A, STUDY OF VERBAL BEHAVIOR PATTERNS IN PRIMARY GRADE CIASSROOMS DURING SCIENCE ACTIVITIES Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D.. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY” I _ THOMAS CHARLES MOON 1969 ‘.a-—- __ . . . . I». L l B R [A .' Y T Michigan State University THESIS —— This is to certify that the ~.~ thesis entitled ' ’ A STUDY OF VERBAL BEHAVIOR PATTERNS IN PRIMARY GRADE CLASSROOMS DURING SCIENCE ACTIVITIES Ar presented by Thomas Charles Moon has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for _P_h_-_1L__ degree in Wducat ion Max-1M" ldnév Adajor profeslor Date 3/; ’/érf I 0-169 I ABSTRACT A STUDY OF VERBAL BEHAVIOR PATTERNS IN PRIMARY GRADE CLASSROOMS DURING SCIENCE ACTIVITIES By Thomas Charles Moon Problem This study was designed to analyze selected examples of verbal behavior patterns in primary grade classrooms during science activities. Thirty-two elementary school teachers within five mid-Michigan public school districts comprised the pOpulation under consideration. Six- teen of these teachers taught science in the manner suggested by their respective school districts. Each of the sixteen remaining teaching participants within the experimental population received an in-depth study of the Science Curriculum Improvement Study's teaching methods. and materials, for they attended a three week workshop in these techniques during the summer of 1968. This study was designed as a quasi-experimental, time-series analysis and involved a series of science teaching observations that began in April, 1968 and were con- cluded in March, 1969. Thomas Charles Meon Procedure Each science lesson was recorded with easily portable, battery powered tape recorders, and two of the three instruments used in evaluating the study's data were exclusively concerned with information gathered from analyses of the taped lessons. These two instruments were the Flanders System of Interaction Analysis and the Science Teaching Observational Instrument. The third instrument, the Science Process Test for Elementary School Teachers, centered upon an evalua- tion of teachers' process skills and comprehension of selected science concepts. Statistical treatments used were a repeated measures design of a mixed model analysis of variance, the Friedman two-way analysis of variance by ranks, and t-tests for correlated data. Findings The following are among those findings obtained through analyses of the collected data: 1. those teachers who were exposed to the teaching methods and materials suggested by the Science Curriculum Improvement Study differed significantly from those teachers employing conventional science teaching methods and materials, by demonstrating an increase in the amount of direct teacher influence displayed in verbal behavior patterns during science activities. Apparently this was due to an increased per- centage of teacher direction-giving to young children who were actively involved with science materials; 2. there was a pronounced shift in the question preferences dis- played by the experimental teachers after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials. The original obser- vations demonstrated a heavy reliance upon low order question types. After the workshop's conclusion, the teachers demon- strated a much greater preference for higher level questions; and Thomas Charles Moon although the SCIS summer workshop's activities seemed to have a definite influence upon the experimental teachers' science presentations during those fall months immediately following its conclusion, the types of science materials used by these teachers also might have contributed to this influence. A STUDY OF VERBAL BEHAVIOR PATTERNS IN PRIMARY GRADE CLASSROOMS DURING SCIENCE ACTIVITIES By Thomas Charles Moon A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1969 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The sincerest appreciation is expressed to those persons who have assisted so greatly in conducting this research and doctoral study. First, to the thesis director and chairman of the doctoral com- mittee, Dr. Wayne Taylor, whose interest, assistance, and guidance were essential to the development and completion of the study. Second, to the other members of the doctoral committee, Drs. Glenn Berkheimer, George Myers, and Frank Peabody who made impor- tant contributions. Third, to the thirty-two primary grade teachers who participated within the study. Fourth, to Dr. Maryellen McSweeney who gave much guidance in_the use of appropriate statistical formulae and to Dr. Julian Brandon, Director of Michigan State University's Science and Mathematics Teaching Center, for the use of the Center's tape recording facilities. Fifth, to Mr. Steven Barnes and Mr. Larry Bruce, doctoral students who aided in.the collection of data. Finally, to friends, family, and my wife Marylyn for their support, encouragement, and patience throughout doctoral study, research, and the writing of this thesis. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES O I O I O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 LIST OF FIGURES O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O 0 LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. II. III. PROBLEM AND ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . .w. . . . . . . . . . Need for the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Objectives of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overview of Procedure and Analysis . . . . . . . . . Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Organization of the Thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . .‘. . . . . . . . . . . . Historical Implications of Elementary School Science Movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Forces Redirecting Elementary Science Teaching . . . Desired Attributes of Contemporary Elementary School. Science Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Role of the Teacher in Medern Elementary School Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pre-service and In-service Teacher Training in Elementary Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teacher Attitudes Toward Elementary School Science . Verbal Behavior Patterns Within the Classroom . . . Research on the Use of Questions during Science Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . IntrOduct ion 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Design of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii Page viii ix 15 15 20 22 25 28 34 -38 40 46 48 48 48 Chapter IV. AN Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Selection of the Population . . . . . . . . . . . The In-service Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . Teaching Methods and Materials . . . . . . . . . . Description of Instruments Used and Collection of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flanders System of Interaction Analysis . . . . . Reliability Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Procedures for Analysis of Data . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ALYSIS OF DATA AND FINDINGS . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Collection and Compilation of Data . . . . . . . . Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparisons Between the Two Teacher Groups . . . . Teacher ID Ratios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Percentage of Teacher Talk Withi SCIS Classrooms Percentage of Student Talk Within SCIS Classrooms Percentage of Continuous Student Comment Within SCIS Classrooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analyses of Teacher Preferences for Question Types Analyses of Science Process Skills . . . . . . . . Discussion of the Study's Findings . . . . . . . . Teacher ID Ratios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Percentage of Teacher Talk . . . . . . . . . . . . Percentage of Student Talk . . . . . . . . . . . . Percentage of Continuous Student Comment . . . . . Teacher Question Type Preferences . . . . . . . . Teachers' Science Process Skills . . . . . . . . . Some Concerns and Attitudes of the Teachers Within the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAP APPENDICES Summary of Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Implications From the Study . . . . . . . . . . . Implications for Future Research . . . . . . . . . IIY O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O I O O O O O 0 iv Page 49 SO 52 53 6O 64 68 75 76 8O 80 80 82 83 84 87 89 91 93 96 100 103 104 104 106 106 108 109 110 111 112 114 114 115 117 124 ll. 12. 13. 14. LIST OF TABLES Lesson Topics Presented by Pre-SCIS Teachers and Conventional Science Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . Observation Dates of Teachers Using SCIS Teaching Methods and Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Observation Dates of Teachers Using Conventional Science Teaching Methods and Materials . . . . . . Intra-observer Reliability for the Flanders System of Interaction Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Intra-observer Reliability for the Science Teaching Observational Instrument Categories . . . . . . . . Summary oanypotheses and Medals Used to Analyze Data Analysis of Variance Data for the ID Ratios of SCIS Teachers, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mean Scores and Standard Deviations of SCIS Teachers' ID Ratios per Observation . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mean Observation Dates for the Sixteen SCIS Teachers Analysis of Variance for Percentage of SCIS Teacher Talk I O O O O O O O O O O I O O I O O O I O O I 0 Analysis of Variance Data for Percentage of Student Talk in SCIS Classrooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis of Variance Data for Percentage of Continuous Student Comment in SCIS Classrooms . . . Summary of Time by Type Interactions Using the Friedman Analysis of Variance by Ranks . . . . . . Pre-test and Post-test Data Concerning the SCIS Teachers on the Science Process Test . . . . . . . Page 55 61 62 7O 74 77 85 86 86 87 91 93 96 99 Table. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 210' 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Summary of Data Analysis for Each Hypothesis Tested . SCIS Teachers' Percentage of Giving Directions (Flanders Category Six) Across Observations . . . . A Statistical Comparison of Two Groups of In-Service Elementary Teachers on Process Test . . . . . . . . . . 1968 SCIS Summer Workshop . . . . . Interaction Analysis Categories . . Observer Tally Sheet . . . . . Observation Matrix . . . . . . . . the Science Science Teaching Observational Instrument Categories Raw Score Frequencies of Two Groups of Elementary School Teachers on the Science Process Test for Elementary School Teachers . . . ID Ratios of Those Sixteen Teachers Using SCIS Teaching Methods and Materials . ID Ratios of Those Sixteen Teachers Using Conventional Science Teaching Methods and Materials 0 O O O O O O O O O I I Percentage of Teacher Talk in Those Sixteen Classrooms Using SCIS Teaching Methods and Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . Percentage of Teacher Talk in Those Sixteen Classrooms Using Conventional Science Teaching Methods and Materials . . . . . . Percentage of Student Talk in Those Sixteen. Classrooms Using SCIS Teaching Methods and ,Materiala O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Percentage of Student Talk in Those Sixteen Classrooms Using Conventional Science Teaching Methods and Materials . . . . . . Percentage of Continuous Student Comment in Those Sixteen Classrooms Using SCIS Teaching Methods and Materials . . . . . . . . . . vi Page 101 105 108 124 133 135 136 137 138 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 Table Page 31. Percentage of Continuous Student Comment in Those Classrooms Using Conventional Science Teaching Methods and Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 32. Percentage of Question Type Preferences for Those Sixteen Teachers Using SCIS Teaching Methods and Materials 0 O O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O I O 159 33. Percentage of Question Type Preferences for Those Sixteen Teachers Using Conventional Science 62 1 Teaching Methods and Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . vii LIST OF FIGURES Subject Areas of the SCIS Program (1968) . . . SCIS Teachers' Mean ID Ratios Per Mean Observations, N - 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . SCIS Teachers' Mean Percentage of Teacher Talk Per Mean Observations, N - 16 . . . . . Mean Percentages of Student Talk per Mean Observations, N - l6 Classrooms . . . . . . . Mean Percentages of Continuous Student Comment Per Mean Observations, N - l6 SCIS Classrooms Mean Percentages of Question Types by the Sixteen. SCIS Teachers Per Mean Observations . . . . . Mean Percentages of Question Type Preferences by Both SCIS Teachers and Conventional Science Teachers on Initial and Final Observations, N . 32 O O O O O O O O I O O O I O O O O O 0 viii Page 58 88 90 92 94 97 98 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page A. The SCIS Summer Workshop and Instruments Used to Gather Data 0 O l O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O 124 B. Summary of Data Analyzed for Both the SCIS Teachers and Those Teachers Using Conventional Science Teaching Methods and Materials . . . . . . . . . 151 C. Data Collected on Teacher Question Type Preference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 D 0 cover Letters 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O O 165 ix CHAPTER ONE THE PROBLEM AND ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY In the past decade an increased interest in American elementary school science curricula has become evident. A wide spectrum of cur- riculum innovations has blossomed onto the educational scene that pro- fess to focus upon the elementary school child and how he learns science. Many such programs stress the importance of the child within their pub- lished materials. And rightly so, for he represents the recipient of that wealth of scientific knowledge deemed important for him as a functioning member of his society. These new science materials also stress the importance of the elementary school teacher and how her teaching role is modified through the introduction of such programs. In actuality the actions of the individual teacher determine the cur- riculum within any respective classroom. The basis for this study stems from a consideration of such teacher actions in response to the intro- duction of a recent curriculum innovation, the Science Curriculum Improvement Study. This study's problem is to analyze selected examples of verbal behavior patterns in primary grade classrooms during science activities. The teacher's role within educational endeavors is of utmost importance. This was made most evident by Hough when he stated: The central activity of any educational institution is teaching. Other activities such as those performed by administrative, 1 2 special services and curriculum development personnel gain sanction only when they function as to support teachers and their teaching.1 The following skills should be continually in evidence throughout the activities of any teacher charged with formulating the learning environ- ments of others: 1. selecting and organizing the content of instruction and , stating the objectives of instruction as observable student behavior; 2. making and implementing instructional decisions; 3. creating measuring devices and measuring student learning; 4. and evaluating the appropriateness of objectives, the effectiveness of instruction and the validity of measurement techniques.2 It is within the realm of science education that the above mentioned activities become most crucial to the elementary school teacher. Yet many such teachers feel uneasy when science is mentioned as an integral aspect of the total elementary curriculum. One definition of science that seems quite appropriate states that science is a systematic and connected arrangement of knowledge within a logical structure of theory.3 Tyler has also described science as a continuing process of.inquiry.4 Scientific endeavors have assumed ever-increasing importance within contemporary educational practices 1John B. Hough, "Ideas for the Development of Programs Relating to Interaction Analysis," Innovative Ideas in Search of Schools: Title III, PACE (Lansing: State Board of Education, 1966, p. 97. 2Ibid. 3Paul DeHart Hurd, Theory Into Action in Science Curriculum Develgpment (Washington, D.C.: National Science Teachers Association, 1964), p. 11. 4Ralph W. Tyler, "The Behavioral Scientist Looks at the.Purposes of Science-Teaching," RethinkiggfiScience Education, Fifty-Ninth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960), p. 31. 3 when one realizes that a principal goal of universal education should be the communication of the spirit of science and the development of peOple's capacities to use its values.5 Cognizance of this goal should be demonstrated by the contemporary elementary school teacher. Increasingly the teaching style demonstrated within the class- room is of critical importance in effective learning of scientific concepts.6 Science in the elementary school can no longer be relegated exclusively to the incidental or chance-happening style of teaching. Jacobson indicated his conception of the type of elementary science instruction needed when he stated: Effective science teaching is not a step-by-step procedure; instead, it is an interaction between children, teacher, materials, equipment, and facilities. The teacher nurtures, stimulates, and guides these interactions.7 The importance of the teacher's role in the learning activities that occur within elementary school science becomes most evident when- one realizes that the effectiveness of any science program depends ulti- mately on the competency and initiative of the individual teacher.8 It has been stated that the improvement of elementary school science: begins with the assignment of a teacher who has-a good science background, has a knowledge of the objectives for teaching science, SEducational Policies Commission, Education and the Spirit of Science (Washington, D.C.: National Educational Association, 1966), p. 27. 6Willard J. Jacobson, "Teacher Education and Elementary School Science--l980," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, Issue I (1967), 76. 71bid., p. 77. 8Samuel W. Bloom, "How Effective is Science in the Elementary School?" School Science and Mathematics, 59 (February, 1959), 95-96. 