A STUDY CONFREBUTJNG TO THE PROFESSIONALIZAHON
OF THE ROLE OF INTERN CONSULTANT

Thesés for the Degzee of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
JOHN THEODGRE GOELD!
1967

THESIS

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

A STUDY CONTRIBUTING TO THE
PROFESSIONALIZATION OF THE ROLE OF
INTERN CONSULTANT

presented by

JOHN T. GOELDI

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph.D. degree in Elementary Education

Maze 5 ,MM/

Major professor

Date JUIY 11. 1967

0-169

 

 

@si-‘moa?

 

 

 

ABSTRACT

A STUDY CONTRIBUTING TO THE PROFESSIONALIZATION
OF THE ROLE OF INTERN CONSULTANT

by John T. Goeldi

Purpose of the study

The role of support and guidance in the preparation of
pre-service teacher education candidates is a constant con-
cern to those charged with this responsibility. This study
sought to examine the multi-role performance of the intern
consultant who, within the Elementary Intern Program at
Michigan State University, is mainly responsible for this
task of support and guidance. Role evaluations of intern
consultants (as derived from the Reel, the Role evaluation
check list, an instrument designed for use in this study) as
perceived by both interns and intern consultants were re-
lated to the choice of superior perceived most ”reSponsible
to“ as selected by the respondents. Similarly, investiga-
tions were directed toward the examination of the male and
female composition of each respective group together with an
examination of possible differences which might exist among
the participating teacher education centers.

Finally, some additional questions, for which no formal
hypotheses had been posited, were considered. These included
an examination of the major strengths and weaknesses of the

Elementary Intern Program (EIP) as perceived by both interns

John Theodore Goeldi

and consultants together with an examination of intern and
consultant differences, if any, according to their respective
selections of a person or persons perceived ”responsible
for." Also, several selected socio-economic and educational
variables were considered in their relation to the self-
perceived role evaluations of intern consultants.
Methodology

Within six teacher education centers fully operational
in the framework of the internship concept at Michigan State
University, (2#) intern consultants and (8h) interns volun-
tarily participated. Intern consultants were instructed to
evaluate their own individual performance according to the
fifty behavioral descriptions of the check list (Reel),
while interns were instructed to consider their respective
consultant, not consultants in general, in reference to the
same statements. Total check list scores were reported in
terms of both total instrument and five additional sub-factor
scores derived from within the instrument. By means of the
instrumentation further data was sought regarding several
selected socio-economic and educational variables as well as
respondent perceptions, through an open-ended question
technique, regarding the Elementary Intern Program and the
function of personnel within it.
gpnclusions

The self-perceived role evaluations of intern consult-
ants were not significantly related to their choice of

superior perceived most "responsible to." However,

John Theodore Goeldi

consultants generally selected university coordinator as per-
ceived superior suggesting, that for these individuals, a
professional model has been identified.

No statistical differences were found between male and
female consultants; although in terms of raw scores, some
differences were apparent with females perceiving themselves
higher in areas associated with human relations while males
indicated higher scores in areas related to instructional
skills and general school services.

No significant differences among centers could be
determined through consultant response.

No significant relationship could be established be-
tween the role evaluations of consultants as perceived by
interns according to their selection of superior perceived
most "responsible to.” Unlike the almost unanimous choice
of consultants, interns selected public school personnel,
university coordinator and intern consultant, in that order.
This finding tends to indicate that for interns, public
school personnel more than consultants, are regarded as pro-
fessional models.

No significant differences were found between male and
female interns regarding their selection of perceived super-
ior, nor was a difference among centers established.

Regarding the additional questions, in response to the
person or persons perceived "reaponsible for” interns chose
”children taught" while consultants selected ”intern.” The

differential response to this question tends to provide an

John Theodore Goeldi

explanation, in part, regarding the intern choice of public
school personnel as perceived superior.

Interns and consultants were in consistent agreement
regarding program strengths which were categorized as:
(1) actual classroom experience, (2) support and guidance of
intern consultants, (3) interweaving of methods with practical
experience, and (h) the convenience and economy provided by
the program. They agreed that these four features (strengths)
of the EIP program were of definite, positive aid and value
in the training of teachers while they also agreed that four
weaknesses (disadvantages) of the program were in most need
of attention and correction. The program weaknesses cited
were: (1) too much pressure, (2) insufficient time, (3) lack
of communication, and (h) inadequate evaluation procedures.

Only two of the sixteen socio-economic and educational
variables were significantly related to the self-perceived
role evaluations of consultants. These were: (1) years
experience as an intern consultant, and (2) outside time
devoted to program work. In both cases a linear relationship
was established, i.e., the greater the number of years of
consultant experience and/or the greater amount of outside
time devoted to program work, the higher the role evaluation
score while the inverse was true for low evaluation scores
and the following variables: (1) years of teaching exper-
ience, (2) age, (3) community of origin, (4) quality of work
in secondary school, (5) family income, (6) quality of work

in undergraduate school, (7) future educational plans,

John Theodore Goeldi

(8) extra curricular activities in undergraduate school,

(9) highest degree attained, (10) marital status, (11) first
consideration of teaching as a vocational choice, (12) final
decision to enter teaching profession, (13) education as a
first vocational choice, (1“) a significant other as an

influence in vocational choice.

A STUDY CONTRIBUTING TO THE PROFESSIONALIZATION
OF THE ROLE OF INTERN CONSULTANT

by

John Theodore Goeldi

A THESIS

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

College of Education

1967

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The writer wishes to express his grateful appreciation
to Dr. Horton C. Southworth, his doctoral committee chairman,
for his friendship and continual support and guidance with-
out which this study may not have been undertaken.

Appreciation is also extended to the members of the
doctoral committee: Dr. William w. Joyce, Dr. Troy L.
Stearns, and Dr. Sheldon G. Lowry for their constructive
criticism and encouragement.

For technical assistance, a debt of gratitude is owed
Dr. Jean LePere, Mrs. Natlie Sproull, and Mr. David Wright
for their contributions in the analysis of data.

Additional thanks are in order for those interns,
intern consultants, and university faculty members connected
with the Elementary Intern Program whose cooperation made
this study possible.

Finally, sincere appreciation is expressed to my wife,
Marijean, and children, Tarianne and Pauline for their faith,
patience, and understanding throughout the duration of this
study. d

11

Chapter
I

II

III

IV

V

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION. 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Statement of the Problem
Importance of the Study
Limitations of the Study
Definition of Terms
Hypotheses and Questions

RELATED LITERATURE. . . . . . . . . . . .

Introduction

Theories of Instruction and Role
Internship Programs

Supervision and Leadership

METHODOLOGY 0 O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O 0

Introduction

Centers

Sample

Information Collection
Nature of the Instrument
Analysis of the Data

ANALYSIS OF THE DATA . . . . . . . e e . .

Hypothesis A-l
Hypothesis A-2
Hypothesis A-3
Hypothesis B-l
Hypothesis B-Z
Hypothesis C-l
Question 1
Question 2
Question
Question

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 0

Introduction

Summary
Hypotheses A-1 and A-2
Hypothesis A-3
Hypothesis B-l
Hypothesis B-Z
Hypothesis C-l
Question 1
Question 2

111

Page

(Table of Contents, cont.)

Question 3
Question h
Conclusions
Hypotheses
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Question 1
Question 2
Question 3
Question A

A—1 and A-2
A-3
B-1 and 3-2
0-1

Recommendations

BIBLIOGRAPHY. . .

iv

Page

97
98
99

101
102
10h
105
106
107
110
111

121

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

7.1

7.2

7-3

LIST OF TABLES

A listing of all intern centers,
approximate distances from East Lansing
campus and number of cooperating school
districts associated with each.

A listing of all EIP centers and the
number of interns and intern con-
sultants associated with each.

Item selection of interns and intern
consultants with regard to the Spearman
Rank Coefficient of Correlation.

Item selection of interns and university
faculty with regard to the Spearman Rank
Coefficient of Correlation.

Item selection of intern consultants and
university faculty with regard to the
Spearman Rank Coefficient of Correlation.

Mean and median scores of interns and
intern consultants as regards the Role
Evaluation Check List for both total
instrument and sub-factor scores.

A chi square analysis of intern con-
sultants' role evaluation scores and
their choice of superior perceived as
most "responsible to.”

A chi square analysis of intern con-
sultants' role evaluation scores
(Personal Characteristics) and their
choice of superior perceived as most
"responsible to.”

A chi square analysis of intern con-
sultants' role evaluation scores
(Intern--Consultant Relations) and
their choice of superior perceived as
most ”responsible to.”

A chi square analysis of intern con-
sultants' role evaluation scores
(Instructional and Guidance Skill) and
their choice of superior perceived as
most "responsible to.”

Page

53

53

59

60

61

66

67

68

68

69

(List
Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

of Tables, cont.)

7.u

7.5

8.1

8.2

8.3

8.h

8.5

10

A chi square analysis of intern con-
sultants' role evaluation scores
(General School Services) and their
choice of superior perceived most
"responsible to."

A chi square analysis of intern con-
sultants' role evaluation scores
(Professional Growth) and their choice
of superior perceived as most "respons-
ible to."

A chi square analysis of male and
female intern consultants and their
self-perceived role evaluation scores.

A chi square analysis of male and
female intern consultants and their
self-perceived role evaluation scores
(Personal Characteristics).

A chi square analysis of male and
female intern consultants and their
self-perceived role evaluation scores
(Intern--Consultant Relations).

A chi square analysis of male and
female intern consultants and their
self-perceived role evaluation scores
(Instructional and Guidance Skills).

A chi square analysis of male and
female intern consultants and their
self-perceived role evaluation scores
(General School Services).

A chi square analysis of male and
female intern consultants and their
self-perceived role evaluation scores
(Professional Growth).

A chi square analysis of male and
female intern consultants and their
choice of superior perceived as most
”responsible to.”

A chi square analysis of role evalua—
tion scores (Total Instrument) of
intern consultants as perceived by
interns and their choice of superior
indicated most ”responsible to.”

vi

Page

69

70

71

71

72

72

73

73

7h

75

(List
Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

of Tables, cont.)

10.1

10.2

10.3

10.#

1005

ll

12

13

14

A chi square analysis of role evalua-
tion scores (Personal Characteristics)
of intern consultants as perceived by
interns and their choice of superior
indicated most "reSponsible to.”

A chi square analysis of role evalua-
tion scores (Intern--Consultant
Relations) of intern consultants as
perceived by interns and their choice
of superior indicated most "reSponsible
to."

A chi square analysis of role evalua-
tion scores (Instructional and Guidance
Skills) of intern consultants as per-
ceived by interns and their choice of
superior indicated most ”responsible to.”

A chi square analysis of role evalua-
tion scores (General School Services)
of intern consultants as perceived by
interns and their choice of superior
indicated most ”responsible to.”

A chi square analysis of role evalua—
tion scores (Professional Growth) of
intern consultants as perceived by
interns and their choice of superior
indicated most ”responsible to."

A chi square analysis of male and female
interns and their selection of a
superior perceived as most ”responsible
to.”

A chi square analysis of interns' per-

.ceptions of superior selected most

”responsible to” with regard to teacher
education center.

A chi square analysis of interns' self-
perceived role evaluations among centers.

A chi square analysis of interns' choice

of superior perceived most "responsible
to” among centers.

vii

Page
76

76

77

77

78

79

81

83

85

(List of Tables, cont.)

Table 15

Table 16

Table 17

Table 18.

A comparison of intern and intern
consultant perceptions of a person or
persons viewed as "responsible for.”

A comparison of Elementary Intern Program
strengths as perceived by both interns
and intern consultants.

A comparison of Elementary Intern Program
weaknesses as perceived by both interns
and intern consultants.

A chi square analysis of sixteen selected

variables and self-perceived role eval-
uation scores of intern consultants.

V111

Page
87

89

89

92

APPENDIX
A

B

C

LIST OF APPENDICES

MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Map of EIP Centers

INITIAL INSTRUMENTATION . . . . .
Role Perception Check List

FINAL INSTRUMENTATION . . . . . .
Role Evaluation Check List

ix

Page
126
127
128
129
137
138

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE Page
1 Proposed Intern Station 118

CHAPTER I

Introduction. For decades teacher education has been
predicated upon the liberal arts model. Implied within this
assumption was the idea that the only ingredient necessary
for one to teach was an adequate knowledge of the subject
matter to be taught. Beyond this the only other concession
made for the prospective teacher was a period of supervised
practice devoted usually to the organization and presentation
of factual material.

With the emphasis placed upon education in a changing
society a new demand upon the quality and quantity of
teachers being prepared for our public schools received
greater priority in the list of educational needs. The
need for innovation and change was at hand and it became the
obligation of education to deliver.

The typical teacher education program consists of three
years of academic preparation with the fourth year being
devoted to professional preparation. The professional prep-
aration year is usually divided into two parts: (1) methods
and materials of instruction and social philosophical founda-
tions of education; (2) a professional laboratory experience
within a cooperating school. The nature of guidance, pro-
fessional models and supervision for teacher education can-
didates is held to be the key to quality preparation. The
success or failure of many programs can be traced to the

adequacy of resource for initial teaching experiences." The

teaching profession generally is open to serious indictment
today concerning guidance for new teachers.

One of the basic reasons responsible for indifference
towards the task of teacher education has been the inability
of universities, public schools, and teacher organizations to
fulfill their necessary roles within the preparation process.
Dr. Horton C. Southworth in a monologue at the AST, 1966
summer workshop, addressed himself to this problem.

In reference to universities he cited their failure to
develop a spirit of partnership. A partnership in which the
university provides adequate orientation to teacher education
for school board members, school administration officials,
and both teachers and students. This partnership should en-
compass the shared responsibilities of selection and prepara-
tion of supervising teachers and should also entail the
development of basic guidelines for placement, supervision
and evaluation. Other than these most basic considerations
each member of the partnership must contribute consistent
fruitful dialogue, which can be realized in new and more
effective means of utilizing the laboratory experience.1

With regard to school districts, Dr. Southworth suggested
that local cooperating institutions have failed to under-
stand that teacher education is an on-going process. there

exists no magical transformation between the stages of

 

1A Monologue presented by Dr. Horton C. Southworth,
Associate Professor, Michigan State University, at the AST
Summer Workshop 1966, p.2. (Mimeographed.)

3

pre-certification and tenure status. The success of many
programs depends upon this understanding. Too frequently
teacher education is identified solely with student teaching,
a limited perception. In terms of a much broader perception,
teacher education within the local school district should
encompass faculty growth, innovation through instructional
teaming, improved instructional ratios, and additional aid
for all pupils. More specifically, role responsibilities
for supervising teacher, principal, and student teachers must
be defined as well as systematic procedures for an accounting
of these roles.2

Concerning teacher organizations, Dr. Southworth detected
a reluctance on the practitioner's part to examine the needed
competencies necessary to become a successful supervising
teacher. Directly related to the idea of competencies there
also exists an unwillingness to share in the identification,
selection and orientation of a competent corps of supervisors.
The realization of the importance of good supervision must
precede a defined role. A role which is realized and evi-
denced by adjusted teaching loads, salary supplements, ade-
quate guidance, supervision and evaluation.3

Taking a view less macroscopic and more microscopic,
individuals, too, have been responsible for shortcomings
within teacher education programs. The principal has been

termed the instructional leader of his building, but modern

2
Ibid., p.2. (Mimeographed.)

3Ibid., p.3. (Mimeographed.)

h
education has divided his loyalties. The central administra-
tive staff has placed upon him the duties of chairing,
organizing, researching, proposing, attending and guiding
the various functions of the public school system. Little
time is allocated for insight and innovation in the instruc-
tion in his building, let alone concern himself with teacher
education candidates. Besides the element of time, the task
of instructional supervision has traditionally been consider-
ed distasteful by both teachers and principals. For this
reason it has been easy for principals, even with sufficient
time, to abdicate their responsibilities in favor of the
clerical duties of their office.

The position of helping teacher in public schools is
traditionally that of resource gatherer. Little assistance
is given the teacher education candidate in regard to an
explicit model of teaching behavior. The numbers of first
and second year teachers require her to be a ”rover,” and in
the case of the student teacher, is unable to consistently
provide the needed professional model.

The continuing attempt to achieve quality as well as
quantities of teacher education candidates has produced some
new trends in teaching as a process and behavior. Judson
Shaplin has described well the new look in teacher education
when he stated:

Teaching is behavior, and as behavior
is subject to analysis, change and im-
provement. The concept of improvement
implies that there are controlling objec-

tives in teaching and that the behaviors
of teaching are organized to accomplish

5
these objectives. A large part of teach-

ing is the result of a conscious process
of controlling behavior to accomplish
certain purposes. The assumption is also
made here that practice conditions can be
established which will enable theuteacher
to learn to control his behavior.

Currently, at Michigan State University a program quite
similar in its operational assumptions as those suggested by
Shaplin provides a basis for the training of elementary edu-
cation candidates. This program is entitled "The Elementary
Internship Program.'5 Basic to the program rationale is the
belief that teaching is a behavior unique unto itself.
Operating upon this premise the professional segment of a
candidate's preparation is placed within a framework in
which the observation of teaching behavior is made as mean- .
ingful as possible--the reality of the public school. With-
in this setting interns are able to examine their previous
modes of behavior in light of their new autonomous environ-
ment. These new surroundings provide an example of the
stress in the teaching situation, along with its complex
matrix of thought processes, verbal behavior and physical
actions. Exceedingly important in this reality test is the

development of the intern's ability to analyze, criticize

 

“Judson T. Shaplin, ”Practice in Teaching.” From a
paper prepared by Judson T. Shaplin, Harvard University, for
a conference at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behav-
ioral Sciences, June 22-August 20, 1960, p.1. (Mimeogrephed.)

S'EIP *Elementary Intern Program / Another Way of
Learning to Teach.“ (Michigan State University College of
Education. Final Report to the Ford Foundation, 196M.)

6
and control his own reactions to the situation. The orien-
tation to this approach, if it is to be effective, must be
as individual as possible, and as such in the case of the
Michigan State program, is provided for by the intern con-
sultant. The intern consultant, a master teacher, as a
fully employed member of a cooperating school district helps
bridge the gap between the theory of the university setting
and the practice of the public school classroom.

Unlike student teaching, the internship experience at
Michigan State University is a paid full time responsibility.
Interns who are working in the program are fully supported
and guided by intern consultants whose sole task it is to
provide resources, demonstrate, supervise, cooperate, analyze,
criticize, reinforce, instruct, evaluate and nurture those
desired behaviors demonstrated by professional teachers.

Each consultant is reSponsible for five to six interns
which he visits periodically or upon request of an individual
intern. The purpose of these visitations can best be des-
cribed as multiple. Visitations may range in purpose from
the consultant's need to familiarize himself with his in-
tern's students to the delivery of a promised resource. On
other occasions his presence may indicate the initiation of
a pre-planned demonstration lesson or a team presentation of
a particular topic. At times his presence will indicate an
evaluation of his intern's progress, culminated by a confer—

ence discussing the intern's strengths and weaknesses,

7
while mapping future plans for the achievement of desired
behaviors.

His task also entails the responsibility of keeping
school officials as well as university personnel well in-
formed of candidate progress and to continually add insight
to present practices which might result in a more effective
program.

The internship at Michigan State University offers the
time and framework in which an analysis of teaching as be-
havior can be examined, understood and practiced in terms of
the present milieu. Corman and Olmsted in their analysis
of the Michigan State Program indicated the importance of the
intern consultant to this program when they stated, "The
intern consultantship position is, we believe, the key to
exploiting the potential inherent in the internship."6

In reflecting upon the teaching profession in general,
we find traditionally that one has had limited choice in his
aspirations. The alternatives in education have been re-
stricted to teacher or administrator. With expanding efforts
to continually improve education a new era of specialization
has developed. This logically has expanded the number of
alternatives within the profession. In order that each of
these new positions achieves proper status and permanence

within the profession, a task remains. This task is one of

 

6

Bernard H. Corman and Ann G. Olmsted, The Internshi
in the Preparation of Elementagz School Teachers (Bureau of
uca on Researc , c gan S a e n vers y, at Lansing,

Michigan, l96h), p.88.

8
professionalizing each new position through the development
of adequate and specific criteria which will insure its
status and permanence within the educational structure.

The intern consultantship is one of the new alterna-
tives within the teacher education structure. The criteria
which will professionalize this position will be derived
from a continuous evaluation of the professional models
presently functioning in the position. Each consultant must
look at himself in terms of introspection envisioning a con-
tinuum which can only be described as an index of becoming.
Consultant evaluation is an act which by its very nature must
be individual, guided solely by the frankness and honesty of
each professional consultant. The individual needs of con-
sultants cannot be separated from the needs of the program.
The quality of the consultantship function is the quality of
the program.

Statement of the Problem. The purpose of this study
was (1) to examine the role evaluations of intern consultants
as perceived by interns and intern consultants and their
relationship to an individual of particular status perceived
as most "responsible to”; (2) to show the differences in
selection of an individual of particular status perceived
as most ”responsible to“ for each group, i.e., interns and
intern consultants as they exist in reference to the male
and female composition of each group; (3) to examine the
differences between male and female intern consultants and

their self-perceived role evaluations; (h) to examine the

9

differences among centers concerning interns' selection of
an individual of particular status perceived as most "respon-
sible to.”

Also, consideration will be given to three additional
questions for which no formal hypothesis has been posited.
These are: (1) What differences exist among centers con-
cerning intern consultants with regard to role evaluations
and status of superior selected as most ”responsible to”?
(2) What differences exist between interns and intern con-
sultants with regard to the individual perceived as most
"responsible for"? and (3) What influence does selected
socio-economic factors have on role evaluations of intern
consultants?

Finally, a comparison of responses by interns and in-
tern consultants regarding various questions of particular
concern to program participants such as perceived strengths
and weaknesses of the total program, the advantages and dis-
advantages of consultants acting as methods instructors and
procedures and responsibilities for intern consultant eval-
uation will be presented.

Importance of_the Study. The lack of support and guid-
ance in pre-professional laboratory experiences has precipi-
tated an indictment against teacher educators and the methods
of training they provide. Several institutions responsible
for the training of pre-service teachers have responded to
this challenge through the form of new programs more closely

allied to the concepts of support and guidance. The intern

10

consultant within the framework of the Elementary Internship
Program at Michigan State University is responsible for this
primary level support and guidance. The importance of this
study existed in its ability to examine how well this primary
level of support and guidance is perceived by both intern
consultant, the supporter; and the supported, the intern. In
other words, does this multi-role position render aid where
more traditional approaches have been lacking?

Hopes for successful evaluation of situations of this
nature rest upon the utilization of many techniques. Each
technique should provide bits and pieces of pertinent infor-
mation which, when placed within the large matrix of teaching
behavior, provides the information for the continual analysis
necessary for top quality teacher education programs. This
study utilized a self-report, supervisee rating technique,
in examining the task of the intern consultant. An attempt
was made to eliminate the various short-comings of self-
report, supervisee rating techniques as suggested by Cronback.7

Limitations of the Study. Although internship and
student teaching have similar objectives for pre-service
teachers basic differences exist between the two training
approaches which limit the conclusions of this study in its
application.

