THE INSTRUCTIONAL FUNCTIONS OF
ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY INSTRUCTORS
IN MICHIGAN COMMWITY JUNIOR
COLLEGES A5 WINE) MWGH AN
ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL INCIDENTS

3".

Thesis For flu Degree oI Ed. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
Rex E. Ray

1966

 

 

LA
4?.
.

 

“tsunami-tee
titans-titled

 

 

 

'me Instructional Functions 0f-‘E1igineering'Technology
Instructors In Michigan Community Junior Colleges
As Determined Through An, Analysis
Of Critical Incidents
presented by

Rex E. Ray - s '.

 

he: been accepted towards fulfillment I
of the requirement: for

Doctors degree in Education

 

 

Msior professor

 

 

 

RDGM USE LINN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     

 

(t.
. ‘1 I €111}ch
{j ;§!;!du3tri,

 
 

   

" ROI-vqw .
'v r' - I

 

 

  

ABSTRACT

  
 
    
  
  
  
  
 
  
  

”cord 5-," '

’Tfénxi FUNCTIONS OF ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
gas IN MICHIGAN COMMUNITY JUNIOR COLLEGES
" ETERMINED THROUGH AN ANALYSIS

OF CRITICAL INCIDENTS

‘an the
'o
"Tf '”7” by Rex E. Ray
th

igvsqent of the Problem. The primary concern of
gIfifidy was to identify and classify instructional be-

‘firhfgg of engineering technology instructors engaged in

”(Isroom and laboratory teaching. In addition, it

t to discover behaviors used most frequently and ef-
{actively in teaching.

AC, The study was conducted because of the increasing

figmand for instructors in post—high school technology

programs and the need for innovations in teacher prep-

 

fixation.

Methodology. The population included in this study
was taken from the total population of Michigan community

College instructors teaching in the areas of mechanical—

 

industrial, drafting-design, and electricity—electronics
‘ technology. From a total pOpulation of sixty—eight in—
} .‘ structors, thirty—two were represented in the study.

The first stage in the study involved an extensive

  
 
 
 

$§YIew of the literature related to the engineering tech—
3 %&¢§§n. technical institute curriculum, and technical
_y .L I .

itute instructors.

.nI" 1:91;.

        

Q

.‘x'Z‘HmJOWFDE'Z '_“.I;.'.f§;‘l."_t‘./!7' CL: < z 7' ‘ . I '4‘ jg"
' BSE‘EIIH'W :‘T’H‘IW’, I I " 1,2” ' .,’ ‘. -:,j'

30 “'13: I':

-od IBGQIJDHI§_'. ‘ ' .‘ ., ,

ul bocsgr: ' : A ‘

-39 on; gjtg'.'~I ~

-4- fax .—.~ ~.. ‘1»

7 I
I a a I _ V .
“I; }_ f ytplg airc u Irv L‘_ 'x

.‘I-.w y: ixumm-J n-g._r"

 

7;, -Isoinsdosn i: , aII un-

aQIHOIfibale-X“:';Jflé'“ . I ~- In

.YF=-CHHyw'

.
4.,

“i; 39_vllvba

I v

 

I‘ I'I' I] _————w———w——V_—VV—V
.‘ ,

,Rex E. Ray

    
   
  
  
  
  
  

"Wsilbnl stage was concerned with the collection
|lflfircritical incident technique was selected
Statement of purpose desCribing the func-
‘Ilhéngineering technology instructor was developed.
,T'Tflfleexperts representing state departmentscfireduca-
”flit! the finited States Office of Education was utilized
=wiaping the statement to be used as a basis for

Ititing incidents involving instructional behavior. The

The third stage consisted of (l) the development of
an11nstructional Grid, (2) classification of the behavioral
I, acts under appropriate headings of the Grid, (3) establish-
ing rank order of importance of the behaviors, and (4)
, testing hypotheses relating to both the frequency and ef-
fectiveness of the instructional behaviors. The Chi square

test was used for all statistical analyses.

 

Major Findings. The following are findings regard—
ing the order of importance of the instructional behaviors
of the instructors: (1) Primary emphasis was placed upon
instructional activities associated with the presentation
of instruction. (2) The instructors utilized the formal

lecture, instructional aids, application and assignment,

     
 

and class discussion as the most frequently used methods

2f instruction. (3) Daily planning and preparation for

,

   
  
   
 
  
   
    
     
  
 

“£99 9d: “ffu SQRIADRGS uLH e:m*‘ :3

'7', Miss 35w :‘LL :I soul 1.. r.” mt... y»

-3lwi 9.1: ant-jun: w: ”an; 1:. «336.5: L'.;:«,., , size

.7‘ -10vsb as»: '.‘-‘ .:“~.L' '._' ' I” :zi.-3. 3,
i “be 3" ‘LI 1" M : . 1:."5: ‘C 2-" .
:l ’
.0 ”Q‘hlilsu 32".. * .. " 3.. - . .7-
' I
v 10% c. , . . I.‘;3 . . 4' _ . H 3‘

m .10I‘.‘3I"I—I ~ g . '

{snorvsdsd L?2 3 ‘ I . ._

10 imamQUJeva-
laioivndn< .p

~dai {1513‘

-,.

21s,: 4‘ *
ET: saeupn Lh v'
‘if

a: . ~bnspe¢ Egalun.

uolvsdos {an I: +r. ; : .
60$! .brsociq 85w slat-figum '. ._I ._- I :2' ,.,
MW 9‘” “1”“ 13535.- -uzaa asljivijys _!'_ MIC' 13¢ _
, .v.

.noijau'xj ani i0

-Viihli iliqgtaultlat .aauiool

 

f ‘.<’

 

v

 

 
 

Rex E. Ray

  
  
 
  

; «:5 I§)LThe analyses identified some relation-

jiefizthe frequency with which behaviors were

l'tfihe following are findings regarding the effective-

‘fflfifid ineffectiveness of instructional behavior: (1)

   
  

find laboratory, and counseling. (2) However, they were
less effective in activities associated with planning

and preparation for instruction. (3) The analyses
identified some relationships between effectiveness of
instructional behavior and certain characteristics of the
instructors. I

The following are findings regarding curriculum

 

development in technical teacher education: (1) The In-
structional Grid developed in this study identified areas
of instructional behavior that should be considered in
curricula for the preparation of technical instructors.
(2) Technical instructors have varied backgrounds of
preparation and experience. But, they also have certain
Competencies in common. (3) Tocapitalize and build upon
these competencies, in—service and university programs

0f teacher preparation should provide for considerable

 
  

guxibiiity.
"it ,, ,

    
  

' ‘
. x- .

 
    
   
 
    
  
  
   

i.

-'3ani ed: naifiw a? yjjuijzb urfi.
Tr I . .

u~5w-$9! 9mm: Islii::wfi . is: lame afi? L

919w aioiv:fled nuiI I*’I vnteflv.

éhwlinai;g aw‘ ‘;;r1€;:: ;.w.um f 7

n1 avL3:n*V : '1,‘ I/;T "" "I I L“

’IOI Jfrmfie'~V.wI 1— “,31' -jIr

MCI012€1E~IITI 913: I 1.1 ,_ ‘ .7

9.151” 19173 ."1 7" ‘ ‘..

onlflfislq Iv;. I k

ntfuq?1<g ‘ , a
-n1 91: " :w Ljr
35515 53:333flz' .Ku*1

ui beasbi-fiwp Ȣ firpn

Ibuifif'hs: _:‘:.I' -

.fi. .

o 3163 DU'13 an:

, . l

QuaganOIQXDEd beiasv vaf dJCENW

coonelaeqxo

F.‘ "I

--B§O$DU‘1:;N. -m‘.’ “.If ,"‘.’t “;.:"!;I"‘

has niifibibq91q

sang) .nmo at aslaneasqmcs
:. . “115'... ‘) V-S..‘.-:I I - ..
. I.“ ‘ .l V

 

    

    

   
 
   
 
   
 

_ mats OF ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
. IN TgCHIGAN COMMUNITY JUNIOR COLLEGES
IERMINED THROUGH AN ANALYSIS

OF CRITICAL INCIDENTS

BY
(A
CL
Rex Eé‘wRay
I;- ”
3 Dr. W.

aw. "I ._

      
 

T ‘ ttee Tn. ‘

A THESIS

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

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
College of Education

1966

w. . ., ._ __
..‘J. . » . ., -‘ ; ~. r‘n'l‘hi

 

 

 

 

 

   
  
   
  
   
   
  
 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TA“?

would find it extremely difficult to
I»”'of the many individuals who have
I Ififig’this event possible. My apprecia-
'Tféfrjtp the members of my Doctoral Committee:
:ifiiiiiborosage, the writer's major advisor and
Itiefiféhairman, who provided assistance and guid—
this research endeavor; and to Dr. J. A.
‘5. Dr. D. E. McFarland and Dr. George Myers, other
ttee members who gave of their time and provided
iLnBtructive criticism as the dissertation came to fruition.
At a moment such as this I would like to make special
._mention of the late Dr. Robert E. Smith, Professor Emeritus,
The Ohio State University, whose encouragement and inspira—
, tion caused me to embark upon this educational adventure.
Finally, as a husband and father, I dedicate this
dissertation to my wife Glenna and two sons, Glenn and
Stuart, who have been so patient and understanding during

my years of doctoral studies.

1

ii

 

 

 

 

amneua .mov. n rm

  
  

_.. vismeuixe :1 5:11

aiaubtvtbni ynsm 291

  
 

~61up one 93;:3', gr 'gi_.*;_ . a;_

0A .1: . 1‘: _ 1,; f‘ 37"; ‘ _" - w > I";

V,

.n;LJih1l
Ibisgqa :j»«

,tujiujrfl

 

 

 

 

     
   
  
 

"‘I380 1M‘5ni 3- ‘_ p
' TABLE OF CONTENTS

,_T gifwose‘offthe Study. .
. . 77 mtion . O I O O O
P“ 's c Assumptions . . .

‘ ”itatiens . . . .
cg; nition of Terms .

METgQPDLOGICAL OVERVIEW . . . . . . . .

ORGANIZATION OF THE PRESENTATION.
SWRY . . . C . . . I C . . . C C O .

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE. . . . . . .

THE ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN. . . . . . .

The Demand for Technicians. . . . . .
Occupational Characteristics of Tech-
nicians C I I O I I I O I I D O I I

I THE TECHNICAL INSTITUTE CURRICULUM. . .
Definition and Characteristics. . . .

The Scope and Level of Technical
Programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Subject Matter Emphasis . . . . . . .
THE TECHNICAL INSTITUTE INSTRUCTOR. . .
The Demand and Sources of Recruitment
Characteristics and Qualifications. .
Programs for Teacher Preparation. . .

SWARY o o o o O o I I o e o I e O O 0

iii

 

PAGE

KOKOOJQON 03

l3

l6
l7

l9
19
20
26
36
37

43
50

54
56
72
85

 

 

 

   
      
    

”Eb IN THE STUDY. . . . . .

  
  

} fiffl. Statement of Purpose. . . .

4 Opment of the Data ColleCting
t‘yi“ Instrument . . . . . . . . . . .
_," . .Population USed in the Study. .
,.*4 LE‘Collection of Incidents . . . .

i
, f— DATA PROCESSING AND CLASSIFICATION. .
Analysis of the Incidents . . . . .
Derivation of the Classification
System. . . .

of the Instructional Grid . . . .

IDN OF THE DAT-A C I D O O I Q C O I
Questions to be Answered. . . . . .
Analysis and Treatment Of Data. . .
Hypotheses to be Tested . . . . . .

SUMMARY 0 I o o o I u o o o o o o o 0

IV. ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA . .
' THE INSTRUCTIONAL GRID. . . . . . . .

‘l. t. Procedures for Analysis of Data . .

  
  
 
 
   

‘ fEQ, ANALYSIS OF THE CATEGORIES AND SUB-
" i I CATEGORIES OF THE GRID. . o o o I I
{22'
i ? Analysis of the Major Category Pres-
~ f enting and Explaining . . . . . .
.x“

Verbal Instruction . . . . . . .
Verbal Performative Instruction .

Analysis of the Major Category Rein-
forcement of Instruction. . . . .

Follow-Up of Instruction. . . . .
f.‘ Learning Environment. . . . . . .

iv

'\ '..- ',_ .'- 'J -,'. ., _ _ ‘ ‘ ,r. -‘O " '-
-|fi_ I it“; a! u‘ .._.' Lu”.- ,\ .«q—fi'ru.

Category Formulation and Development

PROCEDURES FOR ANALYZING AND INTERPRET—

 

89

89
91
93
95
95
97
99

101
101
102
103

105

107
107
109

110

111
114

115

116
119

 

 

 

i3 '1‘ QAHD

.1-l

   

 

.1. — -
“‘
f '“
QIE . -
11'. . . . . .
III . . . . . . -1 _
All . . 1:111D11.n1 JVifhn“.’

-n198 yuogsjs; IDLSM on: ?c 3(qklffi,

. . ... . .noijauijani To :nsmeaxwz

 

   
  
   
    
   
   
 
 
 
   

13%! elathe Major Category Ancil-
‘ VMtSD a e o o I o I o o a n

giggningi and Preparation for

struCEi on. I I I O I I I I I I

{uterpersonal Relations. . . . . . .
(-

H' ”Y ANALYSIS OF THE GRID TO DETER—

‘ IIIE INSTRUCTIONAL ACTS REPORTED MOST

3" PREQUENTLY o o o a o o n o o o o n o o

PrOCedures for Ranking the Data. . . .
Instructional Acts Classified by Rank

I order. 0 I I I I I I I I I I O I I I

Major Categories . . . . . . . . . .
Specific Categories. . . . . . . . .
Major Elements . . . . . . . . . . .

TESTS OF THE STATED HYPOTHESES . . . . .

Procedures for Testing the Hypotheses
Relating to the Frequency With Which
Behavioral Acts Were Reported. . . .

Hypotheses Relating to the Frequency
With Which Behavioral Acts Were
Reported . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hypothesis Al. .

Hypothesis A2. .

Hypothesis A3. .

Hypothesis A4. .

'L' Hypothesis A5.
1 Hypothesis A6-
,9 Procedures for Testing the Hypotheses
gfig ¢,Relating to the Effectiveness and
.3 ‘ Q_Ineffectiveness of Instructional
“'Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ness and Ineffectiveness of In—
structional Behavior . . . . . .

Hypothesis Bl. .
Hypothesis B2. .
Hypothesis B3. .
Hypothesis B4. .
Hypothesis BS. .

~v Hypothesis B6. .
,. Hypothesis B7. .

:ni,~:¢aJ ;~fiflhhfl'

Hypotheses Relating to the Effective- .

PAGE

121

122
125

127
127

128

128
130
130

132

133

135
136
136
140
140
141

144

 

 

      

1&5'3 MaQQBSBD iota“ ed: In areylaxfi

I o c I I n D o c o a 3- .1 JA ‘11!" ,

no? aciiszbqezq DUE g.’nzr'
. . {21- L! m." if’ ~

519i _.no:". ‘o

o o I I I

”.0
‘L

, .,
I I I u I - 4L.|-

'83‘1'3“ 0'1 ".391: 75111 ‘71:) L‘TL,‘ .. AA»: -. !’-'i.
T2024 0321310an 'A 1:: I ;

u ' . . . . . o .
. . ~ . .
. . . . .
. . o . . - .
‘ -
. . . n l ‘
‘.o_
.
1":
‘
,
»
'. .
f'
U ' - I
‘. '¢ .
7, .
,(
i. - . .
3' IL,
, .._
)
I .v
o . . . . .
--v.r. ' H7133 g. ~
4 l ‘ > ‘-:14 .J‘
I I I I . . . ‘ ._ ‘ 13 l y A,
I o o I I I . .

o I t .18 C:.J:B-". :kAub/i.

—. . . . . .38 alasfiioqgh
g' I I I I 0&8 ata‘qijquH

   

.; g .
.98‘1‘”. “I " W
. . - ;,$W§§
‘ v p. .. .
. “,. fit,» '
' -' ,

__ 7.-\.7.A-1 A

PAGE

  
 
  
 
 
  
   
   

FROM THE DATA. . . . . . . 173
“tingT and Explaining . . . . . . 174
174

truction. . . . .- . .
'1 Performative Instruction . . 175

regscment of Instruction. '.' . . 176
176

_' EVOIUQIOWUUp of Instruction. . . . . .
Loarning Environment. . . . . . . 177

quenr' .
A" “WI-11..” Acts. I I I I I I I I I I I 179
Gate Planning and Preparation for In—

179

"r.\]fi struction . . . . . . . . . .
.Interpersonal Relations . . . . . . 181

 

'Limitations of the Analyses . . . . . 182

"sway o O I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 184

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 186

- I ." SIMMARY I 0 O O O O O I C O O I O 0 I I 186

V The Purpose of the Study. . . . . . 187
Procedures Used in Conduct of the .

study I O O O O O I O I I I O O O I 187

Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . 188

' 189

Data Processing and Classification.
Analysis and Interpretation of the
Data. 0 C I O O l O O D C 190

CONCLUSIONS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 191

Question One. . . . . . . . . . . . . 191

Question TWOI I I I I I I I I I I I I 192

Question Three. . . . . . . . . . . . 193

Question Four I I I I I I I I I I O 0 195

question Five I I I I I I I I I I l 0 197
RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . 199

SUMMRY U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 201

‘ II'_.‘ BIBLIOGRAPHY. I I I I I I I I I I I I O O 0 ° 203
213

    
 

vi

 

"nlfil '

.7 aa'I'qws

    
      
 

.1; WWW] u :A ;3e.¢ ,--..1A ;,. yew-71's“
4?. L. o IATAB'! .113. 1‘7! f .“ ' LID '

 

  

O O I I O O I l.!-.Ir 'A' ’1‘
. ncl‘, ( .311' ~
. D ' .-1L',-3' - |Ir '
. . . . ‘ ‘ L v '
Ij‘
r
1-
f ‘
{Si . . . . . .
-:
£91 . . . . . . . . . . .
82!. . . . . . . . . . .
YéI I I I n I I . . :a' . ~¢—»l,r‘
: ’- I I I ,A 1 '1L_:'1_"[",

z.i101TAUM-3W .13 H-

  
 
  
  
 
 
 
  
   
   
 
 

la
4.. run t3:115:11 er TABLES

Tintt.- 'i'
fleaponu ' PAGE
, 6‘ Technical Curricula Devoted
gs Subject Areas. . . . . . . . 52
:“W? fiith”Which Instructional Be-
” 4 3: Reported Under the Major
rabtewvry “PreSenting and Explaining". . 112
:Z4v’qfigngy With Which Instructional Be—

haviérs were Reported Under the Major

Y Category "Reinforcement of Instruction% 117

1 L

quency With Which Instructional Be-
aviors Were Reported Under the Major
Category "Ancillary Acts" . . . . . . . 123
.Instructional Behaviors Classified by
Rank Order of Frequency Mentioned . . . 129
Significant Relationships Between the
Frequency With Which Major Elements
of the Instructional Grid Were Re-
ported and the Respondents When Paired
According to Technical Teaching Areas . 138
6.1 Major Element "Long Range Planning
and Preparation for Instruction"
1' ‘ , and Respondents Paired According
' . to Technical Teaching Areas . . . 138
‘;. 6. 2 Major Element "Application and As—
signment" and Respondents Paired
.1 According to Technical Teaching
1 Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
1}? 6.3 Major Element "Daily Planning and
1 ' Preparation for Instruction" and
Respondents Paired According to
Technical Teaching Areas . . . . . 139

        

 

   

 

 

 

-r. "“«1'5 2 '~ ’ r'r“ 1’;
a - o . sirlg‘. ‘ ’ - .1 1 ._ .
Iamijwrdznj f“ ‘4 .z: .‘ ' 1
ad: 191211» f 4 , _
."p..1 " ix" 1 1 "
f V» - 4'
5'“? 1 . ' 1. .
V
..
.‘1
r
l"
I.
I.
.I't‘
‘ "y ‘ ' ' n
' .115 c :5. 1 1; 4 up, ’-
I - , 1 4 .
, out. "n~ .3'41.l : ‘ ._ . ‘
96 ”H E"1*~"3”.Lv;-. ”431131 1
-_1. n 1 . . ‘ '
~ I ‘ ° ' 27.31.“: -;_; lL-‘t’ilur'.’

 

PAGE

    
  

*M'Ti the Respondents Paired According to
-‘Q¥ofelsiona1 Characteristics. . . . . .

and Preparation for Instruction"
and Respondents Paired According
‘to undergraduate Majors. . . . . .

x7?12’.flajor Element "Counseling" and Re—
spondents Paired According to
Levels of Teaching Experience. . .

Relationship Between the Frequency With
Which Effective and Ineffective Be-
havioral Acts Were Reported by the
Total Group of Respondents . . . . . .

Significant Relationships Between the
Effectiveness and Ineffectiveness of
Behavioral Acts Reported for the Specéu

4ific Categories of the Instructional
Grid and the Respondents When Paired
According to Technical Teaching Areas .

 

9.1 Specific Category "Learning Environ-
y” ment" and Respondents Paired Ac-
1“ cording to Technical Teaching

‘ Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9.2 Specific Category "Planning and Prep-
aration for Instruction" and
Respondents Paired According to
Technical Areas. . . . . . . . . .

9.3 Specific Category "Verbal Instruc—
tion" and Respondents Paired Ac—
cording to Technical Teaching
Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9.4 Specific Category "Verbal Performa-

tive Instruction" and Respondents

Paired According to Technical

Teaching Areas . . . . . . . . . .

viii

   

 

 

 

PAGE

     
     
  

'elnt Relationships Between the

. may With Which Major Elements

The Instructional Grid Were Reported

the Respondents Paired According to
'"FCBSiOnal Characteristics. . . . . . 143

and Preparation for Instruction"
and Respandents Paired According
to undergraduate Majors. . . . . . 143

532 Major Element "Counseling" and Re-
spondents Paired According to
Levels of Teaching Experience. . . 143

Relationship Between the Frequency With
Which Effective and Ineffective Be-
havioral Acts Were Reported by the
Total Group of Respondents . . . . . . 148

Significant Relationships Between the
Effectiveness and Ineffectiveness of
Behavioral Acts Reported for the Space;
ific Categories of the Instructional
Grid and the Respondents When Paired
According to Technical Teaching Areas . 156

 

_ 9.1 Specific Category "Learning Environ-
f ‘ ment" and Respondents Paired Ac-
’4;U ‘ cording to Technical Teaching
' Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
$2 9.2 Specific Category "Planning and Prep—
aration for Instruction" and
Respondents Paired According to
Technical Areas. . . . . . . . . . 156
9.3 Specific Category "Verbal Instruc—
tion" and Respondents Paired Ac—
cording to Technical Teaching
Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
- 9-4 Specific Category "Verbal Performa-
fl tive Instruction" and Respondents
' Paired According to Technical
‘ Teaching Areas . . . . . . . . .

. 157

 

viii

 

 
    

1,. .,

1":J:.
' -

E2!
.513.“ 319314.198 a‘idanc: i;r.’:

L'

1 - ; geaggsla 10tEM-n2’dV- 5:1' .
: 915W blue 15; .~;~-
, -03 zoom b93'5qa31.“!1

o I I I - .33'3ai1933f‘5'i1

  
   
 
 
 
  

    

pninnslq 3p;i% pnc. :JLMT
"OOijbujfiiui 153 n;;: :1quia
gnib1032A gagisq :g.»;.*q c«
. . -1 ‘L -;«> _e'

 

 

“5:: '1 ”I.‘ ~11 l ‘
' 1 I"; "‘. {’11
I o n J. 1
‘1
.

l’ _
l
i’
1.
I 1
‘1
~_
I.
J' - 1
i
‘. 6L. .

“ L117? ,1‘

A . /-
° 3‘- .-L- ‘1
v
"CL-l1, '

. >.

N -_ , ,1 .
-5m10-1:q .fiiluv" ’jgpq'.‘ ..,,.,, . '
‘ ‘ "“‘l~ r...

adnsbnoqaefi pas 'noijaule n' 5.1:
‘ . LeoinnaaT o: gaibioooh be:-;q
3:31.“; a .. 1 0 Q“ 931153691
15L'.'Z,w- A .’ y ,

   
       
   

PACE

  
  
 

sBEEiric Category "Follow-Up of
Instruction" and Respondents
Paired According to Technical
Teaching Areas. . . . . . . . . . 158

6 Specific Category "Learning En-
vironment" and Respondents Paired
According to Technical Teaching

Areas; ;‘; . . . . . . . . . . . 158

Specific Category "Planning and
Preparation for Instruction"
and Respondents Paired Accord-
ing to Technical Teaching Areas.. 159

9.8 Specific Category "Planning and
Preparation for Instruction"
and Respondents Paired According
to Technical Teaching Areas . . . 159

Significant Relationships Between the Effec—
tiveness and Ineffectiveness of Behavioral
Acts Reported for the Specific Categories
of the Instructional Grid and the Respond-
ents When Paired According to Professional
Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168

~“ 10.1 Specific Category "Follow—Up of

1 Instruction"and Respondents

3 Paired According to Professional
Preparation. . . . . . . . . . . . 168

10.2 Specific Category "Learning En-
vironment" and Respondents
' Paired According to Professional
Preparation. . . . . . . . . . . . 168
10.3 Specific Category "Planning and
Preparation for Instruction" and
Respondents Paired According to
Professional Preparation . . . . .

-L 10-4 Specific Category "Interpersonal
Relations" and Respondents Paired
According to Professional Prep-
aration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

-naaaa1amnm

 

 

 

BJSAT

  
 
   

$9 qU-‘wol’lo " 2:39;) 53 :.H£;eqa 5.9
" ndfiébnOQZefi has ""Oi:WU373EL
I Quintin-3T of 9111‘. w-zézra Muir—1G
b a o n o o o .252125 :2. ‘.. V‘It-S‘T
—n3 gniézrud" 11“: 3 :‘;g -.a

b91159 83.1“"»;'11"-_33‘ E bnb ' ‘ a
pnidoae? I;~L;A33" or a. ';.;u‘

gel. 9 O C. I O . I . 1 n o n . - ‘ A t

v ' vI 5
-21'1’: 9L, 1 ' ' J
I! .f‘ , .J»
- 1 _
O“. :- ;a‘ 1
a .
1‘
' f
1.,

‘I‘. _

‘

‘-' _

PE '

.1

..'

r

.

C

n

.

V i

'-

‘l

l

r3]
‘51 Lli' _
:““E H :9 ;'J 7 1
J " ._ .
' C 11.31} \ w r

ISncaIQQ*33nI" {2:99:51 Izii‘ ' «._1
v” E aéaibaoqasfl has "anoizelsn.

3 ”#3829103! 03 mibucooA

. 1" ' u‘. ‘1 _ g I 0 ”13‘18

 

 
 

 

 

  

PAGE

   
  
  
  
   
   

: ‘fifi”&ié§gafy7*béarning En-
';n»$%renment" and Respondents

j’Feired According to Undergrad-
-‘ ‘ °$EQF5¥g1°rs . I O C I O I I O I I . l 70

‘ Specific Category "Planning and

%5~ Preparation for Instruction" and

u T” Respondents Paired According to

. n“& Undergraduate Majors . . . . . . . 170

3‘ Specific Category "Interpersonal
Relations" and Respondents Paired
According to undergraduate
Majors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

d11918 ~Specific Category "Learning Environ-
' ment" and Respondents Paired Ac-
cording to Levels of Teaching
Experience . . . . . . . . . . . .

 

10.9 Specific Category "Phanning and
Preparation for Instruction" and
Respondents Paired According to
Levels of fTeaching Experience . .

 

10.10 Specific Category "Interpersonal
Relations" and Respondents Paired
Acccdrding to Levels of Teaching
Experience . . . . . . . . . . 1 .

   

   

. 7'

    
 
   

-5qu pni'nued" yaopene ' .- -1-.qu
_881'ishaoq29fl but. "311.» ,1: :1“,-
“W830 c3 pn king-313A 1 2": La».

Ems painneIQ" 1
bus "noisunaanl. 1::

 

LLEAT

 

 

 

 

83313312"! “.0 181“
ERUQI"!

. . . . . . . . . . .xf-r Lannifngzkni .I

 

 

 

 
 

"1;” :f/ -
V.“ #441 t" .3
. N '.o'

.V-l ‘ . TIS‘Tfifiwganoxcss

4.“,

-“":rwmy or EXPERTS. . . . .4 . . . .

 
    
 
  
    
  
 
   
   
 
  

fi-yfiifi'rumsm or PURPOSE FOR
I INSTRIETOR - o o n o o o -

:iflQF PURPOSE FOR A POST-HIGH
CHNICAL EDUCATION INSTRUCTOR. .

_ 'mCTING INSTRUMENT . . . . . . . .
I1-,.':‘, “CEO ADMINISTRATORS o a c o o n I c o
Vs!“ ' ' LETTER To STUDY POPULATION . . . .

,2") .
'3‘" . {MST FOLLOW’IIP o o o n a o a a o 3 O o o a
j’." ‘EéOND FOLLOW-UP . . . . . . . . . . . .4 .

F‘- 2 .\
g , 5° THIRD FOLLOW—UP.

JEQ'ZPO-URTH FOLLOW—'UP . I o o c o . ox o I o c o

. RF‘EDGE PUNCH TABULATION CARD . . . . . . . ._

L.» SAMPLE OF BEHAVIORAL ACTS CLASSIFIED UNDER
THE CATEGORIES OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL GRID.

xii

 

"V". ' .-7—v‘ur _

PAGE

213

215

217

 

219
230
232
234
236
238

 

240
242

244

 

ZSDIUMBQQA 30 Tall

XIOHESQA

. . . . "‘Z*.' W' ” Art” .A
’9 a v- vn'w ‘« 1‘ I
QOEK'L‘l i".t:t"l:l 1' ll‘tAt. H‘ T 1 ’ on
~,...r‘v,1
. . . ,..".-," _:.* A ’; *1;
if ' I ‘ ‘- ’.
'—_Z' I” l‘ C_ . .

   

 

 

INTRODUCTION

   
  
 
 
  
  
  
 
 

'4 ythe beginning of the technical institute
pulltc.and'private technical institutes,
zvfljunior colleges, industrial organizations,
filiost~high school institutions with curricula
Eiehnical fields have relied upon a variety of

’:»syfor the recruitment of instructional personnel.
§“V -i been only recently that attention has been

-Ki§¢ifled upon the need to prepare professional personnel

 

‘ lountaff these programs. The development of quality

 
  
   
  
    

tichnical teacher education curricula will depend in
filrge measure on both the quality and quantity of re-
learch that undergirds its development. I

Technical education is not a new phenomenon on
the educational scene. So far as is known, the history
and philosophy of technical education in America may
be traced back to the Academy founded in 1751 by Benjamin

Franklin.1 Wickenden and Spahr identified the Lyceum

 

3 ' 1Leo F. Smith and Laurence Lipsett, The Technical

I stitute (New York: McGraw—Hill Book Company, 19 , p.

 

‘.v #:‘uv

I SETQAH:

molTDUhch LL

  
 
      

WWW ISOiH.‘iUB" 2921' I. v ' " any,
‘I

 

‘f .893U3i3aal [bfinfll- ; ‘ . , ._, ,v,,h.-;«
, k
,aaolass;nsgza In. 1
SIUDilivj fl:,n :J-1;l
IO {3.7. "' -t
o [SJ‘ZLIL'c‘ 1
1. “m"
J;
"1
:3 w--..;
*-
t
A
W
L; A ,
1:.
J. l ,4

   

7"}, ‘ajeaq‘kl B'Vif‘l‘E'lL‘b; l‘Ll' ~-
A,.;quoa flood lfLH~wsuaoH 1%

-fi!

'7- V ww'ww_mv—v

2
3.£lhed.in 1822 at Gardiner, Maine, as the

  
 
   
 

 

"éxfi§talxinstitute in the United States.2 The
'cs Institute opened its doors in 1828, and

  
  
  
   
   
   
   
  
  
  
  
  
   
 
  
  

". stime many and varied technical programs,

 
   
    
  
  
  
  
   
    
   

'iSHhiiely and priVately supported, have come into
‘y’ies. Technical education, especially at the col-
.?fi4lbflol, probably received its greatest impetus from
flier-rill Act of 1862.
”loci The technological explosion of the post World
"HII years created new occupations and increased the
giifichnical requirements Of many existing ones. The
:upidly advancing technology in the United States has
"_.bfought about a significant change in job requirements
of many industrial occupations. Many common require—
ments have been identified and grouped in broad families
9f occupations. This has created a need for personnel
'3. with a wide range of abilities and capable of adjust-
5 ing to the technological changes constantly taking
place. The tradesman with a high degree of skill in a
r apecific trade does not have the breadth of knowledge
“'1 or the flexibility to function at the performance level
required in these new technical occupations. Also, as

g_resu1t of the expanding areas of knowledge brought

 

.....;_< 2 .
‘3IJWilliam E. Wickenden and Robert H. Spahr, A Study

‘a1fin cal Institutes, The Society for the Promot on
£39 hearing Education (Lancaster, Pennsylvania: The

    
   
    

fl “ngQOIQ (5::
| ‘
w.ffif'emoo svcn

95* -‘ ed: as «(1 L r. 1 -

15031 20:19ng :.t:,‘

“H‘ He15a:l
V e
L e-
. -I '3 ..
- ;_| ."
.
A ; r! -
/’
\x. ,
L
"‘ ’M .‘l
L ‘1
. -’.
i‘HJL-‘L‘JL’J"J , .1'.‘

Isvsl Bananas *93

57.1,1snib153 :5 Hi5; n. uBCALLIL?L5 'sw dnldw

E bsdinu edfi mi angi'43' l§rldf333 3:11}

_ _- I ,‘I
‘_ LN. ’:-|'._'5['I "‘ r ..C'
H‘VJSL‘ “3; HUI ‘ “ ’: ' ' 1.“ “"" r

.J i.A..L’;

A ., -
Z“ .. .t l ‘ -.‘

as ,oalA .axzijsqesru -; :~»:;

g

m

 

 

 

l',' . vvwv V‘7—v—w‘w—‘V —- ‘F‘

 
     
   
    
   
  
   
    

. 1‘) A
«1T’~@trtechnological breakthroughs, the modern

n 9' increasingly becoming a theorist who does

“@égttime or the prettical knowledge to function

 
   
  
   
  
  
  
  
  
   
   
  
    
 
 

7E".- em .
,;, realm. This has created a void between the

' and the engineer that has given impetus to a

The increasing need for trained technicians has

»5egevident. The literature reviewed was replete

:,Ege00nited States Department of Labor, in its report to
ehe President, estimated that there will be an increase
of over 775,000 technicians between 1960 and 1975.3

This figure does not take into account replacements for

 

those who die, retire, or leave for other reasons. In

1957 the Carnegie Corporation sponsored a national survey

3 6f technical institutes. It was found that among ninety
' V

vf‘ companies in the United States, the ratio of technicians
£1 to engineers was about 0.8 to 1.0. Employers stated that,

2:; by 1967 the ratio should be 2.2 technicians to each
engineer, representing an increase in the ratio of

teChnicians to engineers by nearly 200 percent.4 This

”‘xf“" 3U.S.'Department of Labor, Manpower Report of the

. resent and A Report on Manpower Re uirements Resources,
' 57’: .9n and Trainino (waShington: Government Frint-

' p 4ce, 1963 , pp. 100-101.

G. Ross Henninger, The Technical Institute in

5.9 (New York: McGraw—Hill Boo? Company, 1§3§3, p.

 

   
 

   

  

fl‘’y,.6.t"lbt1r)’:11‘l'3){5‘51 ,1 Is: LvL. :r 4 a: W. 5&3.le

I.Q£3‘liosflj 5 ynimo'fim 2' w :‘Jti . :; 'wgnjbjg
05 spbslworm (5:12: -:.: , m . 7 f .'
Ifi3~neawasc e.‘v : :~7.a . , In

auieqmi nea.; . - ,. ‘ 7 __

 

 

aflP"
,,
I.
‘ ‘ '3‘”_l I
.
i .
2H:f ‘
l vfisfl‘ .1 ‘
1' 41:25" ‘ i
I
" tr .N
. "J -— ”7 :2 L J
. ?

J. ~ p
3’ 1 »; EIflT .Jnggyvq @

elode io Jn5m335q5fi .3 CE
4 ,“-3“ ‘5 A bus ineaanq
' 0!

.7”‘ 3681 U
”Vivi m

 

4

   
    
  
  
  
 
  
  
 
  
  
  
 
 
   
  

ingu.;-atiained technicians in the years ahead,
€32: fact that in 1960 slightly more than
aring technicians were graduated,5 presents
'Jfifi utmost urgency. To meet_the demands of the
=;i‘i§ is of paramount importance that new technical
1:" Be initiated throughout the United States and
’¥f:%310n of the existing programs be undertaken. Al-
ézit is recognized that industry will have a great
1‘sibility in the upgrading and preparation of

'ngrnecessity be the responsibility of the tax supported
.{gducntional system.

up Federal legislation in the form of Title VIII of
“the National Defense Education Act of 1958 has been con-
;sidered a milestone that has reflected the attitude and
‘concern at the national level about the problem of pro—
}‘f viding adequate programs in the area of vocational and

1', technical education. There has been a growing awareness
g. on the part of public school officials with regard to
_their responsibility for providing educational programs
for the large segment of the school populace who do not
:Qlan to pursue professional preparation at the baccalaur—

g~ :gate degree level. This has resulted in an examination
L ll ‘

 

5D. C. Metz, "Fifth Survey of Engineering Technic-
‘Zrograms," Technical Education News, XX (November,

 

 

 
    
     
  
 
   

. A

.*

 

‘fydupua' 0:»; r.

P.

’-- ~ nab-3.13 u,
'. . 9 ' .

.."n
cg wan Jan‘ .,

{53.2963533 Us‘f;”
I
“1.

.nsXsfiusbuu u'

15919 a 9753

 

 

4gp: ni anslvlnfida;
Pc‘ . .

v

(figfinsgbggg .I'::'.-. u.’:'

 

 

   
  
  
  
  
  
  
    
  
     
    
   
 
   
  

; O o-
,!J with more thought being given to

 

chensive program of public education

iJ73~2. has such program is post—high school
3..#i‘ation.

“fifsse technical education does not fit into the

;3;3P‘ educational pattern, instructors have been

{necdflfrom a variety of sources. Such sources in—

-§d%ineering, industry, vocational education, in-

»3 1 arts, and graduates of technical programs. Real—

ihat individuals from these sources will continue

igfiifl-Wemployed as technical education instructors, it

,gg-Issential that teacher education programs make pro—

i figion for professional upgrading experiences. Also,

~‘ihese programs need to provide a complete higher educa-

: tien curriculum for individuakswho desire to prepare for

Egchnical teaching, but who have had little or no previous

training. In order to provide such a program, it will

necessitate a more flexible approafluto teacher prepara-

tion than can be found at the present time in most

 

teacher education institutions.

, w
a _ c
, .'=:-,
-. ..
5
.- ’ '
h ‘
,1
_ 'r .
w. 5
'-
EL“ .
v
Illwll

For any new subject area to attain professional
_:(§tatus it must provide preparatory programs for entry
‘ikciéll as opportunities for advanced educational and
'"Eiféessional growth. At the present time, very little . .

Vifigeen accomplished in the way of providing prepara— Ti

'VkP} C r'1culums for technical instructors. As a result

 

 
   
  
  
  
   

.' - '

'V‘ jéhlsd dfipuodj 510m Ari; apng.fifin ‘lfiaeiq 10
‘ . ‘
3"‘N'biiduqt i6]. ‘Ylé 122-IQ ’3‘~'~ '.‘ ~“L-3 "v'_ , 5 D.'j DJ. VCXQ

" - ' .
' ,\.‘ lipid-330:1. :1 fiipuéuq .1" . . min-v, ‘.:; 1's?

 

 

L

3“

I; , -
I

‘ '

i.

_ 1,, .
il

~52" Ln" _ t

anoiaaaap‘

'xlifis 10? :msjpnir (A. ,_, _; 7“, V

by..." 1,
k .‘ l

.. .. --
rr'L

‘ ‘ifot-

- -u- anLJlusjfigg.-. .zg ll-gm a.-

      

_ Q

   

IfiflOIisoube b"33[1.’.:‘v"iui " ‘

    

  
  

.«fif;;}?553999 ed: 3A .diwoap lsnokeaeiouq

‘ " mm

“3‘- ..‘

‘11. V

'.p;ov

 

A .‘u‘. Evfl‘zgpm‘

 

‘1’. ‘.. _'.

6

 
     
     

_;,!§velfifltProfessional teacher preparation has had
"h;u~vg959le in bringing about the present quality
Vigsipgopf instructional personnel in other subject
aAbsencerted effort in this direction is essential
".uhgrea,of technical education if this segment of
figjb,edugational system is to attain a higher professional
#1QPEP?’ This is the challenge to those who are interested
ifgd:conCerned about this area of education, and especially
fgfithose who are in the area of industrial teacher educa-

Wm

_‘A.'J I

I. THE PROBLEM

Purpose of the Study
It was the purpose of this study to make an analy—

sis of the classroom and laboratory instructional function

 

of engineering technology instructors in Michigan Com-
munity Junior Colleges through the use of reported
critical incidents.

Specifically, the problem which this study pro-
posed to investigate can be stated in the form of several
questions:

1. What is the order of importance of the various
instructional functions of engineering technology in-

.t.;vgtructors?

 
 

  
     
 
 

t-.3 isnoiasszezq

* an: :5 gr: ;-.

1] 110129631». ;°:‘ :4

. 3 1 4‘;
. .fl _®etdua .sm-
rfiiinsaav 3.1 {1. ‘ '

in}; ;. .i‘ ‘ _
I; l 5 n '

! “ '

f.

t?

W»

4:;

a»

ti-

l‘ 1

l?

I.. i

I"

L: -- _

-‘31q yt-Jja: ?. LU

' , if? '. - .
i”t’,.§!§§¥fié.70 mini 9d: 3r Ll
. ., ‘ ‘3' "

    

. a 3.93, ququa 10 .--

djiw 13533

,Li‘gla

3611

\ L

on at suedi

l.

(u

 

 

7:

   
  
   
  
 

'- apart that demonstrate their effectiveness

~ mm and laboratory instruction? (a) when classi-
€.groUp and (b) when classified according to cer-
Iracteristics .
iVW. What behaviors do engineering technology in-
.ifikructors report that demonstrate their ineffectiveness
ilrclassroom and laboratory instruction? (a) when classif-
td‘fias a group and (b) when classified according to cer—
tain characteristics.

5. What inferences will the investigations and

analyses proposed in this study produce for curriculum

development in technical teacher education?

Contribution

 

It was felt that the findings of this study could
(I) contribute to a better understanding of the instruc—
tional role of the technical instructor, (2) provide
implications for technical teacher education curricula,
and (3) identify areas for future study in the field of

technical teacher preparation.

 

 

 

 
  
  
    

. f“‘§Wfisd Jeixs aqixan; ; a: 15:5

' V .
: “Gu.insjasisfls nfsaxs '3: “J‘r .La

‘1. .
.H“,,..daej pJJESQH in . ' 3. < “
‘V;f‘it§oeile '-e‘+ 4: s. , i - .7

.4Is nsdw (5: .u ;'

~ni vpc 31 ' L;

3",.-. ‘
,C. ‘ .
~. ~l
"1-;g‘x .“ . L
- l‘
I. 4.
‘
;
r -

.BIUDIIIUQ iti‘. A

 

 

 

 

   
  
     
    
   
  
  

'jjfifliggggsumptions underlying the study were

«-
,,. 4
3&3“ lhgt the classroom and laboratory behavior of

yf°7~'t;netructor is a significant factor in the

.sfl.‘

‘3T.§18.tetal performance.

JEFV3£a;That the critical incident technique is a
ffflnumd_accepted method for identifying the functional
“2;;;r_ef teachers.

5:;,er3- That the instructors surveyed in this study .
g 33} teaching in technical education programs that can be
3g§¥glsified as the technical institute type.
‘fitgy, 4. That technical instructors would be able to
‘2'Sedall significant incidents of effective and ineffective
f behavioral acts related to classroom and laboratory in-

struction.

.;.- 7‘ 5. That the community junior college, or its

 

cw~ counterpart, because of its uniqueness and its responsive—
ness to the needs and demands for curricular innovations,
is the logical institution for developing future pro-
grams in technical education.

;;4: 6. That the present sources of recruitment of

.1 Qualified technical instructors, as well as programs

1 e

3 §¥§k teacher preparation, are in need of improvement both

    

tetively and qualitatively to fulfill the needs

"it;

   
  
   
 
  

‘ V A:
' . ._—

‘ 90.133 3-3: .:« :nii ‘ 1‘" 37¢" 7" 7‘ ‘ '3

 

"‘ “and yzozsur': H . 3‘“‘=

”lint 301351 3n, -‘ ‘ >~4~“49 “

5 ai GllpoTK‘

15110133922»? -;- ‘ ‘

 

, ' «v
\ R
M
“ a :
‘ l _ .
Ll
,'
\j ‘,
31'
?:|
h"
L }
.‘U'
3‘33
u :- _; 411:“:

.511 e

- I. 5 ‘
_\ L

710 finsmfiiuitml :0 ..-‘< 7 :3.-

J’" , ~1‘

 
  
 

,: v ..,.,_. . '.
ulna. 15"-“ . “‘_ ' ‘ v.44L-L‘;

oaq.as lieu a: ,s‘w::“‘:3

  
    

h- 9"

  
  
 
 

i‘;_§9;bg” mi 915 ,noidsxsqsiq xedossd 102
Cl;‘;-( f.