4 is interested in teaching, knows how children learn, and wants to be a good teacher. The teacher, then, is the key to the learning situation. His enthusiasm carries to the learner. His interests often become theirs. His concerns for them is reflected in his success as a teacher. The good teacher is a guide; but he is more than that. Because of his experience and understanding he not only guides but also directs the learning into profitable channels. He keeps the learning from being a narrow experience by broadening the interests of the learner and by opening up new avenues of learning.9 Thus the various concepts that a teacher of elementary school science conveys during these learning episodes will contribute much toward the effectiveness of her role in improving science education. The purpose of this study is to determine whether selected examples of verbal behavior patterns demonstrated by primary grade teachers and their pupils change with instruction using the teaching methods and materials developed by the Science Curriculum Improvement S tUdy c The Need for the Study The purpose of research in science education, according to some authors, is to advance the conceptual schemes which have developed to explain events that occur within man's environment.10 An entire array of such conceptual schemes have been delineated concerning elementary school science and Mallinson has stated two such areas in dire need of educational research. She states that such research is needed to 9Glenn 0. Blough, "Teaching and Evaluating Science in the Elementary School," Rethinking;Science Education, Fifty-Ninth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960), pp. 138-139. 10Joseph D. Novak, "A Preliminary Statement on Research in Science Education," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, I (1963), 3. 5 identify those things that science should help children do better, and that researchers must concentrate efforts upon determining how any 11 Both of these given curricular method may be used more effectively. examples are heavily dependent upon.the teacher's effectiveness in com— municating the goals of instruction to the children under her guidance. The spoken discourse within the classroom has been studied profitably from many standpoints and for many purposes. It has been stated by Hough that: . . . a visit to a typical elementary or secondary school will reveal that 60 per cent of classroom time is taken up in verbal interaction, i.e., talk and that more than 70 per cent of such talk is done by teachers. Teachers use their verbal behavior for a variety of instructional purposes. They may manage activities by giving directions; they may present ideas or opinions by lec- turing; they may elicit student involvement by asking questions; and, they may praise, clarify, accept or criticize student ideas or behavior. Clearly then, if only by virtue of its quantity, classroom verbal interaction and particularly teacher talk con- stitutes an important dimension of instruction. Hughes further attested to the importance of effective verbal communica- tion when she stated that the measure of good teaching is the quality of the response the teacher makes to the child or group with whom he is interacting.13 One set of exemplars that are representative of such verbal in- teractions.within the elementary school classroom focuses upon the effective use of questions. Questions can be used by the teacher to stimulate thinking, to initiate discussion, to appraise what children 11Jacqueline Buck Mallinson, "What Research in Science Education Is Needed to Strengthen the Elementary-School Science.Program?" Science Education, 40 (December, 1956), p. 369. 12Hough, 92, cit., p. 98. 13James-Raths, John R. Pancella, and James S. Van Ness, Studying Teaching (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1967), p. 21. 6 have learned, and to determine what they are thinking about.14 Snyder also emphasized the importance of questions as'a measure of verbal interaction when he stated that measuring question-asking behavior may serve as a means of evaluating new science curricula and as a means of determining the effects on inquiry of different science teaching methodologies.15 Those persons primarily responsible for the development of the Science Curriculum Improvement Study have stated that in order for learning to take place the child must be directly involved in the ex- perience.16 This pupil involvement focuses attention upon the teacher as an observer of children's learning activities. It is through these observations that the teacher will hopefully develop the insight and understanding necessary for making the choice of relevant further ex- periences for them. To guide learning in this way, an effective teacher of elementary school science should understand both the content and process aspects of that particular science tapic for which she is for- mulating the classroom instruction. The Science Curriculum Improvement Study heavily emphasizes child-to-child communication as an integral aspect in the operation of a science lesson. An effective teacher is one who is aware of such communication and structures the learning activity in such a way that 14Willard J. Jacobson and Allan Kondo, SCIS Elementary Science Sourcebook (Berkeley: University of California Regents, 1968), p. 44. 15William Ray Snyder, "The Question-Asking Behavior of Gifted Junior High School Science Students and their Teachers," Dissertation Abstracts, 27, No. 11 (1967), 3738-A. 16Robert Karplus and Herbert D. Thier, A New Look at Elementary School Science (Chicago: Rand, McNally and Company, 1967), p. 80. 7 this communication is enhanced. An ideal teacher does not take lightly the importance of question-asking and the purposes for which one asks questions, in formulating her role in elementary school science. A teacher familiar with SCIS teaching methods and materials would ideally have the ability to assume an indirect, passive role when the children are involved in a discovery lesson in which they are formulating and recording their own observations. Conversely, if the science lesson under consideration involves the introduction of new or complex con- cepts, she must be able to explicitly invent these concepts for the children and aid them in the use of these inventions. Ideally, a teacher actively interested in promoting elementary school science would not place primary interest upon telling children about science or listening to them while they read about science, but rather observing and interacting with children while they are directly involved with science. This study focuses upon selected aspects of teaching behavior during science lessons, and is designed to ascertain whether such a new curriculum effort does alter teaching modes. Primary attention is. directed toward an analysis of verbal classroom interactions as ex- emplars of teaching procedures. It has been stated by Aschner that . . . verbal behavior in the classroom is, of course, the most continuous and pervasive of teacher behavior in the classroom. It is the language of responsible actions designed to influence the behavior of those under instruction.17 Such a study as this could be useful in structuring further in-service 17Marie Hughes, Development of the Means for the Assessment of the Quality of Teachinggin Elementary Schools (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1959). 8 educational endeavors that profess interest in changing teachers' instructional activities. Definitions The following are definitions, statements, or assumptions as they are used in this dissertation. “Role, according to Good, is defined as those "behavior patterns of functions expected of or carried out by an individual in a given 18 societal context." According to Bellack, verbal interaction means the communication of language and meaning in the classroom, which in turn tends to indi- cate the behavior of those involved in the classroom.19 Teacher behavior has been described by Ryans as the behavior or activities of persons as they go about doing whatever is required of teachers, especially the guidance and direction of the learning activities of others.20 Interaction analysis could be defined as the systematic quanti- fication of behavioral acts or qualities of behavior acts as they occur in some sort of spontaneous interaction.21' It is an observation pro— cedure designed to permit a systematic record of spontaneous acts and 18Carter V. Good, Dictionary of Education (New York: McGraw- Hill Book Company, Inc., 1959), p. 471. 19John R. Verduin, Jr., Conceptual Models in Teacher Education (Washington, D.C.: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 1967), p. 44. 20David G. Ryans, "Theory Development and the Study of Teacher Behavior," Journal of Educational Psychology, 47 (1956), 467. 21Verduin,|_p, cit., p. 32. 9 to scrutinize the process of instruction by taking into account each small bit of interaction. The I2_ratio has been defined by Amidon and Flanders as the amount of indirect teacher influence in verbal classroom behavior divided by the amount of direct teacher influence. 22 Objectives of the Study The purposes of this study were to determine whether there is a difference in: 1. the teachers' ID ratios during science activities, before and after the teachers have been exposed to the Science Curriculum Improvement Study's teaching methods and materials; the percentage of time teachers spend talking during science activities, before and after the teachers have been exposed to the Science Curriculum Improvement Study's teaching methods and materials; the percentage of time students talk during science activities, before and after the teachers have been exposed to the Science Curriculum Improvement Study's teaching methods and materials; the percentage of continuous student comment during science activities within the classroom, before and after the teachers have been exposed to the Science Curriculum Improvement Study's teaching methods and materials; the kinds of questions teachers ask during science activities, before and after the teachers have been exposed to the Science' Curriculum Improvement Study's teaching methods and materials; and the teachers' comprehension of the process aspects of science, before and after the teachers have been exposed to the Science Curriculum Improvement Study's teaching methods and materials. in the 22 Classroom (Minneapolis: Amidon Associates, Inc., 1963), P. 29. Edmund J. Amidon and Ned A. Flanders, The Role of the Teacher 10 Hypotheses of the Study Hypotheses: H01 There is no difference in the teachers' ID ratios during science activities, before.and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H01: IDl - ID2)' H02 There is no difference in the percentage of time teachers spend talking during science activities, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H02: TTI - TT2)° H03 There is no difference in the percentage of time students talk during science activities, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (Ho ST - 8T2). 3‘ 1 H04 There is no difference in the percentage of continuous student comment.during science activities within the classroom, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H04: CC = CCZ); 1 H05 There is no difference in the kinds of questions teachers ask children, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (HOS: KQl = KQ2)° H06 There is no difference in the teachers' comprehension of the pro- cess aspects of science, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H06: PS - P82). 1 Overview of Procedure and Analysis This-study was designed as a quasi-experimental, timeeseries analysis and centered upon an assessment of teaching procedures during first and second grade science activities. Observations of verbal ll interactions were collected through taped recordings of science lessons and analyzed through the use of the Flanders System of Interaction Analysis. Thirty—two elementary teachers within five mid-Michigan public school districts comprised the population under consideration. Sixteen of these teachers taught science in the conventional manner suggested» by their respective school districts. Each of the sixteen remaining teachers were participants within the experimental population and re- ceived in-depth training in the Science Curriculum Improvement Study's teaching methods and materials, for they attended a three week workshop in these techniques during the summer of 1968. Eleven of the sixteen original teachers within the experimental population were observed twice prior to the workshop; the other five were observed once. All teachers within the experimental group were observed on four separate occasions after the workshop's conclusion. Each of the sixteen teachers using conventional science materials were also observed twice during the 1968-1969 school year. Taped recordings were analyzed for each lesson within the study. The Flanders System of Interaction Analysis was used as the vehicle to gather data pertinent to hypothesis one. Flanders suggested several derived measures from this scale category and Fischler developed two such scales which were modified and used in the analysis of hy- potheses two, three, and four.23 Fischler also developed the Science Teaching Observational Instrument, which is designed to effectively code 23Abraham S. Fischler and N. J. Anastasiow, "In-Service Education in Science (A Pilot)," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3 (1965), 283. ' . 12 teacher questions into five distinct categories.24 This instrument organized data for the hypothesis five evaluation. Hypothesis six was tested from data collected via the following instrument: The Science Process Test for Elementary School Teachers (Revised Edition), devised by Dr. Evan A. Sweetser of Virginia Polytechnic Institute. Correlations of ratings were produced to determine the intra- observer reliabilities of the two individuals engaged in the analysis of the taped lessons. Scott's coefficient of reliability was the statistic used to compute these data. The first four stated hypotheses were tested statistically via a repeated measures design of a mixed model analysis of variance and a Friedman Test was used to evaluate hypothesis five. A t-test for correlated data was used to appraise hypothesis six. Assumptions In conducting this study it was assumed that: the verbal be- havior of the teacher is an adequate sample of her total behavior; that is, her verbal statements are consistent with her nonverbal gestures; how much teachers talk and what they say determine to a large extent the reactions of the students; the kinds of questions teachers ask are an indication of the quality of teaching that is going on and the levels of thinking that are being stimulated; and the lessons observed and recorded are exemplars of the types of science lessons normally presented by those teachers within the study. 241b1d. 13 Limitations Although correlations of ratings were produced to determine the reliability of the two investigators in the use of the evaluation in? struments previously described, there is an element of subjectivity in- the judgments of these individuals in determining the classification of verbal classroom interaction. This subjectivity is a limitation to the study. In addition, the population under consideration was geographi- cally limited to a selected sample of elementary school teachers within five mid-Michigan public school districts. Any inferences thus derived from this study are limited by the similarity of this population to the general population of elementary school teachers. Organization of the Thesis Presented in this chapter was the statement of the problem, the. background of the study, the need for the study, and an overview of the procedures and analysis. Additionally the assumptions and limitations of the study were presented. Chapter two contains the derivation of the objectives of science education in the contemporary elementary school from a historica1_context, and the review of the literature concerning the changing role of the elementary school teacher in regard to the recent curricular developments within elementary school science. The execution of the study is described in chapter three, which includes a discussion of the design used and the procedures demonstrated for selection of the population under consideration. 14 The analysis of data and findings are presented in chapter four; chapter five contains the conclusions and the implications of this study for future research. CHAPTER TWO REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction Before one can adequately consider the varied ramifications of this study's problem as stated in chapter one, some general aspects of elementary school science must be established. Chapter two includes a review of the literature in regard to such germane topics as: the historical implications of the elementary science movement; forces redirecting contemporary elementary science; the teacher's role in elementary science at present and the implica- tions this role demonstrates for pre-service and in-service science education. At its conclusion the literature review emphasizes the teacher's verbal behavior patterns as one exemplar of teaching style. The use of questions as a necessary component of these teaching techniques is also considered. Historical Implications of the Elementary School Science Movement Smith has written that there were two definite influences fostering the development of the modern American elementary school 15 16 science program.1 One focused upon the somewhat didactic literature imported from Great Britain at the time Sir Thomas Huxley was in- stigating seminars in science teaching for English grammar school teachers. The other influence developed from the famous "object teaching" movement of Pestalozzi in the latter half of the nineteenth century. Both approaches were sadly lacking, for they were highly formalized and attempted to impose a mature scientist's viewpoint upon young children. Neither contributed effectively to a sense of sequence and direction; the child often was considered in terms of his limita— tions rather than in terms of his capabilities. Yet these two approaches held prominence within elementary school science until the nineteen twenties, when the nature study move- ment began to gain impetus within American grade schools. The Third Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education,2 entitled Nature Study, had earlier advocated the importance of functional rela- tionships between elementary instruction in science and the natural sciences in secondary schools. Bradley has written that science began to play a conspicuous role in elementary schools as a separate, autono- mous subject3 and that nature study was the basic theme within these 1Herbert A. Smith, "Educational Research Related to.Science Instruction for the Elementary and Junior High School: A Review and Commentary," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1, Issue 3 (1963), 200. 