Specific conclusions can only be generalized to those

programs which, in point of fact, operate upon the basic

7Lee J. Cronback, Essentials of Ps cholo ical Testi .
(New York: Harper & Row, I935}, p.355-g.

 

11
guidelines as that of the Elementary Internship at Michigan
State University and involve populations which demonstrate
similar characteristics. More specifically, such programs
should: (1) utilize internship as the final laboratory ex-
perience, a "last step” preceded by observation, participa-
tion, and student teaching; (2) have interns formally con-
tracted and paid by cooperating local school boards; (3) have
candidates enrolled in credit courses paralleling their pro-
fessional experience; (a) provide intern supervision by com-
petent personnel employed by the local cooperating district
with released time to devote to this activity; and (5) en-
gage a college supervisor to work closely with the public
school contact.

In relation to the more traditional pre-service experi-
ence of student teaching little generalization of the find-
ings can be made, although the findings of this internship
study may be indicative of trends which will characterize new
directions in the kinds of relationships which exist between
student teachers and supervisors and the styles of super-
vision used.

Definition of Terms. In this study the term internship
will be defined in the same manner as that set forth by the
AST Commission on Teacher Education in February, 1966.

The internship in teacher education is an
integral part of the professional prepar-
ation of the teacher candidate, and is the
final laboratory experience necessary for
provisional teacher certification, having

been preceded by observation-part1cipation
and student teaching experiences in a

12
school classroom; is planned and coor-
dinated by the teacher education institu-
tion in cooperation with one or more
schools during which the intern is
l) contracted by and paid by a local
school board, 2) assigned a designed num-
ber of classes to teach for a school year,
3) enrolled in credit courses that parallel
his professional experiences and h) super-
vised by both a highly competent teacher
or administrator who is employed by the
cooperating school and has been assigned
released time to devote to this activity
and a college supervisor who makes period-
ic observations and works closely with the
school supervisor.8

An intern consultant is that person employed by the
local school district, in cooperation with the sponsoring
teacher education institution for the purposes of providing
instruction, supervision and resource to the employed intern
teaChere

Interns are those personnel in attendance at Michigan
State University contracted and paid by a cooperating school
district for the sole purpose of instruction that is super-
vised, guided and supported by an intern consultant.

Status will be defined as the relative ordering of in-
dividuals occupying given roles within the Elementary Intern
Program. For purposes of this study the following rank of
particular statuses has been established: (1) University
Coordinator, (2) Public School Personnel. (3) Intern Con-
sultant, (h) Intern, (5) Students, and (6) Parents and

General Public.

8"Paid Teaching Internships" (Chicago: AST Commission
on Internships, February, 1966). (Mimeographed.)

13

University Coordinator is that person residing in a
community, associated with a particular teacher education
center, possessing full university faculty status, and re-
sponsible for the total operation of university sponsored
teacher education programs as well as individuals function-
ing within them.

Public School:§ersonne; refers to those persons in
administrative positions charged with the responsibility of
assuring the quality of instruction in a particular school
district. For purposes of this study it will include School
Board Members, Superintendents of Schools, Principals, and
Teachers.

”Responsibility to” refers to that person or persons
perceived as answerable to or accountable to.

“Responsibility for” refers to that person, or persons
perceived of as a charge, needing particular attention.

gapervising teachers are those personnel selected to
act as professional models and supervisors for teacher educa-
tion candidates during that portion of the candidate's pro-
gram designated as a professional laboratory or field ex-
perience.

Helpipg teachers are those personnel hired specifically
by public schools for the sole purpose of supporting and
guiding new and experienced teachers desiring such help.

A role evaluation refers to those scores derived from
the Role Evaluation Check List. Throughout the remainder of
this study it will be referred to as 3301.. '

1n
Role is defined as that suggested by Hartley and
Hartley:

Accordingly to include all aspects of role
requirements we must define social role as
an organized pattern of expectancies that
relate to the tasks, demeanors, values and
reciprocal relationships to be maintained
by persons occupying specific membership
positions and fulfilling desirable func-
tions in any group.

Sociological data refers to age, sex, educational back-
ground and experience, individual and family economic circum-

stance, family background and related demographic data.

Hypotheses

A-l. Self-perceived role evaluations of intern consultants
will be positively related to the rank of the in-
dividually selected superior (person) perceived as
most ”responsible £2.”

A-Z. There will be a difference between male and female
self-perceived Role Evaluations of Intern Consultants.

A-3. There will be a difference between male and female in-
tern consultants and their choice of an individually
selected superior (person) perceived as most "respons-
ible to."

B-l. Role evaluations of intern consultants as perceived by
interns will be positively related to the rank of an
individually selected superior (person) perceived as
most "responsible pg.”

B-Z. There will be a difference between male and female in-
terns and their choice of an individually selected
superior (person) perceived as most ”responsible pp.”

0-1. There will be a difference among centers as to the
choice of a perceived superior felt most "responsible
23” as selected by interns.

 

9E. L. Hartley and R. s. Hartley, Fundamentals of Social
Psychology. (New York: Alfred A. Knop , , p. .

15

Additional questions to be considered:

1.

2.

3.

What differences exist among centers concerning Intern
Consultants with regard to: (a) role evaluations and,
(b) choice of superior felt most ”responsible pp”?

What differences exist between intern consultants and
interns with regard to their perceived choice of the
person felt most ”responsible for”?

What differences exist between intern consultants and
interns individually perceived strengths and weaknesses
of the Elementary Intern Program?

What relation exists between role evaluations of in-
tern consultants as perceived by intern consultants
and the following variables: (a) years of teaching
experience, (b) years of experience as an intern con-
sultant, (c) use of personal time devoted to EIP,

(d) age, (e) community of origin, (f) quality of work
in secondary school (g) family income, (h) quality of
work in college, (i) participation in extra-curricular
activities in college, (9) future educational plans,
(k) academic degrees, (1 marital status, (m) first
consideration of teaching as a career, (n) final
decision to enter teaching as a profession, (o) sig-
nificant other influencing vocational choice.

CHAPTER II
Related Literature

Introduction. This chapter includes a review of re-
lated literature in three areas, (1) theories of instruction
and role, which viewed in terms of the concept of internship,
providing tools for the analysis of human interaction and its
by-products, (2) an overview of several internship programs
with regard to the various practices of support and guidance
provided for teacher education candidates, and (3) an exam-
ination of the relevant findings in the area of supervision
and leadership as it relates to those who function in this
capacity. A familiarity with these topics is important if
the reader is to understand the task of the intern consult-
ant in terms of both the Elementary Intern Program and the
total framework of teacher education.

Theories of Instruction and Help. Discussing the need
for research and theory as a means of producing desirable
Imodels for utilization in the training of pre-service teach-
ers and the general improvement of classroom instruction
BerJ Harootunian commented:

Like the quest for the legendary Holy Grail
the efforts of educators to identify the
"good teacher” have been most frustrating.
The ”good teacher" has proved to be a
slippery and elusive fellow. While some
individuals still wait for an educational

Gallahad or Percival, educational research-
ers in recent years have shifted their

16

1?

focus from the teacher as he ought to be
to the teacher as he is.

In an article, Smith11 proposed a theory by which the
act of teaching could be investigated. The theoretical con-
struct involves three classifications of variables, (1) in-
dependent variables (the action of teaching), (2) dependent
variables (the action of pupils) and (3) intervening vari-
ables (the responses of students to teacher as influenced by
memory, beliefs and needs). In reality, teacher actions pro-
duce student responses which have been shaped by the students'
past experiences. As a result of student responses new
teaching actions are formulated and the cycle begins again.
The author believes the strength of his construct is its
ability to categorize all teaching and learning behavior in
a manner that allows not only researchers to examine this
complex situation, but also gives practicing professionals

an opportunity to analyze and evaluate.12

 

10BerJ Harootunian, "The Teacher As Problem Solver:
Extra-Class Decision-Making,” (Paper presented for Symposium:
Curriculum and Instruction: A Dialogue on the Reconstruction
of Theory, 50th Annual Meeting, American Educational Research
Association, Pick-Co ress Hotel, Chicago, Illinois,
February 19, 1966). Mimeographed.)

1lB. Othanel Smith, “A Concept of Teaching,” Teachers
Colle e Record, 61:229-2hl, February, 1960.

121bid.

18

Closely aligned to the work of Smith is that of Arno
Bellock.13 Bellock attempted a linguistic analysis of the
various verbal behaviors of both students and teachers which,
he found, yields common elements from various situations.
An examination of the prescribed rules governing these common
elements may provide the basis for a descriptive model that
actually illustrates what happens in the real classroom sit-
uation.

Utilizing the vehicle of interaction analysis for the
ultimate purpose of producing models and guidelines focused

at instructional improvement, Flanderslu

constructed a system
to measure classroom dialogue between teacher and student.
All verbal interaction is tabulated in matrix form providing
for (1) teacher talk, (2) pupil talk, and (3) a category
designed to record any behavior unclaimed by (l) or (2).
The products of the matrix offers a description of the
”living classroom."

Several other researchers have investigated the concept

of interaction. Hughes,15 in her approach, attempted to de-
fine good teaching and the process by which it could be

 

13A. Bellock, (ed.) Theo and Research in Teachi ,
(New York: Bureau of Publicaélons, Teachers College,
Columbia University, 1963).

1”N. Flanders, "Teacher Influence in the Classroom,” in

A.Bellock (ed.) Theo and Research in Teachi , (New York:
Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia Univer-
sitY: 1963).

15Marie Hughes, ”Teaching Is Interaction,” Elementary
School Journal, 58:457-64, May, 1958.

l9
determined with reliability. Taba,l6 in her examination of
teacher behavior in the classroom, focused attention on the
behaviors utilized by teachers which tend to stimulate and
elicit higher mental processes on the part of students,
while Aschner17 suggested from her work that the effective-
ness of teaching cannot be measured by the achievement of the
learner alone, but must encompass an analysis of all partici-
pants in the learning process.

A further avenue explored in hopes of constructing
models and unearthing significant information pertinent to
teaching styles has been the work of those interested in
studying teaching as a problem solving process. Turner,18
in using the problem solving approach has classified all
teacher tasks into one of three types. A type I task deals
with the teacher's ability to form categories from raw data
(pupil responses) and determine whether it is the best be-
havior for this category. A teacher's ability to order
materials to be used with pupils according to their achieve-
ment level constitutes a type II task, while type III con-

cerns itself with the relation of assigned exercises result-

ing in Specific behavior on the part of students. To this

 

16H. Taba and F. Elzey, ”Teaching Strategies and Thought
Processes," Teachers College Record, 65:52h-38, March, l96u.

17Mary Jane McCue Aschner, "The Analysis of Verbal A
Interaction in the Classroom” in the A. Bellock (ed.) Theo
and Research in Teachin . (New York: Bureau of Publica ions

0 um a nivers y, 3), pp. 53-78.

18Richard L. Turner, ”Task Performance and Teaching Skill
in the Intermediate Grades," Journal of Teacher Education,
14:299-307, September, 1963.

20
time the author has attempted to construct valid estimates of
skill in particular branches of teaching such as reading and
arithmetic in grades three through six. Various others have
followed the same path, yet moved in slightly different
directions. Popham19 explored the area of achievement of

instructional goals, while Harootunian20

considered the pro-
cess of decision making. In still another direction,
Herbert21 sampled the area of lesson analysis; and in much

22 also considered instruc-

the same manner as Turner, Fattu
tional theory in terms of the task.

A notable contributor to research in teacher education
has been David Ryans. In contrast to his colleagues, Ryans23
conceived of the teacher as a ”system” and as a system,

therefore, capable of information processing. Basic to this

systems approach are the input factors which are represented

 

19W. James Popham, "Relationships Between Highly Specific
Instructional Video Tapes and Certain Behaviors of Pre-
Service Teachers," (Paper presented at the 1966 American
Educational Research Association Meeting, Chicago, Illinois,
February 17-19, 1966). (Mimeographed.)

20BerJ Harootunian, loc. cit.

21John Herbert, "Analysis of Lessons: Teacher, Subject
Matter, and Pupils,” (Paper read at the Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois,
1966). (Mimeographed.)

22Nicholas A. Fattu, ”A Model of Teaching as Problem
Solving,” Theories of Instruction, (Washington, D.C.:
Association for SupeFCIslon and Curriculum Development,
1965), pp. 62—87.

23David G. Ryans, ”Teacher Behavior and Research: Im-
plications for Teacher Education,” Journal of Teacher.
Education, 1h:274-93. September, 1963.

21

by the environmental, physical and psychological conditions
which structure the teaching situation. The results of the
system are indicated in terms of the observable behaviors of
teachers. The primary purpose of this approach is to
determine the influence of input variables on teacher be-
havior in hopes of constructing models and discovering par-
ticular styles unique in instruction.

In terms of the elementary internship and more specific-
ally the intern consultant, instructional theory provides a
basis for an examination of the present practices associated
with the tasks of support, guidance and supervision with
which the consultant is charged. In reality, instructional
theories provide a more penetrating means of examining the
work of interns, while at the same time providing data for
consultants to consider, with regard to the kinds of models
and styles they are exhibiting in terms of the candidates'
needs. Not only have efforts been made to examine the
teacher with reference to model and style through instruc-
tion, but considerable work has been done through the utili-
zation of role theory. Unlike an examination of instruction,
role theory seeks analysis in a broader framework, seeking
to examine all aspects of a person. By all aspects is meant
those varied roles such as father, member of a community,
politician, member of a church, and mediator of a culture
which merge within this large framework to produce an unique

individual, the teacher.

22

Sarbinzl4 discussed role theory in reference to an inter-
action formulation, though different from most conventional
interaction theory. The difference is found in the addition
of two finer units of analysis. The first of these is the
designation of role to that phase of interaction theory
known as reciprocal interaction. The second unit is the
interaction which takes place between self and role. Roles
are learned through two widely defined processes: (1) in-
tentional instruction, and (2) incidental learning. Inten-
tional instruction is a process fostered by those responsible
for the mediating of culture within a society attempting to
teach a prescribed act. The incidental learning of roles
is the adoption of behavior practiced by others in a par-
ticular environment. The product of intentional or incident-
al instruction is viewed as role expectation. Each role
expectation is bi-dimensional. That is, for every role ex-
pectation of another, there is a reciprocal role expectation
of self. The organized efforts of persons directed at ful-
filling particular expectations are the ingredients which
comprise a role. Variations in role behavior the author
indicated are a function of at least three variables:

(1) the validity of role perception,

(2) skill in role enactment, 2
(3) the current organization of the self. 5

_—__ h ‘— ____ A h

2nT. s. Sarbin, “Role Theory," In G. Lindzey (ed.),
Handbook of Social Ps cholo . Vol. I, (Cambridge, Mass.,
son- es ey, , pp. 3-255-

25Ibid., p. 255.

23

Suggested here is the theoretical framework for analy-
sis with regard for a particular individual within a par-
ticular environment.

Taking a more microscopic view of role, Lowry26 pro-
posed a social systems model. A basic element within the
model is role and described as follows:

The concept "role” implies a functional

process. It is the part one plays in

the system. It is the active aspect of

a given position in a system such as

teacher, student, son, daughter, etc.27
In terms of total structure within the model, role becomes
significant when viewed in relation to beliefs, sentiments,
objectives, norms, sanctions (both negative and positive),
status, rank, power (both authority and influence) and facil-
ities. In order that the system be functional, specific
processes operate "which mesh, stabilize and alter relation-
ships between the elements through time and give the system
a dynamic functioning continuity."28 The processes respons-
ible for the dynamic functioning of the system are, (1) com-
munication (both formal and informal), (2) decision making
and problem solving (autocratic, democratic or some combina-

tion of the two), (3) boundary maintenance (continual iden-
tification of the system), and (h) systematic linkage (the

26Sheldon G. Lowry, ”The Social Systems Model,” (East
Lansing: Michigan State University, Department of Sociology
and Anthropology). (Mimeographed.)

27l‘oid., p.2.
28;bid., p.n.

2#
convergence of elements between two systems). In regard to
teacher education programs, which basically are social sys-
tems, the model provides a dual means of analysis in terms
of individual and total program contributions.

Utilizing role theory, Brookover29 designed a theoreti-
cal construct appropriate for the examination of role be-
havior and role conflict within the educational milieu. The
model is predicated on the assumption that the concept of
role and role taking are only meaningful in a social interb
action situation. Expectations which direct the dynamics of
the situation are.provided by communication which produces
new expectations and understandings. The construct contains
seven dynamic elements:

A. An actor as he enters a situation with
previous experience in related situations,
personality needs and the meaning of the
situation for him.

S I. Self-involvement, the actors image of
the enls anticipated from participation
in the status as he projects his self
image into the role.

D. The actor's definition of what he thinks
others expect of him in the role.

B I. The actor's behavior in interaction with
others which continually redefines R and D.

R. Others' expectations of actor ”A” in sit-
uation Be

3. Status in situation - Others expectations
of any actor in a particular situation.

8. General status - Others expectations of
any actor in a Broadly defined position,
leee, taachereB

29W. B. Brookover, ”Research on Teacher and Administra-

tive Roles,“ Journal of Educational Sociology, 29:2-13,
September, 19 .

30pm., p.h.

25
The author concluded that in reality the nature of the set-
ting in which the concept functions is not fixed or static,
but in continual flux. Suggested here is a means of analysis
in terms of an occupational type, the teacher or more specif-
ically, the intern consultant.

In the absence of a theory of professional training,
Rex31 developed a theoretical construct aimed at providing a
framework for the evaluation of this kind of experience and
its actual contribution as a means of professional prepara-
tion. The proposed construct probes three areas in terms of
analysis; self, role and community. Each one of these con-
cepts provides an index for the participants in regard to
the total experience. Self perceptions acquired in intern-
ship even though affected by social environment give the
individual ”an intrinsic index of personal worth'32 while
the concept of role provides the intern with an understand-
ing of the dynamic qualities of professional service and
also serves as ”an index of the reciprocal qualities of pro-
fessional interaction."33 Unlike self and role, community
perceptions "act as an extrinsic index of the relationships
which exist between the practitioner and the professional
community of which he is a part."3'+ An examination of the

 

31Ronald G. Rex, “A Theory of the Internship in Pro-
fessional Training,” (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1962).

32;b;d., p.116.

33gbid.

3"pid.

26
total construct shows that the concept of role is conceded
the central position and suggests that the internship ex-
perience centers here. ”In other words, an intern will
realize little in terms of professional perceptions outside
the contact situation of his experience."35 With reference
to the Elementary Intern Program, a framework for the analy-
sis of a particular kind of experience has been established
in consideration of both consultant and intern.

various researchers have gathered information pertinent
to the multi-role function of the intern consultant by use
of the concept of role. Viewed as independent efforts their
meaning remains obscure. Considered in total, they provide
a limited source of data by which consultant behavior could
be reviewed.

Doyle36 in a study of role expectations of elementary
teachers in three communities, using a check list and interb
view technique, sought responses from administrators, school
board members, parents and teachers themselves. In terms of
convergence and divergence, teachers saw themselves in great-
est harmony with administrators and to a lesser extent with
school board members and parents. Doyle concluded that in

reference to professional role, teachers provide a much

 

351bid., p.llu.

36Louis A. Doyle, “A Study of the Expectations which
Elementary Teachers, School Administrators, BOard Members
and Parents Have of the Elementary Teachers Role," (Unpub-
isggid Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University,

2?
narrower definition of their task than do administrators,
board members or parents.

A sample of one hundred teachers interviewed in depth
were the subjects of a study by Terrien.37 The study attempt-
ed to examine an occupational type that he hypothesized had
been formed by the member's behavior. Teachers were found to
describe themselves as loyal, public servants, martyrized
and nonaggressive. Unlike typical Americans they seemed to
lack a positive conception of self. Contributing to this
were three factors, (1) collective behavior, (2) social
control, and (3) status and role which were considered to
be dependent upon factors (1) and (2).

An examination of the teacher's role in a social sys-
tem, the American high school, led Gordon to conclude that
the existence of a typical teacher is one of continual
stress.38 The cause of this stress is attributed to the
continual striving of adolescents for social status. With
regard to the teacher, continual adjustment to protect per-
sonality, tending to be accomplished in private. Gordon
concluded, "The problems of the classroom are not shared on
a colleague-wide basis due to the competitiveness of the

status system among teachers. The success ideology of the

37F. W. Terrien, ”The Occupational Roles of Teachers,”
Journal of Educational Sociology, 29:1h-20, September, 1955.

38C. W. Gordon, ”The Role of the Teacher in the Social
Structure of the High School," Journal of Educational

Sociology, pp. 21-29, September,

28
school states that successful teachers do not have
problems."39
In order to distinguish between the role of special

area teachers and consultants, Hoffmanno

sampled teachers,
administrators, Special area teachers and consultants in
seventeen communities utilizing a questionnaire technique.
Teachers having daily contact with both roles saw little
difference between them, while special area teachers followed
by consultants and administrators saw the greatest differ-
ence. Hoffman concluded from his data that the possibili-
ties of role conflict were definitely established.

“1 sampling 344 teachers in eighteen

Getzels and Cuba
schools representing six school systems attempted an exam-
ination of role structure and conflict. Based on data
gathered from an examination of three particular roles,

(l) the socio-economic roles of teachers, (2) the citizen
role of teachers, and (3) the professional role of teachers.
The researchers concluded:
The teacher is defined both by core expec-
tations common to the teaching situation in

general and by significantly varying expec-
tations that are a function of local school

 

39Ibid., p.29.

quames D. Hoffman, "A Study of the Perceptions That
Administrators, Elementary Teachers, Consultants and Special
Area Teachers Have of the Elementary Special Area Teacher
and Consultant Role," (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1959).

41J. W. Getzels and E. G. Guba, ”The Structure of Role
and Role Conflict in the Teaching Situation," Journal of
Educational Sociolo , 29:30-40, September, 19 .

29
and community conditions.... The existence
of role conflict may be taken as evidence
that the teacher role is imperfectly in-
tegrated with other roles. The consequence
of role conflict may be frustration for
132; 331233231Efizihifisii‘iuti‘fiiffi“"“88

Administrative roles and teaching satisfaction were the
topic of a study by Bidwell.“3 Satisfaction and dissatis-
faction were hypothesized to be synonymous with convergence
and divergence of expectations held by teachers. A change
in satisfaction was also hypothesized in terms of expecta-
tion fulfillment with regard to principals in relation to
superintendents. AA sample of 368 teachers in five school
districts responding to a questionnaire and interview tech-
nique supplied the data. Satisfaction in terms of diverg-
ence and convergence were proved to be Significant, while
change in satisfaction with regard to expectation fulfill-
ment of principals in relation to superintendents could not
be proven.

