”ii-GE WFEQNSHIP GP TEACHER CHARACTERISTICS TO BELIEF CHANGES FQLLQWENG ENTEQQQC'E‘EQH 0F NWoPRQMQTEQH REWCH EWQEMQ fittest: goo flue. qure-a of EaL D. MICHEGM STATE BKWERSI‘EY William M. Racks 1.966 Ill/I/fl/II/l/ II/// M!!! Ill 11/ H WW II! 3 1293 10279 JIM), I \ LIsRAR Y THESIS M idfiu‘i‘lil Stan Unrmréty This is to certify that the thesis entitled THE RELATIONSHIP OF TEACHER CHARACTERISTICS TO BELIEF CHANGES FOLLOWING INTRODUCTION OF NON-PROMOTION RESEARCH EVIDENCE presented by William M. Bocks has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ed .D . degree ianncation ggfiggawm Major professor Date Summer ; 1966 ABSTRACT THE RELATIONSHIP OF TEACHER CHARACTERISTICS TO BELIEF CHANGES FOLLOWING INTRODUCTION OF NON-PROMOTION RESEARCH EVIDENCE by William M. Bocks This study was designed to determine whether a relation- ship exists between beliefs about and practice of non-promo- tion, and whether knowledge about its effects will cause some teachers to change their beliefs. It also examined the rela- tionship of each of several teacher characteristics (attitudes toward children, self-concepts, and perceived expectations of others) to belief changes following the introduction of non- promotion evidence. The participants in the study were thirty-seven first grade teachers from five school districts in metropolitan Muskegon , Michigan. Each of the teachers in the study answered a questionnaire about their beliefs concerning non-promotion at the beginning and at the end of the study. They also completed the Nfinnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory, Berger's Scale of Self-Acceptance, and a questionnaire about their perceptions of the expectations of the second grade teachers and administrators. A booklet, QUESTIONS CONCERNED TEACHERS AS_K_ ABOUT NON-PROMOTION, and research studies on non-promotion were William M. Bocks discussed with the teachers at one of several hour-long meetings. The procedure was to point out the studies which related to the various parts of the booklet and to encourage questions about de- tails of the non-promotion research. The initial and final beliefs questionnaires for each teacher were compared to determine whether beliefs of the teachers had changed. . The teachers were placed in three groups depending on whether their belief scores had changed in a positive direction, a negative direction, or had remained the same. Chi-square tests were used to determine if significant relationships existed between attitude scores and belief changes, between self-concept scores and belief changes, or between perceived expectations of others and belief changes. During the meetings with the various groups of teachers cer- tain atmospheres seemed to exist. Some of the groups appeared to be defensive about their promotion practices and were critical of research. Other groups appeared to be not at all defensive about their promotion practices and to be eager to know what research had to offer. Because of this, relationships were examined between the perceived atmospheres in four of the schools during the meetings and the number of teachers in the schools changing beliefs. These relationships were examined on the basis of subjective data. CONCLUSIONS: Because of insufficient data it was not possible William M. Books to determine if a relationship existed between beliefs about non- promotion and non-promotion practice. The beliefs of some teachers about non-promotion did change subsequent 'to the introduction of research evidence about non- promotion. Twenty-three teachers made a higher score on the beliefs questionnaire after the introduction of research evidence, two teachers' scores remained the same, and twelve teachers scored lower the second time. A significant relationship did not exist between changes in beliefs about non-promotion and teachers' scores on the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory or on Berger's Scale of Self-Acceptance. A significant relationship did not exist between changes in beliefs about non-promotion and the expectations of the second grade teachers. l A significant relationship did not exist between changes in teachers' beliefs about non-promotion and the perceived expectations of the principals or the perceived expectations of the superintendents. Relationships seemed to exist between the atmospheres in four of the meetings and the numbers of teachers with positive changes in their beliefs. Not many teachers from the meetings with the defensive atmospheres changed their beliefs in a positive way. Most of the teachers in the other two meetings did have a positive change in their beliefs. William M. Bocks It is suggested in‘the recommendations that all teachers should be better informed about the research evidence which is related to their teaching. This should be the responsibility of teacher education institutions and school systems. It is suggested that this be done in a way which helps teachers find meaning in the research so that a change in behavior occurs. THE RELATIONSHIP OF TEACHER CHARACTERISTICS TO BELIEF CHANGES FOLLOWING INTRODUCTION OF NON-PROMOTION RESEARCH EVIDENCE by \ \‘ William M!“ Books A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION College of Education 1966 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writer wishes to express his thanks to: Dr. Charles Blackman, the chairman of the committee, who patiently guided, encouraged, and assisted in this project; Dr. Troy Stearns, Dr. Donald Leu, Dr. Frederick Waisanen, and Dr. Walter Scott, who gave of their time and ideas; the teachers and administrators in Muskegon County who participated in the study and made it possible; most of all to his wife, Marge, who provided inspiration and help at crucial points on the way; and to Libby, Sammy, and Jessica, who couldn't wait for dad to finish the book. ii ACKNO IISTtD LIST C) Chapter TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS o o - o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 11 LIST OF TABLES o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 Vi LIST OF APPENDICES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Vii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . 3 Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Justification for the Study . . . . . . . . . 4 Relationships to be Explored . . . . . . . . 7 Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . . . 10 Design of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Organization of the Study . . . . . . . . . 14 H. RELATED IDEAS AND LITERATURE . . . . . 15 Process of Change . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Organizational Health . . . . . . . . . . 22 Awareness of an Idea . . . . . . . . . . 26 Basing Change on Sound Evidence . . . . . 32 The Adoption Process . . . . . . . . . . 36 Planning Change . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Non- Promotion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Subject Matter Mastery . . . . . . . . . 43 iii Social Immaturity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Effect on Homogeneity . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Threat as Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 III. PROCEDURES AND SOURCES OF DATA. . . . . . 51 Collection of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Source of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Analysis of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 IV. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA . . . . 64 Scoring of Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Statistical Significance of Relationships . . . . 66 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Subjective Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8O summary 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O 84 V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDA- . 86 TIONS Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Procedures of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Analysis of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 DiscuSSion O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 92 iv Page Recommendations . . . . . . Closing Statement. . . . . . APPENDICES O O O O O O O O O O O BIBHOGRAPHY O O O O O O O O O O O O LIST OF TABLES Table Page 3. 1 Experience of the Sample: Total Experience 56 and Experience in Present School 4. l MTAI Scores and Corresponding First 68 and Second Belief Scores 4. 2 Summary of Changes in Belief Scores for 69 Teachers Above and Below the Median MTAI Score 4. 3 Self-Acceptance and Corresponding First and 70 Second Belief Scores 4.4 Summary of Changes in Belief Scores for 71 Teachers Above and Below the Median Self- Concept 4. 5 Perceived Expectations of Second Grade Teachers 73 and Corresponding First and Second Belief Scores 4. 6 Summary of Changes in Belief Scores Related to 74 the Perceived Expectations of Second Grade Teachers 4. 7 Perceived Expectations of Principals and 76 Corresponding First and Second Belief Scores 4. 8 Summary of Changes in Belief Scores Related to 77 the Perceived Expectation of Principals 4. 9 Perceived Expectations of Superintendents and 78 Corresponding First and Second Belief Scores 4. 10 Summary of Changes in Belief Scores Related to 79 the Perceived Expectations of Superintendents vi LIST OF APPENDICES Page Appendix A Welcome Letter to Teachers . . . . . ..... . 