MSU RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from LIBRARIES , “ your record. FINES W1” be charged if book is returned after the date cc_miT‘C:_ stamped below. 3- . j ABSTRACT AN EVALUATION OF A COOPERATIVE APPROACH TO CURRICULUM CHANGE by John Richard Verduin, Jr. A THESIS Submitted to the College of Education Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1962 It. Ilium—“w This study in“ sociated with a cooper lifichigan, Public Schc Year with the evaluatic The curriculum short to identify, evalt ‘l in. Small groups V pose change in the are steering committee and The population he school system. i. are the data collectiu m4. ..ter were administei fall... ' Wing the study' t .onths after the stud‘ term he the change in than 8 9 3- Obsemat: ta- 0 questionnaires JOHN RICHARD VERDUIN, IR. This study investigated and evaluated the process and product as- sociated with a cooperative curriculum study conducted in the Cassopolis, Michigan, Public Schools. The curriculum study lasted for one school year with the evaluation study following for eleven months after. The curriculum study utilized most staff members in a cooperative effort to identify, evaluate, and foster solutions to problems in the curric- ulum. Small groups worked on eight problem areas to investigate and pro- pose change in the areas. The curriculum study was led by an elected steering committee and assisted by three university curriculum specialists. The population for this study was 45 teachers and administrators of the school system. Three questionnaires, interviews, and observations were the data collection devices. The questionnaires devised by the writer were administered to participants at three points: one immediately following the study; the second, five months later; and the third, eleven months after the study. The questionnaires served as check points to de— termine the change in the participants and curriculum and tle value of the changes. Observations and interviews were conducted between the last two questionnaires to determine the same changes and value. Hypotheses were designed to check increased interest in and aware- ness to problems of education, democratic and professional attitude change, cohesiveness of staff, re-education of staff, and changes in ideas and per— suasions about education as a result of a cooperative exposure to curriculum change. Also the t desire for and actua' n‘cuium changes we! In the review subject-matter expe approach. From t' that the cooperativi in participants, mc worthwhile change considered in this The data 5] inants and also in. pletion of the orig Ulum Chan99$ were changes in their p CleaSQd 0 Part‘ . 1C1 Wer e alerted to inc IOHN RICHARD VERDUIN, IR. change. Also the effect of small group work for curriculum change, the desire for and actual continued curriculum work, and the value of the cur- riculum changes were tested in the hypotheses. In the review of literature, a comparison was made between the subject-matter expert approach to curriculum change and the cooperative approach. From this comparison, a rationale was offered which suggested that the cooperative approach presented more opportunity for behavior change in participants, more continuity of curriculum work, and more effective and worthwhile change in the curriculum. These three main categories were considered in this study also. The data showed a noteworthy change in the behavior of the partic— ipants and also indicated that curriculum work was continued after the com— pletion of the original study. The usefulness and effectiveness of curric- ulum changes were clearly indicated by those people who utilized the changes in their professional situations. More specifically, interest in education and its problems was in- creased. Participants became more aware of educational problems and were alerted to inconsistencies in their own curriculum. A more demo- cratic and professional attitude resulted from the cooperative effort of par- ticipants and greater concern for students, fellow educators, and education in general was evidenced. More GOhe felt that the curric many Changes in t} young people. 1‘ last check point. fostering curriculu Although 5C was registered in C by most staff memi included evaluatio nentation of sugge solving of new and itiated by the staff It was com fostered valuable < C‘dIn'culum. JOHN RICHARD VERDUIN, IR. More cohesiveness and better rapport was noted. Participants felt that the curriculum study was a learning experience and indicated many changes in their personal opinions and persuasions about educating young people. Most changes were either maintained or increased at the last check point. Also small group work was considered effective for fostering curriculum change. Although some disenchantment about continued curriculum work was registered in questionnaires, actual curriculum work was conducted by most staff members the year following the original study. This work included evaluation of new and old concerns, attention to proper imple- mentation of suggested changes, and actual investigation and problem solving of new and old problem areas. A new curriculum study was in- itiated by the staff. It was concluded that this cooperative approach to curriculum change fostered valuable change in the participants and worthwhile change in the curriculum . AN EVALUATION OF A COOPERATIVE APPROACH TO CURRICULUM CHANGE John Richard Verduin, Jr. A THESIS Submitted to the College of Education Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1962 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer is deeply indebted to a number of individuals for their interest, guidance and assistance in the design, execution and comple- tion of this study. The writer is especially grateful to Dr. Roy A. Bdelfelt, Chairman of the Guidance Committee, for his suggestions, constructive criticisms and encouragement throughout this study. To Dr. Calhoun Collier, special appreciation is acknowledged for his assistance in the Curriculum Study and the evaluation of it. To Drs. Orden Smucker and Stanley Hecker, the writer wishes to express appreciation for their helpful participation on the Guidance Com- rnittee. The researcher is indebted to Superintendent Jack Ryder and the professional staff members of the Cassopolis School District for their com- Plete cooperation in making the study possible. The writer is particularly thankful to his mother and father for their loyal assistance in the completion of this study. ACKNOWLEDGEMEI LIST OF TABLES. . CHAPTER 1. INT Stat Nee Hyr Del Ass Def “- co Inn His Cur III. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................ LIST OF TABLES ........................... CHAPTER I . INTRODUCTION ................... Statement of Problem ................. Need for the Study .................. Description of Study ............. Setting ................ Population .............. Instruments .............. Statistics ............... Procedures .............. Hypotheses ...................... Delimitations ..................... Assumptions ...................... Definitions ...................... Outline of Remaining Chapters ........ II. COOPERATIVE CURRICULUM IMPROVEMENT: A III . TABLE OF CONTENTS RATIONALE .................... Introduction ..................... History of Curriculum Change ............ Curriculum Change .................. DESCRIPTION OF A COOPERATIVE CURRICULUM IM- PROVEMENT STUDY AND THE ROLE OF THE CON- SULTANTS ..................... -111- PAGE ii vi 13 13 13 20 38 CHAPTER CocI Rol: Inh< Inst IDat Ilse ()ve Pres Hyp Hyp Hyp. Hyp Hun Hyp Hyp Hyzo Hyp Hyp Sun (ICX Intr (Ior Imp Rec Rev Par Par iv TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued PAGE CHAPTER Cooperative Curriculum Improvement Study ..... 38 Role of the Consultants ............... 47 IV. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA ....... 51 Introduction ..................... 5 1 Instruments ..................... 51 Data Collection ................... 52 Use of Data ..................... 53 Overview of Results ................. 54 Presentation and Analysis of Data .......... 56 Hypothesis One ................... 57 Hypothesis Two ................... 62 Hypothesis Three .................. 66 Hypothesis Four ................... 71 Hypothesis Five ................... 75 Hypothesis Six .................... 80 Hypothesis Seven .................. 84 Hypothesis Eight ................... 90 Hypothesis Nine ................... 92 Hypothesis Ten .................... 95 Hypothesis Eleven .................. 106 Summary of Results .................. 113 V. CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMEN— DATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH ........ 116 Introduction ..................... 1 1 6 Conclusions ..................... 1 1 6 Implications ..................... 1 1 8 Recommendations for Further Research ........ 124 Review of the Study ................. 125 APPENDDI I ............................. 127 Part I ........................ 12 7 Part II ........................ 135 APPENDD( II ............................. 14 1 APPENDIX III. . . APPENDIX IV. . . APPENDDI V. . . . APPENDDI VI. . . Part I. . . Part II. . , BIBLIOGRAPHY. . , TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued PAGE APPENDD( III ............................ 1 42 APPENDIX IV ............................ 1 4 7 APPENDDC V ............................. 1 6 7 APPENDIX VI ............................ l 8 6 Part I ............................ 1 8 8 Part II ............................ 1 9 1 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................ l 9 8 TABLE III. VII. VIII. CHART QU QL’ TABLE CHART II. III . VII. VIII . LIST OF TABLES QUESTIONNAIRE DATA RELATED TO HYPOTHESIS NUMBER ONE ................... QUESTIONNAIRE DATA RELATED TO HYPOTHESIS NUMBER TWO ................... QUESTIONNAIRE DATA RELATED TO HYPOTHESIS NUMBER THREE. . . . . .......... . . . QUESTIONNAIRE DATA RELATED TO HYPOTHESIS NUMBER FOUR ........ . . . . . ..... QUESTIONNAIRE DATA RELATED TO HYPOTHESIS NUMBER FIVE ...... . ............ QUESTIONNAIRE DATA RELATED TO HYPOTHESIS NUMBER SDC ................... QUESTIONNAIRE DATA RELATED TO HYPOTHESES NUMBER SEVEN AND EIGHT ............ QUESTIONNAIRE DATA RELATED TO HYPOTHESIS NUMBER NINE ....... . .......... QUESTIONNAIRE DATA RELATED TO HYPOTHESIS NUMBER TEN ........... . ....... QUESTIONNAIRE DATA RELATED TO HYPOTHESIS NUMBERELEVEN. . . . . . . . . . . ...... TIME SCHEDULE OF CURRICULUM STUDY AND EVALUATION STUDY. . . ...... . ...... "Vi‘ PAGE 58 63 67 72 77 81 85 93 I Statement of Probl»: This study * I curriculum improve of an evaluation wi evaluate a c00pera‘ process and prodUC The locale is to evaluate a cor lain its value to a s implications which in curriculum study ‘t’llh an evaluation .ecuveness of a co m Cassopolis, Mic To adequate able approach to C CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Statement of Problem: This study will investigate the merit of a cooperative approach to curriculum improvement. The investigation will be conducted in the form of an evaluation with both process and product receiving attention. To evaluate a cooperative approach to curriculum improvement effectively, process and product must be examined and evaluated together. The locale of this study is Cassopolis, Michigan. The purpose is to evaluate a c00perative approach to curriculum improvement, to ascer- tain its value to a school system, and to derive some generalizations and implications which might have relevance for other school systems interested in curriculum study. The evaluation of group process and interaction along With an evaluation of the recommended improvements may determine the ef— fecfiveness of a cooperative approach to curriculum change as experienced in Cassopolis, Michigan. To adequately appreciate and understand the meaning of the cooper- ative approach to curriculum change, it will be compared and contrasted With the subject-matter expert approach. From this comparison and the IreView of related literature, a rationale for cooperative procedures will be -1- built. It descrii3t odolOQY for the Stu plete the attempt K Conclusions, mph" / conclude this rePOr In contempt“ riculum change shc changing society at The controversy on change received its ucation which it pro both educators and provement agent an' W?- This study Change and will atte Although the Cum'Cuhlm study are lest. Since limiter - 2 _ built. A description of the curriculum study under investigation, the meth- odology for the study, and the presentation and analysis of data will com- plete the attempt to validate a cooperative approach to curriculum study. Conclusions, Injlications and recommendations for additional research will conclude this report. In contemporary American education there is a conflict as to how cur- riculum change should be effected to meet the needs and demands of a rapidly changing society and to keep America strong in the face of world conditions. The controversy on how and who should foster the necessary curriculum change received its impetus from the Sputnik incident and the concern for ed— ucation which it prompted. The concern is receiving important notice by both educators and laymen today. To clarify the role of the curriculum im- provement agent and the basis for curriculum change is of prime importance today. This study will direct its attention to the problem of curriculum change and will attempt to shed some light on the entire process. Although the notions associated with the cooperative approach to curriculum study are not new, limited relevant research appears on the sub- lect. Since limited research appears on the subject of cooperative proced- ures, and an effort to help clear up the current controversy on curriculum improvement processes is necessary, a need can be expressed for this study. Need for the Study: ——’—-—L' American 5: To properly serve h should be alert to : clientele. The sr and foster appropri Shane and T of the curriculum b vigorous service. more with the Chan should strive to an TO the eff | festive and Comm total change. Ed eXiSted for many Yr chime. 1\ Shane H t v I CumCUIUm N 2 I D. Applet0n_ Need for the Study: American society is dynamic and complex. Change is ever present. To properly serve the people who live in our society, a social institution should be alert to insure that its services continually meet the needs of its clientele. The school, therefore, must continuously assess its program and foster appropriate change if the needs of its clientele are to be met. Shane and McSwain 1 support continuous evaluation and improvement of the curriculum because these processes help keep a school capable of vigorous service. They contend that such activity keeps a school in bal- ance with the changes and increasing complexity of society. Schools should strive to anticipate the demands and requirements which a rapidly changing society imposes upon children in school and in adult life in years to come. To have effective change in the curriculum there must be a change 2 To change the curriculum and to have ef- in the behavior of teachers. fective and continuous evaluation, staff members must experience a behav- ioral change. Educators tend to retain ideas about education which have existed for many years, and in order for those ideas to change, people must change. 1 Shane, Harold and McSwain, E. T. , Evaluation and the Elemen- tary Curriculum, New York, Henry Holt and Company, 1958. 2 Miel, Alice, Changing the Curriculum: A Social Process, New York, D. Appleton-Century Company, Inc. , 1946. The colleC‘ tion that change ir ships and roles wh cesses or activitie Since chanl lationships and be I. tion and evaluatior Curriculum improv. and the actual curr “him improvement. the Change in par-ti about the change It In Conte mpg -4- 3 supports the no- The collection of writings by Benne and Muntyan tion that change in the curriculum is a change in the system of relation- ships and roles which constitute the structure of the school and in the pro- cesses or activities which these roles and relationships support and permit. Since change in the curriculum may be viewed as change in the re- lationships and behaviors of participating members, the need for investiga- tion and evaluation into the social interaction and process present during curriculum improvement work is important. Evaluating both the process and the actual curriculum changes can determine two dimensions of curric- ulum improvement. Determining the appropriateness and effectiveness of the change in participants and the curriculum is as important as bringing about the change itself. In contemporary America there are two opposite points of view on curriculum improvement which are the extreme poles on the curriculum change continuum. The subject-matter expert approach and the cooperative approach are the two approaches in question. Both approaches aspire to the same general end product; that the student should be a useful and adequate mem— ber of a democratic society. The means to the goal, however, vary consid- erably. The subject-matter expert approach suggests that curriculum change should be effected primarily by a specialist in a particular discipline, while the cooperative educator wants the classroom teacher to foster the change in g 3 Benne, Kenneth and Muntyan, Bozidar, Human Relations in Curric— ulum Change, New York, The Dryden Press, 1951 . acooperative situa orientations and in proaches to conflic Since such 1 ation of each apprc priate for educatior Therefore, 1 contrasting points c an Opportunity to cc This study ideas and methods : tum, Proposed for f fessional QIOWth ar Through the trons and conclusic w} mh may help 0th Since the S (26de with e S 1 C in the Staff meme] .. 5 - a cooperative situation with fellow educators. Other differences in basic orientations and interpretations of educational processes cause these ap- proaches to conflict even more. Since such a conflict is present in American education, an examin- ation of each approach is necessary to determine which one is more appro- priate for education. Therefore, in order to evaluate cooperative procedures and compare contrasting points of view on educational change, this study is needed and an opportunity to conduct it was presented in Cassopolis. This study can serve a two-fold purpose. First, some significant ideas and methods regarding curriculum change may be determined and, in turn, proposed for future use. Secondly, it may develop additional pro- fessional growth among the participants from the CaSSOpolis School System. Through the evaluation study the writer may draw some generaliza- tions and conclusions about evaluation and curriculum improvement studies which may help other school systems who wish to conduct curriculum studies. Since the study will involve professional educators directly con- cerned with the school and its curriculum, it may foster additional growth in the staff members of the Cassopolis Public Schools. The study, more Specifically, may provide participants with additional learning experiences, Opportunities for more cooperative group work, possible continuous research and evaluation of other curricular areas, consciousness of the professional role, and professional growth. Invesfigati' ment indicated a c- riculum improveme tions were re‘newE curriculum: Two fact that curriculu: In Summati during this studY: System and 130351b ing experiences IC The study lbchigan. Cass about 30 miles ea Michigan border. the CiVil War of the residents - 5 - Investigation into the literature and research on curriculum improve— ment indicated a comparative paucity of research related to cooperative cur— riculum improvement and to group interaction. Only six doctoral disserta- tions were reviewed which dealt directly with a general evaluation of the curriculum. Two contemporary curriculum specialists 4 further support the fact that curriculum evaluation is definitely lacking. In summation through the interest, incentive, and knowledge gained during this study, the professional staff members of the CaSSOpolis School System and possible other school systems may be able to bring better leam- ing experiences to young people. Descg‘ption of Study Setting: The study was conducted in the public school system of Cassopolis, Michigan. Cassopolis is located in the southwestern sector of Michigan about 30 miles east of Lake Michigan and 12 miles north of the Indiana- Michigan border. It was the end-point of the underground railroad during the Civil War. Thus, most of the Negro people, who represent 30 per cent of the residents, are northerners of comparative long standing. Two mobile home factories and several other small factories provide the major industrial employment opportunities for the community. Most of the surrounding area is used for farming, which provides a large source of 4 McNally, Harold J. , Passow, A. Harry and Associates, Improving the_Quality of Public School Programs, New York, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1960. income for the cor: cities nearby for ti mum: The populat Who Participated in will be referred to who have joined th group will be refen W: The instnm PT the Writer. In In the tabu- Possibl fie respondEnts. W QuesuOnm l for entire time s W questionnaire n “Operative cunicu Enlist Earl} are a- 1rd are Cum, CUIUm SIUA L. _ 7 _ income for the community. Some community members commute to the larger cities nearby for their employment. Population: The population for this study includes the teachers and administrators who participated in the 1959-1960 curriculum study, and who, henceforth, will be referred to as the old teachers, and the teachers and administrators who have joined the Cassopolis study since September, 1960 . The latter group will be referred to as the new teachers. Instruments: The instruments used in collecting data are questionnaires devised by the writer. Interviews and observations were also used to collect data. Statistics: In the tabulation of questionnaires the per cent of responses for each possible category on a question will be given to show the representation of the respondents. hocedges: Questionnaires were used at three times for data collection (See Chart I for entire time schedule of curriculum study and evaluation study). The first questionnaire was completed immediately after the completion of the co- COperative curriculum improvement study in May, 1960; the second was ad- ministered in early October of the following school year, 1960-1961; and the third was given in April, 1961 , eleven months after the completion of the Curriculum study . Qm\HH\v OH om\oH\$ totem coflmimmno cam 33235 l> rj _ _ re; -. . _ s 2 :13 .JE .48 .m2 own >14 A m a? so <3 as} 0: Sam 23553390 rcoflmoso ccooom H55. Ho coanQEoO Ho cofloHanO 83m}: am>\o: SQVEV tense 833} 8 SEN}: menamz a Room Hoonom cam Hosccmm om m\3 .oEHH coumo 203% .8525 . . 5332 .8332 .2950 5:2 me co/ oanflsfi. 0E “SE _ - _ o . .Lm ._ . - >4: 4m Jam woz $0 8w\NN\mv Amm\w\mv 6m\m\mv 8m\mH\3 05532 H H H . seats see is amass finesse fines 35 mo wfiwo 53m .oEso .2850 cofimHQEoO 5 m fisom ccooom NDDHm ZOE/«D25 Q75 NQDBm SHDHDOHNEDO nHO mHDnHmHHHOm 523. .H Hyamo _ g _ Observations were made periodically by the writer from September, 1960 to April, 1961 . Interviews were conducted periodically by the writer over the same period of time. The questionnaires, observations, and interviews provided the data upon which to determine the change and the value of the change in the cur- riculum and the participants . Since this study proposes to examine and evaluate the process and product associated with a cooperative approach to curriculum change, the criteria used to determine the change and value of the change will be ob- tained from theory and research in this area. The theory, research, and ' related literature will be discussed in Chapter II, and will give an indica- tion as to the basis for this evaluation study. All data will be utilized to support or discredit the following hypoth- eses. Hypotheses: 1. That a cooperative curriculum improvement study tends to alert staff members to additional problem areas in the curriculum. 2 . That a cooperative curriculum improvement study tends to encourage staff members to do additional work in other problem areas in curric- ulum. 3 . That a cooperative curriculum improvement study tends to make the staff a more cohesive unit. 10. 