ww—v -' . ,P_‘,— -1"..- ._- 3‘} ’1' -‘-' A ‘- - A <\_--_a A V ”5931"" a, A. it ‘v J1 {20’ ’.’| " 45' J‘s/.0. .- - :’>" u _.‘ MS ‘ 7‘0"" -—— 4 if A: 3F 2 ‘7. ‘ ...u. - "rt: I - . .25: as. «:1 ‘p \f 1' $.- 1H 3‘; "‘1'?“ WK . {-fifigj ‘- w“! !“,' I:\ .‘ 1.”. . ‘1‘: u" M 1"“11'4-‘1' 1‘ ”..{I ‘x-Sh" v I. 1 £\NI:' _' “Ankh 3'. ’ _ 1 "his. ‘11 pl")! “‘f IF'V n u. 1",. L‘ .- - .‘ .'| -qfiu ‘ xi 54;“.‘11' 2mg gym . ,. ‘1‘l:::z'.1~‘ ‘n. J“ fi‘flfifié. nymi‘irwa “"3 vi"??? ‘ no A. I . "v.05: ' s , ' -~ "132—31.. L1 ur"u»>»‘ |§.~.3.| l r’s‘éik" -. 5 MN D ‘- .... ”1‘5““ 212‘s; .1.‘ ..1 I I'v.":‘~‘-T~Jn ' “w .3» :‘L- a“ " himgb ‘ *“"<‘“.;.':o..r. ....‘Kv . . ' “um-AI m\:."‘n-$‘.‘.. 'w‘i’zk.v 312 W.! 3: 1::“35 5413.311 -»4. 712,". ' -~ 5:1 a" . firmlggfg anfi‘htgyfiii-l‘fifi -- - w may «'x‘ ~ *. H‘“??§é€6~-fi§y a,“ 3%5'szg-sr14, -; .3 “V.“ ’01}. . - 1'“):“ REE-L: ,_ Jk N" :13 ¢ writ?" ‘65:"- -\ ~33"; . "'33”; :3 ”:p ' ‘- :‘Z..‘|‘v ..rvuig: ... "(:52 ‘1 vain“ - a s .m- X > ' . £3}: '5. ‘ “53‘ ~M§i~l < '1 L531: ‘ , .m‘ :fét‘wgww‘gz, ’- ‘ ' ‘Ev'vv v. ~,_ cw . Ch 6 s131'1vm’c". v x~n 21:51:.‘5 wk": ‘szfid" ; ' ‘ “WIS": " '_. Y}. . 1”” ”'1‘“ «1*» ”x1 i . 4 g « ~ ..‘J‘i‘i‘J . "fi'n‘n'uZYf ' ' .r‘;~..'.'.‘"‘.':"" ... —‘ I'v." ".. ‘ u: v‘ ' ' “t. V' -v *"1‘5. WP i- , | I ‘¢"-nn ‘. al‘numi‘. “1.1., ' 11 1: J‘W" , . ..‘ ..1 1; “w“ LIBRARY Michigan Scam University This is to certify that the thesis entitled A STUDY OF THE EFFECT ON PERFORMANCE OF CUING FIRST GRADE CHILDREN TO THE DIFFICULTY OF A PAIRED-ASSOCIATE LEARNING TASK presented by ‘ June Carlotta Green has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Elementary and Ph'D’ degree in . . Specxal Educatlon jeezwfl/ 2??” . / Major professor Date March 15, 1978 0-7 639 © 1978 J UNE CARLOTTA GREEN ALL RI GHTS RESERVED A STUDY OF THE EFFECT ON PERFORMANCE OF CUING FIRST GRADE CHILDREN TO THE DIFFICULTY OF A PAIRED-ASSOCIATE LEARNING TASK BY June Carlotta Green A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Elementary and Special Education 1978 ABSTRACT A STUDY OF THE EFFECT ON PERFORMANCE OF CUING FIRST GRADE CHILDREN TO THE DIFFICULTY OF A PAIRED-ASSOCIATE LEARNING TASK BY June Carlotta Green The Problem This study was designed to test whether cuing first graders to the difficulty of a paired-associate learning task would affect their performance on the task. The subjects were 205 first grade children from two public schools in Detroit, Michigan. Students were randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups: (1) being told prior to attempting a task that it will be "hard” (PAH), (2) being told prior to attempting a task that it will be ”easy" (PAE), (3) being told during a task that it is ”hard“ (DPAH), and (4) being told nothing about the task (control group or NPA). Two pre-tests, Match to Form and Match from Memory, were administered to the subjects before they began the program sequence. The program sequence was developed to be used with an audio—flashcard reader in order that the directions would be identical for all treatment groups. The program sequence was a paired-associate task June Carlotta Green which required matching the appropriate consonant-vowel- consonant oral trigram with its corresponding graphic figure. The Naming task, which required the recording of the number of figures correctly identified during the final trial of the program sequence, was administered as a post- test prior to the other two post-tests: Match to Form and Match from Memory. Major Findings Three multivariate contrasts were constructed to determine whether significant differences existed between the four treatment groups. The three contrasts were: (1) the differences between the population mean of the Psychological Attender Hard group (PAH) and no Psychologi- cal Attender (NPA); (2) the difference between the popula- tion mean of the Psychological Attender Easy (PAE) group; (3) the comparison between the population mean of the Delayed Psycholoqical Attender Hard (DPAH) group and the average of the pOpulation means of the Psychological Attender Hard (PAH) group, the Psychological Attender Easy (PAE) group and the no Psychological Attender (NPA) group. The third contrast proved to be significantly different from the other treatment groups. A series of univariate F-tests were used to deter- mine which of the three dependent variables measured the significance (at the .01 level) for the treatment main effect and the achievement main effect. Results of the June Carlotta Green univariate F-test revealed that only the Naming task measured the significance of the treatment main effect. The Match to Form and Match from Memory measured the significance of the achievement main effect. Summary It was concluded that being told that the task is hard after it has been attempted, proved to be a more effective motivator for increasing achievement than (1) being told that the task is hard prior to attempting it (the PAH group); (2) being told that the task is easy prior to attempting it (the PAE group); or (3) being told nothing about the task. Neither the two achievement levels nor the sexes responded significantly different to the Psychological Attenders. The Delayed Psychological Attender Hard was the treatment that significantly increased the performance of both low and high achievers as well as girls and boys. DEDICATION Each measure of success that is achieved can be attributed to the influence of some very special people. The very special people in my life are: Rev. and Mrs. Havious Vinson Green and Mr. Charles Anthony Rivers ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS While pursuing the doctoral degree, my doctoral committee became ”significant others" because of their guidance, assistance, and encouragement. Although words cannot adequately express the gratitude which the author feels for each committee member, the author wishes to express her appreciation to: Dr. Jean LePere, chairperson of the guidance committee, who gave more than guidance, assistance, and support; her patience, determination, and demand for excel- lence (1) proved to this author that scholarship and humaneness are compatible and (2) resulted in an accomp- lishment of which the author is extremely proud; Dr. George Sherman, committee member, for sharing with excitement and enthusiasm, his insights into the learning of children; Dr. Donald Nickerson, committee member, for quietly and calmly assisting, guiding, and encouraging me, especially during my moments of despair; Dr. Verna Hildebrand, for introducing me to the exciting “world" of pre-school education; iii Dr. William McKenzie and Mrs. Jewell Hyman, school principals, for the Opportunity to conduct this study; First grade teachers and students, for their cooperation. The author is also grateful to Wendy Hursey Newberry, Janifer Hankins, Sherrie Tooles, who assisted with the collection of data; Suwatana Sookpokakit, who assisted with the statistical analysis; Chiarina Green (my fourteen year old sister); Linda Gebhard, who assisted in typing this dissertation; Mr. Oliver Agee, who assisted with the graphics; and last but not least, Dr. Robert L. Green, who planted the seed. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 ix LIST OF FIGURES. o o o o o o o o o o o o x Chapter I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Statement of the Problem. . . . . . . 3 Research Questions. . . . . . . 4 The Significance of the Study . . . . . 4 Overview of the Study. . . . . . . . 9 Population. 0 O O O O O O O O O 9 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . 10 Treatment of the Groups . . . . . . 13 Hypotheses O O I O O O O O O O O 13 Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . 14 Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . 16 Analysis of the Data . . . . . . . . 16 Organization of the Dissertation . . . . . . . . . . 16 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . 18 Introduction. . . . . . .i . . . . 18 The Theory of Achievement Motivation. . . 18 Achievement-Oriented and Failure- Threatened Subjects . . . . . . . 21 Low and High Achievement Need Subjects Who Attribute Their Success or Failure to Four Causal Elements . . . . . . . . 25 Chapter Page Techniques and Strategies that Control and Manipulate the Learner and the Environment of the Learner. . . . . . 32 Self-Concept and Motivation . . . . . 35 Parents and Self-Concept. . . . . .. 39 Teachers and Self-Concept . . . . . 40 Race, Sex, and Achievement as Related t0 SS]. f'COl‘lcept o o o o o o o o 4 4 Verbal Reinforcement. . . . . . . . 49 smary o d o O o 0 O o 0 o O o O 55 III. THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . 58 Design of the Study. . . . . . . . . 58 P0pulation and Sample . . . . . . . . 59 The Community . . . . . . . . . . 59 The School District . . . . . . . . 60 The Research Sample . . . . . . . . 60 Subjects. . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . 62 Checklist . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Test Forms . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Administering the Pretests. . . . . . 65 Visual Stimulus Figures. . . . . . . 66 Highlighting . . . . . . . . . . 69 The Program Sequence. . . . . . . . 71 Experimental Procedures. . . . . . . 73 Major Research Questions and Hypotheses . . 75 Treatment of the Data . . . . . . . . 76 Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS . . . . . . . . . . 80 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Major Research Questions and Hypotheses . . 82 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . 83 vi Chapter Results of Hypotheses Testing. . . . Research Question I Null Hypotheses I . Research Question II Null Hypotheses II. Research Question III Null Hypotheses III Research Question IV Null Hypothesis IV. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . Literature Review . . . . . . . The Study. . . . . . . . . . The Results . . . . . . . . . Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . Implications . . . . . . . . . Recommendations . . . . . . . . Recommendations for Parents and Teachers . . . . . . . . . Recommendations for Further Research. BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES A. Teacher Checklist to Identify High and Low Achievers . . . . . . . . . B. Directions for the Pre-Tests and Post- TeSts. O I O O O O O O O O O C. Introduction to the Program Sequence and Verbal Directions for the Program Sequence. . . . . . . . vii Page 90 92 93 97 98 100 100 106 109 109 109 109 110 112 116 118 120 120 121 125 133 135 139 Appendix Page D. Pre-Test and Post—Test Sheets . . . . . . 147 E. Raw Scores of Subjects . . . . . . . . 149 F. Illustration of an Audio Flashcard Reader . . 160 viii Table 3.1 3.2 3.3 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 LIST OF TABLES The 2 x 2 x 4 Experimental Design. . . . Number of Subjects per Cell for the Achieve- ment x Treatment Interaction Effect . . Number of Subjects per Cell for the Sex x Treatment Interaction Effect. . . . . Pearson Correlation Coefficient Matrix Among Five Tests. . . . . . . . . Correlation Matrix for the Three Dependent Variables: Match to Form, Match from Memory, and the Naming Task . . . . . Observed Cell Means and Standard Deviations of the Three Independent Variables and the Three Dependent Variables . . . . Result of Multivariate Analysis of Variance . . . . . . . . . . . Results of MANOVA for the Three Multi- variate Contrasts on the Three Dependent Variables . . . . . . . . . . .. Univariate F-Test of the Difference Between the Population Means of Group Three and the Average Population Means of Group One, Two, and Four on the Three Dependent Variables. . . . . . Univariate F-Test for Each Dependent Variable Measuring the Achievement Main Effect . . . . . . . . . . Univariate F-Test for Each Dependent Variable Measuring the Interaction Between Sex and Achievement . . . . . Observed Combined Means for the Treatment . ix Page 78 78 78 82 83 86 91 94 96 101 104 105 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 3.1 The Letter-Like Figures and Their Transformations. . . . . . . . . . 68 3.2 The Letter-Like Visual Stimulus Figures and Their Paired CVC Trigram . . . . . 69 3.3 The Vanished Highlighting Technique Used in This Study. . . . . . . . . 70 4.1 The Mean Scores of the Interaction Between Sex and Achievement for the Naming Task. . . . . . . . . . 103 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION When teaching a child a task, motivation becomes very important. Numerous techniques or strategies have been recommended. Hewett, Taylor, and Artuso (1969) used a token system as part of their engineered classroom design to enhance task attention and academic achievement of emotionally disturbed children.1 Sloane and Jackson (1974) stated that, In the younger grades, children's behavior may be maintained mostly by praise, attention, and other behaviors of their teachers or their parents, or by certain concrete things to do with the learning materials such as manipulative fun of handling some of the aids used to teach "new math," or the pictures in the text, or the game aspects of various school activities.2 Motivational strategies may include such alterna- tives as challenging the child by saying, "I don't think that you can do this” to making the task a game that is fun 1W. C. Stainback; J. S. Payne; S. B. Stainback; and R. A. Payne, Establishing a Token Economy in the Classroom (Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company,’1973), p. 917. 2Howard W. Sloane, Jr., and Donald A. Jackson, A Guide to Motivating Learners (New Jersey: Educational TeéhndIogy'Publicathns,71974), p. 11. to learn. Sometimes these strategies are successful in creating attending behavior and sometimes they are not. Such motivating techniques may fail because of a child's low self-image. According to Purkey (1970), ”. . . many students have difficulty in school not because of low intelligence, poor eyesight, poverty, or whatever, but because they have learned to see themselves as incapable of handling academic work . . ."3 Zimmerman and Allebrand (1965) studied an urban population of poor readers in the fourth and fifth grades of middle to lower socio-economic background. These students "lacked sufficient sense of personal worth, freedom, stability, and adequacy to the extent that they avoided achievement."4 If the student has failed many times before, he may be afraid to attend to the task; the student sees himself as a poor learner and does not wish to be reminded of it. This child may protect his self-esteem by reacting in one of two ways. First, the child may not pay attention in order to rationalize that failure occurred not because of a lack of ability, but because of the lack of attention. This is substantiated by the failure studies of Birney, Burdick, and Teevar (1969) who concluded that '. . . some 3William Watson Purkey, Self-Concept and School Achievement (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.,‘1970). p. 2. ‘1bid., p. 22. students fear failure so much that they avoid achievement whenever they can and when they cannot, do not try to succeed."5 Second, refusal to attend to the task may be motivated by the fact that the child really feels incapable and that there is not any sense in attempting a task that will result in failure. It has been hypothesized that children with low self—image may be more attentive if they view the task to be learned as nonthreatening. Thus, this study was designed to test the effectiveness of a strategy intended to enhance and protect the self-concept of the learner by removing the psychological threat of failure to learn. Statement of the Problem Teachers often tell children that a task to be learned is easy, thinking that they are encouraging the child to attend. The basic rationale of this study, how- ever, is just the opposite. Rather than telling a child that a task is easy, perhaps he/she should be told it is hard. It may be hypothesized that telling a child with a poor self-image that a task is easy could leave him.with little protection. Thus, if he fails at an easy task, he may be reaffirming his "dumbness." Telling him it is hard, on the other hand, protects him since it is not a disgrace to fail a task which is difficult. Consequently, this 5Sloane and Jackson, Guide to Motivating Learners, p. 51. study was designed to determine whether telling lower socioeconomic first grade children that a task was easy or hard would influence their performance on a particular task. Research Questions The major questions considered in this study were: 1. Will one treatment group achieve a significantly higher performance than other treatment groups with reference to being told tasks are "easy" or "hard"? 2. Will low and high achievers perform the same across all treatment groups? 3. Will girls and boys perform the same across all treatment groups? 4. Will high achievers perform better than low achievers on all tasks? The Significance of the Study At a time when the issue of whether teachers should be held accountable for the learning of students, how to command the attention of each child becomes significant. Teachers use numerous "gimmicks" to get their students interested in the task that is to be learned. Sometimes teachers find that there are students who do not respond to the ”gimmicks" because these students have experienced failure numerous times before and are afraid of failing again. These students need a “psychological set“ that will remove the fear of once more appearing ”dumb." For these children, a technique or strategy is needed that will modify the child's behavior by changing his attitude toward himself as a learner. Duffy-Sherman (1972) have suggested using a tech- nique called the ”Psychological Attender." The strategy of the Psychological Attender is to inform the child that the task to be learned is difficult and that many people ”make a mess of it” the first time they try it, thereby pro- tecting a child's self-esteem if he fails the task. Some peOple may challenge the idea of telling a student that a task is difficult lest it discourage the student from attempting the task because he/she "knows" that he cannot do anything hard. While this concern is valid, what happens if the child is told that the task is easy? Duffy and Sherman say that the challenge is removed and in effect the child is being told he/she is defective if he/she does not succeed at such a simple task. The argument against telling the student that a task is easy can be best summed up by a quote from Duffy-Sherman, "If you do the performance successfully, it really isn't worth doing in the first place because it Was easy, whereas if you fail the first time, it is because of a defect in you since everyone can do it."6 6Gerald G. Duffy and George B. Sherman, Systematic Reading Instruction (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1972), p. 22. The position of Duffy and Sherman is supported by Atkinson (1957) who states that, ”pride in accomplishment is believed to be limited when a task is perceived as easy and relatively intense when the task is perceived as diffi- cult,” and ”the degree of shame experienced followed non- attainment of an achievement-related goal is believed to be minimal when the task is perceived as difficult and great when task is easy.”7 Much research has been and is being done in the area of attributional theory and achievement motivation which deals with how students react to success or failure and the factors to which their successes or failures may be attributed. Weiner (1971) and others state that indivi- duals attribute success or failure to four variables: ability, effort, task difficulty and luck. Ability and effort are viewed as internal factors and task difficulty and luck are viewed as external factors. According to Bar- tal (1974) "attributions to good luck or the task's being easy produce considerable lessened pride."8 This statement further supports the contention that it is better to tell the child that a task is hard rather than easy. 7B. weiner and A. Kukla, "An Attributional Analysis of Achievement Motivation," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 15 (1970):l-29. 8Daniel Bar-tal, Irene Frieze, and Martin S. Greenberg, 'Attributional Analysis of Achievement Motiva- tion: Some Applications to Education," paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, April 1974, p. 7. The results of attributional research indicate that students with high achievement motivation attribute their success to internal factors and their failure to external factors, while students with low achievement motivation attribute their success to external factors and their failures to internal factors. Bar-tal (1974) states that “failures attributed to the lack of ability results in shame as well as decreased trying since one assumes that the ability will not increase greatly and, therefore, that future performances will show little improvement."9 The psychological attender could be used to shift the locus of control from internal factors to external factors, especially for low achievement motivation students. Davis (1972) holds that by adopting an external orientation these individuals (referring to low achievement motivation students) are able to maintain self-esteem by attributing negative events to forces beyond their control.10 While some research seems to support the notion of pointing out the difficulty of a task, other research indicates its adverse effects. Weiner and Sierad (1975) concluded in their study that having an external excuse for failure improved the performance of those with low 9Ibid., p. 2. 10William L. Davis and Elaine D. Davis, "Internal- External Control and Attribution of Responsibility for Success and Failure," Journal of Personality 40 (March 1972):123-36. achievement motivation while it decreased the performance of those with high achievement motivation.11 Theories by Atkinson and Feather (1966) suggest that an ”achievement- orientated person prefers or is attracted to or challenged by tasks of moderate difficulty.” On the other hand, “failure threatened individuals choose easy tasks to assure success or tasks so difficult that he has a socially accep- table excuse for failing."12 Based on the findings of Weiner and Sierad, the Psychological Attender which shifts the locus of control from internal to external factors may prove to be successful in motivating low achievement stu- dents but not high achievement motivation students. However, some research in the area of achievement motiva- tion indicated that failure-threatened subjects selected an easy task as frequently as they selected a very diffi- cult one. Therefore the Psychological Attender may prove to be of little benefit for some students. While there are some differences of opinion con- cerning the attributional theory, most researchers in that field agree with the notion that by adopting an external orientation, certain individuals are able to protect their 11Bar-tal et a1., "Attributional Analysis of Achievement Motivation," p. 5. 