99 Appendix B Beliefs Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Letter With First Questionnaire . . . . . . . 103 Letter With Second Questionnaire. . . . . . 104 Appendix C Questions Concerned Teachers . . . . . . . . 105 Ask About Non-Promotion, MTAI, and Scale of Self—Acceptance and Acceptance of Others Appendix D Questionnaire of Beliefs of Second . . . . . 106 Grade Teachers and Administrators CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION According to Mort and Cornell1 it takes between 75 and 100 years for an educational theory to be translated into common practice. The research evidence regarding the effects of non- promotion has not been widely accepted. As early as 1911 Keyes2 released a study covering seven years in a school district enrolling approximately 5, 000 pupils. Analyses of work done by the pupils led him to conclude that repeating a grade does not result in any permanent improvement of the scholarship of the retarded pupil. Of the whole number retarded, 20 per cent did better, 39 per cent showed no change, and 40 per cent actually did worse. The research literature contains great numbers of studies which support the idea that failing youngsters is not beneficial for them. In fact many of the studies point out the harmful aSpects of non-promotion. Non-promotion remains a fairly common practice. The records of the sixth grade of a small school system were examined lPaul Mort and Francis Cornell, American Schools in Transition. New York: Bureau of Publications, TeacheF-s- College, Columbia University , 1941. p. 49. zCharles Henry Keyes, Progress Through_ the Grades o_f City Schools. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1911. -2- in 1965. The majority of the students in this sixth grade are well above average in terms of ability and achievement. It was discovered that twelve youngsters in a class of 86 had repeated a grade somewhere in the elementary years. Heck-3, after having studied 25 city school reports, found the percent of failure to vary from 4 to 17 per cent with a median of 9. l per cent. Shane and Yauch4 say that ”this needless education lag could probably be materially shortened if educational leadership was more widely aware of the findings and would devote considerably more energy in encouraging the study of this evidence by the teaching staff. " Kimball Wiles5 states that "one of the big reasons that there has been little curriculum improvement in some schools is that teachers are unacquainted with educational research. " The presentation of research evidence on non-promotion will probably not motivate all teachers to practice in accord with the research evidence. According to Rogers6 "Even though a stimulus 3Arch 0. Heck, Administration _o_{ Pupil Personnel. Cinn, 1929. p. 479. 4Harold C. Shane and Wilbur A. Yauch, Creative School Administration. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1957. p. 71. 5Kirnball Wiles, The Changing Curriculum o_f the American High School. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 1963. p. 257. 6Everett Rogers, Diffusion cg Innovations. New York: Macmillan, 1965. p. 110. -3- may be presented to a total audience, only certain individuals will receive it. Their reception or non-reception depends upon such factors as their past experiences, social values, mental set, and state of knowledge. ” A need exists to determine whether knowledge of research causes certain teachers to alter their beliefs and to discover what factors tend to discourage other teachers from believing in accordance with theory established by research. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM It will be a purpose of this exploratory study to determine whether a relationship exists between the beliefs a first grade teacher holds about non-promotion and her practice in promoting and failing youngsters, and to determine whether first grade teachers will change their beliefs about non-promotion of students after research findings on the effects of non-promotion have been presented to them. This last question raises the issue of whether the acquisition of knowledge alters beliefs. It will be a further purpose of this study to analyze relation- ships between teachers' beliefs after research is presented and (1) a teacher's. score on the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory, (2) a teacher's self concept, and (3) a teacher‘s perception of the beliefs about non-promotion held by the second grade teachers and the administration. -4- DEFINITION OF TERMS Certain terms will be used throughout the study. It is necessary that these terms be defined. MTAI. Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory - referred to throughout the study as MTAI - is an instrument designed to measure teachers' attitudes toward children. 7 Non-promotion. Non-promotion is defined here as the act of not promoting a student to the next higher grade at the end of the school year. A student who is made to spend two years in the first grade would be an example of a non-promoted student. Failure. For the purposes of this study failure is used in the same manner as non-promotion. A student who fails first grade is one who must repeat the first grade. Change. In this paper change is the substitution of a new belief, idea, or practice for an old one. JUSTIFICATION FOR THE STUDY A need for a study of this type appears evident for two reasons. First, a need exists to do away with a practice which is damaging to the self image of many students in our elementary and secondary schools: ’the practice of non-promotion. 7A further discussion of the inventory and what it is designed to do will be found in Chapter III. -5- Second, a need exists to learn more about the barriers to change found in teachers. What are the various reasons for different teachers being reluctant to alter their methods ? The 1962 ASCD Yearbooks deals in great length with the necessity for a school to be concerned with developing fully functioning persons. A fully functioning person is described as one who has a well developed self concept (he likes himself), and therefore is open to all experience. A person who is not fully functioning, who is not open to experience, who has a poor self concept, must constantly seek to maintain what little respect he has for himself by defensive measures. It is very difficult for a person of this type to. learn for he will tend to erect a barrier against any type of experience which threatens his ego. A person who is fully functioning, who has a good self concept, who does not feel compelled to look at information only in terms of what it will do to his ego, can be open to all new experiences. He can look at new eXperiences and information objectively, and thus learn from them. You do not develop a fully functioning person by convincing 8Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Perceivirfi, Behaving, Becoming. 1962 Yearbook. Washington, D. C.: the Association, 1962, p. 36. -6- him of his worthlessness. You do not develop one's self concept by pointing to the fact that he is a failure. The practice of non- promotion convinces a youngster he is not worth very much. It damages his self concept and makes him a less effective learner . The importance of self concept and its influence on achievement is pointed out by Brookover. 9 Educators have a responsibility to remove practices which impede learning. This study seeks to test a method for motivat- ing teachers to alter their beliefs about the failure of students. A second need is to learn more about teachers' barriers to the acceptance of new ideas. Willower10 says that ”the sources of resistance to change in organizations are many. " Not only are they many, they are also varied. In dealing with teacher resistance to change, the curriculum worker must realize that the barriers for the individuals must be recognized so‘that they might be removed. In order for effective work to be done in curriculum improvement it then becomes necessary to discover the barriers which exist in regard to certain types of change. 9Wilbur B. Brookover, Sociology o_f. Education. New York: American Book Company, 1964. 10Donald J. Willower, "Barriers to Change in Educational Organizations. " Theory Into Practice 2:257-258. December, 1963. Bureau of Educational Research and Service, College of Education, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. . -7- This study seeks to discover relationships between beliefs about non-promotion and various factors present in teachers in a school system. It is believed that if relationships are discovered between a teacher's beliefs and some of the conditions present in a school system, the teacher might then be encouraged to alter her beliefs if a condition or her perception of the condition is altered. This studywill seek to serve a three fold purpose. One, it will determine whether a relationship exists between. beliefs about and practice of non-promotion. Two, it will determine whether learning of research results about non-promotion is related to a change in teachers' beliefs about non-promotion. Three, it will determine whether relationships exist between certain characteristics of the teachers and changes in their beliefs. This knowledge will serve as a departure point for further studies and also may give useful information to curriculum workers. RELATIONSHIPS TO BE EXPLORED Blau and Scott11 suggest that much of the resistance to change encountered in organizations is due to the disturbance it would produce in the status structure. Very often change poses a real 11Peter M. Blau and Richard W. Scott," ,Formal giganizations. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Company, 1963. p. 100. or percei\ Rokeé personalit you believ D0 sc their perc ments hav threaten ti Do th' influence attitude to This relations} relations} beliefs. are the fa It. 12 .‘ h BaSic BC- -3- or perceived threat to a teacher's status. Rokeach12 investigated the nature of belief systems and personality systems. He says that "it is not so much what you believe that counts, but 11.93:! you believe. Do some types of teachers feel a greater need to protect their perceived status than do others? Do some school environ- ments have norms and informal structures which would tend to threaten the status of the teacher who deviated from them? Do the feelings of other teachers and administrators have an influence on some teachers ? Does a teacher‘s self image and attitude toward youngsters influence her beliefs ? This study will explore relationships which might exist: relationships which influence a teacher to alter her beliefs or relationships which discourage a teacher from altering her beliefs. Tentative statements of relationships to be eXplored are the following: 1. Is there a relationship between a teacher's beliefs about non-promotion and her practice in regard to non-promotion? 2. Is there a relationship between a teacher’s MTAI score and a change in beliefs about non-promotion after research results have been presented to her? 12 Milton Rokeach, The Open and Closed Mind. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1960. p. 6. 3. -9- Is there a relationship between a teacher's self concept and a Change in her beliefs about non-promotion after research results have been presented to her? Is there a relationship between a first grade teacher's perception of the feelings of the second grade teachers and administration regarding non-promotion and a change in her beliefs about non-promotion after research results have been presented to her? ASSUMPTIONS ON WHICH THE STUDY IS BASED The fundamental assumptions which underly this study and influence its approach, its methods and its recommendations will be stated at this point. 1. It is desirable that schools strive to have students become individuals with good self concepts. Strong self concepts are deve10ped more readily when a person experiences success. A youngster does not feel that he has experienced success when he discovers that he will not be promoted. Many youngsters are not promoted in the hope that they will experience success when they repeat the grade. An assumption underlying this study is that non-promoted students do not experience greater success because of the non-promotion. -10- Research results which indicate that non-promotion is a practice detrimental to a student are valid results. Non-promotion is an undesirable educational practice. Educators should seek to eliminate undesirable practices. Teachers must change in order for many educational practices to change. There is a need for further knowledge of barriers to teacher change. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY This study may be limited for the following reasons: 1. 4. The study may demonstrate that a number of teachers change their beliefs when the research results are pre- sented to them. The same teachers might revert to the old beliefs the following year. The study may show that relationships do exist between certain teacher characteristics and a change in the beliefs about non-promotion. The relationships may not hold true for changes in other educational practices. The assumptions underlying this study are based on the validity of the research on non-promotion. The validity of some of the non-promotion research might be challenged by some persons. The study deals with belief changes by first grade teachers. -11- Relationships found may not apply when considering teachers of other grades. 5. The population participating in the study may not be representative of all first grade teachers. The results may not be applicable to teachers outside the participating group. 6. Relationships may exist, for example, between a teacher's MTAI score and a change in her beliefs about failing students. This study will not suggest what might be done to help a teacher change so that she would score differently on the MTAI. 7. Discussion and interaction may take place among teachers after completing the MTAI and the self concept test. Some changes might occur in a teacher as a result of this discussion. A teacher might change her practice as a result of this discussion rather than as a result of the res earch evidenc e. DESIGN OF THE STUDY Sources of Data Participants for the study will be sought from schools in the greater Muskegon area. Cooperation must be secured from superintendents, building principals , and teachers within the 's chool systems. -12- An attempt will be made to use school buildings with at least three sections of first grade. This will provide for some inter- action among teachers after the research results are presented. Eleven school buildings in the area meet this requirement. If all the teachers in each of these schools participate, more than 35 teachers will be included in the study. It will be necessary for the individual student records to be open to the researcher at the beginning of the study so that it can be determined which teachers had previously failed students. The MTAI and Berger's Scale for Self Acceptance will be utilized in the study. They will be administered by the writer so as to assure a uniform presentation. A booklet will be prepared to be used as a means for pre- senting research answers to questions about non-promotion. This will be supplemented by discussion in each -of the teacher groups. The first grade teachers will be asked to state their. feelings about the non-promotion information given in this booklet. They will be asked what they think the second grade teachers and the building principal and the superintendent feel about non-promotion. Procedures for Collection of Data A meeting will be scheduled early in February with all of the superintendents whose school systems are selected for the study. The proposed project will be explained at this time and approval -13- for the participation of the school systems will be sought. Each of the superintendents will be given a copy of the research on non-promotion booklet at this meeting. Conferences will be held in February and March with the participating principals. The principals will be given a copy of thepresearch on non-promotion booklet and the research project will be explained to them. The student records will be examined at this time to determine the incidence of non-promotion for each of the first grade teachers. In April the participating teachers will be questioned about their beliefs about non-promotion and will be given the MTAI and the self concept test. Later in April the information about non- promotion will be presented to these teachers. The writer will administer the tests and present the materials about non- promotion so that uniformity can be maintained. In May, the first grade teachers will be surveyed to discover what they now believe about non-promotion and what they think the second grade teachers and administrators feel about non- promotion. When the information is gathered for each-teacher it will be possible to see if the relationships do exist between the various factors and a change in the teachers' beliefs about non-promotion. -14- ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY The study will be described in greater detail in the remaining chapters. The research and literature pertaining to the process of change and non-promotion will be reviewed in Chapter 11. In Chapter 111 the methods employed in the study will be explained , and the findings and analysis will be discussed in Chapter IV. In Chapter V the summary and Conclusions will be presented. CHAPTER II RELATED IDEAS AND LITERATURE Ideas and literature related to the study of Change in beliefs about non-promotion are presented in the second chapter. The first part of this chapter will discuss the change process, and the second part will review the research on non-promotion. PROCESS OF CHANGE Educators interested in promoting change in a school system should recognize that there are many aspects to be considered. Forces are operating within the school system. Not all of the forces can be seen; not all of the forces are official, or organized, or even conscious. They are there, however, and they will operate and influence change whether or not the official leader chooses to recognize them. Whether individual teachers change or hold on to their beliefs subsequent to the introduction of research evidence will be determined by various factors. The literature suggests numerous forces at work which influence change. This paper will discuss the ideas under the general headings: 1. resistance to change, 2. organizational health, 3. awareness of an idea, 4. basing change on sound evi- dence, 5. the adoption process, and 6. planning Change. -15- -16- RESISTANCE TO CHANGE Resistance to change is usually present in an organization and in individuals. The reasons for resistance will vary from per- son to person and from one organization to another. There are many sources of resistance to change; our own feelings, the effect our change has on others, and our need to belong among others. 