In reference to the above forms of analysis and cited
studies, a starting point has been established to provide a
continual examination of the multi-role functions of the
intern consultant, and similarly provide feedback in refer-
ence to the total Elementary Internship Program.

Internship Programs. This section of literature deals

With an overview of some internship programs and the various

 

uzIbide, pe32e

“BCharles E. Bidwell, ”The Administrative Role and
Satisfaction in Teaching,” Journal of Educational Sociolo ,
29:“1-“7, September,-1955.

30
kinds of support, guidance and supervision offered teacher
education candidates.

A study conducted by Bishopuu sought to determine the
purposes of internship as seen by teacher education special-
ists and cooperating public school personnel. Various in-
stitutions utilizing the internship concept were also sur-
veyed as to the purpose of their particular program. Agree-
ment between teacher education Specialists and public school
personnel was considered remarkable. A noticeable difference
did exist, however, where public school people picked pur-
poses more closely related to techniques responsible for
classroom climate and classroom management. The examination
of university program purposes revealed six common points
of concern; (1) independence, (2) gradual induction, (3) ex-
posure to reality, (4) knowledge of the school as a social
agent, (5) integration of theory and practice, and (6) an
understanding of child growth and development. Implied
within the findings of the study is the task charged to
supervision, guidance and support, and in reality encompasses
a much larger view of the educational setting than ever
assigned to the supervising teacher. Suggested here is the

evolving need for a catalyst, a multi-role agent.

 

uuClifford L. Bishop, "The Purposes of Teacher Intern-

ship,“ Educational Administration and SuperVision, 3h:35-h3,
January, .

31
Chase,45 discussing the University of Chicago internship
program, described the three basic assumptions which direct
its operation and also implies the need for multi-role
support for pre-service candidates. He stated:

Effective teaching is based upon a sub-
stantial body of knowledge and the methods
of inquiry by which the knowledge is dis-
covered, tested and extended. Secondly,
the practice of teaching can only be
accomplished on a professional level

when a candidate has developed productive
ways of thinking about learning and the
roles of schools in various social set-
tings. And thirdly the act of teaching
is most likely to develop where there is
ample opportunity to observe skilled pro-
fessionals under varying conditions with
particular regard to academic disciplines,
educationfig philosophy and theories of
learning.

Hurlburtl’7 concluded from an analysis of eleven intern-
ship programs that the purpose and implication generated
from this type of pre-professional experience are far reach-
ing and far more encompassing than traditionally believed.
He examined programs at Brown, California, Cornell, Duke,
Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Southern California, Stanford,

North Carolina, vanderbilt and Yeshiva. His examination in-
dicated that no one pattern of field experience and candi-
date guidance is predominante, although contact experiences

u5Francis 3. Chase, ”Chicago Initiates New Two-Year
Graduate Programs for High School Teachers,” The High School
Journal, 43:196-200, February, 1960.

uélbid., pp. 199-200.

“7Allan S. Hurlburt, ”Student Teaching as a Part of a
Post Liberal Arts Professional Year,” In 40th Yearbook of
the Association for Student Teaching, 1961, pp. 75-80.

32

range from one semester to fifteen months. In terms of
focus, eight of the eleven programs were concerned with the
functional relationship between theory and practice.

Reporting on the internship experience at Stanford
University, Bush and Allen!+8 reviewed the advantages of
their new program in relation to their older and more tradi-
tional program of student teaching. Cited as a distinct
advantage to the new program is the greater amount of time
devoted to the candidate's teaching of a particular subject
and less to theoretical course work in education. This new
direction is seen in the total program structure. The tradi-
tional program called for forty-two quarter units, while the
newer experimental program contains thirty-four quarter
units, nine of which are credited to internship and eight
for field work and practicum. Secondly in the way of advan-
tage, the program offers continuous, realistic experience
with candidates acting as a teaching assistant, observer and
finally teacher. The third advantage represents a change in
the professional education segment of theprogram from one
of prescribed courses to a continuing professional seminar
which is directly related to practice. Guidance and super-
vision are undertaken by both public school and university
personnel. Experimentation with micro-teaching has also
supplied a new means of supervision through educational

technology.

 

usRobert N. Bush and Dwight W. Allen, "The Winds of

Freedom,” The Hi h School Journal, 43:168-73. February, 1960.

33
The internship program at Yeshiva University is struc-

tured to attract liberal arts graduates as discussed by
Fine.49 The program, by utilizing the summer before the
internship year, allows each one of the interns to apply for
a provisional teaching certificate which permits them to
teach within the limits of the New York City system. The
supervision of interns is a Shared responsibility between
university and public school personnel with mephasis placed
upon the latter. Compensation for supervisory personnel is
given in the form of tuition free credits at the university
in an attempt to constantly strengthen those individuals
participating.

San Diego State University, in cooperation with the
San Diego public schools, has developed an elementary intern-
ship program. Fisher and Frautschy5O indicated that the pro-
gram was designed to attract liberal arts graduates desiring
to teach in the public schools. Candidates attend a nine
week summer session concentrating on courses in curriculum,
methodology and child growth and development, supplemented by
direct observation in the university laboratory school. Dur-
ing the internship year candidates are assigned four to a
building, and appointed an advisory teacher. The principal
responsibility for support, guidance and supervision rests

ngBenjamin Fine, ”Teachers for Tomorrows Schools,” The
High School Journal, #3:223-30, February, 1960.

5°Sherrick J. Fisher and Frances Frautschy, ”San Diego
Intern Teachers,” NEA Journal, 46:2nu-45, April, 1957.

3#
with the advisory teacher and the building principal. Basic
to their function is classroom observation and the direction
of professional seminars focused on the candidate's actual
situation.

McIntoshSl reported on a study at the University of
British Columbia which attempted to assess the differences
between traditional teacher preparation approaches and in-
ternship. From general observations while conducting the
study and an examination of participants' daily logs and
diaries, he suggested three problem areas which he considered
critical to the development of internship: (l) acquiring
capable master teachers willing to supervise and support
interns, (2) a larger attrition rate on the part of interns
in relation to traditionally trained candidates, and (3) a
characteristic on the part of interns to become quickly
bored with all aspects of practical experience except class-
room teaching. In relation to (1) teachers commented that
the task of supervision of interns was difficult and demand-
ing, and for the most part unrewarding in terms of the
efforts put forth.

The internship at San Francisco University,52 similar
to many other programs in its attempt to attract liberal arts

graduates, operates with its interns under provisional

51J. a. McIntosh, ”A Pilot Study of a Form of Internship
in Teacher Education,” Canadian Education and Research Di est,
2:115-27, June, 1962.

52George D. Miner, ”A Teacher Interne Program," School
Executive, 7h:#8-h9, September, l95h.

35

certification at a reduced rate of compensation. The article
suggested that the key to a quality internship program is
quality supervision. In order to obtain this end two rec-
commendations are made representative of the San Francisco
program, (1) a change in the ratio of supervisor to intern,
and (2) an established provision for in-service university
directed workshops focusing on the development of master
supervisory personnel.

Koppel, Shaplin and Robinson53 described the intern-
ship at Harvard University that serves both for the training
of elementary and.secondary teachers. Three plans for the
utilization of the laboratory experience are offered, (1)
apprenticeship teaching, (2) part-time teaching, and (3) team
teaching. Plan C, the team teaching approach, is most
widely used and has all but replaced plans A and B. The
team operates within a framework of flexible scheduling,
allowing frequent seminars at both the formal and informal
levels. The directed concern of these seminars deals with
the immediate affairs of the laboratory experience, such as
course content, methodology, student progress and evaluation,
and matters of professional concern. The program has fre—
quently appealed to professional teachers who invest their
sabbatical year to participate in this training and return

to their schools ready to act as team leaders for intern

53Francis Koppel, Judson T. Shaplin and Wade M. Robinson,
Recent Developments at the Harvard Graduate School of Educa-

tion," The High School Journal, #3:2#2-6l, February, 1960.

36
groups. An outgrowth of Plan C has been the establishment
of the Harvard-Newton Summer Program where all participating
members of the program intern teams, team leaders, and uni-
versity faculty meet to begin preparation for the coming year.
The summer session is spent in planning, demonstration
teaching, clinical observation and short periods of practice
teaching for interns. The start of the intern supervisor
relationship begins here.

The internship at Southern Illinois University as des-
cribed by Neal5u provides for three types of training: (1)
classroom teaching, (2) supervision, and (3) school adminis-
tration. The objective of the internship for classroom
teachers is the development of the master teacher. The pro-
gram consists of half-time teaching coupled with university
college courses. Compensation is based at one-half the
annual teaching salary. The supervisory internship is
directed at the development of a specialist within a disci-
pline area. Candidates work with supervisory personnel and
are charged with the responsibility of participating in exist-
ing programs and contributing to the initiation of new ones.
Assignments in the administrative internship involve the
candidate's participation in the affairs of the central ad-
ministration staff where he is guided and assisted in plan-
ning, organizing and initiating those tasks germaine to
administration, such as the development of budgets, pupil

SuCharles D. Neal, "Internship in Teacher Training,”
Education, 71:183-89, November, 1950.

37

accounting, the organization of instructional meetings and
participation in school board meetings. Personnel respons-
ible for the guidance of interns must possess the minimum of
a masters degree and exhibit to both university and public
school officials their competence in the area considered for
placement.

Sleeper,55 in discussing the internship at Central
Michigan, indicated that the program represents a combina-
tion of the most current trends in teacher preparation. The
supervision of interns is based on a five to one ratio cate-
gorized as a team approach. Students spent three semesters
off the campus under guidance acting as teacher assistants,
teacher interns, and finally associate teachers at full
salary.

The Brown University plan of teacher education as des-
cribed by Smith56 was designed by the liberal arts faculty.
Of particular interest is the fact that no department or
college of education exists at the university which has led
to a total faculty responsibility for teacher education. At
the internship level, fifty-two courses have been developed
for candidates through the efforts of both university
faculty and public school consultants. Interns receive

state certification by attending a pre-intern summer session.

55William R. Sleeper, "The Internship,” In 40th Yearbook
of the Association for Student Teaching, 1961, pp. 71-7h.

56Elmer R. Smith, ”The Brown Plan of Teacher Education,”
The High School Journal, 43:283-93, February, 1960.

38
The team approach is used within the laboratory experience
with the master teacher designated as the clinical leader
and totally responsible for the reality experiences encount-
ered. Team leaders are granted full tuition graduate fellow-
ships to insure their own professional growth and foster
dialogue in terms of the quality of the total program.

Ward and Gubser57 described the internship in the state
of Oregon which has developed into a framework within which
all participating educational institutions must comply.
Pre-internship includes a professional course block and a
session of observation-participation experiences. The in-
ternship year begins for the intern with complete responsi-
bility for the organization and implementation of the in-
structional program in a regular self-contained classroom.
For each group of four interns there is a team leader respon-
sible for their supervision. Planning and conference ses-
sions are utilized three times per day, culminated by a
weekly seminar. Supervision by the college or university
sponsoring the intern is only periodic.

The National Teacher Corps58 was created by Congress
under title V-B of the Higher Education Act of 1965. The
program has two primary objectives, (1) the creation of

57William T. Ward and J. H. Gubser, "Developing the
Teacher Internship Concept in Oregon " Journal of Teachgp
Education, 153252-59, September, 1965.

58United States Department of Health, Education and Wel-
fare, Pro rams and Services, (Washington, D.C.: Government
Printing Office, September, 1966), p. 207.

39

specially trained teachers to work in slums, and (2) to in-
volve colleges and universities in the training of teachers
for slum areas. Program emphasis is placed upon the psychol-
ogy and sociology of poverty, complemented by courses in
basic teaching methods. Experienced teachers act as team
leaders and tend to the practical aspects of transferring
what is learned on the campus. Extensive support is render-
ed interns in terms of teaching materials, remedial instruc-
tion and various kinds of diagnostic work.

German and Olmsted,59 in a descriptive analysis of the
Michigan State University Internship Program, traced its
development from its inception as a five year program to its
present structure of four years. Although the first two
years of the program are much like any other undergraduate
liberal arts program, the difference appears in the third
and fourth years. Here, interns move from the traditional
campus setting to the public school environment, where
methods, participation and observation are interwoven. The
fourth year is devoted to complete internship under the guid-
ance of an intern consultant. Corman and Olmsted find the
potential inherent in internship keyed to this particular
individual. They concluded:

What is required is the establishment of
relationships such that, in the formative

59Bernerd n. Corman and Ann G. Olmsted, The Internshi
in the Pre aration of Elementa School Teachers. {Eureau
of Educational fiesearcfi, Michigan State University, East

Lansing), 196“.

no
years, counterpressures may be exerted
against routine and conformity. Whether
the internship approach will succeed
depends, in our opinion, on the kind of
persons who are selected for the consult-
ant position, and whether the administra-
tive arrangements are those that will
facilitate or inhibit the consultants'
maintenance of an independent presence.
Granted that, even if established, this
presence will not make a difference for
all interns. But the interns for whom
it will are to be cherished.60

Although it is apparent that no one approach is used in
the supervision, guidance and support of interns, its place
in terms of a definite need is evident. The approach of a
one to one correspondence in the supervisory situation is
diminishing as a more macroscopic view of the teacher and
her task is examined with regard to style and its implica-
tion for teacher education candidates.

Supervision and Leadership. The traditional concept of
instructional supervision was predicated on the model of a
master teacher. The fitness of one's ability to supervise
was measured primarily in terms of his or her competence as
a teacher.

In 1941, Caswell,61 concerning himself with the question
of advancing the status of supervision, broke away from the
traditional concept of master teacher and wrote:

The best classroom teacher might not be a
good supervisor, and the best supervisor

60Ibid., p. 88.

613. L. Caswell, ”How Should Supervision Be Advanced?”
Educational Method, 2137-20, October, 1991.

41

might not be a superior classroom teacher.
The supervisor must be effective in coop-
erative leadership with adults in organi-
zation, and in the identification of
problems. A broad knowledge must be
possessed of teaching procedures and of
materials of instruction. But it should
be expected that classroom teachers may
be frequently more able in actually work-
ing with children than is the supervisor.
In fact, one of the problems of the
supervisor is to discover the high levels
of competence among teachers and to utilize
them for the good of the entire group.

A competent supervisor and a competent
teacher will work effectively together,
because their activities and areas of
competence agg complementary and not
competitive.

Caswell had implied a new time, a new day and a new task for
supervision and the supervisor.

Considering the same topic, Spears63 indicated that the
new supervisor must be able to work effectively with people
in both individual as well as in group situations, while as
a process, supervision must be considered in terms of needs
and resources. In other words, the capable supervisor is
the one able to determine needs and bring to bear upon them
the appropriate resources. In emphasizing this point,
Spears wrote, "No amount of either general education or
skill in classroom management will make up for the lack of
ability to work with others."6“

 

62Ibid., p. 7.

63Harold Spears, Im rovin the Su ervision of Instruction.
(New York: Prentice-fiaEI, Inc., 1933;.

6I‘Ibid” p. 16h.

42
Muheriji and Shumsky65 discussing the role of consulta-
tion with regard to the education of pre-service teachers
indicated that the basic function of the consultant is to

help groups define and meet their needs. As such a new role

66

is defined, "a facilitator of group - a process man.” The

writers concluded:

The major function of the process leader is
to help classroom teachers realize what
they want, in what direction they want t2
move and to help them reach their goals. 7

Most recently, Bishop68 considered the challenges facing
the supervisor of today. Foremost, among the challenges
facing this person is a considerable knowledge of process,
media, students, and the role of the professional. He
stated:

Needed today is a new emphasis on the
dynamics rather than on the stuff of
curriculum. Curriculum must be restated
as the act and art of the transactional,
the dynamic, the personal, the confronta-
tion, and the individualized grappling
with the weight of truth; the Jousting
with wit; the creation of structure, the
extraction, the utilization, and the
weighing. We must plan for response,

for action and interaction.6

 

65R. MuheriJi and A. Shumsky, ”Critical Look at the
Teacher of Teachers,” Journal of Educational Sociolo ,
35:134-40, November, 1961.

66Ib1d., p. 136.

671bid.

68Leslee J. Bishop, "Challenges for Supervisors," The

Suservisor: égent for Change in Teaching, (Washington,
0 03 e a PP- " -

691bid., p. 96.

43

The key to meeting this challenge, as indicated by
Bishop, begins at the undergraduate level of our teacher
education institutions. Through the proper utilization of
support and guidance, candidates must be directed to ex-
perience and recognize the place of academic discipline, the
individual, the new curriculum, the new technology and its
numerous implications, the appropriate methods of inquiry
and development of knowledge; and they must be given adequate
opportunity to develop a set of beliefs about education,
learners, self and above all must be made to understand that
their professional education has Just begun. The supervisor
is charged with this responsibility. Commenting on this
responsibility Bishop stated:

Changes coming from new and powerful
forces require knowledge of change
processes and competence on the part

of the supervisor as the agent of change.
These and many other realities that the
supervisor working with teachers in
these activities today also have new
roles, new tools, new responsibility.
We must grasp this significant respons-
ibility before we lose it - the task is
to research it, delineaga it, nurture
it, professionalize it.

Confronted with the task of acting as an agent of
change, serious consideration must be given to the compe-
tencies necessary to carry out such a responsibility. various
means, ranging from the descriptions of observable behavior
to the listing of traits considered most desirable, have been

used to determine competency.

 

7°;bid., p. 100.

an

Ryans and wandt71 attempted to examine competence
through a factor analysis technique of behaviors exhibited
by 275 high school teachers. Their findings revealed sever-
al teacher behaviors related to competence, defined in terms
of student satisfaction. Instructors that tended to be
sociable, businesslike, reactive, tolerant and pleasing were
found to be most competent in terms of the investigator's
definition.

The New York State Association for Student Teaching72
attempted to define competence through the use of verbal
behavior descriptions in the selection of supervising teach-
ers. Their descriptions considered seven needs:

The candidate:

1. is well prepared to teach in the subject
matter area involved in the student
teachers practicum.

2. is socially and emotionally mature, relates
well to peers and has demonstrated effec-

tive cooperative working relationships.

3. is capable of accepting the student teacher
as one who is becoming a professional.

a. has a sincere interest in the growth of
children toward personal fulfillment of
their individual potential.

5. applies basic principles of learning to
daily teaching activities through use of

 

71A. S. Barr, David E. Eustice, E. J. Noe, ”The Measure-
ment and Prediction of Teacher Efficiency," Review of Educa-
tional Research, 25:261-70, June, 1955.

72John Wilcox, ”Selecting the Supervising Teacher,"
Commission on the Study of the Role of the Supervising
Teacher, NYSAST, Oneonta, New York, 196a. (Mimeographed.)

45
a variety of teaching materials and
demonstrates versality in the use of a
variety of methods and techniques.
6. has prepared for the responsibility of
guiding the activities of a student
teacher.

7. demonstrates sincere concern for advance-
ment of the teaching profession.

Unlike the work of Ryans and Wandt,74 this approach attempts
to define competence in terms of what should be rather than
what is.

A third approach to competence is revealed in a dis-
cussion by Blackman and Edelfelt75 considering graduate pro-
grams and the development of educational leadership. Basic
to their approach is not only a description of desirable
behaviors, but the creation of a climate which allows can-
didates to both demonstrate and utilize those skills develop-
ed in training. The following behaviors were considered
most important by the authors:

1. Competence in planning for and directing
(guiding) educational change.

2. Competence in improving instruction.
3. Competence in human relations.

4. Competence in educational research and
evaluation.

 

73Ibid.

74Barr, Eustice, Noe, loc. cit.

75C. Blackman and R. Edelfelt, "Planning for Leadership,”
Educational Leadership, 20:185-88, December, 1962.

46
5. Competence in communication with appropri-
ate publics, (communication skills, under-
standing of people with whom, and f cli-
mates in which one communicates).

Traditionally, school administrators have been charged
with the task of instructional leadership which includes the
supervision, support, and guidance of teachers at all levels.
The conclusions of a study by Gross and Herriott77 showed
that school districts selecting instructional leaders, used
as a basis for their selections, criteria which have little
empirical justification. Typically, consideration was given
to individuals based, primarily, on the type and/or amount
of teaching experience, administrative experience as assist-
ant or vice principal, the number of undergraduate and grad-
uate courses taken in education or educational administra-
tion, sex and marital status of those considered. Superin-
tendents were asked to respond to the Executive Professional
Leadership (EPL) which by definition of the authors, measur-
ed the efforts of a principal to conform to the definition
of his executive role which stresses his obligation toward
the improvement of quality teacher performance.78 The re-
sults of the compiled profiles indicated that serious con-
sideration for positions of leadership should be given to

those who exhibited a high level of academic performance, a

76Ibid., p. 186.

77N. Gross and R. Herriott, ”CPL of Elementary Princi-
pals: A Study of Executive Professional Leadership,”
National Elementagprrincipal, 45:66-71, April, 1966.

78Ibid.

47

demonstrated ability in human relations, a willingness to
devote time, off-duty, to their work and relatively little
seniority as a teacher.

In a report of research done in the area of leadership
behavior, Faber and Campbell79 reviewed the work of Lipham,
who, by utilization of the Edwards Personality Preference
Schedule, attempted to identify effective and ineffective
leaders. The authors found that effective principals were
those inclined toward engaging in strong and purposeful acts,
concerned with achieving success and higher status, able to
relate well with others and exceptionally secure in their
home and working environments. On the other hand, ineffec-
tive principals were deliberate and preoccupied with specu-
lative thinking, exhibiting satisfaction with their present
levels of achievement and status. With respect to the guid-
ance and support of teachers, ineffective principals found
little satisfaction; however, they were quite anxious to work
With children and, individually, they were highly dependent
on support from others and were prone to exhibit highly
emotional feelings in upsetting situations.

Willower80 examined leadership styles in terms of a
Nomothetic model (conformity by subordinates) and the Idio-
graphic model (self-direction by subordinates). The author

*—

79c. F. Faber and n. F. Campbell, "Administrative Behav-
ior: Theory and Research: Analysis of Leadership Behavior,”

geview of Educational Research, 31:359. October, 1961.

80D. J. Willower,.'Leadership Styles and Leader's Per-
ceptiens of Subordinates,” Journal of Educational Segielogz,
39:58-64, October, 1960.

#8
examined both older and younger principals who had been
classified into one of the two models by superiors. In both
groups younger principals were found to regard teachers as
being less professional than did the older principals within
the respective group. From this, the author suggested that
when threatened by persons of lower status, persons of high-
er status tend to minimize the competence of subordinates.
The data further suggested, according to the author, that
those included in the Idiographic model tend to operate more
effectively in an unrestricted atmosphere in contrast to a
setting structured by explicit expectations.

