S. .zS if; I. . )1 i ‘14 V 1..\H. l n , y. , w: . . .. is? inunm 1.» at.» .. . , ‘ lbw it. 3.1; x 3. {g Janna“): .559. l 3.» afi%-i i fugunflxtfuaprtt. 3.3V." . x. In“? I'M... I ‘ :gu. 2. ~ Q: ' 1 L37 N _ ”LSF. .. a .‘ _. a _ xi I i > I ,713 J'-.‘ ”3%" a . ~ - 'x :l 1" o I 4 . “5511 Y I I ‘ ‘ 2 " ’ _ ’2 1- 7. . K12. _ l . 3 ”.113. .¥Qfl¢vy4.. . Va‘b‘hfliahumwm ,l:\\. ‘1 73. . 3613... u. '1. 1“! I gill! , w b... , A r a in ‘0 '5 it a. . hLP . Wm a»? . a . . ammufl 2;” L. . 3 . z. n a...“ z :u .mu ) Ihsasfil. u it It . . . i B... igkaaz, . . it ~i§.3&lz‘u s. .. fins... lsfiuhrisiflasfinfiui an... an... blurhhufis _ 3., z 3. : .. , .mfié. .m. 8.19.“; .7! 75! y ’r( , . l 5... 23.1 I vs. :2 . x 4 gapiiggilagzz . .. . £3; 3 .3§-..x3,.i£§ ;3!zt.e§zh§z§§l 3,153.3yinllzt. , Sty“; igiggx a! iii.§|l¢§72¢:¥|ii‘g13 Ida‘ii.§ttsgi 13:93!!! 1. ‘ It“! . s 1):: 1., III!!! myunlrglnztlyilullrliwillwill" L LIBRARY fithnfity This is to certify that the thesis entitled A DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF TEACHERS' CONCEPTIONS 0F READING USING A VARIATION OF THE KELLY ROLE CONCEPT REPERTORY TEST presented by Michelle Heppler Johnston has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. d . Elementary and 69361“ ' cation M / V Maj professor Date Januar 31, 1978 0-7639 T 2 ,0 ~ I t W” f1} #1:“ ‘ .' “I: v M emit! W A DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF TEACHERS' CONCEPTIONS OF READING USING A VARIATION OF THE KELLY ROLE CONCEPT REPERTORY TEST By Michelle Heppler Johnston A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfiillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Elementary and Special Education l978 ABSTRACT A DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF TEACHERS' CONCEPTIONS 0F READING USING A VARIATION OF THE KELLY ROLE CONCEPT REPERTORY TEST By Michelle Heppler Johnston Previous research on reading methodology indicated that the most important variable in instructional effectiveness was the teacher rather than the method or material. Yet, the unanswered question continued to be: "What made the teacher effective?" Some researchers pointed to teachers' conceptions of teaching, content, and pupils as the crucial variable in instructional effectiveness. Therefore, the purpose of the study was to identify teachers' conceptions of reading. To identify teachers' reading conceptions, the term conceptions was first defined as what the teachers said about reading and how they organized reading information during interviews. Second, a modification of George Kelly's Role Concept Repertory Test (Rep Test) was developed to be used as a nonscheduled standardized interview guide. Following the development of the Rep Test, twenty teachers were interviewed. The interviews consisted of two components: (l) the teachers sorted and compared students according to the Rep Test proce- dures; and (2)the teachers responded to probing questions posed to clarify their Rep Test responses. Then, the teachers' responses were analyzed using empirical and theoretical coding schemes. The empirical Michelle Heppler Johnston coding schemes were developed from what the teachers said while the theoretical coding schemes were constructed using David E. Hunt's Behavior-Person-Environment Model and four theoretical models from Singer and Ruddell's Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Second Edition. Three research questions were posed. The findings of the coding schemes were used to answer the questions and the results follow. 1. What are the ways in which teachers think about reading? The teachers described three general ways in which they thought about reading. First, they discussed pupil differences by identifying their bases for grouping children and by describing pupils personal traits, backgrounds, and work habits. Second, they discussed instruc- tional practices focusing on both materials and techniques. Finally, the teachers stated their beliefs about their teaching of reading, including successes and frustrations, and changes that would improve their teaching of reading. 2. In what ways can teachers' views be classified? The teachers' views were classified in four ways: (1) descrip- tions of grouping practices, classroom organization, children, instruc- tional techniques, and stated beliefs; (2) production and human orientations; (3) decision cues; and (4) the Behavior and Person components of Hunt's B-P-E model. 3. Are teachers' views similar to some codified models of reading? More teachers reflected views of reading which were associated with the psychological and affective models but those views were dis- cussed within practical contexts such as those associated with basal Michelle Heppler Johnston instructional strategies. The teachers may have reflected practical conceptions rather than theoretical or knowledge-based conceptions because of the nature of the Rep Test or probing questions. Several conclusions were drawn from the findings. First, according to the definition of reading conceptions used in the study, the teachers did have such conceptions. From their descriptions of classroom practices, those conceptions appeared to influence their teaching behaviors. Second, the conceptions were personal as the teachers had individual views about what reading information was impor- tant and how they organized the information. Third, because the teachers had many conceptions about reading related to pupils, tech- niques, materials, and their beliefs, it was concluded that the concep- tions were complex. Fourth, the conceptions were practical based on teaching goals rather than knowledge of the reading process or theory. To Andy ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The completion of this study represents the encouragement, support, and assistance of many persons who have provided professional direction and friendship during the course of the research. Special acknowledgment is given to Dr. Gerald G. Duffy, chair— person of the Guidance Committee and Director of the Dissertation. His involvement, commitment, and concern were instrumental to the writer's growth and development throughout the doctoral program. To Dr. Perry E. Lanier, Dr. Louis M. Sause, and Dr. Jean M. LePere, members of the Guidance Committee, acknowledgments are accorded for their valuable contributions and suggestions which enhanced the writer's graduate experience, doctoral studies, and research. Finally, the writer acknowledges and extends deep appreciation and love to her husband, Thomas, a true partner throughout the doctoral program, and her son, Andrew, whose arrival during the doctoral program enhanced her life and brought new meaning to the future. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES. Chapter I. THE PROBLEM . . Background of the Problem . The Problem. . Significance of the Problem Definitions. . . . Conceptions of Reading Nonscheduled Standardized Interview Guide : Transcripts . Content Analysis Coding Schemes . . Orientations and Decision Stimuli. Orientations . . Decision Stimuli. Questions to be Answered Assumptions and Limitations Assumptions . Limitations . Design of the Study . Data Collection. . Qualitative Data and Content Analyses Summary of the Problem . Organization of the Remainder of the Study II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . Introduction . . . Teacher Conceptions . Page —I \‘OSO‘OSUI-b boom... \JV kDO!) \l\l l0 ll 12 l3 l4 l4 l4 Chapter Teachers' Conceptions of Teaching. . Teachers' Conceptions of Reading . . Theoretical Models of Reading. . . . . Psycholinguistic Models . Ruddell' 5 Model . Goodman' 5 Model . . . Summary of the Psycholinguistic Models . . Information Processing Models . Gough' 5 Model. . LaBerge' s and Samuels' Model. Anderson's, Goldberg's, and Hidde' 5 Model Summary of the Infonnation Processing Models Developmental Models . Holmes' Interpretation. Singer's Interpretation . Summary of the Developmental Models Affective Model. Mathewson' 5 Model . . Summary of the Affective Model . Summary of the Models. Description of the Research Procedures Ethnographic Methodology and Field Study Techniques. . Interview . . . Sampling, Control, and Generalizability . Control Sampling. . . Generalizability . . Summary of control, samples, and generalizability . . . . Summary of Ethnographic Methodologies and Field- -Study Techniques Page 3T 33 34 34 35 36 37 Chapter Specific Procedures Related to the Study. Interviews and Sorting . Rep Test. . . Summary of the Review of the Literature. III. PROCEDURES . Introduction. Procedures Population and Samples. Data Collection . . Pilot and Modification Phase . School District Procedures. Data Collection Period . . . Modification of George Kelly's Role Concept Repertory Test (Rep Test) . . Teacher Identity . . . Data Analysis. Coding Schemes. Empirically derived coding schemes Theoretically derived coding schemes. Qualitative Analysis. Categories . . Summary IV. FINDINGS. Introduction. Results of Coding Schemes Findings From Empirically Derived Coding Schemes . What the Teachers Said About Grouping Practices. What the Teachers Said About Classsroom Organization. What the Teachers Said About Instructional Techniques vi Page 37 38 38 4o 41 ' 41 41 41 44 45 46 47 50 50 53 53 54 55 56 56 58 58 58 58 62 67 Chapter Oral reading. . Content area reading. What Teachers Said About Parents' Role. How the Teachers Described the Children What Teachers Said About Their Stated Beliefs Needed for a successful reading program. Stated beliefs about self as a reading teacher. . Reasons for instructional successes . Summary of stated beliefs Summary Categories Orientations. Decision stimuli Summary of the Empirically Derived Findings . Findings from Theoretically Derived Coding Schemes . . . . . . . . . . Hunt's B-P-E Paradigm Theoretical Models Psycholinguistic models . . . Information processing models . Developmental models . . Affective models Summary of the Theoretically Derived Findings Answers to the Research Questions. What Are the Ways in which Teachers Think About Reading?. . . . . . . In What Ways Can the Teachers' Views of Reading Be Classified?. . Are Teachers' Views Similar to Any Codified Models of Reading? Generalizability Summary . vii Page 7T 72 74 79 82 83 85 86 86 88 91 97 98 99 lOO lOl Chapter V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS. .. . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Major Findings . . . . . . . . . . Answers to the Research Questions . . . . . . . Examination of the Answers . . . . . . . . . Discussion of the Findings . Information Teachers Provided About Reading. Ideas Regarding Pupil Differences . . Ideas Regarding Operationalizing Ideas Regarding Influences of Instructional Materials Ideas Regarding Teachers' Abilities to Teach Reading . . . . . . . . Ideas of Work. . Summary of Information Teachers Provided About Reading . Information Teachers Did Not Provide About Reading . . The Underlying Assumption of Linear Progression Conclusion . . . . . . . . . Implications. Implications for Theory and Practice . . Implications for Training and Materials . Implications for Classifying Teachers. Implications for Research. . . . Underlying Assumption The Rep Test and Interviews Recommendations for Practice and Research . . . REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES Appendix A. Interview Guides . . . . . . . . . . B. Program Descriptions. viii Page 102 102 103 104 105 107 107 107 108 109 110 111 111 111 113 113 114 114 115 115 116 116 116 117 120 124 131 Appendix ‘ Page C. Coding Schemes and Coding Sheets. . . . . . . . . 134 D. Coding Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 E. Correspondence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Grade Level(s) Taught at the Time of the Interview. . . 44 2. Method of Grouping . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6O 3. Classroom Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 4. Activities for Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 5. Instructional Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . 70 6. Oral Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 7. Content Area Reading. . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 8. Parent-Home Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 9. Descriptions of Children . . . . . . . . . . . 77 10. Stated Beliefs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 ll. Belief Orientations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 12. Thoughts About Self as a Teacher. . . . . . . . . 84 13. Human Factors and Production Factors . . . . . . . 87 14. Combined Orientations . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 15. Personal Traits and Instructional Performance . . . . 89 16. Decision Stimuli Mentioned by Teachers. . . . . . . 90 17. Decision Stimuli Used by Teachers . . . . . . . . 9O 18. Psycholinguistic Models. . . . . . . . . . . . 93 19. Information Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 20. Developmental Models. . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 21. The Acceptance Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Background of the Problem Reading research often focused on materials and approaches. Yet, such studies concluded that there were no significant differences between variables or that the key variable influencing reading instruc- tion was the teacher rather than materials or approaches. What was it about the teacher that was important? Many writers indicated that a crucial aspect of the teacher variable was the teacher's concepts, beliefs, or understandings regarding course content, materials, and pupils. For example, McKee specifically directed his attention to "the teacher's understanding of what reading instruction is."1 Similarly, Carroll and Chall, after reviewing the first grade studies of the 19605, concluded that an important aspect of the teaching process was the teacher's systems of beliefs about how different children learn to read.2 'Paul McKee, "Introduction,“ in Reading Instruction: Dimensions and Issues, ed. William K. Durr (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1967 , p. vii. 2John B. Carroll and Jeanne S. Chall, Toward a Literate Society: The Report of the Committee on Reading of the National Academy of Education (New York: McGraw:HilT'Book Company, 1975), p. 16. Further, Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel stated that "the most signifi- cant educational variation exists at the level of the individual practitioner--not at the level of instructional materials, packaged 3 programs or the like." They clarified their views by saying: It is sufficient to say here that this position assumes that the internal mental processes (such as understandings, beliefs, and values) are major underlying determinants of behavior and of the environments people create. Finally, Combs, Blume, Newman, and Wass supported the notion of the importance of teachers' conceptions by stating: Whether a teacher will be an effective teacher depends funda- mentally on the nature of his private world of perceptions.5 This study was an attempt to identify and describe teachers' conceptions of reading by using Wolf and Tymitz's suggestion of pursuing reading research within an ethnographic paradigm which they defined as "an analytical process involving the disciplined and system- atic uncovering of human behavior and interactive patterns within any . . . 6 env1ronment or m1l1eu." 3Anne M. Bussis, Edward A. Chittenden, and Marianne Amarel, Beyond Surface Curriculum: An Interview Study of Teachers' Under- standings (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, Inc., 1976), p.4TZ 41bid., p. 1. 5Arthur W. Combs et al., The Professional Education of Teachers: A Hgmanistic Approach to Teacher Education, 2nd ed. (Boston: AT1yn and Bacon, Inc., 1974)} p. 21. 6Robert L. Wolf and Barbara L. Tymitz, "Ethnography and Reading: Matching Inquiry Mode to Process," Reading Research Quarterly 12 (1976-1977):unpaged. Therefore, this study reflected three basic ideas. First, the teacher, rather than materials and approaches, was considered to be the important element in an instructional setting. Second, the teacher's conceptions of reading were cited by the aforementioned researchers as key factors influencing reading instructional practices. Finally, an ethnographic paradigm provided an analytical way to identify and describe teacher's conceptions of reading. The Problem While the teacher's conception was viewed by many as a crucial instructional variable, few studies attempted to identify teacher's conceptions of reading. Consequently, the purpose of the study was to investigate the ways in which teachers conceptualize reading. Specifi- cally, the study utilized in-depth, probing interviews to identify, describe, and classify teachers' conceptions of reading. Significance of the Problem The identification of teachers' conceptions of reading contributes to educational research in six ways. 1. The study provides researchers of teacher effectiveness with useful information about the way teachers think about reading. Such information gives researchers clues to the reasons certain teachers used specific reading instructional practices. 2. The identification of teachers' conceptions of reading instruction is valuable to teacher educators, curriculum planners, and material developers as an aide for planning instructional improvement. 3. The identification of differences in teachers‘ conceptions of reading instruction provides other researchers with ways to detect the relative influence of presage, process, and context variables. _ 4. The results of the study give teacher trainers a method to identify specific in-service needs in reading to help teachers and in-service teacher trainers identify target areas for in-service training. 5. The data of the study were actual teacher descriptions of instructional practices and the ways in which teachers organize information about reading. Such data provides springboards for future research on the teaching of reading. 6. The interview technique employed in the study provides a useful investigative tool for educational research in content areas other than reading. Definitions The following definitions of terms were specifically relevant for the study. Conceptions of Reading An operational definition of reading conceptions was derived from the writings of Schroder, Karlins, and Phares. They defined concepts as: The rules by which individuals deal with the world and are the rules that individuals employ for organizing units of informa- tion about the world.7 Elsewhere, Schroder, Karlins, and Phares reiterated that "each person 8 Therefore, perceives and responds to the world in his own unique way." using Schroder, Karlins, and Phares as a basis, the following opera- tional definition of conceptions of reading was constructed: conceptions of reading were what the teachers said they did about reading and how the teachers stated that they organized information about reading in response to interview questions. Nonscheduled Standardized Interview Guide Nonscheduled standardized interview guide, as used in this study, referred to the list of information and procedures from which the interviewer worked. According to Denzin, a nonscheduled standard- ized interview guide gave the interviewer freedom to probe and to gather personal or social data, such as attitudes.9 The interview guide was nonscheduled because the questions varied according to the teachers' responses and standardized because the interviewer worked with the same list of procedures for all the teachers. 7Harold M. Schroder, Marvin Karlins, and Jacqueline O. Phares, Education for Freedom (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1973), p. 26. 81bid., p. 26. 9Norma K. Denzin, The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods (Chicago, Illinois: Aldine Publishing Company, 1970), p. 126. Transcripts The transcripts were the typed dialogues that resulted from using the nonscheduled interview guides. Each interview was recorded on cassette tapes and transcribed for content analysis. Content Analysis Content analysis (which was used to analyze the transcripts) referred to the process of examining the transcripts and formulating categories to describe teachers' reading conceptions. More specifically, Hayes defined content analysis as a process for determining charac- teristics of a source from its natural-language utterances.10 There- fore, in this study, the teachers' natural-language, as it appeared in the transcripts, was examined to look for characteristics which represented conceptions of reading. The specific procedures used are described in Chapter III. Coding Schemes Two types of coding schemes were used for the content analysis. One coding scheme was developed empirically from what the teachers actually said and contained lists of words the teachers used to describe reading. The second coding scheme was theoretically based and contained lists of terms used by certain experts to describe reading, students, and instruction. 10David G. Jayes, "Linguistic Foundations for a Theory of Content Analysis," in The Analysis of Communication Contegt, ed. George Gerbner et al. (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1969), p. Orientations and Decision Stimuli Following a content analysis of what the teachers said about reading, two summary categories were formed. The summary categories were labeled "orientations" and "decision stimuli." Orientations Orientations referred to the relative emphasis that the teachers placed on either human attributes or production attributes. While some teachers tended to discuss reading in terms of human attributes such as attitude, other teachers emphasized production, such as work habits. Decision Stimuli The decision stimuli referred to the cues that the teachers described as using when they made reading decisions. Teachers relied on materials, students, self or various combinations of the three when making reading decisions. Questions to be Answered Because the problem was to identify teachers' conceptions of reading, the major question was: What are the ways in which teachers think about reading? Additionally, the following questions were asked: 1. In what ways can teachers' views be classified? 2. Are teachers' views similar to some codified views of reading? Assumptions and Limitations There were several assumptions and limitations which influenced the study. Assumptions In attempting to identify and describe teachers' conceptions of reading, the assumption existed that teachers did have certain beliefs about reading that influenced teaching behaviors and pupil outcomes. McKee reflected this assumption by suggesting that teachers had certain understandings of reading instruction and that these understandings were among the factors that influence pupil achieve- ment.n Furthennore, the assumption was made that teacher conceptions of reading were being tapped by using an in-depth interview technique. This assumption was supported by researchers such as Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel who suggested that "the strength of the interview lies in its ability to elicit personal opinions, knowledge, understandings, attitudes, and the like."12 Finally, there was the assumption that the researcher was able to capably analyze and codify the interview data. As Garfinkel stated, "The coder takes the position of a socially competent member of the arrangement to be described."13 Specifically, the coder or researcher had to be uniquely familiar with the nuances of the elements being described and aware of the ways in which teachers discussed reading nMcKee, "Introduction," p. vii. 12Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Stpdy of Teachers' Understandings, p. 15 '3Harold Garfinkel, Studies in Ethnomethodology (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1967), p. 22. and reading instruction. For the purpose of the study, it was assumed that the researcher met these criteria. Limitations The study had limitations related to the problem, the popula- tions, the design, the analysis of data, and the instrumentation. Specifically, the limitations of the study were: ‘1. Although the problem studied was important, it was difficult to measure. The conceptions of reading attributed to the teachersunay have been limited because of biases subconsciously impoSed by the interviewer and other confounding variables, such as institutional constraints within a teacher's school or a misapplication of probing techniques within the interview. The coding schemes used in analyzing the content of the inter- views have limitations. First, the researcher's judgement was employed to determine the coding schemes. Second, relevant information may have been lost by compressing the data into categories. The study was limited by the populations and samples which were selected by the investigator. Therefore, the ability to generalize the findings of the study was limited to teachers who were interviewed. Because the design of the study was descriptive, many variables such as sex, age, or preservice training were not controlled and, therefore, may have confounded the findings. The concep- tions of reading were not subjected to experimental 10 manipulations nor was any attempt made to determine the reasons for the conceptions. Design of the Study The design of the study included descriptions of the procedures for data collection and analyses. Data Collection The study was a descriptive study in which twenty teachers were interviewed using a modification oereorge Kelly's Role Concept Reper— tory Test (Rep Test) as the basis for a nonscheduled standardized interview guide. During in-depth interviews, teachers were required to sort their students according to how they received reading instruction. Afteridentifying the ways in which their students received reading instruction, the teachers participated in triadic sorting exercises which were used to identify pupil similarities and differences. The triadic sorting procedure was the central feature of the Rep Test. Finally, the teachers were asked to identify successful instructional techniques used and materials needed to help unsuccessful students. The Rep Test was selected as the basis for the interview guide because it forced the respondent to focus on concrete issues while it elicited underlying conceptions and the ways in which information was 14,15 organized. Teachers were forced to focus on their students while '4David E. Hunt, Teachers Are Psychologists Too: On the Appli- cation ofPsycholggyto Edfication (Iowa City, Iowa: The American C011ege Testing Program, 9 6), p. 5. 'SJarrod W. Wilcox, A Method for Measuring Decision Assumptions (Campridge, Massachusetts: The Massachusetts Institute ofrTeEhnoTogy, 1972 . p. 5. 11 responding to the probing questions. As Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel stated, the major interest of the interviews was not the Specific behaviors described by the teachers but "what the described behaviors '6 Thus, the information elicited during the interviews represent." were descriptions of behaviors which were assumed to be representing the teachers' conceptions of reading. Qualitative Data and Content Analyses The data were qualitative in the form of taped interviews that were transcribed. For the purpose of identifying teachers' concep- tions of reading, the collection of qualitative data was the most useful and telling as it provided a broad band of descriptive informa- tion. Because the purpose of the study was to describe teachers' conceptions of reading, the study represents a pre-experimental phase of research rather than a verification or an experimental phase of research. Furthermore, Glaser and Strauss support the collection of qualitative data by positing that it was the most adequate and efficient '7 This study was of way to obtain information in empirical settings. an empirical nature as it was conducted primarily within school settings and focused on the actual pupils. 16Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Study of Teachers' Understandings, p. 15. 17Barney G. Glaser and Anslem L. Strauss, The Discover of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research (Chicago, Illinois: Aldine Publishing Company, 1967), p. 18. 12 To analyze the transcripts, content analysis was used similar to a method described by Glaser and Strauss in which categories emerged '8 The selected method of content analysis was deemed from the data. appropriate as it met the five following characteristics of content analysis advanced by Alexander: (1) the investigator formed discrimi- nating categories; (2) the emphasis was on hypothesis formation versus hypothesis testing; (3) estimates were made of the speaker's intended meaning; (4) the speaker's situation and purpose were taken into account; and (5) there was a close relationship to descriptive proce- dures.19 From the content analysis of the transcripts, descriptions and classifications of the teachers' conceptions of reading were developed. Summary of the Problem The specific problem to be studied was the identification of teachers' conceptions-of reading using ethnographic research metho- dologies. In general, other researchers, teacher trainers, curriculum planners, and material developers were provided with important informa- tion resulting from the identification of teachers' conceptions of reading. Specifically, the Rep Test was used in interviews to identify the teachers' conceptions of reading. Following the interviews, the conceptions were reviewed and categorized to answer the questions: 'BIbid.. p. 18. 19George Alexander, "Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches to Content Analysis," in Trends in Content Analyses, ed. Ithiel De Sola Pool (Urbana, Illinois: Uhiversity of’Illinois Press, 1959), p. 19. 13 1. What are the ways in which teachers think about reading? 2. In what ways can teachers' views of reading be classified? 3. Are teachers' views of reading similar to some codified views of reading? Organization of the Remainder of the Study Chapter II will include a brief review of related research regarding teacher beliefs, some theoretical models of reading, and support for the procedures of the study. The procedures for data collection and analysis will be more fully described in Chapter III. In Chapter IV, descriptions and categories of the teachers' conceptions of reading will be presented. Conclusions, results, and recommenda- tions for future study will be presented in Chapter V. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction The materials in the Review of the Literature were selected to provide background in three areas: (1) previous writing and research on teachers' conceptions of teaching in general and of reading; (2) views of reading held by certain experts; and (3) description of the research procedures used in the study. Teacher Conceptions The literature on teachers' conceptions was reviewed in two ways: teachers' conceptions of teaching in general; and teachers' conceptions of reading. Teachers' Conceptions of Teachipg From their extensive review of the research, Brophy and Good concluded: The teacher individual difference variable that appears to be especially important for the classroom is the teacher's belief system or conceptual level. They saw the beliefs of teachers as having an influence on pupil achievement.2 'Jere E. Brophy and Thomas L. Good, Teacher-Studgnt Relation- ships: Causes and Consequences (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1974), p.4262. 21bid., p. 124. Washburn and Heil concurred with Brophy and Good as they hypothesized that teachers' personalities, including their beliefs, had a "definite and determinable influence on the intellectual, social, and “3 Although their major problem was to emotional growth of children. construct instruments for identifying different types of children and teachers, they concluded: Our experiment does show that whatever effects the teacher's knowledge measured in the Teacher Education Examination are completely masked by the effects of the teacher's personality.4 Further, Fuller found that teachers' conceptions about their roles, teaching content, and pupils vary over time. Fuller used ethnographic methodologies including surveys in a variety of related studies to identify conceptions of teaching at the pre-service level and at several different in-service experience levels.5 In a massive study, researchers at the University of Wisconsin attempted to investigate the "substance and structure of teacher view- points" for the following two reasons: 1. . . . the perceptions and discriminations of a teacher exert critical influence on the stimulation and direction of pupil learning. It is a teacher's own thoughts and conceptualizations of the instructional process which mold and control the learning climate. 2. . . . to improve the performance of teachers, and to accumulate a body of knowledge relevant to facilitating learning, information is needed which describes views 3Carleton Washburne and Louis M. Heil. "What Characteristics of Teachers Affect Children's Growth?" School Review 68 (l960):420. 411111., p. 425. 5Frances F. Fuller, "Concerns of Teachers: A Developmental Conceptualization," Amgrican Educational Research Journal 6 (March 1969 :218. 16 and perceptions of teachers. A program for increasing effectiveness must take into account their existing perceptions concerning teaching and learning. To assess the substance of the teacher viewpoints, the researchers used essays, content analysis of reports, interview recordings, autobio- graphical writings, and lesson plan reports.7 Sorting was used to assess the structure which was referred to as the organization of the substance. Hunt used an adaptation of the Rep Test to help teachers make their implicit conceptions explicit.8 The teachers matched and sorted students according to student characteristics, learning outcomes, and teaching approaches in an effort to get them to think about their teaching.9 By using the Rep Test, knowledge was gained on how the teacher organized information about content and students.'0 The con- ceptions Hunt elicited from the Rep Test were fitted into a paradigm and had the following four characteristics: the conceptions were interactive; 6 . . . . . The Un1vers1ty of Wiscons1n Instruct1onal Research Laboratory, "Elementary School Teachers' Viewpoints of Classroom Teaching and Learn1ngJ'U.S.O.E. Project Number 5.1015.2.12.l (Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin, 1967), pp. 3-4. 71pm, p. 5. 8Hunt, Teachers Are Psychologists, p. 5. 91pm. .'ODavid E. Hunt and Edmond V. Sullivan, Between Ps cholo y and Educat1on (H1nsdale, Illinois: Dryden Press, 1974), p. 54. 17 the person was viewed in a developmental procedure; the conceptions were reciprocal; and they were practical." In a later writing, Hunt asserted: One of the reasons for earlier inconsistency in the study of teacher awareness and its influence on teacher behavior has been the failure to permit teachers to express themselves in their own terms about all aspects of the teaching-learning process.12 Therefore, according to Hunt, the Rep Test allowed teachers to verbalize their conceptions about reading in their own terms in relationship to their pupils.13 Similarly, Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel used in-depth inter- views to capture and describe teacher conceptions of teaching because of their developmental, interactive, and person-oriented view of the teaching learning process.14 Like Hunt, Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel were looking for practical information concerning teachers' conceptions 15 that went beyond surface understandings. Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel concluded that their interview procedure tapped teachers' under- lying conceptions and that those conceptions of what was important instructionally influenced teachers' classroom behaviors.16 "David E. Hunt, "The B-P-E Paradigm in Theory, Research, and Practice,” Canadian Psychological Review 16 (1975):190. 'zDavid E. Hunt, "The Teachers' Adaptations: 'Reading' and 'Flexing' to Students," Journal of Teacher Education 27 (1976):272. 13Hunt, Teachers Are Psychologists, p. 5. '4Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Study of Teachers' Understandings, p. l 15 Ibid., p. 171. '6Ibid.. pp. 169 and 171. 18 In additional studies reported by Combs and others, researchers at the University of Florida wrestled with the question: "What kinds of perceptions do 'good' professional workers have?"17 They have developed hypotheses that were corroborated and led them to believe "that the following major areas were crucial in the perceptual organi- zation of a good teacher": 1. Rich, extensive, and available perceptions about his subject field. Accurate perceptions about what people are like. Perceptions of self leading to adequacy. Accurate perceptions about the purpose and process of learning. Personal perceptions about appropriate methods for carrying out his purpose. U'l ubWN C . ' I The preceding studies focused on teachers' conceptions of teaching which included conceptions of teacher roles, students, learning outcomes and curriculum. In an attempt to tap the teachers' concep- tions, the researchers used interviews, surveys, sorting, biographical sketches, lesson plans, and content analysis. Each researcher con- cluded that the beliefs, viewpoints, or conceptions held by teachers influence their classroom behavior. Teachers' Conceptions of Readipg The research previously reviewed did not focus specifically on teachers' conceptions of reading. According to Belli, Blom, and Reiser, there was very little research on teachers' conceptions of 17Combs et al., Professional Education of Teachers, p. 21. "3111111., p. 22. 19 reading and the research on teachers' conceptions had to be drawn from outside reading and transformed to meet reading needs.'9 Such research was presented in the previous section of the Review of Literature. Another source for information about teachers' reading concep- tions was the literature on in-service activities and teachers' concep— tions related to instructional practices, such as materials and grouping. To illustrate, Cadenhead tried to determine teachers' concep- tions of reading by describing an activity in which participants within 20 groups sorted cards to identify their beliefs about reading. The sorting process consisted of accepting and rejecting assumptions Cadenhead presented concerning reading.2' group discussed the assumptions.22 There were no attempts made to Following the sorting, the codify or categorize the assumptions as he was writing for the purpose of discussing an in-service technique rather than a research study. Further, Mayes used the Teacher Practices Inventory, the Personal Beliefs Inventory, and the Dogmatism Scale to measure the beliefs of teachers using the DISTAR program as compared to the beliefs 19Gabriella Belli, Gaston Blom, and Ann Reiser, Teachers' Concerns and Conceptions of Reading and The Teaching of Reading: A Literature Review (East Lansing, Michigan: Institute of Research on Teaching, Michigan State University, 1977), p. 9. 20Kenneth Cadenhead, "What Are Your Beliefs About Reading Instruction?” Journal of Reading 20 (November 1976):129. 2'Ipid. 221mm, p. 130. 20 of teachers using basals.23 Mayes found no significant differences between the DISTAR teachers and the basal teachers.24 She attributed the finding to the basic common value from which both types of materials originate and to the values of the teachers.25 Because DISTAR teachers and basal teachers had similar values, Mayes concluded that their 26 teaching was similar. She stated that changes in instructional practices "cannot occur" until teachers change their values.27 Miller and Hering asked if reading teachers preferred to teach the more talented readers.28 To answer the question, Miller and Hering asked twenty-six first grade teachers to list the names of their pupils according to reading group. At a later date, the teachers were asked to list the pupils to whom they preferred to teach reading.29 The researchers saw no evidence of sex differences but they found that teachers did prefer teaching the better students.30 When Bennett studied the open classroom, he developed three questionnaires to assess teachers' aims and opinions. His question- naires were composed of items derived from other research studies and 23Bea Mayes, "The Reading Teacher and Values," Contemporary Education 45 (Winter, l974):127. 24 25 Ibid., p. 129. Ibid., p. 130. 26mm. 27111101., p. 131. 28Harry B. Miller and Steve Hering, ”Teachers' Ratings--Which Reading Group Is Number One?" The Reading Teacher 28 (January 1975): 389. 29 30 Ibid., p. 390. Ibid. 21 from teacher interviews.3' Teachers rated aims on a five-point scale in terms of their relative importance. The need for basic skills in reading and number work received a high rating while the necessity to read fluently, accurately, and with understanding was considered less essential.32 From the information reported in the review of teachers' con- ceptions of reading, only Cadenhead's activity attempted to identify teachers' beliefs about reading. However, Cadenhead's article focused on presenting an in-service training activity rather than presenting a research study. The studies in this section presented findings which compared teacher values as related to materials used, instructional group preferences, and rating aims of reading instruction. Therefore, from this review, the researcher concurred with Belli, Blom, and Reiser that there was very little research on teachers' reading conceptions. Yet, teachers' conceptions of reading needed to be identified because, according to literature in this review, the teachers' underlying con- ceptions influenced their classroom behavior. The conceptions reviewed thus far were on a practical not theoretical level. Theoretical conceptions of reading provided a structure within which practical reading conceptions were identified. Theoretical Models of Reading The process of identifying teachers' conceptions of reading included an examination of the views of reading held by recognized 3'Neville Bennett, Teaching Styles and Pupil Progress (London: Open Books, 1976), p. 55. 32Ibid., p. 56. 22 experts. Descriptions of the views of reading held by certain authori- ties gave the study and the teachers' conceptions of reading a frame of reference. For the purpose of the study, four types of reading models described in Singer and Ruddell's Theoretical Models and Process, Second Edition were used. Following a brief presentation of each type of model, practical classroom applications of the models were described. Descriptions of practical classroom applications showed how some aspects of the models were reflected in the teachers' instructional practices and conceptions. The four types of theoretical models of reading were the psycholinguistic models, information pro- cessing models, developmental models, and the affective model. Psycholipgyistic Models Two psycholinguistic models which focused on the relationship between language and thought with comprehension as the major goal of reading were presented by Ruddell and Goodman respectively. Ruddell's Model Although at the initial stages of reading Ruddell recognized that children must be taught to use grapho-phonic, syntactic, and semantic clues, he also recognized "that in some manner, children are independently able to arrive at an optimal decoding unit depending upon their own cognitive strategy and the particular decoding approach used and that the main goal of reading was comprehension."33 33Robert B. Ruddell, "Psychologistic Implications for a System of Communication Model," in Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, 2nd ed., ed. Harry Singer and R6bert B. Rudde1T-(Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association, 1976), p. 454. 23 Goodman's Model Goodman, through the presentation of a slightly different model, concurred with Ruddell that the main goal of reading was c0mprehen— 34 sion. He further posited that through the application of guesses the 35 To reader was able to reconstruct the intended meaning of the author. support his view of reading, Goodman offered practical suggestions for teachers of all levels. First, he suggested that reading was closely tied to practical communication, such as dictating experience stories and reading directions, labels, and signs.36 Because differences between literary language and practical communication exists, he further suggested that children needed prereading experiences with literature.37 Finally, he suggested that reading instruction ad0pted a multimedia approach which used reference skills in the content areas.38 To develop 50phistication in reading, Goodman stated that the reading teacher needed to develop techniques and strategies that led to independence, flexibility, a sense of significance to reading, and a critical sense.39 Summary of the Psycholinguistic Models The psycholinguistic models focused on the relationship of thought and language with comprehension as the main reading goal. 34Kenneth S. Goodman, "Behind the Eye What Happens in Reading," in Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, 2nd ed., ed. Harry Singer and"Robert B. Ruddell (Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association, 1976), p. 454. 35 36 Ibid., p. 472. Ibid., p. 484. 37 38 Ibid., p. 485. Ibid., pp. 486-87. 391bid.. pp. 493-95. 24 Therefore, teachers whose reading conceptions and instructional prac- tices reflected the ideas of the psycholinguists used a variety of materials or strategies which required their students to use their own language and thinking to predict graphemic, syntactic and semantic understandings inherent in the printed page. Information Processing Models Three different types 0f information processing models were examined in Theoretical Modelsggpg Processes, Second Edition. Gough's Model Gough presented an information processing model of reading by attempting to describe what went on in the mind of the reader beginning with eye fixations and breaking down the reading process into a letter- by-letter flow process.40 He posited that the rapid identification of letters was an important reading skill which was mastered through 41 cryptanalysis, not memorization. In advancing the use of phonics instructional procedures over the Look-and—Say method, be qualified his support by saying: It is important to realize, though, that phonics does not teach the mapping required to become a Reader. What the Reader knows is the mapping between characters and system- atic phonemes; what the child is taught in phonics is to name a letter (or a letter part) with a syllable that contains the appropriate systematic phoneme. When the Child "sounds out" a new word, it is apparent to any auditor that the child is not converting letters into underlying phonemic representations. Rather he is searching for something that he can hear as a word.42 40Philip B. Gough, "One Second of Reading," in Theoretical Models and Processes of Readipg, 2nd ed., ed. Harry Singer and Robert B. Ruddell (Newark, Delaware: Internat. Reading Association, 1976), p. 510. 41 42 Ibid., p. 526. Ibid., p. 528. 25 To present an information processing view of comprehension, Gough focused on the element of speed, the interference of oral reading, and guessing.43 -He posited that oral reading forces the reader to have temporal delays between words that hindered comprehension.44 Concerning the psycholinguistic view of the appropriateness of guessing, Gough stated: A guess may be a good thing, for it may preserve the integrity of the sentence comprehension. But rather than being a sign of a normal reader, it indicates that the child did not decode the word rapidly enough to read it normally. The good reader need not guess; the bad should not.45 LaBerge's and Samuels' Model Another model of reading as information processing was pre- sented by LaBerge and Samuels who recognized reading to be a complex skill which the fluent reader processed instantaneously.46 Their model emphasized selectivity and capacity of limitations as two character- istics of the role of attention47 and "involves a sequence of stages of information processing."48 Through an examination of the theoretical relationships between visual and phonological systems and between visual, phonological, and semantic systems, they continued to recognize 43 44 Ibid., p. 532. Ibid. 451bid. 46David LaBerge and S. Jay Samuels, “Toward a Theory of Automatic Information Processing in Reading,” in Theoretical Models and Processes of Readipg, 2nd ed., ed. Harry Singer and RoEert B. Ruddell (Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association, 1976), p. 548. 47 48 Ibid., p. 549. Ibid., p. 549. 26 "the importance of automaticity in the performance of fluent reading."49 For practical application of their model, they favored instructional measures that single out skills at various strategic stages and that had two criteria of achievement for each stage: accuracy and auto- maticity.50 In a re-examination of their model, LaBerge and Samuels noted that it did not "spell out higher-order linguistic operations, such as parsing, predictive processing, and contextual effects on comprehen- 51 sion." They separated word meaning from comprehension by designating word meaning as the semantic referrent of a written word and comprehen- sion as the organization of the word meanings and "thinking in 52 They posited that automaticity processed word meanings were 53 general." organized for comprehension. From their description of the compre- hension process, the assumption was made that without automaticity of word meanings the semantic referrents were lost or nonexistent, resulting in the lack of comprehension. Anderson's, Goldberg's, and Hidde's Model Anderson, Goldberg, and Hidde used the results of two experi- ments to present a third information processing model to describe the meaningful processing of sentences. The researchers posited "that there were several stages or levels of processing which occurred if a 49 50 Ibid., p. 570. Ibid., p. 575. 51 5 Ibid. 21bid., p. 576. 53Ibid. 27 person was to learn from written verbal materials."54 Specifically, they identified two of these stages as auditory and semantic encoding which consist, respectively, of bringing words into speech and of bringing meaningful representations to the mind.56 In their experi- ments, subjects who were required to fill in blanks in sentences learned more than the subjects who only read the sentences. The results seemed to indicate that readers proceeded through the auditory enCoding stage without semantic encoding.56 Sumnary of the Information Processing Models Although the three information processing models presented different pictures of the reading process, they had certain common elements. A commonality existed across the models in their emphasis on skill acquisition and mastery at specified levels. The skills needed to be mastered and become automatic to allow progression to the following stages. Therefore, teachers who had viewpoints of reading similar to the information processing models used instructional procedures that required students to master specified skills at certain stages. 54Richard C. Anderson, Sheila R. Goldberg, and Janet L. Hidde, "Meaningful Processing of Sentences," in Theoretical Models and Processes of Readigg, 2nd ed., ed. Harry Singer and Robert B. Ruddell (Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association, 1976), p. 580. 551bid.. p. 580. 551b1d., p. 586. 28 Developmental Models Holmes' and Singer's interpretations of the substrata-factor theory were presented as developmental models. .Holmes' Interpretation The substrata-factor theory was formulated by Holmes who employed substrata-factor analysis.57 According to Holmes, "the substrata-factor theory assumed that once a meaningful psycho- educational association was learned or established within the mind- brain contraplex, the neurological structure retains memory traces in cell assemblies and supra-assemblies as relatively permanent ability-systems."58 In other words, within a mental structure there were many large and small systems which acted to form associations and retained information. Holmes presented the model pictorially as a tri- level hierarchial connection with the Power of Reading (high school level reading) at the summit. The three leVels below the summit included factors and subfactors which supported reading. A factor entitled “the range of information" and "the breadth of knowledge" was noted to be the most important factor.59 Singer's Interpretation By defining the subtrata-factor theory of reading as "an explanation of the mental structures and dynamics involved in 58Jack A. Holmes, "Basic Assumptions Underlying the Substrata- Factor Theory," in Theoretical Models and Processes of Readipg, 2nd ed., ed. Harry Singer and Robert B. RuddellTNewark, Delaware: Inter- national Reading Association, l976), p. 604. 59 Ibid., p. 615. 601bid., p. 614. 29 reading," Singer attempted to explain the development of the Power of 60 Singer explained further that Reading in grades three through six. as an individual learns to read "he sequentially develops a mental Structure that is interwoven and functionally organized in at least three hierarchial levels."6" Through an experiment, Singer found developmental changes in the Power of Reading in the later elementary grades. For example, he found that syllabication consistency had a direct influence on the Power of Reading in grade 3 but an indirect 62 Similar develOpmental influences influence in grades 4, 5, and 6. Were found in the differences between the Power of Reading in sixth grade, high school, and college. He surmised that Piaget's theory of‘ development explained changes in factor patterns which occurred around the sixth grade level as a result of movement into formal operations.63 Summary of the Developmental Models Holmes and Singer explained the substrata-factor theory of reading which appeared to be hierarchial as the readers proceeded through levels of reading competency until they reached high school level reading. The reader's progress through the stages was related to his cognitive development. Teachers who reflected reading concep- tions similar to the developmental model not only expressed a concern 60Harry Singer, "Substrata-Factor Patterns Accompanying Development in Power of Reading, Elementary through College Level," in Theoretical Models and Processes of Readipg, 2nd ed., ed. Harry Singer and Robert B. Ruddell (Newark,’Delaware: International Reading Association, 1976), p. 619. 61 62 Ibid., p. 620. Ibid., p. 627. 63Ibid., p. 631. 