NASH}

LIBRARIES
.—:—

 

 

 

J.» -" ' a ‘.
. .. ~- -,
(“‘5‘ ~. I u .

RETURNING MATERIALS:
PIace in book drop to
remove this checkout from
your record. FINES will
be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below.

 

x0k'fil52‘

fiflngZUm
2800

.mNzawwt

 

 

A STUDY OF TWO TEAM TEACHERS ATTEMPTING CHANGE,
MASTERY LEARNING, IN THEIR
AMERICAN HISTORY CLASSROOM

An Ethnographic Study
by

Robert A. Skinner

AN ABSTRACT OF A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of -

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Teacher Education

1987

ABSTRACT

A STUDY OF TWO TEAM TEACHERS ATTEMPTING CHANGE,
MASTERY LEARNING, IN THEIR AMERICAN HISTORY CLASSROOM
By

Robert A. Skinner

The purpose of this study was to describe the environment of two
team teachers and their students in American History classes and to
understand the factors in the learning environment for implementing an
instructional change. To accomplish this, the study examined the key
factors affecting the two teachers' efforts to implement a change-
mastery learning--in five sections of American History. The secondary
school classroom, taught by two team teachers, offered a unique
laboratory for the study of change in the classroom.

To establish what was happening in the classroom, ethnographic
methods were utilized to observe the Change process being used by my
fellow teacher Ed Harvey and me. Qualitative research methods included
participant observation, field notes, surveys, interviews, and review of
the high school and course documents. The data provided rich description
of what was happening in our classroom and also an understanding of the
change process as well as the change itself—mastery learning.
Throughout our study, field work focused on meaningful patterns that

resulted from our implementation of mastery learning.

Robert A. Skinner

The results of the study suggest that change in the classroom is
extremely complex. The success of the change depends upon many
extrinsic and intrinsic factors. Mr. Harvey and I discovered that even
with careful planning for the implementation of mastery learning, many
uneXpected problems emerged. Our attitudes and beliefs were primary
factors in determining what we did in the classroom to bring about the
change and how we evaluated the success of the change.

The data collected in this ethnographic study of teacher change
portray the environment in which teachers and students work together in
an effort to bring about positive change in their world of education. The
study has implications for both improving instruction and for teacher
training. The Change—mastery learning--and the model for change both
have implications for educational researchers interested in teachers and

their role in improving education.

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to everyone who helped me complete this project. I
would like to thank the Essexville-Hampton School District for permitting
me to do the research in our Classes.

I am thankful above all to:

I. Dr.‘ John Chapman for encouraging me to begin and to

continue my graduate work.

2. Dr. Lois Bader for making my life as a student worthwhile.

3. Ed Harvey for committing himself to a project of this

magnitude.

4. Margaret Skinner for everything.

iv.

Preface

A school teacher who attempts an ethnographic study on change in
the classroom resembles the fellow standing in a swamp full of alligators.
Should the swamp be drained or should his problem be resolved some
other way? Implementing a change as extensive as mastery learning in
the classroom creates a serious problem for the teacher. What should be
done to effect sustained positive change? A definitive solution to the
problem did not emerge in this study; however, the researcher was
profoundly influenced by having done this study and his exPerience as a
researcher led him to reach the following conclusions:

1. Most of what is called mastery learning is nothing more than

 

sound teaching that dates back in history for many years.
We should quit fooling ourselves with jargon and use
effectively what is already common knowledge.

2. Self accountability is the primary benefit of the change--
mastery learning. Students and teachers will perform at a
higher level if they are held accountable. This study proved
to me that when there is no one to blame but oneself,
chances are greater that more perseverance will be exercised
by all concerned.

3. For change to occur in the classroom, the teacher's attitudes
and beliefs must change, and this will only happen after
teachers have experienced success implementing and using
the change. It is true that student cognitive and affective
outcomes must be apparent for successful change but just as

V.

4.

important and often overlooked is the necessity for the
change to be practical for the teacher. The change must be
feasible without causing any significant increase in teacher
time and effort. Thomas Guskey's A Model of the Process of

Teacher Change is simple but vitally important to the success

 

of any sustained change in the classroom. This research
certainly supports the model.

Ethnographic research is a valid method for studying the
classroom environment. However, one minor problem that I
had with this method involved my use of profanity in my field
notes to describe the environment. Then I had to decide
whether or not to use that salty language in writing The
Study. Some feel that the use of profanity is not scholarly,
so for that reason only the first letter of the profane word is
included in the final copy. I am glad that I didn't record in
my field notes what often crossed my mind or what was said
in the lounge. In our own defense, however, it was difficult
to take field notes and teach. I was often hurried and my
note-taking was frequently reactive rather than reflective.
It was a b _ _ _ _ to get it all down without writing in the

way I think.

We probably won't drain the swamp in the near future, but this

study does indicate that there are some changes that have potential for
making the swamp a better place to stand. Willie Loman spoke for me
and my occupation as well as for himself when he eXplained that "I hate

the job, but I love the territory."

vi.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ................................. viii
LIST OF FIGURES ................................. ix
CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ........ 1

II. SURVEY OF LITERATURE ...................... 7

III. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ................ 30

IV. THE STUDY ................................ 70

V. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH ..... I76

VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................... ' . .190
VIII. APPENDICES

A Sample of Curriculum Guide .................... 207

B Pilot Study ............................... 220

C Mastery Learning Implementation ................. 238

D Student Surveys and Samples ................... 241

E Samples of Student Materials ................... 274

F Classroom Photographs ....................... 303

vii.

Tables

Chapter 14 Test Results ...................... M2
Chapter 15 Test Results ....................... 146
Summative Test A and B Results .................. M7
Chapter 17 Test Results ....................... 160
Chapter 18 Test Results ............ . .......... 161
Chapter 19 Test Results ....................... 163
Final Exam Results .......................... 166, 167

viii.

Figures

A Model of the Process of Change ................. 51
The Essexville-Hampton Junior and Senior High ......... 72
Floor plan of Garber High School ................. 73
Floor plan of Rooms 24 and 25 . .................. 77
Scope and Sequence, K-12 Social Studies Curriculum ..... 80
Extrinsic and Intrinsic Change Influences ............ 109
Extrinsic Forces ........ . ..... . ....... . ..... 110
Bell Curve and Mastery Curve .............. . . . . .124

Implementing the Outcome Based Mastery Model:

American History ..................... - ....... 125

ix.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

In an era of educational reform, many critics are identifying what
is wrong with schools. The critics also have recommendations for solving
the problems of education. Almost all of the school reformers call for
superficial modifications that command public attention but don't do
anything to improve education for the students and teachers. Adler
(1982), Sizer (1984), Goodlad (1984, and Boyer (1983) have research based
plans for improving schools that would alter the structure of the school

significantly. The Nation at Risk (1983) and a Blueprint for Action

 

 

(1984) are government documents that have created public attention but
are not going to improve education a great deal. As a social studies
teacher, my concern is to find an educational tool that will work by
helping students learn what we as professionals have decided is essential
to an education. Waiting for expansive structural change or believing
that rising test scores are sufficient indicators of school improvement is
a serious mistake. What should be done now within the present school
framework to improve learning? As Pat Welsh (1986) has stated recently:
American education may be an impregnable fortress that will
always resist real change, but a local school system is not like
that. It is made up of identifiable individuals who will respond if
faced with facts, prevailed upon with common sense and provided
with good ideas. (p. 61)
A change that is possible and worthwhile should be carefully

considered by the personnel who will be using the idea in the local

district, i.e., the teachers. A widely considered change is mastery
learning. Much has been written about mastery learning, and hundreds of
schools have attempted to implement this learning process. The Mastery
Learning Model of Benjamin Bloom (1976) appears to be a realistic plan
to improve learning. Is mastery learning another educational fad, or is it
a teaching and learning model that teachers will adopt and use?

The four school districts in Bay County are, at one stage or
another, involved in the implementation of a mastery learning model that
Benjamin Bloom and others have been advocating for a number of years.
My concern is that vast amounts of money, time, and work are going to
be expended and no lasting, positive results may emerge. The normal,
conventional or traditional approach to teaching and learning that has
been used forever has obvious shortcomings, but is mastery learning an
answer to school improvement?

The purpose of this study is to describe and explain two team
teachers' classroom perspective on bringing about change in their
American History classroom. This study will contribute to our knowledge
relating to the effectiveness and practicability of implementing Bloom's
Mastery Learning Model (ML). Specifically, the areas of examination are
the implementation of mastery learning in American History classes by
two experienced secondary school social studies teachers. The process of
planning, implementing, and evaluating change will be analyzed. Can the
ML model be implemented, and does the use of this mode of teaching and
learning provide a beneficial environment for students and teachers? To
determine an answer to these questions, a number of subproblems must be

considered. The research proposes to analyze:

l. the two experienced team teachers (Harvey and Skinner)
implementing change in their classroom to determine if their
attitudes and beliefs can change and if they can bring about
change in their teaching procedures in their classroom.

2. the implementation of mastery learning in team taught
American History classes to determine if mastery learning is
a feasible method for teaching and learning history.

3. the cognitive achievement of students in American History
under mastery learning and the conventional method used by
Harvey and Skinner to determine if ML is worthwhile. Do
students learn more history?

4. the affective outcomes of the students under mastery
learning to determine if the outcomes are positive? Do the
students respond favorably to the change, ML?

What is learned can be used not only as an inquiry process to
study other Classroom settings, but also to develop a strategy for
improving teaching within the secondary school classroom through self—
analysis.

The purpose of any research should be a contribution to the

knowledge base of a particular field. To analyze, to explain, to

understand—each of these research goals is best pursued under the
fullest possible awareness of the research question, and to reach
the goal of full awareness the researcher can benefit most from an
interface with the holistic qualities of the educational setting.

Care must be taken to ground the research question in actual

classroom life and to refine it continually in the fieldwork. (Dodge,

1982, p. 6)

By experiencing the classroom firsthand, the researcher might
better analyze the complex social setting from the point of view of both
teachers and students. To focus on an educational setting such as a high
school American History class, ethnographic, i.e., participant observation
or field research, methods would appear to provide the researcher with
wide and rich ranges of descriptive information. The social context in
which teaching and learning take place is considered an important source
of explanation for classroom phenomena (Clark, 1979; Cooper, 1979;
Erickson et al., 1980; Florio, 1978; Yinger, 1978). Theory and methods of
fieldwork research allow the researcher to get closer to the subjects, not
only to explore proposed research questions but also to conceptualize
new questions and emergency hypotheses as they occur in the setting.
Schatzman and Strauss (1973) stressed that the researcher's task requires
distinctive and flexible strategies to maximize discovery in a situation.
They also concluded that the field method of research is like an umbrella
of activity beneath which any technique may be used for gaining the
desired information and for thinking about this information. Erickson
(1972) claimed the gth_no_s_ (in this case, the American History classroom)
is "any social network forming a corporate entity in which social
relations are regulated by custom" (p. 10). This dynamic social unit can
be described ethnographically with more accurate and systematic
descriptions of both the whole and integral parts. Erickson (1979)
contended that ethnography, because of its holism and because of its

cross—cultural perspective, provides an inquiry process by which we can

ask Open-ended questions that will result in new insights about schooling

in American society. He concluded that the unique cultural lenses of the

 

researcher using participant-observation techniques allow for new
vantage points for reflection.

This study will examine the interactions of teachers and students
within the social context of the American History classroom. Because
school today is a complex social institution operating within an even
more complex society, to research any facet of the school, a myriad of
external and internal forces must be considered. Ethnography, Erickson
(1979) contended, provides a rich, more systematic definition of the
society's whole and parts. What results is a more accurate definition of
what is happening.

For the study, the unit of analysis is the secondary school
American History classroom setting and actors in the setting, but only as
they Operate within the contextual setting of the process of bringing
about change—mastery learning. It is not enough to count desks or to
compare students' grades. The task demands analysis of the question in
terms of the values, needs, and attitudes of the participants in this
setting.

The development of a descriptive model of change is based on
grounded theory, which is uncovered from the data emerging from the
actual event (Glaser and Strauss, 1973). Evolving throughout the study,
these models of change can provide an effective tool for comparison with
other settings.

Because of the highly inductive nature of fieldwork, broad

conceptual questions the researcher brings into the field are focused and

redefined while in the field. From many successful fieldwork projects,

Florio, Erickson and Bushman (1980) concluded that fieldwork can best

address the following classes of closely linked research questions. These

qualitative questions have been adapted to the secondary school

American History classroom setting and the problem of bringing about

change in the classroom.

Research Questions
What is happening in the classroom to bring about change--
mastery learning?
What do the happenings mean to the teachers and students in
the classroom setting?
What do teachers and students have to know to function in
the setting?
How does the organization of what is happening in the
classroom—attempt to bring about change—relate to what is
happening in the wider social context of the setting? ..
How does the organization of what is happening in the
classroom differ from that found in different places and

times?

Identifying problems, asking questions related to the problems, and

collecting data through ethnography to answer the questions regarding

Change in the classroom are the aims of the researcher.

CHAPTER TWO

THEORY AND METHODS

In Chapter Two the research methodology is explored. The
appropriateness of participant observation, including strengths and
weaknesses related to research questions, is the focus of the Chapter.
The three parts of the chapter include (a) background of the study, (b)

research strategies, and (c) overview of the study.

Background of the Study

Over the past 25 years of secondary school teaching, I have been
involved in many changes among which have been the following:

1. modular scheduling

2. five and out

3. optional sixth hour

4. team teaching

5. language labs

6. educational television

7. group work, student centers

8. individualized instruction

9. use of a resource room

10. prescriptions for learning

11. student contracts

12. ability grouping

l3. mainstreaming

14. alternative education

15. career education

16. values clarification

17. inquiry approach

18. group counseling

l9. peer counseling

20. altered eligibility

21. elimination of the dress code

22. elimination of bells

23. fewer requirements-~more electives

24. mini courses

25. elimination of final exams

26. reverse shared-time

27. computer education

28. ITIP

29. and now . . . Mastery Learning

Most, if not all, of these innovations have failed to alter in a
positive manner education in secondary schools. There are always
discrepencies between what is said and what is done. After experiencing
so many failures, it is a wonder that teachers continue to attempt
change. My experience with change, I think, is typical of what many
teachers have experienced. Somehow research must be carried out in an
effort to understand the change process. Only when the participants
understand the process will sustained positive change occur.
Ethnographic studies have great potential in this area. Discovering how

teachers cope can guide our perspectives in pedagogical practices.

Research conducted with teachers rather than on teachers by using
ethnographic research became attractive to me when I was trying to
decide how I would make a contribution to the environment in which I
work. The process of learning in and through critical examination of
practice by school practitioners themselves could be a process by which
American schooling might be transformed in small ways that make a big
difference (Florio, 1978). This is my hope; I want to use the metaphor of
culture to explain what is happening in the classroom to begin to explain
some of the heretofore unaccountable problems of teachers. By
observing carefully the Change process, I want to determine whether or
how Specific individuals-«Ed Harvey and I--can charismatically or
bureaucratically affect a holistic cultural system generally devoted to
self-maintenance.

In The Review of Research in Social Studies Education 1976-1983,

 

Hahn notes that certain social studies programs were adopted because a
few individuals thought that they had merit. Innovations are not
accepted merely because of the findings of a needs assessment survey.
Perhaps social studies teachers can realize their potential empowerment
as advocates in the system. They are in a position to be able to
transform and transmit a social studies curriculum change through
informal as well a formal networks based on their ability to try it out,
actively advocate it, and coach its utilization at the classroom level.
Experience as a teacher has led me to recognize that I must, as an
educational researcher, adapt to holistic research methods to reach
understanding about the classroom in an effort to understand change in

the classroom.

Methods of Participation Observation

The secondary schools of the 19805 are experiencing severe
criticism and are under continual pressure to change and improve.
According to research, schools and classrooms have not changed
appreciably over the years. The weight of evidence and inference
contained in the National Science Foundation status reports and case
studies suggests strongly that our notions about the efficacy of
curriculum revision need restructuring. We have too long sought change
through curriculum revision without understanding the environmental
forces that press for stability and continuity by resisting the processes of
curriculum implementation. It seems time to ask why things occur as
they do in social science classrooms. For this reason, to answer any
specific questions about teachers, classrooms, and change in secondary
schools, the answers are best derived from the actual cultural context
within which the questions are framed.

The use of participation observation research (also fieldwork,
ethnography, and descriptive research) as a holistic approach to
understand schooling involves not only face to face encounters but also
an understanding of the broader context in which the event is rooted.
Because the process of teaching and learning operates within the social
context of a larger educational setting, ethnographic methodology with
participant observation fieldwork techniques can provide a rich
descriptive picture of what is happening in terms of change within the
setting. The fieldwork approach would focus on meaningful behavior in

the classroom. Qualitative research techniques can address the question

10

of what is happening in the classroom in a holistic manner, allowing a
systematic documentation of reality within a local setting. But the
relevance of such a study would come from understanding of change in
terms of the actors and implications that may emerge related to the
teachers' and students' attitudes, values, and needs. Further planning for
innovation could best be based upon clear understanding of local
meanings for the people involved in the secondary school classroom.

Lutz (1981) stated that ethnography although not statistical, is
empirical. The classroom may be observed as a cultural system by using
anthropological theory to guide data collection and ultimately to provide

meaning and understanding. Lutz suggested that a representative model-

 

the students' and teachers' interpretation of events and meaning of

events—is interfaced with the operational model—the researcher's view

 

of the events--to produce a final explanatory model.

 

Participation Observation Approach

 

Participant observation is concerned with (a) describing the
process of interpretation used by the subject in constructing his world
and (b) inferring and explaining in abstract terms the perspective or
definition of the situation the subject uses to construct his world. In
order to do this, the researcher adheres to the following process:

While the researcher brings with him some theoretical framework

related to the study, the researcher avoids prestructuring his

inquiry to prove or disprove some relationships of variables.

Instead, hypotheses are generated and tested on a day to day basis

while doing fieldwork and the explanation develops from

11

descriptive data. In the classroom, extensive notes are taken on
the actions and statements of those under study. In some
systematic fashion, the notes are read, organized, and analyzed
tentatively. As the researcher remains in the classroom over a
long period of time, patterns are noted and the frequency of the
patterns is recorded. In some cases, the patterns may be the basis
for further investigation. In such cases, remaining in the
classroom is helpful until the hypotheses are investigated. The
researcher develops concepts to explain the phenomena of most
importance. As the inquiry proceeds, the researcher makes sense
of all these concepts by developing working models to explain the

social world under study. (Janesick, 1977, p. 45)

Value of Participation Observation

 

First-hand observation is important for it allows the researcher to
ground theory in reality (Yinger, 1978). If observable patterns emerge,
theory may be applied and tested. Borrowed from the social sciences,
participant observation research methods have proved to be the best form
of research for understanding the complex cultural frames that we
construct. Through participant observation, a rich, more accurate
description of the classroom environment can be constructed, analyzed,
and, it is hoped, better understood. The participant observer rigorously
adheres to a number of guidelines and can insure that what he says is
indeed a reasonable picture of the social setting. Homans has outlined

six indices of subject adequacy. These indices are the check of over

12

empathizing. Homan in Janesick (1977) suggests the following to produce

a worthwhile participant observation study:

1.

Time—the more time an individual spends with a group, the
more likely it is that he will obtain an accurate
interpretation of the social meaning its members live by.
Place—the closer the observer works geographically to the
people he studies, the more accurate should be his
interpretations.

Social circumstances-«the more varied the status
opportunities within which the observer can relate to his
subjects, and the more varied the activities he witnesses, the
more likely the observer's interpretations will be true.
Language—the more familiar the observer is with the
language of his subjects, the more accurate should be his
interpretations.

Intimacy-the greater the degree of intimacy the observer
achieves with his subjects, the more accurate will be his
interpretations.

Consensus of confirmation in the contextuthe more the
observer confirms the expressive meanings of the community,
either directly or indirectly, the more accurate will be his

interpretations of them. (p. 48)

It should be remembered that the participant observer comes into

the social setting which already has a meaning apart from that assigned

by the person entering the setting. For example, in this study, there is

some meaning in our classroom apart from that assigned by me--the

13

14

researcher. The job of the teacher who becomes a participant observer
is to uncover that meaning. He facilitates that process by adhering to
the indices that Homan suggests. By doing so, the participant observer

increases the value of his study.

Research StratggLeE

Ethnographics recreate for the reader the shared beliefs,
practices, artifacts, folk knowledge, and behaviors of some groups of
people. Participant observation is the primary technique used by
ethnographers to gain access to data (Goetz, Lecompte, 1984). In this
mode the investigator lives as much as possible with and in the same
manner as the individuals being investigated. Researchers take part in
the daily activities of people, reconstructing their interactions and
activities in field notes taken on the spot or as soon as possible after the
occurrence.

Addressing the questions of change—mastery learning--in the
classroom is a complex task for the process may have multiple meanings
for the many actors involved in the process of change. The study of the
implementation of a change—mastery learning-~in the classroom of two
secondary school American history teachers involved the following
methods. By using these methods the meaning of change could be defined

and redefined.

Participant Observation
According to the logic of the method, the researcher must not

only witness and describe the events under study, but by conducting

15

himself properly come to participate in the creation and sustenance of
those events. Ideally he will share the perspective of the participants
and come to understand the events just as they do. Results will be
descriptive and interpretation of the events, from the point of view of
those who create and sustain them (Cusick, 1983). In most ethnographic
studies, the participant observer researcher enters an environment (e.g.,
a classroom) and observes and does some participating. The researcher
enters the environment hoping to find out what is happening, but first
must learn the roles that are being played by the actors. In other words,
the researcher must learn a role as a participant. In this ethnographic
study, I was already a participant as the classroom teacher, but I had to
learn how to be an ethnographic researcher. In an effort to minimize the
problem of empathy and bias regarding teaching, Ed Harvey, another
history teacher, was also a participant observer. As field researchers we
observed and participated in five American History classes in which we
implemented master learning. Four of the sections were team taught,
first and fifth hour; Ed taught sixth hour alone. The amount of actual
participation varied depending upon our lesson plans and the nature of
the class. Gathering information by participating in the implementing of
a major change in the classroom such as mastery learning from beginning
to end, i.e. planning, preparation, the actual class, and evaluation
provided a comprehensive picture of the change process. It was
necessary continuously to discuss with ourselves and the students the

pros and cons of what and how implementation was proceeding.

16

Field Notes/Recording and Analysis of Verbal and Nonverbal Behavior

Because the systematic recording of events is essential in
ethnographic research, detailed field notes of the classroom sessions were
recorded by both myself and Ed Harvey, the other teacher, from on-site
observation. The notes provided a rich, detailed description of what was
happening. The fact that two viewpoints of the same occurrences in the
classroom were recorded made it possible to compare notes to guard
against my biases prevailing in the study. Goetz and Lecompte (1984),
Cusick (1983), and others have outlined strategies for watching, recording
data and coding events. Observational notes were helpful in the ongoing
analysis and hypotheses development. Recording and analysis of the
various aspects of the implementation of mastery learning was essential
for the recognition of patterns and key linkages concerning the change
model. The multiple perspectives of teachers and students allow multiple
comparison of the phenomena observed. Gordon (1969) as cited in Dodge
(1982) suggested that the nature of the problem under investigation
demands a multimethod approach because the various methods give totally
different kinds of information that can supplement each other, because
we do not know how to interpret some of the information unless we can
couple it with other information, or because we need a cross-check to
verify the validity of our observations. (p. 17)

For this reason, the study included multiple observations of Ed and
me teaching a total of five sections during three class periods. We also
taught five other sections of social studies classes during the period of

the study but did not implement mastery learning in them. It is

17

important to consider the total day for the teachers when implementing
any change.

Erickson (1971) and Glazer (1975) suggested that thorough field
notes can reveal situational frames as perceived by teachers so that
better sense can be made of the flow of events. Photographs were used
to frame various interactive patterns, and regular recorded informal
interview sessions between Ed and me provided a detailed record of

classroom events for later analysis.

Interview

To understand and to analyze what was happening in the classroom
regarding the changes being implemented, interview was an important
means to clarify or to reinforce the data gathered by observation.
Formal and informal interviewing of the teacher informant-—Ed-was an
ongoing process. We talked before, during, and after classroom sessions.
The more formal interview sessions occurred after school. Students in
the classroom were interviewed before the implementation of mastery
learning and during the implementation. Most‘ of the oral interviewing
was informal and some of the information was recorded in our field
notes. Both formal and informal interviews provided useful information
to support and/or refute working hypotheses and allowed for exploration
and modification of the implementation of mastery learning.

Florio (1978) demonstrated the value of developing a working
relationship with an informant. Development of trust and adherence to
ethical practices were paramount. While information gathered by the

interviews with students was valuable for understanding the event from

18

the points of view of varied participants, the information could be biased
or, worse yet, unreliable. Care was taken to guard against this (e.g.,
main reason for informal interviews); however, students did know that
they were talking with teachers. In an effort to overcome this problem,

many students were interviewed throughout the observation period.

Enumeration and Sample

 

The use of surveys was a logical instrument to reach all of our
students. The qualitative questions emerged from the strategies used to
teach American History before the implementation of mastery learning
and the changes brought about in the classroom that resulted from the
implementation of mastery learning.

Surveys were given to all American History students at the end of
the first semester before the change was explained or implemented. The
students in the mastery learning classes were again surveyed at the end
of the second semester after they had experienced one semester of
mastery learning. Direct, repeated, quantifiable observations of behavior
and focus were recorded during several classroom sessions. Frequent
testing of the students of a formative and summative nature was carried
out. Grades of students were obtained from the first semester and
during and at the end of the second semester. Comparative grade data
within and between classes were used to support contentions that the
change—master learning-—may have had an effect on student performance.

Ethnographic descriptions, although qualitative, may be reinforced
by relevant quantitative data obtained as questions arise from

observation. While becoming familiar with mastery learning and its

19

related problems of implementation in our American History classrooms, it
was necessary to define the basic ecology of the studynthe community,
the school, the department, the teachers, the students, and the physical
setting. Schatzman and Strauss (1974) suggested starting at the top of
the organization, obtaining a historical perspective, and establishing
subsites for observation.

The process of data collection is controlled by the emerging
environmental changes that occur as a result of the impact of
implementation of mastery learning. The use of local concepts may be
relevant to describing the whole. Theoretical metaphors than can be
developed to account for relevant behavior, and grounded theory can be

developed through comparative analysis. (Dodge, 1982)

Overview of the Study

This study traces the evolving relationship of two team teachers
and their efforts to bring about a significant change in their classroom.
The change implemented and analyzed is mastery learning. Ed Harvey
and I have taught together for 19 years. We have never given much
thought to the way we work; we just do it every day. For once, with
the implementation of mastery learning, we gave careful consideration to
the change process in our classrooms. I was the primary participant
observer researcher and Ed was the teacher informant. To reduce bias
on my part, Ed also took daily field notes and we talked on a daily basis
about our observations. This unique relationship provides for an

alternate way of thinking about change in the classroom in that the

20

participants in the study reveal their biases which are important to their
teaching and learning environments.

Originally I had intended to study the implementation of mastery
learning and compare the results of mastery learning to the results that
we acquired from our normal teaching methods. In preparing for the
quantitative study, I conducted a pilot study in my three law classes to
discover the problems of implementing a new program. As a result of the
pilot study, I concluded that a comparative study of mastery and
non-mastery teaching would not contribute anything significant to the
education profession. The short study suggested the need to conduct a
more in-depth study of what really happens to teachers and students
when change occurs in their environment. There are ethical,
epistemological, and pragmatic reasons why it is worthwhile and
important to adopt such a collegial ethnographic method of research in
classrooms. This method treats teacher and children not as objects of
study but as active subjects of great interest and importance (Florio and
Walsh, 1978). The study then carried out the research in context of
discovery-the joint enterprise of the participant observer-me--and the
observer participant-Ed. The disciplined reflection on change made us
more sensitive to the dynamics of everyday classroom life.

The study was conducted at a small (enrollment, 720 students)
suburban secondary school. Ed Harvey's willingness to work with me on
the study made the research possible. The major focus of the study was
how teachers implement change—e.g., mastery learning--in their
classroom. Superficial observations would define our teaching as team

teaching, but in reality it is turn teaching in which voluntary patterns of

21

cooperation exist. These patterns of cooperation make this study
possible.

The field study was conducted for the entire second semester,
January through June, 1987. Originally the study was going to last for
the first ten week marking period of the semester. For reasons explained
in the study an extension of the research was carried out. The
observations were conducted in several classrooms.

1. First period American History; Ed and I team/turn taught the

class.

2. Fifth period American History; same as first period.

3. Sixth period American History; Ed taught alone and I was

primarily an observer.
All of the class sessions were attended except when one of us had a
substitute. In addition, we had to teach the rest of our daily assignment
which really makes for a better understanding of the ordinary ways of
making sense of the methods used to get through everyday life in the
classroom.

Planning, implementing, and evaluating mastery learning in our
classes and observing this process ethnographically was time consuming
and demanding but made possible by the collegial relationship that had
existed for years between Ed and me.

The students were willing to share attitudes and feelings about
classroom changes. Interviews were conducted with students, but even
more valuable were the informal personal comments that students made
to one another and to us. Participation was no problem; objective

observation was more difficult and constant checks on my biases had to

22

be addressed. This was accomplished to some extent through frequent
dialogue with Ed and Jack Flood, the head of the Social Studies
Department.

A general student survey on student attitudes concerning American
History class was prepared and given to students after they had taken
one semester of American History. A similar survey was given after the
students were exposed to mastery learning. Other periodic surveys and
tests were given throughout the semester to help us evaluate the change
in classroom procedure. Cognitive and affective data were collected.
The data that were collected included quantitative and qualitative
information.

The field notes consisted of:

1. Our classroom experiences implementing changeumastery

learning.

2. Our conversations, formal and informal, about what we had

done or intended to do.

3. Our formal and informal interviews with students.

The filed notes were recorded in Teacher Plan Books and were equal to
approximately 320 pages of 8 1/2 by 11 inch pages.

Data were also collected from surveys. The students in all of our
American History classes were surveyed at the beginning of the semester.
They were given an 8-item survey and a 25-item survey in an effort to
determine their attitudes and beliefs concerning American History class
before the research began. The students who experienced mastery
learning were surveyed at the end of the first marking period to discover

how they felt about mastery learning and again at the end of the

23

semester. These surveys consisted of objective questions and essay
questions providing the researcher with approximately 400 pages of
information.

Test results were used to evaluate the students' progress
throughout the semester. Ten chapter tests were given and two unit
tests were given. Each of the tests had two forms (A and B) for both
formative and summative evaluation of the students' performance under
mastery learning. The tests consisted of 30 to 40 items and were
constructed for correcting and feedback.

Other sources of data collection included:

1. informal interviews with teachers and administrators

2. homework, quizzes, and subjective evaluation of students

3. grade books

4. student essays on history topics (2 sets)

5. teacher surveys

6. notes from Outcome Based Education workshops

7. informal interviews with teachers and administrators in the

Bay City School District
Analysis of the data was ongoing and modifications in the process of
mastery learning were effected. During the summer of 1987 an in-depth
analysis of all data was carried out in an effort to better understand our

environment. \

Strengths and Weaknesses of Fieldwork
Some ethnographers ignore criticism and appeal to conventional

wisdom; they do so because the goals of ethnography are descriptive and

24

general rather than verificative. Others address threats to credibility
because if they do not, their research is weakened. I believe that it is
essential to consider critical issues relevant to the study because the
ultimate quality of the data is dependent upon the researcher's awareness
of the study's limitations.

There are two areas of concern regarding ethnographic credibility
according to Goetz and Lecompte (1984). One is external reliability;
would an independent researcher discover the same thing using the same
constructs? There are five major problem areas of external reliability
that need to be addressed when doing an ethnographic study.

1. Researcher status position. The participant observer must

clearly identify roles of the actors involved in the study.

2. Informant choices. The researcher must understand that no
one informer can provide universal information and a careful
description must be made of those who provided information.

3. Social situations and conditions. The researcher must
understand and explain the social context in which the data
is collected.

4. Analytic constructs and premises. The researcher must
establish constructs by defining the units of analysis. Clear
definitions are essential.

5. Methods of data collection and analysis. The researcher
must explain the scope and development of the study so that
the study's potential for replication is clear to the reader.

The second area of concern is the internal reliability of the study;

 

within the study, do multiple observers agree? There needs to be

25

agreement on the description or composition of events. The researcher
can reduce the threat to internal reliability by

1. Using low-inference descriptions, raw data, as the principle
evidence for assessing validity.

2. Using multiple researchers which guards against one
individual's biases or the problem of empathy on the part of
the participant observer.

3. Using participant research assistants to assist in the
evaluation of the data.

4. Using peers to examine the data.

By dealing with the external and internal problem areas of an
ethnographic study, validity may be a major strength of ethnography.
Strength will be derived from dealing with the potential weaknesses.
Problems must be identified, literature searched, data collection methods
planned and implemented. Disconfirming as well as confirming evidence
must be sought. This can be accomplished if Homan's indices, cited
earlier, are followed. The question to overcome ethnographic criticism
is: Do the data accurately indicate what happened in the setting?
Placing oneself in the social setting over time, working closely in the
same place, in varied social circumstances, with the language of the
subjects, developing a degree of intimacy and confirming the meanings of
the subject, the researcher is able to keep a check on the validity of the
descriptions. Cusick (1979) discusses this notion: I

As one lives close to a situation, his description and explanation

of it have a first-person quality which other methodologies lack.

As he continues to live close to and moves deeper into the

26

situation, his perceptions have a validity that is simply
unapproachable by any so-called standardized methods. (p. 232)
The seeming weaknesses of ethnographic studies in reality becomes
the major strength of fieldwork if the problem areas are understood and
minimized as much as possible. Yinger (1978) describes effectively this
strength of participant observation:
Since grounded theory is concerned with theoretical
conceptualization that fits real situations and works when put to
use, the primary source of data for this type of investigation
should be real social encounters. Thus, fieldwork becomes a
fundamental basis for theory development. For conceptual
categories and hypotheses which have meaning for real situations,
they [_s_i_c_] must be based on qualitative descriptions of behavior in
natural situations. This does not rule out qualitative data from
other sources such as questionnaires, interviews, written
documents, and other research reports and writings. In applying
this method of theory building to research on teaching, the central
concern should be that the theorizing is grounded in situations
that are representative of real teaching and learning settings.
Better yet, theorizing should be grounded in actual teaching and
learning situations. The fact that grounded theory is closely tied
to field data means that the kinds of theories emerging from these
efforts will be somewhat specific and limited in scope. (p. 13)
I believe that the major criticisms of this study will be that as the
teacher I am too close and biased in regard to the environment in which

the research is being conducted. My response is that great care was

27

taken to minimize this problem by acknowledging the problem from the
outset and checking my bias whenever possible. However, it is my
Opinion that my biases as well as Ed's are important to the study. The
attitudes and beliefs of the practitioners are vital to understanding the
classroom.

Ultimately, this dissertation attempts to develop a clear picture of
how change takes place and to develop a way in which individual

classroom teachers might implement change in their classroom.

The Evolution of a Participant Observer

From the age of five I have been a participant in the school
environment as a student, as a teacher and recently as a teacher/student.
My beliefs as a practitioner and student have certainly had a profound
influence on my research.

The tendency to prejudge based upon past experience was an
initial problem that I had. However, as the implementation of mastery
learning proceeded, it became easier to become more objective about
what was going on in the classroom. The theory and practical
application of mastery learning is so different from what we had done in
the past, it soon became natural to allow questions to evolve from the
patterns observed while in the field. Because I had been properly warned
about the questionable role that I had as teacher and researcher, my
original questions concerning mastery learning were replaced by questions
emerging from observation on the change process.

The original research questions of my field study generally focused

on the effectiveness of mastery learning as a teaching and learning model

28

in the secondary school classroom. The research data that can be
accumulated to answer the questions were quantitative and to me quite
meaningless because it seemed that manipulation of the results would be
rather easy. After many hours of participant observation and after
spending a considerable amount of time collecting test result data, the
true meaning of the research became apparent to me. Questions of
context and perception became key elements to what the research was
really about--change. The emerging hypotheses proposed that both the
nature and management of sustained change in the classroom are the
result of a change in the teachers' attitudes and beliefs that evolve from
the practical implementation of a proposed change. The success of the
change it seemed was dependent upon many factors that became
necessary to explore further. There wasn't to be a simple answer of yes
or no regarding mastery learning.

Methods for my research ranged from observational notes to test
result data. But through time in the field, the focus of the observation
became multifaceted by using various tools to chart actual changes
within the setting. This allowed the formulation of ideas concerning
change and the development of patterns, and descriptions of the change
process in the classroom environment. The recurrent patterns and
effects of mastery learning provided me with samples of change data for
later analysis. The actual questions for the formal or informal interviews
and surveys evolved through focusing on the students' behavior and our
behavior in the classroom. These data clarified, reinforced, and refuted

what I had been observing in the classroom. As the implementation of

29

mastery learning progressed, a myriad of new problems demanded
answers.

Even as I observed phenomena in the classroom, the phenomena
changed. The change seemed to be an ever-occurring process. Change
builds upon change creating a system of feedback mechanics, resulting in
adjustments in the change itself.

To understand the change process of the complex classroom
environment, I focused on Ed's and my roles and how we went about
implementing the changes in the classroom, especially how we acted and
reacted to student feedback on the changes that were implemented. The
key linkage describes the change in terms of the teachers' and students'
needs and personalities. The implementation of a change can take many
forms and the success or failure of the change is dependent upon the
total environment.

The descriptive data and emerging theoretical framework bring
definition to the change process in the classroom; my task, as participant
observer, in conjunction with Ed and the students, was to make sense of

the changing environment as mastery earning was implemented.

30

CHAPTER THREE

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Both educational and social science literature include many studies
that shed light on the dynamics of change in the classroom. In this
chapter, three areas of literature are reviewed: first are the studies
related to high school teaching, including research on the role of the
teacher in the social studies classroom and more specific research on
Change in classroom instruction; second, literature is examined that
focuses on the change that is implemented in this study-—mastery
learning; third, the epistemological foundations for the study, including

related ethnographic studies of classrooms, are discussed.

Secondary School Teaching

 

The decades of the 19605,, 19705, and early 19805 produced
volumes of research and rhetoric related to high school teaching (Conant,
1959; Jackson, 1968; Lortie, 1975; Boyer, 1983; Goodlad, 1984; Ravitch,
1985; Welsh, 1986). Clearly what was happening and what should be
happening in American secondary education were reflected in research.
In re5ponse to a challenging milieu, educational researchers proposed a
redefinition of both the role of secondary education and the role of the
teacher in the learning process.

In a review of recent literature, Brophy (1980) concluded that the

decade of the 19705, rather than focusing on curriculum as was common

31

in the 19605, more appropriately focused on the teacher as the unit of
analysis. He suggested that research conducted under more natural
conditions produced the following generalizable conclusions:

1. Teachers do make a difference.

2. Teacher expectation and role definition are important.

3. Effective teachers engage students in- meaningful tasks.

4. Students need direct instruction from the teacher.

5. Different contexts call for different teacher behavior.

Conditions of Teaching

 

Two million teachers across America would love to believe in and
be able to apply these conclusions to their classrooms. However, the
conditions of teaching make it difficult to teach in the way the research
indicates is most effective. Conclusions on teaching and change in
teaching always need to be placed in the perspective of the context in
which they are to be used (Eisner, 1979). Teaching is a complex art that
is not possible to define behaviorally when attempts to say that a person
is or is not teaching is always an act of interpretation (Jackson, 1986).

Although we may not be able to define teaching clearly, we can
consider the conditions of teaching which have a direct impact upon what
is done in the classroom. Many teachers are frustrated, unhappy, burned
out; they hate kids and believe that they are out to get us because of a
system that has tolerated steadily deteriorating working conditions,
discouraged the best young minds from entering, imposed burdensome
bureaucratic procedures and failed to recognize or appreciate the

extraordinary commitment and dedication of most of the high school

32

teachers (Boyer, 1983). Teachers are troubled by low salaries, but they
are also dissatisfied with bureaucratic interference, lack of autonomy,
and lack of administrative support. Reliable studies have shown that the
brightest quit the profession first while the least gifted are the last to
go.

One of the major factors contributing to the low morale of
teachers and one that is seldom mentioned in the media hype about the
teachers' crisis is the kids they have to teach. Students frequently find
what they do in the classroom boring, or say, "I can't read it."

Teachers often feel that they are losing out to the distractions
of electronic media, part-time jobs, and an affluent, seductive youth
culture. In 1980, teachers ranked fourth when students were asked to
list important influences; peers, parents, media and teachers was the
order (Welsh, 1986). Most teachers feel that their work is negatively
influenced by students who are unmotivated (Boyer, 1983). W. C. Sellar
exaggerated only slightly when he said, "For every person wishing to
teach, there are thirty not wanting to be taught." (Peter, 1977, p. 490)

The uncertainty of teaching is another condition of teaching that
is infrequently discussed but is a factor that influences teaching:

What teacher who has ever lived has not made errors? Who does

not expect to make more? Who among us is perfectly clear when

it comes to knowing what he is about? Whose confidence doesn't
waver from time to time? Who hasn't caught himself secretly
yearning for an expert or a boss to tell him exactly what to do to
lighten the burden of decision making and responsibility? Who,

finally, has never felt the dull ache of boredom at the thought of

33

returning to the same classroom day after day and year after

year? (Jackson, 1986, p. 48)

When is a teacher's job done? Teachers are not sure they they
can make all students learn or make any difference. The lack of time
and the feeling of not having finished one's work are perennial problems
experienced by teachers. The problem of uncertainty is best described

by Fullan (1982) in The Meaning of Educational Change:

 

Uncertainty and guilt about whether what they (teachers) are
doing has any value, the isolated joys of reaching individual
students, the lack of reflexivity on either individual or a
collective basis, the perennial frustration of lack of time and
unwarranted interruptions, the complexities of the teaching act in

a crowded classroom with management problems interacting with

one or more students while others are waiting, and the

unpredictability of a well-planned lesson falling flat, an unplanned

session connecting, and so on . . . . (p. 110)

To be sure, there is a gap between the stated ideal and the
acceptance of considerably less. Sooner or later all teachers must
compromise (Sizer, 1984). No teacher ever does what he or she thinks is
best. We do the best we can in the circumstances. What a teacher
thinks is a good idea from the outside turns out to be impossible in the
classroom (Lieberman and Miller, 1984).

Isolation is also a determining factor in what a teacher does in the
classroom. Too often the teacher is in his own little world with nobody
helping anybody else. While performing a myriad of duties, teachers

spend little time in the company of other adults (Boyer, 1983). In an

34

atmosphere where the work is often uninteresting, unrelenting and
unrewarding, contact with peers is not possible because of the time
schedule of teachers. From 8:00 am. to 3:00 p.m. the bells and time
regulate the day. Whoever heard of a profession in which a person can't
even use the bathroom when he has to?

Age and personal problems also enter into the world of teaching.
The average age of teachers in Bay County is 44 years and 8 months;
these teachers average 17.8 years' experience. With the retirement law
in Michigan encouraging teachers to get out after 30 years, it is not
surprising that teachers aren't overly responsive to change. Many have
worked for years and have established a way of teaching that does not
include doing much school work after hours. At Garber High School the
Social Studies Department is comprised of four men all over 40 years of

age. In School Teacher (1975) describing older men (those over 40)

 

Lortie states:

Teaching occupies a definite niche within their life, but they

normally have strong outside interests . . . One feature of life

involvement of male teachers over 40 is especially interesting . . .

almost all had either a strong avocational interest outside teaching

or an additional source of employment income. (p. 95)

This is true of all four social studies teachers at Garber.

Closely related to the importance of age as a condition of
teaching is the wide range of personal problems that teachers must deal
with as a part of their job. Everyone has family problems, but not every
employee has to confront 30 young faces every morning at 8:15

regardless of how he feels. For example, in our little high school alone

35

this past semester the following occurrences impacted the work of the
staff: four teachers had major surgery and were out of work for
extended periods of time, one teacher died unexpectedly, another teacher
was arrested on criminal sexual conduct charges, a student committed
suicide. These sorts of situations make it difficult to concentrate on the
task of teaching much less do all of the things necessary to be a good
teacher.