1 says "We have, each of us, an essential inner Maslow nature which is given, natural and, usually, very resistant to change. He is referring to the inner nature which is biologically determined. Teachers' feelings often become involved when change is suggested. Securities are many times threatened by student freedom, what others might think, feelings of inadequacy, and fears that vested interests are in danger. Willower2 believes that concern with pupil control is a factor in resistance to changes which tend to liberalize the school. He feels it is not surprising since schools have no control over client selection and the clients have no choice concerning their participa- tion. 1Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Perceiving, Behaving, Becoming. 1962 Yearbook. Washington, D.C.: The Association, 1962, p. 35. 2Donald J. Willower, ”Barriers to Change in Educational Organizations, " Theory Into Practice, (Columbus, Ohio, Bureau of Educational Research and—Se-rvice, Ohio State University, 1963) II, No. 5, December, 1963, p. 258. -17- Teachers, administrators, and school boards care what others think. It is often difficult to determine whether an idea will succeed or backfire. Lionberger3 says that the prospect 0f incur- ring the disfavor of significant others is always a real possibility, so it is much more comfortable, and a lot safer to be conventional most of the time. A teacher wants to be considered an adequate working member of his staff.4 He does not wish to have his ideas labeled as any- thing other than an attempt to improve the program. The fear of being labeled as "radical, " "progressive, " or "conservative" can be a real deterrent to change. There is. a view held by many that those who derive security from an organization are reluctant to change the vehicle of their success. Gallaher5 suggests that in schools, the opposite might be true -- those who are secure can sustain the threat of examining alternatives, whereas those whose margin of security is low will resist changing a system that'has accommodated to them. He 3Herbert F. Lionberger, "Diffusion of Innovations in Agri- cultural Research and in Schools, "Strategy for Curriculum Change, edited by Robert R. Leeper, (Washington: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, NEA, 1965, p. 42. 4Kimhall Wiles, The Changing Curriculum 3; the American High School, 1963, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.. pp. 260-61. 5Art Gallaher, Jr. , "Directed Change in Formal Organizations: The School System, "Change Processes i_n_t_l_13 Public Schools, (Eugene, Oregon: The Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administra- tion, University of Oregon, 1965), pp. 43-44. .. 18.. hypothesizes that the better teachers are more likely to accept innovations than are the poorer ones because they are more secure. The ego often becomes involved with a teacher's values. Sharp6 says that "probably the most difficult job of the curriculum worker is that of bringing about a change in the ego-involved values 7 suggests that of a teacher without hurting his ego. " Van Dalen problems should be stated in positive terms and that one should refrain from making accusations about "your present practices. " This would help to prevent ego damage. Teachers who do not adopt new practices even when the majority have accepted may feel guilty. Eicholz8 says that the teacher who feels anxious or alienated about change builds defenses to rationalize his guilty feelings. Gardner9 states that a common strategy of those who wish to escape the swirling currents of change is to stand on high moral ground. 6George Sharp, Curriculum Development 3g Re-education o_f. the Teacher, (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1951), p. 31. 7D. B. Van Dalen, ”How to Facilitate Change, " The American School Board Journal, November, 1964, p. 8. 8Gehard C. Eicholz, "(Why Do Teachers Reject Change?" Theory Into Practice, (Columbus, Ohio: Bureau of Educational Re- Search and Service, Ohio State University, 1963), II, No. 5, December, 1963, p. 268. 9John W. Gardner, Self Renewal, The Individual and t_h_ez Innovative Society, New York: Harper and Rowe.1965, p. 49. -19- Gardnerlo suggests that many teachers resist a new idea because they are committed strongly to their own previously stated doctrines. They may have developed the present program or formu- lated the current school philosophy. Coreyll reports that persons continuously seek to know whether or not their professional behavior has had the consequences they desire. If what the teacher does satisfies him in his perception of its effects, he will go on doing what he has already learned to do. Most changes in the public schools are dynamic changes. In a dynamic change the after-effects are more far reaching, involve a wider relationship, and create an internal as well as an external crisis. Most changes made by a teacher will affect other teachers. Fear of how other teachers will react to the effects of a change often acts as a deterrent. Wadia12 uses the following example to distinguish between a routine change and a dynamic change. If an individual who has never worn a bow tie receives one for Christmas and wears it -- this is a routine change. If a Hindu who reveres the cow eats beef in the 1°roid. . p. 52. 11Stephen M. Corey, Helping Other People Change, (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Press, 1963), p. 21. 12Maneclc s. Wadia, "The Administrative Function of Innova- tion, A Social Science Approach, " Educational Administration, edited by Walter G. Hack, John A. Ramseyer, William I Gephart, and James B. Heck, (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1965), pp. 361-62. -20- United States, it is a dynamic change; he may not consider himself a Hindu anymore, his family may disown him, or he may get sick. Lippittl3 says we find that most new teaching practices require significant psychological changes and skill acquisitions by the adopter. Wadia14 points out that a change in a teaching practice will affect, in varying degrees, all individuals and activities con- nected with the school. Teachers can misuse an adopted innovation that affects them in a way which does not please them. Programmed instruction, adopted in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, allowed students to_wo rk at their own rates. Carlsonl5 found that to keep the students at the same place, some teachers actually restricted the output of those who were proceeding at a faster pace. Peers have a strong influence on attitude change. The need 16 to belong to a group can cause a person to resist change. Cohen l3Ronald Lippitt, "Roles and Processes in Curriculum Develop- ment and Change, " Strategy fo_r Curriculum Change, edited by Robert R. Leeper, (Washington, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, NEA, 1965), pp. 12-13. l4Wadia, 22. 213., p. 360. 15Richard 0. Carlson, Adoption _o_f_ Educational Innovations, (Eugene, Oregon: The Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administration, University of Oregon, 1965), pp. 66-67. 16Arthur R. Cohen, Attitude Change and Social Influence, New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1964, p. 40. -21- discusses an experiment made by Rhine in which subjects who heard their classmates' responses adopted an attitude similar to those classmates more readily than did those who responded in private. He also cites that changes in group anchored opinions can be facilitated by conveying that other group members have changed their Opinions. Coffey and Golden17 say that change can't take place in some persons if the change will jeopardize their membership in the group. Risk18 reports that the isolated worker who attempts to deviate from the norm of the group to which he returns experiences tremen- dous pressure which is almost impossible to resist and which pro- hibits him from attempting change. Cohen19 cites studies in which it was shown that there are serious negative consequences of not adhering to the group in which there 'are strong pressures toward uniformity. Persons who are most strongly motivated to retain membership in a group and there- fore depend most on approval from the group are less likely to accept l7Huhert s. Coffey and William P. Golden, "Change Within an Institution, " In-Service Education for Teachers Supervisors, and Administrators, The Fifty- -Sixth Yearbook of the National Society fo_r t_h__e Study _o_f Education, Part _I_. edited by Nelson B. Henry, (Chicago—: University —of Chicago Press,— 1957), p. 92. l8Beverly Risk, ”The Stress of Change, " Michigan Education Journal, (East Lansing, Michigan, XLIII, No. 4, October, 1965), p. 1‘9Cohen, 32. 213.. p. 115. 17. -22,- communications which advocate positions counter to group norms and values . 2’0 Rogers21 cites the unsuccessful campaign to have citizens of a Peruvian town boil their drinking water. It was found that only the least integrated individuals could afford to defy the community norm on water-boiling. This section cited some of the literature on resistance to change. It centered about resistance which is caused by teachers' need to protect their self image, the fact that change in schools is dynamic, and. a change by one teacher usually has an effect on another teacher, and most persons have a need to belong to a group and do not wish to jeopardize their membership. ORGANIZATIONAL HEALTH In a program of planned change it is well to consider the con- ditions prevalent in the system for which the change is intended. Mileszz feels there has been an over-emphasis on the properties of a given innovation, its diffusion across systems, and its integration 20lhid., p. 41. 