11. _ 10 _ That a cooperative curriculum improvement study will create a more professional attitude among participants. That a cooperative curriculum improvement study tends to create a more democratic attitude among the participants. That a cooperative curriculum improvement study will increase in- terest in all phases of education among the participants. That a cooperative curriculum improvement study through its demo- cratic processes and group interaction tends to change people and their ideas, and, therefore, is an effective way of re-educating staff members . That a cooperative curriculum improvement study through its demo- cratic processes and group interaction tends to change people and their ideas, and, therefore, curriculum change occurs. That small cooperative group work as found in the cooperative cur- riculum improvement study is an effective way to get agreement for change in the curriculum. That a cooperative curriculum improvement study once started tends to continue on with curriculumhexamination and improvement. That effective curriculum improvement can be brought about by a co- Operative curriculum improvement study which involves a public school teaching and administrative staff with consultant help from a university staff . _ 11 .. Delimitations: During the cooperative curriculum improvement study, eight curricu- lum areas were investigated. However, four curriculum areas; Instructional Materials Centers, Evaluating and Reporting Pupil Progress, Guidance and Counseling and Communication Skills were used because implementation had occurred and evaluation of these areas was possible. This study is con- cerned with evaluating these selected recommended improvements and the group interaction involved during the curriculum study. Assumptions: The following assumptions were indicated at the outset of this study: that the responses received in interviews and on the questionnaires would be made honestly and would reflect the accurate opinion of the staff members of the Cassopolis Public Schools, that the evaluation by the staff members and the writer was the most effective way of determining the value of the selected recommended improvements and the value of the group interaction, and that the presence of the writer as an evaluator, observer and interviewer would have no significant effect on the evaluation of the implementation of recom- mended improvements or the group work involved. Definitions: EVALUATION — The process of judging the amount and value of the cur- riculum improvements and group interaction which resulted from the coopera- tive curriculum improvement study. COOPERATIVE CURRICULUM IMPROVEMENT STUDY - The group effort of the staff members of the Cassopolis Public Schools in examining, evaluat- ing and improving the existing curriculum in eight, identified problem areas. _ 12 _ PRODUCT - The recommendations and improvements for curriculum change in the four problem areas; Instructional Materials Centers, Evaluat— ing and Reporting Pupil Progress, Guidance and Counseling and Communica- tion Skills. PROCESS - The interaction in which staff members experienced rela— tions between and among themselves which allowed for reciprocal influences of one upon the other. SUBJECT-MATTER EXPERT - A scholarly authority or group of author- ities external to a school who determine curriculum content and practice. Outline of Remaining Chapters The remainder of this dissertation will follow this pattern: Chapter II wéDdevelop a rationale supporting cooperative curriculum improvement work and will build a theoretical framework for the study. A description of the cooperative curriculum improvement study and the role of the consultants will be presented in Chapter III. Chapter IV will be concerned with the meth- ods and approach to the study and the presentation and analysis of findings. Chapter V will include the conclusions, implications and recommendations for further study. Before the value of a cooperative approach to curriculum change can be determined, a theoretical framework for the use of this approach must be constructed. To build a framework, a rationale will be developed through comparing the cooperative method with the subject-matter expert approach. The rationale and the comparison of opposing methods appear in Chapter II. CHAPTER II COOPERATIVE CURRICULUM IMPROVEMENT: A RATIONALE Introduction: This chapter will build a rationale to provide a theoretical frame- work for the cooperative approach to curriculum change. The rationale will be based on existing literature and research. In building a ration- ale, a comparison will be made with an opposing technique for curriculum change, that of the subject-matter expert approach. These two distinct views are the extreme poles on the curriculum change continuum in present- day education. A brief historical review of educational change will precede the pre- sentation of the rationale to show how approaches to curriculum development have evolved. The review will further show the emergence of two diverse points of view regarding education and its improvement. History of Curriculum Changg Major educational change can be traced back to the mid-eighteenth century when Benjamin Franklin proposed plans for an academy which was a radical change from the Latin grammar school. Modern languages, history, English, and natural science were to be added to the curriculum of the Latin -13.. _ 14 _ grammar school which was patterned on the traditional English plan. From the beginning of the nineteenth century when the common school became a part of American education to World War I, there was noteworthy curriculum change. The common school itself was a radical change from the schools of that time because it advocated education for the young people of the whole community without tuition cost and it was to be supported by the common ef- fort of the whole community. During this period of a hundred years (1820-1920) , educational change was very piecemeal and was carried on in isolation of the total curriculum. 5 Since the curriculum at this time was defined as a collection of subjects, curriculum improvement consisted of reviewing old courses, adding new ones , and changing textbooks. While textbooks and segregated subjects were prominent, few educators saw the curriculum as a whole and integrated pro- gram of experiences. The teacher was confined to specialization in segre- gated subject areas, and textbook writers by their selection and arrangement of content both influenced and created the curriculum of the schools. When lawmakers who governed the regulation of schools fixed the subjects to be taught, the textbook writer prescribed the lessons in these subjects. Near the middle of the nineteenth century, some teachers' institutes appeared on the educational scene. These institutes were utilized for up- grading instruction, but they readily came under the jurisdiction of the law 5 McNally, Harold]. , Passow, A. Harry and Associates, Improve 1_ngthe Quality of Public School Progams, New York, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1960 . - 15 _. makers and assumed a structure which no longer met the needs of the time. They were not effective because they followed the same form even though the teachers were coming to them with different educational preparation and needing different kinds of help. - Courses of study also began to appear in larger cities and in some of the states. Since teachers had different levels of preparation, the courses of study were designed to up-grade the level of instruction and guide the classroom performance of the teacher. These courses of study were usually devised by the superintendent or by members of his staff un- der his immediate direction and they dealt primarily with the content of specific areas and how it should be taught. The 1890's saw the advent of curriculum making by national com- mittees. The Committee of Ten and the Committee of Fifteen were among the first to exert a dominant influence on the development of a school' 8 curriculum. These committees were composed primarily of college profes- sors and school superintendents and were concerned with the revision of courses of study and the publication of new or revised textbooks to fit the various prescriptions. Until the close of World War I, the major influences on curriculum making came largely from people removed from the local school system. Some work was done at the local level by selected central office personnel but, again, this work dealt with the revision of subject areas and resulted in new courses of study for these areas. The end goal of this curriculum activity was either a syllabus, guide, book, report, or test. _ 15 _. Throughout this period, supervisory practices were evolving which resulted in supervision becoming increasingly important in program devel- opment. At first the supervisor's duties generally consisted of assisting the superintendent discharge his responsibilities but they broadened to cover instructional improvement activity. The supervisors began to work with teachers in the classroom although their work consisted mostly of inspect- ing classes and teachers and giving demonstrations on prepared outlines of study. Up to World War I, the courses of study and the graded textbook set the general pattern for the experiences of youngsters in the classroom. After World War I, a number of factors combined to fashion a new approach to curriculum problems. The school program was being consid- ered as a whole of experiences. The school also was being considered a social force in America. The "Cardinal Principles of Secondary Education" in 1918 redefined the primary objectives of education in functional areas of health, family life, vocational preparation, leisure, citizenship, and ethi— cal character. Because of these expressed objectives of education, the relationship between school and society was explored, the traditional sub- ject curriculum was questioned and the need for extensive revisions was stated. If the school was to prepare the student for life in society, then different preparation was needed because many of the objectives were not being considered in the schools. Developments in educational psychology and in learning theory in- dicated the need for relating educational ends to educational means. Ac- tivity learning, a recognition of individual differences, and preparation for life in a dern educating yo also caused 1 production of line procedur money to spe: ing more thing and economic The pr fectively or e) ing the needs indivtdual Stuc the freedom de poses and Drac Dreamed. they not Dretscnratio; Spread rapidly m1dermking in - 17 _ life in a democratic society prompted educators to examine the methods of educating young people. A new era of industrial growth and social change also caused lay people and educators to look at educational offerings. The production of automobiles and other products through the use of assembly line procedures gave impetus to industrial growth. With this came more money to spend and a freer atmosphere in society. More people were do- ing more things and education became recognized as a prerequisite to social and economic upward mobility. The previously prescribed courses of study were not being used ef- fectively or extensively by classroom teachers because they were not meet- ing the needs of teachers and pupils. 6 The courses of study did not help individual students in their total development and did not give the teacher the freedom desired in the classroom. This resulted in changes in the pur- poses and practices of the courses of study. Even though some were still produced, they were now viewed as source material for teachers — guides, not prescriptions. During the 1920's and 1930's, the curriculum movement spread rapidly and curriculum construction and revision became an accepted undertaking in all major school systems. It was felt that a more compre- hensive approach to curriculum making was needed so that all phases of child development would receive attention. It was further considered that the classroom teacher should participate in the curriculum work so that total 6 McNally and Passow, Ibid. acceptance w< ment, and the revision becar appointed and The co. of the classroc curriculum eva‘ ent in educatio tested dun'ng t} Some ed ous and that thi anmed that cum This argument 01 approach and Se. EducafiOn. _ 18 .. acceptance would occur. With the new views on learning, child develop- ment, and the nature of society and education, curriculum construction and revision became so important that curriculum directors and specialists were appointed and utilized to assist in bringing about the needed change. The comprehensive View of curricular experiences, the utilization of the classroom teacher for curriculum change, and the need for constant curriculum evaluation and improvement have continued to grow and are pres- ent in education today. These viewpoints, however, have not gone uncon- tested during their emergence from World War I. Some educators felt that this more modern point of view was errone- ous and that this means of educational improvement was a waste of time and argued that curriculum revision should be done by subject area specialists. This argument of teacher involvement and integrated curriculum versus expert approach and segregated subject matter has reached its peak in present-day education. Contemporary literature definitely reveals this battle for educational improvement. At the present time the issues are still: (a) what should the curriculum be; (b) who should bring about curriculum change; and (c) how can curriculum change be managed most effectively and efficiently. One side suggests a return to the subject-centered method of instruc- tion and wants the expert to prescribe appropriate changes for public school Curricula. These educators and lay people are usually remote from the school classroom and appear to make decisions after a brief, cursory review _ 19 _ of the school program. They respect the nature and structure of knowl— edge and assume they know what children ought to know. Little atten- tion is given to research data regarding the child, his development, and his way of learning. This type of activity characterizes the expert ap- proach to curriculum change. On the other side are educators who advocate the " more modern" approach to education which directs its attention and energies to the child - and lifee-centered curriculum. More consideration is given to individual differences, child development, learning theory, the dynamics of society, research findings, and democratic procedures. Curriculum change should, therefore, consider these factors and should be brought about by the active professional in the field. Utilizing classroom teachers will increase democratic values and bring about desirable behavioral change. In building the rationale for the cooperative approach to educational change, consideration will be given to both points of view and means of curriculum change. It must be realized that these two views are extreme poles in the. conflict present in curriculum change and represent many di- mensions of a complex problem. For reasons of clarity, however, a look at the two extremes is necessary. Through the comparison of research and related literature associated with both methods of operation, the value of the cooperative approach will be seen and the guidelines for this study will be indicated . Cum'culum chanC compafible and a: The ultim the democratic Wc become sufficient However, to attai methods, beliefs, from one another. approaches, a co: terpretations of e: this consideration be examined. In the sub; educated individug educated individua acquired. _ 20 _ Curriculum Change; The ultimate goals for these two distinct views on education are compatible and appear to be the same. They both desire to strengthen the democratic way of life and, therefore, want to prepare youngsters to become sufficient and adequate decision makers for a democratic society. However, to attain this desired behavioral goal for young people, the methods, beliefs, and approaches of each point of view deviate considerably from one another. In order to view adequately and compare these opposite approaches, a consideration must be given to the basic orientations and in- terpretations of educational processes associated with each approach. From this consideration the methods and implications for curriculum change will be examined. In the subject-matter expert approach, the intelligent and basically educated individual will be a useful member of society. To become a well educated individual, a definite body of knowledge in each subject should be acquired. The definite body of knowledge is determined by the specialist in an academic area. The expert approach recognizes and advocates the authority of truth and knowledge. Truth and knowledge can be determined only by a scholar in a particular field. The scholar has dedicated his life to the acquisition of knowledge in one area and, therefore, from this life's work he would know What knowledge and skills are desirable for life in a democratic society. Since he has worked so extensively in one area, his scholarly attributes .. 21 _ equip him to suggest just what is necessary for young people to learn. The scholar can determine the degree of involvement inan area of study and the logical, sequential order of learning experiences. He can suggest and recom- mend areas for both the public school terminal student and the college prepar- atory student. Since he is a well qualified specialist in one area, he can offer the necessary suggestions to pe0p1e less qualified because of his ex- periences in the field and his wealth of knowledge attained through profes- sional work. This is consistent with the idea that if a person is 111, he will get the best help from a medical specialist; if a motor vehicle is not func- tioning properly, a specialist in mechanics is the one to consult; et cetera. The intensified work in one area makes the specialist the ultimate authority of knowledge for his area. In the expert approach then, the subject-matter specialist is the ultimate authority of knowledge, and he is best able to de- termine what knowledge must be acquired by young people in that area. In regard to the curriculum, the expert will suggest a logical, se- quential order of learning. The basis for the curriculum is determined by this logical order because it affords continuity of study and a completeness of coverage. It too will offer an organized background and a basis of pre- requisites in this step by step approach to learning and knowledge. This approach will make teaching easier and more orderly and will give each child an exposure to all necessary knowledge. A definite body of knowledge will usually be handled by the teacher in a definite period of time, and generally it should be standard throughout a school district. The particular area of knowledge will start with the simple and lead to the complex. In this _ 22 .. approach we often find a "parts-whole" approach in which the parts of knowl- edge lead to the whole in a building-block manner. When certain knowledge is acquired, the student then passes on to the next level. Learning in this case is seen as occurring when certain knowledge is obtained by the individ- ual. It is assumed that utilization of knowledge will come after it has been acquired. The curriculum suggested by the specialist is generally very academic in nature and consists mostly of segregated subjects. The integration of subject matter must then occur in the student himself after he has acquired the various knowledge and skills. To adequately handle the material in certain areas, the expert sug- gests that a well disciplined mind is necessary. This disciplined mind is attained through disciplined work in the classroom. The work is highly academic and little value is seen in "frill subjects" or " socialization activ- ities." In his thinking, the expert has little regard for " education for life in a democracy" which is the current philosophy of many contemporary edu- cators . The expert feels that an educated and knowledgeable citizenry is the necessary ingredient for democratic living. If young people are given a logical and disciplined training in public schools, they can govern them- selves and propagate democratic values successfully. A basic education is first and then living in a democratic society will follow. Obviously the subject matter specialist is the curriculum change agent in this case. He is theauthority in his area so he and only he can - 23 _ suggest the appropriate curriculum. In the expert's thinking this method of change has several values. First, the specialist knows what should be taught in school in a particular subject area. Secondly, this approach to change is less time consuming than a democratic, cooperative approach. Lastly, this approach frees the teacher from involvement in activities and gives him more time to concentrate on teaching. The basic tenents held by experts, of course, determine their views on the nature of education for life in a democracy. The advocate of coop— erative change desires successful living in a democracy as a goal for edu- cation, too. But his views and ideas about reaching this goal differ sub- stantially from that of the expert. A consideration of the views and ideas held by the advocate of coop- erative change will illustrate the differences in the points of view and will give an indication of the basic orientations and interpretations found in the cooperative approach to curriculum change. The educators, whom the writer shall call cooperative educators for purposes of definition, use democratic procedures for curriculum change and believe that all people involved should have the responsibility in decision making. The value received from this procedure will be discussed later. However, these educators have certain values and orientations which must be enumerated first before the curriculum change process is mentioned. These values and orientations are quite different and tend, therefore, to be in direct disagreement with the subject-matter expert's views. The ject to the r room and on person. If of knowledge present in ct further restn‘. Becat readiness of CUITiCUIUm 8X 1C> UwQ «QHCQUCOQWOK W3 6.. mvhmeCOHummemW . man5>~< \fluqflfimb ~ WQEfiw N eonamm N hmvxrmwz N loEom uzo ”hunt/No.2 nHmmannVfihkfl: 9H; nhuhrho. $2 mo mmoum 05 0a “gouge SV 85 $8 A8 Eomodo 2830.5 con—momma mucoE rot/0.5:: coccoEEoooh ofi o>mm tum mm.m Nm.mm mad «93.8 “C “NV 88 8v :5an 9.89” “mg m0 9:8 :0 vocooc 325% can cocoon?“ 0008 3 .m .z c0330 02 mo» 02 mm.m tum mmdm :.mm 00.2 o mEoummmiSo> A3 a $5 8: 6V 8V 5 mEoBOE .850 no 303m 850 non op 50> vomsmo 303m .35 mom Amuconconmmom mg m ohmccoflmosd .m.z #333 >385 “cases 253 :m am $50 how < 0.02 med 3.2 mmdv mwdm 3% mad wgofi 0cm. 335m 0033 you A8 at 68 83 3 AC mosco>m :6: Como >053 3:..— 05 mm .m 8 .3 S .8 mm .mm o o 335 35:5me 233 :26 So» § 3: Q: 6: § § 9. “0328 3032a $50 2295 op 503:0? 23.50% 05“ 30> ED Amucovcornamom m$ .a oHBEBEmoaa .m . z $332 333 D $83 603% .8224 :080m '5 mZO mmmzbz mummaogm OH. thfimm mm .N— .z _ COfiCflO OZ~ “0% N 02 NnfiwjflufiflcadUV uh .inWQaUfiH -59- .0030 00000000 00 000000000 00300 :0 0o :0 .2 0 mv.~ 00.0 A o . 00.00 00.00 00000000 00000 A: 3 EV t. 3 “N: 0000000 000 0000000000 0000500500 05000 00000050000000 05o> 005 0000 300 50> 0D >030 0.000> 0000 .00 $5000 0 00 00505000050 000.00 $8 05 00 00000 803000 000050000 00 050000000 00000 0000000 000 0000 100000 00000 00000 0.05 000000000 00000 r0050050 0000000 05 no 035000 00.3. 30000000000 E O 000000030050 .0 .2 0000000 02 050000000 050000000 0800 0009 0002 o 00 . 0 00 . 3 0 00055000050 00|0 A8 A8 88 av 100000 05 00 00000 0003000 000050000 00 050000000 50> 000E >030 005 0000 00 .0 mm . mm mm . mu. 0 000000 0003000 0050 00 000000 E 08 0 8 § 00300 as... 02802 02850000 00 0 00.0m 00.00 00.0 «50> 80 A8 A0 NV 5 00 00000 0003000 0050 000000050 0000000050900 0000000000000 05 0>0m .0 .z 85500 oz 0000 oz 0000050000 . 0 0.0000 Ope additional \ lem areas v. This invest; area. Sec tion receive“ t0 the Origir tion 0f the 1- an area of i: Teac and lanQUag‘ alerted. I1 mOre inSight In Q1 recommer1 dec inal studylS they had bec mm as a 1‘83] cific areas 0 Denmentauol vesfigatiofl a On Fe CESSOpoliS' 1 teen nEW pro?“ .. 60 _ Open-ended responses indicated the following four main areas for additional work. First, a more comprehensive investigation of the prob- lem areas with which the participants had been working was suggested. This investigation would assist in getting a total picture of the problem area. Secondly, problem areas related to areas already under investiga- tion received substantial notice. Thirdly, another general study similar to the original curriculum study was suggested and, finally, an investiga- tion of the relationship of guidance to the total curriculum was indicated as an area of interest. Teaching methods, motivation, core curriculum, reading problems, and language studies were other areas to which individual participants were alerted. It was indicated that the investigation of these areas could give more insight into the total problem of educating young people. In Questionnaire B, 24 of 36 respondents (66. 