Self-esteem and the diffusion of leadership was examined
by Bowers.81 He suggested that traditionally, supervisory
behavior was thought to emanate from one of two sources,

(1) supervisors as a lower level tend to imitate the behav-
ior of their own immediate superiors, and (2) supervisory
behavior stems from personality and motivational forces.
Supervisory behavior between levels is attributed to the
fact that all supervisors think alike and the upper echelon
tend to promote those who think as they do. In terms of
alienation, the results of the study showed that the more
poorly a supervisor was perceived by his subordinates, the
further the supervisor alienates himself from them. In turn,
the more alienated the supervisor becomes, the less support-

ive he will be of his subordinates. From his data, Bowers

 

81D. G. Bowers, “Self-esteem and the Diffusion of Leader-

ship Style,” Journal of Applied Pszchologz, “7:135-h0,
April, 1963.

#9
concluded that "leadership climate is a matter of perceived
selective reward, mediated by the cognitive and connative
structure of the lower level individual."82
Social scientists engaged in researching the area of

leadership have approached the problem in various ways.
Typical of these investigations have been examinations of the
personality of leaders and followers plus various examina-
tions of elected or sociometrically chosen leaders. Current-
ly, the trend in this area is to probe the related aspects
between leader and group. Several studies have indicated
that successful leadership occurs under conditions allowing
the leader to exhibit a democratic stance in contrast to an
authoritarian position. Berkowitz,83 in discussing leader-
ship, questioned the consistent need for democratic leader-
ship when he stated:

The characteristics of the leader, whether

personality-wise or behavioral, become

significant only in terms of the leader's

group. A leader's behavior, thus, may or

may not satisfy the needs of the group,

and a group member's behavior may or may

not be in congprmity with the traditions

of his group.
He suggested, therefore, that the training of leaders should
include exposure to both styles of leadership as the needs

of the group dictate.

 

821b;d., p. luo.

83Leonard Berkowitz, ”Sharing Leadership in Small Decis-

ion Making Groups,“ Journal of Abnormal and Social.§szchologz,
48:231-38, April, 19 .

8“:Lbid., p. 231.

50
From his review of the literature which attempted to
determine the traits and characteristics of leaders, Stogd11185
categorized them.under five general headings as follows:

1. Capacity (intelligence, alertness, verbal
facility, originality, judgment).

2. Achievement (scholarship, knowledge,
athletic accomplishments).

3. Responsibility (dependability, initiative,
persistence, aggressiveness self-
confidence, desire to excel .

4. Participation (activity, sociability,
cooperation, adaptability, humor).

5. Status (socio-economic position, popularity).86
The author concluded from his examination:

A person does not become a leader by virtue
of the possession of some combination of
traits, but the pattern of personal charac-
teristics of the leader must bear some
relevant relationship to the characteristics,
activities and goals of the followers. Thus
leadership must be conceived in terms of the
interaction of variables which are in con-
stant flux and change.... The personal
characteristics of leaders and of the
followers are, in comparison, highly

stable. The persistance of individual
patterns of human behavior in the face of
constant situational change appears to be

a primary obstacle encountered not only in
practice of leadership, but in the selection
and placement of leaders. It is quite an-
other matter to place these persons indif-
ferent wherg they will be able to function
as leaders. 7

h “A

858. M. Stogdill, "Personal Factors Associated With
Leadership: A Survey of the Literature," Journal of P81-
cholo , 25:35-71, January, 1998.

86Ibdd.

87Ibid., pp. 64-65.

51
In conclusion, a review of the literature provides

answers to three important questions pertinent to an exam-
ination of the intern consultant and the elementary intern-
ship. (1) There do exist sufficient constructs in terms of
instructional theory and role analysis which may provide
data as a means of assessment for both program participants
and total program objectives. (2) Supervision, support and
guidance, though following no one particular organizational
pattern, is a vital integral part in the training of pre-
service teachers who must integrate the worlds of theory
and practice. (3) The task of supervision is no longer
singularly focused on the immediate act of instruction, but
has been broadened in its function to incorporate the re-
sponsibility of educational leadership, suggesting a new

basis upon which to predicate selection criteria.

CHAPTER III
Methodology

Introduction. This chapter includes a complete state-
ment of the methodology utilized in the study, beginning
with a brief description of the geographical location of
intern centers and a short statement concerning the total
population in terms of their response to the inquiry. Also
included in this chapter is a brief statement concerning the
collection of data, the nature of the instrument utilized
and a description of the analysis of the data.

Centers. Individuals participating in the fourth year
of the Elementary Intern Program, the internship year during
the 1966-67 school year, represented six off-campus centers
located in various parts of the state of Michigan. At
Michigan State university, these centers represent a unique
means of providing a ”living laboratory“ for teacher educa-
tion candidates and at the same time ofster a partnership
with the public schools dedicated to a mutual concern,
teacher education. The following table indicates the names
of all fully operational centers, their approximate distance
from the main campus in East Lansing, and the number of
cooperating public schools associated with each.

52

53

Table 1. A listing of all intern centers, approximate dis-
tances from East Lansing campus and number of
cooperating school districts associated with each.

 

 

Approximateffiistance Number of cooperating

 

Centers _g, from main campus school districts
Alpena 230 mi. 2
Bay City-Saginaw 80 mi. 3
Port Huron 120 mi. a
Grand Rapids 65 mi. 1
Battle Creek 50 mi. 3
Macomb 90 mi. 10'

*For those unfamiliar with the State of
Michigan a map is provided in Appendix A.

 

Sample. Pursuing the internship year within these cen-
ters are 119 interns supported by 25 intern consultants rep-
resenting a total universe of 1h“ persons. A distribution of

participants according to centers is presented in table 2.

Table 2. A listing of all EIP centers and the number of
interns and intern consultants associated with each.

 

 

Centers Interns Intern Consultants
Alpena 12 2
Bay City-Saginaw 1 5
Port Huron 2 h
Grand Rapids 3h 7
Battle Creek 19 5
Macomb 11 2

All interns and intern consultants were approached and
asked to cooperate in the study. Of the 119 interns approach-
ed, 8h responded to the instrumentation representing 70.59

percent of the intern population. Within the intern sample

54
68 respondents were female, 80.95 percent, and 16 males,
19.05 percent. With regard to intern consultants, 20 of the
total of 25 responded, representing 96.00 percent response.
Within the intern consultant sample, six males responded,
25.00 percent, while 18 females, representing 75.00 percent,
responded.

Information Collection. The collection of information
for this study was carried out in three phases which, in
terms of time, represents the months of February, March and
April, 1967.

Phase I - Through personal correspondence to the uni-
versity coordinator of each teacher education center sponsor-
ing fourth year interns, appointments were made to visit
With both interns and intern consultants to discuss the
study and begin the initial collection of data. Prior
arrangements had been made for separate meetings for interns
and intern consultants on the day of visitation to preclude
any prohibitive behavior on the part of either group. Ini-
tial meetings lasted from forty-five minutes to one hour
during which time the study was discussed and questions
answered. During this time it was indicated that the coop-
eration of individuals would be needed twice, once following
this first visitation. The university coordinator was asked
to participate on this first visitation only. Each partici-
pant was provided with a check list which represented five
basic roles played by the intern consultant; each of the
roles was described by twenty behavioral statements making a

55
total of one hundred items contained within the list. Con-

sultants, interns, and university coordinators alike were
asked to select from each section of the check list the ten
statements they considered most essential to a particular
role as they perceived it now or saw it evolving in the
future. It was further explained that all choices from all
centers would then be item analyzed to find the ten items of
highest consensus for each of the five sections of the check
list. For the final instrument each item selected would then
be matched with a rating to provide respondents with a means
of indicating their perceptions of a particular behavior.

In addition to this, the final instrumentation would contain
two additional sections in an attempt to gather personal
data and opinions about the total program regarding its bene-
fits and shortcomings. In order to provide participants
sufficient time to consider the second instrumentation it

was decided to have this material distributed by the univer-
sity coordinator to be returned to the researcher within two
weeks in the pre-addressed, stamped envelopes precluding con-
tamination.

Phase II - Upon completion of visits to all centers the
analysis of statements from the original check list began.
The Spearman Rank Correlation Method as suggested by Siegel88
was used. Statements ranked high by all groups with

 

88Sidney Siegel, Non arametric Statistics for the Behav-
ioral Sciences. (New York: HcGraw-HiIT BooE Company, Inc.)

: PPO ’2130

56
sufficient correlation coefficients were accepted, while the
remainder were rejected. Upon completion of the analysis,
packets of instruments and pre-addressed, stamped envelopes
were mailed to six Intern Centers for distribution. All
instruments contained specific directions and were therefore
self explanatory, requiring no more than the cooperation of
the respondents.

Phase III - All instruments had been coded according to
Intern Center prior to mailing and as returned, were recorded
on coding sheets to be key punched on cards for computer
analysis at a later date. Throughout this period reminders
in the form of personal contacts were utilized to get the
best possible response from each center.

Egggge of the Instrument. One instrument was utilized
in this study and will be described in this section.

The Role Evaluation Check List was first conceived by
Thomas Fitch89 in an effort to provide intern consultants
With some technique that would enable them to take some
accounting of their performance, which in terms of self-
evaluation could be regarded as guidelines for the develop-
ment of professional growth. The check list in its entirety
represented the Joint efforts of a consultant evaluation
committee which had been contributing to its content for

nearly a year and a half. It was assumed that the instrument

89Thomas Fitch, ”Intern Consultant Evaluation Form.”
(Macomb, Michigan: Michigan State university Teacher Educa-
tion Center), 1966. (Mimeographed.)

57

could not consider total role performance of intern consult-
ants, but rather would focus on five basic roles common to
all intern consultants. They are as follows:

A. Personal Characteristics - the consultant
as a person.

B. Intern--Consultant Relations - the con-
sultant as a participant in human relations.

C. Instructional and Guidance Skills - the
consultant as a professional model.

D. General School Services - the consultant
as a public school resource.

E. Professional Growth - the consultant as a
practicing professional educator.

The original instrument, for purposes of this study,
was rewritten in part to meet the requirements of behavioral
descriptions. Statements which were duplicated or redundant
were rewritten, incorporated to produce a single item, while
others were deleted completely. Upon completion of the
revision the list contained one hundred items, twenty items
descriptive of each role. (A copy of the revised list may
be found in Appendix B.) The list was then presented to all
participants in teacher education centers as described in
the section, Information Collection. Through the selection
and analysis of participants' responses, ten basic behavioral
descriptions considered most important by respondents to
each role was determined. The analysis was made by the
ranking of responses through the construction of a frequency
distribution among groups (University Faculty, Intern
Consultants and Interns) which was applied to the Spearman

58
Rank Coefficient of Correlation as suggested by Siegel.90
The presentation of this data is found in tables 3, h, and 5.
This information served as the basis for the formulation of
the final Role Evaluation Check List.

For the final instrumentation a scale had been devised
and was inserted following each selected statement for the
purpose of providing respondents with a means of indicating
their perception of the performance of a particular behav-
ioral description. The scale presented five alternatives,
excellent, good, adequate, poor, and deficient. Also in-
cluded with each scale was a choice labeled "no basis for
Judgment” which could be used when no evidence to form an
opinion was present. For convenient reference a master
scale was presented at the top of each page of the check
list. The scales were varied in order, throughout the porb
tion of the instrument in.which they were utilized, forcing
the respondents to read all statements and consider them in
relation to each scale of listed alternatives.

Together with the check list itself, additional infor-
mation was sought by use of an objective multiple-choice
type of questionnaire aimed at gathering information about
the individual participants and further, an open-end type of
questionnaire was used for the purpose of gathering the
opinions of the respondents concerning the total Elementary

Intern Program.

9OSiegel, loo, cit.

59

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3. Item selection of interns and intern consultants
with regard to the Spearman Rank Coefficient of
Correlation

I II III IV V

I EfiflE In I §%E§ In I 3%2E In I 3%53 In I 3%25 In

A 15.5 14 A 9 6 N 8 1# A 9 3 A 8 5

B 15.5 15.5 B 9 “.5 B 12.5 7.5 B 6 10 B 3 2.5

C 5 2 C 5 9 C 6 3 C 20 12 C 1 1

D 2 3 D 15 1H 2 1 D 6 8.5 D 6 u

E 13 9 E 16.5 13 E 15.5 13 E 3 h E 8 10

F 11 5 F 11.5 10 F 1 2 F 15 18 P 13 7

G 15.5 8 G 16.5 18.5 G 12.5 10 G 19 19 G 15 16

H 3.5 7 H 18 11.5 H 3 “.5 H 16.5 20 H 10.5 11

I 12 19 I 13.5 18.5 I 7 9 I 13.5 11 I 12 15

J 15.5 17 J 20 17 J 12.5 11 J h 1 J 8 1#

JK 20 20 K 13.5 15 K 9.5 h.5 K 8 5 K 1“ 12

L 1 1 I L 2 4.5 L 9.5 7.5 L 2 6.5 L 16.5 17

M 8 10 M 5 8 M 17 19 M 12 8.5 M 3 9

N 10 13 N 9 7 N 12.5 15 N 6 6.5 N 3 2.5

O 7 12 0 7 11.5 0 20 20 0 11 16.5 0 5 13

P 19 18 P 19 20 P “.5 16.5 P 18 15 P 16.5 8

Q 6 4 Q 5 1 Q 18 12 Q 13.5 13.5 Q 18 18

B 3.5 6 R 11.5 16 R 19 16.5 R 16.5 16.5 R 20 20

s 18 15.5 s 3 2.5 s u.5 6 s 1 2 s 19 19

'1‘ 11 t; 1 2. £1 . 18 J; 10 1 d 10 6

ficance at-.0 level = :33“) .,

 
  
 

In - Intern

- em
C - Consultant

II Intern--Consu
III Instructional & Guidance Skills

 

  

I‘

IV General School Services
V Professional Growth

1tant Relations

 

60

Table 4. Item selection of interns and university faculty
with regard to the Spearman Rank Coefficient of

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
   

 

Correlation.
I II III IV v

I §%EE In I 3%EE In I §%E§ In I figflg In I Biflk In

18.5 14 A 6 6 A 3.5 14 A 5 3 A 5
B 18.5 15.5 B 10.5 4.5 B 14 7.5 B 5 10 B 2 2.5
c 8 2 c 6 9 c 8.5 3 c 20 12 c 2
D 1.5 3 D 19.5 14 D 3.5 1 D 8.5 8.5 D 2
E 6 9 E 19.5 13 E 14 13 E 8.5 4 E 7 10
F 13.5 5 F 15 10 F 3.5 2 F 17.5 18 F 15 7
G 10.5 8 G 17 18.5 G 17.5 10 G 17.5 19 G 19 16
H 10.5 7 H 10.5 11.5 H 3.5 4.5 H 17.5 20 R 12 11
I 15 19 I 10.5 18.5 I 11 9 I 17.5 11 I 15 15
J 18.5 17 J 17 17 J 14 11 J 2.5 1 J 7 14
K 18.5 20 K 14 15 K 19 4.5 K 11 5 K 10 12
L 3.5 1 L 1.5 4.5 L 8.5 7.5 L 2.5 6.5 L 15 17
M 6 10 M 3.5 8 M 8.5 19 M 13 8.5 M 10 9
N 16 13 N 3.5 7 N 14 15 N 13 6.5 N 2.5
o 3.5 12 o 10.5 11.5 o 17.5 20 o 8.5 16.5 o 4 13
P 10.5 18 P 17 20 P 3.5 16.5 P 13 15 P 15 8
Q 6 4 Q 1.5 1 Q 20 12 Q 8.5 13.5 Q 19 18
a 1.5 6 R 10.5 16 a 14 16.5 R 15 16.5 R 19 20
s 13.5 15.5 s 6 2.5 s 3.5 6 s 5 2 s 15 19
T10. 11 __T_10. 2 3; 8.518 __1__1___13_.5__'_1310 6

W" =. —‘F=='.'3'O'_"'“§=—-T>‘I—" "fifi

01 = .534)

F : UnIE. Faculty II Intern-—Con::1tant Relations

In - Intern III Instructional & Guidance Skills

IV General School Services
V Professional Growth

61

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 5. Item selection of intern consultants and university

.ggcgifigegithogegard to the Spearman Rank Coefficient
I II III Iv v

I §%23 c I §%£E c. I 852! c I 1 ‘§%EE c I £355' 0

A 18.5 15.5 A 6 A 3.5 8 A 5 9 A 5 8

B 18.5 15.5 B 10.5 B 14 12.5 B 5 6 B 2 3

c 8 5 c 6 5 c 8.5 6 c 20 120 c 2 1

D 1.5 2 D 19.5 15 D 3.5 2 D 8.5 6 D 2 6

E 6 13 E 19.5 16.5 !E 14 15.5 E 8.5 3 E 7 8

F 13.5 11 F 15 11.5 'F 3.5 1 F 17.5 15 F 15 13

G 10.5 15.5 G 17. 16.5 G 17.5 12.5 G 17.5,19 G 19 '15

R 10.5 3:5 H 10.5 18 a 3.5 3 H 17.5 16.5 a 12 }Io.5L

I 15 112 1‘10.5 13.5 I 11 7 I 17.5 13.5 I 15 12

J‘18.5 15.5 J 17 20 J 14 12.5 J 2.5 4 J 7 8

K 18.5 20 K 14 13.5 K 19 9.5 K 11 8 K 10 14

L 3.5 1 L 1.5 2 iL 8.5 9.5 L) 2.5 2 L 15 16.5

M 6 8 M 3.5 5 IM 8.5 17 M 13 12 M 10 3

N 16 10 N 3.51 9 N 14 12.5, N 13 6 N 7 3

o 3.51 7 o 10.5 7 o 17.5 20 I o 8.5 11 .o 5

P 10.5119 P 17 119 P 3.5 4.5 P 13 18 P 15 16.5

Q 6 6 Q 1.5 5 Q 20 18 Q 8.5 13.5 Q 19 18

a 1.5 3.5 a 10.5 11.5 a 14 19 a 15 16.5 a 19 20

s 13.5 13 s 6 3 rs 3.5 4.5 s 5 1 s 15 19

£10.: 2 r 1 T 3.51.51 1

 

 

 

 

 

    
 

 

 

jSignificance at .01 level =

 

I - Iiem
F - University Faculty
C - Consultant

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I Personaliahar.
II Intern--Consu1tant Relations
III Instructional a Guidance Skills

 

IV General School Services
V Professional Growth

 

_g;_;__J10 10 10.

.534)

 

62

Analysis of the data. The first hypothesis (A-l),
which sought to examine the relationship of self-perceived
role evaluations of intern consultants and their selection
of an individual superior selected as most "responSible to“
was examined through the use of chi square. While the
selection of superior had been categorized by definition the
dicotomy applied to role evaluations was based on the median
of all mean scores reported for intern consultants. Total
instrument scores as well as sub-factor scores were reported
in terms of means, which accounted only for statements which
had been marked in terms of the scale eliminating the re-
sponse, ”no basis for Judgment.”

In addition to investigating the relationship in terms
of total instrument scores, a chi square analysis was also
undertaken regarding each sub-factor of the instrument using
the same categorization and dicchtomy described above.

The second hypothesis (A-2) was examined in the same
manner as (A-l). Total instrument scores as well as sub-
factor scores were submitted to chi square analysis. Unlike
hypothesis (A-l), hypothesis (A-2) examined differences in
self-perceived role evaluations of intern consultants with
regard to sex. Because of the limited number of male re-
spondents, cells within the analysis containing five or less
members were also submitted to a correction formula.

Hypothesis (A-3) which examined the differences between
male and female intern consultants with regard to a superior

perceived as most "responsible to,” was analyzed through chi

63
square. Again, where necessary a correction formula was
applied.

An examination of role evaluations of intern consult-
ants as perceived by interns with regard to rank of superior
chosen as most ”responsible to” was the concern of hypothesis
(B-l). Implementation in terms of analysis was followed in
the same manner as described for hypothesis (A-l). Sub-
factcrs were also analyzed in like manner.

Hypotheses (B-2) and (0-1), which were directed at prob-
ing differences regarding the selections made by interns of
a superior perceived as most "responsible to" examined,

(A) choice with regard to sex of interns, and (8) choice
with regard to teacher education center. Data gathered con-
cerning both of these hypotheses were submitted to a chi
square analysis. Correction formulas were used where
necessary.

Additional Questions. Although no hypothesis was posit-
ed additional questions were considered. The first cf these
examined differences among centers with regard to intern
consultants' self-perceived role evaluations and their
selection of superior perceived most ”responsible to.” Due
to the small number of consultants in particular centers a
conventional chi square representing individual centers
could not be used. Instead, a series of chi squares was
utilized in which each individual center was plotted against
the remaining centers. Correction formulas were used where

necessary.

64

A second question comparing interns and intern consult-
ants with regard to the individual or individuals perceived
as most ”responsible for” was considered. Data was analyzed
through use of chi square.

A third question which compared the strengths and weak-
nesses of the Elementary Intern Program as perceived by both
interns and intern consultants was investigated. Responses
with regard to strengths and weaknesses were categorized for
purposes of reporting. Frequencies were then determined for
each category and reported in terms of percentage for the
total of each group responding.

A final question considered the relation of sixteen
selected variables and the self-perceived role evaluations
of intern consultants. These variables are representative
of the socio-econcmic and educational backgrounds of intern
. consultants and were analyzed through the use of chi square.

Correction formulas were applied where necessary.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

Introduction. To facilitate the analysis of the data
presented in this chapter, the sequence of hypotheses and
questions as established in Chapter I will be followed.
Where chi squares were utilized, a correction formula was
applied to cells with five or less members. In several in-
stances where the collapsing and correcting of cells was of
no benefit, such indication was made. The analysis begins
with a presentation of mean and median scores as generated
by the responses of interns and intern consultants for both
total instrument and sub-factor scores. This information is
of notable importance since, in the majority of the analysis,
it operated as the control variable as stipulated in com-
puter programming.

Table 6 contains the mean scores for the total instru-
ment and sub-factors as well as median scores for each sec-
tion which provided the dicotomy utilized in the chi square
analysis for both interns and intern consultants. Various
differences are apparent in examining these raw scores a1-
thcugh no t-tests were used to test significance for the
following reasins, (1) the data was not collected in matched
pairs (intern to intern consultant) to eliminate the possible
existence of threat, and (2) the differences in size of the

two groups, interns (84), intern consultants (24), lent

65

66

itself more readily to chi square analysis for the purposes
of this study.

Table 6. Mean and median scores of interns and intern
consultants as regards the Role Evaluation Check

List for both total instrument and sub-factor

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

scores.

