' 4971/3 ABSTRACT AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A PHENOMENOLOGICAL APPROACH IN TEACHING, AS USED IN A TEACHER EDUCATION MODERN MATHEMATICS WORKSHOP BY Beatrice A. Brenton This experimental study was designed to analyze the effectiveness of a phenomenological approach in teach- ing a teacher education course (specifically a two-week modern mathematics workshop), through an investigation of: (l) the learner's attitudes toward the student, and the student-teacher relationship, as measured by the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory; (2) the learner's academic achievement, as measured by the Test on Modern Mathematics; and (3) the learner's perceptions of the following, as measured by the four-item Open-Ended Questionnaire: (a) his change in attitude about modern mathematics, (b) his intent to change his teaching behavior, (c) his satisfaction with the amount of mathematics content learned, and (d) his general reactions to the.workshop experience. Two further purposes which arose during the course of the study were to analyze: (l) the relationship between Beatrice A. Brenton the attitudes of the teachers at the beginning of the workshop experience, as measured by the MTAI pretest, and the cognitive gain at the termination of the workshop experience, as measured by the TMM gain scores; and (2) the range of scores on the TMM pre— and posttests. The experimental group consisted of sixty-two students enrolled in a two-week modern mathematics workshop at Central Michigan University. Approximately half were experienced graduates and half were inexperienced under- graduates. The control group consisted of thirty-one experienced graduates and one inexperienced undergraduate enrolled in a concurrent two-week modern mathematics work— shop at Michigan State University. The participation of the researcher as an assistant to the instructor in the experimental group maintained an equivalent student—teacher ratio. The experimental treatment was the implementation of a phenomenological approach in teaching--a learner— centered approach based upon phenomenological psychology. Both groups completed the Personal Data Sheet, the MTAI and the TMM as pre- and posttests, and the Open-Ended Questionnaire as posttest only. Analysis of covariance was used to determine the difference between the experimental and control groups on both the MTAI and the TMM at the .01 level of confidence. Beatrice A. Brenton Pearson product—moment correlations were calculated for the analysis of the relationship between the MTAI pretest scores and the TMM gain scores for both groups at the .05 level of confidence. Percentages of responses to the first three items on the Open-Ended Questionnaire were computed by categories. Conclusions: A significant difference between the experimental and control groups in attitude (MTAI) did exist in favor of the experimental group (.0005). Eighty- four percent of the experimental group as compared to 3% of the control group expressed an intent to change teaching behavior in a more student-centered direction. Although both groups expressed favorable attitudes toward the work- shop experience, those expressed by the experimental group seemed to be more student-centered. A significant difference did not exist between the experimental and control groups in academic achievement (TMM). Both groups expressed favorable attitudes toward modern mathematics and satisfaction with the amount of mathematics learned. A significant relationship between the pretest MTAI scores and the TMM gain scores did exist for the experimental group, but did not exist for the control group. Beatrice A. Brenton The TMM range of scores on the pretest was greater for the control group than for the experimental group, while the inverse was true for the posttest. With both graduates and undergraduates, this study's phenomenological approach in teaching was as ef- fective as the control teaching‘approach in facilitating academic achievement (TMM), and more effective in facili- tating student-centered attitudinal gain (MTAI and Open— Ended Questionnaire). Therefore, it is suggested that a phenomenological approach in teaching be implemented at all levels of a teacher's professional preparation, if the phenomenological View of behavior is the frame of reference. Further research in the implementation of a phenomenological approach in teaching in teacher education is recommended. AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A PHENOMENOLOGICAL APPROACH IN TEACHING, AS USED IN A TEACHER EDUCATION MODERN MATHEMATICS WORKSHOP BY Beatrice A. Brenton A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1969 "an r: >‘/;" . - I 0* © Copyright by BEATRICE A. 1969 ii BRENTON ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my appreciation to the many persons who contributed to this research. Most of them cannot be named herein, but they are remembered with gratitude. Special recognition is accorded to: Dr. Charles A. Blackman, Chairman of the Doctoral Guidance Committee, for his continuing patience, insight, and guidance throughout all phases of my doctoral program; Dr. Dale Alam, Dr. Louise M. Sause, and Dr. John Useem, the other members of my guidance committee, who gave of their time, support, and counsel; Dr. Douglas M. Gilmore, Dr. C. Alan Riedesel, Dr. Marilyn M. Suydam, and the participating students, who gave valuable, individual assistance. Perhaps the most significant contribution to this thesis, and indeed to my entire graduate program, has been made by my children—~Rhonda, Michael, and Kathy. For their patience, understanding, and encouragement, I am always grateful. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES O O I O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 0 O O I O I O O O C C O O O O 0 Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . Conceptual Framework and Teaching Strategies of a Phenomenological Approach in Teaching . . . . . . . . . . Teaching Strategies of the Control Group . Theory Underlying a Phenomenological Approach in Teaching . . . . . . . Significance of the Study . . . . . . Questions to be Considered . . . . . Statistical Hypotheses to be Tested . Assumptions Upon Which the Study is Ba Definition of Terms Used . Scope and Limitations . . . . . . .0.U).00. (D 0..Q;.0.. Design of the Study . . . . . . . Organization of the Study . II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE RELATED TO A PHENOMENOLOGICAL APPROACH IN TEACHING . . . Theoretical Rationale of a Phenomenological Approach in Teaching . . . . . . . . . . Student-Centered Approaches in Teaching . . Discussion as a Student-Centered Teaching Technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Importance of Independent Study in Student-Centered Teaching . . . . . . Workshop Patterns and Attitude Change . Phenomenological Approaches in Teaching Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III. RESEARCH PROCEDURES AND SOURCES OF DATA . . . iv Page vii 19 20 35 41 46 50 52 62 64 CHAPTER Page Identification of the Population . . . . . 64 Identification of the Personnel . . . . . 67 Instrumentation and Data Collection . . . 67 The Personal Data Sheet . . . . . . . . 68 The Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventor-X O O O O O O O O I O O O O O 68 The Test on Modern Mathematics . . . . . 71 Open-Ended Questionnaire . . . . . . . . 73 Treatment of Subjects . . . . . . . . . . 73 Treatment of the Control Group . . . . . 75 Treatment of the Experimental Group . . 77 Procedures for Treatment of Data . . . . . 80 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 IV. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA . . . . . 84 Statistical Analysis of the Relation- Ships 0 O O I O O I O O O O O O O O O O 84 Test on Modern Mathematics Range of Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Analysis of Open-Ended Questionnaire Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 sumary O I O O I O I O O O O O O O O O O 93 V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS O I O O O O I O O O O O O I O 9 4 smary Of the Study 0 O O O O O O O O O O 9 4 Conclusions and Discussion . . . . . . . . 97 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Recommendations for Further Research . . . 105 Implications for Teacher Education . . . . 108 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 APPENDIX A. PERSONAL DATA SHEET 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 121 APPENDIX Page B. MINNESOTA TEACHER ATTITUDE INVENTORY (FORM A) . . . 0 0 0 0 . 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123 C. TEST ON MODERN MATHEMATICS (FORM A) . . . . 130 D . OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONNAI RE . . . 0 0 . 0 . 0 . 1 4 O E. RESPONSES TO ITEM FOUR OF THE OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONNAIRE O O O O O O O O O O C O O O 141 vi TABLE 2.1. 3.1. 4.4. 4.5. 4.6. 4.7. 4.8. 4.9. LIST OF TABLES Dimensions upon which student-centered and instructor-centered methods may differ . . Description of subjects by sex, college level, and experience . . . . . . . . . . Number of previous mathematics courses completed, mean age, and mean years of teaching experience . . . . . . . . . . . MTAI mean and gain scores for the experi— mental and control groups . . . . . . . . TMM means and gain scores for the experi- mental and control groups . . . . . . . . Analysis of covariance of the MTAI posttest difference between adjusted means for the experimental and control groups . . . . . Analysis of covariance of the TMM posttest difference between adjusted means for the experimental and control groups . . . . . The relationship of the MTAI pretest scores and the TMM gain scores . . . . . . . . . Range of TMM scores . . . . . . . . . . . . Attitude change toward modern mathematics . Influence on teaching . . . . s . . . . . . Satisfaction with amount of mathematics learned . . vii Page 37 65 65 85 85 86 87 88 89 91 92 92 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Study It was the purpose of this experimental study to analyze the effectiveness of a phenomenological approach in teaching a teacher education course (specifically a two-week modern mathematics workshop) through an investi- gation of the following: 1. the learner's attitudes toward the student and the student-teacher relationship, as measured by the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory, Form A, (Cook, Leeds, and Callis, 1951) hereafter referred to as the MTAI; the learner's academic achievement, as measured by the Test on Modern Mathematics, Form A, (Riedesel and Suydam, 1967) hereafter referred to as the TMM; and the learner's expressed perceptions of the follow- ing, as measured by the Open-Ended Questionnaire: (a) his change in attitude about modern mathe- matics; (b) his intent to change his teaching behavior; (c) his satisfaction with the amount of mathematics content learned; and (d) his general reactions to the workshop experience. Two further purposes which arose during the course of the study were to analyze: l. the relationship between the attitudes of the teachers at the beginning of the workshop experi- ence, as measured by the MTAI pretest, and the cognitive gain at the termination of the workshop experience, as measured by the TMM gain scores; and 2. the range of scores on the TMM pre-and posttests. The control group was a concurrent two-week modern mathematics workshop taught on another campus. A descrip- tion of the experimental and control group treatments is presented in Chapter III. Conceptual Framework and Teaching Strategies of a Phenomenological Approach in Teaching A phenomenological approach in teaching is a student-centered approach based on phenomenological psy- chology and redefined in Lewinian-group-dynamic theory and Rogerian-nondirective or client—centered techniques. Its specific definition is situational, determined by its organizing and operational principles. The conceptual framework which defines the phenomenological approach in teaching utilized in this study is that which defines Combs' (1965) "self as instrument" approach to organizing the professional aspects of teacher education. He formu- lates three organizing principles: (1) provide information, (2) provide for involvement, and (3) provide for personal exploration and discovery (p. 118). He then suggests a program which would: (1) permit the movement of students at different speeds; (2) provide content and experience in response to student needs; (3) provide simultaneous, rather than sequential, experience for the learner; and (4) place much more responsibility upon the student himself (p. 115). This study's phenomenological approach in teaching was implemented through the eight teaching strategies described in Chapter III, and summarized here: (1) small group and/or independent study; (2) self-determined goals, objectives, and requirements; (3) self-evaluation of personal growth and self-determined-and assigned grade; (4) self-selection of learning procedures and materials; (5) self—paced learning; (6) emphasis upon individual and/or small group instructor-learner interaction; (7) instructors' roles those of facilitators and resource persons; and (8) student-initiated-and led discussion. Teaching Strategies of the Control Group A description of the salient instructional procedures of the control group are presented in Chapter III, and are summarized here: (1) total group lecture-discussion, instructor initiated and led; (2) instructor and instructor—total group determined goals, objectives, and requirements; (3) instructor and instructor-total group selection of learning procedures and materials; (4) instructor evaluation of the learner's growth and instructor-determined-and assigned grades; and (5) emphasis upon total group instructor-learner inter- action. Theory Underlying a Phenomenological Approach in Teaching Human behavior may be observed from at least two very broad frames of reference: from the point of View of an outsider, or from the point of view of the behaver himself. The first approach, called the external or objec- tive approach, has aided psychology tremendously in amass- ing data concerning the behavior of groups. These data have greatly increased our understanding and prediction of normative behavior. But there are those who believe that normative methods are not enough for the understanding of the behavior of individuals. The second approach, which is internally or subjectively oriented, and which is the frame of reference of this study, is thought by the proponents to be a more appropriate and accurate approach to the understanding of the behavior of individuals. A psychology which supports this second approach has appeared during the past 25 years. Known by a number of terms,1 phenomenological psychology is deeply concerned with man's being and becoming. Among those educational leaders who are proponents of this psychology are: Allport (1955); Angyal (1941); Combs (1948, 1959, 1962, 1965); Jersild (1951, 1952, 1953, 1955); Kelley (1955); Lecky (1945); Lewin (1951); Maslow (1954, 1962a, 1962b); May (1960); Moustakas (1956, 1966); Snygg (1941, 1959); and Tenenbaum (1961, 1967). Three basic principles of phenomenological psychol— ogy, as perceived by Combs (1965) are: (1) all behavior of a person, without exception, is the direct result of his total field of perceptions at the moment of his behav- ing; (2) of all the perceptions existing for an individual, the most important single influence affecting his behavior is his self-concept, or his organization of ways of seeing his self; and (3) the need for adequacy is the fundamental motivation of every human being from conception to death (p. 19). This basic need for adequacy includes both striving for self-maintenance and for self-enhancement--a fulfillment of one's self-concepts. lThis psychology is known by such terms as "third force," personalistic, phenomenological, humanistic, perceptual, transactional, existential, and self. The writer chose to ad0pt the terms "phenomenological" and "perceptual" for this study. This way of looking at human behavior provides the basis for the characteristics of the fully functioning person, which from the perceptual viewpoint, is the ulti- mate goal of education. A fully functioning person seems to be characterized by: (1) a positive view of self, (2) identification with others, (3) openness to experience and acceptance, and (4) a rich and available perceptual field. Phenomenological psychology is concerned with more than the forces exerted upon people from the outside. It seeks also to understand the internal life of the individ- ual: his wants, feelings, desires,.attitudes, values, and the unique ways of seeing and understanding that cause him to behave as he does. It does not view intellectual behavior and emotional behavior as a dichotomy; on the contrary, they cannot be separated. Man's emotional commitments are believed to be the key to the profoundest drives, forces, and learning in man; therefore, concomitant learnings are considered of greater educational signifi- cance than the direct or primary learning (Combs, 1959; Kilpatrick, 1951; Tenenbaum, 1967). The teacher's attitudes toward the student and toward the student-teacher relationship on the one hand, and the student's perception of this relationship from his point of view on the other, are thought to be crucial for the translation of knowing into behaving (Combs, 1959; Rogers, 1961). Phenomenological psychology is the foundation upon which the experimental instructional approach used in this study--a phenomenological approach in teaching--is based. Its theory and its implications for teacher education are elaborated upon in Chapter II. Significance of the Study There is often a gap between our understanding of the nature of human behavior and the utilization of these understandings in practice (Carpenter and Hadden, 1964; Combs, 1962). The committee for the 1962 ASCD Yearbook believes the tempo of events in the world today demands that the best we know be converted into practice as quickly as-possible. Current research within the conceptual frame— work of a phenomenological approach to teaching in teacher education should aid in bridging the gap between theory and practice because it is based upon the prOposition that what teachers have experienced through involvement is most apt to affect behavior. Denemark and MacDonald (1967), in their review of research for 1963-67, state that "even a casual perusal of the literature reveals a lack of theory," which they suggest, "has resulted in an obvious divorce of theory and practice" (p. 241). A number of writers see teacher educa- tion research as needing conceptual frameworks (Goodlad, 1962; Howard, 1963; Smith, 1962; Wattenberg, 1963). Wiles (1967) expresses a similar Opinion, when he states, "It is time that methods courses put emphasis on construct- ing a theory of teaching rather than proclaiming a particu- lar model or pattern or theory" (p. 262). Denemark and MacDonald (1967) believe that of the few studies that do project a conceptual framework, or unifying theory, Combs' (1965) study provides a "provocative point of View based upon perceptual psychology and the concern for values and man's search for being and becoming" (p. 241). Combs asserts that "it is at the source of supply--our teacher preparation programs--that review and innovation are most critically called for if we are to bring about the improvements we need in education" (p. v). He calls for a reexamination of teacher education in the context of a modern philosophical-psychological framework evolving from "our changing social needs and purposes on the one hand, and our new understandings about human behavior and learning on the other" (p. vi). Combs (1965) supports his position when he states: The basic principle of learning in perceptual psychology is this: Any item of information will affect an individual's behavior only in the degree to which he has discovered its personal meaning for him. The production of effective teachers will require helping each student to explore and to dis- cover his personal meanings about subject matter, people, purposes, and learning, about methods and about himself. The source of many of our failures in teacher education, it now seems clear, is that we have not sufficiently understood that professional training must operate on these deeper, more personal levels of learning. We have assumed that knowing and behaving are one and that the time-honored ways of teaching subject matter are appropriate for teaching people to teach as well. Our effort has been involved with teaching our students about teaching instead of helping them become teachers. To t e contrary, as we have seen, professional teacher education must be an intensely human process designed to involve the student deeply and personally (p. 28). Jersild (1955) postulates that the teacher's understanding and acceptance of himself is basic to any effort he makes to help students to develop their own self-adequacy. For Rogers (1961) and Tenenbaum (1967), the only learning which is significant is that which is self-discovered, self-appropriated, and therefore, not directly communicable to another person. Combs (1962) says that it is possible and essential for a teacher to see his educational goals in terms broad enough to include the self-concept while simultaneously achieving high academic standards. As he looks at the professional aspects of undergraduate, pre-service educa- tion within the framework of phenomenological psychology, he asserts that teacher education programs: must be con- cerned with the perceptual world of the student; must assist its students in the development of a clear and consistent frame of reference about people and their behavior to serve as a guide in dealing with them; must become student-centered; must help students explore 10 purposes--his, and those of the community, parents, administration, and pupils; must help students to discover the methods of teaching that are right for him; must help students discover the personal meaning of information so that they behave differently as a result of teaching; and must not only satisfy the student's current needs as per- ceived by him, but harness them so as to encourage the seeking of new goals. If adequate people promote adequacy in others, and if it is possible to include the self—concept and the perceptual world of the student in educational goals while simultaneously achieving high academic standards, then it would seem that teacher education courses should be de- signed to promote personal adequacy as well as content adequacy. If behavior is a function of perception, or personal meanings, then it would seem that perceptions should become the focus of the teacher education experi- ences. If significant learning--learning that effects behavioral change--involves the exploration and discovery of personal meaning, then it would seem that teacher education should permit the individual to explore and discover that which is meaningful to him so that he behaves differently. This would enable the learner to learn how perceptions or meanings are built, changed, or broadened. It would facilitate "learning how to learn," 11 which Useem (1963) and other educational leaders deem the hallmark of an educated person in a high civilization. It is the vieWpoint underlying this study that a student- centered approach in teaching based upon phenomenological psychology (a phenomenological approach) provides the frame of reference for this kind of teacher education. It is apparent that a need exists for research in conceptual frameworks, particularly in a phenomenological approach in teaching in teacher education, which is rele- vant to the needs of the individual as a lifetime learner in a "culture of change." Questions to be Considered Several questions now suggest themselves with respect to a phenomenological approach in teaching as used in this study: First, will the learner change his attitude toward the student and toward the student-teacher relationship as a result of the workshop experience? 