21Everett M. Rogers, Diffusion o_f_ Innovations, New York: Macmillan, 1965, p. 11. 22Mathew B. Miles, "Planned Change and Organizational Health: Figure and Ground, "Chan e Processes _i_z_1_£h_e_ Public Schools, (Eugene, Oregon: The Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administration, University of Oregon, 1965), pp. 12-13. -23- within systems without a corresponding degree of interest in the dynamics and functioning of the receiving organization. He believes that the state of health of an educational organization can tell us more than anything else about the probable success of any particu- lar change effort. He says we should look at the state of an organi- zation's health as such, and try to improve it rather than to struggle with a series of more or less inSpired short-run change efforts. Miles23 says that certain characteristics will be evident in a healthy organization. In a healthy organization, the goals of the system would be reasonably clear to the system members, and reasonably well accepted by them. People will have the information they need and will have gotten it without exerting undue effort. Subordinates will be able to influence upward and they will perceive that their boss can do likewise with his boss. Organizational health would imply that the system's personnel are used effectively. The members would feel attracted to membership in the organization. Feelings of well being, satisfaction, and pleasure would be evident as opposed to feelings of discomfort, unwished for strain and dis- satisfaction. A healthy system would tend to invent new procedures, move toward new goals and become more rather than less differen- tiated over time. It would not feel itself a tool of the outside 23Ihid. . pp. 18-21. -24.. environment, nor would it reSpond destructively or rebelliously to perceived demands. The system's ability to bring about corrective change in itself would be faster than the change cycle in the sur- rounding environment. In an effective system there would be problems but they would be solved with minimal energy and they would stay solved: the problem solving mechanisms would not be weakened but maintained or strengthened. Willower24 suggests that the school administrator who wishes to provide for productive change needs to promote an open organi- zational climate. According to Corey, 25 if a teacher perceives the psychological atmOSphere of the working situation to be favorable he will make more effort to change and improve. Eichholz26 says an environment which is conducive to experimentation is effective in meeting rejectors for situational reasons. In such an environment change can be implemented as group endeavor where an individual teacher's fears of failure would be alleviated. The attitude of the school administrator is significant in the state of the organization. BrickellZ7 stated that the 8Ch001 24Willower, 23. 3_i_t_., p. 262. 25Corey, gp. c_it., p. 38. 26Eichholz, 22. 25., p. 267. 27Henry M. Brickell, Organizing New York State for Educa- tional Change, Albany, New York: State Education Department, 1961, pp- 22-24- -25.. superintendent may not be -- and frequently is not -- the original source of interest in a new type of program, but unless he gives it his attention and actively promotes its use, it will not come into being. The principal, too, plays an important role in stimu- lating creative classroom teaching. Chesler, Schmuck, and Lippitt28 relate that there is a high and significant correlation between the amount of staff innovativeness and the staff's perception of the principal's support for innovative teaching. There is an even higher correlation between the teacher's perception of his principal's support and his perception of his colleagues' support of innovation. Jenkins and Blackman29 found relationships between adminis- trators' personalities and the atmOSphere they are likely to establish in the school. They also found that the procedures and processes the administrator uses and the atmosphere he creates affect the teachers' behavior and their reactions. The morale of teachers in a system is important. If morale 28Mark Chesler, Richard Schmuck, and Ronald Lippitt, ”The Principal's Role in Facilitating Innovation, " Theory _I_r_1_t£>_ Practice, Ohio State University Bulletin, II, No. 5, December, 1963, (Columbus: Bureau of Educational Research and Service, 1963), p. 274. 29David H. Jenkins and Charles A. Blackrnan, Antecedents and Effects o_f Administrator Behavior, The School-Community Development Study Monograph Series, Number Three, (Columbus, Ohio, University Press, Ohio State University, 1956), pp. 77-78. -26- in a school is low, Corey3o believes such morale conditions need remedying before teachers can be expected to do much to improve the quality of their instruction. Staff harmony is another vital aspect to be considered. Wiles3l says that unless there is a spirit of harmony among the school personnel, there is little likelihood that there will be cooperative attempts to move ahead on curriculum and instruction or that individual teachers will introduce change into their programs. In this section the need for organizational health was stressed and characteristics of a healthy organization were given. It was indicated that the school administrators have the major responsi- bility for providing the climate for a healthy organization. AWARENESS OF AN IDEA Awareness of an idea is a prerequisite to change. It is suggested in the literature that education would benefit from an organized effort to diffuse and legitimize new ideas and innovations. Nmnerous studies are reported which suggest effective procedures for the communicator to use if he is to influence change. 30Corey, 22. _C_:_i_., p. 40. 31Wiles, 22. £11., p. 257. -27.. Kimball Wiles32 says it could be argued that many have been rejecting what they do not know because they do not know it. 33 echoes these sentiments when he says that many good Lionberger ideas are lost because they are never properly communicated. Proper comlnunication necessitates legitimation in many instances and Lionberger34 believes that exchange of opinions with fellow teachers is very important when the validity of available information is in doubt. Van Dalen};5 believes that marshalling an abundance of facts is a prerequisite for effecting a desired change. The advantages of the idea must then be communicated to all concerned. Wadia-fli'6 believes that when one knows how well the advantages have been communicated he can predict how the idea will be received. Agriculture has made tremendous advances in our country. Part of the success for the spread of farming ideas is due to the county agent. He went directly to the farmer and told him about the 32Kimball Wiles, "Proposals of Strategies: A Sulnznary‘. " ' ‘Strategy £3: Curriculum Change, edited by Robert R. Leeper, (Washington Association for Supervision and Curriculum Develop- ment, NEA, 1965), p. 72. 33Lionberger, 22. c_i_t_.. p. 46. 34lbid.. p. 41. 35Van Dalen, pp. £_i_t_., p. 7. 36Wadia, _op. 32., p. 365. -28- new practice. The farmer did not always adopt the practice immediately, but an organization did communicate the idea to him. Can education benefit from the experience of the farmer and the county agent? Many persons believe so. Carlson, Lippitt, and Rogers37 all agree that part of the eXpla- nation for the slow rate of change in the public schools lies with the absence of a Change agent position in the public schools. They contrast this with agriculture having the extension agent, and the detail-man in medicine. Krathwohl38 suggests that research results must be put into a convincing context by someone who understands them well enough to be convinced of their worth, can see their educational implica- tions, and can convince others. According to Rogers, 39 several research studies demonstrate that the extent of promotional efforts by 37Richard O. Carlson, "Barriers to Change in Public Schools, " Change Processes infill—{Public Schools, (Eugene, Oregon: The Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administration, Univer- sity of Oregon, 1965), p. 4; Lippitt, pp. git” p. 13; Everett M. Rogers, "On Innovations and Education, " a paper pre- sented at the Conference of the Michigan Cooperative Curriculum Program, Boyne Mountain, Michigan, September 24, 1965. 38David R. Krathwohl, "The Scope of the Research Problem, " Theory Into Practice, edited by David L. Clark, (Columbus, Ohio, Bureau of Educational Research and Service, Ohio State University, 1962), I, No. 2, April, 1962, p. 99. 