30 for a reader's hierarchial skill development but also the cognitive development of the reader as he became a more mature reader. Affective Model Mathewson's Model In presenting an affective model of reading, Mathewson dis- cussed the importance of attitude as it was related to the reading process.' He expressed a need for a definition of the role of affect as "the concepts of attitude, motivation, interest, belief, and value 64 Mathewson may have a vague quality reSisting systematic treatment." labeled the affective model, "The Acceptance Model: A Model of Attitude Influence in Reading.Comprehension" and used motivation and attitude as components that "work together to create the condition in which the "65 Although he recognized child begins to pay attention to books. that the model did not present a clear or complete picture of the reading process, the model provided a direction to follow in creating school materials, for teaching, and for future research on the theory of attitude in reading. Summary of the Affective Model The affective model proposed that interest and motivation were the prime forces behind a child's reading progress. The teachers who 64Grover C. Mathewson, "The Function of Attitude in the Reading Process," in Theoretical Models and Processes of Readigg, 2nd ed., ed. Harry Singer and ROBErtEB. Ruddéll (Newark, DeTaware: International Reading Association, 1976), p. 655. 65Ibid., p. 661. 31 permitted self-selection and discussed interests, attitudes, and motivation reflected reading conceptions similar to the affective model. Summa[y_of the Models The models of reading were presented in the Review of the Literature to provide a framework for the descriptions of teachers' conceptions of reading. Teachers' conceptions were compared to four theoretical models of reading in an effort to present clear descrip- tions of their conceptions of reading. The degree to which the teachers' conceptions matched or did not match the theoretical models had important implications as noted by Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel.66 Description of the Research Procedures The materials presented in this section of the Review of the Literature focused on ethnographic methodologies and field-study tech- niques in general and specific procedures and problems related to the study. Ethnographic Methodology and Field Study Techniqges Ethnographic studies, which Garfinkel referred to as ethno- methodological studies, attempted to "analyze activities and members' methods for making those same activities visibly-rational-and- reportable-for-all-practical-purposes . . . practical reasoning."67 66Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Stugy of Teachers' ygderstandings, p. 47. 67Garfinkel, Studies in Ethnomethodolggy, p. vii. 32 As Garfinkel later added, the concern of ethnographic studies was for an adequate description.68 Therefore, a study done within an ethnographic framework focused on describing practical aspects of everyday life. In the case of the present study, the focus was on the descriptions of the teachers' conceptions of reading which were assumed to govern their everyday teaching activities and interactions with children. Denzin looked at ethnographic methodologies as naturalistic research in which the empirical world set the tone69 and in which 70 pre—experimental designs exercised no control. Further, Denzin said that in the case of a survey subjects were asked questions concerning behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs at one point in time.7' This study asked subjects such questions at one point in time. In reporting on his field-study, Erickson defined the work as: . . . ethnographic in a sense that it considers as a whole the organization of behavior in these interactional events-- considers nonverbal and situational aspects of the inter- action as well as verbal aspects--and identifies customary features of interactional form and function in events. Through field work, Erickson identified the "gatekeeping encounters” as salient features of the Chicago West Side and, therefore, appropriate 68 Ibid., p. 89. 69Norman K. Denzin, Sociological Methods: A Source Book (Chicago, Illinois: Aldine Publishing Company, 1970), p. 7. 70 . Denz1n, Research Act, p. 69. 7'Ibid. 72Fredrick Erickson, "Gatekeeping Encounters: A Social Selec- tion Process," in Anthropglogy and the Public Interest: Field Work and Theor , ed. Peggy Reeves Sanday (New York: Academic Press, 1976), p. 112. 33 for study.73 Similarly, in this study, teachers' conceptions of reading were considered to be appropriate features for further study after extensive work with teachers by the researcher. Interview Support for the interview as a means for collecting data regarding teachers' conceptions of reading was reported in a review of the study conducted by Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel.74 Denzin offered further support for interviews by noting they were the favorite "digging tool for sociological research" in which the act of measure- 75 ment comes to life. He classified three types of interviews according to their structure, purpose, and underlying assumptions. The first type of interview identified by Denzin was the standardized interview schedule formulated to give to large numbers of people: a homogeneous population with similar meaning vocabularies and values.76 When using the nonscheduled standardized interview, the second type, the interviewer worked with a list of information required from each 77 respondent. The nonscheduled standardized interview required highly trained interviewers who rephrased and reordered questions to fit each respondent.78 Additionally, the nonscheduled standarized 73Ibid., p. 113. 74Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Study of Teachers' Understanding, p. 2 75Denzin, Research Act, p. 122. 761bid., p. 123. 771b1d.. pp. 123-24. 78 Ibid., p. 124. 34 79 interviews were used for exploratory work. Finally, the nonstan- dardized was the third type of interview which recognized “that 80 individuals have unique ways of defining their world." Thus, it had no prespecified set of questions, no order to the questions, and the 81 freedom to allow the interviewer to probe. Denzin recognized that in gathering social data, such as attitudes, it was acceptable to com- bine approaches.82' The nonscheduled standardized form was used in this study because of the exploratory nature of the study. Sampling, Control, and Generalizability For the purpose of the study, nonrandom samples were used. Two issues which arose from the use of nonrandom samples were: (1) control; and (2) generalizability. Control. Gordon faced the issue of control in exploratory research by stating that "overly severe standards for methodological purity applied to early stages of investigation can lead to paralysis" 83 and can prevent the emergence of valuable insights. Similarly, Sjoberg and Nett suggested that for the basis of discovery there was no well-defined hypothesis and no random sample.84 —_ 79 80 Ibid., p. 125. Ibid. 81 82 Ibid., p. 126. Ibid. 83Chad Gordon, "Self-Conceptions and Configurations of Content," in The Self in Social Interaction, ed. Chad Gordon and Kenneth J. Gergen (NewTYork: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1968), p. 117. 84Gideonszoberg and Roger Nett, A Methodolo for Social Research (New York: Harper and Row, 1968), p. 137. 35 Sampling. Denzin identified two basic types of samples: non- 85 interactive and interactive. Noninteractive samples were typically used in experimental research and "fail to establish directly patterns 86 Conversely, inter- 87 of relationship between natural social units." active samples recognized relationships of natural social units. An example of an interactive sample was a natural work group, such as a group of teachers. The use of comparative samples which were two different natural work groups had the advantage Of uncovering more information88 89 from which categories can emerge. In this study, two groups of teachers were used. Generalizabilipy. Erickson encountered the issue of generali- zability by stating that the findings of his field work were not generalizable but from the analytical procedures used he could make intuitive statements.90 From the description of the cases he col- lected, he made public certain statements but, he warned, one counter example "could ruin" his argument and that a need existed for further evidence.9' 85 . Denz1n, Research Act, p. 87. 861bid. 87Ibid. 881btd, p. 95. 89 Glaser and Strauss, Discovery of Grounded Theory, p. 49. 90Erickson, "Gatekeeping Encounters," p. 141. 9'Ibid. 36 In concluding a review of the research measuring teacher behavior, Shavelson and Dempsey-Atwood stated that generalizability was extremely limited.92 The focus of their review was experimental research, not ethnographic research, but they succinctly pointed to the problem of limited generalizability of the research on teacher behavior. _ Summary of control, samples, and generalizability, The purpose of the study was to describe teachers' conceptions of reading. To describe those conceptions, freedom was needed within the research design to explore. Because of that need for freedom, the two samples contained volunteers from selected populations. Using such samples weakened control and limited generalizability. Yet, the issue of limited generalizability was common in the research on teaching. There- fore, to address the issue of generalizability, the researcher used Erickson for support in gathering evidence within natural settings. According to Erickson, after gathering the evidence and systematically analyzing the data, the results can be used for making strong intuitive statements rather than generalizations.93 This study gathered evidence with natural settings, analyzed the information systematically, and presented statements rather than generalizations about the teachers' reading conceptions. 92Richard Shavelson and Nancy Dempsey-Atwood, "Generalizability of Measures of Teaching Behavior," Review of Educational Research 46 (Fall, l976):608. 93Erickson, "Gatekeeping Encounters," p. l4l. 37 Summary of Ethnographic Methodologies and Field-Study Techniques To describe teachers' conceptions of reading was the major purpose of the study. Because it was an exploratory study, descriptions of the procedures were drawn from the literature on ethnographic methodologies with particular emphasis on interviews, sampling, control, and generalizability. Specific Procedures Related to the Study Many writers recognized the difficulty of measuring teachers' conceptions, understandings, or viewpoints. Examples of such writers are Combs and others who described the effective teacher as being a consequence of the following six conditions: Knowledge of the world and of his subjects. Sensitivity to people, the capacity for empathy. Accurate and appropriate beliefs about people and their behavior. Positive beliefs about self. Appropriate and congruent beliefs about the purposes, the goals of society, schools, the classroom, the teacher's own goals in teaching. 6. The personal discovery of his own appropriate authentic ways of teaching.94 01-h MN—‘ These researchers stated that all the conditions were assessable but items two through six were not measurable by traditional techniques.95 Therefore, the research studies which were reviewed at the beginning of Chapter 11 used varieties of techniques and instrumentation including interviews, sorting, and George Kelly's Role Concept Reper- tory Test (Rep Test). 94Combs et al., Professional Education of Teachers, p. 170. 951m. 38 Interviews and Sorting Using techniques, such as interviews and sorting, provided a solution to the problem of tapping and identifying teacher conceptions. Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel suggested the interview as a method for collecting information about teacher conceptions, as they stated: . . an interview methodology is a sensitive approach to the study of underlying constructs about teaching and learning that have visible counterparts in the classroom and that have a traceable continuity overtime.96 Bennett added support for the interview technique97 while researchers from the University of Wisconsin concurred with Hunt by illustrating the usefulness of sorting.98 Therefore, the present study used sorting procedures within interviews as an instrument for gathering information about teachers' conceptions of reading. The specific sorting procedure used in the study was a modification of George Kelly's Role Concept Repertory Test (Rep Test). Rep Test Wilcox and Hunt, who used transformations of the Rep Test to identify conceptions, applied two distinctly different modifications of the Rep Test in their respective fields of inquiry. The purpose of the Wilcox study was to illustrate the uses of further transformations of the Rep Test. Wilcox specifically used the 96Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Study of Teachers' Understandings, p. 55. 97Bennett, Teaching Styles and Pupil Progress, p. 56. 98University of Wisconsin Instructional Research Laboratory, "Elementary Teachers' Viewpoints of Classroom Teaching,” p. 5. 39 Rep Test to see how stockbrokers made decisions but his central purpose was to illustrate a method to find out how people make choices. He developed an adaption of the Rep Test because: l. Direct questions have limited usefulness as they are time consuming. 2. Assumptions (reasons behind decisions) were only partly conscious. 3. Answers to direct questions were not often put in concrete operational terms. 4. The role concept method asked the decision maker to draw from background experience. 5. In direct questioning observer preconceptions and bias limited reliability. 9 The Rep Test was an instrument that identified implicit conceptions which were tapped by direct interview questions. In identifying teachers' conceptions of reading by direct questioning, there was the problem that the nature of the interview often influences the subjects' responses. Hunt and Wilcox both used variations of Kelly's Role Concept Repertory Test to identify concep- tions with limited bias imposed by the researcher. Using the Rep Test forced subjects to generate conceptions in relationship to objects, students or stocks, about which they were familiar. The subjects responded in their own terminology which limited the influence of the interviewer. The Rep Test as a method of requiring forced comparisons through triadic sorting had limitations. First, the conceptions elicited by the sorting were the true conceptions of the subject but 99 Jarrod W. Wilcox, A Method for Measurin Decision Assum - tions (Cambridge, Massachusetts: M.I.l., l972), pp. 5-6, 41-42. 40 those conceptions forced by the sort. Secondly, there are problems in recording and reporting the data. Kelly originally proposed a grid100 10] For the purpose of the and Hunt categorized teachers' statements. study, Hunt's technique of statement categorization was closely allied to the content analysis used to examine the transcripts. Summary of the Review of the Literature The Review of the Literature provided a framework for the procedures used in the study. Because very little research was done to identify teachers' reading conceptions, literature on teachers' conceptions of teaching in general were examined followed by materials on teachers' conceptions of reading. Information from the studies done on teachers' conceptions of teaching can be helpful in attempting to tap teachers' reading conceptions. Next, four types of theoretical models were presented with possible classroom applications. Finally, information supporting the procedures of the study were examined. 100George A. Kelly, The Psychology of Personal Constructs: A Theor of Personalit , Vol. l (New York: W. W. Norton and Company, Inc., I955), p. 268. 101 Hunt, Teachers Are Psychologists, p. 5. CHAPTER III PROCEDURES Introduction The purpose of the study was to describe teacher conceptions of reading. More specifically, the study attempted to identify: (a) the ways in which teachers thought about reading; (b) classifica- tions or patterns of teachers' reading conceptions; and (c) similari- ties that existed between the teachers' views of reading and some codified views of reading. To accomplish these tasks, a descriptive study was designed utilizing in-depth interviews and content analysis techniques to analyze the interview data. Procedures Population and Samples To answer the research questions, twenty elementary teachers were interviewed using a modification of George Kelly's Role Concept Repertory Test. Ten of the teachers were from Ypsilanti Public Schools, Ypsilanti, Michigan, and ten of the teachers were from Warren Woods Public Schools, Warren, Michigan. The samples were drawn from selected populations on the basis of the following criteria: l. Subjects' background of in-service training: a. Both districts have had continuous in—service training in reading for at least the past two years. 41 42 b. The Ypsilanti in-service training has focused on the implementation of a continuum of reading skills. c. The focus of the Warren Woods in-service training has been toward reading as a communication process and as an interest. 2. Researcher's rapport with the subjects: according to Hunt, teachers have difficulty expressing their concerns and are more open with someone they know and trust.1 Therefore, for the purpose of this study, the teachers and the interviewer had to have a good rapport. The investigator was familiar with the teachers in both districts. The investigator selected the teachers from the Warren Woods and Ypsilanti school district who had received in-service reading training within the last two years. The samples of ten were suggested by Dr. William Schmidt of Michigan State University.2 The teachers were not selected randomly. Instead, they were all volunteers with similar concerns for reading instruction. Evidence of their concern for reading instruction was seen by their participation in local district reading in-service programs. The teachers volunteered to participate in the in-service programs and received financial remuneration, materials, and additional classroom assistance for their participation. Because of this participation, the teachers interviewed were similar to the sixty teachers interviewed by Bussis, Chittenden, IInterview with David E. Hunt, 31 January 1977. 2Interview with William Schmidt, Michigan State University, 23 November 1976. 43 and Amarel who stated, "The common denominator among these teachers was the fact that they were all seeking some form of assistance . . ."3 Two groups of teachers were selected for comparison because each group received in-service training reflecting different reading philosophies. The focus of the Ypsilanti in-service program was a systematic-linear skills instruction; the Warren Woods in-service focused on varieties of activities which integrate reading, language arts, and creative expression. For descriptions of the in-service programs, see Appendix B. According to Glaser and Strauss, the use of comparison groups, such as the Ypsilanti teachers and the Warren Woods teachers, allowed the researcher to identify many properties and a broad range of indi- cators for the development of descriptive categories.4 Because the purpose of the study was to identify teachers' reading conceptions and to categorize the conceptions, using the two groups of teachers with such different in-service training provided the research with a broad range of indicators similar to those described by Glaser and Strauss.5 As indicated in Table 1, most of the teachers taught at the primary levels. Two teachers from Ypsilanti taught first and second grade combinations while the rest taught in self-contained classrooms 3Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Study of Teachers' Understandings, p. 34. 4Glaser and Strauss, Discoverygof Grounded Theory, p. 49. 51bid., p. 41. 44 Table l.--Grade Level(s) Taught at the Time of the Interview. Level(s) WW Y Total —l —J _.a N 1-2 0 2 2 2 2 1 3 3 4 3 7 4+ 3 2 5 10 10 20 containing students of a single grade level. The teachers from both school districts were experienced with all having taught more than three years. Additionally, all of the teachers who participated in the study were females because there were only three male participants in the original in—service programs. The males were not asked to volunteer as they were, at the time of the study, no longer involved in the in—service program, teaching in secondary grades, or out of the class- room working on the administrative level. Data Collection The data was collected using a modification of the Role Concept Repertory Test (Rep Test) which was developed by George Kelly. The following steps outline the procedure for the study: 45 Step 1: October-February IRT* interviewers and researchers used and developed a variety of sorting and questioning procedures prior to the pilot. Step 2: Pilot Phase: February 28, 1977 - March 12, 1977 a. Interviewed four teachers and modified procedures. b. Met with school district officials to clarify procedures. c. Scheduled interviews with teachers. Step 3: Data Collection Phase: March 14, 1977 - April 30, 1977 Interviewed teachers using the Rep Test and recorded responses on cassette tapes and interview guides. Step 4: Data Analysis Phase: May 2, 1977 - July 30, 1977 a. Transcribed tape interviews for analysis. b. Analyzed content of qualitative interview data. Pilot and Modification Phase Prior to the pilot phase of the study, teams of interviewers from the Institute for Research on Teaching assisted the researcher by interviewing teachers using a variety of sorting and questioning procedures. From the initial interviews, the Pilot Instrument (see Appendix A) was developed which combined key interview questions with the triadic sorting procedures of the Rep Test. During the pilot phase, four teachers were interviewed. As a result, the decision was made to require the teachers to sort cards rather than work from class lists and the Interview Guide was reduced in length because the information received from the teachers became redundant. The reduction was two- fold: (l) the teachers were asked to sort fifteen students instead of the entire class; and (2) the number of questions was reduced. The *Institute for Research on Teaching, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. 46 final Interview Guide (see Appendix A) used in the study was a result of the modifications performed during the Pilot Phase. School District Procedures Each school district had a specific research policy. To gain permission to interview the teachers in Warren Woods, the assistant superintendent approved a basic outline of the research design. In Ypsilanti, the proposal for the study had to be approved by a school district committee comprised of administrators, teachers, and represen- tatives of the local education association. Following the approval in each district, teachers who partici~ pated in the local in-service reading programs were contacted indi- vidually by the researcher and asked if they were willing to volunteer for an interview. No teachers declined to be interviewed. After the twenty volunteers were identified, interviews were scheduled at the convenience of the teachers. Data Collection Period The interviews were conducted during the teachers' workday but at released times with the exception of two teachers who had student teachers and felt free to be interviewed during class time. Although Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel indicated that settings apart from the school in which the teachers worked "were more conducive to a leisurely, reflective pace because they were free from the intru- sions and immediacy of school-related matters,"6 most of the teachers 6Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Study of Teachers' Understandings, p. 42. 47 preferred their classrooms or the teachers' lounges for the interview setting. The interviews lasted from 30 to 60 minutes. Although the format was the same for each interview, the time varied because some teachers volunteered more information or made statements which required more probing. Modification of George Kelly's Role Concept Repertory Test (Rep Test) The interviews utilized a nonscheduled standardized format which was based on George Kelly's Role Concept Repertory (Rep Test). The Rep Test was chosen as the basis of the interviews for three reasons. First, because the teachers used their own language to dis- cuss their own pupils, the Rep Test had the advantage of being flexible enough to assist subjects in making their implicit conceptions explicit without imposing too much interviewer bias.7 Both Hunt and Wilcox found the Rep Test to be an instrument which has as a strength the ability to elicit personal opinions, understandings, and concepts.8’9 Second, because the Rep Test forces the subjects to focus on concrete terms, Hunt and Wilcox also found that the Rep Test did not lead their 10,11 subjects to make unproductive responses. Bussis, Chittenden, and 7Hunt, Teachers Are Psychologists, p. 5. 8mm. 9Wilcox, Measuring Decision Assumptiopég p. 5. 10Hunt, Teachers Are Psychologists, p. 5. nWilcox, Measuring Decision Assumptions, p. 5. 48 Amarel defined unproductive responses as those responses which were “'2 Third, the Rep Test was used because it "too vague to be revealing. was flexible enough to be used for the exploratory probing that charac- terized nonscheduled standardized interview procedures which were necessary for the study. The importance of using interview procedures for identifying teachers' conceptions was presented by Bussis, Chitten- den, and Amarel when they stated: . the strength of the interview as a research instrument was equated with its ability to elicit personal opinions, knowledge, and understandings--the type of evidence necessary to obtain personal constructs and a construct system.1 The actual modification of the Rep Test used in this study 14 and was different from both George Kelly's was suggested by Hunt original Rep Test and from Hunt's own Rep Test modification in purpose and procedure. The Rep Test was originally created by Kelly to be used for psychological testing in clinical settings. In the original version, Kelly's subjects were asked to do triadic sortings of likes and differences according to stimulus questions.15 Specifically, subjects were required to identify certain individuals who represented specified roles. Subsequently, modifications of the Rep Test were made by Hunt in educational psychology and Wilcox in business. Both modifications continued to use triadic sorting. Wilcox, however, used 12Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Study of Teachers' Understandings, p. 43 ”Ibid., p. 42. 14Hunt, Interview. 15Kelly, Psychology of Personal Constructs, pp. 219-68. 49 his version for describing the decision making procedures used by stock 16 brokers while Hunt used his modification as a means of getting teachers to look more closely at their children and to think about teaching practices within his Behavior-Person-Environment paradigm.17 For the purpose of this study, the Rep Test was further modified according to suggestions made by Hunt who recommended that the teachers first sorted the names of their students according to how the students receiVed reading instruction, that they then were directed to speak to the interviewer as the pupils' teacher for the following school year, and that finally they did triadic sorting of pupils in terms of reading.18 Hence, the procedures for administering the modification of the Rep Test, as it was used in this study, were as follows: 1. The subjects were asked to sort fifteen of their students according to how they receive reading instruction. 