69-20,818

BARBERI, C arlo C harles, 1916A STUDY OF THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE
SECONDARY STUDENT TEACHING PROGRAM
AS PERCEIVED BY FACULTY, ADMINIS­
TRATORS, PARENTS AND PUPILS IN THE
MT. PLEASANT PUBLIC SCHOOLS, MT.
PLEASANT, MICHIGAN.
University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan

69-20,818
BARBERI, Carlo C harles, 1916Michigan State U niversity, Ed.D., 1969
Education, teach er training

University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan

A STU DY OP T H E A C C E P T A N C E OP THE S E CO ND AR Y
S T UDE NT TEAC HING P R O G R A M AS
FACULTY, ADM I N I S T R A T O R S ,
PUPILS IN THE MT.
SCHOOLS,

MT.

PERCEIVED BY
P A RE NT S AND

PL E A S A N T PUBLIC

PLEASANT, M I C H I G A N

By
(V
Car lo

cY

Barber!

A THE SI S

S u b m i t t e d to
M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y
in p a rt ial ful fil lm en t of the r e q u i rem en ts
for the degre e of

D O C T O R OF E D U C A T I O N

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and Higher E d u c a t i o n

1969

AB S T R A C T

A STUDY OP THE A C C E P T A N C E OP THE SE CO N D A R Y
S T UDE NT T E A C H I N G P R OG RA M AS P E R CE IV ED BY
FACULTY, AD MINIST RAT ORS, PARENTS AND
PUPILS IN THE MT. PLE AS AN T PUBLIC
SCHOOLS, MT. PLEASANT, M I C H I G A N

By
Carlo C. Barb er i

•

The pur po se of the study is to i nv es ti gate the
extent to whic h public

school student teachers are a c ­

cepted by adm in ist rators,
of the Mt „ Pleasant

teachers, parents

School System.

and pupil s

Pour m a j o r h yp ot he ses

were formulated:
1.

There is no sig nificant dif fe r e n c e in degr ee
of student teacher a cc eptan ce among parents,
pupils,

teachers and ad mi ni strat or s a ffi li at ed

with the M t . Pleasant
2.

Public Schools.

There is no significant diff e r e n c e in degre e
of student tea cher acc ep tance among six pupil
groups organiz ed ac co r d i n g to grade level.

3.

There is no significant d if fe re nce in degree
of student teacher ac ce ptan ce am o n g c o o p e rat in g
and n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g teachers in the M t . Pleasant
Public Schools.

4.

There is no significant diffe r e n c e in deg r ee
of student t e ac he r acce p t a n c e amon g four parent
groups or ga n i z e d a c c o r d i n g to edu ca ti onal b a c k ­
grou nd .

A r e v i e w of the lit er at ur e r e ve al ed studies w h i c h
focused upon the a tt itude s of selected school a f f i l i a t e d
groups as they p e r t a i n to student
However,

teacher acceptance.

none of t-hese studies a t te mp ted to examine these

groups in r e l a t i o n s h i p to each other.

Fur th er more,

in

several instances c o n f l i c t i n g results were o b ta in ed for
two or mo r e studies.
The p o p u l a t i o n con sis ted of selected parents,
teachers,

pup il s

and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s af fi li ated wi t h the M t .

Pleasant Public Schools.
A tt i t u d e s of t e ac he r a cc ep ta nce were d e t e r m i n e d by
the Student T e ach er E v a l u a t i o n Quest i o n n a i r e wh i c h was
a d m i n iste re d to all study par tic ip an ts.
was spec if ical ly d esi gn ed

Th e ins tr umen t

for use in this study.

The four h yp ot he se s were s t a t i st ic ally tre ate d u s in g
the Chi Squa re Test

for "K" independent

samples.

F in d i n g s of the Study
The pro fil e anal ys is

of r espon se

for par ents,

pupil s

teachers,

and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s r e ve al ed r elati ve ly p o s i t i v e

attitudes

of student teac he r a cc ep ta nce among all groups.

Areas of low p o si tive r e spon se con ce rn ed the student
tea cher's

subject compet enc e,

his ability to cope with

uario C. B a r b e r i

d i s c i p l i n e problems,

and over-all qua lity of i n s t r u c ­

tion .
The ana lysis

of the h yp ot he se s re v e a l e d the

foll o w i n g findings:
The five school aff il iate d groups did not dif fer
signi f i c a n t l y in their attitud es of student teac her
ac ceptance.