66%) said that the recommended improvements suggested problems closely related to the orig- inal study's problem areas. Thirty—three participants (91 . 65%) stated that they had become more conscious of additional problem areas in the curricu- lum as a result of working on the curriculum improvement study. The spe- cific areas of evaluation and reporting, study habits, special education, ex- perimentation, mental health, and curriculum balance were offered for in- vestigation at this time. On February 21 , 1961 , a general curriculum meeting was held in Cassopolis, Michigan, with both old and new teachers in attendance. Fif- teen new problem areas were identified for investigation by the staff members as well as previous ye tigation. Inte tee and var. tions and or gan. This original prol Vidual and g the seconda indicate an The : ents (95. 119 areas in the Haire B. FrOm additional pr the Original {I sde' Th, months late” elfldenCe S U" P _ 61 _. as well as four uninvestigated problem areas which were identified from the previous year. From these 19 concerns, six areas were chosen for inves- tigation. Interviews revealed that work had been done by the steering commit- tee and various teachers on the eight original problem areas and related sec- tions and on several new areas even before the general curriculum study be- gan. This work included deeper thinking and more investigation into the original problem areas, evaluations of teachers' concerns of problems, indi- vidual and group investigations on reading, parent-teacher conferences for the secondary school, and problems in the area of English. This tends to indicate an alertness to and interest in new problems. The final check point was made in Questionnaire C when 39 respond- ents (95. 11%) indicated that they were either more conscious of problem areas in the curriculum or held the same viewpoint as they did in Question- naire B. From these data it is apparent that the participants were alerted to additional problem areas in the curriculum because of their experiences in the original study. The alertness to problems grew after the cooperative study. This can be seen from Questionnaire B (five months later), the new curriculum work (five to eleven months later), and Questionnaire C (eleven months later). Interviews also revealed that this was the case. Thus, evidence supports the first hypothesis. _ 52 _ Hypothesis Two: That a cooperative curriculum imgovement study tends to encourage staff members to do additional work in other goblem areas in the curriculum. In Questionnaire A, 36 respondents of 45 (79 .99 %) said that they would like to work on future curriculum studies. (See Table II.) From this questionnaire, it is noted that a near—similar number of participants (39; 86. 66%) stated that curriculum examination and improvement should always be a continuous process. In Questionnaire B or five months after the original study, 25 of 36 participants (69 . 44%) said that they found themselves wanting to explore other problem areas in the curriculum while 31 participants (86. 10%) indi- cated that they would be willing to work on committees to help investigate and solve problems if other problem areas were to be determined. A few respondents (3) in Open-ended questions suggested that curriculum work was necessary but that this work should be done after the present improve- ments were utilized and evaluated. Special education, mental health, study habits, new topics, and work at the individual's own teaching grade level were advanced at this time as points for further investigation. Most participants (34 of 36; 94.44%) indicated that curriculum im- provement is necessary on a continuous basis with several open-ended re- sponses indicating that curriculum examination and improvement are imper- ative to keep pace with the changing world conditions. -53- 00.00 00 . 00 00 .0 , 00 .00 000505000050 000 00 000000 000 _ 000 008 000 00000 0>000000 00 >0500 000E0>000 . IE0 00505000050 0000:000> 0000000 00 00 0000 000 50> 00503 00 50> 00503 00 .0 00 .0 00 .00 0 0000000000 000 0300 000 000 600 A000 08 00000000 000000000000 0000 00 00000000 L000 00 00003 00 0000003 00 50> 00503 0000000000 000 00000 00000000 00000 00 0.0.0 00.00 0000.00 00.00 000505000050 000 03 00 3 000 000 00 00000 00000000 00000 00000000 00 0000003 0000050> 00500 50> 000000 0000000000000 000 0 00000000W05O .000 0000000 02 00> 02 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00. 00000 00000 0000500 03 E 03 008 85.80 so x003 00 900 no.0 0063 0.2 02 00000 00 > 000.: 0 00.00 00.00 0 00.0 0 00000000 0505000000 0 08 0000 $0 08 0: SV 00 005000 00505000050 000 00 0000000500 :00 000 0000000000000 0000 00000 50> 00 0000000009000 03 .0 0000000000050 .0 . 2 053000 E050 D 0400000 0000000 00>0Z :000Par OE mumEDZ mHmmEOgm OH. Qmefimm 050.49 MMEZZOHHmmDO . 00 ”0154.0. -54- 00.0. . 00.0 . 3.2 . 3.0%.. 8.00 0200105 E g 000 E 000 8 .0000 000 00 00000 8000000 00 00003 00 0000000003 050> 00 300.0 .08000000 000 0300 000 00000000 000000000000 00B 00 08003 3 0063 005 00000 10000 0003 00000 8000000 00000 00 0000 0000 0000808 00000 >008 .0000000 00 000000000000 03 0 00000000050 .00. 2 000000 0 W00 0 070 , 080 O z 0000?? 00%; 0 0.0.0 . 0 010.000 0.0.0 000000 AS 08 0000 000 0505000000 0 00 >00000000 00 0008 u0>00080 8505000050 0000 0000 50> 0D 30.2 0000000 02 00> 070 00050000000 . 00 "0.54.0. _ 65 .. The responses offered in the questionnaires indicate a general desire to do additional work. A review of actual curriculum work as determined by interviews and observations will illustrate that most participants were in- volved in curriculum work. At the beginning of the school year, 1960—1961 , the steering commit- tee started and continued to evaluate results of the previous year's work on the cooperative curriculum improvement study. Many staff members worked on the previous study areas to perfect them and assist in their implementa~ tion and evaluation. As a result of the evaluative work, six new problem areas were determined at the February, 1961 , curriculum meeting. These problem areas are as follows: Promotion and Retention for Junior High School Students, Deve10pment of Basic Criteria for Assignment of Grades, Consider- ation of Plans for Developing More Patriotic Attitudes, Evaluation of the Phonics Program, Scheduling and Screening for Remedial Work, and Develop— ment of Plans for Limited Experimentation in Parent-Teacher Conferences in the Junior High School. Most staff members appeared on working commit- tees while members of the guidance and English departments were investigat- ing problems associated with their own areas. Other problem areas were voiced but would receive attention later. It can be seen then that most of the current staff members (both old and new teachers) were encouraged to do additional curriculum work. In Questionnaire C, 24 of 41 respondents (58.53%) were as willing to work on new problems of interest and concern as they were at the time of .. 66 _ Questionnaire B. Seven members (17.07%) were even more willing to work on new problem areas than previously stated in Questionnaire B. It is quite evident from questionnaire data and active curriculum work that the cooperative curriculum improvement study participants were encour- aged to do additional work on curriculum problems. This desire to do work on the curriculum increased during the evaluating period as can be seen from Questionnaire C and the investigation work occurring during the interview period, five to eleven months after the curriculum study ended. Hypothesis Three: That a cooperative curriculum improvement study tends to make the staff a more cotgsfiive unit. An early indication of the cohesiveness of the staff can be seen from some open-ended responses in Questionnaire A. Some participants remarked that there was more appreciation and understanding of fellow teachers and their problems. Some mentioned that they felt more a part of the group and that they knew members better, both socially and professionally. In Questionnaire B, 29 of 36 participants (80. 54%) indicated that the staff was a more cohesive unit as a result of the cooperative curriculum im- provement study. (See Table III.) Twenty-seven (75. 00%) stated that the rapport among the staff members had improved as a result of the study and 22 (61 . 11%) mentioned that the staff was more friendly as a result of the study. From interviews, comments both favorable and unfavorable about the cohesiveness of the staff during the school year, 1960-1961, were offered. EE~L-7~L ~hu.hT—_\/~.hh2 flhhnui — 0.70fi0kf. ~ fiJVrh. A.u.l~.5<.hnm~VH (.Huqn u HNV§.~<220.,,Vhr.~....:.u...\ \U \lV -57- 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00800 0000000 000 00 00000 00000 0000 08 03 00: 08 8: $30008 05 06.00 0000 no.0 00 260 >030 0.000> 0000 00 005000 0 00 0005 0.3000000 0008 0 003 00000 000 0000 0000000 00 00000000 0000808 00000 000000000000 03 Wu 00.000000040000400 - .0. z . . 0000000 02 0000000 ._ 0000000 0000000 0000 00003. 0000 000000 00 0800 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 0>0500l000 g 000 008 000 000 00 005000 0 00 0000000 0000808 00000 000 00 000000000000 000 000.0 .82 8800 02 000.800 00020 02 00800 00002 000.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 000500 000 000 000 A00 008 08 00 005000 0 00 0000050000 0000.808 00000 000 00080 0000000 003 300.0 .0 . 2 000000 02 00003 0000000080 000 00 080000 002 8.0 00.0.0 00.0.0 00.0w 00.0 00.0 0080 00.200 0030 05 0o :3 00v 000 00000 800 08 08 :00 0 00 0000000 000000000000 .0000 4 n808 00000 000000000000 000 000 300.0 0000000000000 000 0 00000000000050 .0. 2 0300000.. 0300000 . 0>0000W0l 03000 0300000 >000000 >000000000>0 00002 00000.0 02 000.0 "mm—00.0.0. mmmEDZ mamEOgm 0.0. 000.5350 03.020 MEEZZOHHmmDO . 000 ”0.0000. 03.0. 3 . 0 00 :92...“ v0 . NHN us . 0 0 :50. -68- 00.0 00000 00.: 00.00 00.00 00800 0000000 000 E 60 8: av 63 00 0000808 00000 00080 0000000 00 000000 000 00000 0000000 0000 00 0003 .0 . 2 0000000 0 z 000r0000 0000000 0000000 0000 00003 0000 000000 00 0800 00000000000 . 000 0.0000. _ 69 .. Some participants felt that the staff was more cohesive andsome held an opposite opinion. There, appears to be three major reasons for some breakdown in the staff cohesiveness and rapport after the study. First, the staff members did not have two of their annual dinners during the school year because of other events on the school calendar. Secondly, the new schools separated the staff members so that they did not come together as much as in previous years. Thirdly, staff members did not meet for our- riculum meetings as was done the previous year. An interview with the chairman and two other members of the steering committee tended to sub- stantiate these facts. Their reactions also suggested that various activ- iti es associated with new facilities and the implementation of change from the original study kept staff members busy. This, they contend, kept the staff from one school apart from the staff members of other schools. A separate interview with each school principal indicated that rap- port was good in each school building. Staff meetings to discuss current Problems and procedures associated with individual schools helped to bring about more cohesiveness in the schools. In other words, rapport appeared to be better in individual schools but because of separation, the lack of feeling among all schools was indicated. Many staff members felt that the rapport of staff members was still very good. This feeling is reflected in Questionnaire C where 10 of 41 members (24 - 39%) said that the cohesiveness of the staff was the same as indicated in Questionnaire B. A near-similar number (9; 21 . 95%) thought that the _ 70 _ staff was more cohesive and 13 (31.70%) felt that the staff was less cohe- sive. In checking the rapport among staff members, Questionnaire C re- vealed that 15 members (36. 58%) felt that the rapport was better and 10 (24. 39%) mentioned that rapport was worse than recorded in October, 1960 . Several open-ended questions revealed the poor communication between buildings and the presence of new teachers in the system may have contrib- uted to some breakdown in cohesiveness. The reasons advanced for the lack of cohesiveness among staff mem- bers would appear to be unrelated to the curriculum study. The lack of annual get-togethers and the separation of personnel into new facilities are outside factors. The lack of a large, formal curriculum study at the begin- ning of the year could not be blamed on the original study because a large curriculum study was deemed unnecessary at this time. It is easy to see that the presence of new teachers and the breakdown in communications would hinder the established rapport of the staff but, again, these cannot be blamed directly on the failure of the curriculum study. Before these extraneous factors entered the picture, the rapport and COhesiveness of the staff was considered to be very good. This and the faCt that rapport appeared to be excellent in individual schools tend to sup- port the fact that cooperative procedures can positively influence the rap- pOI‘t of staff members. The latter idea of good rapport in the individual scl"lools may be the true indication of change in social orientations because the staff became decentalized and, therefore, identified closely with their particular school. - 71 _ gypothesis Four: That a cooperative curriculum improvement studywill create a more professional attitude among participants. In Questionnaire A, the responses to several questions indicated a more professional attitude immediately after the completion of the coopera— tive curriculum improvement study. (See Table TV.) All respondents (45) indicated that their thinking about educational problems had increased as a result of the study. Forty-two members (93. 34%) felt that there was some change in becoming a more professional educator and 41 (91 . 10%) were more cognizant of the problems that face education. Prom open-ended responses in Questionnaire A, a substantial change was noted in the participants' attitude with regard to educational research for Curriculum change, the working with students in the classroom, and the work- ing With their colleagues for curriculum change. The participants had more appreciation for individual needs and differences and they knew better the prOble ms of their fellow teachers as a result of the curriculum study. This appreciation tends to indicate increased knowledge and new orientations in ' the development of a more professional attitude. In Questionnaire B or five months later, most of the respondents (32 of 3 6: 88.88%) indicated that the staff had a more professional attitude as a re Stilt of working on the curriculum study. One—half of the respondents (1 8 ; 50 .00%) indicated a favorable change in their behavior as a professional pet‘Son because of their participation in the curriculum study. One person (2 - .7 r. 7%) felt that there was an unfavorable change. VI SAHVP‘N NENHMJHEN‘J-z aHuflr-ui - bufiifl. V-in’ h.h A” 1'! h » \Ju..~./‘-H‘~V§ (vi. I.\R i .u§.1\I44\Z 70A. Vi.‘.]1~.~na~nlo -72- 8.0 8.8 R . N 00. 00 00 .00 00030 0.080 0000 .00 000330000 08 83 fic 8c 09 0000000 000000 0000000000 0 .00 0030000 0:00 00 000000 0 00000 00 .0. 2 000000 000000 0§00 02 .0000 02 0000000300 0 00000000 00 D 00 .0 o 8.00 00 .8 00.00 mm .0 0083000 00 00.:le 3 8c 8c 83 83 E 000 00 000000 0 00 0000000 0000808 00000 00 00000000 0000000000 000 0000 00000000000 08 0 00000000000000 .0. 2 .000000 .000000 000000000000 000000000000 :0 00 002 00> 9.80 0000000002 0.802 00000.0 00.0 2.0 o S . S 080838 800 0000 0020000 Amy Sc Sc 23 000 00 000000000 0008 300 00.0 000 0.2 oz 0030 00> 000.3 o 00.: 00.00 00.00 00.: 00.0 00000000 00000WW000HH0008 8c 50c 8 0c :0 6c 80 0 00080000 000300 00000000 0000 00 000000 0 003 00000 0000 0000 00> 00 o 00.00 3.8 00.0 o o 0.. 0:00 .25 00% $09.08 0.02080 00 a 8 8: 3 5 ac 000000000000 00000 00000000 0000 000 0.2 0£00000 000 0 00:08.0 000.0 000 00000.0 :0 00 002 0050 0000 000202 000000.030 o0. 00.2.80 «.000 0000220000000 .3 ”0100.49 .nllOllI‘lL'h Aha-Inu- -73- m0.~ 00.0 3.: 3.3 3.00 000000 0000000 000 00 000000000 65 63 $0 :3 83 00000 000000 00000000 0000000000000 000 0300000 00> 00 300.0 $0000 0.000> 0000 00 000000 0 00 0000000 000000000000 00000 0 000 00000 000 0000 000000 00000000000 00000 0000000 00 0000000000000 000 0 0000000000000 .0 .2 0000000 02 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000 00003 0000 00000m 00 080m 00200800 .2 0.0000. .. 74 .. Other indications of a more professional attitude can be noted from Questionnaire B. A majority of the respondents disclosed an interest in the implementation of recommended improvements, in new problems, in problems of other staff members, and in the total education program of the CaSSOpolis Schools. 11 The participants were willing to work on new prob- lems and do another year-long curriculum study if necessary. In conclu- sion, many respondents designated a change in teaching techniques and in classroom procedures as a result of the curriculum study. 13 Most staff members were working on departmental problems, on im- plementation of changes, on a steering committee, or on the use of instruc- tional materials when interviews and observations were started. An eval- uation of the recommended changes evolving from the original curriculum study was conducted with staff members doing much of the evaluating. The writer observed many evaluative devices used by study group members. These devices showed a higher level of sophisiication and were concerned with people's feelings as well as curriculum problems. The writer had extensive interviews with the original eight study grOUp chairmen, one of whom was a newly-appointed teacher. These in- terviews revealed that work was still being conducted in each area with some receiving more attention than others. The immediate concern about proper \ 11 ° See Table VI, Page 12 See Table II, Page 63 13- See Table VII. Page .. 75 - implementation of change evolving from the original study was noted. Pur- investigations of recommended changes and deeper thinking into associated problems was noted also. This activity should indicate professional growth because all curriculum work was conducted from five to eleven months after the original study ended. These activities and the fact that a new curriculum study was initi- ated with most of the present staff members taking part tend to indicate a professional concern by the membership about education and its problems. In Questionnaire C, 19 participants (46. 34%) testified that the pro- fessional attitude among staff members was the same as in Questionnaire B. Eleven respondents (26. 82%) noted that the professional attitude was better than in Questionnaire B. At the time of Questionnaire C, the teaching con- tracts for the following year had been given out and the amount of the raise was smaller than expected. This appeared to have an effect on the atti- tude of some staff members at this time. From the data it is quite apparent, however, that the cooperative ap- proach tended to encourage and develop the professional attitude of most participants to a point where their concern, interest, and desire for curric- ulum work were acute and continuous. The professional attitude showed continuing development at all three questionnaire check points. ijothesis Five: That a cooperative curriculum improvement study tends to create a more democratic attitude amonwmclpants. _ 76 _ A cooperative, democratic method of identifying, investigating, and solving problems was used throughout the cooperative curriculum improve- ment study. The value of this democratic method of solving problems was examined in Questionnaire A. (See Table V.) Forty-three participating members (95. 55%) felt that this method of operation was an effective way to get results in curriculum improvement. From open-ended responses many participants stated that this method gave everyone a chance to work on the problems as well as the opportunity to express themselves. This may be an indication of the change in the democratic attitude of participants. In Questionnaire B, after five months for reflecting on the curriculum study, most of the respondents (34 of 36; 94, 44%) favored to some degree the use of a democratic process in which teachers were utilized with equal responsibility in all decision making as a means of solving educational prob- lems. Two-thirds of the participants (24; 66. 66%) revealed that staff mem- bers were more democratic in nature as a result of the cooperative curricu- lum improvement study. Four members (11. 11%) stated that they saw no change; no participant indicated a negative response regarding the democratic attitude change. During the winter of 1961, the staff members of the Cassopolis Schools invited junior and senior high school students to a penel discussion on the value of the school curriculum. The students voiced their opinions regard- ing the strengths and weaknesses of the present curriculum. This action suggests a democratic attitude on the part of the staff members. -77- 00.0 3.: 00.00 «0.00 0N.m~ 000000 03 g a: 3: 35 0000000 000 00 000000000 00000 00 0000 10000 0000000000 000 0300000 00> o0 30m .>0000 0.000> 0000 00 000000 0 00 000000000000 00000 003 0000608 00000 00 0000000 000 0000 000000000 00000 00000000 0000000 000 00 0000000 00.0. 00000000000 :00 0 0000000000000 .0 . 2 0000000 02 0000000 00.00000 0000000 0000 00003 0000 00000m 00 0800 o mm. mm o 00 .00 00 . 00 003000 0.000> 0000 00 000000 0 00 av 08 AS a» 8 03 000000 5 0000000800 0000 00 0008 000000000 00000 00 0000000 000 00 .0 . 2 0000000 02 000.0 00002 00000 00 .0 00 . 0 00 . 00 00. 00 o 0 0.0503850000088000 08 68 Am 8 80 AS av n>000 00 000000 0 00 0000000 00000000 00 0000000300000 0000000 00000 00> 00000 000> 0000 00 >0000 0000000600 1:00 0000000000 0300000000 000 0000 $000000000m 08 m 000000dl0|000md .0. 2 00009000 300000 0000004. 00000.0 .0 :0 00 002 000.0 0 «N. 00 00 .00 3. .0 o 0 00000304000 0000 av 83 88 “8 80 80 . 000000 00 0000000 000 00 >03 0000 000 00 0000000 000000800 000 0000 0000 00> on 00000000000 03 0 0000000000000 .0 . 2 000032 30000 D 0000000000m 000000m 00>0Z 030 000202 0000000000 00 000.500 0000 00222050000 .> mam/a. .. 78 _ During the interview period (September, 1960, to April, 1961) , how- ever, some disturbance in the morale and attitude of several staff members was detected. It appeared that the democratic attitude of the staff was not as good as determined in Questionnaire B. When the interviews were concluded, it appeared that the dissension was due to three old teachers who were not as involved in this present curriculum work as they were dur- ing the original curriculum study. During the opening session of the Feb- ruary, 1961 , curriculum study meeting, one administrator moved the problem definition and committee formation process too rapidly which, in turn, left several areas unattended. This dissatisfied several staff members be- cause they were interested in these areas and felt that some work could be done on them. This action had a definite effect on their behavior; conse- quently, they never really were involved in the new curriculum work. In an interview with the 1960-1961 steering committee chairman, it was noted that all new group work utilized democratic procedures as was experienced in the original study. The writer sat in on several meetings and observed that democratic procedures were in effect. The study group chairman felt that there was more than adequate'interaction and discussion on the part of the participants. These democratic procedures were utilized from October, 1960, to April, 1961 , which then indicates a carry-over and an improvement in democratic attitudes. The latter date was about a year after the original study had ended. In Questionnaire C, eleven months after the completion of the study, eight members (19. 