2. Following the sort, the subjects identified specific reasons for sorting pupils, such as diagnostic or grouping proce- dures. The teachers were then probed for more diagnostic or instructional information. 3. The subjects grouped three students together to identify -two that were similar and one that was different in terms of reading successes, failures, habits, and interests. The 16Wilcox, Measuring Decision Assumptions, p. 1. 17Hunt, Teachers Are Psychologists, p. 5. 18Hunt, Interview. 50 procedure was repeated five times after which the teacher identified two successful pupils and one unsuccessful pupil to compare. After noting the differences between the successful and unsuccessful pupils, the teachers were asked to identify the source of the success. 4. Finally, the subjects responded to specific directed questions posed by the interviewer (see Appendix A). Teacher Identity To protect the identity of the teachers and to respect their privacy in discussing very sensitive issues, each teacher was assigned an identification code which consisted of letters and numbers. All of the teachers from Warren Woods were assigned WW preceding a number. Similarly, the Ypsilanti teachers were assigned the letter Y. Numbers were assigned to each teacher according to the order of the interview. For example, the first Warren Woods teacher to be interviewed was WW#l followed by WW#2, WW#3, and so on to WW#lO. The same procedure was followed for the Ypsilanti teachers. When the teachers' quotations are included, the quotations are followed by the teachers' identifica- tion codes. Data Analysis The data of the study were the taped interviews which were transcribed. The transcripts ranged from seven to thirteen pages in length. Because the data were qualitative in the form of transcripts, content analysis was used to examine the data. Using transcriptions of the interviews was different than the procedure used by Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel who analyzed the 51 actual tapes. They opposed the use of typed transcripts because the transcripts "fail to capture such rich qualities as the teacher's tone of voice, emphasis and hesitations."19 Although Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel make a strong argument against transcribing tapes, for the purpose of this study, the transcripts provided a clearer content for analysis than the cassette tapes. The researcher believed that reading the transcripts was less subjective and easier to replicate than listening to tapes for tone of voice, emphasis, and hesitations. Once the tapes were transcribed, content analysis as defined by Hayes, Krippendroff, and Alexander was begun. Hayes defined content analysis as "the determination of characteristics of a source from the natural—language utterances it emits."20 Content analysis was further clarified by Krippendroff who stated that: . content analysis be restricted to the use of replicable and valid methods for making specific inferenges from the text to other states and properties of its source. Additionally, Alexander defined content analysis by supporting qualita- tive content analysis. He stated that content analysis was employed as 19Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Study of Teachers' Understandings, p. 47 20David G. Hayes, "Linguistic Foundations for a Theory of Content Analysis,” in The Analyses of Communication Content, ed. George Gerbner, Ole R. Holsti, Klaus Krippendroff, William J. Palsey, and Philip J. Stone (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1969), p. 65. 2'Klaus Krippendroff, "Models of Messages: Three Prototypes," in The Anal ses of Communication Content, ed. George Gerbner et al. (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1969), p. 70. 52 a diagnostic tool for making inferences about some aspects of the speaker's purportive behavior.22 Furthennore, he stated: 1. qualitative analysis of a limited number of crucial communi- cations may often yield better clues to the particular intentions of a particular speaker. 2. the important fact about that content feature for his infer- ence may merely be that it occurs at all within a prescribed communication. 3 Pool supported Alexander by stating that qualitative or nonfrequency analysis can establish categories.24 Finally, Glaser and Strauss described the analysis of qualita- tive data using the Constant Comparative Method.25 When using the method suggested by Glaser and Strauss, emerging data were continually fitted into existing categories or new categories were created.26 Therefore, the procedures of content analysis used in this study were derived from Hayes, Krippendroff, Alexander, and Glaser and Strauss. The procedures utilized coding schemes and qualitative analysis to make inferences from the interviews and to establish categories which allowed emerging data to fit and new categories to develop. 22Alexander, "Approaches to Content Analysis,” p. 7. 231pm. pp. 7 and 11. 24Ithiel De Sola Pool, "Trends in Content Analysis Today: A Summary," in Trends in Content Analysis, ed. Ithiel De Sola Pool (Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1959), p. 191. 25Glaser and Strauss, Discovery of Grounded Theory, p. 105. 251pm. 53 Coding Schemes . The content analysis method employed in the study used coding schemes for producing descriptions as suggested by Garfinkel.27 To produce descriptions which attempted to accurately identify teachers' conceptions of reading, coding schemes were empirically and theoreti- cally derived similar to those used by Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel.28 Empirically derived codihg schemgg. The empirically derived coding schemes emerged from reading the transcripts similar to the suggestions of Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel,29 Alexander,30 and 3] From reading the transcripts, the teachers' Glaser and Strauss. responses were divided into the following groups which appeared to represent the way in which the teachers discussed reading and organized information about reading: (1) what the teachers said about grouping, the class, the children, and the reading program; (2) what the teachers said about instructional techniques and about reading in the content areas; and (3) what the teachers said about their beliefs concerning instructional needs, themselves, desired changes, successes, and beliefs. Within each of these three general groups of responses, descriptions were identified. For example, teachers said that they 27Garfinkel, Studies in Ethnompthodology, p. 20. 28Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Study of Teachers' Understandings, p. 46. 29 Ibid. 30Alexander, "Approaches to Content Analysis,“ p. 24. 3lGlaser and Strauss, Discovery of Grounded Theory, p. 105. 54 created instructional groups according to previous records, formal testing, informal testing, maturity, convenience, and performance. Therefore, an empirical coding scheme was developed in which the six teacher grouping procedures could be identified (see Appendix C). The information about grouping procedures was transferred to a coding sheet entitled "Groups Developed By" (see Appendix C), and the transcripts were examined for comments that would fit one of the six bases for grouping as described by the teachers. The results were then recorded on a grid which is presented in Appendix D. A similar procedure was followed to identify the teachers' reading programs, descriptions of their classes, children, teaching techniques, and their stated beliefs. Following content analysis using the empirically derived coding schemes, a second type of content analysis was pursued. The second analysis utilized theoretically derived coding schemes. Theoretically derived coding schemes. The theoretically derived coding schemes were developed to provide a frame of reference for the teachers' reading conceptions and to produce accurate descrip- tions of teacher conceptions of reading in order to answer the research questions: (1) In what ways can teachers' views be classified? and (2) Are the teachers' views similar to some codified models of reading? The theoretically derived coding schemes were developed from two sources. First, Hunt's B-P-E paradigm was used to determine if teachers viewed reading in terms of behavior (B), persons (P), or the environment (E).32 Second, Singer and Ruddell's Theoretical Models 32David E. Hunt, "Person-Environment Interaction: A Challenge Found Wanting Before It Was Tried," Review of Educational Research 45 (Spring, 1975):218. 55 and Processes of Reading, Second Edition, was used as a guide to deter- mine if the teachers' conceptions of reading were similar to any of the four types of models presented in the book. Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel stated that it was significant to note if there was no agree- ment between the themes reflected by the teachers and the theoretical viewpoints.33 Using the Review of the Literature, a set of descriptors was created that could be identified with Hunt's B-P-E Model and the four models from Singer and Ruddell's Theoretical Models and Processes, Second Edition (see Appendix C). Those descriptors were put on coding sheets which were used to reexamine the findings of the empirically derived coding schemes. For example, in Hunt's B-P-E paradigm E represents descriptions of school environment. By reviewing the results from the empirically derived coding schemes (see Appendix D), only one teacher was found who made a statement about school environ- ments. Qualitative Analysis Once the coding schemes were devised and the coding sheets constructed (see Appendix C), the transcripts were reread fifteen times (one for each coding sheet). As the transcripts were read, teachers' comments that reflected a specific issue were recorded on a coding sheet. For example, as the teachers discussed the number of instructional groups that they had, one teacher said, ”I have three. Doesn't everybody?“ (WW#S) Therefore, on her coding sheet under 33Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Study of Teachers' Understandings, p. 46 56 Description of Class, Groups, 3, I'I have three. Doesn't everybody?" was written. This information was used in two ways: (1) the teachers' comments were used to elaborate on the findings in Chapter IV; and (2) in Coding Results (Appendix D), there was a check under WW#S for three groups. Categories From the coding procedures, teachers were categorized according to what they said about their groups, classes, and children, what they said about instructional techniques, and what they said about their beliefs. That information is presented on tables in Chapter IV showing the number of teachers fitting into specific categories. Using those categories and the information about what teachers said, two summary categories were developed. The summary categories attempted to show the relative importance teachers place on human factors and production factors in reading and the types of cues teachers used in making deci- sions about reading. Summary This study consisted of the analysis of in—depth interviews which were conducted with teachers to determine their conceptions of reading. Through an analysis of what teachers said during the inter- views, the research questions were answered by categorizing teacher responses and matching the teacher responses with codified models of reading. The interviews were nonscheduled standardized interviews using a variation of the Rep Test which required teachers to sort 57 fifteen of their students and answer questions about reading. Because the interview was of the nonscheduled standardized type, the teachers periodically were asked probing questions to elicit further explana- tions to their responses. Following the interviews, coding schemes were employed to analyze the content of the interviews. Both empirically and theoretically derived coding schemes were used to develop descriptions. CHAPTER IV FINDINGS Introduction The purpose of the study was to describe teachers' reading con- ceptions which emerged from an analysis of in-depth interviews using a modification of George Kelly's Role Concept Repertory test. The findings were presented in three ways. First, the results of the empirically and theoretically derived coding schemes were presented on tables and supported by quotations. Secondly, answers to the research questions are presented. Lastly, a brief discussion of the generali- zability of the findings appears at the conclusion of the chapter. Results of Coding Schemes The sets of categories which emerged from the coding schemes used to analyze the content of the teacher transcripts were presented in two sections: findings from Empirically Derived Coding Schemes and findings from Theoretically Derived Coding Schemes. Findings From Empirically Derived Coding Schemes To present the findings of the empirically derived coding schemes, categories of responses were used which represent what the 58 59 teachers said about grouping practices, the classroom organization, the children, instructional practices, and their stated beliefs. Following the information about what the teachers said, two summary categories are described: orientations and decision stimuli. Orientations referred to the teachers' emphasis on human factors and production factors when discussing reading. Decision stimuli referred to the information sources that the teachers described as being important when making decisions about reading. Such information sources were learners, materials, or self. What the Teachers Said About Grouping Practices As the teachers sorted their pupils during the Rep Test, they described six bases in which pupils were grouped for reading instruction. An explanation of the six bases for grouping were developed for presentation below. Six Bases of Grouping Previous records: Teachers examined records and report cards from the previous school year. Formal testing: Achievement tests results such as the Metropolitan Achievement Test were used by the teachers to determine instructional levels. Informal testing: Graded oral reading paragraphs, locally con— structed tests, and tests related to the materials used in class were the informal measures used by the teachers. Maturity: Teachers made informal observations of the pupils' behavior and development in relationship to other children. Convenience: Groups were developed according to numbers of groups and children that the teacher could manage efficiently. 60 Productivity: Groups were developed according to work habits, assignments outcomes, and rate of reading (the number of words read per minute). Table 2 shows the number of teachers who stated that they used the six grouping bases, either alone or in combination. Four teachers devised groups by a combination of previous records and informal testing. Table 2.--Method of Grouping.* 2 Groups Developed By Previous Records Formal Testing Informal Testing Maturity Convenience Productivity Combinations a. Previous Records--Informal b Formal and Informal \lOSUl-wafl _: mN—J—‘O‘l-b c. Testing and Productivity d. Maturity and Productivity —I—‘I'\JJ> *Some teachers mentioned more than one method. The teachers who used previous records stated that previous records were useful because the records identified a starting place for administering graded oral reading paragraphs. One teacher explained she usually had children start reading at the level indicated by the previous teacher and then added, ”If they miss seven words on a page, then I move them down . . . and depending on how they read, I move them to another book or put them in that particular book” (WW #4)- Conversely, another teacher opposed the use of previous records to avoid being prejudiced against the students (WW #1). I/ l- 1 61 Some of the teachers did not do their own grouping but relied on a reading consultant or other outside sources. Teacher Eight from Warren Woods used the reading consultant to give graded oral reading paragraphs to her entire class but most of the teachers who used outside help for grouping did it only for specific students who had problems in reading. Of the teachers who stated that the students were grouped according to convenience, one frankly said, "I really hate to handle more than four groups myself. It's frustrating (Y #10)." Her complaint was common and was reflected in the statements of six other teachers. They stated that it was difficult to work with the wide range of reading levels and problems found within their classrooms. The other teacher who grouped because of convenience at the beginning of the year found it necessary to regroup as the children became more indepen- dent in their reading (Y #1). Those who based grouping arrangements on work habits used distinctive formats. Although one teacher used a variety of diagnostic procedures in the Fall, her two instructional groups were distinguished by students who worked independently and those who had difficulty work- ing independently.(Y #4). She instructed the children who could work independently and gave them weekly assignments. The students who had difficulty working independently met daily with the teacher's student teacher. Another teacher who used productivity as a basis for her reading groups used student performances on weekly spelling lists and accompanying worksheets as criteria for a group placement. Following the introduction of the weekly list containing words with regular phonic patterns (such as pep, fee, pep), the teacher says, "Who needs help with 62 it?" From the responses to that question, the groups and activities for the week were developed (Y #5). In another classroom where productivity was cited by the teacher as being a key factor in grouping practices, the speed (words per minute) at which the students read selected passages was the basis on which grouping and instructional assignments were made (WW #10). What Teachers Said About Classroom Organization The teachers discussed classroom organization in relationship to grouping practices. When grouping practices and classroom organi- zation were explained by the teachers, the number and types of groups emerged as important issues. Twelve teachers did not have the traditional three group patterns but used a variety of grouping combina- tions including basal groups, flexible skill groups, and individualized instruction. Five teachers (WW #2, #3, #4, #6, and #9) had three groups. Prior to the interview, Warren Woods #6 said, "I have three groups. Doesn't everybody?” Three teachers (WW #2 and #4 and Y #7) who described their classes as being organized around basal reading levels commented that all the children within each basal group were not on the same instructional level. Those teachers mentioned that the students whom they considered to be the most able and had reading levels well above the majority of their classmates were put in a basal reader one grade level above their grade placement. The numbers in Table 3 represented the teachers' descriptions of their classroom organization which included information on the number and types of groups. 63 Table 3.--C1assroom Organization. Organization N Number of Groups: More than 3 10 3 5 Less than 3 2 Individualized 10 Combination 7 Range—-Many instructional levels within the class 6 Flexible groups--Frequently regrouped 6 Grouped according to: ill 7 Instructional level 9 Not all group members are on the same level 3 When describing the numbers and types of groups, the teachers' comments reflected both personal opinions as well as some local issues. For example, five Ypsilanti teachers had flexible skill groups as opposed to one Warren Woods teacher. This was attributable to the fact that flexible grouping (the practice of regrouping as children master skills) was an integral part of the Ypsilanti in-service program. Another example of a local issue was a complaint registered by a Warren Woods teacher (WW #1). She wanted Joplin plan grouping but such an organizational pattern was against school district policy. In explaining the reasons behind the number of instructional groups, some teachers referred back to their diagnostic information while others stated opinions which gave insights about their concep- tions of reading. Warren Woods #1, who was the previously-mentioned proponent of the Joplin Plan, stated that on the basis of diagnostic tests given at the beginning of the year she divided her class into 64 two groups. The top group was individualized and included "anybody who scores middle second grade or above." The lower group was sent to the reading resource teacher. Another teacher stated that the three groups of first grade children represent ”nonreaders, ready to read, and learned to read (WW #9)." Within the "learned to read" group, there were some children who learned to read with some kind of reading instruction and other children who learned naturally or without instruction, according to the teacher. The term "individualized" needed clarification as teachers tended to operationalize the term in different ways. Some described instruction as being individualized when all students were doing the same types of activities but at different rates (WW #10 and Y #6). For example, a class was described as doing “individualized basal" work (Y #6). After probing, the “individualized—basal" technique was described as allowing students to proceed through basals at paces selected by the students. Similarly, another teacher upon completion of the initial sort, had one pile of cards in which the students were arranged in order of their reading rate (reading speed) because the teacher stated that she individualizes according to the rate at which the students proceed through activities such as a speed reading machine, the S.R.A. Readipg Laboratory, and Reader's Digest Skill Builders (WW #10). Basically, all of the children were doing the same activities and using the same material. Four other teachers described individualized instruction as allowing student self-selection and including varieties of activities according to pupil needs and interests (WW #3, WW #9, Y #3, and Y #8). 65 Although the basal textbooks were the primary instructional tools used by the teachers, they described varying activities which were used to supplement basal teaching or were used instead of basals. However, diverse patterns developed which illustrated that the teachers used different activities with children of different reading levels. Table 4 illustrated the activities used with high, middle, and low groups. The majority of teachers tended to use the same general types of activities with students of different levels. Six teachers stated that they used different types of activities while fourteen teachers used the same types of activities with children of different reading levels. The designations of "different“ or "same" were difficult to identify and may have reflected a bias of the researcher concerning definition of different activities. To illustrate the point, an excerpt from a teacher transcript is used: Interviewer: . . . What are you doing with the four groups? Teacher: Well, I'm doing something different with each group (Y #7). After explaining the instructional activities for each, the teacher was asked to identify the source of material and responded: Teacher: Whatever is along with the Teacher's Guide. Interviewer: Are you using a basal? Teacher: Yes (Y #7 . Although the teacher stated that each group was doing different activities, a basal textbook still remained the key instructional tool for all groups as the teacher had all four instructional groups in different basal textbooks and followed the plans presented in the Teacher's Guide. She did not create new activities for the groups or vary her overall instructional techniques other than those techniques 66 Table 4.--Activities for Groups. High Readers Middle Readers Low Readers WW] Individualized Reading Teacher WW2 Basals ' 1. WW3 Self-selection Basals Basals WW4 Basals Basals Basals (More oral reading) WW Basals Basals Basals WW6 Basals Basals Basals WW7 (Less oral reading) Basals WW8 Basals Basals (Individualized language arts) WW9 (Self-selection, Language Listening, aware- individualized experience ness, perception, oral reading) coordination WW10 Speed readers and 2. kits Y1 Basals Basals Listening and language experience Y Basals Basals Basals Y3 Language experience, 2. research skills, self-selection Y4 Contracts 3. Y5 Contracts 2. Y6 Individualized-basal 2. Y7 Basals Basals Basals Y8 Individualized (self Basals Basals selection) Y9 Skill groups 2. Y10 Basals Basals Basals 1. One child has programmed materials. 2. Same general procedures for different groups or individuals. 3. Weekly or daily contracts developed according to work habits. 67 prescribed in the teachers' edition of the basal textbooks. Furthermore, she was one of the teachers who had a top reading group that included students having a wide range of high instructional reading levels. Warren Woods #3 and #9 and Ypsilanti #3 and #8 indicated that they used self-selection for students who have mastered reading skills. The children who have mastered reading skills, according to the teachers, selected their own reading material and met with the teacher individually for conferences regarding the reading material. One of the teachers was a sixth grade teacher while the others were primary teachers. What Teachers Said About Instructional Techniques In examining the instructional techniques described by the teachers, the basals appeared to influence the teachers more than in-service training and seemed to cause internal conflicts within teachers regarding instructional practices. For example, although Warren Woods has changed basal series from a phonics oriented basal series in the primary grades to a more comprehensive basal series and has had in-service training focusing on language development, creative expression and comprehension rather than phonics, half of the teachers referred to the previous basal and were using parts of the materials from the original basal readers. In fact, when one teacher (WW #9) who continued to use the previous basal was asked if it corresponded with her philosophy of reading, she responded that it did not. Similarly, in Ypsilanti, a teacher (Y #1) taught readiness skills from Scott Foresman prior to a recent first grade adoption of Houghton- Mifflin and a kindergarten adoption of Ginn. The teacher stated that 68 all of the readiness ideas were important from each reading program and that she teaches all of them to the children as she did not want the children to miss any skills. Specifically, she said that she teaches all of the readiness skills from the three publishers. From her explanation, there appeared to be no integration of skills from basal to basal. When the teachers described the ways in which the basals were used, they focused on the basal plus comprehension or the basal plus phonics. Thirteen teachers discussed emphasizing the phonics instruc- tional components of the basals or supplementing the basal work with additional phonetic drill. Sixteen teachers discussed comprehension activities related to the basal. There was some overlap. Warren Woods Five, who had all of her students in basals, identified her pupils according to their comprehension or phonetic strengths and weaknesses. Despite the different in-service emphasis in the two districts, most of the instructional techniques described by the twenty teachers were similar. Only two local issues emerged during discussions of instructional techniques: skill hierarchies and contracts, both of which were covered in the Ypsilanti in-service. Four Ypsilanti teachers referred to hierarchies. Although two of these teachers did not use hierarchies for instructional purposes, the teachers mentioned that skill hierarchies were a guide to which they could refer (Y #1 and Y #3). Three Ypsilanti teachers used contracts but the contracts were directed toward work schedules or spelling, not specifically reading. For example, some weekly and daily contracts were developed because of work habits (Y #4), some because of spelling performance (Y #5), and some to keep track of pupil pace through the basal (Y #6). 