2Nelson B. Henry, (Ed.), RethinkingyScience Education, Fifty- Ninth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960), XIII. 3R. C. Bradley, N. W. Earp, and T. Sullivan, "A Review of Fifty Years of Science Teaching and Its Implications," Science Education, 50 (March, 1966), 152. 17 programs. Even though science became stereotyped as a teaching of facts instead of a method of thinking scientifically, at least the nature study movement directed attention to the child and his need to be aware of, and to know more about, his environment.4 The publication of the Thirty-first Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education in 19325 gave further momentum to elementary school science when it recommended that: 1. all science instruction be organized about certain broad generalizations or principles; 2. the purpose of science teaching was the development of the understanding of major generalizations and associated scientific attitudes; and 3. a continuous science program is a necessity from kindergarten through the twelfth grade. John Dewey also actively crusaded for a viable elementary science program when he contended that the methodology of science was at least of equal, or even greater, significance than the actual knowledge accumulated by young children.6 From the nineteen twenties to the mid-nineteen forties, science instruction in both the-elementary and junior high schools was strongly influenced by "life adjustment education"7 and the various curricula often revolved around technology in a somewhat fragmentary, unorganized 4Edward Victor, Science for the Elementary School (New York: Macmillan Company, 1965), p. 7. 5Nelson B. Henry, (ed.), Science Education in American Schools, Forty-Sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1947), p. 21. 6Smith, _p, cit., p. 202. 7Robert H. Carleton, "Science Education in the Middle or Junior High SchOol Grades," Science Teacher, 34, No. 9 (December, 1967), 26. 18 manner. From the close of the Second World War until the advance of the space age in late 1957, science education was primarily devoted to the preparation of individuals to live healthfully, successfully, and responsibly within a constantly changing society.8 Those science ex- periments that were developed for elementary teachers during this period were more teacher directed than student directed, and the 19508 saw more audio-visual materials and aids, such as science kits and portable science laboratories, developed to encourage this trend. Blough has written that the purposes of teaching science in the elementary schools of the nineteen sixties have bases-in: the pre- vailing American culture, the nature of children, and science itself.9 A review of the literature since 1960 demonstrates how influential these three points have been in the continued quest by society for scientific literacy within its members. For to escape the threat of obsolescence, education in the sciences must continually be based upon. the kind of information that has survival value and upon strategies of inquiry that facilitate the adaptation of knowledge to new demands. A National Science Teachers Association publication fully advocated such an approach to contemporary science.education when it stated that a person literate in science knows something of the role of science in society and appreciates the cultural conditions under which science thrives. Such a person also understands its conceptual inventions and 8Bradley, Earp, and Sullivan, _p, cit., p. 153. 9Glenn 0. Blough, "Teaching and Evaluating Science in the Elementary School," RethinkingyScience Education, Fifty-Ninth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960), p. 112. 19 its investigative procedures. Science teaching thus must result in scientifically literate citizens.10 Therefore it is not surprising to discover how many contemporary authors advocate such an approach to elementary science within their published materials. Mallinson and Mallinson have written that the prime objective of elementary science teaching is to help children~ acquire an understanding of, and an ability in, the topics and skills related to science.11 Sears and Kessen have stated that the central task of science education is to awaken in children a sense of joy and excitement in science's intellectual power.12 And Smith additionally recorded that the function of both elementary and junior high school science today is to provide knowledge, understanding, and concept development in basic science content. Such an approach should reveal the nature of science as a process of inquiry.13 But what circumstances have brought about this increased in- terest in elementary science curricula within the past decade, and the efforts by many authors to elucidate the objectives that such curricula should foster? The section that follows directs itself to this question. loPaul DeHart Hurd, Theory Into Action in Science Curriculum Development (Washington, D.C.: National Science Teachers Association, 1964), p. 8. 11G. G. Mallinson and J. V. Mallinson, "Science in the Elemen- tary Grades: Children's Learnings in Science," Review of Educational Research, 31 (June, 1961), 238. 12Paul B. Sears and W. Reason, "Statement of Purposes and Objectives of Science Education in School," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2 (1964), 4. 13Smith, op. cit., p. 211. 20 Forces Redirecting Elementary Science Teaching Tyler has clearly delineated four primary forces redirecting all levels of science teaching today.14 These forces are: l. the technological revolution that has resulted in public recognition of the importance of science's role in today's society; 2. the closer working relationship that has been fostered among university personnel, the research scientist, and the class- room teacher; 3. the nature of the knowledge explosion that has altered the conception of science itself--so that it is no longer con- sidered to be the acquisition of basic principles and facts, but rather a process of continuing inquiry and reconstruction of knowledge; and 4. the wide range of pupil interests, abilities, backgrounds, and experiences that actively marshalls a science teaching methodology meeting the varied needs of all pupils. This last point has led such authors as Gagné to conclude that any science teaching methodology must not have as its goal the accumu— lation of knowledge about any particular science domain, but rather inculcate competency in the use of processes basic to all the scien- tific disciplines.15 By using such an avenue many science educators feel the needs of all pupils can best be achieved, for the development of such inquiry skills provide the learner with the tools so crucial for independent learning. Through such forces redirecting elementary school science teaching has deve10ped a theory of instruction actively supported by 14Ralph W. Tyler, "Forces Redirecting Science Teaching," Science Teacher, 29, No. 6 (October, 1962), 22. _15R. M. Gagné, "Elementary Science: A New Scheme of Instruction," 151, N0. 3706 (January 7, 1966), 49. 21 a publication of the National Science Teachers Association.16 The booklet states that such a theory of science education is crucial to modern curriculum development and should demonstrate the following aspects of instruction:17 1. the nature of science: its structure, its processes of inquiry and its conceptual schemes; 2. the nature of the learner: his motives, cognitive style, emotional background, and intellectual potential; 3. the nature of the teacher: his cognitive style, ability to communicate, control pattern, educational philosophy, and understanding of science; 4. the nature of learning: its processes, contexts, conditions, and purposes; 5. the nature of the curriculum: its organization, sequence, and its substantive, attitudinal, and procedural dimensions, and 6. the nature of the social structure: the social and cultural forces with their demands and incentives. Although supporting such a theory of science instruction should be actively encouraged, one cannot easily dismiss Tyler's thoughts when he wrote that ". . . the one most important resource we have in im- proving science teaching and in solving the serious problems of this age is the science teacher."18 With this quotation in mind, the fol- lowing few sections are devoted to some desired components of modern elementary science programs and the unique roles teachers portray within them. 16DeH. Hurd, op, cit., p. 13. 17Ibid. 18Tyler, _p, cit., p. 22. 22 Desired Attributes of Contemporary Elementary School Science Programs Gagné has very capably described the functions of any science curriculum endeavor when he stated that ". . . Fundamentally, the pur— pose of a curriculum is to organize the educational situation in such a way-that students, who.are at one stage, or age, incapable of ex— hibiting certain kinds of behavior relevant to science, become capable of exhibiting certain.kinds of behavior."19 Bruner has also written that ". . . A curriculum, as it develops should revisit basic ideas repeatedly, building upon them until the student has grasped the full formal apparatus that goes with them."20 Both authors certainly would agree with Hill when she stated that ". . . the idea of developing concepts related to topics chosen solely on some such opportunistic basis as children's interest or prominence in the news is being dis- carded in elementary science."21 Thus there is a conscientious effort being made to develop elementary school science activities that demonstrate scope, con- tinuity, and sequence. Carin and Sund have endorsed such-a planned program, for they feel that an integrated science curriculum minimizes boredom and repetition. An_integrated science curriculum provides for the early introduction of the methods and_systematic characteristics 19R. M. Gagné, "A Psychologist's Counsel on Curriculum Design," Journal of Research in Science Teachin , l (1963), 27. 20Jerome S. Bruner, The Process of Education (New York: Random House, 1960), p. 13. 21Katherine E. Hill, HelpingyChildren Learn Science, ed. Anne.B. Hopman (Washington, D.C.: National Science Teachers Associa- tion, 1966), p. 4. 23 of science inquiry.22 Blough reinforced this concept when he delineated the following advantages of a structured elementary school science pro- gram.23 Such a program: 1. presents a framework of science principles; 2. does not have to be rigid; 3. demonstrates uniqueness that is not lost--it allows for spontaneous tapics; 4. arouses an interest in science within the school; and 5. allows children to acquire science concepts necessary for a complex world. Craig has written that the content of any such structured ele- mentary science program should be broad enough in scope to provide for growth in learning about all the major aspects of the environment-~the, sky, the atmosphere, the earth--conditions necessary to life, other living organisms, energy and forces (physical, chemical, biological), and the inventions and discoveries of mankind.24 And Blackwood also has stated that: . . . attempts are being made to develop programs and courses that clearly follow the continuity and unity of science. Con- ceptual schemes, threads, themes and the like, are terms used for the strands of integrative ideas that give a continuity and pattern to the study of science. Conscious attention to the development of scientific methods by involving students in making scientific 22Arthur Carin and Robert Sund, Discovery Teachingyin Science (Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Books, Inc., 1966), p. 11. 23Blough, op: cit., p. 128. 24Gerald 8. Craig, What Research Says to the Teacher: Science in the Elementary Schools (washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1957), p. 7. 24 inquiries is expected to give an integrity to the study of science and thereby to strengthen the curriculum. 5 The teacher's role in presenting such desirable science activities for children becomes most evident when one realizes how much written material is devoted to the teacher and her relationships with children during a science lesson. Craig has stated emphatically that the ele— mentary school teacher must be aware of how a child interprets the world about him, and parallels the similarities between children and scientific enterprises in that both are involved in the active process 26 Children's scientific curiosities of interpreting the physical world. are aroused by events in the home, mass communication, the school, and their own desires for answers about their environment. These questions could form the motivating force around which science teachers might devise teaching techniques. Research, according to Cronbach, seems to reveal that leaving a child alone to discover is not nearly as good as providing him with a guided sequence to maximize the possibility of early discovery.27 Atkin's studies have demonstrated that younger children rely more on emperical tests of hypotheses and tend to be less dependent on recourse to 28 authority. Thus most effective learning in science takes place through an active involvement of the learner. Subarsky would agree with this 25Paul E. Blackwood, Using Current Curriculum Developments, A Report of ASCD's Commission on Current Curriculum Developments (washington, D.C.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Develop- ment, NEA, 1963), p. 61. 26Craig, _p, cit., p. 3. 27L. J. Cronbach, "Learning Research and Curriculum," Journal of Research in Science Teachin , 2 (1964), 206. 28Smith, _p, cit., p. 213. 25 concept for he stated that ". . . teaching of science in the primary grades must center around experiences with concrete things to which the child does something."29 Renner and Ragan.further attested to the crucial importance of the teacher within contemporary elementary science when they stated that: When we are teaching children, however, we must remember that they are not skilled scientists and do not think as such. Rather, pupils in the elementary schools are there to learn how to formulate possible solutions (hypotheses) to problems and this will be done only if the teacher leads them to develop correct procedures in hypothesis formation . . . This charac— teristic has been completely missing from science teaching in the elementary schools.30 With these last comments as a frame of reference, one becomes increas— ingly aware of the importance of the following statement attributed to the National Science Teachers Association's publication cited earlier: The success of a new curriculum greatly depends upon how it will be taught. A curriculum reform is as much a matter of improving instruction as.it is a re-evaluation of course content. The next two sections of this literature review focus upon the elementary teacher's role in improving science curricula. The Role of the Teacher in Modern Elementary School Science If one agrees that a primary purpose in educating children must be to give them the kind of guidance which leads them to make adjustments 29Zachariah Subarsky, Helpinnghildren Learn Science, ed. Anne B. Hopman (washington, D.C.: National Science Teachers Association, 1966). P. 11. 30John W. Renner and William B. Ragan, Teaching Science In the Elementary School (New York: Harper and Row, 1968), p. 10. 31Dell. Hurd, op, cit., p. 13. 26 to events occurring in the world around them, then a sound elementary science program can facilitate this goal by providing an adequate base for lifetime learning. Such science programs should be guided by teachers who are able both to distill from science its most basic con- cepts and to present them in meaningful and motivating ways to young children.32 The teacher's role therefore becomes one of helping children achieve specific knowledge_and skills which will serve both them and society in the present and in the future.33 Victor further supported this concept of teacher role.when.he stated that the elemen- tary teacher has two main objectives concerning science activities: 1. to help children learn basic scientific information; and 2. to develop desirable behavior within the children during the process.3 Suchman's studies on inquiry training have special merit for elementary science when one realizes that the various activities that‘ a child undergoes during the process of inquiry are often identical to those that a child exhibits in contemplating science phenomena. Because a child during inquiry performs the following: 1.) searches for mean- ingful relationships within the problem under consideration; 2.) pro— cesses available data; 3.) discovers; and 4.) verifies his discoveries 32Joseph Zafforoni and Edith Selberg, New Developments in Elementary School Science (Washington, D.C.: National Science Teachers Association, 1963), p. 4. 33Harold Tannenbaum, N. Stillman, and Albert.Piltz, Science Education for Elementary School Teachers; Second Edition (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1965), p. 12. 34Victor,__p. cit., p. 115. 27 through appropriate tests.35 The classroom teacher should encourage this kind of student inquiry by: 1. creating a sense of freedom to have and express ideas and to test them with data; 2. providing a responsive environment so that each idea is heard and understood and so that each learner can get the data he requires; and 3. helping each learner to discover a direction to move in and a purpose for his intellectual pursuit.36 Increasingly it becomes important that elementary teachers under- stand the nature of scientific endeavors, the notion of inquiry, and the various cognitive processes that the young learner uses to develop conceptual structures. One of the most successful of the newer elemenv tary science curricula, SciencefA_Process Approach, produced under the auspices of the American Association for the Advancement of Science,37 heavily emphasizes such facets within both pre-service and in-service teacher training. Each teacher involved in such a program receives instruction in the process skills pertinent to scientific enterprises as well as needed instruction in science content. The implications that such newer science curricula have upon teacher training programs are discussed in the section that follows. 