51%) stated that the attitude of the staff was less demo- cratic than was indicated in Questionnaire B. This is supported by _ 79 _ observations and interviews. However, eleven respondents (26.82%) men- tioned that the attitude of staff members was more democratic than it was when checked in Questionnaire B. A near-equal number (12; 29.26%) dis- closed that the attitude was comparable to that indicated in Questionnaire B. A remark from an open-ended question in Questionnaire C apparently summed it up by stating that a few teachers in a group who take an unpro- fessional attitude can be the center of trouble in the whole system. Inter- views with steering committee members support this statement. The breakdown in the democratic attitude was slight, but still must be considered. Most staff members interviewed felt that the trouble arose from a few participants. These members were old teachers and, therefore, were exposed to the democratic processes of the curriculum study. This exposure then should have brought about the change witnessed in others. These acrimonious staff members played an active role in the original study but were quite inactive during the following year. The inactivity may have been due to the mishandling of the new curriculum study problem definition, although this came later in the year. The lack of consultant assistance may also have had an effect. The dissident staff members felt that energies were not being funneled along productive lines and were discouraged by what had transpired. They also were not in agreement with the policies of one administrator. These arguments may be legitimate, but the participants should have taken their problems to the steering committee. The committee's functions were to _ 8O _ facilitate curriculum work and see that operations ran smoothly. This ill feeling was considered a detriment to some new teachers' as well as some old teachers' work. Even though there was this slight breakdown, continuous democratic methods were utilized in all curriculum work the following year. This fact and questionnaire and interview data offer support for the idea that cooper- ative procedures tend to make participants more democratic in their behavior. These data also display the fact that democratic operations tend to be util- ized after they are once attempted. HypOthesis Six: That a cooperative curriculum improvement study will increase inter- est in all yhases of education among the Jarticipants. An early indication of interest can be seen from the results of Ques- tionnaire A. (See Table VI.) The entire membership (45) indicated that there was an increase in their thinking concerning all educational problems while the curriculum improvement study was in progress. The desire to ex— plore other problems related to their own original areas was expressed by 42 of 45 members (93.33%). In Questionnaire B, all respondents (36) stated that working with the implementation of improvements had increased interest to some degree in their teaching positions. Twenty-five members (69.44%) stated that they were interested in exploring other problem areas in the curriculum and, if problem areas were determined, 31 (86. 10%) of the respondents were interested in working on these problems. 14 14 See Table II, Page 63. -81- 00.0 hum mm.mm mmém 0.0.2 o 0030 0000 0000 00000 000000 08 AS Am: 33 8: g I000 00 000000 00 0000000000 00000 :00 00 00> 000000 >030 000 000.0 0 mm . m 00 . 00 mm . 00 mm . m 0 0.0000000000000000 0000000000000 0: § 0: 00 § § 2: Boa... 0000000 0030 0800 00000000 000 00000 00 00 00000 00 o 00.2.” 05% 00.00 :0 o «>030 000 00000 SV 35 85 60 3 § 00000000 0000 00000000500000 0000000 :80000 000 00 0000000000000: 000 00 0000000000 000 00> 000 00 00> 004 300000300 08 m 000000000000d .m .2 8.20000 00.0.3.0 0:850 00.0 00 0000.0 0m. 00 002 8 .0 00 .00 2.8 00 .00 o o 0000)..." 005 0:000 00:3 026 08 as $3 65 08 08 000> 00 0000000 000000000 00000 00000 I000 00 0000003 000000o> 0000 00> 000 .m . 2 0000300 50000 D 00000000000 0000400 00.002 0 00. .00 mm. mm «N. N o 0 «>030 0000 000000 0M000000 000000000 0: a S 83 05 § § 0000000000 00000 00000000 000> 000 000000000000 $0.0 0000000000003 .0 .2 300000 05 0 0000000 000.0 00m 0000010 :0 00 002 0030 000 000202 0000000000 0.0 0000.000 «000 002220000000 .0> "0154.0. -82- illlllllllll'll'lll'l o 000 00.0. 00.00 00.00 000000 000 80 as Amy 8 8 KC 0000 000 00 000000000 00 00000000 000> 00 3000 000000000 00 000000000 000 00 00000000 0.0000008 00000 000 000000 :00 00 000000 >0000 0.000> 0000 0000 000000000 0000000000000 000 0000000 00 00000000d00m 00V 0 000003 .0. 2 0000000 02 000 00000 .000 00000 0000000 0000000Q 00000000 00 00000 E. . N 00 . 00 O0 . mm o 000000000000 00 00000 A: AS 38 08 00000000000 000> 00 0000000 000000000 00000 00000 00 00003000 000000000 000 00 0000000000 000 00> 000 00 00> 00.0 mm .m o 3.00 0 0000000000 00 000000000 000 00 000 5 80 $8 80 100000 000> 000000000 >0000 0000 00m .0 .2 0000000 02 00> oz 00 . N 3.00 mm .00 3.2 o o 0.063.... 20 0o 0:000 0 04010000. 3 E :0 E § § .52 03....“ Scam 80.36 0850 00300 0000000000 000 00 00000 :000 0000000000 000 00 00000000 0000 .m . 2 00000000 000002 000.0 0002 $0000 02 00000000 0000.0 00000.0 000.0 0 mm . cm 3. .3. 3.2 mm .m o 0804000040083 5% 5 000000 80 SC 85 AS 68 80 :00 000> 000000000 00000000600000 00 0000000000000: 000 000 000 00 000.0 .0 .z 0080 00 0 30080022 00.0.0401 0m 00 82 00000 0 8020800 .5 0.0000. _ 83 _ Thirty-five members (97.22%) stated that there was an increase in interest in the total educational program of the Cassopolis Public Schools as a result of the curriculum study. Along the same line, 31 participants (86. 10%) stated that they were now interested in the curriculum problems of other staff members outside of their own field of instruction and a near-sim- ilar number (34; 94.44%) indicated that the curriculum study had caused them to become interested in phases of education other than their own. In conclusion, 34 respondents (94.44%) stated precisely that their interest in the problems of education had increased. The results from observations and interviews revealed that interest in education and its many problems was developed because of a cooperative investigation of curriculum problems. Committees were formed to work on the implementation of improvements and their evaluation and to work on new problems the year following the curriculum study. Even though there ap- peared to be a slight breakdown in some areas of the curriculum study oper- ation, an awareness of and interest in educational problems and their solu- tion were always present. Interviews also revealed a genuine interest and concern on the part of most members about the poor attitude and lack of ac- tual curriculum work displayed by a few members. This interest and desire to continue problem solution resulted in a small group meeting which dis- cussed and brought about ways of improving and increasing the curriculum work. Interviews with old teachers revealed their interest in personal prob- lems . Suggestions were given tothe writer in regard to new ideas for re- search. These many responses and other curriculum activities were apparent .. 84 - after the official completion of the original study which illustrates the fact that interest in education was continued and encouraged after a cooperative exposure to curriculum change. The final check in the evaluation of staff interest came in Question- naire C. Thirty-seven of 41 respondents (90 .24%) stated that their inter- est in all phases of education was either the same or had increased since Questionnaire B. Of all hypotheses tested, this particular one probably was most strongly validated. This validation attests to the fact that cooperative curriculum improvement work can increase interest in all phases of educa- tion and that interest can continue to deve10p. The continued development of interest in education and its problems may be noted at the last two ques- tionnaire check points. Hypothesis Seven: That a cooperative curriculum improvement study through its demo- cgigc processes and group interaction tends to change people and their ideas and, therefore, is an effective way of re-educatichstaff members. In Questionnaire A, 43 participants (93. 33%) said that there was some change in their personal opinions and biases regarding their own problem areas. (See Table VII.) Thirty-one respondents of 45 (68.88%) stated that there was a change in their attitudes about working with their students and colleagues as a result ofthe cooperative curriculum improvement study. All of those who responded (44; 97. 77%) felt that the group interaction in the -85- mm.m tum 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.: «“388 35 mo 9.88.98 .8 A8 :v as KC A5 A3 @9820 8888008 8008.83 80> 3Q 89.898839 m8 m mhmccoflmma 8.2 382800 >820 EsoE< 28.3 < :8 8 Sam ”52 O Na. Nv mm .3 mm .m vvé o «NH .. Mlm8>3 80tm> 8 820v 3 av 83 2 8 8v 5 8v 833 8888.88 98 988.898 0“ 80> 08: 980.5 85 m0 “8308.89: 85 ED NN.N 8.3. 3.3 mad 86 o mmmsmmmfi a: 3 8 83 A3 A8 By #00 80% 988.898 98 Bocx oa. 80> 08: 9.6.8 80> mo coflomnoufi 85 ED 86 mad mm .mm 3.: mod 3.: ~93:an 8:98:00 80M 8v A3 65 A8 A8 23 59> 9:803 no 86338 80% .83 8.8 $6 2.: 8 .3 3.2 3.: 88820 8888 A8 A8 $3 at s, 23 52> 95:03 :0 88338 80> 25 -.N 3.: 34m mméw 3.: NN.N «888 8.838980% m508m as Amy 9.3 83 23 A: :8.“ 883 .8\98 80880 8:8qu 80> 898:0 mmcficca 80% m0 880m 3Q Ampamccommmm 394 8.8803880 .m . z anew 3m 8 980:2 89:4 < :8 8 thD umwm “OZ Emma 072 28mm mum—2:2 885.085 2.. 055mm <80 822202.890 . HH> mum/.2“ a... a, -86- :8 mm.m oo.om mméu 88.: 0 >88 85 mo 3888.8 8 88 AC av 65 6V Amy 8V 838088 0880> 8580888 8008 8888 13305— 888 0.08 80> 88 .80 80> ED .8 .Z 880:5 8 8 88084 8:8: < :8 8 88.8.0 8580 .88.“: 8802 mm .m o mm .m mm .8 coda mm .83 580580888 808 880830 98 >8 8v 5 QC 8V 6V 8883 80> 5 888880 8 no 8888088 88.88000 88: 88888688: E88038 :880 85 0.55 88 80> 08 .80 80> 00 mm.m o mm.m 3.: ENE 88.: 883089 5 8V :3 8: 83 AS 8880> 0580888 8888088 88883 .80\98 880880 880888 80> 898:0 88> 883 m0 >888 85 80 50? 80> ED mmd Ré 3.: 8.3 mmém 3.: >588. 835 m0 8888.88 88 8V :3 6V 3: 8v 3 889880 8888008 80088830 80> 88$ mm.m o 3.3 no.3 8.3 3.: «>888 835 8058 Amy A8 5 63 8V QV 8888830 88888085 8830888 80> .8 0830880. 08 8080888 80> 883.: o o 88.3 3.3 mm.om mm.m >88> 883 m0 >88 85 80 8V 8v 6V GS :5 8V x83 80> 8088 889880 8>88 803 80808 808 88088888 98 8883 80> 85 388“ 88 80> 08 .80 80> on— .m . 2 3883880 388.80 88085 89:13 4 :8 8 .88.: 82 Avmdcflcoov . HS mHm 80 808800 85 8008 08:88“ 88888 80> 80 88.3 88080 0880> 88580888 05 88088 80 880888888 888 888800 88880 885 80 808800 8008 .8088“ 8 8880 880 885 85 ”:80 880 L888 088 85 8 >88 85 888085 88>? n: 8888828888 80080 85 80.5 888880088”— 83 0 8888838880 .8 . 2 800830 .80 8088 .80 8088 80080 02 88888880 8888885 8 888m E. . N o m a . mm o «80> SV SV 68 SV 80 8088088me 880880888 88 >888 88080280 85 888800 80> 80803 .8 .2 800880 02 88> 02 EHN 8.2 mmém 8.8 2.: c “808808898 2V 8V $3 3: A3 8v 888880 8 8880 80 8888806880 8 8058888888: 85 888 >888 85 80 #83 80> 85 88“ 80> 00 .m .2 800838.88 800838.88 80085888 80085888 :8 8 >888 8880 3328802 283 “oz EKN mm.m $.08 coda 3.3 0 «>888 85 8 808888 A: SV 35 A8 8V A8 8 88 88088 0880> 8580888 8008 000880 880 88 80> 88 80 80> 88.0 .m .z 2:088 8m < 2884 888.08 8m 3 8880 8880 .888 880 z A88883800v . :5 mafia. -88- mv.~ 0 $8 mmdm oném mv.m o “808808 A: 8V A8 $8 83 SV SV :88 8 888880080 88088.» 85 8008 88888880 8 >83 838888 88 883 >888 mL88> 880 85 308 88“ 80> 00 88088 88088888 8850 585 883803 888 88880080 8008888 888888 85 80 5888886895 .888 n0880 8 888380085 85 80 >80 88 80882898 8888880 8 883 >888 85 “:88 8880888 088 85 8 80.8 85 8888888 8888838888 80080 80H. 38.2 800880 8388mm 8388mm 8388mm 838808 8383 02 3383600 88820 3328802 88884. -8 “oz A88883800v . HS wage _ 89 .. curriculum study helped the participants to know and understand their col- leagues better and all of the respondents (45) stated that group interaction helped the participants to understand and appreciate what is done at var- ious levels, kindergarten through twelfth grade. In Questionnaire B, many respondents mentioned that a change in their classroom procedure (30; 83. 32%) and approach to teaching (29; 80 . 54%) had occurred as a result of the curriculum study. Thirty-five par- ticipants (97.22 %) stated that they had gained some knowledge and insight into educating young people as a result of the curriculum study. Thirty- three members (91 . 65%) felt that their ideas and persuasions about educa- tion had changed to some degree since their work on the curriculum study and 26 (72 .2296) disclosed that a change in their personal opinions and/or biases regarding the education of young people had occurred. When asked about the curriculum improvement process, most of the membership (33 of 36; 91. 65%) revealed that there was a change in their ideas about how our- riculum improvement takes place. In conclusion, 35 respondents (97.22%) stated that the work on the curriculum study and the implementation of im- provements had been a profitable learning experience. During the investigation period, more sophisticated techniques used in the implementation and evaluation of improvements by participants were observed. When the new curriculum study started, the participants used methods which were found to be effective during the original study. The evaluations were now concerned with both participant feeling and curriculum - 90 _ problems. Thus, concern for process was evident. Problem identifi- cation was more comprehensive and more interaction occurred during this process. More confidence was displayed by the membership when ap- proaching and solving new problems. Several study groups initiated their own problem identification and solution completely separate from the new study. It was now apparent that people knew more about their roles and functions in curriculum improvement and in their educational situations. In interviews, it was found that new procedures recommended from the original study were used in the guidance department, in parent-teacher conferences, in the instructional materials centers, in the communication skills area, and in many classrooms. These procedures will be consid- ered under Hypothesis Eleven. In the final check, all of the members who responded (40; 97. 54%) stated in Questionnaire C that the cooperative curriculum study was an ef- fective way of learning about the various processes of education. The self-education of participants was evidenced in both the execu- tion of professional duties in the classrooms and in evaluating and bringing about additional curriculum change. The re-education was evidenced right up to the final check which was nearly one year after the completion of the study. This should indicate a carry-over and a continued learning effect. Hypothesis Eigfl That a cooperative curriculum improvement study through its demo- cratic processes and_goup interaction tends to change people and their ideas, and therefore, curriculum chm occurs. ._ 91 ._ Change in personal opinions and biases regarding problem areas was indicated by 43 respondents (93. 33%) in Questionnaire A. (See Table VII.) A better understanding of their colleagues and of the various levels of in- struction was indicated by all responding members (44; 97. 77%). This was an early indication of change in people through cooperative work and inter- action. In Questionnaire B, 33 curriculum study members (91 .6’4 %) said that there had been some change in their ideas about education. Twenty-six members (72 . 22%) noted that their personal opinions and/or biases regard- ing educating young people had changed. In Questionnaire C, 34 study members (82 .92%) indicated that the changes in their ideas, biases, and persuasions registered during the study had either been maintained or new changes had occurred after eleven months. From interviews, people appeared more confident and knowledgeable about curriculum change and education in general. This knowledge was evident during new curriculum work. Toward the end of the interview per- iod, it appeared that people were more open to change and were encouraged to do additional work. This action would illustrate that a change in be- havior had occurred and would suggest that ideas, viewpoints, and persua- Sions had been modified. The changes in attitudes, ideas, relationships, interests, and views on education suggested by the data associated with Hypotheses, One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, and Nine will tend to support this hypothesis. Through group interaction and cooperative investigation new perceptions on .. 92 _ human relations, educational processes, and possible meanings to former experiences were formed which brought about the behavioral change in par- ticipants. When this behavioral change occurred, new skills, knowledge, attitudes, and values on education were obtained which, in turn, caused the curriculum change. The behavioral change continued after the study as was noted in Questionnaires B and C. Hypothesis Nine: That small cooperative goup work as found in the cooperative cur- riculum improvement study is an effective way to get agreement for chang_e_ in the curriculum. In Questionnaire A, the worth of small group work can be seen. (See Table VIII.) Forty-four participants of 45 (97. 77%) stated that they were satisfied to some degree with the way their study group functioned and all participants (45) were satisfied to some degree with the members of their own study group. All members (45) strongly felt the democratic method was the best way to obtain results in curriculum improvement. 15 In Questionnaire B, 32 of 36 respondents (88.88%) said that they were satisfied to some degree with the way their study group worked in prob- ing ideas and developing recommendations for curriculum improvement. Twenty-nine members (80 . 54%) said that small group work allows everyone an opportunity for decision making in curriculum change. Twenty-six of 15 See Table V, Page 77. -93- mm.m 2.: NWNN 3.: $3000 22> omcmno EB A8 3 6 8 A3 usogno umfi cm #83 96.8 :mEm E concave on “EoEmouom uncommon 50 0 mm .w 34% R . N 35538qu 83:02.26 93330 By A8 32 as >95 95033 so soon was #83 95.5 :95. H5 x55 “0: 50> op .8 50> on 3 .m 8 .m 2 .mm 0 $930 53833 5 AS 68 :8 A8 ucoaooumm 95.5w «0 >95 95033 cm coon £03 958 o>flm$oooo mom .m .z c3590 02 mo» 02 mm.m 2.: them 36m 3.: Rd $58965 A8 A3 8: 83 A3 A3 in: 83:02.50 co“ mcoflmccoEEooou mcaodo>oc com 2.53 0230.5 5 @3763 96.6 £33m 50> ~83 of 5.25 ooamflmm poo 50> who? no 50> who? Amucoucoomom o8 m ohm-583330 .m .2 Eon—39:00 3520 “56:14 was .a :m 3 Sam ”—02 o 3‘ .3 mm .mm 3. .v 3 . 2 o womfigfioo 35pm :30 .5on0 6V 8 8 65 A8 E 8V muonEoE 05 fits coflmflmm 30> who; 0 3.3 3.3 3.2 2.: ~N.N $3.63 96% av 35 Say at A3 A: 30> ~33 of 52> cmmmflmm 50> who? Wucoccoqmom m3 < 8.8583350 .m .z #385 fim m E595 :m 25.3 :m pm 330 :mm “oz mZHZ mum—92.32 mHmmEOngm OH. Qmfifimm SHED mmZZZOHHmmDO . HHS mag; 29 E 2; E 3.3 :5 No.3. 6: fia E aim E :0“ L300 02 . 50mm >555 IEOO 9,3 nomhm >30 000 9503 .5 33m 1.5002 9,3 nomfim 030.3 9508 lum “52 «8350530 05 9 050030 .5.»— HcmEmmuom 55 3 >03 9553 :5 cm 3 0.53 955 :95 55 x55 00> 00 .053 59....05 9.3 “E .9500 :25 05095 83:02.50 55 0m £53 95.5 :95... 5 0050000 0000 can 508 :0050 505995 55 0:0 50895.5 an: 8302.55 50355 5 >95 9,303 :5 cm 0000 um: £53 955 :25 55 033m 98958 $03 >008 50050 :H 3500003me H3 0 0900003500 35 g 35 As 3 . om as 8 .m A8 mmmamso 8303.95 5 55wa 003500 5m 3535000 am 95995 95020 0.53 955 2080 55 53 00> 00 R . N E 9.3 § 3.3 :8 5x53 505 :25 50> 5 5080050 55 9 3:0 :35 2 05m 50 00> 05 .5 00> 30 835 oz m0> oz HAUmSEEuOOV . 35 mag; - 95 _ 36 participants (72 .22%) stated that sufficient agreement can be reached in small group work so that curriculum change will occur and 21 members (58 . 33%) said that they did not find it difficult to get agreement in small group work. In conclusion, 32 respondents (88.88%) said that small co— operative group work had been an effective way of getting curriculum change. Observations revealed that small group work was utilized in all our- riculum work succeeding the original curriculum study. Groups were formed through personal choice and chairmen and recorders were selected by the groups. Interviews indicated that most of the membership favored small group work and that work proceeded rather smoothly after rapport had been established. Common concerns about particular problem areas caused groups to work better and bring about more meaningful and acceptable change. Those (four from the original study group membership) who apparently didn't favor group work were found to be less interested in the problem areas than other group members . In Questionnaire C, 34 of 41 participating members (83.91%) indi- cated that small group work was effective for reaching agreement for change in the curriculum. The favorable responses regarding small group work and the actual continued use of this practice the year following the study would indicate that this method is effective for reaching agreement in curriculum change. Hypothesis Ten: That a cooperative curriculum improvement study once started tends to continue work on curriculum examination and improvement. .. 96 .. The most effective way to check this hypothesis on Questionnaire A would be to look at the desire of the participants regarding additional cur- riculum work. Thirty-nine of 45 members (86. 66%) felt that curriculum ex- amination and improvement should always be a continuous process and ap- proximately the same number (36; 79 . 99%) stated that they would like to work on similar studies the following year. (See Table DC.) Open-ended questions revealed several areas for future curriculum study. These areas are mentioned under hypothesis number one. In Questionnaire B, most of the membership (34 of 36; 94.44%) still felt that curriculum improvement is necessary on a continuous basis . Twenty- two respondents (61 . 11%) stated that they would like to do another year-long cooperative curriculum improvement study to improve other phases of the cur- riculum. Nenty-eight (77. 76%) of the respondents felt that the curriculum study of last year was an on—going activity the following year. From observations and interviews it was possible to discern both strengths and weaknesses on this point. Desire to continue investigation and actual work were present during the period of September, 19 60, to April, 1961 . There was, however, a little disenchantment on the part of some participants about continued curriculum work because of factors to be dis- cussed shortly. The steering committee elected after the original curriculum study for the purpose of overseeing implementation of improvements and additional curriculum work was very active during the period from September, 1960 , to -97- noEow 2mg mmmEDz £350.53 OH 033mm «.25 mmEzzoflmmDO mm .m mm .m mm . mm mm . m whom» mHfi 5H>Huom$cHoHcflco so on 8. 8mm 8v A8 88 H8 52 mo 35% o5 cooncoo Ho: 50> oo .8 :9» on R . m o 3 . vm E. . N memmnH mooscficoo 0 no 3838: HHV 8V $3 HS 3 HcoEo>anH EstoEso umfi Hoom 30> onH mm .2 mm . m HH . Hm om .mH wasHsoEso of «.0 mommno .850 96.5 H3 H8 38 H8 LE o“ .355 ”EoEmNEEEH 83:02.50 5:07.89» .8598 oHo Op 980 Ho: 50> 3503 .Ho 50> 250.3 Hmucoccoomom mg m ochccoDmosO .m .2 H8330 mo» 02 oz mmd -.~ mm.m mmdu . «“35 E E 3 68 8.: 363.0. 855 no V203 9. 3:: so» 38.3 .m .2 oz 830 3» bomb 0 mm . mm H H . H H o «N . N o mmmoooa Hmscflcoo w on 2593 83502.30 05 av 88 H3 H8 H3 H8 mo HcoEm>oEEH Hocm conmcHmeo 35 x55 50> onH mucocco mom 3 < ouHmccoflmod .m .2 $832 33st 3:5 8033 c962 /\\\||.|II l‘ . um mflmfifi -98- is E :3. E 3.8 as 3.2.. He mumoz mHfi KANE/flow fiasco cm 3 com; 52 .Ho 353 of x55 30> 0c .95“ “comma 05 2 :89» 26. 33300 mcHomuco cm mm? .59» 52 mo >95"... 9.3 $5 “How muonHEmE HHS...