12E. Stewart Marlow III, ”Need for Achievement, Fear of Failure and Attribution Processes in Goal Setting” (Ph.D. dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, December 1971), p. 122. self-image. Birney et al. (1969) commented that ”if failure .is to have any meaning for an individual, it must be assumed that the individual who is afraid of failing is taking some responsibility for his nonattainment."13 The purpose of the Psychological Attender is to prevent fear of failure. Although the Psychological Attender might not serve as a positive strategy for all students, the purpose of this study was to discover characteristics (achievement level and sex) of students who might be motivated by the Psychological Attender. The findings of this study should provide a signifi- cant contribution to those who work with children for the following reasons: 1. The results may have serious implications for both parents and teachers in terms of modifying a child's attitude towards achievement. 2. Most of the research in the area of achievement motivation and attributional theory has been done with college students. This study used first graders since it could not be assumed that first graders and college students would respond in the same manner to motivation in terms of success and failure. Overview of the Study Population The population of this study consisted of first grade students from a public school system in a large metrOpolitan area in Michigan. 13Ibid., p. 129. 10 The two schools that were selected were located in the general vicinity of each other. They have grades kindergarten through fifth with a predominately black lower socio-economic status student body. Both schools receive Chapter 3 and Title I funds. One school with an enrollment of approximately 890 has had a gradual decline in its enrollment over the last few years. The community surrounding this school is not very mobile, with a signifi- cant percentage of the population consisting of second, third, and fourth generation residents. The other school and surrounding community is experiencing the opposite trend. The enrollment since the mid 19708 has swelled to approximately 800. The neighborhood in which the school is located was transient and about four years previous to the time of the study its population and that of the school was predominately white. Procedure All first graders at each of the two elementary schools were considered as possible subjects for this study, with the exception of those students who were retained in the first grade because of unsuccessful academic achieve- ment. On the basis of a checklist used to measure reading and math readiness skills, subjects with a score above forty were labeled high achievers and those with a score below forty were labeled low achievers. The subjects were then randomly assigned to the four treatment groups. 11 The Psychological Attender Hard and the Psychologi- cal Attender Easy treatment groups received a Psychological Attender during the initial instructions and just prior to the third and the sixth trials. The PAH group was told that, ”This is really hard, so don't feel bad if you can't remember all the names." The PAE group was told that, 'This is really easy, so I'm sure you can do it." The subjects in the DPAH group were told, "This is really hard, so don't feel bad if you can't remember all the names," after attempting the task (fourth trial). The control group (NPA) received instructions without a Psychological Attender. Two pre-tests measuring the subjects' ability to Match to Form and Match from Memory were administered. Match to Form and Match from Memory are skills which were involved in the program sequence of this study. The pre- test achievement measures were employed as covariates in an attempt to eliminate the possibility of differences between treatment groups prior to exposure to the program sequence. The day following the pre—test, the program sequence was presented to each subject, one at a time. All experimental groups and the control group received the same program. The program was presented on an Audio- Flashcard Reader so that each subject received the same presentation. Seventy-two audio-flashcards with two sound tracks affixed to each card were fed into the Audio- Flashcard Reader. The audio-flashcard had a stimulus 12 figure on it and appropriate information pertaining to the figure. The child's task was to pair the nonsense oral trigram.with a representative graphic figure and then to recall the association. Four pairs of figures were paired with a CVC Tri- gram randomly ordered to reduce serial learning. An introductory trial was included at the beginning of the program sequence to correct the enunciation of a trigram, if necessary. The first trial following the introductory trial was a learning trial. The learning trials provided the trigram paired with the figure and directed the sub- ject to focus on a particular feature of the stimulus figure. The second trial following the introductory trial was a test trial. The test trials asked the subject to “name” the figure. Each subject was directed to push a button on the machine to check the correctness of his answer. The eight teaching and testing trials were-alter- nated, with the final trial serving_as a post achievement measure for naming task. During this trial, the verbal responses were recorded on each subject's score sheet. After the program sequence, the.Match to Form and Match from Memory post-tests were administered. The total time of the program and post-tests were approximately twenty minutes. The stimulus figures used and the procedures for presenting them were the same as those used by 13 Allington14 in a study which determined that learning of paired associate tasks was enhanced by the use of vanishing color cues. Treatment of the Groups 1. 3. emerged 1. The Psychological Attender Hard (PAE) Group As a part of the directions and just prior to trial three and six, the experimenter told the subjects that "This is really hard, so don't feel bad if you can't remember all the names." The Psychological Attender Easy (PAE) Group As a part of the directions and just before trials three and six, the experimenter told the subjects that "This is really easy, so I'm sure you can do it." The Delayed Psychological Attender Hard (DPAH) Group After the fourth trial, the experimenter said, “This is really hard, so don't feel bad if you can't remember all the names.” The Control Gropp The control group was given only the directions so how to perform the task. Hypotheses The major hypotheses to be tested in this study from the questions which were explored: There will be no difference between the four treatment groups as measured by the three dependent variables: Match to Form, Match from Memory, and Naming. 14Richard L. Allington, ”An Evaluation of the Use of Color Cues to Focus Attention in Discrimination and Paired-Associate Learning" (Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1973). 14 There will be no interaction effect between achievement levels and treatment as measured by the three dependent variables. There will be no interaction effect between sex and treatment as measured by the three dependent measures. ~ There will be no difference between the perfor- mance of High and Low Achievers on the three dependent variables. Definition of Terms Psychological Attender: A method to create an appropriate psychological set for learning which acknowledges the difficulty of a task as a means for removing the fear of failure so that the task will be attempted again if necessary. a. Psychological Attender Hard: A method to create an appropriate psychOlogiCal set for learning which acknowledges the difficulty of a task as a means for removing the fear of failure so that the task will be attempted again if necessary. b. Psychological Attender Easy: A method to create an appropriate psychOIOgical set for learning which acknowledges that a task is easy as a means for encouraging the child to attempt the task. c. Delayed Psychological Attender Hard: A method to create an appropriate psyChological set for learning by allowing the child to discover that the task is hard and then confirming for the child that the task is indeed difficult. Matchin from Memgry: Following a presentation and removal of a stimulus figure, the subject selects that figure from a group of four figures. Match to Form: In the presence of a stimulus figure, the subject selects that figure from a group of four figures. Namin : In the presence of a figure, the subject mEEes the appropriate verbal response. 15 5. High Achievers: Those students who received a score of SBove 40 on a checklist measuring academic achievement in the area of reading and math readi- ness skills. 6. Low Achievers: Those students who received a score below 40 on a checklist measuring academic achieve- ment in the area of reading and math readiness skills. 7. Low socio-economic status: This designation usually refers to people in occupations which require i little or no education. This category primarily includes such occupations as: taxi drivers, jani- tors, bar tenders, restaurant waiters and sanita- tion workers.15 Assumptions The following assumptions underlie this study: 1. It is important for first graders to be motivated to attend to a given task if they are to learn specific skills; . 2. It is important for first graders to be able to match to form in order to distinguish between words that are alike and different; 3. It is important for first graders to be able to visually discriminate in order to identify correctly words that look alike; 4. It is important for first graders to be able to match from.memory in order to identify words by sight when reading; 5. It is important for first graders to be able to recognize and identify the figure; and 6. Naming the figures is equivalent to naming letters of the alphabet or words. 15Robert W. Hodge; Paul M. Siegel, and Peter H. Rossi, ”Occupational Prestige in the 0.8.; 1925-1963,” in Class Status and Power Social Stratification in Comparative Firs eCtive, ed} Reinhard Bendix and Séymour Martin Lipset (New York: New York Free Press, 1966). 16 Limitations This study has the following limitations: 1. The findings of this study were limited to the pOpulation used or similar populations. 2. The findings of this study were limited to situa- tions in which the same or similar learning environments are employed. 3. The findings of this study were limited to the type of learning tasks used in this study. 4. The findings of this study were limited to the way in which the Psychological Attender is used within this study. Analysis of the Data Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) with a 2 x 2 x 4 factorial design was used in this study. The independent variables were the treatments (which involved the use of the psychological attender), achievement levels, and sex. The covariates were the pre-test scores for the Match-to-Form and the Match-from-Memory. The dependent variables were the two post-tests Match to Form, Match- fromeMemory, and the Naming task. The Naming task was the criterion measure for the paired-associate learning task. Organization of the Dissertation In Chapter II a review of pertinent literature will be presented. Chapter III will contain a description of all materials and procedures employed in this study. The design of the study is also presented in detail. 17 Chapter IV will include the presentation of the data collected, treated and analyzed for the study. A summary of the study and appropriate conclusions are provided in Chapter V. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to review existing research related to the effect on performance of cuing first graders to the difficulty of a paired-associate learning task. Relevant research on the psychological control or manipulation of the learner and the learning environment in order to increase academic achievement will be divided into two sections for discussion. The first section will discuss the theory of achievement motivation and research related to it and the second section will discuss tech- niques and strategies used to control and manipulate the learner and the environment of the learner in order to increase academic achievement. The Theory of Achievement Motivation Educators generally agree that motivation is a significant factor that influences academic achievement. The word motivation has been used loosely here because of the numerous and various ways it has been perceived and defined in the field.of psychology. The numerous 18 19 theoretical positions such as the homeostatic model, self- actualization, hedonic, and others do not concern them- selves with educational situations or relate to the purposes of this study. Furthermore, the occasional application of psycho- logical theory to education has not typically eventuated in a theory of academic motivation nor a unified and coherent body of information. As a result, there is very little in the way of motiva- tion theory which is clearly of help to the classroom teacher or to education in general.1 In order to get a perspective that was more in line with the purposes of this study and addressed itself to educational concerns, literature in the area of achievement motivation became the focus of this review. McClelland et a1. pointed out the two important factors of achievement motivation: (1) that it is learned; and (2) that it involves a standard of excellence. . . . all motives are learned, that they develop out of repeated affective experiences connected with certain types of situations and types of behavior. In the case of achievement motivation, the situations should involve "standards of excellence, presumably imposed on the child by the culture, or more particularly by parents as representatives of the culture, and the behavior should involve either "competition" with those standards of excellence or attempts to meet them which, if successful, produce positive affect, if unsuccessful, negative affect.2 1Martin L. Maehr and Douglas D. Sjogren, ”Atkin- son's Theory of Achievement Motivation: First Step Toward A Theory of Academic Motivation?" Review of Educational Research 41 (l97l):l43-61. 2David C. McClelland; John W. Atkinson; Russell A. Clark; and Edgar L. Lowell, The Achievement Motive (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1953). 20 This definition, at least in part, contradicts some motiva- tional theories which view motivation as innate and not learned. It was crucial to the philOSOphy of this study that achievement motivation be defined as learned, other- wise it would not be subject to control or manipulation._ If achievement motivation cannot be controlled or manipu- lated, then educators could never hope to make a signifi- cant impact on the learner or the learning environment. The theory of achievement motivation developed by Atkinson provides hope and may be of assistance to those involved in the educational process. The work of several theorists has shown promise of evolving postulates and hypotheses relevant to the teaching-learning process. Prominent among these is the theory of achievement motivation particu- larly as formulated by Atkinson (1957, 1964, 1965, Atkinson and Feather, 1966). This theory has pro- vided a productive approach to a variety of behavioral phenomena; thus it has been suggested (e.g., Atkinson, 1966; Weiner, 1967) that it may also give direction to educationally relevant research. Two important assumptions resulting from Atkinson's theory of achievement motivation that should be emphasized because they relate to the purpose of this study are: (l) achievement situations are situations which require skill and competence; and (2) achievement situations create a motive to approach success or a motive to avoid failure. 3Maehr and Sjogren, "Atkinson's Theory of Achieve- ment Motivation," p. 143. 21 Achievement-Oriented and FaiIure-Threatened. SEbjedts The major hypothesis that resulted from Atkinson's theory of motivation was that in achievement situations achievement-oriented subjects responded differently from failure-threatened subjects to tasks of varying difficulty. Subjects whose tendency to approach success was greater than the tendency to avoid failure (achievement-oriented subjects) exhibited lowest motivation when the probability of success was P8 = 0.00 or 1.00 because the task was easy or very difficult. However, motivation was highest when P8 = 0.50 because the task was of moderate difficulty. The Opposite existed for the failure-threatened subjects. Such persons exhibited highest motivation when the task was easy or very difficult. Motivation was lowest when the task was of moderate difficulty.4 Research designed to test the hypothesis stated above has all involved older subjects; in fact most of the studies used college students. The results of a study by Karabenick and Youssef (1974) somewhat supported the hypothesis of Atkinson's theory of achievement motivation. In order to measure the motive to achieve success (M8) the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) was administered to male students in a psychology class. Also, the Test Anxiety 4John W. Atkinson, An Introduction_to Motivation (Princeton: Van Nostrand, 1964). 22 Questionnaire TAQ was administered to measure the motive to avoid failure. Based on the results from the two tests, the subjects were assigned to one of four groups: (1) the motive to achieve was greater than the avoidance motive group (MS > M ); (2) the motive to avoid failure was AF greater than the motive to achieve success group (M > MS); AF (3) the students who scored high on both the TAT and TAQ; and (4) the students who scored low on both the TAT and the TAQ. The paired-associate learning task involved words that were color-coded to indicate their level of difficulty (easy, moderately difficult, and difficult). The subjects had from ten to thirty trials to learn the list of words that they selected. The subjects designated as M > M , S performed better than the subjects designated as MAF > M8 at tasks of intermediate difficulty. The performance of the two groups were not significantly different from each on the tasks that were either easy or difficult. However, the subjects designated as MAP > MS performed better than their counterparts on easy or difficult tasks than at those designated as being of intermediate difficulty. The MAF > MS showed a relative aversion for items of moderate difficulty, although not to the degree found in previous studies.5 This trend may not have been evident in previous 5Stuart A. Karabenick and Zakour I. Youssef, “Per- formance as a Function of Achievement Motive Level and Perceived Difficulty," in Motivation and Achievement, ed. J. W. Atkinson and Joel 0. Raynor TWaShington: Winston, 1974), pp. 83-90. 23 studies (Atkinson, 1958c, Atkinson and Litwin, 1960) because college pOpulations have changed through the years.6'7 The results of a study by Moulton (1965) were similar to the Karabenick and Youssef study. Male junior and senior high students were administered a g Achievement test and a Test Anxiety Questionnaire in order to divide them into MS > MAP and MAP > MS groups. The Similarities subtest of the WISC was also administered. Students were asked to select from folders of varying difficulty (easy, moderately difficult, and hard). In these folders was an activity which required that letters be unscrambled in order to make words. The subjects were asked to select a folder of whatever difficulty desired, but first they had to do a task of moderate difficulty, and were then given feedback on their performance. Following this, each sub- ject was allowed to select a folder of his/her choosing. Findings indicated that the avoidance-oriented group chose either easy or a difficult task with greater frequency than the approach-oriented group, although in previous 6J. W. Atkinson, "Toward Experimental Analysis of Human Motivation In Terms of Motives, Expectancies, Incen- tives," in Motives in Fantasy, Action, and Sociepy, ed. J. W. Atkinson (Princeton: van Nostrand; l9SBCT} 7J. W. Atkinson and G. H. Litwin, "Achievement Motive and Test Anxiety Conceived as Motive to Approach Success and Motive to Avoid Failure," Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology (l960):52-63. 24 studies, the subjects in the avoidance group chose easy tasks as often as they chose the difficult ones.8 A study using a population of lower socioeconomic Blacks had results similar to the other studies that tested Atkinson's hypothesis. These results were surprising since lower socioeconomic Blacks were not expected to respond in the same way as the middle-class and white subjects. First, the achievement motivation and a children's form of the measure of powerlessness (Bialer, 1961) was adminis- tered to fifth, sixth, and seventh grade students. The experiment involved the use of spelling and mathematics tasks divided into six levels of difficulty. The subjects were tested on their performance on these skills. Then the subjects had a choice of materials from six levels of difficulty from which to work. The subjects predicted what they thought their performance would be and then were awarded points on the basis of the number of items that were performed correctly. The results indicated that both boys and girls high in g achievement were more inclined to select a moderately difficult task, while those low in‘p achievement were more inclined to select an easy or very difficult task. These findings held true for both spelling and mathematics. According to de Charms: 8Robert W. Moulton, "Effects of Success and Failure on Level of Aspiration as Related to Achievement Motives,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1 (1965): We". 25 It is also possible that the effect of achievement motivation may be more clearly evident in the culturally disadvantaged environment that the high competitive middle class culture where the range of n achievement scores may be skewed toward high 2 achievement.9 The studies reported in this study and numerous others support Atkinson's theory in that there was a differ- ential orientation toward moderate success levels on the part of failure-threatened and achievement-oriented sub- jects. These same results existed regardless of whether the subjects were boys or girls, or from lower socio- economic or middle—class environments. Low and High Achievement Need subjects Who Attribute TEeir success or Failure to Four Causal‘Elements Atkinson's theory of achievement motivation con- cerns itself only with the personality of the subject and the characteristics of the particular achievement task. However, the attributional theory adds another dimension to Atkinson's theory by deve10ping a theory that concerns itself with the subject's perception of the causes of his/her success or failure. Whereas Atkinson's approach places great emphasis on effective reactions as mediators of achievement- related behavior more recent theorizing suggests that cognitive variables may have even more 9R. de Charms and V. Carpenter, “Measuring Motiva- tion in Culturally Disadvantaged School Children,” in Research and Development Toward the Improvemegt of Educa- tion, ed. H. J.