The conditions of teaching would lead one to believe that it is an
unrewarding profession. The description of the conditions of teaching is
negative intentionally; since this research is dealing with change in the
classroom, it does not seem to be necessary to itemize in detail the
conditions of teaching that are positive because it is essentially the
commonly understood ideal of teaching that is rewarding. Teachers
connect major reward with classroom events. Psychic rewards are the
major source of work satisfaction. It is of great importance to teachers
to have reached their students (Lortie, 1975). Teachers certainly do like
people and the subject matter that they teach; they love their summer
vacations. However, it does seem that the negative conditions of
teaching outweigh the positive. The isolation, status panic, uncertainty,
limited power and nonrecognition all cause estrangement (Ashton and

Webb, 1986).

The Act of Teaching

 

The conditions of teaching influence the act of teaching. The
irony of the situation is that although much is said about teaching

conditions that adversely affect teaching and learning, teachers in

36

general feel, we're fine; don't rock the boat (Welsh, 1986). When
teachers are asked what changes they would like to see, according to
Lortie (1975) they respond by saying that they want more of the same.
In general teachers do not want any shift from the pedagogical past.
They want more elbow-room to practice their craft.

What then are the fundamentals of teaching that are so
entrenched in thought and practice? What is this thing called teaching
that is so resistant to change?

As I was being introduced one day to a group of people at the
Michigan Department of Education, one of the individuals asked me what
I did for a living. I replied, "Oh, I'm just a teacher." The person who
was introducing me joked about my response, and I have been irritated
about my answer ever since. JUST A TEACHER--what a put-down!
Teaching is more art than science; to discover what teaching is, one must
go beyond simplistic and mechanistic. Teaching is an art guided by
educational values, personal needs, and by a variety of beliefs and
generalizations that the teachers hold to be true (Eisner, 1979).
Furthermore, teaching can be regarded as art in four senses:

1. As a source of aesthetic experience.

2. As dependent on the perception and control of qualities.

3. As a heuristic activity.

4. As seeking emergent ends. (Eisner, 1979, p. 155)

Teachers need to develop certain fundamentals to be accomplished
at the artistry of teaching. Teachers seldom ponder the significance of
the thousands of fleeting events that combine to form the routine of the

classroom (Jackson, 1968). In High School (1983) Boyer states:

 

37

Much of what the teacher must do to succeed in teaching is a
matter of common senseucareful planning for each lesson,
educational goals for each day's work, pacing and timing, love of
subject matter, and respect for students. Clarity in procedures,
discipline in carrying through, and the careful measurement of
accomplishments are essential elements in the formula for success.

(p. 149)

Barnes and Edwards in Lieberman and Miller (1984) have identified
what are generally agreed upon as effective teaching behaviors. These
behaviors, when established, provide for an environment for learning.
The behaviors are:

1. Learning environment (warm and supportive).

2. Classroom management (well organized).

3. Class instruction (well oriented).

4. Productive use of time (brisk pacing).

The specific behaviors of teaching that are important to
accomplish the four basic behaviors are gaining student attention, clear
presentation, practice of new skills, monitoring, providing feedback,
assigning individual seat-work, evaluating student responses. All of this
must be accomplished in a crowded setting; a typical high school teacher
must manage 25 to 40 students each class period. He or she must
maintain control, teach a prescribed course of study, engage the
students, pay attention to student differences and determine through
tests and questioning how well the students have learned the material
presented. Few teachers are brilliant lecturers or exceptionally skilled

in give-and-take discussions. Almost all find it difficult to sustain a high

38

level of performance five or six periods every day. JUST A TEACHER--
who could accomplish all these tasks? Given the heavy load and tyranny
of time, it is hardly surprising that most teachers fall back on fairly
standard procedures--lecturing, question and answer recitation, seat-work
and homework. After all, these are the practices that teachers are
familiar with from their own school days, and they demand little
imagination (Boyer, 1983). The teacher in the process of making teaching
and learning decisions must keep in mind the large number of apathetic
students who are bored. Even when the teacher acts like a broadcasting
station, it is doubtful that all pupils are tuned in. A more plausible
model is that the teacher is communicating with different individuals for
brief and sporadic periods of time and that these pupils are responding to
other stimulus the rest of the time (Jackson, 1968).

We could go on ad infinitum explaining or attempting to define
teaching. We can, of course, continue to probe the mystery of what
happens when teachers and students meet, but in the end we must
conclude that teaching can never be reduced to a formula. Teachers are
artists, some outstanding, some terrible, but most just plain hardworking
craftsmen who are given much criticism and advice but few rewards.
The problem in teaching boils down to the fact that the educational
establishment has been emphasizing effective classroom management. But
stressing efficiency reduces teachers to machines that are already
overwhelmed by the complexity of their jobs. Certainly what goes on in
most classrooms could be improved upon. When Fullan (1982) can state
that based upon observations, 80% of teaching activities are directed at

the learning of specific facts through teacher talk rather than skill

39

development, we need some changes. We need some changes when it is
said about teachers that:
They're dispensers of information, which is regurgitated by the
students in the form of one-word answers on a ditto sheet. They
either don't know or they don't care that they're boring the hell
out of kids. (Welsh, 1986, p. 122)
One must teach to know what teaching is. Only the individual in
front of the class on a day-to-day and year-to-year basis can fully

comprehend what the job is all about.

Teaching Social Studies (American History)

 

The most commonly taught course taken by high school students is

American History (Case Studies in Science Education, 1978). This fact

 

along with the information from the Research on Student Attitude

 

Toward Social Studies indicates that most students in the United States

 

at all grade levels find social studies-history to be one of the least
interesting, most irrelevant subjects in the school curriculum
(Shaughnessy and Haladyna, 1985). Shaver, Davis and Helburn (1979) state
that in the social studies:
1. The teacher is key to what social studies will be for the
student.
2. The new materials are not being used in social studies
classes.
3. The text is the dominant instructional tool in social studies

classes.

40

4. The social studies curriculum is mostly history and

government.

5. The instruction is mostly group controlled recitation and

lecture in social studies classes.

6. The knowing of information is considered to be important in

social studies classes.

7. The teachers in social studies tend to rely on external

motivation such as good grades.

8. The social studies do not inspire student interest.

9. Affective goals are not explicit parts of the curriculum in

social studies.

10. The teacher is the key to attitude. (p. 695)

Social studies educators might profitably invest in research that
systematically examines these teacher-controlled forces that seemingly
shape the attitudes of our children toward social studies. The area
seems to be in disarray. Not much is known about the state of social
studies or more specifically, American History, in the secondary schools.

In The Troubled Crusade (1983) Ravitch states that, "The educational

 

data collection is today so inadequate that no one can accurately say
how history is taught, how well it is taught, what is taught, or what is
learned" (p. 114). Secondary school social studies curricula are in a state
of curriculum anarchy. Each school district is doing its own thing.
Ravitch continues, ". . . or as one Berkeley professor put it to me a few
years ago, 'They (students) have no furniture in their minds. You can

assume nothing in the way of prior knowledge'" (p. 115).

41

A dismal picture of American history teaching is illustrated by
much of the writing on the subject. Students are apathetic, teachers
only teach facts by the traditional methods and curriculum is inconsistent
with what the goals of the social studies are. Much of the literature
about curriculum reform alludes to the unwillingness of teachers to

pursue the aims of those on campuses and in agencies (Case Studies in

 

Science Educatiog 1979). This to some extent is because in social
studies the commonly stated goals of instruction and therefore the
dimensions of the instructional setting are more complex than for some
areas of the curriculum (Travers, 1973). Smith's case study of Fall
Rivers, Colorado, (1978) accurately describes social studies teachers'
priorities when the writer says:

Teachers must juggle the eXpectations of the invisible, distant, and

mostly impersonal profession of science education and the local,

powerful and relentless demands of teaching. The two roles do
not necessarily conflict; but the latter usually overpowers and

preempts the former. (p. 55)

Although there are many concerns related to the teaching of
history, reviewers have found that complaints about student motivation
were the single most enduring frustration for teachers. Students
indicated that social studies is easier than math, science, or English, and
thus it was regarded differently from other subjects. Two related
students' perspectives on social studies are that grades are more
important than learning and that the social studies are not articulated to

future occupation. (Shaughnessy and Haladyna, 1985)

42

Shaver, Davis and Helburn (1979) report that the elementary and
secondary school teachers are not much aware of educational research
nor are they much influenced by research findings, largely because the
findings usually have little practical importance for the classroom.

Ethnography is relatively new to research on teaching social
studies (Travers, 1973). Ethnographics of schooling have much to say to
social studies teachers as they work and live with students. The need of
social studies teachers to find means simultaneously to control the class,
present academic knowledge, and maintain a positive classroom climate
can be studied as a whole:

Ethnographic research can add to our knowledge of why and how

curricular change occurs or does not by describing in detail what

is happening on sites where social studies curriculum reforms are
introduced. There is a common pattern of discovery among these
ethnographic studies of change. In each case the ethnographers go
into the field to record and describe what happens as participants
on the site incorporate directives from the central government or
office and begin to use the new curriculum guides, rationale, and
materials such as textbooks. However, often late in the study or
when a follow-up study is done, a different cultural pattern
emerges; the ethnogaphers discover that the beliefs, values, and
teaching/learning modes have stayed pretty much the same despite
the overt documental changes. (Stanley, p. 227)
Social studies (American history) practitioners and ethnographers

face the same problems in that both are trying to make sense out of

'Il

43

groups of people whose practices or beliefs frequently seem puzzling,

irrational or nonsensical to others.

Change in Teaching and a Model for Change

 

In recent years there have been many studies on the effectiveness
of teachers and particularly the characteristics and behavior of teachers
that relate to effective instruction. There has been minimal research,
however, on the effects upon teachers of change in their instructional
environment. Little is known about what happens to teachers when they
adopt more effective instructional practices, and as a result are able to
have more of their students learn very well (Guskey, 1984). What
actually happens in the classroom as a result of a new mandate, new
program, or any change that is implemented for whatever reason? The
area where there is pressure to change is the area we have known the
least about-the teacher and instruction (Lieberman and Miller, 1984).

Most innovations as now advanced are shaped by the producing
system rather than by the people who must use them. Teachers must be
understood and respected if the change is going to be implemented and
sustained. Teachers must be viewed as part of the solution, not the
problem (Boyer, 1983). School improvement begins with teachers;
however, most literature of change comes from policy perspective or
from a managerial perspective (Lieberman and Miller, 1984). Most
teachers really want to do both the right and best things. They don't
because they don't know how or because they were never stimulated to
discover the use of existing information. Most teachers receive little

encouragement to seek and inquire or grow professionally. Too many

[I

a

44

work in districts dedicated to safely maintaining existing programs, a
no-wave philosophy always seems to prevail (Champlin, 1987). On the
other hand, change in recent years has often been characterized by
intense frenzy. Innovativeness is valued for its own sake and not for
what the Change has accomplished. Sound planning and implementation is
too often a secondary consideration. Change in the classroom then
frequently is impossible because of the no-wave attitudes or because of
the haphazard way that the change is handled.

In many of the change models and studies implementation of the
innovation is assumed once the adoption decision has been made, or it is
included with little description in the adoption/adaption phase. The use
of innovation in the classroom is either attended to briefly or left to
other documents (Hall and Loucks, 1977).

Teachers need to be involved in the incipiency of any change
process. Most literature on change in schools places emphasis on the
role of the teacher. The behavioral sciences and the insightful reporters
of successful change projects stressed certain factors that needed to be
managed singly and in concert if change was to occur and be successful.
The seven critical factors that teachers must be a part of are:

1. Creation of supporting and an enabling environment.

2. Presence of clear and attainable goals that are publicized

and constantly in use.

3. Presence of a change agent who can effectively break the

equilibrium holding the organization in place.

4. The use of a systematic, planned process that is open and

subject to alteration.

45

5. The involvement of the community as an active partner.

6. The presence of effective leadership with vision and a sense
of mission and courage.

7. A commitment to renewal that disallows compromising for
lesser attainments and aspires to higher levels of
sophistication. (Champlin, 1987, p. 51)

As a part of these seven factors, the teachers need to scrutinize
what they are doing and make changes when they find that making such
changes can enhance their teaching repertoire. The process of change
then becomes local problem solving in which a problem is defined, the
problem is researched, alternative solutions considered, best solution
decided upon, solution explained to other teachers and the new policy
implemented (Lieberman and Miller, 1984). Without the active
participation of teachers from the outset, it does not seem that
successful change is likely. The lack of teacher participation on
curriculum reform is probably one of the main reasons that research is
not encouraging or kind to the would-be change agents (Stanley, 1985).

The new social studies in the early 19605 was to be the revolution

 

in teaching the social studies. Traditional methods were criticized. As a
response to the great debate on on the quality of education in the
mid-19505 and to Sputnick in 1957, the federal government spent large
sums of money to improve math, science, and social studies. The
proposed change in social studies was meant to alter the traditional
history, geography, and government curriculum to an inquiry approach.
The 19605 and 19705 appear to be an era of change in the social studies,

but they really were not. The new social studies did not catch on. The

46

National Science Foundation conducted a triangular study based upon an
extensive literature survey, a vocational survey of offerings and
practices, and a set of actual field sites. Ponder (1977) as cited in
Shaver (1979) concluded from this study that not much Change had
occurred. Stretting and Sundeen (1969) noted that traditional teacher
discussion based textbook assignments was still the dominant instructional
mode in social studies. Shaver (1979) claims that there has been a lack
of change in social studies instruction over the years that was
unexpected. When one reviews the literature on change in the teaching
of American history, it is clear that reform occurred especially during
the 19605 with the birth of the new social studies, but it was pretty
much stillborn according to Barr (1973). What research there is in the
area indicates that American history is about what it has always been.
The reasons that change has not occurred in social studies, especially
American history, is that the teams that developed the new social studies
were overloaded with social scientists and underloaded with classroom
teachers who could have contributed their expertise. The study done by

the National Science Foundation on The Status of Pre-College Social

 

Studies Educational Practices in U.S. Schools (1979) indicates that
teachers are fiercely independent and any decision made to affect the
quality of instruction must have the teacher'suthe individual teacher's--
active involvement (Wright, 1979). The fierce independence of teachers
is best exemplified in the words of an experienced teacher I know who
said, "I listened to all the 'facts', innovations, etc., and then went my

own way in trying to teach the best I could."

47

The picture that emerges from literature on change in social
studies classrooms is one of minimal impact by curriculum revision due to
the extraordinary social complexity of schools and systems. Past reform
can be seen functionally as an effort to produce the kind of social
studies curriculum that scholars at the university level believed we
needed. Because scholars and district level administrators have had little
direct contact with teachers, the proposed changes were doomed to
failure.

Fullan (1982) claims that innovation is not something that can be
added on as an afterthought to be covered in a workshop or through
volunteer work after hours. It must be Jart and parcel of the job. If
change in education consists of an ongoing social process, and if teachers
are central, that process must be a regular part of their daily work.
Educational change depends on what teachers do and thinkuit's as simple
and complex as that. Strategies of change which ignore the working
conditions of teachers are bound to fail. Lieberman and Miller (1984) list
a number of understandings about the process of school improvement.
Most of them are implications for teachers in the process. They state
that there can be no question that continuous participation by teachers is
a critical component in school improvement. The process of
implementation—that is, actually doing something different in the
classroom and finding it to be more effective—is the critical process for
teachers.

In theory, the purpose of educational change is presumably to help
schools accomplish their goals more effectively by replacing some

programs or practices with better ones. However, the implementation of

48

educational change involves change in practice. Educational change is
not a single entity. It is to a certain extent multidimensional (Fullan,
1982). There are at least three components or dimensions at stake in
implementing any new program or policy: (a) the possible use of new or
revised materials, (b) the possible use of new teaching approaches, and
(c) the possible alterations of beliefs. All three are necessary. They
represent the means of achieving a particular goal or set of goals.
Significant educational change, according to Fullan (1982), consists of
changes in beliefs, teaching style, and materials which can only come
about through a process of personal development in a context of
socialization. For teachers to adopt a change three criteria must be
met. This practicality ethic amounts to a way for teachers to evaluate
and assess change (Doyle and Ponder, 1977-78). The criteria that must
be met includes positive answers to the following questions:

1. Does the change potentially address a need? Will students be
interested? Will they learn?

2. How clear is the change in terms of what the teacher will
have to do?

3. How will it affect the teacher personally in terms of time,
energy, new skills, sense of excitement and competence, and
interference with existing priorities?

Because of the failure of staff development programs to meet the
above criteria, the history of change in classrooms is characterized by
disorder, conflict and criticism. Nearly every major work on the topic of
change has emphasized the failings of these efforts. In recent years

advances in research on effective schools and the variables that

49

contribute to instructional effectiveness have increased attention on the
need for high quality teacher development programs (e.g., Bloom, 1976;
Brophy, 1979; McDonald and Elias, 1976). However, relatively few such
programs have been forthcoming. It could be hypothesized that the
majority of programs fail because they do not take into account two
critical factors: What motivates teachers to engage in staff
development, and the process by which change in teaching typically takes
place.

Another critical factor that many staff development programs fail
to consider is related to the process of teacher change. Staff
development efforts frequently attempts to first initiate some form of
change in beliefs, attitudes, and perceptions of teachers (Fullan, 1982;
Harris, 1980). For example, many staff developers try to change
teachers' beliefs about certain aspects of teaching or about the
desirability of a particular curriculum or an instructional innovation.
They presume that such a change in teachers' beliefs and attitudes will
lead to specific changes in their classroom behaviors and practices which,
in turn, will result in improved student learning. Guskey (1986) claims
that this perspective on teacher change evolved largely from a model
developed by early change theorists such as Lewin (1935), who derived
many of his ideas about affective change from psychotherapeutic models.
But current research on teacher change indicates that the assumptions of
this model may be inaccurate, at least under the special conditions of
staff development for experienced teachers. An alternative model that
re-examines the process of teacher change under these special conditions

is necessary, therefore, to guide the development of more effective staff

50

development programs so that effective change in the classroom will be
implemented and sustained. The alternative model, subscribed to in this
study, could accomplish the three major outcomes of staff development-
change in the classroom practices of teachers, change in their beliefs,
and attitudes, and change in the learning outcomes of students. Of
particular importance to this change process and to efforts to facilitate
change, however, is the order of occurrence of these outcomes. In what
sequence do these outcomes most frequently occur? In the past, programs
have been based upon the assumption that change in teachers' beliefs
and attitudes comes first and such programs typically emphasize the
importance of gaining some sense of commitment from teachers
eventually. That is, activities are planned specifically to alter the
beliefs and attitudes of teachers prior to the implementation of a new
program or innovation. Certainly it is important for teachers to be
involved from the beginning so that the program or innovation might be a
bit more palatable, but teacher participation in planning and development
of new programs seldom results in significant attitude change or strong
commitment from the majority of teachers (Jones and Hayes, 1980).

The alternative model, used in this study, suggests a different
temporal sequence among the three major outcomes of staff development.
According to this model, significant change in teachers' beliefs and
attitudes is likely to take place only a_ft_e_r_ changes in student learning
outcomes are evidenced (Guskey, 1986). The model posits that significant
Change in the beliefs and attitudes of teachers is contingent on their
gaining evidence of change in the learning outcomes of their students.

(Figure 1)

51

This model is not necessarily novel. Its simplicity is not meant to
impugn the complexity of the issues involved. Rather the model is
offered primarily as an ordered framework by which to better understand

trends that appear to typify the dynamics of the teacher change process.

Figure l. A Model of the Process of Change.

A Model of the Process of Teacher Chang

 

 

 

 

 

 

Staff Change in Change in Change in

development teachers' student teachers'
classroom learning attitudes
practices outcomes beliefs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The perspective on teacher change presented in this model is
predicated on the idea that change is a learning process for teachers
that is developmental and primarily experientially based. The
instructional practices most veteran teachers employ are determined and
fashioned to a large extent by their experience in the classroom (Lortie,
1975). Evidence of improvement—positive change—in the learning
outcomes of students generally precedes and may be a prerequisite to
significant change in the beliefs and attitudes of most teachers. Only
when a change occurs in teachers' beliefs and attitudes will sustained

improvement in classroom practice be a reality.

52

Mastery Learning

Mastery learning is an instructional approach that has been
discussed and implemented in various schools during the last twenty
years. In this brief review of literature, an attempt will be made to
define this approach and to discuss its strengths and weaknesses. What
are the implications of mastery learning for social studies?

Mastery learning is an instructional process that is being
implemented in hundreds of schools across the country. At the University
of San Francisco, the University of Chicago and in the state of New
York, mastery learning advocates have received national, even inter-
national, recognition. At the present, all of the schools in Bay County,
the county in which I teach, are in the process of implementing mastery
learning which they call Outcome Based Education. The
Essexville-Hampton School District is going to jump on the bandwagon of
mastery learning. The research involving mastery learning should help me
determine whether or not I should jump on the wagon. As a history
teacher, it is only natural for me to look at what has preceded this
panacea then try to determine if mastery learning is a process that I can
use and encourage others to use in an effort to improve education in
Essexville and Bay City.

It seems that educators are constantly laying claim to the
discovery of revolutionary teaching and learning techniques that are
going to vastly improve schools. Philosophers, professors, administrators
and teachers often discover or rediscover approaches to schooling and
then try to implement the idea in the school structure that has been the

basis for American education since before the Civil War. The graded

53

school system has been, and will be the framework within which we must
almost all continue to work.

Many sound educational ideas have failed simply because they
would not fit the framework. One area of educational reform has been
the implementation of various types of individualized instruction.
Individual instruction was really the basis for the one room school that
was standard before it was replaced by the graded school system in the
mid-18005. In the early 19005, self-paced unit approaches were
experimented with. Burke in Santa Barbara, California, and Washburne in
Winnetka, Illinois, developed plans for individualized instruction that had
vanished by the depression years and World War II.

Reinvention of modes of individualized instruction occurred
in the 19505 and 19605. To some extent the development was the
result of B. F. Skinner's work with technological impulse machines.

His work The Science of Learning and the Art of Teaching led to

 

programmed instruction. Keller's Personalized System of

 

Instruction (PSI) used some of Skinner's ideas (1968). Other

programs included Postlethwait's Audio-Tutorial Approach (1961),

 

Individually Prescribed Instruction (IPI) (1964), and Individually

 

 

Guided Education (IGE) (1965). These programs were all somewhat

 

accepted, especially IGE. By 1976 there were approximately 3,000
IGE elementary and middle schools. The major barrier to these
programs being more widely used was that to implement them, it
was necessary to bring about change in school organization.

(Encyclopedia of Educational ResearchJ 1984, p. 852)

 

5.4!». \4h-4

 

54

During the 19605, John B. Carroll's Model for School Learning

 

(1963) would be one of the major models to influence the development of
the particular form of individualized instruction, mastery learning, called
O.B.E. In an article in 1968 entitled "Mastery Learning", Benjamin Bloom
would draw his conclusions from Carroll's model. These conclusions, by
the way, were essentially the same conclusions made by Washburne in
1925. It is true that all of the methods of individualized instruction have
something to offer educators, at least in some limited way. Confusion
often results when discussing the various systems. Mastery learning is
£o_t_ individualized or personalized in the sense that students learn
independently of their classmates (however this is possible). Bloom's
Mastery Learning Model is typically group based teacher paced approach
to instruction in which students learn, for the most part, cooperatively
with their classmates. Mastery learning is designed for use in the typical
classroom situation where instructional time is relatively fixed and a
teacher has charge of 25 or more students (Guskey, 1985). What we are
concerned with is, how does Bloom use Carroll's model for group based
instruction, and what are the strengths and weaknesses of mastery
learning for secondary teachers?
Mastery Model Strategy

Mastery learning is a philosophy about teaching. Mastery is the
name of a model used to structure curricula. It asserts that under
appropriate instructional conditions, virtually all students can and will
learn well most of what they are taught. The roots of this philosophy go

back several hundred years, but only in roughly the last decade have

nlit‘-' ‘5 <‘ll).l."'

55

teaching strategies been developed whereby it might be feasibly
implemented in the classroom.

Learning for Mastery is a group based, teacher paced approach to
mastery instruction wherein students learn, for the most part,
cooperatively with their classmates (Block and Burns, 1976).

The Theoretical Basis for ML

 

The theoretical basis for the strategy was provided by a
conceptual model of school learning developed by John B. Carroll (1963).
Carroll's model proposed that if each student were allowed the time
needed to learn the subject to some criterion level, and if he spent the
necessary time to do this, then he would probably attain that level. In
other words, the degree of school learning will depend on the time the
student actually spent in learning in relation to the time he needed to
spend. The complete Carroll's model can be represented with its

relevant components as follows:

 

 

Degree of School F = lime Spent
Learning Time Needed
F = Perseverance or Opportunities
Aptitude + Quality of Instruction
x IQ)

In brief, the degree of school learning of a given subject depended
on the student's perseverance or his opportunity to learn, relative to his
aptitude for the subject, the quality of his instruction, and his ability to
understand this instruction.

Benjamin Bloom (1968) transformed this conceptual model of school
learning into a working model for mastery learning by the following logic.
If aptitude were predictive of the time a student would require to learn,

it would be possible to fix the degree of school learning expected of

56

each student at some criterion level of mastery performance. Then, by

attending to the variables under teacher control in Carroll's model, such

as the opportunity to learn and the quality of instruction, the teacher

should be able to ensure that students attain this level.

In accordance with this logic, Bloom suggested the outline for the

original ML strategy. Some of the basic features of this outline have

been summarized by McNeil (1969):

l.

The learner must understand the nature of the task he is to
learn and the procedure he is to follow in learning it.
Formulation of specific instructional objectives for the
learning task is important.

It is useful to break a course or subject into small units of
learning and to test at the end of each unit of learning.

The teacher should provide feedback on the learner's
particular errors and difficulties after each test.

The teacher must find ways to alter the time some
individuals need to learn.

It may be profitable to provide alternative learning
opportunities.

Student effort is increased when small groups of two or three
pupils meet regularly for as long as an hour to review their
test results and to help one another overcome the

difficulties. (p. 308)

Block and Anderson (1975) have refined and elaborated upon this outline

so as to make Bloom's ideas more systematic and practical.

57

How is mastery learning going to accomplish what the advocates of

mastery learning say it will accomplish? Following is an abbreviated

outline of the philosophical premises of mastery learning, the operational

essentials of mastery learning, and the four sets of principles that are

critical to establish a mastery learning program.

The philosophical premises are:

1.

Almost all students are capable of achieving excellence in

learning the essentials of formal schooling.

Success influences self-concept; self-concept influences

learning and behavior.

The instructional process can be changed to improve learning.

Schools can maximize the learning conditions for all students

by:

A.

93!“???

E“

Establishing a school climate which continually affirms
the worth and diversity of all students.

Specifying expected learning outcomes.

Expecting all to perform at high levels.

Ensuring opportunities for personal success.

Varying time for learning (needs and complexity).

Staff and students taking responsibility.

Continually assessing learning.

Certifying educational progress whenever mastery is

assessed and validated.

The following Operational essentials would implement a mastery

learning system based upon the stated philosophy. No school system

exists which fully embodies all of these components (Spady, 1981).

58

1. Publicly determined and stated learning outcomes.

2. A criterion-referenced assessment system.

3. Objective-based core and alternative curriculum.

4. A systematic process for planning and providing instruction
for each student.

5. A criterion-referenced information management system at the
classroom and building levels.

6. An evaluative/certification system which allows students to
demonstrate and receive credit for improved levels of
performance at any time.

7. A program evaluation component which guides instructional
planning by comparing the learning outcomes of program
graduates with the performance demands of post-school roles.

The mastery learning model that incorporates these components

represents a fundamental change in the nature of teaching. This change
involves moving away from the current time and role based model of
management. Mastery learning instructional delivery depends on the
availability and day-to—day use of criterion-referenced, publicly-defined
student performance assessment data for determining appropriate and
timely student instructional assignments, as opposed to the privately
defined,vaguely-referenced, and fixed time/single opportunity delivery
system that typifies most of today's schools.

Mastery learning assumes that almost all students can learn what

is taught in a given program of instruction given appropriate teacher and
learning conditions. Four sets of principles are critical to establish a

mastery learning program.

59

Principle One - Organize the overall curriculum in terms of

 

specific objectives which are hierarchically sequenced, integrated,
prioritized and stated according to type of content.

Principle Two - Organize day-to-day instruction in terms of

 

learning units which have a four phase cycle of instruction within
each unit: teach, test, reteach/extend, retest.

Principle Three - Assess performance during the test and retest

 

phases of each learning unit. Formative and summative testing
should be done.

Principle Four - Provide a recordkeeping and management system

 

focused on units of instruction as well as individual progress.

Mastery Learning Research

 

To date, numerous studies related to ML have been based on
Carroll's model and Bloom's strategies. Most parts of these studies are
concerned with the cognitive effects of mastery learning rather than the
affective components. In addition, mastery learning strategies were
mainly applied to treat the individual variance rather than to group based
interaction in many previous studies. Accordingly, many of these studies
were contributed to define the individual characteristics such as the
learning rate, aptitude, and cognitive styles. Some of them involved
extensive investigations of the curriculum components of ML strategies.
Most instructional research has been weak, historically, in terms of
measuring the dependent variables and in specifying the experimental
treatments, especially the control treatments. Block and Burns (1976)
recently conducted a thorough review of mastery learning research.

They described four types of ML studies.

‘.(/‘.'

(j ,‘

60

The early Type One studies tended to be fairly restricted in scope.
They were executed in basic courses that were required and structured
and that emphasized convergent thinking (Bloom, 1971). The objectives
to be taught for mastery were typically drawn from introductory
textbooks. The recent Type One studies, however, have become broader.
They are being executed in courses that are intermediate or advanced,
elective, loosely structured or nonstructured and amenable to divergent
thinking. Moreover, the objectives to be taught for mastery are being
formulated from a wider range of curricular materials. And these
objectives are increasingly asking the student to perform higher order
cognitive behaviors such as application, synthesis, and analysis (Block and
Tierney, 1974; Ware, 1976).

The Type Two research focused on the affective consequences of
learning for mastery. The affective consequences of mastery strategies
have been studied under a range of conditions, though certainly a more
limited range than their cognitive consequences. Many studies in this
type of research indicated that mastery approaches have typically
elicited more favorable affective responses from students than their
nonmastery counterparts and, in some cases, significantly more favorable
responses. In particular, the mastery strategies have had a positive
impact in students' interest in attitudes towards the subject matter
learned, academic self-confidence, and attitude toward cooperative
learning (Anderson, 1976; Block, 1972; Jones et. al., 1975).

The Dpe Three studies used the complexity of the research design

and precluded a detailed treatment of each study and its findings. Such

61

treatments of a number of studies already appear in several sources:
Block and Burns, (1976); Bloom (1976); Johnson (1975); and Ruskin, (1974).

The Type Four research attempted to translate what has been

 

learned about why mastery learning strategies work into detailed
statements of how they can be implemented. This new trend has
concentrated on the development and dissemination of better teacher
training programs and materials. Okey and Ciesla (1975) have developed
a self-instructional module on teaching for mastery at the elementary and
junior high school levels; Anderson and Block (1976) have prepared a
chapter on teaching educational psychology for mastery at the college
level.

Okey and Ciesla's (1975) mastery teacher training module has
evolved over the last five years under the auspices of the National
Center for the Improvement of Educational Systems. The module is
designed to train preservice and inservice elementary and middle school
teachers in basic mastery teaching areas such as identifying and
sequencing instructional objectives, developing evaluation measures,
identifying learning difficulties, prescribing instruction and measuring
learning outcomes. The teaching did have some positive effects on
student achievement although Okey was able to gather usable data for
only about two-thirds of his 40 planned mastery versus nonmastery
comparisons.

Brookover and his associates (1977) developed the teacher training
module for mastery learning at the elementary level. This program
focused on the change of school learning climate related to mastery

model implementation. The module consists of ten subcategories which

62

were based on their research findings from the school learning climate
project (1977). These include modules on the following:

1. School Learning Climate

2. Expectations and Mastery Learning

3. Group Learning Games

4. Grouping and Differentiation

5. Use of Evaluation

6. Parental Involvement

7. Academic Engaged Time

8. The Role of the Principal

9. Individual Reinforcement Principles

10. Teacher Commitment and Student Learning

These modules provide an interplay between relevant school norms
and expectations concerning learning objectives, teaching and learning
environment, appropriate teaching behaviors, and practical activities.

The philosophical premises, operational essentials and the four
principles of mastery learning provide educational researchers with much
to study. The conclusions drawn on mastery learning are not conclusive.
It seems that those who are believers evaluate mastery learning in a
positive way. Students of Bloom such as Block, Anderson, Burns and
Airasion believe that research indicates that mastery learning improves
students' cognitive and affective learning. A main strength that they
report based upon their research concludes that mastery learning
approaches typically illicit more favorable affective responses than

nonmastery classes.

63

Torshen (1977) indicates that in general the research demonstrates
that when a mastery model was implemented, students achieved higher
levels of performance on objective-referenced post-tests and increased
the amount of instructional time spent in active learning. Torshen also
claims that the most significant outcomes were in the affective domain.
Increased interest, greater satisfaction, increased confidence, more
positive perceptions in self, increased optimism are all claimed as
benefits of mastery learning. Block (1975) claims that with mastery
learning 75% to 95% of the students achieve at the same level as the top
25% learning under the typical group based instructional methods. Block
also states that mastery learning makes student learning more effective
and students learn more material in less time. Claims are also made that
teachers, administrators and curriculum makers as well as researchers
will benefit from mastery learning.

The Effects of Mastery Model Implementation

 

It has been proposed that one of the primary advantages asso-
ciated with mastery model implementation is a change in teacher
expectations concerning student performance (Bloom, 1968). The mastery
philosophy asserts that most students in a classroom can master the basic
skills and knowledge in instructional setting in which the mastery
components are implemented (Bloom, 1971; Carroll, 1971).

Generally, the mastery model consists of six or seven components:
objectives, preassessment, instruction, diagnostic assessment, prescription,
and post-assessment. Simply, these procedures can be applied as a

repeated learning process of teach-practice-test-reteach-retest.

64

In investigating the effectiveness of mastery teaching, Okey and
Ciesla (1975) used this model's components to train 20 preservice and 20
inservice teachers. Pretest data indicated that although the teachers
were unfamiliar with mastery philosophy and procedures, the mastery
model had been implemented in some of the model components.

This study begins with an assumption that the implementation of
mastery learning strategies may have different effects under the
differential teacher expectations, evaluations, and academic norms. As
mentioned above, the implementation of a mastery model cannot be an
exception from this premise. Other investigations have demonstrated
that implementation of the mastery model is associated with positive
attitudes of teachers and a favorable attitude toward mastery curricula
(Okey, 1975; Anderson, 1976). In summary, many of these results indicate
that implementation of the mastery model is associated with higher
teacher expectations for student performance and more favorable
attitudes towards the curricula.

From the vieWpoint of mastery implementation, there are two keys
to the cultivation of mastery model strategies: one is dissemination of
mastery ideas and practices to more preservice and especially inservice
teachers. The other key is the development of better mastery teacher
training materials. Such materials might result from comprehensive
product evaluations of the materials that are already on the market.
There have been a few such studies to date, e.g., Lee et a1. (1971) and
Kim et a1. (1970).

One of the larger implementations of mastery has been conducted

in Korea under the direction of Hogwaon Kim (1970), and Young Dug Lee

65

(1971). The best example of the power of Bloom mastery learning
strategies to affect student achievement was conducted by Kim and Kim
(1969). This pilot study used group based mastery procedures for
teaching students in secondary schools. They taught 272 seventh graders
in an eight session learning unit on simple geometric figures. The
students were randomly assigned to two groups. Half of the students
learned under mastery conditions and the other half learned using the
lecture-recitation approach. Two groups were comparable in terms of
their IQ's and past achievement in mathematics. The result indicated
that 75% of the mastery learning students, compared to only 40% of the
nonmastery learning students, were able to attain the mastery criterion
of a score of at least 80% correct on the final exam.

Based on these results of this pilot study, Kim et a1. (1970)
proceeded to expand this mastery learning program. In the next study,
5,820 seventh graders, coming from nine middle schools in Seoul, were
taught mathematics and English over an eight week period. The same
experimental procedures were used as in the pilot study. Once again
their findings favored the mastery learning treatment. In English, 72% of
the mastery learning students compared to 28% of the nonmastery
students reached the 80% mastery criterion. In mathematics, the figures
were 61% versus 30% respectively.

The third project involved teaching mathematics, English, physics
and biology to more than 25,000 middle school students from rural and
urban schools during an entire academic year. The results brought
thousands to the attainment of mastery criteria. Lee et. al (1971)

replicated Kim's procedures in elementary school.

66

As with any practice in education, there are many critics of
mastery learning and even within the school of mastery learning, there is
some criticism of certain aspects. Even Bloom (1980) does not claim that
it will work for everyone. Recent studies among the mastery learning
groups at the University of San Francisco has shed some interesting light
on the mastery learning issues. At the University of San Francisco,
proponents naturally think their system is even better than Bloom's. The
critics claim that Bloom's data are derived from ex-post facto designs
and are a sort of meta-analysis of evaluations. Arlin, Bloom's former
student, has raised some doubts about the learning premise of mastery
learning concerning time. No study is yet on the books that tests the
basic mastery learning proposition concerning time under strict
experimental conditions (Cohen, 1979).

Much criticism of mastery learning derives from the fact that it is
one of those approaches that fits the classification of competency based
methodology. Spady (1981) has warned about the mundane instructional
outcomes currently flooding the schools. Some reading experts criticize
mastery learning because it reduces reading to mundane, irrelevant,
unimportant, isolated tiny skills with the essence of reading lost in this
morass of irrelevancies. Cohen and Hyman (1979) criticize Bloom's
mastery learning process because it doesn't differentiate from the group
taught, time based, assignment driven classrooms. They believe, as Spady
does, that there is a basic contradiction in Bloom's model. Exactly how
the teacher matches time allowed to individual variations in required

time so that every student learns everything required and at the same

67

time presents lessons to 30 students is blatantly ignored by Bloom,
Anderson and Block.

The most important criticism of mastery learning has to do with
whether or not it can successfully be implemented. The success of
mastery learning rests largely with the people who use it daily. The true
test is not in the research but in the schools. Most of the mastery
learning failures, according to Cohen (1979), are the result of principals
who refuse to take responsibility for pressing teachers to perform,
monitoring the curriculum daily, and making a public commitment to the
curriculum. Over four years Cohen was involved in monitoring 300
mastery learning projects and only 60% of them were successful. In
about 96% of the failures, the problem was a principal who would not
take responsibility for the curriculum or who could not lead a teaching
staff.

Having considered what mastery learning is and what the criticism
of the system is, it would appear that the ideas are not new and they do
seem to be educationally sound. The main problem is implementation.
Money, time and reduced teacher/pupil ratio seem to be essential for
mastery learning to be successful. There has been little research done
on social studies and mastery learning. Some courses such as math and
science seem to be more suitable for this method. Using mastery learning
is certainly worth a try if for no other reason than it would make one
carefully consider the teaching and learning process.

To implement mastery learning in social studies, I would first need
to consider carefully the following criticisms and extensions. Mueller

(1975) offers a summary of educational advantages and disadvantages of

68

mastery learning. Mastery learning is quite effective in teaching basic
skills and knowledges, especially to slow learners and to those students
who have not learned to learn independently. Its optimal usefulness is in
the elementary grades. Since the mastery learning model reduces
competition among students and reduces student failure and the
frustration that accompanies repeated failure, it is also an effective
model to use with educationally disadvantaged students and slow learners
at all educational levels.

What the mastery learning model does not do well is maximize
learning for all students, especially in a traditionally organized school
structure with fixed time instructional units as is Bloom's model. Since
the entire instructional emphasis is on a finite set of instructional
objectives, a learning ceiling is established beyond which faster learners
are not allowed to progress. Consequently, the mastery model might
have limited usefulness in the upper grades. Further, the model is not
useful in training students to learn independently. finally, grade
resultant from mastery learning have minimal usefulness in decision
making and prediction (Mueller, 1975).

Keeping in mind the above summary of strengths and weaknesses,
it would appear that a few additions to the mastery model would make
mastery learning an effective teaching model for social studies. Many of
mastery learning's shortcomings could be eliminated if the model included
an index of speed of mastery learning along with certification of mastery
in a particular instructional unit. This modification would render mastery
grades useful for decision making and predicting. Eliminating the ceiling

effect by incorporating enrichment learning activities would negate

69

another of the general weaknesses of mastery learning. Guskey (1985),
for example, places considerable emphasis on going beyond with
enrichment for fast learners. Two categories of instructional objectives

would be beneficial. Minimum essentials and beyond minimum essentials

 

 

would extend mastery learning into a more complete model.

If one were to compare mastery learning to other teaching and
learning models, it might be difficult to decide which model is best. If
one could make a clear case for the implementation of mastery learning
and prove that ML significantly improves student achievement, then
mastery learning could be a practical change for schools. This study will
attempt to contribute to the research base on mastery learning by
documenting the process of the implementation of mastery learning as a

Change in two team teachers' approach to teaching American History.

70

CHAPTER FOUR

THE STUDY

In Chapter Four we shall move from literature to the school

environment, examining the participants as a change—mastery learning--is

implemented in the classroom.

The Setting
The School District

 

Garber High is the central high school of the Essexville-Hampton
School District. Encompassing the city of Essexville and part of Hampton
Township, the district is located near a medium sized metropolitan area,
and Essexville's 5,000 inhabitants are regarded as an integral part of that
area. Essexville is adjacent to Bay City on the east side; in fact, a
traffic sign is the only indication that one has left Bay City and is
indeed in Essexville. Essexville is an upper middle class bedroom
community. Part of Hampton Township makes up the rest of the school
district, and it consists of farmland and a Consumers Power Plant.

As a legal entity the school district was formed in 1962 when the
city of Essexville and part of Hampton Township voted to break away
from the Bay City Public Schools. The school district now consists of
three elementary schools, K-12; one middle school, 6-8; and one
secondary school, 9-12.

The budget for the district is about $7,000,000 which means that

approximately $3,658 is spent per year per child, an expenditure which

71

makes the district one of the wealthiest districts in the state of
Michigan. Almost 100% of the district's revenue is collected in property
taxes of which 75% comes from Consumers Power property. The district
is administered by a superintendent, a business manager and an assistant
superintendent for curriculum, all of whom share a central office complex
in Essexville on the middle and secondary school site. Governing the
operation of the entire school district are the eight members of the
popularly elected Board of Education.

The School

 

Garber Senior High School is located on a large tract of land--37
acres—in Essexville and bordering Hampton Township. It is a modern
well-equipped building completed in 1974 at a cost of $2,600,000. In
front of the school to the west is a large parking lot for teachers and
visitors. To the south is the athletic complex including tennis courts,
baseball and softball fields and the football and track stadium. To the
east is the student parking lot. To the north is a large well-kept lawn.
The area immediately surrounding the property is taken up by farm land,
the middle school, the administrative offices and some nice homes.
Figure 2.

Figure 3 shows a floor plan of the school which is a single
structure planned to house various interest areas and academic disciplines
in different wings. Administrative and guidance offices and the library
are in the central section; English and social studies (Government,
Economics, Sociology, Psychology), math and business in the west wing;
industrial arts, history, home economics and science in the east wing; and

physical education (gym and pool), music and drama in the south wing.

72

Figure 2. The Essexville-Hampton Junior and Senior High.

 

 

. r. . ,
. ink Lu). .. $.53? . nub... .

if...
.v.

71.11..

litfii

rag

 

 

73

won. 2...: 32.3:
25:29: 644.33:-
Jooxun IQ: 5.56

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ESEEEP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“airman

his? Egg."

 

 

.U

f-

 

In... _
En”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mils“.lil H
72 7
AM: a... -

 

 

IUII.‘ lddlld
.uu n.v

 

 

 

H.

 

Figure 3. Floor plan of Garber High School

I

 

 

i... 7....

 

 

 

74

The auditorium deserves note. With its padded seats, expensive looking
stage and high ceiling, it is the only place in the school that manifests
extra expenditure. It is used for assemblies, plays, picture taking, honors
presentations, or practicing drama or music, The main hallway has a
unique feature in that located there are what are best described as
carpeted islands for the students to relax on near their lockers.