“ >53: 35 oouonccH mm? H: ohmccoflmmsu HobouoO o5 88m Hmucoocodmom Hfl 0 ohmccoflmoso c2590 02 mow OZ comHHCfiEOOV . NH mumdfi. _ 99 - April, 1961 . This committee ran an extensive evaluation of the implemen- tation of improvements and then made recommendations for further work. Through its leadership, committees were formed to carry on more work in three problem areas from the previous year. Several new study committees were formed to investigate problems found in individual schools. Work on suggested changes evolving from the curriculum study was done to make them a more effective part of the curriculum and evaluations of these individual improvements were made to determine their effectiveness. It may be noted that new teachers were involved in these functions. In late February, 1961 , a general curriculum meeting was held. The entire staff of the schools and two consultants from the Michigan State Uni- versity team were present. At this meeting, the 1960—1961 steering com- mittee presented and reviewed their evaluation of the implementation of im- provements and discussed other work done on curriculum improvement. The committee mentioned and discussed current concerns of staff members regard- ing new curriculum problems. Fifteen problem areas were identified and discussed. It was then decided to have committees selected to work on the problems. Committees were formed to work on six problem areas with most of the staff members appearing on those study groups or on others de- fined earlier. Several difficulties arose at this point. All of the discussion and committee formation was done in one afternoon which appeared to be too lit- tle time as participants were pushed onto committees which did not always - 100 - meet with their approval. Some important areas were left uninvestigated. Also, it appeared to many people that this new curriculum study came too late in the school year. In the opinion of some teachers, sufficient work could not be done on the existing problem areas in the time remaining in the school year. Interviews revealed that the new facilities and the many problems associated with them hindered curriculum work to some extent. Also, work on the implementation of improvements from the previous curriculum study and the evaluation of them consumed time that may have been used on new curriculum work. Interviews further revealed that the lack of college coordination with consultant help and the absence of academic credit appeared to hinder the new improvement work. Closely associated with these apparent obstruc- tions was a lack of financial support to assist the members in their work. Money was not available for participants' tuition or for outside visitations, consultant help, or procurement of additional materials . Interviews indicated that the attitude of a few staff members could have been a hindrance also. These members felt that a plateau had been reached after the completion of the curriculum study. In their opinion, it was time to concern themselves only with the implementation of changes and with their classroom duties . The fact that the two top administrators were leaving was advanced as a reason for lack of curriculum work. This apparently caused a feeling of uncertainty. - 101 - Many teachers engaged in an off-campus course in the fall of 1960 which had a double effect on curriculum work. These teachers felt that this course absorbed the time that could have been used for curriculum work and most of them considered it a very uninteresting and unprofitable affair. From discussion with the participants, it was concluded that this course had an adverse effect on them which apparently soured them on future work. In this class, participants were not investigating personal concerns and inter- ests, but were looking at material unrelated to their needs . A final point brought out in the interviews is that many participants desired a curriculum study of the type that was experienced the previous year. When this did not occur, a certain amount of frustration resulted. A major study was not in order at this time because many participants ex- pressed the desire to investigate individual departmental problems, interest areas, and school problems. This feeling was especially true because the new schools and other facilities demanded the attention of staff members. During the observation and interview period, several interested staff members recognized that in some cases little curriculum work was being con- ducted by the people who had defined problems for investigation. These members called a special meeting which this investigator attended. A dis- cussion of the problems ensued and it was decided to stop and conduct an evaluation of what had transpired so far and of what could be done in the future. From this point to the final check (about two weeks), work ap- peared to progress more smoothly. It must be pointed out that from the - 102 - interviews it appeared that the interest and desire of most participants were very high and very professional during this period. It appeared that the energies of all of those concerned could have been directed and focused in a better manner to get more productive work. At the final check point, Questionnaire C or eleven months after the completion of the study, 26 of the respondents (63.41%) stated that they con- sidered the cooperative curriculum improvement study to be an on-going ac- tivity the following year. In analyzing the data, several factors are very important. Atten- tion must be given to these factors at this time. The desire for continuous curriculum study is reflected in the work of the steering committee, the activity of evaluation groups working on the original study recommendations, the work of old study groups pursuing their problems further, and the work of new study groups investigating newly-de- fined curriculum problems. This work consisted of examining, improving, and evaluating new and old problems alike with considerable attention given to the successful implementation of the curriculum study's changes. Up to the February, 19 61 , general curriculum meeting, all new work was iniated by the staff members themselves with individual interest areas being explored. Both old and new problems and their exploration and solution were worked on by new teachers. Thus, the effect of the original curriculum study carried over to teachers who had not been previously involved. It must be realized then that substantial and important curriculum work was being conducted dur— ing the interview period from September, 1960 , to April, 1961 . - 103 - However, some feeling about the lack of curriculum work was pres- ent at this time also. Many factors were advanced by the interviewed participants regard- ing the apparent lack of curriculum work. Several of these factors are not directly associated with the curriculum study. The new facilities and their many problems, the administrators leaving, and the lack of financial support are components which cannot be charged to the failure of the curriculum study. Such responses as starting a new study late in the year, having an unprofitable off-campus course at the beginning of the school year, having a curriculum study exactly as last year's, and being busy with the imple- mentation of change could have been affected by the original curriculum study. Curriculum work, especially that using democratic operations, is time consuming. This should have been realized by all participants when they started a curriculum study so late in the school year. The unfavorable course experience could possibly have been averted if the instructor and the original curriculum consultants, all from the same institution, could have discussed the matter together and have worked out the entire course in a manner which would have been more compatible with the expectations of participants and their educational needs. At the time of the original curriculum study, it should have been noted that curriculum improvement work does not necessarily involve all the staff - 104 - members in a total effort. Smaller interest groups can accomplish curric- ulum change too. This notation may have averted the frustration associ- ated with not having a large, major curriculum study at the beginning of the school year, 1960-1961. 4 The curriculum study membership should have been informed that im- plementation of change consumes time which is in reality an extension of curriculum work. The proper and useful implementation of change is as important as suggesting the change itself and should be considered an in- tegral part of curriculum work. It is possible that the four above—mentioned impeditions could not be charged directly to the curriculum study but some consideration should have been given by the curriculum leaders to prevent them. The remaining factors which apparently impeded progress on new and different curriculum work are directly the result of shortcomings in the orig- inal curriculum study. When the new curriculum study was initiated in February, 19 61 , the entire operation was contrary to the accepted principles of democratic curriculum improvement. The definition of problems and the selection of study groups were achieved so rapidly that staff members were unable to think through problem areas and make proper decisions regarding the entire process. The procedure should have been familiar to the people in charge. From experience on the cooperative curriculum study, the lead- ers should have been cognizant of the fact that proper problem identification and selection requires time for all participants to be completely satisfied. This definitely was experienced during the original study. - 105 - Several people interviewed mentioned that a plateau had been reached when the first curriculum study was completed. This fact is somewhat con- fusing. Most of the questionnaire respondents indicated that curriculum improvement should be a continuous process and many stated that they would be willing to work on new curriculum examination and improvement. This seems contrary to data received from interviews. If educational practitioners feel that Continuous improvement is necessary, then a plateau should only be temporary in duration. It appeared that the new facilities, regular class- room duties, and the implementation of improvements were the main concerns of these participants. Additional curriculum work would follow later. The lack of college coordination and college academic credit was ad- vanced as the final reason for the plateau in curriculum work. It would ap- pear from the data that participants were familiar enought with the improve- ment processes so that college curriculum consultants were not necessary. This experience plus a competent steering committee and good administrative leadership should be all that is necessary for new curriculum improvement work. There may be a stronger feeling of security when college personnel are present but with professional and competent staff members, the curricu- lum work should have progressed in a regular manner. The remaining fact that no college academic credit was offered for curriculum work was indeed disconcerting. From all existing data it ap- peared that the study group membership developed a true professional atti- tude as a result of their work on the study. They were eager and were — 106 - interested in curriculum improvement but some felt that college credit was necessary for their work. It must be realized that most public school per- sonnel are interested in obtaining advanced degrees to insure better teach- ing positions and increased abilities as educators but it appeared that the participants were more concerned about the improvement of students' learn- ing experiences and their own teaching positions than anything else. It should be noted, however, that only a few participants made this particular response. Even though some of these facts seem to indicate a lack of support for continued curriculum work, it must be concluded that considerable cur- riculum evaluation, examination, and improvement occurred. It may have appeared that because no major study was iniated at the beginning of the year, there was no curriculum work. This, of course, is erroneous be- cause all but a few members of the entire staff were involved in some man- ner in curriculum work following the curriculum study. This was in evidence right up to the final check point. Hypothesis Eleven: That effective Curriculum improvement can be brougfi about by a co— operative curriculum improvement study which involves a public school teach- ing and administrative staff with consultant help from a university staff. In Questionnaire A, all of the study group membership (45) stated that the results and recommendations should be used to a certain extent in the cur- rent curriculum. (See Table X.) The entire membership (45) further stated -107- mm.m mm.m RKN $.an mm.m tum mmpcovam Ho H8 8v 83 83 8V AHV mvooc Hmcofimosuo $5. 8589.: Ho mHmoo 85 9: namHHoEooom mpcmEm>088H voucoEEooe o5 wee .m .2 382m 3&8 282 235 a :m a 1:80 HHmnH 87H NN.N em .2 3.8 8.3 $5 $4. $0ch50 8 3:8 a HHV 8v 8: 83 3 HS 083 >858 80> Ho 3162 9.3 85 Hoow 50> on .m . z 9332 385mb moEHH lEo)HoHom 8>oz umEom o mm.mH no.3 mm.mH o o 8.83 8v 5 88 8v 8V 8v >v3m 23cm 9.3 Ho 8.3..meh ofi Hmfi H98 50> on .m . z 8H8 coow mumbo>< 80m .828 ram '5 0 0H . Hm oH . Hm HH . HH mm . m o mfiaofi Hoonom mHHOQOmmmO 93 838 He G3 8 s H3 5 8V E; 33.0. 2:5 as: x55 =9H oa 85% “was 8.. o 3 .3 3 .3. HH . HH 8 o «EsHsloso £888 93 5 com: on coo 8V 8 8 88 8V 8v 8V mcoHHmHocoEEooop Hocm mHHSmmc 80> umfi Hoom 59H 00 NN.N 2.2. R .8 3.: 8 .m 0 $288.30 Ho a mason 9: 83%. E a: E: 5 H8 H8 33 seat 50> Ho 33%: 2: Has. 63 nos 00 4% m3 a. 88983850 .m .z 38on 9.5 m HcsoE< “Hm So 8 830 :mm oHEH “oz Zm>mqm mHmmmHOnHNm OH. QMHfimm $5.9 MMEZZOHHmmDO .un “Angus -108- Hm . mH Hm . 3 mm .8H 8 o o «m . mv meooaom 0255 82080880 8 e e e e e a: we .s 382828 85838.2 85 88 8s8> 85> H0 .8988 888888 880 E 825 H85 8888 98: >85. .88> 82 388 388 8 >8 8898850088 883 8853508 H8888 H28 888808 H838 95.888.“ 8% 880888800 88:88.5..8888 85. o modm Nodm o mvé o 38 882080880 H0 H8 9 s 6: H8 3 H8 3 888838 9: coo. so.» 8 88880 8:: I882 88050585 85 88 8s8> 85s. m0 88058 82080880 85 Ho 88 85.85025 8 30: 88 >85. .3038 8.89» 88H 85.88 H0880H8>8Ho H28 :8 88x83 8889882: 8.83 88880 882882 88050585 85. H888Hocoam8m H3 0 8889858830 .m .2 8=H8> 85H8> 85H8> 88va 838.838 88.8 8:H8> 85H8> 8HHH.E HO L80 HO nHooSH H0 855 HO 02 HO rmnH 82 E. . N E. . N coda mm .mm mm . 2 o «88> 88H H0 858 85 Ho 89888 H: H: 8v 8 3 8V 8V 88.85000 88: 8888>086H 83:05 :80 85 x55 8: 50> 05 80 50> on 2.: :8 8.8 8.2” :8 c 88283 8% nos 3 HHV 83 85 HHV 8v 8.855 88.8 85 5 888838 8 8082 1.898 05:83 8830882.. .5 25888 muc888>088H 889888008.“ 85 HES .m .2 N888 38886 830:3 850.3 4 HH8 8 L800 88.8 82 1: AUQDCUCOUV . VA $.than -109- 38. E 3 .8 E omnmm 88 $8. 5 .m .2 80880 02 88> OZ «88> 882 8808888de8 88>> .8 >888 8380880 8 >8 808 8880.8 88 880 888888.88: 83 :80880 838888 85 88.8 308 80> 0Q .88> 88H 8 >888 85 888085 0885 08 88> 8 8088 888 8>88 80> 3.8 E 8.: 8: 8.8 E 3.2 a: 8.3 § § § «8238 805808888 -880 8 888 85 88 8888880 85 88 838> 85> HO 88808.80 85 8 888 8 308 88 888880 8m 8808888888 .88088 85 8 802 .88> 882 8 8808 >888 8238 80880888800 85 88.8 88398 8058888880088 882 3.8. 5 85m 3 mm .8 a: 3.8 s: 2.2 E 8.8 E 8: «88088. 02888 82080880 85 8 8880088 880380888 85 08 880.388 8: 888 88858888 8088880 85 88 838> 85> 80 .88> 885 888588 883 880888 850 >888 888 88808 885888 8 .88088 8088 I880 8838288 038 8088888 8 8... :0888 888.123 8 88888 8 m< .8808 I88 85 888 88858888 8088888 8 08 8888888 8838888888008 8880 #988 88> 882 8 8808 >888 880 .888 -88 “oz 838> 8880 80 838> 888888 .800 HO 838> 888 I802 m0 838> 88.53 m0 838> 02 m0 8888.809 .x 592. - 110 - that the entire study would definitely affect the total Cassopolis School Pro- gram. Thirty-nine of 45 (86. 66%) felt that the results were either good or superior. A near-similar number (38; 84. 44%) stated that the results were the best that could be obtained. 3 In Questionnaire B, 33 of 36 respondents (91 . 65%) felt that the recom- mended improvements would, to some degree, accomplish the goals of meet- ing the educational needs of students. Almost the same number (32; 88.88%) stated that the recommended improvements would result to some degree in im- proving the learning experiences of the students in the teaching areas of the respondents . In his interviews and observations, the investigator examined only four of eight problem areas as outlined in the delimitations in Chapter I. From the interviews, it was noted that each recommended and accepted im- provement had received attention and was either implemented or being stud— ied at the time of investigation. (See Appendix V, Page 167 ) . Committees had been established to test the worth of many of the improvements or to set up further study on each one. In interviews with individuals or groups of individuals directly in charge of or working in the areas under investigation, the following data were noted. An instructional materials center had been established in each school building with each proposed recommended improvement receiving attention. Every school had a person trained in the method of operating the various — lll - machines and this person would, in turn, instruct all other staff members in the school. A cooperative exchange of materials among schools was in effect and was considered useful by all instructional personnel. A committee was established to evaluate the centers and to make recommen- dations for additional change. In evaluating and reporting pupil progress, the committee work was in progress on some recommendations. Parent-teacher conferences were tried at one elementary school and they were found to be very successful and useful. An evaluation meeting of the elementary school personnel utiliz- ing the parent—teacher conferences was held in the presence of this investi- gator. All teachers felt that the conferences were worthwhile and suggested that they be continued and used in all elementary schools. These teachers, in turn, did an evaluation with the parents involved in the conferences. The purpose here was to determine the value of these conferences as seen by parents. Total approval was indicated by parents. The use of Interna- tional Business Machine report cards was in effect at the junior and senior high schools. The use of parent-teacher conferences in the junior and sen— ior high schools was under investigation by a committee. The guidance program had been developed and all improvements were implemented or were in the process of being implemented. A testing pro- gram had been initiated and vocational guidance was being considered. A guidance class for eighth grade students was under investigation and more effort was being given to the idea of part-time employment for high school - 112 - students on a cooperative program. The latter effort was a school-com- munity project. The new full-time guidance director and the two part- time professional people expressed the feelings that the program was do- ing well in its many services and would do more when more finances were available. The communication skills study group had its improvements either implememented or under further investigation. The many suggested ma- terials for instruction had been purchased and were being used. Additional personnel had been hired as recommended but class size was larger than that suggested in the recommendations. This was being studied during the interview period. The people directly associated with these areas felt that there was noteworthy value in these improvements. This investigator, however, ap- pealed to all old teachers for their estimate of the total value. This value is indicated in Questionnaire C . Thirty-nine of 41 respondents (95. 11%) felt that the instructional ma- terials centers were either of considerable or of great value to them and the students of the school district. The elementary school teachers who util— ized the parent-teacher conferences and others familiar with this operation (14; 34. 14%) felt that this means of reporting pupil progress was either of considerable or of great value for the school system. Thirty—nine respon— dents (95. 11%) considered the guidance department and its services of value to the educational program of the School system. 'I'wenty-three respondents - 113 - (56.09%) felt that the recommendations for change in communication skills area were of moderate to great value to the existing curriculum. It should be noted that some participants did not respond to all of the questions be- cause of unfamiliarity with certain phases of the total recommendations. 16 In conclusion, 35 respondents (85. 36%) indicated in Questionnaire C that effective curriculum improvement can be brought about by a coopera- tive curriculum improvement study as was experienced during the school year, 19 59-1960. Thus, in the opinion of the professional educators in- volved, effective program improvement is a product of this method of oper- ation. Summary of Results: The summary will view the results of this study in the three main categories as delineated in Chapter II; that of behavioral change, the end products, and the possibility of continued study. These categories devel- oped by the writer and substantiated by current literature are the features of the cooperative approach which make it desirable for use in contemporary education. The hypotheses designed to check behavioral change received sub- stantial support to indicate that a change had occurred in the individuals. Interest in and alertness to problems of education had increased. Attitude change was indicated when participants noted changes in their democratic 15 See Table x, Page 107. - 114 — and professional functions and orientations. Staff members also witnessed a change in their social orientations when rapport became better and a cohe— sive feeling resulted. Changes in ideas and persuasions about education resulted in increased learning. New skills and knowledge were also ac- quired through this curriculum study. These many changes could be seen in the behavior of most partici- pants the year following the study. They were more conscious of problem areas and were better able to handle the processes of curriculum improve- ment. They initiated much of the additional curriculum work and were more professional and democratic in their approaches. Their newly ac- quired skills and knowledge were reflected in their work. A higher level of sophistication was recognized by them and the writer in their evaluation and improvement work and in their educational situations. It appeared that they had more confidence in themselves, were more open to change, and would gladly pursue more curriculum work. When summarizing these results, it can be seen that a noticeable behavioral change occurred in the curriculum study participants from the beginning of the study to the point of final evaluation. From the rationale presented in an earlier chapter, it would appear that this change is the type needed for educators in contemporary America. The end products or actual curriculum change was rated highly by those who utilized the improvements, the professional staff members. The curriculum changes in the four problem areas evaluated in this study were — 115 - attaining the goals prescribed for them. The improvements assisted the staff in bringing about better learning experiences for the young people in the school district. It must be concluded then that the product section of this cooperative curriculum improvement study was successful. To continue the fostering of useful process and product necessary for education, a cooperative approach should be continuous in nature. Eval- uation, investigation, and improvement of curricular experiences must then propagate themselves. This continuity was checked in this study. From the desire expressed and the actual work on implementation of change, eval- uation work, continued study, and new study by most old and new teachers, it would appear that continuity is encouraged by cooperative procedures for curriculum change. This quality can be considered as useful as the pro- duct and process previously expressed. From these favorable results some conclusions can be drawn. The conclusions should involve other aspects of the study than just the data as- sociated with the suggested hypotheses. It is evident that this approach to curriculum change has some significant implications for education, the educator, and the student in America. These implications should be enum- erated. From reviewing the entire study and the results, it seems necessary to suggest some additional research on other cooperative approaches and as- sociated areas to get a better view of this procedure for educational change. Such research should shed some more light on a procedure with great potential. The conclusions, implications, and suggestions for other research will receive attention in Chapter V. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS4 IMPLICATIONS. AND RECOMMENQATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH Introduction: The purpose of this chapter is to draw some conclusions from the data presented, to bring out some implications for education in general, and to suggest some needed research in the area of cooperative curriculum improve ment . Conclusions: From the findings of this study, the following conclusions are ap- parent: 1. Participation in a cooperative approach to curriculum change. tended to alert staff members to other curricular problems. 2 . Staff members were prompted to conduct study on other problem areas in the curriculum as a result of participating in cooperative curricu- lum study. 3. Staff members became more cohesive as a result of participating in cooperative curriculum study. 4. Staff members became more professional in their thinking and their ways of behaving as a result of a cooperative curriculum improvement study . ~116- 10. 11. - 117 - Democratic procedures and methods were carried over to other our- riculum work as a result of a cooperative, democratic curriculum study. Interest in all phases of education increased in participants as a re— sult of a cooperative curriculum study. Cooperative curriculum participation caused learning about educa- tional processes to occur in participants and, therefore, was an ef- fective way of re-educating participants. Changes in people and their ideas and persuasions about education did occur as a result of democratic curriculum evaluation and improve- ment. The changes included more professional behavior, attitudes, values, and notions on education. Small group work was effective for reaching agreement for curriculum change. Common interests and concerns about problem areas caused greater effectiveness for reaching agreement on change. Continuous evaluation, examination, and the solution of problems by most staff members did occur after a c00perative exposure to curricu- lum change. Even though no official, organized curriculum study developed immediately following the original study, curriculum work continued. Effective and worthwhile curriculum change did result from a cooper- ative curriculum improvement effort of professional staff members in a school system. 