69 The remaining thirteen teachers who did not use contracts and the three teachers who used skill hierarchies used similar techniques, such that their descriptions of instructional techniques appeared to be common across school districts despite different in-service training. A possible explanation for the commonality of techniques between districts was the use of the same basals in both districts. Table 5 was used to present the types of instructional tech- niQues described by the teachers. As previously noted, sixteen teachers identified comprehension as an important instructional technique. In fact, a teacher said, “It doesn't matter if you can call a word. If you don't understand what you're reading, it's useless" (Y #8). Although the teachers did iden- tify comprehension as an instructional technique, they did not identify inferential or evaluative thinking as components of comprehension. Eight teachers discussed following directions as a separate comprehen- sion skill and sixteen teachers discussed literal comprehension. Comprehension appeared to be defined by the teachers during the inter- views as a general understanding of a story or answering questions. The teachers who used spelling as an integral part of their reading programs discussed the relationship between spelling and phonics instruction. Specifically, one teacher (Y #5) used performance on spelling lists and worksheets as the basis for all reading instruc- tion. Another teacher said: I believe in phonics because it's the foundation to reading and spelling. I can't spell well but since I've been teaching reading my spelling has improved (WW #6). Writing was an instructional technique that two teachers said they used in teaching reading, in addition to four teachers who used 70 Table 5.--Instructional Techniques.* Technique Kits Phonics Writing Choral Reading Spelling Machines Language experience approach Sight words Comprehension Research skills/study skills Following directions Contracts Trade books Movement--exercise, balance Listening Skill hierarchies Sustained silent reading Self—selection .—a —‘O‘l —J—l Chw-D-b—JOSWOD-hm-H-bNO—‘U'I *One teacher identified her instructional practices as multi~ media and used eleven of the above techniques. Also, some teachers identified materials such as kits and trade books as techniques. 71 forms of the language experience approach. The use of writing as part of reading was clearly separated from the language experience approach. Teachers who used the language experience approach either specifically stated that they used the language experience approach or mentioned dictations. When the two teachers (WW #2 and Y #5) discussed using writing, they spoke of mechanical tasks, such as copying poetry or drilling on punctuation. The emphasis on the mechanical aspects of writing persisted despite the fact that teachers from both school districts had received in-service training utilizing creative expres- sion. Eleven teachers described their pupils according to their reliance on sight words. For example, Warren Woods #5 called a student "a sight word reader" and Ypsilanti #9 said that her faster children "filled quite a stack of sight words." However, the teachers did not describe how they taught sight words. While six teachers discussed using trade books, four of the six teachers described pupil self-selection as a teaching technique and expressed a desire for more trade books. Those teachers using self- selection noted that their students had mastered enough reading skills to be independent readers. Two teachers regarded reading trade books as something to occupy free time. Oral reading. Oral reading was an instructional technique that received attention although only three teachers identified oral reading as a key element of their instructional program. In fact, two teachers commented that they were trying to do less. The teachers who identi- fied oral reading as an instructional practice used it in a variety of 72 ways. Three teachers used more or less oral reading depending on the child's reading competence. For example, poor readers had more oral reading than good readers (WW #4). Four others used oral reading for evaluation or practice. Ypsilanti #3 used oral reading to check pupil progress while Ypsilanti #7 explained that oral reading was a way that student practiced reading for improvement. Three teachers were particularly strong in their statements concerning oral reading as seen in the following quotations: Y 7: They're oral reading. I have everyone of my kids everyday read orally because I think that's very important. So what if they can read with their eyes? How do we know if they're reading the right words, you know? Y 10: We read orally around the class, one sentence at a time so that everybody tries. A lot of people will miss on words and things, but it keeps moving, and it keeps them following along . . . WW 4: I do oral reading two ways. I have eight tutors and they listen to the kids read. . ad I usually do only the four low kids who need that oral— —type reading. For the children in the classrooms of the teachers quoted above, oral reading was a daily occurrence. The numbers in Table 6 illustrate the uses of oral reading in instruction as described by the teachers. Content area reading. A discussion of the use of reading in the content areas gave insight about the teacher's views of reading as an integrated process. Five teachers did not refer to reading in any content area. In Warren Woods, one teacher (WW #9) spoke of the content areas in general while the other fourteen teachers who men- tioned reading in the content areas identified specific areas. For example, the Warren Woods teachers only discussed spelling, writing, 73 Table 6.--Oral Reading. Oral Reading N Occurs daily with each child Less than daily With certain children To tutors For evaluation For practice For descriptions of the children Would like to do less Did not mention oral reading LDNNNN—‘www and creative dramatics which were all to be considered within language arts while the Ypsilanti teachers mentioned social studies, science, math along with language arts. Insights regarding teachers' conceptions of reading in the content areas were gained by examining some teacher, comments about reading in the content areas. For example, a teacher (Y #10) discussed reading in the content areas as a way to build vocabu~ lary and gain information. The teacher (Y #1) who identified math was comparing the math performance of a child to his reading performance, and said, ". . . there must be a relationship.” The school districts were viewed separately since local issues emerged during the teachers' discussions of reading in the content areas. Because the Warren Woods in—service program focused on integrating language arts and reading and the Ypsilanti in-service contained a component in which reading in all the content areas was discussed, the teachers' responses reflected the differences in training. To illustrate what the teachers said about the teaching of reading in the content areas, Table 7 contains the numbers of teachers 74 Table 7.—-Content Area Reading.a Content Area Reading Warre? Woods YPSZA?ntl Content area in general Language Arts Spelling Writing b Creative dramatics Social Studies Science Math OOONWO‘Ofl—J #wNNN-hNO aSome teachers responded to more than one area; and five teachers did not mention content area. bCreative dramatics as defined by some teachers was doing the plays in the basals. from each district who discussed content area reading as an instruc- tional practice. To review instructional techniques, the findings indicated: (1) teachers interviewed used a variety of materials and techniques but basals seemed to be the most important instructional tool; (2) teachers interviewed limit comprehension to questions at the literal level; (3) phonics and spelling instruction were considered to be more impor- tant than teaching sight words; (4) oral reading seemed important to three of the twenty teachers interviewed; and (5) reading instruction occurred within the content areas of fifteen of the teachers inter- viewed. What Teachers Said About Parent Role Because the teachers' transcripts contained many references to the home and parents, parents were considered to be within viewpoints 75 of reading. Some teachers included parents as part of their instruc- tional programs by utilizing parents as tutors while other teachers used parents for support through communication and positive reinforce- ment of the teachers' attitudes, pupils' attitudes, and teachers' instructional goals. When a teacher was asked to note if the inter- viewer missed anything about her beliefs about reading, she responded: Well, one thing, I do believe that it does, it starts in the home, and I can really tell the kids whose parents will really sit down and take time to read with the kids, read to them, listen to the kids read, or just really spend a lot of time with the kids. I think it is very important (Y #2). To add support, another teacher (Y #8) said that it took six years of schooling to help a child catch up if the parents did not actively participate in reading early at the home. Two teachers (WW #4 and Y #4) stated that they depended on home support through weekly communi- cations; one of those teachers (WW #4) felt that her reading program was faltering because the parents were not responding to her communications. The parent-home role was presented in Table 8. Table 8.--Parent-Home Role. Parent-Home Role N Parent serves as classroom aide Influence-~attitude . Home tutor--after school assistance Foundations--read at home, provide experiences \JNtDN How the Teachers Described the Children Because the responses to the Rep Test focused on comparing children, the teachers described their students in ways which provide 76 insights about their conceptions of reading. The descriptions can be categorized into descriptions of personal traits and descriptions of instructional performance. Descriptions of personal traits focused on such attributes as age, self-image, economic background, health, and many other descriptions that can be applied outside of instructional settings. Conversely, descriptions of instructional performance were attributes, such things as work habits, reading level, needs practice, and other terms used within instructional settings. The teachers used more descriptions of personal traits than instructional traits when comparing the children. In Table 9, the categories of personal traits and instructional performance are presented with corresponding attri- butes. The number of teachers responding to each attribute is given. Combinations of attitude, work habits, and independent were used by the teachers thirteen times to describe children. They often referred to children as ”good little workers," "liking to work," or "independent workers." After describing her students as good, inde- pendent, or capable workers, a teacher said, "Okay, my goal is kids being able to use reading to work independently. My aim is to really make them functionally independent . . ." (WW #2). Teachers who appeared to be committed to the basals identified their students according to the grade level or reading level. They said that the child was "a strong third grade reader," "a weak third grade reader, or "a good solid third grade reader." Although teachers described the children according to reading or grade levels, only one teacher (Y #7) identified children according to their relative position within a group. For example, when she described three boys she said, 77 Table 9.--Descriptions of Children. Description N Personal Traits Self—image Social-emOtional Race Age Language--Language development 1 Economic Creative ability Potential Maturity Health Attitudes 1 Intelligence Interest Home life Discipline problem Motivation/Self—discipline Leader Frustrating Shy Nd-‘(fl-DKDOWN-bbmw—‘WO-bfimm Instructional Performance Work habits Independenta Achievement Needs one to one work with teacher Learning styles Attention span Reading/Grade level Fits into group Needs encouragement Needs rewards Needs practice Natural readers —J H b cud DOW-h-b-‘U'l—J-‘Ol-HO aIndependent was defined by the teachers as the ability to work without assistance. bFour of the teachers identified students as natural readers who learned without instruction. 78 ". . . are really at the top of that group" and "he's in the low group, the lowest group I have but he's the top one in that group." Because teachers simultaneously described children in terms of personal traits and instructional performance, it was difficult to categorize them into two clearly definitive groups. However, some teachers reused specific descriptions a sufficient number of times to categorize them as having tendencies toward conceptualizing reading through either personal or instructional descriptions of children. For example, some teachers emphasized the home, family life, health, or intelligence of the students as being such major factors influencing the pupils' reading that the teachers appeared to have little or no impact on the children's reading progress. The teachers who relied heavily on such personal traits did not describe themselves as being in control of reading instruction. For example, a teacher (Y #2) who stated that she believed that the home was an important factor influ- encing reading success was asked what she needed to help the children who were having difficulty and she responded, I'The answer." She further explained, "It starts in the home, and I can really tell the kids whose parents will really sit down and take time to read to them " Conversely, teachers who tended to dwell on instructional performance seemed to be saying that they were in control and could teach reading. Specifically, a teacher (Y #5) who described children primarily in instructional terms said, "There's always a way to teach reading to somebody." 79 What Teachers Said About Their Stated Beliefs Throughout the interviews, the teachers interjected their beliefs by prefacing certain comments with "I believe," or "I think," or similar statements. In addition, twice during the interviews, they were asked if anything important concerning their beliefs about reading was omitted from the discussion. The information that was obtained from the interjected beliefs and questions concerning their beliefs are reflected in the following three categories: human; environmental; and material-technique. Teachers who could be classi- fied as having human belief orientations stated that the attitudes of parents, teachers, and pupils influenced reading. Those teachers who had environmental orientations primarily stressed the home, although one teacher discussed the size of the school as having an impact on reading. Classrooms were not included in the environmental category as classroom environments were not mentioned by any of the teachers. Those teachers who referred to materials and techniques in stating their beliefs seemed to be supporting their own instructional programs. Some comments did not adequately fit into the three categories. One teacher (Y #6) stated that she did not know what she believed. Three teachers discussed reading as a foundation for school and life success (Y #1, Y #4, and WW #7). Similarly, three teachers added that reading was something applied to other cUrricular areas (WW #2, WW #10, and Y #4). Table 10 was used to present the numbers of teachers who selected attributes within human, environmental, material-techniques, and other categories to describe their beliefs about reading. 80 Table 10.--Stated Beliefs.* Belief Human Teacher attitudes Parental attitudes Student attitudes Learning styles Environmental Home School Materials—Technique Basal Phonics Self-selection Skills Comprehension Hierarchies Research Sight words Writing Speed Literature Multi-media approach Other Foundation (for life) . Application (for school success) I don't know NVV-fl -'.:> N—l—l—lN—lNN—J—l‘“ —l *Some teachers gave multiple responses. 81 Of teachers discussing human belief orientations, only one (Y #9) discussed the teacher's attitudes. After discussing learning styles, she said, "Well, I guess one thing I like to think of is humaneness. That's the key word. I think if I'm humane . . . even in reading, it comes easier." The other teachers who were identified as having human belief orientations discussed pupil and parent attitudes. As an example of teachers believing in reading as a foundation, a teacher (Y #4) said, "Well, my philosophy in reading is that it is a very important skill . . . I feel that getting aggood start is important." A good start was important because, she noted, it was the basis for success in junior high and high school. She continued, "I am not a believer in the sight vocabulary nor in just phonics, but I have a blend of both because of the children and the way we learn." Additional information emerged from combining categories. For example, the human, environmental, and material-techniques orientations were combined for a reexamination of the data. From this reexamination, teachers were found to reflect a single orientation toward attitudes, environments, and materials-techniques, or combinations of two or three of the orientations. For example, seven teachers' beliefs focused only on material-technique orientations while five had a combined orientation of human-materials. To illustrate the orientations, Table 11 was constructed. The primary orientation of the teachers' beliefs was toward materials and techniques. When teachers discussed their beliefs in terms of materials-techniques, they were usually defending their instructional procedures or materials. Although two teachers (WW #2) and (WW #9) stated that they did not believe in the 82 Table ll.--Be1ief Orientations. Orientation N Single Orientation Human Environment " Materials-techniques \IOOO Combined Orientations Human—environment Environment-materials Human-materials Human-materials-environment olwm-a—I types of materials they were using, the materials helped them reach their instructional goals. Needed for a successful reading program. As teachers discussed their beliefs about reading, they suggested two types of improvements: desired changes and needs. The teachers who stated that they wanted to incorporate changes in their instructional practices referred to self- improvements or modifications in their own teaching strategies. Ypsilanti #1 said, ". . . I'm trying to do less oral reading." Others wanted to individualize, improve their organization and management tech- niques, or initiate diagnostic-prescriptive practices. For example, a teacher explained she wanted to provide challenges for the students and an informal atmosphere in which they could work independently on skills prescribed after a diagnosis (Y #8). The teachers who stated specific needs identified items outside of the teachers' control. For example, those teachers cited administrative changes in class size, tracking 83 procedures, or in remediation, readiness, and retention policies, hiring of additional paraprofessionals, and purchasing of materials such as more basals, co-basals, phonics materials, hardware, kits, and activi- ties as being necessary for improvement.- The teachers who discussed grouping or tracking, class size reductions, and paraprofessionals seemed to reflect the undergirding belief that time was an important factor. With tracking, class size reductions, or paraprofessionals, they said they could spend more instructional time with their students. Specifically, a teacher who identified tracking as necessary for improvement stated that with tracking she would have more time to be with those students who need help (WW #8). Another teacher who supported tracking explained that she would need less planning time and therefore spend more time with the children (Y #7). Further, a teacher who requested smaller class size stated that having a smaller class would allow her to Spend more time with individual pupils (WW #8). In citing the need for more materials, the teachers did not appear to consider existing materials. For example, a teacher (WW #9) stated that she was opposed to the materials of a publisher which had a phonics orientation. However, to improve her reading program, she requested materials from a second publisher having an equally heavy emphasis on phonics. Stated beliefs about self as a reading teacher. The needs that the teachers cited for improvement grew out of expressed feeling about themselves as teachers. Fifteen of the teachers discussed their feeling about themselves as reading teachers. Thirteen had negative 84 feelings. In Table 12, the expressed feeling of the teachers were presented. Table 12.--Thoughts About Self as a Teacher. Thoughts About Self N Overwhelmed Powerless Guilty Unhappy Frustrated Overworked Unrealistic Expectations Excited Doing a Better Job L—amddwdmwd _a 0'1 The teachers who were overwhelmed and overworked complained again of the lack of time to adequately prepare materials and meet the needs of the children. Specifically, one teacher said, Well, I'm overwhelmed by the things in the teaCher's edition. If I did all of that stuff, it would take weeks to do a story. As I am doing now, I do a story in one day (Y #7). Frustrated teachers felt that it was difficult to meet the needs of the children. Warren Woods One was frustrated by children who did not do well in both reading and math, although she was not as frustrated in reading. When teachers expressed guilt and unhappiness, they were referring to their way of handling the materials and teaching the materials. For example, Ypsilanti One felt guilty that she was not using materials prepared by her fellow workshop participants. A teacher (WW #2) who had unrealistic expectations moved from sixth to fourth grade and from a middle class-white collar school to a middle class-blue collar school and she felt that she had difficulty making 85 the transition. Both of the excited teachers and the teacher who said that she was doing a better job identified their in—service training as the reason for positive feelings about their teaching (Y #1 and Y #4). Reasons for instructional successes. Finally, from a discussion of their beliefs, the teachers identified reasons for success. Eight teachers attributed reading success to the children themselves. But in identifying the children as the source of success, four teachers said that certain children learned to read naturally without instruction. Seven teachers attributed success to a technique while four teachers could not identify the source of success. As an example of many of the teachers' comments, a teacher said: Okay, Jonathon has made a great deal of improvement but I'm not sure if it is the technique that I'm using, or if it is due to the fact that he is getting a lot of individualized attention, or if it is due to some skill that he has, I really don't know (Y #4). Only one teacher (WW #5) attributed success to herself as a teacher. Summary of stated beliefs. From a review of the teachers' stated beliefs, teachers focused their beliefs on humans (parents, students, or themselves), on environments (home or school--not the classroom) and on material or techniques. They did not relate their stated beliefs directly to the reading process. When they stated that they believed in specific materials or techniques, it was to justify their own instructional practices. Changes that the teachers desired were internal (self-improvement) or external (administrative or material changes). Most of the teachers were negative about themselves as reading teachers and attributed reading successes to children or techniques rather than self. 86 Summary Categories From the findings of the empirically derived coding schemes, teachers were categorized according to orientations and decision stimuli. Orientations referred to teacher emphasis on either human or production factors. Specifically, as teachers discussed their students, reading, and classroom practices, some teachers emphasized attitude/ interest, language, home/family, and intelligence while other teachers emphasized skill acquisition, work habits, developing independence, or performance, such as oral reading. Decision stimuli referred to the cues teachers appeared to use in making instructional decisions. Teachers tended to make reading decisions based on the children, the materials, or themselves. Orientations. As teachers discussed their students, reading, and classroom practices, they seemed to emphasize human factors and production factors. Four human factors were attitude/interest, language, home/family, and intelligence. Factors identified as produc- tion factor containing three attributes. Table 13 represented the 1 number of teachers mentioning each attribute. Although all twenty the human factor category containing four attributes; and the produc- tion factor containing three attributes. Table 13 represents the number of teachers mentioning each attribute. Although all twenty teachers related that the learning of skills was important, not all of the teachers mentioned all of the production factors. Similarly, not all of the teachers mentioned all of the human factors; therefore, the teachers were divided into those who had high, moderate, or low 87 Table 13.--Human Factors and Production Factors.* Human Factors Attitude- ' Home- . Interest Family Language Intelligence Warren Woods . 6 4 8 5 Ypsilanti 4 7 3 3 Production Factors Learning Developing Work Skills Independence Habits Warren Woods 10 5 8 Ypsilanti 10 5 6 *Some teachers mentioned more than one factor. production orientations or high, moderate, and low human orientations. The following criteria were used to determine the degree of production and human orientations: Production and Human Orientations High production teachers: Concerned that children acquire skills, develop independence, and have good work habits. Described children in terms of productivity such as good work habits, reads well orally, finishes work, etc. Moderate production teachers: Mentioned two of the attributes identified for production. Low production teachers: Identified only one or none of the production attributes. 88 High human teachers: Concerned with all of the human . attributes which include attie tudes--interests, home and famil language, and intelligence. Moderate human teachers: ' Mentioned two or three of the attributes. Low human teachers: Emphasized one or no human attributes. Table 14 presents the number of teachers holding combined orientations. Table l4.