The rest of the school, except for the offices, cafeteria,
gymnasium, and industrial arts area, is divided into rectangular
classrooms. Originally many were designed with movable partitions and
were called quads. Four small rooms could become one large, open area.
In fact, this research takes place in one of the few classrooms where a
movable partition is still in place. These rooms are all arranged on the
principle that the teacher is the one who has the knowledge and skills
and, therefore, has the front desk; and the students, the seekers after
these same sets of knowledge and skills, sit in five or six rows of metal
and plastic desks facing the teacher and waiting to be instructed.
Across the front and along one side of these classrooms are the bulletin
boards and green chalk boards, and at the opposite side are walls with
windows and doors leading to the hallways. On the walls and bulletin
boards are school calendars, a clock, a few instructional posters and
occasionally an elaborate display identifying the teacher's interests and
subject matter area. Otherwise, the cinderblock walls sport only their
green or beige paint. The tile paved halls are clean broad, well-lighted,
and unobstructed. Cusick (1973) might have been describing Garber High

when he wrote:

75

All of the school's separate areas reflect the same air of
functional, well-maintained, unpretentious severity, and there is
little danger of mistaking the building for anything but the modern

American high school built to serve good, sensible education to

many people at a moderate cost. (p. 13)

The box concept of construction provides outside compactness with
flexibility on the inside. Looking at the floor plan, one can envision how
the school was built in two main components separated by a center
corridor. It is interesting to note that the architect included only 16
outside windows in the building and was quoted in 1963 in the local
newspaper as saying that the few windows would be a "boon to teachers."

In 1964 The Detroit News reported that, "A small suburban Bay

 

City school district with a population of less than 10,000 is building what
educators call one of the nation's most modern and tradition-shattering
high schools-in teaching, philosophy, technical innovations and flexible
architecture." The article went on to state that Garber was Michigan's
first completely ungraded junior and senior high school. The students'
study program was determined by achievement levels instead of in
traditional grades. Figure 2 is an illustration of this innovative structure
that would soon become just another conventional secondary school--but
that's another story.

Although Garber has gone from an innovative school in 1965 to a
much more traditional environment in 1987, its reputation as an excellent
high school has prevailed. During the 1986-87 school year, Garber High
was recognized as one of the top ten high schools in Michigan and also

received Exemplary School Recognition from the United States

76

Government. Garber has had and continues to have an outstanding
reputation for achievement in education.

The Classroom

 

The American History classrooms used for this research are
located in the east wing of the building, rooms 24 and 25 of Figure 3.
The other social studies courses are taught in the west wing. The
classrooms are between the industrial education department and the
special education rooms and across the hall from a science lab. Both of
the classrooms have northern exterior windows and windows facing the
halls to the south. A movable partition separates the two rooms. The
six rows of five desks in each room face north toward the outside walls,
windows, bulletin board, movie screen, maps, American flags, teachers'
desk, and lecterns. The east wall in my classroom is covered with
bookcases and maps. Colorful posters, maps and charts are displayed
throughout the rooms making them aesthetically pleasing to me. Figure 4.

The School Day

 

The official school day is from 8:00 a.m. to 3:15 p.m. for teachers
and from 8:15 a.m. to 2:59 p.m. for students. There are six class periods
a day, each class period lasting for 59 minutes. Four minutes are
allotted to pass between classes, and there is a 35 minute lunch period.
Teachers are assigned to teach five classes and each has a conference
period. Most students are scheduled into six classes. Ed Harvey taught
five American History classes with third period (10:17 to 11:14) being his
conference period. I taught two American History classes and three

Practical Law classes. My conference period was sixth hour (2:00 to

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n fl M>DQZH3
._ .A lb .1 1.11 1.1-. . .
mm 53 A j \1_ em 23.x _ V
1 W, U E ,
J W J L U
m 6. AT D »1_ 1_
m S w 10
n o . . . _ /1 mad:
m C 4% D 1U S
m k 1 k
.m. w I m E . w
a .
w. /.0,4 .3 135 111V . k
m ZDHHHHNEQ DZH>DZI\\ 53:00Q LNCUOO».

acaog ::g
a .938. 59%

78

2:59). The research was conducted in our first and fifth hour American
History classes and in Ed's sixth hour class.

The Lounge

 

Every study concerning schools should include an observation on
the teachers' lounge. The teachers' lounge is the only place in the
school where teachers really let off steam. This is the place where the
loudest laughs and b _____ sessions occur. In Garber High the lounge is
located adjacent to the library, in the center of the building. The lounge
is where some of the teachers relax during part of their conference
period, make phone calls, smoke and drink coffee or pop. During the
work day few teachers are found in the lounge. However, before school,
at lunch, and after school a regular crew hustles to the lounge for some
badly needed adult companionship. Depending upon the individual, the
lounge can serve as a place to relax, get therapy, commiserate, or find
out the solution to some pressing problem; advice is free.

All too often our lounge is a place where negative attitudes
toward education prevail. Too often the lounge becomes a depressing
place because of the dominance of unhappy people who are constantly
complaining about students, administrators, and other teachers. Ed only
frequents the lounge to get in the check pool or when there are donuts.
I am more inclined to become involved in the b ____ sessions because
of my need for coffee.

The Social Studies Curriculum

 

During the 1982-83 school year, the K-12 social studies curriculum
was revised. The lengthy, never ending process of curriculum revision

led to a document that included everything from philosophy of social

79

studies, rationale, scope and sequence (Figure 5), goals and objectives,
and unit topics. Much of the curriculum that has been developed is
closely tied to the Michigan Department of Education recommendations
for social studies. Once the overall curriculum was ratified, agreed
upon, the teachers had to write curriculum guides for the courses they
were teaching. Since the 1983-84 school year, the curriculum guides
project development has resulted in guides for all secondary school social
studies courses. Ed and I wrote the curriculum for American History.
However, it is really not completed at this time nor will it ever be.

Constant change seems to be inherent in our work.

80

Figure 5. Scope and Sequence, K-12 Social Studies Curriculum.

SOCIAL STUDIES EDUCATION

IN THE

ESSEXVILLE-HAMPTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS

9mg
Kindergarten
lst Grade
2nd Grade
3rd Grade
4th Grade

5th Grade
6th Grade
7th Grade
8th Grade
9th Grade
10th Grade
11th Grade
12th Grade
Electives
Practical Law
World History

Economics (Consumer)

SCOPE] SEQUENCE

M

Myself and Others

School and Family

Neighborhoods

Communities: Urban, Suburban, Rural

Michigan: Local and State History/
Geography

The United States

World Cultures

Global Geography

United States History: Exploration, Civil War

Practical Law (one semester)

United States History: Reconstruct - Present

American Government

Electives

Psychology Sociology
Career Education

History (Discover America)

81

The American History Curriculum

 

When the K-12 curriculum was adopted in 1984, the work of
writing the American History curriculum guide began. The curriculum
was developed by working closely with the Social Studies Specialist, Dr.
John Chapman, in the Michigan Department of Education. The process
was difficult and time consuming but would not have been accomplished
without the recommended goals and objectives provided by the Michigan
Department of Education. Writing the curriculum and selecting a text
were accomplished over a two year period. A sample from the
curriculum guide is included in Appendix A; the text and supplementary
materials used are A History of the Republic; The United States from
E by Davidson and Lytle. The course was taught for the first time
during the 1985-86 school year. The research in the American History
classes was conducted during the second semester of the second year

that the curriculum was in place.

The Actors—Participants

Two Teachers

 

Although the study involved almost 100 students, the focal
research participants were two American History teachers, Ed Harvey and
Bob Skinner. Ed Harvey, just Ed from this point on, was selected for the
study to allow comparison, to reduce bias, and because of his long
professional association with Bob Skinner. Bob, the researcher,
participant observer will be referred to throughout the study in the first
person. Ed and I have each taught social studies for 25 years. For the

last 19 years we have been team teaching at least two class periods a

82

day at Garber High School in Essexville. Over the years we have
attempted change frequently. Because we have worked together for so
long, a special and quite unique relationship has evolved. It is this
unique relationship in combination with our vast experience that will, I
hope, shed some light on the process of change in the classroom.

Ed Harvey. At 48 Ed is the senior member of the Social Studies
Department. All four members of the department are male and in their
405. With his wife and three daughters, Ed lives in the rural area of the
school district, Hampton Township. He is actively involved in his church,
St. John's Catholic Church, and in the Lions Club. He is a tall and
good-looking with a dignified, calm manner that puts students at ease.
Ed graduated with a Master's Degree in history from the University of
Michigan after attending Central Michigan University for his B.S. degree.
Ed began his teaching career in January of 1962 at Traverse City St.
Francis High School. In 1965 he moved to Essexville Garber High School
to teach history and coach football. Ed is still doing both; he is
recognized throughout the state as an outstanding football coach.

Ed is a sociable person, which is reflected in his philosophy of
teaching. He enjoys joking with students and maintains a light
atmosphere in the classroom. Committed to the school and community,
Ed feels that quality teaching and coaching are critical for school
improvement.

Ed remains an active and vital part of the high school although it
has not always been easy to do so. During the last seven years he has
had each hip joint replaced twice. I have m seen Ed depressed or

terribly angry. He is the most level-headed person whom I have ever

83

known. Ed's philosophy is student oriented as one can plainly see in the
following statement made by him before our research began:
The three basic guidelines of "firm, fair and friendly" that I
learned in my education classes in college still apply for me today.
One of the more difficult tasks I find as a teacher is to treat
students as individuals but yet be fair to everyone. Students have
a real sense of what is fair and feel slighted and sometimes angry
if they don't receive the same treatment they perceive everyone
else getting. I work hard at trying to treat students fairly and
provide the same learning opportunities for everyone. At the same
time I try to encourage students to achieve up to their ability by
rewarding verbally or with grades and comments. Before subject
matter like American History can be taught, an atmosphere of
learning has to be established in the classroom. As a teacher of
teen-aged students, I think the most important role that I have is
to let students know that I care about them as individuals. With
the decline of the basic family structure in our society today,
teenagers have to feel that they are important. There are a
variety of ways I use to establish rapport. I try to find out what
is important to the student outside of the classroom and use this
as a means of conversation before and after class. I attend as
many extracurricular activities as I can to let my students know
that I think what they are doing is important. These activities
range from athletic events to band concerts and school plays.
Once this rapport is established, I think it is easier to teach the

subject material.

84

Bob, the researcher. In my late 405 I am married and have two
children. My wife Margaret is a Spanish, Latin, and English teacher. My
son Robb is a graduate student, and daughter Elizabeth attends the
University of Michigan. Education and athletics dominate our lives. We
live on the main street in Essexville, three blocks from Garber High. I
am a runner for physical, psychological, and social reasons. Five years
ago after retiring from coaching varsity basketball for 20 years, I
returned to school (MSU) to begin work on a degree in Curriculum and
Instruction.

Compared to Ed I am not a highly sociable person. My seemingly
stern demeanor keeps me at a distance from my students. Philosoph-
ically, I am committed to a positive learning environment for students
and myself. Rather strict enforcement of classroom rules regarding
behavior ensures a climate for potential learning. My approach to
teaching has been to be a strict disciplinarian in a traditional classroom
structure. In general I have little faith in the ability of children to make
their own decisions concerning education. Most young people are not
interested in reading, writing, and history. Their interests are personal
and narrow. Students need to be told what to do and are, for the most
part, apathetic when it comes to history. Many students find history
boring and unimportant. I believe that it is my job to try to teach the
students the goals and objectives (content), but at this point In my
career, I'll be (I _____ if I am going to try to entertain.

My coaching experience has contributed a great deal to my
teaching philosophy. Hard work, discipline, repetition in practice or in

the classroom make for success on game night or test day.

85

The longer I teach the less interested I am in teaching facts and
worrying about grades. The Gestalt, A-ha, the big picture, values, and
ideas are important to my teaching. The critical problem is that these
are all teachable but don't seem to be testable. We continue to test
facts, knowledge that is important enough but not really rewarding to
either students or teachers. What can we do with what our children
bring to school? What I believe and what I do in the classroom are at
odds.

Obviously Ed and I have different ideas concerning education. Our
strengths and weaknesses complement one another. It is my hope that
the by-product of this unique relationship in education will provide some
meaningful-insights into the world of the classroom and the problem of
bringing about and sustaining change in the classroom environment.

The Students

 

Like snowflakes, almost all students seem very much alike until
one looks closer and discovers that each one is unique. Despite their
uniqueness, broad categories will be used in this study to describe the
students in the tenth grade American History classes at Garber High
School. Although it is difficult to define a typical student, three groups
include the bright and motivated student, the slow, non-reader, and the
apathetic, bored middle or silent majority.

The student population of the tenth grade in 1987 was 167
students of whom 144 took American History from Ed and me. Over 95%
of the students are white; 1.6% are black and 2.3% are Hispanic. This
upper middle-class suburban school district has 5% of its students from

low income families. In our classes there were only three black students

86

and one Hispanic this past year. With mainstreaming we had ten special
education students assigned to our classes. Our classes are
heterogeneously grouped, the slowest students mixed in with the
brightest. Nearly all of the students have completed eighth grade
American History and ninth grade Practical Law so they should be coming
into American History with some background knowledge.

Students were assigned to the American History classes by the
counselors. It would appear at first glance that the classes are randomly
selected; however, due to various scheduling problems there is a wide
range of student abilities in the classes. Some classes achieve at a much
higher level than do other classes. During the school year 1986-87 Ed
and I had the fewest students in our classes that we have ever had.
Over the years we have averaged a total of 130 students each. Because
of declining enrollment our classes were considerably smaller this year.
In the classes where team teaching was used and mastery learning

implemented, there were a total of 71 students divided as follows:

_E_d Bob Total
18 18 36 First Hour
19 16 35 Fifth Hour

Ed also implemented mastery learning in his sixth hour Class in which he
had 25 students.
A total of 96 students participated in the change process. Our

other classes had the following enrollments:

87

52 §o_b
21 American History 20 Practical Law Second hour
29 Practical Law Third hour
32 American History 32 Practical Law Fourth hour

Our student load was small but significant to the study. Ed taught a
total of 105 students and I, 113 each day.

The Teachers in the Setting

 

In this research on two team teachers attempting to change and
effect change in their classroom, it is important to understand what their
day consists of, a day in which the change—mastery learning--is to be
implemented.

For many years Ed would arrive at work shortly after 8:00 a.m.
because of his three daughters not being able to get ready on time for
him to be at work at 8:00 a.m. Since his daughters have finished high
school, he is always at school before 8:00 a.m., and three days a week he
arrives at 7:15 to take a swim with a couple of the other teachers.
Shortly after 8:00 a.m. Ed can be found at his desk working on papers or
doing some task related to his football program.

I arrive at school at 7:55, open the classroom, turn on the lights,
unload my school bag, move the newspapers to the front of the room, pull
out two—one for me and one for the library—and head to the lounge for
coffee, dropping a newspaper off at the librarian's desk. Once the
coffee is in my mug, I will either sit down and become a part of the a.m.
sports review and rundown on the state of the world affairs, or I will
return to the classrooms to go over the day's plans with Ed. This might

involve getting audio-visual materials in place.

88

At 8:15 the bell beginning first hour class rings. This year Ed and
I are team teaching first hour for the first time in many years. Ed is
assigned 18 students, and I am assigned 17 students. A typical class

period would include the following:

8:15 Bell rings.

8:16 Attendance and relaxed chatter.

8:20 Review and reread assignment.

8:30 Discussion of daily assignment.

8:50 Read and/or discuss newspapers.

9:00 Give homework assignment and a few minutes to

work on that assignment.

9:08 Wrap things up and talk quietly until the bell
rings.
9:12 Bell rings ending first hour.

For many years Ed has been the varsity football coach, and until
1982 I was the varsity basketball coach. In those days when I was
coaching we merely took turns teaching and helped one another during
our respective seasons. Not a whole lot has changed since I gave up my
coaching position because Ed is still coaching, and I have been going to
graduate school.
With this small group first hour this past year we have been able
to get quite well organized for the rest of our day.
9:12 - 9:16 Between classes Ed and I remain in our classrooms
talking to students leaving class and to those entering
for second period.

9:16 Bell rings and second period begins.

89

9:17 We have closed the partition and will teach separately
until fifth hour. Ed will teach American History, and
I will teach Practical Law. A similar class format
will be followed usually as was explained for first
hour except that we are now working alone. We do
share the newspaper three or four days a week. I will
frequently try to slip out of class during this period
for a quick half cup of coffee and a trip to the
bathroom. The principal frowns on this practice and
believes that we should only leave our rooms for
emergencies.

10:13 Bell rings ending second hour. Ed and I will chat for
a minute and talk again to students leaving and
arriving.

10:17 Class begins. Ed is off third hour for his conference
hour, and I am teaching another law class of
freshmen. Usually I follow my same plan that I used
second hour; however, there are so many good
students this hour that we always seem to get done
sooner.

11:14 Bell rings and lunch period begins.

Ed has already gone to lunch or is coming back to his room to eat

and grade papers. I am out the door so fast that some students have
difficulty getting out ahead of me. There is a need to hurry since I walk

home for a sandwich and a break from school. When I return to school, I

90

will try to grab a quick cup of coffee and check out the lounge, but this

is only possible once or twice a week because of our short lunch period.

11:54

12:53

12:57

1:56

2:00

2:59

The last bell rings. Ed is ready to teach 30 students
American History and to work with his independent
study history student. I am prepared for my law class
of 31 students.

The bell rings ending fourth hour classes. We throw
the partition open for our team taught fifth hour
American History class.

Class begins and we follow a plan similar to first
hour.

Bell rings and Ed and I review our day and talk
briefly about tomorrow.

Bell rings and Ed is teaching 25 students in American
History. Ed's schedule is unusual this year in that he
is only teaching American History. He has taught
United States Geography, Government, and Economics
in the past. Three preparations was not uncommon.
My teaching day is over after fifth hour. During my
conference period I will usually read, write, correct
papers or go to the lounge for coffee and conver-
sation with teachers I would not see otherwise.

The final bell for the day ring dismissing school. Ed
hustles to practice during the football season, or he
remains in his room until 3:15. I will go to the lounge

and then go to run.

91

It would be nice to think that our work day is over by 3:15, but it
rarely is. As a social studies teacher, reading newspapers, watching the
news, reviewing the text and supplementary materials, grading papers,
and in general, staying up-to-date and informed is time consuming. Much
of this general preparation takes place before school, e.g., reading the
new5paper for law and history articles, and after school. (I wonder if
there has even been a teacher who could relax on My evening.)

The specific outline of our day will be detailed and elaborated
upon later in the study. However, one must remember that this bell
ringing day is the basic structure of our work day that is typical of many
secondary schools. It is within this structure that the challenge of
implementing change must be accomplished. To work, mastery learning
must fit this structure or one similar because this is the way schools are.

Within the framework of the above outline, Ed and I have been
doing our own thing for many years and under numerous methods of
instruction. Our styles are different, but compatible. Having taught
American History for many years, Ed is familiar with the need of every
class session. As the students drift in on a Monday morning, he is busily
organizing materials for the day. He engages in a social conversation (as
opposed to academic conversation) with several students before class,
sharing with them some of the on going events that have interested him
over the weekend. The topic is frequently last Friday's game or some
college or professional sporting event that has occurred on Saturday or
Sunday. Often someone is paying off or collecting a gambling debt,
usually a coke, on the big game of the week. Most of the casual

conversation centers on the activities of the students but occasionally

92

includes the activity of the teacher. (My Field Notes; Monday, January
26, 1987)

Ed conducts his class in a social, conversational style, often using
personal or everyday examples and common language rather than purely
historical information to eXplain concepts. His tone of voice and relaxed
posture add to the easy conversational style. Recently he has been
somewhat restricted because of his hips. Ed's inclination is to walk
around and get close to students, but now he will more often sit on a
stool, lean on his desk, or sit behind his desk when he is presenting
material. His repeated hip surgeries have slowed him down a little.
Students are comfortable coming to Ed for help and his ready availability.
and affable approach to students is often vital to those youngsters who
need a teacher-counselor.

Among students, Ed is known for his wry sense of humor. Some
believe him to be just plain corny. To get students to pay attention he
often says, "O.K., let's make like a corn field," . . . pause "all ears" . . .
and this sometimes gets a chuckle, but in recent years, more often it
gets some major groans. (My Field Notes; Tuesday, May 19, 1987)
Response positive or negative is good-natured and does not hamper his
constant effort at one-liners.

I bring a contrasting style to the classroom. One of the best
descriptions of my teaching is highly orchestrated. My classes are
organized, controlled and quiet, both in terms of teacher-student and
especially student-student. The learning environment created is highly
structured and challenging; I am perceived by students as a disciplinarian

who tolerates little or no foolishness. My teaching style is no nonsense

93

and businesslike. I doubt that it has ever been said that I am a friendly
teacher, but my students would say that I am firm and fair. My approach
to history is much more formal than Ed's. I am also more demanding in
terms of requiring students to sit up and act as if they are paying
attention. The students who like to know where they stand and who
thrive in a structured, conventional school environment are receptive to
my teaching style. It seems that very good and very poor students like
my class, but a fair number of the middle group do not care for me. One
pretty good but lazy student even stated in his survey that he hated me.

When in front of the classroom, my lecture/discussion style is more
relaxed than it once was, and I do a pretty good job of getting the main
idea across. I worry less about getting it all covered, and I attempt to
get the students to uncover some of the worthwhile historical concepts
that we believe are important. Whereas Ed is always positive and
seemingly satisfied with his approach to teaching and his students, I am
frequently pessimistic, sarcastic, and dissatisfied with my performance as
well as that of my students.

The Researcher in the Setting

 

The above personal information is valuable to the reader for
reasons that will become apparent. However, each reader of this study
must keep in mind that I am the true participant observer in that while
the research was conducted, I was teaching (participating) and observing
Ed, our students, and myself. The only way that my biases can be
evaluated is by comparing what the students, Ed, and I say and do.

One of the major goals of the classroom experience is to expose

students to the tools of history and to reinforce specific concepts

94

introduced in the text, lectures, discussion, and other supplementary
materials. The physical setting of the classroom varies in relationship to
course needs. The class may be a collection of physical paraphernalia--
desks, maps posters, texts, study guides, movies, and videotapes, but it is
also peoplenteachers, students and, in the case of ethnography,--the
field worker. It just so happens that this field worker is also the
teacher. Although it was made clear what I was doing and why, there
seemed to be little behavioral effect on either the students or Ed or
myself. The students were so engrossed in their own lives that they paid
little attention to the additional role that I was playing. The students'
and Ed's behavior was consistent with what had occurred the first
semester and would remain consistent throughout the semester's
observation.

Description of Previous Changes in Our Classroom

 

It would appear that teachers trying to change and bring about
change have a receptive if passive audience with whom to work.
Reviewing Ed's and my teaching careers shows evidence of previous
attempts at change. In fact,the entire district has been noted since day
one as an innovative district. Since the fall of 1968, Ed and I have been
teaching American History together. Our teaching has attempted to meet
the changing demands of society. Trying to maintain standards and at
the same time adjust to the demands of a changing society-student
population has been frustrating. There always seems to be something
new that teachers should be doing to make their student more receptive

and more successful learners.

95

1962 - 1968

 

From 1962 until 1968 I was a most traditionalulecture, text, test--
teacher. Ed's early teaching until 1965 was much the same. Both of us
were forced to change teaching methods when we moved to Essexville to
teach at Garber High School. Ed in 1965 and I in 1968 became part of a
non-graded humanities program that involved a team of from four to six
teachers, mostly English and American History teachers. Ed had this to
say about the program:

Non-Graded Humanities: Students would work at their own pace.
They could take tests early or late depending upon whether they
felt they had mastered the material. The humanities approach
included American History, English, art, and music. With the first
graduating class, a problem developed regarding what to do with
students who finished early or didn't finish at all. Another
problem was (that the English Department didn't feel that enough
grammar was taught.

1970 - 1973

 

The program collapsed in 1969 and Ed and I were assigned all of
the American History classes. Not wanting to return to our old ways, we
attempted to use methods of individualized instruction and the inquiry
approach that was being touted at the time. The text we adopted was _A_

New History of the United States: An Inquiry Approach by Edwin Fenton.

 

The idea of inquiry, i.e., teaching students to think and work like
historians, seemed exciting to us. Developing the programs and study
guides to suit the individual's needs and skills also seemed practical.

With large classes, using this approach took a tremendous amount of time

96

and energy on the part of the teacher. Getting students to problem
solve when they lacked background knowledge was a difficult proposition.
Students at that time were rebelling; large classes were hard to deal
with and attempting to use a text that consisted of primary or source
material was impossible for us to cope with. We gave up and changed.

1973 - 1977

 

Next came the multi-text and small group instruction. To solve
the lack of background problem we purchased sets of a traditional
American history text, and we tried to combine the various materials in
the inquiry and traditional with other supplementary materials. The new
wave thinking at the time was to group students. We complied with the
recommendations from the administration to remove the desks and bring
in tables. Ed remembers this about our new approach to teaching and
learning:

The concept was to place good students with poor students in

small groups so that they might learn from each other. One of the

problems here was to motivate students who were not contributing
to the group. Another problem was that good students felt that
they were being pulled down to the average student.

By 1977 the multi-text and small group approach was considered a
failure. Once again we had changed and had not been able to sustain the
implementation of the new ideas. The seven years had been a trying
time for teachers, and this was reflected in our teaching. We had
gradually reduced the amount of work required from students and had
submitted to the hue and cry of the time to become more relevant.

Whether we did this to take the easy way out or because it was

97

necessary, I'm not sure, but it certainly was an unhappy time for us
professionally. In general students were a pain in the a __ during these
years. The drugs, lack of morality, appearance and general anti-
establishment attitude of students about drove me out of education. I
firmly believe that Ed and I survived this chaos in education because of
the coaching that we loved so much. (My Field Notes; Statement of
Philosophy of Education)

1978 - 1984

 

Beginning in 1978 we gradually returned to the single text inquiry
approach. The round tables for grouping students were removed and once
again we attempted to get our students to learn history through

discovery rather than being spoon fed. The new inquiry text, Discovering

 

American History by Kounslar and Frizzle was much improved over our
earlier inquiry text because it provided the students with primary
materials but more background information. Our classroom became more
traditional during this time in that desks were in rows and there was
little small group or individualized instruction. Class discussions, reading
and attempting to solve historical problems were the instructional
approaches that we used.

Ed and I believed in this approach and worked hard at getting the
students to respond positively to the high level thinking skills. Rather
than taking objective tests all the time, this approach required essay
writing. The students did poorly and we were overwhelmed with papers
to correct. Our classes averaged 30 students per class. Ed remembers

this about the second time around for inquiry:

98

In this method of teaching, an emphasis was placed on the student
developing a systematic way of finding answers to questions that
he or she thought were pertinent to the subject material. The
positive benefits of this method were some students found it
challenging and really learned how to think and write
independently. We found the concept to be good, but we found
students did not have a very good background in this approach.
Many average and below average students found it frustrating and
difficult with some students simply giving up.

We used Discovering American History for seven years but

 

gradually reduced the amount of inquiry and increased the amount of
factual, background historical information. What actually happened was
that we found ourselves asking the questions and then answering them
ourselves rather than insisting on the students working through the
problem and drawing their own conclusions. We just couldn't seem to get
enough of the students involved and succeeding. Our American History
class was considered difficult for the average and below average
students.

In 1984 we had a decision to make. What materials would we
adopt to once again change American History? We had revised the K-12
social studies curriculum and divided the course into two parts. Early
American history through the Civil War would be taught in the eighth
grade, and we would teach from 1865 to the present in the tenth grade.
The middle school history was highly traditional. We looked for materials
that would complement the eighth grade text and also meet the standards

of quality in a text that we were accustomed to using. It was

99

interesting to us to discover that not one publisher was printing or
selling a text based upon the inquiry approach by the mid 19805.
Whatever happened to the new social studies?

1985 - 1987

 

With the adoption of A History of the Republic by Davidson and

 

Lytle, Ed and I had come full cycle. In the mid-19605 we were
traditionalulecture, discussion, textbook-«history teachers; by the mid
19805 we had returned to this method of instruction., To be trite, "The
more things change . . . ." As a team we took turns teaching. The
supplementary materials that came with the text were excellent and of
course the audio-visual material had improved significantly over the
years. Ed made these observations about our new old approach:
We used a question-answer approach along with short lectures to
cover American history chapter by chapter. Quizzes and chapter
tests were used to grade students. This approach was easier for
the teacher to organize and use objective tests to measure
progress. The problem with this approach is that the student gets
bored unless we add a variety of activities and changes to the
everyday teaching process.
Ed and I both figured we were set until retirement. The curriculum
guides, text, supplementary material such as maps, television shows,
movies, study guides, etc. were all pretty well in place and all we had to
do was fine-tune our act. Not to be; to paraphrase an old Coasters tune,
". . . and then, and then, and then, along came mastery learning."
For 19 years we have been changing only to end up in the same

teaching mode in which we had both begun. As Ed and I talked over the

100

years, we have come to the conclusion that only two significant changes
have taken place in our classrooms, (a) we lecture less often, and (b) we
require less work of the students.

15 sustained change possible in the classroom? In isolation from
the rest of the school we have often attempted change; we have become
better teachers as a result of our efforts, but the fact remains that with
all our experience we haven't really changed anything to improve the job
of teaching or the task of learning.

This brief account of American History at Garber High is relevant
to this research in that as we study the implementation of another
change—mastery learning--we will attempt to provide data that will be
useful to teachers and other professionals attempting change in

classrooms.

Plannigg for Mastery Learn_ing

The most recent wave of school reform has had an impact upon
the schools in Bay County. Three of the four school districts in the
county, Bay City, Pinconning and Bangor are in the process of
implementing mastery learning on a district wide basis. The other school
district in the county, Essexville-Hampton, is considering mastery learning
but is moving more slowly than the three other districts. The overall
school plan for mastery learning is called Outcome Based Education and
the model for change is the model advocated and implemented by Dr.
John Champlin. Dr. Champlin's Outcome Based Education model, used in
the Johnson City School District in Johnson City, New York, is based

upon the Mastery Model of Benjamin Bloom.

101

Mastery learning would appear to be a model of change that would
benefit the students and the teacher. However, keeping Ed's and my
record in mind concerning our ability to effect and sustain change, we
decided to attempt implementation and document how we went about
implementing mastery learning. As a graduate student, the thought of
making a contribution to our classroom environment, school district,
county, and education in general made me enthusiastic about the
possibilities of a study about change. This section of the study will
describe the process of implementing mastery learning in five sections of
American History at Garber High School. This change—mastery
learning—was attempted by Ed and me with the verbal support of the
administration. The data will assist in making a decision on whether or
not to jump on the bandwagon that the other three districts in the
county are already riding. Whether a school district, a school, a
department, or a teacher decides to carry out a major change such as
mastery learning successfully, teachers will play an important role. If a
teacher wants to change, learning about the proposed reform is essential.

My first contact with mastery learning was in a graduate class

when we read The Paideia Program by Mortimer J. Adler. My initial

 

reaction to mastery learning was that it sounded fine but was unrealistic;
the seed was planted. The second time I heard about mastery learning
was in the teachers' lounge when a group of us were b _______
about a rumor that the mastery learning that was being introduced in Bay
City was going to be the next fad dumped on us from above. Many of us
at Garber remembered the horrible disaster of non-graded, individualized

instruction that was used in the district back in the late 19605. We

102

automatically linked the process to mastery learning. From the lounge
session to conversations with Bay City teachers to the reading of a book
borrowed from an administrator who had not read it, my education on
mastery learning expanded. The book that convinced me that mastery

learning had potential for Ed and me was Implementing Mastery Learninj

 

by Thomas Guskey (1985). During the time that I was doing this reading,
Ed became involved as well as Jack Flood, Our department head. In a
department meeting, we began to discuss what we could do to investigate
the Model for Mastery Learning. Jack and I decided to pilot mastery
units in our Practical Law classes. We didn't team teach, but we did
collaborate on curriculum. The pilot study was a real learning
experience and provided valuable data for the more extensive study in
American History. What Are The Problems of Implementing Mastery

Learning in a Social Studies Classroom? must be evaluated in its entirety

 

to truly understand the mind set that the participant observer researcher
was in when actual classroom implementation of mastery learning began
in American History. (Pilot Study; Appendix B)

The result of Jack's pilot study was similar to mine, and we both
decided to pursue our interest in mastery learning with the administration
and other department members. The groundwork had been laid for the
study of mastery learning in American History.

Once I had covered in detail with Ed what I wanted to do, and he
had agreed to his role in the research, planning was expedient. Finding
time to plan was difficult but possible because of the teaching situation
we are in and because of Ed's willingness to give of himself. It had

become apparent in the pilot study that careful planning was essential

103

for the change to take place efficiently and effectively. Ed and I had
frequent team meetings. We spend our time discussing the mastery model
to be used and getting the instructional materials ready. Ed agreed to
work with me on preparing the many formative and summative tests.
Primarily this work consisted of developing a second form of each test.
We also decided early on that I would be the teacher who would explain
mastery learning to the students. We also realized that considerable
planning and revising would have to occur during the course of the
semester.

It is paramount to remember that extensive planning for the
American History course had already been completed. We had been
revising curriculum and writing the curriculum guides for five years. If
this work had not been in place, planning for mastery learning would
have taken much more time and effort. E5pecially crucial was the fact
that we already had the goals and objectives that we would teach to.
These goals and objectives were taken from the Michigan Department of
Education's Recommended Goals and Objectives Document (1987), and
more specific objectives were taken from the textbook. Preparing
objectives, chapter overviews and summaries for the students was also
completed during the planning stages. We decided that providing the
students with the objectives and overviews along with key vocabulary
would help all concerned.

The next decision involved grading. In the pilot study, students
and teachers had difficulty with a fair grading system. Based upon
Guskey's book, my experience, and conversations with Ed, we decided on

the following grading system that we hoped would comply with the

104

philosophy behind mastery learning and satisfy our needs as teachers and

students. Homework, class work and quizzes would be evaluated for

 

diagnostic purposes. These formative evaluations would provide us
knowledge of the students' progress and also help us determine how we

were doing as teachers. Chapter Tests used previously as the major

 

instruments for assessing grades would, in mastery learning, be used as
formative evaluations. We decided that the students would get 80% of
the questions correct or they would have to take another test over the
material. When they received 80%, they would have achieved mastery.
No letter grades would be given on these tests. A student would receive
mastery or non-mastery. The chapter or formative test would be given

about every other week. Unit Tests would serve as the summative

 

evaluation of the work done during a marking period of nine or ten
weeks. The student's grade would be based upon this unit or summative
examination. To be eligible to take the summative test, a student would
be required to achieve mastery on four of the five chapter or formative
tests.

With our planning complete, at this time we believed that we were
ready to implement the mastery model at the beginning of the second

semester.

Descriptive Model of Chang In the Classroom
To develop an explanatory model of what is happening in the
classroom to bring about change, the native's interpretation of the events
should be interfaced with the research's view of the events (Lutz, 1981).

As observable patterns emerge from the actual phenomenon, grounded

105

theory can be applied and tested (Glazer and Strauss, 1975; Yinger,
1978).

The importance of examining change within the framework of an
organization has long been recognized (Guskey, 1982). The institution
defines change with inherent obligations and expectations; however,
institutions are created by human consensus. Once established, they
provide a framework or context subsequently occupied by participants.
Change then provides places for living, breathing individuals to act and
bring about improvements in the institutional framework.

Because change is a dynamic force, it becomes a highly active
phenomenon often shaped by the change agents, the teacher. When
individuals decide to change, they do so in an individualized style.
Because the forces that shape change are dynamic rather than static, the
process of change is ongoing. Changes do not exist in vacuums, but in
highly interactive social contexts. The relation between change and
social context is mutually constructive in that changes are prescribed to
some degree by social institutions and created in face-to-face interaction
by individuals who assume them. Consequently, by the very nature of
these individuals—their needs, personalities, values and experiences--
institutional changes are humanly reformed and shaped.

The major focus of the study was teacher change and change in
the classroom. Change as a theoretical construct and instructor's
variation or improvisation within a classroom guided the analysis, for

through observation the teacher's perception of change seemed a pivotal

 

factor determining the success or failure of a classroom change--mastery

learning. Although each student in a classroom has a well-defined set of

106

tasks presented in the classroom, the teacher plans for what will happen
in the setting to bring about the change.

Secondary school teachers as professionals have a degree of
freedom in the management of the learning environment. American
History classes, which contain a large volume of factual and conceptual
information, are most often taught by lecture, discussion and reading a
text. Questions and discussion are often limited by the number of
students in the class and student apathy. Classrooms, however, do
provide an environment where the personalities and needs of the
instructor can play a dramatic role in determining what changes can be
successfully implemented to improve the classroom environment.

With qualified, experienced teachers, it is not normally a matter
of right or wrong methods of instruction, but it is a matter of maximizing
the effectiveness of the proposed change within any teaching style to
meet the needs of both the teacher and the students. For the two
teachers, attempting to change and bring about change proved to be
rewarding, challenging and frustrating. What factors contributed to the
change process that are of educational value? The answer is clearer as
the process of change formation is examined more closely. For the
purpose of this study and the model, change in teachers' beliefs and
attitudes is the result of change in teachers' classroom practices and
change in student learning outcomes (Guskey, 1986). It is commonly
institutionally understood that change in teachers' beliefs and attitudes
must come first if the change is to take place. Changes in the beliefs
and attitudes of teachers prior to the implementation of a new program

or innovation must occur (Guskey, 1986). School administrators in charge

107

of staff development efforts frequently attempt to first institute some
form of change in the beliefs, attitudes and perceptions of teachers
(Fullan, 1982; Harris, 1980). Staff developers try to change teachers'
beliefs about certain aspects of teaching or the desirability of a
particular curriculum or instructional innovation. They presume that such
a change in teachers' beliefs and attitudes will lead to specific changes
in their classroom behavior and practices which, in turn, will result in
improved student learning. This perspective on teacher change has never
succeeded in my 25 years of teaching. "Current research on teacher
change indicates that the assumptions of this model may be inaccurate at
least under the special conditions of staff development for experienced
teachers" (Guskey, 1986, p. 6). An alternative model, used in this study,
re-examines the process of teacher change under these special conditions.
A different perspective seems necessary, therefore, to guide the
development of more effective classroom innovation.

As team teachers, Ed and I are interested in three major outcomes
of mastery learning in our classrooms. We want to change our classroom
practices, change our beliefs and attitudes, and change the learning
outcomes of our students. Knowing that we have, for the most part,
failed to bring about change in the last quarter of a century by using the
traditional method of change, we will in this change alter the order of
these outcomes. The changes that we want to bring about are well
defined—mastery learning. However, this time we will use an alternative
perspective on the teacher change process.

According to the model, significant change in teachers' beliefs and

attitudes is likely to take place only after changes in student learning

l\/§

,Il
t"
\
J

.'

108

outcomes are evidenced. Ed and I will not alter our beliefs and attitudes
unless mastery learning can successfully be implemented. If changes in
student learning result from the classroom practices of mastery learning,
and if these practices can be implemented without the expense of too
much time and effort, then and only then will our beliefs and attitudes
be Changed. The perspective subscribed to in this study on teacher
change is predicated on the idea that change is a learning process for
teachers that is developmental and primarily experientially based. The
instructional practices most veteran teachers employ are determined and
fashioned to a large extent by their experiences in the classroom (Lortie,

197 5).

Mastery Learning (The Change) Influences and Formation

Planning for mastery learning took place during the first semester
of the 1986-87 school year. Implementation and the analysis of mastery
learning occurred during the second semester of the same school year.
Ed and I implemented mastery learning in five sections of American
History. Four sections were team taught and Ed utilized mastery
learning alone in one section. To study the change process in these
classes by using ethnography the participant observer must consider
various influences. Change is both intricate and unique. The change-
mastery learning—is intricate in that a myriad of factors influence the
ultimate expression of the change. Figures 6 and 7 illustrate how the
external/extrinsic factors of the setting and the internal/intrinsic factors
of the individual are interfaced to collectively create the attitudes and

beliefs of teachers that result from their classroom experiences. Although

109

some of the forces are specific to Garber High, many others are common

to secondary school environments in general.

Figure 6. Extrinsic and intrinsic Change influences.

INSTITUTION

lusrnucrons
swarms "“95’ cunnicuiuu

PERSONALITY

 

SETTING

Extrinsic Forces
The external or extrinsic forces that impact change include the

institution, curriculum, setting, and students.

110

Figure 7. Extrinsic Forces.

 

 

LChange--Defined by If B I Change-~Perceived I)?
C

ulture‘Institution Instructor

 

 

 

Extrinsic Forces Intrinsic Forces
Students Needs
Setting Personality
Curriculum Knowledge

     
   
   

Institution

  

Mastery
Learning
EXPRESSED

CHANGE

 

Teaching or Teacher

Beliefs and Attitudes

1. The institution contributes to the potential for successful
change by means of the following:

Mission and goals of the school district.

Academic standards.

Instruction as a major focus.

Negotiated contract.

Teacher and Department autonomy and evaluation.

111

With a philosophical aim of maintaining a pattern of excellence within a
broad framework of the school district's mission and goals, the
administration and staff at Garber High are faced with a variety of
dilemmas. The student population is both declining and changing.
District enrollment has declined 11.2% since 1980 and a recent loss of 50
students at Garber High points to the beginning of a long downward slide
in high school enrollment. The composition of the student population of
Garber is changing with increasing numbers of transient students due to
the poor economy of the area and to the students from one-parent homes.
The traditional programs and modes of instruction do not always meet the
more varied needs of the shifting student population. Many teachers
have voiced concern over working with today's students. Complaints that
students aren't prepared or that they are apathetic are common over
morning coffee.

Academic standards at Garber provide teachers with another
dilemma. Pressure to earn a high grade point average to gain admission
to the better colleges conflicts with the teachers' standards of quality.
Garber High has never graduated a four point student. Should teachers
lower their standards or should students work harder? The dilemma is
more complex when one takes into consideration that the majority of
Garber students go on to college. Garber has done follow up studies of
the college bound students and has discovered that in general they do
well in college. But what happens to our other students?

As primarily a staff of experienced teachers, averaging 17.8 years,
traditional instructional practices dominate. The number of staff at the

top of the salary schedule and the declining enrollment place the school

112

in a position of limiting program growth to ensure job security. With the
recent millage failure and other property tax difficulties, even this
wealthy school district is going to be faced with choices concerning staff
and possibly cutting programs. Each of these options would ultimately
affect instruction and the face of the school district.

Teacher and department autonomy and evaluation impact
instruction. For example, teachers' personal influence determines who
teaches courses. In the past, the way courses were assigned was not
always fair or consistent within departments. Who teaches what is based
upon dictates, of the schedule makers and not what is in the best interest
of either teachers or students. It is often stated by the administrators
that there is 92 alternative to their decisions and that it is in the best
interest of the children. (My Field Notes; Friday, April 10, 1987) In
recent years, the negotiated contract has come to play a greater role in
teacher assignments. For example teachers are assigned to as close to
150 minutes per week as is possible which is the main reason for the 59
minute class periods. Every teacher is assigned five, 59 minute classes
five days a week. Little teacher-student flexibility is possible in this
structured program. Teachers are expected to have a conference period
each day, but some teachers do not have an office or classroom Space to
work in during this time, and students are not available during
conference periods because almost all are assigned to six classes per day.
If teachers are going to tutor or informally meet with students, it must
be done before school, during lunch or after school, time that is, for the

most part, outside the requirements of the contract. The contract and

113

administrative decisions spell out the responsibilities of all teachers while
the individual teacher determines specific roles within the classroom.

2. Curriculum The American History curriculum contributes to
the process of change—mastery learning-by means of the following:

Stated goals and objectives.

Learning activities.

Link with instructional methods.

Observations clearly demonstrate how the change in teachers' practices
and beliefs are influenced by the curricula. By the very nature of the
classroom setting and the adopted student materials, teachers are often
bound by pre-determined goals and objectives, learning activities and
traditional teacher expectations and methods.