35D. P. Butts and H. L. Jones, "Development of the TAB Science Test," Science Education, 51 (December, 1967), 464. 36JohnR. Verduin, Jr., Conceptual Models in Teacher Education (Washington, D.C.: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 1967), p. 98. 37A. H. Livermore, "The Process Approach of the AAAS Commission on Science Education," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2 (1964), 271-282. 28 Pre-Service and In-Service Teacher Training in Elementary Science The literature in science education demonstrates that as early as 1947 there was a concerted effort to foster in-service education as well as pro-service education in elementary science; for the text Science Education In_American Schools, published that year by the National Society for the Study of Education, stated that the profes- sional education of an elementary school teacher must continue as long as that teacher is actively engaged in professional endeavors.38 More recently, Jacobson stated that the future elementary school teacher should have completed fourteen years of science instruction before undertaking any professional work in teacher education.39 He further advocated that these studies in science should include such items as the following: 1. an understanding of the scientific view of man.and his world; 2. the conceptual structure of science; 3. a placing of emphasis upon the processes of science; and 4. systematic attention given to the interrelationships of science, technology, and society. As if to give credence to these necessities, Eccles' research had earlier demonstrated that the following basic needs in a teacher's 38 p. 129. 39Willard J. Jacobson, "Teacher Education and Elementary School Science--l980," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, Issue I (1967), 75. Nelson B. Henry, (ed.), Science Education in American Schools, 29 preparation for science teaching must be met at some point in either their general education or professional training:40 1. an adequate background in science concepts; 2. an understanding of the nature of science, how scientists solve problems, and the methods and attitudes of scientists; 3. a clear view of the aims and objectives that should guide science teaching in the elementary grades; 4. some skill in various teaching techniques, including the ability to help children find answers to science questions; and 5. a knowledge of where to obtain materials, equipment, refer- ences, how to select appropriate supplies and how to effec- tively use them in the classroom. Blough also stated that the various science discipline courses taught to both pre-service and in-service teachers of elementary science must serve two underlying purposes: 1. to prepare teachers to be scientifically educated persons who know enough about their environment to interpret at least some of the common things they see; and 2. to give them experiences with subject matter that will some- what resemble the kind which they will use in their own. teaching. Even though these above-mentioned qualities of pro-service science education were published in.l958, Uselton ggflgl. conducted a study in 1963 that involved 78 college seniors in elementary education; it demonstrated that the knowledge of science concepts possessed by these teacher candidates was generally inadequate to enable them to 40Priscilla Jacobs Eccles, "An Evaluation of-a Course in Teaching Science in the Elementary School," Dissertation Abstracts, 19, No. 11 (1959),.2862. 41Glenn 0. Blough, "Preparing Teachers for Science Teaching in the Elementary School," School Science and Mathematics, 58 (October, 1958), 525. 30 teach science to elementary school pupils.42 As if to verify these results, Gega reported that superficially learned science material decays very rapidly; therefore he proposed that science courses designed for pre-service and in-service elementary teachers reduce the scope of content instruction while retaining whatever degree of thoroughness is needed to insure some mastery.43 But what of in-service training in elementary school science, to which this study is primarily directed? Are there certain qualities of such training of which experienced practitioners should be aware? The next few-paragraphs focus upon such questions. Flanders has stated that the following questions must be asked of any in-service training program, whether it be designed for science 44 or for social studies, for language arts or for music: 1. Will the teachers be acting any differently while teaching as a direct result of the in-service training? and 2. If changes have occurred, has the quality of instruction actually improved or is it just different? These questions will be presented again in chapter four's analysis of results, in reference to this study. Yet research on in-service science training for experienced elementary teachers has produced some results worthy of consideration. Of the more recent studies, Hempel employed a questionnaire using a~ 42Horace W. Uselton, 25 51., "Factors Related to Competence.in Science of Prospective Elementary Teachers," Science Education, 47 (December, 1963), 507. 43F. C. Gega, "Pre-Service Education of Elementary Teachers in Science and the Teaching of Science," School Science and Mathematics, 68 (January, 1968), 15. 44Ned A. Flanders, "Teacher Behavior and In-Service Programs," Educationa1.Leadership, 21 (October, 1963), 25. 31 random sample of 1191 elementary teachers.45 He reported that the following types of in-service training were considered most valuable, in order of preference: Hempel graduate study leading to a degree; workshops under the direction of university personnel; individual study not connected with a college or university; extension courses not leading to degrees; local in-service activities other than workshops; and workshops under local leadership. also reported that those teachers responding felt their greatest needs in course work centered around the necessity for more science methodology. elementary science education and reported the following conclusions: 1. 2. Washton also conducted a recent study concerning ineservice 46 most elementary teachers dislike science because they didn't achieve high scores on tests in high school or college; to promote learning of science by elementary school teachers, it is essential that fears be minimized or removed; elementary school teachers need confidence in manipulating materials for science demonstrations; the more rigid teachers have greater difficulty in teaching others to develop scientific attitudes, or to learn how to master skills in problem solving; and. regardless of age, teachers are quite capable of learning science under suitable conditions. 45 Carl H. Hempel, "Attitudes of a Selected Group of Elementary School Teachers Toward In~Service Education," Dissertation Abstracts, 21, No. 13 (1961), 3684. 46 Nathon S. Washton, "Improving Elementary Teacher Education in Science," Science Education, 45 (February, 1961), 34. 32 Much of the research on in-service science offerings seems to concur with Flanders when he wrote that ". . . In-service training, to be effective, must involve teachers actively, and not as passive spectators."47 Scott also reiterated this point when he stated that teachers must experience the philosophy and method of experimentation through active participation in science, in the same manner that it is hoped children will experience these attributes in their respective 48 programs. Blosser and Howe also made determined pleas for sound, in-service education when they wrote that: In regards to elementary science instruction, attention should be given to such problems as finding methods for improving the science competencies of teachers, determining optimal content background and types of experiences in science for elementary teachers, building more positive attitudes toward science on the-part of elementary teachers, as well as continuing the in- vestigations into the area of science content and experiences that should be part of the elementary school curriculum.49 One most certainly agree with the crucial importance of in— service elementary science education when Hurd's statement is recalled concerning the deveIOpment of the newer science project materials. He stated that: Each of the dozen or more new elementary studies in science.main- tain that the style of instruction is as important for achieving the purpose of the course as the instructional materials, that 47Flanders, op, gig., p. 26. 48LLoyd Scott, Helping Children Learn Science, ed. Anne B. Hopman (Washington, D.C.: National Science Teachers Association, 1966), p. 173. 49Patricia E. Blosser and Robert W. Howe, "An Analysis of Research on Elementary Teacher Education Related to the Teaching of.Science," Science and Children, 6, No. 5 (January/February, 1969), 50. 33 learning readiness is dependent on teaching methods as much as on subject matter.50 In reference to this last statement on subject matter, the elementary teacher generally has two avenues of approach. One such possibility focuses upon the more conventional method of teaching elementary science, generally employing traditional textbooks for use by the children. The other avenue is exemplified by those science project materials developed under the auspices of the National Science Foundation (NSF). Berkheimer concisely contrasted these two alterna- tives when he wrote that: In general, the NSF sponsored science project materials emphasize science concepts, the theoretical nature of science, contemporary science, scientific inquiry, the elements of the scientific methods, mathematics to study relations, and the investigative or laboratory approach to the learning of science. In_contrast, the commercial science curriculum materials emphasize teacher demonstrations or group experiences, science content topics, facts and science principles, qualitative observations and ex- planations to study relations, and the practical nature of science or technology.51 But what have been some of the expressed attitudes of elemen- tary school teachers, in reference to the types of science programs outlined in the paragraphs above? Do they feel at ease in conveying science concepts to children? What are their special areas of concern? The following sections address themselves to these questions. 50Paul DeH. Hurd, "New Directions in Science Teaching From Kindergarten through College," Educational Digest, 32 (March, 1967), 17. 51Glenn D. Berkheimer, "An Analysis of the Science Supervisors' Role in the Selection And Use of Science Curriculum Materials" (un- published Ed.D. dissertation, College of Education, Michigan State University, 1966), p. l. 34 Teacher Attitudes Toward Elementary School Science In 1949 Lammers reported the results of an intensive interview study with one hundred elementary school teachers.52 Among the more. pertinent results are the following: 1. approximately fifty percent of the teachers interviewed relied upon a correlational or incidental approach for science instruction; more than fifty percent stated that science in their classrooms evolved around "things brought in"; the majority of teachers had a nature study course as their only science background; the approach used toward science was primarily that of reading and discussion; and a lack of science equipment was mentioned as a basic problem by twenty eight percent of the teachers involved in the study. Johnston reported a study involving a random sample of eighty— 53 seven Minnesota fifty grade teachers conducted in 1954. Her results indicated that: 1. 2.. the typical science lesson was thirty minutes long and the average time spent on science per week was under two hours; the teachers emphasized more biological science topics than physical science topics in a ratio of 3:1; and text.reading and discussion was the most extensively used science teaching method, while field trips and laboratory work were the least in evidence. 52Theresa J. Lammers, "One.Hundred Interviews with Elementary School Teachers Concerning Science Education," Science Education, 33 (October, 1949), 292. 53 Jane Johnston, "The Relative Achievement of the Objectives of Elementary School Science in a Representative Sampling of Minnesota Schools," Dissertation Abstracts, 17 (1957), 2499. 35 In addition, Todd has emphatically written that the attitudes displayed by the woman teacher in regard to science will greatly determine her effectiveness in teaching science as an integral component of the entire elementary curriculum.54 Bixler voiced support of the importance of effective teacher attitudes when his research demonstrated that favor- able teacher attitudes toward science were contributing factors to significant changes in children's science attitude test scores.55 Brown,56 BerryessaS7 and Alford58 reported that elementary teachers have encountered many difficulties in science instruction such as-lack of equipment and materials, a lack of texts and a lack of adequate room space. And Victor has written that a woeful lack of familiarity with science concepts and materials is a definite factor in the reluctance of many elementary school teachers to teach science.59 Such teachers, unfamiliar with the objectives of science education, were more inclined to stress the technological aspects of science. 54V. E. Todd, "Womeaneachers' Attitudes Toward Science In the Classroom," Elementary School Journal, 58 (April, 1958), 385. 55James Edward Bixler, Jr., "The Effect of Teacher Attitude on Elementary Children's Science Information and Science Attitude," Dissertation Abstracts, 19 (1958), 2531. S6Clyde M. Brown, "A WorkshOp in Teaching Elementary Science: An In-Service Training Program for Teachers," Science Education, 42 (December, 1958), 405. 57Max Joseph Berryessa, "Factors Contributing to the Competency of Elementary Teachers in Teaching Science," Dissertation Abstracts, 20, No. 2 (1959), 558. 58Genevieve G. Alford, "An Analysis of Science Interests of Selected Children and An Identification of Problems Encountered by the Teachers of these Children in Science Instruction," Dissertation Abstracts, 20, No. 8 (1960), 2704. 59Edward Victor, "Why Are Our Elementary School Teachers Reluctant to Teach Science?" Science Education, 46 (March, 1962), 186. 36 rather than its underlying principles and philosOphy. In 1965,60 and again in 1967,61 published studies concluded that the largest handicap to adequate science presentations in the elementary schools was the reluctance of teachers to teach science because of inadequate backgrounds. Such teachers felt their own science courses did not: provide assistance in planning and organizing; convey ideas of what should be presented at their respective grade levels; or present methods and techniques neces- sary for teaching science within the elementary school.62 One more recent study conducted by Ramsey and Wiandt63 deserves consideration, for it focused upon alleviating some of the teachers' anxieties depicted in the preceding paragraphs. This study centered upon.attempts to present science activities on an individual basis to a child at his particular level of science competency. One of the most revealing conclusions was that such an individualized science program offered considerable security to the teacher. Teachers appeared less' reluctant or apprehensive in counseling with an individual child about an unfamiliar science topic than they would have been in discussing the same topic with the entire class. The implications of those studies reviewed here become increas- ingly relevant when one considers Blackwood's survey of science 60Gladys S. Kleinman, "Needed: Elementary School Science Con- sultants," School Science and Mathematics, 65 (November, 1965), 745. . 61Sallylee H. Hines, "A Study of Certain Factors Which Affect the Opinions of Elementary School Teachers in the Teaching of Science," Dissertation Abstracts, 27, No. 12 (June, 1967), p. 4153-A. 62Ibid. 63Irvin 1. Ramsey and Sandra Lee Wiandt, "Individualizing Elementary School Science," School Science and Mathematics, 68, No. 5 (Mby, 1967), 427. 37 teaching practices within American elementary schools.64 He strongly suggests the following points in reassessing their individual science programs: 1. the average class size in many of the larger schools should be reduced for more effective instruction in science; 2. the number of minutes per week that science is taught should be increased in a large percent of schools in order for children to have a science program of greater scope and depth; 3. the substantial percent of schools which teach science incidentally in the lower grades may wish to reassess the advantages and disadvantages of that approach in comparison with a program based on a systematically planned curriculum; 4. the need of many elementary schools to acquire more adequate supplies of science teaching materials and equipment is‘ clear. Small schools and schools in small administrative units particularly need to put more effort into obtaining and using science equipment and supplies; 5. schools need to develop or participate in effective in-service programs that enable teachers to update their knowledge and to learn better methods of teaching; and 6. a lack of consultant service was indicated by schools as a most important barrier to good science teaching. This sug- gests the need of schools to identify consultant resources, particularly for the classroom teachers who most often teach science in elementary classrooms. The literature review thus far has focused upon such topics as: the historical implications of the American elementary science move- ment; the varied forces redirecting elementary science teaching today; some desirable attributes-of modern elementary science programs; the role of the teacher in elementary science; and pre-service and in- service teacher training to adequately meet the needs of an evolving elementary science curriculum. Also included was a consideration of 64Paul E. Blackwood, "Science Teaching in the Elementary School: A Survey of Practices," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3 (September, 1965), 197. 