      

l fl;;§&§;7 gang vlpvldodiduofp

_.,» ~' --'.\-~
‘-

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
  
    
  
  

; LTitating factors that were established

¢W5.§g were as follows: ,

-'3LtJ-e collection of critical incidents was

3 the total population of full-time post-

"technical instructors teaching in the fields

Craftinquesign: technology‘, (2) mechanicaler”

tflkll technology,a and (3) electricityeeleCtronics

:.. logy in Michigan Community Junior Colleges dur-

the year 1964-1965.

ypptfae 2. The critical incidents accepted for analysis

iizeilimited to those acts which were reports of actual

‘Tbohavior and identified by the respondents as being

~1 Cither effective or ineffective in contributing to the

Stated purpose as determined by this study.

‘K‘. -

3. Only those incidents associated with the

O

- "K. [of
o"

 

Classroom and laboratory performance of technical in— .
structors were solicited. No attempt was made to study
m ‘ , the personality characteristics, community functions or

technical competencies of the technical instructor.

.. Dgfinition of Terms

I'Pé“;y The terms presented below have been defined so

‘fll to convey consistent meanings applicable to this study.

Critical incident. An observable human activity

 

   

-. 3‘81tuation where the purpose or intent of the act
» “-1—: ‘3

:3e34miied
_~____._—_-_—

    
 
  

   

36w sjueh

-jaL'q ;‘.i-."- . 'L . ' ,Y'Jf: I")

 

ififsii ed: < w l - , 1

 

 

ea baniist 3s: avi; an ‘
'_>:
V :313xnldsolqus apninsom 33932.2: ~u711‘ o: as
.a( v , ‘

'1 , -

    

 

*1 18913113

“in“ :7” 4'

 

 

10

gigs! to the observer and its consequences

   
  
     
     
   
 

-.nt1y definite So that there is little doubt

‘\°\orits effect."6

.zfiggtical incident technigue. '"This is essentially

re for gathering certain important facts concern—

ravior in defined situations with a minimum of in~
,fi’- ces and interpretations."
:.‘u¢ Engineering technology. "Engineering technology
.AfiWhat part of the engineering field which requires the
ILIaplication of scientific and engineering knowledge and
' methods combined with technical skills in support of
engineering activities; it lies in the occupational area
3fi 2 between the craftsman and the engineer at the end of the
area nearest the engineer."8
Instructional act. The specific observed act in-
cluded in the critical incident that was considered by
the respondent to be effective or ineffective in accomp-

lishing the purposes of the engineering technology in-

 

structor. A critical incident may contain one or more

instructional acts.

6Jo hn C. Flanagan "The Critical Incident Technique,"

Psychological Bulletin, LI (July l954),p.'.327.
7Ibid., p. 355.

    
  
  

8James L. McGraw, Characteristics of Excellence
~ igfifiggineering Technology Education, American §OCiety
’jger ng neer ng ducation Urbana, Illinois: University

KI§J;;lj-n¢is, 1962) g p. 1.

 
 

 

Bil DRE 19?1e&uu ac: ‘ 1v‘.fl «xlii‘ amass

s

31‘ 9219.1: re... a." a . XT~ -n-:;: 23:2 an

1‘ I '3 ' ‘13L‘ 7!

 

3dr ‘ p . l : ' . . 1 “at

u
.53
a

   

 

m

 

 

 

ll

     
    
  

‘n.16§y-instructor.-

' "a }‘
“n‘dunior colle e and communit colle e- Terms used

‘Vteenth and fourteenth years for terminal students as
“ggfl as for those who plan to transfer to baccalaureate
degree programs.

F, Major category. A constituent part of the instruct-
ional function of teahhing. For the purpose of this

study the major categories were: Presenting-Explaining,
Follow-up, and Ancillary Acts. A group of one or more
specific categories form a major category in the classif-
ication system of the grid.

Major element. A group of one or more specific
elements form a major element in the classification sys—
tem of the grid.

Respondent. The individual from whom effective
and ineffective critical incidents were solicited.

7 Specific category. It is the second level in the

;h3_ classification system. A group of one or more major

   

A'u‘; ’ . ,
._3elements form a specific category in the classification

,
'I I'll

 

 

fioiifiailiaasfz 5 .;123 :rtczssuxfiawl

 

  
 

    

, . 5‘13 pnldl‘xuent‘ «.r-i 1-'.-:'=a'»' .lw; um -uofevah
a g

Séfiibsed 93541;: q: ‘922 , ‘ : ‘ ,- ' -i.."3;:.1u3
3c 812‘._'.tf'.. a"? ' , ' ~ _;‘ g -'»f‘

A .1

ed: ’1 * l . " .zw. Cuts

. ~w' ,.:,j

   
      
   

beau amueT .soa.

 

adj 1
as 214:1 ‘
:ijéf'l
——7.}1_‘i. I A
1’}
I
II‘
J - 1‘
1‘
3-21:3:
-.'1‘L’-Z :‘ - .
svijoiva-v . '
g- -b5J_JIlO&; 5.1:“! -_d’wci -n'J’__ ’ ; 5' '
' - V 1" . _ _ .I J

'Jn;:ievsf bnoos; sfi; 3‘ 17

v‘ .I‘.

     

“r'l

   

aye noljsoliiaasio

.ms:

    

12

   
   
   
  
  

. It is derived from a particular

”'1fgincident and is the smallest division in the

_' fisation system of the grid. For the purpose of

Lifatugy specific element and instructional act were

'litégggrchangeably.

,}§nncthghnical education. A generic term that refers

xxflggnly those curricula of technical level, which re-

"i.¥e high school graduation or equivalent for entrance,

‘5 fipare for immediate employment, last for one year to

. loss than four years, and which lead to aformal award."9

t, Technician and engineering technician. For pur—

poses of this study, terms that refer to "technical work—

ers whose jobs require knowledge and use of scientific

and mathematical theory and specialized education or train-

ing in some aspect of technology or science, and who, as

a rule, work directly with scientists and engineers in

industrial occupations."lo
Technical ingtitute. Refers to"an institution

or division of an institution of higher learning offer-

ing instruction in one or more branches of technology

m—

9U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Office of Education, Organized Occupational Curriculum,

Egrcular No. 568 (Washington: Government Printing Office,
"59).

1

-1 . 3 0Technical Education Yearbook l9§3- -1964 (Ann
*.. Arbor, M c gan: Prakken Publishers Inc., 1 , p. 57.

    

 

 
  
     
         

,' cm}: DSVJ .197, : i T}. . ,‘_. 'IC’ 5.; fig;

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

" v
.. W Shit 33': gums. 9.5: ’ T ”rt; .‘r'v;
'{1 .. and do”?! a ‘1‘!“ ‘ "":““‘::"5£3
Isnoijoux 5‘ .1, 1
A~ LJ
”193 . v ‘ 3
’ ._Ie'Is' - ~
1'). l ‘ I.
, ,
Al,
I
, -)‘2“ ~
.~\’£'.— k
l‘ -Al.L;-'3
?
j -1
1
F. ' ‘
f“: L -
\” 'lL‘YI-
1,2,3: : 1 _ '
molt-snub? ,z-é:.V;-« u...
Mg3iluzaf 'r. .. ‘.C .11 : :1 V” " 33?".‘P'
A v" -'--— 3 ’ _“
‘m'chu ....Jpnuiaew: an. .zfit 15111311!
a

:. we, * Lama 9T0 ‘-

. "3: if ;_ . fut“: ‘

13

  
 
  
 
 
 
     
   

curriculum. Terms used to designate a

, 5,.6years in duration. Designed to prepare students
'fiipfidfk in the field of engineering technology, and

I
iasfiuiily leads to an associate degree.

g?“"l‘ Technical instructor. Refers to an individual

333§80'provides instruction in one of the technical
.Specialties associated with an engineering technology or
technical institute type curriculum.

Technical specialty. Refers to a specific field

of preparation within the area of engineering technology,

Such as mechanical technology and electronic technology.
II. METHODOLOGICAL OVERVIEW

As was previously stated, there is no consistent
source of supply for teachers of engineering technology.
Although both undergraduate and graduate programs of
technical teacher education are in various stages of

development few institutions have carried on total pro-

   
 

trams.

 

11

‘339. .-a. Carter V. Good (ed.), Dictiona of Education
. 37W”York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, I§Eé5, p. 531.

 

  

   
   
 
    
   
  
      
     

”@518? 19919913 {ars‘ ,. as: : ,'
nfi ion: neewami r~.-::,- ‘ rm: -:-I

)IUOnIDnE Isms:

““85 ”enigma."

 

03 aw: i. _.‘ '- ~ ‘ . '~

83n3§)"—+ :0171‘17‘ ‘ , _ .‘f

 

1’57. : , ‘

I,
‘5
A.
M
v i -
w
l

t

- ‘JP'iJicm: {1 .-
”LC am: if, . . _,

H19 espsaa e._>
-;', l _

“;_,_3»

  

‘. i." ~- ‘74-, . . .
”Jun-u wu: :n-nw rev-m
1.. . .

.amsap

 

   
     
  

I

3n$§gided that a study concerned with the instructional

l.3§¥9n of the technical instructor could contribute

tba existing knowledge in the field of technical teacher

iepcation as well as identify problems for future research

..£p this area. The procedure for collecting the data

f Epncerning the instructional function of the technical

instructor was the critical incident technique.

3.:‘ In order to provide a background for a sufficient
understanding of the problem and its many ramifications,
a survey of the literature pertaining to post-high
school technical education was conducted. Literature
given special consideration for this study was that
which contributed much significantly to the problem of
the preparation of instructional personnel.

John C. Flanagan developed the critical incident

technique as an outgrowth of studies for the United

States Army Air Force to establish procedures for the

   

seleCtion and classification of air-crews. Since then

 

 

.~ . .Jitbfi Al
13+; .:«.;v:&qbiq

,_ aalbuje

“'>A .,.i

 

 

 

 

Jflfitifififi -c3;w.

 

 

 

Dailifll MCI} ‘JG': :'.—<. , ,

1 . r.
., 1., ,
.a grim."

.. .Mezs-ais ‘to noljsoiliaesls bras noijoslsa

aopaebau and 5d,

a

s ‘

 

  
   
   
   
 
 

15
C“aing the critical incident technique as a method
_ “—ng teacher behavior, Flanagan stated:

, {game critical incident technique, rather than
Labllecting opinions, hunches, and estimates, ob-
“v‘ins a record of specific behaviors from those
‘5_twations and evaluations. The collection and
tabulation of these observations make it pos-

sible to formulate the critical requirements of

an activity. A list of critical behaviors pro—
vides a sound basis for making inferences as to
requirements in terms of aptitudes, training,
3and other characteristics. 12

To provide for a systematic analysis and inter-

pretation of the instructional acts of post—high school
technical instructors, it was necessary to develop an
appropriate classification system. The procedure used
was 831’ follows:

1. Flanagan'slBSuggestions were followed with
regard to the selection of a frame of reference to be
utilized in describing incidents.

2. The categories of teacher behavior presented
by Ryans,l4 in his "Information System Theory of Teacher

15 in his "Concept of Teaching,"

Behavior," and Smith,
were selected and adapted for use as a tentative frame

of reference for category formulation.

 

1‘QFlanagan, op. cit., p. 355.

l3Ibid., p. 343.

David G. Ryans, "Teacher Behavior Theory and
Research: Implications for Teacher Education," The

; Qgppnal of Teacher Education, XIV (September 1933’.

f, . 158. O. Smith, "A Concept of Teaching," geachers
. Record, LXI (February 1960), pp.: 22-9-241.

,. 14D

  
  
 

v. .1 .121. .I .‘

 

 
 

  
 
   

Unplanned J'HLLL'VI _' r
M538 aspen? . , .» i".e.‘-~-
'IWBI .SLgnrr 3' a ‘ < . '

    

We $153.33: —*-* l . ~ .; ‘
“bus nol:--- .M a .7 |
-8f.‘n.)_ 3; -:~. ‘ , 7 , v . 1
30 33.135313; g ‘

 

 

~O'1Q TLFI‘T
.33 in". .“'1‘..'“
." . Al "
-1%“ -
>r,fi _
I“
l
D
m
1
uw
“
x
- u. x
'17: _ »‘
‘3“;“3 4

 

.. 4'- _,
.1 ‘.._ '0-.'.- ."b ,flut..’:."»u"

     

.515 .q ,.b1d;‘1

    
 

l.» '1.a;....a#.t a

    
  
  
   
  
    
  
 

,. *1l,e§§écific instructional acts were extracted.
.ir:3

§313r93irranged under major categories to form an
4 A .~ 'I'J'gridt

5-‘ihCThe tentative major categories were modified

5

gfle’ fined where necessary and then subdivided into
EA¥L~lgroups or elements describing the same or closely
,IQffifid behaviors.

k .

{20'
hi; V III. ORGANIZATION OF THE PRESENTATION
(f

1' .
”F- Chapter II presents a review of the literature

p£ which was pertinent to the problem being studied. There

' wares dearth of relevant literature, especially research
studies in the field of technical teacher preparation.
This dearth necessitated a different approach to that
generally used when presenting a review of the literature.
It was decided that a deve10pmental review of the liter-
ature would provide sufficient background for under-
standing the study being conducted. The rationale for

fl selecting the literature to be reviewed was that an

V
.f~ educational program embodies three primary ingredients;

    
 
 

'yafindents, curricula, and instructors. Therefore, a re-
.Tiew of the literature was presented as follows: (1) the
-“:~ring technician, (2) the technical institute cur-

'< ”pnd (3) the technical institute instructor.

  

w: «Mummnl

     
  
  
    
  
  
  
  
  
  
   
   
  

 

   
    

  
 

L103 9'19“

3
1
a.
a,
A
I
u
I
Y

 

:aanagbblh'zii _ 1E1,':' '1 1 . , , (a ‘. .3. '

SIOiSIBIlI . ~‘ .1 A .
" rM-J’www‘l Luof- '..'._;-;:1':. , ;:‘;;~:Au3a

Pqpadnaasiq 25w 01111613311 an: to weiv

 

  
 
  
  
  
   
 
 
  

, , “cfinduct of the study.
ycillectien,

  

They were as follows:

(2) data processing and classifica-

Uéfiapter IV presents an analysis and interpreta-
i‘Bf-thé data. This included: (1) the Instructional

ind procedures for analysis, (2) an analysis of the

lluories and subcategories of the Grid, (3) a summary
?wysis of the Grid to determine instructional acts re-
INC‘Eted most frequently, (4) tests of the stated hypotheses,
-tfifl (5) a summary of the analyses and interpretations

Hide from the data.

Chapter V presents the summary, conclusions,and

recommendations of the study.

SUMMARY

The first section of this chapter presented an
introduction to the problem being studied by identify-
ing some of the developments that have given impetus to
the technical education movement. The present and future
demand for technicians and the resulting need for the
development of technical education programs and instruct-
t9r3to staff these programs was discussed.

The second section identified the problem and pre—

   

 

   
   
   
 
  
    
       

"sq 313135219. 3.63 ’—._‘~.< . “”‘T.
“99‘ yarn .‘ubuc; 3 “ ‘ ' ' 1'3,

“713 bus pnj,:d; :; f" ,' L. , '

 

'mfiqasjni my. ‘ .,-,
iafloldnuajanl efl‘ . .. . r':3

 

SXU?U‘ hue ‘”c.w\'
931:1 "3: : J31:

eonadani has smuatouc n‘:f.' *

4

oDGEEDSELb 3-x amfitpalq ugu : “:jfl

» ."

' ~Wb~bl notices bnosea edT
7. -«A s _

  
  
 
   
    
  
 
   
  
  

18
,“Q3Wig assumptions underlying the study,
‘ )9. ;, indCflheIdefiaition of terms used in
Cpathen presented.
’ ‘xsw 0? Man -

fiffihird section presented an overview of the

<7 I discussion of the methodology for the col-

‘C3,ngnchapters of the study with a discussion of the
Otdliterature reviewed, the procedures followed in

, tcoaduct of the study,
_, .7-Mtatdon of the data.

tech«’

and the analysis and inter;

1111‘-

'Y'

 

   

.13. A ; '

pniyfzemu. tuna». ,. . — 1
- '7 ‘- u‘sauba

$31133 21C fiel" ~.; 1- a-
1, I..-» ‘1. ’1
.. VJ , ”.Au‘i4n

    
 

med: :23‘: n.3, .- -

 

" '” imam...»- 1‘ :.::
. ’ , ""1

13:13 3‘...
an: ' -,
:1 V .14!

 

 

 

  

 
 
   
   
 
   
   
 

CHAPTER II

 

"‘ti““ REVIEW or RELATED LITERATURE
‘g‘chtn -
ivghere was a void in research literature related
“gi'flaroblem being studied. The absence of such liter—
hIEfidictated that the review would be concerned pri—
M'y with an examination of the available literature
“f-h identified and further clarified some of the prob-
f'7;.and issues underlying the problem. The literature
I‘-Qg&tinent to this study was classified into the follow—
:IVing areas: (1) the engineering technician, (2) the
- technical institute curriculum, and (3) the technical

institute instructor. Each of these will be developed

in this chapter.

I. THE ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN

Since the turn of the twentieth century, there
has been a tremendous increase in the application of
SCience and engineering in America's industrial economy.
Scientific research and development during World War II"
and the post-war years have resulted in an explosive

- growth and expansion in industry and technology. A

major outgrowth of this explosive technological advance

   

.3 Egg? the.development of the term concept in American in-
. ?.Modern industry reached its high level of
19

 

 

  

    
 

1’ .AW?
1
@9519: Jill; .
"njil 1"," I. j 01
-Lfifi 'r75
9': ‘:.. -
-A I“ 2“ -1rm
J 1‘
V ‘1
- 1

 

 

evlac foxe .1. .z

7",

-1luuu, , I, ,,

: avleoque aid: to dive

" v.4 33p

1:: we not”:

 

 

20
production through team work rather than through independ—
ent, individual effort. The technician has made a major
contribution as a member of the engineering manpower team.

Technicians, as defined in this study, are a
relatively new occupational group in the industrial econ—
omy. New materials, new processes, automation, and im-
proved techniques of measurement and control have been
combined to increase the need for technically competent
persons with special abilities; persons who can support
and supplement the efforts of the engineers and scienc

tkfls throughout the technological complex.

The Demand for Technicians

 

As a result of the dynamic changes and rapid
growth that has taken place in the industrial economy, a
critical shortage of trained technicians has developed.
Predictions indicate that the growth in the number of
technicians to be needed in the years ahead will be
proportionally greater than for any other occupational
9rOUp.l Underlying this increase in demand for tech-
nicians is the general expansion of American industry
and the increased complexity of modern technology. The a,

trend toward automation of industrial processes, the

\

lU.S. Department of Labor, Manpower Report of the
PreSident and A Re ort on Man ower Re uirements Re—
Sources Utilization and Trainin ZWashington: Govern—
55 80

ment Printing Office, 196 , p- 1 -

   

    

I 935 .v1l~ ; .jc‘ '. H‘zch

“’M baa . 'C‘JJ. ' " ‘ ‘ a ‘ .- . 2‘.-

nsad «use 1’ ~ __ ,. -_.»

fijaqqra

_‘,,

._e ..‘u

. ;.... {:1}??? ‘ ' ; -
thus.- ".4 .e—I’fiiu'g; — ~ v . ‘
V
.
L
’ .

fineteumv' A , 7 .~ , j: '_‘u

'Wd: hem cent: x... - zv'-ii:ubo‘:q
'IDB 25d neiflumfef em? . .:‘* .5tn./:rnl .309

$.fl6qasm gniveenltws 53‘ 13 rua?~ , .‘wziafinoo

 

Nightstands. ~ ; ,rr3;'s_'31

 

i

3Wuqefl .2. U

I.

-'. -" unturnjvm .1

 

 

 

21
nation's vast highway building program, and the growth
of new areas of work, such as the atomic energy field,
the earth satellite and other space programs, are
justifiably expected to add to the demand for technical
personnel. The demands of the defense program, particul-
arly in the areospace and electronics fields, will re—
sult in a growing need for workers in the technician
category. Indications are that there will be large
numbers of technicians needed in research, development,
design, and other work which precedes the manufacturing
process. As the quality of products increase and manu-
facturing methods of industry become more complex, in—
creased numbers of technicians are expected to be re—
quired to assist the engineers and scientists. The United
States Department of Labor made the following statement
with regard to the rapid growth in technical occupations
in the industrial economy.

The extremely rapid growth in technician oc—
cupations is another noteworthy trend, which is
expected to continue. Although the shortage of
engineers and scientists-—and the consequent need
to relieve these professionalwodmrsof tasks
which can be performed by less highly trained
persons-—have helped to increase employment of
technicians in the past two decades, the growth
Of these occupations has more fundamental cause.

It is due basically to the increa51ng com—
plexity of modern technology, which has created
a need for workers who have some basic sc1en—

tifikiand mathematical knowledge and also spec—
ialized training in some aspects of technology.

 

.?

 

 
    
   

 

   

jib bus .msar 1o sn.r.l - rklw‘,‘ aasv z'noidla
9 almost 3R1 an ”'.n . 11w Tb see: 5 wen 30
fi-vgfil ,amaapoac 735G, . a- :t \ ’ -viég NJJSS 3d)
5* sea :01 ucsnat - . -.a- .It'lijeui
«lg .MEHSC‘) ‘«1~ - T . ?' “Je'wq '
'43-6'1 ljiw .n: .- , r g. ,5-

nsi:;.n.:- . '7 i

9:31"

.
. Landau-l ~. ,_ , ‘

 

wean
dish: 1 u“hn
benzc,* : ml .; -
1c -ziazgc' ‘ a 935- ; ._
ndwczp 9!’ ..abs:ef ;q‘ ,
‘ .sausn I5: nansanui 9‘0& '51 w. t‘:gu:- 5;a4‘ t
'; v . ~mozv pniaseaou _ a‘j >‘ ytlsoiae; ~L :1 'I

   
 
 

   
 

.1; "v. lit-['31
Nap; amps gush cm. aaah'aow 10’: been 5
. . ,_ Lsalsmedism [301501111

‘ obedient: actual ..

' baffle}: and fisldw \{paiomines nasbm: ‘

22

There has been an increase in the number of oc-
cupational surveys conducted at the local, state, and
national level. These surveys have provided some estiu
mates. as to the present and future demands for tech-
nicians. In recent years almost every state has conducted
some type of survey concerned with the demand of technical
personnel. Most of the studies such as those conducted
in New York,3 California,4 Texas,5 Kansas,6 Utah,7

North Carolina,8 Illinois,9 and Michigan10 have been

 

3New York Department of Labor, Jobs 1960—1970;
The Changing Pattern (Albany: Department of Labor, 1960).

4Manpower Outlook for the Los Angeles Area in the
1960's. Report No. 5 (Los Angeles: Southern California
Research Council, 1957),

 

5Texas A and M College System, Engineering Exten—
sion Service, Technician Re uirements in Principal In—
dustrial Areas in Texas (College Station: Texas A & M
College System, 1959).

 

6Kansas State Board of Vocational Education, The
Egaining Needs of Highly Skilled Technicians in Twenty:
Three Selected Manufacturing and Procgpsing Firms in
Kansas (Topeka: Board of Vocational Education, 1959).

7Utah Department of Employment Security, Report
of Utah's Technical Manpower Survey for Training Re-
guirements (Salt Lake City: Department of Employment
Security, 1959).

8North Carolina Employment Security Commission,
North Carolina Stud of Skilled and Technical Man ower
(Rale1gh: Employment Security Commission, 1962).

9University of Illinois, Bureau of Educational
Research, College of Education, Vocational and Tech-

nical Education in Illinois (Urbana: University of
I 11n01s, 196 .

 

10Michigan State University, College Of Educa—
tion, Vocational Education in Michi an, The Final Re—
port of the Michigan Vocational Evaluation Project
(East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1963).

   
  
  
 
   
  
  

     

mi! 911:! n} aye-u ,, _, . "'J 15:, g “(.11 r].
#‘eiaa .55351 9H3 ‘r Ww".': ’ 4y~v2~1 ffihnjquus
We barmaid evei :\._~ , ,5 . . my); jg“
‘WS 10'? chm-urn: Ira ‘ - ".;. ~ ,- ' ,mzsm
. “’3‘ 3611 card "-; . 'v . . , 3‘" ‘ ‘I‘ilotn

‘Eflainfloen 3h 'msc-- wane

begoUDnof I 7‘“ ‘ .E'fiq

 

 

  

 

  
 
 

. 1 . I
" - ~x ; . _

. .,_ _‘ . ‘—:—r——» ....—.._ -M
_.*3‘...;_ ; j ;>_‘ :1, :3rb?

 
  

   

to 9991103 .dnaseaefl
‘ ,‘.. fi‘ . \- 1:“ ‘ I
’7' I” I‘- I“ . _~

  

23

  
  
  
 
 

Nthuelve than others,ail have indicated to a vary—
eera trend indicating an increased demand for

ylerians in the American industrial society.

-iuring the year 1956 a total of approximately 16 million
Mbrkers. It was found that in 1960 there were 594,000
technicians in American.industry as compared to the 1959
figure of 550,000. The percentage of increase was ap—
proximately eight percent. In making a further break-
down of the distribution of engineers, scientists,

and technicians by major industry grouping, the report
was able to give indications of the ratio between these
groups.11 These ratios have been used in subsequent
studies conducted by the National Science Foundation
and the United States Department of Labor as a basis

for projecting the future need for technical personnel.

One of the more extensive studies concerned with

the long range estimating of the need for technicians
and also the planning for future training of these

technicians was the study conducted in 1961 by the

11National Science Foundation, Scientific and

- 1’,Tfichnical Personnel in Industry, 1960, NSF 61-
~~,w gas ng on: overnment Print ng Office, 1960).

      

H

I!

 

    
      
     

,

fi’:,op,bsasorhnu :“ga I. _;

J ‘.*.mmsb L‘Ieaeex‘m — .~ .

’ 9 I

_ .1391‘15 , -

bg‘dgllduq Hi.£'~.
(”2.1V reg-.13:

~ -zeuD

bQ‘fQ K I} ‘

33!; v' er

 

 

 

 

'\
‘r -

24
National Science Foundation. This study was undertaken
for the purpose of developing a systematic methodology
for making long—range projections of the demand for
scientific and technical personnel. Utilizing the data

from previous surveys conducted by the Bureau of Labor

Statistics, it was possible to establish ratios of engineer-

ing and scientific employment to total employment. By
applying the projected ratios of scientific and technical
manpower to projections of total employment, it was pos—
sible to derive approximations of employment of scientific
and technical manpower in 1970. Projections for employ-
ment of technicians in 1970 were made by using the ratio
of technicians to engineers and scientists for 1970. The
projected employment of technicians in 1970 as reported
in this study was approximately 1,036,000.12 The study
did not provide estimates for the number of technicians
employed by federal, state, and local government, or by
the manufacturing establishments which came into exist—
ence between 1956 and 1959. Therefore, this represents
a conservative estimate of the total projected demand

for technicians.

 

12National Science Foundation, The Long Range
Demand for Scientific and Technical Personnel, NSF 61-65

{Washington: Government Printing Office, 1961).

    
   
   
    

'--”7§§iew ybuJa air .‘ ,-n . i .,_,3 g
I_ 1 ’ ‘ h “ 3135:7191 :1“: l:- tf. V ' 1 “ -»."

. R
n3"‘fl§§ banneb and :r ;:.A'.- . i,- , .q

ulf” alsfld pnisif?r

’3‘kfiiflhd 30 U531. - , . , ‘g ,-1,
.*’

.
,,. ‘ 7.;- _ .
-«.«na §h E‘Juz- 1-. . at“

YE .‘Qev“

 

' E3.
1
‘ 4).:
:JUFI- 1 -
gt-

onsmab bsx:e

 

     

 

. .noijsbnuofi evasive lsnoijshl*
- ' \'LN:}. T Ina Diiijneigt lo} bnsmea
Nar~ “‘3' anomazavoa :nOJan daawv

'r—

 

 
    
   
    
   

25

  

‘i'num-"Q fReport of the Panel of Consultants on Voca—
'*3¥P§ducation" projected estimates for the number of
s_icians employed by government agencies as well as

Afivstries which came into existence between 1956 and

H

“§¥i§§¥70n the basis of the data from the National Science

 

.fflbundation surveys, this study estimated the total num-
'(-§é§ of technicians needed in 1970 to be approximately

‘t 1,262,000. However, it was pointed out that this

estimate was probably too low because the NSF studies
excluded small establishments where the ratio of tech—
nicians to engineers employed would be considerably greater.
It was further pointed out that the ratio of 0.7 to 1.0
between the numbers of technicians and the number of engi-
neers and scientists as found in the NSF studies also
appeared too low as an optimum ratio. The resulting con—
clusion was that the indicated needs call fOr a ratio

of at least two—to—one between technicians and engineers,

 

or a total of approximately 200,000 technicians needed
annually in the years immediately ahead.13

In an address delivered before the American Voca—
tional Association, Walter M. Arnold indicated that be—

tween 1961 and 1962 there was a 40 percent increase in

 

13U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Office of Education, "Technical Training in the United

States," Education for A Chan in World of Work, Appendix
I (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1953).

A5{

 

     
     
   
   

fl,
, a}

. I—mpn £5303

 

35H

 

    
 
 
    
   

 

w f-§§gsaluanc? :r
u '--

' ' v .
xr"j$eu as aeluzn

I .
J'"§fi£ 3391 usunjsj
O

:"J‘ILWV 1V1“.

sasensni

NI
.2
I
L
0

add no? Perom1‘== be' -, “3'. L:

‘T-ifi‘ilhyfl" " .‘I

I
,‘I.’

,
.

.JP"°a l5nLiImA w ‘ ',‘ w

yjsjemixc~ .y

3n3213q L9 1 .g

.41:
,3«fl$;[n§QGQH 3°
: 'v’n‘,
‘_, M ~
a, {1”9
'Vct?

at'-;zi‘JV

finansxsqsfl .&.U£I .
a?" ,noinsauba 10 saliio

v3-

 

z< '
lanai:

Jriuindoei

_ [:3

«Ainraubnl

.VFQI

 

 

     
   
 

 
 

7.3935}?

.‘I '

‘ 0

P .

wW—wvw -vv —V"'— “w

   
   
   

‘If Ii

26

‘ijgw f jab épenings for engineers. During this

14

   
 
 

.i- ~.A '
r~$hfi Educators, industrialists, and various professional
r~fgovernmental organizations have attempted to define

'V,:fltechnician and describe his work. Even so, within

nature of the positions referred to as technical. For
éXample, the term technician has been used to identify
personnel in industry, medicine and dentistry, public
service, and other broad fields of endeavor. Also, the
term may refer to positions that vary greatly in both
level and scope of tasks performed. In some instances

an individual referred to as a technician may be'perform-

 

ing rather simple and routine tasks. In other instances
the term may designate a person performing complex tasks
similar or equal to those performed by professional eng-
ineers. In one instance, the technician's. job may have
many of the characteristics of the engineer, but in
another be involved with activities associated with the
skilled trades. Somewhere between these two extremes,

L Ctn be found the occupations that generally are classL-

' ~pas technical jobs.

    

 

 

      

  
  

cc- < , vr -

eflj'ddiw DH‘jii-‘v . Ls

'"-f;w;_§3'OWj sasdi flzuwfisj 1.3, V _7.,,
._ 1... -_‘ hibr ' bulilia
"‘l ‘_”.'-’ ”is.

#9.” s

A ~1- - -

ggiasquoao 5:13 bnuoi ed as:

n

 

27

From the definitions used at various times and
for varying purposes, it wasapparent that technician is
a generic term. Because the term did have varying
shades of meaning for people viewing the situation
from different vantage points, a presentation of some
of these viewpoints follows. This was considered neces—
sary in order that a better comprehension can be made in
identifying the occupational characteristics of technic—
ians.

The term technician is prefixed many times by such
terms as engineering, industrial, mechanical, and elec—
tronic. Although the specific duties and functions re—
quired in these fields will differ, the basic purpose
or definition of a technician remains unchanged. Author-
ities generally are in agreement with regard to the broad
definition of the term technician. Disagreement arises ’
when the scope and level of the technician's work or the
type of institution in which preparation is provided is
the point in question. This is discussed more fully
in the section concerned with the "Technical Institute
Curriculum."

The term technician, as defined by G. Ross Hennin—

‘ 15
ger,l4 the United States Department of Labor, the j

   

M
14

G. Ross Henninger, The Technical Institute in
AES£$E§ (New York: McGraw—Hill Book Company, 19595rpp. 18-19.
15U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor State
istics, Em lo ment Outlook for Technicians,"A Report

On Technicians Who Work With Engineers and Physical
Scientists," Veterans Administration Pamphlet, 22-1

Iii , (Washington: Government Printing Office, March l958),p. 1.

 

 

has -;nm1' n '
g1, flfiiDla'HV‘T‘

w‘. A
L ,

a...—

" ivy-:“ROY'

..a
'1' 1.9an 2302 .8“
not?"

V v

 

, _
.- I ' ‘ f — -,

 

 

 

28
National Association of Manufacturers,16 and the Tech—
nical Institute Division of the Society for Engineering
Education,17 embodies the same basic concept as to the
role of the technician in the industrial complex. There
is agreement on the following characteristics and func-
tions of the technician.

1. Technicians work in occupations that have many
levels of skill and a wide variety of training require—
ments.

2. The technician's job is located between those
of the skilled craftsman and the professional engineer.

3. The technician has knowledge of the work of
both the skilled craftsman and the professional engineer
and functions as a liaison between the two.

4. The technician's work is technical in nature
but more narrow in scope than that of the engineer and
has a practical rather than a theoretical orientation.

5. The range of work varies in complexity, but
is usually in a specialized field of research, design,
development and/or construction; in exploration, measure—
ment, analysis, and/or application of basic scientific

16National Association of Manufacturers, Your 0 —

Eortunities in Industry as a Technician, An Educational
Aid New York: National Assoc1ation of Manufacturers,
1957), pp. 7—8.
17 . . . . .
American Soc1ety for Engineering Education, Tech-

nical Institute Division, The Engineering Technician
(Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois, nd) pp. 1—2.

1~IIT;':WAA

 
  
    
     
  

1"“, bnfi E i . -_ :--2 7 -‘ . .193. (“013.1434
.. M19113 1C3 ".j‘J-af an; 1.53“
“3 0'! as 30,533 ;-. V. unsaubl
-m .x9£q«r_ i. “ I»: 9101

-m‘w& bus 2.- ~r-,~naai

2.06.1! 9v in

‘1‘.) .. I). "

-.;.' ,. ._
...-l _ ‘;'-u— . _ A. ,t".

'_ 1,2[5392 :5 2L) '.’.'. Y‘Uw: .
no filfiagaf 1517243127.

4 raIJva4.oc
mile? wolf.) FM
.8-? .qq ,(TEQI

   
 
 

 

.1’

  

 

 

  

    

'
"l
..

P
29
cencepts; and in control of production facilities and
5 manpower.

Thomas H. Picken, of the Republic Aviation
Corporation, drew attention to the fact that the general
term, technician, when associated with the romanticized
fields of electronic, rocketry, or space, leaves unclear
the technician's place as a member of the engineering
manpower team. Also, the inability of the engineer to
recognize a technician's role and purpose complicates
further the problem of identifying the technician and
his role in industrial and scientific activities. In
describing the role of the technician, Picken pointed
out that the realm of the technician is bounded somewhat
indefinitely on a continuum by two other occupations,
the skilled craftsman and the professional engineer.

Tn commenting upon this point Picken stated:

We find the technician at both ends in a twi-
light zone. Crisp outlines are lacking of the
exact area in each specific case, but the basic
responsibilities and his purpose are quite
definite. It is essential that he make his
contribution towards the end product, not by
mechanical means solely, but more by providing

analysis, evaluation, practical direction, and
some resolution. 18

 

18Thomas H. Picken, "Evaluating the Engineering

Technician Position," Technical Education News, XXI
(Special issue, 1961), p. 17.

I‘i‘i’v— ‘

   
   
   
  
 

nolysivA '; "tx~
' .

""'£uaenep ad‘ '11‘ 1

bifiifi;‘nsm'" fl

sealan: .~‘a:

 

 

 

 

r :ajqeanoa

.iawcgntn

dioi

.0

An uniginJDeT
great lsloaqal

 

  

 

 

30

C. J. Freund, Dean of the College of Engineering
at the University of Detroit, commenting upon the role
of the technician in industry, emphasized the fact that
the vast majority of engineers do not understand the role
and function of the technician. Freund's concern Was
reflected when he commented that in spite of the serious
shortage of technicians without doubt too many engineers
spend much of their time doing technician work. He
indicated that probably 90 percent of the engineers have
never given any thought to the nature of the technician's
education.19

Commenting on this same point, W. Scott Hill men-
tionedthat a lack of understanding on the part of the
engineer contributes to industry's inability to get
maximum utilization of its technical personnel. Hill
further contended that engineering groups are reluctant
to revise their practices to the degree that tasks can
be broken down into specific professional levels,and
thus the proper utilization made of those with less

than four years of training.20

 

19C° J. Freund, "The Technician and the Engineer,"

Journal of Engineering Education, XLIV (October, 1953),

20W. Scott Hill, "General Electric's Recent Ex—

periences in Hiring Technicians," Technical Education
News, XV (Fall, 1955),p. 4. '—-

     
   
    
 
   

, 331-13 3.6- Engels ' w . ., _‘., . .,

ighflfi add noqh x. -.a V , . , ._ :v'
m 3351 :rff

size: and bmfi--~.: ‘ 7 r.” ~11:

a”: easy

 

L!
L)
U:

finalise: 31'!“ V g , 2 £1.31

easenihuw , l , ‘vfla

 

    
 
      

3.3 8' 311333913 1519090" 11;}; 33,3; M35

“LET ",analolmioe'r pniulh n1 aeonel'lsq
:, . 0‘ .q.(aeel .Ils'i) W .M

t i -L:

    

._r"‘

_‘> .‘ .
' "P. . . ‘ - 2
A on... ,- ‘ o

    
 

:3'13 -the engineer and the technician, Picken pointed
":thlt although technicians are not the arms and legs
get the engineer, this is often the only manner in
‘_ Ethey are used. Furthermore, the engineer has
l—43itrl about permitting anyone to learn too much about
-_:ihe‘project on which he is working. In both stated
eases the technician inherits only drudgery because of
the failure on the part of the engineer to give him
proper responsibility. Picken stated with emphasis that
"the technician is a state of mind, which must be within
the engineer as to the technician's reason for existence."21
Any penetrating study as to the place of the tech-
nician in industry will disclose that an accurate analy-
sis of job activities is obstructed by the lack of uni-
fOrmity in job titles. Because of this, attempts are
being made to establish uniformly acceptable and clearly
defined criteria that will identify the function of the
technician having applicability to a wide range of
technical occupations.
One of the better analyses of occupational require-
ments for technicians was presented in a recent United

alPiCken, OE. Cite , pp. 16-180

 

_ 4.". .2‘m'rh.l.l¢n.‘-_‘.héi

   
 

w; “-‘OIfldfief 913 it ~'«"“ 4 7 v1.“?; . . Hi

 

‘ .
fl ‘1 biuodc jaw: n.12w 5‘. ,, :~' A w~- we vunaubot
w'

’m ambit:

sfifli has amus ed " -_ . . I an} juo

 

neswjed

at xsflnem yin: w~‘ x' :. , n, §V3r§
85H :e«u ‘ ' ~ ,' , , . , ftrjw
-O

3045

.. '3. ~ ' . ._ ;;n

 

 

to :c r

.i.

 

 

 

32

  
  
 

;§ijaéffice of Education publication. This was de-

to serve as a guide for the establishment,

;iication identified a set of general abilities needed

‘Eér'technical occupations that are reported as follows:

liil

5i? facility with mathematics, (2) proficiency in the
I T; , application of physical science principles, (3) an

‘ understanding of the materials and processes commonly
used in the technology, (4) an extensive knowledge of
a field of specialization with an understanding of the
engineering and scientific activities that distinguish
the technology of the field, and (5) communication
skills that include the ability to interpret, analyze, '
and transmit facts and ideas graphically, orally, and
in writing.22 These general abilities were then util-
ized to prepare a detailed list of criteria for the
purpose of identifying the occupational requirements

of the technician.

 

Because the preceding attempt at identifying
the occupational requirements of the technician has

been stated in terms of general abilities, it becomes

M

22U.S.Department of Health, Education, and Wel—

fare, Office of Education, Occu ational Criteria and

Dre arato Curriculum Patterns in Technical Education

Erograms EWashington: Government Printing Office,1932),
.‘ PP- - -

 

  
 

   
    
   
  
  

ill" aid? .nofr:.;fduq p.135 ‘L r~ «*1313 asidi‘“
}3fl9flfl2ildn‘<n «fi' 1-: a.f; » z- e'lsa C3 bsnpli

'° -&aoq 30 up I..- H. . ’ , ‘.o~“ .: ,la:‘L1nlmbl

-duq EEJ . . .- . -,; A V ~ it n:a mold '

‘bebeen 791:; ' ' ‘ 'VLJBDII

 

 

     
 

  
   

.flalsefl io 3n9m315q90.a.ugg

nolisouba 10 531320 .‘019-
"jA‘;t\?fitl" ‘

 

    

 

33
necessary to translate these into more specific terms
before educational programs can become operational. This
has been accomplished by identifying technical occupa—
tions by types or levels of tasks performed.

In a 1958 publication,23 the United States Office
of Education classified technicians into three basic
types. However, in a more recent publication an addit—
ional category has been added. Because of the recency
and wide distribution of this report, the four types
of technicians are presented as follows: -

1. Narrow—scope limited—level technical oc—
cupations, requiring Simple technical skills
and a relatively short learning period. Not
considered a "technical occupation."

2. Technical specialist occupation, with
somewhat narrow scope but high level of abil—
ity needed within that scope. Training period
usually shorter than that required for "in—
dustrial-type technician" and "engineering
type technician." I

3. Industrial—type technician occupation, I
usually of fairly broad scope and high level
of ability needed. Training period needed
may approximate or equal that for the "engineer—
ing—type technician " Training content may
include less higher mathematics but more ap—
plied technology than that for the "engineer-
ing-type technician." Occupations of this
type may include technical maintenance jobs
of broad scope, technical production jobs, and 2
the like. ;

23U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Wel—

fare, Office of Education, Vocational-Technical Educa—

tion for American Industr (Washington: Government
Printing Office, 19585, pp. 2—3.

 

A

34

4. Engineering-type technician occupation, of
broad sc0pe and high level of ability needed,
usually requiring training equivalent to a two—
year full-time program of post high school level,
rigorous in nature, including mathematics,
science, and applied technology pertinent to the
field of specialization. Persons in these oc-
cupations have sufficient background to be able
to work effectively as aides to engineers and
scientists. 24

In a research report of a study entitled, Twin
Cities Technicians, Brandon pointed out some of the prob-
lems that exist with regard to identifying the role and
function of the technician- He reported that the type
of technician described by the persons interviewed in
many instances did not agree with the firm's job titles
for technicians about whom they were giving infonnation.
He further pointed out that the problem of industry
in not being able to clearly identify and classify
technicians reflects the confusion and ambiguity in
the literature of engineering technology and technical
education.

Brandon reported that large plants tend to formally
classify the technician's work while small plants usually
lack job descriptions. This results in approximately
one-third of the technicians having no job description.

24U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Wel—

fare, Office of Education, "Technical Training in the
United States," Education for A Changing World of Work,

Appgndix I (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1963),
p. o

35

It was further found that the title, engineer, was used
indiscriminately, and further complicated the job of ar—
riving at a clear understanding of the technician's job.25

Although the work activities of technicians are
both numerous and diverse, Brandon found that it was
possible to classify these activities into eight major
groups. These are reported as follows: (1) working with
equipment; (2) working with instruments; (3) working
with production; (4) working with materials; (5) working
with drawings, reports, records, handbooks; (7) working
with energy and power; and (8) working with other per-
sonnel.26

Other studies such as those reported by Mark

Ellingson27 and William G. Torpy28 provide further evid—

ence of the wide distribution of activities in which

 

5George L. Brandon, Twin Cities Technicians (East
Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, College of
Education, 1958), p. 13.

26Ibid., pp. 19-22.

7Maurice R. Graney, The Technical Institute (New
York: The Center for Applied Research in Education, Inc.,
1964), pp. 95-96, citing Mark Ellingson, "Technical
Institute Graduate's Place in American Industry," Tech—
gical Education News (January 1945), p. 1.

28William G. Torpey, "Adequacy of Technical
Institute Curricula," Journal of Engineering Education,
L (November 1959), p. 131:“—

36
technicians engage, both as to sc0pe and level of tasks

performed.
II. THE TECHNICAL INSTITUTE CURRICULUM

Both the technological explosion and the projected
demands for technical personnel that were presented in
the preceding section identified the need for technically
competent persons who can support and supplement the ef—
forts of engineers and scientists throughout the technol—
ogical complex. This need for technically competent
persons can be met through the expansion of educational
services.