*R1ausmeir and T. T. O'Hearn (Madison, WIEEonsin: Dembar Educational Services, 1969), p. 39. 26 potential for explaining apparent motivation dif- ferences with regard to achievement behavior.1 According to Weiner et a1., individuals allocate their successes and failures to four causal elements: ability, effort; task difficulty, and luck. These elements are classified in terms of locus of control and/or sta- bility. Ability and effort are causes within the person (internal locus), while task difficulty and luck are outside of the person (external locus). Ability and task difficulty are relatively unchangeable as a person reattempts the same task again and again and are thus considered highly stable; whereas, effort and luck are highly vari- able and are thus considered less stable. These dimensions of locus of control and stability have been found to be important in understanding respectively the affective reactions to the success or failure and the changes in perceived probability of success for future outcomes (weiner, Heckhausen, Meyer, and Cook, 1972). For example, in a success situation, people feel maximum pride when they can attribute their high performance to either their ability or effort. Attributions to good luck or the task's being easy produce considerably lessened pride. Furthermore, when one perceives high success as caused by good luck, the resulting expectancy is that failure will occur in the future since luck is an unstable factor which is believed to fluctuate over time. Similar implications are found fdr attributions about the causes of failure. Failure attributed to lack of ability result in shame as well as decreased trying since one assumes that his ability will not increase greatly and therefore that future per- formance will show little improvement. Lack of effort attribution, although causing shame, also result in increased rather than lessened trying since the implication is that performance would have been better if more effort had been 10Bar-tal et a1., "Attributional Analysis of Achievement Motivation,” p. l. 27 exerted. Attributions to a very difficult task or bad luck as being the cause of the failure result in little shame since no personal responsibility is taken for failure. Just as Atkinson's theory of motivation and data related to it supported the hypothesis that achievement- oriented subjects responded differently from failure- threatened subjects to tasks of varying difficulty, empiri- cal studies in the area of attributional theory have indicated that contrasting achievement motive groups ascribe their failure or success to different causal elements. Individuals high in achievement needs relative to those low in achievement motivation attribute success to their ability and effort, and their failures to lack of effort or external factors. Individuals low in achievement needs ascribe their failures more to lack of ability, success to external factors, and in general perceive themselves as low in ability.12 A study by Weiner and Kukla (1970) supported the hypothesis of the attributional theory. Their study involved students from grades three through six and from high school. The subjects, both male and female (none of the high school students were female), were from a middle- class environment. The elementary students were adminis- tered the Elementary Intellectual Achievement Responsibility (IAR) and the Children's Achievement Scale. 11Bar-tal et a1., "Attributional Analysis of Achievement Motivation,” p. 2. 121bid., p. 3. 28 The TAT, TAO, IAR, and the Mehrabian Achievement Risk Preference Scale (MARPS) were administered to the high school students. This study concluded that individuals classified as high in resultant achievement motivation tend to attribute success in achievement-oriented situations to themselves more than individuals low in resultant achieve- ment motivation. The mean differences in all of the seven independent male and female comparisons were in the pre- dicted direction, although the findings were most convin- cing for males past the fourth grade. The relative weakness of the finding was among the female subjects, which was not entirely unexpected since similar studies did not have conclusive findings for females.13 Another study by Weiner and Kukla involved only males from an introductory psychology class. These sub- jects, in order to be assigned to a low achievement- oriented group or a high one, were administered a modified version of a self-report developed by Mehrabian (1969). The students had to guess whether a 0 or 1 would be present each time a number was selected from a list of fifty numbers. Each subject was asked whether performance on this task could be attributed to skill, effort, or chance. Then the subjects were assigned to a success, failure, or an intermediate group based on their performance. The conclusion of this study was that individuals high in 13Weiner and Kukla, "Attributional Analysis of Achievement Motivation,” pp. 1-20. 29 achievement motivation are more internal with respect to success. They also perceive that they have more ability and expend more effort, than the subjects low in achieve- ment motivation. The data indicate that: . . . high achievement group perceives the task outcome as primarily determined by skill, and hence is likely to believe that success in this situation is internally controlled. The nega‘ tive recency effect displayed by subjects in the L group reveals that they perceived success to be strongly influenced by good luck, or externally controlled. 4 Kukla (1972)_investigated the relationship between achievement level and attribution of success and failure. The subjects, undergraduate male psychology students, were engaged in a digit-guessing task. Prior to engaging in the task, the subjects were given the Revised and Condensed Achievement Scale for Males (Mehrabian). After the task was completed each subject filled out a questionnaire con- cerning his performance. Results indicated that high achievers attributed their outcome to a combination of ability and effort; intermediate achievers considered . ability and luck to be determinants of their outcome; and low achievers attributed success or failure to ability. An important concern is that attribution may influence academic performance: . . . if attribution determines behavior, then a change in attribution will result in a corres- ponding change in behavior. Thus, if a high 14Ibid., p. 15. 30 achiever acts the way he does because of the manner in which he typically attributes causality, then any operation which increases the likelihood of such an attribution will also increase the likelihood of the behavior known to be characteristic of high achievers. More specifically, it would be expected that any set of conditions which favor the attribu- tion of outcome to effort will result in high- achiever-like behavior; conversely, conditions which discourage the perception that effort determines outcome will lead instead to low-achieverlike behavior.15 Therefore Kukla conducted another experiment to test the above hypotheSis. The subjects were administered the Revised and Condensed Achievement Scale for Males (Mehrabian) and then divided into two groups. Group A was told that to unscramble twenty anagrams was a measure of ability. Group B was told that the task was a measure of effort more than ability. Only the high-achievers were influenced by the ability-effort treatment. Kukla con- cluded that his strategy was unable to change the negative effect associated with failure.16 The experimenter was unable to locate any research that investigated whether Blacks and/or lower-class students attributed their successes and failures to the same causal elements as white or middle-class students. Lefcourt (1966) and Rotter (1966) stated that Blacks have lower internality than Whites. A study by 15Andy Kukla, "Attributional Determinants of Achievement Related Behavior," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 21 (1972):169. léIbid. 31 Bartel (1971) investigated the locus of control and achieve- ment for middle- and lower-class students from grades one, two, four, and six. It was not indicated whether the sample included any Black students. The conclusions were that ”lower- and middle-class children enter school not measurably different from one another in locus of control, but by the time they reach the sixth grade, they are significantly different from one another on this charac- teristic."17 Middle-class children become significantly more internally controlled from grades one to six, while lower-class children remain at relatively the same level of external control from grades one to six. From these results, one might conclude that Black and/or lower-class children as a whole would assume the characteristics of the low Q achievement students and attribute their success to chance and their failure to ability. The first section of this chapter dealt with: (l) achievement-oriented and failure-threatened subjects and how they responded to tasks of varying difficulty and (2) low achievement need and high achievement need subjects who attribute their failure or success to four causal elements. The second section will review and discuss theories and research that deal with the control and 17Nettie Bartel, "Locus of Control and Achievement in Middle- and Lower-Class Children,” Child Develgpment 42 (October 1971):1099-1107. 32 manipulation Of the learner and the learning environment in order to increase academic achievement. Techniques and Strategies that Control and Manipfilate tfie Learner and the Environment of:Ehe‘Learner When discussing the issue of how to improve academic performance, educators frequently refer to stu- dents in terms Of whether they are intrinsically Or extrinsically motivated. Intrinsic motivation has been defined as an integral, autonomous energy source inherent in the organism. Extrinsic motivation has been viewed as_ an external energy source, or stimuli in the environment influencing the organism to behave in a certain manner.18 Some persons in the field Of psychology disagree with educators about the theory of two types Of motivation. For Avila and Purkey (1966): There is only one kind of motivation, and that is the personal, internal motivation that each and every human being has at all times9 in all places, and when engaged in any act1v1ty. Many educators classify those students who are not intrin- sically motivated as being unmotivated. Combs disagrees with this premise (1962): 18Donald L. Avila and William Watson Purkey, "Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation--A Regrettable Distinc- tion," Psychology in the Schools 3 (1966):206. 191bid. 33 . . . people are always motivated; in fact they are never unmotivated. They may not be motivated to do what we would prefer they do, but it can never be truly said that they are unmotivated.20 Comments of a classroom teacher indicated that the teacher realized that an ”unmotivated” student was moti- vated: Galt is motivated from within. He's all over the classroom making things at the workbench, building with blocks, playing with puppets. But Galt doesn't know his letters or his numbers, and he doesn't care to learn them. I find it difficult to motivate him to learn these important first grade skills. Yet he's a totally motivated kid. I watch this child making fantastic creations at the workbench, and I wonder what to do. Combs feels that people are motivated because of a need: . . . an insatiable need for the maintenance and enhancement of the self; not the physical self-- but the phenomenal self, of ghich the individual is aware, his self concept.2 Avila and Purkey agreed with Combs but added another dimension to his philosophy: For the teacher, this is a given, a basic drive toward self-fulfillment. It may be inherent, or learned, but in either case, it is present by the time the child enters school; it is a built in advantage, a force that comes from within the 20A. W. Combs, Perceiving, Behaving, Becomin , Yearbook Of the AssociatiOh for Supervision and—Curriculum Development, 1962, p. 85. 21Walter Drew, Anita R. Olds, and Henry F. Olds, Jr., Motivating Today's Students (Palo Alto, California: Learning HandboOk, 1974), p. 43. 22A. W. Combs, "Some Basic Concepts in Perceptual Psychology," paper read at American Personnel and Guidance Association Convention, Minneapolis, April 1965. 34 individual that, by school age cannot be appreciably altered. No human being can ever motivate another, no matter what the situation or how strong the desire. . . . The teacher is the external force, and a strong force, yet not as a motivator, but as a manipulator Of his charges. He does not motivate, but he controls an environment in which he manipu- lates himself and other classroom variables in such a way that what he is trying to teach appears to be self-enhancing to his students. He casts the situation and himself in such way that the informa- tion and knowledge he is presenting is personally meaningful and enhancing to the student. Atkinson's theory Of achievement motivation and the theory Of attribution both pointed out the importance Of con- trolling and manipulating "the learner and the learning situation so that the learner will perceive both the materials being taught and the learning situation as being self-enhancing.'24 In order to improve learning in the classroom, it is felt that some manipulation.must be done. Although educators are concerned with individual differences in response to environmental events, the exigencies Of education make it incumbent that they be more concerned with how environmental variables have a greater or lesser effect on all students regardless of individual differences. It is difficult, if not impossible at present, to create a specialized environment for each student. A theory of academic motivation must tell the educator how to manipulate environments in order to obtain the greatest over-all effects. Thus the question of concern to the educator is how do I manipulate the school environment so that I can 23Avila and Purkey, "Intrinsic and Extrinsic 24Ibid., p. 208. 35 maximize motivation in all students regardless of personality differences?25 Self-Concept and Motivation The significance of the influence of self-concept on academic achievement warrants the inclusion Of a review of the literature on the self-concept of the learner. In predicting academic achievement, many factors may be considered in determining an individual's potential or capacity for learning. Among such factors are IQ scores; performance on kindergarten readiness tests; socioeconomic background; racial background; social and physical maturity; language development; self-concept; and numerous others. However, research studies indicate that there is a correlational relationship between self-concept and academic achievement and that this relationship is significant in predicting a student's academic performance. There is some indication that self-concept may be equal to or superior to IQ scores in predicting a student's success or failure in school. Lamy (1965) found that per- ceptions of kindergarteners about themselves and their world Obtained from inferences made by trained Observers, gave as good a prediction of later reading achievement as intelligence test scores. In concluding her study, Lamy suggested that the perceptions of a child about the world 25Maehr and Sjogren, ”Atkinson's Theory of Achievement Motivation,” p. 154. 36 were not only related to, but may in fact be causal factors in subsequent reading achievement.26 In another study, Wattenburg and Clifford (1964) obtained measures of the kindergarten children's self- concept based on self-referent statements Obtained as the children drew pictures of their families and as they responded to incomplete sentences. From the self- references, two aspects of self-concept were noted: (1) feelings of competence; and (2) feelings of goodness. Two-and-a-half years later, reading achievement was measured and self-concept measures repeated. The results indicated that the self-concept phenomenon was antecedent to and predictive of reading achievement.27 Numerous studies (Campbell, 1967; Bledsoe, 1967; Irwin, 1967; Gill, 1969) support the fact that academic achievement is influenced by self-concept. One of the ideas communicated to students in a study by Brookover et a1. (1965) was that the limits of ability, though affected by innate and other factors, are rarely attained in one's performance. In addition, the students were told 26M. W. Lamy, "Relationship of Self-perception of Early Primary Children to Achievement in Reading," in Human Development: Readings in Research, ed. I. J. Gordon TCEicagO: Scott Foresman,il965). 27William W. Wattenburg and Clare Clifford, ”Relation of Self-Concepts to Beginning Achievement in Reading,” Child Developgent 35 (June l964):461-67. 37 that too Often one speaks Of "ability” as if it were a fixed, unchangeable attribute which determines one's per- formance in school. Besides these wide limits Of potential, there are several other important factors which influence one's performance. Such factors as how one feels about a subject, interest in it, or whether one defines a subject as an appr0priate area for goal achievement, are not con- stant factors, but rather they are related to one's social milieu and self-perceptions.28 A brief discussion of the development of self? concept would clarify why self-concept has such a signifi- cant influence on achievement in school. The development of the learner's self-concept is predicated on the indi- vidual's experiences. Interaction with the environment and "significant others,” be it positive or negative, influences how the child is to feel about himself. As far as we can tell, the newborn baby is unaware of his existence as a unique and separate entity. But as the days pass he experiences con- tinuous changes in his internal and external environments. Through layer after layer of direct experience with smells, sights, sounds, tastes, feelings, and pressures, he begins to organize a coherent mental organization of his world and adapt to the external environment. It is this cauldron Of experiences, this process 28Wilbur B. Brookover; Jean M. LePere; Don E. Hamachek; Shailer Thomas; Edsel L. Erickson, Self-concept of Ability and School Achievement, II, Report of COopera- tive Research Project NO. 1636, U.S. of Education, entitled ”Improving Academic Achievement through Self-Concept Enhancement,“ College of Education, Michigan State University, October 1965. 38 Of mental organization and adaption, which forges the self.29 George Mead in Mind, Self, and Society, views the concept Of self from a social perspective. His theory is that the ”functional limits” of one's ability to learn are determined by his self-conception Of his ability as acquired in interacting with “significant others.'30 Snygg and Combs also pointed out the importance Of the role Of "significant others" in forming perceptions of self. As the child grows and explores himself, he dis- covers he is male or female, tall or short, fat or thin, blond or brunette. Some of these percep- tions he arrives at through his own explorations of self. Other concepts, particularly those which have to do with values, he acquires from his interactions with people about him. He dis- covers not only what he is, but also what he is not and attaches values to these discriminations. He perceives himself as "good" or "had,” adequate or inadequate, handsome or ugly, acceptable or unacceptable, depending upon the ways he is treated by those who surround him in the growing- up years. He learns about himself not just from his own explorations, but through the mirror of himself represented by the actions of those about him. The self is essentially a social product arising out of experience with people. Although some of the individual's experience of self may be achieved in isolation from other people, by far the greater portion arises out of his relationships with others. Human personality is primarily a product of social interaction. We learn the most significant and fundamental facts 29William W. Purkey, Self-Concspt and School Achievement (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1970), p. 29. 30George H. Mead, Mind, Self and Society (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,*l934). 39 about ourselves from what Sullivan called “reflected appraisals," inferences about ourselves made as a consequence Of the ways we perceive others behaving toward us. We learn who we are and what we are from the way we are treated by those who surround us; in our earliest years by our families, and in later years by all those peOple with whom we come in con- tact.31 Anderson (1952) defines significant others as "those persons who are important or who have significance to the child by reason of his sensing their ability to allay insecurity or to intensify it--to increase or decrease his sense of helplessness, to promote or to diminish his sense Of well-being."32 Parents, teachers, and peers are the significant others identified in research. Parents and Self-Concept. Parents play an impor- tant role in shaping their child's perception of self. Manis (1958) reported from his research that a child's level of self-regard is closely associated with the parents' attitudes about their children and have a tremen- dous influence on the scholastic performance of their off- . 33 spring. 31D. Snygg and A. W. Combs, Individual Behavior (New York: Harper and Row, 1949), pp. 126-27. 32Camilla M. Anderson, "The Self-Image: A Theory of the Dynamics of Behavior," in The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learnin , ed. Don E. Hamachek (Englewood Cliffs, New Jérsey,il96 ), p. 6. ' 33M. Manis, "Personal Adjustment, Assumed Similar- ity to Parents, and Inferred Parental Evaluation Of the Self,” Journal of Consulting Psychology 22:481-85. 40 A study by Brookover et a1. (1965) examined three treatments designed to enhance the self-concept and thus to increase the scholastic achievement levels Of forty-nine junior high students. The strategy was to enhance the self-evaluations and expectations of the students by: (1) enhancing the academic expectation and evaluations parents hold Of their children's ability; (2) introducing an ”expert“ who communicated directly to students enhancing information about their academic ability; and (3) creating a new significant other in the form of a counselor whose high academic expectations and evaluations might be internalized by the students.34 Only the first treatment, which involved modifying parents' perceptions of their children, resulted in changing the self-concept of low achieving students and thereby increasing their academic achievement. The results of this study contradicted literature which stated that the adolescent was influenced more by his peer group than by his parents (Coleman, 1961). Thus, it is important to note that parents play a vital part in forming self-perceptions, which can result in the academic success or failure of their children. Teachers and Self-Concept. The teacher's attitude also plays a significant role in modifying the student's self-concept and his academic achievement. ”In other 34Brookover et a1., Self-Concept of Ability and School Achievement, p. 7. 