--Combined Orientations. ya Production Human N High production High human 1 High production Moderate human 6 High production Low human 1 Moderate production High human 0 Moderate production Moderate human 3 Moderate production Low human 5 Low production High human 0 Low production Moderate human 3 Low production Low human __1 20 The orientation which appeared to be most frequently emphasized was the high production--moderately human; the responses of six teachers fell within that orientation. Decision stimuli. When the teachers described their instruc- tional practices, three stimuli emerged as being used by teachers as cues for making decisions. The three stimuli were the students! personal traits and instructional performance; materials; and the teacher. The decision stimuli identified as materials generally referred to basal texts which were the primary types of instructional 89 reading materials used by the teachers, although some teachers used spelling materials as a decision source. Because of textbook adoption policies, both school districts used basals from the same publishers. When relying on themselves for instructional decisions, the teachers used either their beliefs or intuition. No one mentioned that their knowledge of the reading process influenced their instructional practices which was probably due to this modification of the Rep Test. All of the teachers used their students as cues for making decisions about instructional practices. Teachers placed the emphasis either on the students' instructional performance or the students' personal traits, with ten teachers relying on instructional performance and ten relying on personal traits. In Table 15, the number of teachers who relied on personal traits and instructional performance were presented. Table 15,--Personal Traits and Instructional Performance. Personal Instructional Equal Traits Performance Emphasis Warren Woods 4 6 O Ypsilanti 3 4 3 Total 7 10 3 Five of the teachers who emphasized instructional performance over personal traits were the same teachers who fell within the high production category (see Table 14). Some teachers tended to use only the students as cues for making instructional decisions while others used combinations of the 90 students and materials or self. Two teachers (WW #2 and Y #1) used a combination of all three as cues for making decisions about instruc- tional practices. Many teachers mentioned more than one decision cue. Ypsilanti Ten was categorized as using intuition because she said that she taught reading "like she plays bridge--off the top of her head." The numbers on Table 16 represent the number of teachers who mentioned each stimulus. Table 16.--Decision Stimuli Mentioned by Teachers. Stimuli N Learner Personal traits 15 Instructional performance 2 Equal emphasis 3 Materials Basals 10 Spelling 2 Kits 1 Self Knowledge 0 Beliefs 5 Intuition l The numbers on Table 17 represented how the teachers used the decision stimuli in combination. Table l7.--Decision Stimuli Used by Teachers. Stimuli N Only students as cues 5 Students and materials 9 Students and self 4 Students, materials, and self 2 91 Summary of the Empirically Derived Findings The findings from the empirically derived coding schemes indicated that the teachers discussed reading according to descrip- tions of grouping practices, of their instructional techniques, and of their children in addition to stating their beliefs about reading, desired changes, self as a reading teacher, and instructional successes. From those descriptions, two summary categories of orienta- tions and decision stimuli emerged. The high production-moderately human orientation was the most popular and was held by six teachers. In making decisions about reading, nine teachers relied on a combination of students and materials as cues for reading decisions. fjndings from Theoretically Derived—Coding Schemes The findings from the theoretically derived coding schemes were developed after rereading the transcripts and examining the findings of the empirically derived coding schemes. The first group of cate- gories derived from the theoretical coding schemes were from Hunt's B-P-E Paradigm. Next, a second group emerged which related to four models of reading presented in Singer and Ruddell's Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Second Edition. Hunt's B-P-E Paradigm The transcripts and previous findings were reviewed to look for descriptions of behaviors, persons, environments, and relationships between those three characteristics in the manner described by Hunt. The empirically derived teacher orientations showed that teachers viewed reading in terms of human and production orientations. The 92 human and production orientations were similar to Hunt's person and behavior descriptions presented in Chapters II and III and Appendix C. As was previously described, the category labeled as "high performance- moderate human" received the largest number of teacher responses. Thus, from the teachers' descriptions, a relationship seemed to exist between behaviors and persons because teachers most frequently described their students in terms of a combination of instructional performance, work habits and independence, and personal traits or attitudes. The environ- ment component of the paradigm received little recognition by the teachers as they primarily focused on the home rather than the school environment. Only one teacher (WW #9) mentioned the school environment but she did not mention materials or the other aspects of the classroom environment which were under her control. Theoretical Models To categorize the teachers' viewpoints of reading according to the four models presented in Singer and Ruddell's Theoretical Models end Processes of Reading, Second Edition, the findings presented concerning teachers' descriptions of children and instructional tech- niques were reread to see if the teachers used any of the terms which were identified with each model as presented in Chapters II and III and Appendix C. Psycholinguistic models. A number of teachers described various aspects of the psycholinguistic models. Table 18 presents the number of teachers who described each component of psycholinguistics. The teachers who discussed the language experience approach were counted as those who saw a connection between language and thought but the 93 Table 18.4-Psycholinguistic Models. Psycholinguistic Models N Language and Thought Multimedia Approaches Learning to read--natural 7 Communication 0 Reading and Writing Related 6 Goal of Comprehension* 4 Relevance ‘ 0 Flexibility 6 l 4 . *Although fifteen teachers mentioned comprehension as an instructional technique, within that group four teachers mentioned comprehension as an instructional goal. possibility existed to also classify the language experience approach under communication. Besides communication, another descriptor which was difficult to code was relevance. No one specifically mentioned relevance, although one teacher stated that the basal series needed updating (WW #3). More teachers mentioned components of the psycholinguistic models than the information processing and developmental models. Although no teacher comments were identified solely with one model, four teachers (WW #8, Y #3, and Y #8) mentioned three or four of the psycholinguistic terms. Warren Woods Six and Ten and Ypsilanti Two and Four did not mention any component of the psycholinguistic models. Information processing models. To look for teachers whose views closely matched information processing models, the descriptions of instructional techniques were reexamined. Some teachers discussed phonics, speed, self-instructional materials, attention, and skills hierarchies which were identified in Chapters II and III and Appendix C 94 as descriptors of the Information Processing Model. Phonics instruc- tion, which was mentioned by twelve teachers, was the most frequently identified component of information processing. The visual components, such as scanning and fixations, were ignored by the teachers. Ypsilanti One, who appeared to have incorporated more of the psycholinguistic model into her instruction, mentioned three of the infbrmation pro- cessing components which was the most mentioned by a teacher. The data presented in Table 19 represent the number of teachers who responded to each component of the Information Processing Model. Table l9.--Information Processing. Information Processing N Visual Process Attention* Fixations Scanning Phonics . 1 Speed Accurate Decoding Automaticity Stages Self-Instructional Materials Close Procedure Skills Hierarchy #O-‘OOOONOO-HO *Attention, as in attention span, was mentioned by a teacher. She did not discuss visual attention. Developmental models. The developmental models were not closely related to the teachers' conceptions, although a few aspects of these models were mentioned by the teachers. As previously noted, four of the teachers mentioned hierarchies (Y #1, Y #2, Y #9, and Y #10), and four teachers mentioned age as a factor (WW #1, WW #6, 95 WW #9, and Y #8). Of that group of teachers, Warren Woods Nine also mentioned maturity. The teachers who used self-selection as an instructional technique felt that the children had mastered the skills for their level, regardless of grade placement, which could be associ- ated with the developmental models as they were presented. No one mentioned cognitive development, mental structures, or Piaget. On Table 20, the numbers represent the teachers who mentioned components of the developmental models. Table 20.--Developmental Models. Developmental Model N Piaget Hierarchial Age-related differences* Information and knowledge Mental structures Cognitive development OOO-P-DO *One teacher who mentioned age-related differences taught a first grade-second grade combination (Y #8). While eight teachers identified components of the developmental models, seventeen mentioned elements of the affective model. Affective models. To determine the degree to which teachers' conceptions were related to the affective model of reading, which Matthewson called the Acceptance Model, the teachers' descriptions of the children were reviewed to look for terms such as motivation, interest, attitude, belief, and attention. All of the terms associated with the acceptance model were used by the teachers and were presented in Table 21. 96 Table 21.--The Acceptance Model. Acceptance Model N Motivation 4 Interest 6 Attitude . l4 Attention l Beliefs/Values l Because fourteen teachers mentioned attitude, attitude appeared to be a very important pupil characteristic in relationship to reading. Three teachers did not mention any component of the affective model (WW #2, WW #6, and Y #10). Warren Woods Three, Warren Woods Nine, and Ypsilanti Six had the strongest leanings toward the affective model by mentioning three of the five affective descriptors. Summary of the Theoretically Derived Findings The teachers' viewpoints of reading reflected elements of Hunt's B-P-E paradigm and the four theoretical models of reading. Regarding Hunt's paradigm, the behavior and person components received attention from all of the teachers but only one teacher mentioned the school environment. In relating the teachers' responses to the four models of reading, the teachers' conceptions were more closely aligned to the affective and the psycholinguistic models as evidenced by the number of teacher responses using the terms identified with those models. Yet, the context within which the psycholinguistic and affec- tive terms were used does not match the intent of the theoreticians who presented the models because the teachers relied on basal textbooks for reading instruction. 97 Answers to the Research Questions Because the teachers' conceptions of reading were operationally defined as what the teachers said they do about reading and how they organized information about reading in response to the interview ques- tions, the answers to the research questions could be found in the descriptions of the teachers' responses presented in the findings from the empirical and theoretical coding schemes. What Are the Ways in which Teachers Think About Readipg? During the interviews, the teachers discussed reading according to descriptions of their grouping practices, classroom organization, pupils, and instructional techniques. When teachers mentioned grouping practices, they identified six bases for forming groups. Of those six bases for forming groups, informal testing was the most popular as it was cited by eleven teachers. The teachers used a variety of organiza- tional plans but ten teachers indicated that they had more than three instruction reading groups and individualized instruction. Although the teachers discussed having varieties of organizational formats and using varieties of materials, fourteen teachers tended to use the same general types of instructional techniques with children of different abilities. The teachers described the children in two ways: personal traits and reading instructional performance. Besides discussing their students and different instructional practices, the teachers stated their beliefs about reading. Yet, while the teachers focused the discussion of their beliefs on human factors, environmental factors and materials, no one identified their beliefs as being related to the reading process. When discussing their beliefs, 98 the teachers included information about desired changes, themselves as reading teachers, and instructional successes which they primarily attributed to the children. The teachers discussed reading instruction and organized reading information in.a variety of ways. The conceptions that were expressed by the teachers during the interviews reflected viewpoints more closely associated with reading instruction than a reading process. This may have happened because the form of the Rep Test encouraged the teachers to discuss reading as an immediate issue or in curricular terms rather theoretically. Three teachers discussed reading as a foundation for future life and separate from the school environment. In What Weys Can the Teachers' Views of Reading Be Classified? The teachers' statements about reading were presented in three classifications using the empirically derived coding schemes. First, their views were classified according todescriptions of grouping prac- tices, classroom organization, the children, instruction techniques, and stated beliefs that were the presented findings from the empirical coding schemes. Second, from the above descriptions, the teachers were grouped according to orientations: human and production, since the teachers tended to view reading according to human and production orientations. Teachers who had leanings toward the human orientations emphasized personal traits, such as attitude/interest, home/family, language, and intelligence, and teachers favoring production discussed skills, developing independence, and work habits. Third, the teachers' views were classified according to the sources from which they received cues in decision making. When teachers discussed making reading 99 decisions, they relied on pupils, materials, self, or a combination. Production teachers tended to rely on materials for their decisions. A fourth classification of teachers' views was developed by the theoretically derived coding schemes. Responses of the teachers can also be classified according to Hunt's B—P-E model. The teachers thoroughly discussed behaviors (B) and persons (P) but only one teacher mentioned limiting the school environment (school size) and no one mentioned the classroom environment. Environment was mentioned more frequently when the teachers described the children's home life. Using Hunt's model, teachers' views of reading can be said to focus on behaviors and persons, not environment. Are Teachers' Views Similar to Any Codified Models of Reading: The teachers mentioned terms that could be identified with the four models of reading presented in Singer and Ruddell's Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Second Edition. The terminology associated with the psycholinguistic and affective models were men- tioned most frequently. Although specific teachers were identified as having reading conceptions that matched only one model, some teachers were identified as having viewpoints which more closely relate to certain models. For example, four teachers (WW #8, Y #1, Y #3, and Y #8) were identified as being more closely associated with the psycholinguistic model as they mentioned more psycholinguistic terms than the other teachers. Similarly, Warren Woods Three, Warren Woods Nine, and Ypsilanti Six were more closely associated with the affective model because they used more affective descriptors. Conversely, other teachers were 100 identified as not being associated with specific models because they did not mention those terms. To definitely say matches exist would be wrong, or to generalize across teachers and say that all teachers were more closely associated with the affective and psycholinguistic models would be wrong. Because of the nature of this study, the answers are descriptions not generali- zations. Generalizability The issue of generalizability was confronted in Chapter II of this paper but needed reemphasis here. Because the study was descrip- tive within an ethnographic paradigm, the findings apply only to the teachers interviewed during the data collection period. A teacher (WW #2) most succinctly addressed the issue of limited generalizability of findings in research on teaching by saying that if she were interviewed the previous year, her ideas and responses would have been different. Because the twenty teachers who were interviewed in the study were volunteers from two selected populations, the study has weaknesses that are often associated with case studies and field work. Issac and Michaels described the weakness as follows: 1. Because of their narrow focus on a few units, case studies are limited in their representativeness. They do not allow valid generalizations to the population from which their units came until the appropriate follow-up research is accomplished, focusing on specific hypotheses and using proper sampling methods. 101 2. . . . To the extent selective judgements rule certain data in our out, or assign a high or low value to their signifi- cance, or place them in one context rather than another, subjective interpretation is influencing the outcome.1 Therefore, although the study was conducted in a systematic manner employing procedures which could be replicated, the interpreta- tions of the data were uniqueto the researcher. This was a weakness inherent within naturalistic studies and generalizations were not made beyond the specific teachers interviewed. Summary The teacher transcripts were analyzed using empirically and theoretically derived coding schemes. From the analysis of the tran- scripts, descriptions of how teachers organize information about reading emerged. The findings indicated that teachers described reading in a variety of ways which were classified according to orientations, decision stimuli, grouping procedures, descriptions of children, descriptions of techniques, stated beliefs, and the P and 8 components of Hunt's model. Teachers' views of reading reflected some aspects of the four models of reading described in Singer and Ruddell's Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Second Edition, although the teachers more frequently mentioned terms associated with the psycholinguistic and the affective models. 1Steven Issac and William B. Michael, Handbook in Research and Evaluation (San Diego, California: Robert R. KnappFPUblishers, Inc., 1974). P. 20. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction Chapter V is divided into six main headings: summary; major findings; discussion of the findings; conclusions; implications; and recommendations. Summary The purpose of the study was to describe teachers' conceptions of reading because assumptions were made regarding the influence of teacher reading conceptions on teacher behavior and pupil outcomes. Thus, a linear progression from conceptions to teaching behavior to student impact was assumed to exist. Such an assumption regarding the linear progression from conceptions to pupil impact was supported in the literature. The identification of reading conceptions was the focus of this study rather than teacher behaviors or pupil outcomes. To identify teachers' conceptions of reading, the term concep- tion was first defined as what teachers said about reading and about how they organized reading infbrmation during interviews. Second, for the interviews a nonscheduled standardized guide was develOped using a modification of George Kelly's Role Concept Repertory Test (Rep Test). The modification of the Rep Test required teachers to sort and compare students. As the teachers compared students, they discussed 102 103 reading instructional practices, described their students' reading abilities, and stated certain beliefs about reading. The pupil sorting technique forced teachers to discuss the concrete practical aspects of their reading conceptions. For the purpose of the study, the major emphasis of probing interview questions and of the content analysis was to determine the reasons behind the comparisons or what the comparisons represented. Once the interviews were completed, transcripts of the interviews were typed and prepared for content analysis. The content analysis included using empirically and theoreti- cally derived coding schemes for the examination of qualitative data and the development of categories. While the empirical coding schemes were based on what teachers actually said during the interviews, the theoretical coding schemes were developed using Hunt's Behavior-Person- Environment Model and four models from Singer and Ruddell's Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Second Edition. Two types of coding schemes were needed to answer the three research questions regarding identifying teachers' reading conceptions, classifying those conceptions and matching the teachers' conceptions to the four theoretical models presented by Singer and Ruddell. The major findings regarding the answers to the questions are presented in the following section. Major Findings The answers to the research questions are presented and examined in this section. 104 Answers to the Research Questions Question 1. What are the ways in which teachers think about reading? During interviews using a Rep Test modification, teachers described the ways that they think about reading in terms of instruc- tional practices, students, and student work habits.y The teachers discussed classroom practices such as grouping procedures and instruc- tional techniques. ‘In addition, they described their pupils according to personal traits as well as the pupils' performance in reading instruction. Teachers expressed concerns about pupils who achieved success, pupils who experienced failure, and improving their reading programs. Question 2. In what ways can teachers' views be classified? The teachers' views of reading were classified in the following four ways: (1) descriptions of grouping practices, classroom organiza- tion, children, instructional techniques, and stated beliefs; (2) pro— duction-human orientations; (3) decision stimuli; and (4) the Behavior and Person components of Hunt's B-P-E model. . Question 3. Are teachers' views similar to some codified views of. reading? Althoughthe teachers' views contained some elements of four theoretical reading models, more teachers reflected views which could be associated with psycholinguistic and affective methods but those views were usually discussed within the context of basal text instruction. 105 Examination of the Answers Using the operational definition of reading conceptions (which was what the teachers said they did about reading and how the teachers organized information about reading in response to interview questions), the findings did indicate that teachers had conceptions since they con- veyed a great deal of information about reading and about how they organized reading information during the interviews. Those teacher statements about reading and organizing reading information had three characteristics: they were complex, personal, and practical. First, the conceptions appeared to be complex since teachers discussed many aspects of reading as being important to them. They described grouping procedures, materials and techniques as well as their personal feelings about reading, the children and the children's parents. Second, the conceptions were personal as each teacher had specific views regarding information and those specific views governed their teaching behaviors. For example, two of the teachers discussed oral reading as important but they viewed oral reading as important for different reasons. One teacher viewed oral reading as important for purposes of evaluation while the other teacher viewed oral reading as a means of practicing. This second characteristic of teachers' reading conceptions was reflected in the work of Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel who stated that teachers were influenced by their view of what was important.1 1Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Study of Teachers, p. 47. 106 Third, the conceptions did not reflect reading theory as presented in Singer and Ruddell's Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Second Edition, or a knowledge of the reading process. This finding was probably due to the modification of the Rep Test used in the study and to the type of probing interview questions, neither of which Specifically asked the teachers theory or knowledge based questions. Instead, the researcher noted that the teachers did not volunteer information about reading theories or knowledge of the reading process but, rather, responded in practical terms. The signifi- cance of the teachers' focus on practical reading issues was presented by Cogan in a discussion of teacher education in which he examined educational innovations in British schools. Cogan posited that teaching the innovations would have been more efficiently accomplished if the innovations had been grounded in theory and if the teachers had been allowed to state their aims and related classroom practices to theory.2 Further, he questioned the absence of theory in teacher training and schools, when he asked, "Or is it the inescapable condition of schools that they must stumble forward without the aid of relevant theories?"3 Therefore, the practical rather than theoretical concep- tions of the teachers could have also been due to the general nature of the school settings and in-service training in which theories were not related to classroom practices. 