Until recent years the role of educational in—
stitutions in providing training for industrial employ-
ment lay in two areas; the training of craftsmen and the
professional training of engineers. Even at the present
time, many schools are reluctant to expand their cur-
ricular offerings to meet the new educational needs of
society by providing programs for training personnel who
desire to enter the technical occupations. However, a
number of publicly supported and Operated post—high school
institutions have recognized the problem. Thus, they
have increased both the quantity and quality of their

technical education programs.

37
Definition and Characteristics

As Maurice R. Graney pointed out the term, tech-
nical institute, has a variety of meanings. He indicated
that there are two dominant concepts of the term which
tend to be used most frequently in current literature
of technical education. One is the recognition of the
technical institute as a concept of education, and the
other as an educational institution.

As a type of education, the technical institute
can be compared to such educational fields as engineer—
ing, law, or medicine. Like them it is viewed as a total
program of study along with its many concomitant educa-
tional experiences, and not as an institution per se.
When the technical institute is identified as a program
of study, those individuals pursuing this program follow
an orderly sequence of subject matter and become prepared
for productive and gainful employment.

When the term technical institute is interpreted
as an institution, technical institutes can be identified
with many kinds of organizational or administrative
structures. Some technical institutes are single—pur—
pose schools with the sole purpose being that of pre-
paring technicians. Other technical institutes may be
a division of a multipurpose school or university offer-
ing programs in a variety of disciplines. In either

instance, there are many institutions which identify

38
themselves as technical institutes but do not measure
up to the standards considered acceptable for such
programs. However, there are schools which Offer
quality programs of technical education that may not
use the term technical institute to designate either
the school or the curricula.29

The term technical institute curricula, has been
used in recent literature published by the United
States Office of Education, the Engineers‘ Council for
Professional Development, and many other educational
and professional organizations. Well known writers in
the field of technical education differ in their usage
of the term technical institute. Not only do they dif-
fer among themselves, but it is possible to observe that
each writer has a tendency to vacillate in his own us-
age of the term.

In a report of the 1928—1929 study of technical
institutes Which was conducted for the Society for the
Promotion of Engineering Education, Wickenden and Spahr
identified the characteristics of the technical institute.
The nature of their statement when referring to the
term, technical institute would indicate that they con-
ceived of it to mean an institution.30 Smith and Lipsett

30William E. Wickenden and Robert H. Spahr, A

§3udy of Technical Institutes, The Society for the Bro-

motion of Engineering Education (Lancaster, Pennsylvania:
The Lancaster Press, Inc., 1931).

39

also defined the term technical institute as a post-
secondary institution.31

In attempting to eliminate some of the confusion
that exists in terminology, McGraw indicated that there
has been considerable dissatisfaction among technical
educators with the term technical institute curriculum
because of the ambiguity of the word institute which is
more often associated with an institution than with a
type of program. He recommended that in view of its
impression and ambiguity the term technical curriculum
be dropped and that the term engineering technology,
cUrricula be used to designate such programs.32

Henninger defined the term technical institute
as all types of collegiate institutions and divisions
of multipurpose collegiate institutions which offer
programs in technical institute education. Although
his report discussed the technical institute as an in-
stitution, even within his definition there is the
inference that the term could (and does throughout his

book) refer to a type of education.33 This dichotomy

31Leo F. Smith and Laurence Lipsett, The Technical
Institute (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1956), p. 3.

2James L.McGraw, Characteristics of Excellence

American Society for Engineering—Education (Urbana,
Illinois: University of Illinois, 1963), p. 11.

33 . .
Henninger, 22;_2£E.

40

and vacillation from their basic definitions is pre—
valent in the writings of most authorities in the field.

Because of this dichotomy the term technical
institute as defined in the Dictionary of Education
will represent more closely the composite views on the
subject than any other single definition. This defini—
tion34 was presented in Chapter I and is used consis-
tently throughout this research study.

All institutions of higher education in the
United States, including those offering technical in—
stitute education, have as one of their major objectives
the preparation of students for effective and satisfy-
ing participation in a democratic and technological
society. Smith and Lipsett have identified additional
objectives which technical institute programs are par—
ticularly suited to achieve. These objectives are:
(l) to prepare graduates for occupational competence
in a clearly identified technological occupation or
cluster of jobs; (2) to serve the needs of industry
for technical personnel within a geographical area,
such as a city, region, or state; (3) to provide in—
struction in the technology of specific industries; and

(4) to serve technical education needs of employed adults.35

34Carter V. Good (ed.), Dictionary of Education
(New York: McGraw—Hill Book Company, 1959), p. 554.

35Smith and Lipsett, Op. cit., pp. 106-107.

"av-fi‘ V‘ ner
_ -

y
..-..u~no ‘:

'L)

‘ : ° A
:2 ECCLVE J
I

, .
-:‘\I k" VA v-
..v/u (n. a. n-

. p ‘

w u. . 1

an. .h g .A
V

‘nnvj-u '-
CUNAI .
.. ‘

‘ V
Ff! o.»
CsAu 1,,
"‘7‘ nu;
’ n
‘V‘ de
v
.
aw, ~—

v.
’ ‘
fl§ F‘ C
4‘ DI‘V
'7
_~
”AV
' As,
H ‘
‘g’fi‘ “~C‘r
Ian-Att‘;.,‘b‘
, Q
"A
I ‘q
“‘7." ‘
g
"‘e n'f"
5‘.‘\‘

m.

w -A‘~;“H
Rs

“ h' ‘

F ”a .
"H‘ ‘ 1A
‘ t'*~- V

 

 

41
In his study of the technical institute, G.Ross
Henninger presented what he considered to be the basic
objective of the technical institute in higher educa-
tion when he described technical institute education

in the following manner:

It is to give to a qualified student a practi-
cal working knowledge of fundamental principles
in a selected technical field. The scope of the
curriculum must be sufficient to enable him to
apply his talents effectively and satisfyingly
and to coordinate the development of competence
for gainful employment. Gainful here means not
only monetary remuneration, but also the satis-
faction and inspiration which can be earned by an
individual only through productive performance
in a challenging occupation within the range
of his interests and aptitudes. 36

Various studies and reports such as the study by

37 38

Henninger, the Smith and Lipsett study, the Califor-

nia39 and Illinois40 studies on technical education,
the Michigan study on vocational education,41 the Michi-

gan publication on technical education,42 and numerous

366. Ross Henninger, The Technical Institute in
America (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1959), p. 31.

37Ibid.

38Smith and Lipsett, op. cit., pp. v-319.

39Herbert S. Wood, A Study of Techpical Education
Lg California, Bulletin of the California State Depart-
ment of Education, XXVIII, No. 7 (Sacramento: California
State Department of Education, September, 1959).

40

 

University of Illinois, op. cit., pp. iii—163.

41Michigan State University, op. cit., pp. i—252.

42Michigan State Department of Public Instruction,
Division of Vocational Education, Industrial Technical
Efigcation in Michigan, Bulletin No. 2139'(Lansing:
Department of Public Instruction, 1959).

 

)1

.‘~.-V-‘
.

. .
pp“"7“ "
,y..n¢-~~‘.

‘I:

.
.

an in~:k‘ ‘\

woo 'v'kuLv

’0. hpzy- ’

.A"-c'\.c .
5......h 'U .l
.

.
'm‘V'Y‘pn ..~
y““~‘- ‘1-

H...

v
ot“‘

'Q“‘“\0- .
...u-_“‘

v

”c ns.,
‘5. ‘F a e.
‘.I‘ '

‘Q I
S-C'. P'~o- C
u, ~‘_ ~

:"‘;I

.

“mes r».
7‘-

 

~':..‘ '
-._.‘ g ‘ v-
u‘ ‘ \
..U
[A
54
"v
C'- o
s.
v A
‘ :-
“\'E 5“ -.
‘ V L
‘
‘
v ~
-- it n ~.
"~ - -
v, ‘ K .
1 ,' ‘
- :';“»" \
‘ r
‘. ‘\._“ n‘
n -~ t“
' §‘ 1 "

42
publications from the United States Office of Education
have identified criteria and characteristics of good
technical training programs. The "Panel of Consultants
on Vocational Education"43 developed a detailed list
of characteristics of a good technical program that is
receiving wide distribution and promises to have con—
siderable impact on technical curricula throughout the
United States. These studies identify the same basic
concepts that should be embodied in a quality technical
curriculum.

Maurice R. Graney pointed out that a technical
institute type curriculum has certain definite char-
acteristics. He added further that these characterist-
ics have evolved over the years and are undergoing con-
stant but subtle modifications. Although presented in
less detail, Graney identified five characteristics
that summarized the basic concepts presented in the
studies previously cited: (1) it is post—secondary,

(2) it is essentially terminal, (3) it is related to
the fields of science and technology, (4) it offers in—

tensive instruction in a brief period; generally for two

43U.S Department of Health, Education,and Welfare
Office of Education, "Technical Training in the United
States," Education for A Changing World of Work, Appendix
§7(Washington: Government Printing Office, 1963), pp.
-58.

‘1‘:
T)
‘1'

I
. n :A gnarl
F ‘ vgvt

"1e Scone an
+
je-‘Ln:fi 1 r:

van-A‘N- ‘-
'7‘ er
LA. ..
. ‘ .
"'V’"‘F‘J a ‘ rc
vdhucy . A...
IQ

‘O‘n ""r‘ ‘k ‘v
r‘. upon 6.

«.41. -.,

763‘. fiat C316

I l‘
3. .re 5993:}:

.9.

.
1 7r hul‘ ~.
‘vls 5‘ c. .

‘e
2‘. .LW‘Hb-c ‘hxu C
'-»..lub~ ~,
‘ 4
c: .
I'"Ar, . ‘
°"‘v.. _‘
I. .
“W “x: ,‘
H. ‘ A‘
van U‘ yvc)
.
r, n . ‘
~. ””" -0PM“
~-._ 3“,-“

. CY ~.
"»
:‘V \l

v

'v

-A«.'

"I I. ‘ ~‘ I— ,
‘ u
n—‘V..:‘ p"

5“
‘4
~

"F-.

I p
‘ v ‘ ‘0. L ‘
. IIU v‘ g‘a,”
b- .A

‘O

.

'A\

In ‘ .

up u. ." .

I- ‘f‘r‘ -O~~
"em: “

 

43
academic years, and (5) it lays heavy emphasis upon

application of theory to practical situations.44

The Scope and Level of
Technical Programs
In engineering oriented technical institute
curricula instruction covers a spectrum of levels.
Although there is disagreement with regard to specific
classifications of technicians there is general agree-
ment that the objectives of curricula at the upper end
of the Spectrum closely approach those of engineering
curricula. The tendency for technical curricula to
be lumped into one educational category has resulted in
attempts by some to identify techniafl.curricula by levels.
Much of the confusion and disagreement as to the
nature of post-high school technical curricula has been
brought about by the range of needs in the industrial
complex. The "Report of the Panel of Consultants on
Vocational Education"45 emphasized that within the
group of technical occupations in industry, one finds

great variations in the range of content with which

 

44Graney, Op. cit., pp. 4—7.

45U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Wel—
fare, Office of Education, "Technical Training in the
United States," Education for A ChangingfiWorld of
Work, Appendix X*(Washington: Government Printing
Office, 1963), pp. 57—58.

the wcrker

.
hr
w"

J- r
L.

. 'Q ‘
-n' .V 0H,!
‘ \
....A-
a

oh ,.
~V‘ Luvie
"a “r -
...€ c.€c
‘9 f: ‘
xn A»
C. In...”

p;“"n§
f.
'V‘dv‘

.'..,

'1.‘ ~

g .
5'.

'"OO‘
4.
‘»

ere

‘Y‘

.
o-n
9‘

-

l
‘vn
\‘ A“

Ao-

»_

A

C..u

(I)

A

V‘
u..'.

L).

(D

11'
r

rm-
‘4.

u

44

the worker must deal. These variations are apparent
when there is an examination of the level of intellectual
ability and technical background which the worker must
have in order to perform his tasks. There are few who
will disagree that technicians can be found performing
tasks which range from those of the skilled craftsman
to those approaching the professional engineering level.
The area of disagreement is associated with the level
at which certain types of technicians work and the type
of educational preparation needed.

Various occupational analyses have indicated
that the range between the craftsman and the engineer
will include positions which vary greatly in the level
of technical education required. Much of the existing
confusion in technical education results from the fact
that many institutions have attempted to cover the en-
tire spectrum in their programs for the preparation of
technicians. Although programs are needed for the
preparation of technicians at all levels in the spectrum,
this diversity of programs often has been interpreted
as differences in quality.

One section of the "Report of the Evaluation
of Technical Institute Education," sponsored by the
American Society for Engineering Education was concerned
with the distinction between the quality and level of
the programs that prOpose to prepare technicians. In

commenting upon this point James L. McGraw stated:

 

u

v

n...

it

an» fl
no. ‘

. - '
"'
qr‘ F' I

\

Var VV“'
J
. .
ann~ 1'C‘S
.u... U»

I.
Aw
DS.H€
‘ .
ere'r C"
5.. -. v.4.

, .
A- b-P

VA. but ‘
p .

A- bf 21

'4. an \..

Fp‘r‘ "‘

v 6"5 *‘
an. - ~—

1

hr C‘w
n

.sae a...”

. .

cab-fi-
1

saw-ave- I

(D

V' 'Q
fi':or‘r~-
U‘u—.¢A.~A

en 1
‘rAr

*4 I
“.15.: 4

v

& m.

~n....

' ~ c .
"‘Q ‘- App‘n-
w

x a
v-tenAb‘.

‘“'rir1n-.~

I
visa“, l

(1

r-..'
Lc_:er 9-1
-.
A
p
Lhe f;

'4.

45

The level of a program is determined by its
objectives, and the quality by how well it
achieves these objectives. . . .

Some technical curricula intend to cover
their subject matter at a level close to that
of the engineering college, or at least that
of the engineering college of a few years ago.
Others set their objectives at essentially
the same level of difficulty as the secondary
school. Between these extremes we find a well-
distributed range of objectives and levels. 46

When Henninger referred to the scope and level
of the technical institute curriculum, he contrasted
the technical curriculum with the vocationalotrade
curriculum, and also with the professional engineering
curriculum. This reference is presented as follows:

The technical institute curriculum is aimed
principally at the development of intellectual
capatity, supplemented by development of directly
related skills. This is in contrast with the
craft or vocational-trade curriculum which is
aimed at the development of a high degree of
proficiency in manual skill, supplemented by
a general understanding of the fundamentals-
of related subject matter. This is also in
contrast with the present trend in engineering
and science curriculums, which aims at the
development of an extended intellectual capacity
rather than manual skills. 47

One of the foremost advocates for identifying cur—
ricula by level is Russell Beatty, President of Went—
worth Institute, who has been very articulate in his

identification of the two levels of technical institute

46McGraw, Op. cit., p. 13.

47Henninger, Op. cit., pp. 32-33.

vw
‘ ‘QVA 5"
UP:

‘4 L's.
I‘ .
. .
,nv
.

.
A~..‘. fr -
Hum:- v~t
'0

a
:r--:h"$-‘ a:
V
n; .éufl»;
.

. -
~. .'~

F"?V"‘ - .0

.u..5\.h.u.

: VS 7' a -
rn r
e..u...ee- AAA :

"=“"“e an:

coca C. .J '

a.33 was ‘38:)!

'i “.r?fi FO- F
ue”:b my 5 ‘
5

en-

‘ ‘

flAn-r’_~ w.. P

.‘,_ ‘

u-_JC§ y-He“ \- ‘-
.

.nejy- “r“fir-~
‘” “ U‘»:‘ 51.,
O

.
ho.

. v
4- 'vv- ‘r- 4r
..... me me;

‘:;Q .
' rfi‘Pr»
»..-r Gang-..f:ca

,.
I“ r
"vln ‘-
~ .
r-‘
T... Ar «Va;
v...» d‘vu
‘r.:‘
-. 7‘ A p
-:‘-.S .5?!
‘U ‘«
.
u.Y\
.:"C ‘Q'. U
..e-
.
'I
‘4‘. u
11" ‘ F 1 :4
‘u§vn.c‘ L4“

‘¢:'i"~.“ :
t hq.a *' I
‘. .
5" A:
0“.

 

46

curricula. Because of his strong conviction concerning
the two types of technicians, Beatty had a tendency to
equate the level of technology programs with a type of
institution rather than with the quality of a given
curriculum. He contended that the education of the
engineering technician is the task of the technical
institute and implied that only those programs accredited
by the Engineers' Council for Professional DevelOpment
should be considered engineering technology level. Beatty
also wasvery vocal with regard to vocational education
departments of public schools and vocational-technical
departments of community junior colleges that refer to
their programs as engineering technology. He would ques-
tion whether it is possible for such institutions to
offer engineering technology level curricula.48

With regard to identifying technical curricula,
another area Of confusion develOps as a result of skilled
crafts programs being Operated at the post-high school.
level. The "Report of the Panel of Consultants on
Vocational Education" compared the content of selected
curricula in machine shop practice with the average con—
tent distribution of selected curricula in mechanical

48H. Russell Beatty, "How the Technical Institutes

Can Meet the Challenge of Technical Education," (Address
before the American Technical Education Association, Am-
erican Vocational Association Convention, Buffalo, New
York, August 12, 1958) (private printing).

 

 

 

':*""“. 03".

v
b~,\,....V. ‘

A u-o‘l, f '
fvlrfi -L AA.

. .
' +1«r~o
'3‘“ a” lhl.
yuv‘r V-fi

oeu- ovu- r '3‘: 0-
EL fl. .

u'vu ..¢
4

c . ,

VLNVI‘refl ‘F.r

‘V-I‘J-‘ U ‘2..-
4

‘ V
. ”'7‘“ fih‘v f-

' "Nivovu v ‘_
«A

i c .

:r‘n an ._rp

-...(. .” _”~

1

hr

‘ Q
O . .
a n a
.. ..
..._ HEE‘EL

.,\_\_

”V .'

‘1' P” .‘

~ .“‘1.A.~ ‘V'
.. '

“~rgfi" n,“

47
technology. The comparison yielded the following in-
formation: (1) The skilled crafts curriculum emphasized
shop activities, with 59 percent of the total curriculum
devoted to machine shop practice. The objective was
to develop manipulative skills needed for the crafts,
together with the technical knowledge and understanding
required for performing the skilled tasks. In the
technology curriculum the student received some exper—
ience in the machine shop, but the primary purpose was
the development Of understanding of machine processes
rather than the development of skills in machine opera-
tion. (2) The level Of mathematics, science, and
technology needed for the skilled craft was lower than
that needed for the technician occupation, and these
subjects were in direct relation to the shOp practice.
The laboratory and classwork in the technology, math,
and science represented 70 percent of the technology
curriculum while only 34 percent of the skilled crafts
curriculum was devoted to these areas of study. (3)
Fifteen percent of the technology curriculum was de-
voted to general education while only 4 percent of the

skilled crafts curriculum was in this area.49

49U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare, Office Of Education, "Technical Training in the
United States," Education for A Changing World of Work
Appendix I (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1963),
PP- 57-58.

 

 

 

 

.
-4 .
.n~v-:."\fi "-

_‘J'U'-th tr ~

‘ ~
rc~;rfi ‘A *'

.yuuqu \rV \-'
.

. .

r“: RPANV':

no.-. M‘Vvl‘-
L a

m-
‘P‘~V‘;"‘ r
h.u\q..‘.. O -.
. 4

‘
>vaa hu- fi.‘~v‘ '

J5. A." 9“...»
d b

I.“ '-
c .
cf r-A 0
u... Quay -

-v‘ o'na .. a},

“‘ ""- v -0:-

n
”a... F!

‘
‘\ va5 q
J" V 'VvEu
..
..r: .IoA ..
.“V‘\- wt‘v‘u ‘

F‘UI'iC'ed E)"

.36::er.t) wh'

F
.55'” *9- a;
.“" tie, J‘ ‘

7“ »

... Cue

A u

:"«~rc .
Qt-A“‘Ver‘r
a ~¢.

a
t a
.4

U.

«:5 3620“ .

‘v-

{D
)
)

 

48

A publication from the United States Office of
Education pointed out that confusion also exists with
regard to the basic differences between a two-year tech—
nical program and the first two years of an engineering
program. This publication differentiated between the
two by comparing the relative emphasis on subject mat-
ter. The following comparisons were presented: (1)

In the technical curriculum 47 percent of the course work
was devoted to the field of specialization while in the
first two years of the engineering curriculum only 6
percent was specialized. (2) The engineering curriculum
provided extensive study in mathematics and science (68
percent) while the technical curriculum devoted only 27
percent Of the two-year period to these disciplines.

(3) In the technical curriculum 12 percent of the
course work was devoted to auxiliary and supporting
technical courses while in the first two years of the
engineering curriculum only 3 percent Of the course work
was devoted to such courses. (4) The first two years of
the engineering curriculum provided for 23 percent of
the course work to be in general education while the
technical program required only 15 percent in this

area. It was further pointed out that, being complete
in itself, the technical curriculum is distinctly func—
tional. That the emphaSis on specialized technical

courses clearly identifies the objective of the technical

 

 

r~
ah” f fir
gt..E-:- V- .b
A
‘ yap A
V.-~.v

..¢‘v

4:. c4357“
9.: a vu—

.
_,,.-

“are In,” ‘ A r—

uv-b '1 v... V

l

we,- 4:”

Ub‘,‘ .1 iv‘

B':r\0- (ye/Kw .-

usu... fi‘V-K. _
o

1 -\
VC"[“"§' ‘I'p ‘7. -
‘Vt-Vbb ‘O‘u‘ :
. ‘ .
rjmnnfi. ,. f‘
9‘VULAHI .. \—

.
A: are ”~‘r
u v
‘ '1‘ ‘.u‘.
—
' t
A
V? #Rpcg “A:
‘ why“; ‘
haw.
o
q
- I
‘0 r
YA! ‘
J‘ucr‘7cd ”-
o.-
~‘u ls.»
C -
‘vu.
‘ 7
*yv-io v'.‘ "r'
‘

V‘N ' ~
vs”.

M... ”i
J “VM‘

7“-
“ t.‘~.

.
fi

‘

o.

v‘ V-A .

d Vl’lv- 'L:

r\
o
‘7‘

a
p~YF -.

. N“. r

 

-g“

49
curriculum as being employment oriented rather than
general or pre-engineering in nature.50

One of the more recent pieces of literature on
the subject of technical institute curricula was a re—
port by James L. McGraw, Sponsored by the American
Society for Engineering Education and financed by a
grant from the National Science Foundation. In the
report McGraw discussed the engineering technology cur—
riculum in considerable detail. Three principle points
were presented and elaborated upon in McGraw's discussion
of the engineering technology curriculum. An abstract
of these points is presented as follows:

1. A curriculum is an integrated sequence of
organized courses planned to fulfill a particular Ob—
jective within a specified time. From this it follows
that courses designed fora.four—year program in engineer-
ing would not, in most cases, be appropriate components
of a two—year program in engineering technology.

2. An engineering technology curriculum differs
significantly from a pre-engineering curriculum, which
is equivalent to the first two years Of an engineering
program. The one is the preparatory part of a more in-
clusive program; the other a complete program in its own

right.

L

SOU.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,

Officeof Education, Occupational Criteria and Preparatory
Curriculum Patterns in Technical Education Programs
(Washington: Government Printing Office, 1962), pp. l6—l7.

 

LA)
a

are: the en
A

.A ‘me ~ra~(
.v‘ 1.... )4- —

>n -.A.‘- . ‘7
ve‘. fly “] *‘

’9’:ch

fi~y
*~-‘~u~ t3.
.
.
“ any.“
.-
~cu¢ LVNH-‘:J
on :J" ”A :
v " i C
' “‘ v-..
‘

.
Jr?“
,hgv
M.
F
me C
\c
L.
IN

~. ~ 0
‘“Les 1*hr
‘..'~~
L..-
~ ‘
”n‘uflp P
_“H ”I h
V
b
,—
\‘1
J.
«‘D
in"
0. ~

SO
3. The more concentrated demands of time impose
upon the engineering technology curriculum a greater need
to integrate the courses with each other and to aim the
subject matter more directly toward the particular de-

mands of the specialized occupational field.51

Subject Matter Emphasis

The very nature of the nation's industrial sys-
tem would indicate that various levels of technical ex—
perience can be expected and utilized within the indust—
rial complex. Thus the demand for technical personnel
to fill positions within this system has been reflected
in the variety of technical institute curricula which
have been offered. Each level of technical curricula
Offered has served a valid purpose in fulfilling the
needs not only of the employed individual and industrial
concerns served directly by such curricula and programs,
but also the socio-economic system of which they are a
part.

The subject matter emphasis in technical curricula
has differed from one type of institution to another,
and also within similar institutions. Since technical
curricula are usually for the duration of two years, it
becomes increasingly difficult to achieve a desirable

balance of courses in technical and technical related

51McGraw, op. cit., pp. 22—23.

.4. «bu;
4

.
A. 0“
v. ..,.1~.I

...
.. . .
.- pvt-“p,
”5......“ r,
i
.- ;
"r‘
1 y " ~
:l‘fi A

HSflr
.-
in.“ g,“ ‘4‘.

.r.e S

‘
on”

.. - used 1

. ‘ .
or ‘F n“'1rfi
m. ct ..C".‘u

I,
A

w

 

FF
“b
4‘!
"J1
' l
s' K.“
a-
'\ C he. n,
‘ v \Y-‘V‘l
Q U . ‘
§ ' "u
b
1‘: -
“‘2: ~“ A .
‘ E v.
H I ‘ 5_‘.‘ I
a, *\
“can .
“~n. Q 1,. ,
‘u .
‘-’.'. - r“
A," .
“‘- ‘N‘h ~‘
““~ \g
‘0
U“. u-"
__

51
fields, mathematics and science, and also include courses
in general education during this relatively short period
of time.
Many studies have been conducted for the purpose
of identifying the subject matter emphaSis in technical
curricula. Data from studies conducted by the United

States Office of Education,52 Smith and Lipsett,53

Henninger,54 the California State Department of Education,55

and Larson56 are presented in Table I.
The selection of the institutions and curricula

to be used in the U.S.O.E. study was not contingent upon

their having been approved by an accrediting agency.

 

52U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Wel-

fare, Office of Education, Occupational Criteria and
Preparatory Curriculum Patterns in Technical Educa—
tion Programs (Washington: Government Printing Office,
1962), pp. ll—l4.

53Smith and Lipsett, Op. cit., pp. 69—77.

54Henninger, op. cit., pp. 38-39.

55Herbert S. Wood, "A Study of Technical Educa-
tion in California," Bulletin of the California State
Department of Education, XXVIII, No. 7 (Sacramento:
State Department of Education, September 1959), pp. 33-
36.

56Milton E. Larson, "A Study of the Characteris—
tics of Students, Teachers, and the Curriculum of Indus—
trial—Technical Education in the Public Community Junior
Colleges in Michigan? (Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1965), pp. 77—106.

I¢.va‘gyed "V‘ \'
éu'lV-‘ VI.-‘V

" .J, l “A
LT.....E€IS CO

.. .
A.‘A‘nrnu‘\ C.-
d -_,

.:.-. Vmoucb

-
0‘ F‘NW'VF‘O‘!

.v £84....“ $5.- .
J

. ' H' ‘ '

n’,~ I‘PF‘H‘V“

U-Au u-\...--v'3e.
J

.a

‘n 1 “fl

-:~-e A. r::
V'-
Mar
'u-

i I I
\“HV
an

~“'a"vt Areas
M

.AA‘ ' s
h 'F1p I F
‘vyn-t.‘*~a‘ . a

P, u

‘

"n'S‘fi- ,

a...‘ i' ErA

.FO

”nu
\' 0
ya.

I .

'V'n
I- a.
.b.e I V
‘h
'I
«A H
.. v b
V. f‘ e
V
0~., :‘w‘ .
“1
~
1‘
i“’ f
n, firs‘,
‘¥a:f’4 “R
a ‘u v‘
\v
.
-",‘f“ ‘
§‘.‘ u” ’
‘4‘... r
I.c ‘.
u. h
.
‘-
v.“ I"
'§.. ~Y‘
u
a fi
v

‘
““‘: C‘x.
bud

52
However, the studies by Smith and Lipsett and Henninger
involved only programs that had been approved by the
Engineers' Council for Professional DevelOpment. The
California study as well as Larson's, were restricted
to community junior colleges in the states of California
and Michigan respectively.

Table 1. Percentage of Technical Curricula Devoted to
Various Subject Matter Areas

 

 

 

m n m
. Smith & Hennine‘Cali-

Subject Areas U.S.O.E. Lipsett ger fornia Larson‘

Technical & allied 59.0 53.0 62.6 58.5 53.1

Basic science 26.0 26.5 23.2 7.5 23.4

General 15.0 15.0 10.2 26.7 18.7

Electives 0.0 5.5 4.0 7.3 4.8

‘Computation from data presented in the study.

The findings of the studies conducted by the
U.S.O.E., Smith and Lipsett, and Larson, were very similar
with regard to subject matter emphasis in the technical
curriculum. Although there were some differences between
the Henninger study and the studies mentioned pre-
viousely, two differences were quite obvious in the

California study: (1) the relatively small amount of

 

v
,Ar 7
{Wyn .‘ ‘

’ ‘.: fiu~l\ 1
.4

- -AI
que'f? :AI 1
" V v~“
a. .Ao-b

 

an
PC- '13
ogtv -H
A.
5,;
- , «u - .
ant”,-
'-I"J
- W .. .'
~“rr‘r‘” "V‘. ?
VUOQOLJOJ-«l '.

‘v"‘P-- y- - .
H
1.1.22.8-8 c-,

- .
par.~;p\fifiq f‘
-----uu.¢-J.u.. \,

«.4... u
{he 'T a h __
v \ _
.., "Uobogo
u'..‘ .-
,3 as”;
U
A -‘V
1";;
‘~'-...

..
"'7
U
" a
‘ A
.I
“‘44.
~A
‘r-
~...,
*‘ I
. ,‘.
~ .
T, .
.N g F“? -
““Q..€‘C‘"‘v
v‘
1. . -.
N LV‘A.' .,
O .
~m":.. ‘cflr
. ‘y‘
‘Z'v ‘ v‘
u
mi bra
‘ V
“~‘DE';
.9 L

 

53

course work required in basic sciences and (2) the large
amount of course work required in general education.

The.m£ommendations presented by McGraw57 and
Beatty58 with regard to the percentage of the technical
curriculum that should be devoted to the various subject
areaswere almost identical. Also, both of these recom-
mendations closely agreed with the U.S.O.E. study59 and
the Smith and Lipsett study6O previously cited. The pri-
mary difference was the percentage of the curriculum de-
voted to general studies. McGraw and Beatty recommended
that approximately twenty to twenty-five percent of the
curriculum should be devoted to general studies whereas
the U.S.O.E. and the Smith and Lipsett studies recommend

that 15 percent of the curriculum be devoted to this

area.

 

57McGraw, Op. cit., pp. 24-25.

58H. Russell Beatty, "Characteristics of Excellence
in Engineering Technology Education" (Address before the
American Technical Education Association, Atlantic City,
New Jersey, December 9, 1963) (Mimeographed).

ng.S. Department of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare, Office Of Education, Occupational Criteria and Prep—
ggatory Curriculum Patterns in Technical Education Pro-
giams (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1962), pp.
~14.

60Smith and Lipsett, Op. cit., pp. 69—77.

 

a-
I

In 195;

xiingineers

. . .
”renne- ha f- r c

vaI‘JVb .Aq u-nx.
l

' Q I t ‘. +

O'A. 1 o. ..

.rr- 135-1-.t

"<'”“ "or '-
.""""" “194‘ .0
.

f
‘ n
‘4“, , ‘fl

6 . .
"‘1- : C'Jr‘rjp.
~. ‘Vu

V
.
."‘
’ "r‘v .
«._.U‘ ”f '- Ah" a
a " ».h.l

T‘F .
u .“e tEf‘npoj

”New

-—
y-

4“.

.ger
.3 ‘
."\ I
.‘1 YA“ ‘
N‘ Na ‘
v.4“, v~ 5.-
v V ck.
p
"l
V '1- ‘
.M '-
s. I ‘
.~~M ‘««1
~

(
I
)I

54

In 1957 the President's Committee on Scientists
and Engineers and the American Society for Engineering
Education sponsored a study of technical institute cur-
ricula. The specific responsibilities of the Task Force
conducting the study were to review the content of tech—
nical institute curricula, Obtain opinions concerning the
adequacy of such curricula, and make recommendations for
improvement.

When William G. Torpey reported the findings of this
Task Force, he disclosed that the respondents from the ninety-
six industries studied did not seem to know (in terms of
specifics) what actually should constitute a satisfactory
technical institute curriculum. Torpey's report concluded
that a curriculum most favored by employers would contain
a high proportion of mathematics, basic sciences, and lab-
oratory techniques, with a smaller amount of specialization

in the technology.61

III. THE TECHNICAL INSTITUTE INSTRUCTOR

It has been pointed out previously in this study
that the increasing complexity of our technological society
has brought about an unprecedented demand for professional

61William G. Torpey, "Adequacy Of Technical Instit-

ute Curricula," Journal of Engineering Education, L, No.
2 (November, 19597, p. 131.

 

 

. a
' A”- I
‘rA.;SslU;¢3- \

ucv.»

was in rece

cuv¥

. . ‘ ‘ V ‘
.2”: :rfl C -
.uua- «.10 v .a
.
v 1
v‘ a awn?“ .-
a u‘e uJ‘-u- \—

a A ~ ,au

' ".m “.4? o
w-vusmA V. EV
‘ J

(\V“‘*v‘fi.~7 ’-

“
l... J....C..;g_,
a

'1
v ..
7"fl "*1 r;
4..

b-vl.'u “

.
~":- "'!,I A; c..-
:uuAQI-I J- UJ-
“as, L' . .
{in re N":-w
r we V‘*-‘
.
,
.I
_ at“ Drfihrq~c
um. ‘.V‘-c_ ~
J

HM.“ H ‘
naufi‘ 315:6”

:Q I
.J‘.’ the fHLy.

“Cure

'7‘
.1 : ~~ ‘ n
" ~ ~ Q ‘ vv

..‘_ .
. ‘ s
§ l
~J~C ”Cy. C‘ r,
-
b
t
*A
. y
N .c‘ '- ‘.,. 1
\‘5.L."~
“s
in
d~ Q.
. in~
. 1 ..
HI‘\‘ M r-
s‘5epl 3‘
a.

55

professional engineers chemists, and scientists, whose
successful work depends to a great extent on the semi-
professional or technician occupations. Technological ad—
vances in recent years have resulted in a body of know-
ledge and skills too specialized to expect the technician
to be educated through any other channel than a systematic
program of educational experiences. It would appear that
well organized post—high school technical curricula could
provide one reliable source Of technical manpower. The
quality of such curricula will depend to a large measure
upon the quality of the instructional personnel who staff
these programs.

It has been suggested that the tax-supported educa—
tional system must shoulder much of the responsibility
for the future develOpment of technical education. At
the same time the challenge to develop quality prOgrams
which will meet the needs that have been predicted neces—
sitates that curricula be developed for the preparation
of a new type of teacher. The development of such cur-
ricula would provide professionally prepared instructors
fer technical programs rather than relying on an inadequ—

aflesystem of recruitment and preparation.

“'C:
...- 3 card c...

' o-m .u' t
*‘ Recrul 6..
..

p/‘r‘-
r. yo....

I
. r1
'1:: 15 e>:;e- .

“"12; need f

0.“! ‘.
‘ 1» ,,
“'NN-‘V.
4‘ .
.
A S+"C‘r
\4 i
\- 4
A; ‘ 1.
u»
Had H‘Hv- +. ‘
Ugh-b a... 5”
.“AQ‘

«m-
. y .
‘ ’LW‘ “'- .v
. ‘1“
‘ - ‘.' “
'I fl .
\ ..
'~.

‘0
'A
h
Vt“ .
Orr. r
enyt.“‘.
FA
"1
v
d.'. ‘ .
"‘ A».
. .I'L
I '“~ ,.
.1‘~~: .
“‘ \ A :-
“ A .
u§u¢t Jr V’Qf‘
A »
ft. :-V‘ 'v
n [A : .
\, A‘
J; 'JEF‘.‘
u».-
._.' '
‘u‘ VT .
.N
‘ ' ‘AFQ~r/‘
P. I‘AU“‘V .
C
it. [". J
‘4‘. v"

56

The Demand and Sources
of Recruitment

In contrast to many new subject areas in the early
stages of their development, the field of technical educa-
tion is experiencing a rapidity of growth that has already
exceeded the supply of qualified instructors. The develop—
ment of any new educational program brings about a corres-
ponding need for teachers, and the very nature of technical
education has created a new type of teacher-~a teacher in
a field where there is at present no consistent source of
supply.

A study, using 1956 as a base figure of 100, pre-
dicted that the need for instructional staff in all tech-
nical programs would increase 79 percent by 1965. At the
same time there would be an increase of 126 percent in the
need for technical instructors at the junior college level.62
A.similar study conducted in Michigan predicted that in
the five-year period between 1965 and 1970 there would be
a,75 percent increase in the need for technical instruct—
ors of industrial occupations at the community college

level.63

62 . .
Henninger, Op. Cit.

. 63Michigan State Department of Public Instruction,
Division of Vocational Education, ”A Survey of Anticipated
lbed for Vocational-Technical Education Teachers in Mich-
19&V'(Lansing: Department of Public Instruction, April,
1965). (Mimeographed)

F3
2"
(D
’_.J
’1
11

via“
. a ‘ ' r:
o'r-o ' ef‘f * p
‘3‘. 0 "" "“'
..

\ F
..
rcp . run I

.x..¢..-..U .5».
a

-;n‘un~jn:1 ec'vr

“up”..qu JE

\

.-..::st every 5

" :v I
“:P‘“ HR fih 1 Y—
5‘”; ”‘4 L”. ‘.
' d

' x o .

.‘rA‘:~r . ‘1

....Ju.4.. EX‘..-‘
v'

5.:1'. as area t

A
Ammax p
\rv..-‘ C“

v...
a

‘l
.u_“

.
‘nQo-p.,,.._
.tuy _“‘\' b

.
-
:‘A‘q“,\r ’I‘...
"b-.. -~H 1

‘1-V.. ‘."‘

f
h:
V‘M‘
“-.~~
. ¢..“/ :2
' l
.: ML...“ Q '
""Vh : {'1
fig
3 - v
a “~‘\‘ v
'P‘
V I u.
‘- recap
U‘V
,
nl
v
V“ .
~§ . §
' w“ . I
’- - “Vs;
. Nu.
. H
".‘3 ‘rWAy.
. “‘tkg
a. I
,VE‘N.‘ ’
s n A
. v§“ £‘Q-‘Q
”u
ix.

 

57

The literature was replete with articles and reports
such as those by Rung and McCord,64 Peterson,65 and Roney66
that identified the acute shortage of technical instructors
resulting from the increased emphasis being placed upon
technical education at the federal, state, and local levels.
Almost every state in the nation is in the process of ex-
panding their offerings in technical education, either
through existing institutions or new educational systems
such as area technical centers and community junior colleges.

Commenting upon the need for post high school tech-
nical instructors, the American Technical Education As—
sociation-National Association for Industrial Teacher Educ-
ation (ATEA-NAITE) Committee on Recruitment and Education

of Teachers of Technical Subjects is credited with making

the following statement:

 

64Thomas J. Rung and Robert E. McCord, "Teacher
Selection and Training," Technical Education News, XVII
(Special Issue, 1957), p. 4.

 

65Basil H. Peterson, "Technical Education in Cali—a
fornia Junior Colleges," Technical Education News, XVIII
(Special Issue, 1958), pp. 3-5.

66

Maurice Roney, "Technical Education for Teachers,
A New Dimension in Industrial Teacher Education," Technical
EQUCation News, XX (November 1960), p. 5.

”* nee
\
3f sucn ;:
stitutions
nurse: :3
n

.
r L‘ 51“"
uau&Vo;G.~ n

ftpqe in: .—

i“»u .‘U 'd
u ,. _.-.
WISH a 5.4:

‘r tr'mwa

ouvvs an: -ul

’4
._J-
rt
(1)

~ c
5’9‘ .0- Y‘ ':
‘vv. ""vvee 3.. ‘-

-3113 3:58:“:&
C

~A,p:£~., r” .
.—
""~\.¢A6A. CC “
. u ‘

hi 1
v. a
A (AA.
".u f’ ".l
4. ~VV‘V- .
VV

 

fa
”I
I
"“a
.. .- ‘.
‘ ‘*~.‘r-'
":51: ‘ u L
‘C-Anpl
". . ‘¥-..‘ h‘
~.- . . ‘ fl
» ,3~' *4
\ J ‘Nt ~ -
‘._. ._ec.~-,
h, ‘-I. a ‘v‘
w (
‘n‘
' V \c‘ ’c.
~¥
.
’A
“A
U'V"
.

.p‘ :Igf‘f‘h .
,‘~:. . y»; A
§ ‘-

\‘LF‘N
. “w 8 "
‘ ‘n' . ~,.
. , w
‘ V‘ .1
.‘ F
"4 no A
4'v.
A ~fl‘
v

58

The need for teachers of technical subjects is
of such great magnitude thatif educational in—
stitutions of sufficient size and in sufficient
number to meet fully the current and projected
national need (for technicians) were now established,
these institutions could not possibly be staffed
with a sufficient number of adequately prepared
instructors from the current supply. 67

In its Second Report to the President, The President's
Committee on Education Beyond the High School made the fol-
lowing observation with regard to the present shortage of
teachers. This observation also included some of the fact—
ors that have been responsible for the shortage and the
consequences it will have, not only on education, but the
total socio—economic well being of the nation.

The most critical bottleneck to the expansion
and improvement of education in the United States
is the mounting shortage of excellent teachers.
Unless enough of the Nation's ablest manpower
is reinvested in the Educational enterprise, is
human resources will remain underdeveloped and
specialized manpower shortages in every field-
will compound. Unwittingly the United States
right now is pursuing precisely the Opposite
course. Demands for high—quality manpower have
everywhere been mounting, but colleges and un—
iversities have found themselves at a growing
competitive disadvantage in the professional man-
power market.

Our Nation, like the prodigal farmer, is con—
suming the seed corn needed for future harvests.
The ultimate result could be disaster.68

67ATEA-NAITE, "Recruitment and Preparation of Teach-

ens of Technical Subjects," (Interim Report presented at
the joint meeting of the ATEA and NAITE, Milwaukee, Wis-
consin, December 3, 1965) (Mimeographed).

8Second Report to The President, "A Report of the
FEesident's Committee on Education Beyond the High School"
WBshington: Government Printing Office, July 1957), p. S.

Until ‘
have relied u;
:r';it tea:l".e:s
g:.:+vte I~r;'

umvovu v-9.

~ r-
'3": Ar V fl 9‘
- C

nc. v thgl c

.
Z": nrqupfi ‘3
""~ r.v‘v.u e.»
. I
‘2”: fins”, .1,,_
.A-1' ""I :-'I':
Dr
~':A, :1 ‘can
:-.~‘v¢.u‘, _\'hu
.
w. ‘ g-
\n I" ‘
A
.ur enea
‘7». ‘
fl
“NILE.
. I
g.
r ~~~
‘. V‘ .

‘Ern " a, a
c» .erarteC

 

l- .
F ,l
.: "w,“na
hb‘ih-. u we“
a
4 "VI.

".‘
_. r
‘-.cr e}.
"vs F ..
A ~
ilk-As. f.
a
s
. -
-¢‘x‘1 .
u. .H
‘ “an- o ,
I.“ .
4
{pm ‘9
-_ V‘
'1 , O. V
~‘Hu 65”“
v H b..“
I. «
r-. M 4 .~
V“ P

y
“ ;Q m
b ‘u U 1
\
'H
y. F .
‘j‘u erlri,
A
H ‘
do Chlu,r’
“ . ”V ‘.
A. . .
I ,9-
.t§.r‘er e‘
, g _
(m. X

 

59

Until the present time technical institute programs
have relied upon many and varied sources from which to re—
cruit teachers. Industry, high school teachers, technical
institute graduates, engineers, and retired personnel, to
name only a few, are sources that have been utilized for
the recruitment of technical instructors. None of these
have proved to be a consistent source of supply. Neither
have they always yielded personnel with the desirable
personal, technical, and professional qualifications neces-
sary for effective teaching in post high school technical
programs.

In commenting upon the sources of recruitment that
were reported in the 1931 Wickenden and Spahr study, it
was pointed out that most institutions seemed to prefer
recruiting men from industry, and training them as needed,
rather than taking men already in the teaching profession.
The following comments with regard to the problem of
securing technical instructors are typical of those re-
ported in the study.

It is more difficult than securing them for

engineering college teaching. . . .
No source of ready-qualified teachers exist.