‘fInterns .5IEEEEH—C3533153553'
lTotal & Sub-Factor Sections Mean Median Mean Median
ITotal Instrument 2.04 1.98 1.82 1.76
Personal Characteristics 8—7 1.90 1.868 71.71 1.60
Intern--Consultant Relations 1.98 1:89 1.76 1.60
Instructional and Guidance

Skills 2.37 2.00 1.85 1.80
General School Services 2.12 2.00 1.84 1.80
Professional Growth .7 2.01 2.00 1.91 1.90

 

 

 

Several reasons can be put forth at this time in support
of the contention that the scores derived from the partici-
pants represent an accurate picture of their perceptions of
the intern consultant. They are as follows: (1) for both
interns and intern consultants, participation in this study
was wholly voluntary, (2) the objectives and procedures of
the study were presented and explained initially at a meet-
ing between the researcher and separate groupings of interns
and intern consultants during which time all questions asked
were answered to alleviate any unnecessary apprehension,

(3) assurances were given in this regard--no attempt was

made to evaluate individuals or their performance, (4) par-

ticipants utilized their own time to complete the instrument

67
in order to preclude a time pressured response.
Hypothesis A—l. Table 7 contains a chi square analysis of in-
tern consultants' role evaluation scores in relation to the
superior perceived as most ”responsible to.” Five categories
were derived from total participant response and of these
possible choices consultants selected three; university coor-
dinator, public school administrative personnel and the gen—
eral tax-paying public with the university coordinator as the
major choice. A similar pattern existed for all sub-factor
analysis presented in Tables 7.1-7.5. In this case, an exam-
ination of the distribution indicated that there would be no
benefit in the collapsing and correcting of cells. From
the analysis it is evident that no significance exists be-
tween role evaluation scores of intern consultants and their
choice of superior perceived as most ”responsible to.“
Table 7. A chi square analysis of intern consultants' role

evaluation scores and their choice of superior
perceived as most "responsible to.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Person Perceived b it;
Responsible University School Intern
22, (Coordinator Personnel Consultant Other Total,
Consultant

High 10 l 0 l 12
Consultant

Low 10 l 0 0 11
Total 20 2 0 l 23
N a 23 x2 . 2.00 15.05(3) a 7.82

 

 

 

Table 70 1e

68

A chi square analysis of intern consultants'

role evaluation scores (Personal Characteristics)
and their choice of superior perceived as most
"responsible to.”

 

 

 

 

Terson Perceived Public
Responsible University School Intern
To Coordinator Personnel Consultant Other Totafl
(Consultant

High 11 1 0 1 13
WConsultant

Low' 9 1 0 0 10
Total 20 2 0 l 23

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a 23¥¥ x218 2.05. x::05(3) = 7.82

 

 

Table 7.2.

A chi square analysis of intern consultants'
role evaluation scores (Intern--Consultant
Relations) and their choice of superior per-
ceived most ”responsible to.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Person Perceived Public
Responsible University School Intern
To Coordinator Personnel Consultant Other Total
Consultant

High 10 l 0 l 12
Consultant

Low' 10 l O 0 11
Total 20 2 0 1 23
N - 23 x2 - 2.00 22.05(3) a 7.82

 

 

Table 7e 3e

69

A chi square analysis of intern consultants'
role evaluation scores (Instructional and
Guidance Skills) and their choice of superior
perceived most ”responsible to."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Person Perceived Public
Responsible University School Intern
To Coordinator Personnel Consultant Other Total
HConsultant

High 10 l 0 1 12
HConsultant

Low 10 l 0 0 11
Total 20 2 0 l 23
N = 23 x2 . 2.00 i§.os(3) . 7.82
Table 7.4. A chi square analysis of intern consultants'

role evaluation scores (General School Services)
and their choice of superior perceived most
"responsible to.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Person Perceived Public
Responsible University School Intern
To Coordinator Personnel Consultant Other Total
(Consultant

High 11 l 0 1 13
Consultant

Low ' 9 l 0 0 10
hotel 20 2 o 1 23
IL” 23 x2 . 2.05 x2.05(3) - 7.82

 

 

 

70

Table 7.5. A chi square analysis of intern consultants'
role evaluation scores (Professional Growth)
and their choice of superior perceived most
”responsible to.”

 

 

 

 

Person Perceived Public
Responsible University School Intern
To Coordinator Personnel Consultant Other TotaD
{Consultant

High 10 1 0 1 12
Consultant

Low 10 1 0 0 11
Total 20 2 0 l 23

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. 23 :2 - 2.00 x2.05(3) = 7.82

 

Hypothesis A- . An examination of the two-by-two contingency
tables which sought to examine the differences between male
and female intern consultants and their self-perceived role
evaluations could not provide any significant evidence that
a difference between the two groups existed. Table 8, util-
izing role evaluation scores (total instrument) as the con-
trol variable in relation to sex as the spread variable,
indicated that the majority of males fell below the median
for the total group while females, in terms of percentage,
are nearly identically above the median. All the sub-
factors (tables 8.1-8.5) for hypothesis A-2 were analyzed in
similar fashion to those of hypothesis A-l. Regarding sub-
factors, particular attention should be paid to the change
of male and female distribution in the areas of instruction-
al and guidance skills and general school services. The

 

71

vast majority of female scores fell above the median in the
areas of Personal Characteristics, Intern--Consu1tant Bela-
tions, and Professional Growth. However, male scores appear-
ed above the median in two other areas, Instructional and
Guidance Skills and General School Services. A correction
formula has been utilized on the following contingency tables.
Table 8. A chi square analysis of male and female intern

consultants and their self-perceived role
evaluation scores.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sex Male Female Total
Consultant

High 2 10 12
Consultant

Low # 8 12
Total 6 18 2h
N=2u x?=0.89 x?.05(1)=3.8u

 

 

 

Table 8.1. A chi square analysis of male and female intern
consultants and their self-perceived role
evaluation scores (Personal Characteristics).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sex Male ' Female Total
Consultant

High 2 11 13
Consultant ,

Low 4 7 11
Total 6 18 2b
N-zu :2-1.uo x2=.05(1)=3.8u

 

 

72

Table 8.2. A chi square analysis of male and female intern
consultants and their self-perceived role
evaluation scores (Intern--Consu1tant Relations)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sex Male Female Total
Consultant

High 2 10 12
Consultant

Low # 8 12
Total 6 18 2h
stu x2=o.89 x2.05(1)=3.8u

 

 

 

Table 8.3 A chi square analysis of male and female intern
consultants and their self-perceived role
evaluation scores (Instructional and Guidance

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Skills)

Sex Male Female Total
Consultant

High 3 9 12
Consultant

Low 3 9 12
Total 6 18 2h
N-zu x2=0.00 x2.os(1)=3.8n

 

 

 

73

A chi square analysis of male and female intern
consultants and their self-perceived role
evaluation scores (General School Services).

Table 8 e 4e

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sex Male Female Total
Consultant

High # 9 l3
Consultant

Low 9 11
Total 18 24
N82“ x2-0.50 12.05(1)-3.84

 

 

Table 8.5. A chi square analysis of male and female intern
consultants and their self-perceived role
evaluation scores (Professional Growth).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sex Male Female Total
Consultant

High 2 10 12
Consultant

Low 4 8 12
Total 6 18 2b
Nazu x2=0.89 x2.05(1)=3.8h

 

 

 

Hypothesis A-fi. Differences between male and female intern
consultants and their choice of a superior perceived as most
"responsible to" could not be detected through a chi square
analysis. An examination of the distribution in Table 9
indicates that male and female consultants alike perceive
the university coordinator as their choice of superior most

”responsible to.” Percentage-wise this represents 83.33 of.

7#

each group and tends to suggest that for the majority of
intern consultants the university coordinator has become the

professional model. No collapsing or correction was applied

in the analysis for reasons evident to the reader.

Table 9. A chi square analysis of male and female intern
consultants and their choice of superior per-
ceived as most "responsible to.”

 

 

 

 

Person Perceived Public

Responsible University School Intern

To Coordinator Personnel Consultant Other Total
Male _ 5 0 O O 5
Female 15 2 0 1 18
Total 20 2 O l 23

 

 

 

 

 

 

N a 23 x2 = u.oo x2.05(3) = 7.82

 

 

Hypothesis B-l. Role evaluations of intern consultants as
perceived by interns with regard to their choice of superior
perceived as most "responsible to” were analyzed in much the
same manner as that done for hypothesis A-l. Analysis was
made in terms of both total instrument and all sub-factor
scores. No evidence pointing toward the existence of a sig-
nificant relationship between role evaluation scores as per-
ceived by interns and their choice of superior most ”respons-
ible to" could be generated. Unlike the limited choice of
consultants, the distribution of choices made by interns was
of a wider range. Peroertage-wise, public school personnel
was the most frequently selected choice although the remaining

 

75

categories also received notable response. While con-
sultants were apparently able to identify with one particu-
lar individual (university coordinator), interns had no such
defined identification in this regard. Tables 10 - 10.5
contain an examination of interns' perceptions in terms of
total instrument scores and sub-factors and their choice of

superior selected as most ”responsible to.”

Table 10. A chi square analysis of role evaluation scores
(Total Instrument) of intern consultants as per-
ceived by interns and their choice of superior
indicated most "reSponsible to."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Person
Perceived Public
Responsible Univ. School Intern General
To Coor. Personnel Consultant Self Public Total
Consultant

High 6 21 8 3 h #2
Consultant

Low 11 16 3 h 3 37
[Emu 17 37 11 7 7 79
IN = 79 x2 . n.73 x?.os(5) = 11.07

 

 

Table 10.1.

76

A chi square analysis of role evaluation
scores (Personal Characteristics) of intern
consultants as perceived by interns and their
choice of superior indicated most ”responsible
to.”

 

 

 

 

Person
Perceived Public
Responsible Univ. School Intern General
To Coor. Personnel Consultant Self Public Total
Consultant

High 7 21 6 3 3 #0
Consultant

Low 10 16 5 4 h 39
Total 17 37 11 7 7 79

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N a 79 x2 - 1.78 x2.05(5) . 11.07

 

 

 

Table 10.2.

A chi square analysis of role evaluation scores
(Intern--Consu1tant Relations) of intern con-
sultant as perceived by interns and their choice
of superior indicated most ”responsible to."

 

 

 

 

 

Person
Perceived Public
Responsible Univ. School Intern General
To Coor. Personnel Consultant Self Public Total
Consultant

High 5 22 6 3 3 39
Consultant

Low 12 15 5 h u no
Total 17 37 11 7 7 79

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N a 79 x2 . n.78 12.05(5) a 11.07

 

 

 

Table 10 e 30

77

A chi square analysis of role evaluation scores
(Instructional & Guidance Skills) of intern
consultants as perceived by interns and their
choice of superior indicated most "responsible

to.“

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Person
Perceived Public
Responsible Univ. School Intern General
To Coor. Personnel Consultant Self Public Total
Consultant

High 5 20 8 2 h 39
Consultant

Low 12 17 3 5 3 “0
Total 17 37 11 7 7 79
N = 79 x2 a 6.73 x2.05(5) = 11.07

 

Table 10.4.

A chi square analysis of role evaluation scores

(General School Services) of intern consultant
as perceived by interns and their choice of
superior indicated most "responsible to."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Person
Perceived Public
Responsible Univ. School Intern General
To Coor. Personnel Consultant Self Public Total
Consultant

High 8 18 8 3 h #1
Consultant

Low 9 19 3 a 3 38
Total 17 37 11 7 7 79
N . 79 x2 = n.un x2.05(5) = 11.07

 

 

 

78

Table 10.5. A chi square analysis of role evaluation scores
(Professional Growth) of intern consultants as
perceived by interns and their choice of
superior selected most "responsible to.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Person
Perceived Public
Responsible Univ. School Intern General
To Coor. Personnel Consultant Self Public Total
Consultant

High 8 18 8 3 5 #2
Consultant

Low 9 19 3 h 2 37
Total 17 37 ll 7 7 79
N . 79 = 3.81 x2.05(5) = 11.07

 

 

Hypothesis §:g. No statistical differences were detected
through an examination of a superior perceived as most
”responsible to” in relation to the male and female composi-
tion of the intern group. As a total group, in terms of the
frequency of selections made, an order did exist with public
school personnel first, followed by university coordinators
and intern consultants in that order. As a group, males
were split evenly regarding their first choice which was
divided equally between public school personnel and univer-
sity coordinator. It appears that interns have not been able
to identify with consultants in the same way that consultants
have with their university coordinator. This tends to
suggest that the total potential of the intern consultant as
a professional model has not been realized. In terms of

purpose and function, the consultant role still begs

79
definition for interns. Table 11 illustrates the total dis-

tribution of male and female interns with regard to their

selection of a superior perceived as most ”responsible to."

Table 11. A chi square analysis of male and female interns
and their selection of a superior perceived as
most ”responsible to."

g.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Person

Perceived Public

Responsible Univ. School Intern General

To Coor. Personnel Consultant Self Public Total
Male 4 4 3 2 1 lb
Female 13 . 33 8 5 6 63
Total 17 37 11 7 7 79

N s 79 x2 = 4.12 x2.05(5) = 11.07

 

 

Hypothesis C:;. In addition to an examination of the differ-
ences between male and female interns and their choices of
superior perceived most ”responsible to," hypothesis C-l
attempted to discern any differences which existed in this
regard among centers. A chi square analysis of the control
variable (center) in relation to the spread variable (per-
ceived superior) was unable to detect a significant statis-
tical difference. A pattern, similar to that derived from
the examination of male and female interns, was found. It
should be noted, however, that in center C, fifty percent of
the interns did select the intern consultant as their choice
while at the same time, no selections in favor of public

school personnel were made. This particular distribution is

80
in distinct opposition to that of fellow interns who re-
sponded to public school personnel first, followed by uni-
versity coordinators. Unlike all other centers, apparently
Center C has a unique triatic relationship between teacher
education center personnel, public school personnel and
teacher education candidates. Center F was also of particu-
lar interest because of the frequent responses made to the
”other” category which represented self and the general
public, although in regards to public school personnel and
university coordinator Center F responded in much the same
manner as did the other centers. The ”other" category
represents 20.80 percent for Center F, a comparatively large
number who find themselves unaligned with individuals re-
sponsible for their pro-professional and professional train-
ing. An illustration of the distribution for all centers
and their choice of perceived superior can be found in

Table 12.

81

Table 12. A chi square analysis of interns' perceptions of
superior selected most ”reSponsible to” with
regard to teacher education center.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Person

Perceived Public

Responsible University School Intern

To Coordinator Personnel Consultant Other Total

Center A 1 5 2 2 10

Center B l 3 1 2 7

Center C 3 0 i; 1 8

Center D 5 9 2 l 17

Center E 1 9 1 1 12

Center F 6 11 1 7 25
Total 17 37 11 1h 79

N = 79 x2 = 20.17 x2.05(15) . 25.00

 

 

 

Some additional questions.

Question 1. Although no formal hypotheses were posited,
four additional questions were considered. The first of
these concerned itself with possible differences which might
exist among centers with regard to perceived role evalua-
tions and choice of superior perceived most ”responsible to”
as indicated by intern consultants. As explained in Chapter
III, the analysis was based on a series of chi squares in
which each individual center was tabulated against the re-
mainder. The small population of intern consultants
necessitated this procedure. No statistical significance
was found in the analysis of role evaluations among centers

as presented in Table 13. The limited number of observations

82
in the majority of centers prevented the large numbers
necessary in diagonal cells from occuring. Center F with
seven consultants had the greatest probabilities for reach-
ing a significance level, but when submitted to the median
dicotomy the potential power of the large cell was lost.
Continued analysis of this type with larger numbers of ob-
servations is needed and should be considered in terms of

program growth.

83

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 13. A chi Square analysis of interns self-perceived
role evaluations among centers.

Recl Recl

Score High Low Total Score High Low Total
C-A 2 3 5 0-3 0 2 2
All 10 9 19 All 12 10 22
Total 12 12 24 Total 12 12 24
x2-.25 x2.05(1)=3.84 x2=0.33 x2.05(l)=3.84
Recl Reel

Score High Low Total Score High Low Total
C-C l l 2 0-D 3 l 4
All 11 11 22 All 9 ll 20
Total 12 12 24 Total 12 12 24
x2=0.00 x2.05(l)=3.84 x2=1.20 x2.05(1)=3.84
Recl Recl

Score High Low Total Score High Low Total
C-E 1 3 4 C-F 5 2 7
All 11 9 20 All 7 10 17
Total 12 12 24 Total 12 12 24
xZ-l.20 x2.05(1)-3.84 x2=l.81 x2.05(1)=3.84

 

 

 

 

84

Table 14 deals with the second portion of question one,
the selection of superior perceived most "responsible to” by
consultants among centers. In similar fashion to that es-
tablished by the analysis of role evaluations, the analysis
of perceived superior failed to establish any kind of sig-
nificant difference among centers. Cells were collapsed to
a two-by-two contingency table, but based on the same popula-
tion as analyzed in Table 13, the necessary large diagonal
cells could not be produced. Unlike interns, consultants
responded overwhelmingly to university coordinator as the
superior perceived most ”responsible to” leaving only a
small number to complete the distribution already hindered
by the limited size of the total consultant population.

85

A chi square analysis of interns choice of
superior perceived most "responsible to” among

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 14.
centers.
Univ.
Superior Coor. Other Total
C-A 5 0 5
All 15 3 18
Total 20 3 23
x2=.99 x2.05(1)=3.84
Univ.
Superior Coor. Other Total
C-C 2 O 2
All 18 3 21
Total 20 3 23
x2=.33 x2.05(l)=3.84
Univ.
Superior Coor. Other Total
C-E 2 2 4
All 18 l 19
Total 20 3 23
x2=.00 x2.05(l)=3.84

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Univ.
Superior Coor. Other Total
0-8 2 O 2
All 18 3 21
Total 20 3 23
x2=.33 x2.05(1)=3.84
Univ.
Superior Coor. Other Total
0-0 2 1 F3
All 18 2 20
Total 20 3 23
x2=1.25 x2.05(l)=3.84
Univ.
Superior Coor. Other Total
C-F 7 0 7
All 13 3 16
Total 20 3 23
x2=.51 x2.05(l)-3814

 

 

 

 

86

Question 2. A major portion of the analyses thus far
has dealt with an examination of the choice of superior per-
ceived most "responsible to" by both interns and intern con-
sultants. Question two changes focus and has as its primary
concern the opposite end of the responsibility continuum,
i.e., the person or persons perceived as "responsible for."
The following categories were derived from total participant
response regarding "responsibility for": (1) students,

(2) interns, (3) self, and (4) other (which represented such
responses as EIP program, the school system or tax-paying
public).

In response to the question of "responsibility for,”
interns generally chose the "student" response realizing the
students they teach as their first consideration. However,
a very small percentage responded to the "self" category
and an examination of the data concerned with a person per-
ceived as "responsible to" shows that these same individuals
responded to ”self" in that inquiry. This tends to suggest
that these individuals have been unable to fix themselves
within the program or public school setting. Some interns
responded to the ”other" category as defined above, suggest-
ing that "responsibility for" can only be viewed macroscop-
ically, i.e., in terms of the total objectives of an educa-
tional effort.

As first choice, intern consultants selected "interns"
in response to the person or persons felt "responsible for.”

Of the twenty-three respondents, only two consultants'

87
selected the "student" response in respect to "responsibil-
ity for" which tends to suggest that the basic consideration
of the consultant as defined within the job description,
i.e., students taught, has been overlooked through a more
immediate concern of support and guidance of teacher educa-
tion candidates. A comparison of the responses of interns
and intern consultants regarding ”responsibility for" is
presented in Table 15 reported in terms of observations and

percentages of each group.

Table 15. A comparison of intern and intern consultant
perceptions of a person or persons viewed as
”responsible for.”

 

 

 

 

 

Interns Consultants

Responses No. 1 No.
Pupils 64 86.00 2 9.00
Interns 0 0.00 20 87.00
Self 2 3.00 1 4.00
Other 9 11.00 0 0.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 3. Question three considers an examination of
the strengths and weaknesses of the Elementary Intern Program
as viewed by interns and intern consultants. For convenience
of reporting five categories of program strengths were de-
rived from the overall response of both groups. They are as
follows: (1) benefit of actual classroom experience, (2)

continuous guidance and support by an intern consultant,

88

(3) more practical methods courses interwoven with actual
experience, (4) mutual concern for teacher education on the
part of public school and university staff, and (5) "other,"
including such responses as being able to reside at home and
earning a salary while completing the program.

In like manner, five categories were also derived for
reporting program weaknesses, and they are as follows:
(1) lack of time for communication between interns and con-
sultants, (2) a lack of structured definition of intern and
intern consultant role within the public school setting,
(3) a lack of communication between the teacher education
centers and their needs and campus personnel, (4) the ex-
treme pressures created by a full time teaching load and
university course work, and (5) a lack of selection criteria
and continuous structured evaluation for the mutual benefit
of interns and consultants.

The responses of participants in terms of observations
and percentages of each group are indicated in Tables 16
and 17. In total, percentages appear to exceed one hundred
percent; this is accounted for, however, by the fact that
respondents were requested to indicate £12 weaknesses and

strengths of the program as it exists.

89

Table 16. A comparison of Elementary Intern Program
Strengths as perceived by both interns and

intern consultants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interns Consultants
Categories No. i No. 5
Actual Classroom Experiences 39 46.33 10 41.67
Guidance and Support 51 60.71 21 87.50
Practical Methods Courses#_- 23 27.38 10 41.67
Teacher Education Partnership 8 9.52 2 8.33
Accommodations and Ecgnomy 12 14.29 3 12.50

 

 

 

Table 17. A comparison of Elementary Intern Program
Weaknesses as perceived by both interns and

intern consultants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interns Consultants

Categories No. S No. 5
Lack of time for communi-

cation 19 22.62 5 20.83
Lack of definition of role 15 17.86 1 4.17
Lack of communication be-

tween campus and teacher

education centers 7 8.33 4 16.67
Extreme pressure 16 19.05 8 33.33
Selective criteria and

evaluation 32 38.10 11 45.83

 

 

 

 

90

Question 4. This fourth and final question deals with
sixteen selected socio-economic and educational variables
and their relation to the self-perceived role evaluations of
intern consultants. 0f the sixteen variables listed in
Table 18 only two were found to be significant; years ex-
perience as an intern consultant and the amount of weekend
time devoted to EIP. Regarding the first of these signifi-
cant variables, years of consultant experience, and its
relation to role evaluation scores several possible interu
pretations could be suggested. Foremost among these possi-
bilities would be the consideration of each year of experi-
ence as a performance index whereby consultants could review
their own assets and liabilities in terms of previous per-
formance. Thus, consultants with limited experience have
had little opportunity to review their own behavior and to
test new—found direction which, in terms of their role per-
ception, necessarily restricts their insight. A further
question begs consideration, however, and that is, at what
point does the experience variable no longer significantly
relate to role evaluation or is it possible for it to become
inherent to the role of consultantship.

The second variable of significance, weekend time
devoted to EIP work, appears to support the work of Gross
and Herriott,91 who found in their study of the elementary
principal, that desire to devote spare time to their position

91Gross and Herriott, loc. cit.