41 words, when the teacher believes that his students can achieve, the students appear to be more successful; when the teacher believes that the students cannot achieve, then it influences their (the students) performance nega- tively."35 Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) found that teachers' favorable expectations influenced their pupils' achievement gains. In their study, Flanagan's Test Of General Ability (1960) was administered to the students. The experimental group consisted of students arbitrarily and randomly selected as academic "spurters." Each teacher was given a list of the students in the class that were designated as having the t0p 20 percent scores on the IQ test. After one year the experimental group gained over twelve IQ points. To summarize our (Rosenthal and Jacobson) specula- tions, we may say that not by what she (teacher) said, by how and when she said it, but her facial expressions, posture, and perhaps by her touch, the teacher may have communicated to the children of the experimental group that she expected improved intellectual performances. Such communi- cations together with possible changes in teaching techniques may have helped the child learn by changing his self-concept, his expectations of his own behavior, and his motivation, as well as his cognitive style and skills.36 Other research evidence supported the relationship between teacher attitude and student academic success. 35Purkey, Self-Concept and School Achievement, p. 47. 36R. Rosenthal and L. Jacobson, Pygmalion in the Classroom: Teacher Expectations and Pupils' Intellectual Development (New YOfk: Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968), p. 180. 42 Davidson and Lang (1960) found a positive correlation between the student's perception of the teacher's feelings toward him and his perceptions about himself. Also, the more positive the children's perceptions, of their teacher's feelings, the better their academic success; and the more desirable classroom behavior, as rated by the 37 teacher. Gill (1969) posits that teacher attitudes toward students are equally important in shaping the self- concept Of their students.38 Some researchers pointed out the importance of the teacher being considered as significant by the child in order for interaction to take place between the teacher's expectations and the student's performance in school. According to Johnson (1970), . . . the teacher's expectation toward the child as a learner will not always effect the self- attitudes of the child . . . one must take into account the exact conditions under which relation- ships will hold. Under some conditions a teacher's expectations of student's ability will have a significant influence upon the student's self-attitudes regarding his ability. But this situation will probably hold only when either the child has a need for social approval from 37H. H. Davidson and G. Lang, "Children's Percep- tions of Their Teacher's Feeling Toward Them Related to Self-Perception, School Achievement and Behavior," Journal of Experimental Education 29:107-18. 38M. R. Gill, "Pattern of Achievement as Related to the Perceived Self,” paper read at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Convention, Los Angeles,_February 1969. 43 adults or when the teacher has a warm, trusting relationship with the child. In addition, there is some evidence that it is only when the teacher really believes that the child is capable of achievement that his expgctations affect the child s self-attitudes. Moustakas (1966) states that a teacher must earn the right to be considered as a ”significant other.” He declared that every teacher wants to meet the student on a significant level, every teacher wants to feel that what he does makes a difference. Yet in order to influence students it is necessary to become a significant other in their lives. We are seldom changed by peOple whom we see as insignificant or unimportant. The way the teacher becomes significant seems to rest on two forces: (1) what he believes, and (2) what he does.40 Teacher attitude seems to have the greater influ- ence on younger children and exerts the most influence on children from low socioeconomic status (SES). Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) found that children in the first and second grades made the most dramatic gains of all the grades through sixth.4l Kerckhoff (1972) concluded that the teacher's influence upon the children from the lowest 39David Johnson, The Social Psychology_of Educa- tion (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1970), pp. 95-96, 990 4oC. Moustakas, The Authentic Teacher: Sensitivity and Awareness in the Classroom‘TCambridge, Massachusetts: HowardiA. Doyle’PublisHing CO}, 1966). 41Rosenthal and Jacobson, Pygmalion in the Class- room. 44 . SES was potentially greater than the influence Of the teacher upon children within the middle class.42 The research reviewed reveals that teacher expectations or attitudes affect the self-concept Of students which in turn influence academic achievement. Although the researcher was aware of the body Of research that deals with the influence of peers on academic achievement, especially for adolescents (Coleman, 1961), it was not discussed in this study because it was not signifi- cant tO the purpose of this study.43 Race, Sex, and Achievement as Related to Self- Concept. The interaction effect among race, sex, achieve- ment level with self-concept will be discussed because these three factors were experimental variables considered in this study. Much controversy has surrounded the self-concept of Black children. Before the results of the Soares and Soares study (1969) was published, it was unanimously con- cluded that Blacks had a significantly lower self-concept than Whites. This assumption was based on: (1) studies where the Black child showed a preference for light-skinned 42Alan C. Kerckhoff, Socialization and Social Class (New Jersey: Prentice-H511, Inc., 1972). 43James S. Coleman et a1., E uality of Educational 0 ortunit (Washington, D.C.: U.S. vernment Printing 0 ice, . . Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1966). 45 4 dolls (Clark and Clark, 1946);4 (2) the fact that the academic achievement of Black children was significantly lower than that Of White children (Coleman et a1., 1966);45 and (3) the fact that Blacks as a whole have been relegated to an inferior position in society (Deutsch, 1960).46 The Soares and Soares (1969) study compared the self-perceptions of advantaged and disadvantaged students in grades four through eight. Two-thirds Of the disadvan- taged youths were Black and Puerto Ricans. The results of this study indicated that the disadvantaged students had higher self-perceptions than the advantaged students. The reason given for the unexpected results was that the disadvantaged students were attending a neighborhood school.47 Coleman (1966) reported that the self-concepts Of the Black students diminished when they attended an integrated school system. Another reason that could 44D. Clark and Mamie Clark, "Racial Identification Preference in Negro Children," in Readings in School Psychology, eds. T. M. Newcomb and E. L.’Hartley (New York: 0 t, Rinehart, and Winston, 1946). 45Coleman et a1., Eqpalipy of Educational Oppor- tunity, 1966. 46Martin Deutsch, Minority Group and Class Status as Related to Social and Personality Factors in SchOlastic Achievement, Monograph No. 2} Society fOr AppliediAnthro- pOIOgy,il960. 47A. T. Soares and L. M. Soares, "Self-Perceptions Of Culturally Disadvantaged Children," American Educational ResearchyJournal 6 (1964). 46 account for the results was that advantaged students are more likely to be pressured for better achievement by significant others. Research by Kerensky, 1967;48 De Blassie and Healy, 1970;49 McCarty and Yancy, 1971;50 Baughman, 1971;51 and others also confirmed that minorities or the disadvantaged do not necessarily have lower self- concepts. Another interesting result in the Soares and Soares study was that no significant differences existed between the sexes but significant differences did exist for the interaction between the sexes and their socioeconomic level.. Advantaged girls had higher self-perceptions than advantaged boys. The converse existed for the disadvan- taged students. 'The disadvantaged boys had higher self- perceptions than their counterparts. The interaction 48V. M. Kerensky, "Reported Self-Concepts in Rela— tion to Academic Achievement in an Inner-City Setting," Dissertation Abstracts 27, 2325. 49R. R. De Blassie and G. W. Healy, Self-Concspt: A ComparisonJ of Spanish-American, Negro, and AnglO AdOIes- cents Across Ethnic, Sex and—Socio-Economic Variables, ERIC Document ED 037 287, University Par, New Mexico, New Mexico State University, March 1970. 50John McCarthy and William Yancey, "Uncle Tom and Mr. Charlie: Metaphysical Pathos in the Study of Racism and Personal Disorganization," American Journal of Sociology 76 (January 1971): 648- -72. 51Earl Baughman, Black Americans: A Psychological Analysis (New York: Academic Press, l97l). 47 effect between sex and socioeconomic status appeared to result from societal influences. The conclusion that girls have a greater self- esteem than boys was supported in a study by Bledsoe.52 Also, findings from Baum et a1. indicated that both high and low achieving girls have a higher self-concept than high and low achieving boys.53 Studies by Farls (1967)54 and Davidson and Green- berg (1967)55 concluded that there was a positive relation- ship between self-concept and achievement. Farls' experimental pOpulation was middle school students in which the self-concept Of high achieving students was found to be significantly higher than the self-concept of low achieving students. Davidson's and Greenberg's sample of lower-class children rated themselves according to personal competence, 52J. Bledsoe, "Self-Concept of Children and Their Intelligence, Achievement, Interests, and Anxiety," Child- hood Education 43 (l967):436-38. 53M. Baum et al. "Unified Effort of a Junior High School Faculty (NDEA Pilot Guidance Program) to Encourage Success for Seventh-Graders," Reporting Research, 1968. 54R. J. Farls, ”High and Low Achievement of Intellectually Average Intermediate Grade Students Related to the Self-Concept and Social Approval," Dissertation Abstracts 28 (1967):1205. 55H. H. Davidson and J. W. Greenberg, School Achievers from a Deprived Background, USOE ProjecE N . 2895, Contract NO. OE-5-10-132 (New York: The City College of the City University of New York, 1960). 48 academic competence, and social competence. Farquhar (1968) studied over- and underachievers in the eleventh grade. Students who were academically successful tended to have higher self-concepts.56 Research related to sex and achievement was conclusive in its findings, but more research is needed in the area of Blacks and/or lower socioeconomic children because even though their self- concepts are not necessarily low, their academic achievement is much lower than their middle—class counterparts. The research results related to self-concept reviewed in this study have been conclusive in confirming the relationship between self-concept and academic achieve- ment. The learner with a positive self-concept will usually achieve well in school while the one with a negative self-concept performs poorly on academic tasks. These findings emphasize the need for modifying a negative self-concept in order to improve the academic achievement of the learner. The personality types (need-achievement) discussed in Atkinson's theory of achievement motivation and the attributional theory were products of their self- concepts. Therefore, it is crucial that techniques and strategies for increasing achievement motivation are based on the principle of enhancing self-concept. It appears 56W. W. Farquhar, "A Comprehensive Study Of the Motivational Factors Underlying Achievement of Eleventh- Grade High School Students," U.S. Office of Education, Cooperative Research Reports NO. 846 (East Lansing: Office Of Research and Publications, MSU). 49 that the two most significant conditions that must exist, in order to influence a change in self-concept, are: (l) the learner's perception of learning; and (2) the learner's interaction with significant others. If the child sees the educative process as meaning- ful and self-enhancing, and if the degree of threat provided by the school experience is not over- powering, then he is likely to grow in self-esteem and in academic achievement. Very few students want to be failures at learning, just as few teachers want to be failures at teaching.57 Verbal Reinforcement Techniques and strategies to improve academic achievement include such things as tangible rewards, social approval, grades, instructional aids, to positive verbal reinforcement. From their research, Zigler and Kanzer (1962) had conjectured the, .'. . existence of a developmental sequence in the relative potency Of different reinforcers. With young children, tangible rewards are postulated to be most effective; with Older youths, sOcial rewards (expressions of affection or praise by an adult) and self-reinforcement (through internali- zing achievement values and acquiring a capacity to adjust one's behavior to factual feedback on performance) become successively, effective methods for motivating academic achievement. Since the purpose of this study was to test the effectiveness of a specific type of verbal cuing, the 57Purkey, Self-Concept and School Achievement, p. 12. 58Seymour Spilerman, "Raising Academic Motivation in Lower Class Adolescents: A Convergence of Two Research Traditions," Sociology Of Education 46 (l97l):103-18. 50 review Of the literature was limited to verbal reinforce- ment. Two types Of verbal reinforcements were measured in a study by Zigler and Kanzer (1962). The verbal reinforce- ment involved saying ”right" when the student made a correct response or saying "good" or "fine” when the student made a correct response. The subjects were both lower- and middle-class second graders.' Each subject was engaged in a game of Marble in the Hole. There was a choice of two holes in which to drOp a marble. The sub- jects were reinforced for dropping a marble in a specific hole. Praise proved to be a more effective reinforcer for lower-class children, while correctness feedback was more ~effective for middle-class students.59 A replication of Zigler's and Kanzer's study was done by Rosenhan and Greenwald (1965). Their study included both White and Black lower-class students and only White middle-class students. Their findings did not support the findings of the Zigler and Kanzer study. There was no interaction between praise versus correctness reinforcement and socioeconomic status. However, there was an interaction between sex and SES. Middle-class girls and lower-class boys were more responsive to both kinds of 59Edward Zigler and Paul Kanzer, "The Effectivness of Two Classes of Verbal Reinforcers on the Performance of Middle- and Lower-class Children," Journal of Personality 30:157-65. 51 verbal reinforcers than were middle-class boys and lower- class girls.60 A study by Van De Riet (1964) compared the effectiveness of praise and reproof on educationally retarded children. One hypothesis of the Van De Riet study was that educationally retarded children have a "need to fail," therefore they view praise as threat. The subjects, fourth, fifth, and sixth grade boys, had to associate a (CVC) trigram with a color. After the criterion level was reached on the first task, the subjects in the praise group were told: Boy! You really did well. You know, you learned them faster than nearly any of the other kids that took this test. I'll bet you are one of the best students in your class. Now just to be sure, let's try another list like this first one to see if you can do as well on it. Here are the new names for these colors. The reproof group was told: . . . you know, you took a lot longer to learn those names than I expected, and I'm kind of disappointed. DO you think . . . maybe if we try another list you could do better on it? I tell you wait we'll forget these scores and try a new list. 60D. L. Rosenhan and Jean A. Greenwald, "The Effects of Age, Sex, and Socioeconomic Class on Responsive- ness to Two Classes of Verbal Reinforcement," Journal of Personality 31 (1965):108-21. 61Hani Van De Riet, "Effects of Praise and Reproof on Paired-Associate Learning in Educationally Retarded Children," in Remedial Teaching: Research and Comment, eds. Wayne Otto and RarI Roenke (BOston: HOughton Mifflin COO, 1969)! p. 1280 ' 52 Reproof resulted in slower learning than did saying nothing (control) or praising the subject. A study by Cradler and Goodwin (1971) compared the effectiveness of material reward (M & M candy) versus praise (good) versus symbolic reinforcement (tallies on a sheet of paper). The sample included second and sixth grade students from lower- and middle-class environments. The subjects had to form sentences from four personal pronouns and one hundred verbs. The lower class second graders were significantly more responsive to material than to social and sym- bolic reinforcement, but the difference between the effects of social and symbolic reinforcement was not significant. Contrary to expectations, the middle- class second grade subjects evidenced no signifi- cant differences in responsiveness to any of the three types of reinforcement. At the sixth grade level, lower-class subjects showed no significant differences in their responsiveness to the three types Of reinforcement. The middle-class sixth grade subjects showed no significant difference between the effectiveness of praise and symbolic reinforcement; yet, as expected praise and symbolic reinforcement each produced a significantly greater increase in response than did material reinforce- ment.62 The findings of a study by Anderson (1976) contra- dicted the study discussed above and others that indicated that material rewards are more effective for lower-class children of all ages than other forms Of reinforcement. In Anderson's study, the effectiveness of positive verbal 62John D. Cradler and Dwight L. Goodwin, "Condi- tioning of Verbal Behavior as a Function of Age, Social Class, and Type Of Reinforcement," Journal of Educational Psychology 62 (l97l):279-84. 53 reinforcement, a monetary reward, or a good player reward was measured and positive verbal reinforcement was the most effective technique for increasing intrinsic motivation. The effectiveness of the treatments was measured by how many pictures were drawn by four and five year old pre- schoolers from a lower socioeconomic environment.63 Research in the area of verbal reinforcement is sparse and the few studies in this area are contradictory. It is difficult to come to any definite conclusions about verbal reinforcement until far more investigation is done. The investigations should involve a variety of verbal reinforcements and a comparison of these verbal reinforce- ments to each other and with other types of techniques and/or strategies designed to increase achievement. The purpose of this study was to test the effective- ness of the "Psychological Attender." This achievement motivational strategy, for which there is no data avail- able, is a strategy that was develOped by Duffy and Sherman (1972). Duffy and Sherman feel that the role of the~ teacher is to control and direct the learning situation in order for the learner to learn the desired skill. To adequately direct the learner to the task to be learned, we must be certain that the learner 63Rosemarie Anderson; Manoogian Anderson; Sam Thomas; and J. Steven Reznick, "The Undermining and Enhancing of Intrinsic Motivation on Preschool Children," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 34 (1976): 915-22. 54 possesses an apprOpriate psychological set for learning the task . . .64 Sometimes the learner attends to the task because of interest; however, some tasks that should be learned are not interesting. Therefore, it is crucial for the teacher to command attention whether the task is interesting or not. There are techniques that achieve this condition but the concern today about poor test scores alludes to the fact that these techniques are not adequate. Techniques and strategies have failed to improve academic achievement because many students choose to ignore them. Usually . . . learners who have experienced a long history of failure and confusion in learning what adults want to teach . . . have found that teachers invariably put them in positions where they can't perform, where they can't find the answer or make the correct response. Therefore, in self defense, they refuse to play the teacher's games, which they always lose. Such a learner views himself as "dumb," because he is made to feel dumb every time he joins a learning activity, and as a defense mechanism, he will not be proven dumb again by a teacher whose instructional skills do not allow him to learn. For such learners, you must pay special attention to the psychological conditions of learning.65 64Gerald G. Duffy and George B. Sherman, Systematic Reading Instruction (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, I972), p. 20. 651bid., p. 21. 55 . . . the sensitive acknowledgment of the difficulty of the learning task, is an important aspect of efficient instruction; it assists in establishing an apprOpriate psychOlOgical set for the learner. A wise teacher recognizes that learning, whether it be pie baking or a reading skill, is seldom a one-shot deal, that failure will probably occur more Often than success, and that recognition of the difficulty of the task to be learned is essen- tial if the learner is not to feel personal failure.66 The ”Psychological Attender" Operates on an impor- tant premise. This premise is that the acknowledgement of the difficulty of the task by a "significant other" pro- tects and enhances the self-concept of the learner by removing the psychological threat that learning may have for some children. Summary The studies reviewed in this chapter which are most pertinent to the present investigation were concerned with the theory of achievement motivation and manipulating the learner and his environment in order to increase academic performance. Atkinson's theory of achievement motivation hypothesized that achievement-oriented subjects preferred tasks of intermediate difficulty while failure-threatened subjects preferred easy or very difficult tasks. The research studies (Karabenick and Youssef, 1974; Moulton, 1965; de Charms and Carpenter, 1969) that tested Atkinson's hypothesis did prove that achievement-oriented 661hid., pp. 21-22. 