399mg Innovations, 22. .93." pp, 257-258. -29- change agents is directly related to the rate of adoption of an inno- vation. When one looks at the effect the county agent has had in encouraging the adoption of new farm practices, he is inclined to agree with Gallaher40 that a program to prepare change agents to assist school systems is well worth considering. In the process of communication, some techniques seem to have more influence for change than do others. Cohen‘l‘l discusses research studies which were done on the effectiveness of various techniques for directing change in attitudes and beliefs. He relates that a two-sided communication is more effective when, no matter what its initial opinion, the audience is exposed to subsequent counterpropaganda or when, regardless of subsequent exposure, the audience initially disagrees with the position advocated by the com- municator. The two-sided communication is less effective if the audience agrees with the initial position and is not exposed to later 42 cites another study whose results showed counterpropaganda. He that more than twice as many listeners changed their opinions in the direction advocated by the communicator when the conclusion was exPlicitly drawn as did when it was left to the audience. 40Gallaher, 3p. c_it., p. 51. 41Arthur R. Cohen, Attitude Change and Social Influence, New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1964, p. 4. 421bid. , p. 12. -30- Cohen43 states that ”attitudes change more when communi- cations highly desirable to the subject are presented first, followed by the less desirable ones, than when the less desirable ones come first. " Also, the "pro-con" order is superior to the "con-pro" order when both "pro" and "con" arguments are presented. The amount of change advocated by the communicator seems to be a factor. Cohen44 states that the greater the attempt at change, the higher the resistance to the change, if there is some question about the credibility of the communicator. With respected com- municators, the greater the discrepancy between the subject's position and the one advocated, the greater the change. The opinion leaders in a school are important in the communi- cation pattern. According to Cohen, 45 in regard to voting behavior. what influenced people most was other people -- friends, family, community contacts. It is these opinion leaders who serve as mediators between communicators and other people. He46 points out that the subject matter being transmitted is important in deter- 47 mining who will lead and who will follow. Rogers suggests that 431bid., p. 12. 441bid., p. 30. 451bid., p. 117. 46Ibid., p. 118. 47Rogers, "On Innovations and Education, " <_)p_. Cit. , p. 9. -31- change agents can often achieve a more rapid rate of adoption for a given innovation by packaging it in certain ways (labeling modern math "modern") and working it through Opinion leaders. One who wishes to promote change through the influence of communication should be aware of the status structure of the com- munication path. Carlson“!8 says that the flow of communication is influenced by the status structure of the group. Persons of high status do not seek advice from those lower on the status ladder, and those of lower status are guarded in their contacts with upper status pers-O'ns. In,Carlson's study,49 school superintendents definitely tended to ”ask up" the status ladder for advice in education matters. Hesoifound‘that status serves as a barrier to advice seeking. The self-esteem of a person influences his persuasibility. Cohen51 found that persons of low self-esteem tended to be more susceptible to influence from persons of higher self-esteem than vice versa. He also found that threatening appeals are more likely to be rejected by those of high self-esteem than those of low self- esteem. On the other hand, 52 those appeals which enhance an 48Carlson, Adoptionngducational Innovations, 22. 53., p. 30. 491bid., p. 37. 5°lbid.. p. 48. 51Cohen, 22. £i_t_., p. 45. 521bid.. pp. 45-46. -32- individual's self-picture may be accepted more readily by the highs than by the lows. This section discussed the idea that awareness of an idea is a prerequisite to change in school practices. Education was con- trasted with agriculture and medicine in that it has no Specified change agent. The idea was presented that change agents for education may be desirable. Literature was discussed which related some of the factors which affect the flow Of information in organizations. Information flow is dependent upon methods of transmission and the medium through which it passes. BASING CHANGE ON SOUND EVIDENCE Changeis popular.today. Our society at the present time seems to encourage and reward change. The word, "innovation, " is used so frequently that it has become trite. Educators should beware that they do not become swept up with the current and promote change just because it is fashionable. Change should be based on sound evidence if it is to be justifiable. All decisions are not made on the basis of sound evidence. 53 The alleged ability of an individual teacher to reach sound conclusions on the basis of his reasoning capacity and his experience form the basis for many decisions. This method is called common sense. 53Lionberger,£p. c_it., p. 42. -33.. Pellegrin54 says that common sense tells us that the world is flat, that the sun goes around the earth, that heavy bodies always fall faster than light bodies, that boats made of iron will sink. Shane and Yauchss say that one of the weaknesses of the aver- age administrator is that he has a tendency to rely on hunches or intuition rather than factual information that derives from research. This indictment is also placed against teachers. Wile356 says that one of the big reasons there has been little curriculum improvement in some schools is that teachers are unacquainted with educational research. Changes do occur in many schools, however not all of them can be classed as curriculum improvements. Carlson states that "it is rare indeed when an educational innovation is backed by solid research. " Stiles57 contrasts schools with industry when he cites that one small manufacturing company Spent five million dollars on the 54Roland J. Pellegrin, "The Place of Research in Planned Change, " Charggg Processes in the Public Schools, (Eugene, Oregon: The Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administration, University of Oregon, 1965), p. 67. 55Harold C. Shane and Wilbur A. Yauch, Creative School Administration, New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1957, p. 71. 56Wiles, The Changing Curriculum of the American High School, 22. cit., p. 257. 57Lindly J. Sti iles, "Educational Research: The Source of Better Schools, " Theory Into Practice (Columbus, Ohio, Bureau of Educational Research and Service, Ohio State University, 1962), No. 2, April, 1962, p. 70. -34- development of an electric shaver during the time that the total amount spent for research in education was seven million dollars. He says that professional educators Often ignore the fact that research, not debate, will produce better schools. There is not an absence of research in the literature. The research we have is not heeded as it should be. Shane and Yauchf"8 use reading as an example. Studies have shown that reading instruc- tion should begin during the second half of the first grade for most children, yet it is much more common to find such instruction reaching considerable intensity during the first half of the first grade. Gugenheim59 says it is the responsibility of professionals in all fields, including education, to understand the scientific literature connected with their work. This must be one. of the prerequisites to the deveIOpment and implementation of innovation, and in the long run, to a successful educational program. The persons in a leadership position have a responsibility to act as a quality control in regard to adopting educational practices. One of the major characteristics of leadership should be the ability to recognize a good idea and the persistency to make it overtly acceptable. 60 58Shane and Yauch, 32.- cit., p. 70. 59Fred Gugenheim, "Curriculum Development Through Research," Education, 84:52, September, 1963, p. 52. 60Wadia, pp. g_i_t_., p. 363. -35.. Before we move to accept a new practice we should ask our- 61 selves certain questions. Rogers suggests we need to know what improvement in educational quality will result. He62 feels a change agent should anticipate the consequences of an innovation in his social system, and if these are undesirable, they should be avoided. Not only must we look carefully at new practices, but we must also critically examine our present practices. Lionberger63 says that many poor ideas are retained because they are not objectively evaluated. We continue with many practices merely because we have always utilized them and never really questioned their worth. These last few pages presented the idea that although an abundance of research evidence is available, it is not utilized as it should be. It was suggested that curriculum improvement would be more prevalent if sound evidence were heeded. It was also related that changes should not be made unless they are based on research evidence, and that many practices might be discontinued if their soundness were examined. 61Rogers, "On Innovations and Education, "_o_p_. £3. , p. 8. 62lbid., p. 10. 63Lionberger, gp_. 