'Second, as a result of the workshop experience, will the learner express an intent to change his teaching behavior? Will the direction of change be toward student- centered behavior? Third, will the learner express a change of attitude about mathematics as a result of the workshOp experience? 12 Fourth, what effect will the workshop experience have upon the learner's academic achievement? Fifth, will the learner express satisfaction with the amount of modern mathematics learned? Sixth, what effect will the workshop experience have upon the range of scores on an achievement test in modern mathematics? Seventh, will there be a relationship between the learner's attitudes at the beginning of the workshop and his mathematics achievement at the termination of the workshop experience? Statistical Hypotheses to be Tested Hypothesis I. HO There is no difference between the experimental group and the control group in attitudes as measured by the MTAI . Hypothesis II. H There is no difference between the experimental group and the control group in mathematics achievement as measured by the TMM. Hypothesis III. H There is no relationship between the pretest MTAI scores and the gain scores in mathematics for the experimental group. l3 Hypothesis IV. H There is no relationship between the pretest MTAI scores and the gain scores in mathematics for the control group. Assumptions Upon Which the Study is Based It is assumed that the development of a fully functioning person should be the goal of educa— tion. It is assumed that all behavior is a function of the total perceptual field at the moment of action; therefore, to effect change in behavior, percep- tions must be changed. It is assumed that each person is continually motivated by the need for greater effectiveness in relating with his world. It is assumed that intellectual and affective behavior cannot be separated. It is assumed that what a teacher believes about his students will have an important effect upon how he behaves toward them. It is assumed that the attitudes of a teacher afford a key to the indication of the type of classroom atmosphere a teacher will maintain. It is assumed that attitudes, as measured by the MTAI, are valid indicators of a teacher's l4 openness to learner-centered teaching, and, therefore, to a phenomenological approach in teaching. 8. It is assumed that a teacher with a high positive score on the MTAI will be favorable toward learner- centered teaching and will be open to a phenomeno- logical approach in teaching. 9. It is assumed that the self-reports of teachers are valid representations of their true feelings and belief systems, within the delimitations of any self-report (Combs, 1962; Combs and Snygg, 1959). 10. It is assumed that the objective measures used in this study, namely, the MTAI and TMM, are valid instruments within the delimitations as stated in Assumption Nine. 11. It is assumed that the analysis of covariance and the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients are appropriate statistical treatments for this experimental-exploratory study. Definition of Terms Used Attitude is defined as the "degree of positive or negative affect, or feeling, associated with some psycho- logical object. Psychological object is defined as any symbol, phrase, slogan, person, institution, ideal, or 15 idea toward which people can differ with respect to positive or negative affect" (Edwards, 1957, p. 2). The kinds of attitudes which are the concern of this study are those that the teacher has toward the learner, himself, the teacher-learner relationship, the teaching-learning process, and subject matter. It is the point of view of this study that attitudes are the function of perceptions. Learner-centered attitudes, also known as student- centered, integrative, democratic, or nondirective atti- tudes are defined as those which are positively associated with concern for the needs, feelings, ideas, values, atti- tudes, desires, and unique understandings and capabilities of the individual. In this study they are positively associated with student-centered teaching, and, therefore, with a phenomenological teaching approach. Subject-centered attitudes, also known as instructor-centered, dominative, or directive attitudes, are defined as those which are positively associated with subject-matter achievement, teacher-directed needs, authoritarianism, and teacher status. In this study they are associated with subject-centered teaching. Scope and Limitations This study was designed to explore the effective- ness of a phenomenological approach in teaching a teacher education course. The experimental and control groups 16 were concurrent two-week modern mathematics workshops. Thus, intact groups were used. To the degree that statistical equivalence is true, this approach, when replicated with random equivalence, should yield similar results. As in any research utilizing self-report as a measuring device, this study has the delimitation of the discrepancy between self-perceptions and self-report. How an individual believes and feels, and what he is will- ing to say about his beliefs and feelings may not be congruent (Combs, 1962). Design of the Study This experimental study was designed to analyze the effectiveness of a phenomenological approach in teach- ing a teacher education course, specifically a two-week modern mathematics workshop. The participants were 102 students enrolled in two workshops held concurrently during the summer of 1968. The experimental group consisted of 69 students, enrolled in a workshop at Central Michigan University. Since seven did not complete one or both of the posttests, data were analyzed for an N of 62. Of the 35 graduate students, 23 were experienced teachers. Eight of the undergraduates were also experienced. l7 Thirty-three students enrolled in a workshop at Michigan State University comprised the control group. Because one student did not complete the posttests, data were analyzed for an N of 32. Thirty-one of the students were experienced graduates. The one undergraduate was inexperienced. The experimental treatment was the implementation of a phenomenological approach in teaching as described in Chapter III of this study. Pretest and posttest instruments used in the study were the MTAI and the TMM. An Open—Ended Questionnaire consisting of four items was administered as a "posttest" to both groups. Both groups completed a Personal Data Sheet on the first day. Copies of the instruments are included in the Appendices. The Nonrandomized Control-group Pretest-Posttest Design, as described by Van Dalen (1966) was used in this research. Analysis of covariance was used to compare the adjusted mean scores of the experimental and control groups on the MTAI and the TMM posttests. Pearson product- moment correlations were calculated for relationships between MTAI pretests and TMM gain scores. The TMM pretest and posttest score ranges for both groups were computed and compared. The responses to the first three items in the Open-Ended Questionnaire were individually analyzed and 18 percentages of responses were computed by categories for both the experimental and control groups. Responses to item four of the Open-Ended Questionnaire are quoted in Appendix E. Organization of the Study Chapter I is an orientation to the study. A theo- retical rationale for, as well as literature related to, a phenomenological approach in teaching are reviewed in Chapter II. In Chapter III the research procedures, sources of data, and procedures for data treatment are explained. The findings are reported and analyzed in Chapter IV. The summary and conclusions, with implica— tions for teacher education and further research are presented in Chapter V. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE RELATED TO A PHENOMENOLOGICAL APPROACH IN TEACHING Before an individual's behavior can be understood, one must have a framework for interpreting behavior. That phenomenological psychology should from such a framework has been debated in the literature (Maslow, 1961; Rogers and Skinner, 1956; Smith, 1950; Snygg, 1941; Snygg and Combs, 1950). It is the point of view of this study that phenomenological theory does provide a framework for teacher education which has as its basic concern the development of a more effective person. From a phenomenological point of view, to under- stand the becoming of others, and to use one's self effectively as facilitator of learning, one must understand his own becoming--the factors controlling and limiting the processes of his perceiving and the function of his per- ceptual field. As stated in Chapter I, five of the basic assumptions underlying this study are: (l) the develOpment of a fully functioning person should be the goal of educa- tion; (2) all behavior is a function of the total perceptual 19 20 field at the moment of action; (3) each person is continually motivated by the need for greater effectiveness in relating with his world; (4) intellectual and affective behavior cannot be separated; and (5) what a teacher be- lieves about his students will have an important effect upon how he behaves toward them. To assist the reader in the understanding of these basic assumptions, and, there- fore, his individual becoming, a theoretical rationale for a phenomenological approach in teaching is presented herein. With the exception of specific documentation, the rationale represents the researcher's synthesis of the central themes of a phenomenological theory of human behavior as postulated by Combs and Snygg (1959) in Individual Behavior, and by Wilhelms (1963) as interpreted by Clark and Beatty (1967) in Evaluation as Feedback and Guide. Theoretical Rationale of a Phenomenological Approach iiin Teaching Phenomenological psychology is a field theory psychology which stresses the important role of the "phenomenal field" or surroundings in which behavior occurs. It is oriented toward the Leibnitzian view of the nature of man's mind, which maintains that man is not a collection of acts, nor simply the locus pf acts, but he is the source of acts. The nature of man's mind, therefore, is active, not passive (Allport, 1955). 21 Phenomenological psychology takes into consideration the learner's motivation, his values, the uniqueness of his perceptions, and the social nature of man. Its basic postu- late is that all behavior, without exception, is completely determined by, and pertinent to, the total perceptual field of the behaving organism at the moment of action. Man's basic need, which controls all behavior, is the maintenance and enhancement of the phenomenal self. Stated by Combs (1959), man's basic need "is that great driving, striving force in each of us by which we are continually seeking to make ourselves ever more adequate to c0pe with life" (p. 46). This need is also referred to as self-adequacy or self-realization (Combs and Snygg, 1959), self- actualization (Maslow, 1962), fully functioning (Rogers, 1961), self-effective (Clark, 1967), or the authentic self (Moustakas, 1966). The Adequate Personality It has been postulated that the goal of all behavior is the achievement of personal adequacy, and that man is continaully striving toward that end. Since behavior is a function of perceptions, the adequate person- ality can be described from the way in which such persons perceive themselves and the world in which they live. An adequate person seems to be characterized by (l) a positive view of self, (2) high identification of self with others, 22 (3) openness to experience and acceptance, and (4) a rich and available perceptual field. Phenomenal Field Perception has been defined by Combs (1959) as "any differentiation the individual is capable of making in his perceptual field whether an objectively observable stimulus is present or not" (p. 31). The phenomenal field includes all of a person's perceptions, including those about himself and those about things quite outside himself, at the moment of action. To each individual, his phe- nomenal field ii reality, the only reality he can directly experience. Each individual invests meanings unique to him in the things about him, and these meanings become the ones to which he uniquely responds. That part of the phenomenal field which includes all those perceptions which an individual has about his self, in a given situation, irrespective of their impor- tance to him is the phenomenal self (Combs, 1959). People always behave in terms of the total phenomenal field, but since it is always the self which is perceived as behaving, the phenomenal self is the individual's basic frame of reference, in terms of which all else is observed. It is the phenomenal self which each human is always seeking to maintain and enhance. Thus, the more closely related an 23 experience is perceived to the phenomenal self, the greater will be its effect upon behavior. To further differentiate the phenomenal field, those perceptions about the self which seem so vital to the individual as to be "he" in all times and in all places are the core of the individual's concept of self. Several of the known factors which control and limit the processes of perceiving and the function of the perceptual field are: the physical organism; time; oppor- tunity; the effect of need; goals and values; the phenome- nal self; and the restriction of the field. Behavior is always a product of a number of these variables Operating at any given moment (Combs, 1959). Differentiation and Behavioral Change Change in the perceptual field and, hence, change in behavior, occurs through the process of differentiation. Learning, reasoning, problem-solving, remembering, crea- tivity, and forgetting are direct outgrowths of the process of differentiation. A discussion of the differentiation process, as described by Combs and Snygg (1959), may help clarify this concept. The meaning of any event perceived is a product of the relationship of that item in the phenomenal field to the total ground of which it is a part. This relationship, 24 and the process by which aspects of the perceptual field are brought into clear figure from ground, is called differentiation. The process of differentiation, and the levels of awareness, will determine the intensity with which events are experienced in the phenomenal field. Although the perceptual field includes all the universe of which one is aware, one is not aware of all parts with the same degree of clarity at any given moment. Precision of behavior will be a result of precision of figure. Percep- tions at low levels of awareness will affect behavior with less precision than those more clearly in figure, but as long as they exist at all in the perceptual field, they will affect behavior. Perceptions, or differentiations, once made are made forever. Man as a Social Being Man's basic need for greater effectiveness, as he can best define effectiveness, is explained by his pre- carious being. He must learn to relate to nature in such a way as to survive and at the same time continually transcend his biological beginnings (Fromm, 1955). Although each man is born with the potential to become involved in a great variety of processes, he develOps this potential in the unique way that he chooses. Thus, man is constantly trying out new ways of relating with 25 his physical and social environment, bringing meanings to his experiences, and constantly testing and judging the results of the relating. This constant process of testing and judging, or evaluation, is the process of making mean- ing out of experience and is a central part of the learning process, since no one could learn from his experiences unless he received feedback from them and converted it into meaning (Clark, 1967). No two pe0ple see effectiveness the same way, but since all human beings have their humanity in common, they have similar experiences as they mature physically and socially. The presence of similar meanings in the percep- tual fields of different persons makes communication possible. From the way each person uniquely knows these similar experiences, each person learns to value certain kinds of relations with his world, always in terms of some form of acceptance (Combs, 1959). Through his interaction with his "significant others, a person comes to see him- self much as he perceives them as seeing him (Mead, 1934). Motivation and Strategies for Becoming As has been pointed out, man's basic need--the driving power for the process of becoming--is the person's need to be effective. As man learns how he does relate to his world, he also learns how he should or could relate to have a more effective relationship as he uniquely defines 26 effectiveness. Each individual has a unique and developing concept of adequacy made up of attitudes and goals similar to Havighurst's (1953) developmental tasks. Whenever there is a descrepancy between the perceived self and the concept of adequacy, as defined by the behaver, it must be harmo- nized. If the self-system perceives its relationship with the world as congruent with its concept of adequacy, the system tries to maintain the relationship. But if the relationship is dissonant, the system must strive to alter the relationship toward greater effectiveness——toward greater harmony. This is the general explanation of human motivation (Clark, 1967). From the above discussion, it is clear that a person is always motivated, that the motivation is always toward greater adequacy of the phenomenal self, and that the more central to the phenomenal self the discrepancy is, the more meaningful will be its motivational state and its resolution. Although definitions are unique, each person's self-system is motivated by four motivational states: to maintain relations as they are; to change relations; to explore the discrepancy (curiosity); or to express one's "self" in a relationship which tests the "self" for mean- ing, as related to the discrepancy. The first two motiva- tional states are aroused when the self is threatened. The 27 latter two come into effect when the self is not threatened, and can involve the self in many new experiences in which the self can be more richly experienced and more completely understood (Clark, 1967). Each person builds from his perceptions of the world and his concept of adequacy certain continuing criteria, or strategies for becoming, which enable him to choose activity in patterns. He defines certain satisfac- tions or activities as appropriate to his self-system and others as inappropriate by two means: (1) by prejudged patterns--those dictated by an external authority, such as a parent, or an internal authority built by his self from his own experiences; and (2) by situational selection, the effectiveness of the relationship determined anew with each experience. This second method allows freedom to discover one's potential for adequacy, and one's values remain relevant. A person also develops strategies for becoming by deciding upon long range goals and accepting certain roles, which then direct his choices. Each person's activities fit together in a pattern leading to effectiveness, as defined by him, according to his evaluation of his becoming. New data from the environment can be accepted by the self-system only if they clarify, augment, or change consistently the old meanings in the system (Lecky, 1945). 