Neither ex—college teachers nor mature men from
industry are satisfactory.69

69William E. Wickenden and Robert H. Spahr, A Study
SELTechnical Institutes, The Society for the Promotion
cfi'Engineering Education (Lancaster, Pennsylvania: The
Iancaster Press, Inc., 1931), P- 152-

‘s-‘d

:1;
(D
(n
.l -
7 i
o;
' V

.5 ‘.

.-. Anya-e: A.-
. l , i, ,
.d SUV.» v ~14.

= I- e
‘M' (33’8” rt;

.0... g

c
5

1.3.4. 7

o
‘
.y‘ui-n.§ Q -1.

snrces 3f 5'

.4

sex: the l

(U

“VG .; ~
r3.~'!....€ ch

teeters frm

'51.”

9‘“
:virce Of Sue
.

Y
I
A

:: C‘ ":‘W‘!
”in“! for

..

‘ FA

..“_e wa ‘e_
i:

b. .
."“A-1 o
"'-. N,
.s-M‘ 1‘38?-
..
u 'v
.
.
§, , r
. “if. :*‘"Y‘A
y“ u I”
v ‘-
‘FA‘ I
~ A' A“ .
m.“ ‘c . “3“
“o:)
..
'l‘
p.‘ _
- "r-
" Q‘th‘;
«alabpc
VU
‘0
v v.
..-~‘h A];
'h V.
v s n“
K‘
‘ i
. 4,
.“.
'7»
'l‘a
\m. - -
&
v H
l.‘ ‘1.
.
7}
‘H
to» -
.thr‘, V
l“

60

The forty institutiomsthat responded to the Smith
and Lipsett survey70 of 1956 resulted in findings that
were similar to those reported by Henninger71 with regard
to sources of supply for technical teachers. Both studies
indicated that high school teachers, industry, and the
technical institutes' own graduates were the most frequent
sources of supply. Henninger reported that industry repre-
sented the largest single source for both full-time and
part-time faculty for all types of institutions while
teachers from high schools represented the second largest
source of supply. However, when considering the source
of supply for junior college teachers, the situation was
reversed. For the junior college, the largest single
source was teachers from high schools.

One of the sources for supplying post high school
technical instructors that has been referred to repeatedly
in literature on technical education is the graduate of the
technical institute program. In commenting upon the idea
that graduates of technical institute curricula are a good

source of supply for technical instructors, Maurice Roney

said:

70Smith and Lipsett, op. cit., p. 152.

71Henninger, op. cit., pp. 78—80.

n
.
”2C; ”GKC‘
JVVV LV“V
. ,n
rnpr-Ho-A:
lgnvab \vc“
.,A. q cv‘~
LU CS». “El
-~'
A-wr fir" ":
VI‘ U-u'udu
a
a
a... n...- l»-
5c“ A; ‘- \—

. .
F1‘“~ pip!
uuieaee-&o-
.
.
v- fiH‘r m r
.euu;.€.. ..
o
5r tr” tfir
.uSVsuc VL

:ree "H

“1.4.; L.

o
.p-pl Q q ‘
. Hr
F.
U‘vK‘ur'v .40-
4

g.
‘Ffiy‘,
6.. . .635

'i"‘ M: a l

‘
.aa..bl VO‘aLEZE

.
”.fluq
b
"1..: e ,as a
. -
|

NPP.
‘ r"r\..,‘ s
.m. r
mums. .
.;.:‘
g
I! N
.... ,c -
-- .~ cs Dray
£ .
1 -.., A
I. v- A.
.*~u V :r
a .
‘.
. (
. i
~_ LWQF‘T‘
"~me "zr
J V...
,‘ .
. A .R ‘ t
1.. \ 1“ ‘4
\~ ’
“vi--129
v.‘
n.
l: I. a Q
2‘ , 7’
“6|t~‘ at
y
a”.
§
"a :‘~:A ‘
' ‘~3: 1':
‘V“u~ C. ,
K.“
n.
"~~‘.. A: L-
U
~
..E
‘I
.
'\ C l‘ ‘
er fis
fin,‘.‘ N
‘ O-
“ E
‘.
_
I
.=~>:
v
'1‘ A.“ h
- § ‘ I
“e'o S l"
‘A
.
n'.
I‘b R
. . I
0" ewh‘
A. 1 '

 

61

Their graduates will probably be the best and
most consistent source of teachers for technical
institutes in the future. It seems inconsistent
to assume, as some people have indicated, that
our graduates are competent engineering technic-
ians but cannot qualify as teachers of courses in
engineering technology. To meet the indicated
requirements for qualification as a technical
instructor, the graduate with an associate de—
gree must have occupational competency. With this
background, however he will also need a well-
planned program of professional and technical ed—

ucation up to, and in some cases through, graduate
school.72

Charles W. Laffin Jr., Dean of New York City Com—
munity College, also envisioned the technical institute
graduate as a potential source of supply for technical
instructors. Laffin discussed the use of teaching tech-
nicians as practiced at New York City Community College.
He pointed out that many of the semiprofessional aspects
of teaching can be turned over to a teaching technician
who is utilized by the technical instructor much in the
same manner as an engineering technician works with the
{upfessional engineer. Further, he pointed out that 75
percent of the graduates which they employed originally
am technical teaching assistants went on to complete
remflxenents in engineering or professional colleges, and

fine now employed as regular members of the faculty.73

Maurice Roney, "Teacher Training and Recruitment,"

Igduucal Education News, XIX (Special Issue, 1959), p. 16
73Charles W. Laffin Jr., "Teachers for Technical

Ihmtitutes: Teaching Technicians Help Solve the Problem,"

§§?NUC31 Education News, XVII (Special Issue, 1957), pp.

n-U u

\ (
.o-O ~f‘f‘"~* C
. UQCUJC Lev
o

WW,” fv

"-uvvv- V‘
l O

. . .
.--o c-r-o as
. --

lib. u-Iv"

 

a. ._.._ A.” _‘
:_.,~_. .

'1. ~ LR ‘F'
‘evvyu EV. ,

., . .

: .£;"r‘r‘~ ,.

m. ,

' "~‘v--L.,_‘ ‘1

d . .

l' A. ' A

~ I

'-.. y DP‘ CO-i A

n "s '
“" a {Fr-“:0“.
“‘\r i'
J
:‘..,.
O‘ p N“
”"‘V'«. "’“r
k...
-.
_-\ a ‘
.' V 0"”4,‘
~*'-¢.‘
V
-...
:v.:m'
.‘ 1“
‘~v (J fie.
‘ r-
u
a
is .‘-
.

.f‘ ;.
"watts A:

.
~“N Q
6)::
A
'7/
"a

V!
7‘
t u“g

 

62

Thomas J. Rung and Robert E. McCord also indicated
that graduates of technical institute curricula are good
prospects for future teachers. They commented to the ef—
fect that, as a rule, the better technical student is the
one most interested in teaching. They suggested giving
this type student an opportunity to take more advanced
work as part of his program as well as utilizing him as an
assistant in the laboratories. As a result, he may be
stimulated to obtain further preparation and later enter

the teaching profession.74

Characteristics and Qualifications

As pointed out previously, technical instructors
have entered the teaching profession from many sources
Math a variety of backgrounds of preparation. With a
situation such as this, it is reasonable to expect stud—
ies of technical instructors to reveal a corresponding
variety of teacher characteristics. However, the few
studies reviewed concerning the characteristics and qual-
ifications of technical instructors have been restricted
to such an extent that the only information available was
that which pertained to degree levels, number of years

industrial experience, and the number Of years teaching

74Rung and McCord, Op. cit., pp. 4-5.

1"";r;pffie. [J

”A.._..\.uv
.

   

I {On-A". :nv'A
.u‘» u-uul As. I c

: were: ~»

vo-

I

(

I

I
[I
«D
(I)
:1»:
I 3
'- 4
D
(D

‘7: Y
:"E' 3. NBC"

‘.r.~,,\r ”‘4

'"Iwyu. r-r
..

.,

’t. :.. .

. ‘ ‘

I
I
(15
~:
(D
(1'
1
(D

.“V‘r
. r
~--. ‘
..'
:I":A: ‘ ‘
:v-._:‘7e~ r..
H U ~v
¢
.
‘.

..~
i‘b.‘
‘p
.rw
I .
an 4,, .
‘ H" i ‘ C
"V-
V
.
'A
." ”CA-V
"'t "'4 .A
.‘ V
“d -V I
Q
‘4
n
.D
..
v.” -‘y-
.‘ x” C .
V.“ ‘ o~"r-
~
I “I.“
‘ ‘

El.‘ *1:
a
z ,
..‘.£
. n~‘ _
-~.: “I
5
VA.

 

.
. .7,
a.
.‘s:\$ A;-
U» 5 I"
4‘ \s.
~.
~§
[\
'-
v.
D‘ '

63
experience. As a result very limited information was avail—
able concerning the specific type of general, technical,
and professional preparation technical instructors have had.

One section of the l931 Wickenden and Spahr study
dealt with the qualifications of the technical instructor.
The study involved ten institutions and 239 instructors.

It revealed that 70 percent of the instructors held college
degrees while only 16 percent possessed the master's de—
gree. In reporting the experience of these instructors in
the same study it was shown that only 4 percent of the in—
structors had no previous industrial or teaching experience.
The average industrial and teaching experience reported

“as five years for full-time instructors.

Furthermore, in reporting the qualifications most
emphasized by the respondents it was found Umat while most
cf the institutions preferred men with college training,
very few insisted upon it. Only one institution stressed
the need for previous teaching experience and then with
the same emphasis as other qualities. However, industrial
experience was considered highly desirabde. All respondents
éxueed that the highest priority should be placed on per-
sonal characteristics, such as moral character, leadership,
common sense, and the ability to maintain the morale and

interest of students.75

7SWickenden and Spahr, op. cit., pp. 150-54.

...1'n_~‘~r-H,r"‘
0‘

h ‘ vyv‘
‘ Q 55‘“
‘-

“'P**‘e55131

on}. -V&

E , 1
n::e:h:1ca-
o‘
'“*“l fer 3'
.M4HL‘ V . ‘
.

H “A
‘8‘ r {.4‘

unnpa . ‘V’C'
......‘C§l y ..

a

. ‘. ‘
:‘~"T Frr‘wq,
‘§'uc~‘ “-qu-

-
‘r‘

Aw“. A.” flu.
.....E 5""OI‘JOS

n,‘f‘

O: ‘ I ‘
5.. ”Fl lrfi-
. 'voéh“- A.“
9‘1.”

P‘ v- A
““hi “are "1 ‘fi
' K ‘ Gav v
‘1‘! 1
v: ‘ A; *pg :V‘

n
. ~14. ..,¥ “~

.
\ .Q
' A
' 1: {"hfiV‘O-
“T'V~ \-
"‘ s.‘ _
. C. l A‘
i‘, .‘3 v
.
L" Ar- I
....‘. , f-b- c"
.2. “we ‘ “
U‘; :
.‘ . ~
~ “.5 “josh
~v,
.l .
"“'~‘ c ,.
«My JP“"
V'U‘
."
.
‘ "w .
“‘3 L+“~..
- V, ‘
u_EQ
V
:w.
“12.5;- ‘2 -
‘4‘ “”hp“
'~>-"IQJ
‘l
.
y‘CI-A '
"“ex‘.t of ‘
VA
‘A
. n
"L ‘-
. ~ H
"-.. O’c. .

64

A study of the characteristics of technical instit-
ute instructors was conducted by the Engineers' Council
for Professional Development and reported by K. L. Holder-
man. The study included 533 fullvtime instructors and
253 part-time instructors in eighteen institutions hav—
ing technical curricula accredited by the Engineers'
Council for Professional DevelOpment.

In reporting the educational background of the
technical instructors, it was disclosed that 44 percent
of the 533 full—time instructors had develOped as teachers
either through their training at technical institutes and
trade schools or by serving apprenticeships and gaining
practical industrial experience. The instructors in this
group were not college graduates. The remaining 56 per-
cent of the instructors held academic degrees. Other data
concerning the educational preparation of these instruct-
ors as reported in thhsstudy were: (1) 70 percent of the
part-time instructors held degrees as compared to 56 per-
cent of the full—time staff; (2) relatively fewer part-
time instructors held advanced degrees than did full—
time instructors; (3) only 39 percent of the instructors
in institutes that offered instruction in but a single
area of technology held academic degrees as compared to
7% percent of the instructors in institutions that offered

rmue than one program of instruction.

vv ‘ ‘

, f1
:Cl‘KJeI

. I
:-"‘"‘3r5 CCE

.ccivv

-
. ‘ f! 11‘
Gin-5r ". e “C

.1..y-& A.
.

5'--r':*‘- r c
...:-n4vx—O§ r-

p.“

9.91: years

5
£3

‘ l
"'a ‘PQ'-r'~r~¢-
‘ ‘4‘“

-
A-v- .
:Wcr tum

‘vo-‘ua.v
“ ‘
fi '“"
“ LIA-v
. ‘ y-
u" 1

5,
D

‘1.

D
w
, a
(D

l
p;

l CVN‘F
N
.§.,.“. ran

bk)
~

:-
v“

65

Holderman reported that for the 533 fullatime in-
structors the average length of industrial or business
experience was five and one—half years. The part-time
instructor represented in this study had an average of
eight years industrial or business experience. The aver—
age teaching experience of full—time instructors reported
was found to be seven years and nine months. The 253 part—
time instructors averaged seven and one-half years teach-
ing experience.76

Although there were minor disagreements, the Smith
and Lipsett study77 and the Henninger study78reported find-
ings similar to those of Holderman. The only area where
considerable disagreement was discovered was with regard
to the educational qualifications of the technical instruct—
ors. Smith and Lipsett and also Henninger reported that

85 percent of the instructors held academic degrees whereas

Holderman reported only 56 percent.

 

76K. L. Holderman, "Some Facts About Our Technical
Institute Instructors," Technical Education News, XI
(April 1952), pp. 1-5.

77

Smith and Lipsett, Op.cit., pp. 148—151.

78 . .
Henninger, Op. Cit.

_ 1 . .
.'~ ~~"\ 3;” A:
1.... ”than“...
.

nov‘"f‘“"r k’r'.
C..n..v~ H'-
l ‘ wl'

var P‘- ‘ ‘

"an nus, .....

-. , ,, u

DA ofl flr‘fi
’- 3V1!!-

.uu oVfi. 0““

H .
'3'. nfl .flwn
‘vuv and Uu‘AV

V;

\
.:., A .,
e x .
k "c. w,
x...‘ d.
I
.
a‘uA‘-
”'1‘ t ‘P' .
N 7“
vs. ,
av.“:

 

66

Larson79 reported a summary of the characteristics
and qualifications of 138 Michigan junior college in-
structors who participated in the National Defense Educa-
tion Act, Title VIII program during the year 1960—61.
The following year the ATEA—NAITE80 Committee on Recruit-
ment and Education of Teachers of Technical Subjects made
a similar report of 219 experienced teachers who applied
to the National Science Foundation Summer Institute for
further technical preparation for teaching technical sub-
jects. These two studies indicated that: (1) approximately
90 percent of the instructors held the bachelor's degree,
(2) between 40 and 45 percent held only the bachelor's
degree, (3) approximately 45 percent held the master's
degree, and (4) less than 10 percent had not acquired the
bachelor's degree. In addition, the studies pointed out
that industrial arts, industrial education, and vocational
education accounted for the largest number of major fields
of preparation of the instructors reported. Also, over

half of the instructors reported in the studies had high

school teaching experience.

79Milton Larson, ”Personnel Inventory of Instruct—
cms in Industrial—Technical Curricula in N.D.E.A. Title
VIII Programs in Public Community Junior Colleges in
Dfichigan" (unpublished working document of the Michigan
\kmational Education Evaluation Project, Michigan State
LMiversity, East Lansing, n.d.) (Mimeographed).

8OATEA—NAITE, Op. cit., pp. 1-7.

I‘ I

. are? F‘]
_ .

a-\.‘v'¢ Hr &

l I

.':..'.T‘Lc ‘lyg‘

uni-n i‘d v‘v -‘LI
0

n n.

‘ur ,oAy- 1| .

~u~lyu¥‘ ‘n-

”31:: "cw-em
...v’—\- yv..&, s.

a .
. - a u

H'k 5“ bank”. "I
“"“ '9 VIA-‘;‘.

- .
: ”‘5‘. "k ‘6 h‘v
‘o...v' ,4“

d \c \‘n

trase of tee

 

'A- ' o
‘d', ‘ ¢.
......t {Ls 1

'7
‘rfi
,. .
' Hut—.96

.b‘

c, .
.... --«.dc..l _ i 2

'cr
(I'

 

,
i
I
r
1

,.
if,

(I)

67

Fred J. VanZeeland, Director of the College of
Electrical Engineering at the Milwaukee School of Engineer-
ing, discussed the desirable characteristics of a technical
institute instructor. VanZeeland divided technical in-
structors into three groups; those who teach the humanities,
those concerned with the tool subjects, and those charged
with teaching the technical specialties. He implied that
although technical instructors have much in common with
those of the engineering college, they do have some sign-
ificant distinguishing features.

VanZeeland indicated that instructors teaching in
the humanities and also instructors in some of the tool
subjects have an advantage over teachers of the technical
specialties. This advantage is due to the fact thattheir
Preparation was in the field of education with a major in
the subject they teach. In addition, they have had an
exposure to the fundamentals of good pedagogy. However,
it seems that these instructors have considerable difficulty
in appraising the Objectives of the technical institute
student and in assimilating the general philosophy of the
institution. In contrast to the instructor in the humanit-
ies and tool subjects, in many instances the instructor
in the technical specialty has not had the time or the Op—
ertunity to develOp adequate teaching techniques. In
commenting specifically upon the problem of instructors

in the technical specialties, vanZeeland stated:

Too :2:
*echmca
‘ '5 arr-1
sen. OtAiJ
I- ‘y T", ‘
{11.} CV .
(“eneral :
abiline:
~ 7'43!
~O stag)
' ‘ L
nteres-

- I
'R ’f“ c Q g
qu LVAEUQL\
“"5!“ Pfifl‘neg
I'H'. bug, e

i .
:vvq'VQCtnf‘ fr-
usvvvv 5‘ \vonc
:‘ : IO\p ‘ A:
I. b ‘bie. U.

.,,P
“ “CI Pflrr.
"' N» g r
.1 . .
‘.r “’ ‘ ‘ C F
V‘VAA gt; ‘X‘U :
,
.. A A _
a”! e~§y ‘v

 

C.- .- .

..._ \nah‘c:

U'Bs'l A
O “‘E

.

"". P

‘i. ,‘
§

 

68
Too often he is so completely absorbed in his

technical subjects that he forgets about the stu-
dent and the processes of learning. Only occasion-
ally do you find a technical specialist who has the
general educational level, the technical-specialty
abilities, the teacher qualifications, the desire
to study and practice good pedagogyé and a genuine
interest in developing technicians. 1

T. B. Merson classified traits which are shared by
all outstanding community college instructors under three
general headings: personality, subject matter preparation,
and professional competence. In discussing the subject
matter competence of community college instructors, Merson
suggested that if college students are expected to perform
at a level distinctly above that expected in high school,
it would seem logical that the instructor's preparation
must be correspondingly higher. An instructor's prepara-
tion in his subject matter field must have both breadth
and depth, and he must be able to emphasize interrelation—
ships of the various disciplines.

Merson identified the professional knowledge and
skills that distinguishes outstanding junior college in-
structors by emphasizing that (1) they understand and
subscribe to the basic general aims of education and to

the Specific functions of the junior college, (2) they

are familiar with the characteristics of the students they

81Fred J. VanZeeland, "Desirable Characteristics
of a Technical Institute Instructor," Technical Education
HSEE: XI (January 1952), pp. l-2.

fl ‘. u
‘ ‘ 5‘
Hurt-:0 ‘ 1 3..
.:.n.uu J~
- \ "
.-u-~.'§p {‘7‘ f
. :lluu» Uh' vi ‘ A

9' Of fec‘fi
a» wu

uv‘ 'D‘

(f)

A; ""0 pfimre‘Wy

v‘ may bv.. 4.

1 .
‘r’rq Y‘""
c...-s.d 5,-v‘

I ‘ .
' 1 ' .
v~~. "‘ h-o-q

H ' "

....,“ U‘y -J

 

.nn‘

I, ’ ‘ '
n. ‘h ,
”1 MM

 

‘Vfl“.u
“fir-o. A
N

.u‘- V

.,
a:
a; “‘ ,
‘“ . H +
‘. ‘1
A; ‘e a
4'. N CA"
‘0
-\ ..
, u
v. “‘2‘ N-
.
’u a ‘4‘.
“61 ‘v‘
‘ 'r ..
~‘y '
I ‘ b.
A‘ ‘
.. .
.1 c. a-”
\. Inc: ‘
R
i. ,.
~
'5‘-..
'35 Curd,
-g‘ C r
.
Cm.n_ .
x 4“.”
.4 ‘4‘.
‘. V
.~.S 3., ‘
'u

 

69
teach and adapt their teaching to the needs of their stu-
dents; (3) they are able to motivate students to their
maximum achievement, and (4) they adapt their instruction
to the needs of the community and utilize the resources
of the community in their teaching.82 C. C. Tyrrell,83
President of Broome Technical Community College, in out-
lining a program of staff develOpment for potential tech-
nical education instructors, listed many of the same desir-
able characteristics identified by Merson.
The American Council on Education (ACE) reported
the results of an Opinion poll that was conducted by visits
to more than sixty representative junior colleges and
technical institutes in various parts Of the United States.
The following criteria met with almost unanimous approval
on the part of instructors and administrators to be used
as a measure of qualifications for junior college instructors.
1. By completion of the equivalent of twp years
Of graduate work of high quality with certification
of that fact by the graduate school, and completion
0f at least a year of college or institute teaching
of high quality in his field of preparation, certlj
fied by the college or institute in which the candi-
date has taught.
2. Or by the completion of the equivalent of.a
master's degree, including professional courses in

Education, certified by one or more graduate schools;
plus two years or more of exacting technical work

 

 

82T. B. Merson, "The Preparation and Selection of
lhmtructors for Community Colleges," California Journal
53:58condary Education, XXXI (December 1956), pp. 496-501.
83

C. C. Tyrrell, "Staff Development: A Program
fbr TWO-Year Colleges," Technical Education News, XVII

(Special Issue, 1957), pp. 6-

1 m
J. k-

'- ‘ 1 !
fiNNFe AV-
-

~uy-- w’-

. a

Q . f40\A-o-
‘ N

Al. 44v¢u
-

W ‘1 firlwv“

b‘.‘ by. L.‘

n 5

‘I r
......_ _3 S
x: ‘
c
u‘. e ah” 7“ A
... “He- .

n
u
c

.1-

(I!
'
Y

 

70

in industry, or community service; plus completion

of at least a year of high quality college or

institute teaching in his field of preparation, cert-

ified by the college or institute in which the cand—

idate has taught.

3. Or by completion of the equivalent of a

bachelor's degree, including professional courses

in education, certified by an accredited college;

plus completion of four years or more of varied

and exacting technical work in industry or commun-

ity service, certified by competent experts; plus

completion of at least a year of high quality col—

lege or institute teaching in his field of pre—

paration, certified by the college or institution

in which the candidate has taught.84

James L. McGraw reported on an evaluative study of

technical institute education conducted under the auspicies
of the American Society for Engineering Education. One
section of this report was concerned with the technical
institute faculty. McGraw chose to discuss the character—
istics and desirable qualifications of the technical
institute faculty as a unit rather than as individual in-
structor qualifications. He emphasized the fact that the
attributes desirable in the faculty of an engineering tech-
nology curriculum are identical with those desired of all
college teaChers. There was reference to the fact that
since engineering technology curricula are of college

level a prOportion Of the faculty should have acquired at

least the baccalaureate degree. McGraw further stressed

4American Council on Education, Wanted: 3OJOOOIn-
structors (Washington: American Council on Education, ‘7

"'t since t

.1.‘

. , “

~ pr 1! '1‘ Q

'7 EV u
d

l
.1": 'Ol .« J
-

A"" r er:
:uaoone sh).

:thi“ A "Vzc

.

hulk“ ~' 3‘ _‘
.

"-3" ‘r‘ «we

..':-.. n: S u

 

, . _
.Q

.95!“ . ru- '1‘
.v v»...;‘-=_:

A

 

71
that since these curricula are so closely related to engineer—
ing they must contain a substantial proportion of graduate
engineers. It was recommended that approximately one-half
of the faculty members teaching the technical specialties
shoukibe graduate engineers or the equivalent. Also, the
need was stressed for a significant prOportion of the fac—
ulty to have had relevant and reasonable current industr—
ial experience.

When expanding upon the commitment of instructors

to technical institute education McGraw stated:

It is important that all members of the engineer—
ing technology faculty be familiar with and sym-
pathetic toward the goals of this type of educa-
tion. The engineering technology teacher must not
only be conscious of a desire to teach his subject,
but also to teach it at the engineering technology
level. Unless the faculty has this quality an in-
stitution can easily find itself over—loaded with
teachers for whom engineering technology education
is at best a secondary interest.85

In concluding the discussion on the characteristics

and qualifications of post high school technical instruct—
CMS the following statement from a publication of the
American Council on Education would seem aprOpos.

In short, this is a job for thoughtful, stout—
hearted men and women, with certain traits--will—
ing to step outside traditional academic circles
in an important cause, not afraid of pioneer con-
fusions and growing pains, or of temporary "junior"
status, or of the direct Speech of the factory,

the farm, the store, the newspaper office, or the
City hall.86

85McGraw, Op.cit., pp. l6—18.

86American Council on Education, op. cit., p.8.

rpm/wry“ far

..J~l‘ *‘ V

II“. Ch:

, u
:H-jnzo-l-en an
.uivuv Val VJ

 

.
. , ,

x??? ‘f‘, o-v
~~ 5 -‘J -.

:A.';V‘"O~er Q. n
v

martyr...“ .. "
\-

1:?

f ).
n;
m
w

9'

C

I

I

u )
(D
)

72
Programs for Teacher Preparation

In the twenty years since World War II many changes
have occurred in the teaching profession. Noteworthy
among these have been the development of specific teacher
education curricula for the preparation of teachers in
the various subject matter fields, higher standards for ad-
mission to the profession, and the continuous professional
advancement and educational attainment aftarentering the
profession. In general, the conditions that exist at the
present time with regard to the preparation and profes—
sional advancement of post high school technical instruct—
ors are not conducive to a professional upgrading of this
group of teachers.

In discussing the future status of technical educa-
tion and the instructors who staff these programs, Ken
August Brunner, Specialist, AssociaUaDegree and Related
Programs, United States Office of Education, contended
that if the technical institute wishes to continue to be
regarded as an institution of higher education, its stand—
ards should be on par with the standards of colleges and
universities. He emphasized the fact that only a small
percentage of beginning college instructors hold less than
a master's degree. Also, that certification standards
Of secondary teachers are increasing to the point where
many states already require the master's degree. Comment-

ing specifically Upon the educational preparation of

.anhr; Pal

.
W
.UU“.." .‘nq

q‘fA'.‘ AV
.uuv va"
.

A ~
\1- .,
DUO..-

fiAR,‘ F;

\- c.8149

. .

P‘ *"

he S --&

.
bf 93‘..-
.vav

u
o “F“*‘"\
-Cuya--.’

'5,’ the c~-"‘:
"" --- van, 8|
J

51:1:tors . 1

,‘N'

.51, F “g
!~€-L; "

2.";
l ‘ v
in; Y‘fga.
nu.
I ‘v
V
p
1 H a
s“ Y‘fi‘
~ A
‘sv C.‘
0 ‘V
\
p
u... 3..-
~v‘
‘ I
ah}! ’.
‘.“ C
\-
fi . Ux.
~
.c“ A,
"Jui s,—

 

 

’A
"‘-
v“.-
5- W
- ”a .-
“ V
.‘ _
'u (\h .
. .g‘ C

73
technical instructors, Brunner presentedthe following
questions:

Should not the bachelor's degree program be ac-
cepted, then, only as a first step? Would it not
be setting the sights too low for technical in—
stitute instructors to settle for less than the
educational level required of secondary school
teachers?87

There has been a considerable amount of writing
on the subject of the preparation of community college in-
structors. Because technical institute curricula are
rapidly becoming an integral part of the community col—
lege program, it is to be expected that many of the same
qualifications required of community college instructors
will also be deemed essential for the technical staff.

One ofthe more prolific writers on junior college

education has been Walter C. Eells. Writing as early as
1931, Eells made the following statement regarding the
preparation of community college instructors:

It is not too much to expect every permanent
well—qualified instructor to have had at least two
years of graduate work, largely in the field in which
he expects to teach, or in closely related work;
and that he should have had a substantial training
in professional courses in Education, to prevent
him from being a narrow Specialist in his own field,

and to see his work in proper perspective with re-
lation to the rest of the institution.88

87Ken August Brunner, "Editorial-—The Technical
Institute Instructor," Technical Education News, XX
(November 1960), (Editorial).

88Walter C. Eells, The Junior College (New York:
tkmghton Mifflin Co., 1931), p. 421.

‘ -
“":‘V‘fi fire
A ,
‘—.u.o.\l .,.
‘ a

 

 

"w
‘,
1 ~
-rH"
PM».
0. W
"
N l

. ‘ ~

. -V‘Le‘e ~E

’* 1‘ ....

:- jl’“ V9.7

" , Us
‘ a

flat

.4,

J(\ ‘

. ‘. ‘-

"m, A‘

i‘ n.

‘~ 6 r!
u.‘ ya.c~ :C
‘I. . ‘P‘_~

""‘C'V' «3

§ U-
’NA
j«
d“ '
. F.

. ‘ . _‘

.E:‘ CV: " “
., ‘~, .

‘. 'A, “.4

"I ' ‘--\

_' iéj~l4n

v'.
"t
‘4.
J
.
Lfl‘r

“" “‘4”

-_ L“ -‘

“~‘Q g .

"v-
~ .‘ ‘~fl--.

,' ,. ’

.133ng

i,".),
I“.
‘4!
JV"
(arr:
.,~‘~

74

The academic and professional standards prOposed
by Bells have become relatively common for teachers in
the academic field. However, this has not been observ-
able to any degree in the technical fields. Other author-
ities, such as Garrison,89 Sexson and Harbeson,90 Eckert,
Hawkins,92 Dolan,93, K003,94 and Merson,95 writing in re—
cent years have embraced many of these same concepts re-
garding the preparation of community college instructors.

In 1952, F. H. Dolan reported a study of the pre-

paration needed for junior college teachers based on in—

formation provided by some 500 instructors in Illinois

 

 

89Lloyd A. Garrison, "Preparation of Junior College
Instructors," Junior College Journal, XII (December 1941)
pp. 204—209.

90

J. A. Sexson and J. W. Harbeson, The New American
Colle e (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1946), pp. xviiii‘
312.

91Ruth E. Eckert, "A New Design for the Training
of College Teachers," JUnior College Journal, XVIII (Septem—
ber 1947), pp. 25—33.

 

92T. J. Hawkins, "Junior College Teachers, Some
Unique Characteristics," Junior College Journal, XXV
(January 1955), pp. 298-302.

93F. H. Dolan, "The Preparation of Junior College

Teachers," Junior College Journal, XXII (February 1952),
pp. 329-336.

94Leonard V. Koos, "Preparation for Community

Cbllege Teaching," Journal of Higher Education, XXI

95 .
Merson, op. Cit.

iglor cclle

a
a

'eertended

n
;'\A.I an :'

.4...—‘.~/at, u.

wuuuUAU VA.
. _‘ ‘
pp--.r‘ ‘,'
q ‘
“~e- u---‘ .
.

.
."5 Q’,‘ 6":
" H

.QO.‘ luv '_

..
. ‘II F
9" >5.
“" “- u -c-
' a

‘
:“n~:c‘efl y.‘
dduuyv- \J "

-.

v-s hr u""§»‘
F rt.
‘L‘ .1
A ‘ ‘
in. _
I. " Q‘Lflr
“1.“. y ‘

‘-
:‘1 can ‘0‘”
...~~4~ _-c‘
.
. Q

 

," .1
i.
"u‘vr C
.‘A C
h ”A x
_c. #4.. y
»_ _~‘ ‘
.’~ .I
‘u u- ‘
‘ ‘e. n &.,'_
1».
‘t
A;-
u"
4'“

75

junior colleges. On the basis of his findings, Dolan

recommended that junior college teachers take the same
education courses required of high school teachers plus

(1) a course concerned with the history, development,

function, and philosophy of the junior college; (2) a

course in the psychology of adolescence with particular

emphasis on late and post-adolescent years; (3) a course

primarily concerned with junior college curriculum develop—
ment and evaluation; (4) a course in guidance and counsel—

ing adjusted to the junior college age group. He further

suggested two years of graduate work, including the mas-

ter's degree.

In the same year, Merson reported a study of cred-
ential standards for California junior college teachers

and recommended basically the same preparation for junior

college teachers as Dolan. In addition Merson made the

following recommendations:

1. One—sixth of the total program of professional

education in a program designed especially for preparation

for junior college teaching. This would include at least

one semester in an internship program of directed teach-

ing in a typical junior college teaching situation.

96Dolan, op. cit.

2.1

:‘KH‘ECt-

-‘~J

‘ F
‘1'- tnree .
v1.0“.

[—
[-4

(‘ r:
“ *“e p:

w L.
L

 

r

.
p-
t to

:5~
de.‘

«‘D
"
U)
H

:‘jerut'leri lye

Flg" ‘ .“C
IH‘ll‘v.‘ may
.
Cue: I
1,“?!
b."¢\.tg fig “
Q. I
~".cc‘ ‘ ‘
I H
a :I‘.~~ ‘.. q
‘
q
‘A d..‘
“A ‘
.\_fl ~rtfir‘w
‘. -HVLLu‘
.fl
'aP‘ : - '.
(.I' H . ,1.
Q H v \
.u .
.‘ v- ‘
I.‘¥<.E L: yr-
v . ~
‘5
‘1
J;
lave:
., ‘V

 

76
2. Work experience in a field related to the major

subject. This related work experience should be longer

than three months for teachers of transfer students and
a year or longer for teachers of terminalstudents.97

L. L. Jarvie98 and Lloyd A. Garrison9 made many of

the same recommendations as Dolan and Merson with regard

to the preparation of junior college instructors. How-

ever, Jarvie questioned the proposals of Dolan and Merson
with regard to the number of credits in education which
junior college instructors should be expected to complete.
With the amount of graduate academic work and/or vocational
experience expected of junior college teachers, he con-
siders it to be unrealistic and unncessary to require

twenty-five to thirty units of work in education. His

opinion was that twelve to fifteen units in education, in-
cluding work in the field of the junior college,shou1d
comprise an adequate and defensible minimum.

In analyzing the problem of developing good tech-
nical instructors, VanZeeland pointed out that the develOp—

ment of a technical specialty instructor as an effective

teacher is more difficult than the development of his'

97Merson, Op. cit.

98L. L. Jarvie, "Teaching More Effective," The Pub-

ll; Junior College, National Society for the Study of
Emucation, 55th Yearbook, Part I (Chicago: University

cfi'Chicago, 1956), pp. 213-231.
99Garrison, pp;_£i£.

. 'le I'C
-"." ya
H

‘
fl.
q
- 1
3:63, L,
. . ”‘1
‘V'Ruhp [‘1‘
S». \«J

I I-

~.‘. t
:r" 4" (.
‘¢.v

.
R ‘l',
\an: “L
. A
5
.'::_f1 _ .
‘N
I“ Q
A» H
a ' h.
3 ‘1 A H
"‘“~““ U14 5...
‘:'n ‘ H"
u__“ ,1

.
" ~
Fr." Q‘{V\
c~~u hie“ y"L
.
.’ .
. R age," J“
.... ._ ”._“Q'
.._ ‘
(h. C c‘r‘f‘a
. M‘..¥‘
.
‘
'EC";,1“' ~rw
'Q‘L ' y‘
a.) . .
‘1 A A
.‘_

‘
0“ c‘

77

technical knowledge. He identified four basic areas of

proficiency that each technical specialty instructor

should acquire. These areas are listed as follows:

1. A thorough knowledge of his subject area and
its relation to knowledge as a whole.

2. Mastery of the tools and techniques needed
not only to acquire sound knowledge of the subject
area, but also to engage in original creative
study of the subject.

3. Successful experience in independent research,
which should include not only the acquisition of
new information, but also the evaluation and inter-
pretation of knowledge in relation to human exper-

ience.

4. Capacity to use his knowledge and understand-
ing in ways that will have maximum meaning to others,
whether they are students, scholars, or members of
the general public; and the ability to stimulate
those with whom he comes in contact to continue to

learn and to think. 100

As a result of the 1945 conference of the American

Council on Education, recommendations were made with re-

gard to what should constitute basic programs of prepara—

tion and experience for teachers in community colleges

and technical institutes. Although it has been twenty

years since these recommendations were made, they are

generally accepted at the present time. The six recom-

mendations are presented as follows:

lOOVanZeeland, op. cit., p. 2.

'7. I
n‘C-I

n
‘F‘fl ‘
”U I

1"“ '
-uuq
.‘
v1
173”“‘17

'vvdx

r»...

-UAU "

..,_
h h.
" r., s-
A u,
"‘&I

 

 

78

l. A clear conception of the philosophy and back-
ground of these institutions, their relationship
to the whole educational structure, and especially
their place in the community.

2. An understanding of human growth and develop-
ment and of the special problems of age groups en-
rolled in these institutions.

3. Adequate skill in curriculum construction,
evaluation, and other areas related to the art
and science of instruction in these institutions.

4. Adequate supervised teaching experience--at
least a quarter or a semester-~in the type of teach-

ing in which they are planning to engage.

5. A clearly balanced appreciation of both the
occupational and general educational service of these

institutions.

6. For occupational instructors, occupational
competence-—which includes practical experience*—
With due recognition of this practical occupational

experience.10

Recent studies such as the Illinois study,102 and
reports by individuals such as Holderman, 3 Tyrrell,104
Roney,lOS and Venn106 have been concerned Specifically

101American Council on Education, OE- cit., PP- 12‘13°

lozUniversity of Illinois, Bureau of Educational
Research, College of Education, Vocational and Technical
Education in Illinois (Urbana: University of Illinois,fi*

l9 , pp. 1 7—131.

103Holderman, Op. cit°

Tyrrell, Op. cit.

lOSMaurice W. Roney, "Teacher Training and Recruit—
ment," Technical Education News, XIX (Special Issue, 1959),
p. 16.

104

106Grant Venn, Mggj Education and Work: Post—second-
QEY Vocational and Technical Education (washington: Amer~
1can Council on Education, 1964), pp. 35-36.

(13
(1-
" 3
( A)
(II

“ramp ‘

\wv-bt-v

»
pl§‘-.- A":

n
'“v‘b‘VO‘I

- .
--,...‘ -

s 0".
-v-nvov‘»- -

-
n~ p
4.?" f- c

~‘~- v- .
.

“w e. .._

' Q
"o .-.u\,

. I .
R; fifir ‘ n
..

fidc-u- V

or.

.
Fa ~ 1‘
m.” - ‘4

u
. c
‘01.”... .‘F
~"“tha.

IA'- 'l
" ..
5“ \ ‘. o.
"‘1'; V‘

a

 

 

N
V,
p
A y
1‘ ‘u
v
-..
u
‘o
‘ n
'c 5 gym,
..
. -
~11
,.
'1 ”ha
'VL'
_ .
.A
0
" ~pAVDK ‘
“"‘.4‘
.
F ’Q
“ ~ ‘AA
. ~ ‘ _
y V
“N4 ’
s.
,
‘_ _
. .
‘.:~" ‘7‘ .
v. '1.
“u.
9‘
a". A:
I .A ‘ ‘F
v
-.
In
. ~
'_ N-‘I

79
with programs for the preparation of technical instructors.
It was suggested that well qualified technical instructors
must possess considerably more specialized technical com-

petence than is normally expected of secondary school

vocational teachers. In addition, there is need for a

considerable amount of appropriate work experience on the

part of the technical instructor. It was further pointed

out that the preparation of technical instructors should
be considered in terms of a less conventional program

than is usually available in most teacher education in—

stitutions. The competencies and experiences that should

constitute a program of teacher preparation were identified

as being: (1) a rich background of general education, (2)

mastery of the technical specialty being taught, (3) mast-

ery of the art and science of teaching, and (4) a period
of supervised industrial experience.
Each of these reports placed emphasis upon the need
for cooperative work study programs with industry in order
to provide a well balanced program of teacher preparation.

In elaborating upon the nature and importance of the super—

vised industrial experience as an integral part of a pro-

gram of technical teacher preparation, the Illinois report

Stated:

-’A~\‘
Cylu

(1
(‘J
1?
(1’

(n
(S
f

t)

n:
(3‘
U'

an.

...J.. Of '

'e‘flr.
‘bv'u. _ W
.

-

1" ‘

‘Iiu F",
u

5-...

I”?

“V

.F,- ‘
~‘EV‘FV"‘
' A “"‘-

u.”

(4,.
0'
$

80

Experience in the field, particularly in the
areas of occupational specialization, are helpful
only if the more fundamental requirements of pre-
paration are met. The early notion that a teacher
in the subjects of occupational specialization
needs only a background of experience in business
and industry is no longer tenable. He must have a
first-hand knowledge of the needs of occupations,
but to gain this knowledge efficiently he should
acquire it as a planned part of his preparation
for teaching. The important thing, therefore, is
that experience should be an integral part of a
total program of preparation. The occupational
specialty should be a part of a context which has
a background of general education.107

The ATEA-NAITE Committee on Recruitment and Educa-

tion of Teachers of Technical Subjects, in an interim

report presented in 1962, made some propositions regard~

ing technical education instructors and programs of teacher

preparation. Because of the significance of these pro—

positions and their relevance to this study, they are

summarized as follows:

1. That at least some of the teaching positions
in post-high school technical education must be
filled by professional engineers.

2. That strictly technical courses of a labor—
atory nature must, in the main, be staffed with
personnel who are themselves technicians by virtue
of both formal preparation and experience, and
who are, in addition and by virtue of professional

Preparation, teachers.

3. That technical teacher education programs can
be most effectively developed in institutions that
prepare professional engineers. If this institution
does not also prepare technicians, then it must main-
tain liaison with a number of institutions committed

to the preparation of technicians.

107University of Illinois, op. cit.

I
l..-

”l
e...

(l‘

 

 

.‘ .

 

 

‘n
«'-

~§

 

,Q’A
-

81

4. That teacher education for technical instructor
personnel should be a joint venture between the de—
partment or college of education in an institution
and the departments or colleges of that institution
which prepare professional engineers.

5. That because of the lack of the facilities
required and the‘ lack of staff members with suf-
ficient technical competence, the great majority
of industrial arts teacher education departments
in America are in no position to make a significant
contribution to the preparation of post-high school
technical instructors.lO8

R. E. Ray in 1963 conducted an exploratorystudy

of the literature and programs relating to technical teacher
education. One phase of this study was concerned with
existing programs of technical teacher preparation. On the
basis of visits to each program and an analysis of the
literature describing each program, he made a descriptive
analysis of the technical teacher education curricula at
Purdue University and Oklahoma State University. In des—
cribing the basic philosophy underlying these programs

it was indicated that the bachelor's degree requirements
were established in accordance with the minimum qualifica-
tions that were deemed necessary for effective initial
performance in a teaching situation. A combination of
formal education in the technical occupation, industrial
experience, basic professional teacher education, general
studies, and additional technical preparation at an ad-
vanced theoretical level is considered necessary to develOp

108ATEA—NAITE,Op. cit., p. 2.

‘,rf
u-‘v

.rq
and
v

 

IA] I
(I,
>r 1

 

’» .

....‘

OAR;
—

vv».

l
"rA.

 

 

 

 

 

82

the competencies demanded of teachers in the rapidly evolv-
ing technological Specialties. Additional professional

and technical preparation at the graduate level as well

as periodic and purposeful industrial experience is con—
sidered essential for continued professional growth. In
describing the formal education in the technical specialty
it was indicated that the completion of a two-year tech—

nology program is mandatory for admission to each of these

technical curricula.109

In the Purdue University publication describing the
program for the preparation of technical teachers, the fol—
lowing statement was made concerning the purpose of the
first two years of preparation in the technical Specialty.

The primary purpose of the work completed during
these first two years is to develop occupational
competence in the technical specialty; it also pro-
vides the potential instructor with first—hand ex—
perience with the nature and organization of the
material he will subsequently attempt to teach, as
well as with such environmental factors as char-
acteristics and objectives of the student body,
teaching facilities, and purposes of post—high
school two year technical institutions. 110

Ray pointed out that although the curricula at Purdue

and Oklahoma State University differ in their approach as

k

. l09R.E. Ray, "A Study of University Programs Prepar—
lng Engineering Technology Instructors and A Review of the
Literature Pertinent to This Phase of Teacher Education”
(Charleston, Illinois: Eastern Illinois University Research
Grant, 1963), p. 21 (Unpublished).

. llOPurdue University, Applied TechnologyTeaching
Cption (West Lafayette, Indiana: Industrial Education Cur-
riculum Bulletin, 1962), pp. 2-3.

.A

,Q.
5V

5::

vy-

 

5..

cd‘

‘h;
'v\

"o

.e.