Most American History classes at Garber use a commercial text
and supplementary materials that were used as the basic tool to build the
curriculum guide. But some of the classes are taught by staff who refuse
to use the curriculum guide and simply do their own thing. Ed and I use
the curriculum guide that we developed during the era of social studies
curriculum revision. However, we have continued to rely on the textbook
and to walk students through the text and the chapter questions to
ensure that they do some reading and writing. We also talk them through
the vocabulary and basic ideas to ensure at least minimal understanding
of what is being read and discussed. We can never assume that they
know anything about the past. (My Field Notes; Wednesday, May 6, 1987)

In American History, the learning activities are written to the
stated goals and objectives to allow for teacher and student direction for

daily learning experiences. The teachers introduce the day's tasks by

114

reviewing the previous day's reading, and then they expect students to
read through and prepare assigned questions for discussion. The days are
often broken down into four parts for each class period—review, class
work, discussion and reading daily newspapers. When team teaching, Ed
and I usually divide up the teacher led portion of the class period.
Taking turns and double teaming the combined groups occasionally is how
we move students through the day's pre-arranged activities. Depending
upon the personalities of the students in particular classes, activities will
be added or deleted. It is remarkable how different each group is. The
59 minute class period (that is, by the way, too long for some fifteen-
year-olds) does allow for some flexibility in the curriculum. For example,
the daily Detroit newspaper that we use almost daily might be used for
in-depth current events in one class if time permits, and it might not be
used at all in another class that needs the class time for other learning.
When Ed and I are team teaching, there is yet another external
pressure on the instructors. Material must be prepared for the day's
lesson and equipment, movies, film-strips, etc., attended to for both our
team taught classes and our individually taught classes; tests must be
team written, administered and graded. For example, Ed and I may team
teach two periods a day, first period and fifth period. We must plan and
work together during those two sessions, but we must also plan and be
prepared for our other three classes each day. My three law classes and
Ed's three individually taught history classes must be attended to as well
so that a smooth transition from one class to another occurs. Keep in

mind that there are only four minutes between classes.

115

The problem of coordinating the team taught classes must be dealt
with during the classes or before school begins; we have m had the
same conference period. Usually the primary responsibility will fall upon
the teacher. who will be making the initial contact with the students first
period. A few minutes each morning must be spent on what our roles
will be for that day's lesson. Certainly the curriculum does influence the
teacher's role in bringing about change in the classroom, but outside of
an occasional need for flexibility, the curriculum format is predetermined
and consistent. In our case the curriculum guide only enhanced the
chance of mastery learning being successfully implemented.

3. Setting. The actual classroom setting contributes to the
process of change by means of the following:

Equipment and materials.

Class size.

Location and structure.

As an external force, the setting also influences teacher attitude and
beliefs concerning change, but unlike the other factors, once defined, the
physical components, e.g., the desks, chalk boards, and other physical
structures, and time frame change little from week to week. Ed and I
feel that our classrooms are well designed and adequately equipped. The
simple feature of a movable wall between our classes, rooms 24 and 25,
provides opportunity for flexible grouping of students. This
characteristic of our setting is not a requirement of team teaching and
change, but it certainly is helpful. The American History classes vary in
size from 16 to 31 which does cause a bit of a problem. Interacting with

students in the smaller classes is much easier, and it also is easier to

116

move students around in the classrooms when there are fewer students.
During the semester in which this study was conducted, our classes were
the smallest they had ever been, making the setting conducive for
change. This was demonstrated during any session when the team taught
classes came together for films or the VCR or for carrying out the plan
to implement mastery learning. The physical layout of the classrooms
allows teachers and students to move easily from one setting to another
maximizing the opportunity for interaction. Students frequently drop in
during lunch period or between classes. It is not unusual for students to
spend some of their lunch period in the classrooms or for them to stop in
between classes to ask a question. Ed and I often have difficulty getting
anything done between classes because of the frequent interruptions.
Because the special education classrooms are next door to our rooms and
we have many special education students mainstreamed into our classes,
these students get to class early and often have questions or just want
our attention. (Informal interview; Monday, March 16, 1987)

4. Students The classroom students contribute to the change by
means of the following:

Heterogeneity—academic background.

Homogeneity—age, race and economic background.

Extracurricular activities.

Outside obligations.
The students at Garber were described earlier as a heterogeneous group.
This is particularly true of the American History students. The
mainstreamed special education students have special needs that must be

addressed. They tend to be insecure about being in a large, regular

117

classroom. The mainstreamed students are mixed in with borderline
special education non-readers, average apathetic students, and the best
and the brightest. The required American History course is highly
demanding for some and just receiving credit is important. For others,
the goal is to learn as much as possible and to maintain a high grade
point average.

The extremes, special education and highly motivated, are
relatively small percentages of the total number of students. The
greatest percentage of students make up a silent majority. These
students generally behave themselves but are not particularly interested
in American history. Attention needs to be given to the three major
groupings of students.

Homogeneity in some respects is another factor contributing to
what we do in the classroom setting. The students at Garber and in
American History are almost all caucasian and middle class. One might
have an entire row of Heather's and Holly's who look just alike. Almost
all of the students wear whatever the latest teen-aged fashions are. The
dress conformity makes it difficult to determine if a student is wealthy
or poor. Most qualify as members of the middle class. Minority and
poverty students are the exceptions in American History classes.

For most students at Garber, history is not a primary interest.
They have many outside obligations such as extracurricular activities and
part-time jobs. Getting students to do make up work after school is
difficult because of jobs and sports. (Ed's Field Notes; Monday, May 4,

1987) Class time for student-athletes is often reduced because they

118

frequently must be excused from class to go to participate. This is
especially true in the spring when this study was conducted.

Certainly single-parent families, TV, rock music, drugs, etc. are
also extrinsic factors contributing to schools and classrooms. As
important as they are, a consideration of their impact is beyond this
study on change but the reader must remain conscious of their
contributing forces.

Intrinsic Forces

 

The internal or intrinsic forces that impact changes in the
classroom include the teacher's individual needs, personality and
knowledge.

1. Teacher's needs. The teacher's needs contribute to the

 

changes in the classroom by means of the following:

Recognition.

Self-esteem, acceptance.

Self-actualization.
The needs of the teachers are key in determining change. Most often
the salary and working conditions meet basic needs of teachers, but other
needs that help bring about change must be met. Ed and I need
recognition, and it is difficult for teachers of required courses to receive
any recognition. Coaching is one way that we have satisfied this need in
the past. However, just being a social studies teacher does little for
one's self-esteem. As long as teachers don't make any waves, they
aren't apt to be recognized in any way. In all the years that Ed and I
have taught we have never really been challenged about what we do as

teachers, nor have we ever been praised. As coaches, recognition both

119

good and bad has been frequent. Recognition is important to us. All too
often we must seek recognition outside of the classroom. Rewards are
few and far between for the typical classroom American history teacher.
So often my attitude becomes: Why bother; nobody gives a s _ _
anyway. (My Field Notes, Monday, March 16, 1987) I think a main reason
for Ed's continued enthusiasm in education is the result of his continued
success as a coach, thus providing the recognition he deserves whereas
my more pessimistic outlook toward life in the classroom is due to my
graduate study of what should be as opposed to what I experience daily.

The personal need to grow intellectually is demonstrated by my
graduate study at MSU and Ed's willingness to change and improve.
Professional growth has enhanced our willingness to grow and change.
By taking classes, attending seminars or just reading, our professional
needs have been met.

Both Ed and I bring with us into a class a broad range of
professional experiences that we share with students during class. The
need to feel successful is important to each of us while the source of
achieving the feeling clearly varies.

2. Teacher's Personality. Ed's personality and my personality

 

contribute to any change implemented by means of the following:

Values, beliefs.

Social interests.

Family background.
Our personality has a definite way of creeping into each facet of the
classroom change giving the change a unique quality. The belief about

student outcomes is not uniform among teachers who teach the same

120

course at the same time. While Ed may feel it is a classroom teacher's
job to make students comfortable by using an informal approach, I may
feel that a quite disciplined approach is more appropriate. Values and
personal beliefs about a teacher's role in shaping student behavior may
be as simple as demanding recall of a fact or as complex as demanding
abstract reasoning and problem solving using the conceptual information
learned. Students pick up on what they perceive is important to the
teacher, and the most successful, feedback appropriate behavior.
Personality interacts with aspects of the social setting to shape
the context of any change in the classroom. Ed is most willing to listen
and attend to students' social and personal needs. I am not. Ed
socializes in and out of class with students. I do little socializing with
students. I am inclined to challenge students in the classroom. Ed is
more likely to make an effort to simplify the material in terms of
common experience. Whatever each of us does alters the environment.
Just as background and family demands affect student behavior, so
too do they impact how teachers implement a change. Ed and I are
family men with children who are all out of high school Ed's three
daughters and my son and daughter have been in our classes. The
experience of rearing children and the eXpanded awareness of having
them in our work environment has given us a perspective on education
that has had a profound impact upon what we do. Our own childrens'
trials and tribulations have made us much more compassionate teachers
than we might otherwise be. When our students do not succeed, we feel

partly responsible; this was not the case years ago.

121

Frustrations from outside the job can and do affect anyone's
performance on the job. A conscientious as Ed is, he had great difficulty
recovering from the four hip surgeries over the last seven years. It
would seem that the older our teaching staff becomes, the more outside
frustrations, difficulties and health problems we are confronted with.
Tragic examples of this occurred during the classroom study on mastery
learning; one of the teachers on the Garber staff died suddenly and
another one was arrested for criminal sexual conduct. (My Field Notes;
Tuesday, May 26, 1987) Trouble like this impacts students and teachers
and are factors that influence the goings on in the classroom. Only an
empathic student and teacher population will have a successful learning
experience.

3. Instructor's Knowledge. Ed's knowledge and my knowledge also

 

contribute to the process of change by our training and experience. Ed
and I bring to the classroom a strong academic background in history and
a vast amount of eXperience. Although we may know the subject matter
content, the ability to teach that information to others is still a problem
for us. Even with our knowledge and experience, we are not able to be
as effective as we would like to be. Although we have attempted many
changes we have not been able to sustain any of the changes nor have
we significantly improved our methods of instruction. As stated earlier,
we have about come full cycle during the last 25 years. Experience
working with any curriculum change or teaching method seems a key
factor in how a teacher behaves in the classroom. Teachers learn what
works or doesn't work for them in their environment. Learning the

trouble spots and how to recognize and address them comes with

122

experience. Therefore, change in teachers' attitudes and beliefs is a
result of adjusting to ongoing needs of both the curriculum and students
and, ultimately, those of the teacher.

Each of the above intrinsic factors is set within a larger cultural
and community framework. Culture influences the array of external
forces and certainly plays a major role in the classroom environment.
The extrinsic forces of the institution, curriculum, setting, and students--
individually and collectively—impact the process of change in the
classroom. Interfaced with the intrinsic forces—-the teacher's individual
needs, personality and knowledge—the change results in the expressed
teaching method that can be observed in the classroom.

I am interested in how teachers change. Ed and I have often
implemented changes in our classroom, but in 25 years of teaching,
neither of us has changed our instructional methods. By using Guskey's

Alternate Model of the Process of Teacher Change (See diagram, page

 

51) and Bloom's Instructional Process of Mastery Learning, Ed and I will
carefully observe what happens in our classrooms regarding change--
mastery learning. As stated earlier, the staff development, or our
development regarding mastery learning, was rather informal. We became
interested as a result of surrounding school districts' interest in mastery
learning and because of rumors that our district was going to become
involved in mastery learning. I read material about mastery learning,
asked questions, and attended workshops held by the Bay-Arenac
Intermediate School District on the topic of mastery learning. After
having a number of discussions with Ed and doing pilot studies with the

Social Studies Department Head, Jack Flood, Ed and I began to plan for

123

the implementation of mastery learning in our American History
classrooms.

I can not overemphasize the importance of how time consuming
this planning is and how essential it is to have a curriculum guide and
materials in place to use in this planning stage. If one only had a text
and had to plan a semester's worth of work for the use of this
instructional process—mastery learning--it would be extremely difficult.
Our curriculum guide is a good example of the prerequisite kind of
planning that is so important. (Sample pages, Appendix A). Adapting the
curriculum guide to mastery learning was not nearly as difficult as
starting from scratch would have been. Extensive planning took place,
and it was possible because of the positive total environment of our
school.

Throughout the second semester Ed and I used the five essential
elements in the mastery learning process. They are:

1. Feedback and correctives.

2. Congruence among Instructional Components.

3. Clearly specified learning objectives.

4. Clearly formulated learning standards.

5. Appropriate group based instruction.

We consciously introduced and practiced the five elements trying to keep
in mind four of the five mastery variables. We felt that we didn't have
any control over the first variable, student aptitude for particular kinds
of instruction, but we could to some extent influence the other four
variables—quality of instruction, ability to understand instruction,

perseverance, and time allowed for learning.

124

How Mastery Learning Was Implemented
WEEK ONE: Day one. Because of my extensive work on mastery
learning, we decided that I would handle the introduction with the
students and Ed would be the observer. The first part of the first class
period second semester was used to survey the students' attitudes about
their American History class during the previous semester. This survey
will be discussed later in) the paper.

I used an overhead projector and the chalk board to introduce and
explain mastery learning. Figure 8 illustrates the transparency that
served as the basis for the lecture and discussion on mastery learning.
The chalk board was used to illustrate how grades should improve by
using the mastery approach. Showing the students the normal bell curve
that has been used in the past and the negatively skewed curve predicted
for mastery learning was done to create enthusiasm for the program.

Figure 8. Bell Curve and Mastery Curve.

KOBCCOOHE

 

HYp0thetical Dre-post A

achieve-ant
(nor-ally distributed)

achievement frequency
distributions for
mastery versus non-

mastery groups.

«OSOBDCH'I

 

_/\

achieve-ant

(Idstein, 198'}, p. 10) (negatively akeved)

125

Figure 9. Implementing the Outcome Based Mastery Model: American
History.
IMPLEMENTING THE OUTCOME BASED-MASTERY MODEL:

AMERICAN HISTORY

 

UNIT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES - CURRICULUM GUIDE
UNIT MATERIAL

 

 

[SUB-UNIT 1 SUB-UNIT 2 SUB-UNIT 3 SUB-UNIT 1:]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SUMMATIVE EXAM - Score less than 80% must take retake

 

V
\l .
\1 *Must pass 3 of 4 to qualify

, for the summative exam
r RETAKE I

If students fail to score 80% on two of the four FORMATIVES,

 

then they must submit written and oral proof of understanding the

objectives.

126

Students appeared to be listening, but not one student in the
classes asked a question following the explanation. After the students
had an opportunity to ask questions and didn't, I distributed the materials
that would, we hoped, contribute to student learning in American History.
The class handouts for the first unit included an overview of Chapter 13
chapter vocabulary, a summary of each section of the chapter and
chapter objectives. This procedure would be followed throughout the
semester. The material was read and discussed and again the students
didn't have any questions. The 59 minute class period was about over.
Based on the classroom experience of introducing mastery learning, it
would appear that when introducing a change of this magnitude, the
teacher is going to have to be willing to slow down and be patient.

Ed concluded that as a result of his glancing at the survey and the
lack of questions that there was evidence of a lack of interest as well as
a dislike for history. He also noted that when I explained the
opportunity to achieve mastery and receive an A or B, student interest
seemed quite high. (Ed's Field Notes; Monday, January 26, 1987) My
notes indicated a lack of time to cover what we had planned to do and a
problem with sixth hour in that we were short of overview materials.
That necessitated a quick trip to the copy machine for more copies--a
benefit of technology and team teaching. (My Field Notes; Monday,
January 26, 1987).

Day Two. The best laid plans were fouled up as we entered day
two of mastery learning. Initially we were going to implement the
change in our fifth and sixth hour team taught classes but because of a

scheduling mix-up, my class schedule had to be changed and a number of

127

students had to switch class periods. The change would result in mastery
learning being implemented in our team taught first and fifth periods and
in Ed's sixth hour class. Under certain conditions teachers might just
have said, "The h __ _ with it!" and returned to their old ways. I felt
that I had to go on in spite of the scheduling snafu and Ed was willing;
so were the students. A few indicated concern over being in a class that
was n_o_1_ going to experiment with mastery learning. The problem would
take a couple of days to be resolved. We decided to go ahead as
planned.

During class periods the second day I reviewed the grading
procedure for mastery learning because that was going to be a major
change for the students. Ed and I spent a considerable amount of time
talking about the grading system. Ed has some reservations that were
based upon the seeming similarity between mastery learning and the
non-graded system that he experienced in Essexville during the years
1965 to 1968. Ed says, "Retesting to achieve mastery is similar to
non-graded . . . . The Program can work if time boundaries can be set
up. What happens to those who can't achieve mastery or take longer
than the school year to achieve mastery?" (Ed's Field Notes; Tuesday,
January 27, 1987) My concerns ranged from how to check homework to
how important it was for us to work closely together teaching to the

objectives. Normally we would use the Detroit Free Press in class during

 

the last 10 or 15 minutes, but we did not have time to on Monday and
Tuesday. Mastery learning and schedule confusion had gotten off to a

slow start.

128

Day Three. The previously discussed schedule changes finally took
place today with the head of the Counseling Department coming to the
sixth hour classes to change the students' schedules. We were gaining
students from another teacher and losing a few to her class. This
necessitated the running off of additional material. During class we
checked homework and discovered that a number of the students hadn't
done their assignments. After some discussion Ed and I agreed that a
mark of + would indicate mastery and a mark of - would indicate non-
mastery on homework in our grade books. We also decided that we would
have to establish rules for eligibility to take the tests if students
continued to neglect their homework.

After three days of trying to implement mastery learning, we
didn't seem to be making much progress. Flexibility and patience seemed
to be the keys at this time. On the fourth day we finally had our
students and schedules in place. We would team teach mastery learning
first and fifth periods, and Ed would use the same instructional process
sixth hour alone.

Day Four. It became obvious that the new first hour students
needed the introductory information. So, once again I did my thing, and
I'll be d ______ if we didn't get some questions this time. (My Field
Notes; Thursday, January 28, 1987) Questions were asked by good
students regarding grades. They asked: "If I get over 90% on the first
formative tests and only in the 80% range on the summative test, do I
get an A or B?" "Can I take a retake on the summative test if I get 80%

on the summative test?" "Can enrichment improve my grade?" My

129

description of mastery learning was much better the third time around.
(My Field Notes; Thursday, January 29, 1987)

By the end of the first week we were beginning to feel as if we
were making progress. Our best shot teaching had been about what it
had been in our previously taught classes.

Day Five. On day four and five a good portion of class time was
taken up with using a video, "Time Was-The 30's." The students and
teachers seem to enjoy these programs, but our major question is—-What
do we do after the programs? Do we merely discuss, or do we quiz,
test? Just what would be most appropriate for mastery learning? In a
way, the videos are enrichment activities. Ed asked, "How do we check
mastery on film? If we gave a quiz-students not achieving mastery on
film information—would they have to view films again or find answers
from another source?" (Ed's Field Notes; Friday, January 30, 1987) My
notes on this date include a couple of important points concerning
mastery learning:

We don't have to change teaching method with mastery learning

unless we were flo_t_ teaching. It would seem that self-

accountability becomes one of the major assets of mastery learning
or a liability if we do not care to work. One must constantly
check on the relationship of what is going on in class to what his
goals and objectives are. The first week was a success especially
after the first few days of the new semester were over. It is also
somewhat difficult to g use mastery learning in our other

classes. (My Field Notes; Friday, January 30, 1987)

130

WEEK TWO: Day six. Week two would prove to be a most

 

difficult week for Ed and me. The change—mastery learning--that we
were implementing entered a crucial phase in that we had decided that
homework and quizzes would be checked to establish eligibility for the
formative test that was formerly just a chapter test. The issues
surrounding test eligibility, formative testing, and summative testing were
going to be complex and difficult to resolve. Not only was the change
process difficult at this time, but a number of extrinsic and intrinsic
factors had a significant influence on us. What we taught and how
students learned was negatively influenced by happenings in the general
environment.

Preparing for the formative test that was to be given on Friday
raised a number of issues that would be considered for the rest of the
semester. We began the week with a review of the previous week's
material. The importance of congruence, that is, the objectives and
teaching to the objectives, became obvious by this time. It is also more
difficult to do than one might think. For example, the students,
according to our lesson plans, were to interpret a cartoon in class and
discuss the meaning of that cartoon. (After they had completed the
questions over the cartoon on the New Deal, we tried to discuss the
meaning of it only to discover that the students didn't have any
conception of what it was about. Upon questioning we learned that they
had no idea what a Trojan Horse was. The students' lack of background
knowledge made it impossible for us to discuss the cartoon. This type of
situation occurs often in class. "Never assume that they know anything."

(My Field Notes; February 2, 1987) In reviewing section one and two of

131

Chapter 13 by relating objectives to information on the test, I really
began to question the importance of many of the test items. Why are we
testing what we test? Many of the test items are so specific. I guess
we are testing the way we do because it is easier to use the tests made
by the publisher.

Knowing that we were going to test on Friday, we were concerned
with getting through the material. Time on task became a factor and we
had to make some decisions about what to do and just as important, what
not to do. As it turned out Tuesday, Day Seven, was pure, unadulterated
chaos. Ed was called for jury duty, and we had an idiot for a substitute.
Having a sub in a team teaching situation poses certain problems that we
have overcome in the past by having the teacher who is at school simply
do all of the work that day and letting the sub sit. While implementing a
planned change, it is more difficult to work with a sub—especially a poor
one. (My Field Notes; Tuesday, February 3, 1987). To further
complicate the day, a science teacher in our system for over 20 years
had been arrested the day before on second degree criminal sexual
conduct charges. He taught across the hall from us, and many of our
students were in his Biology class. As a law teacher, I felt a special
obligation to deal openly and directly with the charges and our criminal
justice system. Needless to say, we did not teach to the objectives on
February third.

Other problems that had become apparent by this time involved
what to do about poor homework effort. It is really tough not to simply
hand out E's. How to deal with absent students was also becoming a

more serious problem with the implementation of mastery learning.

132

Day Eight. The problems from Tuesday carried over to Wednesday.
Ed returned but wanted to talk about jury selection which in the past
would have been fine with me, but now it seemed to screw up our
schedule and get useven further behind. Certainly what he had to say
was more important than the planned lesson. Other issues confronting us
on this day were how to handle daily assignments for those who won't do
the work, how to handle the evaluation of editorials written by students,
how to handle all the papers (homework), and how to handle the large
number of students missing class on this day because of a field trip. We
seemed to be taking more time on the material to be tested and more
time on critical thinking skills. The problems related to best shot
instruction are minimal. Ed and I continue to teach much as we always
have. The problems with this change have to do with the total school
environment and grading for mastery learning.

Day Nine. Thursday, February 5, was a day when American
History class concentrated on getting ready for the formative test over
Chapter 13 of the text. We reviewed all work, and it went well except
for the students who were absent due to a field trip. Drama field trip
students missed the review, so they get another day before they must
take the test.

Test preparation is a b _ _ _ _. (My Field Notes; Thursday,,
February 5, 1987) We need at least two forms of every test so that
students who do not achieve mastery can do a retake. Test items
become critical. The key for us was that we had a test bank of items
provided by the publisher of the text. This is both good and bad because

we are provided with some very good questions, but we also have a

133

tendency to rely on these items too much. Planning and implementing
the changes for two Class periods is tough; doing it for all five would be
almost impossible. There would be so much paper shuffling that one
would go crazy. (My Field Notes; Thursday, February 5, 1987).

Students are now asking more questions about the testing process.
They don't ask about the content or history, only about the rules
concerning formative and summative tests that might have some bearing
on their grades.

Day Ten. On Friday of the second week of mastery learning, we
gave the first major formative test. This test was used for diagnostic
purposes. Both teachers and students evaluated the test. There were 40
questions on the test and we had decided that the students would achieve
mastery with 80% correct. Once again the changenmastery learning-
resulted in our asking many questions about the change and about the
impact on the change from extrinsic forces. The questions regarding the
testing with mastery learning arose from the following observations:

1. The test took too long. How important are some of the

items?

2. How do we handle students who didn't achieve mastery? Can

the students keep the tests for study purposes?

3. Does mastery learning force the teacher to reduce content

and lower expectation?

4. The seven special education students in our classes were

having difficulty. What should we do for special education
students?

5. Should we throw out poorly worded questions?

134

6. Should we correct the tests, exchange them in class or have
students correct their own tests?

First Cycle of Mastery Learning Retest

 

If we would have been using the conventional teaching methods,
the unit would have been concluded with the test over Chapter 13.
However, using mastery learning requires the use of correctives,
feedback, enrichment, and retesting. On Friday we corrected the tests
in class and then divided the class into two sections. One section was
comprised of the students who had achieved mastery on the test. Ed

took those students and worked with the Detroit Free Press on an

 

enrichment assignment. I took the students who had not achieved
mastery (those who scored below 80%) and worked on correctives. The
students worked in groups or individually finding the answers to the test
questions that they had missed. In our first hour classes, 15 students had
achieved mastery on Formative Test A over Chapter 13, and 17 had
scored below 80% and had not achieved mastery. In the fifth hour class,
8 achieved mastery and 15 did not, and in Ed's sixth hour class, 13
achieved mastery and 11 did not. These results were somewhat better
than what we normally achieved but not spectacular.

On Monday, February 9, the students who had not achieved
mastery took the retest or Formative Test B over Chapter 13, and the
results were encouraging. In the first period class 8 more students
achieved mastery; there were only 7 who did not get at least 80% and
they were all between 70 and 79%. The fifth hour results weren't as
good with only 7 more students achieving mastery and 8 not achieving

mastery, but sixth hour, 6 more achieved mastery and only 4 did not.

135

Our totals then for Chapter 13 were as follows: 57 students achieved
mastery (80% or better), and 29 did not achieve mastery. However, only
12 students did not achieve 70% of the material. It would be nice to
conclude that the first cycle of mastery learning was over, but technical
problems on testing had to be resolved. What to do about students who
had not taken the first test was a problem. Should they take Test A or
Test B? We decided on Test A, so we had some students taking Test A
while others were doing Test B, the retest. The A Tests had to be
corrected immediately because those students not achieving mastery
would have to do the retest on Tuesday. Another problem was what to
do with students who came close but did not achieve mastery. We
decided that by assigning some additional essay questions, we would make
them eligible for mastery especially if effort on the students' part was
apparent. "Testing, retesting, make-up work and tests make for a great
deal of paper shuffling in mastery learning classrooms." (My Field Notes;
Monday, February 9, 1987) After using the better part of two class
periods for testing we still were not done with testing. On Tuesday as
we began our work on Chapter 14, we had to administer make-up tests
both A and B. The problems of classroom management were further
complicated with Ed's being gone from school because of jury duty. My
notes for February 10 indicate my frustration:
Sub for Ed sits on her a _ _. It is very difficult to describe the
frustration I feel from working hard and not seeming to get any
place. I'm also hot; my room used to be 60 degrees but for the
last week, it has been 82 degrees. (My Field Notes; Tuesday,

February 10, 1987)

136

Finally by Wednesday, February 11, the first cycle of mastery
learning was completed. Our test results were encouraging, but other
problems of classroom management had to be resolved before we were
going to feel comfortable with this change. For example, as we were
finishing up Chapter 13 and just nicely getting into Chapter 14 we
discovered that a rather significant number of students was not doing the
daily assignments. What to do about them would have to be addressed.

Our day was complicated enough just handling the change in our
American History classes; however, we also both had other things to deal
with during the day that influenced our attitudes and beliefs towards this
change—mastery learning. The assistant superintendent asked me to
evaluate 200 elementary school essays on the Constitution and to meet
with an English teacher to determine winners from each grade. He
wanted this done by Monday. As if we didn't have enough to do--what a
joke! "Help!" was my entry in the field notes after his call. We also had
to fill out evaluation sheets for prospective skill center students and
evaluate our mainstreamed students for the special education teachers.

Teachers would like to think that they will do whatever is
practical and good for their students, including change, but as this study
would indicate there seem to be other factors that contribute to change.
There is a subtle mixture of outside and inside influences that impacts
change. After two weeks of implementing mastery learning, we had had
some success, but we had primarily asked numerous questions and had
come up with only tentative answers. Testing and grading were going to
be the major problems with mastery learning along with how we could

handle the daily pressure of teaching.

137

Ed and I spent some time discussing testing at the end of the
second week. We were both surprised positively and negatively on the
change process. On the positive side, we were pleased with the seeming
success that many students had on the test. We were negatively
surprised by the reaction to the test by some of the students. For
example, Bob K. is convinced, "I am a 'C' student; I can't change." (Ed's
Field Notes; Friday, February 6, 1987). Ed was much more positive about
the results than I was, but over the years that had often been the case.

One other problem needed to be addressed regarding the
implementation of change. As I stated earlier, accountability became a
factor and this was really made clear when we corrected the tests in
class. As we discovered in the pilot study, poorly worded questions,
incorrect answers, and untaught items surface when students and
teachers double-check their work and do correctives. On this test, two
items had to be thrown out which changed the mastery level for a few
students.

At the end of two weeks we had completed the cycle of mastery
learning for the first time. At this point we hoped that we would
discover answers to the questions that had come up regarding the
implementation of mastery learning. The five elements of mastery
learning that we had implemented had brought about the following
changes in our instruction:

1. Feedback and Correctives. In the past Ed and I would assign

 

material, lecture and discuss, test, and go on to the next
unit. With mastery learning, after the test we went over the

test with the students, identified problem areas, did

138

correctives (alternative assignments) and retested those
students who did not achieve mastery.

Congruence amonLinstructional congaonents. In the past we
would teach and test with little regard for clearly linking
goals and objectives to the content and the test items.
Under mastery learning, congruence became important in that
we spent considerable time on review. This provided the
student with a clearer idea of what would be tested. We
told them what we were going to teach them, we taught
them, and then we told them what we had taught them.
Clearly specified learning objectives. Although we had
incorporated into our curriculum guide goals and objectives
recommended by the Michigan Department of Education and
from our textbook, we never paid any attention to them. As
mastery learning was implemented, we gave careful
consideration to which objectives we would teach to and the
students were, for the first time, provided with objectives.
Clearly formulated learning standards. Grading, homework,
quizzes, and tests has been the basic method of evaluating
students. In the past, we had corrected some homework. We
graded quizzes and tests, but we were never very specific
about the standards expected. A modified bell curve was
generally used in which we expected so many A's, B's, C's,
D's, and E's. In an effort to buy into mastery learning
theory--that almost all students can learn almost all of what

we want them to learn—we clarified our learning standards

139

and tried to make the standards clear to the students, i.e.,
80% to achieve mastery.

5. Appropriate group based instruction. We had always believed

 

that our teaching was appropriate and mastery learning
theorists indicate that it is not necessary to change the mode
of instruction when implementing mastery learning. We
discovered that this premise was only partially true. We
continued to teach much as we had in years past. We used
lecture, discussion, text-a conventional or traditional
teaching methodnunder mastery learning. However, it did
beCome necessary to go more slowly and carefully over the
material. It was also essential to be much more concerned
about teaching to the objectives. A sense of accountability
seemed to prevail throughout the implementation process.
After two weeks we had implemented mastery learning; that is, we had
attempted to bring about significant change in our classrooms, but we
were a long way from being in a position to sustain those changes
because of the many questions and problems that had arisen. The staff
development-discussions workshops, planning sessions, and reading books
on mastery learninguhad not prepared us for the problems relating to
change.
Materials used to implement mastery learning are in Appendix C.
The problem of ethnographic research regarding what to include
and what to eliminate must be acknowledged at this time. During the
first two weeks of the study, I tried to identify what was most important

about change in our classrooms. It was extremely difficult to eliminate a

140

considerable amount of data. One could go on forever. In Cusick's view,
a field study is a lengthy reduction sentence in narrative form. It is my
job then to take on, understand, describe, and explain the perspective of
the acting unit (change in the classroom) that I am observing. It is this
perspective that is the important element when trying to understand this
study. The environment is so complex and it seems as if so much
influences our attitudes and beliefs that eliminating anything detracts
from the total picture. As I continue this narrative on change in the
classroom, bear in mind that it is merely a reduction sentence.

At this point it seems propitious to alter the reporting of the
research findings to a topical rather than a journalistic format. I will
discuss (a) the basic problems of implementing change—mastery learning--
especially the testing problems and (b) the test results from each chapter
test. I will also include the information from the field notes that
contributes to the understanding of the change process.

If we had concluded our study of mastery learning at the end of
the first unit, we would not have sustained the change because of the
problems of implementation. However, by continuing the study we hoped
that the process would become more efficient. The introduction to
Chapter 14 and the best shot instruction went much smoother than it had
for Chapter 13. A number of students were still not doing their
homework but that was a perennial problem.

The curriculum material for Chapter 14 consisted of a number of
activities that Ed and I believed were interesting and worthwhile. The
learning activities also included some critical thinking exercises. By

using audio-visual material and various worksheets we hoped that the

141

students would acquire an interest and an understanding of the material.
After watching "Our World--1938" and a film on the Flint Sit-Down
Strike and doing worksheets analyzing oral history with an emphasis on
determining frame of reference and finding supporting evidence for given
generalizations, we found that many students were bored and not doing
their work. We also determined that we had other problems.

What to do about students who don't work on daily assignments?

If we collect papers on homework, this could present a problem of

correcting a lot of papers. What if they can achieve mastery

without doing every assignment? Should we require that all
assignments be completed before students are eligible to take the
test? Then we would have the logistical problem of tests on

different days. (Ed's Field Notes; Wednesday, February 18, 1987)
My notes indicated a problem of trying to deal with evaluating what
students learn from films and critical thinking exercises.

Mastery learning requires constant evaluation to be effective.

How to evaluate daily work, classroom participation, attitude, etc.,

remains a problem. So much in social studies does not seem to be

readily testable but is maybe what is most important. (My Field

Notes; Friday, February 13, 1987)

We decided that the second formative test A and B would be given
on Thursday and Friday instead of Friday and Monday as we had done
following Chapter 13. After giving a detailed review on Wednesday, we
felt that the students were ready for the test. The same testing
problems were apparent this time, but the test results were a little

better.

142

Students keep figuring out ways to cause more confusion for
' make-up tests-the variables are numerous. We are trying to do
interesting enrichment but the students don't seem to be all that
interested. We listened to old radio shows today and over half of
the students who mastered the material on Thursday's test would

rather just read the Free Press. (My Field Notes; Friday,

 

February 20, 1987)
Table 1. Chapter 14 Test Results

 

Mastery Non-Mastery
First Hour 28 6
Fifth Hour 15 19
Sixth Hour 21 __4_
Totals 64 29

The results were about as they were for the Chapter 13 test. However,
these results are much better than the test results from first semester in
all American History classes. It would appear that about 60% of the
team taught mastery students are achieving at or above 80% whereas
during the first semester on a typical chapter test, only about 38% would
receive the equivalent of mastery.

We felt pretty good about the results from mastery learning at
this time, but we continued to have some concerns. As I made notes
during the fourth week of implementation, I thought more and more about
the personal factors of our lives that had an impact upon our work. For
example a random list of problems in my notes for the week of February
16th included the following: tax changes (W-4), no sub hired for the

counselor who had serious lung surgery, teacher friend with alcoholic

143

problems, stress, retirement, fellow teacher being married, our Exemplary
School award, incident of racism between students, Bay City's millage
fails, and concern for a friend having health problems. How all matters
of these types influence what is done in the classroom can only be
surmised, but these types of factors must be acknowledged if we are ever
going to understand schooling and why change does or does nOt occur.

Just as we seemed to be establishing a pattern for implementing
mastery learning we had a week that set us back a bit. The week of
February 23rd, during which we began Chapter 15 proved to be trying.
As is often the case, it is not mastery learning that is the problem, but
the teachers and students who are the problem. On Monday, February
23rd, Ed and I met early to discuss the week and we discovered that Ed
was going to be gone for jury duty for at least one day and for a
football clinic on Friday; I was going to be gone to the Michigan
Department of Education on Wednesday. Problems with substitute
teachers are more difficult with team teaching and mastery learning than
they are under traditional conditions because of the teamwork that is
necessary. We decided that only our experience and flexibility would get
us through the week. Starting Chapter 15 and doing make-up tests would
be the basis for classroom activity on Monday, and then we would just
have to wing it. Again the change process was thwarted by a variety of
factors. As previously noted, substitutes find it difficult to play a role
in the process.

A page is stolen out of my grade book on Wednesday when I am

gone. Five week letters are due next week. Sally, a friend of the

family, is in the hospital. Another friend, Mike, apparently has

1414

cancer. Do we ever consider all of this impacting education? The
age of teachers is really important in considering changenreform.
(My Field Notes; Friday, February 27, 1987) As we teach,
implement mastery learning, and deal with all of the other
problemsnboth personal and professional—it is apparent that subtle
factors impact upon the ideal of education. There is a wide gap
between what the idealists proclaim and what is going on in our
classrooms. Students do not do homework and are bored, teachers
have concerns other than their teaching, the structure of the
school day is often demoralizing—all of which make change
difficult. The grind of five performances a day, five days a week
makes sustained and significant change d _____ near
impossible. (My Field Notes; Tuesday, March 4, 1987)

Testing over Chapter 15 would go as the other tests had except that

some patterns were emerging. Ed and I made similar comments in our

field notes regarding students and mastery learning testing. Ed states:
It seems that the students that benefit the most from mastery
learning are those students who are "motivated" to achieve
success. Those that are interested in bettering themselves will
show great improvement on the second test should they fail to
gain mastery on the first test. Those non-motivated students
continue to do poorly on the second test with little if any
improvement. What can yv_e_ do to help motivate??? Talking with
students individually about goals may help. (Ed's Field Notes;
Tuesday, March 13, 1987)

On the same day I stated that:

145

Students seem to be doing better except for the ones who simply

refuse to put forth any effort . . . . One must know the students

especially well since the classes range from students who are
special education students to the so-called best and the brightest.

(My Field Notes; Tuesday, March 13, 1987)

Problems of testing in addition to those mentioned earlier are:

1. How should eligibility for taking the formative chapter test be
determined? It would appear that " . . . we need more
quizzes and checks on homework. How about if homework
isn't done or quizzes aren't passed, they can't take the
chapter test?" (Ed's Field Notes; Thursday, March 12, 1987)

2. Is formative testing over chaptersuabout every two weeksutoo
long between evaluations? We now think that the chapter
tests might be better summative evaluations instead of being
the formative evaluations that they have been used for. (My
Field Notes; Friday, March 13, 1987)

3. What is the best way to determine grades when the mastery
learning process is used? Ed noted that Kris, an outstanding
student, was concerned about the grading process. She was
upset that she was getting a 'B' mastery while 'C' students
were achieving 'A' mastery on retests. Another student,
Mark felt that a unit test or the summative evaluation might
be too much riding on one day's effort. "What if you have a
bad day?" (Ed's Field Notes; Friday, March 13, 1987)

Three students were upset with the grading because in the past they had

been able to get by with a D- and now,under mastery learning, they were

146

failing. They asked, "Why should I try?" In reality, they had M been
trying. Concerns we have and students have regarding grades would
indicate that modifications in the process are necessary. It is also clear
that a general review of mastery learning is needed. Students seem to

have lost track of what mastery learning is all about.

Table 2. Chapter 15 Test Results

 

Mastery Non-Mastery
First Hour 25 1 1
Fifth Hour 18 1 7
Sixth Hour L8 1
Totals 61 35

About 2/3 of our students are not achieving mastery. Although
this number is much improved over what we were getting before mastery
learning, it is far short of what the pro-mastery literature of the Bloom
school would predict.

Chapter 16 Test was the last formative assessment before the
major summative exam over the entire unit, chapters 13, 14, 15, and 16.
The introduction, best shot instruction, and review all went well except
for the bored students. One additional assignment problem had to do
with how we would evaluate essays using mastery learning. The essay
attempted to tie Michigan history to World War II. Careful planning and
teaching made this an effective assignment. Seventy-five students
achieved mastery on the assignment and of the 20 who did not, most
didn't turn in a paper. The major problem with the assignment was "the
number of hours it took to correct the papers." (Ed's Field Notes;

Monday, March 23, 1987) Essays prove the necessity for (Horace's)

147

compromise. "Planning, testing and retesting and encouraging higher
level thinking all are time consuming." My Field Notes; Monday, March
23, 1987)

The results of the Chapter 16 formative tests were good. A total
of 70 students achieved mastery; 23 did not. These were our best results
to date, and we also had the fewest problems with the test. This might
have resulted from the fact that we were all getting better or because
the summative evaluatidn is next. My feelings are that some students
have developed a way to use the system.

They might be cheating. Grade problems resulted when students

are absent for Formative Test A and then come in with the

answers the next day after getting answers from students doing
correctives to study for Test B the next . day. Absent students
should take Test B. There is so much trial and error necessary
with mastery learning that data are suspect, but gains can be
seen. (My Field Notes; Wednesday, March 25, 1987)
The first marking period of the second semester came to an end

with the summative test.

Table 3. Summative Test A and B Results

 

Mastery Non-Mastery
First Hour 21 15
Fifth Hour 17 18
Sixth Hour _l_7 _8
Totals 55 41

There was an obvious drop in the test scores on the summative

evaluation compared to the formative tests, but when we compared these

148

results to a similar test given the first semester we found that the
students did much better under mastery learning. On the Unit Three Test
at the end of the first semester, 33% of the students earned an A or B,
about 33% earned a C, and 33% earned a D or E. Under mastery learning
on Unit Four, well over 57% received an A or B, 10% received a C and
about 33% received a D or E. Much of the gain in mastery learning
seems to come from students in the C range who given a second chance,

do better. There also seems to be a hard core that just won't respond.

The Continued Implementation and Practice of
.Mastery Learninj The Second Ten Week Marking Period
Ed and I decided to continue the study for the second marking
period because we were not satisfied with the process of change. Test
scores were improved, but we were uneasy about the process of
implementation. We agreed that if we couldn't improve the methods of
instruction in three areas that it was unlikely that we would be able to
sustain the effort to maintain the change in our classes. The three areas
where change was needed are:
1. We must teach to objectives and more clearly identify what
should be tested.
2. We must provide correctives and feedback that are more
effective.
3. We must develop a workable testing and grading system.
The first two problem areas would take additional curriculum planning
time, but the third problem was the greatest threat to sustained change.

We concluded that for our research to be worthwhile, we must modify

149

the process of instruction—mastery learning--and continue our study for
the second marking period.

We had completed the first marking period with a mixed reaction
to the change. The test scores were significantly better, but not as good
as Bloom and Company had predicted they would be. The insructional
process as defined by Guskey (1985) seemed effective but was hard work
and time consuming. Describing a teaching change in print oversimplifies
the complexity of the environment. Change as extensive as mastery
learning is complex and dependent to some extent on the personalities
involved. A problem such as grading appears clear cut, but the number
of variables that arises is amazing.

At the end of the first marking period, we were encouraged with
the potential of mastery learning in our classes, but our attitudes and
beliefs had not yet changed to the extent that we could sustain the
change and advocate the process to others. "The main issue of mastery
learning is not if it works but how much work it takes!" (My Field
Notes; Monday, March 23, 1987)

Ed and I began the second marking period committed to the idea
that we would concentrate on teaching to the objectives and creating
better correctives and enrichment assignments. But our main effort was
going to be to change the testing and grading process so that it would
make our lives easier and be beneficial to the students. The changes
would be the following:

1. Formative Evaluation would occur more frequently. Rather

than use chapter tests for formative evaluation, we would

150

use homework, quizzes, short writing assignments and
subjective evaluations based upon class participation.

Summative Evaluation (Grades) would be given on the chapter

 

tests rather than simply using them for diagnostic purposes.
The unit test that we used as the summative evaluation
during the first marking period would continue to be used but
only as one of a number of summative evaluations.

Eligibility for Mastery Students would be required to

 

complete homework and achieve mastery on quizzes before
they would be eligible to take the summative tests.

Grading System would make it possible for students who

 

mastered the material the first time to retake the test in an
effort to get an even higher score on the second test.
Establishing rules for A and B mastery seemed to be
important to some of the more competitive students. (It
seems as if we are all hung up on grading when we should be

hung up on learning.)

The first ten weeks of the implementation of mastery learning

1.

proved to be encouraging in some respects and unsettling in others. The
account of the second ten weeks of change will focus on three critical
areas of change that had become constant strands in our field notes.

The three areas are the following:

Extrinsic and intrinsic factors that impact the classroom

environment and affect change.

151

Specific factors related to grading and testing that seemed
to be disproportionately important to all concernednstudents
as well as teachers-"with the process of this change.