28 Consequently, when persons are motivated by the "maintaining state," data which would threaten the defense of the status quo of the self-system is rejected and does not acquire meaning in the self-system. Restriction of the Phenomenal Field When attention becomes narrowed to some event being experienced or being anticipated, pleasant or unpleasant, the area of the phenomenal field open to differentiation becomes narrow, and perceptions available for action are confined to this limited area. The narrowing of the phe- nomenal field when need is strongly affected is called "tunnel vision." Some perceptions are very clearly experi- enced, but others, which under conditions of less concen- trations would be available, are blocked out. As has been stated, whatever seems to the behaver to be inconsistent with his existing perceptions of self may be experienced by the individual as threat. Whatever seems threatening to the behaver demands attention and produces a degree of tunnel vision in the perceptual field. A second major factor restricting perception in the phenomenal field is man's need to defend his self when his defenses are threatened. Because of man's basic need, he must resolve dissonance between the perceived self and adequacy, and when the maintaining motivational state is 29 aroused through threat, his defenses are threatened. But because the phenomenal field is restricted by tunnel vision and defense of self under threat, behavior is apt to be static and unresponsive to change. The degree of feeling of personal adequacy dis- tinguishes threat and challenge. People feel challenged when confronted by situations in which they feel fairly adequate and see opportunities for testing and enhancing their effectiveness. But they feel threatened when con- fronted with situations or ideas with which they feel fundamentally inadequate to cope. The effect of threat has been demonstrated: In a series of frustration experiments, Hamilton found that both animal and human subjects under stress often were unable to perceive more than one line of behavior and this they used in rigid fashion despite the fact of its inappropriate- ness. . . . Other experiments have demonstrated that the experience of threat is accompanied by decreased efficiency and adaptability to a task, by adverse effects on learning and problem- solving, and by perceptual inadequacy (Combs, 1959, p. 171). Most of the threats experienced in life are social rather than physical--are threats by people rather than by things. Intellectual Behavior and Affective Behavior Intelligence, from a perceptional point of view, is a function of the factors which control the richness, 30 extent, and availability of perceptions in the phenomenal field. Since all the factors stated earlier as greatly influencing perceptions can be changed to some degree, the capacity for intelligent behavior can be created in the degree to which the phenomenal field itself can be changed (Combs, 1959). This new conception which refutes the con- stancy of intelligence and emphasizes the importance of phenotype development has been researched (Hebb, 1949; Hunt, 1961; Pribram, 1958, 1960). Every human activity is accompanied by some degree of emotional response (tension). Emotion is a behavioral manifestation of the organism's attempt to satisfy need. It represents the reaction of the organism to the percep- tion of the possibility of need satisfaction (enhancement of self) or the perception of threat (self-maintenance). The behaver's perceptions of his self, of the situations in which he is involved, (including the emotional state), and the interrelationship of these two, are communicated to himself and to others through feelings. All behaviors are a product of our perceptions, all involve a degree of tension, and all are always a function of the total perceptual field at the moment of behaving. It, therefore, appears that intellectual and affective behaviors cannot be separated. Since perceptions will differ in the degree to which they are related to the 31 self and, thus, in the degree of emotion, they will differ in the degree of feeling involved; but no behavior can be purely intellectual or emotional (Combs, 1959). Learning Learning is the process by which the individual is able to change his behavior. It is an active, goal- directed, and purposeful process which results from the efforts of the individual to satisfy his perceived needs. Its basic characteristic is a progressive differentiation from a more general perceptual field (Combs, 1959). The degree and direction of learning are determined by the need of the behaver, from his point of view, and the opportunities for differentiation that are available. Al- though learning can occur in the not-self portions of the field, it cannot occur unrelated to self. Before learning can make a difference in the behavior of the person, per- ceptions must be differentiated with relationship to his self. This is the explanation for the difference between knowing and behaving (Combs, 1965). Since man must build his relationship with the world in order to survive and to transcend his biological beginnings, he must learn what he is and what he can become, and he must learn the means by which this can be achieved. The former type of learning is intrinsic, the latter type is instrumental. In the process of becoming, both 32 intrinsic and instrumental learnings are essential, play into each other in a circular fashion, and must be fostered by both learner and teacher (Clark, 1967). Intrinsic learnings involve selecting goals and purposes and giving direction to the motivation to survive and find satisfaction. They become the criteria for selecting the instrumental learning to be achieved. They change the internal self-system at the deep level of moti- vations, perceived self, strategies, of concepts of adequacy. When any of these aspects of the self-system changes in relation to the phenomenal field, the self is different, with different purposes and goals. Instrumental learning has occurred when, as a result of the "consequences of acting" feeding through the self-system, the system recognizes more or fewer choices of action in the phenomenal field, more skillful ways to perform available actions, or change in the understanding of the consequences of action. The kind and degree of differentiation which are immediately possible in any situation are determined to a great extent by the character of the existing phenomenal field. The degree of differentiation already attained is always a limiting factor. Since the process of differen- tiation is quite regular and proceeds step by step, an individual cannot learn any detail for which he is not 33 ready--for which he does not have the prerequisite learning (Combs, 1959).l Conclusion It must be emphasized that the aspects of self discussed herein are hypothetical constructs, not physical entities, which facilitate the understanding of human behavior. In the foregoing discussion, phenomenological psychology postulates that all behavior, without exception, is determined by the total perceptual field at the moment of action. To change behavior, then, the individual's perceptual field must be changed. Of the multiple factors controlling and limiting perception, that of need is viewed as being the most pervasive. The seemingly unlimited number of motives are reduced to a single, all inclusive human need which motivates all human behavior at all times and in all places--the need to maintain or enhance the effectiveness of the phenomenal self. Man is, therefore, deeply and intimately affected by his environment, but capable also of molding and shaping his becoming in important ways. 1For a discussion of other aspects of learning, (from a phenomenological point of view), i.e., memory, reasoning, problem-solving, conception, perception, cogni- tion, synthesizing, and generalization, the reader is referred to Combs and Snygg, 1959. 34 From a phenomenological point of view, to understand the becoming of others, and to use one's self effectively as facilitator of learning, one must understand his own becoming. Such understanding would reveal that there are not too many ways in which the teacher can affect the be- coming of a student. He cannot directly influence the student's perception of self, his concept of adequacy, or his motivational states or strategies. But he can directly influence the richness and availability of the perceptions in the student's perceptual field. Although the student chooses his actions, they can be restricted or facilitated by the teacher. From a phenomenological point of view, emphasis in relating with people is upon the creation of the kinds of situations which: seek change in behavior through change in perceiving; emphasize an immediate rather than a histor- ical understanding of the causation of behavior; emphasize the role of the teacher as facilitator of learning; empha- size in practice techniques of communication, learning, and exploration and discovery; and emphasize the importance of groups in creating leadership and releasing potential. As stated in Chapter I, a phenomenological approach in teaching is a student-centered approach based on phenomenological psychology and redefined in Lewinian- group-dynamic theory and Rogerian-nondirective or 35 client-centered techniques. It, therefore, appears to be a teaching approach relevant to the kinds of emphases deemed important to facilitate the development of greater personal adequacy in the learner. The remainder of this chapter presents a review of the literature concerned with the teaching methods and techniques pertinent to a phenomenological approach in teaching. Literature concerning the relationship of work- shop organizational patterns and attitude change, as well as that assessing the current status of phenomenological approaches in teaching is also presented. Student-Centered Approaches in Teaching The concern for learner-centered teaching is not a new one, although each wave of interest has taken a different name (Wispe, 1953). During the middle twenties, largely under Dewey's influence, learner-centered teaching was concerned with the way individuals met and solved problems, the habits they developed in adjusting to their environment, and the implications of these for democratic living. This concern provided an impetus for the discus- sion method in college teaching. Since educators thought that it was more important to teach students how to think than what to think, and since discussion was felt to en- courage reflective deliberation of problems, discussion was-deemed important for a democratic society. 36 In the forties, the learner-centered concept was re-emphasized under the name of student-centered teaching, with its orientation toward pupil-teacher working and planning. Rogerian influence emphasized the "nondirective" terminology. Today, this kind of teaching behavior pattern is known by a variety of terms, such as student-centered, learner-centered, integrative, nondirective, group- centered, or democratic. They have in common a breaking away from the traditional instructor—dominated classroom and an acceptance of greater student participation and responsibility. Birney and McKeachie (1955) list some of the ways in which a student—centered approach to teaching differs from the traditional instructor-centered approach (p. 53). Table 2.1 contains their summary. The literature concerning the superiority of one teaching approach over another is vast and characterized by many contradictory and conflicting findings. Excellent surveys of the literature have been presented by McKeachie (1954, 1958, 1960). Gage's (1963) Handbook of Research on Teaching contains valuable reviews, most of which pre- sent summaries of findings, discussions or suggestions for improving instruction, and predictions of future trends in research. The Annual Review of Psychology (1958, 1961, 1962) also presents interesting reviews. Anderson (1959) 37 mummmm cofiuomwn oz mwcmum can mummu mo mm: Hmcofluflcmua mamanmumfi mmHsoo co ummx cowmmsomflo mmHuH>Huow mmcHEHmuwc MODOSHUmcH chHuanuucoo ucmcsum ucm>mamuufl Ho msomcouum muomflmn no wuomunoo uouosnumcH coauomumucfl ucmpsumIHODUDHumcH coaummwoflunmm Houosuumsfl c052 muuommu cowuomwm mmcmum cam mummu_mo mammnmEmlmn Ummmusoocm mmocmwnmmxm assemumm .musmpsum mo sowmwsomflo mwfluw>fluom C30 mwpflomc msouo macausnflnucoo pampsum ucm>mamuufl Ho msomcouum mummoom nouosnumcH cofluomumucw pcmosumnucmcsum soflpmmfloflunmm ucmcshm nos: mmwufl>fluom EooummmHU mmmcm>wmm£oo msoum moaw>mo on umfimuum oz mmmcmno flagpowaamncfl com: mammnmfim Houosuumcfi an cocflfinmpmo mamow mmmcm>amwnoo msoum moam>m© on mumEmuud mmcmno Hmcwcsuwuum cam m>auommmm coma mammnmfim msoum an cmcwfinmuma pmnmucmOIHOpUSHumcH pmumucmuuucmpnum mcocums pmnmpcmoluouosuumcfl pcm.cmnmuc601ucmosum HmMMflU use £0H£3 com: mc0flmsmefln .H.N mqmds 38 presents a resume and critical evaluation of forty-nine experimental studies in this area. The studies cited in this review are those which seem to have a significant bearing on the study. Two of the best known experimental attempts to demonstrate the effectiveness of student-centered teaching are those of Faw (1949) and Asch (1951). Each taught all the groups involved in his experiment. Whereas Faw's student-centered section attended lectures twice a week, and it is assumed were assigned a grade by the instructor based on a final examination, Asch's student-centered section had no lectures, were told that the final examina- tion would not affect their grade in the course, and assigned their own grades. The findings from the two studies do not agree completely. Faw's student-centered group scored significantly higher on the final examination than the instructor-centered group, but perceived the latter approach as more conducive to cognitive gain. Asch's student-centered group scored significantly lower than the instructor-centered group on the final examina- tion, but perceived student-centered instruction as more conducive to cognitive gain. Asch's student-centered group appeared more adjusted than the instructor-centered subjects on the basis of MMPI scores. Bills (1952) found no difference in achievement between psychology classes taught by lecture-discussion 39 versus student-centered methods, but did find that the students in the student-centered class were significantly more favorable in their attitude toward psychology. As noted in Chapter III, Stern (1963), in discussing the find- ings of 34 studies designed to measure the difference be- tween student- and teacher-centered instruction in their effect on either the acquisition of information, changes in attitude, or both, concluded no difference in cognitive gain, and more positive attitudinal gain with nondirective teaching. The above cited research is representative of the kinds of conflicting and contradictory results of student- centered and instructor-centered research. But while scores on objective final examinations seem to be affected little by teaching method, there are indications that student behavior outside the usual testing situation may be influenced in the direction of educational goals by student-centered teaching. Bovard (1951) and McKeachie (1951) reported that when the variables of the degree to which the class made decisions about assignments, examinations, and other matters of classroom procedure, as well as the degree to which students were encouraged to interact, were considered, the groups did not differ in achievement as measured by the final examination; but the student-centered groups 40 reflected much more insight and understanding. Similar findings were reported by Gibb and Gibb (1952). Student- centered subjects were significantly superior to students taught by traditional lecture—discussion methods, in role- playing ability and self—insight, and they rated higher in leadership, likableness, and group membership skills in nonclassroom groups. Wispe (1951) did an interesting study on the inter- action of teaching method and student personality. Instead of trying to control the instructor personality variable by having instructors teach both instructor-centered and student—centered classes, he selected instructors who were rated as permissive or directive. He found no difference in final examination scores between students taught by different methods, and demonstrated that student attitudes toward particular classroom atmospheres were highly selec- tive. Student-centered instruction was preferred by those who reject traditional sources of authority, have strong needs for demonstrating their personal independence, and are characterized by a high drive for academic achievement. McKeachie (1963) concludes that although findings are conflicting, in general there seem to be no significant differences between student-centered and instructor-centered teaching in achieving lower-order cognitive objectives. When higher—level outcomes are compared--i.e., ability to 41 apply concepts, attitudes, motivation, and group—membership skills--student—centered approaches seem to be favored. Hunt (1961) suggests that the contradictory find- ings in educational and psychological research are due in part to the difficulty encountered when controlling the various factors which are relevant to the outcomes of in- vestigations with human subjects. Teacher enthusiasm for the approach being implemented could be one of these influencing variables. Since innovative methods usually are explored by persons who have a keen interest in them, researchers attempting to function in several roles might have difficulty in developing genuine interest and tech- niques for each role. Discussion as a Student—Centered TeachingiTechnigue Discussion seems to be a method of learning which lends itself to student-centered teaching and small group interaction. The discussion method has no consistent definition, either by its proponents or in the research related to it. Its salient feature is verbal participation on the part of the students. Discussion ranges from a highly unstructured situation in which the instructor is an observer, mediator, or just another group member, to an instructor monologue in which occasional questions are interposed. Varying degrees of student control of class activities are found. 42 The choice of instructor-dominated or student- centered discussion techniques appears to depend upon one's goals. The more highly outcomes going beyond acquisition of knowledge are valued, the more student-centered the discussion is likely to be (McKeachie, 1963). Therefore, student—centered discussion is more relevant to this review of the literature. There is experimental evidence that, when the de- velopment of concepts or problem-solving skills is the goal, active participation on the part of the learner is more effective than passive listening or observing (McKeachie, 1963). That discussions can promote more active learning than lectures is supported by Bloom (1953) and his colleagues. Tape recordings of classroom activ- ities were played back to groups of college students who were asked to recall what their thoughts had been at the time. Discussion-class students reported more thoughts classified as relating to "self," "other persons," and "problem solving," and fewer thoughts classified as "irrel- evant" and "simple comprehension," than students in lecture classes reported. There were no significant differences between lecture and discussion for the thoughts classified as "evaluating and considering meaning" and "attempts to apply material." Krauskopf (1960) employed essentially the same approach in his study and obtained similar results. 43 McKeachie (1963) discusses the merits of discussion in providing feedback to the learner. If students are to achieve application, critical thinking or some other higher cognitive objective, it would seem that they should practice application and critical thinking and receive feedback on the results. Group discussion provides the opportunity to do this. He says that discussion permits "presentation of a variety of problems enabling a number of people to gain experience in integrating fact, formulating hypotheses, amassing relevant evidence, and evaluating conclusions. . . . students are encouraged to discover solutions for themselves " (p. 1133). It is known that feedback among or between students can lead to desirable changes in behavior in the same manner as feedback from the class instructor can lead to desirable changes in behavior (Jenkins, 1951). This implies that the structuring of classroom proceedings so that students receive the maximum amount of feedback is desirable. Following this thinking, Herbert Thelen (1949) has proposed that the number of students in a classroom group is of crucial importance in determining group progress. An implication of Thelen's proposal is that the student's "activeness of participation" is a very important factor in learning. He states: 44 If one accepts the postulate of an experimental point of view (that one learns by assessing the situation, planning strategy: carrying it out, and appraising the consequences of his actions . . . ), then we would submit that vicarious participation does not usually have these dimensions of self— initiation, self-direction and self-evaluation which characterize firsthand self-directive experience. The size of the group should be the smallest group in which it is possible to have represented at a functional level all socialization and achievement skills required for the particular learning activity at hand (pp. 139, 148). Phenomenologists believe that providing a non- threatening climate promotes expression of feelings and attitudes which is a step in behavioral change. Discussion could provide the climate for such expression. They further believe that most attitudes that change behavior are developed through interpersonal interactions and stablized, discarded, or modified through one's perception of the attitudes of his significant others. Discussion could promote change in attitudes permitting "significant other" relation to develop, both with other classmates and instructor. In light of the newer technologies now available and appearing over the horizon, Bush (1967) perceives the role of the teacher as becoming one of interrelating with the learner on an individual or small group basis. But, he states, "Much, if not most, of the current training of teachers is antithetical to effective teaching in small groups. . . . the teacher behaviors needed appear to be 45 almost exactly the opposite of most of what we are trying even with our experimental programs in teacher training at Stanford . . . " (pp. 248, 250). From his study of teach- ing in small groups at Stanford, he makes the following observations: 1. An important purpose of small groups is to open wide the channels of communication among its members, on an emotional and social as well as an intellectual level, between pupil and pupil as well as between teacher and pupil. 2. The learner behaviors to be fostered in the small group are: greater responsibility for his own learning; genuine involvement in listening, sharing ideas, probing, approving, arguing, and disagreeing; and active searching for an under— standing of himself so as to develop a positive self-concept. 