91
was indicative of educational leadership. In terms of pro-
gram growth, further analysis of such variables as; years of
teaching experience, age, future educational plans, academic
degrees attained and the influence of significant "others”
regarding vocational choice may provide additional pertinent

information as the population to be analyzed enlarges.

92

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 18. A chi square analysis of sixteen selected
variables and self-perceived role evaluation
scores of intern consultants.
Variables
Down Across x2 (df) P
Reel 1. Years of teaching—experience 2.80 1 N.S.

" 2. Years experience as intern

consultant 10.29 3 .05
” 3a. Evening work devoted to EIP 0.69 1 N.8:
” 3b. weekend work devoted to EIP 6.75 l .05
0| “’0 Age _ 3e60 1 NeSe
“ 5. Community of origin 0.75 l N.S.
” 6. Quality of work in secon-

dary school 0.89 1 N.S.
" 7. Family income 0.00 l N.S.
" 8. Quality of work in under-

graduate school 0.00 1 N.S.
" 9. Extra Curr. A6tivities in

undergraduate school 0.00 l N.S.
” 10. Future educational plans 2.66 l N.S.
" 11. Highest degree attained 3.10 1 N.S.
" 12. Marital status 1 0.25 1 N.S.
" 13. First consideration of

teaching as a vocational

choice 0.00 1 N.S.
" 14. Final decision to enter

teaching profession 0.00 1 N.S.
' 15. Education as a first

vocational choice 0.49 1 N.S.
" 16. A significant other as an

influence in vocational

choice 2.28 2 N.S.

 

 

A. xJZTO 5(1) «73:81;

Be 12.05(2) g 5099
Ce 12e05(3) . 7e82

 

 

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Iggggduction. The purpose of this chapter is three-
fold: (l) to summarize the findings of this study, (2) to
present the conclusions and implications of these findings
in regard to the Elementary Intern Program and its personnel,
and (3) to present recommendations which should be considered
in terms of program change and indicate various topics which

are still in need of research.

Summary
Hypotheses A-1 and A-2. No positive relationship was found

between the self-perceived role evaluation scores of intern
consultants and their choice of superior perceived as most
”responsible to." Consultants in general, regardless of
high or low total instrument scores, selected university
coordinator as the superior perceived most ”responsible to"
although the prevailing choice of a small number of consult-
ants was public school personnel and the tax-paying public
in that order. No significance was detected when the sub-
factor scores of the instrument were submitted to chi square
analysis, in fact, a pattern similar to that established by
the total instrument was followed. However, it should be
noted that regarding their role evaluations, consultants per-
ceived themselves most lacking in two of the five roles
examined; those activities and understandings related to
general school services and professional growth.

93

94

No statistically significant differences between male
and female intern consultants and their self-perceived role
evaluations in terms of both total and sub-factor scores was
found. An investigation of raw instrument scores did show
that although, in terms of total instrument scores male and
female consultants appeared identical, some mean differences
were detected on the sub-factor scores. In the areas of
personal characteristics and consultant--intern relations,
females had a higher self-perception while males perceived
their greatest strengths in the areas of instructional and
guidance skills and general school services. A contrast was
thus distinguishable with females associating themselves more
predominantly with human relation skills and males identify-
ing more clearly with instructional and service skills. In
earlier dissertations, the studies made of the personality
patterns of male and female teachers have indicated that a
difference between the two groups does exist. A further ex-
planation of this contrast may be found in an examination of
the academic backgrounds of the participants involved; the
perceived strengths may be a reflection of the areas most

strongly reinforced within this background.

Hypothesis 5:3, The third hypothesis which predicted differb
ences between male and female consultants and their choice

of superior perceived as most ”responsible to" could not be
substantiated. Although the choice of consultants generally
focused on university coordinator, public school personnel

and general tax-paying public, an analysis with regard to

95
sex could not establish any statistical evidence indicating
that a difference did exist. In this case, sex, as a
variable, had no significant relationship to a consultant's

choice of superior perceived most "responsible to.”

Hypothesis B-l. No statistical evidence in support of
hypothesis B-l, which attempted to examine the relationship
of role evaluations of consultants as perceived by interns
and its relation to a choice of superior perceived most
"responsible to,“ was found. Unlike the majority of con-
sultants who selected a single individual (university coor-
dinator) as their choice of superior perceived most "respons-
ible to," an examination of the choice of interns regarding
the selected superior showed no such single identification.
Their selections varied from public school personnel to
university coordinator followed by intern consultant in that
order. In terms of a model, the university coordinator
appears to have established himself for consultants but for
interns an identifiable model apparently is much less certain.
Regarding role evaluation perceptions, interns indicated that
of the five roles examined, those activities and understand-

ings related to general school services are most lacking.

Hypothesis B-2. An examination of male and female interns
and their choice of a superior selected as most ”responsible
to” yielded no statistical evidence that a difference exist-
ed between the two groups. A pattern, similar to that es-
tablished by the total intern group, was revealed when

96
intern sub-groups of males and females were examined separ-
ately. It is also interesting to note that a minor percent-
age of interns both male and female selected "self" as their

response to superior perceived most "responsible to."

Hypothesis C-l. It was found that, in relation to the in-
terns' choice of superior perceived most "responsible to,"
no differences statistically significant existed among
centers; this can be attributed to the similarities of the
distributions. A closer look at the data did show that one
center, unlike the others, differed in its selection of
superior perceived most ”responsible to." While public
school personnel was the first choice of most centers the
choice of this particular center was divided evenly between
university coordinator and intern consultant. Apparently, a
unique relationship between teacher education personnel,
public school personnel and interns exists within this par-
ticular center.

Question 1. Patterns, with regard to role evaluations
and superior selected most "responsible to" as perceived by
consultants, which had been established by earlier hypotheses
remained constant even when individual centers were analyzed
against all remaining centers. Limitations due to the small
size of the consultant population (24) could not be overcome
in this case.

Question 2. When differences between the selections
made by interns and consultants regarding their choice of a

person or persons perceived "responsible for" were

97

scrutinized it was found that consultants reSponded largely
to "intern" while interns generally selected ”students taught"
as their response. Here again, a small number of interns
responded to ”self." Interestingly enough, a recheck of
previous data indicated that these same individuals responded
to "self" regarding a superior perceived most "responsible
to.” This may suggest that these individuals are "program
users," i.e., for these individuals the Elementary Intern
Program has not been a unique means of preparing for this
profession but simply a means to an end. A further possi-
bility bearing consideration is that which arises from the
pairing of intern with consultant. Suggested here is the
possible initiation of conflict especially in the areas of
values and attitudes which may result from the cross-pairing
of male and female interns and consultants.

Question 3. In an open-ended question portion of the
role evaluation instrument participants were requested to
cite two major strengths and weaknesses of the Elementary
Intern Program as they perceived them; from the total par-
ticipant response the following categories of strengths and
weaknesses were derived. (See Tables 16 and 17, Chapter IV,
pp. 90.) The following were cited as major program strengths:
(1) actual classroom experience, (2) guidance and support of
the intern consultant, (3) methods courses interwoven with
actual experience, (4) a mutual concern for teacher educa-
tion candidates on behalf of public school and university

personnel, and (5) the convenience and economy which the

98
program provides. A comparison of the responses of both
groups revealed that consultants and interns were in consis-
tent agreement regarding program strengths. Guidance and
support of the intern consultant together with actual class-
room experience were the outstanding strengths cited by both
groups.

From total participant response the following program
weaknesses were derived: (1) lack of time for communication
between intern and intern consultant, (2) undefined roles of
intern and intern consultant within the public school setting,
(3) a lack of communication between teacher education center
and campus, (4) extreme pressure produced in taking univer-
sity courses together with the assignment of the actual
classroom and (5) lack of adequate evaluation and selection
criteria for program personnel. By comparison, there was
much less agreement between interns and consultants regard-
ing program weaknesses. Total participant response to the
question of weaknesses was much more limited than it was for
strengths. Lack of communication between teacher education
center and also between intern and intern consultant were
the program's most pronounced weaknesses.

Question 4. Only two of the sixteen socio-economic and
educational variables analyzed in relation to the self-per-
ceived role evaluations of intern consultants were found to
be statistically related. Years of experience as an intern
consultant was the first of these; chi square analysis indi-

cated that the larger the number of years experience, the

99
higher the role evaluation. The amount of outside time
devoted to program work was the second variable of signifi-
cance which was found. In this case, chi square analysis
indicated that the more personal time utilized, the higher

the self-perceived role evaluation.

Conclusionsgand Implications

Hypotheses A-1 and A-2. Although no significant relation-
ship could be determined between the self-perceived role
evaluations of intern consultants and their choice of super-
ior perceived most ”responsible to," by their almost unani-
mous choice of university coordinator, apparently a pro-
fessional model with which consultants identify has been
established. Several possible reasons can be offered for
the selection made by consultants. First, in terms of his
university position and affiliation the coordinator repre-
sents a status which is far more appealing to consultants
than that of his public school colleagues whether on an ad-
ministrative or teaching level. The prestige which accrues
to the university coordinator because of a high degree of
academic training and influence in both university and public
school circles provide a further attraction for consultants
who recognize this position as a "step-up" from their own.
The coordinator, as a professional model, may have been
selected by consultants for another, perhaps more basic
reason, i.e., the coordinator personifies the professional

educator at both the university and public school levels, a

100
recognition which public school personnel have had great
difficulty in achieving.

The university coordinator acts as the spark plug with-
in the operation of teacher education centers and thus,
serious consideration should be given to the characteristics
of a successful coordinator. The professional stance of
consultants in their relationship with interns may very
likely be reflections of their particular coordinators. An
intensive look at the attitudes, values, skills, personality
traits and operational patterns of coordinators could con-
ceivably answer many questions about intern consultants.

Although no statistical evidence was found to support
the hypothesis that there was a difference between male and
female consultants regarding self-perceived role evaluations
and their choice of superior perceived most ”responsible to"
some raw score differences did appear. A closer look at
these raw scores showed that females perceived themselves
highest in those roles associated with human relations.
Males, on the other hand, had a higher self-perception in
skill areas. From this one can conjecture that in terms of
consultantship style, males and females are inclined to em-
phasize different aspects of their roles. Need patterns of
male and female teachers together with the intensity of
these needs have been examined by various studies. This
type of investigation could provide better and more positive
evidence regarding the differences between male and female

consultants. Of primary importance in this regard would be

101
the detection of differences, should any occur, when male
consultants are paired with male interns and females with
females. Further, an examination of the consultantship
styles of males and females may indicate that distinctive
approaches are taken by each group toward the task of support
and guidance. In the course of placing interns with con-
sultants such information could prove to be invaluable and
most essential to the processes of communication and evalua-

tion.

gypothesis Aej. No significant differences were found be-
tween groups of male and female consultants and their choice
of superior perceived most ”responsible to.” The university
coordinator, as derived from hypothesis A-l, remained the
outstanding consultant choice, concluding that the univer-
sity coordinator has fulfilled the professional role expect-
ed by intern consultants. Coordinators, by understanding
and assisting consultants in the solution and avoidance of
problems, render a level of support and direction while
providing, at the same time, a reciprocal relationship with
consultants encouraging their participation in all phases of
the teacher education program on a ”give and take” basis.
This type of reciprocal cooperation together with active in-
volvement in the total EIP program tends to induce a sense
of colleague-ship (equality of status in terms of ability to
contribute) between intern consultants and university coor-

dinators and may very well be listed among the reasons

102
accounting for consultant selection of coordinators over

their public school colleagues.

flypotheses B-1 and B-2. No significant relationship between
the role evaluations of intern consultants, as perceived by
interns and their choice of superior perceived most ”respons-
ible to" could be determined. Unlike consultants, interns
were unable to identify with a single individual representa-
tive of a professional model. In order of selection, interns
chose first, public school personnel followed by university
coordinator and intern consultant. When intern choices were
examined in terms of male and female sub-groups a pattern,
similar to that established by the total group, occurred.

It can be concluded that contrary to the consultant-
coordinator relationship which was clearly identifiable, for
interns and consultants no such consistent recognizable re-
lationship has yet been discerned. Insufficient role defi—
nition for both interns and consultants may, in large part,
account for this lack of identification. A clarified defi-
nition of the consultant role must be made in terms of
actual purpose, responsibility and position within the
organizational construct. The internship role must likewise
be clarified in these terms with the important addition of
and stress upon intern needs. Definition of this type may
provide the missing link in the intern--consultant relation-
ship whereby interns will look toward the consultant as a
professional model, a multi—functional resource in terms of

analysis, communication and evaluation. Barriers due to a

103
misconception of status levels affecting the intern--con-
sultant relationship can also be overcome through a more
specific definition of roles. Benefits, most profitable to
the intern-~consultant relationship, can be derived when
interns and consultants regard themselves on a colleague
basis bound by a common goal of quality education for child-
ren. The timing of consultant visitations to intern class-
rooms should be given serious consideration as a practical
and positive step toward the betterment of the intern--
consultant relationship. The dreaded traditional concept of
direct supervision may be promoted by visits which are too
frequent while on the other hand, infrequent visits may pro-
duce a detrimental impact in terms of threat to the intern.
Pressures and anxieties produced by minimum time and maximum
obligations imposed by the program could be lessened and
alleviated for both interns and consultants through the
reciprocal aid and mutual concern potentially inherent in an
intern-~consultant relationship.

As was earlier stated, interns, in reference to their
selections of perceived superiors, selected public school
personnel as first choice. This tends to suggest that, in
some cases, the relationship which should exist between in-
terms and consultants has been transferred to the teachers
and administrators working daily in the public school setting
who have come to be regarded as professional models by some
interns. The following reasons can be offered for this con-

clusion: (l) in terms of accessibility, public school

104
personnel are immediately available as they pursue a task
similar to that of the intern, (2) daily contact within the
school atmosphere promotes a colleague type relationship and
diminishes the saliency of status levels, (3) the possibil-
ity of threat is lessened within an environment of co-workers
and interns are able to seek support and guidance informally
through casual observation or by simple questioning, and
(h) interns desire to become fully accepted members of the
profession. Serious consideration should be directed toward
the kind of school environment in which interns are placed,
and the personnel within the schools selected should be
made aware of the fact that their professional behavior is
being utilized as a model by the intern teachers with whom
they work.

gypothesis C-l. No significant differences were found when
centers were analyzed in reference to the interns' selection
of superior perceived most ”responsible to." An examination
of the raw data did distinguish one center from the others
in that it singularly did not respond to the selection of
public school personnel as did the majority within the
remaining centers. The selection made by this particular
center was evenly divided between university coordinator and
intern consultant. This finding leads to the conclusion
that within this particular center a relationship between
interns, teacher education center personnel and public school
personnel differs from that which exists among the remaining

centers. Reasons contributing to this differentiated

105
response may include: (1) the geographical location of the
center which separates it largely from the mainstream of
educational trends, (2) personnel involved are traditionally
conservative, slow in accepting and experimenting with newer
educational concepts, and (3) in this traditionally oriented
public school setting the innovation of the teacher educa-
tion center in its attempt to create an awareness of current
educational trends on the part of interns may be uncon-
sciously producing a gap between interns and the schools
they service. An examination of the holding power which
these cooperating school districts have in retaining interns
as fully licensed professional personnel would be a meaning-
ful test of this conclusion.

Qpestion 1. An examination among centers in reference
to the self-perceived role evaluations of intern consultants
and their choice of superior perceived most ”responsible to"
yielded no significant differences. As established earlier
in this section, consultants readily identify themselves
with the university coordinator. In terms of role evalua-
tion consultants perceive themselves as doing a good Job but
with a recognized awareness of the need for professional
growth. Although it can be concluded that these role eval-
uations represent a realistic evaluation of the consultant's
current performance, additional influencing factors which
may also affect consultant self-perceptions should also be
considered. Counted first among these additional influenc-

ing factors is the positive reinforcement which individuals

106
receive regarding their professional image when selected
from various applicants for the consultant position. The
professional mobility and possibilities for personal contact
and opportunity on all educational levels which accrue to
the consultantship position, again, afford a source of posi-
tive reinforcement to the professional self. Another factor
important in influencing the consultant's self-perception is
the responsibility entrusted to him for the support and
guidance of intern teachers. Thus, since the inception of
the Elementary Intern Program consultants, before ever con-
sidering a specific evaluation of their performance, had
developed a high professional self-concept.

Question 2. Interns selected "students taught“ while
consultants generally chose ”interns” in their response to
the person or persons perceived "responsible for." These
responses according to the respective tasks of the partici-
pants within the framework of the program seem to be quite
appropriate, although a question can be raised in respect to
the consultant response as an instructional model. What
relationship between children and consultant has seemingly
gone unnoticed? Should not consultants, in fact, recognize
as an inherent part of their responsibility for intern
teachers the children being taught? Children are essentially
the heart of the program and as such must be assured of top
quality efforts in their behalf not only by interns, but
consultants alike. The unique contribution which can be made

by a consultant in terms of a model should be accomplished

107
at the child, intern teacher interaction level. Consultants,
by removing themselves from this opportunity, run the risk
of becoming quasi-administrators in the eyes of interns as
well as the children for whom they are responsible. Child-
ren can be a common focal point for both interns and consult-
ants where ideas, insights and dialogue should be in flux
providing a means of continuous evaluation and improvement.
The quality of relations between interns and consultants
will become more firmly enhanced as consultants recognize
more fully the opportunity which children provide as cata-
lytic agents in the accomplishment of their task.

Question 1. In terms of intern and consultant response
regarding the strengths of the Elementary Intern Program as
they perceived them, remarkable similarities occurred. The
advantage of support and guidance in an actual classroom
setting was the outstanding strength named by the majority of
both groups. A second strength recognized largely by both
groups was the important benefits derived from having methods
courses interwoven with practical classroom experience. From
these participant responses it can be concluded that con-
sultants and interns alike have an acute awareness of the
potentialities of a teacher education program such as EIP
not singularly in terms of the internship year but also in
light of those activities and experiences encountered by
candidates at the pre-intern stage. Several reasons can be
rendered for the similiarity of intern and consultant re-

sponse to this question of program strengths. The most

108
obvious reason can be summed up in three words, "learning is
doing"; in this case, the classroom provides a working labor-
atory where the implementation of teaching concepts can be
observed, tested, discussed, analyzed, retained or rejected
in favor of others perhaps more suitable and beneficial to
the particular individuals involved. In terms of a teaching
and consultantship repertoire the Elementary Intern Program
provides the basis for a broader exposure to working styles.
The feedback communication of campus and off-campus person-
nel, whether formal or informal, provides interns and con-
sultants with an index of comparison between the two types
of teacher education programs offered by the university.
Finally, the possibility cannot be overlooked that as an
innovative approach to teacher education the Elementary
Intern Program has been highly propagandized among the par-
ticipants involved with it and realistically, this may be
the basic reason underlying the similarity of intern and
consultant response regarding program strengths. At this
time, however, no positive evidence exists indicating which
of the two alternative teacher education programs produce
superior candidates if, in fact, there is a difference.

Both groups, especially consultants, were more reluct-
ant to express weaknesses regarding the program than were
they regarding the strengths. Perhaps this is a case of
”not being able to see the forest for all the trees." The
participants are so close to, and actively involved in, their

own functional capacities within the program they tend to

109

develop a restrictive and narrow scope toward the program as
a whole. Another reason for this hesitant response may be
the possibility that an admission of program weaknesses is a
reflection on program personnel; therefore, a personal threat.
Although varying in proportion, the interns and consultants
who responded to this question agreed on four fundamental
weaknesses of the program: (1) too much pressure, (2) too
little time, (3) a lack-of inter and intra-communication,
and (0) too little consistent evaluation. Apparently these
weaknesses bear an interrelatedness and a solution for any
one also provides a beginning for the correction and elimina-
tion of the remainder.

It might also be concluded that the original model of
EIP has become obsolete through program expansion and is no
longer able to accommodate a growing population in regards
to communication and evaluation. As the program grows it
necessarily follows that its system of communication in-
creases in complexity as do the means and methods of evalua-
tion essential for the progress of such a program. Solutions
to the problems of time and pressure also rest in a model
change. Serious consideration, within a new construct,
should be given.tc time allocations for all program partici-
pants for the purpose of alleviating emotional and work load
pressure in terms of a total classroom responsibility to-
gether with University commitments. Necessary adjustments
made to the existing model would surely improve the system
of communication and provide for a type of consistent

110
evaluation which is sorely lacking in the present model.
Provision for adequate time as well as propinquity of per-
sonnel could provide quality and consistency of communica-
tion between intern, consultant and coordinator forming a
basis for continual evaluation.

Qgestion 4. Only two of the sixteen socio-economic and
educational variables examined in relation to the selfaper-
ceived role evaluations of intern consultants were found to
be significantly related. They are: (1) years experience
as an intern consultant, and (2) the amount of outside time
devoted to RIP. A linear relationship was established be-
tween years of consultant experience and the consultant's
self-perceived role evaluation, i.e., the longer a person
has.served as a consultant, the higher his role evaluation.
In explanation of this finding, two reasons appear obvious:
(l) the longer an individual has served as a consultant, the
more opportunity he has had to examine and adjust his multi-
role behavior according to the various experiences encount-
ered within the program, and (2) the fact that a consultant
is retained in this position over an extended period of time
tends to assure the individual that he is accomplishing his
task satisfactorily thus reinforcing his professional self.

The second significant variable, the amount of outside
time devoted to EIP, appears to be in agreement with the
findings of Gross and Herriott92 who found this type of

L ‘— A

92Cross and Herriott, loo, cit.

111
variable to bear a relationship to their concept of pro-
fessional educational leadership. In terms of a conclusion,
this type of behavior is indicative of those genuinely in-
terested in putting forth their best possible performance
and pursue efforts beyond the normal expectation. An add-
itional possibility which bears consideration is that con-
sultants may measure the quality of their performance in
terms of their extra time investment thereby deriving rein-
forced satisfaction through their self-peroeived role
evaluations.

Recommendations

The burden of proof of the positive contributions which
can be made by a teacher education program such as the
Elementary Internship Program rests primarily on the shoulders
of its facilitators.

Continuous assessment, which has been lacking since the
inception of the program, holds the key for providing the
necessary information pointing to the effectiveness or in-
effectiveness of such a venture. The excellence of the pro-
gram in its ability to prepare pro-service teachers is
dependent, in large part, on an investment in research which
can isolate and identify strengths and weaknesses in terms
of program participants and total program objectives. The
program director should provide leadership in this task and
establish a list of priority studies which could be underb
taken by any one of three groups: (1) university faculty

112
involved in RIP, (2) program participants involved in SIP,
and (3) graduate students interested in all phases of teacher
education, thus allowing for at least two or more research
projects operational each year.

This study represents an initial attempt at examining
the existing multi-role performance of the intern consultant.
Much research remains to be done regarding the intern con-
sultant position and the influence of such a position in
terms of its effectiveness in the preparation of teacher

education candidates.