-C.

p“,

v.»

r'“

o
H‘

 

 

v

'.
~..
~.\
\-

83
to how the student will obtain industrial experience,
both consider recent and appropriate industrial experience
essential for effective technical teaching. Purdue Un-
iversity's curriculum includes a non—credit, fifteen month,
full-time training period of supervised work in a pertinent
occupation for students who have had less than two years
of prior employment experience in the technical specialty.
Although the Oklahoma State University curriculum does
not make provision for such training it assumes that all
candidates without industrial experience will have to ob-
tain it in order to qualify for initial employment as a
technical teacher.

It was further denoted that curricula at both un-
iversities emphasized the need for basic preparation in
professional education, and placed primary emphasis upon
the philOSOphy, organization,methods and techniques,
and problems involved in technical teaching. Both require
student teaching experiences in a post-high school teach-
ing Situation as an integral part of the minimum qual-
ifications necessary for effective initial performance in
a teaching situation.

In describing the advanced technical and related
preparation required in the two curricula described, it
was reported that both institutions require that these
be senior level college courses drawn from the regular

undergraduate engineering and/or science curricula of the

II,

 

up

D»-

u.-
'\‘
tr,

84
university.111 The importance attached to the advanced
technical preparation required in the curricula of both
universities can be expressed best by the following
statement from the Purdue University publication, Applied
Technology Teaching Option.
This additional technical study is considered

to be extremely important in the preparation of

an individual for a teaching position in tech-

nical education. It should increase the student's

breadthenxidepth of knowledge, thus enabling him

to understand and teach better the less theoret-

ical content; it will prepare him to COpe with

future technological developments; it will pro-

vide the basis for additional formal education at

the undergraduate and/or graduate level.112

In concluding the discussion on technical teacher

preparation programs it seems appropos to review an article
that presents some insights into future developments that
are likely to take place in this area of education. C.
Thomas Olivo made the following long range predictions with
regard to technical teacher education programs: (1) the
experience requirements, selection, training and education
Of technical teachers will become more exacting and rigor-
ous; (2) greater attention will be paid to secure crafts-
men and technicians with greater trade competency, vali—

dated by well-developed trade proficiency testing instru—

ments; (3) basic educational levels and educational

.4

111 .
Ray, op. Clt.

112Purdue University, Op. cit., p. 3.

oer

.~ v.-

 

-..4

 

 

.n.
1"
.
‘.
‘ .
'~
‘ .
n'!
m
A.
,“
i

 

 

85
background requirements will rise; (4) greater dependence
will be placed in teacher selection on personality fact-
ors essential for teaching success; (5) the Skilled crafts—
man with exceptional understandings in the related tech—
nical subjects and technology may by background and train—
ing represent the best teacher potential; and (6) exper-
iences may prove that teachers of trade shOp subjects
with additional college level content courses, or teachers
of industrial arts subjects, or the technical institute
graduate, in addition to the engineer, may become the best

13
potential teacher of related technical subjects.

SUMMARY

This chapter has presented a review of the litera-
ture pertinent to the problem being studied. The pre-
sentation was developed around one central theme or con—
cept; that an engineering technology program is composed
of three essential elements; the student, the curriculum,
and the instructor.

First, the engineering technician (student or prod—
uct of the program) was discussed. The literature revealed

113 . . . .
C. Thomas Olivo, "Vistas in Trade, Industrial,

:pd Technical Education," American Vocational Associa-
fin Journal (April 1961), p. 17. C

 

.I .3.“ 'W» mar»: awn-(MW

OI“

,.v

 

‘1‘
.t)

‘I.

v‘~‘

v
1
‘u

r
4 J
I"

86

that the demand for well qualified technicians is in-
creasing rapidly and that the projected demand far exceeds
the anticipated supply of personnel in these fields. The
occupational characteristics of the technician were dis-
cussed, and it was pointed out that the function of the
technician has not been defined sufficiently enough to
result in a universal agreement as to the role of the
technician in the industrial complex.

Next, the technical institute curriculum was dis—
cussed. It was pointed out that as a result of the lack
of agreement as to the role of the technician, there also
are divergent points of view with regard to what constitutes
a quality technical institute curriculum. The primary
area of disagreement with regard to the curriculum was
that concerned with the scope and level of the technical
curricula offered. There were a few writers who were quite
vocal about the fact that only technical institutes with
curricula approved by the Engineers' Council for Profes-
sional DevelOpment Should attempt to prepare engineering
technicians. However, most writers agreed that the level
Of a given technical curriculum Should be judged by the
quality of the program rather than by the type of in-
stitution in which it was offered. Technical institute
curricula are found in community junior colleges, tech-
nical institutes, and technical institute divisions of
HNltipurpose universities. As yet, there is little agree-

Hmnt among educators as well as employers upon the degree

———-——— .—.—-—~— if 4—— *4 44

.~'_,_

 

 

o‘r'

"L

v.

.A-
..

.-_

‘r

87
of emphasis that should be placed on general and special-
ized education in the technical curriculum. Furthermore,
this is aggrevated by structuring technical ecucation
programs within the traditional two-year college prepara—
tory framework of organization.

The third type of literature to be reviewed and dis-
cussed in this chapter was thatwhich pertained directly to
the post high school technical instructor, his character-
istics and qualifications, and programs for teacher pre-
paration. It was pointed out that the present and future
demand for technicians has resulted in a corresponding de-
mand for technical instructors. Also, the sources of
teacher recruitment which are presently utilized (engineer-
ing, high school teachers, technical institute graduates,
etc.) have become inadequate to fulfill the increased de-
mands for instructional personnel. In addition, there is
a need for "professionally prepared" instructors to staff
technical programs in community junior colleges and tech—
nical institutes. The recommendations concerning programs
for teacher preparation as presented by professional or—
ganizations, government agencies, accrediting agencies,
and various authorities in the field of technical educa-
tion were presented.

The review of literature would indicate that complete

agreement has not been achieved on such issues as (l) the

Vi

out.

,:.

.6»

.) ID.‘I..v.a nu

88
role and function of the technician, (2) the type of cur-
ricula best suited for the preparation of technicians,
and (3) qualifications and preparation of technical in-

structors.

 

w.“

~'.

uu.

u“

 

ah-
.IV 1

 

CHAPTER III
PROCEDURES USED IN THE STUDY

In order that the reader may be able to under—
stand the study more clearly, the procedures followed in
the conduct of the study were as follows: (1) data col—
lection, (2) data processing and classification, and (3)

analysis and interpretation of the data.
I. DATA COLLECTION

The data collection procedures employed in con-
duct of the study were those that would facilitate the
usage of the critical incident technique. This section
of the study described the data collection procedures
as follows: (1) the development of the general statement
of purpose for the activity being studied, (2) the
development of the data collecting instrument, (3) the
pOpulation used in the study, and (4) the collection of

the incidents.

general*5tatement of Purpose
The develOpment of a general statement of purpose

for the activity studied was listed by John C. Flanaganl

lJohn C. Flanagan, "The Critical Incident Technique,"
B§YChOlogical Bulletip, LI (July 1954),pp. 336-337.

89

 

p...

h‘-

"P

->&

"my—1 ‘---——-~-
. . u . .
‘ I
I c

L. '5 «v
t
9

'V -‘l. I“
I
a
1

A

 

90
as the first step in the critical incident technique. The
general statement of purpose must be a functional descrip—
tion of the activity studied. In this case, the activity
studied was the classroom and laboratory instructional
function of post-high school technical instructors. Flan-
agan's procedures for develOping the general statement of
purpose were followed with minor modifications. A review
of the literature yielded various concepts as to the role
and function of the technical instructor. These concepts
were consolidated to form a tentative statement of the pur—
pose. This tentative statement of purpose2 was then
submitted to a jury of authorities in the field of tech—
nical education for their comments and reaction. The
jury was composed of Sixteen authorities;3 one represent-
ing the Technical Education Branch of the United States
Office of Education, and one from each of fifteen state
departments of education that had an individual specifi-
cally designated as being responsible for technical educa-
tion. One hundred percent response was received from the
jury selected and there was almost unanimous agreement

with the proposed statement of purpose. Only minor changes

 

2See Appendix B for statement of purpose.

3See Appendix C for list of the jury of authorities.

,9

5'

AA

‘r
..,
IA
5
.,_
y.
.
a
.
p

\IIIII’IIEIl,iquV!-Ing H“ We.

 

91

in wording and points of emphasis were necessary before
the statement was considered operational.
geveIOpment_of the Data
Collecting Instrument

Since the critical inCident technique was utilized
for the purpose of soliciting instructional behavior, it
was necessary to develop a data collecting instrument4
that would proVide instructions with enough specificity
to assure that all respondents were following the same
rules for reporting incidents. The instrument was de-
signed to solicit two types of information: (1) basic data
concerning the respondent and (2) a record of reported
incidents of classroom and laboratory instructional be—
havior. The respondent's identity was left anonymous.

The characteristics of technical instructors as
drawn from the review of literature, provided a frame of
reference for the type of information that was included
in Part I of the "Basic Data" section of the data col-
lecting instrument. The diversity in the background of
Preparation and experience of technical instructors neces—
sitated a more detailed listing of teacher characteristics
than would have been needed for teachers in many other

subject areas. The basic data requested from the respondents

4See Appendix D for copy of the data collecting in-
strument.

 

4r

 

 

   

4

. ~
».

92

included: (1) professional preparation including degree
level, major and minor fields of preparation, where tech—
nical preparation was obtained, and the extent of prep—
aration in various subject areas; (2) teaching experience
including the number of years experience, subject area(s)
in which teaching experiences occurred, and the level(s)
of teaching experience; and (3) industrial experience in-
cluding the nature of work and years of experience.

Part II of the data collecting instrument was con-
cerned with reports of incidents including classroom and
laboratory instructional behavior. This section of the
instrument included: (1) general information including
a brief statement of the purpose of the study, a descrip—
tion of the critical incident technique, and criteria for
the selection of incidents to be reported; (2) a separate
record Sheet was provided for recording each effective and
ineffective incident. The statement of purpose of a
technical instructor and specific instructions were located
at the top of each Sheet for ready reference.

A pre-test of the instrument was conducted with a
select group of post—high school technical instructors
from the Vocational-Technical Institute, Southern Illinois
University. The responses received from the pre-test
resulted in revisions being made and the instrument devel-

OPEd in final form.

plu-

Viq

in

2C

0!-

‘vd-

 

 

93

The Population Used in the Study

The population from which data were collected was
limited to technical education instructors in Michigan
community colleges who met the following criteria for
selection: (1) were identified as full-time regular staff
members who were listed in the 1964-1965 college catalog
of their respective institutions and (2) were designated
as teaching in a post-high school college level technology
curriculum in either drafting—design technology, electric-
ity—electronics technology, or mechanical—industrial
technology. A total of sixty—eight technical instructors

met the above criteria.

The Collection of Incidents

An individually typed letterS describing the study
was sent to the chief administrator of each institution
where technical instructors were contacted. They were
appraised of the significance of the study and requested
to provide support and encouragement to the instructors
being asked to participate. At the Same time, a letter6

describing the study and soliciting support was sent to

5See Appendix E for copy of the letter to adminis—
trators.

. 6See Appendix F for COpy of the letter to technical
lnstructors.

n-a

.-

.5

.—~
.\~

.F—
.n a

Air
in.

pm.

a

.'~

'3!“

p
~
~‘

\
i

 

 

I! igtw‘?’ I. o

94
each instructor making up the population. One week later
a copy of the data collecting instrument7 was forwarded.
A total of four follow-ups were made.

1. One week following the mailing of the data—
collecting instrument a poStcard reminder was mailed
to the instructors who had not returned the instrument.

2. Two weeks following the postcard reminder a
second follow-up in the form of a letter9 was mailed.

3. A third follow—up letter10 and an original
data collecting instrument was mailed to all non-respond-
ents.

4. Ten days following the third follow-up a fourth
and final follow—up letterll was mailed. This letter
asked that the data collecting instrument be returned
or a personal interview be granted for the purpose of
discussing the study and collecting the data requested.

A self-addressed postcard was provided for the purpose of

scheduling convenient times for interviews.

7See Appendix D for copy of the data collecting
instrument.

8See Appendix G for COpy of postcard reminder.

9See Appendix H for copy Of second follow—up letter.

lOSee Appendix I for COpy of third follow-up letter.

11See Appendix J for copy of fourth follow—up letter.

M1: I; nan—r-"— —"A"—'—"""'—_‘ _

 

 

 

 

7“

'~

 

..‘

95

Two instructors indicated a willingness to grant a
personal interview. In both instances the instructor had
previously completed and returned the data collecting in—
strument. Since the instrument had been completed satis-
factorily, it was considered unnecessary to interview these
two instructors. The fourth follow—up concluded the data
collecting phase of the study with a total of thirty—eight
(56%) instructors having responded. Of this number thirty-

one (47%) provided usable returns.
II. DATA PROCESSING AND CLASSIFICATION

The general problem posed for this phase of the study
was the identification of behavioral acts and formulation
of the basic behavioral themes revealed in these acts that
would identify the instructional function of the instruc-
tors. This section of the study describes the data process-
ing procedures as follows: (1) analysis of the incidents,
(2) development of the classification system, and (3) cate—

gory formulation and development of the instructional grid.

£331YSis of the Incidents

Upon completion of the data collection phase, a
tOtal of 101 incidents involving teacher behavior had
been reported. Many of this number were detailed narra-
tives which in some instances incorporated a report of

more than one incident. The purpose of this study was

w p' —.—'¢_" mgr;

 

.v

(I)

 

AF‘

ar:

v--

 

p.‘

'l

\.“

 

96
to make an analysis of the classroom and laboratory
instructional function of technical instructors rather

than the identification of behaviors critical to the

success or failure of the instructor. Therefore, it was

considered unnecessary to identify the many separate be-

haviors that may have been incorporated into the writing

of some of the incidents. Instead, the important consid—

eration was that the Specific behaviors inherent in the

incidents should be distinguishable as either effective

or ineffective. It was necessary to keep the purpose

of the study foremost in mind throughout the entire process

of analysis and category formulation.

The first step in data processing and category
formulation was to extract each behavioral act where the
instructor was involved in the instructional function of

a teacher. An incorporation of the recommendations of

Flanagan,l2 Jensen,13 and the study of Critical Reguire-

mgnts for Research Personnel 4 resulted in the following

criteria being used as a basis for accepting or rejecting

incidents involving teacher behavior.

12 .
Flanagan, Op. Clt.

13Alfred C. Jensen, "Determining Critical Require—
ments for Teachers," Journalfigf Experimental Education,
XX (September 1951), PP- 77—86:

14American Institute for Research, Critical Re-
ggirements for Research Personnel (Pittsburg: American

Institute for Research, 1949), p. 18.

.,-.
.u—

“U
..
w.
‘A
_ .
‘i
a.
\
U
o.

Ell-III. it'll-II: lupiilu . aslhig 1“!

 

L..

L.
n b-

97

l. The incident described should be a report of
actual behavior.

2. Incidents Should be reports of observed or
experienced behavior.

3. Incidents should be clearly identified and
defined as effective or ineffective.

The preceding criteria was applied to each incident

reported and the instructional acts contained therein

were extracted and recorded on 3x5 cards, later to be

used in category formulation. In instances where a reported

incident contained more than one instructional act, each

act was recorded on a separate card which identified the

respondent, the incident, and whether it was considered

effective or ineffective. A total of 274 instructional

acts were extracted and considered as meeting the criteria

stated previously. Behavioral acts and information con—

tained on the 3x5 cards were then transferred to tabula—

tion cards15 which recorded additional information con»

cerning the educational background and experience of each

respondent. The cards made it possible to retrieve the

pertinent data needed for the various analyses conducted.

Qgrivation of the Classification

System

The second step in the data processing and category

formulation procedure was the develOpment of an appropriate

5See Appendix L for data tabulation card used for
recording data.

 

n."

v.4

II)
o 4
. o

:5-

-A-

~',
.n.

5r-

n...

.1?-

‘u.

'I
rl\

 

"P.

y...

F.

u.

\

H!
V

N

‘ .

 

98

classification system. A trial classification system was

constructed to serve as a guide in the development of cate-

gory formulation. The instructional acts which had been

extracted from the incidents involving effective and in-

effective teacher behavior were read carefully and the five

categories of teacher behavior presented by Ryans were
utilized as an initial system for ordering the data. These
(1) Motivat—

categories of teacher behavior were as follows:
ing-Reinforcing, (2) Presenting-Explaining, (3) Organizing—
Planning-Managing, (4) Evaluation, and (5) Counseling-
Advising.

This trial classification provided an estimate of
the range and types of behaviors that might be expected,

and in addition pointed out the necessity for continued

flexibility throughout the classification process. It

was necessary tO keep in mind that an apprOpriate classi-
fication system must "increase the usefulness of the data

while sacrificing as little as posSible of their compre-

hensiveness, specificity, and validity,"17

on this premise
and on the basis of information derived from the trial
classification, it was decided that the basic concept

involved in the categories of teacher behavior presented

16David G. Ryans, "Teacher Behavior and Research:
Implications for Teacher Education," The Journal of Teacher
Efiucatiog, XIV (September 1963).

l7Flanagan, op. cit., p. 344.

F"

Nfl

A‘

AA. .9
a s .

 

F
n... ... n. In p\-

“,‘\.’Lflrllvi|t'.l!. .3rfifi-W.

.O§

.
p
‘.

 

99

by Ryans18 could be adapted for use. The final basis for

category formulation included the following major cate-
gories (l) Presenting and Explaining, (2) Reinforcement

of Instruction, and (3) Ancillary Acts.-

Cate or Formulation and Develgpment
gf the Instructional Ofid I

Flanagan's 9 discussion of category formulation, as

well as studies utilizing the critical incident technique,
pointed out that the categories should not be considered
final once selected but should remain flexible throughout

the entire process. Even though three major categories

were identified to cover the entire range of behaviors, it

soon became apparent that there was a need for sub-cate—

gories to provide more specificity in grouping Similar

behaviors within the major categories. Here again, the

basic system presented by Ryans was drawn upon as a

basis for developing the additional categories to be used

in further classification of the data. This resulted in

each of the major categories being further divided into

two specific categories.

 

8 .
Ryans, op. Cit.
19Flanagan, Op. cit., p. 343.

20 .
Ryans, Op. Cit.

100
The need for further steps in the classification

procedure and subsequent category formulation was recog—

nized. In discussing the problem of category formulation

Flanagan made the following statement:

NO simple rules are available, and the quality
and usability of the final product are largely de-
pendent on the skill and sophistication of the
formulator. One rule is to submit the tentative
categories to others for review. Although there
is no guarantee that results agreed on by several
workers will be more useful than those obtained
from a single worker, the confirmation of judg-
ments by a number of persons is usually reassur-

ing. 21
On the basis of this suggestion four analysts, in

addition to the investigator, were utilized in the category

formulation process. The analysts independently classified

each instructional acts under one of the three major

categories. In addition, each act was further classified

into one of the specific categories listed under the major

category headings. If the behavior could not be readily

assigned to a major category or Specific category, a
revision in the system was made by broadening an existing

category or adding a new one. This resulted in the addition

of the major element as another level of classification.
There were a few instances where an instructional act may
well have been classified under one or more of the cate-

gories. In such instances the primary intent or purpose

21Flanagan, Op. cit., p. 344.

 

Lr_."

l

A.

.n

11’

a.

v,-

'I-

 

101
of the Specific behavior determined the category to which
it was assigned. Finally, the definitions for all cate-
gories and sub—categories were reexamined in terms of the
actual instructional acts classified under each.

Utilizing the major categories, specific categor-
ies, and major elements previously discussed, an Instruc-
tional Grid was developed for the purpose of analyzing the
data. This Grid was utilized as a frame of reference for
all analyzes of instructional behavior in answering the
various questions prOposed in the study. The Instruc—
tional Grid is presented in Chapter IV.

III. PROCEDURES FOR ANALYSIS AND
INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA

In this phase Of the study procedures for analyzing
and interpreting the data were established. The follow—
ing section describes the procedures: (1) questions to
be answered by the study, (2) analyses and treatment of

data, and (3) hypotheses to be tested.

Qgestions to be Answered

For purposes of analyzing the data a restatement
Of the initial questions were considered.

1. What is the order of importance of the various
instructional functions of engineering technology instruc-

tors?

i

 

 

D'A-

(I)

ox.

D

5..

~V

102

2. What relationships exist between the reported
instructional acts and certain characteristics of the
respondents?

3. What behaviors do engineering technology in-
structors report that demonstrate their effectiveness in
classroom and laboratory instruction (a) when classified
as a group and (b) when classified according to certain
characteristics?

4. What behaviors do engineering technology in-
structors report that demonstrate their ineffectiveness
in classroom and laboratory instruction (a) when classif-
ied as a group, and (b) when classified according to certain
characteristics?

5. What inferences will the investigations and
analysis proposed in this study produce for curriculum

develOpment in technical teacher education?

Apalysis and Treatment of Data

The procedures and analyses were conducted to
Provide answers to the above questions and were carried
out in three stages as follows:

1. An analysis of the categories and sub-categories
0f the Instructional Grid for the purpose of determining
bOth the number of respondents reporting the act and the
frequency with which the various behavioral acts were

reported by the total group of respondents.

381.”;wa-

n+1“

.r-v

l
(h

' t
(I)

‘A

v-

G‘—

a...

‘r‘
m.

r V‘
l'r’

103

2. An analysis to determine the rank order of the
instructional behaviors.

3. Tests of hypotheses to determine relationships
between categories of the Instructional Grid and (l) the
respondents as a group and (2) according to certain char-
acteristics.

The statistical method employed to test the Signif—
icance of these relationships was the Chi square test.
This method was chosen because the data were quantitative
and non-parametric. The null hypothesis was rejected if
the Table of Percentiles22 Showed that the value of Chi

square attained or exceeded a significance level of .05.

Hypotheses to be Tested

The hypotheses to be tested were stated in null
hypothesis form and classified into two categories: (1)
frequency with which behavioral acts were reported and

(2) effectiveness and ineffectiveness Of instructional

behavior.

A. Egegueggy With Which Behavioral Acts Were
Reported

1. There is no significant difference in the
frequency with which the respondents re-
ported each of the thirteen major elements
of instructional behavior when paired ac-
cording to the technical teaching areas
mechanical—industrial and drafting-design.

22 . .
Allen L. Edwards, Statistical Methods for the

gphavioral Sciences (New YOrk: Rinehart and Company,
nc., 1958), p. BOO.

104

2. There is no significant difference in the
frequency with which the respondents re—
ported each Of the thirteen major elements
of instructional behavior when paired ac—
cording to the technical teaching areas
mechanical-industrial and electricity-
electronics. ‘

3. There is no Significant difference in the
frequency with which the respondents re—
ported each of the thirteen major elements
of instructional behavior when paired ac-
cording to the technical teaching areas
drafting~design and electricity-electronics.

4. There is no significant difference in the
frequency with which the respondents re—
ported each of the thirteen major elements
of instructional behavior when paired ac-
cording to professional preparation.

5. There is no significant difference in the
frequency with which the respondents re-
ported each of the thirteen major elements
of instructional behavior when paired ac-
cording to undergraduate majors.

6. There is no significant difference in the
frequency with which the respondents re-
ported each of the thirteen major elements
of instructional behavior when paired ac-
cording to levels of teaching experience.

Effectiveness and Ineffectiveness of Instruc—
tional Behavior AI

1. There is no significant difference in the
frequency with which the respondents re—
ported acts involving effective and in-
effective behavior for each of thirteen
major elements of instructional behavior.

2. There is no significant difference in the
frequency with which the respondents re-
ported effective and ineffective behaviors
for each of the six Specific categories of
instructional behavior when paired accord—
ing to the technical teaching areas, mechan-
ical-industrial and drafting-design.

105

3. There is no significant difference in the
frequency with which the respondents re-
ported effective and ineffective behaviors
for each of the six Specific categories
of instructional behavior when paired ac-
cording to the technical teaching areas,
mechanical-industrial and electricity-
electronics.

4. There is no significant difference in the
frequency with which the respondents re-
ported effective and ineffective behaviors
for each of the six specific categories
of instructional behavior when paired ac—
cording to the technical teaching areas,
drafting-design and electricity—electronics.

5. There is no significant difference in the
frequency with which the respondents re-
ported effective and ineffective behaviors
for each of the Six Specific categories
of instructional behavior when paired ac-
cording to professional preparation.

6. There is no significant difference in the
frequency with which the respondents re—
ported effective and ineffective behaviors
for each of the six specific categories
of instructional behavior when paired ac—
cording to undergraduate majors.

7. There is no significant difference in the
frequency with which the respondents re-
ported effective and ineffective behaviors
for each of the six specific categories of

instruCtional behavior when paired accord—
ing to levels of teaching experience.

SUMMARY

The procedures, instrumentation, and methodology em-
p10Yed in the colleCtion, analysis, and interpretation of

the data were described in this chapter.

 

I
‘u.

."

F.

u
~n“

 

106

The first section of the chapter presented the fol—
lowing precedures for collecting the data: (1) the devel-
opment of a general statement of purpose for the activity
being studied, (2) the development of the data collecting
instrument, (3) the population used in the study, and (4)
the collection of incidents of teacher behavior.

The second section Of the chapter presented the
following procedures for processing the data: (1) the
analysis of reported incidents into Specific acts of ef-
fective and ineffective teacher behavior, (2) the devel—
opment of a classification system for ordering the data,
and (3) the formulation of categories in the form of an
Instructional Grid for the purpose of grouping the data
for statistical analysis.

The third section of the chapter presented the fol-
lowing procedures for analyzing and interpreting the
data: (1) questions to be answered, (2) analysis and

treatment of the data, and (3) hypotheses to be tested.

rc.r‘x

mu: '5 a

 

' I
3’5 '
IAI“

‘v
:—
..\ 6.

y

A. -4

 

 

 

.
\b‘
5
~‘- A
4.... A
~ (
v
‘.
‘ u
v
5 c
'u ".
“.‘
‘.
,.
. "x
\ a

CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

The preceding chapter described the procedures,
instrumentation, and methodology employed tithe collection,
analysis, and interpretation of the data presented in the
study. This chapter will provide an analysis and inter—
pretation of these data as follows: (1) the Instructional
Grid and procedures for analysis, (2) an analysis of the
categories and sub—categories of the Grid, (3) a summary
analysis of the Grid to determine instructional acts
reported most frequently, (4) tests of the stated hypotheses,
and (5) a summary of the analyses and interpretations made

from the data.
I. THE INSTRUCTIONAL GRID

The Instructional Grid was of major importance be-
cause it determined the form in which the data were
classified. The Grid was composed of three major cate-
gories that described teacher behavior. Each Of these
major categories was divided into two specific categories
with subsequent major elements which provided more Specifi—
CitY in describing the data. The various categories and
sub-categories of the Instructional Grid were used as a
frame of reference for all analyses of data conducted through—

OUt this chapter. The Instructional Grid is presented in

Figure l. 107

. . . 1:. L I I-uu ' .A.. - FrLr‘h I I .rLfK r $.I\.—LI~ u...~L~. h F.«r~r.~r..v> O I

u

 

 

 

 

.fv_<.~.- Muz<0 ZA,U~,.~.-4~.V—.~.uuz~ Inna .~.2u.-\cw.-.av-fiv..-z~u.~.v~l 4.z~ z~ (V\~.w..r«4..~ «~z< ...Z~.~.2...~ufi..~»~.~l

108

mQchcoHpmHmm
ucmpsumlumnumme

mcflawmcsou

 

mcowumem HOCOmummumpCH

OCHCCMHQ >Hfimo

mCHccmHm mmcmm ocoq...

 

coeuusuumCH pom coaum
Immum UGO mdflccmflm..

 

WBU< Nm<Q4HUZ<w

.pwuo mru mo mucmsmam scams...
.OHHD or» mo mmfluommumu UHwHumom..
.ofluo mcu mo mmfluommpmu nonmz.

OHMO AOCOHuusuumcH .H musmflm

cofluum
IMOQCH ucmozumlumcumme

pcmE
Immmcmz HMCOApusupmcH

 

ucmecoufl>cm mmflcummd
mucmumflwm< HOSOH>HOCH
COHumsam>m

acme
Icmflmm< UGO COHpOUflHQQ<...

 

COHuusuumCH mo QDIBOHHoms.

 

ZOHBUDmBmZH LO BZMEMUmOhZHmms

mOH< HmcofluusupmcH

coaumuumsoemo

 

coauusupm
,ICH m>aumsuomumm HOQMO>

mmuzouumpCH
amnum> ucmosumlumcumwe

GWMSOUWHD HMQH$> «HMSUMMB; O Q

 

cofluuzuumCH Hmnum>..

 

UZHZH¢QQXM Q24 UZHBZMWMKQ.

.Ar

OV-

‘Fl
‘.,_

 

“r

ME

l .Js

‘II

‘J.

109
Procedures for Analysis of Data

Once the behavioral acts had been classified and
grouped into the proper categories Of the Instructional
Grid it was then possible to make certain analyses of the
data whereby answers to the Specific questions proposed
for the study could be ascertained. These analyses were
carried out in three stages as follows: (1) ananalysis
of the categories and sub-categories of the Instruction
Grid, (2) a summary analysis Of the Grid to determine
instructional acts reported most frequently, and (3)
tests of hypotheses to determine relationships between
categories of the Grid and (a) respondents as a group
and (b) according to certain characteristics.

The first stage of theermlysis was to make a fre-
quency count of the behavioral acts classified in each
major category, specific category, and major element of
the Grid. From this analysis it was possible to determine
the number and percent of respondents who reported the
behavior and the number and percent of behavioral acts
reported for each classification. The first stage in the
data analysis is reported in Section II of this chapter.

The second stage in the analysis of data was to
determine the instructional acts reported most frequently
by the respondents. This particular analysis of the data
established the rank order of the frequency with which

the total group of respondents reported the various behaviors

llO
associated with classroom and laboratory instruction.
Those behaviors were first ranked by major categories,
then by specific categories, and.thirdby major elements
of the Instructional Grid. The Second stage of the data
analysis is reported in Section III of this chapter.

The third stage in the analysis of data was that
of testing hypotheses to determine relationships between
categories of the Grid and (l) the respondents as a group
and (2) according to certain characteristics. This analy-
sis was concerned with all behaviors, whether effective
or ineffective as well as the frequency with which they
were used. A frequency count of all behaviors classified
under each heading of the Instructional Grid and an analy-
sis of the behaviors according to certain characteristics
of the respondents provided a basis for statistical analy-
sis of the data. The third stage in the data analysis is
reported in Section IV.

II. ANALYSIS OF THE CATEGORIES AND
SUB-CATEGORIES OF THE GRID

A description and brief discussion of each section
Of the grid is given in the following paragraphs. This
description provides an account of each classification of
the Instructional Grid and are presented as follows: (1)
analysis of the major category Presenting and Explaining,

(2) analysis of the major category Reinforcement of

.1“

fl...

V.
hr;

ta

Ft”
‘5-

v .

it ~

{7
n ‘5

111

Instruction, and (3) analysis of the major category
Ancillary Acts.
Analysis of the Major Categogy
Presegtifig anthxplaining

This category of the Instructional Grid was used
to classify the formal or structured behaviors used by the
respondents for the primary purpose of disseminating sub—
ject matter information. An analysis of the major cate—
gory Presenting and Explaining identified a total of 101
behavioral acts or 36.9 percent of all behavioral acts
(See Appendix M for sample listing). Thirty (93.8%) of
the respondents reported acts involving this form of
instruction. This category ranked first among the three
major categories of the Instructional Grid. The major
category Presenting and Explaining was divided into two
specific categories: (1) Verbal Instruction and (2)
Verbal Performative Instruction. The section of the Grid
that describes this major category is presented in Table 2.

Verbal Instruction. Within this specific category
were classified all behavioral acts where the respondents
used some form of verbal communication in the formal pres—
entation of instruction. Fifty-seven behavioral acts
were classified in this category. This represented 20.8
percent of all behavioral acts Twenty-eight (87.5%) of
the respondents reported acts where verbal means of pres—

enting instruction were utilized. Verbal Instruction

I...
f'
v

OK!

112

Frequency With Which InStructional Behaviors
Were Reported Under the Major Category "Pres-

enting and Explaining"

Table 2.

Frequency Reported

 

 

 

 

 

o 9‘ u a
o l u c l
.p > U) (U O-‘J
H La LH r0 m «U 94 0.54
m cc) or:+: meccm o m<3
0:40. OLJU ocvc mil
0 m -p43a1w 'Ow4.us4a)u
quw c p L4C4J c LJU
. ,8?” 873763 38.23 8'3.“
BehaVioral Acts En“ ,4th Ewe. “gym
SGJU w<3c>o SQJO a)o;:c
:zrzm m-quu z HS4¢l4JQhH
PRESENTING AND EXPLAINING 101 36.9 30 93.8
Verbal Instruction 57 20.8 28 87.5
Teacher Verbal Discourse 37 13.5 24 75.0
Teacher—Student Verbal
Intercourse 20 7.3 16 50.0
Verbal Performative In—
struction 44 16.1 19 59.4
Demonstration 18 6.6 11 . 34.4
26 9.5 15 46.9

Instructional Aid

NOTE: The first and second columns give the number and
percent of behavioral acts classified under each

heading. These numbers total upward to the specific
categories and major category headings.

The third and fourth columns give the number and
percent of respondents who reported acts under
each heading. These numbers and percentages can-

not be totaled upward.

r;'

A‘-

I I'D

(n
(D

(In
(I)

ha

~y'

5 .

bn'

L»

t.

is.

: :I
All

 

 

113
ranked first among the six specific categories of the
Instructional Grid. This specific category was further
divided into the following major elements for more
specificity in describing instructional acts: (1) Teacher
Verbal Discourse and (2) Teacher-Student Verbal Intercourse.

The major element Teacher Verbal Discourse was
selected to classify all acts involving one-way communica-
tion on the part of the instructor. There were thirty-
seven (13.5%) behavioral acts reported within this section
of the Grid. Twenty—four (75%) of the respondents re-
ported acts in which they engaged in this form of instruc-
tional behavior. Of all the major elements, Teacher Verbal
Discourse was reported most frequently.

The major element Teacher—Student Verbal Intercourse was
used to classify all acts involving two-way communication
between teacher and student when used in the context of
primarily "verbal" means of presenting instruction. Twenty
acts were reported that met this criteria for classifica-
tion. This represented 7.3 percent of all acts reported.
Sixteen (50%) of the respondents reported incidents that
involved acts of Teacher-Student Verbal Intercourse. This
major element ranked third among the four major elements
classified under the major category Presenting and Explain-

ing.

 

,.
N:
.

VA

 

.i

'H
\-

A.
‘5

 

 

 

114

Verbal Performative Instruction. This specific
category of the Instructional Grid classified all acts in
which the respondents used a combination of verbal and
performance behavior in formal (structured) presentation
of instruction. An analysis of this specific category
identified forty-four behavioral acts, or 16.1 percent
of all acts. A total of nineteen (59.4%) respondents
listed acts in which they utilized a combination of verbal
and performance behavior in the presentation of instruc-
tion. This specific category ranked fourth among the
six specific categories of the Instructional Grid. Verbal
Performative Instruction was further divided into two major
elements: (1) Demonstration and (2) Instructional Aids.

Within the major element Demonstration were clas-
sified behaviors where the reSpondents presented formal
(structured) instruction by using the demonstration method.
Eighteen behavioral acts, representing 6.6 percent of all
acts, were clasified under the major elementof the Grid.
There were eleven (34.4%) respondents who reported acts
involving Demonstration as a method of presenting instruc-
tion. This major element ranked fourth among the four
major elements classified under the major category Pres-
enting and Explaining.

Within the major element Instructional Aids were
classified all acts involving the use of instructional

aids such as films, chalkboard, models, duplicated materials,

n\1u

Cy.
...

. u
nkh

U
n\~

115

and the like as means of presenting and explaining sub-
ject matter in the classroom and laboratory. There
were twenty—six acts reported under this heading. This
represented 9.5 percent of all acts. Fifteen (46.9%) of
the respondents reported the use of instructional aids
in their teaching. The use of instructional aids ranked
second among the four major elements classified under the
major category Presenting and Explaining.
énalysis of the Majpr Category
Reinforcement of Instruction

The previous major category Presenting and Explain-
ing provided an analysis of those acts in which the in-
structor was primarily engaged in the presentation of
subject matter information and/or skills associated with
a particular technical subject area. The major category
Reinforcement of Instruction was used to classify acts
where the instructor was involved in an extension of the
more formal aspects of the teaching-learning process
where less structured forms of teacher behavior were in—
volved. An analysis of the major category Reinforcement
Of Instruction identified a total of eighty-seven be—
havioral acts (See Appendix M for sample listing). This
represented 31.7 percent of all acts. Twenty-seven (84.3%)
respondents reported acts involving this major category

Of the Grid. This major category ranked second to the

Fr

.9

- r

on.

(1')

'rl

m...

-..~
.

4....

 

I'll

A
~‘.
'3

116
previous category Presenting and Explaining in both the
total acts reported and the number of respondents report—
ing acts classified under this heading. The major cate—
gory Reinforcement of Instruction was divided into two
specific categories: (1) Follow—Up of Instruction and
(2) Learning Environment. The section of the Instruc—
tional Grid that describes this major category is pres-
ented in Table 3.

Follow-Up of Instruction. Within this Specific
category were classified all acts in which the respond-
ents were active in providing classroom and laboratory
experiencesthat would give meaning and develOp further
understandings of the concepts and information presented
in the more structured aspects of teaching. There were
fifty-two behavioral acts classified in this specific
category. This represented 18.9 percent of all acts.
Twenty—two (68.7%) respondents reported acts that were
identified and classified under this heading. Follow-up
activities of the instructor ranked third among the six
specific categories of the Instructional Grid. The
specific category Follow—Up of Instruction was further
divided into three major elements: (1) Application and
Assignment, (2) Evaluation, and (3) Individual Assistance.

The major element Application and Assignment pro-
vided for the classification of acts in which the respond—

ents were involved in the reinforcement of instruction.

117

Table 3. Frequency With Which Instructional Behaviors Were
Reported Under the Major Category "Reinforcement

of Instruction"

 

 

Frequency Reported

__L_L
rfi,_,

 

 

 

 

O+J l
O o O O
m H o c I
u > Q m 0-U
equ 44m 0 u lHILH
44m<3 012w ”4:10 0020
oxao. m on): Q’Q
on) 4Jr2m 13H +lu01u
Luv-1&4 C P MCJJ C. MU
831.8735? 888 833..”
Behavioral Acts 553p LLU ELQQAJ M4J+30
DGJU QJOF4U zip or) m<3c1c
2:O¢u m-unsm z ux4m 0.9 mw+
REINFORCEMENT OF INSTRUCTION 87 31.7 27 84.3
Follow-Up of Instruction 52 18.9 22 68.7
Application and Assign—
ment 24 8.8 15 46.8
Evaluation 18 6.6 11 34.3
Individual Assistance 10 3.5 7 21.8
Learning Environment 35 12.8 18 56.2
Instructional Manage-
ment 23 8.4 12 37.5
Teacher-Student Inter—
action 12 4.4 11 34.3

NOTE: The first and second columns give the number and
percent of behavioral acts classified under each
heading. These numbers and percentages total up—
ward to the specific category and major category

headings.

The third and fourth columns give the number and
percent of respondents who reported acts classified
under each heading. These number and percentages

cannot be totaled upward.

118
More specifically, acts involving the various techniques
and procedures utilized by the instructors whereby stu-
dents had an opportunity to make further investigations
and application of things learned were classified under
this heading. There were twenty—four behavioral acts
classified in this major element. This accounted for 8.8
percent of all acts. Fifteen (46.9%) respondents reported
incidents in which behaviors of this nature were identif-
ied. The major element Application and Assignment ranked
first among the five major elements under the specific
category Reinforcement of Instruction.

A11 acts where the behavior was primarily that of
evaluating students' classroom and laboratory achievements
were classified under the major element Evaluation. Eighteen
behavioral acts were identified for this section of the
Instructional Grid, representing 6.6 percent of all acts.
There were eleven (34.3%) respondents who reported inci-
dents in which acts involving evaluation were identified.
Evaluation ranked third among the five major elements
listed under the major category Reinforcement of Instruc-
tion.

Those acts reported in which the respondents were
described as providing further clarification of concepts,
remedial instruction, constructive criticism and sugges-
tions in the form of individualized instruction were

classified under the major element Individual Assistance.

“A

not

qu

fl!

6d

'
‘..

(I!

"v

A

‘7

-
‘-

 

119
On the basis of the incidents reported it would appear
that the respondents did not consider this to be as im-
portant as other classroom and laboratory instructional
aCtivities. It was ranked the lowest of all the major
elements reported, both in the number of acts and the
number of respondents reporting incidents involving the
act. There were ten behavioral acts identified in this
major element, representing 3.6 percent of all acts
reported. Seven (21.8%) of the respondents reported
incidents involving Individual Assistance. This may be
attributed to the fact that in some instances the primary
intent of the act may have caused it to be classified in
another category.

Learning Environment. This specific category was
used in the Instructional Grid to classify acts where the
instructor was described as making a conscious attempt at
providing and maintaining a classroom and laboratory
environment conducive to learning. It was recognized that
"environment" is an all—pervasive phenomenon that is pres—
ent, to some degree either positively or negatively, in
all teaching situations and instructional activities in
which teachers engage. However, this specific category
and the acts classified therein were limited to those
individual behaviors Specifically described as contribut—
ing to the classroom and laboratory environment. Thirty-

five acts were reported that met this criteria. This

120
represented 12.8 percent of all acts. Eighteen (56.2%)
respondents reported incidents involving acts of this
nature. Learning Environment ranked fiffliamong the Six
specific categories of the Instructional Grid. This
specific category was divided into two major elements
for the purpose of further classification: (1) Instruc-
tional Management, and (2) Teacher—Student Interaction.

The major element Instructional Management served
to classify acts in which the instructor played a major
role in stimulating learning through the kinds of ex-
periences provided in the classroom and laboratory. Listed
below are examples of the types of behavioral acts classif-
ied under this heading.

1. Provides situations that challenge and encour—
age initiative and creativity in problem solving,exper-
imentation, and scientific inquiry.

2. Provides situations in which much of the respon-
sibility for learning is placed upon the student.

3. Provides Opportunities for group work and team
efforts in researching and arriving at a solution to a
problem.

There were twenty-three acts identified and classif-
ied under this heading of the Instructional Grid. This
represented 8.4 percent of all acts. Twelve (37.5%)
reSpondents reported incidents that included behavioral

acts of this nature. Instructional Management ranked

ea

5.”.

l
n):

ON

«a

It—
(I!

:4-
(D

.1

i .

 

,1;
1

121
second among the five major elements listed under the
major category Reinforcement of Instruction.

The major element Teacher-Student Interaction was
concerned primarily with those teacher—student inter-*
actions that occurred within the classroom and laboratory
and contributed to the learning environment. There were
twelve acts classified under this heading of the Instruc—
tional Grid. This number represented 4.4 percent of the
total acts. Eleven (34.3%) respondents reported incidents
in which acts fitting this classification were listed.
This major element ranked fourth, slightly above Individual
Assistance, among the five major elements classified under
Reinforcement of Instruction, in both the number of acts
identified and the number of respondents reporting inci-
dents involving such acts. From the incidents reported
it would appear that acts involving Teacher-Student Inter—
action in the classroom and laboratory teaching situation
were not as prevalent as many of the other behavioral
acts in which teachers engaged-

ADalysis of the Major Categgry
Ancillary Acts

The two previous major categories analyzed behaviors
where the respondents were directly involved in the teach—
ing-learning process within the classroom and laboratory
environment. The major category Ancillary Acts provided
an analysis of behaviors that served as support functions

for the instructional activities previously analyzed and

 

AA,
'V‘

A
o l

~‘1

c-

-u

A..;

[1'
i

"V

I"

we.

‘s.

‘-

122
discussed. Only those acts identified as making a direct
contribution to the instructional behavior of the instruc—
tor were analyzed and recorded in this major category.

An analysis of the major category Ancillary Acts
identified eighty—six behavioral acts that met the criteria
cited above (See Appendix M for sample listing). This
represented 31.4 percent of all acts. Twenty—six (81.2%)
respondents reported incidents involving acts classified
under this major category. This category ranked third
among the three major categories of the Instructional
Grid inlxflilthe number of acts identified and the number
of respondents reporting the act. However, there was such
a slight difference between this category and the second
ranked category,Reinforcement Of Instruction,that the
importance Of Ancillary Acts cannot be overlooked when
considering the total realm of teacher behavior. The major
category Ancillary Acts was divided into two specific cate—
gories: (1) Planning and Preparation for Instruction and
(2) Interpersonal Relations. The section Of the Grid
that describes this major category is presented in Table 4.

Planning and Preparation for Instruction. This
specific category of the Instructional Grid classified
all behavioral aCts where the respondents were involved
in making plans and preparations for instruction directly
related to his role as director of the teaching—learning

Process. Fifty-seven behavioral acts met this criteria

h

4..