3. The chief characteristic activity in the small group should be discussion--not reading, writing, lecturing, memorizing, or taking examinations. The structure of the learning experiences prOperly proceeds from the nature of the group and the problems and ideas that emerge from it. 4. The teacher behaviors to be developed are: a nonevaluative acceptance of all contributions; 46 sensitivity to the ideas, feelings, and actions of group members; and empathic acceptance of each individual. McKeachie (1963) concludes that, in general, there are no significant differences between discussion and lecture methods on cognitive gain, but that when there are significant differences in effectiveness between the two methods, the differences favoring discussion usually are on measures other than final examinations testing knowl- edge. Combs (1965) summarizes by saying, "Generally speaking, however, various forms of group discussion or individual interaction remain our most valuable means of inducing the exploration and discovery of meaning" (p. 66). The Importance of Independent Study in Student-Centered Teaching The role independent study can play in a phenomeno- logical approach in teaching is expressed by Cyphert (1966): To shift to the individual the responsibility of his continuing education has often been identified as the ultimate goal for American education. Learning is change in behavior and such change is necessarily personal. . . . Self-pacing, self-discovery, self- appropriation, and self-independence are all central to individual learning to learn. Understanding requires experiencing. . . . Independent study, therefore, . . . is the only learning approach which nurtures self-selection of the relevant, self- execution, and self-evaluation—-the student's perceptions must prevail if reality is to exist for him (p. 105). 47 McKeachie (1963) states that few differences have been found between achievement of students working inde- pendently and those taught in conventional classes, and that the expected gains in independence have often failed to materialize. He further states that independent study experiments have varied greatly in the amount of assistance given students and in patterning instructional versus independent periods. Most of the differences in achieve- ment have been in the amount of factual content learned from a particular book, an objective which is not usually the major one in independent study. Brownell (1966) asserts that much research in evaluation of learning under dissimilar systems of instruc- tion is biased in favor of the conventional instructional method due to the testing of outcomes. In describing one experimental study, as an example of this, he criticizes the use of conventional tests used to measure unconventional teaching and learning: . . . it seriously prejudiced the case against the more novel program. That is to say, it was devoted to the content and objectives of the conventional program, and it disregarded certain important con- tent and objectives peculiar to the more recent program. Hence, the achievement of the traditionally taught children was measured precisely with respect to what they had been taught. By contrast, the achievement of the children in the rival program was measured with respect only to what they had been taught ip common with their counterparts. They, therefore, had no chance to show what they had learned with regard to those aspects of the subject unique to their program of instruction (p. 268). 48 Capretta (1966) in his historical review of independent study from its origin in 1900 through 1965, alludes to the ambiguity of definition and essential elements and attributes of the concept: "The term 'inde- pendent study' includes tutorials, student-led seminars, colloquia, supervised and nonsupervised reading, library research, and laboratory and field investigations not necessarily related to any particular course" (p. 252). Bonthius, Davis, and Drushal (1957) state that independent study provides formal opportunity, apart from organized courses, for individual students to pursue scholarly projects under the guidance of faculty advisors. Alexander (1966) discusses the definition dilemma and concludes that independent study is really more a philosophy of learning and teaching than a single method or procedure. He perceives independent study as a learn- ing activity largely motivated by the learner's own aims to learn, and its rewards largely within its intrinsic value. In Cyphert's (1966) opinion, the lack of agreement on a definition or on essential attributes of the concept hampers investigation into and communication about inde- pendent study, which has resulted in a paucity of studies and studies of questionable design. That independent study can develop greater integra- tion, increased purposefulness, and more intense motivation 49 for further study has been demonstrated at the University of Colorado by Gruber and Weitman (1960) and at the Univer- sity of Michigan by McKeachie, Lin, Forrin, and Teevan (1960). Both of these studies involved a high degree of student-instructor contact. In a course in physical optics (Gruber and Weitman, 1960) groups of students who attended class independently of the instructor but were free to consult him were superior to students in conventional classes in difficult applica- tions and learning new material, but inferior in facts learned and simple applications. In a retest three months later, the former difference was maintained, while the latter difference disappeared (Weitman and Gruber, 1960). In a class in educational psychology (Gruber and Weitman, 1960) an independent study class meeting once a week with the instructor and twice a week in groups of five or six students without the instructor was equal to a conventional class hearing three lectures a week in mastery of content, but tended to be superior on measures of curiosity. In the study by McKeachie, Lin, Forrin, and Teevan (1960) students normally met with the instructor in small groups weekly or biweekly, but were free to consult the instructor whenever they wished. The results showed that the experimental students did not learn as much from the textbook as the students taught in conventional lecture and discussion classes, but they did develop stronger 50 motivation both for course work and for continued learning after the course, as was indicated by the responses on the questionnaire at the end of the semester and by the number of advanced psychology courses later elected. The paucity of positive results suggests that we need more research on arranging the independent study experience and in measuring the outcomes. Workshop Patterns and Attitude Change A question inherent in this study was whether the time element imposed by a two-week workshop pattern would be a delimiting factor in attitudinal change. It was a purpose of this study to determine the degree and direction of attitude change at the termination of the workshop experience. However, it was not a purpose to determine the degree of permanency through a longitudinal study. There is little research focusing upon attitude change in workshop patterns. However, the writer was able to find some research relevant to this question. That workshop patterns of teaching are effective in changing attitudes has been documented by Rogers (1961). In his nondirective approach to teaching psychology, he not only achieved attitudinal change through workshop patterns but favored them over the conventional patterns of college courses. 51 C103 (1966) also documents the effectiveness of the workshop design in changing attitudes. He conducted a study to determine the effect of a mental health workshop experience upon the teacher-learner relationship. Of the seven workshops involved, five extended over a three—week period for a three-hour day, five days a week, and two extended over a semester, meeting each Saturday, and for the same total amount of time. The workshops were on a graduate level, did not require examinations, but did require outside reading in the field of mental health. The MTAI was given as a pretest, posttest, and nine-month posttest. For all seven workshops, there was a significant positive attitude change beyond the .01 level of confidence. All but one group showed a significant positive attitude change beyond the .01 level of confidence between the pretest mean and the nine-month posttest mean. These findings demonstrated that teacher attitudes changed significantly in a positive direction through taking the workshop, and in general, the positive attitudes held up over a nine—month period. Shaw, op_§l. (1952) report similar significant positive attitudinal change as measured by the MTAI in a two-week guidance workshop. 52 Phenomenological Approaches in Teaching As pointed out in Chapter I, a number of writers perceive a need for a conceptual framework, or unifying theory upon which to base research in teacher education (Combs, 1965; Denemark and MacDonald, 1967; Goodlad, 1962; Howard, 1963; Smith, 1962; Wattenberg, 1963; Wiles, 1967). The review of literature in this chapter seems to reveal a lack of research based upon a relevant psycho- logical-philosophical framework evolving from social needs and purposes, and understandings about human behavior and learning. Thus, within student-centered teaching there is evidence of varying degrees of structure imposed by such techniques as lecture, teacher determined requirements, teacher selected materials and learning experiences, and competitive examinations and grades. Wallen and Travers (1963) state that in the past, teaching methods have lacked a conceptual framework, because it is only within the last few years that scien- tific knowledge in both ethics and the psychology of learning has reached a point which might provide a solid foundation needed for a rational construction of teaching methods. These authors suggest that most patterns of teaching behavior have derived: 53 1. from teaching traditions (teaching as he was taught); 2. from social learnings in the teacher's background (reinforcing middle-class values); 3. from philosophical traditions (Froebel or Rousseau tradition); 4. by the teacher's own needs (lecturing to satisfy a need for self-assertiveness); 5. by conditions existing in the school and community (demanding highly disciplined behavior because it is required by the principal); and 6. from scientific research on learning. It is the point of View underlying this study that phenomenological psychology does provide an appropriate base for the rational construction of a unifying theory of teaching--namely, a phenomenological approach in teach- ing in teacher education. There is a lack of experimental studies relating to a phenomenological approach in teaching in the litera- ture. There are a few descriptive studies and a number of philosophical discussions. Although the "self" concept came into psychological literature in the late nineteenth century, largely through William James, rising interest in the concept was not shown until the 1940's (Wylie, 1961). 54 one of the earliest references to a phenomenological approach "in teaching" appears to be in a paper by Rogers (1942), in which he tried to crystallize into a distinctive point of view some of the things he had learned through the psychotherapeutic treatment of clients. His nondirective counseling laid the groundwork for a new orientation toward teaching, which emphasized the integrity of the learner as the initiating agent responsible in every sense for his own destiny (Rogers, 1953). He stresses the centrality of the "helping relationship," speculating that through maximizing conditions of psychological safety and freedom, we maximize the likelihood of an emergence of constructive creativity and learning. He suggests that psychological safety may be established through a relationship in which (1) the indi- vidual is accepted as of unconditioned worth; (2) the individual is accepted without external judgment; and (3) the individual is understood empathically. This con— cept is supported by research which has investigated certain of its aspects (Baldwin, 1945; Betz and Whitehorn, 1956; Dittes, 1957; Fiedler, 1953; Seeman, 1954). As Rogers says: If I can provide a certain type of relationship, the other person will discover within himself the capacity to use that relationship for growth, and change and personal development will occur (1961] p. 33). Kellough (1968) points to a need for the utiliza- tion in the classroom of our understandings of the nature 55 of personal meanings and human behavior: "If perceptions become the focus, and the development of self-actualizing people our goal in education, then the student will learn those concepts that he feels are important to him" (p. 48). He recOmmends the technique of "situational case studies" to bridge the gap between theory and reality in teacher education and supervision. . . . teachers must be concerned with effective ways of helping others modify and improve their percep- tions. . . . A method has been developed that does help peOple relate well with others, that presents situational cases, . . . to challenge the thinking and feeling of those capable of identifying with some aspect of the situation depicted (p. 49). From a phenomenological point of view, the group is provided maximum opportunity to make choices and de- cisions; to define goals; to interact; to raise questions about anything; to explore the self-other relationship; to analyze and criticize; to contribute to and be involved in their own education; and to participate in self-evaluation. The importance of people rather than things is emphasized. Will (1967), in discussing the education of the teacher as a person, says that the development of the pro- spective teacher as a person is an essential responsibility of any teacher education program. If teacher education is to help prospective teachers develop responsibility for their own personal growth and the qualities that emerge from and lead to meaningful encounters with others, 56 experiences in this area must be provided. He calls for a shift in emphasis: . . . from a curriculum characterized by prescrip- tion to one characterized by self-discovery, from a curriculum characterized by reliance on external responsibility for growth to one characterized by personal responsibility for growth, and from a curriculum characterized by talking about ideas, values, and qualities to one characterized by the discovery and development of ideas, values, and qualities through personal involvement in real and open relationships and experiences. The teacher education program must become a genuine dialogue between the prospective teacher and the significant experiences and significant others he may encounter throughout the program (p. 474). Melby (1967), in his paper, "The Contagion of Liberal Education," submitted to the Symposium on Teaching Teachers to Provide Liberal Education, says: The all important challenge in the preparation of the teacher is to humanize him. . . . As teacher educators we must see both our students and our- selves as artists. This means that our success depends on what we individually become. . . . But essentially a university or college that is educa- ting teachers faces the task of creating a climate that humanizes both professors and students. . . . The teacher's first human quality is compassion. Compassion means involvement (p. 136). Ryan and Muro (1968) implemented a humanistic approach in teaching an educational psychology course. The student was viewed as being capable of decision making and concerned for his own educational growth. Formal lecture procedures were replaced with group methods designed to create a climate of acceptance, understanding, and respect for the student's views. The three objectives of the experiment were: 57 l. to involve students in the learning process through group interaction; 2. to present problems in learning as human situations which demand a sensitivity to other persons; and 3. to approach learning through utilization of situa- tional topics which would present problematic application of educational psychology in real cases. The class operated on a relatively unstructured basis. Student perceptions of educative problems were a focal point for class discussion. A key focus was to discuss and interact with ideas as they had personal meaning for the student. Hopefully, this provided the student with opportunity to discover that learning can occur when man is involved, interested, and committed to examining issues as they relate to his personal growth. After a postsession evaluation, Ryan and Muro concluded that this approach had promoted: l. greater understanding of human behavior, as verbalized by the students; 2. spontaneous group discussion and the development of group cohesiveness; 3. higher quality writing and topical selection of term papers, as compared to their fall instructor assigned term papers; and 4. numerous student initiated and developed practical research projects. 58 Moustakas' (1956) research is concerned with the "authentic self" in the "authentic teacher-learner rela— tionship." In an inservice teacher education program aimed at fostering teacher sensitivity and awareness to the personal factors in learning and teaching, he pursued the hypothesis that the most effective learning occurs in educational situations in which threat to the learner's self is minimal. To him, the desirable interpersonal relationship was one: . . . where there was freedom of expression within the limits of the classroom, where each person could state himself in terms of himself without fear of criticism or condemnation, where feelings were expressed and explored, where ideas and creative thinking were treasured, and where growth of self was the most important value (p. 259). In a report of this work, which is clinical, anecdotal, and observational rather than experimental, Moustakas narrated the ways in which the teachers he observed implemented the ideas of the authentic relation- ship. Through illustrations of significant interpersonal relations in the classroom, he indicated the kinds of teacher behavior that facilitated positive mental health, which he deemed necessary for significant learning and positive growth. In his study there were 92 elementary and second— ary school teachers from a variety of school systems, who met in small groups with other teachers, principals, and counselors, for a period of one year, to discuss their 59 experiences in the classroom and in the community. Each teacher was also enrolled in an extension course on inter- personal relations which met three hours a week over the academic year. Each school system had the services of a visiting teacher and a psychologist for consultation. Every teacher developed his own way to implement the "authentic relationship" approach in his teaching. But for a number of weeks prior to attempting their approaches, the teachers studied and discussed the theory and principles of individual psychology and creative teaching. They ex- plored problems in their interpersonal relations and became more sensitive and accepting of each other. Each teacher kept careful notes and/or made tape recordings over the year of the interpersonal relations within his classroom. They came to believe that children grow through creative, spontaneous experiences which have personal mean— ing and value. They provided opportunities and resources to make these experiences possible within the classroom. And their work showed movement in the direction of healthier, happier, and more authentic interpersonal interacting between the teacher and the child. Ten years later, Moustakas (1966) expanded his search into the sources of mental health within the individual, within the home, and within the school that contribute to the evolution of genuine selfhood and 60 authentic relatedness. The illustrations of the significant interpersonal relations in the classroom discussed in his original report cited above, and a few additional ones, were viewed from a new set of principles, concepts, and values, among which were freedom; choice and the capacity to choose; and responsibility. He found that "When authenticity and love are com- bined with freedom to make choices, and be responsible for them, real life emerges, and the teacher relates with children, whether in conflict or harmony, on a meaningful, human basis" (p. vii). Tenenbaum (1959) describes, from a participant's viewpoint, a four week course taught by Carl Rogers (Brandeis University) using a nondirective technique. It was characterized by being completely unstructured, with the students responsible for their own learning, including their own evaluations and grade. The instructor acted as faxzilitator and resource person and provided an atmosphere 0f acceptance and trust. Tenenbaum recalls that out of frtlstration and chaos, developed group cohesiveness. Of ‘Uris experience, Rogers (1961) states, "I would without (knzbt class it as among the most satisfying of my attempts t0 :Eacilitate learning in courses or workshops" (p. 298). Teneanbaum says of this common experience: Its importance , I believe, goes beyond the class- room and extends to every area where human beings communicate and try to live with one another. 