12. 13. - 118 - The need for curriculum consultants, at least on a part-time basis, may be necessary for effective and continuous study. The period of time for consultant help should probably depend on the compe- tencies and confidence displayed by participants. Curriculum study participants apparently influenced and propagated a carry-over of interest, desire, and actual curriculum work to new teachers who were not previously involved in curriculum work. Implications: A number of implications can be drawn from this study. Most sig- nificant of these are: 1. The cooperative approach to curriculum change has definite implica- tions for fostering educational improvement to meet the needs and demands of society. The cooperative approach can influence pro- fessional advancement in educators and continuity of study which are necessary to keep pace with the rapidly changing American society. The demands of society are far-reaching and people must learn to adjust to them in a rapid fashion. Since the goal of education is preparing young people to live happy and adequate lives, schools must have curricular experiences which can effectively prepare stu- dents to live in a rapid, ever-changing society. With the ever- changing demands in America, schools must go beyond everyday needs and look at the future. Cooperative procedures may be an effective process to cope with future, demands because such procedures can - 119 - encourage evaluation and foster change which, in turn, will offer a curriculum which gives youngsters the needed capabilities and tools for successful living. The cooperative approach has implications for fostering democratic values in young people. The cooperative process can go beyond effecting useful curriculun change and favorable behavioral change in educators. In the long run, it could help youngsters build stronger democratic values . If worthwhile democratic values are recognized and estab- lished by educators during a learning situation, then this exposure may cause educators to appreciate and propagate democratic values in their association with youngsters. It seems logical to assume that the educator may use democratic procedures in working with young people if he found them successful in his learning. Such ‘ activity could foster democratic values and encourage their greater use in everyday living. The cooperative approach has implications for all curriculum improve- ment work. Teacher-involvement in curriculum study has more than just meaning for change in content. It reaches out to include change in participants and ways of behaving. The struggle about how change should be brought about has been discussed earlier in the study. Since the cooperative method was found successful in one situation, it can undoubtedly be successful - 120 - in others. Such success has particular meaning now when science study commissions, other discipline study committees, and outside experts and specialists are proposing change. Usually the experts prescribe change in content and method. The cooperative approach goes beyond prescription and contributes to behavioral change. Pur- ther, it encourages a commitment to the ever-expanding need for our- riculum work. Changes arrived at through cooperative procedures ' are more consistent with current research and theory and, therefore, should receive more attention in any improvement work. Fostering change in a cooperative manner could make educa- tion one of the most productive and worthwhile agencies in our society. The cooperative approach has significant implications for the support of local determination of curriculum. The success of this study may cause a person to wonder about the need for a national curriculum. The success would further substantiate the philosophy of the Michigan 1 Department of Public Instruction which subscribes to a notion that lo- cal action should determine the policies and functions of education. The cooperative approach goes beyond curriculum development. It can also develop decision-makers. If these qualities can be de- veloped in local situations, then education stands a good chance of being consistent with the democratic idea of individual responsibility. There may be little expression for national committees or a national curriculum to insure that America is strong in the face of world condi- tions. Through cooperative procedures, American education can be strong and this can be done at the grass roots level. - 121 - This study has implications for the way institutions of higher leam- ing work with public school people. The function and role of col- lege and university personnel may need to be changed and clarified when the cooperative approach is carefully examined. The use of subject matter specialists and curriculum special- ists takes on additional meaning when seen from the eyes of the co- operative educator. With consultant assistance to public school personnel, local educators can work out their own problems and bring about appropriate change in their educational experiences. This activity goes beyond the usual idea of consultant help fostering the change in a school system. The valuable products of this operation have been enumerated previously. Cooperative procedures have considerable meaning for in-service ed- ucation. If, through in-service education, we aspire to develop greater competence and proficiency, then cooperative curriculum study may be an important approach to attaining these goals. This study suggests that cooperative procedures develop ed- ucational experiences, more skills and knowledge, and more profes- sional educators. Through cooperative study, educators find more meaning to educational processes and their profession. Coopera- tive procedures function and reach beyond the usual in-service activ- ity to develop appropriate curriculum experiences and a more knowl- edgeable educator. The cooperative aproach to educational change has particular impli- cations for the graduate study of professional educators. - 122 - Many educators take graduate work primarily for advanced certification or for increased monetary benefits. These factors are important but, of course, additional learning is essential if educa- tors are to improve their professional competence. Cooperative methods extend beyond the usual classroom graduate work and reach into the field of increased responsibilities, commitments, and atti- tudes of the educator. Therefore, cooperative procedures not only encourage increased graduate work but also can develop important professional goals. Cooperative procedures have implications for the development of needed skills in leadership and in curriculum improvement processes. Curriculum improvement work naturally fosters learning exper- iences which were not present or not developed in the previous cur- riculum. The cooperative approach also contributes to the develop- ment of leaders and curriculum change agents. The Cassopolis study caused educators to become more effective leaders and change agents. The competent leader and change agent can, of course, carry on addi- tional work in education and help bring solutions to problems. The results of this study prompts one to review "Post-Sputnik" ap- proaches to educational improvement. The cooperative approach has meaning for change which may not have been previously consid- ered. The use of crash programs and the experts' recommendations should be challenged now that cooperative improvement has been found 10. 11. - 123 - successful in one situation. The cooperative approach is slower but more meaningful changes can occur in the participants and the curriculum when this method of operation is used. The implications derived from this study would suggest that new pro- cesses should not be externally foisted on educators. Television, teaching machines, large and/ or small group in- struction, and many other instructional ideas are being recommended for use in the classroom as a panacea for educational problems. These recommendations often come down by edict without consent or even the knowledge of classroom teachers. Such action Often causes a person to doubt the purposes and validity of recommendations and to wonder if needs, interests, and goals are being met. Classroom teachers should decide after careful investigation that these devices and ideas are necessary. When this occurs, then the important ac- ceptance and approval will be present. Finally, cooperative methods have implications for college curriculum development programs. Colleges and universities may have to look at their curriculum offerings. Are college programs meeting the needs and interests of col- lege students? Are college programs propagating the expert ap- proach? Are these programs preparing future and active teachers to handle curriculum development in their professional situations? If institutions of higher education familiarize their students with - 124 - democratic curriculum improvement processes, then less effort may be needed in the field. This familiarization with processes could, in turn, develop more effective learning in the classroom. The cooperative approach can be used in the college class- room to encourage learning and self study as well as independence, initiative and democratic values. An exposure to cooperative meth- ods could possible discourage a subject-matter approach before it can become a part of the behavior pattern of prospective teachers. Recommendation; for Further Research: This study suggests some needed research in the area of cooperative curriculum improvement . 1. More cooperative curriculum studies are imperative to validate this concept. The studies should be conducted systematically and eval- uated vigorously to further validate this curriculum improvement ap— proach. Behavioral changes resulting from cooperative curriculum studies need additional investigation. The perceptual theory of psychology could be used as the basis of this study. The long-range impact of the cooperative approach to curriculum change should be ascertained. Determining its effect on the total school program and on the community would assist in ascertaining more completely the value of the cooperative approach. The carry-over in participants and their curriculum work needs fur— ther study. This study would assist in determining lasting values and worthwhile learning . - 125 - 5. A participant's classroom should be studied before and after an ex- posure to a cooperative curriculum study. This study would de- termine the carry-over of democratic values and activity learning. 6. The relative merits and appropriate use of a system-wide and/or a building level curriculum improvement study needs further investi- gation. Such study may reveal at what level most effective change can occur. 7. The use of consultant help after the completion of a cooperative cur- riculum study needs further attention. This type of study would clarity the role of specialists after educators have been exposed to cooperative procedures and how long it is necessary to consultants to aid in the process of curriculum change. Review of the Study: Even though this study is not highly structured, there is support for cooperative, teacher-involved curriculum improvement. This study has attempted to validate a democratic means of foster- ing curriculum change. Clear evidence supports many facets of the coop- erative approach in this study. Behavioral change, increased social orien- tations, new skills and knowledge, and new ideas, values, and persuasions about education were some facets that received support for the use of coop- erative procedures. The cooperative approach goes beyond this study in its total effec- tiveness. This type of curriculum change can encourage respect for the ir an ce wa fur Ad< dit A t 1119 — 126 - individual dignity of the classroom teacher and it utilizes an important con- cept in America, the grass roots approach to solving local problems. These are values which are very important to any activity associated with a social institution. The significance of this approach is far reaching. The entire struc- ture of education could be affected if this approach were closely scrutinized and utilized in curriculum development. Most of all, the cooperative pro- cess could affect the development of young people in American classrooms. The use of cooperative procedures for change in process and product was successful in one situation. Additional study on this method could further substantiate the use of democratic procedures for curriculum change. Additional evidence would be helpful in validating this method. Prom ad- ditional studies, a theory on curriculum change will probably be established. A theory of democratic, cooperative curriculum change would have great mean- ing for education in America. APPENDICES APPENDD( I PART I EXPERIMENTAL SELF-EVALUATION FORM FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL CURRICULUM The purpose of this evaluation schedule is to provide a device which can be used by teachers and administrative staff as a guide for self-evaluation. The schedule does not attempt to provide a check list or requirement schedule to which a school must conform. It can be used as the first step in taking a look at the status quo of the school. This schedule is designed to provide information about where research and improvement can begin as areas that need improvement are identi- fied or are found to be lacking in a school. It is felt that the faculty of the school is in a better position to evaluate curriculum in that they are aware of existing conditions. It is also felt that self-evaluation has the advantage of allowing the fac- ulty to express opinions more freely and of being more critical. -127- -128- SELF-EVALUATION FORM FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLLCURRICULUM The Public school curriculum comprises all leamirg experiences provided under the auspices of the school which are authorized by the board of education. This schedule will attempt to emphasize the learn- ing experiences and curricular patterns which are most clearly related to the total growth and development of the student. The schedule is in two parts. PartI calls for certain factual information concerning learning experiences for children and facilities for implementing them. Part 11 calls for evaluation of the effectiveness of the curriculum. Parts I and II provide the basis for self—evaluation which may lead to further development and which may be useful for self— improve ment . An effort has been made to save time in answering questions and also to adapt the schedule to the variety of types and sizes of schools. Where this adaptation is obviously not successful, indicate the ques- tion or sections which are not appropriate by such comments as " does not apply" or "not present in this school" . Any additional comment or explanations can be added on separate pages and identified by the ap- propriate number in the outline. Name of School: 1. -129- Date: General Education Does the curricula in your school serve the following needs of children: a. To feel like others in his age group? To gain reasonable success in school work? To participate in school activi- ties on an equal basis? To develop skills and standards for: 1 . group acceptance? 2 . cleanliness and good grooming ? 3 . reliability ? 4 . active sports ? To understand differences in him- self and others? To discover and develOp his as- sets to offset physical and other handicaps? To receive guidance? To be sensitive to the feelings of others? To stand on issues and not be swayed? -130- Has a statement of objectives for this program of education been formulated for your school? If yes, do you have knowledge and possession of such a statement? Does the curriculum provide for partic- . ular needs or interest of individual children? If yes, a. Are students excused for special classes? b. Is teacher—pupil planning used? o. Is ability grouping used? (:1. Is heterogeneous grouping used? e. Is the curriculum based on devel- opmental tasks? f. Is the curriculum based on age grade? g. Is provision made for children to‘ explore new fields? h. Is provision made for opportunities in group leadership? 1. Is provision made for hobby and recreational opportunities? j. Other For which of the following educational objectives does your program of general education attempt to provide? -131- Check the appropriate columns: Is this con- sidered es-j Not sential for Specif- Indi- at child ically rectly all flwth? Yes No a. A broad cultural back- ground? b. An understanding of current life problems? c. A preparation of the student for future life situation in a chang- ing society? d. To develop a self-con- cept which is accurate, healthy and realistic? e. To develop a concept of other individuals which is accurate, healthy and realistic? f. A usable knowledge of the broad economic en— vironment in which the student is increasingly finding himself? g. A usable knowledge of the broad social environ- ment in which the student is increasingly finding himself? h. A continuing emphasis upon effective social living? ~132- Is this con- sidered es- Not sential for Specif- India- at child ically rectly all Mm? Yes No A continuing emphasis upon effective social living? A continuing emphasis upon effective civic living? Development, under guidance, of demo- cratic leadership in groups of children? Participation in com- munity organizations? Participation in extra- class organizations? Participation in educa- tive tours? Participation in work experiences? Participation in school forums? The ability and desire to think critically? The ability and desire to evaluate results? The ability and desire to continue growth in the various fields of - study? -133- Specif- ically Indi- rectly Not at all Is this con?- sidered es- sential for child growth? Yes No Development of moral and esthetic respon- sibility? The following implement the educational objectives of a cur- riculum. Does your curriculum provide: Opportunities to develop the ability to think crit- ically? Continuous development of the basic skills in- volved in reading, writ- ing, and listening? Development of the basic calculational skills? Experiences that de- velop understandings of the physical and scientific events en- countered in daily living? Activities which de- velop social and civic ' awareness and concern for community problems? Experiences that con- tribute to the physical and emotional well-being of the student? Activities for developing respect for the rights of others regardless of race, creed, color, social posi- tion and/or economic standing? -134- Specif- ically Indi- rectly Not at all Is this com sidered es4 sential for child growth ? Yes No Direction that will help the student develop sound moral and sound ethical standards? Opportunities to de- velop the necessary manual and motor skills? Opportunities for student% to evaluate their progress or achievements? Opportunities for devel- oping study skills? Opportunities for em— ploying various research procedures in solving problems? Understanding and study of the occupations and industries of the region? Utilization of community and resource persons? Experiences that provide for understanding and the use of public facilities (libraries, play grounds, parks)? Opportunities for the de- velopment of the apprec- iation of art, music, and literature? ‘ Development of skills and abilities in esthetic endeavor? -135- Is this con sidered es~ 1 sential for Specif- Indi- Not child ically rectly at all growth? . Yes No r. Opportunities for de- veloping leadership abilities? PART II Explanation of Column Headings .0 Item not present in this school - does not apply N No opinion or no basis for judgment 1-2 All or nearly all aspects unsatisfactory 3-4 More aspects unsatisfactory than satisfactory 5-6 More aspects satisfactory than unsatisfactory 7-8 Most aspects satisfactory 9-10 Nearly all or all aspects satisfactory The above lO-point progressive scale is to be used to answer ques- tions of evaluative judgment. Adapt it to the item or quality or service under question and indicate your estimate of satisfactoriness or complete- ness, or effectiveness by placing an "X" in the appropriate column. Where it appears necessary to differentiate among regular and special teachers in evaluating any item, please substitute for the symbol "X" the following "E" for elementary, "S" for secondary and "Sp" for special teachers. -136- 10 General Education . How satisfactorily does the general education program of this school provide for: l . The general education needs of students? 2 . The special education needs of students? 3. A usable understanding of the principal areas of organized knowledge? 4. Emphasizing a student's effective personal, social and civic living? 5. Guidance to students in the development of dem- ocratic leadership in groups of students? 6. Encouraging participa- tion in such varied ac- tivities as community and extra-class organ- izations, travel, work experience and forums? 7. The development of the ability and desire to think critically, evaluate results and continue growth? 8. To develop a self-con- cept that is accurate, health and realistic? 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. -137- To develop a concept of other individuals that is accurate, healthy and realistic? A usable knowledge of the broad economic en- vironment in which the child is increasingly finding himself? Are students excused for special classes? Is teacher-pupil planning used? Is ability grouping used? Is heterogeneous group— ing used? Is the curriculum based on developmental task? Is curriculum based on age-grade? Is provision made for special interest areas? Is provision made for students to explore new fields? Is provision made for op- portunities in group lead— ership? Is provision made for hobby and recreational opp‘Ortunities ? 10 21. 22. -138- 10 A preparation of the stu- dent for future life situ- ations in a changing society? Other? Needs of Youth . How successfully does the cur- riculum meet the needs of youth: 1. To feel like others in his age group? To gain reasonable suc- cess in school work? To participate in school activities on an equal basis? To develop skills and standards for: a. Group acceptance? b. Cleanliness and good grooming? c . Reliability? d . Active sports? To understand difference in himself and others? To discover and develop his assets to offset physi— cal and other handicaps? -139- 7 . To receive guidance? 8. To be sensitive to the feeling of others? 9 . To stand on issues and not be swayed? Overview. Does curriculum: 1. Develop a well-balanced and integrated personality and aid others in develop- ing such personalities? Enable students to partic- ipate in a wide range of extra-class activities such as clubs, societies, sportsi, hobby groups, forums, and school government? Supplement or widen their interests or creative tal- ents? DevelOp poise, articu- lateness, and exercise leadership in group ac- tivities? Is curriculum: 1. Continuously developed for students? Providing for a balanced inter-relationship between general and special edu- cation? -l40- 3. Giving opportunities for wholesome personal de- velopment? Indicate an overall estimate of the satisfactoriness of the cur- ricula for students. * This schedule was developed by graduate students of Michigan State University from an idea formerly used by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education in the accreditation process. Adaption, modifications and changes were developed by Richard Evans, Fred Gable and Howard King. APPENDIX II ANONYMOUS EVALUATIONS CONDUCTED DURJAIG CURRICUjLUM STUDY November 3, 1959’. (Third fall curriculum meeting.) 1 . Give something on your thoughts and feelings on our work to this point. 2 . What suggestions do you have for facilitating future direction and work of this group? (Please be specific) November 19I 1959 . (Fourth fall curriculum meeting.) 1 . Write a few sentences giving something on thoughts and feelings on our work to this point. 2 . What suggestions do you have for facilitating future direction and work of this group? (Please be specific) 3. What is the role of the Michigan State University consultants dur- ing the winter study sessions? March 22 , 1960 . (First spring curriculum meeting.) 1 . Give some thoughts on our work to this point. 