3:11., p. 46. -36- THE ADOPTION PROCESS The adoption process is complicated by many factors. One cannot draw up a master plan which will cover the adoption of every idea in each given social system. It is helpful, however, for a person who wishes to promote change to examine some of the factors which do influence the adoption process. Characteristics of people as potential adopters along with the characteristics of the idea to be proposed should be understood when patterns of adaption are studied. People vary in the degree to which they are likely to ad0pt new ideas. Some persons will be ready to accept an innovation with the presentation of much less evidence than is required by other persons. Corey64 believes that self-dissatisfaction with one's own practice is a necessary prerequisite to change. He goes on to say, however, that it is not a sufficient condition for change. Coffey and Golden65 agree that dissatisfaction with things as they are is neces- sary, . but they say that dissatisfaction or a new level of aSpiration may be very threatening unless the person sees how he can change, and unless he can understand the regions through which he must 64Corey, 22. cit., p. 29. 65Coffey and Golden,_2£. cit., p. 72. -37- travel, psychologically, in order to reach the goal. According to Eichholz, 66 some teachers want to wait and see how good a new idea is before they try it. They view with anxiety any change that might endanger past success. Knowing this, it is wise to refrain from forcing reluctant teachers to participate, but as Van Dalen67 suggests, invite them to join when the idea demon- strates its effectiveness. Persons who are late adopters usually accept their ideas from some of the earlier adopters rather than from outside persons. Lionberger68 suggests that "outside" change agents might as well neglect the late adopters as their efforts will be wasted. Teachers in a school system will fall on a continuum which ranges from innovators on one end to laggards on the other end. Roger869 describes some of the characteristics of innovators and laggards. Innovators are venturesome individuals; they desire the hazardous, the rash, the w'w' and the risky. He says they venture out of their local circle of peers and into more cosmop- olite social. relationships as Oppos ed to laggards who are localites. Laggards look to the past and interact with peers who have values 66Eichholz, 22. gi_t_., p. 267. 67Van Dalen, pp. 22.. p. 9. 68Lionberger, 22. £11., p. 35. 69Rogers, "On Innovations and Education, " pp. cit. , p. 9. -33- like their own. They tend to be suSpicious of innovations, innova- tors, and change agents. When they finally adopt an idea it may al- ready be superseded by another more recent idea. Innovators look to the road of change ahead while laggards have their attention fixed on the rear-view mirror. Persons who are of the late adopter type will be likely to accept their ideas from one of their group who is an opinion leader. Rogers70 describes the Opinion leader as one who conforms closely to the norms of the social system and serves as a role model to others in the system. The rate of adoption of an idea in a school system is going to depend on the adopter characteristics of the educators in the school system. The rate of adoption over time will also vary considerably from one idea to another. Rogers.71 points out that it is the characteristics of a new idea, not as seen by the experts, but as seen by the potential adopters that really matters. He suggests that more rapid rates of adoption are characteristic of innovations that: 1. have more relative advantage over the ideas being replaced, 2. are simple to under- stand and less complex, 3. are visible; their results are plainly 701bid, p. 10. 711bid, p. 4. -39- seen, 4. are divisible for trial, and 5. are compatible with presently held values and attitudes. An idea must have meaning to the potential adopters. Chesler, Schmuck, and Lippitt72 say that the teachers must feel that new practices can help solve problems important to them and their pupils. Aurbach and Kaufman?3 reported on practices followed by 139 farm- ers in Mississippi. They had nearly all heard of five practices for better farming and nearly all thought that each practice was worth- while, but there was a wide discrepancy among practices in terms Of using them. They ranged from a low of 17% who kept written farm records, to a high of 79% who planted certified cotton seed. Those practices which seemed most relevant to greater production were the ones most commonly used. Rogers 74 has found that adopter distributions generally follow a bell shaped curve over time and approach normality. Innovators constitute approximately the first 2- l/ 2% of the adopters, the next 13-1/2% is made up of early adopters, while the next 34% is com- posed of the early majority. The next 34% of the adOpters makes 72Chesler, Schmuck, and Lippitt, 23.53.. p. 271. 73Herbert A. Aurbach and Harold F. Kaufman, Knowledge and Use of Recommended Farm Practices, State College, Mississi-p-pi Agricultural Experiment Station Information Sheet 540-R.S. , 1956. 74Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, Op. cit., pp. 158 and 162. -40- up the late majority and the last 16% to adopt new ideas is the group called laggards. Lionberger75 believes we should recognize the fact that acceptance of change by an individual is a product of a sequence of events and influences operating through time, rather than something that happens to a person all at once. He suggests that there is a need for sustained effort over an extended period of time before action results can be expected. Decision making takes more time for some persons than it does for others. Lionberger76 states that the average time from awareness to first trial of hybrid seed corn by Iowa farm- ers was about five years while for doctors the time between first knowledge and first using of a new antibiotic was only a matter of months. This section discussed the adoption process. Factors which influence adoption are the receiving population and the characteristics of the innovation. A certain pattern exists for the adoption process in terms Of time for adOption distributions. PLANNING CHANGE If school systems are to improve, they must implement changes which enhance the learning opportunities for youngsters. We are at 75Lionberger, 22. £13., p. 31. 76Ibid, p. 43. -41- a point in education when interest in the change process is at a high level. Gardner.77 believes the most distinctive thing about innovation today is that we are beginning to pursue it systematically. Wiles78 says that Since 1957 there has been a shift on the part of many to a belief in a strategy of directed change. In this strategy, certain persons make an assumption that they know what change is desirable and use the best strategy they can devise to bring about the desired change. Lippitt79 discusses several methods which are now being tried experimentally to encourage adoption of certain innovations. He tells of recorded inservice training packages, the "budding off" process, "the cafeteria of possibilities" method, and anticipatory rehearsals with groups of youngsters. These are examples of meth- ods for introducing educational ideas and for gaining confidence by trying new ideas without taking a big risk. Lionberger80 suggests modern math as an example of an innova- tion with the system as the chief instrument for achieving adoption. Modern math was largely adopted by total school systems. Individual 77Cardner, 2p. _ci_t, p. 75. 78"Proposals of Strategies: A Summary, ” 22- Cit- . P- 4- 79uRoles and Processes in Curriculum Development and Change, " op. cit. , pp. 21-22. 80Lionberger, 22. 2E." p. 39. -42- teachers generally have had no choice in the matter, however they have been given support in the way of local workshops and many Opportunities for college courses on the techniques of the new ap- proach to teaching mathematics. Modern math teaching in most schools is the result of planned change. The first part of Chapter II discussed the process of change. The ideas discussed were related to resistance to change, Organiza- tional health, awareness of an idea, basing change on sound evidence, the adoption process, and planning change. This study examines the relationships between teacher character- istics and change in beliefs about non-promotion. The second part of Chapter II will present a review of ideas and research about non- promotion. NON-PROMOTION The studies reported in this Chapter deal with non-promotion and its relationship to the academic and social aspects of the students and the school. More Specifically it will concern its elf with non- promotion as a device to ensure greater mastery of subject matter, non-promotion for the reason of social immaturity, non-promotion as a means for controlling the ability range in higher grades, and non- promotion as a threat to motivate students to higher achievement. -43- SUBJECT MATTER MASTERY As early as 1911 a seven year study was done by Keyes81 in a school district of about 5, 000 pupils. He discovered that of the whole number retained, 20 percent did better, 39 percent showed no change, and 40 percent actually did worse. Buckingham 82 found that only about one-third of several thou- sand children did better work after repeating a grade. McKinney83 studied repeaters in grades above the first and found that 35 percent of the repeaters did better work the second time, 53 percent did not improve, and 12 percent did poorer work. It appears from these studies that the majority of the pupils who repeat a grade will achieve no better the second time in the grade than they did the first time. A substantial nmnber do poorer work the second time in the grade. 84 Grace Arthur compared the achievement of 60 first grade repeaters with the achievement of non-repeaters of the same mental 81Charles Henry Keyes, Progress ThroughEE Grades 2f City Schools, New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1911. 