61 . . . It seems to me this approach ought to be tried out in every area of learning-—elementary, high school, college, wherever human beings gather to learn and improve on the old (p. 307). Tenebaum (1961), in writing about his own teaching experience implementing a similar phenomenological approach in teaching a two week course in psychology, spoke of the release of the person; the exhilaration and excitement; the warmth, mystery, and personal closeness; the group cohe- siveness; and the radical and fundamental change in their person--in outlook, values, feelings, and attitudes toward themselves and toward others. The students' oral and written self-reports corroborated his observations. Moon (1966) describes his experience with imple- menting a phenomenological approach in teaching a course in beginning poetry in college. He felt that the students got a real enthusiasm and feel for the subject, and that some seemed to have been reached on the level of the authentic self, with its real needs and real responses. For him, he had come to believe the truest and deepest teaching to be one of the teacher's authentic response to the authentic self of the student, and the truest learn- ing to be that of the student's authentic response to the teacher's authentic self. In The Professional Education of Teachers: A ‘Egrceptual View of Teacher Preparation, Combs (1965) suggests a "self as instrument" approach in teacher 62 education based upon phenomenological psychology. His conceptual framework is discussed in Chapter I of this study, and defines the conceptual framework of this research. In general, research involving the implementing of a phenomenological approach in teaching in teacher educa- tion courses is not prevalent, which would seem to indicate a need for exploration in this area. Summary The purpose of Chapter II was to present a theo- retical rationale for, as well as literature related to, a phenomenological approach in teaching. Literature concern— ing the relationship of workshop organizational patterns and attitudinal change was also presented. The central themes of a phenomenological theory of human behavior that were discussed were the adequate personality, the phenomenal field, differentiation and behavioral change, man as a social being, motivation and strategies of becoming, restriction of the phenomenal field, intellectual behavior and affective behavior, and learning. Literature concerned with student-centered teaching approaches, discussion as a student-centered teaching technique, the importance of independent study 63 in student-centered teaching, and phenomenological approaches in teaching was presented. Although findings are conflicting, the literature seems to point to no significant difference in cognitive gain regardless of teaching method, technique, or patterns of organization. Student-centered teaching approaches, independent study, and discussion methods seem to support greater positive attitudinal gain when compared with more instructor-centered teaching procedures. The literature available concerning workshop organization patterns and attitude change seems to support significant positive attitudinal gain when attitude change is the educational objective. There is a lack of experimental studies utilizing a phenomenological approach in teaching. The experimental, descriptive, and philosophical research reviewed seems to emphasize the centrality of the "helping relationship" in teaching and the importance, therefore, of the teacher's attitude toward the student and toward the student-teacher relationship, when the objective is to facilitate the development of a fully functioning person. CHAPTER III RESEARCH PROCEDURES AND SOURCES OF DATA Identification of the Population The experimental subjects were 69 students enrolled in a two-week workshop in modern mathematics at Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant, Michigan, during August, 1968. Of the original 69 students, 7 did not complete one or both of the posttests, leaving 62 included in the final data. The control subjects were 33 students enrolled in a concurrent two-week workshop in modern mathematics at Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. Of the original 33 students, 1 did not complete the posttest, thereby leaving an N of 32. The tables on the following page summarize perti- nent data for both groups, as derived from the Personal Data Sheets. Consideration of the data in Tables 3.1 and 3.2 lead to the following general conclusions regarding the experimental and control groups: 64 65 w mm we «H av ma ma m HOHuGOU m on om am an ma Hm ma Hmucmsflummxm ammo» mummy m w m t w w msouw mocmwummxm mud mco nm>o mco mcoz mmmusoo cum: msow>mum mocmwuomxm maesommu mo mumm» same can .mmm some .pmpmameoo mmmusoo moaumenme msofl>mnm mo HmQEsz .N.m mamme m H mm Hm m H km Hm Hm mm as 6 Houucoo mm mm ma om ms om mm mm we 54 am ma Hmuamsflumaxm w x m A m A w A w x w * macaw Umocmfiuwmxm uoz cmucmflummxm mumscmumumccs mDMSpmuw mHmEmm mam: mocmwnmmxm can .Hm>wa mmmaaoo .xmm an muomeSm mo cowumfluommo .H.m mamas 66 l. The experimental N was about twice that of the control N. This factor is discussed further under Identification of the Personnel. 2. The experimental group contained about half graduates and undergraduates, whereas, the con- trol group consisted of 97% graduate students. 3. About half of the experimental group were experi- enced teachers as compared to 97% in the control group. 4. The mean age and mean number of years of teaching experience were higher for the control group. 5. The sex ratios were about equal for both the experimental and control groups. 6. The number of previous mathematics courses com- pleted was approximately the same for both the experimental and control groups. The variance between the experimental and control groups resulted from the method used in selecting the populations. The study was concerned with analyzing the effectiveness of a phenomenological approach in teaching a course in teacher education. Factors influencing the selection of the experimental and control groups were: the availability of qualified instructors who were willing to cooperate with the requirements of the study; and, the availability of concurrent courses, in a common subject 67 area, of equal duration, and carrying equal credit. Homogeniety of the experimental and control groups by ran- domization was not a delimiting requirement, since lack of similarity between the two groups could be eliminated statistically by the analysis of covariance. Therefore, intact class groups were selected. Identification of the Personnel The instructors of both the experimental and the control groups were associate professors in elementary education, with experience in conducting educational re- search and in teaching workshops in modern mathematics. The nature of the experimental approach required that the instructor have a commitment to a phenomenological view of human learning and behavior. The participation of the researcher as an assistant to the instructor in the experi- mental group maintained an equivalent student-teacher ratio. Instrumentation and Data Collection Four instruments were used in this study: 1. Personal Data Sheet 2. Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory, Form A (MTAI) 3. Test on Modern Mathematics, Form A (TMM) 4. Open-Ended Questionnaire The Personal Data Sheet was completed by each class member of both the experimental and control groups at the 68 beginning of the first day of the workshop. The MTAI and the TMM were given to both groups as pre- and posttests. The Open-Ended Questionnaire was a posttest only for both groups. Copies of each instrument are found in the Appendices. The Personal Data Sheet A Personal Data Sheet obtained data with respect to selected demographic factors from all members of both the experimental and control groups. The Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory A phenomenological approach in teaching is a learner-centered approach which emphasizes the learner's "becoming." It is, therefore, concerned with the learner's affective as well as cognitive growth. One of the purposes of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a phenomenological approach in teach- ing in effecting attitudinal change in the learner. In Gage's (1963) Handbook of Research on Teaching, Stern classifies the results of 34 studies (for the period 1943-57) designed explicitly to measure the differences between student- and teacher-centered instruction in their effect on either the acquisition of information, changes in attitude, or both. Nineteen studies showed a positive attitudinal gain and fifteen studies showed no attitudinal 69 gain. Stern concluded that the results of studies involving attitudinal change generally have indicated that nondirective instruction facilitates a shift toward more acceptance of self and others. The writer attempted to develop an instrument to measure a person's attitude toward the learner and the student-teacher relationship. It was felt that one of the more important results of implementing a phenomenological approach in teaching would be a change in the learner's attitudes about human behavior and learning. The predicted and desirable direction of attitude change would be toward a more humanistic- or person-centered rather than an instructor- or subject-centered point of view. After considerable effort to construct an original instrument to measure such attitudinal change, it became apparent to the writer that the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory was an appropriate as well as a reliable and validated instrument for this purpose. In the manual, the authors discuss the experimental background of the inven- tory, and they state that the reliability of the instrument (Spearman—Brown split-half procedure) is .89. The test has a validity coefficient of .60. Both reliability and validity appear to be acceptable (Cook, Leeds, and Callis, 1951). The MTAI is an instrument designed to determine the extent to which a teacher holds those attitudes which make 70 for a warm, permissive classroom atmosphere. The authors assume that the higher the score of an individual, the greater the probability that he will conduct a democratic classroom. They state: . . . a teacher ranking at the high end of the scale should be able to maintain a state of harmo- nious relations with his pupils characterized by mutual affection and sympathetic understanding. . . . The teacher and pupils should work together in a social atmosphere of cooperative endeavor, of intense interest in the work of the day, and with a feeling of security growing from a permissive atmosphere of freedom to think, act and speak one's mind with mutual respect for the feelings, rights and abilities of others. . . . Group solidarity resulting from common goals, common understandings, common efforts, common difficulties, and common achievements should characterize the class. . . . The teacher tends to think in terms of . . . what the pupil needs, feels, knows, and can do (Cook, Leeds, and Callis, 1951, p. 3). Stern (1963) states that the most extensive research on teacher attitudes has involved the differences between teacher- and pupil-centered orientations to teach- ing, and that the MTAI is an instrument devised to measure these dimensions. In reviewing the instrument, Cronbach (1953) states of the MTAI, "The authors wisely seek to predict a particular aspect of the teaching job, success in establishing rapport with children, rather than a nebulous global criterion. . . . There is a clear corre- spondence between inventory scores and teaching behavior at the time the test is given" (p. 798). Cook and Medley (1955) studied the relationship between the MTAI and the K scale of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. 71 Since an elevated K score was designed to represent a generalized "set" to mark items in a socially acceptable way more often than the average person does, the finding that teachers scoring high on the MTAI tend to have ex- tremely high K scores, while those scoring low tend to have K scores near the mean of normal adults, led the investigators to argue that no matter what the reason for this high relationship, "There can be no question of the validity of the MTAI which was developed and evaluated by strictly empirical methods" (p. 516). Since a phenomenological approach in teaching is a learner-centered approach, the MTAI should measure a per— son's propensity for a phenomenological approach in teaching. A search of the literature reveals that the MTAI has been used extensively in attitudinal studies (Beamer and Ledbetter, 1957; Campbell, 1967; Clos, 1966; Horn and Morrison, 1965; Jean and Deignan, 1968; Ofchus and Gnagey, 1963; Teigland, 1966; Wilk and Cook, 1963).1 The Test on Modern Mathematics Critics of student-centered instruction often claim that the amount of cognitive gain is less than in 1For further discussion of the MTAI and studies using it, the reader is referred to Gage's Handbook of Research on Teaching, 1963. 72 instructor-centered teaching. Of the 34 studies cited by Stern (1963) earlier in this chapter, 27 showed no differ- ence in cognitive gain, 5 showed a negative cognitive gain for the nondirective instruction, and 2 a positive cogni- tive gain for the nondirective instruction. However, Stern criticized the methodology of the latter 7 studies, and concludes that the amount of cognitive gain is largely unaffected by the autocratic or democratic tendencies of the instructor. In light of the conflicting findings concerning the effect of student-centered teaching on cognitive gain, one of the purposes of this study was to measure the learner's academic achievement, as measured by an objective test. A search of the literature reveals a paucity of published tests on modern mathematics content for teachers and no standardized tests. Permission was granted by the authors to use the Test on Modern Mathematics by Riedesel and Suydam (1967). The authors of the test describe its 50 items as being divided into three classifications: knowledge (30%), understanding (32%), and application (38%). A reliability of .82 (Kuder-Richardson, Formula 20) was reported (p. 28). This test was used as the pretest and posttest for the mathematics content. 73 Open-Ended Questionnaire Both groups were asked to complete a four—item Open-Ended Questionnaire at the end of the workshop, con- sisting of the following: 1. Compare your attitude about modern math po!_with your attitude about it at the beginning of the workshop. 2. What influence, it any, will this workshop have on your teaching? 3. In light of your personal goals, do you feel that you learned enough "math content" in the workshop? Please explain. 4. Please add any other comments you wish to make. To facilitate validity of responses to the question- naire items, anonymity was assured. Answers to these open-ended items should give 'illssight into the kinds of experiences afforded by the work— 311<3p as perceived by the participants. Treatment of Subjects Each workshop met for a period of 2 weeks, 5 days E1 \neek, for a minimum of 3 hours each day. The workshops met concurrently on two separate campuses, were conducted ‘WY’ qualified, competent instructors (see Identification of the Personnel in this chapter), and carried equal credit. BOth groups had access to an instructional materials center 74 and a university library. The two texts used in the control group were recommended in the experimental group as being books with which the students might like to be- come involved. This research followed the Nonrandomized Control- group Pretest-Posttest Design as described by Van Dalen (1966). The MTAI (Form A) and the TMM (Form A) were used These two instruments and for both pre- and posttests. the Personal Data Sheet were administered to both groups To minimize distortion ciuring the first class session. (3f attitudes, the MTAI was administered prior to the TMM and the students were not told that a content test was to be administered. Since having to complete a subject matter Content test could heighten the anxiety level of some respondents, it was felt that this precaution would lessen The Open-Ended Questionnaire, the MTAI, contamination . (811:1 the TMM posttests were administered to both groups ‘3‘1lring the tenth class session, and in that order. To minimize the reactive effect of experimental pr‘C>cedures, neither the experimental nor the control group was informed at any time that they were a part of a re— Search experiment, or that posttests would be administered. Data were gathered for both groups by the instructors as a nCDJ‘L‘mal part of the instructional program. The instructors ‘mfluphasized that the testing would not be used for judg- To further control internal mental or marking purposes. 75 validity of the design, the control group instructor was not informed of the experimental treatment. The conditions common to both groups as described in this section further minimized the effect of extraneous variables. It was not necessary to provide for makeup pre- and posttest data collection, since only data collected under the controlled conditions as described herein were included in the final data analysis. Treatment of the Control Group Information concerning the control group instruc— tLion was obtained through interviews with the control group irlstructor and through a description of the workshop ac- 1:imrities as written by him. His outline was developed ‘tllzrough student-teacher planning and is reproduced here: Elementary Mathematics Workshop--Control Group M. Onday: A Balanced Mathematics Curriculum; Providing for Individual Differences SEVleesday: Behavioral Objectives for Elementary Mathematics ‘Efiaélnesday: Identifying and Classifying Teaching Strategies Eflhllrsday: Evaluation Friday: Verbal Problem-Solving Monday: Tuesday: 76 Computer Assisted Instruction Research in Elementary Mathematics Education Wednesday: Instructional Materials; Structured Materials Thursday: Textbook Selection; Materials Selection; Friday: Geometry in the Elementary Mathematics Program Probability and Statistics Three films on teaching and one film on computer assisted instruction were used. The following two textbooks were used: Today's Mathematics, A Guide to Concepts and Methods .in.Elementary School Mathematics, James W. Heddens (1964). (Suiding Discovery in Elementary School Mathematics, C. Alan Riedesel (1968) . The following is a summary of the salient features (Di? the instructional procedures of the control group, as described by the instructor through personal interviews: 1. Total group lecture-discussion, instructor initiated and led. Class discussion centered around the topical areas of the day, assigned readings, and the special concerns and interests of the class members concerning certain aspects of modern mathematics. Instructor and instructor-total group determined goals, objectives, and requirements. Topics to be studied by the group were determined through instructor-total group planning. 77 3. Instructor and instructor-total groupgselection of learning procedures and materials. The texts and films were selected by the instructor. Individuals developed a project (teaching aid) of their own choosing. 4. Instructor evaluation of the learner's growth and instructor determined and assigned grade. No final examination was administered. 5. Emphasis upon total group-instructor learner interaction. The instructor was available for small group and/or individual student interaction if requested. Treatment of the Experimental Group The phenomenological approach in teaching which cOmprised the experimental treatment in this study was a Conceptual framework based upon phenomenological psychology. Its basic organizing principles were (1) providing informa- tion, (2) providing for involvement, and (3) providing for IPGixsonal exploration and discovery. Its operational prin— ciples were: (1) permit the movement of students at (ii.fferent speeds, (2) provide content and experience in zrfiasponse to student needs, (3) provide simultaneous, rather 'tllan sequential, experiences for the learner, and (4) place ‘nuach more responsibility upon the student himself. 78 This approach was implemented in the experimental group through eight teaching strategies which were evolved from the conceptual framework and are described in the following paragraphs: 1. Small group and/or independent study. Each work- shop member affiliated with a small group formed around a common area of interest and/or he worked independently. Grouping, regrouping, and interest areas were determined by the learner-—as an individual, or as a small group decision. Self-determined goals, objectives, and require- moppo. Each workshop member developed his own objectives and determined his own requirements for his learning, changing both as his learning demanded. Self-evaluation and self-determined- and assigned grod_. Each workshop member evaluated his own needs and goals, and his personal growth in light of these needs and goals. To aid the student in his awareing, and to aid the instructors in pro- viding meaningful feedback, each workshop member wrote two self-evaluations, collected on the fifth and tenth days. Their self-determined- and assigned grade was submitted to and honored by the instructors prior to the posttesting. 79 Self-selection of learning procedures and materials. The structure of the learning experi- ences proceeded from the nature of the small groups and the problems and ideas that emerged from them, or from the goals, needs, and interests of the individual. Although no common textbook was re— quired, Today's Mathematics, James Heddens (1964), and Guiding Discovery in Elementary School Mathe- matics, C. Alan Riedesel (1968), were suggested. Self-paced learnipg. Workshop members self-paced their learning, determining the quality and quantity of content to be learned and when and where to learn it. Attendance of daily class sessions was optional for each student. Instructor-learner interaction on an individual and/or small group basis. These interactions were instructor and/or learner initiated, in an informal or office setting, as determined by the learner. Coffee conferences were encouraged. Instructors' roles that of facilitators and resource persons. The instructors' behaviors were those of nonevaluative acceptance of all student contributions, sensitivity to the ideas, feelings, and actions of the individual and the group, and empathic acceptance of each individual. These 80 behaviors plus the beliefs that significant learning must be self-discovered and self— appropriated, and faith in the learner to be responsible for his own learning, set the tone for the learning atmosphere of the experimental workshop experience. The instructors provided reprints, journals, books, and research materials to supplement other resources. 8. Student initiated and led discussion. The emphasis was upon small group student initiated and led discussion. The instructors participated upon invitation. Through student-instructor planning, opportunity for large group discussion for those who wished to participate was provided. The instructors did not lecture. Procedures for Treatment of Data Subjective data yielded by the final Open-Ended <311£astionnaire were individually analyzed, then categorized 35(3): each of the two groups as follows: Item One: Compare your attitude about modern mathematics pop with your attitude about it at the beginning of the workshop. 