2 . What suggestions do you have for future direction and work? -141-— APPENDD( III THE PROBLEM AREAS IDENTIFIEQ The description of the problem areas will be made by utilizing the notes of the second fall meeting and will reflect the ideas of the individ- ual study groups who identified the problems. This description will not be verbatim from the notes, but it will contain the essential points in them. Initructional Materials Centers: This group stated that their function was to explore, ascertain, and make known the various kinds of instructional resources and make them available for further use. They stated their problem as: conduct- ing an inventory of the existing equipment, resources, and materials now on hand; conducting an inventory of the staff and student needs in the entire school system; and making recommendations for instructional ma- terials programs for all of the schools. Guidance and Counselim: This group stated their problem as determining how the guidance program of the Cassopolis Public Schools can help every child develop a desirable self-image through testing, counseling, in-service training of staff members, parent-teacher-child communications, inventory services, and occupational and vocational information. It may be noted that the -142- - 143 - guidance and counseling program of the Cassopolis Public Schools was quite limited at the beginning of the curriculum study, so they hoped to build a department which would satisfy the above-mentioned goal. SpeciaLEdfucation: The special education group identified the various specific cate- gories which the Cassopolis Public Schools special education program should serve. The categories are: deaf and hard of hearing, blind, sight saving, epileptic, crippled, cardiac, any physical handicap, speech, mentally retarded, visiting teacher, home-bound students, socially de- prived students, and the gifted child. This study group stated that one of their problems was seeing that the Cassopolis Public Schools utilize the services provided by the county special education program and to increase the services in their own school district. They also stated the problem of getting proper referral of child- ren for special education; the problem of integrating these children into the regular classroom; and the problem of enriching the environment of the child socially through this program. The special education program was limited financially; therefore, the study group wanted to advance it as far as possible within the limits of the existing budget. my Habits: At first this group had poorly defined problems and stated only that they wanted to investigate mOtivated and unmotivated direction. It may - 144 - be noted that they still lacked direction and clear-cut definitions at the end of the third fall meeting. However, their main purpose was to im- prove the study habits of the students of the Cassopolis Public Schools. Commupircation Skills: This study group identified many problems under this general head- ing. They saw their general problems as: teaching students to read critically and with understanding; providing literature of interest for all levels; developing concentration; developing self-identification in read- ing; developing usable knowledge of mechanics of speaking and writing; developing a vocabulary which will be acceptable for future adult life; and providing continuous growth in the language arts , grades one through twelve. For the specific skills of writing they listed the problems of: de- veloping legibility; developing logical organization of thought; and devel- oping clarity in expression. For speech they listed as specific problems: utilizing sources of information; organizing thought for clarity and emphasis; and develop- ing confident self-expression. In the communication skills of listening they listed: developing skills for understanding, such as recognizing main ideas; developing good taste and critical judgment in using leisure time, particularly in regard to reading materials, television and movies; and promoting courteous behav- ior in listening situations. - 145 - In conclusion, this group listed the problems of teaching related to communication skills. They are: challenge and motivation; recog- nizing long range goals; honesty in evaluation; grouping by ability; class size; development of cultural and aesthetic values; and parent-teacher conferences . Development of Sound Moral and_Et_h_i_cal Standards: This study group identified their problem areas for consideration as: respect for authority; social life; respect of property; and personal health. They also wanted to determine through an opinion survey what the people of Cassopolis considered ethical and moral standards. Ability (swing: This study group identified their problems as: What is meant by ability and heterogeneous grouping? To what extent should the school system consider other types of grouping? Would the same type of group— ing be desirable for both elementary and secondary schools? What sys- tem will be used to determine the ability of the child? How does en- vironment affect the ability of the child? What resource materials are available? Will the Cassopolis Public Schools have facilities for abil— ity grouping? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each pro- gram? How can the school educate the community to accept a new grouping program? Is the present system satisfactory?- Is ability grouping satisfactory for Cassopolis? How can it be put into operation? Should ability grouping only apply to academic subjects? - 146 - Evaluating and Reporting Student Proggss: This group stated their problems as: the need for a good testing program to determine student capabilities, aptitudes, and I.Q. 's; the standardization of evaluation and reporting in the system; the develop- ment of a criterion for determining the evaluation; and the practicability of different types of diplomas. It must be noted that these eight study groups identified these problem areas at the second fall meeting. Even though these problems were essentially the same throughout the study, some additions, dele- tions, and revisions were made. This can be seen in the final recom- mendations, which were submitted by these study groups to the Cassopolis Board of Education . APPENDD< N QUESTIONNAIRE A AND RESULTS (45 Respondents) EVALUATION-CURRICULUM STUDY Cassapolis, Michigan May 3, 1960 This evaluation is an attempt to determine ideas or reactions that have evolved from our year-long curriculum study. There may be short- comings in this evaluation form. However, we would appreciate your sincere and honest reaction to each question. This evaluation should help us determine how we have progressed, what we have learned, and our feelings toward the entire study. This form will, in turn, help the Michigan State staff when working on similar studies in the future. This evaluation is anonymous. Please give the name of your study group. Kindly girfle the appropriate number or letter and react to the open- ended questions as you see fit. (Name of Study Group) - 147 - -148- Were you satisfied with the method of problem identification? Not at all 0% Little bit 0% Fair amount 33 . 33% Quite a bit 44. 44% Greatly 15. 54% (No response) 6. 66% Do you feel that the formation of the significance for this study? steering committee had any Were you satisfied with the work of the members of the steering Not at all 0% Little bit 4 . 44% Fair amount 8 . 88% Quite a bit 39 .99% Greatly 44 . 44% (No response) 2 .22% committee? Not at all 0% Little bit 4 . 44% Fair amount 11. 11% Quite a bit 48. 88% Greatly 31 . 10% (No response) 4. 44% To what degree did you enjoy and profit from the study? Not at all 0 % 8. Little bit Fair amount Quite a bit Greatly (No response) To what degree did the consultants help during the organization of this study? Not at all Little bit Fair amount Quite a bit Greatly (No response) Were you satisfied with the way your group worked? Not at all Little bit Fair amount Quite a bit Greatly (No response) Did the amount of your reading increase while making this study? Not at all Little bit Fair amount -149- 0% 15.54% 33.33% 48.88% 2.22% 0% 6.66% 15.54% 42.22% 31.10% 4.44% 2.22% 11.11% 15.54% 44.44% 26.66% 0% 0% 2.22% 22.22% -150- Quite a bit 42.22% Greatly 33 . 33% (No response) 0% 9 . Did your interest in the problem area grow as the study proceeded? Not at all 2.22% Little bit 0% Fair amount 4. 44% Quite a bit 35. 55% Greatly 57 . 77% (No response) 0% 10 . Did your thinking about educational problems increase during this study? Not at all 0% Little bit 0% Fair amount 2 . 22% Quite a bit 39 . 99% Greatly 57 . 77% (No response) 0% 11 . Did some of your findings change your personal opinions and/or biases regarding your problem area? Not at all 2.22% Little bit 24.44% Fair amount 28 . 88% -151- Quite abit 31.10% Greatly 11. 11% (No response) 2 . 22% 12 . Has your attitude about research changed since undertaking this study? Not at all 17. 76% Little bit 19.98% Fair amount 13. 33% Quite a bit 26. 66% Greatly l 1 . 1 1% (No response) 1 1 . 1 1% If so, how? 13. Has your attitude on working with students changed? Not at all 24.44% Little bit ' 15 . 54% Fair amount 15. 54% Quite a bit 31.10% Greatly 6. 66% (No response) 6. 66% If so , how? 14 . Has your attitude on working with your colleagues changed? Not at all 24.44% Little bit 6. 66% Fair amount 1 7 . 76% 15. Quite a bit Greatly (No response) Did the interaction of your group help you to know and understand your colleagues? -152- 35.55% 8.88% 6.66% Not at all 0% Little bit 6. 66% Fair amount 8. 88% Quite a bit 35. 55% Greatly 46. 66% (No response) 2 .22% 16. Did the interaction of the groups help you to understand and appre- ciate what is done at various levels, K - 12? Not at all 0% Little bit 4. 44% Fair amount 6 . 66% Quite a bit 46. 66% Greatly 42 . 22% (No response) 0% 17. Did your attitude about the democratic process change during this study? Not at all 35. 55% Little bit 13. 33% Fair amount . l 5. 55% Quite a bit 15. 55% - 153 - Greatly 6.66% (No response) 13. 33% If so , how? 18. Did your classroom procedure change during this study? Not at all 24.44% Little bit 11 . 11% Fair amount 2 6 . 66% Quite a bit 24. 44% Greatly 2 . 22% (No response) 11. 11% If so, how? 19 . Did your desire to become more involved in professional educational problems increase during this study? Not at all 2.22% Little bit 6. 66% Fair amount 15. 54% Quite a bit 51 . 10% Greatly 2 4 . 44% (No response) 0% 20 . Do you feel that there was a change in your behavior toward becom- ing a more professional educator? Not at all 6. 66% Little bit 11.11% Fair amount 19.98% Quite a bit 51.10% -154- Greatly 11.11% (No response) 0% 21 . Has your attitude about education and the problems that face it changed? Not at all 6. 66% Little bit 19 . 98% Fair amount 19 . 98% Quite a bit 33. 33% Greatly 17. 76% (No response) 2 . 22% 22 . To what degree do you feel that this study had pertinence to the total educational picture in America? Not at all 2.22% . Little bit 8. 88% Fair amount 15. 54% Quite a bit 35. 55% Greatly 26. 66% (No response) 11.11% 23. Do you feel that the results of your study will affect the young people of Cassopolis? Not at all 0% Little bit 6. 66% Fair amount 11.11% Quite a bit 37. 77% Greatly 42 . 22% (No response) 2.22% -155- 24. Do you feel that your results and recommendations can be used in the present curriculum? Not at all 0% Little bit 0% Fair amount 1 l . l 1% Quite a bit 44. 44% ." Greatly 44 . 44% (No response) 0% 25. To what degree do you think this entire study will affect the Cassop- olis School program? Not at all 0% Little bit 6. 66% Fair amount 11 . 1 1 % Quite a bit 51. 10% Greatly 31 . 10% (No response) 0% 26 . To what degree do you think the results obtained in your study meets the goals or objectives that you prescribed at the beginning of the study? Not at all 0% Little bit 11.11% Fair amount 1 5 . 54% Quite a bit 64.44% Greatly 6 . 66% (No response) 2 . 22% 27. 28. 29. To what degree do you feel your results meet the needs defined by -156- you at the beginning of the study? Not at all Little bit Fair amount Quite a bit Greatly (No response) Did the experimental self-evaluation form help in the identification of problem areas? Not at all Little bit Fair amount Quite a bit Greatly (No response) To what degree do you think your recommendations should be ac- cepted? Not at all Little bit Fair amount Quite a bit Greatly (No response) 0% 8.88% 31.10% 44.44% 11.11% 4.44% 2.22% 4.44% 33.33% 55.55% 2.22% 2.22% 0% 2.22% 13.33% 44. 44% 39.99% 0% -157- 30 . To what degree do you think your recommendations will be accepted? Not at all 0% Little bit 2 . 22% Fair amount ' 37.77% Quite a bit 53. 33% Greatly 6 . 66% (No response) 0% 31 . My general, overall opinion of this "course" as compared with others I have taken in education. Inferior 0% Poor 0% Average 1 5 . 54% Good 48 . 88% Superior 35 . 55% (No response) 0% 32 . Do you feel the results of the entire study were: Inferior 0% Poor 0% Average 13 . 33% Good 66 . 66% Superior 19 . 98% (No response) 0% 33. 34. 35. Do you feel that the democratic method is the best way to get re- sults in curriculum? Never Seldom Sometimes Usually Always (No response) Do you think that examination and improvement of curriculum should be a continual process? Never Seldom Sometimes Usually Always (No response) Did you find yourself wanting to explor other problems related to -158- 0% 0% 4.44% 73.33% 22.22% 0% 0% 2.22% 0% 11.11% 86.66% 0% your own while making this study? Never Seldom Sometimes Usually Always (No response) If so, give examples. 0% 0% 35.55% 31.10% 26.66% 6.66% -159- 36. Did you feel yourself becoming more proficient in research and re- lated methods while making this study? 37. Did this study open new avenues for future study and thought? Never 2 . 22% Seldom 4 . 44% Sometimes 22 . 22% Usually 48 . 88% Always l 5 . 54% (No response) 6. 66% If so, give examples. 38. Do you feel that other school systems could profitably make a sim- ilar study of their curricular problems? Never 0% Seldom 2 . 22 % Sometimes 2.22% Usually 48.88% Always 46 . 66% (No response) 0% Never 2 . 22% Seldom 6 . 66% Sometimes 48. 88% Usually 35. 55% Always 6 . 66% (No response) 0% 39. 40. 41. Do you feel that the results of your study were the best that could be obtained? Never Seldom Sometimes Usually Always (No response) Do you think that the time spent on this study was utilized in the most profitable manner? Never Seldom Sometimes Usually Always (No response) Do you now feel that the problem areas identified were the most -160- 4.44% 8.88% 28.88% 39.99% 15.54% 2.22% 0% 8.88% 8.88% 48.88% 26.66% 6.66% pressing problems of the school? Never Partially Sometimes Usually Always (No response) 0% 8.88% 17.76% 47.77% 8.88% 6.66% -161- 42 . Did the Steering Committee serve its function of communication, facilitation, and leadership in this study? Never 0% Partially 8 . 88% Sometimes 8 . 88% Usually 48.88% Always 2 6 . 66% (No response) 6. 66% 43. Were you satisfied with the members of your own committee? Never 0% Partially 1 5 . 54% Sometimes 4 . 44% Usually 35 . 55% Always 44 . 44% (No response) 0% 44. Were the general meetings set up to your liking? Never 0% Partially 4 . 44% Sometimes 13 . 33% Usually 59 . 99% Always 22 . 22% (No response) 0% -162- 45. Were the study group meetings set up to your liking? Never 0% Partially 0% Sometimes I 5 . 54% Usually 64 . 44% Always l 3 . 33% (No response) 6. 66% 46. Did you feel overburdened with meetings? Never 46 . 66% Partially 4 . 44% Sometimes 39 . 99% Usually 4 . 44% Always 0% (No response) 4. 44% 47 . Do you feel that there were sufficient materials and resources with which to work. during your study? Never 4. 44% Partially 22 .22% Sometimes 19 . 98% Usually 39 .99% Always 8. 88% (No response) 4. 44% -163- 48. Was there sufficient communication between the study groups? Never 2 . 22% Partially 17. 76% Sometimes 33 . 33% Usually 33.33% Always 8 . 88% (No response) 4. 44% 49 . Was there sufficient resource people for this study? Never 6 . 66% Partially 11. 11% Sometimes 19 . 98% Usually 42 . 22% Always 1 5 . 54% (No response) 4 . 44% 50 . Were you interested in your particular problem area? Never 2 . 22% Partially 2 . 22% Sometimes 4 . 44% Usually 19 . 98% Always 64 . 38% (No response) 6. 66% -164- 51 . Did the college credit offered by MSU serve as a primary reason to work on this study? Yes 24 . 44% Undecided 1 5 . 54% No 53 . 33% (No response) 6. 66% 52 . Did a need for curriculum examination and improvement serve as a primary reason for making this study? Yes 59 . 99% Undecided 22 . 22% No 2 . 22% (No response) 15. 54% 53. Was the reason for making this study a combination of numbers 51 and 52? Yes 48 . 88% Undecided 4 . 44% No 33 . 33% (No response) 13. 33% 54. Do you feel that using college credit for this type of study is ef— fective? Yes 91 . 10% Undecided 2 . 22% No 0% (No response) 6. 66% -165- 55. Do you feel that giving a blanket "B" is the best way of assigning grades for this sort of study? Yes 57. 77% Undecided 24. 44% NO 11. 11% (No response) 6. 66% 56. Did the assignment of a "B" affect the attitude and effort with which you approached the study? Yes 13. 33% Undecided 6. 66% NO 68. 86% (No response) 1 1 . 11% If yes, how? 57. Are you now more cognizant of the problems that face education? Yes 9 l . 10% Undecided 0% No 2 . 22% (No response) 6. 66% 58 . Would you like to work on further studies like this? Yes 79 . 99% Undecided 8 . 88% No 2 . 22% (No response) 8. 88% 59 . Do you feel that more time should have been allowed so that fur- ther study could have been made? -166- Yes 35 . 55% Undecided 37 . 77% No 19 . 98% (No response) 6. 66% 60. If you had to do it over again, would you change your methods or techniques? Yes 37. 77% Undecided 37 . 77% No l 5. 54% (No response) 8. 88% Please add any additional comments you feel appropriate. -167- APPENDDC \E QUESTIONNAIRE B AND RESULTS (36 Respondents) EVALUTION This evaluation is an attempt to determine your feelings, reactions, and opinions about the cooperative curriculum improvement study that oc- curred last year and the improvements that evolved from it. There may be shortcomings in this evaluation form. However, I will appreciate your sincere and honest reaction to each question. Space has been provided after most questions to qualify your answers or to make additional comments . This evaluation is anonymous , but I should like to have you indi- cate the study group on which you worked. Kindly Me the appropriate number or letter opposite your reac- tion and, again, qualify or comment on the questions as you deem necessary. N_O_I_E_: When a question refers to recommended improvements, it means the improvements that evolved from the group work of all eight prob- lem areas, Instructional Materials Center, Study Habits, Evaluating and Reporting, Special Education, Grouping, Guidance and Counseling, Moral, spiritual, and Ethical Standards, and Communication Skills. Thank you, John R. Verduin, Ir. (Name of Study Group) -168- 1. Are you or are you not interested in the implementation of the recommended improvements that resulted from last year's study? Not at all 0% A little 2 . 77% Moderately 1 3 . 88% Greatly 52 . 78% Completely 30 . 56% 2 . Is there or is there not interest among staff members about the recommended improvements? None at all 0% A little 8 . 33% Fair amount 41. 66% Great 41 . 66% Complete 8 . 33% 3. Is there or is there not enthusiasm for working with these curric- ulum improvements? None at all 0% A little 2 . 77% Fair amount 44 . 44% Great 52 . 78% Complete 0% 4 . Are you or are you not anxious to work with the new improvements that pertain to you? Not at all 0% A little . 0% 6a. 7a. Moderately Greatly Completely In your opinion are other teachers anxious to work on the imple- mentation of recommended improvements? Not at all A little Moderately Greatly Completely Are you or are you not satisfied with the way the improvements are being implemented? Not at all A little Moderately Greatly Completely Please comment further on your degree of satisfaction if you wish. Have new facilities affected the implementation of the new improve- ments? Not at all A little Pair amount Greatly Completely Please comment further on Number 7 if necessary. -169- 11.11% 47.22% 41.66% 0% 5.55% 44. 44% 44. 44% 5.55% 0% 22.22% 36.11% 30.55% 11.11% 0% 8.33% 11.11% 77.76% 2.77% 9. 9a. 10. 10a. -170- Has or has not the implementation of improvements increased your interest in your teaching position? Not at all 0% A little 5. 55% Moderately 19 . 44% Quite a bit 44. 44% Greatly 30 . 55% Did your classroom procedure change as a result of this study? None at all 11.11% A little l9 . 44% Fair amount 47. 22% Greatly 13. 88% Completely 2 . 77% (No response) 5. 55% Please comment on the change mentioned in Number 9 if necessary. Are the recommended improvements accomplishing the goals of meeting the educational needs of students? Not at all 2 . 77% A little 8 . 33% Fair amount 47. 22% Greatly 27. 77% Completely 8 . 33% (No response) 5. 55% Please make additional comments on Number 10 if necessary. -171- 11 . Is more research and study needed on some of last year's problem areas? No 8 . 33% Yes 83 . 32 % No opinion 5. 55% (No response) 2 . 77% Qualify 12 . Have the recommended improvements suggested problems closely related to the areas of last year? No 5 . 55% Yes 66 . 66% No opinion 27. 77% Qualify 13. Have the recommended improvements suggested other problem areas to you? No 8 . 33% Yes 66 . 66% No opinion 25.00% Qualify 14. Have you found yourself wanting to explore other problem areas in the curriculum? No 13. 88% Yes 69.44% No opinion 13. 88% (No response) . 2 . 77% Qualify . ll! 5 -172- 15. Is additional research and study needed in other problem areas? No 0% Yes 72 . 22 % No opinion 22 . 22 % (No response) 5. 55% Qualify 16. If other problem areas are determined, would you be willing to work on committees to help investigate, research, and help solve the problems? No 0% Yes 86 . 10% No opinion 5. 55% (No response) 8. 33% Qualify 17. Will the recommended improvements result in improving learning experiences of students in the areas where you are teaching? Not at all 0% A little 2 . 77% Fair amount 33. 33% Greatly 50.00% Completely 2 . 7 7% (No response) 11. 11% 17a. If you would care to comment further on Number 17, please do so here . -l73- 18. Has the professional attitude of staff members altered as a result of the study last year? Not at all 5. 55% A little more pro- fessional 27 . 77% Moderately profes sional 36 . 11% Quite professional 25 . 00% Very professional 0% (No response) 5. 55% 19 . What was your attitude about using teacher involvement in decision making as a means to solving educational problems before last year's study occurred? Completely useless 0% Of little use 8 . 33% Moderately useful 2 7 . 77% Greatly useful 44 . 44% Completely useful 5 . 55% No opinion 1 1 . 11% (No response) 2 . 77% 20 . Has the cooperative curriculum improvement study of last year made you favor teacher involvement in decision making as a means of solving educational problems? Not at all 0% A little 0 % Moderately 2 2 . 2 2 % Greatly 63. 88% -174- Completely 8 . 33% (No response) 5. 55% 21 . Has interest in the educational program of the Cassopolis Public Schools changed among staff members as a result of the study of last year? Less interest 0% No change 0% A little more in- 19 . 44% terest Fair amount of interest 58 . 33% Great interest 19 . 44% (No response) 2 . 77% 22 . How has the professional staff members' relationship changed as a result of last year's study? Less cohesive 5. 55% No change 5. 55% Little more cohesive 27. 77% Moderately cohesive 38 . 88% Greatly cohesive 13 . 88% (No response) 8. 33% ‘23. Is there a change in your behavior as a professional person because of your work on last year's study? No change 22.22% Unfavorable change 2 . 77% -175- Favorable change 50 . 00% No opinion 16. 66% (No response) 8. 33% Qualify 24. How was rapport among the staff members influenced as a result of last year's study? Not at all 0% Improved 75 . 00% Became worse 2 . 77% No opinion 1 3 . 88% (No response) 8 . 33% Qualify 25. Has the relationship between the staff members and the administra- tion been influenced since last year's study and this year's work on implementation? Same as before 8. 33% Better than before 66. 66% Worse than before 2 . 77% No opinion 16 . 66% (No response) 5. 55% Qualify 26. Has cooperative group work been an effective way of getting agree- ment in curriculum change? No 0% Yes , 86.10% -176~ No opinion 8 . 33% (No response) 5. 55% Qualify 27. Has this study increased your interest in the problems of education? No 0% Yes 94 . 44% No opinion 0% (No response) 5. 55% Qualify 28. Has this study made you conscious of additional problem areas in the existing curriculum? No 0% Yes 9 1 . 