Factors regarding mastery learning relating to accountability

that influence teachers' attitudes and beliefs.

Extrinsic factors continually influenced what went on in the

classroom during the implementing of change. If we didn't have to deal

on a daily basis with student problems, outside forces, nut and bolts

conferences, time restraints, and institutional bureaucracy, the teaching

of American history would be much easier. We noted the following in

our field notes as factors that had an influence on our teaching:

1.

excessive heat and humidity in the classroom one day, and
uncomfortably cold the next

illness and death of staff and family members

vacations, long week-ends

inability to get students to work on Friday or Monday
students' family problems

grade competition between students

personal social activities (Teachers like to go out at night
once in a while, and the next day can be tough.)

extra time taken outside of and inside class to keep up with
current events and worthwhile documentaries that might
improve instruction

getting students to do homework and making myself correct

homework

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.
19

20.

152

exercise programs--Ed's swimming in the morning and my
running after school

problems with special education students in the classroom
(their poor attendance, tardies on the one hand, and their
hard work and lack of success on the other)

lack of administrative interest and support in what we are
doing

lack of recognition for anyone who only teaches

recognition and special benefits for a chosen few teachers
who, for some reason, are allowed to go by a separate set of
rules

what neighboring school districts were doing to support their
teachers so that they would be prepared to implement change
what my wife was confronting in her teaching in a nearby
district

the atmosphere in the teachers' lounge—the only place for
teachers to blow off steam, but _co_ulg_ serve as a place to
discuss education

my outside reading on education—what the experts are saying
the ideal versus the real world (we were recognized this year
by both state and federal governments as an Exemplary
School.)

students giving obvious priority to jobs or extra-curricular

activities

153

Since it is not feasible to deal with each of these factors, I will
elaborate on a couple of the more constant of these extrinsic forces
impacting our work in the classroom.

If we only had to teach students American history, mastery
learning would be an excellent way to do it. However, in the classroom
we have to deal with much more than content. At Garber High, students
have available to them a variety of extra-curricular activities.
Especially in the spring time students are involved in any number of
activities. Many students are excused from their afternoon classes for
athletic competition. The spring musical at Garber always creates hard
feelings. Students are up late at play practice and expect special
concessions from their teachers. The director of the musical is one of
those teachers who, under the guise of an artist, has always been allowed
to go by a separate set of rules; she does not w the students to do
homework while they are at play practice. 'This past spring the South
Pacific b _ _ _ s _ _ _ had many teachers mad as h __ _ _. (My Field
Notes; Friday, April 6, 1987) Students trying out for cheerleading
became upset in class. A lot of distractions: spring sports, cheerleading
try- outs; Lori and Amy—"life or death" feeling. Sistersuwhat if one
makes it and the other doesn't? (Ed's Field Notes; Monday, May 4, 1987)

But there are real problems arising within the confines of the
classroom too. Some students are extremely concerned about grades and
others don't care at all about them. Kristyn and Robyn were in constant
competition with one another and critical of mastery learning because to
them it was unfair that some students would get a second chance on

tests. Students cause trouble for substitutes and won't do the work in

154

class. Many students have jobs after school and can't do the
assignments. But the greatest problem of all regarding students and the
classroom continues to be their limited background knowledge.

Certainly the ideal is to move from the basics to critical thinking
in the secondary schools. Bringing about change in the classroom by
implementing mastery learning could be one positive way to accomplish
critical thinking goals and objectives. One excerpt from my field notes
indicates why teachers become frustrated and resistant to change. On
Monday, June lst, after considerable planning we decided that we would
do some EL teaching of critical thinking.

Every once in a while I still get carried away with wanting to

really teach. In the final chapter of our text on the future, there

is a section on What is an American? Alexis de Tocqueville and

Richard Reeves are mentioned. I thought it would be a good idea

to discuss briefly both of their works when talking about the

mobility of the American people. But the best laid plans often go
astray. Both Ed and I had to spend considerable time talking
about such basic information that there was neither time nor
interest to pursue the subject in a way that would develop critical
thinking skills. Ed got bogged down when we discovered that our
students didn't know what a Protestant was. I was waylaid in
attempting to discuss what a puralistic society was. The students
had heard about a melting pot but pluralistic was a foreign term
to them. This was a day of education when only 7 of 72 students
in their mastery learning classes had even made an effort to do

their homework. (My Field Notes; Monday, June 1, 1987)

155

"When I am motivated I feel like a very good teacher, but the older I get
the more difficult it is to become motivated." (My Field Notes;
Wednesday, June 3, 1987) Students and their attitudes and beliefs really
influence our attitudes and beliefs.

Another important extrinsic factor influencing teachers and change
is the role played by administrators. The head of the counseling
department, the assistant principal, the principal, the curriculum
supervisor, and the superintendent all influence the change process in the
classroom. The problem with scheduling of students has already been
detailed. The counseling department schedules students into classes and
determines teachers' assignments. Success or failure of the change--
mastery learning—hinges upon class size and the ability of teachers to
work together. For example, because of our study Ed and I will be team
teaching in all of our classes next year. This certainly enhances the
possibility for long term change success. The principal and the director
of counseling have made this possible.

On the other hand, change can be impeded by indifference on the
part of administrators. Ed and I were most enthusiastic about mastery
learning, but we were never asked once about how it was going by an
administrator or another teacher. In fact, after many weeks of research
on improving our classroom instruction, the supervisor of curriculum
required a teachers' meeting so that he could introduce to the staff ITIP
advocated by Madeline Hunter. Here we were again with a top down
initiative on change with little or no interest in what staff members were
doing that was directly related to the teachers' meeting. On a clear,

warm spring day after our teaching day had ended, we met and the

156

curriculum director told us about how many decisions teachers make each
day, how lessons can be designed, how to use a chalk board, and about
four types of classrooms. The reaction of the teachers was not good.
(My Field Notes; Monday, May 4, 1987) This type of force feeding
certainly did not contribute to a positive attitude toward change.

The assistant principal makes change difficult with his frequent
class interruptions, memos, and after school meetings with students to
deal with attendance problems. Assemblies are important but shortened
class periods and schedule changes do not enhance instruction especially
when change is being implemented.

An example from my communication with our superintendent
exemplifies the type of extrinsic and intrinsic factors that influence
teachers' attitudes and beliefs towards change. Our district has a policy
to reimburse teachers for tuition expenses so that they will feel
encouraged to improve themselves and subsequently, the school. I had
been reimbursed for a number of my graduate hours but was denied
reimbursement for a school finance course, a decision that didn't make
sense to me. But I was amazed when our superintendent refused my
request for reimbursement for dissertation hours because as he stated in
a memo to me on May 18, 1987:

We have come to the point where I can't approve or recommend to

the Board the reimbursement of your graduate tuition. The basic

intent of offering reimbursement was for updating skills which

would be useful in the classroom and would, therefore, have a

payoff for the district. I think that you would agree that the

Board has been very generous in your specific case, but when you

157

get to the point of doing your dissertation, I think you have to

take over the financial responsibility.

I'm glad that we can provide the laboratory for your research, but

I don't believe there will be a direct payoff to the district. You

could probably argue that point, but this request does go beyond

what we had in mind when we started the reimbursements. You've
got to admit it was great while it lasted! (My Field Notes;

Monday, May 8, 1987)

If extensive research on Change in the classroom is not a direct payoff to
the district, I certainly don't know what is. Does this type of
administrative economics enhance teachers' attitudes and beliefs? Not in
my case!

The intrinsic factors influencing teachers are overlooked as they
certainly were in the above communication. Teachers' needs,
personalities, and their knowledge are important to the school
atmosphere. In the process of implementing mastery learning during the
second marking period we found that the intrinsic factors had
considerable importance as to how we conducted ourselves in the
classroom. Examples should clarify this point. The average age of
teachers in our district is 44, and we average 18 years of experience.
As we get older the number of personal problems appears to increase.
Problems with our children, divorces, illness, surgery, and even death all
contribute to our emotional dispositions and affect the way we deal with
many students all day every day.

Our teaching was definitely affected by the arrest of a fellow

teacher on five counts of criminal sexual conduct and the sudden death

158

of our art teacher in the spring. Although these are not common
occurrences, they are the type of factors that change agents must
consider when planning and implementing an innovation. Although there
is an infinite number of environmental and personal factors affecting
teachers, the point I want to make is that when one has to be in front of
students daily, there is no escape. We must go on. On Tuesday, May
26th, following the Memorial Day recess we had a teachers' meeting at
8:00 a.m. to discuss Bud, the art teacher, who had died over the
weekend. Class begins at 8:15, and the principal came over the P A
system at 8:20 to tell the students about Mr. Schrantz's death. This was
a trying time for everybody. Bud had been in the system for 23 years
and was close to retirement. We had never experienced a death on our
staff, but as is the case with all types of difficulties, we just had to go
on teaching. That day and many more to follow would be a little bit
emptier without Bud. It does seem that things could just have been put
on hold to take account of a fine teacher, but a 30 second announcement
had to suffice. It just so happened that on this day the principal saw fit
to put in our mail boxes a memo that reminded us:
Except in rare emergencies, staff members should be in their
classrooms supervising students at all times. I would appreciate
your cooperation in this matter. (My Field Notes; Tuesday, May
26, 1987)
We dealt with sadness and trivia on the same day, but after a three day
weekend we had to give make-up tests then try to figure out how we are
going to complete the course in ten class periods, including the study of

the Vietnam War. Change don't come easy! Extrinsic and intrinsic

159

forces can encourage change, but all too often, they restrict the
potential for change to succeed.

Implementing mastery learning in American History involved the
answering of many questions, but the most difficult problem to resolve
was the problem of how to effectively and fairly evaluate and grade
students. It seemed that no matter what we did, we created another
quandary. During the first marking period we had attempted to give
daily assignments based on the objectives for the purpose of having a
basis for class discussion. The chapter tests were used as formative or
diagnostic evaluations and the unit test was used as a summative
evaluation which would determine the students' grade. This system didn't
work out, and we found it necessary to give letter grades on the
formative tests. The competitive grading system that students are used
to is difficult to change.

We altered the evaluation process for the second marking period
based upon our experience during the first marking period. Formative
evaluation would take place on a daily basis. Homework would be
checked, quizzes given, and subjective evaluation made. Students would
be required to complete their work before they would be able to take the
summative tests. The summative tests would now be the chapter tests.
The unit test would also be a summative evaluation. We had hoped that
these modifications would reduce student concern, encourage daily work
by students, and provide us with a more efficient and practical system.
This was not to be. Our field notes throughout the marking period
indicate the constant difficulty that we had with evaluation. The notes

also make clear the fact that we continually attempted to modify the

160

system so that we could adapt the change—mastery learninguto a method
workable in our environment.

Checking homework for formative evaluation became a problem
immediately. "I believe that it will work better but the busy work is a
real pain in the a __ and our correctives need work." (My Field Notes;
Wednesday, April 1, 1987)

Using worksheets ‘5 and checking homework assignments and
rechecking those that don't achieve mastery requires a lot of time and
recordkeeping. It's a good idea to set requirements before you are able
to take the test. (Ed's Field Notes; Monday, April 6, 1987) Students in
the early stages of this method of evaluation responded well. They
seemed to succeed with more frequent quizzes.

As the students became accustomed to the new system, problems
began to surface.

Flaw in the testing system-by doing correctives in the morning

classes, students in the afternoon classes are getting the test

answers—also we have to keep an eye on students correcting each

others' tests—"buddies". (Ed's Field Notes; Friday, April 29, 1987)
The Chapter 17 Summative Test results were good, and it appeared that

we were on the right track.

 

Table 4. Chapter 17 Test Results Mastery Non-Mastery
First Hour 26 9
Fifth Hour 22 ll
Sixth Hour 19

_5
Totals 67 25

161

Another important finding was there there were only a very few D's and
E's compared to what we used to get on tests.

Unfortunately, the grading and testing policy that we had
developed ran into increasing difficulty from this point on. When we
came back from spring break (April 17th through April 26th) the students
just plain couldn't get going. Vacations, warm weather, spring sports and
distractions, but the fact remains that students quit doing their
homework and simply would not participate in class discussion. "It was
really tough getting started today—very poor discussion—students dead.
Ed asks me, 'Whose fault is it?‘ d _____ depressing!" (My Field
Notes; Tuesday, April 28, 1987) The test results from Chapter 18 were
down as a result of the vacation, lack of effort on the students' part and

poor, hurried teaching on our part.

 

Table 5. Chapter 18 Test Results Mastery Non-Mastery
First Hour 18 12
Fifth Hour 18 15
Sixth Hour l_4 _l_0
Totals 50 37

The test results were really down from other chapter tests.

Easter break in the middle plus we didn't review section 4 as well

as usual. Some students could do it on their own and did well.

Others couldn't, or wouldn't. (Ed's Field Notes; Monday, May 4,

1987)

Further evidence of our problems in measuring the success of
change became more apparent by the end of the week, Friday, May 8.

The process of formative evaluation was becoming a major burden. On a

162

short formative, seemingly easy quiz, only 4 of over 70 students in the
team taught classes achieved mastery. Many of the students openly
admitted that they had not studied. Why? Because they knew that they
could take it again after doing correctives.

On a quiz today no one achieved mastery first hour—only about 4

people studied for the quiz. A problem with a second chance on

quizzes—don't study for the first one-wait for the second on

Monday. A possible solution, give an average of the two. But if

the quizzes only give eligibility for the chapter tests, what is a

good alternative for those who don't achieve mastery? (Ed's Field

Notes; Friday, May 8, 1987)

Establishing rules of eligibility seemed like a sound solution to
evaluation problems but getting the students eligible became an even
greater problem.

Students are simply not doing homework, few had section 4

questions completed today . . . . I wish I could express my

feelings of frustration concerning our students' inability to read
and apply or express what they have read—discussion on civil
rights was a disaster today—I couldn't get answers on basic
questions regarding civil rights movement. To get students to do
anything, we must check their work. (My Field Notes; Tuesday,

May 12, 1987)

When it was time to give the summative test over Chapter 19,
more than 10 students were not eligible to take the test because they
had not completed their formative evaluation assignments. A number of

students turned in their work on the day of the test which proved

163

confusing because it had to be checked immediately to determine
eligibility. More paper shuffling and chaos.

Some logistical problems in correcting qualifying assignments and

getting ready for tests . . . . Problem with students not getting

work done because of laziness. Next time we should go to
retesting after school to make it more important to master the
test the first time. Make-ups can be a problem and take a lot of

class time from teaching. (Ed's Field Notes; Tuesday, May 19,

1987)

The Chapter 19 Test was difficult to administer because so many
students were not achieving mastery on the first test, were not eligible
to take the first test, or were absent from class the day before the test
or on the test day. Keeping the classes organized was difficult but the

test results were again positive.

 

Table 6. Chapter 19 Test Results Mastery Non-Mastery
First Hour 26 8
Fifth Hour 24 11
Sixth Hour 22 _5
Total 70 24

The question became . . . does the end justify the means?

We decided to attempt one more modification in testing so that we
could finish the school year with a basis of further knowledge on testing
and grading for the next school year. Because a few students were
taking advantage of the testing process, because testing and retesting
was taking so much class time, because testing was causing so much

extra work for us, we decided that retests would be given after school.

164

It was our hope that by giving make-up tests and retests after school, we
would eliminate some of the testing difficulties that we were having.
But again questions arose.

Some thoughts on taking the retests after school. I think it solves

the problem of not putting as much emphasis on achieving mastery

on the first test. Some problems: What about the student that
works or goes to Skill Center? What about problems with
transportation? Will students with B mastery be content and not
go after the A? What grade do you give a C test if they don't
take the retest? Do they get a C or an E? (Ed's Field Notes;

Friday, May 22, 1987)

The policy of retesting after school proved to be worthwhile. The
onus to complete their work was placed on the students. One of us had
to stay after school, but that worked out satisfactorily because it did
give us an opportunity to talk directly and semi-privately with students
in a more informal environment. Testing was and will continue to be a
problem under mastery learning. One reason for this research was to
determine a better way to teach and learn, and certainly being flexible is
the key.

Based upon our field notes, the third area of importance was
accountability. The changes we affected in our classes were successful
in some respects and troublesome in others. One factor that we became
aware of at the outset washow the process not only held the students
accountable for their work but clearly held us accountable to them and
to ourselves. Literature on effective schools stresses that accountability

is essential if schools are going to improve. Review and evaluation of

165

the implementation of this changenmastery learning--is vital to the
establishment of attitudes and beliefs essential to sustaining the change.
One of the consistent strands throughout our notes was how important it
was for us to plan carefully. Teaching, practicing, testing, reteaching,
and retesting to goals and objectives constantly held us accountable.
The idea of congruence between objectives, instruction, and testing was
accomplished at times and at other times, it was not. By using the
mastery learning strategy, the importance of self-accountability became
obvious. Using constant review of objectives and linking them to text
and test items was a strategy that we had to develop, practice and be
constantly conscious of. Testing what one teaches is much more difficult
than it might seem to be. (My Field Notes; Wednesday, April 8, 1987)
The chapter test scores improved considerably during the second
semester under mastery learning. Teaching to objectives, providing
correctives and feedback, and especially retesting were the main reasons
for the improvement. If mastery learning was the success it appeared to
be, then we expected that the students would perform much better on
their semester final examination, but this was not the case. At the end
of the first semester, 130 students took the history final which was made
up of 100 questions given on earlier chapter tests. We used the same
type of final examination at the end of the second semester for the 96
students who had been taught by the mastery learning approach. In both
cases the test scores were discouraging and, more important, mastery
learning did not seem to make a difference. The scale used on both tests

was as follows:

166

100 - 90% A
89 - 80% B
79 - 70% ' c
69 - 60% D
Below 60% E

Table 7. Final Exam Results

First Semester Final Exam Grades

 

 

Grade A B C D E
First Hour 0 8 7 4 7
Second Hour 0 11 7 11 11
Fourth Hour 0 6 5 6 3
Fifth Hour 2 _Z_ _8_ L0 l_6_
Totals 2 32 27 31 38
Percentage 1.5 24.7 20.8 23.8 29.2
Second Semester Final Exam Grades
Mastery Learning Taught Classes
Grade A B C D E
First Hour 2 12 5 5 8
Fifth Hour 1 2 8 5 l9
Sixth Hour 2 _l_g g g _6
Totals 5 24 I 17 14 33
Percentage 5.4 26 18.2 15 35.4

(Things became "curiouser" and "curiouser"! cried Bob.)

167
Table 7. (cont'd.)

FIRST SEMESTER EXAM RESULTS

 

No. of % Receiving
M Students M
26.2 A 2 1.5
Mastery B 32 24.7
C 27 20.8
D 31 23.8
E 38 29.2
Total 130 100.0%
SECOND SEMESTER EXAM RESULTS
No. of % Receiving
ggd_e_ Students M
31.4 A 5 5.4
Mastery B 24 26.0
C 17 18.2
D 14 15.0
E 33 35.4
Total 93 100.0%

It appears that about 5% more students scored in the A - B mastery
range under mastery learning teaching and learning, but that about 6%

more failed under mastery learning.

168

Affective Outcomes

In a study of change in the classroom, the students' reaction to
the change is important. If the students' cognitive outcomes are
improved and if there are positive affective outcomes, certainly the
chance for successful sustained change is enhanced.

A very important aspect of learning outcomes concerns the way

students typically feel about the subject they are studying, their

teacher, their school, learning in general, and themselves. These
feelings are referred to generally as student affect. (Guskey,

1985, p. 117)

Although we recognize that there are a wide variety of important
affective outcomes, for our purposes we shall concentrate on two-
academic self-esteem and interest in the subject. A number of surveys
were administered to the students; the two pre-mastery surveys were
given to all of Ed's and my students at the beginning of the second
semester after they had completed one semester of American History. A
brief survey was given to the students in our mastery learning sections at
the end of the first marking period, and another essay survey was given
to the same students at the end of the semester. It is E the purpose of
this study to enter into a statistical analysis of the data gathered from
these surveys but rather to identify general affective outcomes of
students studying under mastery learning. What we wanted to know was
if students felt good about the change—mastery learning--in American

History class.

169

The results of the eight item survey on students feelings toward

history generally indicated that:

Most students did not feel upset or nervous in class.

Most students were not proud of their work in history.

A majority was not confused easily.

A large number was unsure about their performance in
history.

About 2/3 of the students did not feel that their teacher
makes them feel that they are doing poorly.

Interestingly, 100 of 158 claimed that they were doing their

very best work in history.

Considering the results of this survey, one can conclude that

students have no strong feelings one way or another about history.

When a more lengthy 25 item survey was given to the students

about the same time, more information for the purpose of generalization

became available. From this survey we concluded that:

l.

2.

Only about 50% of the students found history interesting.
About 65% believed that history is important, or they were
undecided about its importance.

Just over 50% claimed that they like history.

113 of 160 students did not feel stupid in history.

A majority did not enjoy history a great deal.

A majority did not think that history is important in everyday
life.

A majority did think that history is important to keep the

world running.

170

8. Almost 2/3 thought that history is only important for
historians.
9. 2 out of 3 believed that history is important for under-
standing the world.
The interpretation of these data could be endless, but it does seem to be
evident that our students do not have a strong emotional reaction
negatively or positively towards American History. These results were
encouraging to Ed and me, but the reason that they are included in this
study is to give the reader a sense of the students' feelings before
mastery learning so that the reader can evaluate the students' responses
to survey items on mastery learning. Surveys were modified from

Guskey's melementing Mastery Learning (1985) and Yilderan's

 

dissertation The Effects of Level of Cognitive Achievement on Selected

 

Learning Criteria Under Mastery Learning and Normal Classroom

 

Instruction (1977).

When the first marking period of the second semester was over,
the approximately 90 students in the mastery learning sections of
American History were again surveyed. We learned that:

1. Over 2/3 of the students believed that they had learned more

in American History when mastery learning was used.

2. Most students did not feel that it was too hard to get an A

or B.

3. Over 2/3 of the students thought that 80% for mastery was

fair.

4. Just over 50% believed that all social studies classes should

be taught with mastery learning techniques.

171

The essay survey taken at the end of the semester overwhelmingly
supported the use of mastery learning. Fifty-seven students wrote in
support of mastery learning, 18 were opposed to mastery learning, and 5
said that it didn't make any difference which method was used. Thirteen
students did not turn in an essay survey. (Surveys, survey results, and
samples of essays are in Appendix D)

Mastery learning seemed to be a change about which most students
reacted positively. It appears that most were not terribly unhappy
before mastery learning, but they felt that the method was beneficial and
fair. The student did not put their names on the surveys so before-and-
after individual comparisons are impossible to assess. In general, the
students did have greater self-esteem and more interest in the subject
than they had before mastery learning.

Ed and I agreed frequently in our field notes that the students
seemed to respond favorably to the changes that we had implemented.
On Monday, April 13, Ed's field notes indicated that the enrichment and
correctives assignment went well. He wrote that "the students were
interested and worked all hour trying to find the answers." I stated in
my notes on the same day that "the students worked very hard on
correctives—working with test A—ideally not great but when compared to
previous process, very good." These notes illustrate team teaching and
mastery learning at its best. Ed had taken charge of enrichment, and l
handled the correctives and both seemed to work.

Our notes were also similar when we were struggling with the
changes and the students' reaction to the change. For example on

Friday, May 15, Ed's entry stated:

172

problem with motivation on reading enrichment assignments. The

trick is to find something educational and hold their interest. Kris

and Robyn did not get mastery and will try again on Monday. "I

didn't study." Maybe they will like mastery learning better now.

Or could it be that even the good students are learning to play

the retest game?

My notes on this date stated:

Summative test over Chapter 20 todayusix students were not

eligible to take the test because they had not completed their

work. Five other people turned in their essays today. This
problem could be serious to ML. It is irritating in the least.

Kate, Mark, Randy, Fred, Phil, Jay-now what to do with them?

Too many people turned in overdue assignments today. Must

change so that work is due the day before the test. Half-

a_____ again. The weather is so nice this spring--we must

crack down to get any work out of students.

And so it goes . . . teachers and students had their ups and downs
but in general we believed that teaching and learning conditions were
better than they had been before mastery learning was implemented.

When attempting to evaluate student affective outcomes resulting
from change, it becomes apparent that there are three things our schools

must do; unfortunately, no one knows what they are.

173

Summary of Findings_

Change in the classroom is not an accident but a complex social

encounter that must be well planned yet remain flexible. In the study we

moved from an examination of the change—mastery learning-to the

planning for mastery learning, to the implementation of mastery learning,

and finally to teacher and students' response to mastery learning. From

an analysis of the qualitative data, Guskey's alternate model for change

and mastery learning, the study suggests:

1.

That change is a result of the transaction between the
extrinsic factorsninstitution, curriculum, students and
settinguand the intrinsic factorsa-instructor's personality,
needs values and attitudes.

That the teacher's attitudes and beliefs about the change are
a major factor in determining the success or failure of
sustained change in the classroom.

That the students' attitudes and beliefs about the change are
a major factor in determining the teacher's attitudes and
beliefs about the change.

That the amount of additional teachers' work as a result of
the change is a a major factor in determining the success or
failure of the change.

That the value of change is recognized by both teachers and

students.

174

6. That the change—mastery learningumay have a positive
effect on students both cognitively and affectively.

7. That the change-mastery learningumay have a positive
effect on teachers from the standpoint of accountability.

8. That the Change practices of the teachers are influenced
positively or negatively depending upon what is happening
outside the classroom both personally and professionally.

9. That the school environment affects the potential for change
in the attitudes and beliefs of teachers.

10. That teachers' attitudes and beliefs must change before
sustained change is going to occur in the classroom.

The qualitative data suggest the importance of the change in
teachers' attitudes and beliefs but also reveal the broad range of change
possible within a highly complex social setting. Certainly it is not just
top-down administrator to teacher in-service that brings about change in
the classroom, but the quality of the change results from teacher
planning, implementation and evaluation of a proposed change. Further,
the study suggests the importance of a clear definition of the change for
both teacher and student, of the adoption of a change with which the
teacher feels comfortable, of environmental support for the change, of
flexibility so that problems can be resolved, of the need for time so that
the gradual implementation and evaluation of the change can occur. Two
weeks or ten weeks is not long enough. To try to implement a major
change—mastery Ieaminguall at once is a plan for failure. Incremental

implementation may succeed but attempting implementation in all classes

I“. “a.m.-(1.9.3? afi "WI-43ml; 3 '5'.“ V- But.» ‘

.4. “H‘Q-mhfifimnqm Meow-1519a ngmmgww;fiflwspw ‘

”'1 57"! fl: 9 'ijW “KW yWV‘fifletz‘fir“ WWW W

van."

:5.-

.fh'fl- I v H Y
«my. cum rum ; 112:2; '. 1'"

r two‘sy‘vfjtsx‘v’. r,“

‘rGitys 4.4/1

175

at once dooms the change to failure. Teachers' attitudes and beliefs
must be given time to change for the change to succeed.

The Essexville-Hampton Schools should continue to support teacher
change through the use of the Guskey Model for Change. Ed and I have
only begun to alter our attitudes and beliefs in a way that will make
possible the success of mastery learning.

Earlier in this paper I made reference to the other school districts

in Bay County that are implementing mastery learning on a district wide
basis. Their efforts at such an implementation are doomed to failure
unless greater emphasis is placed upon creating a classroom environment
for the students and the teachers that makes change possible. Spending
hundreds of thousands of dollars up front for inservicing teachers in an
effort to change their attitudes and beliefs b_ef_o_r£ implementation of the

change in the classroom takes place is simply not going to work.

Teachers need support, but they are too pragmatic to be brainwashed.

- may a n w» Nifwelflfa "W’M‘D‘mwaw. ‘

Pr: 13.-1v ~7. 7~nw.m.a.~.w «It-«é MM 1». - v We WWO mm 1. ms at m”: u- "rsg (H‘vt m-mma'xmmzmmm -: 77—- _.

- uni-.- ‘C‘.
l r - !.

 

J-a-'»-

7‘: fle- . . A _ ‘ ‘
"" “WW-9342:341- m.'viz=-.m.v1 . :7

'.' sec:-

~“a..n ‘
I. y ’, 2‘.

176

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH

Discussion of the Finding;

In 1831, a 26 year old Frenchman named Alexis de Tocqueville
visited America for nine months. For more than a century after that
visit, "Tocqueville's Democracy in America has provided its readers an
unparalleled abundance of description, analysis, and prophecy concerning
almost every aspect of the American scene" (Tocqueville, 1956, p. 9).
Tocqueville kept a journal (field notes) and used these notes along with
interviews to explain America to the world. It would seem reasonable
that using a similar method for six months, I could make a similar
contribution to the understanding of change—mastery learning-~in the
classroom. If Tocqueville and his friend and partner Gustave de
Beaumont could observe America, then certainly Skinner and his friend
and partner Ed Harvey could do likewise in a classroom.

This research has attempted to trace the evolving relationship of
the two team teachers who shared life in a classroom during an attempt
to change their practices, their attitudes and beliefs, and the learning
outcomes of their students. The research was done in an effort to
discover rationale concerning change in the classroom. Considering and
attempting mastery learning was the change implemented for producing
ethnographically valid accounts of classroom change. The study became

a history of trial and error and provided us with insights that could not

I .v“ n17 1v Y‘f” "-'-‘.-

K'l‘v !.V"*w V‘- _

r I" 'SH’ T r “T... .,

 

a. Mica/unrefi'v': M '. "3’.’

r “NHU'A “I‘d-"WW'VW‘ <."

--v 3"?‘fvrfl' . “I“.N’WLNM-O "Mowm. -<

,._— .
9

we. .. . 15a -.-_..

...'" '.. V . I
“ ’“fi'mm‘nfimu‘ I'm-1:.- .«r m- :h 1 '

H ‘T‘T'E'P .‘K’T- Q-fi'fi'p.

In" 9'"-

177

have been anticipated. Florio and Walsh (1978) state that there are
ethical, epistemological, and pragmatic reasons why it is worthwhile and
important to adopt such a collegial ethnographic method of research in
classrooms. "This method treats teachers and children not as objects of
study but as active subjects of great interest and importance" (P. 21).
This opinion was important to our study because both Ed and I felt
strongly about the past experiences that we had had in an effort to
change. In the past the educational change process had been top-down,
outside-in and, in every instance, we retaliated by learning to reduce
change agents into submission. Consequently, many innovations took root
in Garber High School, flourished for a brief period of time, but withered
on the vine and never truly reached any kind of classroom integration
that impacted on children.

In this study we hoped to capitalize on the virtues of ethnography
in hopes of improving our understanding of change in the classroom. The
method of participant observation would help us identify discrepancies
between what is said and what is done regarding change. By showing
how teachers cope with change, we hoped to establish guides for our
perspectives on pedagogical practices.

Using Guskey's alternate model of change, Figure 1, and
implementing Bloom's five elements of mastery learning-~feedback and
correctives, congruence among instructional components, clearly specified
learning objectives, clearly formulated learning standards, and
appropriate group based instruction—we discovered that educational

change depends upon what teachers do and think; . . . it's as simple and

complex as that" (Fullan, 1982, p. 107).

 

. \1‘2'. "‘flh" ”w ‘1‘“de "Wm-34:15. P” Mew-hour ‘f-v-*"~?€r~"fltfliflwux warm ‘WW’VF .Iqu ., ,,

._.:

.' I M1

1:1.

2 e. .. . A
Y? 5"m'm’lfiuhntrd

'1 ""*'!I.17-.':',-“.5-.~: ':

'flfl-Me... -~,'. .

178

Ed Harvey and I attempted to bring about change in our American
History classes. Mastery learning was the instructional method used in
an effort to change our attitudes and beliefs regarding change. We had
tried a number of changes over a 25 year period and had failed to
actualize change in our instructional methods. Our classrooms seemed to
be change resistant and we wanted them to be change persistent. To
implement a change as extensive as mastery learning the quality of our
working conditions became most important. Our classrooms were
structured in a flexible way that was conducive to change e.g., the
partition. Our class load was relatively small; we each had fewer than
115 students during the day. Our students were receptive to the change
experiment. In sum, the classroom environment seemed to enhance our
potential for successful change.

On the other hand, effecting change was made difficult by the
inability of the students and teachers to make the necessary adjustment
to a cooperative approach to learning as opposed to the traditional
competitive approach. Formative and summative testing proved to be the
major problem in the classroom. Changing our classes so that the five
essential elements in the mastery learning process would be implemented
never became a significant problem. Occasionally our field notes would
indicate that it was necessary to improve a particular element in our
instruction, but in reality the elements simply were a reinforcement of

what good teaching has always been regardless of the jargon attached to
the basic principles of sound teaching practices. It was clear that with
this change—mastery learning-a system of testing and retesting must be

developed for the change to be sustained. By the end of the semester it

an 22m~tmav-.im98=~

\. _ _. . ..
1"“,—
‘zr vw-v— ‘

. W. '3- 7'3”" duu‘

_' l"'\k""a

-17.” 115‘ Till

.19.;—

.5..—

 

' ruswa-um-Msnw-«e-v-M'M-w'n were

,5 aim-tn saw-v: w '1'“ 1 4‘" ~ .

(anxiety-r13?!" . _ .

--. a
I l-Ilrv a 3

-')".~"" . _ ‘ 1 -
.4” "°"‘- ”“5”“ rum-m-.:;1:.~.

‘W'mxwm 1.7.11 ’;

'-"‘"Y' Her. ..

179

appeared that we were getting closer to a practical system of testing for
mastery, but it was also clear from the field notes that we must work
through the experiencenthe change-4n a way in which the rewards at
least equaled the investment.

The happenings in a classroom mean many different things to the
teachers and students in that classroom. Interviews and surveys of the
students indicated that an overwhelming majority of the students
approved of the change. Test results of the students improved except
for the scores on the final exams. It appeared that by testing and
retesting, the students were able to score higher On the chapter tests
that each covered about two weeks of work. The final exam, however,
showed that the positive chapter test results were not sustained over a
period of time. Most students liked the idea of a second chance, some
used the system to their own advantage, and others just couldn't be
reached.

Ed and I found the implementing of change exciting and
rejuvenating. However, we also discovered frustration and futility on
many occasions. Because of our age and experience, it seemed that
there were many extrinsic and intrinsic forces working against our
chances for successful sustained implementation of mastery learning. The
daily routine of teaching in a public school does not lend itself to
change. The students' lack of interest in history coupled with their
interest in jobs and extracurricular activities have a negative impact on
teachers' enthusiasm for working toward change. Although we felt that

it was important to do whatever is good for students, there was also a

1.» w w «m «when! me! e "a ..M' sun-aw ~11 ‘1”: C“—:Jc.."""- 72:3;‘2'9" 314112-331. "‘1' '1'". «"9: - “'- ~ ”m i W‘V'W'ox-I" NJ 'hfifi'fi'i‘ ' warez-WNW: Ms.

"'9' are ‘7 ‘7"! "I‘m; a 41W .‘O‘WHW'M' ’W-"‘ e

37”...

nun-.97
ap-

‘3'3~'“‘m’”'1'='3€-Lraumm Tr.‘ _..

‘ “'0“; vas- H“. ,.

.f._ .

180

strong need for us to do what was important for our survival in an
institution that simply doesn't provide any incentive to work hard.

The age of teachers in combination with their outside interests
(developed primarily to satisfy intrinsic needs) make it seem impossible to
expend the additional time and effort required to sustain change such as
mastery learning. There is much more to successful change than
improved test results. What goes on in our classroom is also contingent
upon our lives outside of the classroom. Ed and I both had many
interests, both professional and personal, that limited the extent to which
we would work outside of the school day to bring about change. Cusick
(1979) acknowledged this situation:

One may ask then whether it is realistic to expect teachers to

engage normatively while students engaged only marginally. While

the rhetoric of teaching is 'often phrased in affective and
normative terms the fact is that for both teachers and students,
life in secondary schools is much more mundane than that. It is
small wonder that teachers as well as students seek activities and

interests outside school." (p. 100)

Fullan (1982) notes, "Time for change is a critical missing factor
in the schedules of most teachers" (p. 129). We found it difficult to do
what was necessary to sustain change for one semester in only about half
of our daily teaching schedule. Gradual implementation certainly seems
important to successful change based upon our experience. Ed and I
agreed throughout the semester that by using the mastery learning
instructional process, our teaching had improved significantly because we

were holding ourselves accountable for what was being taught and tested.

" B'!;m'rewfi!\:mgum- - 1

I...

e._—.
x-w-w'r,

" lw—wr -eluq! ‘-

.:..r.!.:..il 313.22. "LP—V ’J'K .au‘TSaJ'h. . ’- '—v' .

m. ~.‘uwnfilfwwtrurt~rfl'fie'vvwv'I-I-vkw ‘_ ., _

_-
-yw-'

 

""J- ‘ 17:42.12 ‘3:T:-':::.'n.:7zr; tawny-:mms's’r‘ "WW - _

““ mums-m “gill-..

31'»): rim..-

-n~$—'9 ew- ‘.w.l‘"‘ -.
i”, v _-

181

The testing and evaluation of mastery learning was the major problem
throughout the study. Our field notes made frequent reference to the
difficulty of establishing a practical testing method that would fulfill the
ideal of mastery learning and, at the same time, be efficient. It seemed
that we should have been concerned with problems relating to knowledge,
critical thinking skills, correctives, feedback, enrichment, etc., but the
predominance of the testing issue was the focus of our attention. It
appeared that we were trapped in a larger system. Ed and I, as well as
the students, found it difficult to break away from the traditional
competitive grading system. The students simply could not assimilate the
belief that the formative testing was for their benefit in terms of
learning. To many, a grade is more important than long term learning.
As hard as we tried we found it impossible not to have to modify the
change to conform with the institution in which we worked. Realizing a
major change in the classroom without an extended period of time and
support from the entire system would appear to be futile based upon our
experience.

Our problems with testing offers the prime example. The
authorities on mastery learning such as Bloom, Block, and Guskey have
written many books on the subject, and they all emphasize the

importance of testing, but they do not show any knowledge or sensitivity
to the complexity of the nature of implementing the testing system that
hey advocate. For instance there is no evidence that they recognize
OW time consuming the testing and retesting is in the classroom. Even
iore disconcerting is their lack of understanding regarding the busy work

reated by using this system of testing. How to deal with absent

-' ‘ -' —-—— ———.._._—‘—-.- .___--.--..

w - ‘7'.“ «W‘mswilr'fi‘r-WWJWEW ’

' 'B’";.1-r"7m 1.1..

m]. -4-....—' WV 1.1m.

.e

 

n
n

e «H Wettwtragomm nvaawuwww sfi'flt’f’f.

336161.4- V. ,,I ' ’ ' ' V V L 1 V_
mac-emf‘lNEQ—tz .'.‘.f'.‘.';.;":‘-’.r urgent an: e; :nwm~*’ m"

‘.-..':'

' wayrhlfi ‘u‘vd‘o-W' viewmu4.;' -

182

students, how to prevent mass cheating, how to change beliefs regarding
grades are just a few of the many questions not answered by the books
that only the ever occurring process of change in the classroom can
resolve. As we discovered, change builds upon change creating a system

of feedback mechanics, resulting in adjustments of the change itself.
Change then, Ed and I agreed, would take a long time. One
marking period or one semester was far from sufficient to change our
attitudes and beliefs. Gradual change over a number of years would be
necessary. Students and teachers have to not only know what the change
is about but also they must experience success with the change.
Practice of the fundamentals is essential to change. With our coaching
backgrounds, it was easy for Ed and me to agree that the basics of
mastery learning had to be developed before we would be skilled teachers
or the students, skilled learners. In one semester we had accomplished
the basics and had gone through a learning process with our students that
was developmental and experientially based but far from complete. The
attitudes and beliefs that'we had brought to the study were beginning to
change, but more success was necessary before we would ever be able to
sustain the change and spread the belief in the change to others. At the
end of the semester we felt encouraged about mastery learning but
remained concerned about testing. Ed expressed concern about the low
grade on the final exam and indicated that maybe we should have
lowered the scale. (Ed's Field Notes; Tuesday, June 9, 1987) We
discussed for some time the low scores on the final exam and mastery

learning and were not able to conclude much of anything except that we

v WROMU¥WIJEQQH~11h

. WWamras

. m::rcrm:. . . .

  

A .- -\ v Wa-mmh-«qnaaw wyuom-wq—pr-s; (cgrflf' - .~

sews: 8:272: :a awavb.mw*‘ W

'H'.. .
"a. —--1-3.

5.er ’ ‘ . ~
slammwc mmmI'? - ,

IM‘.‘ 1 .
‘ T. "' V‘WWWI no.0} v

183

had all failed to some extent. What would the educationists say about
this?

An important element of any change in the classroom is that the
change must fit the framework of the institution in which it will be
implemented. Mastery learning is a model used to structure curricula and
in some respects, it does fit the framework of our environment.
However, in some other respects the framework would have to be
modified for sustained change. A change in teacher expectations
concerning students is vital. It is important that participants in the
mastery learning process believe that almost all students are capable of
learning almost everything that is taught. This theory is different from
what we have practiced in the past. Because of his positive attitude, Ed
has positively influenced me on this subject, but it is difficult to get the
students to accept the premise that they all are capable students. Their
personal histories convince them differently.

It is difficult to generalize about students in regard to change. In
the surveys our students indicated that mastery learning affected them
positively; however, the final exam and other survey items indicated a
mixed understanding of what they were doing. A vast majority of
students believe that they try to do their very best work in history (Item
8 in 8 item survey; Appendix D), but when surveyed on the amount of
time that they study, their responses indicated that 25 of 87 of them
didn't do any homework, and 53 of the 87 did less than 30 minutes of
history homework daily. This evidence is included at this point in the

paper only because I feel that for us to successfully change education we

37am was $345»:

wrzrmim‘mssmm

mmrewew -

  

- I "my, .‘IW‘WW not w : - M «II-'9‘“! '4' '1': cut.

wee-e ram-J wag"

_-
, fl IV'

$;~v " " '

 

:IaH‘th-r ,~ .-

. ....
..:p,.. .r 33!

Doe
-

reenaummm (‘MMR’L .3:

’ R .3 4‘" )~ vs e ‘ I '
v 5' ‘ .
‘ ‘3 ."".m'f_,‘ux7.'"

184

must change the attitudes and beliefs of the students as well as those of
the teachers.

It would appear that for both teacher and students to participate
most effectively in a change in the classroom, a clear picture of not only
what the change is but also the reason for the change is essential.
Through the use of the mastery learning model and the alternate model
of change, a picture of both what is happening and why it is happening
from the point of view of participants can be eXplored. The goal would
be better understanding of the change with an eye toward improving
teaching and learning. Both the nature and management of sustained
change in the classroom were the result of a change in the teachers'
attitudes and beliefs that resulted from the practical implementation of a
proposed change. A descriptive analysis of the learning environment
through the use of a change model (Guskey's, 1985) and a change-
mastery learning (Bloom's, 1986) has implications for improving teachers'
attitudes and beliefs which in turn has implications for improving

secondary education.

Implications for Teacher Chaggg
Analysisof bothgqualitative and quantitative data provide support
for the alternate model of change used in this study. Change in
teachers' attitudes and beliefs can result _a_f_t_e; the successful
implementation of the change if there is some evidence of improved
student outcomes, and if it is seen by the teachers that enough support
will be given so that change fits the institutional framework of the

school in a way that does not significantly increase the amount of work

- ——- . _q _ ._..v H..-.

h «1' ~" “Awe-”mm” fist-C View” quqnwnrrflf: mim‘mwmsflémfi WMWLTmflaiflflwumVM1gfigmggm. —.

Jena-mg, . ‘ - - - A. , . .—
m ' “a magma“... :63'7'.’ meson-wan -: r-pwwwn-Mw W W“ '1

“'8‘ “""' ‘f'W'mvw-w .. .. '
l .- .- , ‘

185

that must be done for the sustained success of the change. The change
model and the change—mastery learning--allow for a variety of teacher/
student change possibilities. The change—mastery learning--has been
perceived as important by both teachers and students. The change does
have implications for improving both teacher and student attitude and
beliefs. The change also has implications for improving classroom
instruction and increasing job satisfaction.

What are the implications for American history classroom
teachers? The study suggests through analyzing the classroom setting
using mastery learning and Guskey's (1985) model for change:

1. A better understanding of change in terms of both extrinsic
and intrinsic forces would be helpful in clarifying change
expectations in terms of personal needs.