56 subjects preferred tasks of moderate difficulty. However, results were not conclusive in proving that failure- threatened subjects preferred easy or very hard tasks. The attributional theory concerned itself with the attribution Of success and failure. Bar—tal et a1. (1974) stated that individuals high in achievement need attribute success to internal factors and their failures to external factors. The individuals low in achievement need ascribe their failure to internal factors and their success to external factors. Studies by Weiner and Kukla (1970) and Kukla (1972) supported the attributional theory. Prior to discussing techniques and strategies, the self-concept of the learner was discussed. There proved to be a correlation between self-concept and academic performance (Lamy, 1965; Wattenburg and Clifford, 1964; Campbell, 1967). Manis (1958), Brookover et a1. (1965), Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968), and Moustakas (1966) established the importance of the role of the "significant other" in developing and modifying the self- concept of the child. The self-concept of girls and high achievers was higher than the self-concept of boys and low achievers. However, the self-concept of Black and lower socioeconomic children did not prove to be significantly lower than the self-concept of the White and middle-class students. The relationship between self-concept and academic achievement pointed out the importance of 57 selecting techniques and strategies that would enhance and protect the self-concept of children. Since this study was designed to test the effective- ness of a verbal reinforcement-type strategy, only literature concerned with this type of strategy was reviewed. Studies compared praise and correctness; praise and reproof; material reward versus praise versus symbolic reinforcement; and monetary reward versus a good player reward versus positive verbal reinforcement. Although research in this area was scarce, some conclusions were reached about verbal reinforcement. In spite of other studies to the contrary, Blacks and lower-socioeconomic children were found to be as responsive to verbal rein- forcement as White and middle-class children. In Chapter II a review of the literature pertinent to the present study was presented. The design of the study will be discussed in Chapter III. CHAPTER III THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This chapter will contain a presentation of the following: the design Of the study; the pOpulation and sample; the data collection procedures; the major research questions and hypotheses; and the treatment of the data. This study was designed to test the effect of cuing to the difficulty Of a (paired-associate) learning task on the performance Of first graders. Design of the Study In order to test the effect of cuing to the diffi- culty of a paired-associate learning task on the perfor- mance of first graders, three treatment groups and a control group were formed. All four groups were presented with the identical program sequence and verbal directions. The only variation between groups was the use of the Psychological Attender. Group 1 (PAH) was told prior to beginning the program sequence and prior to the third and sixth trials that the task was hard. Group 2 (PAE) was told prior to beginning the program sequence and prior to the third and sixth trials that the task was easy. After Group 3 (DPAH) had attempted the learning task (fourth 58 59 trial), they were told that it was hard. The control group (NPA) was given no psychological attender. The two hundred and five first grade subjects were rated as low, average, or high achievers by their classroom teachers. Following this, the subjects were randomly assigned to the four groups. Each subject's performance on the pre-tests and post-tests was recorded. Population and Sample The Community The community in which this research was conducted is Detroit, Michigan. With a population of approximately 1,350,0001 this community has all the problems of a large urban setting: (1) a high crime rate, (2) high rate of unemployment, (3) white flight to the suburbs, (4) cut- back Of city employees such as police and firemen, (5) a deficit city budget; and (6) slums. According to 1975 pOpulation estimates, this community is about 55 percent black. In 1973, this city elected its first black mayor, who was re-elected to Office in 1977. The median income in this urban center is $10,044 per year. Thirty-seven percent Of the population of this city is employed by manufacturers, such as the automobile 1"Population Estimates for Detroit," City of Detroit, Planning Department, Data Coordination Division, Report #406, September 15, 1976. 60 industry. White collar workers (professional, managerial, sales, and clerical) make up about 48 percent of the total population. Those involved in wholesale and retail trading compose 20 percent, government 12 percent, construction 4 percent, services (including educatiOnal) 13 percent, and craftsmen about 12 percent.2 In spite of much adverse publicity this community, through various projects, is striving to revitalize itself. The School District The public school system is made up Of eight rather autonomous units called regions. In November 1976, a mil- lage proposal was defeated for the second time that year. This resulted in the reduction of schools' services and the formation of a committee to investigate the possibility of revising the perhaps costly decentralized system. The Research Sample The research sample was drawn from the population of first grade students in one region of the school system described above. The two elementary schools used in this study, designated as schools A and B, are located in the same general area (approximately five miles apart). Both schools have a predominantly black population with 2qunty and City Data Book 1972: A Statistical Abstract Supplement, U.SI—Depirtment of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, ROEert L. Hagan, Acting Director, 1973. 61 school A being made up of 98 percent minority students and school B having a minority student population of 78 percent. Both schools receive Title I and Chapter 3, federal and state funds. School A, pre-school through fifth grade, has an enrollment Of around 890. The community surrounding the school has a somewhat stable residency with a high percent of the pOpulation consisting of second, third, and fourth generation residents. School B, kindergarten through fifth grade, has a student enrollment of approximately 800. Unlike the national trend, the enrollment of this school is increasing rapidly. Presently, the neighborhood surrounding the school is highly transient. About four years ago, this school was predominantly white. Subjects The subjects were 205 first grade children; 119 from school A and 86 from school B. These subjects were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups and a control group. Those children retained in the first grade for a second or third time were disqualified. In addition, those children who were absent, or transferred to another school during the time that the experimenter pre-tested the subjects, were eliminated from the study. Subjects in the study ranged in age from 6 years 0 months to 6 years 11 months, with the average age being 62 6.4. The racial composition was 115 blacks and 4 whites at school A and 74 blacks and 12 whites at school B. The 92 percent of black subjects and 8 percent white subjects in this study reflects fairly accurately the racial composi- tion of this city's public school enrollment, which is 81 percent black and 19 percent white. Data Collection Procedures The three instruments utilized in this study were a checklist and two tests (used both as pre- and post— tests). Checklist A twenty-one item checklist was used by the class- room teachers tO evaluate the subject's academic achieve- ment. The twenty-one items dealt with such concepts as auditory and visual discrimination, fine motor skills, ability to comprehend and verbalize, and number concepts (Appendix A). This checklist was designed from areas included on the Metropolitan Readiness Tests; The Harrison- Stroud Readinngeadiness Profiles; and the Detroit Reading Test. Test Forms The two tests used both as pre- and posttests were constructed to measure the subject's ability to Match to Form and Match from Memory (Appendix D). These tests were developed and used in a study by Allington designed to test 63 the effectiveness of color cues in assisting children in discriminating between similar-looking figures. The tests were constructed according to Smith's suggestion that: Foils are selected so that recognition of the unit must be based upon unique characteristics. Thus, other members of the unit's class are used. They have some characteristics in common (class features), thus maximally confusable and they differ from the unit in other characteristics (unique features).3 Each form contained the correct figure, its transformation, an incomplete and/or a figure with an added feature and/or a transformatiOn of the figure other than one used in the program sequence. Position of the correct answer was randomly determined.4 The ability to discriminate a par- ticular figure from a similar-looking figure and the ability to memorize the distinguishing feature of a figure in order to identify it again were skills that a subject needed to possess not only to complete the Match to Form and the Match from Memory tests but to complete the program sequence (paired-associate learning task) as well. The teachers at schools A and B were asked to use the checklist and evaluate their students (with the excep- tion of those repeating the grade), high, average, or low for each of the twenty-one items. 3Donald Smith, A Technology for Reading and Writing, Vol. I, Learnipg_to Read and Write, Task Analysis (New York: Academic Press, 1976). 4Allington, "Use Of Color Cues in Discrimination and Paired Associate Learning.” 64 Some researchers question the validity of teachers academically evaluating their students. However, some research indicates that teachers' evaluations are as accurate as formal tests. Wang devised a study to measure the accuracy of teacher predictions in order to eliminate the comprehensive testing that is considered essential to an individualized program. The results of this study reflected: . . . a wide range of variability in the accuracy Of the teachers' informal observation for evaluating and diagnosing student learning needs. The vari- ability occurred both within and between teachers. The variability we found in teacher's prediction accuracy lends its support to our assumption about the critical role that formal diagnostic testing plays in the individual instructional model. How- ever, the fact that the teachers were able to predict with some accuracy (68 percent for teacher A, and 76 percent for teacher B, as Opposed to an expected chance accuracy of 50 percent), suggests that some formal testing may be replaced by teacher observation.5 At school A, the teachers took on the average of fifty minutes to complete checklists for approximately thirty-two students. While each teacher left the room to complete the checklist, the researcher supervised the classroom. At school B, where the experimenter was employed, teachers were given the checklist to complete at their leisure. Margaret C. Wang, "The Accuracy of Teacher's Predictions on Children's Learning Performance," The Journal of Educational Research 66 (July-August 1973): 462-65. 65 In order to divide the subjects into high or low achieving groups, an achievement score was computed for each student. A score of three, two, or one was given to a high, average, or low rating, respectively. The number of checks were then multiplied by their appropriate rating and added together to get an "achievement score" for each subject. For example, if a subject was rated high in ten areas, average in five areas, and low in six areas: ten, five, and six would be multiplied by three, two, and one, respectively. The resulting scores (30, 10, and 6) would be added together to get an achievement score of 46. All achievement scores were ranked from the lowest possible score of 21, to the highest possible score of 63. The median score of 40 was the point at which the subjects were separated into high and low achieving groups. The thirteen median scores were randomly assigned to the two groups. The subjects were assigned to the two achievement groups; and then assigned to one of the four groups: the Psychological Attender Hard treatment (PAH), the Psycho- logical Attender Easy treatment (PAE), the Delayed Psychological Attender Hard treatment (DPAH), or the Control group (NPA) was given no psychological attender. Administering the Pretests Two pre-tests measuring the subjects' ability to Match to Form and Match from Memory were administered by the researcher to each student individually. On the Match 66 to Form test, the subject was asked to circle from among four similar-looking figures, a figure that looked exactly like the first one. There were eight figures to match. For the Match from Memory test, a tachistoscopic device was used to show the subject eight different figures at approxi- mately five second intervals. After the subject viewed a figure for approximately one second, he/she was asked to select that figure from among four similar-looking figures, by circling it. Each subject took about seven minutes to complete both pre-tests. The pre-test scores were used as covariates in an attempt to eliminate the possibility of differences between the treatment groups prior to their exposure to the program sequence. If significant differ- ences occurred, it was concluded that the differences were due to the treatment and not to the composition of the treatment groups and the control group. Visual Stimulus Figures Four pairs of visual stimulus figures used in this study were selected from a group of figures developed for a study done by Gibson et a1. These figures were constructed using the same structure as actual letters, such as curves and lines, thus eliciting the same response as English orthography, at the same time eliminating the influence of past experience with the figure. The letters of the alphabet could not be used in this study because it would be impossible to control each subject's exposure to or 67 knowledge Of the alphabet. However, by using figures that are similar to the letters of the alphabet, the results of the study could be generalized to a situation in which the subject would encounter English orthography. Letter-like figures such as‘t andld are similar to the letters t and k. Gibson discusses the guidelines used in constructing the letter-like figures. Construction of Standard Forms. An analysis was made of actual letters (printed capitals, uppercase, of the simple type customarily used in primary texts) in terms of number of strokes, straight vs. curved lines, angles, Open vs. closed forms, symmetry, etc. This procedure provided a set of ”rules" which describe generally the construction of letters. New forms were generated which follow the same constraints.6 The four figures selected for this study were paired with either a left-to-right or an up-to-down transformation (see Figure 3.1). Gibson used letter-like forms and their transforma- tions to investigate the development of the ability of four through eight year Olds to visually differentiate discrimi- nating features. This experiment was then replicated by using the same transformations of real letters, but with five year Olds. ”The correlation between confusions of the same transformations for real letters and for the letter- 1ike forms was very high (r = +.87), . . ."7 6Gibson et al., "A Development Study of the Dis- crimination Of Letter-Like Forms,” Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 4 (l962):897¥906. 7E. J. Gibson, ”Learning to Read," Science 148 (1965):1066-72. 68 /\ V\ 3? ZS 5 .r Match to Form '2 6.83 6.91 6.27 6.67 g sd 1.04 1.30 1.28 1.11 wt m u='; Match from Memory i’5.56 5.64 5.20 5.27 mg sd 1.38 1.75 1.78 1.39 the Naming task E .72 .82 1.47 .87 sd .90 .92 1.25 1.06 87 variables of (l) the treatment groups in relationship to the sexes within the two achievement levels, (2) the sexes in relationship to their designated achievement level, and (3) the two achievement levels. In reference to treatment, the mean score of the low achieving boys in the PAE group was greater than the mean scores Of the other treatment groups on the Match to Form. On the Match from Memory, the mean score of the low achieving boys in the PAH group was highest. However, on the Naming task, the mean score of the low achieving boys in the DPAH group was greater than the mean scores Of the low achieving boys in the other treatment groups. The low achieving boys were not consistent in their response to the Psychological Attender. As measured by the Match from Memory test, it appeared that being told that the task was easy before attempting it was more motivating. However, the performance on the Match to Form test seemed to indicate that being told that the task was hard prior to attempting it, boosted the achievement of the low achieving boys. For the high achieving boys, the mean score of the DPAH group on all the dependent variables (Match to Form, Match from Memory, and the Naming task) was greater than the high achieving boys in the other treatment groups. For the high achieving boys, all three dependent variables seemed to indicate that being told that a task was hard after it was attempted increased achievement. 88 The low achieving girls in the PAH group had the greater mean score on the Match to Form and on the Match from Memory tasks. However, On the Naming task the mean score of the low achieving girls in the DPAH group was the highest. The high achieving girls in the PAE group had the greatest mean score on the Match to Form and Match from Memory tasks. However, on the Naming task, the mean score was the highest for the DPAH group. It seemed that being told that a task was hard prior to attempting it proved to be motivating for the low achieving girls as measured by both the Match to Form and Match from Memory tests. However, as measured by both the Match to Form and Match from Memory, the high achieving girls might have been more motivated by being told that the task was easy before they attempted it. Although only tentative conclusions were drawn, one significant factor might be that both low and high achieving girls and boys in the Delayed Psychological Attender group scored highest on the Naming task only. Telling a student that the task was difficult after he had attempted it, appeared to be most successful regardless of sex or achievement. Observation of the mean scores in terms of sex and achievement levels revealed that low achieving boys had higher mean scores than low achieving girls on the Naming task. However, the opposite existed for the high achievers. 89 The mean score of the high achieving girls was greater than the mean score of the high achieving boys on the Naming task. On the Match to Form test, both the low and high achieving girls had higher mean scores than their counter- parts. On the Match from Memory test, the low achieving boys scored higher than the low achieving girls while the high achieving girls performed better than the high achieving boys. It was interesting to note that girls were not superior performers on all of the dependent variables. It seemed that there were some academic tasks on which primary grade boys performed better than girls. One factor which was puzzling and difficult to account for was that for the most part low achieving boys performed better than the low achieving girls while the high achieving girls performed better than the high achieving boys. In terms of the achievement levels, with one exception, the mean scores of the high achievers were higher than the mean scores of the low achievers. The exception was the NPA group as measured by the Naming task. It seemed that the academic achievement Of the subjects as a whole was accurately assessed for their designation and assignments as either a low achiever or a high achiever. In order to determine whether the differences between the mean scores of the four treatment groups, the sexes and the two achievement levels discussed above, were 90 statistically significant, a 2 x 2 x 4 multivariate analysis of variance was applied. Results or Hypotheses Testing The following discussions will be in response to each of the four research questions and the hypothesis generated by each of them. These discussions will be pre- faced by tables reflecting related statistical analyses. The four hypotheses were tested simultaneously by (MANOVA) in response to their corresponding research ques- tions. The four multivariate testings were performed for the treatment main effect, the interaction between achieve- ment and treatment, the interaction between sex and treatment, and the achievement main effect. The results of the multivariate analysis of variance as applied to the three dependent variables Match to Form, Match from Memory, and the Naming task are repOrted in Table 4.4. Table 4.4 contains data for which research ques- tions and hypotheses were not formulated. The by product data for the sex and achievement and treatment will be discussed briefly. The sex main effect and the three- way interaction effect among sex, achievement, and treatment will be discussed at this point; while the 91 Table 4.4.--Result Of Multivariate Analysis of Variance. Source of Variance dfl/df2 MUI tivariate F-ratio p Decision Sex 3/187 .77 .51 N.S. Achievement 3/187 7.97 .0001* 5. Treatment 9/455 2.06 .03* S. Sex x Achievement 3/187 2.75 .04* S. Sex x Treatment 9/455 .71 .70 N.S. Achievement x Treatment 9/455 .77 .64 N.S. Sex x Ach1evement 9/455 .57 .82 N.S. x Treatment *This test is significant at the .05 level. 1 # df = degrees of freedom for the between terms. dfz degrees of freedom for the error terms. 