38 prevailing teacher attitudes toward science and possible guidelines to be used in reassessing the science programs within individual school systems. All these topics were presented so that one might be aware of some of the problems engendered in teaching elementary science and the present status of such curricular offerings. The remaining por— tidns of this chapter will focus upon selected aspects of teacher activities during science lessons--namely, the verbal behavior patterns demonstrated by both the-teacher and pupils during learning experiences. Additionally, studies involving the use of questions as a necessary component of verbal behavior will be reviewed. Verbal Behavior Patterns Within the Classroom Flanders has written that: In our society the authority to direct the learning activities of the student is given to the teacher. Both the teacher and the students expect the teacher to take charge, to initiate learning activities, and to contribute information as needed in the problem solving process.65 Although no one would seriously refute this statement, one must not negate the importance of the child in classroom verbal interaction, for what the pupil does determines in some measure what the teacher does, for both pupil and teacher are influenced by the texture of the teaching and learning environment.66 Hughes likewiSe stated the importance of a teacher's verbal behavior patterns when she wrote that: 65Ned A. Flanders, Teacher Influence,yPupil Attitudes and Achievement (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1960), p. 6. 66DeH. Hurd, Theory Into Action In Science Curriculum Develope ment, p. 13. 39 If teaching may be described as decision-making in interaction, then the product of the teacher's decision is the response he makes to the child or group with whom he is interacting.' The measure, then, of good teaching is the quality of the response the teacher makes to the child or group with whom he is inter— acting.67 A In addition, Kleinman.reported that: . . . observation of what goes on in elementary and secondary schools indicates that the major classroom activity is verbal interaction between students and teachers. Flanders reports that the asking of questions and the giving of information accounts for 70% to 90% of teacher talk. Bellack, SE Sl- found that the teacher—pupil ratio of verbal activity in terms of lines spoken is three to.ane, indicating that teachers are consider- ably more active than pupils in the amount of verbal activity.68 B. Othanel Smith has also suggested that there are three types. of verbal behavior used in teaching.69 One type, such as instructing, eliciting responses, and causing the topic to be remembered, is intended to have a.specific effect. This kind of discourse involves such in- tellectual Operations as explaining and defining so that the topic can be understood and restated. The second kind of verbal behavior, simply telling the student how to perform an operation, can be checked if the student is able to perform the skill or operation required of him. Once the skill is acquired, then nothing more is required. The third kind of verbal behavior, such as praising, advising, and commending the student, has an emotiOnal rather than a cognitive influence on the 67Marie M. Hughes, "The Model of Good Teaching," Studying Teaching, ed. James Raths, John R. Pancella, and James S. Vaaness (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1967), p. 21. 68Gladys S. Kleinman, "Teachers' Questions and Student Under- standing of Science," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3, Issue 4 (1965), 307. 69Verduin, _p, cit., p. 7. 40 student. These kinds of utterances are not usually of an intellectual nature, but are used for affective purposes. Anderson has found that the verbal behavior of the teacher, more than any other influence, sets the climate of the class in question.70 And Flanders has written that such verbal behavior can be categorized into the dichotomy described below:71 1. direct influence by a teacher restricts the freedom of action of‘a student by setting restraints or focusing his attention on an idea; and 2. indirect influence by a teacher increases the freedom of action of a student by reducing restraints or encouraging participation. Very few researchers would disagree with Ryans' statement that teacher behavior and pupil behavior demonstrate substantially more interdependence within the elementary school as compared with the secondary classroom.72 This certainly becomes evident when one ponders the use of questions as one ingredient in dialogue patterns during elementary science activities. Research on the Use of Questions during Science Activities Science educators have long acknowledged the importance of the method of inquiry--of asking the right question of nature--for Kleinman stated that as early as 1867, Youmans deplored the lack of study of- 7oFlanders, Teacher Influence, Pupil Attitudes and Achievement, p. 6., 7lIbid., p. 12. 72David G. Ryans, "Some Relationships Between Pupil Behavior and Certain Teacher Characteristics," Journal of Educational Psychology, 52 (1961), 89. 41 nature-and the emphasis on verbal acquisition and mechanical recitation rather than "thinking about things" and the "cultivation of independent judgment."73 The very nature of the inquiry processes dictates the tasks of the teacher: to help the child formulate questions that are. important and meaningful to him and to aid him in his quest for answers.74 Thus the teacher's questioning is the basic technique for guiding the very young child through the inquiry process. Many references are made in the literature to basic question types and their appropriate definitions. A few such definitions will suffice here. Kleinman has written of two fundamental question categories:75‘ lower type questions, including those questions that_ require simple recall and the memorization of limiting responses; and higher type questions, which clarify students' concepts and call for comparison, the drawing of inferences, and the supporting of conclusions. R. L. Carner has categorized question types into the three fun— damental categories described below.76 Level l--Concrete Questions The type of question used at this level usually elicits responses which are characteristic of.concrete thinking where there is a primary concern for observable, tangible, or obtain- able details. In this kind of thinking one is dealing with relatively simple ideas, objects, processes, or concepts which 73Kleinman, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, p. 308. 74Frank J. Estvan, "Teaching the Very Young:‘ Procedures for Developing Inquiry Skills," Phi Delta Kappan, 50, No. 7 (March, 1969), 391. 75Kleinman, _p, cit., p. 310. 76R. L. Carner, "Levels of Questioning," Studying Teaching, ed. James Baths, John R. Pancella, and James S. Van Ness (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1967), pp. 182-186. 42 most.often do not require evaluation, judgment, or drawing conclusions. Level 2--Abstract Questions The kind of question asked at this level aids in the develop- ment of abstract thinking skills and requires pupils to go bee yond the specific or detail level to comprehension in order to generalize, classify, or relate these specifics into meaningful' patterns. Level 3--Creative Questions Questions which are asked at this level require answers which are more creative by nature and may demand both concrete and abstract thinking. Carner also has stated that within the hierarchy of questions outlined above, teachers have been most reluctant to probe the creative realms where answers are not comfortingly right or wrong.77 Such open- ended questions could be used in scientific endeavors to enable pupils to hypothesize new or different applications of principles learned, for it does not restrict the pupil to a specific context. Jacobson and Rondo have labeled such open—ended questions as divergent questions and have written that these types of questions asked of children serve to enlarge the scope of the materials being studied, and to deepen the interest in the topic under study.78 Some exemplars of such divergent questions are: "How are these objects alike?" and "How can we find out?" In addition, Taba has written that concerning strategies of teaching, teachers need to change their role from the customary answer-giving to question-asking. Cognitive operations are stimulated 77Ibid., p. 185. 78Willard J. Jacobson and Allan Kondo, SCIS Elementary Sciencn Sourcebook, (Berkeley:. University of California Regents, 1968), p. 440' 43 only as the students are required to search for answers and to invent and discover processes by which to deal with the tasks proposed by the questions.79 Taba also suggests that questions should be viewed as serving specific pedagogical functions.80 One function would be that of focusing. The questions should set the stage for both the kind of mental operation to be performed and the topic.or the content on which this question is to be performed. Another pedagogical function might be that of extending a series of thought patterns on the same level. A third function would involve making a transition from one level of thought to another. Taba described this activity as a.form of changing the focus, or "lifting thought processes to another level."81 The fact that teachers often do not.possess adequate skills in question asking techniques has been mentioned often in the literature. Craig has written that in many instances a type of instruction_con- sists of ferreting the answers from the children.82 In this procedure the teacher asks a question, expecting the children to give the re- sponse she seeks. This response is then followed by another question to which another correct response is sought. For Craig such teaching assumes an absolute concept of knowledge which is contrary to the nature, of modern science.; And Renner and Ragan likewise deplore such teaching practites. They have noted that . . . 79Hilda Taba, Helping Children Learn Science, ed. Anne B. HOpman (washington, D.C.: National Science Teachers Association, 1966), p. 14. 80Verduin, 22, cit., p. 21. 811bid., p. 22; 82 Craig, _p, cit., p. 25. 44 Teachers usually ask a question . . . to get an answer already formulated in their own minds or to make a point of their own choosing. Teachers rarely ask a question because they are really curious to know what the pupils think or believed or have observed. But skill in questioning is, of course, valueless unless it is accompanied by a willingness to listen.“ Jacobson and Kondo have even stated that if questions have no useful purpose in advancing the lesson, they should not be asked.85 Some recent studies seem to confirm the opinions brought forth in these past few paragraphs. Moyer conducted a study focusing upon the types of questions asked during instructional processes in selected elementary schools.86 He analyzed over 2500 questions and his con- clusions demonstrated that: 1. teachers tend to be consistent in the types of questions they ask, and display distinguishable patterns of ques- tioning in terms of structure, language, function, and utilization; 2. over fifty percent of the total questions analyzed were initiated with WHAT, HOW, WHY, WHO, WHERE, WHICH, and WHEN; 3. no evidence was found of any question that required students to evaluate; 4. the number of questions asked and percentage of responses received are not accurate signals that pupils are.being challenged to think; 5. teachers' questions and questioning practices do not effec- tively involve pupils in critical thinking activities; and 83Renner and Ragan, _p, cit., p. 220. 84Jacobson and Rondo, gp, cit., p. 33. 85Ibid., p. 45. 86John R. Moyer, "An Exploratory Study of Questioning in the Instructional Processes In Selected Elementary Schools," Dissertation Abstracts, (1965), p. 147-A. 45 6. it appears that teachers are not prepared to develOp and utilize the questioning process effectively. Three studies have been reported in the past four years that have direct implications for the research under consideration. All have some bearing upon the implementation of one of the newer science programs, the Science Curriculum Improvement Study (SCIS), in elementary school classrooms. This science curricular approach will be described in depth within chapter three. Fischler and Anastasiow reported the results of a summer work- shOp employing SCIS teaching methods and materials, where emphasis was placed upon generating question-asking techniques most conducive to sound elementary school science activities.87 Among their conclusions were.the following: 1. there.was a clear trend for the teachers to reduce their own participation in the class situation by asking fewer questions; 2. most teachers asked more indirect questions and allowed the- students to answer at greater length; 3. there was a marked reduction in the number of questions which "ask children to relate facts but do not go beyond"; and 4. there was a noticeable increase in the teachers' use of observational questions after instruction in SCIS teaching methods and materials. Wilson conducted a study reported in 1967 that included thirty teachers. --fifteen of whom employed SCIS teaching methods and materials in grades one through six plus fifteen additional teachers who used the 87Abraham 8. Fischler and N. J. Anastasiow, "In-Service Educa— tion in Science (A Pilot)," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3 (1965), 283-284. 46 more conventional science materials described in previous sections of this chapter.88 The following results were among his conclusions: 1. those teachers educated in SCIS teaching methods and materials asked approximately one and one-half times as many questions as those teachers employing traditional science methods; 2. the traditional science teachers heavily relied upon question categories which elicit lower levels of thinking whereas the SCIS educated teachers asked questions which evoke higher levels of thinking to a significant degree; and 3. the SCIS-educated teachers used significantly more demon— stration-ofeskill type questions. This suggests that these teachers are probably treating science more like a skill subject than as a content subject. Kondo also reported results of a study focusing upon the ques- tioning behavior of teachers employing a specified unit within the Science Curriculum Improvement Study.89 This research demonstrated that when individual lessons were largely presented through demonstra— tions, the percentages of routine questions were relatively low and the percentages of cognitive-memory questions were relatively high. In addition, approximately fifty percent of all questions asked were of a convergent type. Summary The current literature on the role of the teacher in modern elementary school science programs indicates that_the success of such. 88John H. Wilson, "Differences Between the Inquiry-Discovery and the Traditional Approaches to Teaching Science in Elementary Schools" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Oklahoma, 1967), pp. 67-69. 89Allan K. Kondo, "A Study of the Questioning Behavior of Teachers in the Science Curriculum Improvement Study Teaching the Unit on Material Objects" (unpublished-Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California at Berkeley, 1968), p. 2. 47 efforts greatly depends upon the attitudes that teachers demonstrate toward science and upon the methods used in pre-service and in-service science training to foster desirable teaching styles. The chapter that follows describes the execution of this study that had its origins in an analysis of teacher role and in-service training, in response to the introduction of teaching methods and materials advocated within the Science Curriculum Improvement Study. CHAPTER THREE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STUDY Introduction This chapter describes the organizational plan of the study, the science methods and materials employed by the two groups of teachers under consideration, and the approaches used in gathering research data. Additionally, the evaluation instruments are dis- cussed and a summary table outlines the hypotheses.tested and the. statistical models used in analyzing the data. Design of the Study In December, 1967 Dr. Glenn D. Berkheimer, Coordinator of the Science Curriculum Improvement Study's Trial Center at Michigan State University, invited the writer to generate a possible study that would focus upon selected aspects of teacher classroom behavior. As a result of this initial suggestion, a study evolved that centered upon verbal behavior patterns in primary grade classrooms during science activities. This research was designed as a quasi-experimental, time- series analysis1 and involved.a series of observations during science' 1DonaldT. Campbell and Julian C. Stanley, Enperimental and Qnasi-Experimental Designs for Research (Chicago: Rand, McNally and Company, 1963), p. 34. 