2Morris L. Cogan, "Current Issues in the Education of Teachers," in Teacher Education: The Seventy-fourth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study Of Education, Part II, edT’Kevin Ryan (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1975), p. 216. ’ 31pm. 107 Discussion of the Findings The answers to the research questions indicated that the teachers have very complex, individual, and practical conceptions of reading. Because of the emergence of a broad range of conceptions rather than a single conception of reading and the generation of a vast amount of information about reading, teachers, and conceptions, the discussion of the findings examined: (1) the infbrmation that the teachers provided regarding reading and organizing information about reading; (2) the information that the teachers did not provide regarding reading; and (3) the assumption regarding a linear relationship between teachers' conceptions, teaching behaviors, and pupil behaviors. Information Teachers Provided aboutheading As a result of the interviews, five ideas related to reading emerged. These five ideas reflect teacher responses regarding pupil differences, Operationalizing viewpoints, influences of instructional materials, abilities to teach reading, and work habits. Ideas Regarding Pupil Differences Concerning pupil differences, the teachers identified six methods of collecting information about their pupils and described their pupils in many ways. When diagnosing reading differences among their pupils, teachers used records of past performance, formal testing, informal testing, pupil performance, pupil maturity, and teacher convenience (which was the only method not related directly to the pupils). In describing their pupils, teachers used descriptions of personal traits like health, intelligence, attitude, and sex and 108 descriptions of performances such as work habits, need for practice, oral reading, and speed of reading. From the varieties of ways in which teachers gathered information about children and desoribed children, the inference was made that teachers viewed pupils as having many differences related to reading. Ideas Regerding Operationalizing Although the teachers gathered information about the children in six different ways and used many descriptors in discussing pupils, the teachers presented three types of evidence to show that they did not always use diagnostic information. First, the teachers described using the same instructional techniques with groups of students having different needs. Second, teachers placed children having different instructional levels within the same group. Third, teachers placed students in groups for reasons different than the diagnostic data suggested. For example, after collecting a variety of diagnostic information, a teacher ignored it and divided her class in half; those who worked independently; and those who did not (Y #4). Not only did teachers act upon their knowledge of pupil differ- ences in a variety of ways which suggested that there might be a mismatch between their ideas of pupil differences and Operationalizing reading, they also pursued stated instructional goals differently. For example, a number of teachers stated that vocabulary development was important. However, one of the teachers operationalized that point of view by having every pupil in the class read a line from a content area text in a "round robin" fashion (Y #10) while other teachers 109 discussed taking dictation or other types of language experience activities. After examining the examples of how teachers operationalized their views of pupil differences and vocabulary development, the infer- ence was made that teachers had different ideas or methods of opera- tionalizing their reading programs. Specifically, teachers stated similar goals and concerns but attempted to meet those goals by different means. Ideas Regarding_Influences of Instructional Materials There were three types of evidence presented by the teachers which demonstrated the influences of instructional materials, specifi- cally basals. First, the teachers discussed using materials as bases for decisions. Second, materials which had supposedly been abandoned by a school district continued to have an effect on teachers. Finally, the materials used by the teachers appeared to have a greater influence than in-service training. The teachers discussed relying on three types of cues for decision making. Those cues were pupils (personal or work traits), materials, and themselves. Of the three types of cues that teachers used, the teachers most frequently relied on materials, specifically basal textbooks. In fact, the teachers' reliance on the basal text- books for decision cues superseded the knowledge of reading content received in their in-service training programs, their knowledge of the children and personal beliefs. The basal series had a lingering effect on the teachers. For example, teachers were using basal text series previously abandoned 110 by their school districts.- While some teachers taught all reading lessons from basal series which had not been officially used in their school district for three years, others used selected parts of these basal series, such as worksheets and practice activities. When the teachers described their reading programs, there were similarities across districts. For example, the teachers in both school districts used the same basals and similar strategies. Such similar strategies were attributed to the materials rather than to the in- service training received by the teachers, since the philosophical foundations of the in-service training programs were different in each school district while the instructional materials (basal series) were the same. Ideas Regarding Teachers' Abilities to Teach Reading Some teachers described themselves as being in command of instructional situations and able to teach children to read. For example, they discussed improving reading instruction by changing their instructional strategies, thereby signifying internal control. Other teachers explained that instructional improvements resulted from external changes, such as more materials, parental intervention or administrative changes. Teachers who discussed external changes appeared to view their power for making an impact on children as weak. For such teachers, that power or ability to teach a child to read was out of their control. Another way in which teachers described their control over teaching children to read was their direct comments. The types of comments ranged from teachers who needed "the answer" to help children 111 to those who gave up because children's reading depended on home life and those who stated that there was always a way to teach reading. Ideas of Work Teachers' conceptions of work were also related to reading. Teachers discuSsed production related terms, such as developing good work habits and working independently as being important to their reading instructional goals. For example, children who were usually identified as good workers were also identified as good readers. Summary of Information Teachers Provided About Reading The examination of the aforementioned information that teachers provided about reading showed that a broad range of ideas relating to reading emerged from the interviews. In addition, other insights regarding reading emerged from information that the teachers did not provide about reading. Information Teachers Did Not Provide About Reading During the interviews, the teachers' comments did not include thorough descriptions of the reading process and theoretical models of reading or a broad view of classroom environments. This exclusion of comments relating to the reading process, theoretical models and classroom environments could be due to the Rep Test and probing inter- view questions used in the study which forced the teachers to focus on their pupils and practical reading issues. Specific questions were not asked about the reading process, theoretical models, or environ- ment. Yet, the exclusion of the comments regarding the reading 112 process, theoretical models, and the classroom environments was impor- tant because Hunt stated that the Rep Test allowed implicit views to become explicit.4 In this case, the teachers' implicit knowledge about the reading process and theory did not emerge. Further, Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel reported that it was significant to note whether or not teachers mentioned theoretical knowledge.5 Therefore, it was important for this study to note the limited ways in which teachers discussed knowledge of the reading process, theoretical models, and classroom environments. The teachers' failure to mention the reading process, knowledge of theoretical models and classroom environments leads to three conclu- sions. First, teachers appeared to have an incomplete knowledge of the reading process, specifically comprehension. Second, although the teachers discussed some components of the four theoretical models in Singer's and Ruddell's Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Second Edition, they mentioned those components within practical situations, such as instructional settings using basal textbooks. Finally, a contradiction emerged in the teachers' descriptions of environments. Although teachers discussed practical aspects of reading instruction, the classroom environment under their control was not mentioned by the teachers since they only discussed home environments and school environments under administrative control. The Rep Test forced the teachers to focus on practical aspects of reading but it was important to note that the teachers did not 4Hunt, Teachers Are Psychologists, Too, p. 5. 5Bussis, Chittenden, and Amarel, Interview Study of Teachers, pp. 46-47. 113 mention the reading process or theory and aspects of the environment over which they had control. The Underlying Assumption of Linear Progression This study was based on the assumption that teachers had identi- fiable conceptions of reading which influenced their teaching behaviors. As a result of the study, the assumption appeared to hold true for the teachers interviewed. In addition to discussing reading, how they organized reading information, and what was important in reading instruction, the teachers cited illustrations in their reading behaviors that would substantiate their reading conceptions.‘ Yet, the findings did not indicate that teacher conceptions were based in know- ledge and theory nor did it point out the influences on the conceptions which might explain variations within and among teachers. Therefore, the assumption about a linear progression between reading conceptions and teaching behavior held true for the teachers interviewed but infor- mation did not emerge which explained the bases of the conceptions. Conclusion This study identified what the teachers said about reading and how the teachers organized information. Those conceptions were then described, classified, and matched to theoretical reading models which were based on the assumption that conceptions influenced behavior. The results of the study indicated that the teachers have reading concep- tions as defined by the study which influenced their behavior and that those conceptions had the following three characteristics: conceptions were complex; conceptions were personal and appeared to govern behavior; 114 and conceptions were practical rather than theoretical. Besides the characteristics of the conceptions, five ideas emerged from what the teachers said regarding the teachers reading conceptions. The five emergent ideas were the teachers' concerns for pupil differences, the teachers' varying methods of operationalizing similar viewpoints, the influence of materials, the teachers' feelings about their abilities to teach reading, and the teachers' concern over student work. The findings indicated that there were conceptions of reading which influenced behavior but the findings were unable to determine if the conceptions had foundations in knowledge of the reading process or theory. Perhaps, as suggested by the practical focus of the teachers' discussions, their conceptions were-formed to meet reading instruction problems in daily practice. Implications The following implications were drawn from the conclusions, discussion of the findings, and the study: 1. Implications for theory and practice 2. Implications for training and materials 3. Implications for classifying teachers 4. Implications for research Inpljeations for Theory and Practice In the reading literature, there has been a great deal of discussion focusing on describing various theoretical views of the reading process and developing theoretical models to explain the reading process. During the interviews, the teachers did not express a knowledge of the reading process and did not focus on theoretical 115 issues. Perhaps experts in reading should also relate theories to the practical problems encountered by teachers and assist teachers in acquiring knowledge of the reading process as it applied to practice. Implications for Training and Materials Assisting teachers to acquire a thorough knowledge of the reading process has been an elusive problem for teacher edUcators. In Ypsilanti and Warren Woods, attempts were made to help teachers gain more reading knowledge by providing in-service programs and follow-up support for the teachers. Although the programs were philosophically different, there appeared to be few differences in the practices pursued by the teachers in the different school districts. To be specific, the teachers from Warren Woods and Ypsilanti who did oral reading did so for similar resaons. Similarly, many of their instruc- tional activities and stated beliefs revolved around procedures pre- scribed by the materials. Therefore, if in-service training is to make a difference, perhaps materials and training procedures should have similar foundations. Implications for Classifying Teachers Each teacher interviewed was an individual practitioner organizing reading information in a unique way. While there were similarities between teachers, enough differences existed to question the usefulness of discrete classifications. To discuss teachers along continuums was more productive. For example, all of the teachers valued pupil production traits but some teachers valued the production traits more intensely than others. 116 Implications for Research The implications for research are related to the underlying assumption, the Rep Test, and interviewing teachers. Underlying Assumption The assUmption which undergirded this study posited a linear progression from reading conceptions to teacher behaviors which impact pupils. Each teacher had many reading conceptions which included con- ceptions of students' reading, students' working influences of materials, or teachers' abilities to teach reading that work within the teachers in a variety of ways. Such conceptions were manifested in different teacher behaviors depending on goals and interactions with curriculum, resources, children, time, or milieu. This study suggests that teacher actions may emerge from a broad range of reading concep- tions regarding students, materials, and teaching. Such actions may then by directed to some anticipated reading goal. For instance, a teacher who had a goal of children reading with expression used basal readers differently than the teachers who had comprehension as a goal. The Rep Test and Interviews The modification of the Rep Test, which required teachers to sort and compare students, was an instrument used for identifying teachers' reading instructional practices and teachers' conceptions of reading instruction, their children as readers, themselves as reading teachers, and causes for reading successes and failures. Because such a diverse amount of information can be obtained from the Rep Test, it could be a good tool to use to assess the entry behavior of teacher in- service participants or to assist teachers in focusing on classroom 117 problems. For example, in a local school district, a reading consultant uses another Rep Test modification to identify areas in which she can help teachers solve instructional problems. Also, because the Rep Test is flexible, it may be possible to restructure the Rep Test to elicit information about the teacher knowledge and theoretical concerns. Using interviews as a research technique generates a great deal of information for study: specifically, nonscheduled standard inter- views allow the researchers to ask exploratory, probing questions which attempt to identify the reasons behind actions and establish patterns of response. More studies using nonscheduled interview techniques would give researchers and teacher educators valuable information regarding teacher conceptions, beliefs, and goals. Recommendations for Practice and Research Specific recommendations for practice and research arose from the findings and implications of the study. Recommendations for practice: 1. Although the teachers in this study came from two school ' districts, having different philosophical foundations under- pinning their in-service programs, the teachers used similar instructional techniques and had similar concerns. Since this similarity is apparently due to the influence of materials, training programs should use materials which reflect the desired philosophical foundations of the in-service. 2. Teacher training procedures like those pursued in Warren Woods and Ypsilanti may have been more productive or shown greater results if the teachers articulated their goals, or if the 118 teachers' needs had been assessed using something similar to the Rep Test. Recommendations for Research 1. A need exists to determine teachers' conceptions of the reading process, specifically, comprehension. For example, the teachers who cited comprehension as being important failed to mention specific components of comprehension. Thus, research should be pursued to identify teacher conceptions of components within the reading process. The following terms should be clarified through research to more accurately identify teachers' conceptions of reading and instructional practices: individualized reading and reading independently. Teachers consistently identified the good readers as good workers and well-behaved children. For example, a teacher (Y #4) divided her class in half; children who could work without a lot of direction and those who needed direction and supervision. Further research should be conducted which examines teacher practices, expectations and conceptions regarding the work habits of children having different reading abilities. Teachers recognized wide ranges of student abilities through their diagnostic work but placed children having different reading levels in the same group. Researchers should investi- gate such a practice to determine possible reasons and effects. The teachers who used self-selection as an instructional tech- nique stated that their students had mastered certain skills 119 or all the skills necessary for successful reading. Additional research should focus on the identification of suchs skills and how perceptions of those skills vary across teachers. Teachers identified students according to grade level. For example, they would refer to children as "good third grade readers" or "a solid fourth grader." Researchers should work with teachers to identify specific behaviors common to students carrying titles such as "a solid third grade reader,“ "an average sixth grade reader," and so_on. The procedures of the study need to be replicated for valida- tion, and the findings need to be studied in more controlled designs. Specifically, the human and production orientations, the relative influence of the decision stimuli, and the six types of conceptions need to be studied. In addition to con- trol, more demographic information is needed about the teachers to determine if their conceptions vary according to age, sex, experience, or training. The study was limited because it indexed conceptions on one dimension. To produce accurate descriptions of teachers' reading conceptions, teaching behaviors need to be examined independently. REFERENCES REFERENCES Belli, Gabriella; Blom, Gaston; and Reiser, Ann. Teachers' Concerns and Conceptions of Reading and the Teaching_of Reading. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Institute of Research on Teaching, 1977. Bennett, Neville. Teaching Spyles and ngil Progress. London: Open Books, 1976. Borg, Walter R., and Gall, Meredith D. Educational Research: An Introduction. 2nd ed. New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1971. Brophy, Jere E., and Good, Thomas L. Teacher-Student Relationships: Causes and Consequences. New York: HOlt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1974. Bussis, Anne M.; Chittenden, Edward A.; and Amarel, Marianne. Beyond Surface Curriculum: An Interview Study of Teachers' Under- standings. FBoUTder, Colorado: Wéstview Press Inc., 1976. Candenhead, Kenneth. "What Are Your Beliefs About Reading Instruction?“ Journal of Reading 19 (1976):128-31. Carroll, John B., and Chall, Jeanne 3., eds. Toward a Literate Sociepy: The Report of the Committee on Reading of the National Aeademy of'Education. New York: McGraw-HilTlBook'Company, 1975. Cogan, Morris L. "Current Issues in the Education of Teachers." In Teacher Education: The Seventy-fourth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Part II. ’Editedfiby Kevin Ryan. ’Chicago:TThe University of Chicago Press, 1975. Combs, Arthur W.; Blume, Robert A.; Newman, Arthur J.; and Wass, Hannelore L. The Professional Education of Teachers: A Humanistic Approach to Teacher Education. 2nd ed. Boston: Afllyn and Bacon,TInc., 1974. Denzin, Norman K. The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods. Chicago: Aldine PubliShing Company, 1970. 120 121 . Sociological Methods: A Sourcebook. Chicago: Aldine / Publishing Company, 1970. Dunkin, Michael J., and Biddle, Bruce J. The Study of Teaching. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1974. Durr, William K., ed. Reading Instruction: Dimensions and Issues. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1967. Fuller, Frances F. "Concerns of the Teachers: A Developmental Con- ceptualization." American Educational Research Journal 6 (1969):207-26. Garfinkel, Harold. Studies in Ethnomethodology, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1967. Gerbner, George; Holsti, Ole R.; Krippendroff, Klaus; Paisley, William J.; and Stone, Philip J., eds. The Analysis of Communication Content. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1969. Glaser, Barney G., and Strauss, Anselm L. Ine Discovery of Grounded Theggy: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine PuBlishing Company, 1967. Gordon, Chad. "Self-Conceptions: Configurations of Content." In The Self in Social Interaction. Edited by Chad Gordon and Kenneth A. Gergen. NewFYork: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1968, pp. 115-36. Hunt, David E. "The B-P-E Paradigm in Theory, Research, and Practice." Canadian Psychological Review 16 (1975):185-97. "Person-Environment Interaction: A Challenge Found Wanting Before It Was Tried." Review of Educational Research 45 (1975): 209-30. . "Teachers' Adaptation: 'Reading' and 'Flexing' to Students." Journal of Teacher Education 27 (1976):268-75. Teachers Are Psycholpgists Too: An Application of Psychology to Education. Iowa City, Iowa: The American College Testing Program,_1976. Interview, 31 January 1977. Hunt, David E., and Sullivan, Edmond V. Between Peychology and Educa- tion. Hinsdale, Illinois: Dryden Press, 1974. Issac, Stephan, and Michael, William B. Handbook in Research and Evaluation. San Diego, California: Robert K. Knapp,TPGblisher. 1974. 122 Kelly, George A. The Ps cholo of Personal Constructs: A Theor of Personalit . V01. 1. New York: N. W. Norton and Company, Inc., 1955. A Theory of Perspnality: The P5 chology of Personal Con- structs. New York: W. W. Norton, 1955. Mayes, Bea. "The Reading Teacher and Values." Contemporary Education 45 (Winter 1974):126-3l. . Messick, Samuel, and Ross, John. Measurement in Personality and Cogni- tion. New York: John Wiley and’Sons, Inc.,71962. Miller, Harry B., and Hering, Steve. "Teachers' Ratings--Which Reading Group Is Number One?" The Reading Teacher 28 (January 1975): 389-91. :———— Pool, Ithiel De Sota, ed. ‘Trends in Content Analysis. Urbana, Illinois: University ofTIllinois, 1959. Sanday, Patricia Reeves, ed. Anthropology and Public Interest: Field- work and Theory. New York: Academic Press, 1976. Schmidt, William. Michigan State University. Interview. 23 November 197 Schroder, Harold M.; Karlins, Marvin; and Phares, Jacqueline 0. Education for Freedom. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1973. Shavelson, Richard, and Dempsey-Atwood, Nancy. "Generalizability of Measures of Teaching Behavior." Review of Educational Research 46 (Fall, l976):608. Singer, Harry, and Ruddell, Robert B., eds. Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading. 2nd ed. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association, 1976. Sjoberg, Gideon, and Nett, Roger. A Methodology for Social Research. New York: Harper and Row, 1968. The University of Wisconsin Instructional Research Laboratory. Elementary School Teachers' Viewpoints of Classroom Teaching and Learning. U.S.O.E. Project Number 5.1015.2.12.l. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin, 1967. Washburne, Carleton, and Heil, Louis M. "What Characteristics of Teachers Affect Children's Growth?" School Review 68 (1960): 420—28. Wilcox, Jarrod W. A Method for Measuring Decision Assumptions. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1972. 123 Wolcott, Harry F. "Criteria for an Ethnographic Approach to Research in Schools." In Human Organization Research, 3rd ed., pp. 111-27. Edited by RiChard N. Adams andPJack J. Preiss. Homewood, Illinois: Dorsey Press, 1960. Wolf, Robert L., and Tymetz, Barbara L. "Ethnography and Reading: Matching Inquiry Mode to Process." Reading Research Quarterly 12 (1976-77):unpaged. APPENDICES APPENDIX A INTERVIEW GUIDES PILOT INTERVIEW GUIDE The procedures for the interview guide employing the Rep Test are a combination of those described by David E. Hunt in an interview and in his paper entitled, "Teachers Are Psychologists Too: On the Application of Psychology to Education." The following procedure should be taped. Student Tape Numbers 'FoOtege Step 1. List student names on 3 x 5 cards and number the cards. Step 2. Tell the teacher to sort student name cards into piles according to how they receive reading instruction. Notes: Step 3. Ask the teachers to explain why they sort the student name cards into their specific piles. Notes: Step 4. The interviewer selects three students from different piles constructed in Step 2. Step 5. In answering the following questions, ask the teacher to pretend to be speaking to the teacher who will have the students next year. 124 Step 6. Step 7. 125 Student Tape Numbers Footage_ A. How are two of the students alike in terms of reading? Notes: (Probe for reading successes, failures, habits, and interests.) Repeat Step 5 about four or five more times or until the responses become redundant. A. (Repeat Step 5) Notes: B. (Repeat Step 5) Notes: C. (Repeat Step 5) Notes: 0. (Repeat Step 5) Notes: E. (Repeat Step 5) Notes: Ask the following questions. A-i. Pick two students who have responded particularly well to a specific instructional tech- nique you have used. What is that technique? A-ii. Who are the students who have responded well? How are they the same? "‘fi-Ia— --: Fur A-iii. A-iv. B-iv. 126 Student Numbers Tape Footage What was particularly good about the way these pupils responded? Select one student who did not respond well to this same tech- nique. Why do you suppose the student did not respond well? How do the students differ? Pick out two pupils in your room who, in your opinion, are not making satisfactory progress. Who are they? Why do you think they are not making satisfactory progress? If you had the money or resources or "administrative pull" to get anything you needed to help these pupils, what is it that you would get? Why do you think they would profit from this? How do they differ from one student who is making satis- factory progress? Pick out one pupil who is having trouble with a particular aspect of reading. What aspect of reading are you thinking of? Which child has trouble with this? Why do you think he or she has trouble? Is there another pupil who has similar difficulty with this aspect of reading? Who is it? Step 8. 