92 interaction effect between sex and achievement will be discussed when most apprOpriate within the section con- cerned with the achievement main effect. For the sex main effect, a multivariate F-ratio of .77, with 3 and 187 degrees, had an Obtained probability Of .51, more than the specified p value of .05. Therefore, significant differences did not exist between the perfor- mance of the sexes. The mean scores of the girls and boys were ppt significantly different from each other as measured by the three dependent variables. For the interaction effect between sex, achievement, and treatment, a multivariate F-ratio of .57, with 9 and 455 degrees had an obtained probability of .82 more than the specified p value of .05. Therefore, an interaction effect did not exist between sex, achievement, and treat- ment. The performance of all sixteengroups (2 x 2 x 4) were equal when compared to each other. Thus the mean scores of the girls and boys, the low and high achievers, and the PAH, PAE, DPAH, and the NPA groups, when compared to each other were not significantly different from each other. Research Question I One major concern of this study as expressed by the first research question and its corresponding null hypothesis was the effectiveness of a particular cuing strategy. Three treatment groups and a control group were 93 formed to compare the Psychological Attender Hard, the Psychological Attender Easy, the Delayed Psychological Attender Hard, and no Psychological Attender. Will one treatment group achieve significantly higher than the other treatment groups? Null Hypothesis I There is no difference between the four treatment groups as measured by the three dependent vari- ables. The statistical analysis used for the examination of the research question stated above is presented in Table 4.4. For the treatment main effect, an F-ratio of 2.05, with 9 and 455 degrees had a probability of .03, less than the specified p value of .05. This suggested that significant differences existed between the groups as a result of the treatment, and implied that one of the treatment groups did perform differently from the other treatment groups. To determine which treatment group was statisti- cally different from all other groups, three multivariate contrasts were constructed and were tested by the multi- variate F-test. The three contrasts are stated in the null hypothesis form as: 1. There is no difference between the pOpulation mean of group one (Psychological Attender Hard) and the control or group four (no Psychological Attender) on v1 (Match to Form), v2 (Match from Memory), and V3 (the Naming task). (Ho: “1 - U4 = 94 2. There is no difference between the population mean of group one (Psychological Attender Hard) and group two (Psychological Attender Easy) on v1, v2, and v3. (HO: “1 - 02 = 0) 3. There is no difference between the population mean of group three (Delayed Psychological Attender Hard) and the average of the pOpula- tion mean of group one, two, and three on v1, v2, and v3. (Ho: U3 - “l + “2 + H4 = 0) 3 The results of the hypothesis testing is shown in Table 4.5. Table 4.5.--Results of MANOVA for the Three Multivariate Contrasts on the Three Dependent Variables. . Multivariate . . Source of Variance df F-ratio p Dec151on “1 - “2 3/195 1072 .16 N.S. .. * U3 pl + “2 + U4 3/195 4.02 .008 S. 3 *This test is significant at the .05 level. Table 4.5 reveals that there was a significant difference at the .05 level for only the third contrast (DPAH) on the dependent variables. The third contrast was the comparison between the population means of the Delayed Psychological Attender Hard group and with the average of the population means of the other three groups, Psychological Attender Hard, Psychological Attender Easy, and the control group. Informing the subject that the task was hard after it has been attempted, significantly 95 motivated the subject to remember more Of the paired- associations than the subjects that were told that the task was hard or easy prior to beginning the program sequence; or the subjects that were not told anything about the difficulty Of the task. To determine the particular source Of the Observed significant difference, a series Of univariate F-tests were performed. Since the three dependent variables were tested separately, in order to control for the overall (Type 1 error), each test was judged at a = .01, which is more conservative. The results are reported in Table 4.6. Three variables were measured to determine the effects of the experimental treatment. The purpose of the univariate F-tests was to pinpoint the functioning variable(s) that was influenced by the treatment. The decision to reject the null hypOthesis was made if the obtained p value was equal to or less than .01. The p value for Match to Form was .12, for Match from Memory was .70, and for Naming was .003. Therefore, the function of one dependent variable (Naming) resulted in the rejection of the null hypothesis indicating that the Delayed Psychological Attender group exhibited influence only on the Naming task. Significance existed on the Naming task even when the step-down method was applied. This method examines each variable while holding the other remaining variables constant. The Naming task was the criterion measure for the paired-associate learning task. 96 .Ho>oa so. one on ucmoaoeconm me some one, .bma we House How Eoomoum mo mooumoo .m «moo. vm.m moo. mm.m ma.m H xmmu mofieoz one .m.z mm. mooo. ow. ma. ov. H muoaoz Eoum nouns .m.z NH. Nv.m NH. ~e.~ ho.v H Euom ou.oouoz umouum unouua .om one: sowmfiooo m c30oumoum m oumHHm>flsD memocuoohm mo manoeuo> .noanowuo> usoocoooo mouse on» so Hoom can .039 .ooo moose mo mono: soflumflomom ommuo>¢ on» com Tosca moouw mo memo: oofluoaooom may coosuon ooconommwo ocu mo ammo h ouowuo>flosll.o.v mance 97 This experiment was designed to test the effects of the Psychological Attender upon the ability to memorize paired- associations. The Naming post-test was to measure the 'subject's performance in memorizing the paired-associations, while the experimental treatment involved the use of the three Psychological Attenders and no Psychological Attender. Therefore, the treatment would affect only the Naming as part of the paired-associate learning task and not the other dependent variables, Match to Form and Mgtgp from Memory. Research Question II Data, in response to research question two and the null hypothesis it generated, was secured to determine whether low and high achievers would respond in the same manner to the treatment groups. Research reviewed in this study indicated that low and high achievers would respond differently to the different cuing strategies. Will low and high achievers perform the same across all treatment groups? Null Hypothesis II There is no interaction effect between the achieve- ment levels and the treatment groups as measured by the three dependent variables. The statistical analysis related to the second research question and null hypothesis is contained in Table 4.4. The interaction between achievement and 98 treatment had a multivariate F-ratio of .77, with 9 and 455 degrees of freedom. The decision to reject the null hypothesis was made if the obtained p = .64 was less than the p = .05. There- -fore, the null hypothesis was accepted indicating there was no significant interaction effect between the achievement levels and the treatment groups on any of the three depen- dent variables. Both low and high achievers responded in a similar manner to all four treatments. The mean scores of the low achievers on the three dependent variables were pgt significantly different from the mean scores of the high achievers in each one of the four treatment groups. Research Question III One concern of educators was the academic differ- ences between boys and girls in the primary grades. Girls, up until about the fourth grade, were higher achievers than their male counterparts. Various motivational strategies to date had not bridged this achievement gap. Studies in the field Of reading had rejected the theory that sex differences in reading achievement were due to physical or maturational differences but rather that they were socio- logical expectations.2 As a result of the sex differences 2Dale D. Johnson, "Sex Differences in Reading Across Culture," Reading Research Quarterly 9 (1973-74): 67-86. 99 controversy as it relates to academic achievement, whether cultural or physiological, boys and girls may respond differently to cuing strategies. The following research question and its accompanying null hypothesis were formu- lated in reSponse to the sex difference dilemma as it relates to academic achievement. Will girls and boys perform the same across all treatment groups? Null Hypothesis III There is no interaction effect between the sex and the treatment groups as measured by the three dependent variables. The statistical analysis related to research ques- tion three and null hypothesis III was reported in Table 4.4. A multivariate F-ratio of .71 was attained which, with 9 and 455 degrees of freedom, had a signifi- cance level of .70. The decision to reject the null hypothesis was made if the p value was equal to or less than .05. There- fore, the obtained p value of .70 was ppt significant. The null hypothesis was accepted indicating that girls and boys did perform in a similar manner across all treatment groups. .Sex was pgt a significant factor in terms of the effect of the treatments. Therefore, boys as well as girls in the Delayed Psychological Attender Hard group performed significantly higher on the Naming task than girls and boys in the other treatment groups. 100 Research Question IV Each subject was assigned to a high or low achieving group as discussed on page 65. Each treatment group contained about equal numbers of both achievement levels. Since each subject was designated as either a low achiever or a high achiever, the fourth and final research question concerned itself with whether or not the teachers assessed the subjects correctly and whether or not high achievers proved to be superior performers to the low achievers on a paired-associate learning task. Will high achievers perform better than low achievers on the three dependent variables? Null Hypothesis IV There will be no significant difference between the two achievement levels as measured by the three dependent variables. The statistical analysis related to the above research question and its corresponding null hypothesis, which deals with achievement main effect, is reported in Table 4.4. A multivariate F-ratio of 7.97 attained which, with 3 and 187 degrees of freedom, had a signifi- cance level of p less than .0001. These results indicated that significant differences did exist between the high and low achievers on at least one of the three dependent variables. The mean scores of the high achievers were 101 significantly higher than the scores of the low achievers. as recorded in Table 4.3. These results were expected since the sample was assigned to the two achievement levels on the basis of their academic achievement. The high achievers did perform better than the low achievers on at least one of the three dependent variables. However, the variable(s) which produced the significance was not identi- fied. To determine the specific variable(s) which pro- duced the significance, a series of univariate F-tests were employed. Since the three dependent variables were tested separately, in order to control for the overall (Type 1 error), each test was judged at o = .01, which is more conservative. Results of the univariate F-test on each of the three dependent variables are presented in Table 4.7. Table 4.7.--Univariate F-test for Each Dependent Variable Measuring the Achievement Main Effect. df Hypothesis Univariate Variable Mean Sq. F—test p Dec131on Match to Form 1 31.74 18.73 .0001* S. Match from Memory 1 19.10 7.63 .006* S. The Naming task ' 1 4.21 4.21 .04 N.S. Degree of freedom for the error is 189. *The test is significant at the .01 level. 102 The decision to reject the null hypothesis was made if the obtained p value was equal to or less than .01. The p value obtained for Match to Form was .0001, for Match from Memory was .006, and for Naming was .04. Thus the function of two dependent variables (Match to Form and Match from Memory) resulted in the rejection of the null hypothesis that there was a significant difference between the two achievement levels. The mean scores of the high achievers were significantly higher than the mean scores of the low achievers on these two post-tests. However, the mean scores of the low and high achievers were not signifi- cantly different from each other on the Naming task. Thus, treatment may have had an effect on low achievers since they performed almost equally as well as the high achievers on the Naming task. It was discussed under Research Question I that the Naming task was the only dependent variable that measured the effect of the treatment. While the other two dependent variables discriminated between the low and high achievers, the Naming task was not a discrimi- nator between the achievement levels. These results . implied that the mean scores of the low achievers and high achievers did not differ significantly in relationship to the treatment. O The test of interaction between sex and achievement revealed sex to be a factor that affected achievement. 103 For the interaction effect between sex and achievement, a multivariate F-ratio of 2.75, with 3 and 187 degrees has a probability of .04, less than the specified p value of .05. This suggested that the significant differences that existed between the two achievement levels was not the same for both boys and girls. In fact, they had a reverse effect as shown in Figure 4.1. Mean Scores .97 girls' .70 .64 boys .34 Low High Achievers Figure 4.1. The Mean Scores of the Interaction Between Sex and Achievement for the Naming Task. To further analyze which dependent variable measured the interaction, a series of univariate F-tests were used. The results of the univariate F-test on each of the three dependent variables are presented in Table 4.8. I The data in Table 4.8 imply that only the Naming task identified the differences in performance between Tabl Va] Mat- Mat the 91 104 Table 4.8.--Univariate F-test for Each Dependent Variable Measuring the Interaction Between Sex and Achievement. ' . Hypothesis Univariate . . Variable df Mean Sq. . F—test p Dec151on MatCh t° 1 .019 .011 .92 N.S. Form “ate“ fr°m 1 6.738 2.569 .11 N.S. Memory . . . the Naming 1 5.700 6.397 .01* s. task Degree of freedom for the error is 189. *The test is significant at the .01 level. girls and boys across achievement levels. The obtained p value for the Naming task was .01. For the Match to Form and the Match from Memory_the obtained p value was .92 and .11, respectively. The specified p value was .01. A graph of the interaction pattern between sex and achievement on the Naming task is shown in Figure 4.1. The mean score of the low achieving boys was significantly higher than the mean score of the low achieving girls while the mean score of the high achieving boys was significantly lower than the mean score of the high achieving girl. Table 4.9 provides a summary of the results con- cerning the average performance of the students among the four treatment groups. Since the three-way interaction between treatment and sex and achievement was not 105 Table 4.9.--Observed Combined Means for the Treatment. Variable 1(PAH) 2(PAE) 3(DPAH) 4(NPA) Match to Form 34' 6.58 6.22 6.07 6.09 Match from Memory if 5.14 4.50 4.81 4.80 XI the Naming task .56 .58 1.12 .62 significant and neither were the two two-way interactions between treatment and sex and between treatment and achievement, the combined mean scores are reported. As discussed earlier in this chapter, the subjects (both low and high achievers and girls and boys) in the Delayed Psychological Attender Hard group performed signi- ficantly better than their counterparts in the other two treatment groups and the control group. The combined mean scores for the Naming task were approximately two times greater for the Delayed Psychological Attender Hard group (DPAH; §'= 1.12) than for the Psycholoqical Attender Hard (PAH; §'= .56), the Psychological Attender Easy (PAE; i = .58), and the control group (NPA; §’= .69). These results were interpreted to mean that the DPAH group identified about two more figures correctly than the other groups. Therefore, it is assumed that the Delayed Psycho- logical Attender Hard was more effective in motivating students to memorize the paired associations. Telling a child, regardless of sex or achievement level, after the task had been attempted that it was hard proved to be the 106 most effective of the other cuing strategies used in this study. . Summary The multivariate analysis of variance indicated that the treatment main effect and the achievement main effect were significant at the .05 level. However, the interaction between treatment and sex and the interaction between treatment and achievement was not significant. Both girls and boys and low and high achievers responded in a similar manner to the treatment. A series of univariate F-tests were used to deter-‘ mine on which specific dependent variable(s) the treatment main effect and the achievement main effect were found to be significant. Three multivariate contrasts were con- structed to determine where the significant differences existed among the four treatment groups. The three con- trasts were the difference between the population mean of the Psychological Attender Hard group (PAH) and no Psychological Attender (NPA); the difference between the population mean of the Psychological Attender Hard (PAH) group and the Psychological Attender Easy (PAE) group; and the comparison between the population mean of the Delayed Psychological Attender Hard (DPAH) group and the average of the population means of the Psychological Attender Hard (PAH) group, the Psychological Attender Easy 107 (PAE) group and the no Psychological Attender (NPA) group. The results of the multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) to test the three contrasts on the dependent variable(s) at the .05 level, indicated that the comparison between the population mean of the DPAH group and the average of the population means of the PAH groups, the PAE group and the NPA group to be significant. The subsequent univariate F-test revealed the comparison between the population mean of the DPAH group and the average of the population means of the PAH group, the PAE group, and the NPA group to be significant at the .01 level on the Naming task only. . For the achievement main effect, only the Naming task did not discriminate between the low and high achievers. On the Match to Form and Match from Memory, the achievement levels performed accOrding to their desig- nations (low and high). On the two post-tests, the mean scores of the high achievers were significantly higher than the mean scores of the low achievers. Sex was a factor that seemed to influence achievement. The mean score of the low achieving boys was significantly higher than the mean score of the low achieving girls; while the mean score of the high achieving girls was significantly higher than the mean score of the high achieving boys. In conclusion, it appears that the Delayed Psycho- logical Attender Hard was the most effective of the treatments, in producing a higher level of performance for 108 both high and 16w achievers and for both boys and girlsi Informing the subjects that the task was difficult SEES; they had attempted it motivated the subjects to remember the paired associations. The performance of the subjects in the DPAH group was significantly greater than the subjects who were told prigr to entry into the program sequence that the task was hard or easy, or were not given any Psychological Attender. The DPAH cuing strategy proved to be effective for both achievement levels (low and high) and for boys as well as for girls. Chapter V, the next and final chapter, contains a summary of the results of this study along with the conclu- sions and implications; and recommendations for further research. CHAPTER.V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction The effectiveness of cuing first graders to the difficulty of a paired-associate learning task was the major focus of this study.' The discussion and summary of the results, the conclusions, the implications, and the recommendations are presented in this final chapter. Summary Literature Review A review of the literature revealed no other studies dealing specifically with the Psychological Attender theory. This theory, advanced by Duffy and Sherman (1972) is a strategy which informs the child that the task to be learned is difficult, thus protecting the child's self-esteem if he fails. Research that closely relates to the psychological attender theory is in the areas of achievement motivation and attributional theory. While these two areas are some- what related to the psychological attender theory, they 109 110 differ from it in that they are concerned with the percep- tion of the task once it has been completed, either with success or failure. From the results of research done by Bar-tal (1974), Davis (1972), Weiner & Sierad (1975), high achievement motivation students attribute their success to internal factors and their failures to external factors, while low Ea achievement motivation students attribute their success r to external factors and their failure to internal factors. 0n the basis of these results, it was concluded that the '"I-.-l.r-l '\.. .1. . high and low achievers in this study would respond differ- ently to the psychological attender. Related research was concerned primarily with col- lege or adult students. While some of the studies were undertaken with younger subjects, none were found to involve primary students. The Study To measure the influence of cuing first graders to the difficulty of the task, a program sequence was develOped. The program was a paired-associate learning task which involved four letter-like figures and their transformations. It involved the use of an audio-flashcard reader in order that each treatment group would receive standard directions and information. Each letter-like figure was randomly assigned a CVC trigram that had a low association value. 111 The four treatment groups were each assigned a different Psychological Attender. The PAH group was told that the program sequence was hard; the PAE group was told that it was easy; the DPAH group was told that it was hard .EEEEE the fourth trial; and the control group (NPA) was told nothing about the difficulty of the task. This study included 205 first grade students from two public schools in an urban setting. Each subject was designated as either a low or high achiever on the basis of the classroom teachers' ratings on a checklist. This checklist included items dealing with various readiness skills. (See Appendix A.) The subjects were then randomly assigned to one of the four treatment groups. Each subject was pre-tested on his/her ability to match letter-like figures from among similar figures and on his/her ability to match the letter-like figure from memory. Each subject was administered the program sequence individually which was then followed immediately by a post-test. The post- test was the same as the pre-test. The multivariate analysis of variance was used to determine: (1) the treatment main effect; (2) the inter- action between sex and treatment; (3) the interaction between achievement and treatment; and (4) the achievement main effect. The null hypotheses were tested at the .05 level. A series of univariate F-tests were used to test for the specific dependent variable(s) that measured the. 112 significance. The level of significance for the univariate F-test was at the .01 level. Three multivariate contrasts were constructed to determine which treatment group performed statistically different at the .05 level. Another series of univariate F-tests were performed to determine on which variable(s) significant differences existed at the .01 level. The Results The results of the multivariate analysis of vari- ance indicated that no significant interaction effect existed for achievement by treatment (p = .641) and sex by treatment (p = .700). The level of significance was tested at the .05 level. Nonsignificance for the interaction effect between achievement by treatment implies that low and high achievers responded in a similar manner in all treatment groups as well as the control group. Nonsignifi— cance for the interaction effect between sex and treatment indicated that both boys and girls responded in a similar manner to the different treatments. Therefore, treatment did not influence one achievement level differently from the other achievement level. The Delayed Psychological Attender Hard proved to be the most effective treatment for both low achievers and high achievers as well as boys and girls. 