48 49 lessons that extended over an eleven month period, from April, 1968 through March, 1969. A three-week workshop employing the Science Curriculum Improvement Study's teaching methods and materials was the primary experimental variable, and sixteen of the thirty-two teachers included within this study's population attended the workshop from August 5 through August 23, 1968. These sixteen teachers used the teaching methods and science materials advocated by SCIS in their. classrooms during the 1968-69 school year. Portable tape recorders were used to gather data from each science lesson observed, and two individuals were trained to analyze the verbal comments during these activities. The data thus gleaned from the taped lessons were used to consider the following hypotheses, which set the major structure for this study. Hypotheses Stated in null form, the hypotheses were: H61 There is no difference in the teachers' ID ratios during science activities, before and after the introduction of. SCIS teaching methods and materials (H01: ID1 - ID2); H02 There is no difference in the percentage of time teachers ' spend talking during science activities, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H02: TT1 - TTZ); Ho3 There is no difference in the percentage of time students. talk during science activities, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials, (H03: ST1 - 8T2); H04 There is no difference in the percentage of continuous . student comment during science activities, before and after the introduction onSCIS teaching methods and materials (H04: cc - ccz); 1 50 HOS There is no difference in the kinds of questions teachers ask children, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H05; KQl - K02); Ho6 There is no difference in the teachers' comprehension of the process aspects of science, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials- (H06: PS1 - P82). Stated in symbolic form, the alternate hypotheses to those stated above would be: H : ID1 # ID2 H : TTl # TT2 8T1 # ST2 :1: H : cc1 f 002 H : PS1 f P82 D: Selection of the Population The population considered within this study was composed of thirty—two primary grade teachers employed within the following five mid-Michigan public school districts: DeWitt, East Lansing, Grand Ledge, Laingsburg, and Williamston. These teachers were all females and displayed a spectrum of teaching experiences that ranged from new teachers with no formal teaching background to some with over twenty years' experience in the primary grades. The teachers taught primary grade children in nine separate school buildings scattered throughout these districts. Although the great majority of the classes contained first and second grade children, the East Lansing district had two classrooms composed of students who normally would have been placed in the more traditional second, third, and fourth 51' grade classes. These two groups of children were labeled the transi- tional classes by the East Lansing district. Of the five districts employing these teachers, two are con- sidered primarily rura1--DeWitt and Laingsburg. Both East Lansing and Grand Ledge are suburban. In addition, East Lansing is a university- oriented community. The parents of school children within these five districts are primarily farmers, industrial workers, and professional people. When it was formally determined that an in-service workshop would be conducted using SCIS teaching methods and materials during August, 1968, the writer contacted those teachers who were sent invi- tations.to attend. Sixteen of these teachers agreed to allow the writer to visit and record their classroom science activities during April and May, 1968. Eleven of these teachers were observed on two separate occasions prior to the workshop and the other five teachers were observed once during this period. In September, 1968 sixteen. additional teachers who had no experience in the newer elementary science programs agreed to visits by the writer during their science presentations. Each of these sixteen teachers were observed twice between November, 1968 and March, 1969. The following two sections describe the in-service science. workshop attended by sixteen of the teachers, and the basic methods and materials employed by both groups of teachers in their science lessons.during the course of the study. 52 The In-Service Experience As previously mentioned, during August, 1968 the Science and Mathematics Teaching Center of Michigan State University (in coopera- tiOn with the National Science Foundation) offered an in-service work- shOp using the Science Curriculum Improvement Study's teaching methods and materials. The workshop was designed basically to acquaint pri- mary grade teachers and their elementary school principals with the newer approaches to elementary school science as stated in chapter two. Attention was placed upon preparing these teachers to use effectively SCIS teaching methods and materials in their respective classrooms during the 1968-69 school year. Lectures were presented describing the scope and sequence of science units offered by the Science Curriculum Improvement Study.and films were previewed demon- strating the implications Piaget's studies in developmental psychology have for some of the modern elementary science curricula. Inquiry laboratories were an integral aspect of the three-week workshop and the teachers were directly involved in using science equipment and preparing lessons. Certainly one highlight of the-workshop was attained when each participant had opportunities to present SCIS lessons to individual children on.a one-to-one basis. Within such micro-teaching situations, portable television cameras and tape re- corders were employed to produce instant feedback for lesson analysis. Additionally, the teachers were able to converse with guest lecturers on the nature of scientific activities and to observe demonstration lessens conducted by experienced SCIS teachers with primary grade children. Teaching participants also engaged in field trips to 53 observe examples of different types of ecosystems. In Appendix A, Table eighteen presents a synapsis of the summer workshop. In addition, the participants were given two other opportunities to observe different examples of living organisms within varied environ- ments, for two week-end conferences were conducted during the school year (September 28-29, 1968 and May 17-18, 1969) at the Kellogg Biological Station, Hickory Corners, Michigan. Lectures on ecology and field studies were presented by university personnel at the bio— logical station, and the teachers collected and studied representative specimens from both aquatic and terrestrial habitats. The SCIS Trial Center at Michigan State University also employed three half-time science consultants who actively advised the in-service teachers throughout the 1968-69 school year. These consultants visited. each teacher approximately once every two weeks during science lessons, and periodically conducted feedback meetings with the teachers in an effort to assist them with any problems encountered. Occasionally, these consultants would teach selected science lessons if requested by the teachers. The following paragraphs describe some representative science activities that were presented by these thirty-two teachers during the eleven months this study was in progress. Teaching Methods and Materials Of the science lessons recorded during April and May, 1968, there is close similarity observed among the topics included by the 54 sixteen pre-SCIS teachers2 and those presented by the second group of sixteen teachers using conventional science materials after the work- shop's conclusion. Both groups relied heavily upon traditional text- books for guidance. If science materials were included as part of the lessons, they were used primarily by the teacher in demonstration fashion. There was very little children involvement in these science activities, for the lessons were essentially teacher-oriented. Table one outlines lessons topics and the basic methods of instruction used by both groups for the time periods indicated. The following section describes some particular aspects of the Science Curriculum Improvement Study and some representative units that were used by the sixteen experimental teachers during the 1968-69 school year. Stendler has stated that in constructing any science series, whether it be elementary, secondary, or college oriented, there must be a rationale put forth for the selection and grade placement of; subject matter.3 Such a rationale could cooperatively evolve from mature scientists' analyses of what is important in science, plus the contributions of science educators and psychologists concerning what is known about human learning. Some of the newer science programs have attempted to emulate this; the Science Curriculum Improvement Study is but one example. 2The pre-SCIS teachers are those sixteen teachers originally observed prior to the SCIS summer workshop. They represent the ex- perimental group that participated in the workshop activities and who.used SCIS materials throughout the 1968-69 school year. 3Celia Stendler, "The Developmental Approach of Piaget and its Implications for Science in the Elementary School," The Macmillan Science Series (Chicago: Macmillan Company, 1966), p. 14. 55 .oosmxuoa unease mHum oeu.0u sowed vopuomno muonooou omosu one muoeooou mHumloum « .uaoao>ao>afi .usoao>flo>o« uaoonum uoouav oHuuHH .m quaoonum uoouav oHuuHH .m msowumuumooaoo Hosanna .N mcowumuumnoaoo nonooou .N coaumuaomoum mo excepuxou .H mxoonuxou .H avenue: humaaum Anoomoa Av mucosaaonxm Anommoa Hv muoaoo .MH unovoum mo sofi>om .HH Aaommma av enemas coco .NH Aaommua av museum enemas coco .oa Anommoa av confines: magaam .HH Asommoa av muowmwnwmz mo omp .m Aaommoa Hv maoummuu .OH “doomed HV mucous: mo mowuuonoum .w Aaommoa Hv nouns mo moumum Hmofimhnm .m Accommoa NV nOfiuHuoHHaHm Accommoa NV muonwoz mo mowuuoeoum_.m hp muoohno wcamnouo .n Anaconda NV usoaouacmoz .m Accommoa NV wowuoom .noooa Accommoa NV muwsouwo owuuooam .o ..oumma mo momoom mean: .0 Accommoa my museum wean: .m Accommoa NV venom mo moauuomoum .m Accommoa mV Eoumhm ueHom one .o Anaconda NV momma mo coaumowwwmmmao .q Accommoa mv unsucuoeaoH,.uosumos .m Accommoa mV munoam .soaumowauoc comm .m Accommoa my ufi< mo mofiuuoeoum .N Accommoa mv soumam Heaom 059 .N Anaconda mv maoafiq< mo coauoowwfimnoao .H Accommoa NV mHmEHn< mo oOHumonammmHU .H Assumoma .pouaaz .Hamev muosomoa casewom Honoauao>eou Ameaa .maHMAmv «causeway mHomloum common we come soon we Hoaaaz one nausea doomed mumwodmh MUZMHUm AdZOHsz>zoo nz< «mmm504m9 mHUmlmmm Mm amazmmmmm mUHQOH 20mmMA H Mam¢9 56 One individual whose research has contributed significantly to the development of the Science Curriculum Improvement Study is the behavioral psychologist, Piaget. Piaget's contributions to cognition theory have influenced such personalities as Almy, Bruner, Hunt, Inhelder, and Stendler. Simply stated, Piaget's theories have two related, central themes: 1.) children's intellectual capacities pass through a number of qualitatively contrasting stages before adulthood; and 2.) a child's interaction with his environment plays a very significant role in his transition from one stage to the next.4 In- herent within Piaget's writings is the underlying premise of actively involving the child with concrete objects from his environment. Duckworth has interpreted Piaget as stating that good instruction must involve presenting the child with situations in which he himself ex- periments in the broadest sense of that term--such as trying things out and manipulating symbols.5 Likewise, Flavell added his support to active involvement when he stated that ". . . the child should- first work with the principle in the most concrete and action-oriented context possible; he should be allowed to 'see' the principle in his own actions."6 Karplus, one of the primary forces behind the development of the Science Curriculum Improvement Study during this decade, seems to have paraphrased these thoughts when he wrote that: 4Robert Karplus and Herbert D. Thier, A New Look at Elementary School Science (Chicago: Rand, McNally and Company, 1967), p. 21. SEleanor Duckworth, "Piaget Rediscovered," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2 (1964), 173. 6John Flavell, Studies in Cngnitive Growth, ed. Jerome Bruner, g£_ni, (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966), pp. 208-209. 57 The function of education is to guide the children's development by providing them with particularly informative, suggestive experiences as a base for their abstractions. At the same time, children must be led to form a conceptual framework that permits them to perceive the phenomena in a more meaningful way and to integrate their inferences into generalizations of greater value than they would form if left to their own desires.7 Karplus further contends that the essence of the SCIS program rests in the effort to attempt to develop in children's thinking about natural phenomena a hierarchial structure of concepts that later be- come inereasingly more sophisticated. Each topic within the entire program represents an application of previous elements of study and at the same time presents a foundation for subsequent elements of study.8 Figure-one depicts an outline of such topics within the over- all SCIS program. Within all these subject areas outlined in figure one, special care is given to acquaint the children with specific examples of. objects and living organisms, to let them examine natural phenomena, and to help them develop skills in manipulating equipment and recording data. Instead of being supplied with correct answers, children are encouraged to think for themselves, to respond creatively to problems presented to them, and to arrive at conclusions on the basis of their own observation and interpretation of evidence. As was mentioned in chapter one, a teacher ideally trained in the SCIS approach to elementary school science would be one whose position is not primarily telling children about science or listening 7Robert Karplus, "The Science Curriculum Improvement Study," Journal of Research in Science Teaching (October, 1965), 8. 8Robert Karplus, "The Science Curriculum Improvement Study-- Report to the Piaget Conference," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2 (1964), 237. 58 Material Or anisms Objects 3 Interaction Life Cycles Relativity Systems and Populations Subsystems Position Approaches to and Motion Equilibrium Environments Phases of Food (energy)r Matter Transfer Electricity Ecosystem and and l Magnetism Figure 1 Natural Selection Subject Areas of the SCIS Program (1968) 59 to them while they read about science, but rather observing and inter- acting with children while they are directly involved with science. The sixteen teachers within the experimental population used four SCIS units in their classrooms during the 1968-69 school year. The four first grade teachers used the Material Objects and Organisms units, representing subject areas in the physical sciences and life sciences respectively. The remaining second grade and transitional grade teachers employed the Interactions and Life Cycles units. Figure one outlines these units. All four units stress basically two kinds of lessons. One type, denoted as an "invention lesson," in- volves activities of defining new concepts for the children. The ' and is second kind of lesson has been labeled a "discovery lesson,’ designed to aid a child in manipulating materials, broaden his back— ground of experience, and apply new ideas.9 Each lesson within these four units has essentially the following types of information present: A l. objectives of the learning experience, which state the intended goals of the lesson in behavioral terms; 2. background information for the teacher, which stresses relationships among the present activity, past lessons, and succeeding activities; 3. teaching materials-~a list of all materials to be distributed to the children for that specific lesson; and 4. teaching suggestions--a general plan for carrying out the particular exercise and what to look for in the way of- children'stbehaviors. Thus far this chapter has been primarily concerned with delineating the design of the study, the hypotheses tested and the 9Donald B. Neuman, "The Influence of Selected Science Experi- ences on the Attainment of Concrete OperatiOns by First Grade Children” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1968), p. 65. 60 selection of the population. The in-service science experience and the teaching methods and materials used by the teachers have also been reviewed. The sections that follow center upon a description of the instruments used to collect data and procedures used for their analyses. Description of Instruments Used and Collection of Data The act of teaching is a highly complex phenomenon that involves simultaneously_a number of complex, interacting forces. Unless one has some way to.capture the essence of an instructional act at the moment it occurs, it is lost forever. Once lost it cannot be analyzed and evaluated in any meaningful way. The use of tape recordings and more recently video tapes, captures and holds the moment of teaching for further analysis. Such a technique was used in this study, for three individuals working as a coordinated team were engaged in col- lecting taped recordings of the science lessons observed. Originally, easily portable, battery powered tape recorders with accompanying tape cassettes were used to record verbal classroom interaction. But when many of the SCIS teachers increased their.mobility during science activities, a wireless microphone was placed around each teacher's neck so that her comments could easily be recorded as she moved freely about the classroom. An FM tuner was used to feed the microphone out- put into the tape recorder. At no time, however, were tapes analyzed in which either the teacher's or the children's voices could not be heard. Tables two and three list the observation dates of science lessons for both the sixteen SCIS teachers and the sixteen teachers using more conventional science materials. 61 TABLE 2 OBSERVATION DATES OF TEACHERS USING SCIS TEACHING METHODS AND MATERIALS Teacher Number Dates of Observation O O l 2 3 4 5 6 1. 5/3/68 5/20/68 11/3/68 12/2/68 1/29/69 2/19/69 2.- 5/21/68 5/22/68 9/25/68 10/9/68 11/6/68 12/5/68 3. 5/15/68 . . 10/29/68 ll/18/68 1/14/69 2/25/69 4. 5/16/68 5/23/68 10/24/68 11/7/68 1/23/69 3/13/69 5. 5/24/68 5/25/68 10/9/68 10/23/68 11/6/68 12/5/68 6. 5/15/68 5/16/68 10/24/68 11/7/68 1/23/69 3/13/69 7. 5/8/68 10/10/68 10/24/68 11/14/68 12/5/68 8. 4/29/68 5/3/68 1/8/69 1/20/69 2/19/69 3/5/69 9. 5/11/68 5/24/68 10/9/68 10/23/68 11/6/68 12/4/68 10. 5/15/68 5/16/68 10/24/68 3/13/69 3/18/69 3/27/69 11. 5/23/68 12/5/68 1/16/69 1/30/69 3/6/69 12. 5/8/68 10/10/68 11/14/68 1/30/69 2/27/69 13. 4/22/68 10/22/68 11/5/68 12/3/68 2/18/69 14. 5/3/68 5/20/68 1/20/69 1/29/69 2/5/69 2/19/69 15. 5/21/68 5/22/68 10/16/68 10/30/68 3/12/69 3/25/69 16. 5/21/68 5/22/68 9/25/68 10/9/68 10/23/68 12/5/68 62 TABLE 3 OBSERVATION DATES OF TEACHERS USING CONVENTIONAL SCIENCE TEACHING METHODS AND MATERIALS Teacher Number Dates of Observation 01 02 1. 11/20/68 2/26/69 2. 11/25/68 2/26/69 3. 11/20/68 2/26/69 4. 2/6/69 2/27/69 5. 2/4/69 2/18/69 6. 2/5/69 2/12/69 7. 2/5/69 2/12/69 8. 2/4/69 2/18/69 9. 2/4/69 2/18/69 10. 2/4/69 2/18/69 11. 2/18/69 2/18/69 12. 2/6/69 3/4/69 13. 2/4/69 2/27/69 14. 2/4/69 2/18/69 15. 2/6/69 2/27/69 16. 2/4/69 2/18/69 63 Ryans has reported that teacher behaviors are classifiable, both qualitatively and quantitatively.10 Both Aschner and Gallagher have also written that the spoken discourse within a classroom can be. studied profitably from many standpoints and for many purposes.11 One, such purpose might be in gathering evidence to aid in the development of instructional theories. Flanders has stated that . . . A theory of instruction can be distinguished from a theory of learning because the former incorporates concepts and principles about the teacher's behavior while the latter places greater emphasis on_the student's behavior. The development of a theory of instruction will require some emperical verification of hypotheses. Many of these hypotheses will be concerned with patterns of teacher influence. Interaction analysis techniques are helpful tools in this research. Three instruments were used in evaluating the study's data. Two of these measurements were exclusively concerned with information' gathered from analyses of the taped science lessons--the Flanders System of Interaction Analysis and the Science Teaching Observational Instrument. The third instrument, the Science Process Test for Ele- mentary School Teachers, is a written test designed to evaluate process skills and science concepts. Each of these measurements will be thoroughly described in the following paragraphs. Two individuals were trained to analyze the taped lessons; each lesson, therefore, was reviewed twice-~once to gather data using the Flanders System of Interaction Analysis and a second time using the 10David G. Ryans, "Theory Development and the Study of Teacher Behavior," Journal of Educational Psychology, 47 (1956), 472. 