123
Table 4. Frequency With Which Instructional Behaviors

Were Reported Under the Major CategoryuAncillary
Acts"

W

Frequency Reported

 

 

 

 

 

B I O
o O 4) T3C
m o u c~4
u mro 043
H “HI—4L1 4.) 449.54
m m ()m 0 44C m 0090
os4e uci o or: m o
uw4w cw4w s4c-u c O
Q):>L4 (11> (DOS-a (DH
. bruo Ocum .QCLO Oran
BehaVioral Acts 85:0. urzp EUJQ. O+Ju44
301m OGJU SQJO mC)C(J
zen mom zuu meow
ANCILLARY ACTS 86 31.4 26 81.2
Planning and Prepara—
tion for Instruction 57 20.9 23 71.8
Long Range Planning 22 8.1 14 43.7
Daily Planning 35 12.8 19 59.3
Interpersonal Relations 29 10.5 18 56.2
Counseling 19 6.9 13 I 40.6
Teacher—Student
Relationships 10 3.6 9 28.1

 

NOTE: The first and second columns give the number and
percent of behavioral acts classified under each
heading. These numbers and percentages total up—
ward to the Specific category and major category
headings.

The third and fourth columns give the number and
percent of respondents who reported acts classif-
ied under each heading. These numbers and percent-
ages cannot be totaled upward.

A 1..

._‘

’5.

up.

 

IN‘

I\U

‘-

124

and were classified under this heading. This represented
20.9 percent of all acts. There were twenty—three (71.8%)
respondents who reported incidents involving such acts.
This category ranked second among the six specific cate-
gories of the Instructional Grid. From the data presented,
it would appear that Planning and Preparation for Instruc-
tion was considered one Of the more important teacher
behaviors. The specific category Planning and Preparation
for Instruction was further divided into two major ele-
ments: (1) Long Range Planning and (2) Daily Planning.

Under the heading Long Range Planning were classif—
ied all acts involving the overall organization and planning
of courses. There were twenty-two acts identified under
this heading, representing 8.1 percent of the total acts.
Fourteen (43.7%) requondents reported incidents in which
behavioral acts were identified as fitting this classifica-
tion. This element ranked second among the four major
elements classified under the major category Ancillary Acts.

It was under the major element Daily Planning that
all acts involving the day—to-day tasks of organizing,
Fflanning, and preparing for instruction were classified.
Daily planning and preparation for instruction ranked
second among the thirteen major elements of the Instruc—
tional Grid, in both the total number of acts identified
and the number of respondents reporting incidents involv-

ing the act. There were thirty—five behavioral acts

't’

v.)

“I

(I)

(I)

I:

125

identified under this major element. This represented 12.8
percent of all acts. Nineteen (59.3%) respondents reported
incidents in which acts of this nature were identified.
From the data it would appear that daily planning and
preparation for instruction was considered of primary im—
portance in the total instructional activities of the in-
structors.

Interpersonal Relations. This Specific category
of the Instructional Grid served to classify day-to—day
interpersonal relationships between teachers and students.
More Specifically, it was used to classify all interper—
sonal relationships outside of the classroom setting. An
analysis of incidents resulted in twenty—nine behavioral
acts being classified in the specific category Interpersonal
Relations, or 10.5 percent of all acts. Eighteen (56.2%)
respondents reported incidents involving interpersonal
relations with students. Although this specific category
was not mentioned as frequently as other categories of
the Instructional Grid, it would appear from the number
of responses that this area of instructor behavior was a
part of the day—to—day activities. The Specific category
Interpersonal Relations was divided into two major ele-
ments: (1) Counseling and (2) Teacher-Student Relationships.

Under the major element Counseling were classified
all acts in which instructors were involved in structured

or Spontaneous, individual or group counseling situations.

126
Within this context were classified all acts involving
occupational, educational, and social problems and situa-
tions associated with the counseling function. There
were nineteen behavioral acts classified under this head—
ing. This number represented 6.9 percent of all acts.
Thirteen (40.6%) respondents reported incidents in which
acts of this classification were listed. The counseling
activities reported by the respondents were primarily
concerned with providing occupational information pertain—
ing to the specific technical areas. This category ranked
third among the four major elements listed under the major
category Ancillary Acts.

Within the major element Teacher-Student Relation—
ships were classified acts involving teacher-student inter—
personal relationships that transpired outside the formal
structure of the classroom and laboratory environment.
There were ten behavioral acts reported under this head—
ing, representing 3.6 percent of all acts. Nine (28.1%)
respondents reported incidents involving acts listed under
this classification. On the basis of these data it would
appear that the respondents were less frequently engaged
in informal teacher-student relationships than other types

of teacher behaviors.

 

.y

“xvi

VI

in

.\~

 

as.
I.

127
III. SUMMARY ANALYSIS OF THE GRID TO DETERMINE
INSTRUCTIONAL ACTS REPORTED MOST FREQUENTLY
The three major categories of the Instructional Grid

with subsequent sub-categories, have been analyzed in the
previous sections of this chapter. Although the previous
discussions did relate the comparative frequency with which
certain behavioral acts occurred, no attempt was made to
present the total rank order of the frequency with which
the respondents reported the various acts. It was decided
that an analysis of the total Grid would serve to con—
solidate the data of the previous sections and more
specifically would provide answers to the following ques—
tion; What is the rank order of importance of the various
instructional functions reported by engineering technology
instructors? This section describes the procedures as
follows: (1) procedures for ranking the data and (2)

instructional acts classified by rank order.

Procedures for Ranking the Data

Since there were differences in both the number of
respondents reporting acts in each category and in the
number of behavioral acts reported by each respondent,
it was necessary to utilize a correction formula that
would take these factors into account before rank ordering
Of the data could be accomplished. The formula pres~
ented produced an index number for each category of the

Instructional Grid, that in turn was converted into the

on ”—.wsd

(J

‘Oo

128
rank order of frequency with which acts were reported.

correction formula

 

 

NO. respondents a. ~3L;No. acts reported
~ reporting acts for l for the category
the category __ '
Index No. = Total No. respond- .X Total acts reported
ents (32) (274)

Instructional Acts Classified
by Rank Order

The major categories, specific categories, and major
elements of the Instructional Grid are presented in Table
5 by rank order of the frequency with which the acts were
reported.

Major Categories. Presenting and Explaining was
ranked first among the major categories of the Instruc-
tional Grid. All but two of the respondents reported
incidents in whth the instructor was engaged in this form
of instructional activity.

Although Reinforcement of Instruction ranked second
among the major categories of the Grid, there was such a
slight difference between it and the third ranked cate-
gory Ancillary Acts that no further attempt was made to
differentiate between the two. However, there were ele-
ments within each of these two classifications that Showed

greater differentiation as the Grid was further analyzed.

129

Table 5. Instructional Behaviors Classified by Rank Order
of Frequency Mentioned

Rank order by categor—
ies and sub—categories
of the Instructional Grid

Behavioral Acts Major Specific Major
Category Category Element

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PRESENTING AND EXPLAINING l
Verbal Instruction 1
Teacher Verbal Discourse l
Teacher-Student Verbal Inter- 5
course
Verbal Performative Instruction 4
Demonstration 9
Instructional Aids 3
REINFORCEMENT OF INSTRUCTION 2
Follow-Up of Instruction 3
Application and Assignment 4
Evaluation 10
Individual Assistance 13
Learning Environment 5
Instructional Management 7
Teacher-Student Interaction 11
ANCILLARY ACTS 3
Planning and Preparation
fgr Instruction 2
Long Range Planning 6
Daily Planning 2
Interpersonal Relations 6
Counseling 8

Teacher-Student Relationships 12

130

Specific Categories. The specific category Verbal
Instruction ranked first, with fifty—seven behavioral acts
identified, and all but four of the respondents reporting
acts under this heading. Planning and Preparation for
Instruction ranked second. The same number of acts were
reported for Verbal Instructions with five fewer respond-
ents reporting incidents involving the act. The specific
category Follow-Up of Instruction ranked third, followed
in order by the categories Verbal Performative Instruc—
tion, Learning Environment,and Interpersonal Relations.

Major Elements. Since the major elements were the
smallest division of the Instructional Grid, it was
through their use that more specificity was obtained in
identifying the various behavioral acts. It was possible
in the analysis of the major element to become more ac-
curate in interpreting the rank order of the frequency with
which behavioral acts were reported.

An analysis of the data indicated that the respond-
ents used Teacher Verbal Discourse, or lectured more fre—
quently than any other form of instructional behavior.
Daily Planning for instruction ranked second in terms of
acts reported as well as respondents reporting the act.
The third, fourth, and fifth ranked major elements of
the Instructional Grid were those associatalwith the
presentation and follow—up of instruction. The rank was

as follows: Instructional Aids, Application and ASSignment,

 

I

,1

r

LLI)

L]

H

131
and Teacher-Student Verbal Intercourse. Long Range Planning
and the major element Instructional Management ranked sixth
and sevendn Within the eighth ranked category,Counseling,
the respondents' involvement in interpersOnal relations
with students became apparent.

Contrary to what might have been expected for the
group being studied, demonstration, as a method Of instruc-
tion, ranked ninthin the frequency of mention as activit-
ies in which instructors were engaged. These data in—
dicated that demonstrations were used less frequently
than any other methodcn: technique of presenting instruc-
tion in classroom and laboratory teaching. Evaluation
ranked'Uathxnth regard to the frequency of times mentioned
by the respondents.

The three remaining major elements, Teacher-Student
Interaction, Teacher-Student Relationships, and Individual
Assistance ranked elevenflhtwelffll,and thirteenflnconsecutively.
It would appear from these data that instructors were en-
gaged less frequently in behaviors associated with close
teacher—student relationships than any other form Of
teacher activity.

In concluding this analysis it would appear that
behaviors in which the respondents were most frequently
engaged were those associated with the daily planning
and presentation of subject matter in structured teaching

situations. Also, it would appear that the respondents

3.

HI

I...

-\b

‘ I

F\v

M.

‘4'

. PMN. ..., N. .I.. §

II;

132
were less frequently engaged in working with students as

individuals.
IV. TESTS OF THE STATED HYPOTHESES

The primary purpose of this section was to establish
relationships between instructional behavior and certain
characteristics of the respondents. The specific hypothe—
ses to be tested were stated in Chapter III. Briefly,
the hypotheses can be classified into two broad categor—
ies: (l) the frequency with which behavioral acts were
reported and (2) the effectiveness and ineffectiveness
of instructional behavior.

The organization for the presentation of this
section is as follows: (1) procedures for testing the
hypotheses relating to the frequency with which behavioral
acts were reported, (2) hypotheses relating to the fre—
quency with which behavioral acts were reported, (3)
procedures for testing the hypotheses relating to the
effectiveness and ineffectiveness of instructional be—
havior, and (4) hypotheses relating to the effectiveness
and ineffectiveness of instructional behavior.

Brocedures for Testing the Hypotheses
Bfilatinq to the Frequency With Which
Bahavioral Acts Were Reported

In order to obtain as much specificity as possible

in describing the data, each of the thirteen major ele-

ments of the Instructional Grid were selected for statistical

u:

'I

.y‘nifis‘lg...

‘

133
analysis and tested against each of the hypotheses. The
primary purpose of the statistical analyses was to establish
relationships between the various characteristics of the
respondents and the individual classifications within the
Instructional Grid rather than for the total Grid itself.
The Chi square test of significance was used to test the
null hypotheses. In instances where there were differences
in the number of respondents within paired groups it was
necessary to make adjustments for these differences and
the effect this would have upon the expected frequencies
and the subsequent statistical calculations. This was
done by determining the total number of respondents in-
cluded in the two paired groups and calculating the percent—
age of respondents in each group. This constant (percent)
was utilized in calculating the expected frequencies for
all statistical analyses where the paired groups were

involved.23

Hypotheses Relatingjto the Fre-
gpency With Which Behavioral
Agts Were Reported
It was decided at the outset of the study that
the frame of reference within which all analyses and

interpretations of data were to be made would be primar-

ily concerned with its relevance to teacher education. In

h

23M.J. Moroney, Facts From Figures (London: Penguin
Books Ltd., 1957), pp. 246—252.

0’

v .

\ u

1"-

‘u

 

Fr,

'11..

II
N.

 

134

this same context it was decided that the establishment
of relationships between the various instructional ac-
tivities and certain characteristics of the respondents
would contribute to a more thorough understanding of the
instructor's role in classroom and laboratory instruction.
Therefore, the hypotheses relating to the frequency with
which behavioral acts were reported were posed for the
purpose of discovering which, if any, of the thirteen
major elements of instructional behavior appeared to be
related to certain characteristics of the respondents.
The respondents were paired according to technical teach-
ing areas and professional preparation and experience.
This resulted in six pairs of environmental relationships
to be tested against each of the thirteaimajor elements.
A total of seventy—eight statistical analyses were re-
quired. The hypotheses were organized and discussed as
follows: (1) hypotheses Al, technical teaching areas
(mechanical—industrial and drafting-design), (2) hypothesis
A2, technical teaching areas (mechanical-industrial and
electricitywelectronics), (3) hypothesis A3, technical
teaching areas (drafting—design and electricity-electron—
ics), (4) hypothesis A4, professional preparation, (5)
hypothesis A5, undergraduate majors,and (6) hypothesis
A5, levels of teaching experience.\\

All hypotheses will be reported, but only signifi—

cant findings will be discussed in this section. Findings

a. .

I.

‘1

V.

‘r

 

‘I-

\;

 

 

A‘i

135
for these hypotheses were considered Significant at the
.05 level if the calculated Chi Square values for observed
differences attained or exceeded the rejection value for
l d.f. of 3.84.

Hypothesis Al. There is no significant difference
in the frequency with which the respondents reported each
of the thirteen major elements of instructional behavior
when paired according to the technical teaching areas,
mechanical-industrial and drafting-design.

When each of the thirteen major elements of the
Instructional Grid were tested against the null hypothesis,
one was identified as being significant. An analysis of
the major element Long Range Planning and Preparation for
Instruction revealed that mechanical—industrial instruc—
tors reported significantly more acts classified_under
this heading than drafting—design instructors. In Table
6.1 it may be noted that mechanical-industrial instruc-
tors reported thirteen (10%) of the total 129 behavioral
acts within this major element while drafting-design
instructors reported three (4%) of the total seventy-five
behavioral acts.

The calculated Chi square for the observed differ—
ences was 4.139. This indicated that the differences
were significant at the .05 level, and called for rejection
Of the null hypothesis for this major element of the In—
structional Grid. The null hypothesis was accepted for

each of the remaining twelve major elements.

136

In summarizing the data analyses for Hypothesis A1,
it would appear that the mechanical-industrial instruc-
tors were involved more frequently in activities associated
with planning and preparation for instruction than draft-
ing-design instructors.

Hypothesis A2. There is no significant difference
in the frequency with which the respondents reported each
of the thirteen major elements of instructional behavior
when paired according to the technical teaching areas,
mechanical—industrial and electricity—electronics.

When each of the thirteen major elements of the
Instructional Grid were tested against the null hypothesis,
none were identified as having attained the value of 3.84
which would have been necessary for rejection at the .05
level. Therefore, the null hypothesis was accepted for
each of the thirteen elements of the Grid. .

Hypothesis A3. There is no significant difference
in the frequency with which the respondents reported each
of the thirteen major elements of instructional behavior
when paired according to the technical teaching areas,
drafting-design and electricity-electronics.

Two elements were identified as being significant
when each of the thirteen major elements were tested
against the null hypothesis. The two were as follows:

(1) Application and Assignment and (2) Daily Planning and

Preparation for Instruction.

i

 

Q.

 

s!

A.

ho

‘A

 

 

137

Table 6.2 reveals that electricity-electronics
instructors reported nine (12.9%) of the total seventy
behavioral acts within the major element Application and
Assignment as compared with three (4%) reported by draft—
ing—design instructors. The calculated Chi square for the
observed differences was 6.467, which indicated that the
differences were significant at the .02 level. However,
since the statistical analysis had but one criterion of
classification with only two categories, and one of the
expected frequencies was less than five, it was necessary
to use the binomial expansion (p+q)n to determine the
probability of obtaining the observed frequencies upon
the basis of the null hypothesis tested.24 This resulted
in rejection of the null hypothesis at the .05 level for
this major element of the Grid.

In Table 6.3 it may be noted that electricity-
electronics instructors reported thirteen (18.6%) of the
total seventy behavioral acts within the major element
Daily Planning and Preparation for Instruction, while
drafting—design instructors reported eight (10.7%). A
calculation of Chi square for the observed differences

amounted to 4.631, therefore, the null hypothesis for

24Allen L. Edwards, Statistical Methods for the
Eghavioral Sciences (New York: Rinehart and Company, Inc.,
1958), pp. 218—221 and p. 384.

138

Table 6. Significant Relationships Between the Fre-
quency With Which Major Elements of the In-
structional Grid Were Reported and the
Respondents When Paired According to Tech-
nical Teaching Areas.

Table 6.1. Major Element "Long Range Planning and Prepar—
ation for Instructiod‘and Respondents Paired
According to Technical Teaching Areas.

 

Teaching_Areas Behavioral Acts Percent

 

Obs.Freg. Exp.Freq;

 

Mechanical—Industrial (14)(129) 13 8.96 10
Drafting—Design (ll)(75) 3 7.04 4
(16) (16.00)
x2 = 4.139 1 d.f. p >.05

Table 6.2. Major Element "Application and Assignment" and
Respondents Paired According to Technical
Teaching Areas.

__~ .—

Teaching Areas Behavioral Acts Percent

Obs.Freq. Exp.Freg.

 

Drafting-Design (ll)(75) 3 7.3 4.0
Electricity—Electronics(7)(70) 9 A 4.7* 12.9
(12) (12.0)
x2 = 6.467 1 d.f. p 5.02 (.05):

*Expected frequency in one cell was less than 5,
therefore the binomial expansion (p+q) -was used. This
resulted in a significance level of (.05).

139

Table 6.3 Major Element "Daily Planning and Preparation
for Instruction" and Respondents Paired Ac-
cording to Technical Teaching Areas.

 

 

Teaching Areas Behavioral Acts Percent

Obs.Freg. Exp. Freg.

 

Drafting—Design (ll)(75) 8 12.81 10.7
Electricity-Electronics ( 7)(70) 13 8.19 18.6
(21) (21.00)
x2 = 4.631 1 d.f. p ;>.05
NOTE: The first parentheses following each technical teach-

ing area gives the number of respondents, the second
gives the total acts reported by the respondents.

The percent column refers to the percentage of total
acts reported for the major element of the Grid.

r-

140

this major element was rejected at the .05 level of
significance. The null hypothesis was accepted for each
of the remaining eleven major elements of the Grid.

In summarizing the data analysis for Hypothesis
A3, it was concluded that electricity-electronics in-
structors tended to be involved more frequently in instruc-
tional activities associated with applicationeum.assign-
ment and daily planning and preparation for instruction
than drafting-design instructors.

Hypothesis A4. There is no significant difference

 

in the frequency with which the respondents reported each
of the thirteen major elements of instructional behavior
when paired according to professional preparation.

No significant differences were identified when
the null hypothesis was tested against each of the thirteen
major elements of instructional behavior. Since none at—
tained a significance level of .05, the null hypothesis
was accepted for each of the thirteen elements.

Hypothesis A5. There is no Significant difference

 

in the frequency with which the respondents reported each
of the thirteen majoreflements of instructional behavior
when paired according to undergraduate majors.

When each of the thirteen major elements of instruc—
tional behavior were tested against the null hypothesis,
one element was identified as lxflxu; Significant. An

analysis of the major element Long Range Planning and

Ch

4

.Ti

141

Preparation for Instruction revealed that instructors
whose undergraduate major was in the field of industrial
education reported significantly more behaviors under
this heading of the Grid than instructors with under-
graduate majors in other subject fields. An examination
of Table 7.1 will reveal that instructors with an under-
graduate major in industrial education reported sixteen
(11.3%) Of the total 141 behavioral acts within this
instructional category as compared to six (4.5%) reported
by instructors with majors in other subject fields.

The calculated Chi square for the observed differ-
ence was 4.546. Since this exceeded the value of 3.84,
the null hypothesis was rejected for this element at the
.05 level of significance. The null hypothesis was ac-
cepted for each of the remaining twelve major elements
of theGrid.

In summarizing the data analyses for Hypothesis
AS, it would appear that instructors with undergraduate
majors in the field of industrial education were involved
more frequently in activities associated with long range
planning and preparation for instruction than the instruc—
tors with undergraduate majors in other subject fields.

Hypothesis A6. There is no significant differ-

 

ence in the frequency with which the respondents reported
each of the thirteen major elements of instruction when

paired according to levels of teaching experience.

(D

(D

‘

(D

142

Upon testing each of the thirteen major elements of
instructional behavior against the null hypothesis, one
element was discovered as being significant. When the
major element Counseling was analyzed it was found that
instructors with teaching experience at only the post-high
school level reported significantly more behavioral acts
in this category than those with both high school and
post-high school experience. An examination of Table 7.2
will reveal that instructors with only post-high school
experience reported fifteen (10.9%) of the total 138 be-
havioral acts within this major element of the Grid, while
those with both high school and post—high school experience
reported four (2.9%). The calculated Chi square for the
difference between these two groups was 6.368. This re-
sulted in rejection of the null hypothesis at the .02
level of significance. The null hypothesis was accepted
for each of the remaining twelve elements.

Based upon the preceding statistical analysis, it
would appear that instructors with only post-high school
teaching experience were more inclined to be involved
in counseling activities than those with previous teaching

experience at the high school level.

_..
‘r
0“-

‘rs"

.u...‘

51
on,‘

p...'

 

v -‘
._x
v

‘

 

143

Table 7. Significant Relationships Between The Fre—
quency With Which Major Elements of the In—
structional Grid Were Reported and the Re—
spondents Paired According to Professional
Characteristics.

Table 7.1. Major Element "Long Range Planning and Prep—
aration for Instruction" and Respondents Paired
According to Undergraduate Majors.

Undergraduate Majprs Behavioral Acts Percent
Obs.Freg. Exp,Freg.

 

InduStrial Education (16(141) 16 11 11.3
Other Subject Areas (l6)(133) 6 11 4.5
(22) (22)
x2 = 4.546 1 d.f. I? 7 .05

Table 7.2. Major Element "Counseling" and Respondents
Paired According to Levels of Teaching Experience.

 

gevels of Experience Behavioral Acts Percent

Obs.Freg. Exp.Freq.

High School & Post

 

High School (l6)(136) 4 9.5 2.9
Post High School (l6)(l38) 15 9.5 10.9
(19) (19.0)
x2 = 6.368 1 d.f. p ‘7 .05

NOTE: The first parentheses following each professional
characteristic gives the number of respondents,
the second gives the total acts reported by the
respondents.

The percent column refers to the percentage of total
acts reported for the major element of the Grid.

 

l1

144
Epgcedures for Testing the Hypotheses
Relating to the Effectiveness and
gneffectiveness of Instructional
Behavior

In order to answer the questions concerned with
effective and ineffective classroom and laboratory in-
struction it was necessary to make an analysis of the
Instructional Grid with primary emphasis upon these
two classifications of behavior. This analysis made it
possible to formulate and test specific hypotheses con—
cerning the frequency with which the total population
reported effective and ineffective behaviors, as well
as the relationships between these acts and certain
characteristics of the respondents.

Since as much specificity as possible was desired,
the major elements of the Grid were selected for statisti-
cal analysis when testing Hypothesis Bl. Each of the
thirteen major elements were tested against this hypothe-
sis A total of thirteen statistical analyses were
required.

In testing Hypotheses 82—87; only the specific
categories of the Grid were utilized. This was neces-
sary in order to provide sufficiently large responses for
statistical analysis. Since, with one exception, each
respondent reported an equal number of effective and in-
effective incidents involving instructional behavior,
the assumption was made that an equal number of effective

and ineffective behavioral acts also should have been

U I

O |

POO

SI.

p..

.17.. r1..~. ..~

7.7

.§

145
reported. Therefore, a 25 percent expected frequency was
used in calculating the values for each cell when testing
the hypotheses. Also, in instances where there were dif-
ferences in the number of respondents within paired groups,
it was necessary to make adjustments for these differences
by calculating (1) an "adjusted total" for acts reported
by each of the paired groups and (2) an "adjusted (ob-
served) frequency" for both effective and ineffective
behaviors reported by each of the paired groups. The ad—
justed frequency was used for calculating Chi square. The

formulas used for these calculations are as follows:

formulas

 

. _ total acts (A+B) No. respondents (A)
Ad3° Total (A) 1 :XNO. respondents (A+B)

ll

Adj. Freq. (A) Adj. total (A) X % of acts in this

classification

prg: A & B represent each of the two paired groups
Hypotheses Relating to the Effective- .
Hess and Ineffectiveness of Instruc—
pional Behavior

In addition to the thirteen statistical analyses

required for testing the relationships concerning the total
population (Hypothesis Bl), the respondents were paired
according to technical teaching areas as well as pro—
fessional preparation and experience. This resulted in
six pairs of environmental relationships (Hypotheses B2—B7)

tO be tested against categories of the Instructional Grid.

0“

I-l-

146
A total of thirty—six statistical analyses were required.
The hypotheses are organized and discussed as follows:
(1) Hypothesis Bl, total population, (2) Hypothesis B2,
teaching areas (mechanical-industrial and drafting—design),
(3) Hypothesis B3, teaching areas (mechanical-industrial
and electricity—electronics), (4) Hypothesis B4, teaching
areas (drafting—design and electricity-electronics), (5)
Hypothesis B5, professional preparation, (6) Hypothesis
B6, undergraduate majors,and (7) Hypothesis B7, levels Of
teaching experience. All hypotheses will be reported,
but only significant findings will be discussed in this
section. Findings for these hypotheses were considered
significant at the .05 level if the calculated Chi square
values for observed differences attained or exceeded the
rejection value for 1 d.f. of 3.84.

‘ Hypotheses Bl. There is no significant difference
in the frequency with which the respondents reported acts
involving effective and ineffective behavior for each of
the thirteen major elements of instructional behavior.

When each of the thirteen major elements of the
Instructional Grid were tested against the null hypothesis
four attained or exceeded a Significance level of .05.

The four were as follows: (1) Instructional Management,
(2) Teacher—Student Interaction, (3) Daily Planning and

Preparation for Instruction, and (4) Counseling. The

147
thirteen major elements and the results of the statistical
analyses are presented in Table 8.

The major element Instructional Management was
reported twenty-two times by the respondents Of the
study. There were seventeen effective acts as compared
with five reported as ineffective. The calculated Chi
square for the observed differences was 6.546, therefore,
the null hypothesis for this element of the Grid was re-
jected at the .02 level of significance.

On the basis of these data and the statistical
analysis it would appear that the respondents were more
frequently effective than ineffective in this area of
teacher activity.

The major element Teacher—Student Interaction was
reported twelve times,v&th ten of the acts identified as
effective and two ineffective. The calculated Chi square
for the observed differences was 5.334. This indicated
that the differences were Significant at the .05 level,
and called for rejectionImfthe null hypothesis for this
major element of the Instructional Grid. Although the
respondents did not appear to be as frequently engaged in
this activity as others, it would appear that they were
effective in these behaviors.

The major element Daily Planning and Preparation
for Instruction was the only area of teacher activity

in which the respondents reported Significantly more

l48

Table 8. Relationship Between the Frequency With Which
Effective and Ineffective Behavioral Acts Were
Reported by the Total Group of Respondents

W

Effec- Ineffec- Signifi—
Behavioral Acts Total tive

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

tive cance
Acts Acts Acts Level 1 d.f.
PRESENTING AND EXPLAINING
Verbal Instruction 58 29 29
Teacher Verbal Dis—
course 38 19 19
Teacher—Student Verbal
Intercourse 20 10 10
Verbal Performative In-
struction 44 24 20
Demonstration 18 12 6
Instructional Aids 26 12 14
REINFORCEMENT OF INSTRUCTION
Follow—Up_gf Instruction 52 31 21
Application and Assign-
ment 23 14 9
Evaluation 19 10 9
Individual Assistance 10 7 3
Learning Environment 34 27 7 .05 (E)
Instructional Manage-
ment 22 17 5 .02 (E)
Teacher-Student
Interaction 12 10 2 .05 (E)
ANCILLARY ACTS
Planning_and Preparation
fpr Instruction 57 18 39 .01 (I)

 

Long Range Planning

and Preparation for

Instruction 22 12 10
Daily Planning and

Preparation for

 

Instruction 35 6 29 .01 (I)

Interpersonal Relations 29 21 8 .02 (E)

Counseling 19 16 3 .01 (E)
Teacher-Student

Relationships 10 5 5

149
Table 8 (Continued)

EEK; The letter in parenthesis in column four indicates
that there were significantly more effective (E)
or ineffective (I) behavioral acts reported for
that category of the Instructional Grid.

ineffective than effective behavioral acts. A total of
thirty-five acts were reported, twenty—nine of which were
ineffective. The calculated Chi square for the observed
differences was 15.114, which resulted in rejection of
the null hypothesis for this element at the .01 level of
Significance. Since the major elemen¢ ranked second in

a previous analysis with regard to frequency of times
reported it would appear that the instructors not only
considered this area of teacher activity an important phase
of their work, but also were less effective than in any
other area reported.

Counseling was the fourth major element of the
Instructional Grid that attained a level of significance
sufficient enough to reject the null hypothesis. Nineteen
behavioral acts were classified within this element of the
Grid. Of these, sixteen were identified as effective
and three as ineffective. The calculated Chi square for
the Observed differences was 8.894. This indicated that
the differences were significant at the .01 level, and
called for rejection of the null hypothesis. On the
basis of these data and the statistical analysis, it would
appear that the respondents were involved in significantly

more effective than ineffective acts of counseling.

150

In summarizing the data analyses for Hypothesis
B1, it would appear that the instructors were significantly
more effective than ineffective in three of the thirteen
major elements of instructional behavior. These were:

(1) Instructional Management, (2) Teacher-Student Inter—
action, and (3) Counseling. There was evidence to indicate
that the instructors were significantly more ineffective
than effective in activities associated with daily planning
and preparation for instruction.

Hypothesis B2. There is no significant difference
in the frequency with which the respondents reported
effective and ineffective behaviors for each of the Six
Specific categories of instructional behavior when paired
according to the technical areas, mechanical-industrial
and drafting-design.

When each of the six specific categories of the
Instructional Grid were tested against the null hypothesis,
two attained the significance level for rejection. The
two categories were: (1) Learning Environment and (2)
Planning and Preparation for Instruction.

An inspection of Table 9.1 will reveal that mechanical-
industrial instructors reported a higher percentage (86.3%)
Of effective behaviors involving the Specific category
Learning Environment than drafting—design instructors who

reported 66.7 percent of their behaviors as being effective.

151
A calculation of Chi square for the observed differences
amounted to 10.734, therefore, the null hypothesis was
rejected at the .01 level of significance for this
Specific category of instructional behavior.

An analysis of the Specific category Planning and
Preparation for Instruction revealed that both classifica—
tions of instructors reported a higher percentage of in—
effective than effective acts involving this particular
aspect of instructional behavior. An examination of Table
9.2 will Show that drafting-design instructors reported
(91%) of the behavioral acts in this category ineffective
as compared with drafting-design instructors who reported
56.6 percent as ineffective. The calculated Chi square
for the observed differences was 10.763. This exceeded
the .01 significance level and resulted in rejection of
the null hypothesis for this specific category of the Grid.

In summarizing the data analysis for Hypothesis
B2 the following observations were made:

1. The null hypothesis was rejected for two of
the six specific categories of the Instructional Grid and
accepted for the other four.

2. Both groups were classified as more effective
than ineffective in activities associated with Learning
Environment, however, it would appear that mechanical-
industrial instructors were more effective than drafting—

design instructors in this instructional activity.

152

3. Both groups were considered more ineffective
than effective in the area of Planning and Preparation
for Instruction, however, it would appear that drafting-
design instructors were least effective.

Hypothesis B3. There is no significant difference
in the frequency with which the respondents reported ef-
fective and ineffective behaviors for each of the Six
specific categories of instructional behavior when paired
according to the technical teaching areas, mechanical-
industrial and electricity-electronics.

When the Six specific categories of instructional
behavior were tested against the null hypothesis,signifi-
cant differences were noted for five of the six categories.
Each exceeded the Chi square value of 3.841 required for
rejection of the null hypothesis at the .05 level. The
iivecategories were: (1) Verbal Instruction, (2) Verbal
Performative Instruction, (3) Follow—Up of Instruction,
(4) Learning Environment, and (5) Planning and Preparation
for Instruction.

Upon examining Table 9.3 it will be found that
mechanical—industrial instructors reported more acts (61.6%)
involving the specific category Verbal Instruction as in—
effective than effective, while electricity—electronics
instructors reported more (53.8%) of the acts in this
category as effective. The calculated Chi square for the

Observed difference was 6.231, which resulted in rejection

.. Ivy-hr.” t

153
of the null hypothesis for this Specific category at the
.02 level.

Upon analysis of the specific category Verbal Per-
formative Instruction it was discovered that mechanical-
industrial instructors reported 62.5 percent of the acts
as effective as compared with electricity—electronics
instructors who reported 54.5 percent as effective (Table
9.4). The calculated Chi square for the Observed differ—
ence was 4.694. This exceeded the .05 level of significance
and resulted in rejection of the null hypothesis for this
category of the Grid.

Table 9.5 presents an analysis of the data concern-
ing the specific category Follow—Up of Instruction. It
may be noted that mechanical—industrial instructors reported
57.6 percent of the behavioral acts as effective while
electricity—electronics instructors reported 58.3 percent.
The calculated Chi square for the observed difference was
6.053. This exceeded the .02 significance level and re-
sulted in rejection of the null hypothesis for this cate-
gory of instructional behavior.

An analysis of the specific category Learning En-
vironment presented in Table 9.6 revealed that mechanical-
industrial instructors classified 86.3 percent of the
behaviors as effective as compared with electricity-
electronics instructors who classified 67 percent as ef-

fective. Upon calculation of Chi square, the value for the

rs

Cw

»

Adv

i.

154
observed difference was 16.580. This far exceeded the
rejection value of 3.841 and resulted in rejection of the
null hypothesis for this category at the .01 level of
significance.

When the specific category Planning and Preparation
for Instruction was analyzed (Table 9.7) it was found that
both classifications of respondents reported more ineffec-
tive than effective behavioral acts. Mechanical-industrial
instructors reported 56 percent of the acts as ineffective
as compared with electricity-electronics instructors who
reported 74 percent as ineffective. The calculated Chi
square for the observed difference was 8.234. This ex—
ceeded the .01 significance level and resulted in rejection
of the null hypothesis for this specific category.

In summarizing the data analysis for Hypothesis B3
the following observations were made:

1. The null hypothesis was rejected for five of
the six specific categories of the Instructional Grid and
accepted for the other.

2. Mechanical-industrial instructors were identif-
ied as more effective than ineffective in three of the six
specific categories of instruction; however, in the areas
of verbal instruction and planning and preparation for

instruction were classified as less effective.

155

3. Electricity-electronics instructors were more
effective than ineffective in all but one of the categories;
that being Planning and Preparation for Instruction.

4. It would appear that mechanical-industrial in-
structors were more effective than electricity-electronics
instructors in the areas of Verbal Performative Instruc—
tion, Follow—Up of Instruction, Learning Environment, and
Planning and Preparation for Instruction, while electric-
ity-electronics instructors appeared to be more effective
in activities associated with Verbal Instruction.

Hypothesis B4. There is no Significant difference
in the frequency with which the respondents reported ef-
fective and ineffective behaviors for each of the six
specific categories of instructional behavior when paired
according to the technical teaching areas, drafting—design
and electricity-electronics.

When each of the six specific categories of in-
structional behavior were tested against the null hypothe-
sis, only Planning and Preparatiaifor Instruction attained
the significance level for rejection. An examination of
Table 9.8 will reveal that both classificatimusofinstruc-
tors reported a higher percentxfiaof ineffective than ef—
fective acts within this category. Drafting-design
instructors reported 91 percent of the acts as ineffective
compared with electricity-electronics instructors who

reported 74 percent as ineffective. A calculation of Chi

I I1 Q III I I {It

. -. . - . 4- ! .I 5.1..
uAV any-vF-tv>HU-JLJd wasp-h cur-1“ =1unv..-F,r>!U-J.V.u unv- .v-..-. pucv-.u3~nvnu

iI.lI.I1..AI Fl.‘ :1!“ nurlllw¥§ll~lhefifih

q.
Whfihhnnfllflnfvfi“!\.~nfli¥fl Ulhu..-v\~ innxiwfl -3 +v~n~w.-.~«

8. A m the a 852 u x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N
868 $8 3&8 $8 $.93 Am:
ooH n.0H Hg o.~m N.ma 0H o.m m.H H cwemmauwcwuwmua
2: TE R 6.? T: 2 e13 {a S smspumspfiémopamfimz
e, 3:5. 425 e . apps 3:2 .3; .68 e .3; H3. so; .26
mHmuoH muo< Hmuow>mcmm m>wuoommmcH muo< Hopew>mcom m>wuummmm mmmu<lwcecum68
.mmmu< wcwcummH Hmowccowa OH wcwtuouud
"w pouwmm masoccommom tc< :coHuospumcH pom GOMumumdmum cc< wcwccmfim: xuowmumo oewwomdm N.¢ manmfi
l
8. A a as s 42.2 u we
Ao.mmv Ammo Am.eo Ame Ak.sav AmNo
OOH m.NH o m.mm H.¢ N n.0o ~.w e cwemmnuwceummua
oo~ n.mH mm m.m~ ~.~ m m.cw m.m~ ma HmeuuwsvcHIHmowsmcomz
N fifiv< .mp0 N .ddum .mp< wanna .mbo N .mwum .Hp< .mmum .mp0
mfimuos muo< HmuoH>m£wm m>wuumwmocH muom HmuoH>mcmm m>wuowwmm mmmu<xwawcome

 

.mmou< wcwcomwa amuwccuoa
OH wafipuooo< touwmm mucmcconmmm vac :usoeaouw>cm wcwcummA: huowoumo uwmwowmm .H.m manna

.mmwu< wswcummfi ~muw6£omfi OH waficuooo< omnwwm :053 unconcoammm mcH tc< pwuu
awanuusuuncH may mo mouuowmumo owwwomam onH pom pmuwomwm muu< amuow>wcmm
mo umucm>auumwwmcH pa< ummcm>fiuummmm onH sumaumm mchOGOwuwHQM unmowwwcwwm .m mfibmh

. mu. 2.: Iu< x- W-U awfvin
H 3. .1» dry uhU-irfi. Fern. Ink 1 ndld AVUUK.‘ —v..VL h :6- : def-fivfivF-Avhnzflv Va uc< .onuc u U IJ-uuu 1. st..- H ,H ~xA~.~.J->.. \A..H.IJ n1...- 0 ......v .1. .7... u ,vflunnm p..- - Av .8 n A~ THNI

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

no. Am a .u.p s eae.e u Nx
Ao.ANv AANV Am.oHv Assc Am.esv Aesv
ooH m.w HH m.m¢ o.e m m.¢m m.e o newcouuomam-muwowuuomam
oo~ H.wH OH m.Nm w.o o m.~o m.HH OH HmwuumSOGHnHmowcmsowz
N .Hp< .mpo e semen .ea< .mopm .mp0 e swaps 1ne< .mpps .mpo
mfimuoa muo< emuoH>mrmm m>wuommwmcH muo< Hmpoe>mcmm m>wuomwwm mmmn< wmwsomma
WW .mmmu< wcwcommH HmowccooH OH
11 mcwtuooo< towemm mucmtcoammm tc< :SOeuosuumcH m>wumauowumm ambum>z snowmumo onwwomam .e.o memH
No. A .m do H amp u Nx
Ammo AmmV Ammo Ammo Aesv Aksv
cod ma ma N.o< o o m.mm N N mowaouuumamuxuwouuuumam
cod 0N om o.~o ea ea <.wm OH OH fimwuumsvcHuamoeamnumz
N .nv< .mp0 N flamum nflm< .mOum .mbo N: .vmum rflp< .mmum .mbo
mamuoH muu< amuofi>m£mm m>euommmmcH

uuo< Hmuow>mcmm w>wuoowwm mmou<lwcwcomw5

 

 

.mmwu< magnummH

HmuwcSOOH OH wcwvuoou< tmuwmm mucwpcoanwm tam :cowuosuumcH ambum>z mwowmumo uwmwommm m.m wanna

 

 

- [nHflv -NCV NWF.W~..~HU~H.U.H fi-IH.J W~u.~.J.I-..N.
ch. w: I'VIHGHVUA‘ Ukvhdaiafl :JP-Ue-JF-nuhmnflnlbv- nJPu< ..P-CHU.U-JU-HUP~H HO finalghuH finvh~.. \fi.~fluu~-b&-hflv (wins hurl-LU. Wu .3. +9~h-va

158

He. an m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.m.p H owm.oH u Nx
Ho.mmo Ammo HH.mo Hmv Hm.mmv Ammo
OOH ¢.m o o.mm H.m N o.N© m.o q mOHcouuomHmukuHowuuoon
ooH o.wH NN o.¢H o.~ m 0.0m o.oH mH HmHuumstcHuHmuHcmSOOZ
w .Hpe .mpo e wears .eme .mmMMIqmmm. e .mMMMIqflmn .mppp .mpo
mHmOOH muu< kuoH>mrmm m>HuomwmmcH muo< HmuoH>mrwm o>Huommmm nwmu< mchommH
.mwmu< mchommH Hmowccome
OH wcHtwoooc cwuwmm mucmtsoanmm tc< :ucmEdouH>am wchume: knowmumu OHMHuwmm o.m OHan
No..An a .u.6 s mmo.o u we
Ho.wmv Hens Ho.esv HGHV Ho.mmv Ammo
ooH m.NH NH N.H¢ ~.m m m.wm m.N N mOHaouuomHmImuHuHuuomHm
ooH m.m~ 0N ¢.~¢ w.oH HH o.Nm N.¢H mH meuumachaHmuHcmcomz
N .eee .mp6 e .mppm .Hp< .mmpm .666 e .mmpm .He< .mmpm .mp6
«Hence muufiIHmuoH>mcmm w>HuuwmmmcH nuu< HmuoH>mnmm m>Huoommm mmwu<deHnummH

 

 

.mmmu< mcwnomme Hmowccome
OH wdwpuoou< twuHmm mucmpsoawom ts< :coHuosuumsH mo QDISOHHOh: muowmumu OHwHommm m.m mewH

. WQUMAV “A: a 591......H u ~....v a €295.75 avg. m: Maw -NAVQ Um...
UUHd-Afl IJF~U~VF.-Funb.fl.dz uVFu< :PhAJiUU-JIHUWF-H .Hflarvn Fun: u d2.“ aunt-Id“ nit-64 “1....- W-.--.~....~R~.. \fi.~fidu.l._..,d.u 7....v LVHIN ~-u.vfi1~ufl K .9» ..d.~n~.....fi

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ho..nn m .u.p H me.ms - ax
Ho.omv Hone He.mmo Heme H6.ev H68
OOH N.HH 0H «N N.@ ¢H 0N o.m m mowcouuomHthuHowuuoon
ooH- m.mH HH Hm A.oH 6H m p.H H awsmmo-wanuumpo
_e .Hp< .mpo e .eopm sHpe .eopp .mp6 e .empp .Hpe .mmpp .mp6
mHmuOH muo< Hmuow>mrwm m>HuommmmcH muo< HmpoH>mrmm m>Huommmm mmmp< wcHsumoH
O,
5
11 .wmwu< wrecomma HmOchomH OH wchuooo<
pmemm mucmtcoammm nc< :coHuospumcH pom GOHumumamum ec< wCHccmHm: anowmumo OHwHomam w.a memH
Ho. AH m .m.t H qmm.m u Nx
Ho.eeo H648 Hm.mmv Home Hm.emv HHHV
ooH N.mH mH em m.HH «H ON m.m m mOHOOHOOOHMINuHOHuuome
ooH w.om NN om N.NH mH «q o.mH NH HmHuumdccHIHmomamnuoz
N .Ho< .mp0 N .mmum .Hp< .mwum .mp0 N .mmum .Hp< .mmpm .mp0

 

mHmuoH

muo< HmuoH>mnmm w>HuommwmcH

 

 

muo< HmuoH>mcwm m>Huommmm mmwu< ucHzommH

 

 

.mwmu< wanome HmOHccomH OH wchuoOo<

pouHmm mucmvcoammm pc< :coHuoswumcH pom dowuwwmmmum pc< mcHscmHm: %wowmumo OHmHommm N.m mHan

160

square for the observed differences amounted to 19.818.
Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected at the .01
level of significance for this category of the Grid.
The null hypothesis was accepted for the five remain—
ing categories.

In summarizing the data analysis for Hypothesis
B4 the following observation was made: although both
classifications of respondents were more ineffective than
effective in the area of Planning and Preparation for
Instruction, it would appear that electricity-electronics
instructors were more effective than drafting-design
instructors.

Hypothesis BS. There is no Significant differ—

 

ence in the frequency with which the respondents reported
effective and ineffective behaviors for each of the Six
specific categories of instructional behavior when

paired according to professional preparation.