The following recommendations are drawn directly from
data of this study and are focused upon (A) program per-
sonnel, and (B) future operational practice. The following
recommendations have been based on the data presented in
Tables 7-7.5 and 10-10.5. (See Chapter IV, pp. 68-79.) An
examination of these tables shows that although consultants
identified with their respective university coordinators,
the same was not true for interns and consultants. These
recommendations are, therefore, proposed to aid consultants
and interns in the task of establishing a colleague-ship.

A. Program Personnel:

1. The university coordinator, through an es-
tablished colleague-ship with the consultant,
must be more directive in defining the con-
sultant task.

2. The pre-orientation of interns must include

a definite explanation of the purpose and

3.

113
task of the consultantship; this would be
most beneficial at the pre-intern level.
Consultant participation during the in-
structional methods sequence may provide an
important opportunity for familiarizing pre-

interns with the consultant role.

a. A colleague type relationship between intern

and consultant can best be promoted through
mutual concern for and interaction with

children in the classroom.

Regarding (B) future operational practice, the following

recommendations have been predicated on participant percep-

tions of program strengths and weaknesses presented in

Tables 16 and 17. (See Chapter IV, p. 90.) The fourth rec-
ommendation in this section is directed toward the elimina-

tion of possible personality conflict that may result from

'limited model exposure, i.e., interns and consultants working

strictly on a one-to-ene basis.

B. Future Operational Practice:

1.

2.

Continual efforts must be extended to the
creation and formulation of instruments, both
objective and subjective, which can help in
the assessment of consultant performance in
light of the professional objectives of the
consultantship.

A systematic procedure for the implementation

of evaluation must be devised which considers

114
not only the individual, but which provides
for ”inter" as well as ”intra" interaction
among centers by consultants.

3. Consistent dialogue between all participants
must be attained. Oneaway dialogue is not
conductive to the promotion of professional
growth .

4. Multi-model, style and exposure advantageous
to both interns and consultants may be
facilitated through utilization of a team
approach.

In addition, several other recommendations should be
made which are not drawn directly from the data of this study.
The following recommendations have been derived from the
writer's contact and experience with the Elementary Intern
Program and further, the insight resulting from conducting
this study.

1. Replication studies should be undertaken with a
method of data collection through which matched pairs would
be identifiable. These additional studies should re-examine
the intern consultant role as well as those of the intern
and university coordinator.

2. Besides an examination of participant roles, an
investigation of the Elementary Intern Program as a social
system should be undertaken. Of particular importance would
be the processes of communication, decision making and prob-

lem solving by and among individuals involved at all levels
of the program.

115

3. A systematized procedure must be developed to inves-
tigate, more effectively, the importance of support and
guidance, currently the chief duty of the intern consultant
and its relationship to quality in terms of teacher educa-
tion candidates.

4. The investigation of Gross and Herrictt93 indicated
that the traditionally accepted criteria for the selection
of elementary school principals has been ineffective in
terms of leadership, although heavy emphasis has been placed
on criteria such as degrees attained, previous classroom and/
or administrative experience; thus the way has been paved
for further research in investigating criteria for the selec-
tion of intern consultants and their specialized function
within the teacher education program. What factors are most
important in the selection of intern consultants in light of
their role of support and guidance of interns?

5. Another area of significant interest to teacher
educators and of particular interest to those utilizing the
internship concept would be the measurement of changes in
behavior resulting from a particular kind of experience,
such as internship. Academic achievement, personality traits,
attitudes, values, and interests should be examined closely;
data documenting what changes, if any, occurred during the
training of prospective teachers would be highly valuable to
teacher education institutions. Similar undertakings could

93Gross and Herriott, loc. cit.

116
also provide valuable information where comparisons of campus
and off-campus programs are made in terms of participants and
supervisory personnel.

6. Finally, follow-up studies of graduates from the
Elementary Intern Program should be made; evidence can be
gathered regarding the effectiveness of graduates as prac—
ticing professional teachers. This type of data would pro-
vide a basis from which to make continual adjustment of the
existing training model in terms of program structure and
participant roles.

7. Deliberate consideration should be extended to the
creation of a new training model. The variant form of the
internship model proposed is that of an ”intern station,”
one school within each cooperating school district used
solely for internship training. The model proposed, through
an adjustment in consultant, intern, and pro-intern opera-
tional patterns retains the strengths of the current model
while providing for the elimination of its recognized weak-
nesses. (See Tables 16 and 17, Chapter IV, p. 90.) The
staffing of these stations would be predicated on a clinical
team approach. In this case the total school faculty would
be composed, ideally, of a permanent team including intern
consultants (team leaders), university coordinator (teacher
education specialist) and additional university resource per-
sonnel including an educational and/or child psychologist (a
learning process researcher), and a sociologist (a group

process researcher). All colleges contributing to the

117
education of elementary teachers would be encouraged to send
representative personnel to join the permanent team at
various times when the aid of their additional expertise and
resource is needed. Each station could accommodate ten to
fifteen fourth year interns plus fifteen to twenty third
year pro-intern candidates (see Figure l).

Essentially, the clinical team would be charged with
the responsibility of ordering and planning various kinds of
experiences necessary for the promotion of individualized in-
tern support and guidance based on the most recent advances
in educational media and instructional theory. The function
of the team's psychologist and sociologist would be to con-
duct continuing seminars on pertinent community problems
together with seminars in learning theory and educational
psychology focused at, and suited to, the needs of interns.
The undertaking of continuous research for purposes of pro-
gram evaluation and change must be a responsibility assumed
by the clinical team.

Consultants and interns would be organized on the basis
of instructional teams, functioning on a flexible schedule--
permitting exposure to more than one grade level. Interns
could be provided with an advantage of multi-model exposure
regarding teaching styles and special area interests by the
altering of team composition throughout the internship year.
This type of organizational pattern would also promote the-
development of a colleague type relationship among team
members and provide the opportunity for released time by

118

Figure 1. Proposed Intern Station

 

 

 

 

 

Instructional ~ »
: Team I 2 Clinic Team
a Self-contained . pre-1nterns

Class

 

Single School Complex

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘2 (‘4'
EL . .‘Il

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Periodic Relations Consistentr Flexible
Reciprocal Groups and

Relations Instruction

119
reducing classroom contact for interns which can then be
utilized by interns for purposes of meeting their other pro-
gram obligations. In this way, the pressures produced by
the existing training model as cited by both interns and
consultants, can be reduced and alleviated. For consultants
and interns alike, communication would be improved and eval-
uation facilitated under this proposed organizational struc-
ture. A further advantage provided by the intern station
construct and close inter-contact of a clinical team would
be the establishment of criteria, not only for assignments
during the intern year, but also information essential to
the selection of incoming pro-interns. The segment of the
pre-intern's third year which concentrates on teaching-
methods courses could be conducted within the intern station
in the "true life" situation it affords. Methods' instruc-
tors would be expected to demonstrate, as well as lecture.
Pre-interns could have the advantage of joining instructional
teams of interns and consultants to test, in limited periods
of exposure, those ideas and concepts which had been pre-
sented.

The intern station, as a proposed differentiation to
the existing EIP model, embodies the notable strengths of
the current program while it provides corrective measures to
eliminate the weaknesses of time, communication, evaluation
and pressure as they exist within the present program.
Implicit in a structural model change is the creation of new

roles and the adjustment of existing ones. Consultants, in

120
particular, must adjust the scope of their influence within
this framework and focus directly on the task of instruction:
of primary importance is their knowledge of instructional
theory and educational media, their skill in instructional
analysis and use of support and guidance through leadership.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ashner, Mary Jane McCue. "The Analysis of Verbal Inter-
action in the Classroom,” Theo and Research in Teach-
%g§, A. Bellock, (ed.) New Yorfi: Bureau of Publications,
0 umbia University, 1963.

Barr, A.S., Eustice, David E., and Noe, E.J. ”The Measure-
ment and Prediction of Teacher Efficiency," Review of

Educational Research, 25:261-270, June, 1955.
Bellock, A. (ed.) Theo and Research in Teachi . New York:
Bureau of Publicat§ons, Columbia university, 1963.
Berkowitz, Leonard. “Sharing Leadership in Small Decision

Making Groups,” Journal of Abnormal and_chia1 Ps -
cholo , 48:231- , Apr , .

 

Bidwell, Charles E. “The Administrative Role and Satisfac-
tion in Teaching,“ Journal of Educapignal_§ociolo ,
29:“l-H7, September, I953.

Bishop, Clifford L. ”The Purposes of Teacher Internshig,”
gaucational Administration agd Supervision, 30:35- 3,
anuary, 8.
Bishop, Leslee J. ”Challenges for Supervisors,“ The Super-
visor: Agent for ggfigge in Teachigg. Washing on,
ee’ eeee, e
Blackman, Charles and Edelfelt, Roy. ”Planning for Leader-

shép,” Educational Leadership, 20:185-188. December,
19 2.

 

Bowers, D.G. ”Self-esteem and the Diffusion of Leadership

Style,“ Journal of Applied ngchclogy, h7:135-lh0,
April, 1 .

Brookover, W.B. “Research on Teacher and Administration

Roles,” gournal of Educational Sociology, 29:2-13.
September, .

Bush, Robert N. and Allen, Dwight W. ”The Winds of Freedom,"

129 gigh School Journa , h3:l68-l73, February, 1960.

Caswell, R.L. ”How Should Supervision Be Advanced7,”

Educatyonal Method, 21:7-20, October, l9h1.

Chase, Francis S. ”Chicago Initiates New TwoAIear Graduate
Programs for High School Teachers,” The High School
Journal, 43:196-200, February, 1960.

121

122

German, Bernard R. and Olmsted, Ann G. The Internshi in
the re ration of Elements School Teachers. Eureau
o uca ona esearc , c gan a e n versity:
East Lansing, l96h.

Crcnback, Lee J. Essentials of Fe cholo ical Testi .
New York: Harper and Row, I965.

Doyle, Louis A. “A Study of the Expectations Which Elemen-
tary Teachers, School Administrators, Board Members and
Parents Have of the Elementary Teacher's Role." Un-
published Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State Univer-
sity, East Lansing, 1956.

”EIP *Elementary Intern Program/Another Way of Learning to
Teach.“ Michigan State University, College of Educa-
tion. Final Report to the Ford Foundation, 196“.

Faber, C.F. and Campbell, R.F. “Administrative Behavior:
Theory and Research: Analysis of Leadership Behavior,"

Review of Educational Research, 31:359. October, 1961.

Fatter, Nicholas A. ”A Medel of Teaching as Problem Solve
ing,” Theories of Instruction, Washington, D.C.:
Asgociaticn for Supervision and Curriculum Development,
19 5.

Fine, Benjamin. “Teachers for Tomorrow's Schools,” The High
School Journal, “3:223-230, February, 1960.

Fisher, Sherrick J. and Frautschy, Frances. ”San Diego
Intern Teachers,“ NEA Journal, us.2uu-2u5, April, 1957.

Flanders, N. "Teacher Influence in the Classroom," Theo
and Research in Teachi , A. Bellock, (ed.) New Yoié:
Bureau of Publications, Columbia university, 1963.

Getzels, J.W. and Guba, E.G. "The Structure of Role and

Role Conflict in the Teaching Situation,” Journal of
Educational Sociolo , 29:30-00, September, 1935.

Gordon, C.W. ”The Role of the Teacher in the Social Struc-
ture of the High School,” Journal of Educational
Sociolo , 29:21-29, Septem er, .

Gross, N. and Herriott, R. "EPL of Elementary Principals:
A Study of Executive Professional Leadership,”

National Elementagy Principal, “5:66-71, April, 1966.

Harootunian, Berj. ”The Teacher as Problem Solver: Extra
Class Decision-Making.” Chicago, Illinois: American
Educational Research Association, February, 1966.
(Mimeographed.)

123

Hartley, E.L. and Hartley. R.E. Fundamentals of Social
gsychology. New York: Alfred A. Knopf Company, I952.

Herbert, John. "Analysis of Lessons: Teacher, Subject
Matter and Pupils.” Paper read at the annual meeting
of the American Educational Research Association,
Chicago, Illinois, 1966. (Mimeographed.)

Hoffman, James D. "A Study of the Perceptions That Adminis-
trators, Elementary Teachers, Consultants and Special
Area Teachers Have of the Elementary Special Area
Teacher and Consultant Role.” unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1959.

Hughes, Marie. “Teaching is Interaction," Elementagy School
£22£22l0 58:457-h6h, May, 1958.

Hurlbert, Allan 8. ”Student Teaching as a Part of a Post
Liberal Arts Professional Year,“ In 00th Yearbook o
the Association of Student Teachigg, .

Keppel, Francis, Shaplin, Judson T. and Robinson, Wade M.
"Recent Developments at the Harvard Graduate School of

Education,“ The High School Journal, “3:202-261,
February, 19 .

Lowry, Sheldon G. “The Social Systems Model.” East Lansing:
Michigan State University Department of Sociology and
Anthropology. (Mimeographed.)

McIntosh, J.R. “A Pilot Study of a Form of Internship in
Teacher Education,” Canadian Education and Research
Digest, 2:115-127, June, .

Miner, George D. "A Teacher Interne Pro ram," School
ggecutive, 7b:h8-h9, September, 195 .

Muheriji, H. and Shumsky, A. “Critical Look at the Teacher
of Teachers," Journal of Educational Sociolo . 35:
l3u-lh0, Novem er, .

Neal, Charles D. ”Internship in Teacher Training,” Education,

Popham, James W. "Relationships Between Highly Specific
Instructional Video Tapes and Certain Behaviors of Pro-
Service Teachers.” Chicago, Illinois: American Educa-
tional Research Association Meeting, February, 1966.
(Mimeographed.)

”Paid Teaching Internships.” Chicago: AST Commission on
Internships, February, 1966. (Mimeographed.)

12“

Rex, Ronald G. “A Theory of the Internship in Professional
Training.” Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan
State University, 1962.

Ryans, David G. "Teacher Behavior and Research: Implica-
tions for Teacher Education,“ Journal of Teacher uca-
tion, l#:27h-293. September, 1953.

Sarbin, T.R. "Role Theory,” Handbook of Social Ps cholo ,

G. Lindzey (ed.) Cambridge, ss.: A son- es ey,
Vol. 1, 1951‘s

Shaplin, Judson T. ”Practice in Teaching.” From a paper
prepared for a conference at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Bheavioral Sciences, June 22-August 20,
1960. (Mimeographed.)

Sleeper, William R. ”The Internship,” In 90th Yearbook of
the Association for Student Teachigg, I95I.

Smith, Elmer R. ”The Brown Plan of Teacher Education,”
The Hi h School Journal, 43:283-293, February, 1960.

Smith, Othanel B. ”A Concept of Teaching," Teachers College
Record, 61:229-291, February, 1960.

Southworth, Horton C. ”A Monologue.” Indiana, Pennsylvania:
AST Summer Workshop, 1966. (Mimeographed.)

Spears, Harold. Improvi the Su ervision of Instruction.
New York: Prenzice-EEII, Inc., I935.
Stogdill, R.M. "Personal Factors Associated With Leadership:

A Survey of the Literature,” Journal of Pszchologz,
25:35-71, January, 19%.

Taba, H. and Elzey, F. "Teaching Strategies and Thought

Prggesses,' Teachers College Recogg, 65:52h-538, March,
19 .

 

Terrien, F.W. ”The Occupational Role of Teachers,” Journal

of Educational Psychology, 29:1h-20, September, I953.
Turner, Richard L. “Task Performance and Teaching Skill in

the Intermediate Grades,” ournal of Teache Education,
1u.299-307. September, 1965.

United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare,
grograms and Services. Washi ton, D.C.: Government

n ng 0 ca, ep ember, l9 6.

Wara, William T. and Gubser, J.R. "Developing the Teacher
Internship Concept in Oregon,” Journal of Teacher Educa-
tion, 15:252-259, September, 19 .

125
Wilcox, John. ”Selecting the Supervising Teacher." Oneonta,
New York: Commission on the Study of the Role of the
Supervising Teacher, N.I. AST, 196“. (Mimeographed.)

Willower, D.J. ”Leadership Styles and Leader's Perceptions

of Subordinates," Jo of Educatio Sociol ,
34:58-6“, October, 13%;.

APPENDIX A
MAP OF EIP CMERS

126

127

Michigan State Universitz
Fourth Year Internship Centers 1966-67

Alpen

 

:z' City-Saginaw

GrandRap ‘ .

3 n

 

 

Battle Creek .

M3 0' e

 

APPENDIX B
INITIAL INSTRUMENTATION

128

1.

2.

Role Perception Check List

The following check list is an attempt to examine the
multi-role aspects of the intern consultant. Each of
these roles is described by statements of behavior which
could be important to the function of this role. In
examining these statements we would like you to select
the §g§_you consider to be the most important to the
performance of that particular role. The ten descriptions
you select can be signified by placing a chick in the
appropriate space next to the statements of your choice.

Please check one of the following which most appropriately
describes your position.

A. Intern Consultant

Be Intern

C. University Faculty or Staff

129

130

I. Personal Characteristics

The intern consultant gives positive evidence that he

ac

b.

0.

d.

f.

h.
1.

k.

1.

0e

Part I

Is well groomed and dresses appropriately.

Has a pleasant voice appropriate for both everyday
conversation, classroom demonstration and lecture.

Is friendly and tactful with all personnel involved
in the educational setting.

Has enthusiasm for the task of education and in par-
ticular for intern consulting.

Uses good common sense even in those situations bound
by annctye

Is alert and open minded.

Is consistent in behavior patterns.

Is receptive to new ideas contributed by all concerned.
Avoids use of sarcasm.

Uses good English correctly and effectively whether
spoken or written.

To the best outward appearances possesses good
physical health.

Has a positive attitude which is demonstrated by
acceptance of constructive criticism, genuine interest
in pupils and interns, and sensitivity to the needs
and feelings of others.

Demonstrates initiative and seeks opportunities to
assume responsibilities.

Demonstrates interest through persistence and com-
pletion of tasks.

Demonstrates sound mental health by such signs as
absence of continual moodiness, acceptance of praise
with poise, a sense of humor and an objectivity about
himself.

Is able to control the ambiguity of authority.

Demonstrates flexibility in thought, word and deed in
opposition to rigidity.

continued. e e e e e e

re

131

Demonstrates a professional stance in his support and
guidance of interns.

Is aware of the psychological principles which guide
his multi-role behavior.

t. Demonstrates his ability to consider and make decisions.

II. Intern--Consultant Relations

The intern consultant gives pgsitive evidence that he

 

8e
b.

0e

d.

f.

Is a good team worker as well as leader.
Is willing to participate as well as verbally suggest.

Is committed to internship as a unique means of con-
tributing to teacher education.

Is aware of the contributions made by administrators,
office staff and custodial help.

Offers opinions that, whether agreed or disagreed
with, are respected.

Does not talk unfavorably about other interns,
teachers, parents or students.

Does not belittle the work being performed in other

. schools.

h.
l.

_..J-

k.

1.

me
no

Go

Is willing to compromise when necessary.
Is willing to ask for help when he needs it.
Renders prompt, accurate and objective reports.

Observes channels when operating in matters affecting
the welfare of interns.

Can pace and individualize his approach from intern
to inteme

Recognizes various levels of intern growth.
Represents an active professional model to interns.

Develops a receptive ear that is evidenced by good
listening habits.

Part II continued . . . . . .

III.

p.

q.

r.

t.

132

Distinguishes between friendliness and familiarity
towards interns.

Assists interns in setting realistic work goals.

Provides opportunities for intern participation and
leadership through seminars and professional activities.

Is consistently attempting to improve the interns self-
concept.

Demonstrates his belief in the dignity and worth of
the individual.

Instructional and Guidance Skills

The intern consultant gives positive evidence that he

8e

b.

0e

d.

f.

8.

h.

1.

J.

k.

Has an understanding of the multiple causes of intern
behavior.

Provides a wide range of enrichment experiences.

Suggests and provides a wide range of teaching aids
suitable for intern classrooms.

Suggests and demonstrates a variety of teaching
techniques.

understands the emotional and social needs of interns.
Suggests meaningful approaches to preparation, lesson
continuity, motivation and the general organization
of classroom activities.

Assists interns in the process of teacher-pupil
planning.

Provides evaluations for interns that promote self-
direction.

Demonstrates an understanding of the objectives and
content of the elementary and middle school years.

Exhibits an above average knowledge of the subject
matter or skills being taught in a particular grade.

Shows and demonstrates interest and enthusiasm for
elementary and middle school children.

Part III Continued e e e e e e

133

1. Is continually learning facts and skills to add
to his teaching repertory.

m. Approaches problem solving through a process of
analysis.

n. Demonstrates his ability to use and foster critical
thinking.

0. Gives evidence of achieving individual goals while
maintaining and improving his self-direction.

p. Continually seeks analysis of his own behavior in
terms of its relation to interns.

q. Accepts responsibilities for helping and sharing
with interns in co-curricular activities.

r. Aids in developing and maintaining faculty and student
morale.

s. Continually shares professional literature which may
provide new inroads to the solving of classroom
problems and the refinement of teaching behavior.

t. Continually demonstrates to interns the value of

action research as a means of gathering information
to bolster the process of decision making.

IV. General School Services

The intern consultant gives positive evidence that he

a. Helps interns to interpret individual school and
district policies.

b. Helps interns to interpret individual school and
district educational philosophies.

c. Assists interns in preparing for social functions
requested of classroom teachers.

d. Assists interns at reporting time whether it be
written or oral evaluation.

e. Keeps principals and other appropriate school admin-
istrators informed of his candidates progress.

f. Works with local school faculty members that seek his
assistance.

Part IV continued . . . . . .

8e

h.

1.

J.

k.

1.

In.

no

0.

P.

re

t.

13H

Attends local school faculty meetings to keep con-
stantly aware of the ”pulse beat" of the school.

Attempts to facilitate school principals with tasks
that he feels are within his province and power to
undertake.

Provides resources to local schools which the school
is limited in supplying, such as A.V. equipment,
supplemental texts, and resource personnel.

Is familiar with both school and district material
centers.

Is familiar and aware of the personal and guidance
services of the districts he works with.

Is aware of and familiar with the innovations and
special instructional programs offered by the dis-
tricts he works with.

Is aware of and familiar with the testing programs
utilized by each school district.

Is aware of and familiar with the socio-economic
conditions of the clientele his interns service.

Assumes initiative in demonstrating the ”professional
model” for the serviced public as well as pre-service
and professional teachers.

At invitation criticizes existing programs, accepting
the responsibility of offering favorable alternatives
in their place.

Participates in activities necessary for the promotion
of teacher welfare, such as professional standards,
educational legislation and participation in local
teacher organizations.

Is aware of the contribution the educational institu-
tion makes to the local community and does all
possible to maintain its contributing power.