11Mary Jane Aschner, James J. Gallagher, s£_ni,, A System for Classifying_Thougnt Processes in the Context of Classroom Verbal Interaction (Urbana: University of Illinois, 1962), 1. 12Ned A. Flanders, Teacher Influence, Pnpil Attitudes and AchieVement (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1960), p. 10. 64 Science Teaching Observational Instrument. The training period began in September, 1968 with a literature review concerning these measure- ments and a memorization of the various categories within each instru- ment. Taped lessons gathered the previous spring months in the sixteen pre-SCIS classrooms were used for study during an intensive one week training session. The formal data analysis began in early October, 1968. The writer analyzed all tapes using the Flanders System of Interaction Analysis and an experienced elementary school teacher was employed to categorize question types. Throughout the course of the study, random samples of tapes analyzed previously were selected and recoded by both individuals as an indication of intra-observer reliability. This process will be described more fully in later paragraphs of this chapter. The Flanders System of Interaction Analysis The Flanders System of Interaction Analysis developed from ex- tensive studies conducted by Flanders13 and his associates, and focuses upon student-teacher verbal interaction in classrooms. The system could be defined as the systematic quantification of behavioral acts or qualities of behavior acts as they occur in some sort of spontaneous interaction. Emphasis is placed upon verbal behavior primarily because. it can be observed with higher reliability than can nonverbal behavior, with the assumption that the verbal behavior of an individual is an adequate sample of his total behavior. Flanders has identified the following ten categories within the system: 1. accepting student 13Dr. Ned A. Flanders is Professor Education at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 65 feelings, 2. giving praise, 3. accepting, clarifying, or making use of a student's ideas, 4. asking a question, 5. lecturing, giving facts, or opinions, 6. giving directions, 7. giving criticism, 8. student response, 9. student initiation, and 10. confusion or silence. The first seven categories are assigned to teacher talk and categories eight and nine are assigned to student comment. Table nineteen in Appendix A summarizes these various aspects of Interaction Analysis. To use this system for analysis purposes requires an observer who has had some training and an adequate knowledge of the categories. The observer can either tally the appropriate category of behavior as the teacher instructs or mark each category while listening to previously taped lessons. To obtain an adequate sample of interaction, Flanders suggests.that a mark for recording a number should be made approximately every three seconds, which would record twenty instances in a minute. During a recorded period of a class session there would be several columns of numbers. The tempo should be kept as steady as possible and the observer should be as accurate as possible. Some ground rules that may assist the recorder of interaction are as follows: GROUND RULES Rule 1: When not certain in.which of two or more categories a statement belongs, choose the category that is numeri- cally farthest from Category five, except ten.. Rule 2: If the primary tone of the teacher's behavior has been consistently direct or consistently indirect, do not shift into the opposite classification unless a clear indication of shift is given by the teacher. Rule 3: The observer must not be overly concerned with his own biases or with the teacher's intent. 66 Rule 4: If more than one category occurs during the three- second interval, then all categories used in the interval are recorded; therefore, record each change- in category. If no change occurs within three seconds, repeat that category number. Rule 5: If a silence is long enough for a break in the inter- action to be discernible, and if it occurs at a three-second recording time, it is recorded as a ten.14 Perhaps a small example might be appropriate.15 A verbal inter- actiOn pattern during a science lesson might develop something like this: First of all silence (10); then a directive of, "Take out your books" (6); "Open them to page 27" (6); some confusion (10); then the teacher asks, "What did you think about this chapter?" (4); a student responds, "It was interesting" (8); another student states, however, "I don't understand the first part" (9); silence or confusion (10). The recorder of such a series of verbal interaction would have written the following numbers in a column.arrangement: cocoa 1 In Appendix A, Table twenty demonstrates the Observer Tally Sheet used to record such data. As suggested above, the recording of interaction data in sequence is important for the analysis process. Once it has been recorded, an 14EdmundJ. Amidon and Ned A. Flanders, The Role of the Teacher in the Classroom (Minneapolis: Amidon Associates, Inc., 1963). P. 26. 15John R. Verduin, Jr., Conceptual Models in Teacher Education (Washington, D.C.: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Educa- tion, 1967), p. 36. 67 interpretation may begin. The process for analyzing the sequence of events can be accomplished by placing the numbers on a matrix. For placing the data on the matrix, the numbers must be paired. The first number of the pair is concerned with the row and the second number is concerned with the column. The second number of the first pair becomes the first number of the new pair. Each pair of numbers overlaps with the previous pair and each number is used twice, with the exception of the first and last. The first and last numbers should always be ten to make analysis easier and because it can be assumed that any session starts with silence and ends the same way. Using the previous example of verbal comment, the sequencing of numbers would be: H O H 0 \v/ 10 The pairing would thus be H Dom-b Weft The pairing of numbers, then, assists the recorder in placing the pairs in the appropriate cell of the matrix. The first number dictates the row; the second the column. Included in Table twenty-one is the type of matrix used in this study. Once the matrix is completed with the verbal interaction data, the analysis process can begin for that particular lesson. One step the analyst could take before any other activity would be to determine the percentage of time spent in each cell. This is done by dividing 100 by the total marks on the matrix and using the quotient to multiply the total for each column. For this study, teacher talk (columnle-7) and student talk (columns 8 and 9) were determined by adding the 68 apprOpriate column percentages. Additionally, the ID ratios, defined in chapter one as the ratio of indirect influence of teacher talk (columns 1-4) to the direct influence of teacher talk (columns 5, 6, 7) were calculated by dividing the first total by the second. The per- centage of continuous student comment was determined by totaling all entries in the 8-8, 8-9, 9-8, and 9-9 matrix cells and dividing by the total number of matrix entries. This number was then converted to the apprOpriate percentage. The following section summarizes the reliability estimates for the two instruments used to determine verbal behavior patterns. Reliability Estimates Although only one observer was used to analyze the taped lessons via the Flanders technique, it was considered important to maintain frequent.checks of the observer's stability—-i.e., the ability of the observer to obtain the same information from the same observation. This estimate of stability will be referred to as intra-observer reliability. Flanders advocates the use of Scott's coefficient of reliability 16 for estimating such intra-observer reliability. Scott calls his coefficient "pi" and it is determined by the two formulae below: 1. fl - Po is the proportion of agreement, and P8 is the proportion of agree- ment expected by chance which is found by squaring the proportion of 16Flanders, loc. cit., p. 10. 69 tallies in each category and summing these over all categories. In formula two there are k categories and P is the proportion of i tallies falling into each category. n, in formula one, can be expressed in words as the amount that two observers exceeded chance agreement divided by the amount that perfect agreement exceeds chance. Commenting on Scott's coefficient of reliability, Flanders states that the coefficient is . . . "unaffected by low frequencies, can be adapted to per cent figures, can be estimated more rapidly in the field, and is more sensitive at higher levels of reliability."17 As was mentioned previously, random samples were selected at. periodic intervals of tapes done previously, and these random samples were analyzed again in their entirety. This procedure was followed in determining checks using both the Flanders System of Interaction Analysis and the Science Teaching Observational Instrument. Table four outlines the results of such reliability checks for the Flanders System. Borg.has written concerning reliability coefficients that cor- relations ranging from .65 to .85 make possible group predictions that are accurate enough for most purposes.18 With the exception of re- liability check number eight, the reliability coefficients listed in table four are adequate. A close inspection of this reliability check will denote the greatest discrepancies occurring within categories 17Ibid. 18Walter R. Borg, Educational Research, An Introduction (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1963), p. 283. 7O n.m m. m.o o m.H m.m q.H m. m. o. 0.5 w.H n.5N ¢. om m.HH o.q~ H.N m. n.~ mm. m.HH m.H N.HN m. m.HN «.ma N.m~ m.H N.H w.H ~.m N.N m.H m. N.@ n.m w. m. m. m. o.m m.qH H.HH o m.wm H.HH n.0a m.~ N.H N.H cm. m.m H.NH o.~H w. m.Nm m.qa m.nH w.H q. q. o . m.q m. o c.H m. ~.q H.H q. o. q. n.m o.qm a. m.~ q. m.m~ m.m q. n.m on. e. ~.w o.qm q. m.a N.H m.m~ w.q o H.m muowoumo 50mm ca mmuaama mo uamuumm monoummwwn Ammmv mmHHHau covouom Heqmv mmHHHmu Hmafiwfiuo m oudouowwfin HHmNV m«HHHS vomooom HmHNV mmHHHmu Hmcfimfiuo N oucmHmMMfin Aqqmv mmHHHmu vmvoowm Ammmv mmHHHmu HmusHuo H euHHHanHmm OH a m e o n s m N H umgasz mouse zuHHHpmHHmm mHmwAMmmm0I¢MHzH e mama; 71 «m. mm. mm. mm. N.H o.c N.m m.m m.~q ~.wq m.m m.oa m.¢H q.q H.¢H m.wH m.w n.6m w.mq ~.m m.m n.~ H.m~ H.NN “.mN m.q~ N.H H.5H m.ma m.m m.mq ¢.nm N.N m.o~ N.¢N o.H N.NN H.HN m.~ m.mH q.qa m.m 0.5 «.ma m.H m.m m.~ N.H o.¢ H.HN m.oH N.H N.mN NN o.N w.oa w.~H m.H H.H m.H ousoummmwn Aqmmv voflaaou wovooom AmmHV moHHHau HmaHmHuo a ousmuommwn HmNNV moHHHau vowooom HHHNV moHHHmu HaanHuo o raucoummmwn Aommv moHHHmu vmvooom ANNNV mmHHHmu .Hwawwfiuo m mosouommwn AmHmv ooHHHmu wovooom ANHmV aoHHHuu Hmawwwuo q 72 o. a.H m. o o. m.H N. o.~ m. o moauummmHn e.H e.m ~.oq o H.@ H.H o.~m m.m m. o HaHNV moHHHmu movoomm mm. o.~ c.0H ¢.om o o.“ H.m m.Hm m.m o o, HmmHv muHHHau HmaHmHuo oH q. H. m.H H. m.m m.m H.H H. m. m. monouawwHa m. o.“ H.om o.~ m.HH H.0H H.o~ m.q o.H o Amomv auHHHmu vuvooom cm. H. e.“ o.m~ m.~ s.m n.¢H ~.e~ ~.q e. m. HewHV muHHHmu Hmawwwuo m m. o.HH e.m o ~.H o q.~ m. a. o ooamHuHMHn o. o.- ~.m~ e. w.m~ o m.m~ o H.H n.~ Hmumv muHHHau . movooom «o. m. ~.mm o.QH o. H.HN o m.- m. m. ~.~ Ammmv uuHHHmu amawmwuo m huowoumo zoom ca mofldama mo uaouuom euHHHaaHHom oH a m e o m e m N H “unasz guano auHHHnaHHum vmaaHuaooune.mHm mo mammamq< mOoud mocwHum> mo mammamc< mOoflU mucmfium> mo mammamc< MCoNU mocmfium> mo mamaama< .Amoo a Hoo “qomv mamwuouma can avonuoa mewsumou mHom mo sowuosvouusfi onu Houwm was ouowmn .aooummmao msu casuaa mmaufi>wuom moamaom wsHusv ucoaaoo uaovsum mooscfiucoo mo ommusoouma onu ca moamummmfim oa mH whose .HNHm u Ham "momv meHuouma can mvonuma wcHnumou mHum mo coauusvouusfi msu wound was ouomon .mmHuH>Huum moamHom wcausv mama mucmwsum mafia mo ammusmouma on» ma mucouommav on ma macaw .AHHH n Hay "Home mamaumuma can amorous wsfinomou mHom mo aoHuosvouuaH can umumm mam ouomon .moaua>fluom oucmwom waausv wcaxHMu macaw muonomou mafia mo owmuamoumm msu Ga moamummmwm on ma whose .ANQH u HaH "Homv mamfiuuuma van muonuoa weasumou mHom mo sowuusvouusfi mam “mums mam ouommn .mofiufl>fiuom moswflom weapon mafiumu 9H .muwnommu wnu aw mosmumwwwm o: ma macaw #0 MO ND HO mama mawu%HMd< wow wow: mamvoz mononuoahm mo usuaoumum mo namhduam >m3103u smavowum .HNmm.u Hmm ”cosy mHmHuouma was ovonuua wawnooou mHom mo soauosvouusw oau “mums was ououmn .oosoaom.mo «acumen mmoooua.onu mo cognac: nougsoo .muonomuu can cu mocuuomm«v on ma mummy .Awoe u Hoe "momv mauwuouma can ovonuoa wsfinocou mHom mo souuusvouu law may sound was ouommn .aouvaano ama.muo&ouou maowumosv mo mvsax onu aw mosuucmmwv on ma oumaa 00 m0 3 79 reviewed, in addition to the various statistical procedures selected for testing each hypothesis. Chapter four will center upon an analysis of the results gleaned from this study. CHAPTER FOUR ANALYSIS OF DATA AND FINDINGS Introduction Included within this chapter is a restatement of the six null hypotheses that were tested in this study, a presentation of collected data, and a summary of findings. Each hypothesis is discussed indi- vidually and pertinent results are presented in tables throughout the chapter. Additional data are located in the appendices. Collection and Compilation of Data This study focused upon an analysis of verbal behavior patterns during science activities in thirty-two mid-Michigan primary grade‘ classrooms. Sixteen of the teachers within these classrooms used the teaching methods and materials suggested by the Science Curriculum Improvement Study.(SCIS), and the remaining sixteen teachers presented more conventional science activities as advocated by their respective school systems. These teachers were employed within the DeWitt, East Lansing, Grand Ledge, Laingsburg, and Williamston public schools and taught.in nine separate buildings scattered throughout these dis- tricts. A three-week workshop (August.5-August 23, 1968) employing the Science Curriculum Improvement Study's teaching methods and materials was the primary experimental variable, and those sixteen 80 81 teachers who taught.science using the SCIS approach during the 1968-69 school year were active participants within the workshop. Portable tape recorders were used to gather data during each science lesson observed for the thirty-two teachers. Formal observa- tiOns of the sixteen SCIS teachers began prior to the summer workshOp on April 22, 1968, and both the SCIS teachers and those teachers using more conventional science activities received periodic visitations throughout the 1968-69 school year. The final lesson was recorded on March 27, 1969. Three instruments were used in evaluating the study's data. Two of these measurements were exclusively concerned with information gathered from analyses of the taped lessons--the Flanders System of Interaction Analysis and the Science Teaching Observational Instrument. The third instrument, the Science Process Test for Elementary School. Teachers, was a written test designed to evaluate process skills and science concepts. Two individuals were trained to analyze the taped lessons; each lesson, therefore, was.reviewed twice--once to gather data using the Flanders System of Interaction Analysis and a second time using the.Science Teaching Observational Instrument. The third evaluation instrument, the Science Process Test for Elementary School Teachers, was giVen to only the experimental group--those teachers who attended the summer workshop and who employed SCIS teaching methods and materials in their classrooms during the 1968-69 school year. A pre-test using this instrument was given to the teachers on August 6, 1968, prior to the summer workshop's formal_activities. On April 19, 1969 these 82 teachers were tested again with the same instrument and under similar conditions, at the study's conclusion. Of the null hypotheses stated in the section that follows, the Flanders System of Interaction Analysis was used in obtaining data to test hypotheses one through four. The Science Teaching Observational Instrument evaluated data gathered for hypothesis five. Hypothesis six was analyzed using the results of pre-test-and post—test adminis- trations of the Science Process Test for Elementary School Teachers. Hypotheses Stated in null form, the hypotheses tested were: H01 There is no difference in the teachers' ID ratios during science activities, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H01: ID1_- IDZ); H02 There is no difference in the percentage of time teachers spend talking during science activities, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H02: TTl - TTZ); H03 There is no difference in the percentage of time students' talk during science activities, before and after the in- troduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H03: ST1 - STZ); H04 There is no difference in the percentage of continuous student comment during science activities within the classroom, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H04: CC1 - C02); HOS There is no difference in the kinds of questions teachers ask children, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H05: KQ1 - KQZ); and H06 There is no difference in the teachers' comprehension of the process aspects of science, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H06: PS1 - P82). Although-these hypotheses were primarily concerned with those sixteen teachers using the Science Curriculum Improvement Study'sa 83 teaching methods and materials, additional statistical tests using both the SCIS teachers and the teachers employing more traditional science methods were conducted. The following section delineates the results of these tests. Comparisons Between the Two Teacher Groups Analyses were conducted to determine whether there were any significant differences between the SCIS teachers and those teachers using conventional science materials for hypotheses one through four. To obtain necessary statistical data, four separate t-tests were com- puted on the initial observations of both the sixteen SCIS teachers and the sixteen teachers using more conventional approaches to elementary school science.1 The results demonstrated that there were no significant differences between these two groups of teachers on their initial obser- vations, in regards to ID ratios, percentage of teacher talk, percentage of student talk, and percentage of continuous student comment during science activities. In addition, the investigator determined whether any significant differences had occurred, for hypotheses one through four, between the initial observations and the final observations of those teachers employing conventional science activities. Therefore four separate t—tests for correlated data were calculated between the initial and final observations for this group.2 The results demonstrated that there were no significant differences between these two observations 1N. M. Downie and R. W. Heath, Basic Statistical Methods, second Edition (New York: Harper and Row, 1965), pp. 132-143. 