65% No opinion 8 . 33% (No response) 0% Qualify 29. Has the relationship of the staff members changed as a result of last year' 5 study? Less friendly 2 . 77% No change 13.88% More friendly 61 . l l % No opinion 1 6 . 66% (No response) 5. 55% Qualify -177- 30 . Is the attitude of staff members more or less democratic in nature as a result of last year's study? Same ll . l 1% More , 66.66% Less 0% No opinion 22 .22% (No response) 0% Qualify 31 . Do you or do you not think that small group work has been an effec- tive way of getting curriculum improvement? No l 2 . 77% Yes 88 . 88% No opinion 8 . 33% (No response) 0% Qualify 32. Do you feel that there has been a change in your educational out- look as a result of last year's study? Favorable 72 . 22% Unfavorable 0% No change 22 .22% No opinion 2 . 77% (No response) 2 . 77% Qualify -178- 33. Can sufficient agreement be reached in small group work so that curriculum change will occur? No 11 . 11% Yes 72 .22% No opinion 11 . 11% (No response) 5. 55% L Qualify ; 34. Did you or did you not gain knowledge about educating young peo- ple as a result of last year's study? None at all 0% A little 16. 66% Fair amount 22 .22% Quite a bit 50 .00% Great amount 8. 33% (No response) 2 . 77% 34a. If you wish to comment further about Number 34, please do so here. 35. Did you or did you not gain insight about educating young people as a result of last year's study? None at all 0% A little 22 . 22% Fair amount 25.00% Quite a bit 41 . 66% Great amount 8. 33% (No response) 2 . 77% 35a. If you wish to comment further about Number 35, please do so here. -l79- 36. Would you or would you not care to do another year-long coopera- tive curriculum improvement study to improve other phases of the curriculum? No 16 . 66% Yes 61 . 11 % No opinion 8 . 33% (No response) 13. 88% Qualify 37. Do you or do you not feel that your ideas and persuasions about education have changed since your work on the study of last year? Not at all 8.33% A little 30 . 55% Fair amount. 44. 44% Greatly 16 . 66% Completely 0% (No response) 0% 37a. Please comment further on Number 37 if necessary. 38. Do you or do you not feel that your ideas about how curriculum im- provement takes place have changed since your work on the study of last year? Not at all 2 . 77% A little 19 . 44% Fair amount 44. 44% Greatly 22 . 22% Completely 5 . 55% (No response) _ 5. 55% I} ”A"? Mini '\ 1'- ”—- t {I'll-I'll \ -l80- 38a. If you wish to make further comments on Number 38, please do so here. 39 . Has your approach to teaching or your teaching techniques changed since the study of last year? Not at all 11.11% A little 25. 00% Fair amount 41 . 66% —.-" Greatly 13 . 88% g : Completely 0 % 2- A. (No response) 8. 33% 39a. If you would care to comment on the change, please do so here. 40 . Do you feel that your work on the study and the implementation of improvements has been a learning experience? Not at all 0% A little profitable 11 . 11% Moderately profit- able 33 . 3 3% Quite profitable 38. 88% Greatly profitable 1 3 . 88% (No response) 2 . 77% 40a. If you wish to comment further on Number 40 , please do so here. 41. Has your classroom procedure changed as a result of this study? Not at all 11.11% A little 22.22% Fair amount 41 . 66% 41a. 42. 42a. 43. 43a. 44. --181 - Greatly 13 . 88% Completely 2 . 77% (No response) 8 . 33% If you would care to comment on the change, please do so here. Did your work on the study of last year change your personal opinions and/ or biases regarding educating young people? Not at all 16. 66% A little 27 . 77% Fair amount 44 . 44% Greatly 5 . 55% Completely 0% (No response) 5. 55% If you would care to comment on the change, please do so here. Were you or were you not satisfied with the way your study group worked in probing ideas and developing recommendations for our- riculum improvement? Not at all 2 . 77% A little 13. 88% Moderately 36 . 11 % Greatly 27. 77% Completely l 1 . ll % (No response) 8. 33% If you would care to comment further on Number 43 , please do so here. Do you feel that curriculum improvement is necessary on a contin- uous basis? Yes 94.44% -182- No 2 . 77% No opinion 0% (No response) 2 . 77% 45. Do you or do you not think that curriculum improvement has oc- curred because of a change in your ideas and opinions about education? Not at all 16.66% A little 2 5 . 00% Fair amount 47. 22% Greatly 5 . 55% Completely 0% (No response) 5. 55% 46. Do you or do you not think that curriculum improvement has oc- curred because of the study of last year? Not at all 0% A little 1 3 . 88% Fair amount 55. 55% Greatly 25.00% Completely 2 . 77% (No response) 2 . 77% 47. Would you consider the curriculum study an educational exper— ience for you? No 0% Yes 97 . 2 3% No opinion 0 % - 183 - (No response) 2.77% Qualify Did you or did you not find it difficult to get agreement in your small group work? ‘u" m “It. -3_ 'k No 58 . 33% Yes 22 . 22 % No opinion 2 . 77% (No response) 16. 66% Qualify 49 . Are you or are you not interested in the curricular problems of other staff members outside your immediate field of instruction? No 0% Yes 86.10% No opinion 1 1 . 11% (No response) 2 . 77% Qualify 50 . Do you feel that small group work allows everyone an opportunity for decision making in curriculum change? No 8. 33% Yes 80 . 54% No opinion 5 . 55% (No response) 5. 55% Qualify -184- 51. Has this study caused you to become interested in phases of edu- cation other than your own? Not at all 0% A little 27 . 77% Moderately 30 . 55% Greatly 33 . 33% Completely 2 . 77% (No response) 5. 55% 52. Do you or do you not consider the study of last year to be an on- going activity this year? No 8 . 33% Yes 77 . 76% No opinion 5. 55% (No response) 8. 33% Qualify 53. Has this study caused you to become aware of other problems in your system? Not at all 0% A little 1 6. 66% Moderately 36 . 1 1 % Greatly 38 . 88% Completely 2 . 77% (No response) 5. 55% 53a. If you care to comment further on Number 53, please do so.here. 54. 54a. -185- Have the recommended improvements resulted in experimentation or systematic study in your classroom? None at all 11.11% A little 1 3 . 88% Moderate amount 44 . 44% Quite a bit 19 . 44% Great amount 0% (No response) 11. 11% If you would care to comment further on Number 54, please do here. 30 APPENDIX VI. QUESTIONNAIRE C AND RESULTS (41 Respondents) EVALUATION It has been about six months since the first questionnaire (October, 1960) was completed. Time has undoubtedly offered staff members the opportunity to work with and think about the many recommended improve- ments that evolved from the curriculum study of last year. Staff members may also have thought through the entire study and formulated judgments about what has taken place this year. One way to assess the curriculum study would be to look at present sentiment and individual perceptions of the curriculum as it exists today. It should also be significant to determ- ine the degree of change that has occurred in individuals as well as to de- termine the appropriateness and value of the change in the curriculum. The first part of the questionnaire is designed to determine the amount of satisfaction, value and appropriateness of some specific and some general recommendations . Some staff members have worked directly with some or all of the recommended changes, so they are in the best po- sition to judge this degree of satisfaction and value, and the appropriate- ness of changes. Some, however, may not be able to offer a judgment on certain questions. Therefore, answer only those questions about which you have some familiarity. -186- - 187 - The second part of this questionnaire is concerned with the degrees and direction of change and the perception of individuals as seen a year af- ter the original study. Specific directions appear at the beginning of Part II. Kindly circle the appropriate number or letter which is opposite your response. This again is anonymous, but please indicate the study group on which you participated l_a_st year. Thank you again . John R. Verduin, Ir. (Last year's study group) -188- PART I Many recommendations for change that evolved from last year's study are now a part of the curriculum. The interest now should be focused on the value and degree of satisfaction in the changes. This part of the questionnaire is concerned with a few of the many specific recommended changes that are now a part of the curriculum. Your opin- ion on the value of these changes and your degree of satisfaction with changes are requested here. Value in this case would be defined as useful, desirable and appropriate. 1. The Instructional Materials Centers were investigated, worked on, and developed during last year's study. They are now function- ing as part of the Cassopolis Schools. Of what value are the Instructional Materials Centers to you and the students of Cassopolis? Of no value 0% Of little value 2 . 43% Of moderate value 0% Of considerable value 39 .02% Of great value 56.09% Other - not familiar, no opinion, etc . 2 . 43% (No response) 0% How satisfied are you with the Instructional Materials Centers? Not at all 0% A little satisfied 0% Moderately satisfied 29 . 2 6% Greatly satisfied 58 . 53% Completely satisfied 7 . 31% Other - not familiar, no opinion , etc . 2 . 43% (No response) 2.43% -189- The Parent-Teacher Conferences for reporting pupil progress and related activities were recommended by a study group last year. They have been tried twice in one elementary school. Of what value are the Parent-Teacher Conferences for the Cassopolis Public Schools? Of no value 0% Of little value 0% Of moderate value 0% Of considerable value 14. 63% Of great value 19 . 51% Other — not familiar, no opinion, etc. 46.34% (No response) 19 . 51% How satisfied are you with the Parent—Teacher Conference? Not at all 0% A little satisfied 0% Moderately satisfied 2 . 43% Greatly satisfied 9 . 75% Completely satisfied 7 . 31% Other - not familiar, no opinion, etc. 48.78% (No response) 31.70% One study group of last year developed recommendations pertain- ing to a guidance department and its services. As a result, a full-time director of guidance, two half-time guidance people, a testing program, and many other services were initiated this year. Of what value is the guidance department and its services to the educational program of the Cassopolis Public Schools? Of no value 4 0 % -190- Of little value 7 . 31% Of moderate value 12 . 19% Of considerable value 29 . 2 6% Of great value 36 . 58% Other - not familiar, no opinion, etc . 9 . 75% (No response) 4. 87% How satisfied are you with the guidance department and its ser- vices? Not at all 2 . 43% A little satisfied 0% Moderately satisfied 43 . 90 % Completely satisfied 2 . 43% Greatly satisfied 29 .26% Other - not familiar, no opinion, etc . 12 . 19% (No response) 9 . 75% Many recommendations evolved from the communication skills study group of last year. Most of the recommendations for change are now a part of the curriculum. Of what value are the changes in the area of communication skills? Of no value 0% Of little value 0% Of moderate value 19 . 5 1% Of considerable value 29 . 2 6% Of great value 7 . 3 1% -191- Other - not familiar, no opinion, etc. 41.46% (No response) 2 . 43% Are you satisfied with the changes in the communication skills area? Not at all 0% A little satisfied 0% Moderately satisfied 24 . 39% Greatly satisfied 26. 82% Completely satisfied 2 . 43% Other - not familiar, no opinion, etc. 41 .46% (No response) 4. 87% PART II This section is concerned with the change in the staff members as seen about a year after the original study and six months after the comple- tion of the first questionnaire. Space has been provided at the end of each question for remarks which may be pertinent to your response. There is additional space at the end of the paper for any comments, general feel- ings, and perceptions of the respondent. Please comment freely. 1 . The results of the October questionnaire indicated that most staff members had become more conscious of additional problem areas in the existing curriculum as a result of last year's study. Do you now feel that your consciousness about educational problems has changed since October? The same 29 .26% More conscious of problems 65.85% Less conscious of problems 0% -192- No opinion 2 . 43% (No response) 2 . 43% Remarks: 2 . In October many staff members said that if other problem areas were identified... they would be willing to help investigate, re- search, and solve the problems. How is your willingness to work on problem areas at the present time? Same as in October 58. 53% More willing than in October 17.07% Less willing than in October 14. 63% No opinion 4 . 87% (No response) 4 . 87% Remarks: 3. Staff members indicated in October that the staff was a more co- hesive unit as a result of last year's study. How do you feel about the cohesiveness of the staff at the present time? Same as in October 24. 39% Better than in October 21 . 95% Worse than in October 31 . 70% No opinion 14 . 63% (No response) 7. 31% Remarks: 4. In October, most respondents stated that the staff had a more pro- fessional attitude as a result of last year's study. How do you perceive the professional attitude among staff members at the pres- ent time? Same as in October 46. 34% -193- Better than in October 26 . 82% Worse than in October 14. 63% No opinion 9 . 75% (No response) 2.43% Remarks: The results of the October questionnaire indicated that the attitude of staff members was more democratic as a result of last year's study. How do you perceive the democratic attitude of staff mem- bers at the present time? Same as in October 29.26% Better than in October 26. 82% Worse than in October 19 . 51% No opinion 14 . 63% (No response) 9 . 75% Remarks: In October, the questionnaire indicated that last year's study helped to increase the staff member's interest in the problems of education. How is your interest in all phases of education at the present time? 2 The same as in October 41.46% Increased since October 48. 78% Decreased since October 7. 31% No opinion 2 . 43% (No response) 0% Re mark 5: -194- The October questionnaire revealed that most of the staff members felt the study was a learning experience no only in the techniques of curriculum improvement, but that it affected classroom proced- ures and working with other professional people. Do you feel now that last year's study was an effective way of learning about the various processes of education? Not effective 0% A little effective 2 . 43% Moderately effective 31 . 70% Greatly effective 58 . 53% Completely effective 4 . 87% No opinion 0% (No response) 2 . 43% Remarks: From the October questionnaire, it was indicated that many of the staff members felt there had been a favorable change in their ideas, biases, and persuasions in regard to educating young people. What is your present feeling about the change in your ideas, biases, and persuasions? Change has been maintained since October 41 . 46% Changes have increased since October 41 . 46% Changes have decreased since October 4 . 87% No opinion 7 . 31% (No response) 4 . 87% Remarks: ‘g .1» w... ..--.'~t-z “(infightifififip 10. 11. -195- In October, many staff members stated that small group work had been an effective way of getting curriculum improvement and that sufficient agreement had been reached in small group work so that curriculum change will occur. At the present time, do you think that small group work is an effective way to get agreement for change in the curriculum? Not effective 2 . 43% A little effective 9 . 75% Moderately effective 39 . 02 % Greatly effective 41 . 46% Completely effective 2 . 43% No opinion 2 . 43% (No response) 2 . 43% Remarks: From the October questionnaire, it was indicated that many staff members felt that the study of last year was an one-going activity this year. At the present time do you think the study of last year is an on-going activity this year? No 21 .95% Yes 63.41% No opinion 4 . 87% (No response) 9 . 75% Remarks: You have had about a year to think through the study of last year. Do you now feel that effective curriculum improvement can be brought about by a curriculum study as was experienced last year? No 4.87% Yes 85.36% ~196- No opinion 4. 87% (No response) 4 . 87% Remarks: 12 . Is there or is there not an interest among staff members to continue on with some phase of curriculum examination and improvement at the present time? No interest 7 . 31% A little interest 17 . 07% Moderate interest 48 . 78% Great interest 19 . 51% Complete interest 0% No opinion 4 . 87% (No response) 2 . 43% Remarks: 13. Many of the staff members in October said that rapport among the staff had improved because of last year's study. What is your Opinion about the level of rapport among staff members at the present time? Same as in October 36. 58% Better than in October 21 . 95% Worse than in October 24. 93% No opinion 14 . 63% (No response) . 2 . 43% Remarks: -197- 14. What effect has the completion of the new buildings had on the curriculum work this year? No effect 4. 87% Speeded up the work 53 . 65% Slowed down the work 24 . 39% No opinion 7 . 31% (No response) 9.75% Remarks: General Comments: (one page on original copy) 9A.. .1 .3. 04.; ‘ I, g” .lv'ug Md".divflfi§‘.‘afiu' .‘I‘ BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Alcorn, Marvin D. and Linley, James M. (Editors). Issues in Curric- ulum Development, Yonkers—on Hudson, New York, World Book Company, 1959.. Anderson, Vernon E. Principles and Procedures of Curriculum Improve- ment, New York, The Ronald Press Company, 1956. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, N.E.A. , Action for Curriculum Improvement, 19 51 Yearboolg Washington, D. C. , National Education Association, 1951. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, N.E.A. , Research for Curriculum Improvement, 1957 Yearbook, Washington, D. C. , National Education Association, 19 57. Beauchamp, George A. Curriculum Theog, Wilmette, Illinois, The Kagg Press, 1961. Benne, Kenneth and Muntyan, Bozidar. Human Relations in Curriculum Change, New York, The Dryden Press, 1951. Boykin, L. L. "Let's Eliminate Confusion: What is Evaluation", Edu- ' cational Administration and Supervision, 43:115-21 , February, 1957. Butts, R. Freeman and Cremin, Lawrence A. A History of Education in American Cultujr_e_, New York, Henry Holt and Company, 1953. Caswell, Hollis L. and Associates. Curriculum Improvement in Public School Systems, New York, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1950. Chamberlin, Dean and Enid, Drought, N. E. , and Scott, W. E. Did They Succeed in College? , New York, Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1942. Conant, James B. The American High School Today, New York, McGraw- Hill Book Company, 1959 . Corey, Stephan M. , Action Research to Improve _Sfchool Practices, New York, Teachers College, Columbia University, 19 S3. -198- -199- Cremin, Lawrence A. The American Common School, New York, Teach- ers College, Columbia University, 1951 . Cronbach, Lee J. Educational Psychology, New York, Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1954. Derthick, Lawrence G. Review of the American Education SystemJ Washington, D. C. , United States Government, 1960. Ebaugh, A. Raymond. "An Evaluation of the Processes Used in a Curric- ulum Program," (Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Wayne State University, 1954) . Edelfelt, Roy A. " Two Views: What the High School Should Be" , Michi- gan EducationLJurnal, 37:562-63, May, 1960. Edmiston, V. "Evaluative Study in Relation to a Faculty" , Educational Administration and Supervision, 30:278-88, May, 1944. Foshay, Arthur W. , Wann, Kenneth D. , and Associates. Children"s Social Values: An Action Research Study, New York, Teachers College, Columbia University, 19 54. Frazier, Alexander (Editor), Learning More About LearnirLgJ Washington, D. C. , Association for Supervision and Curriculum Develop- ment, 19 59. Gold, Milton, J. "Group Process and the Curriculum", Educational Leadership, 9:230-34, January, 1952. Gold, Milton J. "The Workshop, The Group, and The Curriculum", Educational Leadership, 12:289-95, April, 1955. Hall, James A. "Organization for Curriculum Improvement" , Educational Leadership, 9:234-34, January, 1952. Henry, Nelson B. (Editor) In-Service Education, 56th Yearbook, Chi- cago, The National Society for the Study of Education, 1957. Herrick, Virgil E. " Evaluating Curriculum Improvement Programs", Educational Leadership, 8:234-39, January, 1951 . Koerner, James D. (Editor) The Case for Basic Education: A Program of Aims for Public Schools, Boston, Little, Brown and Company, 19 59 . -200- LaCoste, John Alden. "An Evaluation of the Curriculum of the District as a Basis for Suggested Revision and Additions in Both Scope and Sequence of Learning Experiences", (Unpub- lished Doctoral thesis, The University of Washington, 1954.) Lawler, Marcella Curriculum Consultants at Work, New York, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1958. Lewis, Arthur J. "Cooperative Self-Evaluation Can Aid Curriculum De- 1: velopment", Educational Leadership, 11:482-85, May, ' 1954. Mackenzie, Gordon N. and Corey, Stephen M. Instructional Leadership, New York, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1954. w ‘—._:.‘-‘-_'— ‘k 15 - I McNally, Harold J. , Passow, A. Harry, and Associates. Improving thefiQuality of Public School Progr_ams, New York, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1960. Miel, Alice and Associates. Cooperative Procedures in Learning, New York, Teachers College, Columbia University, 19 52 . Miel, Alice. Changing the Curriculum: A Social Process, New York, D. Appleton-Century Company, Inc. , 1946. Otrick, G. H . "Improvement Through Evaluation is the Key to Good Public School Relations" , Educational Administration and Supervision, 42:488-95, December, 19 56. Parten, Mildred. Surveys Jolls, and Samples: Practical Procedures, New York, Harper and Brothers, Publishers, 1950 . Payne, Stanley L. The Art of Askingguestions, Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 1954. Ready, Issac Epps. "An Evaluation of the Public School Program in Roanoke Rapids, North Carolina" , (Unpublished Doctoral thesis, New York University, 1949 .) Rickover, Hyman G. Education and Freedom, New York, E. P. Dutton and Company, 1959 . Saylor, J. Galen and Alexander, William M. Curriculum Plannipg for Teaching and Learning, New York, Rinehart and Company, Inc., 1954. 7.201 - Schorer, Mark and Others. Regirt of the San Francisco Curriculum Sur- vey Committee, San Francisco Unified School District, April 1 , 1960 . Sells, Saul B. , Loftus, John J. , and Hervert, Louis. " Evaluative Studies of the Activity Program in the New York City Public Schools: A Preliminary Report", Journal of Experimental Education, 9:310-22 , 1941 . Shane, Harold and McSwain, E. T. Evaluation and the Elementary Cur- riculum, New York, Henry Holt and Company, 19 58. Sharp, George. Curriculum Development as Re-education of the Teacher, New York, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1951 .. Smith, B. Othanel; Stanley, William O.; and Shores, J. Harlan. Funda- mentals of Curriculum Deve10pment, Yonkers—on-Hudson, New York, World Book Company, 1957. Stratemeyer, Florence; Forkner, Hamden L.; McKin, Margaret G.; and Passow, A. Harry. Developing a Curriculum for Modern Living, New York, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1957. Street, Scott Winfield. "A Description and Evaluation of Cooperative Curriculum Planning by Staff and Parents at the Andrew Jackson School and the Paul L. Best School, Ferndale School District, Michigan" , (Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Wayne State University, 1959 .) Taba, Hilda and Noel, E. Action Research: A Case Study, Washington, D. C. , Association for Supervision and Curriculum Develop- ment, 1957. Trump, J. Lloyd. Images of the Future - A New Approach to the Secon- darLSchool, Urbana, Illinois, NAASP Commission of the Experimental Study of the Utilization of the Staff in the Secondary School, 19 59. Wiles, Kimball and Patterson, Franklin. The High School We Need, Washington, D. C. , Association for Supervision and Cur— riculum Development, 19 59 . I. a} —202- Williams, Johnette King. "A Critical Analysis and Appraisal of the Processes of Curriculum Improvement and Their Develop- ment in the Negro Schools of Chattanooga, Tennessee" , (Unpublished Doctoral thesis, New York University, 1953.) Wilson, Herbert Blair. "The Evaluation of Social Action Education Programs" , (Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Stanford University, 1957.) if I. .. .Rfi. ' 6"“ T’- Tl‘f‘ KI )3; 55’: (I LN»? FURL" uuuui vi... Uh »A ”.V nrcuran sran UNIV. LIBRARIES VINI”HimVIWIWIWIINN[WW"WWW" 31293105751972