2. A variety of teacher change patterns can be used effectively
in the classroom to modify the change so that it will fit the
framework of the institution. The choice should be a
function of the multiple factor of teachers' attitudes and
beliefs, curriculum demands and student needs.

3. Each change, if clearly defined and practiced, provides
unique opportunities for teacher/student success.

4. The value of the change can be reflected both in student
academic progress and attitudes and beliefs.

5. Ultimately, if the change can be seen to be beneficial to
teachers and students, then their attitudes and beliefs will

change; thus the strategies for improving the teaching and

"‘W'uumnm. {25.-w. .

. . ..."f."-_"1".'&HT". m, 3m . .. lu‘fl%:‘7yf-55M'qa

 

.. Ha W‘M-«a cum 3- “PM.” ""112”; -. .

"2.04.“ 'g V . . ' I V
" “* manna-a.m. “6134.41. -..‘..‘7.:-::.' -;-.:.::=-: $1“: :wwwfla'“* "”“‘“"'

‘f‘ ”'“R'V "3'. i-

“on”- .
t. L" ‘y

186

learning within the classroom can be recognized and, it is
hoped, applied.
Fullan (1982) notes:
Significant educational change consists of changes in beliefs,
teaching style, and materials which can only come about through a
process of personal development in a context of socialization. (p.
121)
For this to occur teachers must acquire the necessary background
knowledge through some non-threatening staff development. Coercive
educational change efforts should not be used. Teachers should be
accorded a direct and initial role in the production, dissemination, and
utilization of educational knowledge so that they will implement the
changes in their classrooms. If the teachers acquire the knowledge for
the change, are able to use the change, and can see a positive change in
student learning outcomes, then their attitudes and beliefs can change.
According to Fullan (1982):
Change is not something that can be added on as an afterthought
to be covered in after school teachers' meetings directed by
administrators. Change must be part and parcel of the job. If
change in education consists of an ongoing social process, and if
teachers are central, that process must be a regular part of their
daily work. (p. 128)
Mastery learning was a change implemented by two team teachers.
The nature and management of that change in the future will depend
upon the extent of the change in Ed's and my attitudes and beliefs that

resulted from the semester long practical implementation of the change.

.‘ .mwnvv

I”! U

L-flflfi '3‘" ""v""r‘ ‘

-00?.W . ‘ oym'Q-v‘m“ mini:

«- p ”q . ..——. b—uunu

n‘Iuv-wano ‘a-v; A. .

187

Change then is a learning process for teachers that is developmental and

experientially based.

Implications for Further Research

The secondary American history classroom setting is an
environment that demands further research. Further research is also
needed in the areas of change in the classroom and mastery learning.
This study was limited to selected American History classes where a
change—mastery learning—was implemented by two team teachers over
one semester. There appears to be a need for further research in the
following areas:

1. Descriptive studies that focus on change in other social
studies classes.

2. Descriptive studies that focus on curriculum change which is
planned, implemented, and evaluated by teachers.

3. Descriptive studies involving classroom observations to
determine if format changes such as mastery learning affect
teachers' attitudes and beliefs.

4. Studies that will help find more creative ways to help
teachers translate new knowledge into practice.

5. Studies that explore the Specific teacher beliefs and
attitudes most crucial to professional growth and
development.

6. Studies that implement and test the alternate model of
change over an extended period of time, e.g., 2, 3, 1+ or more

years.

.. mmmmn WW WMML' I"?! M'A‘l' 'TWF‘MB'D’KW‘PI!“

o "0.4”":qu \Ejr't't'Q‘Dm-"ul'v-C-Ju flw‘gopo.qum

' .—

3131 are: ~: 7 '1 rywuay ; vam“""“'* "a—I 4""

v.1...

.~. - . 1‘ ‘ ‘
3 - “firms-.9“: {'“Im'flf.fi}j _\ .73

‘c—‘..
.‘o— --

r ' “Wan-1r -.~

’W‘~9~ 'w‘ v

188

Continued research can not only aid the researcher to develop the
working model of change into a tool for use by the practitioner, but also
could explore the other facets of education that influence teachers'
attitudes and beliefs. Finally, such research will contribute to our
understanding of the complexity of change and, at the same time,
illustrate that change can also be somewhat orderly. Furthermore, by
using a model of the process of teacher change, it can be suggested that
careful attention to that order is likely to facilitate change and the

endurance of change. (Guskey, 1986)

The Next Step

One of the most important aspects of research, particularly
ethnographic research is the close relationship that develops between the
researcher and the subjects. Not only to help Ed and me see our
environment more completely but also to share the findings with other
teachers and school administrators has given the study more value. In
Bay County where three of the four school districts are spending
hundreds of thousands of dollars on in-servicing teachers for
implementing mastery learning, the results of this research just might
have some significance. But, more importantly, it may serve as a basis in
our school district for future change programs.

Because the description of the change—mastery learning-~is just
emerging from the data, continued research is necessary to support and
refine it. for future application. The future application should be
twofold: (a) to continue applying Guskey's alternate model of change and

(b) to continue to implement mastery learning.

_ _ . “w“.—

“WY NH". xtwfiw :9 y»: . ‘

rem...” (.2 sat-fist. .

""‘l 'V

v—yu- ._-

 

‘merl'sflkafi‘Yfifl _. .

~.vamm-n1q m:- n wwwflmmfw

“Fest—.4 wan-w

‘-
v rm”

_-

_._
“lw —v

 

3333* E'fi-‘fla. —

..
Oi pas

mm a”.
a .3 .

- —-«vnm..g...l." 3..

 

s a yin”... 'A'w“$"o7mkm——

189

Recognizing the validity of this direction in change research, the
Social Studies Department at Garber High School has committed to doing
further implementation of mastery learning. Ed and I will continue to
use mastery learning components in all of our American History classes
(eight sections) in an effort to improve our teaching by improving or
changing our attitudes and beliefs.

The next step for the researcher is to develop strategies for
applying the model of change and mastery learning model on a wider
scale. To take that step however, it will be necessary to recruit
teachers and administrators. If we do not, teachers will continue to
teach in the way they were taught instead of the way research indicates
they should be teaching. Cusick (1983) identified problems with

attempted teacher change:

With no institutional process for systematic implementation or
evaluation, then the individual who wanted a change could create
one and could even find some like-minded people to assist, but
when his/her interest changed or enthusiasm faded or when like-
mindedness no longer held, then the program ceased. And even on
those occasions when the department did try to exert some

influence, that influence stopped at the classroom door. (p. 90)
It remains to be seen if our experimentation with mastery learning at
Garber High School will join our other attempts and subsequent failures
at bringing about improvements in the teaching and learning process.

iistory is not on the side of the implementation of mastery learning.

we 3"“ ' mom—5m.- 33' can"; €m.atk‘.i$1:”-:-Wv

 

0' e ‘39”?5 gw‘wmxaq.».c'Mnugregyr-xtfi,1tm7Mama."-. «.- vw . -

4;? 5173:“:1'; azuawwmaaj 9! mmm )w 0“ WW“

.. ~13? mwfiwumummm W

"G-flr 99!. ‘- fk P 4" fi‘wm gm".

190

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, L. W. 6: Block, J. H. (1976). Mastery learning. In D.
Treffinger, J. Davis dc R. Ripple (Eds.), Handbook on educational
psychology: Instructional practice and research. New York:
Academic Press.

Ashton, P. T. 6c Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers'
sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.

Averch, H. A., Carroll, S. J., Donaldson, T. S., Kiesdling, H. G. 6: Pincus,
J. (1974). How effective is schooling? Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Educational Technology Publications. _

Barr, R. D. (1973). Beyond the new social studies. The Social Studies, ll,
157-159.

Barr, R. D., Shermis, S. S. or Barth, J. L. (1978). The nature of social
studies. Palm Springs: ETC Pub.

Barr, R. D. (1971). Values and youth: Teaching social studies in an age of
911113. Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies.

Barzun, J. (1983, September). Some recommendations for the teaching of
history. The Educational Diggst, pp. 15-18.

Barzun, J. (1984). Teaching in America. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.

Benjamin, J. M. (1975). What have we done to social studies? Social

Education, 39, 88-90.

—H__ —--- eh-

- W ""“V ‘ *WW'WH"VSV$ ‘T‘W‘NfirflTfiZQv flan-u. u.

«Lavage-rm n- .

o‘tn”

.1 n-va-w'a-w .na'munn.al-.a*m. www.6". 5:53?me

 

““1"

_ A - Ann“!
-7 m.

7... . .yr-

"I

 

‘ *4- 0-0. - __
.~ 1253......d: --r.3:t.'a==mr¢.. - a... ...,- a

A'-

c._._-__

 

TERM“:—

1
'v

WVA‘EY‘A"H"“Q.§‘ .1

191

Block, J. H. (1985). Belief systems and mastery learning. Outcomes, 4(2).

Block, J. H. or Burns, R. R. (1976). Mastery learning. In L. S. Shulman

(Ed.), Review of research in education (pp. 3-49). Itasca, IL: F. E.

LW—fi mm 7585932139? :5: ._:.:.°.-,::_:a mgvycmtp}.w. u

Peacock.

M
.MIQ'

, .ocwawmq.hw'ywwfiu;egggx_¢¢mfimtm

Block, J. H. of Anderson, L. W. (1975). Mastery learninLin classroom
instruction. New York: MacMillan.

Block, J. H. (1971). Mastery learning theorx and practice. New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Block, J. H. (1972). Student learning and the setting of mastery
performance standards. Educational Horizons, 50, 183-191.

Block, J. H. (1973, November-December). Teachers, testing, and mastery
learning. Today's Education, pp. 30-35.

Bloom, B. (1979). Alterable variables: The new direction in educational

“.1..-
v—vfi.’

research. Great Britain: Lindsay 6: Co. Ltd.

ru—

__ h‘“.-
V -'

‘115-3352-‘1‘77‘1 ..,.‘1JW ' '1" W

.W'

Bloom, B. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. New York:
McGraw-Hill.

Bloom, B. (1978). New views of the learner: Implications for instruction
and curriculum. Educational Leadership, 563-576.

Bloom, B. (1980). The new research in educational research. Phi Delta

 

1,. ,-_

7... _

Kappan, 382-385.
Bloom, B. (1973, August 27). Time and learning. Thorndike Award

Address, let Annual Convention of the American Psychological

Association, Montreal.

- W ’3'°"-'-’3¢Mvu_ mam “seam-‘5‘.

‘W‘vfi‘ ,9‘0'.7' a...
r

 

W -

. LWWWJWXWM'UY-WTQV " W?! 1""! 5394'.“

192

--.- __ __.__ __ ..___V...._ .._.>._.—....-

Bloom, R. B. (1976). Teacher Training, moral dilemmas, and nonsense
reSponses. Phi Delta Kappan, 61(2).

Blumer, H. (1962). Society of symbolic interaction. In Herbert Rose (Ed.),
Human Behavior and social processes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Blumer, H. (1966). Sociological implications of the thought of George
Hervert Mead. American Journal of Sociology, 71, 535-544.

Boyer, E. B. (1983). High school: A report on secondary education in

. '. «magnifies» 'fl~l‘.1.~w¢---zfivy:

America. Boston: Harper and Row.

Brophy, J. E. (1980). Recent research on teaching. (Occasional Paper No.
40) East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research
on Teaching.

Brophy, J. E. 6c Everton, C. (1974). Student characteristics and teaching.
Boston: Allyn 6c Bacon.

Brophy, J. E. at Good, T. L. (1970). Teachers' communications of

I'MM 8" ‘M W!"

differential eXpectations for children's classroom performance:

Some behavioral data. Journal of Educational Psychology, 61,

 

365‘3740
Brophy, J. E. dc Good, T. L. (1974). Teacher student relationships: causes

and consequences. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

 

Brown, L. (1981, October). Sixties social studies movement: Have
conditions really changed? Clearinghouse, pp. 86-87.
Bruyn, S. T. (1966). The human perspective in sociology: The methodology

of participant observation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

“ '0', - I - J .1 " ’ - _ _ __« __ . .. . A

- 2r «I'V-fi" .0 ’0‘»
' " - W.V-..-r

193

Carroll, John B. (1963). A model of school learning. Teachers College
Record, 64, 723-733.

Case Studies in Science Education. (Vol 1.). The case reports; (Vol II.).
Design, overview, and general findings. (1978). Urbana-Champaign:
University of Illinois, Center for Instructional Research and
Committee on Culture and Cognition.

Champlin, J. (1987, Fall) Leadership: A change agent's view. Leadership.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum, 9-12.

Chesler, M. (1967). Values and controversy in secondary social studies: A
critical review of literature. In C. B. Cox 6t B. G. Massialas
(Eds.), Social studies in the United States. A critical appraisal.
New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.

Clark, C. M. (1979). Five faces of research on teaching. (Occasional
Paper No. 24). East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute
for Research on Teaching.

Cohen, A. S. (1981). In defense of mastery learning. Principal, 60(5),
35-37.

Cohen, A. S. (1983, April 11). Instructional psychological implications of

mastery learning. Paper presented at annual meeting of the

 

American Educational Research Association, Montreal.
Cohen, A. S. (It Hyman, J. (1979). Learning for mastery: Ten conclusions

after 15 years and 3,000 schools. Educational Leadership, 104-109.

. -. 1. «m-mg'mrw‘ 1‘s,.9'..W.‘t4P.-A‘I.tm.€‘2w‘7f‘-

 

4_._.-—_._. —-

«'33::x-1123rzaaunfi: 'flwnwwfi'm ‘W"“"*"“"M' “I!” .W. ‘W'WRVCTH mw'm__,m . _ ‘m‘m S’f-LW ‘ . .suwr I"! m -

..___1
— v._— “w

an;

 

““9“ ”W ¥*~m:',zazr3en'so.m___ '

IU-‘l '-

‘3'. ‘3;

.~:’-'-.".“.-'r-oe'_ wax:

. smwmsmvna

194

1.. ._... . .1. . _

Cohen, A. S. (1982). What is mastery learning? J. S. Hyman (Ed.) A
seminar in learning for mastery. Unpublished.

Coleman, J. S. (1965). Adolescents and the schools. New York: Basic

Books.

 

Conant, J. B. (1959). The American him school today. New York:
McGraw-Hill.

Cooper, C. (1979). An ethnographic studL of the dynamics of the

instructional process in a college classroom. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.

Corbett, S. 6: Edward, P. J. (Eds.). (1980). APA editorial style. In The

«W ~W.. m MMhJIM'WONC'fl’E, ”£36“?- _ u ‘

little Erflish handbook: Choices and conventions. New York: Scott,

va—

Foresman.

'7

Crandall, D. P. (1983). The teacher's role in school improvement.

‘4. .4 I‘Lfl' _‘n...
. ‘v w

‘p'vv‘r'

 

Educational Leadership, 6-9.

‘—
v..-"rx‘ _

Cusick, P. A. (1973). Inside high school. New York: Holt, Rinehart and

 

.1- “

.-r_:..-.a.mmmmmcgrtmem.na.“rmrx':swam-am»: 1. ~ -

vw-r v,

Winston.

Cusick, P. A. (1979). Report of a seminar on field research methods in
education. (Conference series No. 2). East Lansing: Michigan State
University, Institute of Research on Teaching.

Cusick, P. A. (1983). The egalitarian ideal and the American high school:
Studies of three schools. New York: Longman.

Davidson, J. W. 6: Lytle, M. H. (1986). A history of the Republic. New

’
-v-

Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

IMQO“ ‘wn—{j V. - ,1

”wax-,1 ‘M_“ :.

195

Dodge, K. (1984). An ethnographic study of the interrelationship of
community collegp teachers in a laboratory setting. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.

Doyle, W. 6: Ponder, G. (1977). The practical ethic and teacher
decision-making. Interchange, 8(3), 1-12.

Eisner, E. W. (1979). The educational imagination. New York: MacMillan.

Eisner, E. W. (1983, October). The kinds of schools we need. Educational
Leadership, 48-55.

Erickson, F., Florio, S. or Bushman, J. (1980). Fieldwork in educational
research. (Occasional Paper No. 36). East Lansing: Michigan State
University, Institute for Research on Teaching.

Erickson, F. (1979). Mere ethncmraphy: Some problems in its use in
educational practice. (Occasional Paper No. 15). East Lansing:
Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching.

Erickson, F. (1971, April). The cycle of situational frames. Paper
presented at the Midwest Anthropology Meeting.

Encyclopedia of Educational Research, 5th Edition (1984). Mastery
learning. (Vol 11.). 851-858.

Florio, S. (1978). Learning how to go to school: An ethnography of
interaction in a kindergarten/first grade classroom. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Harvard Graduate School of Education,

Cambridge.

at... a... .-. -. .- «um "Ewrmmtqn‘na- m. wswmammmsmsmmmwwmmfia awn-«u.» ‘ W

__u"
vv

”qr—r

_
‘,=,. w-

W '-

 

33’33113'7-13 T—

“Oat—.0
. . ow‘vvv

1‘-" 7C. MI&WW MU“?

.-4’p ‘3. \. ’1 ~ «5" 7: ENVMVR‘.

196

Florio, S. 6: Walsh, M. (1978). The teacher as colleague in classroom

 

research. (Occasional Paper No. 4). East Lansing: Michigan State
University, Institute for Research on Teaching.

Fullan, M. (1982). The meaning of educational change. New York:

 

Columbia University Teachers' College.
Getzels, J. W. 6c Guba. E. G. (1957). School behavior and the

administrative process. School Revievy, 65.

 

Getzels, J. W. dc Thelen, H. A. (1960). The classroom as a unique social
system. In N. B. Henry (Ed.), Yearbook for the National Society for

the Study of Education.

 

Glatthorn, A. A. (1980). A guide for developing an English curriculum for

 

the eighties. Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.

 

Glazer, B. (it Strauss, A. (1975). The discovery of grounded theory:

 

Strategies for (galitative research. Chicago: Aldine.

 

Goetz, J. 6: Lecompte, M. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in

educational research. New York: Harcourt, Brace.

 

Good, T. L., Biddle, B., 6: Brophy, J. E. (1975). Teachers make a

 

difference. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

 

Goodlad, J. L. (1984). A place called school: Prospects for the future.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Green, 3. 6t Wallat, C. (1981). Ethnography and language in educational

settings. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

_.._...h _ _e_--__... ._...____

._. «armauwwmnomawmummfimmmym ”WMSI‘EE'WT' 'W’l’mffl' [EM 9334

hnmw
r." .v' . .

' fi’ly n" “

 

.u' "37L: . l. -" K'EWKT. ‘ I. .

:;n.szau.mmaamm (3.061.: 8693'; ‘

“ “m V' '1”- ! ' J."

M P‘M‘,4'...'

197

Guskey, T. R. (1985). Implementirg mastery learning. California:
Wadsworth Publishing.

Guskey, T. R. (1986, May). Staff development and the process of teacher
change. Educational Researcher, pp. 5-12.

Guskey, T. R. (1982). The effects of change in instructional
effectiveness on the relationship of teacher eXpectations and
student achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 75,
3145-3”.

Guskey, T. R. (1984). The influence of change in the instructional
effectiveness upon the affective characteristics of teachers.
American Educational Research Journal, 14, 2145-259.

Hall, G. E. 6: Loucks, S. F. (1977). A developmental model for
determining whether the treatment is actually implemented.
American Educational Research Journal, 14, 263-276.

Harris, B. M. (1980). Improving staff mrformance though inservice
education. Boston: Allyn 6c Bacon.

Hathaway, D. (1980). Changing school climate and student achievement.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East
Lansing.

Heffner, Richard D. (Ed.). (1956). Democracy in America. New York:
New American Library.

Hirsch, E. D., Jr., (1987). Cultural literacy: What every American needs

to know. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

-.. v—.-.....--"_.—— .. - -\.-._

————u-. _ _ _

_~ _ . ‘ . .. .. “'9' “5"”. c“. .rmrr-m.~ , W W. ,m ,._, T - .
«a WWW tm‘fifl‘J—I. ' n n at. . . '1 . . mm, \mffi?§”r .Q‘i'i."§m‘im,'.fim? ""5504

‘4‘ uJ’l‘uJJ—li-
.yv-nr-v — .V V v

 

m
.w m, v. .y.,-

 

: 1'34""- ..aa‘F. .raxaummfinztr-

h...

n4

ww‘

 

1M; -‘ ‘

I- A
A!» "1- 5“: Qbyomm?..

" ' wWVGX-A7W'1m3l'ffl§\'w- “‘

198

Husen, T. (1979). The school in question. Oxford: Oxford University

 

Press.

Idstein, P. (1984, Winter). More or less variance: A decision for mastery

learning educators. Outcomes, pp. 9-14.

Issac, 5. 6c Michael, W. B. (1981). Handbook in research and evaluation.

t...

San Diego: Edits.

”5:???"

Jackson, P. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.

Jackson, P. (1977). The practice of teaching. New York: Columbia
University Teachers' College Press.

Janesick, V. J. (1977). An ethnographic study of a teacher's classroom

perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertatiop, Michigan State

 

University, East Lansing.

Janesick, V. J. (1978). An ethnograjgic study of a teacher's classroom
perspective: Implications for curriculum. (Research series No. 33).
East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on
Teaching.

Johnson, J. H. (1975). Doing field research. New York: MacMillan.

Jones, L. L. 6: Hayes, A. E. (1980). How valid are surveys of teacher

needs? Educational Leadership, 37, 390-392.

'w‘tutuIn-‘nyu -~‘, young. 3,... “‘- _ " ' - ~ . A _ r. A .4 -- A ‘ ' ' ' "W 'A' _ "" "'7 """
' 1"""MMEB’WQW amzum..mme‘f':arzmumw-am . .45” am. .Mdrm’. “*r' “M” “"5“ "aw name‘s! '1” "" ”My. "

199

Kim, B. S. (1980). Teachers' instructional climate: Mastery model
strategy and student achievement at different grade levels.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East
Lansing.

Kim, C. H. 6c Kim, B. S. (1969). A pilot study on the Bloom strategy for

mastery learning. (Research Bulletin No. 3). Seoul: Korean Institute

 

for Research in the Behavioral Sciences.

Kim, H. (1971). The mastery learning in the Korean middle schools.
UNESCO Regional Office for Education in Asia, §_l_(l), 55-60.

Kim, H. et al. (1970). Mastery learning in the middle school: Final report
on mastery learning project. (Research Bulletin No. 70). Seoul:
Korean Institute for Research in the Behavioral Sciences.

Kownslar, A. O. 6: Frizzle, D. B. (1974). Discovering American History.
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Lee, Y. D. et al. (1971). Interaction improvement studies on the mastery
learning project: Final report on mastery learning. Seoul National
University, Educational Research Center.

Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw
Hill.

Lezotte, L. W. 6: Bancroft, B. A. (1985, March). Growing use of the

effective schools model for school improvement. Educational

Leadership, 23-27.

~1~~ -ww-—~tw:maw «no «new MOI-$- W3“ c-‘f'Rm ammndrsmm

332m 3219-1791 W‘QflwmwMT' mi ." " w

— A I..- _w ‘- _______.._—...-- .....

wary-“www- - sass firmware '9;

 

‘ 1.1.,

y] _i‘

urn-.9-

«12.23; I 6‘7.

cm

on»

_,

 

': ""1 “Wu «2'1" mac-p4.

_.
P-‘t-iuv- r I :- ,

200

Lieberman, A. dc Miller, L. (1984). Teachers, their world and their work.

 

' - " "’“"‘ ww,&:.01iflf’ifi .ugxygqoomyMIfl‘W‘

Implications for school improvement. nginia: Association for

 

 

Supervision and Curriculum DeveIOpment.
Lortie, D. C. (1975). School teacher: A sociological study. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press.

 

Lutz, F. W. (1981). The holistic approach to understanding schooling. J.

“'1'"? p.
.v-wfi . n _ '14.»

Green and C. Wallat (Eds.) Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

McDonald, F. J. dc Elias, P. The effects of teaching performance on pupil

 

learning. (Vol 1., Final Report. Beginning Teacher Evaluation
Study, Phase 2, 197(4-1976). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing

Service.

.~.. 4’M‘9’0’MQ*WQ"’ arming-cur

McNeil, J. D. (1969). Forces influencing curriculum. Review of

 

Educational Research, 39, 293-318.

 

Melton, R. G. (1979). Summary of the findings of three NSF Sponsored
studies on the status of pre-college science education. In J. P.
Shaver, O. L. Davis dc S. Helburn (Eds.) What are the needs in
pre-college science, mathematics and social science education:

View from the field. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.

 

Michigan State Board of Education. (1984). Better education for

Michigan citizens: A blueprint for action. Lansing: Michigan

 

Department of Education.

Michigan State Board of Education. (1980). The common goals of

 

Michigan education. Lansing: Michigan Department of Education.

 

4“““4‘ "W ‘7‘~9~u§A-.'.“2'::'. - -.

201

Michigan State Board of Education. (1984). Essential goals and objectives
for secondary social studies education in Michigan. Lansing:
Michigan Department of Education.

Michigan State Board of Education. (1982). Essential performance
objectives for social studies. Lansing: Michigan Department of
Education.

Michigan State Board of Education. (1984). 1983-84 social studies
education interpretive report. Lansing: Michigan Department of
Education.

Moore, J. R. 6c Williams, P. L. (1980). Current issues.
Criterion-referenced testing for the social studies. Washington,
DC: National Council for the Social Studies.

Mueller, D. G. (1975). Mastery learning: Partly boon, partly boondoggle.
Teacher Education Forumg 3(11), Bloomington: Division of Teacher
Education.

Newman, F. M. (1971). The teacher's role in value issues. In Robert Barr
(Ed.) Values and youth: Teaching social studies in an age of crisis.
Washington, DC: National Council for the social studies.

Okey, J. R. (19714). Altering teacher and pupil behavior with mastery
learning. School Science and Mathematics, 74, 530-535.

Okey, J. R. (1975). Development of mastery teaching materials. Final

Evaluation Report, USOE, G-74-2990. Bloomington: Indiana

University.

mun: .‘ , I thunk. “WTAA‘ - 531V: idfijafl (9"9'0-‘2? 353'- -

'1..wa r ,

{JV-n -u'-—vldlzl~l- . -

n.4- " .LR‘B‘PJEIE‘: run-r13

. . .évwfiwmoflhflqvvn;~ _,._ ,__.._,,.. _,

“‘A‘—‘4'... ’ —‘
I' 7

 

.337 v—v

 

A .

.-
‘vww—‘

 

1:03:31 93¢.er

m: 'mwmwm own: v.22: r .-m:,':.-.L

id... 1
“1'3”," £1“!

349'

.v‘

’5.“ '

202

Okey, J. R. 6c Ciesla, J. (1975). Mastery teaching. National Center for
the Development of Training Materials in Teacher Education.
Bloomington: Indiana University.

Olson, L. (198(4). Opinions clash at conference to define history
curriculum. Education WeekJ g, 1.

Outcomes, Inc. (1986). An analysis of research compiled for use by
outcomes driven developmental model district to create a data
screen for instructional decision making. Lubbock, TX.

Panel of School Science Commission on Human Resources, (1979). The
state of school science. A review of the teaching of mathematics,
science, and social studies in American schools and
recommendations for improvements. In J. P. Shaver, O. L. Davis 6r
S. Helburn (Eds.) What are the needs in pre-college science,
mathematics, and social science education: View from the field.
Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.

Peter, L. J. (1979). Peter'SJuotations. New York: William Morrow and
Co.

Ponder, G., Brandt, R. 6c Ebersole, B. (1977). The more things change:
The status of social studies. In J. P. Shaver, O. L. Davis 6: S.
Helburn (Eds.) What are the needs in pre-college science,
mathematics and social science education: View from the Field.

Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.

._.._.A._...._

- _.._.\_.._..

.wmawm waflmim-w raw ..

-v— ... now-d. ~—.~

 

331311541? ‘wa*mw Wad: -"-w+~wmgw’mwwr qawmuwu “fig: miw’L‘J‘Jm "’11'2.‘ .313, ___, 1.1! "$1.; _? ‘

\
fl’. D

: 7‘ ‘wak'm'mmmaum gunfighrmxnu

b-u..~\..'-. L‘r “’W'EK‘F'I-Q‘ .

203

Raffini, J. P. (1986, September). Student apathy: A motivational dilemma.
Educational Leadership, pp. 53-55.

Ravitch, D. (1985). The schools we deserve. New York: Basic Books.

 

Ravitch, D. (1983). The troubled crusade; American education 1905-1980.

 

New York: Basic Books.

Ruskin, R. S. (1974). The personalized system of instruction: An

 

educational alternative. ERIC/Higher Education Research Report

 

N0. 5. ERIC ED093 256.
Rutter, R. A. (1986, April/May). Profile of the profession. Social
Education, pp. 252-256.

Schatzman, L. and Strauss, A. (1974). Field research: Stratgies for a

 

natural sociology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

 

Shanker, A. (1986, September). Teachers must take charge. Educational

 

Leadership, 12-13.
Shaver, J. P., Davis, O. L. 6: Helburn, S. (1979). What are the needs in

 

pre-college sciencp mathematics, and social studies education:

 

View from the Field. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.

 

Shaughnessy, M. 6: Haladyna, K. (1985, November/ December). Research in

student attitude toward social studies. Social EducationJ pp.

 

692-695.
Shieve, L. dc Schoenhert, M. E., (Eds.). (1987). Leadership: Examining the
elusive. Yearbook of the association for supervision and curriculum

development.

 

204

Shulman, L. S. (1979). Research on teaching in the arts: Review,

 

analysis, critique. (Occasional Paper No. 19). East Lansing:

 

Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching.

Sizer, T. (1984). Horace's compromise--The dilimma of the American high

 

551%. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Smith, H. A. (1979). A report on the implications for the science
community of three NSF supported studies on the state of
pre-college science education. In J. P. Shaver, O. L. Davis 6c 5.

Helburn (Eds.) What are the needs in pre-college science,

 

mathematics and social studies education: View from the field.
Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.

Spady, W. G. (1981, January). Outcome based instructional management:
A sociological perspective. National Institute of Education.

Spady, W. G. (1981, January). Outcome based instructional systems.

 

Lubbock, TX: The Network for Outcome Based Schools.

Stanley, W. B. (1985). Review of research in social studies education
1976-1983. Washington, DC: National Council for the Social
Studies.

Stretting, M. 6: Sundeen, L. (1969). In Wiley, K. B. (1977). The status of
pre-college science, mathematics and social science education:
1950-1975, (Vol 111.), Social science education. Boulder: Social

Science Education Consortium.

205

Switzer, T. J. (1981). Reflections on the fate of the new social studies.
Phi Delta Kappan, 62, 729-770.

Torshen, K. P. (1977). The mastery approach to competenq based
education. New York: Academic Press.

Travers, R. M. (Ed.). (1973). Second handbook of research on teaching.
Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing Co.

Waller, W. (1932). The sociology of teaching. New York: Russell 6c
Russell.

Ware, A. (1976). A comparison of two mastery learning strategies for
teaching gecgraphic concepts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Washington.

Weber, M. 0982). The essentials of bureaucratic organizations: An ideal

construction. In R. Merton (Ed.) Reader in bureaucracy. Glencoe,

 

IL: The Free Press.

Welsh, P. (1986). Tales out of school. New York: Elizabeth Sefton Books,

 

Viking Press.

Welsh, P. (1986, September). What reform? Educational Leadership,
56-62.

Wiley, K. B. (1977). The status of pre-college science, mathematics and
social science education: I950-1975, (Vol 111.). Social studies

education. Boulder: Social Science Education Consortium.

206

Wright, G. Z. (1979). The status of pre—college social studies educational
practices in United States schools. In J. P. Shaver, O. L. Davis 6:
S. Helburn (Eds.) What are the needs in pre-college science,
mathematics and social science education: View from the field.
Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.

Yilderan, G. (1977). The effects of the level of cognitive achievement on
selected learning criteria under mastery learning and normal
classroom instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University
of Chicago.

Yinger, R. J. (1977). A study of teacher planning. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation. Michigan State University, East Lansing.

Yinger, R. J. (1978). Fieldwork as a basis for theory building in research
on teaching. (Research Series No. 19). East Lansing: Michigan

State University, Institute on Research for Teaching.

Appendix A: Sample of Curriculum Guide 207

nun-roan
armor'rm

zusrnncrmounnwunrrs

1 - A New Deal (1933 - 1935)

2 - rug New no.1 Continuo- (lsas - 193d)

3 - Prelude to Another World Conflict (1920 - 1941)

4 - rm. Second "6:14 uuz'(1941 - 1945i.

Appendix A: Sample of Curriculum Guide 208

Instructional Dnit - A New Deal (1933 - 1935)

Overview

This instructional unit focuses on the early years of the New Deal. Students
will learn about the roots of the New Deal and the blurry of legislation passed
during the first hundred days of Franklin D. Roosevelt's first tern in office.
They will also analyze criticism of the new Deal and the rotor-.neasures passed

in 1935.

Vbcshulggy

New Deal, Fireside Chat. TVA. NRA, CCC, “PA, Utility Cospeny, Ingndr Act.
Social Security Act

Haterials

Worksheet - ”The First Hundred Days”: A Crossword Puzzle
'A.View of the New Deal“: Analysing Cartoons

Videotape - "Tile was the 1930's"

.lichigan History - ”Putting Michigan Back to work”

Appendix A: Sample of Curriculum Guide 209

AIBIICAI HISTORY - PRO“ 1877 (CIRCLE ONE): I H A

 

provided a basis for New Deal ideas.
b. describe the variety of ideas behind the political philosophy of the New Deal.
c. classify information on a chart.

 

8.6.s:
franklin Roosevelt. New Deal

 

LIIIIIIG ACTIVITIES:

1. Review with students the condition of the country in late 1932 and early
1933.

2. Hake a chart on the chalk board and discuss the experiences and ideas that
formed the roots of the New Deal. The following columns should be included:

Personal Egpgriences National Erpggiences Others

3. Videotape - "Time was 1930's"

 

8
Videotape - "Time was 1930's"

 

 

 

v ;;)|" ('=(

 

Appendix A: Sample of Curriculum Guide 210 g

AHEIICAN HISTORY - FROM 1877 (CIRCLE ONE): I H A

 

[sun 0mm: 5‘

‘3 SA'G
88 1D: 2A")

 

c.
D.

FDNTINT OVERVIEN’ 2. a. describe the problems the nation faced in early 1933.

analyse actions the government took in response to those problems.
work in a group to complete a chart.
auuav$a1lnx

 

"The First Hundred Days"

 

l.

3.

‘I.

LEAIIING ACTIVITIES:

Divide the class into small groups. and have each group draw a large chart

 

 

 

 

 

 

based on the small one here. ‘1115‘

,1 “a ‘
p_p Problem Measureslngency_ Aggigpg
[-
lmplomnt -
lhgriculture .
llndustry

 

 

 

 

 

Complete the charts and discuss the following:

a. Which problem seemed most severe in 1933?

b. which problem affected the largest number of people?

c. Nhich.agency took the most dramatic action?

d. Which agency had the most direct impact on peoples lives?

e. Which agency created the most controversy? Why?

Michigan History - ”Putting Michigan Back to Norkf
WW: W W”
WW' W)WNW

he" s

 

RBSODNCZS: Michigan Nistory - ”Putting Michigan Back to work”

 

 

 

....

Appendix A: Sample of Curriculum Guide 211

mead tumour - man 1377 (cm: our: : I n a

 

1;»: Wives. 3' 23' 33
K: SA,L

S: 13

cow-rm OVERVIEW 3. a. describe reasons why people criticised the New Deal.
b. analyse cartoons.

 

 

”'6'" Critics of the New Deal - Long. Townsend. Charles 30‘191‘11“

 

LIAIIIIGTACTIVITIES:

l._ Read about criticisms of the first hundred days of the New Deal and discuss.
Make sure the students understand the constitutional basis for the Supreme
court's decisions against the N. R. A. and the A. A. A.
2. Do Worksheet - "A View of the New Deal: Analysing Cartoons” If 3'5

3. Write a paragraph in which you state whether you agree with any of the
critics and explain why.

9. WWAWW- .
f‘WW /7"}\

 

nsouncss: worksheet - "a View of the New Deal"

: www.1- / 7,705

 

 

 

Appendix A: Sample of Curriculum Guide 212

Instructional Unit - The New Deal Continues (1936 - 1939)

Overview

This unit focuses on the'New Deal following Franklin Roosevelt's reelection
in 1936. Students learn about the controversy surrounding the President's
attempt to reorganize the judicary and about the recession of 1937 - 1938.

They also examine new reform measures and life during the depression and
New Deal.

Vocabulggy
Deficit Spending, Industrial Union, Sit-down Strike

Materials
Nbrksheet - ”New Deal Gains and Losses”
Time Line - ”The Grapes of wrath” extract

Film - 'Nith Babies and Banners” 9938230
“Life in the 1930's” (ours)

Michigan History - “Ballad of a Lumber Strike"

Appendix A: Sample of Curriculum Guide 213

AMERICAN HISTORY - now 1877 (CIRCLE ONE) : I H A

A:
TE omrvrs: K: 5A.l(
8: 1D,:
OVERVIEW 1" a. describe some of the factors that influenced Roosevelt's

reelection.
b. describe the causes and effects of the recession of 1938-1939.

c. describe the crisis surrounding Roosevelt's plan to reorganize the judiciary.
d. identif causes and effec s -
18.6.”

 

Roosevelt's Reelection, Judiciary

 

LIAIIIIG ACTIVITIES:

1. Rave students review conditions in the country as the presidential election
of 1936 approached. Point out changes that had taken place from 1932-1936.

2. have students complete worksheet - "New Deal Gains and Losses": Relating
Cause and Effect.

3. Discuss multiple causes and effects of the events during the time period.

4. Write a generalization based on unemployment during the depression - graph
page 257 text.

5. Film - ”Life in the 1930's" (ours)

I

 

RESOURCES:
worksheet - "New Deal Gains and Losses: Relating cause and effect“
Film - ”Life in the 1930's” (ours) '

 

 

 

Appendix A: Sample of Curriculum Guide 214

mean msroar - ’non 1977 (cm: our) : I u a

gee cocoa-Ives: 1“ 11.8. 58
K: 55,3

8: 23,3

 

gunman! ovzxvtgw 2. a. describe the labor orgainsation efforts of the mid-1930s.
b. explain the causes and effects of the Dust Bowl.

c. .recall factual information.quickly and accurately.

d. work as a team member.

 

 

B.S.s: Dust Bowl

 

ACTIVITIES:

1. Students should find and describe the main idea of each subsection in
Section 2. Have volunteers read their descriptions.

2. Use fiction as historical evidence 7 Jehn Steinbeck's The Crepes of Nrath.
Describe the Dust Bowl from.the extract.

3. have students do the time line for reinforcement.

4. Michigan History - supplementary ”Ballad of a Lumber Strike”.
readihg:

5. Film - ”With Babies and Banners" 0938230

 

mum‘s” Michigan history - ”Ballad of a Lumber Strike”
Film — "With Babies and Banners" #938230

 

 

 

.-

Appendix A: Sample of Curriculum Guide 215

mean 'uts'rosr - m 1377 (CIRCLE our) : I u A

g. ourcuvss 3' 1"
rs : x: sa,r,c
8: 1D

 

OVERVIEW 3. a. identify photographs, paintings and murals of life during
the depression and the New Deal.
b. classify illustrations using a chart.

 

 

e6e.’
Entertainment during the Depression. Minority groups during the Depression

 

LIARIING ACTIVITIES:

1. Look at some photographs. paintings, and murals of people during the
depression. Identify destitution and hope for the future in the material.
Why are they considered important historical evidence?

2. Have students do wordsearch worksheet - ”Life During the Depression" : A
Wordsearch.

3. Write one or two factual statements about one of the following:
a. Entertainment during the depression
h. Fortrayal of the depression by artists and writers
c. Black Americans during the depression years
d. John Collier wanted to improve life for Native Americans

e. Women during the New Deal

 

RESOURCES:
Worksheet - "Life during the Depression"

 

 

 

Appendix A: Sample of Curriculum Guide 216

Instructional Unit - Prelude to Another world Conflict (1920 - 1941)

Overview

. This material focuses on United States international relations during the
1920's and 1930's. Students learn about American isolationist statement
and about threats to peace in Asia and Europe. The hope of ending agression
without direct United States involvement ended at Pearl Harbor in December 1941.

Vocabulggy

Allegation, Belligerants, Infamy, Isolationist, Internationalist,
Totalitarian State. Appeasement. Blitzhueg '

Materials

Worksheet - "International Challenges"
"Agression in Europf

Videotape - "The Democrat and the Dictator” Bill Moyers

Appendix A: Sample of Curriculum Guide 217

AHERICAN HISTORY - PRO! 1877 (CIRCLE ONE) :. I N A

 

arr cease-rm: 3‘
K: 53

8: 1K

 

CONTENT OVERVIEW 2. a. speculate about reasons for isolationist sentiment.
b. formulate valid generalizations based on given facts.

c. recognize overgeneralizations.

 

E'G"' Adolph Hitler. Benito Mussolini. Good Neighbor Policy, Gerald Nye Committee

 

(LEARNING ACTIVITIES:

1. Worksheet - "International Challenges": Making Generalizations

2. Identify: Hitler, Franco, Roosevelt, Hull, Nye, Mussolini, Hoover,
Birahito . Tojo ' -'

3. Extra Credit Reports: Have students identify the political, social, and
economic conditions that led to the rise of strong leaders like Roosevelt,
Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, or Tojo.

'4. Videotape - ”The Democrat and the Dictator"

 

RESCUR:EE: Worksheet - "International Challenges"
Videotape - "The Democrat and.the Dictator"

 

 

 

Appendix A: Sample of Curriculum Guide 218

AMERICAN HISTORY - FROM 1877 (CIRCLE ONE): I. H A

X: 5A

Parr omms: 3*
S: ID

 

couwgnw ovngzgw 3. a. describe the United States reaction to the outbreak of
war in Europe.
b. label a map.

 

E’G"' Panay Incident, Appeasement, German invasion of Poland 1939. Blitzkreig,

Winston Churchill, Proposed Ludlow Amendment

 

PLEARNING ACTIVITIES:
1. Worksheet - ”Agression in Europe”: Map Reading

2. Have students arrange the following events in chronological order.

a. Germany annexes Austria

b. Germany invades Poland

c. German troops occupy the Rhineland

d. United States approves cash-and-carry plan
a. Germany annexes Czechoslovakia

f. Britain and France declare war on Germany
9. Germany annexes Sudetenland

3. In a class discussion ask students to describe Japanese actions in Asia
in 1937 and United States response to these acitons. Point out that
agression in Europe also seemed to threaten to bring the United States
into a war.,

4. Extra Credit: Have students investigate the proposed Ludlow Amendment.
Write an essay explaining whether they think the amendment should have
been passed by Congress and ratified by the states.

 

RESOURCES: Worksheet - "Agression in Europe"

 

 

 

w—ur- --‘.— __.

Appendix A: Sample of Curriculum Guide 219

AMERICAN HISTORY - PRO“ 1877 (CIRCLE ONE): I H .A

 

Lars oases-rues: 1“

K: .
S: 1D, 2A

 

b.

OVERVIEW 4. a. describe foreign policy developments between the summer of

1940 and November 1941.

prepare newspaper articles based on given guidelines.

 

IE.G.s:

Election of 1940, Land Lease, Pearl Harbor, Atlantic Charter

 

1.

LEARNING ACTIVITIES:

Tell students to imagine that they work on the staff of a newspaper in late
November, 1941. The newspaper is publishing a special section reviewing the
developments in the war since the summer of 1940 and reporting on the
current situation in both Eurpoe and Asia. Students are to use information
from their text or library sources to prepare articles and illustration

for the special section.

a. Germany bombing raid on Britain in the summer of 1940.

b. Foreign Policy in the 1940 election campaign

c. The Lend-Lease Policy

d. German submarine attacks on British ships carrying lend-lease supplies
a. Sinking of the Reuben James and Kearny

f. German invasions of the Soviet Union

g. Atlantic Charter

h. Japanese occupation of French Indochina

i. United States reaction to Japanese expansion into French Indochina

3. Meeting between Secretary of State Hull and Japanese diplomats

Students should use a variety of techniques for the special section. For
example: news stories, editorials, feature stories, political cartoons.
Remind students that news stories should relay basic factual information
about topics: editorials should express.and defend a point of view: feature
stories should contain background information or items of human interestr
and cartoons should contain elements of humor.

