Hall, Inc., 1963. Joint Committee on State Responsibility for Student Teaching. A New Order in Student Teaching. Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards. National Education Association, 1967. Koerner, James D. The Miseducation of American Teachers. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Company, 1963. Warner, Lloyd N., Havighurst, Robert J., and Loeb, Martin B. Who Shall Be Educated. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944. Wattenberg, William, et al. The Teachers Role in Americsn Society. John Dewey Society, Fourteenth Yearbook, 1957. 85 86 Periodicals Barr, A. S. "The Measurement and Prediction of Teaching.Efficiency. A Summary of Investigations," Journal Of Experimental Education, XVI, 1948. Bach, Jacob 0. "Practice Teaching Success in Relation to Other Measures of Teaching Ability,‘l Journal of Experimental'Education, XXI (September, 1952). Best, John Wesley. "A Study of Certain Selected Factors Underlying the Choice of Teaching," Journal of Experimental Education, XVII (March, 1948). Booze, H. R. "External Examinations as Predictor's of Competence," Journal of Teacher Education, XVI (June, 1965). Carlile, A. B. "Predicting Performance in the Teaching Profession," Journal of Educational Research, XLVII (May, 1954). Cheong, George S. C. "Can Successful Teaching”be Empirically Determined?" Journal of Teacher Education, XXI (Summer, 1970). Diehhoff, John S. "The Last Encyclopedists," Saturdgy Review (September, 1962). Garrison, Karl C. and Scott, Mary H. "The Relationships of Selected Personal Characteristics to the Needs of College Students Preparing to Tgach,“ Educational and Psychological Measurement, XXII (Winter, 1962 . Hamachek, Don. "Characteristics of Good Teaching and Implications for Teacher Education," Phi Delta Kappan, L (February, 1969). Harrison, Gough and Pemberton, William. "Personality Characteristics Related to Success in Student Teaching," Journal of Applied Psy- chology, XXVI (October, 1952). Henjum, Arnold. "A Study of the Significance of Student Teachers' Personality Traits," Journal of Teacher Education, XX (Summer, 1969). Hilliard, Pauline and Durrance, Charles L. "Guiding Student Teaching Experiences," Association for Student Teaching, Bulletin No. l 1968 . Hunt, N. C. "Why People Lose Their Job or Aren't Promoted," Personnel Journal, XIV (1935-1936). Lewis, J. M. "Test for Teachers,” Journal of Teacher Education, XX (March, 1970). 87 Lins, Leo J. "The Prediction Teaching Efficiency," Journal of Experi- mental Education, XV (September, 1949). Madsen, I. N. "The Predicting of Teacher Success," Educational Adminis- tration and Supervision, XIII (January, 1928). Magee, Robert M. "Admission-Retention in Teacher Education," Journal of Teacher Education, XII (March, 1961). Magee, Robert M. "Selection of Candidates for Teacher Education," Journal of Teacher Education, III (September, 1953). Major, C. L. "The Influence of Academic Standing Upon Success in Student Teaching," Educational Research Bulletin, XXXII. Medley, Donald M. "The Language of Teacher Behavior: Communicating the Results of Structured Observations to Teachers," Journal of Teacher Education, XXII (November, 1971). Rubin, Jouis J. "New Skills for a New Day," American Society_of Curricu- lum Development Yearbook, Life Skills in School and'Soéiety (1969), pp. 14-16. Ryans, David G. "The 1948 National Teachers Examination," Journal of Educational Research, XVII (March, 1948). Shaplin, Judson T. "Practice in Teaching,” Harvard Educational Review, XXXI (1961). Shaw, Jack. "Functions of Interview in Determining Fitness for Teachers Training," Journal of Educational Research, VI (May, 1952). Sims, Werner M. "The Social Class Affiliations of a Group of Public School Teachers," School Review, CIX (September, 1951). Spalding, H. G. "National Teachers Examination: Why You Should Take the Test," Scholastic Magazine, VXVII (January, 1967). Stinnett, T. M. "Selection in Teacher Education," Journal of Teacher Education, V (December, 1954). Ullman, R. R. :The Prediction of Teaching Success," Educational Adminis- tration and Sgpervision, XVI (November, 1930). Walberg, Herbert J. "Scholastic Aptitude, The National Teachers Exami- nations and Teaching Success," The Journal of Educational Research, LXI (November, 1967). Watson, G. "The Surprising Discovery of Morale,” Progressive Education, XIX (1942). 88 Unpublished Material Brothers, W. L. "The Relationship of Certain Factors of Effectiveness in Student Teaching in the Secondary Schools," Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Indiana (1950). Darrow, Harriet D. ”The Relationship of Certain Factors to Performance of Elementary Student Teachers with Contrasting Success Records in Student Teaching," Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Indiana Univer- sity (1961). Dove, Pearlie C. "A Study of the Relationships of Certain Selected Criteria and Success in the Student Teaching Program at Clark College, Atlanta, Georgia," Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Univer- sity of Colorado (1959). Johnson, James A. "A National Survey of Student Teaching Programs," U. S. Office of Education: Research Report (1968). Errington, Garth., "An Analysis of Certain chtors Leading to the Predict- ability of Success and Failure in Elementary Student Teachers," Unpublished Ed.D. Dissertation, Michigan State University (1970). Lindsey, Margaret, Editor. "Report of the Task Force on New Horizons in Teacher Education,” New Horizons in the Teacher Profession, Washington, D. C. (1961), p. 162. Martin, Lycia. ”The Prediction of Success for Students in Teacher Education,” Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University (1944). Morsh, John E. and Wilder, Eleanor W. ”Identifying the Effective Instructor: A Review of the Quantitative Studies, l900-l952,‘I United States Air Force Research Bulletin. AFPTRC-TR—54—44 (1954). Perry, James O. "A Study of a Selective Set of Criteria for Determining Success in Secondary Student Teachers at Texas Southern University," Unpublished Ed.D. Dissertation, University of Texas (1962). Shea, Joan A. "The Predictive Value of Various Combinations of Standard- ized Tests and Subtests for Prognosis of Teaching Efficiency,” Education Research Monograph, VI (1955). Other Sources "A Guide for Student Teaching," Indiana School of Education (1964). American Council on Educations, The Improvement of Teacher Education, Washington, D. C. (1964). ~ 89 "Educational Testing*Service,Bulletin," Educational Testing Service (1948, 1951, 1954, 1960). Greenhoe, Florence. Community_Contacts and Participation of Teachers, American Council on Public Affairs, Washington, D. C. (1941). National Council of Independent Schools. Teacher Education Survey. (1969), p. 31. National TeaChers Examination, New Jersey Educational Testing Service, 1964. "Newsletter," Council on Cooperation in Teacher Education. American Council on Education (July, 1959)- Pitcher, Barbara. "The Relationship of Academic Success in Teacher Preparatory Curricula to Scores on the National Teachers Examina- tions," Educational Testing Service Bulletin, LXI (November, 1967). Ryans, David G. "Characteristics of Teachers"--Their Description, Comparison and Appraisal," American Council on Education (1960). Ryans, David G. Ryans Classroom Observation Record, The American Council on Education, 1955. Mlll'llllllllllflilljlljlljlllllll“