Assumes initiative for public relations for the E.I.P.
program as a unique contributor to both teacher educa-
tion and the local school district.

Assumes responsibility for furthering a teacher
education partnership between university, public
schools and professional teacher organizations.

135

V. Professional Growth

The intern consultant gives positive evidence that he

a.

b.

0.

d.

f.

h.

1.

k.

Has sufficient academic preparation in subject
matter areas; that is, disciplines outside the general
area of education.

Has sufficient professional preparation in methods and
techniques pertinent to the elementary and junior high
school years.

Has sufficient understanding of child growth and
development pertinent to the elementary and junior
high school levels. .

Has sufficient understanding of learning theory and
its meaning for children of elementary and junior high
school levels.

Has sufficient understanding of the social philosoph-
ical foundations of education and their implications
for interns, consultants and the school districts
they service.

Has sufficient experience with various type school
organizations, program innovations and varied student
abilities to assess strengths and weaknesses.

Affords himself of opportunities offered by pro-
fessional organizations and their publications.

Attends night classes, workshops, summer schools and
institutes seeking to constantly improve himself as
teacher, professional and intern consultant.

Attends professional meetings and conferences to pare
ticipate in the professional process of "give and
take.”

Subscribes to or reads consistently those professional
publications helpful to him as intern consultant and
professional educator.

Thoughtfully experiments with new ideas in terms of

' action research or a more formal structure, which

1.

might entail analysis or diagnosis.

Contributes to professional research in terms of par-
ticipation as well as initiation.

Part V Continued. e e e e e e

Illa

n.

Go

P.

Qe

r.

t.

136

Seeks and accepts help from teachers, administrators,
fellow consultants, and university faculty and staff.

Is aware of his major strengths and weaknesses as a
consultant, and strives to maintain his strengths and
improve upon his weaknesses.

Attempts to evaluate his performance whether it be
through formal instruments or self-report.

Is constantly aware of current community interests
and their meaning for his work and the E.I.P. program.

Takes an active interest in professional organizations
at all levels.

Contributes as an author to professional journals,
university publications or school publications as a
means of furthering the professional dialogue.

Is an activist in regard to legislation affecting
education whether it be national, state, or local.

Is aware that interns provide for the development of
good consultants as well as consultants for interns.

APPENDIX 0
FINAL INSTRUMENTATION

137

138

To all Interns and Intern Consultants:

The success of this inquiry is wholly dependent on your

fullest cooperation in completing and returning rom t1
the enclosed data booklet in the self-addressed, stampei
envelope provided for your convenience.

I am hopeful that this material will be given your con-
sideration without delay and that all returns be made on
or preferably before March 30.

Thank you

1.

5.

139

Intern Intern Consultant

Questionnaire

You will find that each question within the questionnaire
can be completed rather quickly. Please read each
question carefully.

If you have difficulty in answering any question, please
give us your best estimate or appraisal. If, after
responding to a question, you would like to comment on
it you may do so in the margin.

It is hoped that Intern Consultants will answer all
questions within the questionnaire.

Interns need not answer uestions 3, h, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,
10, 23, 2h, 25, 26, 27, 1, 32, and 3“. Each of these
questions will be marked by an asterisk for your con-

venience.

Please do not place your name anywhere on the questionnaire.

1.

2.

*3.

it}.

*5.

*6.

140

Personal Data

Are you:

1) An Intern

2)An Intern Consultant

Are you:

_1) Male
:2) Female

How many years have you been a licensed teacher?

_1) One year _6) 6-10 years

:2) Two years :7) ll-15 years

:—2) Three years :8) 16-20 years
) Four years —9) 21-25 years

—5) Five years 26 years or more
What grades have you taught during your teaching expert
ience? (Please check any grade level you have had
experience at.)

'9'“

_1) Kindergarten ___6) Grade five
:2) Grade one _7) Grade six
)Grade two :8) Grades 7 8 or 9 (specify
Grade three
:5 Grade four 9) Grades IO,1l or 12
(specify2

How many different school districts have you had exper—
ience in as a teacher?

_1) One school system ‘___6) Six school systems
:2) Two school systems _7) Seven school systems
:3) Three school systems :8) Eight school systems
) Four school systems —9) Nine school systems ‘
“5) Five school systems ' __jb) Ten or more school
systems

Which one of these best describes the kind of environment
in which your experience has taken place?

_1) Urban _5) Urban and Rural
:2) Suburban 2:6) Suburban and Rural.
:3) Rural :7) Urban , Suburban and
:h) urban and Suburban Rural

Q7.

*8.

*9.

’10.

ll.

12.

1’41

How many years have you been an Intern Consultant?

1) One year

_2) Two years
:2) Three years
) Four years
:5) Five years or more

Which of the following positions have you held during
your teaching career? (Check more than one if necessary.)

_1) Classroom teacher ___5) Curriculum Coordinator
:2) Subject hatter Con- _6) Assistant Superintendent
sul tant :7) Superintendent
‘___3) Principal :8) Any other (specify
____4) Counselor )

 

Approximately how often do you work on school activities
at home?

___1) No evenings per week.
____2) One evening per week
) Two to three evenings per week
) Four to five evenings per week
:5) More than five evenings per week

Approximately what portion of your weekend is taken up
with school work?

_1) None at all
:2 Somewhere between one and four hours
Somewhere between five and six hours

_ _4) Somewhere between seven and eight hours
—5) More than eight hours

ILH

When were you born?

_1) 1900-1905 _6) 1926-1930
.22) 1906-1910 _7) 1931-1935
.. .) 1911-1915 __8) 1936-19110
‘j ) 1916-1920 9) 19111-1916
5) 1921-1925 __ ) 19116-1950

Where were your parents born?

1) Both are native born Americans
___2) One born in U.S. and one foreign born
___3) Both are foreign born

13.

14.

15.

16.

142
What was your father's major life-time occupation?

1) Education
2) Professional (other than education) or scientific
3) Managerial, executive or proprietor of large
business
) Small business owner or manager
) Farm owner or renter
) Clerical or sales
; Skilled worker or foreman
Semi-skilled worker
) unskilled worker or farm laborer
) Other (specify

 

What was your father's highest educational attainment?

1) No formal education
Some elementary school
. 2; Completed elementary school

___ Some high school, technical school or business

school
5) Graduated from high school, technical school or

business school

___5) Some college

___7) Graduated from college

___S) Graduate or professional school

What was your mother's major life-time occupation?

None

Education

Professional (other than education) or scientific
Secretarial, clerical

Small business owner or manager

Skilled worker

Domestic worker or unskilled worker

Semi-skilled worker

Other (specify )

vwvvvvv V

was your mother's highest educational attainment?

No formal education

Some elementary school

Completed elementary school

Some high school or business school
Graduated from high school or business school
Some college

Graduated from college

Graduate or professional school

IMMM¢EUQMM¢

vvvvvv w

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.,

'23.

lh3

In what type of a community did you spend most of your
youth?

‘___1; Rural (farm)

___2 Village or town (under 10,000 population)
a) Small city (10,000 - 50,000 population)

____) City (50,000 or more in population)

In what type of schools did you receive the greatest
portion of your elementary school education?

-1) Public
2) Parochial
3) Private

In what type of school diduyou receive the greatest por-
tion of your secondary education?

1) Public
2) Parochial

3) Private

Approximately what was the quality of your work in
secondary school?

___l) Way above average
___2) Above average
___3) Average

____) Below average

How active were you in extra-curricular activities in
secondary school?

___l) Way above average
___2).Above average
"‘3) Average

___ ) Below average

What was the income situation of your parents at the
time of your graduation from secondary school?

___l) Top 251 of the community

___2) Second highest 2;, of the community
a) Third highest 25 of the community

___ ) Lowest 251 of the community

At what kind of institution did you do most of your
undergraduate work?

‘___l; State university
___2 Private university or college
) State teachers college or normal school
) Private teachers college ornormal school
5) Other Parochial college or university

*2“.

.25.

*26,

.27.

28.

29.

In”

In general, what was the quality of your work in college?

1) Graduated with honors
2) Above average

zgnAverage
Below'average

How active were you in extra curricular activities in
college?

___l) A great deal above average
___2 Above average

g Average
___.) Below average

In your teacher education program, what kind of pre-
service laboratory_experience did you encounter?

___l) Hone at all

___2) Student teaching in a university laboratory school
2 Student teaching in a public school

___, An internship (similar to the model offered by ISO)

5) Other (specify )

At what type of university did you do most of your
graduate work?

___l) I have not done graduate work

2; State university

a State teachers college or normal school
___,) Private university or school of education

5; Private teachers college or normal school
___fi Parochial university or school of education

When you were in undergraduate school, what percent of

your expenses did your parents contribute to your
education?

1 o 1: 2
“-2) 26 go 23;

2:2) 51 to 75$
___,) 76 to 1005
What are your plans for future formal education?

___l) I have no plans
___2) I have no specific plans for a degree program, but
am considering taking courses
3) I plan on pursuing a masters degree
___9; I plan on pursuing an educational specialists degree
5 I plan to undertake a doctoral program

30.

*31.

.32.

33-

03b.

35;

36.

145

How many credits of education courses did you complete
as an undergraduate?

-—;3 “a; ——‘;’ 30-23
1- -
_3) 16-30 _6) 61 or more
How many graduate credits have you completed?
__1 None ___lt) l-1+5
l-15 :5) -6O
_3) 16-30 :6) 61 or more

What is the highest academic degree conferred upon you
to this time?

__1) Certificate
:2; Bachelors degree
Masters degree
:) Educational specialist
Doctorate

What is your marital status?

1) Single

2; harried
Separated

) Divorced

Widow or widower

ch category best represents your current income?

Less than $5,000
5,000 - 7,000
7,001 - 9,000
9,001 - 11, 000

More than 811, 000

WVVV

LLLU... 2 LLLII

When did you first consider entering teaching?

_1) Before attending high school
:2) During high school

:2) During college
) After graduating from college

When did you make your final decision to enter teaching?

_1) Before attending high school
:2) During high school

:3; During college
After graduating from college

37-

33-

39.

146

Was teaching your first or second preference as a voca-
tional aspiration?

1) First
2) Second, because I was unable to enter another

Who was most influential in your entering teaching?

___1) A member of your family
___2) A friend

) A person active in education or connected with it
_ ) No one at all

English (Language Arts)

History (Social Studies)

Science

Mathematics

Foreign Language

Home Economics or Industrial Arts
Beading

Physical Education

Fine Arts (Music, Art)

Other (specify

vvwvvvvvv

1&7

Intern Intern Consultant

1.

2.

3.

5.

Questionnaire - Part I

The following statements have been item analyzed from
selections previously made by interns, intern consultants
and center coordinators.

Following each statement is a five point scale on which
the performance of a particular behavior can be rated.
In addition to the scale there is a space which can be
marked when available information is insufficient for
making a Judgment.

Bead and inspect each statement and eve¥z scale care£¥lly.

A number on each sca e s 0 en c rc c , n
our Judgment most accurately indicates the performance

0 e behavior described. If, in your estimation,
insufficient information is available for making a Judgb

ment then place an X.on the line indicating ”no basis for

3mmt e I

For your convenience, a master scale has been placed at
the-top of each page. It defines for the rater the
specific meaning of the terms as they are being used in
reference to this instrument.

Intern consultants responding to each scale are therefore
rating themselves. Interns responding to each scale are

rating their particular intern consultant, not consultants
in genera .

Please do not place your name anywhere on the questionnaire.

148

 

5 a 3 2 1
Deficient Poor de uate I Good I Excellent
e - or no cons s ent Su icient [Above averagel u s an ng
utilized professional professional professional professional

model model model model

I. Personal Characteristics

A.

B.

C.

D.

E.

F.

Is friendly and tactful with all personnel involved in
the educational setting.

Deficient‘PoorlAdeguatelGoodlExcellent _L,
No‘baSIB

for Judgment

 

Has enthusiasm for the task of education and in par-
ticular for intern consulting.

Excellent ood Ade uate Poor Deficient
N6“basis .

for Judgment

 

Uses good common sense even in those situations bound
by anxiety.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
3 I 5 5 I 5 I l fib‘basis

for Judgment

 

 

Is receptive to new ideas contributed by all concerned.

Excellent Good e uate Poor Deficient
N3:basis I I 2 I 3 I E I 3

for Judgment

 

Has a positive attitude which is demonstrated by
acceptance of constructive criticism, genuine interest
in pupils and interns, and sensitivity to the needs
and feelings of others.

Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
" I ' I“ 2"+""§" I' E'I' "3 o s s

for Judgment

Demonstrates initiative and seeks opportunities to
assume responsibilities.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
3 I E I 5 I 2 I I No basis

for Judgment

 

.II I. l 'I I'll. III] I I

149

5 u 3 2 l
Deficient Poor Ade-uate . Good Excellent
Be :v or no ncons 3 en 'u“ c en --ove average cu s an- ng
utilized professional professional professional professional

model model model model

II.

G.

H.

I.

J.

Demonstrates his ability to consider and make decisions.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
Noibasis

for Judgment

 

Demonstrates a professional stance in his support and
guidance of interns.

_fi_ ExcellenthoodlAdeguatelPoor'Deficient
No basis

for Judgment

 

Demonstrates sound mental health by such signs as
absence of continual moodiness, acceptance of praise
with poise, a sense of humor and an obJectivity
about himself.

DeficientlPoorlAdeguatelGoodlExcellent
5 3 2 1 No basis

for Judgment

 

Demonstrates flexibility in thought, word and deed in
opposition to rigidity.

g_ Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
Nofibasis

for Judgment

 

Intern--Consultant Relations

A.

B.

Is a good team worker as well as leader.

Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
I I 2 I 5 I 5 I 3 Nolbasis

for Judgment

 

Is willing to participate as well as verbally suggest.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
N3Ibasis 3“"'I'"E'+"J¥§"'I'1E‘I"'1f""

for Judgment

 

150

5 h 3 2 l
Deficient Poor Ade.uate Good Excellent
:e7?*'or>no nconsis en 'u c en Aoove average 6u s an- ng
utilized professional Professional professional professional

model model model model

o. Is committed to internship as a unique means of con-
tributing to teacher education.

ExcellenthoodlAdeguatelPoor'Deficient _;
No'basIs

 

 

for Judgment
D. Can pace and individualize his approach from intern
to inteme
Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
N6 basis

for Judgment

B. Is consistently attempting to improve the interns
self-concept.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
T‘I-TI—ar—I'T'Ifi— $75.33

for Judgment

 

F. Represents an active professional model to interns.

Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
33 basis I I 2 I 3 I E I 3

for Judgment

 

G. Recognizes various levels of intern growth.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
33*basis

for Judgment

 

H. Develops a receptive ear that is evidenced by good
listening habits.

_L Deficient Poor Ade uate Good cellent
No‘basis

for Judgment

 

I. Assists interns in setting realistic work goals.

Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Defic ent 4__
No_basis

for Judgment

 

151

h 3 2 l
Deficient Poor Ade uate Poor cellent
Be or no nconsistent Su ic ent A ve average Ou stan ing
utilized professional professional professional professional
model model model model

J. Demonstrates his belief in the dignity and worth of
the individual.

Excellent Good Ade uate oor Def cient
No‘basis

for Judgment

 

III. Instructional and Guidance Skills

A. Has an understanding of the multiple causes of intern
behavior.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
“"3—"I—T'I—‘gT—‘I‘T'I—‘T— NB basis

for Judgment

 

B. Suggests and demonstrates a variety of teaching
techniques.

Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient _l
Nifibasis

for Judgment

 

C. Demonstrates an understanding of the obJectives and
content of the elementary and middle school years.

Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
Ho°basis I I 2 I 5 I E I 3

for Judgment

 

D. Shows and demonstrates interest and enthusiasm for
elementary and middle school children.

Excellent Good de uate oor Deficient
I I 2 I 3 I E I 5 Nolbasis

for Judgment

 

E. Continually seeks analysis of his own behavior in
terms of its relation to interns.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
WP? it? basis

for Judgment

 

152

5 h 3 2 l
Deficient Poor Ade-uate Good Excellent
Be :v or no «cons s an Su ‘ c ent A-ove average cuts an- ng
utilized professional professional professional professional

model model model model

F.

G.

H.

I.

J.

Is continually learning new facts and skills to add
to his teaching repertory.-

DeficienthoorlAdeguatg‘Good|Excellent
Nofibasis

for Judgment

 

Continually shares professional literature which may
provide new inroads to the solving of classroom prob-
lems and the refinement of teaching behavior.

Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
I I 2 I 5 I 5 I 3 Nofibasis

for Judgment

 

Suggests meaningful approaches to preparation, lesson
continuity, motivation and the general organization
of classroom activities.

ExcellenthoodlAdeguatelPoor|Deficient
No basis

for Judgment

 

Provides evaluations for interns that promote self-
direction.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
3 I HI 3 I 2"I"—1"—’ No basis

for Judgment

 

Suggests and provides a wide range of teaching aids
suitable for intern classrooms.

Excellent'GoodlAdequatelfioorlDeficient
Nobasis

for Judgment

 

IV- General School Services

A.

Is familiar and aware of the personal and guidance
services of the districts he works with.

Excellent 'Good I Adequatg‘ Poorl Deficient
No basis

for Judgment

 

153

5 h 3 2 l
Deficient Poor Adeouate Good Excellent
:e :vior no cons 8 en ‘u ic en A-ove average Cu 8 : - ng
utilized professional professional professional professional

model model model model

B.

C.

D.

F.

G.

Helps interns to interpret individual school and
district policies.

Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
Fibasfs

for Judgment

 

Is aware of and familiar with the socio-eoonomic con-
ditions of the clientele his interns service.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good cellent
5 I E I 3 I 2 I I NS‘bEsIs

for Judgment

 

Assumes initiative for public relations for the E.I.P.

program as a unique contributor to both teacher
education and the local school district.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
Ngfibasis

for Judgment

Assumes initiative in demonstrating the professional
model for the serviced public as well as pre-service
and professional teachers.

Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
I I 2 I 3 I u I 5 No basis

for Judgment

 

 

Assists interns at reporting time whether it be
written or oral evaluation.

cellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
Noibasis I I 2 I 3 'I E I 3

for Judgment

 

Is aware of and familiar with the innovations and
special instructional programs offered by the district
he works with.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
3 I E I 3 I 5 I I fizlbasfs

for Judgment

 

15#

5 h 3 2 l
Deficient Poor Ade-uate Good Excellent
:e :v or no cons s en ’u ‘ c en ‘oove average on s an- ng
utilized professional professional professional professional

model model model model

V.

H.

I.

J.

Keeps principals and other appropriate school admin-
istrators informed of his candidates progress.

Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
I I ZI 3 I III 3 fiobasis

for Judgment

 

Helps interns to interpret individual school and
district educational philosophies.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
No basis 3 I E I 3 I 2 I I

for Judgment

 

Is familiar with both school and district material
centers.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
fib‘baSIs

for Judgment

 

Professional Growth

A.

B.

C.

Has sufficient academic preparation in subJect matter
areas; that is, disciplines outside the general area
of education.

ExcellenthoodlAdeguatelPoorlDeficient _
1 2 3 5 No basis

for Judgment

 

Has sufficient professional preparation in methods
and techniques pertinent to the elementary and Junior
high school years.

_; Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
No‘Basis

for Judgment

 

Has sufficient understanding of child growth and
development pertinent to the elementary and Junior
high school levels.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent __
No‘basis

for Judgment

 

155

 

5 4 3 2 l
Deficient Poor Adequate I, Good Excellent
Be a or no ncons s an u c1553 [Above averageIOuEstandIng
utilized professional professional professional professional

D.

E.

F.

G.

H.

I.

model model model model

Has sufficient understanding of learning theory and
its meaning for children of elementary and Junior
high school levels.

Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
W ficT‘oasis

for Judgment

 

Has sufficient understanding of the social philosoph-
ical foundations of education and their implications
for interns, consultants and the school districts
they service.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
No‘baSis

for Judgment

 

Is aware of his maJor strengths and weaknesses as a
consultant, and strives to maintain his strengths
and improve upon his weaknesses.

Excellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
—'I'“"I"T‘I'—ST—‘I"T‘I"_T- fifisfi

for Judgment

 

Seeks and accepts help from teachers, administrators,
fellow consultants, and university faculty and staff.

ExcellentIGoodIAdeguatelPoorIDeficient _;_
No‘basis

for Judgment

 

Attempts to evaluate his performance whether it be
through formal instruments or self-report.

Deficient Poor.Ade uate Good Excellent
3 I E I 3 I Z I I fizibasis

for Judgment

 

Is aware that interns provide for the development of
good consultants as well as consultants for interns.

cellent Good Ade uate Poor Deficient
No this I I 2 I 3 I E I 3

for Judgment

 

156

5 4 3 2 ' 1
Deficient Poor Adeouate Good. Excellent
Be :v or not cons 8 en ‘u c on A-ove average Cu 8 an-ing
utilized professional professional professional professional

model model model model

J. Subscribes to or reads consistently those professional
publications helpful to him as intern consultant and
professional educator.

Deficient Poor Ade uate Good Excellent
3 I E I 3 I 2 I I Nb basis

for Judgment

 

157

Intern Intern Consultant

1.

2.

3.

5.

7.

Questionnaire
Part II

Are you:

a. an intern
b. an intern consultant

In your estimation, what are the two greatest needs in
Teacher Education today?

As you consider them, what are the two greatest stre%gths
of the Elementary Internship Program at Michigan Sta e
University?

ae

b.
As you consider them, what are the two greatest weaknesses
of the Elementary Internship Program at Michigan ate
University?

8e

b.

To whom do you feel responsible, in your present position
in the Elementary Internship Program?

For whom do you feel responsible, in your present position
In the Elementary Internship Program?

Of what value have the Clinic School Materials (LSI -
green original prototype and blue inner city manuals)
been to you in the Elementary Internship Program?

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

IR,

158

What kind of professional career plans are you considering
in the future?

What kind of educational aspirations do you have for the
future?

As you work within the Elementary Internship Program,
what do you presently consider as your two greatest

strengths?

8e

b.
To date, as you work within the Elementary Internship
Program, what do you consider as your two greatest
weaknesses?

ae

b.

Cite the most significant advant e of having an intern
consultant as a methods instructor.

Cite the most significant disadvant e of having an
intern consultant as a metfiods Instructor.

What method or procedure do you feel should be used in
evaluating the effectiveness of the intern consultant?

159

15. What part do you feel the following personnel should play
in consultant evaluation?

a.

b.

0.

d.

16. Please

Intern Consultant

Intern

University Coordinator

Cooperating Public School Personnel (Principal,
etc.

rank (1 to 6) these roles in the order of their

importance to you, as you function within the Elementary
Internship Program.

Member of a Community

Mediator of the Culture

Director of Learning

Guidance and Counseling Person
Liaison Between School and Community
Member of a Profession

17. Would you be interested in knowing the results of this
inquiry?

8e yes
be no