 

RESOURCES:

 

 

 

Appendix B: Pilot Study 220

PILOT STUDY
What Are the Problus of Implementing Mastery Learning
in a Social Studies Classrooa?

Inanefforttopreparecollectingthedatatoaakeaconparisonof
the mastery learning process to normal/traditional teaching. it is impera-
tive than an understanding of Bloom's Mastery Learning Model be acquired.
It is also important for the researcher to mm the steps necessary
to implant mastery learning. To truly mderstand the implantation
process, it is necessary to experience the steps of implantation 1v
doing thu. One needs to be able to anticipate problus. to idmtify
limitations and to establish a clear idea of what aspect of the two tendi-
ing aethods—eastery and traditional-will be studied. nae pilot study was
undertaken in an effort to answer the following questions and to provide
information relating to the mess of the study that will make decisions
more valid. What are the problems, issues and concerns regarding the
ispleaenting of mastery learning in a social studies course. specifioally
Practical Law? Is there a significant iaprovumt in cognitive achievumt
and affective responses in a mastery learning classroom to wan-ant further
study of the model?

The pun-pose of answering these two questions is to lean: about mas-
tary learning and to implement Blou's model for the clarification and
evaluation of the process in an effort to be prepared for a sore ea:-
tensive stuiy of two teachers attapting to change and bring about change
in their classrooms.

Appendix B: Pilot Study 221

The study will lay out a practical strategy whereby this mastery
learning theory can be iapluentod in a typical classrou. The research
strategy for this pilot study that will describe. iaplaont, and analyse
is designed for use for the instructional necessities that the practitioner
must know to use the ”Mastery Model" successfully. 'lhe process needs fine
tuning through experience so that the research later in American History
will not be contaminated by inerperimice and indecision.

The Subjects and the Setting of the Study

The subjects for the study were ninth ands students in two required
Practical law classes at Garber High School in the msexville-liampton
School District. A third period class and a sixth period class were mod
for the study. The third period class had an enrollmmt of thirty students.
and the sixth hour class had thirtyhone students in it.

The study was done in these two classes using a two-week unit a:-
titled ”The Trial and Juvenile Justice" which was the last part of a
major unit WEEMMM- lbs come was taught by
the researcher in ten, fiftyhnine ainute class periods using materials
developed in the past but rewritten for mastery learning. During the
first seven weelm of the first marldng period, the stuients were taudit
by the sorrel/traditional teaching method used by the same researcher]
teacher—mo. Lecture. text. vocabulary, study guides and norm-referenced
tests were the basic means of instruction. Studmts' grades are based

Appendix B: Pilot Study 222

upon a traditional. sligflty nodified downward ten percent scale that

is really a sci-class curve that required at least fifty percent to
pass with a D-. his students were doing satisfactory work with this
teaching nethod except for the fact that few students were really doing
well. Most were not succeeding. It seems that over the years standards
have been lowered and the work has become less denanding so that the il-
lusion of success could be aaintained. Because I. was dissatisfied with
what was going on in the classroom and anticipating a sore ertmsive
conparative study of nastery learning later in American History classes,
I decided to pilot mastery learning in these rather large Practical Law
classes that I was teaching. After the students completed a sub-unit,
MM, ME, and were tested over the naterial. the ass-
tery learning approach was introduced. A record or log was kept on a
daily basis to provide sons of the information on implementation. Teacher
and student problem, concerns. issues and successes were recorded. 1n.

log as well as the test results serve as a basis for the study.

‘Ihe Mastery 'Iheory and Strateg Used in this Pilot Study

'lhis brief study will be limited to the aspects of nastery learning
that are a part of the process referred to as ”'Ihe Quality of Instruction”
by Bloom, Block, Guskey, etc. Much of the theory and background for
mastery learning are beyond the scope of this research. Mastery learn-
ing as Spady would say "has become a slogan and a terminological unbrella
under which higily diverse sets of issues, projects and philosophies can
be found." The component best-known to most educators involves attempts

’ Appendix B: Pilot Study 223

~

inmschoolstomovetsachingandlsarningto explicit eoapetmcyon
parforaancs-based criteria. hon this diversity of mgraas related to
mastery. outcome-based education or individualized instruction systems .
the only one that offers a practical approach in today's schools is
Bloom's Mastery Learning Hodel because the advocates of this model under-
stand that the teacher to stalent ratio of about thirty-to-ons mt be
taken into consideration. School classroom structure must be a major
consideration when school effectiveness is considered. Unless the
structure is to change, anyuschool reform must take into consideration
the limitations placed on learning by the thirty-towns ratio. Bloom
andhisstudentsrsalise this, andtheyapplyandadaptormodify
"(hrmll's learning nodsl" to an environmmt that does not seem to be
changing. Fixed time periods and a ratio of thirty-towns are reality
and only Bloom's Mastery Model seems to be willing to face this reality.
Masterylsarningisatsachingmilosophythatinpartasserts that
under appropriate instructional conditions virtually "all" stalemate can
learn well most of what they are taught in school. he strateg that
will be implemented to test this theory is adapted from the work by
'Ihomas R. Guskey entitled W m Legging. his entire
process cannot be considered due to the limited scope of this study.
Guskey identifies five variables that Bloom and company call "Alterable
Variables” that mastery learning can do something about to improve learning.
These are: (l) aptitude for particular kinds of learning. (2) quality
of instruction. (3) ability to understand instruction. (it) perseverance.
(5) time allowed for learning. These five variables are interrelated thus
they are somewhat mutually dependent.

Appendix B: Pilot Study 22‘!

IilueressartfiuthatIamintersstedinuuvilldealprimarilywith the
quality of instruction because in the setting that I am in. this one is
the only variable that I can alter to improve the other four. ibpecially
in a brief study such as this one, we as teachers cannot do a great deal
about our students' aptitude, ability to understand instruction. perse-
verance and the time allowed for learning unless we alter the quality of
instruction. Mastery learning might make this possible. If the quality
of instruction can be improved by effectively using the five basic elements
relating to the quality of instruction in mastery learning. then peuuaps
the other four variables might also be altered. 'Ihe five basic elements
in the mastery learning process are: (1) feedback and correctives. (2)
congruence among instructional components. (3) clearly specified learning
objectives. (4) clearly formulated learning standards. (5) group based
instmction.

It is these five elements that will be experimautsd with in the two
Practical Law classes. Hopefully,developing materials, using those mat-
erials and effectively evaluating these materials within the context of
mastery learning will provide considerable practical information on the
feasibility of expanding the mastery model for more extensive research
and possible adoption in the Social Studies Department in our school

system.

A Description of the Planning Process for
Mastery Learning Instruction

Preparing curriculum and lesson plans is a time-consuming and dif-

' Appendix B: Pilot Study 225

ficulttask. Taldngcln'riculmthatisalreadyinplaceandmodifying
the materials for mastery learning takes additional effort. Attempting
to instruct by using the mastery model takes careful planning. In this
pilot study situation, for experimental reasons. I attempted to use the
same cmiculm and teaching style that had been used in Practin Law
for the last four years. Gn'ricmm guides have recently been written
based upon Michigan Department of Education guidelines . me State re-
commended goals and objectives were used with the text §_tr_eet &- Pre-
paring the two-week unit for mastery involved correlating what was in
place with Bloom's Model as explained by Guskey. 'Ihese steps were fol-
lowed to complete the planning for mastery instructions .

(1) Clearly specified learning objectives needed to be available to
the teachc and made clear to the students. “me stated goals and objec-
tives had to be rewritten for the students. Objectives were takai from
the course miculum guide and the “3mg.

(2) (nearly fonulated learning standards are basic to the success
of the instruction. 'Ihe teacher must have a clear idea of what mint be
done.but the students must be carefully prepared for the changes that
are going to take place in their daily routine in the classroom. 'me
students were provided with a brief written explanation of mastery learn-
ing and information on how the class would be run and how they would be
evaluated. Along with the written explanation, a lecture with discussion
was given as an introduction.

(3) Congruence among instructional components was a time-consuming
but vital part of the process. It is easy to say,"'I am going to tell
than what I'm going to teed: them: I'm going to teach them, and then I'm

Appendix B: Pilot Study 226

going to tell them what I taught than.” ‘lhis does not always happai,
but it should. Preparing the materials to teach to the objectives...
and then testing the objectives is a major task.

(4) Appropriate group-based instruction needed to be carefully
considered. 'niat writing lesson plans on a daily basis to accomplish
what the curricula: guide specifies should be done is obvious. but it
becomes absolutely necessary in an outcome-based teaching model. Text.
readings, film-strips. lectures and discussions had to be planned to
insure coverage of the stated objectives. '

(5) Unique to the mastery model are the feedbacks and correctives.
Host of the tasks in preparation are generally considered to be sound
teaching, andmanycarryout thesteps tosomedegreeonaregularbasis.
The testing procedure in mastery learning is something new for me and
required great care and patience to accomplish. 'lhe criterion referaiced
tests that are called Formative Tests must be written to measure whether
or not the objectives have been taught/learned. 131680 tests should also
be prepared so that the students know not only what questions they have
missed. but also what objectives they have not acquired and where they
might begin to correct the problem. The answer sheet for these objectives
needed to be keyed in such a way that students could make correctives and
so that a second, parallel Formative Test could be taken by the students
who did not achieve mastery (80%) on the first Formative Test. An im-
portant part of the mastery process then involves test writing and the
additional task of preparing alternate learning activities to help students
make correctives so that mastery can be accomplished by almost "all"
students'. On top of that, enrichmmt or eottension learning activities

' Appendix B: Pilot Study 227

had to be prepared for the students who acquired mastery on the first
Formative Test.

(6) The final step in preparation for mastery learning was to
evaluatethepdncesstomakesin-ethattherehasbeenacongruenceamong
the instructional components. The careful evaluation of the objectives.
materials and tests is essential in identifying problems.

Once the unit has been planned, it must be delivered in the class-
room. 'nie implementation of the above plan is what this pilot study
is about. Will the implementation of the Mastery Model provide helpful
data for mute: research? Finding out what is necessary for successful
implenentation is vital so that the mechanics of the model can be re-
fined for the environment in which the model is being used. "hat the
teacher needs and what the students need should be more apparent if 'a
trial run is made.

Secondly, finding out how the students react to a. very different
concept should make it easier to anticipate the students' needs . Merely
understanding the mechanics is insufficimt. What affective needs and
outcomes might be anticipated? Expanding on the positive and dealing
with the negative in an honest, straightforward manner might be easier
if the instructor has practiced what is necessary to carry out mastery
learning successfully.

The third area of introductory data will be information regarding
test results to compare with test results from other units. Social
Studies is an area of education that needs research data to clarify what
Ganges shouldbemade inthis age ofreform. Does the metaryflodel
produce significant learning improvment over what has been done in the

— Appendix B: Pilot Study 228

past? filtering a major research problem without some personal feeling
for what might be expected and smperienced, in this case, could hamper
the effectiveness of the study. The three interrelated areas of in-
formation are essential pre-requisites of the process of implementation.

A Description of the Implementation of Mastery Learning

Once the goals, objectives, learning activities. two sets of tests.
Formative Test A and Formative Test a . correctives , enrichment and
student explanation of the process are prepared. it is time to teach and
learn. The subjects. thirty law students in the third hour class and
thirty-one in the sixth hour class, must be prepared for the experiment.
Glass time was used to distribute an information sheet on what is to be
done and to explain mastery learning. especially the grading system.
Getting ninth grade students to comprehend a process that is alien to
them takes time and understanding. After the students had read the in-
formation sheet and had the mastery learning model explained to them, -
they were generally receptive to the changes. It is important to remem-
ber that the basic group instruction remained the same.and that the ele-
ments of mastery learning were added to what had been done in the past.
After the introduction of mastery learning. it is time for the teaching/
learning to begin. Giving the students an overview of the content.
specific objectives and materials that are based on the objectives was
the first of a specific series of mastery applications to bring about
congruence. Once the students see what they will learn and realise what
they are going to do is clearly related to objectives, they should have a

handle on where they are going in the class. Going over the objectives

Appendix B: Pilot Study 229

and explaining then with each assignment lakes it possible for the
students to focus on what the instructor believes is important. Relating
the objectives to specific assignments often establishes a pattern for
future learning. lbs students seemed to like this change and were able
to take better notes. Originally I had intended to only formative test
at the end of the two-week unit. but it becaae obvious early in the unit
that a formative quiz over every couple of objectives and assignnents
was essential because of the need for constant student and teacher mon-
itoring of the work. he first quiz over the first two objectives was
somewhat surprising in that the sttrlents didn't do as well as I had ex-
pected the! to do. About 50 percent of the students achieved the 80
percent mastery on the easy quiz over ”due process” of law. he in-
struction before the quiz was as it had always been except for the ob-
jectives. his teaching included text reading and discussion along with
a study guide and vocabulary assignnent. Having the students correct the
quizzes and then doing correctives over the missed questions was a bit
confusing for the students. but it did seem to interest them.

After the instruction had been completed on objectives 3.1+,5.6 on
"sentencing" , the formative quiz results were much better. In the third
hour class only sir students did not accomplish mastery and tiventy-three
achieved at least 80 percent mastery. In the sixth hour class it was
even better: there were only four non-nastery. but twenty-six, mastery.

The only concern expressed by students up to this point was that
they wondered about the reasoning for not recording their "fonative'
quizzes that were being used only for diagnostic reasons. lie-explaining
the process is important. While the students are doing correctives, it
is also a bit difficult to keep those who have achieved nastery doing

Appendix B: Pilot Study 230

enrich-ant activities. The daily newspapers helped out a great deal
because tiaely law-related articles could be assigned. me rest of
theunitwas taudztashasbeenexplained. Porthepurposeofthis
pilot study. it was decided to quiz frequently for nonitoring purposes
and to use the unit tests fons A and B as summative tests. In a longer
study on mastery learning, these short tests would only be used for
diagnostic purposes, but for this study the test over the two-week unit
could be used for ,smative (evaluation) decisions as well as disgnosti-
cally. 'Ihe short‘quizzes covering just a couple of objectives were
relatively easy to use for correctives . The test over the two-week

unit was more difficult to use effectively. The uacher and stuients
had to make adjustlents in an effort to snooth out; the learning pro-
cess. In general the testing procedure proved to be successful with
certain reservations. Again it was important to explain how the mastery
learning testing practices were different from what had been done pre-
viously in the class.

When the students finished form A of the test, it was corrected
inmediately in class so that the students who didn't receive at least
80% mastery could begin on correctives. The next day the students not.
acquiring mastery took form B of the test. The test results follow.

Appendix B: Pilot Study 231

 

 

 

'niird Hour Sixth Hour
No. wrong No. of students No. of students
90% 0-2 0 3
80% 34 6 10
Masters!
70% 5-6 8 5
60% 7-8 8 -
505 9-10 2 2
under .
50x 10 or 5 1
more
29* 28*

*does not include absent students

When these results were compared to previous test scores in the class.

it was apparent that there was improvement but not much. For maple. on

the test covering part two of the Criminal Justice Unit, the grades were:

' mini Hour Sixth Hour
No. of students No. of students
A 1 it
B 13 8
C 10 ' 8
D 3 6
E 2 2

 

29* 28*

‘ ‘“ “*— - --——-——o- -—-q ~———.. -_. .-._——._.______.__.__

Appendix B: Pilot Study 232

In fact. the third hour class seemed to do better on the previous test
before mastery learning. (Test analysis and other general observations
will account for this in the conclusions of this work.) Because of the
unexpected poor results on this test. it was decided that an item analy-
sis of the test was in order. th were the scores so low? Which questions
were missed most frequently? The answers to these two questions proved

to be a major frustration to the teacher. The following chart shows how
any stinents did not answer each question correctly on Test A.

Incorrect Answers . Incorrect Answers
Test Item Third Hour Sixth Hour Test Item Third Hour Sixth Hour

1 8 6 11 10 5
2 6 7 12 21 20
3 3 6 13 13 3
it 1+ 22 11+ 17 10
5 6 7 15 20 . 13
6 16 10 16 ll
7 2 2 17 5
8 2 2 18 1‘} l4
9 11 5 19 ll 4
10 6 2 [ 20 7 2

 

The test Questions that over half of the students answered in-
correctly were further analyzed to determine why they were missed.
When this was done, first with the third hour class, it became clear

why the students did so poorly on certain test itans. ‘lhe main rea-
sons were: (1) poorly worded questions, (2) content not specifically
taught, (3) incomplete information that made the questions vague.’

 

 

Appendix B: Pilot Study 233

(4) questions with more than one possible answer, and (5) lack of study.

When a few corrections were made on the test before the sixth hour
class took it, obvious improveient occurred on those items that were
revised. When the sixth hour results were compiled. other problems were
discovered with the test and the teaching leading to the test. libr example.
a couple of facts that the third hour class were given. were not given to
the sixth hour class. I simply forgot to provide the students with the
needed infonation. - The students didn't do really well on the test. but
the teacher: didn't either. Test construction is an area of vital im-
portance in mastery learning. Based upon this experience alone, it
becomes obvious that if we are going to test based upon objectives and
instruction, great care must be exercised.

Only six third hour. but thirteen sixth students acquired nastery on
the first test on the unit. his students who did not acquire mastery did
correctives and took form 3 of the test during the next class period. Some
reteaching took place before fora B was given. The results were:

 

 

an a as; rent;
Third Hour Sixth Hour
No. wrong No. of stuients No. of stirients
90% 0-2 5 3
80% 34+ . 10 6
Mastery
70% 5-6 1 5 ‘
60% 7-8‘ 6
505 9-10 2 1
' under 10 or 1

50% more

Appendix 3: Pilot Study 234

Overall, the test results were satisfactory when they were compared
with earlier test grades. After the testing and re-testing were com-
pleted, the graded appeared as follows. me modified curve used on
the previous tests is also shown.

 

 

 

Items Mastery Previous Previous
Incorrect 31d.6th Hr. Totals Grade Scale Test Grade
90% plus 0-2 11 A 5
W 3-4 ' 32 B - 21
Master!
70-79% 5-6 6 a
60-69% 7-8 8 G 18
50-595 9-10 3 D 9
Below 50% 10 plus 1 E

 

Total 61 .

Forty-three of the sixty-one students achieved mastery level. hur-
teen more students came close and would have received G's by the old grade
scale. and only four students received under sixty percent.

After the tests were discussed and the mastery model was evaluated
by the instructor and the students informally. the following ideas re-
presented the consensus regarding the implementation and the effectiveness
of the teaching and learning strategy. The pilot study led to these con-
clusions:

1.0 Mastery learning requires careful planning to be successful.

l.l Raster-y learning can be used effectively with the normal/
traditional way of teadiing Practical Law.

1.2. Mastery learning is really a model that provides for teacher

 

 

- ‘..A4-h--—v.'—AA ‘ _ _ _ _

‘ Appendix B: Pilot Study 235

and student accountability.

1.3 Mastery learning requires carefully identified objectives.

1.“ Hastery learning requires carefully stated test it‘s.

1.5 Mastery learning requires teadier planning so that there is
instruction based upon the objectives and the test items.

The pilot study disclosed some positive results regarding teaching
and learning by using the mastery learning model.

2.0 Students were rewarded with higher test scores.

2.1 Students applied themselves better whai they knew exactly what
to study.

2.2 Students liked the idea of having a second chance on a test.

2.3 Students were willing to help evaluate and improve the process
of mastery learning. '

2.4 Students became more concerned about specific test items as a
result of the correctives and feedback.

'nue pilot study identified a number of problem areas regarding the
implementation of mastery learning that must be considered before using
the model more extensively.

3.0 Should the stated goals and objectives be specific to exactly
what is being taught or should they be general? In other words, should
there be a rather large number of objectives or should there be just a
few major objectives?

3.1 Should a traditional grading scale be used for al.]. work done
by the students? If not, what should be graded and what should only
be for diagnostic purposes?

3.2 Should enrichment or extension work be graded and how should
it be monitored?

 

Appendix B: Pilot Study 236

3.3 Ihatmodificationsinclassrooastructureneedtobemadsin
order to carry out the correctives and auriohment assignmnts?

3.1: Ihatisthebestwaytogoaboutlnvingstudmtado'nhaup
Formative tests who they have been absent?

3.5 What specifically is thebest gradingpolicy m- mm
Leaning?
Baseduponquperienceinthispilotstudy.mofthesequestionaaeed
carerulcouidanation.

conclusions nguding hurl-her Researdu

thtbspilotstndywasbegun. itwaswiththeidaathatthe
aechanics ofmoom'sflasteryLearningllodelcouldbeworkedoutsothat
amorevaliddissertationonmastarylearningasamodelforduange
couldbecoapleted. 'nuepilotstudynotonlyhelpedtoclarifyhow
to implnent master-y learning, butitalsoprevided inforntion that
indicatedthatftu'therresearchshouldbealtmdsothatitwouldbe
ofgrsatedvaluetopractitionars. ‘nuepilotstudynotenlyclari-
fiedandaodified the dissertation proposal. but it also idautified
problastMtneedtoberesolvedbeforethedatacollectionprocess
basin.

this practice with the implantation of mastery leaning provided
the researcher with ideas, approaches and clues not forseen prior to
att-pting what was described in books.

Appendix B: Pilot Study 237

inepilotstudyhasmadetheprelininarytestingofthelwpotheaes
possible and profitable in that generally it supports the idea that
mastery learningiswortmthile. However. therssults have led meto
believe that certain instructional changes we necessu'y. thus it may
bewortlnlhiletoextendtheresearchtoincludsadiffarentteaching
approach. 'l‘hepilotstudywasdevelopedwithone teachariaplusating
mastery learning. misapproachhassome obvious linitations. Asa
resultofthisfinding,theninstudywillbeanethnographiostdyof I
masteryteachinginateaateaching setting. mmmm }
the amber of treataaut errors by revealing unforseen problas and '
Ila-neitpossibletoredesignthsmainstudy.
'nuestudyalsorevealedtlnttherearesoaesariouwm
mmmnmmmmm- mam-pm:
altarnategradingsystusinthepilotstudy.noneofwhichweretotany
satisfactory. further investigation is taflngplace todeterainewhat.
whenandwlwgradesaretobegivenundermasterylearning.
Masterylearningisanapproachtcteachingthatshouldbetabau
seriously‘weducators. l1.111sbriefpilotstutiyhasprovuutcaethal‘.
themastery approach works: further researchwillhelp aetodeoide
what needs to be done to make it work in both affective and coguitive
doaainsforboththeteachersandthestudents.

 

Appendix C: Mastery Learning Implementation 1 238

ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS

I. Feedback and Corrective;
.7. Congruence. among Learninj Oldecfives
3. Clearly Specified. Learninj Objectives

4. Clearly Formulated Learninj Standards

 

5, Appropriate. Group-Based Instruction

 

'b "" '.'“~w-WW-- «_ ."._

Appendix C: Mastery Learning Implementation 239

FIVE VARIABLES
or LEARNING ’

I. Hptiiude for particular. kinds me

learning

.2. Quality of Instruction

'3 ”bi/ii] to understand Instruction

4. Perseverance,

5.771119. Hilowed forLeaJ‘ninj

 

Appendix C: Mastery Learning Implementation 2140

IMPLEMENTING THE OUTCOME BASED-MASTERY MODEL:
AMERICAN HISTORY

UNIT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES - CURRICULUM GUIDE
UNIT MATERIAL

ISUB-UNIT I SUB-UNIT 2 SUB-UNIT 3 SUB-UNIT t

 

 

  
  
  

ot Instruction

 

ing Activities

 

 

 

 

[ suuuanvs EXAM - Score less than 80% must take retake 1

 

V
i

. ustpass30f¢to quality
‘1' for the summative exam

 

r RETAKE ' I

if students {all to score 80% on two of the tour FORMATIVES,
then they must submit written and oral proof of understanding the

objectives.

 

m. __Wflv—mhc—e--m

 

.HF ———-'_.—-—vv .-—~—-

 

 

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 241

OPINION SURVEY

 

 

 

 

 

Name Sex (circle) H F
Age Year in school (circle) 8 9 10 ll 12
School

Teacher Period

Date-

 

Directions: Each of the statements on this opinion survey expresses
a feeling or belief which a person might have toward
History. You are to eXpress how much you agree with the
belief or feeling given in each statement. The five
choices are: Strongly Disagree (SD), Disa ree (D),
Undecided (U), Agree (A), Strongly Agree SA).Circle
the letter which best indicates how closely you agree
or disagree with the feeling or belief expressed in
each statement as it concerns you. Answer the way you
feel. There are no right or wrong answers.

History is an interesting subject. '

Historians.

2%” a?

29

“1.: so a u A SA
- 15 29 35 70 ll
2. History is not important in everyday life. SD D U‘ A‘ SA
13 59 34 #0: 14
3. I do not like History. SD D U A SA
20 65 29 29 17
A. History makes me feel stupid. SD D U A SA
.27 86 18 20 9
5. There is nothing creative about History;
it's just memorizing dates and things. SD D U A SA
M 58 28 #6 14
6. Host History is too concerned with ideas
to be really useful. SD -D U A SA
6 64 61 25 4
7. History is something I enjoy a great deal. SD D U A SA
25 58 35 35 7
8. Guessing plays a role in doing History. SD D U A SA
20 59 38 39 3
9. One value of History is its usefulness in
solving everyday problems. SD D U -A SA
18 67 th- 27 4
lO.‘I think knowing some History will help me
- get a good job later. SD D U A SA
10 39 54 46 ll
11. Answering History questions can be fun. SD. D U A SA
20 38 #1 54 6
12. History is needed in order to keep the
world running. SD D U A SA
. 3 2t; #9 70 I3
. t i b in to work on Histor uzzles. SD D U A SA
13 I 8 or 8 yp 9 65 33 3815
1“. History plays an important role in modern
society. SD D U A SA _
6 28 27 88 ll- '
15. American History is only important for

e

 

-.-. I .14- *4 ..a—-e

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 242

16. Learning History is more understanding than

e o izin . S
"”“I' 8 P1938???
17. History is easy for me. SD D U A SA
36 37 31 51 3
18. There are lots of uses for History in the
world. SD U A SA
7 36 46 6O 9
19. History is a dull and boring subject. SD D U A SA
15 65 30 28 19
20. There is little need for History in jobs. SD D U A SA
‘ 8 44 47 46 12
21. A knowledge of History is helpful in under- \
standing today's world. SD D U A SA
. 4 >18 24 98 14
22. There is no place for originality in History.SD D U A SA
10 66 50 51 7
23. History is not very useful for solving world
problems. . SD D U A SA
26 76 31 19 3
24. History is more for boys than for girls. SD D U A SA
59 56 31 4. 6

25. I plan to take another History course
after this one.
Y1? 36° Notneure

 

 

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 243

SWDENT SURVEY . Teachers' ' \ ‘e ‘. \ ‘. 9. '. ----------

Class PeFIEEvfwie.....e.ii

Directions: Each of the statements on this survey expresses a feeling

1.

21
48
42

2.

30
71
30

3.

20
56
25

4.

28
43
45

5.

20
66
18

6.

IO
42
57

7.

4O
7O
26

8.
a

27
26

a person might have toward History. Please circle the
‘most appropriate answer for you. Do not circle more than
‘bne answer for each item. Remember that there are no
right or wrong answers.

I like to be called on in history class and asked to discuss important
issues.

A. strongly disagree 43 D. agree
B. disagree 4 E. strongly agree
C. not sure either way

I feel upset and nervous in history class.

A. strongly disagree 21 D. agree -

8. disagree 6 E. strongly agree

C. not sure either way

I find it hard to talk in front of my history class.

A. strongly disagree 47 D. agree

B.’disagree 10 E. strongly agree

C. not sure either way

I am very pround of my history class work and performance on tests.
A. strongly disagree 31 D. agree

B. disagree 11 E. strongly agree

C. not sure either way

History is the type of subject that confuses me very easily.
A. strongly disagree 42 D. agree

8. disagree 11 E. strongly agree

C. not sure either way

I am encouraged with my history performance.

A. strongly disagree 42 D. agree

B. disagree 7 E. strongly agree

C. not sure either way '

My history teacher makes me feel that I am doing poorly.
A. strongly disagree 17 D. agree

B. disagree .5 E. strongly agree

C. not sure either way

I try to do the very best work in history that I can.

A. strongly disagree 85 D. agree
B. disagree 23 E. strongly agree
C. not sure either way

 

—..-— __.._. -#‘-—

Sigh—i _._.-_-

 

l_W'AW‘ ..___.——- _._- -.f. Afiivm-

 

 

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 244
STUDENT SURVEY AND RESPONSES

 

American History/Mastery Learning

Survey Question: To the left of the following statements, place the appro-
priate number that indicates how you feel:

 

i. I strongly agree. 4. I disagree.
2. I agree. 5. I strongly disagree.
3. I'm not sure. 6. This doesn't apply to me.
1. I feel that I learned more in American History when it was

taught using Mastery Learning.

2. I feel that Mastery Learning required too much work of the
A and B students.

3. I feel that the standard for achieving mastery (80%) was fair.

4. I would like to see all social studies classes taught with

Mastery Learning.

5. I would like to see all classes at Garber taught with
Mastery Learning.

Survey Resmnses:

 

 

 

 

 

Statement No. Response No.
l 2 3 4 5 6
l 29 36 19 7 3 l
2 l IO 15 4O I7 10
3 18 5O 9 9 4 l
4 23 23 26 ll 8 3
5 l6 17 i8 20 21 2

Remainder .of Survey:

To the best of your ability, please answer the following questions regarding
Mastery Learning:

1. What did you like about Mastery Learning?

2. What didn‘t you like about Mastery Learning?

3. Did you think the grading system was fair? Why, or why not?

(60 said Fair; 30 said not fair)

 

 

 

 

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 245

STUDENT SURVEY AND RESPONSES

 

Continued

Would you like all of your classes taught using Mastery Learning?
Why or why not?

(30 said yes; 52 said no; 12 were in the middle

Please identify any problems or concerns you may have about
Mastery Learning.

Do you like history? Why

(45 said yes; 17 said no; 34 were inthe middle)

Do you like school? Why?

(43 said yes; 13 said no; 38 were in the middle)

 

 

 

: Student-.ESur‘yveys

, 1’ ‘ s, l, d 3". g '2‘ ‘
- agrain-weuntil-Eton- m,
was

‘ . " I4-
' 7r .
w '

 

AM”. Studenr'SUrVeYS A f '

u i

 

‘flnt‘suester. (D) tam
ithe ooms‘lid'lt b9 “mm'

 

ll“!!! 1

 

 

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 250

{we we
You have now conpleted Anerican History. Dinning the first suestea:
you were taught using the nethods we have used for any years at Garber.
Beginning with the second semester Mastery Learning was implemented in your
class on an experimental basis. would you please consent on your experience
in American History. Include your feelings about (A) school, (B) history.

X :33 teaching methods first semester, (D) teaching methods second semester
(E) ways the course night be improved.

W A WWW mafia—9M.
WWOfWMM/kfflw
W’s/5W Mefi’uW/MW

  

@432 ,4 W ”WA/“WA 01- My?
final». ”(M9). WW Wwfi)
W W flirt/é W.WM
55¢WZ04 7!? 6“

 

.92 amen-“eh; Dal..-‘ 1.5-.. . . . .1 o-.-'

 

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 251

You have now completed American History. During the first suester
you were taught using the methods we have used for many years at Gerber.
Beginning with the second semester Mastery Learning was implemented in your
class on an experimental basis. Would you please coment on your experience
in American History. Include your feelings about (A) school, (B) history.
(03 teaching methods first semester, (D) teaching methods second semester
an (E) ways the course might be improved.

Wad-21.7 W @MMWW
MmM/d’éww (WM

'5". A'vv— __. u.—

_V..n-g..—"vr“. ,

‘n~..r (r‘u’Y'Y

__—
u rv .

 

A J... ‘14‘;‘ i~

-—4- m...- .e,em;z.',...aguz.'

 

we- p“..w‘ e'*.-—~§_‘

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 252

.‘_ _. _-__.i.s.... .._..,.._1.__.._..-.-~_.-- -

Youhavenow completedAmericsnEistory. Duringthefirstsuester
youweu'e tangit mingthemethods we have used formeyears at Gerber.
Beginning with the second semester Mastery Learning was implemented in your
class on an experimental basis. would you please comment on your exparimce
in American history. Include your feelings about (A) school. (B) history.
:3 enching methods first suester, (1)) teaching methods second suester

E) ways the course might be improved. .

. . ‘ 1‘ bee‘t Wm‘s *MVW h mom‘cfi‘iwu
”Emu.“ 3M1 mum‘s 6‘s *Qodrx'mggws) °W+°r Mb SM) Sum"
Mme... m was s-‘n\\ . s A mm 9"“, '5’” 9“”.
is get 82M. b6 mans Queues can-Her hm gooiush. Om. 'Hi'")
11‘de \\\2b was D1105 able. 40 Nitric F0? whack)" 3°” Mb 1
4 “hunk meat gouooolb snag a ln‘Hc butane 3134‘? ““4"" 5&9 ’ '
A ”(3 ’nll +0 59:65 am 4% puma)“. 5°“ nab-K0 +as'l. «Stpo (5‘an
oh well go.) we‘d “'Wt)‘ min-f. 17),, ,1, Lina/lg semi-ng-‘Hur
hows Siphon-ts c’x‘mr than N batters .

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 253

———-q———~.' -».~‘— w.--_-r...‘s «1.. --.._,.s.—.-W..l- ....-, ..i “.7 2.. 2. _ _. ._ ___ _
,,. _ -_r‘~ ,,_. . - a--._‘-..__. _—‘...- v- . ..... h r—o

A-

_ You havenow completed American History. Duringthsfirstsuester
~.youweretauditmingthemethodswehavemedformlwyearsat Garber. _
Beginning with the second suestar lasted-y Learning was impluen ented in your
1 class on an ear-perinatal basis. Would you please comment on your experience
in American History. Incline your feelings about (A) school. (B) history.
ӣ3 rushing methods first saester. (D) teaching methods second suester
E)waysthecourse mightbeimproved. , 1

\
1

’0 5017000 pm; alikttqj J I l quot ~LLfictx2x£d Leo, 24296:.

cm; w/«Ic 3452.1" MIMIC MOI FLO/M1 7% JOK 1
(7w ’é) Cf), a, /3L Jain“; (ii/L222 flow at- .» ~-
flag/0M2“; cal—LL”? erJLcI/LLQ 210+“er 721,2] UléW-l/J.
Lf‘c “I "a?” Jew-L225 .42wa +0 by (ca/73mm
Lu; SeJui—ACJ LLthm. Lfl haw J Jaws, .214, '
PWMJMJ’ Cm ' 7h /CL227-e 2:} A4V122¥4Z£I N ”v
W W JacUch/(m nag/(0,20, In 562.7 are»
NI county; . 2:12:21." 252/“2%; 2,2,2; 454% L1
Jim «LE 1: c. LL09!) ALLLQILo/MJ no ileurfLSomé
(222.2225 {24,le 2,2; sowed CLLxC.) amps) Co of’ Z271. wit—9,2;

(ll/v SCLU.» Com c4 2 [€14de db flxtcfia (”my
ALLA“ ,rfcuf L/KLCC) )7 62k! a Mom JAMAQ-a/
Puss-L when com [Fur I—o Ico‘i/I Cd ’ sun
apva] mug 1’41 QLC—LLCCL. W Lit/RP gKfiH‘Oélj
’ .SQmoI OILVEL 42w" Info/2.24:2. “422/ ,,—I dug“,
‘ i MP “3 ‘ I, 'k
h 6>ALJMLIQAW KM" {3"‘\\9‘- King M JVCMW\S €01...
Maj M62 or‘. _ 0 <22:on Item’s 2x25202-
:kSM bk Ct Nags/Mld (files/3‘) p0 (::LI)V\QS.Q,\
“’m Cum A), (”'C‘ bum \LL—Jufi Cloud ‘

V A." flex/mm)? 2W CU "‘2 LA’.

\\

Appendix 1): Student Surveys and Samples 254

C m L ‘5. ( :h. K \ . Q )\ ‘- ‘ +h© CV.) fi..§::k\ S; é‘Q-IWXL giCA

, . .2 . “I! ’I I1. 2' s m 2: and ma!
MCCoU-w , \AL, L 0 pet X ‘5‘“ “‘C‘“ “M “‘1‘" "*d‘2.3’3itw"§~Q.+
2. . j ‘2) t: 2. :C 21"? II" 2,9427 1.1".“
a r :J\' 3 - " ‘1 a I
~""22 W “L ..\,‘L‘QrC\ . 87);»:- kLNL—R. Q.._ QWfi‘its‘Q

5

{Al .3.“

'u 2‘. as! m ;.;.=,:"-.I.¢=_-

kw 221;:ng .C Au: 2 +2. _. of) £11,: \“ne'K-J‘so
W 01/ .17) 1 V1 \~ 1 ~ -. . 2- .
7 db OLD c. 2 QC Xxx} ALA. “o%:-S4

 

(.
D' MC~\\CS DL\I\‘ R‘S‘QT‘ K—CL\ . \. ( C O x

U M w 540/“ cl
C'- :“M”C’\\ QR fw¥mk Q‘r’u 0 CM.) 4r Li mxs 7"‘6

119/u % £121 )un W ”brooks LLuLAC- “0+
flexes—ta! vw Mo‘ C‘SWS JG: 05 M
ha-mno “Siam/‘C‘ U1m‘uo M 32221; Jud- Own
(up CXLCIIS {’0 JW 0e iéco» c/ Qkoku,
.21.; AxC/CCCXJMWQ U C do? 11 712.1122: L223
2120”; L}, 202/22,02 I104) A CL/CQJL.LLLCQ{4¢\_€

0,122.1" W JNCVVCL I-o 122mm 01.7wa

E. ”a”, “'4’ :‘LLCW J‘s 7'72LRE7‘J/L7; “glued Asa/.2224
a 41/05/172 7); Wk» CZ (M52 IL’C'ZCM/f r/g Mm
WW“ 457’“ “W 4172va $25640.
421/4 01252215 U— WW5 ,1 (a (22 0..
x5! ( 0~{‘W\ I. LJK-‘K ”IQ/k'é mm |
I 63%“ m p LM ' ‘i‘g
Efflw LUCA/CC. (a 12352,; W224 (124/:4 5427“,:
0'1 62 ”WW ?:é/W0 949% 1

m .— ~ ‘
IIIIIIIIIIMC VIII; I 1‘ 555153;“

I
"" ’ 0’ ."fl ' ”W 20v W‘ -"‘--vn “m'WwW-v U-v an“ .nuvu‘fl' H29-»

‘1 "v .‘n— twn v—‘n—u— v. r-w- "v ' . —- .-

 

I'M‘n‘. ~".’w'§‘ ' Haw-H - _ w r

at .mq.~';'-.~ Q-| .- v

: ‘X

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 255

You have now oonpleted Anerioen Hietory. Ming the first e-eetea:
youweretmdztueing the nethode we have need forunyyeu-e et Gerber.
Beginning with the second eeneetea: Mastery Leaning was implemented in your
clue on on experinentel basis. would you please comment on your experience
in Marleen History. Include your feelings about (A) school. (3) history. .

53 W nethode first eueeter, (D) teaching nethode second eueeteu:
3) Hey: the come liait be improved.

‘1

1 “Rd me, kaching mwhods bid-RF HUI 9W8?
semester“. Dunne m gcond semeskr‘ . Hure
WGSh’+ o. mo—HVaJn'om +0 learn. AH Loom had

‘0 00 was ho+ shade} Hm. firs? ‘fiN' 5‘“

W 4&5? .omd qou coufld 6.0qu 9055.9“? _
445+ "HIQ fiCOHd-finqq, RrsbnOHq |didh‘+ 30
440:3 .beH momma Ptoole, did. '

 

Dd ‘.
‘mngp—oaueuon-quvmmv‘ “no.3” v'o‘q L ”to? .“a I-'.

 

' . . 0 ~
o~"’~ ‘4'..- ‘. .I... ..

 

‘ '5 Myl~r¢r

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 256

You have now conpletod American History. During the first senester
you were Mt using the nethods we hsve used for any years st Garber.
Beginning with the second semester Mastery Leaning was implemented in your
class on an experinentsl basis. Would you please comment on your oxperimoe
in American History. Include your feelings about (A). school. (B) history,
33 tenching nethods first senester, (1)) teaching methods second sweeter

(E) ways the some night he inproved.

A) Awe to iwn 60»:qu 50 you can ge¢flfié
(3)1?!“ 5'7“

C3 Soc (cc,

 

 

5M

 

o
"". A“. .“, _sm.a~nu‘n-u4 It...“ U unit. a-

 

 

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 257

Youbavenow ooapletedAnsricannistory. Dun-ingthefiratsuaater
youwerataogbtusingtheaethodswehsveused forumyeu-aatcarber.
Beginning with the second suester Mastery Learning was iapl-ented in your
class on an «perinatal basis. Would you please consent on your experience
£1313 Aaerican History. Include your feelings about (A) school. (3) history.

3

aethods first suester, (D) telcmng aethods second suester
)waysthecotn-seaightbeiaproved.

A Jim/la W/W
W 5W Mic/m Mme W"
C W mil/“wk '
D 07h QM Hm 46/1/0224 Q40” XVI/[Z9 M
Ma, ' . l ‘
E 752647 fishnwmxw 4 44,9,“
3 : g Wvg‘O/“QLW—pwfi "

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 258

You have now coapleted American History. During the first scooter 5712

you were taught using the methods we have used for any years at Garber.
Beginning with the second semester Mastery Learning was implemented in your
class on an “perinatal basis. Would you please comment on your experience
in American History. Include your feelings about (A) school, (B) history,

£33 teaching nethods first semester. (D) teaching methods second semester
(E) ways the course night be improved.

MY Fé'élznkas ‘A'BOUST SCHOOL- Hfirué' Aka‘lS

866A) 7715 SANTE. Seneca. 1's F1410 3:73 3M7
We: (55me UP TD 60 To 117’ is 7?): float/Y).
j: sou-r mm!) Hrs-ram design-Am

dams Afiour 77-25 mgr Buff HA7? zr 7:}: Ir
H45 7'0 851327—2452) on 9014406631) 2307b mg. 7745
720+ch METHOAS OF THE FIQV .56M657’é‘fl- Am)
7745 55am) sgmad c.9526 P515777 ¢Lo55 75
55.7496 mg 5% gum roe ,9 F620 ”1025’ .4576 ADM/075',
7‘75” flit/‘7’ mMr Amy; 'fl/c’CMSS c/W 664’
'Z—mpeow'l’i Bu'f THE 49177241; 55,270» BWa
_ éo. 7797 HAW/357’ wASwoeKEb 1.4V «rims was PM
"if Somcom 6573 A b are. 4.0th Mflgy
be“? V5 ‘75 '51?“ AF 75L Esau: Tr IDEA/(1g our".

WWEW Mo
um (34%).: 72> 657' mg magg-
5 /

MW .74 657. 71W;
_WC‘AZDQL’ Dom-re @AwaWz
‘ _r,

7395;.) wry SfiOuLD s-rm Jar/>752. T can P041247

‘75 HA—ve LL: 4» Due Hungwoan 72> Bf guaranty FGL
fir 7337 Because: got/0510,18 774mg WW 5! to»; 725

667' $7“ 0006, Surf (57.1506 72:0 Hula” HOWOCK 78
8: arrange»; 23417 may Flt-Tl.

 

 

 

 

’5 "V‘ ’—

 

 

 

APPOHdl’F Distudent Surveys andlps

fig). : ~ !; 4
”@332
I “.314

..

ould you?pleasei

l

coaaent—_
feelingssboutlA) school»
e tor. (D)_.teadzing’ nethods‘second
aightbe improved. f ' , ’ ‘

, your
ethodsfiirstsu s

 

 

 

        

 

 

 

    

Student Su

D) t'

ndixp

(

     

 

course night he 'impmovedj

nethods-jfirst s
the

 

‘7\

8) My:

 

Li. 1559ch °= 5mg”) 3‘5

.uwaethods wanna. ,7

 

 

 

 

 

 

fithOlgwme
1w“ * " '

,. :fi.
'9'».

a
n+1“

<

..