113 Although MANOVA did not reveal significance for the interaction effect between achievement by treatment and sex by treatment, it did reveal significant differences for the treatment main effect (p = .03) and for the achievement main effect (p = .0001). The level of signifi- cance was tested at the .05 level. For the achievement main effect, the data corroborate that there were differ- ences between the two achievement levels. The subjects in the study were assigned to their reSpective groups on the basis of their achievement in school. A series of univariate F-tests for the achievement main effect revealed that only two of the dependent vari- ables, the Mgtch to Form (p = .0001) and the Match from Memory (p = .006), measured the.significant difference between the mean scores of the low achievers and the high achievers. On the Naming task (p = .042), the mean scores of the high achievers were not significantly different from the mean scores of the low achievers. Since the three dependent variables were tested separately, in order to control for the overall (Type I), each test was judged at a = .01, which is more conservative. Although the I high achievers performed significantly better than the low achievers, on the Match to Form and the Match from Memory post-tests, the high and low achievers performed about the same on the Naming task. Since the Naming task was the dependent variable that measured the effect of the 114 treatment, these results indicated that low and high achievers were influenced in a similar manner by the treat- ment. For the treatment main effect, the multivariate analysis of variance did reveal that significant differences did exist between the treatment groups. Therefdre, three multivariate contrasts were constructed and tested by the multivariate F-tests in order to find out which treatment group was statistically different from the others. The contrast groups were: (1) the difference between the popu— lation mean of the Psychological Attender Hard (PAH) group and the Psychological Attender Easy (PAH) group, (2) the difference between the population mean of the Psychological Attender group (PAH) and no Psychological Attender (NPA), and (3) the comparison between the population mean of the Delayed Psychological Attender Hard (DPAH) group and the average of the population means of the Psychological Attender Hard (PAH) group, the Psychological Attender Easy (PAE) and the no Psychological Attender (NPA) group. The third contrast, the comparison between the population mean of the DPAH group and the average of the population means of the PAH group, the PAE group, and the NPA group, with (p = .008) was found to be statistically significant at the .05 level. The univariate F-tests revealed the comparison between the population mean of the Delayed Psychological Attender (DPAH) group and the average of the population means of the PAH group, the PAE group, and the 115 NPA group, to be significant at the .01 level at the Naming task only, at p = .002. The Naming task was the only dependent variable that measured the effect of the treat- ment. I The results indicate that the Delayed Psychological Attender was superior to the Psychological Attender Hard, the Psychological Attender Easy, and no Psychological Attender on the Naming task (the criterion measure for the paired-associate learning task). The Delayed Psychological Attender Hard group had a mean score approximately two ‘ times greater than the mean scores of the other treatment groups. Data for the sex main effect, the interaction effect between sex and achievement, and the interaction effect between sex by achievement by treatment were avail- able. Significant differences did not exist for the sex main effect (p = .512) and the interaction effect between sex by achievement by treatment (p = .820). The perfor- mance of girls and boys on the three tasks did not differ significantly. For the interaction effect among sex, achievement, and treatment, the mean scores of the sixteen cells on the three tasks were not significantly different. 116 MANOVA did reveal significant differences for the interaction effect between sex and achievement (p = .044), which indicated that the differences that existed between the low and high achievers were not the same for both sexes. In order to determine which dependent variable measured the interaction between sex and achievement, a series of univariate F-tests were used. The Naming task (p = .0123) was the only dependent variable of the three (Match to Form, p = .951 and Match from Memory, p = .110) that measured the differences of the means for the sexes within the achievement levels. The low achieving boys performed better than the low achieving girls while the high achiev- ing girls performed better than the high achieving boys. In summary, the Delayed PsycholOgical Attender Hard treatment proved to be the most effective motivator regard- less of the subjects' sex and or achievement level. Conclusions The major conclusion obtained from the analysis of the data of this study is that children who are told that a task is hard after they have attempted it, achieve at a significantly higher level (mean scores were approximately two times greater) on a paired-associate learning task than children who were told initially that the task was hard or easy or those children who were not cued as to the_ difficulty of the task at all. 117 Research findings in the area of achievement motivation had indicated achievement oriented individuals preferred a challenge, while on the other hand, failure- threatened individualspreferred easy tasks or very difficult ones. As a result of the achievement motivation findings, the following assumptions were made at the outset of the present study: (1) low and high achievers would respond differently to the psychological attender; and (2) low achievers would be motivated by the psycholoqical attender easy while the high achievers would be motivated by the psychological attender hard. However, the results of this study were contrary to these assumptions. Both low and high achievers responded in a similar manner in the three treatment groups and in the control group. The most significant finding of all was that the Delayed Psychological Attender proved to be the most effec- tive for motivating both the low achievers and the high achievers. The Delayed Psychological Attender appeared to provide the child with an opportunity to discover for him- self whether the task was easy or hard. Once the child discovered that he/she was going to have difficulty master- ing the task, the experimenter confirmed this by saying that the task was hard. The removal of the possible threat of being proven ”dumb" may then have allowed the child to concentrate on learning. 118 .Implications One of the most perplexing issues in education today is the challenge of motivating students to learn. This problem has resulted in the creation of numerous "gimmicks," many of which are time-consuming, expensive, and yet are not always effective because perhaps they operate on the basis of faulty assumptions. The purpose of this study was to test the Psycho- logical Attender theory to determine whether it could be used as an effective motivator. The findings indicated that it would be an effective motivator for learning if two important factors were involved: (1) the emotional aspect of learning as it relates to self-concept; and (2) timing. In the classroom, every teacher knows the impor- tance of "attention getting devices" when beginning instruction. Perhaps even more important than the physical prop(s) used to get the student's attention, is the ”psychological prop." This "psychological prop" must do more than command and hold the child's attention throughout instruction. It must, like a prop, boost or be non- threatening to a child's self-concept so that the child can concentrate on achieving. This is the theory behind, . and the function of, the psychological attender. The other crucial factor involving the Psycho- logical Attender is timing. One controversy surrounding the psychological attender had to do with the notion that if a child was told a task was difficult before it was“ 119 attempted, the child might not attempt it at all. In effect, the child would view the task as an obstacle that he was not equipped to handle. However, the Delayed Psychological Attender proved to be the solution for this dilemma. Once the child has discovered that a task is difficult, it is important for this to be acknowledged to the child by a "significant other." For the high achiever, the Psychological Attender challenges and for the low achiever it not only "saves face," but provides a challenge as well. The Delayed Psychological Attender approach is probably most crucial for pre-schoolers, kindergarteners, and first graders who enter school thinking that they will learn to read, write, and compute math Operations auto- matically with little or no effort at all. For many of these children who thought learning was going to be easy, learning will be difficult. Many of these children begin to assume that if these tasks were supposed to be easy and ,they cannot perform them successfully, then they must be ”dumb." Such students may become discouraged, frustrated, and lose interest in academic learning. Sometimes their interest in school is never regained. The child concludes that if I'm ”dumb," I cannot learn, so why make the effort. Therefore, it is crucial for the "significant other" to step in When the child discovers that learning is going to be difficult and reassure the child that the difficulty is 120 due to the nature of the task and not because of the child's ability. Recommendations The following statements are recommendations offered both to parents and teachers and for further research. Recommendations for Parents and Teadhers 1. It is suggested that teachers and parents should empathize with the child, once the child has dis- covered the difficulty of the task. When the difficulty of the task has been acknowledged by a significant other (such as parent or teacher), the child is able to focus on the task and achieve because he/she is no longer blocked by the potential feelings of inadequacy. 2. Caution is recommended in the use of the word feasy' as a motivator. Many tasks that children attempt are 222 easy, at least for them. To be told that a task is ”easy" when in actuality it is "hard," frustrates a child and causes negative feelings about one's self, which impedes achievement. 3. Perhaps teachers and parents should use the Delayed Psychological Attender Hard in preference to tangible rewards. The Delayed Psychological Attender Hard may prove to be even more effective than tangible rewards because it produces a more intrinsically motivated child. 121 4. The Delayed Psychological Attender Hard may be. useful with lower-socioeconomic Black children regardless of sex or achievement level since it appears that lower- socioeconomic Black children do respond to verbal reinforcement. 5. When a child successfully completes a "diffi- cult“ task, it appears to be important for the teacher or parent to indicate to the child that the success was due to the child's ability and effort. This strategy may well enhance the self-concept of the child. 6. When a child experiences failure, the teacher or the parent ought to indicate to the child that the failure was due to the difficulty of the task and not to the child's lack of ability which may protect the self- concept of the child. 7. Results of this study make it clear that timing is an important factor in the use of the Psycho- logical Attender. It seems to operate best when the child is allowed to discover that the task is difficult. Some children become discouraged if they are told that a task is hard before they attempt it. Recommendations for Further Research 1. This study was carried out with individual children outside of the classroom and with the use of a machine that was a novelty to the children. This study 122 should be replicated in a group or classroom setting and with the use of different instructional aids. 2. The pre-test measures used in this study were perceived as being easy by the subjects and therefore they expected the program sequence to be easy. This study should be replicated without using pre-tests or with pre- tests of equal difficulty to the program sequence. 3. The program sequence in this study provided the subjects with continuous feedback as to whether they made correct or incorrect responses.. It would be inter- esting to discover if the results would be the same if the child was not being constantly made aware of how he/she was performing. 4. This study used a paired—associated learning task to test the effectiveness of the treatment. Studies using other types of learning tasks are crucial in terms of the impact of the findings of this study. 5. The review of the literature for this study discussed the influence of the psychological attender on self-concept. However, a self-concept measure was not included in the design of this study. In order to measure the influence of the treatment on self-concept, in a replication of this study some measure of self-concept should be undertaken for all subjects before and after the treatment. 6. The researcher noted that subjects in the Psychological Attender Easy group exhibited more obviously 123 frustrated behavior. For example, one child cried and another child complained of a stomachache only after attempting the task. Thus, the systematic recording and subsequent analysis of information should add another interesting and revealing dimension to a study such as this one. 7. This study could be replicated using a sample of children that would include various socioeconomic levels and racial groups. Some research indicates that verbal reinforcement is more effective with White and middle-class children than with Black and lower-class children. 8. Many pre-schoolers and kindergarteners come to school with the notion that they will instantly know how to read, write, and do mathematical Operations. They have no idea of how laborious these and other tasks are going to be for them. However, the longer children are in school the more realistic they become about the difficulty of various tasks. This study should be replicated at all grade levels in order to determine whether one grade level would differ significantly from the others. '9. A study in which a rewording of the psycho- logical attender(s) is utilized might be conducted to test the effect of various verbal cues. (Example: I know you can do it, even though it is hard.) Some research indi- cates that children are sensitive to various kinds of verbal reinforcement. 124 10. A longitudinal study to measure the effect of the treatment on achievement and/or self-concept could provide educators with data on the impact of teacher's motivational techniques and strategies over a long period of time. 11. In order to control for the influence of timing, the Delayed Psychological Attender Hard and the Delayed PsycholOgical Attender Easy should be compared. 12. Changing the timing of the Psychological Attender may change its effectiveness. For example, the Delayed Psychological Attender was given after the fourth trial. The point at which the child is told that the task is hard may be a significant factor. In conclusion, the results of this study have con- tributed to the field of motivation and learning an effective technique for raising performance among first graders. It was demonstrated that the Delayed Psychologi- cal Attender Hard was successful with low achievers as ' well as high achievers of both sexes and that it was a - superior motivating technique over the Psychological Attender Hard, Psychological Attender Easy, and no Psychological Attender. B IBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Allington, Richard L. ”An Evaluation of the Use of Color Cues to Focus Attention in Discrimination and Paired-Associate Learning." Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1973. Anderson, Camilla M. "The.Self-image: a Theory of the Dynamics of Behavior.” In the Self in Growth, Teaching and Learning. Edited by Dbn‘E. Hamachek. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1965. Anderson, Rosemarie; Anderson, Manoogian; Thomas, Sam; and Reznick, J. Steven. "The Undermining and Enhancing of Intrinsic Motivation on Preschool Children." Journal of Personality and Social Psyghology 34 (1976):915-22. Atkinson, J. A., and Litwin, G. H. ”Achievement Motive and Test Anxiety Conceived as Motive to Approach Success and Motive to Avoid Failure." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 60 (l960):52-63. Atkinson, John W. An Introduction to Motivation. Princeton: Van Nostrand, 1964. . ”Toward Experimental Analysis of Human Motiva- tion in Terms of Motives, Expectancies, Incen- tives." In Motives in Fantasy, Action, and Society. Edited by J. W. Atkinson. ‘Prihceton: Van Nostrand, 1958c. Atkinson, John W., and Feather, Norma T., eds. A Theor of Achievement Motivation. New York: Johfi WiIey and'Sons,'1966. Avila, Donald L., and Purkey, William Watson. "Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation--A Regrettable Distinc- tion." Psychology in the Schools 3 (1966):206-8. Bar-tal, Daniel; Frieze, Irene; and Greenberg, Martin S. “Attributional Analysis of Achievement Motivation: Some Applications to Education." Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, April 1974. 125 126 Bartel, Nettie R. ”Locus of Control and Achievement in Middle- and Lower-Class Children.” Child Develop- ment 42 (October l97l):lO99-1107. Baughman, Earl. Black Americans: A Psychological Analysis. New York: Academic Press, I97 . Baum, M. et al. ”Unified Effort of a Junior High School Faculty (NDEA Pilot Guidance Program) to Encourage Success for Seventh-graders." Reporting Research (Oregon Board of Education), October‘I968. Bledsoe, J. "Self-concept of Children and Their Intelli- gence, Achievement, Interests, and Anxiety.” Childhood Education 43 (l967):436-38. Berretta, Shirley. "Self-concept Development in the Reading Program." The Reading Teacher 24 (December l970):232-38. Bower, W. Scott; Boyer, Joe L.; and Scheirer, Elinor A. "Research Related to Academic Achievement Motiva- tion: An Illustrative Review.” Theory Into Practice 9 (February l970):33-46. Brookover, Wilbur B.; LePere, Jean M.; Hamachek, Don B.; Thomas, Shailer; Erickson, Edsel L. Self-concept of Ability and School Achievement. II, Report of Cooperative Research Project No. 1636, U.S. of Education, entitled, "Improving Academic Achieve- ment through Self-Concept Enhancement," College of Education, Michigan State University, October 1965. Clark, D., and Clark, Mamie. "Racial Identification Preference in Negro Children." In Readings in Social-Psychology. Edited by T. M. Newcomb and E.CE. Hartley. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1946. Clark, Philip M. ”Psychology, Education and the Concept of Motivation." Theory into Practice 9 (February l970):16-22. Clifford, Margaret. ”Motivational Effects of Competition and Goal Setting in Reward and Non-Reward Condi- tions." The Journal of Experimental Education 39 (Spring l97l):ll-15. Cofer, C. N., and Appley, M. H. Motivation: Theory and Research. New York: John WiIéy and Sons., Inc., IyEIT"‘ . 127 Coleman, James S. et al. Equalit of Educational Oppor- tunit . U.S. Department 0 'Health,fidfication, and Welfare, Washington, D.C., U.S.-Government Printing Office, 1966. Combs, A. W. Perceiving, Behaving, Becoming. Yearbook of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Washington, D.C.: Education Associa- tion, 1962. . "Some Basic Concepts in Perceptual Psychology." Paper read at American Personnel and Guidance Association Convention, Minneapolis, April 1965. Cotler, Sheldon, and Palmer, Richard J. "The Relationships Among Sex, Sociometric, Self, and Text Anxiety Factors and the Academic Achievement of Elementary School Children." Psychology in the Schools 7 (l970):211-16. Cradler, John D., and Goodwin, Dwight L. "Conditioning of Verbal Behavior as a Function of Age, Social Class, and Type of Reinforcement." Journal of Educational Psychology 62 (l97l):279-84. _ Davidson, H. H., and Greenberg, J. W. "School Achievers from a Deprived Background.” USOE Project No. 2895, Contract No. OE-5-10-132. New York: The City College of the City University of New York, 1960. Davidson, H. H., and Lang, G. "Children's Perceptions of , Their Teacher's Feelings toward Them Related to Self-perception, School Achievement and Behavior." Journal of Experimental Education 29 (l960):107-l8. Davis, William L., and Davis, Elaine D. "Internal-External Control and Attribution of Responsibility for Success and Failure." Journal of Personaliry 40 (March 1972):123-36. De Blassie, R. R., and Healy, G. W. Self-Concept: A Comparison of Spanish-American, Negro, and Anglo Adolescents Across Ethnic, Sex, and Socio-Economic Variables." ERIC Documents ED 037 287, University Park, New Mexico: New Mexico State University, March 1970. ' 128 de Charm, R., and Carpenter, V. "Measuring Motivation in Culturally Disadvantaged School Children.” In Research and DevelOpment Toward the Improvement of Education. Edited by H. J.:?Iausmeir andfiG. T. OTHerarn. Madison, Wisconsin: Dembar Educational Services, 1969. ' Deutsch, Martin. Minority Group and Class Status as Related to Social and Personality Factors In SéhOlastic Achievement. Monograph No. 2, Society for Applied AnthropOIEgy, 1960. ' MotivatinggToday's Students.- California: Learning Handbooks, 1974. Drew, Walter F.; Olds, Anita R.; Olds, Henry F., Jr. E“ N If}. n}! 1 Duffy, Gerald G., and Sherman, George B. Systematic Reading Instruction. New York: Harper and Row Publishers,gl972. Farley, Frank, and Sewell, Trevor. "Attribution and y E Achievement Motivation Differences Between Delinquent and Non-Delinquent Black Adolescents." Adolescence 10 (Fall l975):391-97 Farls, R. J. "High and Low Achievement of Intellectually Average Intermediate Grade Students Related to the Self Concept and Social Approval. Disserta- tion Abstracts 28 (1967):1205. Farquhar, W. W. "A Comprehensive Study of the Motivational Factors Underlying Achievement of Eleventh-grade High-school Students. U.S. Office of Education, Cooperative Research Report No. 846. East Lansing: Office of Research and Publication, Michigan State University, 1968. Farr, Roger. Reading: What Can Be Measured? Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association Researach Fund, 1969. Gibson, Eleanor J. ”Learning to Read." Science 148 (May 1965):1066-72. - Gill, M. R. "Pattern of Achievement as Related to the Perceived Self." Paper read at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Convention, Los Angeles, February 1969. Goyen, Judith, and Lyle, J. G. "Effect of Incentives upon Retarded and Normal Readers on a Visual-Associate Learning Task.” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 2 (l97l):274e80. 129 Heckhausen, Heinz. ”Achievement Motive Research: Current Problems and Some Contributions toward a General Theory of Motivation." Nebraska Symposium on Motivation 16 (1968):103-74} Henderson, Grace. “An Analysis of Self-Concept of Academic Ability (S.C.A.A.) as Related to Social- Psychological Variables, Comprising School Climate, in White and Black Elementary Children within Differential School Settings." Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1973. Hogan, Ermon O., and Green, Robert L. "Can Teachers Modify Children's Self-Concepts?" Teachers College Record 72 (February l97l):423-26. Hood, Elizabeth F. "Motivating Urban Minority Group Youth." Education 93:363-66. Hunt, J. "Intrinsic Motivation and Its Role in Psycho- _ logical DevelOpment." Nebraska Symposium on 9 Motivation 13 (1965):189-282. ' Johnson, David. TheiSocial Psychology of Education. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and'Wihston, Inc., 1970. Karabenick, Stuart A., and Youssef, Zakour I. "Performance as a Function of Achievement Motive Level and Per- ceived Difficulty.” In Motivation and Achievement. Edited by J. W. Atkinson and JoeI'O. Raynor. Washington: Winston, 1974, pp. 83-90. Kerckhoff, Alan C. Socialization and Social Class. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.,—1972. Kerensky, V. M. "Reported Self-Concepts in Relation to Academic Achievement in an Inner-City Setting." Dissertation Abstracts 27 (1967):2325. Kukla, Andy. "Attributional Determinants of Achievement Related Behavior." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 21 (l972)?l66-74. . "Foundations of an Attributional Theory of Performance." Psychological Review 79 (1972): 454-70. . "The Cognitive Determinants of Achieving Behavior." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 21 (1972):166379. 130 . Lamy, M. W. ”Relationship of Self-perception of Early Primary Children to Achievement in Reading." In Human Development: Readings in Regearch. Edited By I. J. Gordon. Chicago: Scott Foresman, 1965. Lefcourt, Herbert M. "Internal Versus External Control of Reinforcement.” Psychological Bulletin 65 (1966): 206-20. McCarthy, John, and Yancey, William. "Uncle Tom and Mr. Charlie: Metaphysical Pathos in the Study of Racism and Personal Disorganization." American 1 Journal of Sociology 76 (1971):648-72. McClelland, David C.; Atkinson, John W.; Clark, Russell A.; Lowell, Edgar L. The Achievement Motive. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1953. Maehr, Martin L., and Sjogren, Douglas D. "Atkinson's H“ Theory of Achievement Motivation: First Step Toward a Theory of Academic Motivation?" Review of Educational Research 41 (April l971):l4§-61. Manis, M. ”Personal Adjustment, Assumed Similarity to Parents, and Inferred Parental Evaluation of the Self." Journal of Consulting_Psychology 22 (1958):481-85. Marlow, E. Stewart III. "Need for Achievement, Fear of Failure and Attribution Processes in Goal Setting." Ph.D. dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, December 1971. Maslow, Abraham. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper and Row Publishers,‘l970. Mead, George H. Mind, Self, and Socieyy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934. Moulton, Robert W. "Effects of Success and Failure on Level of Aspiration as Related to Achievement Motives.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1 (1965):399-406. Moustakas, C. The Authentic Teacher: Sensitivity and Awareness in the Classroom. Cambridge, Mass.: Howard A. DouIe Puinshing Co., 1966. Purkey, William Watson. Self-Concept and School Achieve- ment. New Jersey: Prentice-HaIl, Inc., 1970. 131 Rosenhan, D. L., and Greenwald, Jean A. "The Effects of Age, Sex, and Socioeconomic Class on Responsiveness to Two Classes of Verbal Reinforcement." Journal of Personality 31 (1965):108-21. Rosenthal, R., and Jackbson, L. Pygmalion in the Class- room: Teacher Expectations anHMFupiIsT'Intellechal Developmenr. New York: H61t,iRinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1968. Roth, Robert M. "The Role of Self-Concept in Achievement." Journal of Experimental Education 27 (June 1959): 278-81. Spilerman, Seymour. "Raising Academic Motivation in Lower Class Adolescents: A Convergence of Two Research Traditions.” Sociology of Education 44 (Winter 1971):103-18. ' Soares, Anthony T., and Soares, Louise M. "Expectancy, Achievement, and Self-Concept Correlates in Disadvantaged and Advantaged Youths.” Reprinted from the Proceedings, 79th Annual Convention, APA, 1971, pp. 561-62. Soares, Anthony T., and Soares, Louise M. "Self- perceptions of Culturally Disadvantaged Children." American Educational Research Journal 6 (1964): 31-45. Sloane, Howard W., Jr., and JacksOn, Donald A. A Guide to Motivating Learners. New Jersey: Educational Technology Puincations, 1974. Snygg, D., and Combs, A. W. Individual Behavior. New York: Harper and Row, 1949. Stainback, W. C.; Payne, J. S.; Stainback, S. B.; and Payne, R. A. Establishing a Token Economy in the Classroom. Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing C00, I973. ' Van De Riet, Hani. "Effects of Praise and Reproof on Paired-Associate Learning in Educationally Retarded Children." In Remedial Teaching: Research and Comment. Edited by Wayne Otto and iarlfifioenke. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1969, pp. 125-30. Waetjen, Walter B. "The Teacher and Motivation." Theory into Practice 9 (February l970):10-15. 132 Wang, Margaret. "The Accuracy of Teacher's Predictions on Children's Learning Performance.” The Journal of Educational Research 66 (July-August 1973):462-65. CWattenberg, William W., and Clare, Clifford. ”Relation of Self-Concepts to Beginning Achievement in Reading." Child Develgpment 35 (June 1964): 461- 67. Weiner, B.; Heckhausen, H.; Meyer, W. U.; and Cook, R. "Causal Ascriptions and Achievement Motivation: A Conceptual Analysis of Effort and Reanalysis of Locus of Control. “ Journal of Personalityyand Social Psychology 21 (1972): 239- 48. weiner, B., and Kukla, A. "An Attributional Analysis of Achievement Motivation.“ Journal of Personality End Social Psychology 15 (l970):1-20. Weiner, B., and Petepan, P. A. "Personality Analysis and Effective Reactions toward Exams of Succeeding and Failing College Students.” Journal of Educational Psychology 61 (l970):144-51. Williams, Robert L. "Self-Concept and School Adjustment." The Personnel and Guidance Journal 46 (December Wyer, Robert S. "Effects of Task Reinforcement, Social Reinforcement, and Task Difficulty on Perseverance in Achievement-Related Activity.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 8: 269- 76. Wylie, Ruth. The Self-Concept: A Critical Survey of Pertinent ResearCh Literature. Lincoln: Univer- s1ty dfiNebraSkaPress, 1961. Zigler, Edward, and Kanzer, Paul. "The Effectiveness of Two Classes of Verbal Reinforcers on the Perfor- mance of Middle- and Lower-class Children." Journal of Personality 30 (1962):157-65. APPENDICES ,'J_ _.n-. .- 'u'v7 -'! l' APPENDIX A TEACHER CHECKLIST TO IDENTIFY HIGH AND LOW ACHIEVERS APPENDIX A TEACHER CHECKLIST TO IDENTIFY HIGH ‘ AND LOW ACHIEVERS High Average Low 1. Verbal and Comprehensive Ability Knows the meaning of words Expresses self well verbally Understands the relationship of opposites Classifies objects Understands the meaning of prepo- sitions and that they signal relationships Able to comprehend sentence and paragraphs (note details or ideas and retain in mind for brief periods) Relate both literal and inferred details of a story 2. Listening Skills Adequate attentiveness Follows directions well 3. Visual and Auditory Discrimina- tion Able to match alike shapes, letters, and words Auditorially discriminates between alike and different sounds 133 Moto Hand Can Can Und C011 Abll Id. Un r7 134 Motoeroordination Handles crayon and pencils well Can trace straight lines Can copy figures correctly Understands number concepts Counts up to ten objects Able to manipulate quantitative relationships Identifies and reproduces number symbols Understands the concept of money Identifies the lower case letters of the alphabet Identifies the eight basic colors Do you think this child is performing up to his potential? High .Average Low APPENDIX B DIRECTIONS FOR THE PRE-TESTS AND POST-TESTS APPENDIX B DIRECTIONS FOR THE PRE-TESTS AND POST-TESTS Directions for the Match to Form Pre-Test Instructions to Subjects: (Subject's name), I'm trying to find out how boys and girls learn, so I want you to help me by marking some sheets. Look carefully at this first figure, on the first sheet (the experimener points to the appropriate figure). Now, look carefully at each of the other four figures in the row (the experimenter points to each one of the other figures). Only one of these figures is just exactly the same as the first one. Find the one that looks exactly like the first figure and put a circle around it. There is a figure in this row that looks exactly like the first figure (the experimenter points to the second row). Put a circle around it. Do the same thing in each row. Good (is said of the subject follows the directions correctly). 135 136 Directions for the Match from Memory Pre-Test Instructions to Subjects:. This sheet is different from the other one. This time you will see a figure in this window (the experimenter points to the window in a tachistosc0pe). You will see the figure for only a few seconds so you must look at it carefully and try to remember what it looks like. After you have seen the figure, slide the cover down and look carefully at each figure, then circle the figure that you saw in the window. Look carefully at the figure in the window because I will show it to you only once. Do you have any ques- tions? Are you ready? Here is the first figure. Look at it carefully. Now, slide the cover down and look at all the figures, then circle the one that looks just like the one that you saw in the window. Remember only one is just like the one in the window. Good. Now, here's the next one. 137 Directions for the Match to Form Post-Test Instructions to Subjects: Remember how we did this paper before? Look care- fully at the first figure and then at each of the other four figures in this row. Circle the figure that is just exactly like the first one. Remember that in each row only one figure looks just exactly like the first one. 138 Directions for the Match from Memory Post-Test Instructions to Subjects: Do you remember how we did this paper? I'll show you a figure in this window, look at it carefully and try to remember it. Slide the cover down and circle the one that looked exactly like the figure you saw in the window. O.K., now look carefully at this figure in the window, slide the cover down and circle the figure just like the one in the window. Good. Now look at the next figure. APPENDIX C INTRODUCTION TO THE PROGRAM SEQUENCE AND VERBAL DIRECTIONS FOR THE PROGRAM SEQUENCE APPENDIX c INTRODUCTION TO THE PROGRAM SEQUENCE Instructions to Subjects: I'm trying to find out how children learn. I have put some figures on these cards. I want to see if you can learn the names of these figures (the eXperimenter points to the cards with figures on them). In order to learn the name of these figures, you must look at the figure and remember what it looks like. Then you must remember its name. Let me show how this (the Audio Flashcard Reader) machine works. I'll put the card in and then push button (the experimenter demonstrates). When you push the button one a voice will tell you the name of the figure. Later the voice will ask if you remember the figure's name. If you do, say it, then push button three to see if you were right. If you don't remember the name push button three and the machine will tell you the name. This is really hard, so don't feel bad if you can't remember all the names of the figures (this statement was made to those subjects in the Psychological Attender Hard group--PAH). 139 140 This is really easy, so I'm sure you will remember all the names of the figures (this statement was made to those subjects in the Psychological Attender Easy group-- PAE). For the Delayed Psychological Attender Hard group (DPAH) the introduction was followed immediately by the verbal directions for the program sequence. The statement ”This is really hard, so don't feel bad if you can't remember all the names of the figures,” was made after the fourth trial. 7 For the control group (NPA) the introduction was followed immediately by the verbal directions for the program sequence. 141 .N .H ma .N .H 5H .H wH .H m& .H vd .H ma .H NH .H HH .H OH .H m .H m .H h .H o .H m .H e .H m .H N .H H -xooua amnesz Owosm mucosvom thou 053 . m non 053 moo Hex >«E >03 >sm xmo to» >03 >sm 093 eon xmo to» max >w8 Hr-lr-IHHI-Iv-iv-i H H H H H H H H N musmflm Hofiua :m053 mom :0» o e.usmflu 0H03 50» MM swam own» new musmfim emnon mom :0» .unmwu 0u03 50% we soon soc» can musmflm was unwed nosed 0:» 30s assoc nosed 0:» 30: we mean mus 06am goats ago meat on» as mono goers mmcfiuswom m.uw >03 :0Hn3 mmcwuswom m.ufi >03 nowc3 00m HG Ufla wwm 0mm 0mm 00m mop mo sconce one on soon .66» one no no» on» so soon s.mo3 :.>sm :.0s3 =.flon wow wow wow wow wow wow mom how .053 6 me mess. mom on mounu couusn were no use: one mom. .noo a me «one 00w ou 00mg» coupon were no men: may mom. :.053 how .053 6 me meta. ..noo mom assoc .noo a as mass. =.mex saw «no .mex a we were. :.>HE ham .>ae a me wees. :.>o3 how .503 m we mesa: :.>sm how .25 m we 0.29.. =.xmo mom .xmo .x00 0 ma mwnac :.oom wow .66» a me mete. .>03 0 ma mass: .>sm m we mass: .033 m we mans: .non 0 me mane: .xmo 0 ma macs: .oo» a we mans. .mwx a ma mane: .>fla m we mane: mcowuomuwo.aonum> 142 .0 om .0 mN .0 0N .0 5N .0 0N .0 mm .N .0 vN .N .0 mN .N .0 NN .N .0 0N .N .0 ON .N .0 00 00009 000552 00054 00005000 0000 053 m 000 0 >03 m >50 m 000 0 >08 0 x00 N 000 N >03 N >50 N 000 N >08 N 005000 00009 =.053 >00 000000000 000 0800 000 >03 00003 000 .053 0 00 000B: ..000 000 000000000 000 0800 000 >03 00003 000 .000 0 00 000B: =.>03 >00 000000000 0.00 >03 00003 000 .>03 0 00 000B: =.>5m >00 «00000000 0.00 >03 00003 000 .>50 0 00 000B: =.00x >00 0300 0o 00 000: 000 0000 000:3 00m .000 0 00 00:0. =.>0E >00 000.00 0050 000 0000 00003 000 .>0E 0 00 0009: :.00000 000 50> 000 50> 0H N000 >00 50> 000a ..00000 00.50> 00 000 00 00000 000050 0050 0000 000 000 0000 00 0000 000 >00 .000 0000 >09: =munm00 00 000 so» 000 .000 0 m0 0000. =.00000 00.50> 00 000 00 00000 000050 0050 0000 000 005000 0000 00 0800 000 >00: =m>03 >00 50> 000: =.00000 00.5o> 00 000 00 00000 000050 0050 0000 000 005000 0000 00 0800 000 >00: :.00000 0.0009 .>50 >00 50> 000a =.00000 00.50> 00 000 00 00000 000050 0050 0000 000 005000 0000 00 0505 000 >00: .mumne 00020000 so» 000 .000 0 00 0000 .000. =.00000 00.50> 00 000 00 00000 000050 0050 000 005000 0000 00 0800 000 >00: :0>HE M mun mwfifi: =.00000 00.50> 00 000 00 00000 000050 0050 000 005000 0000 00 0500 000 >00: 0000000000 00000> .N :.00000 >000500000 00.50> .000 50> 00 «>03 >00 50> 000: .0 av 003 0 :.00000 000000 0050 0000 .005000 0000 00 0500 000 >00: .N . :N>5m >00 50> 000: .0 an >00 0 :.00000 000000 0050 0009 .00 >00 .0500 000 00050500 50> 00: .N :000 000 000 000 .x00 000 00 0000: .0 mm 000 v :.00000 000050 0050 0000 .000 0000 00 0500 000 >00: 0 N = 69300...." >000500000 00.50> .00> U000 50> 0H .00>: .0 en 000 e , :.00000 000000 0050 0000 000 005000 0000 00 0500 000 >00: 3 .N :.003000 00000 000 0.0009 0.053 50> 000 .053: u . 0 on 003 e .. . 00000 000050 0050 0000 000 000 0000 00 0500 000 >00: .0 :.00000 0000000000 00.000 .000 0000 so» 00: .0 mm 000 0 :.00000 000050 0050 0000 .00 >00 .000 0000 05000 300: .N :.00 0000 H 000000 00 000 0o.0 000 .000 0 0.0000 .000: .0 vm 000 v :.00000 . 000050 0050 0000 .005000 0000 00 0500 000 >00: .N :.00000 000 50> 000 50> 00 «>05 >00 50> 000: .0 mm >05 0 :.00000 00.50> 00 000 00 00000 000050 0050 0009 .000 0000 00 0500 000 >00: .0 mm x00 0 :.xmo 000 0x00 000 00 500000 000 000 .000 0 00 0009: .0 0m 000 m :.00» 000 0000 000 00 000 000 000 .000 0 00 0000: 00009 000552 005000 00009 0000000000 00000> 00050 00005000 0000 144 mm mm 0m cm 00 av 00 00 O H H H H H H H H HN HNHN FIN H N m0 vv m0 N0 00 00009 000552 00054 00005000 0000 000 0 000 0 >05 0 053 w 000 0 ”may m 000 m 053 m 000 m 000 m >05 0 003 0 >59 m 005000 00009 :.00000 00.50» .00» 0000 50» 00 .00» 0 00 0009: :.00000 000050 0050 0000 .000 0000 00 0500 000 000: .0000 000 000 000 .000. :.00000 000050 0050 0000 000 00 000 0000 0000 0000 03 00 0003. :0>00 000 000 000 .000 0 0.0000: :.00000 000000 0000 0000 .000000 0000 0000: :0053 >00 50» 000 .053: :.00000 000050 0050 0000 .005000 0000 00 0500 000 >00: ..00000 00.000 .000 000 00 0000 000 000 000. :.00000 000000 0000 0000 000 00 000 0000000 .0000 00 0000 000 0.0003: :.000 000 0000 000 00 500000 000 000000 0000 000 000 .000 0 00 0009: :.00» 000 000 000000 0000 0 000 00» 000 00 000 000 300 000 .000 0 00 0009: :.053 000 005 00000 0500 000 300 000 .053 0 00 0009: :.000 000 000000000 000 0500 000 003 00003 000 .000 0 00 0009: ...000 000 .0000 00000 000 00 m0 0000 000 .000 0 m0 0000 .000. :.>05 M00 000 m0 0000 000 0000 00003 000 .>00 0 00 0000. :.mo3 000 «00000000 00 00 003 00003 000 .003 0 00 0009: :.>5m 000 000 00 000 000 0000 00003 000 .>50 0 00 0009: 0000000000 00000> 145 FIN 5m 0 Flu-IN HN mm mm vm H mm me am 0 Fad om mm mm O H H H H hm mm mm 0 PIN HNHN vm xomua Honssz owcsd mocmavmm cumo >HE m >03 m >sm m xmn h on» h wax u >flE n 053 s hon 5 >03 5 >Dm . 5 >03 m >59 0 xmc o musmflm awake :. .usmdu m .umna m>aE mum so» can: :.mmunu couuzn swam cwsa .musmflm many mo mam: mnu ham: :.ho3 ma mnumwm mane: :.mmunu couusn swam awn» new mac many no made man ham: :.ucmflu m.umna m>sm hum so» can: :.mmnsu couusn swam cmzu .mco was» mez: :.xmo mmm .xmv. may no Eouvon may 0» unwom .xmv m ma manag :.cmm amm .Om» may no mo» may 0» ucflom .nmm.m ma mans .umm: :.uflg amm .mess mg» on ucflom .max n ma mans: :.>wE mum .mEsn map on uqaom .>HE m ma mane .>flz= 3.053 hum mmcwucwom. mum menu may. >03 nuanz mmm .053 0 ma mane: :.non ham mmcflucwom mum mean map hm3 :0H53 00m .non m m.umna .nom: :.ho3 ham mmaucHom m.uw >m3 nown3 mmm .mo3 m m.umnes :.>sm ham mco ma man man moan scans mmm .>:m ma vase .>am= gmunmflu a“ umm so» can .>03 m m.umna .mozg :.mmunu Gouuan swam awn» can mco man» msmz: cm>sm ham :0» awn .>am m ma vans: .. o mmhfiu. COUUHAQ Swan con» can munmwm was» no man: man amm: :mxmc mco was» damn w3 HmnEmEmH 50% can: :.mmunu couuan swam ems» .mco mwzu Ho mama may ham: acowuomuwa Hmnum> 146 .m . :.unmwn mHmu5H0mnm mH.5om .053 mama 50% MH .053: .H m» 053 m :.mmusu couu5n £m5m cmna .mu5mflm was» Mo 0855 may mam: .m gfiflon 5mm so» ofla .non ma mco mace: .H as non , m :.mmunu couu5n nm5m cmsa .mu5mflm was» no mam: may wmme .m gmusmfiu uw umm so» can .xma: .H on xmv m :.mmunu couu5n £m5m 5mg» .uco was» no man: man ham: .N gmcmm man so» can .cww. .5 an on» m :.mmunu couusn swam awn» .memc muw hum mmco was“ nmnEmEmu 50» on: .N :.unmfiu mamusaomnm mu“:52" .MMx 55mm so» HH .mfix m m.umna= .H mm max m ..mmugu nouusn amam can» .mco was» meng xomua HOAE5Z ou5mflm Hawua meowuomnflo Hmnum> 0av5¢ mocm5umm oumu ' APPENDIX D PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST SHEETS [faafii #54. H (4. X N. 8: X" Zé Y. M E H X 2: 52' X 3? ’ /\ /\ V /\ /\ f \L % . f /\ . \/ /\ /\ /\ V /\ /\ A /\ K) . A- \/ /\ A APPENDIX E RAW SCORES 0F SUBJECTS 149 Test Data of Subjects Psychological Attender Hard mcwemz . N :flmu m umom m mum H.5flmw H umom H mum unwm cowumooq Hm>wq acme Im>mwno< unmEummHB Hmnfi5z m.u€¢©9um 002 3 0 o 004 009 014 022 023 024 026 030 034 045 052 054 060 062 066 070 071 072 080 150 mcwsmz m came m umom N can H.cfimo H umom H can xom coflumocq am>mq “Ems Im>mwso< acmfiuumua Hmnfi5z n.ucmcfium 089 092 096 097 092 105 106 109 116 118 122 123 124 125 137 139 140 146 148 149 150 155 151 mcwfimz N cflmo N umom N mum H chu H umom H mum unmm cofiumooq Hm>mq ucmfi um>mflno¢ usmfiumcua umna5z m.“fi0©§um 157 162 3 6 1 166 169 173 177 178 179 181 190 193 195 196 203 mcwfimz001023100001021011100 ~.5Hmu . _ . _ . . . _ Numom824542327624634716635 N 0H“ 5 2 5 3 4 4 3 3 7 4 3 3 4 5 l 3 3 4 6 5 6 H Gwmo 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 4 1 2 1 0 1 2 H umom 8 6 6 7 8 6 5 6 8 4 6 8 6 5 8 5 3 7 6 8 8 H mum 5 4 4 5 6 4 3 4 8 5 4 7 7 4 4 6 5 8 6 7 4 xmm211121222211221211221 152 Test Data of Subjects Psychological Attender Easy GOHUMOS l l l .l. l l 1.. 1 l 1.. l l .l. 1 1... l l 1.. 1.. 1 l Hm>3 ““05 2 2 .l. l 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 l 1 1 .I. 2 2 2 1 Im>mwnod UCQBHUQQHB 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 nonfi5z m.ucmflfium 005 011 015 116 020 028 030 039 042 046 047 049 055 056 061 067 073 074 077 079 081 153 mcHEmz N cho N umom H mum H chw H umom H can xmm coHunooq Hm>mH acme Im>cho< usofiuuwua Hmna5z m.uflwfiflum 086 087 088 095 098 104 114 115 119 126 127 128 5 3 1 136 141 144 145 151 152 159 161 171 174 175 187 188 a - \Unhmbflvgnum 19‘ 20 2C 154 mGHEmz N chw N umom N mum . H chw H umom H mum xmm coHumooq Hm>wH acme Im>ano4 oucmaumoue Hmna5z m.ucmosum 174 175 187 188 194 202 205 155 Test Data of Subjects Delayed Psychological Attender Hard mcHEmz N GHMU N me H :Hmo H umom H mum xmm soHumooq Hm>mH acme Im>mHno¢ usmfiummua HonE5z m.&cwvflum 001 '007 018 019 025 027 031 032 035 040 043 050 057 063 064 076 078 082 083 091 093 156 mCHEmz N :Hmo N umom N mum H :Hmo H umom H mum xmm coHumuoq Hm>mH Dame I0>0H£o¢ 55mEummHB HmnE5z n.55055um 094 099 7 0 l 108 110 111 113 129 132 143 153 160 165 172 180 185 186 *192 200 157 Test Data of Subjects No Psychological Attender @5HEmz N chu N umom N mum H GHMU H umom H mum xmm coHumooq Hm>mH acme Im>mHnod uswfiumoua umna5z m.u:mcsum 006 8 O 0 010 012 013 017 021 033 036 037 038 041 044 048 051 053 058 059 065 2 o 068 069 158 ocHEmz N :Hmo N umom N mum H chu H umom H mum xmm coHumooq Hm>mH ucwE Im>mH£o¢ iucmEumoHB “05552 m.ucmflfium 075 084 5 8 0 090 100 101 103 112 117 12.0 121 130 131 133 134 138 142 154 156 158 164 167 159 maHEdz N GHmw N umom N mum H cho H “mom H mum Kmm coHumooq Hm>mH ucmfi Im>mH£0d ucmsummua HmnE5z m.u:mosum 168 170 176 182 183 184 189 191 197 A! 8 9 1 199 205 APPENDIX F ILLUSTRATION OF AN AUDIO FLASHCARD READER APPENDIX F ILLUSTRATION OF AUDIO FLASHCARD READER ' Card Holder Frame Talk Control Card Slot Track 1 Control 4” \ ’7 End 0! Track Flag Track 2 Control 4— Track 3 Control Track 4 Contra Master Record Receptacle (Turn Master Key Clockwise And Hold To Record) Talk Control Lock Receptacle (Turn Master Key Clockwrse To Lock) Volume Control . Receptacles (color coded) For Model 305 Headset Model 101M Audio Flashcard Reader