81 Categories of answers for this item were: 1. attitude toward modern mathematics remained constant 2. attitude toward modern mathematics became more favorable 3. attitude toward modern mathematics became less favorable The percentages of responses for each of the above categories in the experimental group were compared to those of the control group. Item Two: What influence, if any, will this work- shop have upon your teaching? Categories of answers for this question were: 1. no influence 2. student-centered change 3. subject-centered change The percentages of responses for each of the above ‘3Ei1tegories in the experimental group were compared to those 0.5 the control group. Item Three: In light of your personal goals, do you feel that you learned enough "mathematics content" in the work- shop? Please explain. Responses to this question were dichotomized into: 1. did learn enough mathematics content 2. did not learn enough mathematics content 82 Percentages of responses for each group were recorded and compared. Item Four: Please add any other comments you wish to make. The responses to this item were considered. They were reproduced and are included in Appendix E of this study. The TMM and the MTAI were given as pretest and posttest to both groups. Reliability of the test-retest mean scores for each group were compared and the mathe- matics test yielded a correlation coefficient of .78, while the reliability measure for the MTAI was .66. Both levels appear to be satisfactory for further statistical comparison by analysis of covariance. Tables 3.1 and 3.2 of this chapter reveal group variance between the two populations. Thus, to be able to compare the mean test scores of the experimental and con- trol groups, a statistical procedure which nullifies group variance was required. Analysis of covariance seemed to be the most appropriate statistical treatment for this purpose. Van Dalen and Meyer (1966) state: Because of the difficulties that arise when matching procedures are employed, educators are grateful for the development of procedures that enable them to control variation in the experi- mental and control groups through an analysis of covariance. This statistical tool enables 83 an E to adjust the T2 mean scores to compensate for a lack of original equivalency between groups that is discovered when T1 is given or arises during the experiment (p. 259). Thus, an analysis of covariance was used to deter- mine at the .01 level of confidence the significance of the difference between the adjusted posttest means of the two groups with respect to their scores on the mathematics test and attitude inventory. Pearson product—moment correlations were calculated for relationships between the MTAI pretest scores and the TMM gain scores for both the experimental and control groups. The MTAI pretest means and the TMM gain score means for the graduate and undergraduate subgroups in the experimental group were compared. A scatterplot was made of the control group MTAI pretest scores and their TMM gain scores to determine the possibility of a nonlinear rela— tionship between the two sets of data. TMM ranges of scores for the experimental and control groups were com— pared. Summary Procedures utilized in the development of this study are presented in this chapter. A description of the instruments used and the methods of data analysis are also included. CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA This chapter presents a statistical analysis of the scores on the two objective instruments, the MTAI and the TMM, for the experimental and. control groups, and an analysis of the subjective responses to the four items on the Open-Ended Questionnaire which was given to both groups as a "posttest." A summary of the analysis'of data col- lected for the study concludes the chapter. Statistical Analysis of the Relationships An analysis of covariance was used to determine, at the .01 level of confidence with 1,90 df, the signifi- cance of the difference between the adjusted posttest means Of the experimental and control groups with respect to their scores on the MTAI and the TMM. An MTAI test- 1'-‘etest reliability coefficient of .66 and a test-retest reliability coefficient of .78 on the TMM established Satisfactory linear relationship beyond the .01 level of Confidence. Therefore, the analysis of covariance was an appropriate statistic to use. 84 85 Data pertinent to the experimental and control groups are summarized in Tables 4.1 and 4.2. TABLE 4.1. MTAI mean and gain scores for the experimental and control groups Pretest Postte§t *Average X Group N X Adj . X Gain Experimental 62 46.23 78.4 30.84 Control 32 53.34 54.3 8.9 *Based upon raw pretest and posttest scores. TABLE 4.2. TMM means and gain scores for the experimental and control groups Pretest Posttegt *Average X Group N X Adj. X Gain ExPerimental 62 21.24 29.51 6.89 Control 32 26.59 27.53 4.47 R *Based upon raw pretest and posttest scores. The comparison of the experimental group and the c301'1trol group was made to test the following null hypoth- eses that no significant differences existed between the t“vopopulations on the stated criteria. Hypothesis I. Ho There is no difference between the experimental group and the control group in attitudes as measured by the MTAI. 86 The effects of the teaching approach on attitudes toward the student and toward the student-teacher relation- ship were measured by the MTAI posttest adjusted means for ‘tlme experimental and control groups. An analysis of co— variance of the posttest difference between the adjusted means of the two groups showed significance at greater than 'tlae .01 level of confidence. The null hypothesis of no difference was rejected. The data of this analysis are presented in Table 4 .3. CPIKBLE 4.3. Analysis of covariance of the MTAI posttest difference between adjusted means for the experimental and control groups ‘ Group N A.M. D.F. M.S. F ExPerimental 62 78.4 1,90 12388.28 34.50* COntrol 32 54.3 *p > .0005. Hypothesis II. H There is no difference between the experimental group and the control group in modern mathe- matics achievement as measured by the TMM. The effects of the teaching approach on the mathe- matics achievement were measured by the TMM posttest af this analysis are presented in Table 4.4. CDJ¥BLE 4.4. Analysis of covariance of the TMM posttest difference between adjusted means for the experimental and control groups Group N A.M. D.F. M.S. F Experimental 62 29.51 1,90 78.15 2.47* Control 32 27.53 *p > .120. Hypothesis III. HO There is no relationship between the pretest MTAI scores and the gain scores in mathematics for the ex- perimental group. Hypothesis IV. HO There is no relationship between the pretest MTAI scores and the gain scores in mathematics for the con- trol group. The relationship between the attitudes of teachers toward the learner and the student-teacher relationship 88 prior to the workshop experience, and the mathematics gain during the workshop experience, was determined by the MTAI pretest scores and the TMM gain scores for the experimental and control groups. The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient between the MTAI pretest scores and the TMM gain scores showed significance greater than the .05 level of confi- dence for the experimental group, but did not show signifi- cance at the .05 level of confidence for the control group. An r = i.211 or better (60 df) and an r = i.296 or better (30 df) was needed to establish significance at the .05 level of confidence for the experimental and control groups, respectively. 'Therefore, the null hypothesis of no relationship was rejected for the experimental group and was not rejected for the control group. The data of these analyses are presented in Table 4.5. TABLE 4.5. The relationship of the MTAI pretest scores and the TMM gain scores Group N df r Experimental 62 60 .248* Control 32 30 .079** *p > .05. **p < .05. The MTAI pretest scores and the TMM gain scores fom'the graduate and undergraduate subgroups of the 89 experimental group were compared to determine if the subgroups differed from each other and, thus, from the total experimental group in the relationship between these two sets of data. The MTAI pretest means and the TMM gain score means for these two subgroups did not differ. There- fore, it was concluded that the relationship between the MTAI pretest scores and the TMM gain scores for the graduate and undergraduate subgroups of the experimental group was the same as that existing between these two sets of data in the total experimental group. A scatterplot of the MTAI pretest scores and the TMM gain scores for the control group did not suggest a nonlinear relationship between the two sets of data. Test on Modern Mathematics Range of Scores The range of scores on the TMM posttest was greater for the experimental group than for the control group, whereas the range of scores on the TMM pretest was greater for the control group. These data are presented in Table 4.6. TABLE 4.6. Range of TMM scores _ Pretest Pretest Posttest Posttest Group Limits Range Limits Range ¥ Experimental 7-41 34 11-49 38 Control 8-46 38 18-47 29 90 Analysis of Open-Ended Questionnaire Responses Since phenomenological psychology postulates that all behavior is a function of the individual's unique perceptual field, it would seem that the way to examine the meaningfulness, to the individual, of the experiences permitted in a workshop would be through analysis of the expressed perceptions of the learner. Therefore, the individual responses to the first three items in the Open- Ended Questionnaire were analyzed, then categorized and summarized for each of the two groups. Responses to item four were considered and included in Appendix E of this study. Item One: Compare your attitude about modern mathematics go! With your attitude about it at the beginning of the workshop. The responses to this item were classified accord- ing to the degree of change in attitude expressed toward modern mathematics as defined by the following three categories: a. attitude toward mathematics remained constant b. attitude toward mathematics became more favorable c. attitude toward mathematics became less favorable 91 The percentage of responses in each category for the experimental and control groups is presented in Table 4.7. TABLE 4.7. Attitude change toward modern mathematics Remained More Less Constant Favorable Favorable Group % % % Experimental 31 69 0 Control 56 44 0 Item Two: What influence, if any, will this workshop have on your teaching? The responses to this question were classified according to the degree to which they expressed their intent to become more student centered, as defined by the following three categories: a. no influence b. student-centered change c. subject-centered change The percentage of responses in each category for the experimental and control groups is presented in Table 4.8. 92 TABLE 4.8. Influence on teaching Student- Subject- None Centered Centered Group % % % Experimental 2 84 14 Control 3 3 94 Item Three: In light of your personal goals, do you feel that you learned enough "math content" in the workshop? Please explain. The responses to this question were dichotomized into the following categories: a. did learn enough mathematics b. did pop learn enough mathematics The percentage of responses in each category for the experimental and control groups is presented in Table 4.9. TABLE 4.9. Satisfaction with amount of mathematics learned Did Learn Enough Did Not Learn Enough Mathematics Mathematics Group % % Experimental 95 5 Control 97 3 ‘ 93 Item Four: Please add any other comments you wish to make. This item was included to allow the workshop members to express anything which was not elicited by the first three items. Therefore, many did not respond to this item. The responses for both the experimental and the control groups were reproduced and are included in Appendix E. Summar This chapter has presented an analysis of the data derived from the previous chapters of the study. Signifi- cant and nonsignificant findings will be discussed further in Chapter V. Chapter V will also include a summary and conclusions for this study. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS In this final chapter a summary of the study will be presented. Conclusions derived from the analysis of the data obtained in the study will be presented and dis- cussed. Recommendations for further research and implica- tions for teacher education conclude the chapter. Summary of the Study This experimental study was designed to analyze the effectiveness of a phenomenological approach in teach- ing a teacher education course (specifically a two-week modern mathematics workshop) through an investigation of the following: 1. the learner's attitudes toward the student, and the student-teacher relationship, as measured by the MTAI; 2. the learner's academic achievement, as measured by the TMM; and 3. the learner's perceptions of the following, as measured by the Open-Ended Questionnaire: 94 95 (a) his change in attitude about modern mathematics, (b) his intent to change his teaching behavior, (c) his satisfaction with the amount of mathematics content learned, and (d) his general reactions to the workshop experience. Two further purposes which arose during the course of the study were to analyze: l. the relationship between the attitudes of the teachers at the beginning of the workshop experi- ence, as measured by the MTAI pretest, and the cognitive gain at the termination of the workshop experience, as measured by the TMM gain scores; and 2. the range of scores on the TMM pre- and posttests. This research followed the Nonrandomized Control- group Pretest-Posttest Design as described by Van Dalen (1966). The experimental group consisted of 69 students enrolled in a two-week modern mathematics workshop at Central Michigan University during August, 1968. Data were analyzed on 62 students. About half of the population were experienced graduates, and about half inexperienced undergraduates. The control group consisted of 33 students enrolled in a concurrent two-week modern mathematics workshop at Michigan State University. Data were analyzed on 96 32 students. Thirty-one were experienced graduates and l was an inexperienced undergraduate. The instructors of both the experimental and the control groups were associate professors in elementary education. The researcher participated in the study as an assistant to the instructor of the experimental group, thereby maintaining a teacher-student ratio of 1:35 in the experimental group, as compared to the 1:33 ratio in the control group. The experimental treatment was the implementation of a phenomenological approach in teaching. A Personal Data Sheet was completed by each class member of both the experimental and control groups. Per- centages of pertinent data for both groups were computed. The MTAI and the TMM were given to both groups as pre— and posttests. A four-item Open-Ended Questionnaire was a posttest only for both groups. Copies of these instruments are in the Appendices. Analysis of covariance was used to compare the adjusted posttest means of the experimental and the control groups on both the MTAI and the TMM. Pearson product- moment correlations were calculated for the analysis of the relationship between the MTAI pretest scores and the TMM gain scores for both groups. The MTAI pretest means and the TMM gain score means for the graduate and 97 undergraduate subgroups in the experimental group were compared. A scatterplot was made of the control group MTAI pretest scores and TMM gain scores to determine the possibility of a nonlinear relationship between the two sets of data. Ranges of scores on the TMM pre- and post- tests for both groups were compared. Percentages of responses to the first three items on the Open-Ended Questionnaire were computed by categories for both groups. Responses to item four were considered and reproduced and are included in Appendix E of this study. Conclusions and Discussion Conclusions Hypothesis I, the null hypothesis of no difference between the experimental group and the control group in attitude as measured by the MTAI was rejected in favor of the experimental group. An analysis of covariance of the posttest difference between the adjusted means of the two groups showed significance at greater than the .01 level of confidence (.0005). Hypothesis II, the null hypothesis of no difference between the experimental group and the control group in modern mathematics, as measured by the TMM was not rejected. An analysis of covariance of the posttest difference between the adjusted means of the two groups showed no significance at the .01 level of confidence. 98 Hypothesis III, the null hypothesis of no relationship between the pretest MTAI scores and the TMM gain scores for the experimental group was rejected. The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (r = .248) showed significance greater than the .05 level of confi- dence. Hypothesis IV, the null hypothesis of no relation- ship between the pretest MTAI scores and the TMM gain scores for the control group was not rejected. The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (r = .079) was not significant at the .05 level of confidence. A scatterplot did not indicate a non-linear relationship between the two sets of data. The relationship between the MTAI pretest scores and the TMM gain scores for the graduate and undergraduate subgroups in the experimental group was the same as that for the total experimental group. Comparison of the MTAI pretest means and the TMM gain score means for the sub- groups did not indicate a difference. The TMM range of scores on the pretest was greater for the control group than for the experimental group. The TMM range of scores on the posttest was greater for the experimental group than for the control group. The attitudes of some teachers about modern mathe- matics did change subsequent to the workshop experience. Forty-four percent of the control group and 69% of the 99 experimental group expressed more positive attitudes in response to item one of the Open-Ended Questionnaire. The remaining students expressed no change in attitudes. The intent to change teaching behavior in a more student-centered direction as a result of the workshop experience was expressed by 84% of the experimental group and by 3% of the control group, in response to item two of the Open-Ended Questionnaire. Only 2% of the experi- mental group and 3% of the control group expressed no intent to change. Nearly all (95% and 97% of the experimental and control groups, respectively) of the participants in both workshOps claimed that in light of their personal goals, they had learned enough mathematics content, in response to item three of the Open-Ended Questionnaire. The members of both the experimental and the control groups seemed to have favorable attitudes toward the workshop experience, as expressed in response to item four of the Open-Ended Questionnaire. The attitudes of the experimental group seemed to be more student centered than those of the control group. Discussion These conclusions are interpreted within the frame- work of phenomenological psychology. To set this context, the assumptions basic to this study are restated here. 100 It is assumed that the development of a fully functioning person should be the goal of education. It is assumed that all behavior is a function of the total perceptual field at the moment of action; therefore, to effect change in behavior, percep- tions must be changed. It is assumed that each person is continually motivated by the need for greater effectiveness in relating with his world. It is assumed that intellectual and affective behavior cannot be separated. It is assumed that what a teacher believes about his students will have an important effect upon how he behaves toward them. It is assumed that the attitudes of a teacher afford a key to the indication of the type of classroom atmosphere a teacher will maintain. It is assumed that attitudes, as measured by the MTAI, are valid indicators of a teacher's openness to learner-centered teaching, and, therefore, to a phenomenological approach in teaching. It is assumed that a teacher with a high positive score on the MTAI will be favorable toward learner- centered teaching and will be Open to a phenomeno- logical approach in teaching. 101 9. It is assumed that the self-reports of teachers are valid representations of their true feelings and belief systems, within the delimitations of any self-report (Combs, 1962; Combs and Snygg, 1959). 10. It is assumed that the Objective measures used in this study, namely, the MTAI and the TMM, are valid instruments within the delimitations as stated in Assumption Nine. 11. It is assumed that the analysis of covariance and the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients are appropriate statistical treatments for this experimental—exploratory study. The students in the experimental group scored significantly higher on the MTAI than did the control group students. The level of confidence (.0005) at which Hypothesis I was significant strongly indicates this result is not due to chance. As stated earlier in the study, Cronbach (1953) purports a clear correspondence between the teacher's scores on the MTAI and the teaching behavior at the time Of the inventory. In view of this and the basic assumptions underlying this study, it seems highly probable that the phenomenological approach in teaching strongly influenced the type Of student-teacher .relations, and, therefore, the kind of classroom atmosphere 'teachers think they should or will maintain. 