When each of the six specific categories Of
instructional behavior were tested against the null hy-
pothesis, four attained or exceeded the significance
level for rejection. The four categories were: (1)
Follow-Up of Instruction, (2) Learning Environment, (3)
Planning and Preparation for Instruction, and (4) Inter-
Personal Relations.

An inspection of Table 10.1 will reveal that in—

structors classified as having professional preparation

I U

161
reported 64 percent of the Follow~Up of Instruction acts
as effective while those without professional preparation
reported 50 percent effective. The calculated Chi square
for the observed difference was 5.413. 'This exceeded the
3.841 value and resulted in rejection of the null hy—
pothesis for this category at the .05 level of significance.

An analysis of the specific category Learning En-
vironment presented in Table 10.2, Shows that instruc-
tors with professional preparation reported 81 percent of
the behaviors as effective while those without professional
preparation reported 78 percent as effective. The cal—
culated Chi square value for the observed difference was
14.076. This resulted in rejection of the null hypothesis
for this category at the .01 level of significance.

Upon inspection of Table 10.3, for the specific
category Planning and Preparation for Instruction, it will
be found that both classifications of respondents reported
more ineffective than effective behaviors. Those with
professional preparation reported 69 percent ineffective
while those without professional preparation reported
68 percent ineffective. The calculated Chi square for
the observed difference was 5.773, resulting in rejection
of the null hypothesis for this category at the .02 level

of significance.

162

An examination of Table 10.4 will present data
relevant to the specific category Interpersonal Relations.
It can be seen that instructors with professional prep—
aration reported 86 percent of the behaviors as effective
as compared with 60 percent reported by those without
professional preparation. When the Chi square was cal-
culated for the Observed difference it amounted to 12.544.
This was sufficient to reject the null hypothesis for this
specific category at the .01 level of significance.

In summarizing the data analysis for Hypothesis
B5, the following observations were made:

1. The null hypothesis was rejected for four of
the Six specific categories of the Instructional Grid and
accepted for the other two.

2. Both groups were classified as more effective
than ineffective in three of the four areas; however,
were classified as less effective in Planning and Prep-
aration for Instruction.

3. It would appear that instructors with profes-
sional preparation were more effective than those without
in the areas of Follow—Up of Instruction, Learning En-
vironment, and Interpersonal Relations. However, it would
appear that, although both groups were more ineffective
than effective in Planning and Preparation for Instruction,

those with professional preparation were least effective.

163

Hypothesis B6. There is no Significant difference
in the frequency with which the respondents reported ef—
fective and ineffective behaviors for each of the six
specific categories of instructional behavior when paired
according to undergraduate majors.

When each of the six specific categories of in-
structional behavior were tested against the null hypothe-
sis, three attained or exceeded the significance level for
rejection. The three categories were: (1) Learning
Environment, (2) Planning and Preparation for Instruction,
and (3) Interpersonal Relations.

An examination of Table 10.5 will reveal that in—
structors with majors in fields other than industrial educa-
tion reported 81.8 percent of effective behaviors within
the category Learning Environment as compared with industrial
education majors who reported 69.2 percent effective. The
calculated Chi square value for the Observed difference was
8.338. This was sufficient for rejection of the null hy-
pothesis for this category at the .01 level of significance.

When the specific category Planning and Preparation
for Instruction was analyzed (Table 10.6) it was found, as
in all previous analyses, that more ineffective than ef-
fective behaviors were reported by the respondents. It
was discovered that instructors with undergraduate majors
other than industrial education reported a higher percent-

age (80%) of ineffective behavioral acts than instructors

1111' VIE ',.IIIF.V§41H§IJ E..$IW\:lnu.q

164
with a major in industrial education. Instructors with a
major in industrial education classified 62.2 percent of
the behaviors as ineffective. The calculated Chi square
for the observed difference was 11.588. This resulted
in rejection of the null hypothesis at the .01 Significance
level for this category of the Grid.

The third Specific category that attained a signifi-
cance level sufficient enough to reject the null hypothesis
was Interpersonal Relations. Table 10.7 will Show that
both groups reported more effective than ineffective be—
havioral acts. However, instructors with a major in
industrial education reported a higher percentage (83.3%)
of effective behaviors than the instructors with an under—
graduate major in other fields who reported 64.7 percent
of their behaviors in this category as effective. The
calculated Chi square for the obServed difference was 7.722.
This was sufficient for rejection of the null hypothesis
at the .01 level of significance for this category of
instructional behavior.

In summarizing the data analysis for Hypothesis B6,
the following observations were made:

1. The null hypothesis was rejected for three
of the six specific categories of instructional behavior
and accepted for the remaining categories.

2. Both groups were considered as more effective

than ineffective in two of the three areas; however, were

165
classified as less effective in Planning and Preparation
for Instruction.

3. It would appear that instructors with under-
graduate majors in fields other than industrial educa-
tion tended to be more effective than industrial education
majors in activities associated with Learning Environment
while those with industrial education majors appeared to
be more effective in Interpersonal Relations. Although
both were more ineffective than effective in Planning and
Preparation for Instruction, those with majors in other
subject areas appeared to beleast effective.

Hypothesis B7. There is no significant difference

 

in the frequency with which the respondents reported
effective and ineffective behaviors for each of the six
specific categories of instructional behavior when paired
according to levels of teaching experience.

When each of the Six specific categories of instruc-
tional behavior were tested against the null hypothesis,
three exceeded the significance level for rejection. The
three categories were: (1) Learning Environment, (2)
Planning and Preparation for Instruction,and (3) Inter-
personal Relations.

An analysis of the Specific category Learning En-
vironment (Table 10.8) revealed that both classifications
Of respondents reported a greater proportion of effective

than ineffective behavioral acts. The respondents with

166
only post—high school experience reported a higher percent-
age (89.4%) of effective behaviors than the instructors
with both high school and post-high school teaching ex—
perience who reported 66.6 percent effective. The cal-
culated Chi square for the observed difference was 12.050.
This was sufficient to reject the null hypothesis at the
.01 level of significance for this specific category.

When the specific category Planning and Preparation
for Instruction was analyzed (Table 10.9) it was again
found that more ineffective than effective behavioral acts
were reported. Instructors with only post-high school
teaching experience reported a higher percentage (79.4%)
of ineffective behaviors in this category than instruc-
tors with both high school and post—high school experience
who reported 57.2 percent ineffective. The calculated
Chi square for the observed difference was 10.132. There-
fore, the null hypothesis was rejected for this specific
category at the .01 level of Significance.

The specific category Interpersonal Relations also
attained a signifiance level sufficient to rejeCt the
null hypothesis. As evidenced by an inspection of Table
10.10, both classifications of respondents reported more
effective than ineffective acts in this category of teacher
behavior. The instructors with both high school and post—
high school teaching experience reported a higher percent-

age (77.7%) of effective behaviors than the instructors

167
with only post—high school experience who reported 58.3
percent. The calculated Chi square for the observed
differences was 4.812. This was sufficient for rejection
of the null hypothesis for this category at the .05 level
of significance.

In summarizing the data analysis for Hypothesis
B7, the following observations were made:

1. The null hypothesis was rejected for three of
the six specific categories Of the Grid and accepted for
the remaining categories.

2. Both groups were considered as more effective
than ineffective in two of the three areas; however, were
less effective in Planning and Preparation for Instruction.

3. It would appear that instructors with only post—
high school teaching experiences were more effective than
those having high school experiences in activities associ—
ated with Learning Environment, while those with high
school experiences were more effective in Interpersonal
Relations.~ Although both groups were more ineffective
than effective in Planning and Preparation for Instruc-
tion, those with only post-high school teaching experiences

were least effective.

m—Av :zLJ-I.J>d.u.9.d -.u.J-~ —u_u< 2:.dnu.lv>~wu.dnv1~ -u u.~ .J-ffi. n-uU.d3I-.Jm~ var-.~.fl~.av~U-.~.vV~ Han-uhyfiu h-Lu4icfa Inv~ ..v~e-.r~I

1-: lIEIIi! TEAM 1., it t

Ho._An m .H.p H pHo.eH u x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N
Ho.emO Heme Ha.eo HHO . HH.HNV HANS
ooH o.MH wH NN o.m H mm o.oH eH oz
ooH ¢.ON 0H mH m.m m Hm m.oH NH mow
N ._t< .mp0 N .doum .Ht< .amum .mbo N .mmwm14fip< .conm .mbo
meuoH . muo< HmuoH>m£mm w>HuoomwmcH nuu< HmhoH>WSmm m>HuumHHm .amwm HmconmOHoum
no .GOHumumamum HmGOHmmOHOHm OH
”m wcHuHooo< pmuHmm mucwtcommmm tc< :ucmficouH>cm waHduwwH: muowwumo OHHHOOam .N.oH memH
me. AM. a .H.6 H mHe.n n Hx
Ho.HmO Ammo H6.H~V HHNV He.omc AHmV
ooH m.oN 0H om ¢.oH m om «.0H m 02
ooH N.Hm cm on N.HH MH do o.ON MN mow
e .Hee .mp6 e .mopm .He< :mwpp .mpo e _ weeps «Hue .appm .mp6
mHmuoH muo< HmuoH>m£mm o>HuumHHoaH muo< HmHoH>m£mm o>Huoommm .mMum HmaOmeomoum

.coHumummmum HmSOHmmmmoum oH
wchuouu< ewuHmm madmuHOAnad fis< :soHuusuuonH Ho QDIsoHHom: Hwowwumo OHHHomam .H.0H memH

.mOHuuHumuomuwau HmaonmoHoum OH wchuouu< pouHmm coca mucmtsonmmm onH nc< tku
HmaoHuoduuncH mnH Ho mOHuowmumU OHHHumam mcH pom muuoamm wuu< HmuoH>mcmm
Ho mamam>HuomHHmsH pc< nmmsm>HuuwHHm mrH cmmsumm nnHrmcoHumem unmonHcmHm .OH memH

 

«U Ed .H .1 SAN

I Ur-LJUF-oamflvvu

1C6.

..F~o.i UranI- Gut-LN

(- gunk

.FufiVHdufiL-wfi—Mvnnhm -1.F.fuw@»wflwn~ cunt
ave-AV m..-..-5~AN.. \fi.~anN.vu~..nU -vu.~ H.-V.Uhn..fi.

P. Av u U 7.1- 12L 3 1. 4*

CH. Mu...— HUIHCUUHV

-fiv.~

IV ~ EN ‘1?”-

169

He. AM a .H.6 H eem.~H u Nx

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ho.oNV Homo Ho.Hv Hwo HNNV HHNV
ooH o.HH mH oq c.q o oo N m 02
ooH ¢.NH «H «H ¢.N N ow mH NH no»
N .flt< .mbo N smwum14HO< .wmum .mp0 N rmwumlfiflv< .mmwm .mbo
mHmOOH muu< HmuoH>mcmm m>HuomHHOcH muo< HmHOH>m£mm O>Huomwwm .aoum HchHmmmHOum
.GOHumHmQOHm HchHmwwHoum
OH wchHooo< cOHHmm mucwpcoamwm cc< :mcoHumHmm HmGOmHmauoucH: zuowmumo OHHHooam .¢.oH memH
Ho. nu a .H.6 H see.HH u Nx
Ho.HmO Hkmv HH.emo Home Ha.HHV HmHo
ooH w.NN wN we m.mH mH Nm m.N m oz
ooH N.¢m mN ac o.MN ON Hm o.oH o no»
N .Hv< .uno N smwum .mp4 .mmum .mbo N .mmum .Hv¢ .mmum .mp0
mHmuoH muo< HmuoH>mnmm m>HuuommmcH wuo< HmuoH>mnmm m>HuomHHm .noum HmconmmHoum

 

.coHumumaoum Hmconmowowm OH wchuooo€
thHmm uncutcoamwm tam :coHuosuumcH uom coHumumamum pc< mchcmHm: Huowmumu OHHHommm .m.oH memH

b. .QIIIIIIIIIJ...‘ ‘ IOFII‘H null ! FILIia;I.hhu

. Eisi" . .. USJIM .

>

viii}. .IJI

HSSHV

.J .N G. N 11v 91' AH $144

L“.

-R.v~

53 N an INN.

Ho. An .H .H.p H . mwm.HH u x

 

 

 

 

N
Ho.Hmo Heme Hm.oev Home Hm.eHo HmHv
ooH m.mm . oN 6.6m m.- 6H o.o~ H.m e ,.mmop< HopHpsm porno
ooH m.m~ Hm N.H6 H.HH . mm m.Hm m.oH eH coHHmosem HmeumseeH
H ..H6< .mpo e .mmpm .Hp< .mppp .426 H .mmpp .H6< .mmpm .wpo
wHOOOH muo< HmuoH>m£mm m>HuOOHHOcH muo< HmuoH>mLom w>HquHHm muOHmZ mumstmewumpcs

 

JI

 

170

.mHOHMZ mumspmuwHOOGD OH wcHtuooo<
OOHHmm mucmtcOdmmm Oc< :coHuoawumcH pom coHumHmdmum Oc< wchcmHm: zuowoumo OHHHOwam .o.oH memH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ho. An A .H.6 H mmm.m u Nx
Ho.mmv Hmmv Ho.mv va He.6NV ANNV
ooH m.HH NH «.mH N.m e m.Hw m.eH wH emote Homesm porno
ooH m.HH mH m.Hm e.m e N.He H.~H a coHumuspm HmeHmspeH
e (MMee- .mp0 e .mmpm .Hpe .mopm .466 e smote .Hp< .eopm .mp6
mHmuoH muo< HmuoH>mawm O>HuommmmcH .muo< HOOOH>m£mm m>HuOmHHm anommz mumsOOHMHOOOD

 

 

.muohmz mumspmuwumpca
OH wcHOuooo< OmuHmm mucOOcommom Oc< :ucmEcouH>cm wchummHz knowmumu OHHHOOQm .m.oH mHan

.muhnufifiéé «WUQJUUEELUUCD
CH. WCfiFVIHOUU< Humvhfinwnn much-UCCP—mumvx «0:4... :munnaufiufixunvvw H~..4:AvmuIHMnQI~.UQ-H: \thovirvUHuuv .Vufmeavnarfa .k.°.~ ,rvNAHTHH.

171

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ho. A m HO H OmoNH u Nx
Homo HemV Hm.Nv HNV Hm.emv HNNV
ooH NH mH o.HH w.H N. ¢.mw N.mH NH NHOO Hoocom :sz umom
ooH NH mH «.mm N.m m - p.66 m.HH oH .m.m umom e Hoonom eme
N .HO< .mbo N .mmum .HO< .moum .nbo N .mMMMldefi .mmum .mbo
mHmuOH muu< HmuoH>mnwm m>HuOOHHOOH muo< HmOoH>wcmm m>HuomHHm OOcOHumOxm Ho;mHo>mH
.mOcOHHOOxm wcHsome Ho mHO>OH
OH wcHOuooo< touHmm mucmpcomwmm Oc< :OOOEOOHH>Om wcHOummH: Nuowmumu OHHHOOOm .w.oH OHbmH
Ho. kn H .H.p H NNH.H u Nx
Ho.a~v Home Hm.Nc Hmo Hm.HNv HHNV
ooH m.eH NH m.mm H.m e N.ep 4.6 HH amuse HomHeam porno
ooH m.eH NH Non- ¢.N N m.mw H.NH oH OOHumOspm HmHuumsch
N ..H6< .mpo NH . .eopm .Hae .awum .466 N .mppm .Hp< .mmps .mpo
mHmuOH muu< HmuOH>w£mm o>HuOOHHOOH muo< HmuoH>m£mm m>HuomHmm muoflmz wumavmnwumpcp

 

 

OH mcHOuooo< pmuHmm muOOOcoammm Oc< :mcoHumHmm HchmummpmucH: zuowmumo OHHHOOQm

.OHOHOZ oumavmwwumpcs
.N.oH OHbmH

h'!lll| EH1” 4N4. ihil,‘ NIH} >0...

172

me. An .H .H.p H NHw.e u x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N
Ho.mmv Homo Hm.ov Hmv Hm.aHv HHNV
ooH m.eH oN N.He o.e 6 m.mm m.m 4H NHeo Hooeom eme upon
ooH m.¢H O m.NN N.m N N.NN N.HH N .m.: umom e Hoocom cme
N .Hp< .mp0 N .eopm .Hm< .mmwm .mp0 N .mopm .Hee .mopm .mpo
mHOOOH muo< HmuoH>mcmm m>HuowHHOcH muo< HmHoH>mcmm m>HuomHHm mocmHHmowm Ho wHO>mH
.OucmHumaxm wchome Ho mHm>mH
OH wchnooo< cmuHmm mucOpcoammm cc< :mcoHumHOm HOOOmHmaHOucH: knowmumo OHHHOOam .oH.oH OHbmH
Ho. An. m .H.6 H NmH.oH u NH
Ho.Hmo HHmv HH.mmV Hans Hm.mHv HwHV
ooH m.m~ mm «.mH 6.NN MN 6.0N a.m e NHeo Hooepm :me upon
ooH m.wN wN N.Nm H.0H oH m.Nq ¢.NH NH .m.m umom @ Hoocom :me
N .HO< .mbo N .mem .HO< .mmum .mbo N .mmum .HO< .mmum .mbo
mHOOOH muo< HmHoH>mcmm m>HuOOHchH wuo< HmHoH>mme m>HOOOHHm mocmHumomm Ho me>mH

 

 

.OocoHummxm wchommH HO mHm>oH OH mchuoOo<

tonHmm mucmpcoamom pom :coHuosHumcH pom coHumHQOHm pc< mchcmHm: knowoumo OHwHommm .m.oH pomH

173
V. SUMMARY OF ANALYSES AND INTERPRETATIONS
MADE FROM THE DATA

The preceding sections of this chapter have pres-
ented various analyses of the data collected. Each of
these sections has discussed the Significant factors con-
cerning the data. The following summary of these analy—
ses and interpretations made from the data are primarily
a restatement of the inferences made in the previous
sections.

The same frame of reference and general format
utilized throughout the chapter in the presentation of
the various statistical analyses have been used in this
summary presentation. More specifically, the summary of
analyses and interpretations made from the data was
concerned with the frequency with which specific categor—
ies of the Instructional Grid were mentioned, the re-
lationships that existed between the various clasifica-
tions of the Grid and certain characteristics of the
respondents,the instructional acts in which the respond-
ents demonstrated significantly effective or ineffective
behaviors, and inferences for curriculum development in
technical teacher education. This section of the study
is presented under the following headings corresponding
to the three major categories of the Instructional Grid:
(1) Presenting and Explaining, (2) Reinforcement of In-

struction, and (3) Ancillary Acts.

174
Presenting and Explaining

Behavioral acts classified under this major cate-
gory represented 36.9 percent of the total acts reported.
Thirty (93.8%) respondents reported incidents involving
activities associated with Presenting and Explaining in
classroom and laboratory instruction. A summary of the
specific categories classified under this heading of the
Instructional Grid are as follows: (1) Verbal Instruction
and (2) Verbal Performative Instruction.

Verbal Instruction. This classification of be-
havioral acts was used most frequently by the respond—
ents as a method of presenting instruction. Eighty—seven
and one-half percent (87.5%) of the respondents reported
the use of Verbal Instruction. Within this specific
category the major element Teacher Verbal Discourse was
found to be the most frequently used method in classroom
and laboratory teaching, with 75 percent of the respondents
rePorting this as part of their instructional behavior.
Only 50 percent Of the respondents reported the use of
the major element Teacher—Student Verbal Intercourse.

There appeared to be no significant difference in
the frequency with which the respondents reported the use

Of verbal means of presenting instruction when classified

according to certain characteristics.

175

There appeared to be no significant difference in
the effectiveness or ineffectiveneaswith which the respond-
ents performed the various activities associated with the
verbal presentation of instruction. HOwever, when paired
according to certain characteristics, it appeared that
electricity—electronics instructors were more effective
than mechanical—industrial instructors.

Verbal Performative Instruction. This area of

 

instructional behavior ranked fourth among the six
specific categories of the Instructional Grid relative

to frequency of use. The instructors did not appear to
use Verbal Performative Instruction as frequently as
might have been expected. Demonstration, as a mediod of
instruction, was reported by 34.4 percent of the respond-
ents while the use of various types of instructional aids
was reported by 46.9 percent.

There did not appear to be any significant differ-
ence in the frequency with which the respondents reported
behaviors associated with Verbal Performative Instruction
when classified according to certain characteristics.

When considering the total population there was
no evidence of any significant difference inthe effective—
ness or ineffectiveness of performance involving verbal
performative behavior. However, when classified accord-

ing to certain characteristics there appeared to be

176
Significant differences for the groups paired for
statistical analysis. There was indication that mechan—
ical—industrial instructors were more effective in this
area of instructional behavior than drafting-design in—

structors.

Reinforcement of Instruction

 

Instructional acts classified under this major
category represented 31.7 percent of the total behavioral
acts reported. Twenty—seven (84.3%) of the respondents
reported incidents involving this classification of the
Instructional Grid. A more detailed summary of instruc—
tional activities involving Reinforcement of Instniction
is presented as follows: (1) Follow-Up of Instruction
and (2) Learning Environment.

Follow-Up of Instruction. A total of twenty-two
(68.7%) of the respondents reported incidents involving
behaviors associated with Follow-Up of Instruction. With
reference to the frequency with which behaviors of this
nature were reported, it was found that this category
ranked third among the six Specific categories of the
Instructional Grid. Behaviors involving Application and
Assignment were found to be used most frequently (46.8%).
Evaluation as a method of following—up instruction was
reported by 34.3 percent of the respondents while Individual

Assistance was used by 21.8 percent.

177

Upon an analysis of the major element Application
and Assignment it would appearthat electricity-electronics
instructors used this as a method of following—up instruc-
tion more frequently than drafting—deSign instructors.

NO Significant differences appeared to exist be-
tween the effectiveness and ineffectiveness with which
the respondents performed instructional activities associ—
ated with Follow—Up of Instruction. However, when clas—
sified according to certain characteristics, differences
were detected. Mechanical-industrial instructors appeared
to be more effective than electricity-electronics instruc-
tors and instructors with professional preparation more
effective than those without such preparation.

Learning Environment. Eighteen respondents (56.2%)
reported a total of thirty-five behavioral acts classified
under this heading of the Instructional Grid. Activities
associated with providing for, and maintaining a Learning
Environment ranked fifth among the Six specific categor-
ies in terms of the frequency with which behaviors were
reported. When considering the two major elements, In—
structional Management and Teacher—Student Interaction,
there was a slight difference in the number of respond—
ents who reported acts, but a considerable difference in
the number of behavioral acts reported. This resulted in

Instructional Management being ranked seventh and Teacher-

178

Student Interaction ranked eleventh among the thirteen
major elements of the Instructional Grid.

There appeared to be no significant differences
in the frequency with which the respondents, paired ac—
cording to certain characteristics, reported acts clas—
sified under either of the two major elements listed
under this specific category.

An analysis of the Specific category Learning En—
vironment revealed Significant differences in the frequency
with which the respondents reported effective and in—
effective behaviors. The respondents reported signifi-
cantly more effective behaviors in this specific category
as well as in each of the major elements. There appeared
to be significant differences between the number of ef-
fective and ineffective behaviors when the respondents
were paired according to certain characteristics. These
were: (1) mechanical—industrial instructors were more
effective than either drafting-design instructors or
electricity—electronics instructors, (2) instructors with
professional preparation were more effective than those
without such preparation, (3) instructors with under-
graduate majors in subject areas other than industrial
education were more effective than those with industrial
education majors, and (4) instructors with only post-

high school teaching experience were more effective than

179
those with previous high school experience. In no instance
were there more ineffective than effective behaviors re-

ported.

Ancillary Acts

 

The major category Ancillary Acts ranked third
among the three major categories of the Instructional
Grid. Twenty—six (81.2%) of the respondents reported
a total of eighty-Six behavioral acts classified under
this heading. On the basis of the number of respondents
reporting and the number of acts identified, it would
appear that the ancillary behaviors associated with in-
struction were considered to be a major part of the
instructorfisresponsibilities in classroom and laboratory
teaching. A summary Of the Specific categories classified
under this heading is presented as follows: (1) Planning
and Preparation for Instruction and (2) Interpersonal
Relations.

Planning and Preparation for Instruction. Twenty—
three respondents (71.8%) reported a total of fifty—seven
behavioral acts classified under this specific category
of the Instructional Grid. The importance of this par-
ticular area of teacher behavior was evidenced by the
fact that it ranked second among the Six specific categor-
ies of the Grid with reference to frequency of use. The

two major elements Long Range Planning and Daily Planning

180
had a rank order of six and two respectively. Daily planning
and preparation for instruction appeared to be of consider-
able concern to the instructors.

An analysis Of the major elements and certain
characteristics of the respondents revealed that (l)
mechanical-industrial instructors reported more behaviors
associated with Long Range Planning than drafting-design
instructors, (2) electricity-electronics instructors re-
ported more behavioral acts involving Daily Planning than
drafting-design instructors, and (3) instructors with an
undergraduate major 31 industrial education reported
more acts associated with Long Range Planning than in-
structors with majors in other subject areas.

Upon analysis of the total population, significant
differences in the number of effective and ineffective
behaviors were noted in the specific category as well as
in the major element Daily Planning. In both instances
there were more ineffective than effective behaviors.

An analysis of the Specific category and certain character-
istics of the respondents revealed that (1) each classifi-
cation reported more ineffective than effective behaviors,
(2) mechanical—industrial instructors appeared to be

more effective than either drafting-design or electricity-
electronics instructors, while drafting-design instructors
appeared to be least effective of the three, (3) instruc—

tors with no professional preparation were more effective

181
than those with professional preparation, (4) instruc-
tors with an undergraduate major in industrial education
were more effective than those with majors in other
subject areas, and (5) instructors with previous high
school teaching experience were more effective than
those with only post—high School experience.

Interpersonal Relations. Eighteen reSpondents
(56.2%) reported acts that were classified under this
specific category of the Grid. It would appear that
the instructors were not involved as frequently in this
type of activity as in other behaviors associated with
teaching. However, it was evident that the respondents
were involved, to a considerable extent, in limited
counseling activities such as providing occupational
information. The data would indicate that instructors
had rather limited outside—of—class relationships with
students other than in counseling situations.

Upon analysis of the major element Counseling it
would appear that instructors with only post—high school
teaching experience were involved more frequently than
instructors with previous high school experience.

The respondents reported significantly more ef-
fective than ineffective behaviors in the specific cate-
gory as well as in the major element Counseling. An
analysis of the specific category indicated that: (1)

instructors who had professional preparation for teaching

182
were more effective than those without such preparation,
(2) instructors with an undergraduate major in industrial
education were more effective than those with majors in
other subject areas, and (3) instructors with previous
high school teaching experience were more effective than

instructors with only post—high school experience.

Limitations of the Analyses

The analysis of the Instructional Grid was limited
by the number of respondents and the number of behavioral
acts reported. The numbers were sufficiently large for
analysis and interpretation when the total population
and the Specific categories of the Grid were utilized.
However, interpretations became more limited as respond-
ents were classified according to characteristics and
when acts were further divided into effective and ineffec-
tive behaviors.

In addition, three other known variables may have
biased the statistical analyses. First, incidentswere
solicited from only one source,the technical instructors
themselves. An analysis of behavioral acts secured
from others who may have been in a position to observe
technical instructors might have contributed to a more

thorough analysis of instructional behavior.

183

The second variable that may have biased the
statistical analyses of the study was the difference
in the number of respondents in each of the groups
when classified according to certain characteristics.

This factor was more noticeable when classified accord-
ing to technical teaching areas. However, this was not

a significant factor to be considered in the analyses
concerned with the professional characteristics of the
respondents since there were only slight variations

in the size of the various pairs selected for statistical
analysis.

The third variable was the difference in the num—
ber of behavioral acts identified in each incident reported
by the respondents. However, this was not a major factor
to be considered since, with only one exception, each
respondent reported an equal number of incidents involv-
ing effective and ineffective behaviors. In addition,
there was only a Slight difference in the total number of
behavioral acts reported by each respondent.

It was possible to take into account the second
and third variables mentioned when making the various
statistical analyses of the data. Corrective measures
used to reduce the effect of these known variables were

discussed throughout the chapter.

184
Although the study was exploratory in nature, and
generalizations cannot be made,the data was sufficient
to permit interpretations that would provide both implica-
tions for teacher education programs and further research

concerning the problem of technical teacher preparation.
SUMMARY

This chapter has presented a description of the
Instructional Grid that was used for the purpose of clas—
sifying the behavioral acts reported. An analysis of the
categories and sub—categories of the Grid provided general
information and interpretations of instructional behavior.
In addition, an analysis was made to determine the instruc-
tional acts reported most frequently for the purpose of
establishing the rank order of importance of the various
behaviors associated with classroom and laboratory instruc-
tion. Statistical analyses were conducted to determine
if differences existed between the frequency with which
major elements of the Grid were reported and certain
characteristics of the respondents. Six hypotheses were
tested to determine those relationships.

Further analyses made it possible to determine the
frequency with which effective and ineffective behaviors

were reported. Seven hypotheses were tested to determine

185
relationships between effective and ineffective behaviors
reported by the respondents (l) as a group and (2) when
classified according to certain characteristics. A sum—
mary of the analyses and interpretations made from these

data concluded the presentation.

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The purpose of this chapter is to briefly review
the nature and conduct of the study, present a recapitula—
tion of the significant findings,and make certain recom-

mendations on the basis of these findings.
I. SUMMARY

Recent years have seen many new developments in
the field of education. Although not a new phenomenon
on the educational scene, post—high school technical
education is one of those areas in the field of education
that has grown with such rapidity as to create an urgent
need for professionally qualified instructors to staff
the many new and developing programs throughout the
country. This need is particularly evident in the pub-
lic community junior colleges. It has been only recently
that attention has been focused upon the need to develop
teacher education programs specifically designed to pre—
pare professional personnel to staff these programs. The
dearth of relevant literature,especially research studies
in the field of technical teacher preparation, identified
the need for exploratory studies that might serve as a

186

187
basis for further research related to curriculum develop—
ment directly concerned with the preparation of post—high
school technical instructors. It was with this purpose

in mind that this study was conducted.

The Purpose of the Study

It was the purpose of this study to make an analy-
sis of the classroom and laboratory instructional functions
of engineering technology instructors in Michigan community
junior colleges. More specifically, the study was con-
cerned with (l) the order of importance of the various
instructional functions, (2) the relationships between
instructional acts and certain characteristics of the
respondents, (3) the types of behaviors that demonstrate
effectiveness and ineffectiveness in classroom and labora-
tory instruction; when classified as a group, and accord-
ing to certain characteristics, and (4) implications for
curriculum development in technical teacher education.
Epocedures Used in Conduct
pf the Study

The format used in Chapter III for presenting the
procedures followed in the conduct of the study will also
be utilized in this summary presentation as follows: (1)
data collection procedures, (2) data processing and
classification procedures, and (3) procedures for analyz-

ing and interpreting the data.

188

Data Collection. Each of the data collection pro—
cedures used in the study will be presented in the fol-
lowing paragraphs in the order used.

1. Since the critical incident was utilized in the
collection of data it was necessary to develOp a general
statement of purpose and functional description of the
activity being studied. In this case, the activity being
studied was the classroom and laboratory instructional
function of post-high school engineering technology in-
structors. A review of the related literature yielded
various concepts as to the role and function of the tech-
nical education instructor. These concepts were con-
solidated to form a tentative general statement of purpose.
This tentative statement of purpose was then submitted to
a jury of authorities in the field of technical education
for their comments and reactions. On the basis of these
comments the operational statement of purpose was refined
and develOped.

2. Once the statement of purpose was ready for
use it was possible to develop the data collecting in-
strument. A pre-test was conducted for the purpose of
refining the instrument before having it printed for use.

3. The population was limited to technical ed-
ucation instructors in Michigan community colleges who
were identified as full-time regular staff members

teaching college level courses in one of three technical

189
fields of mechanical-industrial technology, drafting—
design technology, or electricity-electronics technology.
A total of sixty—eight technical instructors met this
criteria for selection.

4. The mailed questionnaire was utilized for the
purpose of collecting the data. An initial letter de—
scribing the study and soliciting cooperation was for-
warded in advance of the data collecting instrument. The
data collecting instrument was then forwarded to each of
the sixty-eight instructors. A total of four follow—up
letters. was :sent to the instructors who had not responded.

Data Processing and Classification. Upon completion
of the data collection phase procedures were established
for processing the data. These procedures will be pres-
ented in the following paragraphs in the order used.

1. The first step was an analysis of the incidents
for the purpose of extracting all acts involving instruc-
tional behavior. These were first recorded on 3x5 cards
and later transferred to tabulation cards, along with
pertinent data concerning the educational background and
experience of the respondents.

2. Once the behavioral acts had been extracted and
recorded as either effective or ineffective it was then
necessary to develop an appropriate system for classify-
ing the data. A review of related literature produced

a tentative frame of reference for classifying the data.

190
Several trial classifications were made utilizing this
frame of reference. This resulted in minor changes be-
fore the classification process was considered complete.
These changes produced the Instructional Grid that was
used throughout the study. The Instructional Grid in its
final form was composed of three major categories, six
specific categories, and thirteen major elements.

3. Four analysts, in addition to the investigator,
were utilized in the category formulation process. Each
of the analysts and the investigator classified each be-
havioral act under one of the headings of the Instruc-
tional Grid. Eighty percent agreement between the analysts
was considered sufficient for classification purposes.

Analysis and Interpretation Of the Data. The pur-
pose of the study, specific questions tolxeanswered, and
the Instructional Grid provided a frame of reference and
classification system for all analyses of the data.

These analyses were carried out in three stages:

1. The first stage involved an analysis of the
categories and sub—categories of the Instructional Grid
for the purpose of determining both the number of respond-
ents reporting the act and the frequency with which the

various behavioral acts were reported.

191

2. The second stage provided a summary analysis
of the categories and sub—categories of the Grid for the
purpose of establishing the rank order of importance.

3. The third stage involved the testing of hy—
potheses to determine relationships between categories of
the Grid and the respondents; classified as a group, and
according to certain characteristics.

The statistical method employed to test the Signifi-
cance of these relationships was the Chi square test. The
null hypothesis was rejected if the value of Chi square at-

tained or exceeded a significance level of .05.
11. CONCLUSIONS

The conclusions which resulted from the conduct of
this study are presented in the form of answers to the
basic questions posed in Chapter I. On the basis of the
data and the limitations cited, the following conclusions

are presented.

Question One

What is the order Of importance of the various
instructional functions of engineering technology instruc—
tors?

It would appear that the respondents placed primary
emphasis upon instructional activities associated with

the presentation of instruction. More specifically, they

192
appeared to utilize the formal lecture, instructional
aids, application and assignment, and class discussion
as the most frequently used methods of teaching. Daily
Planning and Preparation for Instruction was ranked
second in importance among all the activities associated
with classroom and laboratory instruction. Chapter IV
provided a listing, by rank order, of the relative im-

portance of the various instructional behaviors.

Question Two

What relationships exist between the reported acts
and certain characteristics of the respondents?

The Chi square test of significance was utilized
for the purpose of identifying possible relationships
between the frequency with which instructional acts were
reported and certain characteristicsof the respondents.
Although the statistical analyses did not produce a suf-
ficient number of significant differences to warrant
general conclusions, the following relationships appeared
to exist: (1) mechanical~industrial instructors were
involved more frequently in Long Range Planning and Prep—
aration for Instruction than drafting—design instructors,
(2) instructors with undergraduate majors in industrial
education also were involved more frequently in this
activity than those with majors in other subject areas,
(3) drafting-design instructors were involved more fre—

quently in Daily Planning and Preparation for Instruction

193
than electricity—electronics instructors,and (4) instruc-
tors with only post-high school teaching experience were
more frequently involved in Counseling activities than

those with previous high school experience.

Question Three

What behaviors do engineering technology instruc—
tors report that demonstrate their effectiveness in class-
room and laboratory instruction, (a) when classified as
a group, and (b) when classified according to certain
characteristics?

Since the respondents reported an equal number of
effective and ineffective incidents from which behavioral
acts were extracted, it was assumed that an equal number
of effective and ineffective behaviors Should have been
reported. Therefore, any significant differences between
the number of effective and ineffective acts was inter-
preted as demonstrating either effective or ineffective
behavior.

In answering the first part of the question, it
would appear that the respondents were significantly
more effective than ineffective in activities associated
with providing and maintaining a learning environment.
There appeared to be Significant differences in both of
the sub—categories relating to Learning Environment:

(1) activities associated with Instructional Management

194
for learning and (2) maintaining satisfactory Teacher—
Student Interactions within the classroom and laboratory
environment. In addition, the respondents appeared to
be especially effective in Counseling activities.

In answering the second part of the question, there
were several areas of teacher activity where the respond-
ents appeared to be more effective than ineffective when
classified according to certain characteristics.

1. In the areas of Verbal and Verbal Performative
Instruction, mechanical—industrial instructors appeared
to be more effective than electricity-electronics instruc-
tors.

2. When considering activities associated with
the Follow—Up of Instruction, it appeared that mechanical-
industrial instructors were more effective than electric-
ity-electronics instructors;znd instructors with professional
preparation were more effective than those without such
preparation.

3. The following relationships were detected for
activities associated with Learning Environment: (1)
mechanical—industrial instructors were more effective
than either drafting—design or electricity—electronics
instructors, (2) those with professionalpreparation
were more effective than those without such preparation,
(3) those with undergraduate majors in subject areas

other than industrial education were more effective than

195
those with industrial education majors,and (4) instruc—
tors with only post-high school teaching experience were
more effective than those with previous high school ex-
perience.

4. In the area of Interpersonal Relations the
following relationships were detected: (1) instructors
with professional preparation were more effective than
those without such preparation, (2) those with an under—
graduate major in industrial education were more effective
than those with majors in Other subject areas, and (3)
instructors with previous high school teaching experience
were more effective than those with only post-high school

experience.

Question Four

What behaviors do engineering technology instruc-
tors report that demonstrate their ineffectiveness in
classroom and laboratory instruction, (a) when classified
as a group, and (b) when classified according to certain
characteristics?

In answering the first part of the question only
one classification of instructional behavior was identified
as being significantly more ineffective than effective.
This was the area involving activities associated with

Daily Planning and Preparation for Instruction.

196

In answering the second part of the question it
should be pointed out that each of the Six classifications
of respondents reported more ineffective than effective
acts involving Planning and Preparation for Instruction.
On the basis of the data, it would appear thattflmafollow—
ing conclusions are valid:

1. Although all three groups classified according
to technical teaching areas reported more ineffective than
effective behaviors, it would appear that electricity-
electronics and drafting-design instructors were less
effective than mechanical—industrial instructors.

2. When the respondents were classified accord—
ing to professional preparation, it appeared that those
with professional preparation were less effective than
those without such preparation.

3. When the respondents were classified according
to undergraduate majors, it appeared that those with
majors in subject areas other than industrial education
were less effective than those with majors in industrial
education.

4. It would appear that instructors with only
post-high school teaching experience were less effective

than those with previous high school experience.

197
Question Five

What inferences will the investigations and
analyses proposed in this study produce for curriculum
develOpment in technical teacher education?

Analyses and interpretatiomsof the data would
appear to have identified certain broad inferences
for curriculum development in technical teacher education.
Some of the inferences for curriculum development used
in answering this question will also be found in the
following section "Recommendations."

1. The Instructional Grid that was utilized as
the frame of reference for all analyses of data is con-
sidered a major contribution toward curriculum develOp—
ment in the area of technical teacher preparation. Since
the Grid identified what would appear to be the major
areas of teacher behavior in classroom and laboratory
instruction, it in turn implies that these same areas
should be considered when developing curricula.

2. Areas of instructional behavior that were
reported to be used most frequently by the respondents
might also be areas that should receive major emphasis
in the preparation of instructors.

3. Areas of instructional behavior reported in-
frequently by the respondents of the study might result

in either less emphasis in the teacher education curriculum

198
or additional emphasis if it Should be decided that
teacher activities should be increased in this area of
teacher behavior.

4. Although the statistical analyses did not
produce a sufficient number of Significant differences
to warrant general conclusions when classified accord-
ing to technical teaching areas, there appeared to be
certain instructional activities used more frequently
by some types of instructors than others. This would
infer that some areas of a technical teacher education
curriculum might vary in emphasis, depending upon the type
of instructors being prepared.

5. The review of literature, as well as this study,
revealed that technical instructors have varied back—
grounds Of preparation and experience. In addition, the
increased demand for technical instructors, coupled with
the void in technical teacher education curriculums, would
indicate that the instructional staffs in technical educa—
tion are likely to continue having this diversity of
backgrounds. In this connection the study has produced
inferences that appear to have implications for teacher
preparation. Whether teacher preparation takes place
in the form of in-service education or in a full—time
teacher education program on a university campus, con-

sideration should be given to the existing competencies

.. until-E ”:59

«will... -3- ....

199
of the individual. Although the data of the study was
not conclusive it would appear that respondents with
different backgrounds of preparation and experience have
certain competencies in.common. Considerable flexibility
should be provided in in-service and teacher preparation

programs that would take these factors into account.
III. RECOMMENDATIONS

During the conduct of this study new areas for re-
search presented themselves. Some areas that appeared
to merit further research are as follows:

1. The fact that this was an exploratory study
concerned with the instructional function of engineering
technology instructors implies a need for similar stud—
ies, conducted on a broader scale,that would not only
continue the investigations of these three technical
areas but also investigate all the major fields in
technical education.

2. An extensive study that wouldcfiecover the
more specific behaviors inherent in technical teaching.
This would provide a basis for determining the kinds
of educational experiences that should be provided to
develop the broad range of competencies needed for tech—

nical teaching.

200

3. Since there are many organizational patterns
of technical education programs there would appear to be
merit in a comparative study of instructional behavior
between instructors in each type program. Suggestions
of some of the types of programs from which instruc-
tors might be selected for comparison are: private
technical schools, separate two-year technical institutes,
two-year technical institutes associated “with colleges and
universities, four—year technology programs, community
junior colleges, and technology programs approved by
various accrediting agencies such as the Engineers' Council
for Professional Development.

4. There would appear to be merit in a study of
the technical competencies needed by engineering tech—
nology instructors in the various fields of technical
education.

5. Since curriculum development for the prepara-
tion of technical instructors is in its early stages of
development, it is recommended that experimental studies
be conducted with various approaches to the preparation
Of technical instructors before any decisions are made
relative tO specific curricular requirements. Some pos—
sible approaches that might be studied are presented as

follows:

201

(1) A COOperative arrangement between two—year
community colleges or technical institutes whereby an
individual would obtain the first two years of general
and technical preparation then transfer to a four-year
university. There he would gain depth in the technical
specialty through courses in the college of engineering
and at the same time complete the professional require-
ments for teaching.

(2) Utilize the clinical school concept of a
cooperative in—service program of preparation in which
the individual would be enrolled at the university but
would alternate between time spent as an intern in an
on—going technical program, educational experiences on
the university campus, and supervised program of industrial
employment.

(3) A flexible curriculum whereby individuals with
different backgrounds of preparation and experience might
enter a program tailored to their Specific needs, taking
into account the competencies each may possess upon enter—

ing the program.
SUMMARY

The purpose of this study and the procedures used
in the conduct of the study were summarized in this chapter.

In addition, conclusions were presented in the form of

 

202
answers to the basic questions posed in Chapter I. Also,
specific recommendations were made concerning the need
for future research and experimentation that would bring
about innovations in curricula development in the area of

technical teacher education.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
American Council on Education. Wanted: 30,000 Instructors.
Washington: American Council on Education, 1949.
Bethel, Lawrence, Jesse Bouge and Frank Lindsay. Junior
College Technical Education in Your Community. New

York: McGraw—Hill Book Company, 1948.

Bogue, Jesse P. The Community College. New York: McGraw-
Hill Book Company, 1950.

Good, Carter V. (ed ) Dictionaryjof Education. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1959.

Edwards, Allen L. Statistical Methods for the Behavioral
Sciences. New York: Rinehart and Company, Inc., 1958.

Eells, Walter C. The Junior College. New York: Houghton
Mifflin Company, 1931.'

 

. WHy Junior College Terminal Education?
Washington: American Association of Junior Colleges,
1941. '

 

Graney, Maurice R. The Technical Institute. New York:
The Center for Applied Research in Education, Inc.,
1964

Henninger, G. Ross. The Technical Institute in America.
New York: McGraw—Hill Book Company, 1959.

Medsker, Leland L. The Junior College: Progress and
Prospegp. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1960.

Moroney, M. J. Facts From Figures. London: Penguin
Books Ltd., 1957.

Rummel, J. Francis. An Introduction to Research Pro-
ceduresin Education. New York: Harper andEkt$., 1958.

 

Ryans, David G. Characteristics of Teachers. Washington:
American Council on Education, 1960.

204

205

Schill, William J. Career Patterns of Vocational Educa—
tors. Danville Illinois: The Interstate Printers
and Publishers Inc., 1963.

Sexson, J. A. and J. W. Harbeson. The New American
College. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers,
1946. ‘

 

Smith, Leo F. and Laurence Lipsett. The Technical In—
stitute. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1956.

Technical Education YearbookJ 1963-1964. Ann Arbor,
Michigan: Prakken Publishers Inc., 1964.