 

 

4 mount, be <inpzioved

 

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 270

You have now conpleted American History. During the first suester
youweretaughtusing the aethods we have used foraanyyears at Garber.
Beginning with the second senester Mastery Learning was inplaented in your
class on an uperimmtal basis. Hould you please conent on your experience
in Anarican History. Include your: feelings about (A) school, (B) history,

a £3 W aethods first scooter, (0) teaching methods second suaester
" .3)waysthe course lightbeimproved.‘

_ I U130», school to norm U (”fit and I 0’
X 7 do I {m hisl‘oru allotmn #704517 I coal
\ / ' . 7mm: msy‘or 1'5
”3L écmc [mPFOO/ry. w L/

Uar im rl-amL 5709’ 52/50 Ihfira’fii'ngflha'
oldqmafiodfi 7%67L we used first cam/(p w

A . - ware/ff um; good. I do Mfg )Lhafleéhry
* ‘ lwmi ' much bdfcr and I 7%x'n/S’ 4 f
DhOuI 5Q Confi'nud) {70+ Jufil‘ l'fl 1’7/57LO/‘c/ ,
but Oliver 06656: as an”. I? wee/O
all O‘CQHF‘ home sac/7; andfigligf/m ’
first +£va and deny P3354 MWLLM '
V7600, an extra mfg/#70 90 cue/Me
MG’l'CZf/fl/ (44% mxbjzo’ 6700/ flada JIM/LAW
Cl”) 300%, I rad/A, 0/0/2\7‘ fh/hg f/l/‘jn.

3y 6 ram 77((0’5 / 'mloroux'ry4

I!!! i .:... E .III

 

 

‘_ din D: Student 35L]. ‘eys

er’, .,

 

a
ways the

 

Appendix D: Student Surveys and Samples 273

You have now completed American History. Dining the first scooter
you were might using the methods we have used for many years at Garber.
Beginning with the second semester Mastery Learning was implenented in you
class on an experimental basis. would you please oomenton youcxperien
in American History. Include your feelings about (A) school. (B) history,“
(:3 teaching methods first semester, (D) teaching methods second sanester
(E) ways the course might beim

X WMMWV m J Zflzflflé WI,

 

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 27¢

UNIT FOUR * _A_ TIME 93 TRIAL

 

Chapter 13 A NEW DEAL

Overview

Chapter 13 focuses on the early years of the New Deal. Students
read about the roots of the New Deal and the flurry of legislation
passed during the first hundred days of Franklin D. Roosevelts'
first term in office. They also analyze criticism of the New Deal
and the reform measures passed in 1935.

Chapter VOcabulary

genteel (p. 239) adversity (p. 230 vehement (p. 241)
abysmal (p. 245) tributaries (p. 245) disclosure (p. 245)
Section 1 The Roots Of The New Deal (text pages 239-240)
Summary

When Franklin Roosevelt was inaugurated in 1933, he was ready to
initiate the New Deal he had promised during the campaign. Although
Roosevelt did not have a definitive program when he began his term of
office, he was able to draw on a store of experiences and ideas. In
this lesson students examine the roots of the New Deal.

Objectives

After completing the suggested procedures, students should be able to

* describe the personal and national experiences that provided a basis
for New Deal ideas.

* describe the variety of ideas behind the political philosophy of
the New Deal.

* classify information on a chart.

Section 2 The First Hundred Days (text pages 241-246)

Summary

The first hundred days of Roosevelt's administration were days of
great activity as the President and Congress began to provide relief
for millions of unemployed and to plan for the recovery of the banking
system, agriculture, and industry. In this lesson students analyze

the measures taken during that period.

l

Objectives
After completing the suggested procedures, students should be able to

* describe the problems the nation faced in early 1933.
* analyze actions the government took in response to those problems.
* work in a group to complete a chart.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 275

Section 3 Critics Of The New Deal (text pages 247-249)

Summary

Although many Americans approved of the programs created to fight
the depression, the New Deal also had vocal critics. Some people
charged that the programs did not go far enough, and others thought
the New Deal threatened basic American liberties. In this lesson
students analyze criticism of the New Deal.

Objectives

 

After completing the suggested procedures, students should be able to

* describe reasons why people criticized the New Deal.
* analyze cartoons.

Section 4 The Second New Deal (text pages 249-252)

Summary

In 1935 Congress passed a series of measures in an attempt to reform
conditions that had contributed to the start of the depression. Among
the areas of reform were labor relations, regulation of the utilities,
and social security. In this lesson students evaluate the actions taken
during the second New Deal.

Objectives
After completing the suggested procedures, students should be abLe to
* describe governmental actions during the second New Deal.

* defend a given position in a written editorial.
* evaluate opposing positions on a given issue.

(13-3)

(13-3)

(13-3)

92

SKILLS:

1011.

1012.

1013.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 276

Date

Chapter 13 Test A NEW DEAL

ANALYZING CARTOONS

 

 

 

 

 

"hat "disease" are the characters in Figure 32 trying to
cure?

a. stock market speculation

b. the depression

c. the New Deal

d. end of the Florida land boon

who does the doctor in Figure 32 represent?

a. President Hoover c. President Roosevelt
b. Congress d. the Supreme Court

what do the bottles on the table represent?

a. New Deal agencies and programs

b. organizations opposed to President Roosevelt

c. agencies set up by President Hoover to fight the depression

6. hills passed by Congress to check the power of the
President

0 1966 Prentice-Hall. Inc.

(13-3)

(13-3) *1015.

(13-1)
(13-2)
(13-3)
(13-3)
(13-3)
(la-4)

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 277

1016. According to the doctor in Figure 32. what should be done if

the "disease" is not cured by these renedies?

a. A new doctor should be found.

b. The "disease" should be allowed to take its course without
interference.

c. New remedies should be tried.

d. The nurse should be replaced.

The person who drew Figure 32 probably

a. actively supported the New Deal.

b. thought too nany different remedies were being tried.
c. thought sore agencies should be created.

d. thought the New Deal would destroy the nation.

KEY PEOPLE. PLACES. AND TERMS

18H. Decide which description at right IOIt closely latches each naee at

\1

left and write its letter in the space provided. (You will not use
all descriptions.)

Frances Perkins a. blaeed the depression on an
international conspiracy of bankers
Barry Hopkins
b. introduced the National Labor
Huey Long ' Relations bill

Charles Coughlin c. served as secretary of agriculture
under President Roosevelt
Francis E. Townsend
d. Louisiana senator who favored a
Robert F. Wagner redistribution of wealth

e. secretary of labor under President
Roosevelt

f. headed the National Recovery
Adninistration

g. proposed that the government give
elderly people a pension

h. headed the Federal Emergency Relief
Act

(e) 1986 PlenticeHall. Inc. 93

(13-2)

(13-2)

(13-2)

(13-4)

(13-1)

(13-1)

(13-1)

(13-2)

94

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 278

ifibi. Decide which description at right most closely matches each name at
left and write its letter in the space provided. (You will not use

|1

)0

Bl...

1019.

Q
10 o.

('0

1021.

all descriptions.)

Federal Emergency a.
Relief Act
Tennessee Valley b.
Authority

National Industrial
Recovery Act

works Progress
Administration

f.

sponsored projects that employed
laborers. actors. and writers

tried to end stock market speculation

supplied electric power in several
states

distributed money to local and state
welfare agencies

insured savings accounts against bank
failure

called for regulation of production.
prices. and working conditions

One basis of Franklin Roosevelt's political philosophy was the
idea that the government should

a. help people in need.

b. stay out of economic affairs.
c. move slowly in times of economic crisis.
d. promote the growth of monopoly.

The term "brain trust" referred to a group of

a. anti-New Deal senators.

b. business leaders who supported the New Deal.
c. scholars who opposed the New Deal.

d. President Roosevelt's advisers.

that

In his inaugural address in 1933. President Roosevelt declared

a. the depression must run its course.
b. labor legislation would hurt chances for an economic

recovery.

c. vigorous antidepression measures would be taken.
d. unemployment had been virtually eliminated.

During the first hundred days of the New Deal, Congress tried

to relieve the problem of unemployment by passing the

a. Fair Labor Standards Act.

b. Social Security Act.

c. Emergency Relief Appropriations Act.
d. Civilian Conservation Reforestration Relief Act.

63 1986 Prentice-Hall. Inc

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 279

(57

(13-2) 1022. The purpose of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 was to

a. make farmers more efficient.

b. limit farm production.

c. raise the living standards of tenant farmers.

d. resettle farmers who lost their farms as a result of the
‘) drought.

(13-2) 1023. The Blue Eagle represented support of £/,

a. the National Recovery Administration.
b. lower wages during the depression.

c. the leadership of Huey Long.

d. unregulated competition in industry.

’7)
(13-3) {024. Congress created the Tennessee Valley Authority in part to

a. conserve the area’s natural resources.
b. place private power companies under government ownership.
c. end the recreational use of the area's rivers.

(I? d. reduce the area's harvest.

(13-4) 1025. One purpose of the National Labor Relations Act was to L.

a. guarantee the workers' right to organize.
b. abolish collective bargaining.
c. stop unfair labor practices by unions.

) d. allow employers to hire nonunion workers.

(13-4) 1026. The Wagner Act required employers to
a. pay a minimum wage.

b. hire employees who were union members.
c. engage in collective bargaining.

([4) d. provide a pension for every retired employee.
(13—4) 1027. Under the Public Utilities Holding Company Act. the government
could

a. assume ownership of holding companies in the utility
industry.

b. require electric power companies to join trade
associations.

c. dissolve holding companies.

d. encourage holding companies to control the distribution of
electric power.

© 1986 Prentice-Hall. Inc. 35

(13-4)

(13-2)

(13-2)

(13-2)

(13-1)

(13-2)

(13-3)

(13-1)

1028.

CNRONOLOGY

*1029.

*1030.

)J

3)

)7

2V

2f

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 280

One purpose of the Social Security Act was to

.0
b.
c.
d.

abolish federal unemployment insurance.

establish a national pension for the elderly.

give financial assistance to private. charitable agencies.
discourage employers from laying off their employees.

Which of the following happened first?

a.
b.
Ce
d.

American Liberty League founded

Emergency Banking Act passed

Agricultural Adjustment Act declared unconstitutional

Social Security Act passed

Decide which event in each pair happened first and write its letter
in the space provided.

American Liberty League b.
formed
National Industrial b.

Recovery Act passed
works Progress b.

Administration created

Civilian Conservation. b.
Corps created

Schechter v. United States b.

decided by Supreme Court

CRITICAL THINKING

a»)
*1031.

Roosevelt's "first hundred
days" begin

National Labor Relations
Act passed

President Roosevelt
declares "the only thing we
have to fear is fear itself"

Social Security Act
passed

second New Deal begins

The New Deal and the progressive movement were similar in
that both

a.
b.
c.
d.

favored government ownership of industry.

opposed conservation efforts.

supported federal regulation of business.

rejected advice from experts.

© 1906 Prentice-Hall. Inc.

(13-1)

(13-2)

(13-2)

(13-2)

(13-2)

(13-3)

© 1988 Prentice-Han. Inc

(all. _

1033.

1035.

90?...

is?

"2
0 .

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 281

The experiences of the world Nar were a source of ideas for
the New Deal because

a. unions had successfully operated industries.

b. government agencies had worked with industry to coordinate
production.

c. government programs had reduced unemployment.

d. price and production controls had failed.

Roosevelt tried to solve the banking crisis by supporting
legislation that

a. allowed sound banks to borrow federal funds.

b. prohibited monopoly in the banking business.

c. placed financially troubled banks under federal ownership.

d. restricted the amount of money a depositor could withdraw
from the bank.

Critics of the Tennessee Valley Authority argued that the
federal government should

a. start conserving natural resources.

b. provide aid to the southern states.

c. allow local and state authorities to manage their own
affairs. -

d. prohibit monopolies in business.

All of the following problems were meant to be solved by the
TVA EXCEPT

a. flooding. c. unemployment.
b. erosion. ' d. shortage of electricity.

Congress created the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in
order to

a. provide low-interest loans to farmers.

b. enable homeowners to keep their homes.

c. protect people's savings accounts.

d. set interest rates for money deposited in savings banks.

Members of the Liberty League charged that the Roosevelt
administration had

a. neglected the needs of the poor.

b. undermined the free enterprise system.

c. failed to regulate the banking industry.
d. refused to solve the problems of farmers.

97

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 282

1 (13—3) *1038. In Schechter v. United States. the Supreme Court held that
the National Industrial Recovery Act was unconstitutional
because it

a. took money from one group to benefit another.

b. refused to recognise the right of workers to join unions.
c. imposed a tax on manufactured products.

c. regulated commerce within a state.

(13-2) *1039. Describe two measures passed by Congress during the ”first hundred
days" that were designed to provide relief to the unemployed.

(13-2) 1040. How did the National Recovery Act seek to protect workers and
reduce unemployment?

(13-2) *1041. Uhy were NRA regulations difficult to enforce?

(13-4) 1062. Why did President Roosevelt favor the creation of the works Progress
Administration in 1935?

(13é4) *1043. Describe two laws that reflected the emphasis of the second New
Deal.

98 o 1966 Prentice-Hall. Inc

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials

 

283

 

Name Date
Chapter 13 Test A New Deal
Multiple Choice
Four choices are given for each question that follows. Write the letter of the correct answer in
the space provided.

One basis of Franklin Roosevelt’s political
philosophy was the idea that the government
should

a. help people in need.

b. stay out of economic affairs.

c. move slowly in times of economic crisis.
d. prmnotc the growth of monopoly.

.TheNechalandtheprogressivemove-

mcnt were similar in that bath

a. favored government ownership of in-
dustry. '

b. opposed conservation efforts.

c. supported federal regulation of business.

d. rejected advice from experts.

.‘l‘heexperienccsoftheWorldWarwerea

source of ideas for the New Deal because
a. unions had successfully operated in-
' dustrics.

b. governmwagencics hadworkcd with in-
dustry to coordinate production.

c. government programs had reduced un-
employment.

d. prbe and production controls had failed.

Thebraintrustrefcrstoagroupof

a. anti-New Deal senators.

b. businesslcaderswhosupportedtheNew
Deal.

c. scholars who opposed the New Deal.

d. President Roosevelt’s advisers.

.lnhisinauguraladdressinl933.President

Roosevelt declared that

a. the depression must run its course.

b. labor legislation would hurt chances for
an economic recovery.

c. vigorous antidepresslon measures would
be taken.

d. unemployment had been virtually elimi-
natcd.

. Roosevelttriedtosolvethebankingcrisisby

supporting legislation that

a. allowed sound banks to borrow federal
funds.

b. prohibited monopoly in the banking
business.

c.~placcd financially troubled banks under
federal ownership.

d. rcstrictcdthcamountofmoneyadcposi-
tor could withdraw from the bank.

OIOOOPrenIIoe-l'lamnc.

7.

10.

11.

12.

13.

The Agricultural Adjustment Administra-

tion worked for agricultural recovery by

a.convincing farmcrstodonatccropsto
relief agencies.

b. stopping foreclosures on farms.

c. urging farmers to reduce production.

d. reducing the price of farm products.

The Blue Eagle represented support of

a. the National Recovery Administration.

b. lower wages during the depression.

c. the leadership of Huey Long.

argued that the federal government should

a. start conserving natural resources.

b. provide aid to the southern states.

c. allow local and state authorities to man-
age their own affairs.

d. prohibit monopolies in business.

Congress created the Federal Deposit insur-

ance Corporation in order to

a. provide low-interest loans to farmers.

b. enable homeowners to keep their homes.

c. protect people’s savings accounts.

d. setintcrestratesformoncydepositedin
savings banks.

Members of the Liberty League charged that

the Roosevdt administration had

a. neglected the needs of the poor.

b. undermined the free enterprise system.

c. failed to regulate the banking industry.

d. refused to solve the problems of farmers.

in Schechter v. United States. the Supreme

Court held that the National industrial Re-

covery Act was unconstitutional because it

a. took money from one group to benefit
another.

b. refused to recognize the right of workers
to join unions.

c. imposed a tax on manufactured products.

d. regulated commerce within a state.

OnepurposeoftheNationallaborRela-

tions Act was to

a. guaranteetheworkers’righttoorganiae.

b. abolish collective bargaining.

c. stop unfair labor practices by unions.

d. allow employers to hire nonunion
workers.

Chapter 13 Test 0 25

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 28‘!

_M.UnderthePublic Utilities Holding Com- _l$.OnepurposeoftheSocialSecurityActwas
panyAct,thegovernmentcould to
a.mumeownershipofholdingcompanies a.abolishfederalunemploymentinstuance.

intheutilityindustry. b.establishanationalpsnsionfortheelda-
b. requireelectricpowercompaniestojoin ly.

tradeassociations. e.givefinandalassistancetoprivate.char-
c. dhsolveholdingcompanies. itableagencies.
dencourageholdingcompaniestocontrol d.discourageernployersfromlaying off

thedistrihutionofelectricpower. theirernployees.

Matching

Deddewhichdaalptioninthedghtcdumnmoudadymuchuachhaninmekflcolumn.
thetheappropriueminthespaceprovidedJYouwiflnmwafldmuipdons.)

OroupA
_l6.FrancesPerkins -a.blamedthedepressiononaninternationalconspiracyofbankers
. introducedtheNationaluborRsMionsbill
__11. l-iarryi-lopkins
servedassecretaryofagricnltureunderi’residutRooseveit
_II.HwLoos Louisianasenatorwhofavoredaredistrlbutionofwealth
_l9.CharlesCoughlin secretaryoflaborunderPresidentRoosevelt

headedtheNationalRecoveryAdministration
proposedthatthegovernmentgiveelderlypeopleapension

{secretary ofagricultureunderl’resident Roosevelt

headedtheFederalEmergencyReliefAct

__20. FrancisB.Townsend
_21. RobertF.Wagner

rm.- :~9 99 0'

GroupB
_22.FederalEmergency asponsoredprojectsthatanployedlaborers,actors,andwriters
ReliefAct b.triedtoendstockmarketspeculation
_23.va.n¢y. c.suppliedelectricpowerlnseveralstates
' Authority d.enabledsomebankstoreopenbyborrowingfederalfunds
_24.Nationallndustrial e. distributedmoneytolocalandstatewelfareagencies
RecoveryAet f.insuredsavingsaccountsagainstbankfailure
_2$.WorksPr'ogreas a.mnedforregtrlationofproduction.prices.andworkingconditions
Administration
Chronology

Deddewhkheventinachpahhappenedeafbrandwfikiuleuahthespaceprwided.

_26. a. Americanlibertyleagueformed
_27. a. NationallndustrialRecoveryActpassed

_ 28. a. Worksl’rogressAdministrationcreated

Roosevelt's “first hundred days" begin
Nation! Labor Relations Act passed

PresidentRooseveltdeclares‘hheonlything
wehavetofearisfearitself”

5".” PF?

_29. mavnianConservadonCorpsaeated SocialSecurltyActpassed

__30.a.sasclucv.UnMSmdecidedby secondNewDealbegins
SupremeCourt

Basso-cations

l. (”DuaibetwomampamedbyConmduflngthe‘flmhundreddathhnm
daignedwproviderdiefmmeunemployed.(b)WhydidPreddmtRoaevdtfavuthe
creationoftheWorksProgressAdministrationin 1935?

2. (a)iiowdidtheNationalindustrial RecoveryActseektoprotectworkersandreduce
unemployment? (b) Why were NRA regulations difficult to enforce?

3. (a)WhatwasthenewemphasisofthesecondNewDeal7(b)Describetwolawsthatreflected
thenewemphasis.

Gas M13733! e19ssm.m

U.S. HISTORY
2ND SEMESTER

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 285

Date

 

”.m‘ U - . U s e O o e .-

One basis of Franklin Roosevelt's political philosophy
was the idea that the government should

c. move slowly in times of economic crisis.
The term 'brain trust' referred to a group of

b. business leaders who supported the New Deal.

In his inaugural address in 1933. President Roosevelt
a. the depression must run its course.
b. labor legislation would hurt chances for an economic

c. vigorous antidepression measures would be taken.
d. unemployment had been virtually eliminated.

During the first hundred days of the new Deal. Congress
tried to relieve the problem of unemployment by passing

c. Emergency Relief Appropriations Act.
d. Civilian Conservation Reforestation Relief Act.

The purpose of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933

c. raise the living standards of tenant farmers.
d. resettle farmers who lost their farms as a result

FINAL EXAM
Name
1.
a. help people in need.
b. stay out of economic affairs.
d. promote the growth of monopoly.
2. ____
a. anti-New Deal senators.
c. scholars who opposed the new Deal.
d. President Roosevelt's advisers.
3.‘____
declared that
recovery.
4. ____
the
a. Fair Labor Standards Act.
D. Social Security Act.
5. ____
was to
a. make farmers more efficient.
b. limit farm production.
of the drought.
6.

The Blue Eagle represented support of

a. the National Recovery Administration.
b. lower wages during the depression.

c. the leadership of Huey Long.

d. unregulated competition in industry.

10.

11.

12.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 286

Congress created the Tennessee valley Authority in
part to

a. conserve the area's natural resources.

b. place private power companies under government
ownership.

c. end the recreational use of the area's rivers.

d. reduce the area's harvest.

One purpose of the National Labor Relations Act was
to

a. guarantee the workers' right to organize.
b. abolish collective bargaining.

c. stop unfair labor practices by unions.

d. allow employers to hire nonunion workers.

The Wagner Act required employers to

a. pay a minimum wage.

b. hire employees who were union members.

c. engage in collective bargaining.

d. provide a pension for every retired employee.

Under the Public Utilities Holding Company Act. the
government could

a. assume ownership of holding companies in the utility
industry.

b. require electric power companies to join trade
associations.

c. dissolve holding companies.

d. encourage holding companies to control the distribu-
tion of electric power.

One purpose of the Social Security Act was to

a. abolish federal unemployment insurance.

b. establish a national pension for the elderly.

c. give financial assistance to private. charitable
agencies.

d. discourage employers from laying off their
employees.

The New Deal and the progressive movement were similar
in that both

a. favored government ownership of industry.
b. opposed conservation efforts.
c. supported federal regulation of business.
d. rejected advice from experts.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 287

Critics of the Tennessee valley Authority argued that
the federal government should

a.
b.
c.

6.

start conserving natural resources.

provide aid to the southern states.

allow local and state authorities to manage their
own affairs.

prohibit monopolies in business.

Congress created the Federal Deposit Insurance Cor-
poration in order to

a.
b.
c.
d.

provide low-interest loans to farmers.

enable homeowners to keep their homes.

protect people's savings accounts.

set interest rates for money deposited in savings
banks.

Nany workers were drawn to the Democratic coalition
because Roosevelt had

I.
b.
C.

d.

consistently opposed the National Labor Relations
Act.

favored the decision of the Federal Reserve Board
to increase interest rates.

prohibited the use of the National Guard in the
General Motors sitdown strike.

supported the workers' right to organize.

During the 1936 election. some business critics of
President Roosevelt charged that he

a.
b.
c.
d.

failed to implement Buey Long's goals.
threatened the free enterprise system.
refused to use deficit spending.
undermined the Wagner Act.

Roosevelt hoped that increasing the number of justices

on
a.

b.
c.

d.

the Supreme Court would

prevent New Deal legislation from being declared
unconstitutional.

weaken the Fair Labor Standards Act.

discourage legal challenges to the New Deal's
civil rights legislation.

and debate on the Social Security Act.

Because of the 1937 strike at General Motors.

b.
c.

6.

Congress limited the right of workers to organize
labor unions.

the AFL expanded its membership.

the company recognized the United Automobile Workers
as the employees' union.

Congress delayed passing the Wagner Act.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

AS

a.
b.

c.
d.
As
a.
b.

c.
d.

In

C.
b.
C.
d.

In
of

a.
b.

c.
d.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 288

a result of the sitdown strikes of the 19308:

Congress passed the Wagner Act.

automobile and steel companies recognized the
workers' union.

the government assumed control of several vital
industries.

child labor in interstate commerce was banned.

a result of the New Deal. the federal government

took over ownership of the automobile and steel
industries.

worked to discourage the growth of the American
Federation of Labor.

assumed responsibility for the needy.

decreased its role as business regulator.

1931 many Americans were outraged when Japan

attacked Pearl Harbor.

signed the Nine Power Treaty.

invaded Wanchuria.

sent aid to Franco's forces in Spain.

1937 Roosevelt tried to alter the isolationist mood
Americans by stating that

aggression anywhere in the world could affect all
nations.

Britain did not need American help.

Germany did not threaten vital American interests.
neutrality represented the safest course.

Congress passed the Lend-Lease Act to

a.
b.
c.
d.

help Britain fight Germany.

preserve United States neutrality.

protect France from an Italian and German invasion.
prohibit the sale of arms to countries that were
at war.

Which of the following lists of events is in correct
chronological order?

a.
b.
c.

6.

civil war erupts in Spain. Bitler takes power.

Hunich conference begins

United States enters second World War. Lend-Lease Act
is passed. United States makes base-for-destroyers deal
Germany occupies the Rhineland, Germany invades

Poland. Germany annexes Austria

Japan occupies hanchuria, Panay incident occurs.

Japan attacks Pearl Harbor

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

so.

31.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 289

The Neutrality acts of the middle 1930s reflected
American

a. outrage at Japanese aggression in China.

b. sympathy for the republican cause in the civil war
in Spain.

c. support for an isolationist foreign policy.

d. belief that Poland would stop Germany.

In 1940 President Roosevelt responded to British
requests for aid by

a. stating that the United States would remain neutral
in the war.

b. sending United States planes to reinforce the Royal
Air Force.

c. giving the British naval bases.

d. supplying the British navy with United States
destroyers.

The United States was unprepared for the attack on
Pearl Barber because the government believed that
Japan would

a. withdraw its troops from the Asian mainland.

b. attack Southeast Asia.

c. enter negotiations with China.

d. reach an agreement with Secretary of State Bull.

Which one of the following nations was a member of the
Axis powers in 1942?

a. Soviet Union c. United States
b. Great Britain d. Italy

Which of the following declined during World War II?

a. taxes c. unemployment
b. gross national d. agricultural production
product .

During World War II. most American workers

a. lost the right to join unions.

b. won the right to strike.

c. became employees of the federal government.
d. enjoyed higher wages.

During 1943 and 1944. the Allies tried to defeat Japan
by

a. landing an invasion force near Tokyo.

b. dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
c. invading Japanese-held islands in the Pacific.
d. organizing an invasion through China.

 

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 290

The joy over German Surrender in 1945 was clouded by
the report that

a. Allied nuclear weapons had killed thousands of
German civilians.

b. Soviet troops had landed in Japan.

c. Germany had carried out a policy of genocide against
the Jews.

d. Japan had conquered Iwo Jima and Okinawa.

As a result of their invasion of North Africa. the
Allies

a. drove the Germans out of France.

b. opened the Mediterranean Sea to their shipping.
c. lost control of Morocco and Algeria.

d. broke the alliance between Germany and Japan.

Because of the 1943 Allied invasion of Italy.

a. Mussolini was overthrown.

b. German troops in Italy surrendered quickly.

c. Axis control of North Africa was strengthened.

d. American troops ended their offensive in southern
France. - .

The Allies agreed that Germany should be

a. placed under exclusive Soviet control.

b. excluded from the European Recovery Plan.
c. divided into four zones of occupation.

d. required to join the Warsaw Pact.

In 1947 a United Nations commission recommended that
Palestine be

a. made a colony of Britain.

b. divided into an Arab and a Jewish state.
c. recognized as an independent nation.

d. invited to join the Security Council..

The Soviets imposed a blockade on Berlin because they
opposed

a. German membership in NATO.

b. unification of the western sectors of Germany.

c. President Truman's order to airlift supplies to
Berlin.

d. American testing of atomic bombs.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 291

Truman relieved General NacArthur of his command
because NacArthur had

a. refused to lead United Nations forces north of the
38th parallel.

b. failed to land United Nations forces at Inchon.

c. rejected the concept of limited war.

d. called for a negotiated settlement to end the war.

Which pairs represent cause and effect relationships?
I. United Nations troops cross the 38th Parallel
into North Korea-~North Korea begins its invasion
of South Korea
II. Soviet Premier Stalin dies--the United States
breaks diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union
III. Castro seizes American businesses in Cuba-~President
Eisenhower reduces the quota of Cuban sugar imports
to the United States
IV. U-2 incident--Paris summit conference collapses

a. I and II only c. I and Iv only
b. II and III only d. III and IV only

During the early 19503. Senator tharthy frequently
claimed that the

a. House Un-American Activities Committee was abusing
its power.

b. state department had hired communists.

c. Democrats had effectively reduced subversive
activity in government.

d. Senate had no legal power to investigate disloyalty
in government departments.

The term 'tharthyism' is most closely associated with

a. opposition to blacklists.

b. support for aid to veterans.

c. unfounded accusations about disloyalty in govern-
ment.

d. concern for the rights of defendants in criminal
cases.

In Brown v. Board of Education. the Supreme Court held
that racially separate educational facilities

a. damaged the education of white children.
b. raised the morale of black children.

c. did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment.
d. are inherently unequal.

43.

44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

Appendix B: Samples of Student Materials 292

In 1955 the Reverend Martin Luther King. Jr.. tried to
integrate the buses of Montgomery. Alabama. by

a. organizing a march on Washington.

b. staging 'freedom rides' on the buses.

c. asking black people to boycott the buses.

d. urging black people to fight for black power.

During the 1960 presidential election campaign. the
Republicans stressed the

a. prosperity of the Eisenhower era.

b. missile gap.

c. importance of the religious issue.

d. ngocratic candidate's refusal to debate on tele-
v sion.

Republicans won a majority in both houses of Congress
in 1946 because voters

a. favored a federally financed medical insurance plan.
b. wanted to revive New Deal programs.

c. opposed the Taft-Hartley Act

d. were tired of inflation and strikes.

Truman advanced the civil rights of blacks by

a. denouncing the report To Secure These Rights.

b. persuading Congress to pass civil rights
legislation.

c. banning segregation in the armed forces.

d. sending troops to integrate several schools.

As a result of their invasion of North Africa. the
Allies

a. drove the Germans out of France.

b. opened the Aediterranean Sea to their shipping.
c. lost control of Norocco and Algeria.

d. broke the alliance between Germany and Japan.

'Cold war' refers to tension between

a. China and Japan.

b. Britain and Germany.

c. Egypt and Israel. .
d. the Soviet Union and the United States.

The United States implemented the Truman Doctrine by

a. withdrawing troops from Korea.

b. dividing Germany into four zones.
c. providing aid to Greece.

d. joining the United Nations.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials

SKILLS:

450. According to Figure

3. 1974-
b. 1979
c. 1980
- d. 1982

293

READING GRAPliS

14
13

40
12 Figure

and-O
0-

 

I Eamukabnflmms

1972-1982 J

-- --Arwardretsdm

O‘Nubmofloo

 

 

40, the rate of inflation was highest in

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 294

U.S. BISTOR!
2ND SEMESTER
FINAL EXAM PART II

Name Date

 

1. Senator McCarthy's rise to prominence was aided by

a. abolition of the Loyalty Review Board.

b. disclosures about Alger Biss.

c. Klaus Fuch's refusal to reveal the workings of the
Los Alamos spy ring.

d. Eisenhower's victory in 1956.

2. The American public became increasingly disturbed
about the danger of communist activity at home as a
result of the

a. arrest of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg.
b. abolition of the Loyalty Review Board.
c. launching of Sputnik.

d. scandal involving Charles van Doran.

3. Because of McCarthy's activities. the

a. power of the Senate was limited.

b. government arrested hundreds of spies.
c. Republican party lost the 1948 election.
d. reputations of many people were ruined.

The popular culture of the 1950s reinforced the view
that women should

a. encourage their husbands to be domestic.
b. remain as homemakers.

c. compete with men in the business world.
d. take a more active political role.

Eisenhower sent troops to Little Rock because the
governor had refused to

a. obey a court orer integrating buses.

b. allow black people to participate in civil rights
activities.

c. permit stores to integrate lunch counters.

d. integrate the city's high school.

6. The Cuban missile crisis led to a

a. new anti-Castro invasion of Cuba.

b. diplomatic defeat for the United States.

c. desire to limit nuclear weapons testing.

d. feeling that the Castro government would soon fall
from power.

 

ll... :il Illlrll

 

 

10.

11.

12.

Appendix B: Samples of Student Materials 295

Which of the following were part of the Great Society?

I. Civil Rights Act of 1964

II. Medicare Act
III. voting Rights Act of 1965 ’
IV. creation of the Department of Housing and Urban

a.
b.

Development
I and II only c. I. III. and IV only
I. II. and III only d. I. II. III. and IV

Under the leadership of Elijah Muhammad. the Black
Muslims urged blacks to

a.
b.

c.
d.

BY

a.
b.
c.
d.

seek equality by bringing lawsuits in federal
court.

use nonviolent civil disobedience to protest
discrimination.

join the 1963 march on Washington.

separate from white society.

1964 Malcolm x had rejected the

possibility of black-white cooperation.
goals of Martin Luther King. Jr.
tactics of the Black Panthers.

ideas of Elijah Muhammad.

Cesar Chavez tried to help Mexican Americans mainly by

a.
b.
c.
d.

establishing La Raza Unida.

urging schools to offer bilingual education.
organizing a farm workers' union.

sponsoring school breakfast programs.

The Gulf of Tonkin resolution gave the President
authority to

a.
b.
c.
d.

In

suspend naval patrols off the North Vietnamese
coast.

negotiate with North Vietnam.

take military measures against North Vietnam.
draft people into the armed forces.

reaction to the growing opposition to the war in

Vietnam. President Johnson announced in 1968 that he
would

b.
c.
d.

seek to end the war by heavily reinforcing American
combat troops.

not run for reelection.

negotiate with North Vietnam.

recall General Westmoreland.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 296

The American people learned that no part of Vietnam
was safe from Viet Cong attack after the

a. attack on the United States destroyers Maddox and
Turner Joy.

b. campaign called Rolling Thunder.

c. assassination of Diem.

d. Tet offensive.

United States officials hoped that the Bay of Figs
invasion would result in ‘

a. removal of Soviet missiles from Cuba.
b. overthrow of the Cuban government.

c. the end of the Soviet blockade of Cuba.
d. strengthening the Cuban armed forces.

The Berlin wall was a valuable propaganda weapon for
the West because it showed that the

a. Soviet Union was militarily weak.

b. West German government wanted NATO forces removed
from their country.

c. people of West Berlin were unhappy with their
government.

d. East German government was unpopular.

As a result of the Cuban missile crisis. the Soviet
Union

a. resumed testing nuclear weapons.
b. withdrew its missiles from Cuba.
c. landed troops at the Bay of Pigs.
d. established a naval blockade of Cuba.

Kennedy advanced the civil rights of blacks by

a. signing a civil rights bill that barred segregation
’ in public accommodations.

b. sending federal marshals to integrate the University
of Mississippi.

c. withdrawing the National Guard from the University
of Alabama.

d.-insuring the ratification of the Twenty-Fourth
Amendment.

President Johnson was able to enact his Great Society
program in part because the

a. Democrats were a majority in Congress.

b. Republican party stood for social reform.

c. nation's economic growth had declined.

d. business community had pressured Congress to enact
a social reform program.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 297

Because of civil rights actions in the 19603.

a. Congress repealed the Civil Rights Act.

b. many segregation laws were repealed.

c. blacks began moving to the North.

d. de facto segregation in northern cities was largely
eliminated.

During the Johnson administration. the United States
was reluctant to oppose South Africa for fear of

a. condemnation from newly independent black nations.
b. weakening the system of apartheid.

c. getting involved in African affairs.

d. losing valuable resources.

President Nixon's policy of Vietnamization was designed
to '

a. increase the military role of South Vietnam in the
war.

b. and the bombing of North Vietnam.

c. convince Congress to repeal the Gulf of Tonkin
Resolution.

d. put diplomatic pressure on China.

The War Powers Act limits the President's power to

a. declare war.

b. negotiate peace treaties.

c. send troops into action.

d. determine the level of military spending.

President Nixon tried to achieve a policy of detente
by

a. ordering the invasion of Cambodia.

b. signing the SALT agreement.

c. proposing Vietnamization.

d. cutting off grain sales to the Soviet Union.

Nixon believed that the Warren Court had

a. unreasonably restricted the power of the police.

’b. ignored the rights of accused persons.

c. unconstitutionally expanded the power of the
President.

d. unfairly sided with Congress during the Watergate
investigations.

In 1911 Nixon responded to inflation by

a. raising interest rates.

b. reducing government spending.

c. urging Congress to increase taxes.
d. freezing prices and wages.

26.

sale

28.

29.

30.

31.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 298

During the Watergate hearings. John Dean testified
that Nixon had

a.
b.
c.

d.

In

a.
b.

C.

d.

tried to cover up the link between the Watergate
burglary and the White House.

ordered Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy to break
into the Democrats' Watergate office.

made tapes of all conversations that took place in
the White House.

told H.R. Haldeman to destroy Watergate-related
evidence.

foreign affairs. President Ford

continued the policy of detente.

ended disarmament discussions with the Soviet
Union.

ordered the withdrawal of American forces from
South Vietnam.

refused to sign the Helsinki Accords.

During the 1976 presidential election. the Republicans
were hurt by

a.
b.
c.
d.

A8

Andrew Young's controversial comments about world
affairs.

enactment of the War Powers Act.

fall of the shah of Iran.

voter concern about Watergate.

a result of President Nixon's visit to China. the

United States and China agreed to

a.
b.
c.
d.

A8

recognize the Soviet Union.
increase cultural exchanges.
withdraw their troops from Vietnam.
supervise the Vietnamese border.

a part of the policy of detente. the United States

and the Soviet Union agreed to

a.
b.
c.
d.

AS

eliminate their nuclear arsenals.
establish diplomatic relations.
lower the price of oil.

increase trade with each other.

a result of President Nixon's appointments. the

Supreme Court

a.
b.
c.

d.

reversed the Warren Court's landmark decisions on
criminal procedure.

narrowed the legal protection available to the
accused.

refused to rule on cases dealing with the rights
of the accused.

widened the scope of Mapp v. Ohio.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 299

In 1973 the Arab nations imposed an embargo on oil
shipments to the United States because the United
States had

a. recognized the independence of Israel.
b. approved Palestinian self-rule.

c. supported the shah of Iran.

d. aided Israel during the October War.

Vice-President Spiro Agnew resigned from office because
of charges that he had

a. planned the Watergate burglary.

b. accepted bribes from private businesses.
c. lied about the Watergate cover-up.

d. established CREEP's 'slush fund.’

President Nixon ordered the dismissal of special
Watergate prosecutor Archibald Cox because Cox

a. fired Haldeman and Ehrlichman.

b. refused to obey a federal court subpoena.

c. testified in favor of the Federal Campaign Reform
Act.

d. requested release of the White House tapes.

The House Judiciary Committee began deliberations on
the impeachment of President Nixon as a result of the

a. indictment of John Mitchell. H. R. Haldeman. and
John Ehrlichman.

b. disclosure that the President had acted to limit
investigation of the Watergate burglary.

c. discovery that an 18 1/2 minute segment had been
erased from one White House tape.

d. dismissal of the Watergate special prosecutor.

President Carter's reputation as an ineffective leader
resulted in part from his

a. inexperience in dealing with Congress.

b. failure to grasp the details of the issues he
confronted.

c. refusal to propose new legislation.

d. formal manner when appearing in public.

During the 1980 election campaign Ronald Reagan
promised to

a. increase interest rates.

b. reduce the size of the federal government.
c. increase the federal budget deficit.

d. reduce defense spending.

as .

39.

40.

41.

“e

43.

44.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 300

Which of the following was developed first?

a. computers c. lasers
b. silicon chips d. fiber optics

As a result of President Carter's efforts at the Camp
David summit. the

a. groundwork for a peace treaty between Egypt and
Israel was laid.

b. Soviets agreed to withdraw their troops from
Afghanistan.

c. United States agreed to transfer the Canal Zone to
Panamanian control in the year 2000.

d. agreement limiting the testing of nuclear weapons
was canceled.

President Reagan urged Congress to increase defense
spending because. he argued.

a. the Soviet Union had superior nuclear weapons.
b. the federal budget had to be balanced.

c. too much money was spent on sea-based missiles.
d. the Soviets had reduced their defense spending.

From which two areas did immigration increase the most
during the 19603 and 19703?

a. northern and western Europe

b. the Americas and southern Europe
c. southern Europe and Asia

d. the Americas and Asia

The move to the sunbelt is in part a continuation of
the historic trend of movement to

a. the South. c. the Midwest.
b. the West. d. the Nbrtheast.

By the 1830s most states had extended the right to vote
to

a. white women.

b. all men.

c. white men who owned property.
d. white men.

The initiative and referendum allow voters to

a. select members of the electoral college.

b. choose delegates to a party nominating convention.
c. determine the outcome of Senate elections. -
d. influence legislation.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 301

After World War II. American leaders became primarily
concerned with

a. remaining neutral in world affairs.

b. restraining Japanese expansion.

c. ending isolationism in the Third World.
d. containing Soviet power.

In the last 50 years the fastest growing part of the
work force has been in

a. agriculture.

b. manufacturing.

c. professional and service areas.
d. household work.

Trends of the late 19703 indicated that the population
of

a. Texas and Florida was declining.
b. rural areas was decreasing.

c. northeastern cities was declining.
d. the Midwest was increasing.

A3 a result of changes introduced in the twentieth
century.

a. voters in all states directly elect the President.

b. the state legislatures elect the members of the
United States Senate.

c. voters in some states can recall elected officials.

d. primary elections have been abolished.

Since the late 18003. the federal government has
generally

a. decreased services to the needy.

b. increased regulation of the national economy.

c. refused to enforce environmental regulations.

d. assumed the cost of implementing most regulations.

Appendix E: Samples of Student Materials 302

SKILLS: READING GRAPHS

Federal Government Expenditures mm 41
Distribution of Outlays. 1981 Amount 01 Outlays. 1930-1980

 

50. According to F1 re 41, the steepest increase in the amount
of fe deral 1spen mg occurred between
a. 1930 -
. b. 1940 - 1950
c. 1960 - 1970
d. 1970 - 1980 '

Appendix F: Classroom Photographs 303

 

Ed at work with our first period team taught class.

 

Bob at work on correctives with the students that must do a re-test.

Appendix F: Classroom Photographs 304

 

The team.

 

The partition open for large group viewing of Our World.

Appendix F: Classroom Photographs 305

 

Partition closed--enrichment group.

 

Students taking an oral quiz.

 

 

Appendix F: Classroom Photographs 306

 

Fifth hour class--they seem interested but scored poorly on tests.

 

The Detroit Free Press--current events for all--enrichment at other times.

Appendix F: Classroom Photographs 307

 

Full house--test time.

 

An environment conducive to positive change.

Appendix F: Classroom Photographs 308

. ,_., -- Us,“ ,. .~»-- .294 _a« 76:53
.4 ;- . . r
r . 'r ‘ L
I f O S m . -é ‘
x ‘ .
'3" " . _,.1 ~: ‘ 1" ’I (l - y‘ --.
’ ~ .» .‘I. ~ ' ' ' . .1‘
y-n J". if-zr‘ "N a" ' J : . - ~. - - rm. ,.1 . ,
am est m-n t1 --
I ‘31. , .'_
i3 Cd-‘Yl‘:‘.",5|g ': Haifa; 1 .~--‘ 1‘ .. ,-7' infirmigsu‘ .. I‘m. _ M
s .‘ ‘1. .-4 .‘1 , ‘L-- 9.. 8 '.
\‘L. ' . ‘ 5;)- ' - ran .
‘_ ”1 t..~ .
."_ , “r '
‘ t

‘.
"rt-

   
    

. l wen-.1; "H

\l_ R

.
r'- E

17“: 1.4-
:I‘r‘;

   
    

   
   

   
   

      

       

 

 

_f___.

.31-.-.T..._._

 

:4 -. _ .7 " 7.. ' _..,.e-.;.>ra{ ‘--~3;¥13 n1, 1 ‘18."; . ’
‘ , -‘=- Wave! is; -. ..:’.'-5'”.». . new... a -' . .smrrw mun-2?. -: ' ‘ a _- .4

3'
.‘f
~33?