82Burdette Ross Buckingham, Research for Teachers, New York: Silver Burdette and Company, 1926. 83B. T. McKinney, "Promotion of Pupils a Problem of Educa- tional Administration, " Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer- sity of Illinois, 1928. 84Grace Arthur, "A study of the Achievement of 60 Grade I Repeaters as compared with that of Non Repeaters of the Same Mental Age, " Journal of Experimental Education, V (December. 1936), pp. 203-205. '— -44- age. She discovered that the average repeater did not learn more in two years than the average non-repeater learned in one year. Coffield and Blommers85 discovered from their research that slow learning children who are required to repeat a grade and slow learning children who are promoted, ultimately perform at about the same level when this performance is measured in the same higher grade, in spite of the fact that the failed pupils each spent an added year in attaining this higher grade. Klene and Branson, 86 in a study made in Long Beach, Califor- nia, equated children, all of whom were to be retained in the grade, on the bases of chronological age. mental age, and sex. Half were then promoted and half were retained. They concluded that, on the whole, potential repeaters profited more from promotion than did the repeaters from non-promotion, in terms of measured achieve- ment. Farley, Frey, and Garlands? found that children with low 85William H. Coffield and Paul Blommers, "Effects of Non- Promotion on Educational Achievement in the Elementary School, " Journalo_f_ Educational Psychology, XLVII, No. 4, April, 1956, pp. 235-250. 86Vivian Klene and E. P. Branson, "Trail Promotion Versus Failure, " Los Angeles Educational Review Bulletin, VII, No. 5, January, 1929, pp. 6-11. 87Eugene S. Varley, Albin J. Frey, Gertrude Garland, "Factors Related to the Grade Progress of Pupils, "Elementary School Journal, XXXIV, NO. 3, November, 1933, pp. 186-193. -45- IQ's who had repeated several grades were not doing as well in their school work as children of the same ability who had been kept with those of approximately their own age. Non-promotion was more likely to be a deterrent than an impetus to acceptable achievement. Coffield88 found that failed and promoted pupils who are com- parable in achievement at the time of failure, perform at about the same level when achievement of both is measured in the seventh grade. The practice of failure, in the form of non-promotion, as a device to ensure greater mastery of elementary school subject matter does not receive support from research findings. SOCIAL IMMATURITY Social immaturity is Often suggested as a reason for having a youngster repeat a grade. The argument is advanced that "he plays with the younger children, he will fit in better with them. " The persons who use the social immaturity reason for non-promotion believe that it is beneficial socially for the youngster to repeat a grade. Anfinson89 studied 116 pairs of junior high school pupils who 88Wi11iam H. Coffield, "A Longitudinal Study of the Effects of Non-Promotion on Educational Achievement in the Elementary School, " Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of Iowa, 1954. 89R. D. Anfinson, ”School Progress and Pupil Adjustment, " Elementary School Journal, XL, 1941, pp. 504-514. -46- were matched on school attendance, chronological age, sex, intelligence, and socio-economic status. One of each pair had been regularly promoted while the other had repeated the previous grade. Anfinson found that the regularly promoted students were significantly better in their personal and social. adjustment. Sanding0 studied the social, behavioral and emotional results of non-promotion through the use of tests, ratings and interviews. He found that the retarded child on the average is likely to choose companions in grades ahead and would like to join them there. The children who made slow progress tended to regard their younger classmates as inappropriate companions. The retarded children did not often receive the social approval of the regularly promoted, and on most behavior traits teachers rated the slow progress chil- dren less favorably than those in the normal progress group. Other children are inclined to describe the slow progress children as more likely to be unhappy, grouchy, quarrelsome, rude, and selfish. Sandin reported that children who had previously been failed said that their parents had been angry, that they had been spanked, or that they had been lectured on the need for studying harder. Brothers, sisters, and relatives had criticized their shortcomings and failure was a continual sore point to be brought up for conversa- 90Adolph A. Sandin, Social a__nd Emotional Adjustments of Regularly Promoted and Non-Promoted Pupils, New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1944. -47- tion from time to time. A study by Goodlad91 showed similar findings. He reports that the promoted children were rejected significantly less by class- mates as persons not desirable for very best friends. He says the whole picture of sociometoric change over the school years was one Of decline in desirable adjustment for the non-promoted children and of improvement for promoted children. Morrison and pen-3.92 found that discrimination against overage children varied considerably at different age levels and was most severe in grades four, five, and six. In general, a definite degree of non- acceptance for overage children was found in this study. The studies which have examined the social outcomes of non-promotion point to many harmful consequences. Non-promotion for the reason of social immaturity does not receive support from research findings . EFFECT ON HOMOGENEITY Early elementary teachers feel a concern for the wide range 91John I. Goodlad, "Some Effects of Promotion and Non- Promotion upon the Social and Personal Adjustment of Children, " Journal 2_f_ Experimental Education, XXII, 1954, pp. 301-328. 92Ida E. Morrison and Ida F. Perry, "Acceptance of Average Children by Their Classmates, " Elementary School Journal, LVI, January, 1956, pp. 217-220. -48- of abilities which confront upper grade teachers. It is a fairly com- mon belief that retaining youngsters who are not performing to a predetermined standard will help to alleviate this problem. Studies by Goodlad, Coffield, and Cook93 all report basically the same finding; that non-promotion does not appear to reduce the range of Specific abilities with which the upper grade teachers have to cope. It appears from the research studies that early elementary teachers need not worry about the higher grade teachers having a 'wider range of abilities to deal with even when every student is pro- moted. It makes very little difference. THREAT AS MOTIVATION Very Often the threat of non-promotion is used as a motivating force. Many teachers feel that youngsters will quit working if they get the idea everybody is going to pass. Otto and Melby94 put this to a test with second and fifth grade students. They concluded that children who are told at the beginning 93Coffield, op. cit.; John I. Goodlad, "Research and Theory Regarding Promotion and Non Promotion, "Elementary School Journal, November, 1952, pp. 150-155; and Walter W. Cook, "Some Effects of the Maintenance of High Standards of Promotion." Elementary School Journal, XLI, 1941, pp. 430-37. 94Henry J. Otto and Ernest O. Melby, "Attempt to Evaluate the Threat of Failure as a Factor in Achievement, " Elementary School Journal, XXV, 1935, pp. 588-596. -49- of a semester that all will be in the following grade the next term do as well on a comprehensive achievement test as children who throughout the semester are reminded that they must do good work or suffer non-promotion. This study demonstrates that threat of non-promotion is not a motivating force. Teachers need not fear that removing the threat of failure lowers achievement. SUMMARY The purpose of Chapter II was to present ideas and literature related to the study. The first part of the chapter dealt with change; the second part discussed non-promotion research. Ideas discussed in relation to the process of change centered about resistance to change, organizational health, awareness of an idea, basing change on sound evidence, the adoption process, and planning change. The literature seems to point to the fact that an organized attempt to influence the practices of teachers in a direc- tion consistent with research evidence is desirable. Research evidence on non-promotion is used in the study to influence teachers' beliefs. A summary of research studies was presented in this chapter. Studies were cited which dealt with non- promotion as a device to ensure greater mastery of subject matter, non-promotion for the reason of social immaturity, non-promotion as a means for controlling homogeneity in higher grades,and non- -50- promotion as a threat to motivate students. With this background as a basis, Chapter III will examine the procedures used in collecting the data, the source of the data, a description of the instruments used, and the data analysis procedures. CHAPTER III PROCEDURES AND SOURCES OF DATA The procedure used in the collection and treatment of the data is the topic of Chapter Three. The steps used in the collection, the source of the data, a description of the instruments used, and the methods of data analysis are described in order. CCHTLEKTIKIN