102 This conclusion is supported further by the responses to items two and four Of the Open—Ended Question- naire. Eighty-four percent of the experimental group as against 3% of the control group expressed an intent to change teaching behavior in a more student-centered direc- tion. The responses to item four seemed much more student- centered for the experimental group than those of the control group (see Appendix E). This conclusion supports those of Stern (1963) and McKeachie (1963), as reported in Chapter II. Although there was no difference at the .01 level of confidence between the experimental and control groups in mathematics achievement, the experimental group did attain an adjusted mean score on the posttest of nearly two points higher than that of the control group, which was significant at the .120 level of confidence. Responses to items one, three and four on the Open-Ended Questionnaire support further the conclusion that the academic achievement was satisfactory for the individuals within both groups. It seems, therefore, that the phenomenological approach in teaching implemented in this study was as effective as the control approach in facilitating academic achievement, as measured by the TMM. This conclusion supports those of Stern (1963), McKeachie (1963), and Dodes (1953), as reported in Chapter II. 103 During the course of the study, speculation about these conclusions just discussed led the researcher to hypothesize as to other kinds of relationships which might exist. Is there a difference in the TMM range of scores for the control and experimental groups? It would seem that in the experimental atmosphere, where the individual was responsible for his own learning (self-determined goals, requirements, procedures, and grade), individual differences in quantity and quality of subject matter learned would be accentuated, and would be reflected in a wider range of scores on the TMM posttest. Conversely, it would seem that in the control atmosphere, where content to be learned is more instructor prescribed, individual differences in quantity and quality of subject matter learned would be restricted, as reflected in a narrower range of TMM post- test scores. This hypothesizing was supported by the data. Is there a relationship between the attitudes of the teachers at the beginning of the workshop, as measured by the MTAI pretest, and the cognitive gain, as measured by the TMM gain scores? Did students with high MTAI pretest scores (student-centered) have more cognitive gain than students with low MTAI pretest scores (instructor-centered) in the experimental environment? Did student-centered astudents tend to resist the control environment and have arverage cognitive gain, or did they extend effort beyond 104 that required and have high cognitive gain? Did the instructor-centered student have high cognitive gain in the control group, where content requirements were more prescribed? These kinds of questions led to Hypotheses III and IV. Conclusions bearing on these hypotheses show that a relationship (r = .248), significant at the .05 level of confidence, did exist between the MTAI pretest scores and the TMM gain scores for the experimental group, but that no relationship existed between these sets of data for the control group. The.relationship between the MTAI pretest scores and the TMM gain scores for the graduate and under- graduate subgroups in the experimental group, as determined by a comparison of the MTAI pretest means and the TMM gain score means for the subgroups, revealed the same relation- ship between the two sets of data as for the experimental group as a whole. A scatterplot of the two sets of data for the control group did not suggest a non-linear correla- tion between them. What variable, or composite of variables, intrinsic to a phenomenological approach in teaching might explain the conclusions bearing on Hypotheses III? Are there personality variables within the learner which could be isolated through research as having a significant relation- ship with certain variables of a phenomenological approach? 105 Further research is needed to explore this problem more fully. In View of the basic assumptions underlying this study, and the findings Of this study, it seems that a phenomenological approach in teaching is relevant to the kinds of emphases deemed important in the professional preparation of the teacher. This conclusion gives direc- tion to the recommendations and implications which follow. Recommendations for Further Research Since a phenomenological approach in teaching seems to provide for educational goals in terms broad enough to include the self-concept while simultaneously achieving high academic standards, the study should be replicated, implementing any one of the following changes: 1. Provide for random equivalence. 2. Vary the time factor, from a one-day workshop up to three periods of class a week, for a full term or longer. 3. Have the population consist of graduates or under- graduates, exclusively. 4. Have a population consisting Of a faculty group for inservice education. 5. Apply to courses of varying subject matter content. 6. Have a population consisting of para-professionals. 106 7. Eliminate the collection of data by Objective measures. Obtain data with subjective measures, such as student self-reports or student-instructor conferences. Observe individual, rather than normative data. A long term follow through of the students involved in the study would be desirable in order to ascertain the following: 1. the delayed and/or superficial effects of a phenomenological approach in teaching; 2. the persistence of the attitudinal gain and the cognitive gain; and 3. the percentage and persistence of the students in the study who put into practice a phenomenological approach in teaching in their own classroom. There was a significant, positive, direct relation- ship between the learner's attitudes toward the student and the student-teacher relationship at the beginning of the experimental workshop, and his cognitive gain. Research is needed to determine the independent variables existent within a phenomenological approach in teaching which cause this relationship. The relationship between specific personality variables, such as high and low dependency proneness, and attitude and/or cognitive change should be explored within 107 a study implementing a phenomenological approach in teaching. The continuous increase in the school-age popula— tion creates the problem of increased class size. The possibility of creating a student-centered atmosphere regardless Of class size should be studied. The effects that a phenomenological approach in teaching has upon the total culture of the college should be ascertained: 1. Do students taught by a phenomenological approach in teaching rather than another make more use of their knowledge and skills in other courses? 2. How does the implementation of a phenomenological approach in teaching affect faculty-administration relationships? 3. How does the implementation of a phenomenological approach in teaching change faculty perceptions of teaching and its value? Research implementing a phenomenological approach in teaching and based upon the following questions needs to be pursued: 1. Do differing evaluative and grading practices facilitate or block learning? 2. How do students learn to evaluate themselves? 3. How do students learn to set goals for themselves? 108 Implications for Teacher Education Before an individual's behavior can be understood, one must have a framework for interpreting behavior. Teacher education courses should assist its students in the development of a clear and consistent frame of refer- ence about people and their behavior to serve as a guide in relating with them. That phenomenological psychology should form such a framework is postulated in this study. From a phenomenological point of view, the funda— mental goal of education is the development of a fully functioning person. Therefore, emphasis is upon the promotion of both affective and cognitive growth. A phenomenological approach in teaching was effec- tive in facilitating both cognitive and attitudinal gain with both undergraduates and graduates in this study. It seems, therefore, that a phenomenological approach could be implemented at all levels of a teacher's professional preparation, both graduate and undergraduate, if the phenomenological view of behavior is the frame of reference. The apparent success of a phenomenological approach in teaching in a two-week workshop suggests that inservice education would benefit from the implementation of this kind of teaching approach. The discussion of the experimental treatment in Chapter III, and the general observations of the students 109 as expressed in their responses to item four of the Open-Ended Questionnaire, may suggest to future innovators various possibilities for replicating or modifying the activities implementing a phenomenological approach in teaching. In conclusion, this researcher feels that there is a need for further research in the implementation of a phenomenological approach in teaching in teacher education. Such research may be of value both in measuring the effec- tiveness Of different instructional designs, and in pro- viding clues for implementing change in the professional preparation of teachers. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Allport, G. W. Becoming: Basic considerations for a psychology of personality. New Haven, Connecti- cut: Yale University Press, 1955. Angyal, A. Foundations for a science of personality. New York: Commonwealth Fund,il94l. Bonthius, R. H., Davis, F. J., & Drushal, J. G. The independent study program in the United States. New York: Columbia University Press, 1957. Carpenter, F. & Haddan, E. Systematic application of psychology to education. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1964. Combs, A. W. The professional education of teachers. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1965. Combs, A. W. & Snygg, D. Individual behavior, a perceptual approach to behavior. New York: Harper & Row, 1959. Edwards, A. L. Techniques of attitude scale construction. New York: Appieton-Century-Crofts, 1957. Fiedler, F. E. "Quantitative studies on the role Of therapists feelings toward their patients." In 0. H. Mowrer (Ed.), Psychotherapy: theory and research. New York: Ronald Press, 1953? Fromm, E. The sane society. Greenwich, Connecticut: Fawcett Publications, 1955. Gage, N. L. (Ed.) Handbook of research on teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963. 110 111 Hamachek, D. E. The self in growth, teaching, and learuing: A book of readings. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1965. Havighurst, R. J. Human development and_oducation. New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1955. Hebb, D. O. The organization of behavior. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1949. Heddens, J. W. Todays mathematics, a guide to concepts and methods in elementary school mathematics. Chicago: Science Research Associates, 1964. Hunt, J. McV. Intelligence and experience. New York: Ronald Press Company, 1961. Jersild, A. T. In search of self. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia Univer- sity, 1952. Jersild, A. T. When teachers face themselves. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1955. Jersild, A. T., Helfant, K., & associates. Education for self-understanding. New York: Bureau of Publica- tiOns, Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1953. Kelley, E. C. Education for what is real. New York: Harper & Bros., 1947. Kelley, E. C. The workshop way of learning. New York: Harper & Bros., 1951. Kelley, G. A. The psychology of personal constructs. 2 volumes. New York: Norton, 1955. Kilpatrick, W. H. Philosophy of education. New York: Macmillan, 1951. Lecky, P. Self-consistency: A theory of personality, New York: Island Press, 1945. Lewin, K. Field theory in social science (Ed. by D. Cartwrighti? New York: Harper, 1951. Maslow, A. H. Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Bros., 1954. 112 Maslow, A. H. "Existential psychology--what's in it for us?" In Rollo May (Ed.), Existential psychology. New York: Random House, Inc., 1961. Maslow, A. H. Toward a psychology of being. New York: D. VanNostrand, 1962. iai May, R. (Ed.) Existential Psychology. New York: Random House, 1960. McKeachie, W. J. "Research on teaching at the college and university level." In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963. Mead, G. H. Mind, self and society. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1934. Mort, P. & Cornell, F. American schools in transition. New York: Bureau Of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1941. Moustakas, C. E. The self: Explorations in personal growth. New York: Harper, 1956. Moustakas, C. E. The authentic teacher. Sensitivity and awareness in the classroom. Cambridge, Massachu- setts: Howard A. Doyle Publishing, 1966. Pribram, K. H. "Neocortical function in behavior." In Harlow, H. F. & Woolsey, C. (Eds.), Biological and biochemical bases of behavior. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1958. Riedesel, C. A. Guiding discovery in elementary school mathematics. New York: Appleton-Century, 1968. Rogers, C. R. Client-centered therapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1951. Rogers, C. R. Counseling and psychotherapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1942. Rogers, C. R. On becoming a person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1961. Rogers, C. R. "Some directions and end points in therapy. In 0. H. Mowrer (Ed.), Psychotherapy: theory and research. New York: Ronald Press, 1953. 113 Seeman, J. "Counselor judgments of therapeutic process and outcome." In Rogers, C. R. & Dymond, R. F. (Eds.), Psychotherapy_and personality change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1954? Smith, E. R. (Ed.) Teacher education: A reappraisal. New York: Harper & Row, 1962. Stern, G. G. "Measuring noncognitive variables in research on teaching." In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963. Tenenbaum, S. "A personal teaching experience." In Rogers, C. R., On becoming a person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1961. Van Dalen, D. B. & Meyer, W. Understanding educational research. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966. Wallen, N. E. & Travers, R. M. W. "Analysis and investiga- tion of teaching methods." In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963. Wylie, R. The self-concept. Lincoln Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1961. Periodicals Alexander, W. M. & Hines, V. A. "The nature of independent study in secondary schools." Theory Into Practice, 1966, 5, 213-16. Anderson, R. C. "Learning in discussion: A resume Of the authoritarian-democratic studies." Harvard Educa- tional Review, 1959, 29, 201-15. Asch, N. J. "Nondirected teaching in psychology: An experimental study." Psychological Monographs, 1951, 65, NO. 4 (Whole No. 321). Baldwin, A. L., Kalhorn, J., & Breese, F. H. "Patterns of parent behavior." Psychological Monographs, 1945, 58’ NO. 268’ 1-75. Beamer, G. C. & Ledbetter, E. W. "The relation between teacher attitudes and the social service interest." Journal of Educational Research, 1957, 50, 655-66. 114 Bills, R. E. "Investigation of student-centered teaching." Journal of Educational Research, 1952, 46, 313—39. Birney, R. & McKeachie, W. "The teaching of psychology: A survey of research since 1942." Psychological Bloom, B. S. "Thought processes in lectures and discus- sions." Journal of General Education, 1953, 7, 160-69. Bovard, E. W., Jr. "Group structure and perception." Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 1951, 46, Bovard, E. W., Jr. "The experimental production of inter- personal affect." Journal of Abnormal Social Brownell, W. A. "The evaluation of learning under dis- similar systems Of instruction." The Arithmetic Teacher, 1966, 13, 267-74. Bush, R. "Redefining the role of the teacher." Theory Into Practice, 1967, 6, 246-52. Campbell, D. E. "Dimensional attitude changes of student teachers." Journal of Educational Research, 1967, 61, 160-62. Capretta, P. J. "The student on his own power." Improving College and University Teaching, 1966, 14, 252-56. Cartwright, W. H. "Improving the preparation Of teachers: One staff member's interpretation of the Conant report." Educational Forum, 1964, 28, 187-97. Clos, M. "Evaluation of mental health workshops in Kentucky." Journal of Educational Research, Combs, A. W. "Phenomenological concepts in non-directive therapy." Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1948, 12, 197-208. Cook, W. W. & Medley, D. M. "The relationship between Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory scores and scores on certain scales Of the Minnesota Multi- phasic Personality Inventory." Journal of Applied Psychology, 1955, 39, 123-29. 115 Cyphert, F. R. "Independent study: The dilemma." Theory Into Practice, 1966, 5, 205-08. Davies, D. "A search for relevancy." Theory Into Practice, 1967, 6, 215-19. Denemark, G. W. & MacDonald, J. B. "Preservice and in- service education Of teachers." Review of Educa- tional Research, 1967, 37, 233-59. Dittes, J. E. "Galvanic skin response as a measure of patients reaction to therapist's permissiveness." Journal of Abnormal and Social PsychologY, 1957, 55, 295-303. Dodes, I. A. "The science of teaching mathematics," Mathematics Teacher, 1953, 46, 157-166. Faw, V. "A psychotherapeutic method of teaching psychol- ogy." American Psychologist, 1949, 4, 104-09. Gibb, L. M. & Gibb, J. R. "The effects of the use of 'participative action' groups in a course in general psychology." American Psychologist, 1952, 7, 247. Goodlad, J. I. "Next steps in cooperation in teacher education: By whom and for what?" Educational Hamilton, G. V. "A study of perseverance reactions in primates and rodents." Behavior Monograph, 1916, 3, l3. Horn, J. L. & Morrison, W. L. "Dimensions of teacher attitudes." Journal of Educational Psychology, 1965, 56, 118-25. Howard, E. Z. "Needed: A conceptual scheme for teacher education." School Review, 1963, 71, 12-26. Jean, G. L. & Deignan, F. J. "Do teachers need more preparation in psychology?" Journal of Teacher Education, 1968, 19, 53-7. Jenkins, D. H. "Interdependence in the classroom." Journal of Educational Research, 1951, 45, 137-144. 116 Jersild, A. T. "Self-understanding in childhood and adolescence." American Psychologist, 1951, 6, Kellough, R. D. "Perceptions and self-actualization: A goal for education and a theory for teacher train- ing." Science Education, 1968, 52, 47-55. Koerner, J. D. "Findings and prejudices in teacher educa- tion." School and Society, 1964, 92, 127-34. Lafferty, J. C. "Values that defeat learning." National Association of Secondary School Principals McKeachie, W. J. "Anxiety in the college classroom." Journal of Educational Research, 1951, 45, 153-60. McKeachie, W. J. "Student-centered versus instructor- centered instruction." Journal of Educational Psychology, 1954, 45, 143-50. McKeachie, W. J. "Students, groups, and teaching methods." American Psychologist, 1958, 13, 580. McKeachie, W. J. "The improvement of instruction." Review of Educational Research, 1960, 30, 351-60. McKeachie, W. J., Lin, Y. G., Forrin, F., & Teevan, R. "Individualized teaching in elementary psychology." Journal of Educational Psychology, 1960, 51, 285-91. Melby, E. O. "The contagion of liberal education." Journal of Teacher Education, 1967, 18, 134-37. Moon, S. "Teaching the self." Improving College and Universitereaching, 1966, 14, 213-19. Ofchus, L. T. & Gnagey, W. J. "Factors related to the shift of professional attitudes of students in teacher education." Journal of Educational Psychology, 1963, 54, 149-53. Riedesel, C. A. & Suydam, M. N. "Computer assisted instruction: Implications for teacher education." The Arithmetic Teacher, 1967, 14, 24-9. Rogers, C. R. & Skinner, B. F. "Some issues concerning the control of human behavior." Science, 1956, 124, 3231, 1057-1066. 117 Rossi, P., Yengo, C., & Boyd, W. "A comparison of methodology on the fakability of the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory." Journal of Educa- tiOnal Research, 1966, 59, 475-78. Ryan, C. W. & Muro, J. J. "A humanistic approach in teaching educational psychology." The Clearing Shaw, J., Klausmeier, H. S., Luker, A. H., & Reid, H. T. "Changes occurring in teacher-pupil attitudes during a two-weeks guidance workshOp." Journal of Applied Psychology, 1952, 36, 304-06. Smith, M. B. "The need for a phenomenological approach in personality theory: Some critical remarks." Journal of Abnormal and Social PSYChOlOgXI 1950, 45, 516-22. Snygg, D. "The need for a phenomenological system of psychology." Psychological Review, 1941, 48, 404-24. Snygg, D. & Combs, A. W. "The phenomenological approach and the problem of 'unconscious' behavior: A reply to Dr. Smith." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1950, 45, 523-28. Teigland, J. J. "The relationship between measured teacher attitude change and certain personality charac- teristics." Journal of Educational Research, 1966, 60’ 84-50 Tenenbaum, S. "Carl Rogers and non-directive teaching." Educational Leadership, 1959, 16, 5, 296-302. Tenenbaum, S. "Implications of a phenomenological approach to education." Educational Theory, 1967, 17, 343-52. Thelen, H. "Group dynamics in instruction: Principle of least group size." School Review, 1949, 57, 139-48. Wattenberg, W. W. "Evidence and the problems of teacher education." Teachers College Record, 1963, 64, 374-80. Wiles, K. "The teacher education we need." Theory_Into PraCtice, 1967' 6' 260-65. 118 Will, R. Y. "The education of the teacher as a person." Journal of Teacher Education, 1967, 18, 471-75. Wispe, L. G. "Evaluating section teaching methods in the introductory course." Journal of Educational Research, 1951, 45, 161-86. Wispe, L. G. "Teaching methods research." The American Miscellaneous Betz, B. J. & Whitehorn, J. C. "The relationship of the therapist to the outcome of therapy in schizophre- nia." Psychiatric research reports #5. Research techniques in schizophrenia. Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association, 1956. Cook, W. W., Leeds, C. H., & Callis, R. Minnesota teacher attitude inventory. New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1951. Cook, W. W., Leeds, C. H., & Callis, R. Minnesota teacher attitude inventory, manual. New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1951. Edelfelt, R. A. The teacher and his staff: Working paper no. 2. Washington, D.C.: National Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards, National Education Association, 1968. Gruber, H. E. & Weitman, M. "Cognitive processes in higher education: Curiosity and critical thinking." Paper read at Western Psychological Association, San Jose, California, April, 1960. Krauskopf, C. J. "The use of written responses in the stimulated recall method." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 1960. (Dissertation Abstracts, 1960, 21, 1953) Useem, J. "American society as a high civilization: Implications for educators." Changes in Teacher Education. Report of the Eighteenth National Teacher Education and Professional Standards Conference, Ohio State University, June, 1963. 