Venn, Grant. Man, Education and Work: Post Secondary
Vocational and Technical Education. Washington:
American Council on Education, 1964.

Ward, Phebe. Terminal Education in the Junior College.
New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1947.

Wickenden, William E. and Robert H. Spahr A Studyjof
Technical Institutes. Lancaster, Pennsylvania:
The Lancaster Press, Inc., 1951.

 

Publicatigps of the Government, Learned
Societies ,and Other Organizations

American Institute for Research. Critical Rquirements
for Research Personnel. Pittsburg: American In—
stitute for Research, 1949.

American Society for Engineering Education, Technical
Institute Division. The Epgineering Technician.
Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois, n.d.

Brandon, George L. Twin Cities Technicians. East
Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University,
College of Education, 1958.

California State Department of Education. A Study of
Technical Education in California. Sacramento,
California: California State Department of Educa-
tion Publication, Volume XXVIII, No. 7, 1959.

. Technical Education for Industry. Suggestions
for Meeting the Need for Technical Education Pro-
grams in California Junior Colleges. Sacramento,
California: California State Department of Education,
1957.

 

206

Kansas State Board for Vocational Education. The Training
Needs of Highly Skilled Tegpnicians in Twenty:Three
Selected Manufacturipgjand Processingjfiirms in Kansas.
TOpeka, Kansas: Board for Vocational EducatiOn, 1959.

 

Krumm, R. L. Development of a Measure.of Pilot Instruc-
tor Proficiengy Based on the Critical Rquirements of
the Instructor's Job. Pittsburg: American Institute
for Research, 1953.

. Critical Requirements of Pilot Instructors.
Human Resources Research Center, Technical Report

52-1. San Antonio, Texas: Lackland Air Force Base,
1952.

 

Manpgwer Outlook for the Los Apgeles Area in the 1960's.
Los Angeles: Southern California Research Council
Report Number 5, 1957.

McGraw James L. Characteristics of Excellence in Epgineer—
ing Technology Education. American Society for
Engineering Education, Urbana, Illinois: University
of Illinois, 1962.

Michigan State University, College of Education. Voca-
tional Education in Michigan. The Final Report of
the Michigan Vocational Evaluation ProjeCt. East
Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, College
of Education, 1963.

Michigan State Department of Public Instruction, Division
of Vocational Education. Industrial Technical Educa-
tion in Michigan. Lansing, Michigan: Department of
Public Instruction, Vocational Education Bulletin
Number 2139, 1959.

National Association of Manufacturers. Your Opportunities
in Industry as A Technician. New York: National
Association of Manufacturers, 1957.

National Science Foundation. Scientific and Technical
Personnel in IndustryJ 1960. Bulletin NSF 61-75.
Washington: Government Printing Office, 1960.

__, . The Long Range Demand for Scientific and
Technical Personnel. Bulletin NSF 61-65. Washington:
Government Printing Office, 1961.

New York Department of Labor. Jobs 1960—1970. The Chang-

ing Pattern. Albany New York: Department of Labor,
1960.

I Dirk“. . I

207

North Carolina Employment Security Commission, Bureau of
Employment Security Research. North Carolina Study
pf Skilled_and Technical Manpgwer. Raleigh, North
Carolina: Employment Security Commission of North
Carolina, 1962.

Second Report to The PreSident. A RepOrt of the President's
Committee on Education Beyond the High School. Wash-
ington: Government Printing Office, 1957.

Texas Agriculture and Mining College System, Engineering
Extension Service. Technician Requirements in Principal
Industrial Areas in Texas. College Station, Texas:
Texas Agriculture and Mining College System, 1959.

United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Office of Education. Education For A Changing World
of Work, Appendix I. Washington: Government Printing
Office, 1963.

. Occgpational Criteria and Preparatory Curriculum
Eatterns intTechnical Education Programs. Washington:
Government Printing Office, 1962.

 

. Organized OccupationaipCurriculums. Circular
568. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1959.

 

. Vocational Education of College Grade. Bul-
letin Number 18. Washington: Government Printing
Office, 1946. '

 

. Vocational-Technical Education for American
Industry. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1958.

 

 

United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Employment Outlook for Technicians. A Report on
Technicians Who Work With Engineers and Physical
Scientists. Veterans Administration Pamphlet 22-1.
Washington: Government Printing Office, 1958.

. Manpower: Challenge of the 1960's. Washington:
Government Printing Office, 1961.

 

. Manpower Report of The President and A Report
on Manpower Requirementsi Resources, Utilizationy_and
Training. Washington: Government Printing Office,

1963.

 

University of Illinois, Bureau of Educational Research, Col-
lege of Education. Vocational and Technical Education
in Illinois. Urbana, Illinois: UniverSity of IllinOis,

1960.

 

Utah Department of Employment Security. Report of Utah's
Technical Manpower Survey for Training RequirementST

Salt Lake City, Utah: Department of Employment
Security, 1959.

 

 

Walsh, John P. Teacher Competence in Trade and Industrial
ngcation. A Publication of the United States De- 7‘
partmenEIOf Health, Education, and Welfare, Office
of Education, Bulletin OE-84006. Washington: Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1960.

Eeriodicalg

Arnold, Walter M. "Meeting Manpower Needs Through Tech—
nical Education," American Vocational Journal

(December 1962), pp. 8-11.

Brunner, Ken August. "The Technical Institute Instruc-
tor," Technical Education Nepp, XX (November 1960),
(editorial).

Colvert, Clyde C. "Ideal Junior College Instructor,"
gpnior College Journa , XXV (May 1952), pp. 502-507.

. "Professional Development of Junior College
Instructors," Junior College Journal, XXV (April 1955)
pp. 474-478. »

Corbally, J.E. Jr. "A Second Look at the Critical Incident
Technique," Epi Delta Kappan, XXXVIII (December 1959),

 

DOIan, F. H. "The Preparation of Junior College Teachers,"
Junior College Journal, XXII (February 1952), pp.
329-336°

Eckert, Ruth E. "A New Design for the Training of College
Teachers, Junior College Journal, XVIII (September
1947), pp. 25—33. ‘

Flanagan, John C. "The Critical Incident Technique,"
Esychological Bulletin, LI (July 1954), pp. 327-355.

. "Critical Requirements,A New Approach to
EmpIOyee Evaluation," Personnel Psychology, II (1949),

pp. 419-425.

Freund, C. J. "The Technician and the Engineer," Journal
ngngineering Education, XLIV (October 1953), pp.

209

Garrison, Lloyd A. "Preparation of Junior College Instruc-
tors," Junior College Journal, XII (December 1941),

Harris, Norman C. "Technical Education in the Community
College," Junior College Journal, XXV (December 1954),
pp. 200-208.

Hawkins, T. J. "Junior College Teachers, Some Unique
Characteristics," Junior College Journal, XXV
(January 1955), pp. 298-302.

Henderson, L. N. "Internship in Junior College Teaching,"
Junior College Journal, XXVII (March 1957), pp. 388-395.

Hill, W. Scott. "General Electric's Recent Experiences in
Hiring Technicians," Technical Education News, XV
(Fall 1955), p. 4.

 

Holderman, K L. "Some Facts About Our Technical Institute
Instructors," Technical Education News, XI (April 1952),
pp. 1-5.

Jarvie, Lawrence L. "Preparation of Technical Institute

Instructors is Challenge to Schools," Technical Educa-
tion News (March 1948), p. 6.

Jensen, Alfred C. "Determining Critical Requirements
for Teachers," Journal of Experimental Education,

XX (September 1951), pp. 77-86. '

Koos, Leonard V. "Programs of Junior College Teacher

Preparation," Junior College Journal, XIX (February

1949), pp. 3334346.

. "Preparation for Community College Teaching,"
Hpurnal of Higher Education, XXI (June 1950), pp.

Laffin, Charles W. Jr. "Teachers for Technical Institutes,
Teaching Technicians Help Solve the Problem,"
Technical Education News, XVII (Special Issue,1957),

pp. 5-6.

Martprawa, S. V. "Washington's Teacher Education Plan
Related to Preparation of Community College Instruc-
tors," Junior College Journal, XXII (November 1951),

Mayhew, Lewis B "The Critical Incident Technique in
Educational Evaluation," Journal of Educational
Research, IL (1956), pp. 591-598.

210

Merson, T. B. "The Preparation and Selection of Instruc-
tors for Community Colleges," California Journal of
Secondagy Education, XXXI (December 1956), pp. 496-501.

Metz, Donald C. "The Demand and Supply of Technicians,"
Industrial Arts and Vocational Education, (September
1962), pp. 16—18.

"Fifth Survey of Engineering Technician
Programs," Technical Education News, XX (November
1960), p. 15.

 

Moss, Jerome Jr. "Industrial Education Program Offers
Option to Prepare Teachers of Technical Curriculums,"
Technical Education News, XXI (June 1962), pp. 17—18.

Olivo, C. Thomas. "Vistas in Trade, Industrial, and Tech—
nical Education," American Vocational Journal,
(April 1961), pp. 16-25.

Peterson, Basil H. "Technical Education in California
Junior Colleges," Technical Education News, XVIII
(Special Issue, 1958), pp. 3-5.

 

Picken, Thomas H. "Evaluating the Engineering Technician
Position," Technical Education News, XXI (Special
Issue, 1961): p. 17.

 

Roney, Maurice W. "Excerpts From Committee Reports,
Teacher Training and Recruitment," Technical Educa—
tion News, XVIII (Special Issue, 1958), pp. 10-11.

"Public Technical Education," American
Vocational Journal (May 1963), pp. 16-19.

 

"Teacher Training and Recruitment,"
Technical Education News, XIX (Special Issue,
1959), p. 16.

"Technical Education for Teachers, A New
Dimension in Industrial Teacher Education," Tech-
nical Education News, XX November 1960), p. 5.

. "Trends in Technical Education," School
ShOp, XX (March 1963), pp. 17-18.

Rung, Thomas J. and Robert E. McCord. "Teacher Selection
and Training," Technical Education News, XVII (Special
Issue, 1957), p. 4.

211

Ryans, David G "The Investigation of Teacher Characterist-
ics," Educational Record, XXXIV (1953).

"Teacher Behavior Theory and Research: Implica-
tions for Teacher Education," The Journal of Teacher
Education, XIV (September 1963).-

 

Seltz, James E. "Progress and Problems of Technical
Institute Training," Industrial Arts and Vocational
Education, (May 1960), pp. 22-24.

Smith, B. O. "A Concept of Teaching," Teachers College
Record, LXI (February 1960), pp. 229-241.

Tillery, Dale. "The Internship Approach to Junior College
Teaching," Technical Education News, XX (April 1961),
pp. 13—14.

Torpey, William G. "Adequacy of Technical Institute Cur-
ricula," Journal of Engineering Education, L (November
1959), p. 131.

Tyrrell, C. C. "Staff DevelOpment: A Program for Two—
Year Colleges," Technical Education News, XVII (Special
Issue, 1957), p. 6.

VanZeeland, Fred J. "Desirable Characteristics of a
Technical Institute Instructor," Technical Education
News, XI (January 1952), pp. 1—2.

Uppublished Material

Arnold, Walter M. "Technical Education-Forecast of the
Future" (paper read at the Trade and Technical
Division Meeting, American Vocational Association,
Atlantic City, New Jersey, December 8, 1963)
(Mimeographed).

American Technical Education Association — National As—
sociation of Industrial Teacher Educators. "Recruit-
ment and Preparation of Teachers of Technical Subjects"
(Interim Report presented at the joint meeting of
the ATEA and NAITE, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, December
3, 1962) (Mimeographed).

212

Beatty, H. Russell. "Characteristics of Excellence in
Engineering Technology Education" (Address before
the American Technical Education Association, Atlantic
City, New Jersey, December 9, 1963) (Mimeographed).

. "How the Technical Institutes Can Meet the
Challenge of Technical Education" (Address before the
American Technical Education Association, American
Vocational Association Convention, Buffalo, New
York, August 12, 1958) (Private printing).

Ciernick, sylvia. "Development and Use of A Conceptual
Schema for Analyzing the School Public Relations
Process" (unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Michigan
State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 1962).

Larson, Milton. "Personal Inventory of Instructors in the
Industrial—Technical Curricula in N.D.E.A. Title
VIII Programs in Public Community Junior Colleges in
Michigan" (working document of the Michigan Vocational
Education Evaluation Project, Michigan State Univer-
sity, East Lansing, Michigan, n.d.) (Mimeographed).

.. "A Study of the Characteristics of

 

Students, Teachers, and the Curriculum of Industrial—
Technical Education in the Public Community Junior
Colleges of Michigan" (unpubliShed Doctor's disserta-
tion, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan,
1965).

Purdue University. "Applied Technology Teaching Option"
(Industrial Education Curriculum Bulletin, Purdue
University, West Lafayette, Indiana, 1962).

Ray, R. E. "A Study of University Programs Preparing
Engineering Technology Instructors and A Review Of
the Literature Pertinent to This Phase of Teacher
Education" (Sponsored research study, Eastern Illinois
University, Charleston, Illinois, 1963).

Weber, Earl M. "A Comparative Study of Industrial Tech-
nology Programs in American Colleges and Universities,
With Industrial Arts Teacher Education and Technical
Institute Programs" (unpublished Doctor's disserta-
tion, The Pennsylvania State University, University
Park, Pennsylvania, 1961).

Wenrich, Ralph C. "The Administration of Technical Educa-
tion in A Comprehensive College" (paper read at the
American Technical Education Association, Milwaukee,
Wisconsin, December 3, 1962) (Mimeographed).

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A
LETTER TO JURY OF EXPERTS

Dear Mr.

Teacher recruitment and preparation is a persistent problem in all
fields of education. Those interested in technical education are
made aware of this situation as enrollment in established programs
continues to increase and new programs are initiated. Recent stud-
ies and reports indicate that technical instructors are recruited
from many sources and with varied backgrounds of educational prep-
aration. Even so, very few collegiate programs have been developed
for the purpose of upgrading these individuals or providing initial
preparation for others desiring to enter the profession.

Before any major curriculum development can be made in technical
teacher education there is a need for a more thorough understand-
ing of the role of the technical instructor. Realizing this,

a study of the "classroom and laboratory function of the technical
instructor" is being conducted at Michigan State University. The
initial study will be limited to the State of Michigan, but it

is hoped that it will provide implications for studies of larger
SCOpe.

The "critical incident technique" developed by John C. Flanagan
and used in similar studies of both military and civilian occupa—
tions is being utilized in this research project. The first

phase of a study employing this technique is to define the purpose
of the activity being investigated. Accordingly, a tentative
statement of the purpose of the technical instructor has been
developed from a review of the literature and is being submitted
to individuals in positions of leadership in technical education
for their reaction with the intent of perfecting a working state—
ment of purpose. The attached form can be used for your individual
response.

The second phase involves a study of the classroom and laboratory
behavioral acts of the technical instructor and is entirely depend-
ent upon the development and perfection of a statement of purpose
from authorities in the field.

The time and consideration given to this endeavor will be greatly
appreciated.

Sincerely,

Rex E. Ray, Instructor
Secondary Education and Curriculum

214

APPENDIX B

II.

III.

APPENDIX B

A DEVELOPMENTAL STATEMENT OF PURPOSE FOR
THE TECHNICAL INSTRUCTOR

Introduction:

You are being asked to assist in the development of a
statement of the general purpose of the technical in-
structor in classroom and laboratory instruction. It is
fully recognized that a lengthly discourse could be made
concerning specific functions, activities, and responsi-
bilities of the technical instructor. However, the pri-
mary purpose is to develOp a general statement that is
comprehensive and yet not so specific as to suggest
reSponses from the technical instructors who will be in—
volved in the second phase of the study.

Statement of the General Purpose:

The purpose of the technical instructor in classroom and
laboratory instruction is to prepare students who are
technically competent to enter the world of work in the
field of engineering technology. It is his responsibility
to utilize his knowledge of the subject and his skill in
the fundamentals of the teaching-learning process in such
a manner as to provide an environment that will stimulate
learning and the desire to continue to study and learn.
He is responsible for familiarizing the student with the
application of scientific and engineering principles,
methods, and technical skills necessary to perform a
Support function in engineering activities.

To What Extent do you Accept the Above Statement of Purpose?
I accept the above purpose as stated. . .
I accept the above purpose with the following minor

revisions.
The above purpose is unacceptable to me unless the

following major revisions are made.

 

Name and Position

216

APPENDIX C

 

APPENDIX C

JURY OF EXPERTS USED IN DEVELOPING THE STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
FOR A POST-HIGH SCHOOL TECHNICAL EDUCATION INSTRUCTOR

The April 1964 Issue of School Shop, in its "Directory of
Federal and State Officials in Vocational and Industrial-Arts
Education," lists fifteen State Departments of Education in the
United States that have someone specifically designated as
responsible for technical education. One individual from each of
these StaceDepartments was asked to participate in developing

the statement of purpose for the technical instructor.

In addi-

tion, the Technical Education Branch Of the U.S. Office of Educa-
tion was also contacted. One hundred percent (100%) response

was obtained from this group of individuals.

of those who participated.

Robert M. Knoebel, Acting Director
Technical Education Branch

Division of Vocational & Tech. Educ.

U.S. Office of Education
Washington 25, D.C.

Russell Journigan, Supervisor
Technical Education

State Department of Education
Sacramento 14, California

Lucian Lombardi, Chief

Bureau of Technical Institutes
State Department of Education
Hartford 15, Connecticut

T. W. Strickland, Assistant Dir.
& Supervisor of Technical Educ.
State Department of Education
Tallahassee, Florida

Walter J. Bartz, Supervisor
Technical Education

State Department of Education
Springfield, Illinois

Myrl Curtis, Supervisor

Area Vocational & Tech. Training
State Department of Education
TOpeka, Kansas

D. H. Moreland, Supervisor
Technical Educ. & Industrial Educ.
State Department of Education
Baton Rouge 4, Louisiana

Carl S. Barber, Supervisor
Technical Education

State Department of Education
Jefferson City, Missouri

218

Below is a list

Nicholas Frigiola, Director
Technical Education

State Department of Education
Trenton 8, New Jersey

Nelson J. Murbach,Chief
Bureau of Trade & Tech. Educ.
State Department of Education
Albany, New York

Arthur L. Hardwick, Supervisor
Area Vocational Technical Trng.
State Department of Education
Stillwater, Oklahoma

Stephen Sworen, Specialist
Technical Education

State Department of Education
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

G. E. Freeman, Director

Area Technical Programs

State Department of Education
Nashville, Tennessee

Dale Peterson, Specialist
Trade—Technical Education
State Department of Education
Salt Lake City, Utah

Lawrence Hill, Coordinator
Area Vocational Technical Schs.
State Department Of Education

Richmond 16, Virginia

Charles A. Kline, Director
Technical Education & Trade

& Industrial Education
State Department of Education
Cheyenne, Wyoming

APPENDIX D

APPENDIX D

DATA COLLECTING INSTRUMENT

PROJECT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
OF

CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR INSTRUCTORS
OF

POST HIGH SCHOOL TECHNICAL EDUCATION

 

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

College Of Education

East Lansing, Michigan
220

221

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EAST LANSING

 

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

Technical Educator:

A few days ago you received a letter describing a Sfudy that is being conducted atMichigan
State University in which we are attempting to identify the classroom and laboratory function of
The post high school technical education instructor. As a professional educator in the field of
technical education you are In a strategic position to Contribute To a better understanding of the

role and function of the technical instructor. We are soliciting your cooperation and participation
in this proiect.

IT is fully realized that you have many demands (or your time, but it is hoped that this study and
The implications it has for technical education has created enough interest that you will Take
time out of your busy schedule to complete and return this instrument at your earliest possible
convenience. Only through maximum participation on the part of personnel involved in post
high school technical education can the success of this phase of the study he assured.

Having contributed to the success of this proIeCf you will no doubt be interested in having a
Summary of the findings and recommendations. Therefore, a copy will be forwarded to all part-
icipamsas soon as the study has been completed.

Sincerely,

/ ,.
44? y I

Rex E. Ray, Director .
Technical Teacher Education PrOIect

L)

DIRECTIONS: Please answer every item as it applies to you.

222

Part I

response.

EDUCATION

Educational Background (College)

Highest degree held

Number semester hours

 

 

beyond degree

 

Undergraduate maiorl si

Undergraduate minor( 5)

 

 

Graduate maior(sl
Graduate minor(s)

 

Through what source or sources did you
receive preparation in the technical area
you are teaching?

Technical institute (public)
Technical school (private)
ommunity junior college

Industrial eXperience
Military service

( l
( l
( )C
( )4 year college or university
( i
( l
( lOther:

Indicate the total number of semester hours in
the following areas of study.

0 O
" N

NONE
1120
OVER

( )( )( ) ( ) Professional education
courses (general)

( )( if )( ) Professional education
courses in major field

( If if )( ) Student teaching

( if if )( ) Technical courses directly
related to area you are
teaching

( ( )( )( ) Science (physics 8: chemistry)
( if If )( )Math
( (

31

32
33
34
35
36
37

38

39

4O

41

BASIC DATA

Either check or supply the apprOpriate

TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Total number of years eXperience
Number of years in present position

Indicate number of years experience in the
following areas at the various levels

Levels Subiect Areas

) Technical education
) Vocational education
l Engineering
) Science (physics or chemistry)
) Math
l
l
l

Industrial arts

a"\./~\ ’A‘ ,«AA‘A J

Indicate the area in which you devote the
maior portion of your time in your
present assignment

Mechanical technology
Drafting technology
Engineering technology
Industrial technology

Automotive technology
Administration

( l
( l
( l
l i
( ) Electronic technology
( i
( i
l l

INDUSTRIAL EXPERIENCE

Total number of months experience
Longest period of empIOyment (mos)
Most recent eXperience

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

20 f I ) )( ) Engineering DATE LENOTHIMOS)
Classify Your Industrial Experience
Date(s) [[52ng Type of experience Descriptive statement of work

‘2 Apprenticed to a trade
4‘3 Journeyman tradesman
4“ Technician
45 University Industry

cooperative program
46

 

 

Other:

 

223

PART II CLASSROOM AND LABORATORY BEHAVIORAL FUNCTIONS

General Information

I. The purpose of this study is to identify the various instructional functions involved in classroom m
and laboratory teaching of a post-high school technical subject.

II. The critical incident technique is a research tool somewhat different from those commonly used in
the study of educational problems. At least two questions generally come to the mind of those par-
ticipating in a study utilizing this technique. These questions are (I) how does one writeodes-
criptive account of an incident, and (2) how can an objective analysis be made of these incidents.
A clarification of these questions is presented below.

I. A critical incident involves an act of teacher behavior that is considered to be either effective
or ineffective. It is a descriptive account of an act involving the behavior or activities ofo
person as he goes about whatever is required of him as a teacher, particularly those activities
which are concerned with the guidance or direction of the learning of others. --—EXAMPLES
of descriptive accounts of incidents are included on the insert sheet.

2. This research tool definitely provides for objective analysis of the incidents recorded. Ob-
jective procedures for identifying the Specific behavioral act(s) recorded in each incident have
already been established. Categories for the tabulation and classification of these acts are
already developed. This technique was develOped at the American Institute for Research and
has been used successfully in hundreds of similar studies.

Ill. On the following pages of this instrument you will be asked to describe incidents occurring in class-
room and laboratory teaching that you consider to be especially effective or ineffective in contribu~
ting to HThe Purpose of the Technical Instructor”. Listed below are guidelines for writing incidentS.

I. The incidents which you describe should be reports of actual behavior.

2. Incidents should be objective, accurate reports of observed or experienced behavior.
3. Incidents should be clearly identified and defined as effective or ineffective.

4. Ineffective incidents are just as important as effective incidents in arriving at the instructional
function of an instructor.

5. The descriptive account of an incident need not be lengthy, neither must it be an elaborate
account of some dramatic incident that has taken place over a period of time. A brief, simple,
description of incidents involving teacher behavior is all that is necessary.

6. It is entirely unnecessary to identify yourself or individuals you describe since it is only their
behavior that will be analyzed. Both you and they will remain completely anonymous.

224

EXAMPLES 9E EFFECTIVE CRITICAL INCIDENTS

The following EXAMPLES are descriptive accounts of critical incidents occurring

in Industrial Arts teaching. They are provided only as illustrations of how critical
incidents are written using the same format found in this instrument.

I.

II.

II.

 

Account of an Incident Involving an Instructor‘s Own Class

Give a descriptive account of the incident and the specific thing you did that
made it stand out in your mind as being especially Effective. What actually happened?

I had a student in class who impressed me as being an agitator, a "wise guy".
I decided to talk with the counselor about this student and also look over his
Cumulative Record. I found that this was an exceptionally bright student and
wasn't generally prone to behave as he had been in my class. I asked the student
to come in for a conference. We discussed his likes and dislikes and finally got
around to his problem in my class. The class was not challenging him and he felt
that he was wasting his time. We worked out some special types of research
assignments and challenging laboratory problems and experiments that better fit

his needs and capabilities.

Why do you think you were effective?

His whole attitude seemed to change over-night. Now this student is a
leader in the class and I can‘t keep enough work for him to do. He is a challenge
to me, and the class is profiting from his more advanced work and enthusiasm. I‘m

learning from him too.

Account of an Incident InvolvingAAnother Instructor

Give a descriptive account of an incident involving another instructor and the
specific thing hg did that made it stand out in your mind as being especially
,Efiigggizg. What actually happened?

I observed another instructor during the period of time he was organizing
and setting up the student personnel plan for cleaning up the laboratory. He
presented the idea that this was a cooperative effort and therefore the students
themselves should identify the jobs to be done and decide upon the best way to
accomplish them. They took a tour of the laboratory to familiarize themselves
with the layout. He conducted a brainstorming session to get ideas of jobs to
be done and procedures to be used and then let the class discuss it further to
come up with a workable plan. The class decided to divide into smaller groups
to tackle specific aspects of the problem and then combine their ideas into

the class personnel plan.
Why do you think he was effectigg?

This personnel plan was ”their” plan. They had decided upon what should
be done and how they would do it. Instead of being "teacher imposed" it had
grown out of a class problem and one that would take c00peration on the part of

all concerned. The personnel plan worked efficiently and there were no

I I v -
gripes" from the students.

225

EXAMPLES QT: INEFFECI’IVE CRITICAL INCIDENTS

 

The following EXAMPLES are descriptive accounts of ineffective incidents occurring

in Industrial Arts teaching. They are provided 9_nly as illustrations of how critical
incidents are written using the same format found in this instrument.

II.

II.

Account of an Incident Involvinggan Instructor‘s Own Class

Give a descriptive account of the incident and the specific thing you Mthat

made it stand out in your mind as being especially ineffective. What actually
happened?

 

I met my woodworking class one day and suddenly realized that some of the
students needed a demonstration on cutting a dado joint. I called the group
together and proceeded to give the demonstration. I had failed to think through
the presentation ahead of time so that I could assemble the necessary tools. I
had just started when I needed a bench rule. Normally they hang on the side of
the work bench. I reached down to get one and there wasn't any. I went to
another bench and there wasn’t one there. Finally I realized they had been used
in the classroom the day before and had not been returned. I sent a student to
get one and finally proceeded with the demonstration.

Why do you think you were ineffective?

 

Whatever interest there was at the beginning of my presentation was lost
by these delays and obvious lack of planning on my part. The students were

restless and inattentative and I had to repeat the demonstration again the next day.

Account of an Incident Involving Another Instructor

Give a descriptive account of an incident involving another instructor and the

specific thing he did that made it stand out in your mind as being especially
ineffective. What actually happened?

 

I observed another instructor in a course in engineering drawing attempting
to get across the concept of dimensioning by the use of film strips. Ikewas
operating the projector which of course was some distance from.the mnmmn.

He was explaining each film as it appeared on the screen and attempting to
teach the concept of the placement of dimensions and the new terms (dhmnmimi
lines, extension lines, etc.). He was standing at the projector using marten“
trying to tell the students what was on the screen instead of being in front of
the class using a pointer actually pointing out the things he was talkingefiwuh

Why do you think he was ineffective?

 

At the end of the presentation he asked questions about placement of
dimensions, terms and concepts involved in dimensioning practices and found that
the students were unable to associate these terms and concepts because he had

not reinforced his presentation by actually pointing these out on the screen as
he talked about them.

226
RECORD OF CRITICAL INCIDENT

The purpose of a post high school technical education instructor in classroom and laboratory instruction
is to function as a member of the educational team in preparing students to become sufficiently competent
to enter an occupation or a cluster of related occupations in a selected field of technology. In his
educational role he shall utilize his technical knowledge and practical experience, as well as his skill to
carry out the teaching-learning process in such a manner as to create and maintain an environment that
will tend to stimulate learning and foster a thirst for continued learning. He shall contribute to the total
effort to familiarize the student with the application of scientific and engineering principles, methods,

and technical skills necessary to perform a support function in engineering, scientific, and allied
activities.

It};

INSTRUCTIONS: Now think of a recent incident that has occurred in your classroom or laboratory teach-

. ing in which you feel you were effective in contributing to the ”purpose" stated above.
°‘ Record the account in the space provided at the bottom of this page.

In what technical area did this incident occur?

- I. Give a descriptive account of the incident and the specific thing you did that made it stand out in
"‘9'" your mind as being especially effective. What actually happened?

......

iiiii

~V‘V

ll. Why do you think you were effective?

227
RECORD OF CRITICAL INCIDENT

The purpose of a post high school technical education instructor in classroom and laboratory instruction
is to function as a member of the educational team in preparing students to become sufficiently competent
to enter an occupation or a cluster of related occupations in a selected field of technology. In his
educational role he shall utilize his technical knowledge and practical experience, as well as his skill
to carry out the teaching-learning process in such a manner as to create and maintain an environment
that will tend to stimulate learning and foster a thirst for continued learning. He shall contribute to the
total effort to familiarize the student with the application of scientific and engineering principles,
methods, and technical skills necessary to perform a support function in engineering, scientific, and
allied activities.

INSTRUCTIONS: Now think of a recent incident that has occurred in your classroom or laboratory teach-
ing in which you feel you were ineffective in contributing to the ”purpose” stated

above. Record the account in the space provided at the bottom of this page.

In what technical area did this incident occur?

 

I. Give a descriptive account of the incident and the Specific thing you did that made it stand outin
your mind as being especially ineffective. What actually happened?

II. Why do you think you were ineffective?

228

RECORD OF CRITICAL INCIDENT

The purpose of a post high school technical education instructor in classmom and laboratory instruction
is to function as a member of the educational team in preparing students to become sufficiently competent
to enter an occupation or a cluster of related occupations in a selected field of technology. In his
educational role he shall utilize his technical knowledge and practical experience, as well as his skill
to carry out the teaching-learning process in such a manner as to create and maintain an environment
that will tend to stimulate learning and foster a thirst for continued learning. He shall contribute to the
total effort to familiarize the student with the application of scientific and engineering principles,

methods, and technical skills necessary to perform a support function’in engineering, scientific, and
allied activities.

INSTRUCTIONS: Now think of a recent incident involving another technical instructor whom you feel
was effective in contributing to the "purpose” stated above. Record the account in
the space provided at the bottom of this page. If you are unable to recall an incident

involving another instructor you may desire to substitute another account involving
yourself.

In what technical area did this incident occur?

 

I.

Give a descriptive account of the incident and the Specific thing this instructor did that made it stand
out in your mind as being especially effective. What actually happened?

ll. Why do you think he was effective?

229
RECORD OF CRITICAL INCIDENT

The purpose of a post high school technical education instructor in classroom and laboratory instruction
is to function as a member of the educational team in preparing students to become sufficiently competent
to enter an occupation or a cluster of related occupations in a selected field of technology. In his edu-
cational role he shall utilize his technical knowledge and practical experience, as well as his skill to
carry out the teaching-learning process in such a manner as to create and maintain an environment that
will tend to stimulate learning and foster a thirst for continued learning. He shall contribute to the total
effort to familiarize the student with the application of scientific and engineering principles, methods,

and technical skills necessary to perform a support function in engineering, scientific, and allied ac-
tivities.

INSTRUCTIONS: Now think of a recent incident involving another technical instructor whom you feel
was ineffective in contributing to the ”purpose" stated above. Record the account in
the Space provided at the bottom of this page. If you are unable to recall an incident

involving another instructor you may desire to substitute another account involving
yourself

In what technical area did this incident occur?

I. Give a descriptive account of the incident and the Specific thing this instructor did that made it stand
out in your mind as being especially ineffective. What actually happened?

II. Why do you think he was ineffective?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION

'0 'Sf‘o

I.
'I ‘q.
0.-

 

n
.1
u

I §. u...’1-
~ i
" ' n. .
I‘ ~;-
' .
u. -.
I .\ .'_‘_

"‘ ...,

taut min.

niu

ilE

qnh hl:u

.. c Tl

.nu nxu

AFC

\Hu

h\~

A \

«av

‘Nu

n\~

AMC

a Rh

wit.

APPENDIX E

LETTER TO ADMINISTRATORS

November 10, 1964

Dear

A research study is being conducted at Michigan State University
that should be of interest to you. Realizing the need for a

more thorough understanding of the role and function of the tech—
nical instructor as a basis for curriculum develOpment in tech-
nical teacher education, a study of the "Classroom and Laboratory
Function of the Technical Instructor" is being conducted. The
technical staff of Community College and technical
educators in schools throughout the state are being asked to
participate. These educators are in a strategic position to

make a major contribution to this study.

After discussing this study with Dr. Max Smith, Director of Com-
munity College COOperation, and upon his suggestion I am apprais—
ing you of this study and soliciting your support and cooperation.
Each full—time technical instructor on your faculty has received
a letter describing the study and is being asked to participate.
During the week of November 16—20, these instructors will re—
ceive the data collecting instrument. The Critical Incident
Technique, developed at The American Institute for Research

and considered to be a sophisticated research tool for studies
such as this, is being utilized. Sufficient instructions and
examples will accompany the instrument. However, it is conceiv-
able that there may be reluctance on the part of some instruc—
tors to participate in the study because of unfamiliarity with
the technique. Any encouragement you may provide will be
appreciated.

The first phase of this study, the establishment of an acceptable
statement of "The Purpose of a Technical Instructor," has been
completed with 100% response from the U.S. Office of Education
and all state departments having persons Specifically designated
as responsible fiX‘technical education. It is anticipated that
similar interest and response will be demonstrated by technical
educators in Michigan.

Your assistance and cooperation in this effort will be appreciated.
Upon completion you will be furnished with a summary of the
findings and recommendations.

Sincerely,
Rex E. Ray, Director
Technical Teacher Education Project

REszf 231

APPENDIX F

APPENDIX F

INITIAL LETTER TO STUDY POPULATION
MICHIGALISTATE UNTVERSFFYamrummG

 

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

A research study is being conducted at Michigan State University that should be of
interest to you. As a professional educator in technical education, you are in a
unique position to make a major contribution to a better understanding of the role
and function of the post-high school technical instructor.

Recent studies and reports indicate that technical instructors are recruited from
many sources and with varied backgrounds of educational preparation. Even so,
very few collegiate programs have been developed that will provide advanced prep
aration for these individuals or initial preparation for others desiring to enter the
profession. Before any major curriculum development can be made in technical
teacher education, there is a need for a more thorough understanding of the role
of the technical instructor. Realizing this, a study of the "Classroom and Labor-—
atory Function of the Technical Instructor" is being conducted. The initial study
will be limited to the state of Michigan.

The critical incident technique develOped by John C. Flanagan and used in similar
studies of both military and civilian occupations is being utilized in this research
project in the following manner. You and other technical educators throughout the
state are being asked to write descriptions of specific incidents which illustrate
effective or ineffective classroom and/or laboratory behavior on the part of the in-
structor. By analyzing a large number of such incidents, it will be possible to ar-
rive at the requirements for a technical instructor and discover implications for
teacher education programs in this field.

The first phase of this study, the establishment of an acceptable statement of "The
Purpose of a Technical Education Instructor, " has been completed with. 100% re-
sponse from the U. S. Office of Education and all state departments having persons
specifically designated as responsible forvtechnical education. It is anticipated
that similar interest and response will be demonstrated by technical educators in
Michigan.

Within a few days, you will receive the data gathering instrument that is being used
in this study. Your consideration and participation will be appreciated.

Sincerely,

Rex E. Ray, Director

Technical Teacher Education Project
2 3 3

APPENDIX G

APPENDIX G

FIRST FOLLOW-UP

(Postcard reminder).

Technical Educator:

About a week ago you received a research instrument
soliciting your cooperation in a study of "The
Instructional Function of Post-High School Technical
Education Instructors."

If you have already returned this instrument, please
accept my thanks for your cooperation.

If youtunmanot as yet completed and returned it, will
you please do so at your earliest convenience so
that we may benefit from your professional experience.

Thank you,

Rex E. Ray, Technical Teacher Education Project
College of Education
Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan

235

APPENDIX H

APPENDIX H
SECOND FOLLOW-UP
lMICHHICLAhI STAKFE [UNIVWERSITYTamnxammuz

 

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

December 7, 1964

A short time ago you received a letter and research instrument soliciting

your c00peration in the "Project for the Development of Critical Requirements
for Instructors of Post High School Technical Education." By completing and
returning this instrument you will be contributing to one of the first research
studies conducted in the field of technical teacher education.

Others are interested in this aspect of technical education!! Seldom does one
attend a convention or read a professional article without some reference being
made to the need for a better understanding of the unique role and function of
the technical instructor in our educational system. This interest was demon-
strated during the first phase of the study by 100% response from other tech-
nical educators in state departments as well as the U. S. Office of Education.
The second phase, in which your c00peration is solicited, is the HEART of the
study; and technical educators like yourself have a wealth of experience that
can be brought to bear on a research problem of this nature.

It is fully realized that the "Critical Incident Technique" may be new to you,
and at first you may wonder how anything can be gained from the incidents you
record. Actually, nothing can be gained from JUST YOUR incidents; but when a
few hundred incidents are tabulated, objective analysis can be made by extract-
ing the specific behavioral acts and grouping them into functional categories.
From an analysis of these incidents the role and function of the technical
instructor CAN be established for specific technical specialities.

Are you interested in knowing more about the role and function of technical
instructors? By cooperating in this study, and thus assuring its success, a
summary of the findings will be forwarded to you. If you have already completed

and returned the instrument please accept my thanks.

 

Technical Teacher Education Project

REszf
237

APPENDIX I

APPENDIX I

THIRD FOLLOW—UP
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EAST umsmo

 

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

January 5, 1965

Several participants who have completed and returned the data gathering
instrument for the "Project for the Development of Critical Requirements

for Instructors of Post High School Technical Education” indicated that it
was received at an unusually busy time and suggested that a better time would
have been immediately after the holiday season. Realizing this, as well as
the fact that time is at a premium for all teachers and that we respond to
requests in the order of their importance, another c0py of the instrument is
enclosed in event the first one did not reach you or has been misplaced
during the holiday rush.

It was with the belief that the study was important and that a cooperative
effort such as this could make a contribution toward a better understanding
of the role and function of technical education instructors in the state of
Michigan that the study was initiated. It should take approximately forty-
five minutes to one hour to complete the entire instrument. However, if you
desire to complete the Basic Data Section and record ONLY TWO of the Critical
Incidents requested, this should take approximately thirty minutes and will
still give us an Opportunity to profit from your professional experience and
make the study representative of all technical educators in Michigan.

If you have already returned the instrument, please accept my thanks.

Sincerely,

Rex E. Ray, Director
Technical Teacher Education Project

REszf

2359

APPENDIX J

APPENDIX J

FOURTH FOLLOW-UP

January 16, 1965

Dear*Sir:

The "Project for the Development of Critical Requirements
for Instructors of Post—High School Technical Education"

is now at the stage where it is necessary to make a final
attempt to solicit your participation. Since the study

is concerned with technical educators in Michigan, it is
important that the professional experience of as many
technical instructors as possible be included in the analy-
sis of the data.

For the study to be representative of Michigan Technical
Educators YOUR PARTICIPATION IS IMPORTANT. If you have
already returned the data gathering instrument please ac—
cept my thanks, if not it would be appreciated if you would
do so as soon as possible. However, if the instructions
and information accompanying the instrument were not suf—
ficiently clear, and you feel a personal interview would
be advantageous, the enclosed card will enable you to
indicate a convenient time for the interview. On the
basis of the times you have indicated I will make arrange—
ments accordingly and confirm an appointment.

Sincerely,

Rex E. Ray, Director
Technical Teacher Education Project

REszf

Encl:

241

APPENDIX K

APPENDIX K

. I b N n V n V b N ‘ fl U h
NVGHWWwauu ' g 'N_ 'NO I“. I D "N U-O 0‘ U: 3‘ an” . '.O a. 2 "fl '0 or D n .
U OOQOJ .‘u.. 8- 85.3..

a . .
z
.. O

 

 

R4
1'!
T

O

 

I
R
OI

I
O

 

R
l
I
O

 

”1
l
O

 

 

ll"!
7
O

 

0

C N
I T
O.

 

 

R"
1"!
I

O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H1
3

JIZ

3 .25

t:

 

 

 

 

.HMOCH .uo .MHH

 

 

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOO
H
r
O

:5;

—

_
u
'

 

 

 

 

 

o...
I...
.v5
.h.
On
.NS
0.

v
N
C

On

 

243

APPENDIX L

APPENDIX L

SAMPLE OF BEHAVIORAL ACTS CLASSIFIED UNDER THE
CATEGORIES OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL GRID*

PRESENTING AND EXPLAINING
Verbal Instruction
Teacher Verbal Discourse
l. Utilizes the technique of going from the general
form to an explicit form in getting across a

concept.

2. Uses the technique of comparing and contrasting
concepts to get a point across.

3. Presents information by relating own personal
experience.

4. Reads material directly from the text.
5. Uses lecture to present new concepts to class.
Teacher-Student Verbal Intercourse

1. Answers a stUdent's question by directing another
question.

2. Uses questioning technique to clarify concepts.

3. Uses class discussion as a means of presenting
subject matter.

4. Uses questioning technique to summarize lesson
presented.

Verbal Performative Instruction

Demonstration

1. Uses typical industrial practices in laboratory
instruction.

2. Demonstrates a practical application to get across
a new concept.

3. Demonstrates the use of a new piece of equipment.

4. Demonstrates how to set up an experiment.

 

*Abbreviated statements for descriptive purposes only.
245

246

Instructional Aids

Uses chalkboard to present material to class.

Uses materials from trade journals.

Uses work sheets and laboratory assignment sheets.
Uses simple teacher constructed visual aids.

Uses opaque projector in presenting material
to class.

Uses film strips and tape recording for presenting
information.

REINFORCEMENT OF INSTRUCTION

Follow-Up of Instruction

Application and Assignment

 

1. Makes abstract and theoretical concepts more
meaningful through appropriate laboratory assign-
ments.

2. Uses the laboratory to supplement classroom
presentations.

3. Makes challenging and thought—provoking out-side-
of class assignments.

4. Sets up problem solving situations for students
through the use of special assignments.

Evaluation

1. Uses pencil and paper tests to evaluate students'
work.

2. Makes corrections and evaluations of students'
work by written comments to students.

3. Evaluates students' work through the use of
practical laboratory problems.

4. Evaluates students' work by the use of industrial

standards.

247

Individual Assistance

1.

Follow—up class instruction with individual
assistance to detect students' problems and
clarify concepts.

Provides adequate supervision of students' work.
Checks work of individual students through

individual conferences at the work station while
student is working.

Learninngnvironment

Instructional Management

1.

4.

Provides situations that challenges and encourages
initiative and creativity in problem solving,
experimentation, and scientific inquiry.

Provides situations in which much of the responsi-
bility for learning is placed upon the student.

Provides Opportunities for group work and team
efforts in researching and arriving at a solution
to a problem.

Provides experiences whereby students can have
success.

Teacher-Student Interaction

1.

Maintains a class environment that makes students
feel free to participate in a give and take
situation.

Provides opportunity for student involvement and
student presentations to the class.

Maintains a class environment that is quiet
and orderly but still provides for student

interaction.

Generates enthusiasm as a result of his own
vitality and personal interest in the students

and the subjects being taught.

248

ANCILLARY ACTS

 

Planning and Preparation for Instruction

Long Range Planning

1.

2.

4.

Provides for continuity in the lessons and activit-
ies carried on during the term.

Develops and follows a planned course of study
designed to meet the needs of industry.

Times the various phases of the course so as to
have maximum impact and usefulness to students.

Sets up specific deadlines for completion of
classwork.

Planning

Makes adequate provisions for the physical well
being of students.

Selects apprOpriate and effective methods for
class presentation.

Has all necessary materials on hand for the
presentation.

Demonstrates technical competence and thorough
preparation for class presentation.

Interpgrsonal Relations

Counseling

1.

2.

Counsels with students concerning difficulties
they are having in class.

Provides occupational information concerning the
technical fields.

Investigates student's cumulative record for the
purpose of becoming more familiar with the student.

Provides for informal group discussions concern—
ing the world of work.

249

Teacher—Student Relationships

1.

2.

Exhibits patience in working with individual stu-
dents.

Uses firmness and diplomacy to change students'
behavior.

Considerate of students, fair in his dealings
with them.

Understands and respects students' point of view.
Provides extra sessions (outsidecf class) to give

assistance to students who are having difficulty
in class.

 

"Illllllll'lllllllI