21bid. 84 in regards to ID ratios, percentage of teacher talk, percentage of student talk, and percentage of continuous student comment during science activities. The-original data germane to these analyses are included in Appendix B. The following paragraphs report the results of data analysis for-each of the six hypotheses within this study. Because five of the sixteen SCIS teachers could be observed only once, rather than twice, prior to the summer workshop, mean scores for the remaining eleven teachers on observations one and two were used in pertinent calcula- tions. Both the original and adjusted data for these teachers are included within the appendices. Teacher ID Ratios Within the spoken discourse of the classroom, Amidon and Flanders have defined the ID ratio as the amount of indirect teacher influence in verbal classroom behavior divided by the amount of direct teacher influence.3 Flanders has also written that direct influence by a teacher restricts the freedom of action of a student.by setting restraints or focusing his attention on an idea; and indirect influence by a teacher-increases the freedom of action of a student by reducing restraints or encouraging participation.4 It was hypothesized that exposure to one of the newer elementary science curricula might have a noticeable effect on teachers' ID ratios during science activities. 3Edmund J. Amidon and Ned A. Flanders, The Role of the Teacher ' in the Classroom (Minneapolis: Amidon Associates, Inc., 1963), p. 29. 4Ned A. Flanders, Teacher Influence, Pupil Attitudes and Achievement (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1960), p. 6. 85 A repeated measures design of a mixed model analysis of variance was employed to test this hypothesis and the results are summarized in Table seven, in the manner suggested by Winer.5 TABLE 7 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE DATA FOR THE ID RATIOS 0F SCIS TEACHERS Source of Variation SS df MS F Between Subjects 29.1385 15 . . . . Within Subjects Treatment 8.2556 4 2.0639 40.7080** 3 Error 3.0479 60 0.0507 Total 40.4420 79 * F 53 .95, (4,60) ' 2' - 3.65 * F.99, (4,60) The resulting F statistic demonstrated significance at both the .05 and .01 a levels. Therefore the null hypothesis that there is no difference in the teachers' ID ratios during science activities before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H01:. ID1 - IDZ) is rejected. Table eight supplies the mean scores and standard deviations for the significant ID ratio analysis. In an effort to determine more precisely where the greatest changes might have occurred, an-additional test contrasting the teachers' initial ID ratios with those obtained during observations two and five was conducted after the significant F statistic was 5B. J. Winer, Statistical Principles in Experimental Design. (New York: McGraw—Hill Book Company, Inc., 1962), pp. 105-124. 86 reached. No significant results were obtained from this particular analysis. TABLE 8 MEAN SCORES AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF SCIS TEACHERS' ID RATIOS PER OBSERVATION 01 O2 O3 O4 05 Mean 1.6687 2.0681 1.2606 1.1650 1.4931 S.D. 0.7821 1.7368 1.1228 1.0780 1.2234 Throughout the remaining sections of this chapter, tables are presented which graphically illustrate the data gathered from the taped lessons. Because it was virtually impossible to record every teacher during a science lesson on the same observation day, mean observation dates for the sixteen SCIS teachers were obtained and are illustrated in Table nine. These mean observation dates are used in many of the following figures. TABLE 9 MEAN OBSERVATION DATES FOR THE SIXTEEN SCIS TEACHERS Number Mean Date T1 5/16/68 T2 10/22/68 T3. 11/7/68 T4 1/23/69 T 2/19/69 87 The SCIS teachers' mean ID ratios per mean observation times are portrayed in Figure two. The interrupted portion of this graph demonstrates the summer vacation period. Percentage of Teacher Talk within SCIS Classrooms A literature review concerning the newer elementary science curricula might lead one to ponder whether or not the percentage of time teachers spend talking during science activities would differ, in response to the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials. A repeated measures design of a mixed model analysis of variance was used to test hypothesis H02, and the results are summarized in Table‘ten. TABLE 10 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR PERCENTAGE OF SCIS TEACHER TALK . Source of Variation SS df MS F Between Subjects 2183.5548 15 . . . . Within.Subjects Treatment 17.3356 4 4.4339 0.0326 NS Error 8151.3644 60 135.8560 . . Total 10352.2548 79 F.95, (4,60) ' 2'53 The analysis failed to produce an F statistic that reached the assigned level of significance. Therefore one fails to reject the null hypothesis that there is no difference in the percentage of time teachers spend talking during science activities, before and after the 88 ea a z .msowum>uouno use: new mowudm 9H one: .muosomoa mHom N ousmam usage sowuo>uomno one: mm. b N l- H coausom> nosaom - d D T H.H P fi.o.H T.n.H r.o.N I n.~ r o.m 801383 aI “93H 89 introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H02: TT1 - TT2)' Figure three graphically displays these data across mean observation times. Percentage of Student Talk within SCIS Classrooms Those persons primarily responsible for the development of the Science Curriculum Improvement Study have stated that in order for effective learning to take place the child must be directly involved in the experience.6 One indication of such direct involvement during science activities might be a measure of how much student talk takes place within a classroom's verbal behavior patterns. Data measuring the percentage of student talk within the sixteen SCIS classrooms were gathered to test hypothesis Ho there is no difference in the per- 3: centage of time students talk during science activities, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H ST1 - 8T2). A repeated measures design of a mixed model 03' analysis of variance was used to test hypothesianoa, and Table eleven summarizes the results. The analysis failed to produce an F statistic that reached the assigned level of significance. Yet the test statistic certainly approached significance, for it missed the .05 significance level by .1754. Based upon the statistical evidence, one fails to reject the null hypothesis that there is no difference in the percentage of time students talk during science activities, before and after the 6Robert'Karplus and Herbert D. Thier, A New Look at Elementary School Science (Chicago: Rand, McNally and Company, 1967), p. 80. 90 0H m z .meofiuu>uomno coax mom Mama “assume no owsucoouum use: .uuonouoa mHom m anamHe a so mom mesa: my «a mosey coaus>uumno can: my me we > m H p tl. .r p 1d . p p 1 tea tom voq tom row :05 wow voa rooH x191 isqosal.;o'safis:uaozea neon 91 introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H03: ST1 - 8T2). Figure four presents the data in graphic form. TABLE 1]. ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE DATA FOR PERCENTAGE OF STUDENT TALK IN SCIS CLASSROOMS Source of Variation SS df MS F Between.Sub1ects 3910.0785 15 . . . . Within Subjects Treatment 1329.8562 4 332.4640 2.3546 NS Error 8471.7878 60 141.1964 . . Total 13711.7225 79 F.95, (4,60) ' 2'53 Percentage of Continuous Student Comment Within SCIS Classrooms The Science Curriculum Improvement Study heavily emphasizes. child—to-child communication as an integral aspect in the operation of a science lesson. Such an emphasis led the investigator to hypothesize whether or not the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials into primary grade science activities would enhance this communication. Thus the.following hypothesis was analyzed via a repeated measures design of a mixed model analysis of variance: H04: There is no difference in the percentage of continuous student comment during science activities within the classroom, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H04: CC1 - 0C2). Table twelve summarizes the results. 92 maooummoau ea u z .msowuseuomno.suuz.uue same uaovoum mo_momduaoouom one: B needy soauo>uonno can: a shaman ma L NH. GOHUCOM> Hflgm P b J I 1 H H .8 .0m .cq .om .bo 55 B .‘ bm .ooH are; nuapnas JO sasnnsozaa neon 93 TABLE 12 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE DATA FOR PERCENTAGE OF CONTINUOUS STUDENT COMMENT IN SCIS CLASSROOMS Source of Variation SS df MS F Between Subjects 3822.3729 15 . . . Within Subjects Treatment 526.9882 4 131.7470 0.7230 NS Error 10933.1878 60 182.2197 Total 15282.5489 79 F.95, (4,60) ' 2'53 The analysis failed to produce an F statistic that reached the assigned level of significance. Therefore null hypothesis H04 fails to be rejected. Figure five displays these mean percentages of continuous student comment across mean observation times. The original data for these above mentioned hypotheses are located in Appendix B. The following section describes the results gathered from analyses of teacher preferences for question types displayed during science activities. Analyses of Teacher Preferences for Question Types The literature review described in chapter two underscores the importance of effective questioning strategies that should be used by elementary school teachers during science activities. In essence, good questions can be employed by the teacher to stimulate thinking, 94 maooummuao mHom ea I z .maoaum>uumno new: new usuaaou acousum msoonaunou mo momeusoouom new: m shaman me «H. 33:. 83.2638 56: H.H «a 8332, 355 HH. b L b p L n J- 1 .OH .cm L H2 .0: :3 .co .0n H8 .Oa nuammoo :uspnas snonurauoo go afienueoxaa neon food 95 to initiate discussion, to appraise what children have learned, and to determine what they are thinking about.7 The Science Teaching Observational Instrument effectively codes teacher questions into five distinct categories and was used to determine whether or not there was a difference in the kinds of questions teachers ask children, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H05: K01 - KQZ). The Friedman two-way analysis of variance by ranks was used to analyze hypothesis HO After the percentage of questions asked in. 5. each of the five categories per teacher observation was determined, these percentages were ranked across all five observations for the sixteen SCIS teachers. The Friedman statistic was calculated to analyze whether there was a difference in the kinds of questions teachers asked of children during science activities. This statistic was significant (x:- 57.7 > 9.48 at the .05 level of significance). After this original Friedman test produced statistically significant results, additional tests for time by type interactions were performed by making orthogonal tests within the subtables.9 Table thirteen displays these.test results. Based upon these statistical results concerning teacher prefer- ences for question types, the null hypothesis that there is no difference 7Willard J. Jacobson and Allan Kondo, SCIS Elementary Science Sourcebook (Berkeley: University of California Regents, 1968), p. 44.- 8Sidney Siegel, Nonparametric Statistics (Chicago: McGraweHill Book Company, Inc., 1956), pp. 166-173. 9James V. Bradley, Distribution-Free Statistical Tests (Wright- Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio: Wadd Technical Report 60-661, 1960), pp. 292-296. 96 in the kinds of questions teachers ask children, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H05: K01 - K02) is rejected. Figure six demonstrates a graphic presentation of the data gathered for each question type. In addition, Figure seven illus- trates the plots of question preferences for the SCIS teachers and the teachers using more conventional science methods and materials on both the initial and the final observations for each group. TABLE 13 SUMMARY OF TIME BY TYPE INTERACTIONS USING THE FRIEDMAN ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BY RANKS Time by Type Interaction Friedman Statistic (XE) _ * T1 T2 22.11 S _ * T1.+ T2 2T3 23.61 S 10.94 * S T + T + T + T - 4T 4.35 NS *x:,.95, 4 df - 9.49. All pertinent data used in the Friedman calCulations are located in Appendix C. In the following section the data gathered on the sixteen SCIS teachers using pre- and post-tests of the Science Process Test for Elementary School Teachers are analyzed. Analyses of Science Process Skills As was previously mentioned in chapter two, many of the newer‘ elementary science programs developed within the past decade place 97 .m:owuu>uoono one: new masseuse mHum aeouxfim can an momma soaumooc mo mowuucouuom new: oucofiuomxu eonnxuoz one soaudon> possum tlaro mwmonuoemm anew ouauonuoohm coaue>uomno axe: newnesoauuaom mom munch danced 42:20:00 9 ouowwm ma «H mosHH aofium>uomno one: ma NH - h b b A. @nlllllé‘ $JI.\* O I\m Jml. - . . . .IE\\ E10“; voa SN tom too you .ow Tom vooa saSsnusOJaa neon 98 unoaue>uomno Assam was HeHuHcH so masseuse oosoaom Hesowusopsoo was anemones mHom zoom an mooaouowoum ooze cowumuso mo momsusouuom one: H one»; me .He. ma .HH. anemones oonoaom Hedofiuae>eoo causeway mHom m n U m ¢ m a o m canonuonhm umoa ouwuonuomhm sofiue>uompo can: meannsoaueaum mom epoch Hanson I I I I I <:¢:c>c:u: :om .O¢ eooa ~sa$snuaaaaa neon 99 emphasis upon teacher comprehension of the basic process skills that good science teaching should foster within children. From such an emphasis, the investigator wished to determine whether or not there would be a difference in the teachers' comprehension of the process aspects of_science, before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H06: P81 - P82). A preetest using the Science Process Test for Elementary School Teachers was administered to all- sixteen SCIS teachers on August 6, 1968, prior to the summer workshop's formal activities. A post-test using this-same instrument was given to these sixteen teachers on April 19, 1969. Using a tvtest for correlated data,10 the test scores were analyzed. Table fourteen summarizes the results. TABLE 14 PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST DATA CONCERNING THE SCIS TEACHERS ON THE SCIENCE PROCESS TEST Pre-test Post-test T-test Number of teachers 16 16 Mean score 20.94 20.00 1.29 NS Standard deviation 5.40 4.98 t.95,(15 df) - 2'131 Based upon the statistical results outlined above, the null hypothesis that there is no difference in the_teachers' comprehension 10Downie and Heath, 2p, cit., pp. 132-143. 100 of the process aspects of science before and after the introduction of SCIS teaching methods and materials (H06: PS - P32) fails to be re- 1 jected. Descriptive data concerning the use of this instrument with other populations of in-service elementary school science teachers have been obtained from the test's author, and are located in Appendix A in addition to a specimen test copy. Table fifteen summarizes the data analysis for each of-the six hypotheses tested within this study. A more detailed consideration of each hypothesis, plus a synthesis of informal conversations with the thirty-two teachers involved in the study, are found within the following sections. Discussion of the Study's Findings This research indirectly evolved from the results of a pilot study published in 1965 under the joint authorship of Fischler and Anastasiow.11 Using ten teachers who were employed in fourth, fifth, and sixth grade classrooms, these authors gathered two taped recordings on six of the teachers prior to their participation in a summer work- shop using the Science Curriculum Improvement Study's teaching methods and materials. At the workshop's conclusion, one additional science lessen was taped for each participating teacher. Among the results were the following points of interest: 1. there was a significant decrease in the teachers' indirect- direct ratios (ID ratios); 11Abraham S. Fischler and N. J. Anastasiow, "InQService Educaw tion in Science (A Pilot):" Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3 (1965), pp. 280-285. 101 oooouommaw unmoHMHame m woomHuMMHv oomofimaowwm on oudmuommav uddewmaowfim oo oudouommam ucmowmaawwm on mucouommwv oomowmacwam m exude hp mundane» mo mammamau mus Iosu noavowum .ooomwum> mo mfimhamom moomfiom> mo mHm%Hmom moomflum> mo mankamom oucmwum> mo mammamam .mHuwuouoa was moonuua moanomou mHom mo sowuusvouuofi sou Houmm was uuomon .oouvaflsu moo muonooou macaumusu mo ovofix one ow ouauuowwfio on ma oumnH .mamfihouua was moosuoa moaoommu.mHom mo sowuosvoouow on» Houmo mom muommn .aooummmao emu ownufia muauw>wuom mocuflom moaned unmaaoo unavoum mooocfiuooo mo ommuououoo emu ow moomHuHMHv on ma moose .mHmHuouma use moosuua wofifiomou wHom mo cowuoomouuow one Hound vow ouomon .moHuH>Huom mooofiom woaosv meu muoovsum mafia mo smouooouuo use a« mucouuwwfim on ma mummy .mamwoouma use moonuua wownomou mHom mo oofiuoov Iouuofi usu uuumm use ouomon .moHuH>Huom moooaom moauoo woaxamu momma muonomou mafia mo ammuomouun one ow ooowuumwfiv on ma momma .mHmHuuuma van moonuua wownomuu mHom mo sowuoomouusw sou Houmm vow uuommn .mofiufi>fiuom ouooaum mswusv mowuon DH .muosooou one aw moooHoHMHv oo mH mouse m0 «0 MO ND HO no. a a con: venom muasmom some wofiuhams¢ How womb maowoz momonuoohm mo unassumum amammh mHmmmHomwm modm mom mmqu