119 Weitman, M. & Gruber, H. E. "Experiments in self- instructed study: Effects on immediate achieve- ment, performance of achievement, and educational values." Paper read at Western Psychological Association, San Jose, California, April, 1960. Wilhelms, F. T., Beatty, W. H., Clark, R. A., & Ysulot, B. L. "Teacher education and mental health." Monograph, San Francisco State College, 1963. Wilk, R. E. & Cook, W. W. A study of factors operative in the selective retention of students in teacher education, part I. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Cooperative Research Project No. 174. Minneapolis: College of Education, University of Minnesota, 1963. Yearbooks (Zlark, R. A. & Beatty, W. H. "Learning and evaluation." Evaluation as feedback and guide. Washington, D.C.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, National Education Association. 1967 (Yearbook) Combs, A. W. "A perceptual view of the adequate person- ality." Perceiving behaving becoming, a new focus for education. Washington, D.C.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, National Education Association. 1962 (Yearbook) Cronbach, L. J. "Minnesota teacher attitude inventory." In 0. K. Buros (Ed.), The fourth mental measure- ments yearbook, Highland Park, New Jersey: Gryphon Press, 1953. FEtrnswarth, P. R. & McNemar, Q. (Eds.) Annual Review of Psychology] Vol. 11. Palo Alto, California: Annual Reviews, 1960. Farnswarth, P. R. & McNemar, Q. (Eds.) Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 12. Palo Alto, California: Annual Reviews, 1961. Farnswarth, P. R. & McNemar, Q. (Eds.) Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 13. Palo Alto, California: Annual Reviews, 1962. 120 Kelley, E. C. "The fully functioning self." Perceiving behaving becoming, a new focus on education. Washington, D.C.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, National Education Association. 1962 (Yearbook) Maslow, A. H. "Some basic propositions of a growth and self-actualization psychology." Perceiving behaving becoming, a new focus for education. Washington, D.C.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, National Education Association. 1962 (Yearbook) (b) Pribram, K. H. "A review of theory in physiological psychology." Annual Review of Psychology: Vol. 11. Palo Alto, California: Annual Reviews, 1960. IRogers, C. R. "Toward becoming a fully functioning person.’ Perceiving behaving becoming, a new focus for education. Washington, D.C.: Association for SupervisiOn and Curriculum Development, National Education Association. 1962 (Yearbook) PVilhelms, F. T. "Evaluation as feedback and guide." Evaluation as feedback and guide. Washington, D.C.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, National Education Association. 1967 (Yearbook) APPENDICES APPENDIX A PERSONAL DATA SHEET (a) (b) (C) (<3) (63) (f) APPENDIX A PERSONAL DATA SHEET Name: Sex: (1) Age: (1) (2) (3) (4) Male Under 25 25 - 29 30 - 34 35 - 39 College education: (2) Female (5) 40 - 44 (6) 45 - 49 (7) 50 - 54 (8) Over 54 (1) Under 2 yrs (5) 4.1 - 4.9 yrs (2) 2 - 2.9 yrs (6) 5.0 yrs (3) 3 - 3.9 yrs (7) 5.1 - 5.9 yrs (4) 4.0 yrs (8) 6.0 or over Undergraduate Graduate Academic major(s): Academic minor(s): Previous math course(s) completed: Name PTerm Credits Grade Name Term Credits Grade Name #iTerm Credits Grade 121 122 (9) Number of years teaching experience: (1) 1 year (5) 5 - 9 years (2) 2 years (6) 10 - 14 years (3) 3 years (7) 15 - 19 years (4) 4 years (8) 20 or more (h) Number of years experience teaching math by grade level: years grade years grade years grade years grade (i) If elementary teacher, please list grade(s) you teach: (j) Approximate class size: (k) If secondary teacher, please complete the following: Subject Grade Level . Class Size Subject Grade Level Class Size (3») Number teachers in your whole school system: (1) Under 21" (2) 21 or more (In) Organizational pattern of your school: (1) Self contained grades (2) Departmentalized grades (3) Combination of l & 2 (4) Nongraded (It) Please state your reason(s) for taking this workshop: APPENDIX B MINNESOTA TEACHER ATTITUDE INVENTORY (FORM A) APPENDIX B DO NOT OPEN UNTIL TOLD TO DO SO MINNESOTA TEACHER ATTITUDE INVENTORY Form A WALTER W. COOK CARROLL H. LEEDS ROBERT CALLIS University of Minnesota Furman University University of Missouri DIRECTIONS This inventory consists of 150 statements designed to sample Opinions about teacher-pupil relations. There is considerable disagreement as to what these relations should be; therefore, there are no right or wrong answers. What is wanted is your own individual feeling about the statements. Read each statement and decide how YOU feel about it. Then mark your answer on the space provided on the answer sheet. Do not make any marks on this booklet. SA A U D 50 If you strongly agree, blacken space under "SA" ...................................................... I .. .. .. .. SA A U 0 SD If you agree, blacken space under "A" ............................................. ' ................. . ............ i 5 I SA A U 0 SD If you are undecided or uncertain, blacken space under "U” .................................... .. .. I SA A U D SD If you disagree, blacken space under "D” .................................................................... .. .. I: I SA A U D SD If you strongly disagree, blacken space under ”SD" ...................................... , ............ 35 3; I Think in terms of the general situation rather than specific ones. There is no time limit, but work as rapidly as you can. PLEASE RESPOND TO EVERY ITEM. Copyright 1951. All rights reserved. The Psychological Corporation 304 East 45th Street New York 17, N. Y. Printed in U.S.A. Sl~161 TB L...“ WWmfinnxfir-vmym u 'IE‘EL I : I a ‘ ' .__ ,. SA—Strongly agree U—Undecided D—Disagree A—Agree or uncertain SD—Strongly disagree 1. Most children are obedient. 2. Pupils who “act sma ” probably have too high an opinion of themselves. 3. Minor disciplinary situations should sometimes be turned into jokes. 4. Shyness is preferable to boldness. 5. Teaching never gets monotonous. 8. Most pupils don’t appreciate what a teacher does for them. 7. If the teacher laughs with the pupils in amus- ing classroom situations, the class tends to get out of control. 8. A child’s companionships can be too carefully supervised. 8. A child should be encouraged to keep his likes and dislikes to himself. 10. It sometimes does a child good to be criticized in the presence of other pupils. 11. Unquestioning obedience in a child is not desirable. 12. Pupils should be required to do more studying at home. 13. The first lesson a child needs to learn is to obey the teacher without hesitation. 14. Young people are difficult to understand these days. 15. There is too great an emphasis upon “keeping order” in the classroom. 16. 17. 18. 19. 21. 22. 25. 28. 27. 28. 30. A pupil’s failure is seldom the fault of the teacher. There are times when a teacher cannot be blamed for losing patience with a pupil. A teacher should never discuss sex problems with the pupils. Pupils have it too easy in the modern school. A teacher should not be expected to burden himself with a pupil’s problems. Pupils expect too much help from the teacher in getting their lessons. A teacher should not be expected to sacrifice an evening of recreation in order to visit a child’s home. Most pupils do not make an adequate effort to prepare their lessons. Too many children nowadays are allowed to have their own way. Children’s wants are just as important as those of an adult. The teacher is usually to blame when pupils fail to follow directions. A child should be taught to obey an adult without question. The boastful child is usually over-confident of his ability. Children have a natural tendency to be unruly. A teacher cannot place much faith in the state- ments of pupils. GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE SA—Stron g1 y agree A—Agree U—Undecided or uncertain D—Disagree SD—Strongly disagree. 31. 32. 33. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 41. 42. 45. Some children ask too many questions. A pupil should not be required to stand when reciting. The teacher should not be expected to man- age a child if the latter’s parents are unable to do so. A teacher should never acknowledge his ig- norance of a tOpic in the presence of his pupils. Discipline in the modern school is not as strict as it should be. Most pupils lack productive imagination. Standards of work should vary with the pupil. The majority of children take their responsi- bilities seriously. To maintain good discipline in the classroom a teacher needs to be “hard-boiled." Success is more motivating than failure. Imaginative tales demand the same punish- ment as lying. Every pupil in the sixth grade should have sixth grade reading ability. A good motivating device is the critical com- parison of a pupil’s work with that of other pupils. It is better for a child to be bashful than to be “boy or girl crazy.” Course grades should never be lowered as punishment. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. More “old-fashioned whippings” are needed today. The child must learn that “teacher knows best.” Increased freedom in the classroom creates confusion. A teacher should not be expected to be sym- pathetic toward truants. Teachers should exercise more authority over their pupils than they do. Discipline problems are the teacher’s greatest worry. The low achiever probably is not working hard enough and applying himself. There is too much emphasis on grading. Most children lack common courtesy toward adults. Aggressive children are the greatest problems. At times it is necessary that the whole class suffer when the teacher is unable to identify the culprit. Many teachers are not severe enough in their dealings with pupils. Children “should be seen and not heard.” A teacher should always have at least a few failures. It is easier to correct discipline problems than it is to prevent them. GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE SA—Strongly agree A—Agree U—Undecided or uncertain D—Disagree SD—Strongly disagree 61. 62. 63. 65. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. Children are usually too sociable in the class- room. Most pupils are resourceful when left on their own. Too much nonsense goes on in many class- rooms these days. The school is often to blame in cases of truancy. Children are too carefree. Pupils who fail to prepare their lessons daily should be kept after school to make this prep- aration. Pupils who are foreigners usually make the teacher’s task more unpleasant. Most children would like to use good English. Assigning additional school work is often an effective means of punishment. Dishonesty as found in cheating is probably one of the most serious of moral offenses. Children should be allowed more freedom in their execution of learning activities. Pupils must learn to respect teachers if for no other reason than that they are teachers. Children need not always understand the rea-' sons for social conduct. Pupils usually are not qualified to select their own topics for themes and reports. N 0 child should rebel against authority. 76. 77. 78. 79. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. There is too much leniency today in the hand- ling of children. Difficult disciplinary problems are seldom the fault of the teacher. The whims and impulsive desires of children are usually worthy of attention. Children usually have a hard time following instructions. Children nowadays are allowed too much free- dom in school. All children should start to read by the age of seven. Universal promotion of pupils lowers achieve- ment standards. Children are unable to reason adequately. A teacher should not tolerate use of slang expressions by his pupils. The child who misbehaves should be made to feel guilty and ashamed of himself. If a child wants to speak or to leave his seat during the class period, he should always get permission from the teacher. Pupils should not respect teachers anymore than any other adults. Throwing of chalk and erasers should always demand severe punishment. Teachers who are liked best probably have a better understanding of their pupils. Most pupils try to make things easier for the teacher. GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE SA—Strongly agree A—Agree U—Undecided or uncertain D—Disagree SD—Strongly disagree 91. 92. 97. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. Most teachers do not give sufiicient explana- tion in their teaching. There are too many activities lacking in acad- emic respectability that are being introduced into the curriculum of the modern school. Children should be given more freedom in the classroom than they usually get. \ Most pupils are unnecessarily thoughtless rel- ative to the teacher’s wishes. Children should not expect talking privileges when adults wish to speak. Pupils are usually slow to “catch on” to new material. Teachers are responsible for knowing the home conditions of every one of their pupils. Pupils can be very boring at times. Children have no business asking questions about sex. Children must be told exactly what to do and how to do it. Most pupils are considerate of their teachers. Whispering should not be tolerated. Shy pupils especially should be required to stand when reciting. Teachers should consider problems of con- duct more seriously than they do. A teacher should never leave the class to its own management. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. A teacher should not be expected to do more work than he is paid for. There is nothing that can be more irritating than some pupils. “Lack of application” is probably one of the most frequent causes for failure. Young peOple nowadays are too frivolous. As a rule teachers are too lenient with their pupils. Slow pupils certainly try one’s patience. Grading is of value because of the competition element. Pupils like to annoy the teacher. Children usually will not think for themselves. Classroom rules and regulations must be con- sidered inviolable. Most pupils have too easy a time of it and do not learn to do real work. Children are so likeable that their shortcom- ings can usually be overlooked. A pupil found writing obscene notes should be severely punished. A teacher seldom finds children really enjoy- able. There is usually one best way to do school work which all pupils should follow. GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE SA—Strongly agree A—Agree U—Undecided or uncertain D—Disagree SD—Strongly disagree 121. 122. 123. It isn’t practicable to base school work upon children’s interests. It is difficult to understand why some chil- dren want to come to school so early in the morning before opening time. Children that cannot meet the school stand- . ards should be dropped. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. Children are usually too inquisitive. It is sometimes necessary to break promises made to children. Children today are given too much freedom. One should be able to get along with almost any child. Children are not mature enough to make their own decisions. A child who bites his nails needs to be shamed. Children will think for themselves if permit- ted. There is no excuse for the extreme sensitivity of some children. Children just cannot be trusted. Children should be given reasons for the re- strictions placed upon them. Most pupils are not interested in learning. It is usually the uninteresting and difficult subjects that will do the pupil the most good. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. A pupil should always be fully aware of what is expected of him. There is too much intermingling of the sexes in extra-curricular activities. The child who stutters should be given the opportunity to recite oftener. The teacher should disregard the complaints of the child who constantly talks about imag- inary illnesses. Teachers probably over-emphasize the ser- iousness of such pupil behavior as the writing of obscene notes. Teachers should not expect pupils to like them. Children act more civilized than do many adults. Aggressive children require the most atten- tion. Teachers can be in the wrong as well as pupils. Young people today are just as good as those of the past generation. Keeping discipline is not the problem that many teachers claim it to be. A pupil has the right to disagree openly with his teachers. Most pupil misbehavior is done to annoy the teacher. One should not expect pupils to enjoy school. In pupil appraisal effort should not be dis- tinguished from scholarship. s .S ...... S ...... S s S S S .S S ,,,,, S ..... S S S 5.. S ..... S S ..... S s S ...... S S ..... “......” D ELK D D ..... D D D D D D 0 ..HP. 0 ..... D D D D ......HH 0 ..... D ..... D D D ..... D D ..... D ..... D ..... D ..... D 33.. D ..... D 3.3.. 0 ”RH UH” U UH” U ..... U ..... U 33.. U HRH U ..... U TAU U U 3...... U ...... U ...... U ..... U ..... U U“ U ..... U ”....H U H3” U ..... U ...... U ..... U ..... U ..... U ..... U ......H U ...... U “HE U Hf... U HE“ A “1......” A A A A A A A A A ..... A A A A ..... A” A.-: A ..... A A..H.... A ..... A ..... A A A A A ..... A ..... A A ..... ..... A A A A A... A. A A A A A A A A.. A... A A... A.-... A A.... A A;.. A A A A.-; A....- A A ..... S 5 5 S 5 5. 5 5 5 S S S 5 5 S S S 5 5 S 5 S. S 5 5 S S 5 5 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 O l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 O l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 9. on 9a a; on 9; 0; 04 9; do so so so do no so so so so A4 A4 A4 A4 A4 A4 A4 A4 A4 A4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1- 1 1| 1 1 1 1| 1 1 1 1 1 1 1a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ..... D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D. D D D D D D D D D D D D D S 5 ..... S S S S 5 S 5 S S 5 5 5 S S 5 5 ..... 5 S 5 5 S ..... 5 .. S S 5 ..... S S . ..... D ...... D ..... D D ...... D D D D D D D D D D D. D D D D D D ...... D D ..... D D D ..... D .23.; D LR. D ...HV. ”NU U ..H... U U U ..... U U U U U U U U U ..... U ..... U . U M ..... U U U ..... U 3H,. U U U ..HH U ..R! U ..... U HUT. U ..H....... U Hun U .32 A HM“ A ...... A ..... A A A A A A A A A ..... A A ..... A . A A ...... A A A HUM A ..... A A ..... A 33.. A A 3.1..“ A ..... A ...... A ...... A ..... A ..... A A A ...... A A A A.. A A ..... A ..... A. A ..... A A ..... A A A..; A ...... A A A ..... A..: A ...... A ..... A A A ..... S ..... 5 . 5 S S. 5 S S S 5 S .. .5 5. 5 S S 5 S S S S 5 S ..... 5. 5 S 5 5 5 1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 O l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 O l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 O 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 O 0 O O O O O O O O l l. l l .l 1| l l l l 2 1| 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ..... D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D. D D D D D D D D D D D D ..... 5 5. 5 5 5 S 5 S 5 5 5 5 5. S 5..... S 5 5 5 S 5 5 S 5.... S..- 5. 5.1.5.1251: HUM D Eu“ O NH“ 0 “UV. 0 ..... D ..... D ..... D ..... D “......“ D ..... D H“... D ..... D ..... D D 3.5” D D ..... D ..... D ...... D ...... D ..... D ..... D ..... D ”3..“ D “HE O “NH D “HT. D 32” D Hun D EH“ ..Hn U ..... U ..... U 1.9.3 U ....H.. U U U U ..... U U U U U U ..... U. U U ..... U U ..HH U ...... U U ..... U ..... U ..... U ..... U U ..... U HRH U ..... . .... A 11% A ...... A U“? A ..... A A A A ..... A A A A 3.3.. A A ...... A A A .. A A A ..... A A ...... A31.H A ..... A A ..... A ..... A UP; A SH” ..... A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A ..... S 5 5. 5 S. :5 5 .. .. 5 S 5 S 5 S 5 S S ... 5..... 5. 5 5 5 5.... S. 5..... 51.25:..- 5.... 5.... 5 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1.. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 O l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 D ..... D D D ..... D O D D D D D D D D ..... D D D D ..... D ...... D ..... D D D D ..... O ..... D ..... D ..... D ..... D ..... ..... 5 5 S 5 5 S S 5 5 5 S 5-... S S 5.. 5 S 5.... S-..- S 5..-.. S 5..-.. 5.--. 5...- 5..- 5..-. 5.... 5..-.. HUN 0 EH... D HRH D D H.,..H D ”HE D ...... D ..... D ...... D ..... D 8.3” D ..... D ..... D D ..... D. D ...... D ..UP. 0 ..... D ..... D ..... D ..... 0 HR.” 0 ...... D ..... D HUM D .33.. D ..... 0 EH” D ”UH v.3“ U ..... U ..... U JUN U U U ..... U ..... U ..... U ..... U U U U U U H U ....HH U ...... U ”UH U U ..... U ..... U ..... U ...”..H U UH” U ..... U HUI U ”HI U ..... U UH“ A ..... A $4.” A ..... A ...... A ..... A A ..... A ..... A A A A ”KB A ...... A ..... A ... A ...... A ..... A HS... A ..... A A ..... A ..... A ..... A “HE A ..... A ..... A UK“ A A ..... A A A A A.....A ..... A ..... A A A A ..A. A A A A...: A ..... A ..... A ..... A ...... A ..... A ...... A A ...... A A ..... A S ..... S S ..... 5 5 5 S ..S. S S S 5 S. S 5 ...... S ..... S S S ...... S ...... 5 ...... S S 5 ..... S ..... 5 ..... S ..... S l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 O l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 ..... D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D. D D D D D D D D D D D D ..... 5 5 5 S 5 5..... 5 S 5 S S 5 S 5 5 S. 5..... 5..-5.-..51... 5 5..-.. S 5-... 5.... 5.. 5..-.- 5 HE... D “3..” D ..Hfl O “NH. O ”H...“ D H..H D ...... D ...... D ..... D “RR 0 HE. D ...... D D 35.. 0 ..HH 0 ..... D ..... D ..Hn 0 HA“ 0 ...33 D “NH O ..... 0 HR” D ”NH O 33.. D ..... O ”NH 0 HE“ D HE“ U ..... U ...... U ..... U Hm” U ..... U ..... U ..... U 3”...“ U ..... U ..... U ..... U .33.. U ”H...“ U ..:.MH U ..UH U 1.3” U U ..... U ”UH U ..... U H3.“ U HRH U ..... U U U U U - ..... A A ”UH A HHS A H....... A A A A A A ”H...” A A ..HH A A A “UN A A SH“ A A A ...A..” A “H.,” A HT.” A ......U A 2.3” A HF.” A ..... A “HE A .....-... A ..... A ”...H A A A ..... A A ..... A ..... A 1..“ A ”3..” A UP; A .14“... A “US A TJ” A ..... A ...... A ....H A ..... S 5 S 5 S . S S .. S ..... 5 ..... 5 ..... 5 S ..... 5 ..... S .. 5 5 5 5 S .. S ..... S ..... S 5 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 O l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 l 2 3 4 ZOERKOQKOU ._mm MI... m: . - 60.3.10 Us: Enter: or: c. Down—m ms 60>.omac ”22m: :( 4mm; CCNIAQOU Gum: mECOZ m___eo-mnoaa .xooo >mO-_.Zm>2_ MOD-:.:..Q is .. c E... . ..t biz-l uz