127 Student Tape Numbers Footage C-v. Is the cause of his or her diffi- culty the same as for the first pupil? C-vi. Who has no trouble with any aSpect of reading? C-vii. To what do you attribute this lack of difficulty? Is there anything concerning your beliefs about reading, how you teach it, or your students that is missing in the interview? 128 INTERVIEW GUIDE* The procedures for the interview guide employing the Rep Test are a combination of those described by David E. Hunt in an interview and in his paper entitled, "Teachers Are Psychologists Too: On the Application of Psychology to Education." The following procedure should be taped. Student Tape Numbers Footage Step 1. List 15 student names on separate 3 x 5 cards and number the cards. (1 through 15). Step 2. Tell the teacher to sort student name cards into piles according to how they receive reading instruction. Notes: Step 3. Ask the teachers to explain why they sort the student name cards into their Specific piles. (Probe for diagnostic testing, grouping procedures, instructional strate- gies, and other reasons for card arrange- ments.) Notes: Step 4. The interviewer selects three students from different piles constructed in Step 2. Step 5. In answering the following questions, ask the teacher to pretend to be speaking to the teacher who will have the students next year. , - A. How are two of the students alike in terms of reading? Notes: *Used in the study. Step 6. Step 7. Step 8. 129 Student Tape Numbers Footage B. How is the remaining student different? (Probe for reading success, failures, habits and interests.) Notes: Repeat Step 5 about four or five more times or until the responses become redundant. A. (Repeat Step 5) Notes: B. (Repeat Step 5) Notes: C. (Repeat Step 5) Notes: 0. (Repeat Step 5) Notes: Ask if there was anything about their reading beliefs that was omitted or any child omitted that was crucial to the discussion. Notes: Ask the following questions: A. Pick two students who have responded particularly well to a Specific instruc- tional technique you have used. What is that technique? Why? Notes: B. Select one student who did not respond well. Why? Notes: C. How does the student differ from the two students that were successful? Why? Notes: Step 9. Step 10. 130 Student Tape Numbers Footage_ Ask the following question: A. If you had the money or resources or "administrative pull" to get anything you needed to help these pupils, what is it that you would get? (Relate to pupils on the cards.) Notes: 1 Is there anything concerning your beliefs about reading, how you teach it, or your students that is missing in the interview? Notes: APPENDIX 8 PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE 0' EDUCATE" EAST LANSING - mcmcm - «m namrnnmrcmlammmnnwrannsmmmmlmmcxnou November 1, 1977 Michelle Johnston, Instructor 133-3 Erickson Hall Michigan State University Campus Dear Michelle: This letter describes the Ypsilanti Reading Inservice Program which I directed. The reading inservice program was comprised of three major components: (1) the training courses; (2) the follow-up classroom visitations and meetings; and (3) the materials development. During the summer vacations of 1975 and 1976 and the academic school year of 1976-77, advanced training courses in reading instruction were offered to the Ypsilanti teachers, teacher-aides, and substitute teachers. The content of the training courses included the development of diagnostic and prescriptive instructional skills, the analysis and development of skill hierarchies in word recognition, comprehension, study skills, and literary understanding, the development of a reading program which maintained a balance among skills, use of skills and the desire to use skills. In addition, materials were analyzed and developed; functional reading, reading in the content areas; language develop- ment, recreational reading, and development reading were included; and trade- books were examined and included in the developing reading program. The second component was built around the follow-up classroom visitations and meetings which were designed to assist the teachers during the implementation and maintainance of the reading program which had been developed during the training course. Specific assistance was offered to the teachers in the forms of demonstration teaching, consultation, and observation. The visitations and meetings were scheduled periodically during the school year of 1975-76 and the school year of 1976-77. The final component, the development of materials, had two thrusts. The first thrust was the development of a skills management system by the teachers for the Ypsilanti Public Schools. Objectives, pretests, posttests, record-keeping devices, and teaching suggestions were included in the management system. The second thrust was the development of teacher made materials which corresponded to the objectives in the skills management system and supplemented the teaching strategies in the reading program. Teachers were provided with special facili- ties, materials, and assistance during both school years and summer vacations. 131 132 Michelle Johnston November 1, 1977 Page 2 Throughout the inservice program, there has been close cooperation between the Ypsilanti administrators and teachers in the implementation of their local district skills management system. The participating teachers have been given released time and materials. In addition, a workroom was created for the teachers with the purpose of establishing a place where the teachers can get together and develop new materials such as games for practice. Final evidence of the c00peration between the administrators and teachers is the continued recognition of the need for classroom visitations and follow-up. Ypsilanti now has a reading demon- stration teacher who helps the teachers with classroom implementation. If you have further questions, I can provide more information. Sincerely, . "Laura R. Roehler Assistant Professor LRR/lr 133 WARREN wooos‘ PUBLIC SCHOOLS 27100 SCHOENHERR ROAD WARREN. MiCHiGAN 48093 . PHONE: (313) 775-1012 800:!" S. TOWER Superintendent C. DUANE BRUNN Assistant Superintendent Elementary Instruction HENRY S. SIEN KIEWICZ Assistant Superintendent Secondary instruction W. A. YUNGTON Business Manager April 22, 1977 Ms. Michelle Johnston, Instructor Michigan State University 301/14 Erickson Hall ' Beat Lansing, Michigan (.8824 Dear Ms. Johnston, Over the past two years, approximately 80 teachers in grades 1-6 have participated in the Warren Woods Title I Reading In-Service Program. Bach teacher attended 7 full days of in-service and tutored 3 children from his/ her own classroom 1 hour per week on an after school paid basis. Workshop topics included: Values Clarification, Self-Concept and Self-Awareness, Dr. W. Glasser and Classroom Meetings, Informal Diagnosis of Reading Problems, Tour of M.I.S.D. Facilities, Language aperience Approach, Motor Skill Develop- ment, Art and Reading, Auditory and Visual Skill Development, Use of the Newspaper in the Classroom, Cooking and Reading, Creative Dramatics, Paperback Books in the Classroom and Music and Choral Reading. Most workshops included a make and take session and/or hands-on materials. Teachers were expected to utilize activities and ideas gained from the workshops in their tutoring sessions. Each teacher kept a log of activities conducted during tutoring sessions. The Gates-Maccinitie and Coopersmith were given as pre and post testse ' This program has bem totally funded through Title 1, Part A funds. If you need any further information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, 306442 (J; ' ' Robbie Fairleigh, Title I Director APPENDIX C CODING SCHEMES AND CODING SHEETS CODING SCHEMES The following outline presents the attributes within each category used for the empirically derived coding schemes. I. What teachers said about A. Groups created on the basis of Olm-bQJN-H Previous records--CA60, previous teacher Formal testing--the standardized tests Informal testing--local tests, oral reading Maturity-~teacher's estimate of development Convenience--of the teacher Performance--student work habits Program for l. 2. 3. 4 High readers--description Middle readers--description Low readers--description Same/different--variety of instructional program between groups Class descriptions 1. DOOR) OOWNGU‘I Number of groups a. more than 3 b. 3 c. less than 3 According to basal Level--instructional reading level or grade level Range--more than one instructional level within the classroom Skill--groups/instructioned based on skills Individualized Combination--use both individualized and basals Flexible-~groups change according to pupil need Contracts Match groups with levels--a reading group consists of children on a Specific reading level 134 135 Descriptions of children \OmeUW-vaN—J . O O . O g 0 O 0 Work habits Self-image Social characteristics Racial characteristics Age Economic characteristics Creative--artistic ability Achievement--according to tests Values Potential Maturity Health/physical--illness Language--language development Attitudes Intelligence Effort Independent Interests Home life Needs one to one Learning styles Discipline Sex Attention span Self-discipline Fits into group Needs rewards Leadership qualities Frustrating Shy Needs encouragement Needs practice Natural reader--learned to read without help Reading/grade level--reading at grade level or an instructional level II. What teachers said about instructional techniques A. Reading instructional techniques* 0507-9me Kits Phonics Writing Choral reading Practice-drill Oral reading a. important b. daily *Some teachers referred to materials like kits as techniques. 136 c. less than daily d. all children e. with certain children f. for practice g. for evaluation h. for description i. would like to do less j. not mentioned Machines Language experience approach Research skills--study skills Sight words Comprehension Trade Books Unified sustained silent reading Movement--exercise, balance Listening Self-selection Skill hierarchies 8. Reading in the content areas 1. 2. 3 comma-:4:- Content areas in general Spelling Writing a. creative--composition, expository b. mechanical--punctuation, copying Language arts Creative dramatics Social studies Science Math III. What the teachers said about their beliefs. A. Needed for a successful reading program l. Human resources a aides b. reduction in class size c. remedial reading teacher d grouping/tracking--changes in policy Materials a. basals b. co-basals c. phonics materials d. hardware--tape recorders, projectors -\ 137 e. trade books f. kits 9. activities h. nothing Other a. I don't know b. Administrative support c. Time Beliefs about self as a teacher \DCDVO‘iU‘IbOON-d 0 . O O 0 0 0 e e Overwhelmed Powerless ,Guilty Unhappy Overworked Frustrated Excited Doing a better job Unrealistic expectations Changes desired Maia-puma Remediation Tracking Grouping Diagnostic-Prescriptive Retention Readiness Organization and Management Attributes successes to l. 2. 3. 4. Self Child Technique Unknown Stated beliefs 1. Human a. teacher attitddes b. parent attitudes c. student atttitudes d. learning styles Environment a. home b. school IV. 138 3. Materials and Techniques basals a. b. phonics c. self-selection d. skills e. hierarchies f. comprehension 9. speed h. sight words i. writing j. speed k. literature l. multi-media approaches m. foundation n. application 0. I don't know Summary categories A. Receives cues from 1. Learner a. performance b. traits 2. Materials (e.g., basals) 3. Self Reading is a function of Developing independence Work habits l. Attitude-interest 2. Home 3. Learning skills 4. Language 5. Intelligence 6. 7. 139 The following lists of descriptors were used in the theoreti- cally derived coding schemes to determine how teachers' views can be classified and if the teachers' views were similar to any codified models. List l Hunt's B-P-E Paradigm Behavior -- descriptions of reading behaviors and outcomes Person -- descriptions of pupils Environment -- descriptions of school environment Relationship -- descriptions of relationships between behaviors, persons, and environments Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading Psycholinguistic Models -- language and thought communication reading and writing related goal of comprehension relevance flexibility multi-media approaches learning to read--natural element of communication Information Processing Models -- visual process attention fixations scanning phonics speed accurate decoding accuracy automaticity stages self-instructional materials Developmental Models -- Affective Model -- T40 close procedure skills hierarchy Piaget's stages hierarchial age related differences information knowledge mental structure motivation interest attitude belief value attention l4] zocx cmzocm “togazm m>wu p.coo m>ezuu mm?“ mxoom was: weak _ -mcpm_cw2c< H mewsuoz -w>wuo< mu_x meme» nuts: mpmwewpez m~wm mfimmam mcwummm mmmpu cw muwcoca .Fl .09 mpemmm mcwaaoto meumsmm cospoaumm mmuw<. mpm_tmpmz cmszz Eetmoca Pawmmmouzm m to» umcmmz Legummh T42 meowempumaxm ovumwpmmacz new twppmm m mcwoo eapmoxm umumcpmscm umxcoztw>o assess: Apfiwsw mmmpthoa emEFm33cm>o cmsomme m we epmm uzon< meow—mm awesome cowueu mcwummm mmapm> mum Lapse Amoemapecw toev T43 -wcaseou cowamucaoe use: . ucoqqzm . muw< ceases: mzcweeome space Cme apex acute; ou umuanwcpu< mmmooam newsmmecaz m>wuavcomwea new cowumNPcmmao mmmewvwwm comucmpmm uwpmocmmwa mcwaaotw mcwxuath cowumwvamm wmgwmmo comceeu Legumes 144 mpm>mm new: macaw coves: cm~_Pe=c ~m>wm Ppwxm _ammm noun: muomcucou mpnwxwpm -_nsou -_>wecH mmcmm o» mcwuaooo< m- m m+ masocw mummmpo we cowue_cummo mmwvspm moppeEmto muc< m>wpemcu mo_cmeumz Pmcmcmm cw gum: mucmwum meuom m>mummtu massages mewu_t3;iy mchFmam A mme< pc¢pcth mmmc< ecmpcou we» cw mememmm emeommh T45 mcwumme mappmwh mucoumm mucmELomcma. wocmwcm>coo »u_e=umz FmeeoecH Faeroe maow>wca an ummopm>mo mesotw 33 8 8s _ :5 2.25 umco_pemz. on exam cowugpeummo :owuas—a>m surnames :weutmu cmcupweu ease uoz e_:o2 com tom tom new: __< mmmm >_wmo pcmptoaefi mcwcamm Pogo awesome T46 memeamm so; mamvmwm apee_z mcmummm eat: tom animate emzummh mpmm ~emam so_ata accustomed; success scam mmao mm>_mumx succumb T47 .mmzcwcgowu mm muwx mew, m—mwtmume 09.nmccmwmt memeummp esomr mmpgutmtmpz mxoom :owmcm; mute: mppwxm _me_emumwm A p:m5m>oz P__xm munch -mcaeou unmwm suammmwm coasaa_mm m=_eaam m__txm .<.m.m mmcwzomz -m_om .m.m.m.: chosu mcwpwtz worsens were «mummacsome cho_uu:epmcH mewummm assumes 148 mew; Fmowmxea .mEo: umwcmuea “cavemamvem pcomem mucmmpppmueH mmezuwuu< massage; \gppmmz savanna: xuw_wn< pmeowuoEM mmmeH moans: mepemuoa manpm> acmem>mwsu< m>wumwtu UVEocoom ma< _m_omm nowuom Cme ego: cascade emtcpwcu eo cowpeweummo T49 pm>m_ newsmmmczoocm mowpomca mumam\m:_nmmm peeapmz mummz mummz xem mewpmepmztm utmzwm azocw ochQVUmpo seam mm—xpm P i — museum; mcwmz oecH mead epmm cowucmpp< xmm mc_Paw0mwo mcwccmma mummz Aumzcwpeouv cmccpweu eo cowpangmmo assume» 150 zocx :opmcw; u.:oo eaves mete: -mtneou m co_ueuwpaa< eowpauezom -pupaz weapecmuam ummqm m:_uwc unmwm cocmmmmm m:w__mam mmzcwczump ecu mpmwtmumz mm_;ucm comuumpmm mmpapm monspwuu< mmuapwup< mouapwuu< -cm_: m___xm -epmm mumeosa mpemmm possum mac: mewctamm acmeaum peace; cmgumop mmacwegum» can m_amcmamz vesseocw>em cuss: assume» meaa_mm easasm “Oiluaiiv anlsn Jallafl apnliiiv isaaaiux UOITPAIJOW aanqonais leuuau afipalmoux uogiewaolul saauaaa;;;p paneled 36V nuawdolanap aniiiufiog [egqaaeaagn lafiPId KHDJPJGIH SlliXS aanpaaoad 32013 [eiaaiew leuoiuonaisui-glas safiezs buipooap aneanoov . paads soiuoud fiuguueos SUOlIPXij "Ollualiv ssaaoad lensiA leanieu --peaa 01 DUIUJUOT sauoeoadde eipam-gzlnu XIIIIQIxalJ aauenalaa uoisuauaadwoa ;o [909 paneled buiiian pus buipeaa uogieaiunwmoa nqfinoui pue abenfiuei iuawuoainua loouos slidnd ;o uoiidiaosao samoaino buipeaa SJOIAPUBQ buipeau Teacher WW T WW 2 WW 3 WW 4 WW 5 151 NW 6 WW 7 WW 8 WW 9 NW 10 Y T Y Z Y Y 4 Y 5 Y 6 Y Y 8 Y 9 Y 10 APPENDIX D CODING RESULTS 152 *x XXXX x «x hE «x XXXXXXXX «x .mmzcwccump mm mumx mxw_ mpmwtmpme op coarsest newness» weomas .mmcaumooca mamms ucm5m>oz so_uum—mmuwpmm mxoom munch cowmcmgmcneoo mute: ugm_m mppwxm eucmmmmm .<.m.m mmcwcumz mmwcucmtmw: _pwxm mmm: mcwummm Pagozu newest: mppvxm mowcoza muwx «awwmawceom» Pocompoacumcu seatatt_o «Sam «manage ucmtmmewo toe maneuoca o— a w m m m e OF m m m m m aa=a__ma> muooz emcee: 153 x mmspm> x acmem>mwsu< x :pw__n< m>wummcu x x x masocoom x x x x mm< x meumm x x x x x x PmcowuoEmumeuom x x x x x x x x x mmmeH epmm x x x x x x x x x x x x x maven: ego: emcupweo we cowumwgumma x x x x cowumowcaeeoo x x x mcwummm x mmspm> x x mum copummcaom x x cause meo: x x x x x x x x ucoqasm x x mup< mpo: pemcma x x x x x mcwcmumPA op m m N o m e m N F op m m N o m a m N F Puempwms> muoo: emcee: l54 op m m n o m op m N o mcmsmmmcaouem mummz xem mcwumcpmagm mammmmm asotm one? were x so_um>_uoz :mam so_aemuu< xmm x mcwpawumwo mmpxum mewccmmm F o» P mmmmz x me_m mac: x ummcmucm x acmuemqmuc~ ucommm x mocmmwppmucu mmu:u_uu< x mmmzmcmm x _euamsea\es.am: Auwcaumz x Peacemuom ts=a__ma> memo: emcee: 155 x x x ~m>mm new: masocm coumEmPZ x x muumtpcoo mpnwmee so_pmcwneoo um~w_mamw>wucH mace: Pm>mm x x x x x x ppwxm XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXX XX XXXXX >< XXXX x x x x x Pmmmm . op mcwmcouu< x m- x x x x x m x x x x x x x x x . m+ manage mmmmm_u Co cowemwcummo x x x x Folsom: x x x x x mowuumcm x x x x mmcmzmm x x x x x _m>m~ mmmcw\mewmmmm m m o m a m N F op m m N w m w m N _ wucmpwma> memo: emcee: 156 mocmEcoecma mocmwcm>coo amwcaomz mcwpmmu Fmscomca mempmmp Posted museums meow>mcm Nd mmaopm>mo masocw mmumm op mmmp on op mxw_ case: cowvawcommm com cowpmapm>m com mowpumcq com :mtm_wgo :_mpcmo ;u_: :mcm__;o PF< AFamm case mmmm wamo pcmueoqu mmwewmm Face o_ m m N o m N m m Pa=a__ma> memo: emcee: 157 quweeeumz accucc: m=c_caam chmemm ew mmmcm uempeou mmmc< pemueou me» ew me_emmm ezoexez mecweeume cpmm e~_eu oe mmmuuem amusewcpp< pemEmmmemz new eowpmNPemmco mmmewemmm eowuemumm m>wme_c0mmca\owpmoemmwo emuwpmeew>weeH mewxoece\mewe:ocu eowpmwemem: umcwmmo mmmemeu op m m n o m a w n m m aseapcmac memo: emcce: 158 eowuompmmicpmm x x x x x x x moweoee mpmmmm mmecweeumh eem m~m_cmumz x Fooeom x mac: pemEeocw>em x x mm—Aum mewecmmm x x x x x mmeepwppe uemezpm x x x mmeepwupe uemcea x mmezmwpum cmeommp ease: mmmwpmm empmpm ems: x x moemwom x x mmweepm ~m_oom x x mu_mm5mce m>wpmmco x x x x x mmc< mmeememm x m>wpmmcu 9.3:: o_ m m N o m e o_ m m N m m a wueepwme> memo: emcce: 159 x x x meFasoco\meFxomcF x meFemmc FmFemsmm x x x mNFm mmmFu eF eoFuueemm x x x x x x x mmeF< ease: Emcmoce Fecmmmuoam m cow ememmz x x eoFmememceEoo x ace: u.eoe F x x x eoneuFFee< x x x eoFumeeeom x x meonmeFeeou x x mceumcmmFm x emmem x 3:23 x x mecoz memFm x eocmmmmm x meFFFmem x x mmFeucmcmF: x mFFFxm oF m m N o m e m N F oF m m N m m a m N F FpemFFme> meoo: emcca: 160 mmumcumecm emxcozcm>o seemee: AuFFao mmchmzoe emeFmezcm>o cmeummFymeFemmm m mm Fme paces mcmFme meFF zoex p.eoe F emzoem m>meinmeFepoz ucoeeem m>FpmcumFeFee< cmeuo mmFuF>Fuu< mmFx mxoom meecF mcmzecm: moFeoee mmemeuou mmeem mFchmumz oF m w n o m e m N OF N F o m csceccmac memo: emccm: 161 .----I1!= I meoneuumexm onmFmecea new cmumme m meFoo emuFoxu oF m m n m m e m N oF m m N o m e cueaccmac memo: emccm: 162 Human Production Atti- . DevelOping 155252;. Far??? till" all}? Igggggn- list. WW1 x x x x x x WW2 x x x x x WW3 X x X x WW4 x x x x WW5 x x x WW6 x x x x WW7 x x x x x x WW8 x x x x x WW9 x x x x x x WW10 x x x Y1 X x x X x x X Y2 x x x Y3 x x x x x‘ x Y4 x x x x Y5 x x x Y6 x x . x Y7 x x x Y8 x x x x Y9 x Y10 x 'X X 163 Decision Stimuli The teacher receives cues from: Learner Materials Self ngzgg' Traits Basals Kits Spelling $233; Beliefs 12:3;- WWl 4 9 WW2 6 3 l l WW3 l 7 l l WW4 5 6 l WW5 2 3 l WW6 l 6 l WW7 l 6 WW8 2 4 l WW9 4 8 l WW10 2 3 1 VT 5 7 l 1 Y2 2 2 1 Y3 6 2 Y4 5 5 1 Y5 3 4 l Y6 l 5 Y7 2 2 l Y8 l 6 Y9 l 2 l YlO l 8 l uoiluailv anleA Jailafl apnlillv nsaaaiux U°l19Al10W aanionais [equaw afipalmoux uoiiemuoyux saouaaallip DBIEIBJ 36V iuawdolaAap aAiigufiog leguaaeaain lafifild 643494314 SIIIXS aanpaooad azolg [eiaaiew [suctionaisuI-Jlas $36915 buipooap aqeanoov paads soiuoqd buiuueas suogiexig “Oiluallv ssaooad lensiA leanieu --pea4 on Buiuaeai sauoeoadde egpam-Iilnu NillQIXalj aaueAalaa uoisuaqaadmoo 50 [209 panelaa Buiigan pus buipeaa ‘uoizeoiunmwog iubnoqq pue afienfiuei iuawuoaiaua [oouos slidnd go uogzdiaosaa samooino 6uipeaa saoixeuaq Sulpeau Teacher 164 X x x x X x x x x x X x x X X X X x x x X x X X x x X X X x x x x x X x x X X x X x x x X x X x X x x x x x x x x x x x X x x x x x x x x x x x x K x x x x x x x x x x x X x x X x x x x x x x O f" N m v m ‘0 N C0 01 r- r- N m Q LO 0 Y 7 Y 8 Y 9 Y 10 1 O 0 4 O 4 0 4 O 0 5 6 14 1 0 0 12 1 0 0 1 4 6 3 0 6 1 6 O 1 20 20 20 Total APPENDIX E CORRESPONDENCE Ypsilanti Public Schools innmuunn,launnoaw 48197 Enclosed is an application to conduct research in the Ypsilanti School District. Please complete in detail enclosing any and all instru- ments and return them to me at your earliest convenience. 1 would like to take this opportunity to familiarize you with the process that occurs upon my receiving your completed application and any supplementary information that you may provide. Copies will be made and distributed to the members of the Ypsilanti School District Research Committee for their reaction. Before a decision is reached, you may be requested to meet with them to answer additional questions that have arisen. A letter will then follow indicating whether or not your application has been approved. Obviously, the approval of research applications is time consuming and you should allow approximately a month for the process. If there are any questions, feel free to call me at 482-2970. Sincerely, Paul Kacanek Administrative Coordinator of Research and Evaluation PK:bc encl. cc 165 II. III. IV. VI. VII. VIII. IX. XI. 166 Date Applicant's Name & Title Agency or Institute Affiliation Address Phone Funding Agency Purpose: (Research Grant, Dissertation, Class Project, etc.) Name of supervisor to whom you are responsible: Has the above-named person granted approval for conducting this project: If class project. cite course name: Title of project: Proposed beginning date: Proposed termination date: General Objectives: Statement & Description of Problem: (Include brief review of previous research and theoretical basis for project, as well as theoretical and practical implication.) Hypotheses: Instruments: (Name of instrument, administration methods & time required.) Please attach a sample of all instru- ments proposed for use with complete directions or adequate description of procedure. 167 XII. Methodology: Describe in detail research design, data collection . methods, time schedule, number of subjects, method or criterion for selection of subjects, data analysis, procedure and form of presenting data. (Attach sheets, if needed.) 168 XIII. Treatment: If treatment or service is rendered to students or staff, describe in detail all procedures as well as time schedule. XIV. Describe in detail the proposed involvement of local school personnel, students and facilities. XV. Presentation of findings to school system: Approximate data of submitting written report, number of copies which will be made available, form of final report. Also, please indicate if you would be willing to give an oral presentation of your findings to the staff members involved. XVI. Cite how the project's findings will be of practical use to the school system. 169 301 Erickson Hall Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48824 March 15, 1977 Mr. Paul Kacanek Administrative Coordinator of Research and Evaluation Ypsilanti Public Schools l885 Packard Road Ypsilanti, MI 48197 Dear Mr. Kacanek: Enclosed is the Application to Conduct Research in the School Dis- trict of Ypsilanti as I am requesting permission to interview teachers in Ypsilanti for my dissertation. For the past two years, I have been assisting Dr. Laura Roehler with the reading in-service workshops. My duties have been to observe, interview and assist the workshop participants concerning implementing the reading continuum. Because of my role in the reading workshops, I have become acquainted with many of the Ypsilanti teachers. In my proposed study, I want to interview ten of the reading work- sh0p participants at their convenience. The interviews will be an outgrowth of my previous work with Dr. Roehler and the reading workshop participants. I want to thank you for processing my application. I will call you on March 29, 1977 to find out the decision of the research committee. Sincerely, Michelle Johnston Mdzav Enc. 170 March 8, 1977 Mr. Dwayne Brunn Assistant Superintendent Administrative Services Building Warren Woods Public Schools 27100 Schoenherr Road Warren, MI 48093 Dear Mr° Brunn: The purpose of my pr0posed study is to describe teachers' conceptions of reading using a sorting procedure called The Rep Test (Role Concept Repertory Test) as an interview guide. After interviewing the teachers, I'll attempt to categorize their responses to look for pat- i terns and match their responses to explanations of reading advanced by ‘ some reading "experts." The teachers' responses will not be compared or evaluated in anyway as I am only doing a descriptive study. Also, the teachers must know that I'll code their responses to maintain their anonymity. During the interviews, the teachers will be asked to sort their students into triads and answer questions about the students' reading. The teachers should bring a class list to the interview or send a copy of their lists in advance because their students' names will have to be copied on 3 x 5 cards. I'll be free to interview the 10 teachers on the following days: March 14 - March 18 (all day) March 22 - March 24 (all day) March 28, 29, and April 1 (all day) Starting April 4th, I'll be free every Monday at 10:00 a.m. Because of the distance, it would be helpful if I could see more than one teacher per trip. My study is a very small component of the Institute for Research on Teaching at Michigan State University. and it is also a response to a call for ethnographic research by the International Reading Associa- tion. If you want information about either the IRT or IRA, please let me know. 171 Mr. Dwayne Brunn March 8, 1977 Page 2 Because of the mail procedures, it would be faster if you wrote me at home. My home address is: 1928 Autumn Lane Lansing, MI 48912 Thank you for your help. Cordially, Mlflefim Michelle A. Johnston Instructor Elementary and Special Education 301 Erickson Hall Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48824 MAJ/1r RN STATE UNIV. LI 2I IIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII2 II I II