How ever, pup il s and c oo pe rati ng teac her s e x ­

p r ess ed the most p o si ti ve attitudes.

A d m i n i s t r a t o r s and

n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g te achers were m o d e r a t e l y po s i t i v e in
thei r attitud es,

and parents were least positive.

The six pup il groups did not dif fer si gn if ic antly
in their at titu des of student teac her acceptance.
Seventh,

eighth,

ni n t h and tenth grade pupi ls were most

accepti ng, w h ereas elevent h and t w e l f t h grade pupil s were
m o d e r a t e l y accepting.
There' were slight diff er en ce s in the ac ce p t a n c e
att it ude s of co o p e r a t i n g and n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g teachers.
C o o p e r a t i n g tea ch ers tended to be mor e accepting.
ever,

these di ff eren ce s were not

How­

sta tisti ca ll y significant.

Th e four pare nt groups org an iz ed a c c o r d i n g to v a r y ­
ing e du ca ti onal back gro unds did not dif fe r sig ni fi ca nt ly
in their student teacher a cc eptan ce attitudes.

A C K NO WL ED G ME NT S

I wish to pay tribute to my committee mem bers,
Fred J. Ve scolani,
Dr. Joh n Useen,

Dr. W i l l i a m V. Hicks,

Dr.

Dr. Max Raines,

and Dr. Haro ld J. D i l l o n for the benefit

of their gui danc e and con str uc ti ve c r it ic is m in w r i t i n g
this di ssertation.

A special than k you is owed to Dr.

Fred J. V e s c o l a n i whose able as si sta nce over an ext en de d
p er i o d of time has been most valuable.
I am indebted to the sec ondary pupils and pa re nt s
of the M t . Pleasant

school system,

and to the secondar y

te ach ers and ad min istr at or s who were gen erous of their
time in r es po n d i n g to the ques ti onna ir e and duri ng the
interviews.
I express my sincere ap p r e c i a t i o n to Dr. Wilbur
Brookover,
Mrs.

Dr. David E. Murphy, Dr. Wilb ur Harris and

H e l e n Conaway for their help and guidan ce in c o m ­

p l e t i n g this study.
I de dic ate this thesis to my wife,
her encou rag ement
to my children,

Catherine,

throughout the doc tora l program,

Joseph,

for
and

Carl and Mariann, whose interest

in the study kept alive the desire to com plete i t .

ii

TAB LE OF CONTENTS

Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

.

ii

LIST OF T A B L E S .......................................

v

Chapter
I.

INTRODUCTION

- .

1

.

.

1
Need for the S t u d y
The P r o b l e m ....
7
De f i n it io ns of Terms . .
H yp ot h e s e s to be T e s t e d

.

II.

A

V.

.

.

. .

9

15

23

A
F U N C T I O N A L DES CR IP TION OF THE CEN TRA L
M I C H I G A N U N I V E R S I T Y SEC ONDARY DIR ECT ED
S T UD EN T TE A C H I N G PROGRAM.
. . . . . .

25

TH E METH ODO LOGY.

.........................

42

Source of Data . . . . . . . . .
The P op ul at ion
..............
D e s c r i p t i o n of the Instrument . . . .
Pr ocedures
. . . . . . . . . .

42
42
43
44

A N A L Y S I S OF THE D A T A

.

IV.

. .
12

R E VI EW OF THE PERTINENT LITERATURE.
S u m m a r y ........

III.

.

47

Profile Anal ysi s
.....................
Hy pot h e s i s 1 ....
63
Hy pot h e s i s I I .
65
H ypot he si s I I I .
67
Hypoth es is IV
. . . .....................
S u m m a r y ........
69

iii

47

69

Chap te r
VI.

Page

SUMMARY AND C O N C L U S I O N S ...............

72

S u m m a r y .............................
72
C o n c l u s i o n s .........................
75
Sugges tio ns for F u rt he r R e s e a r c h . . .

78

B I B L I O G R A P H Y .................... -......................

8l

................................

91

APPENDICES.
Appendi x
A.

Student Teacher E v a l u a t i o n

B.

Letter to P a r e n t s .......................... Ill

iv

Questionnaire

.

92

LIS T OF TABLES

Table
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Page
F r e q u e n c y Res pon ses of C o o p e ra ting Teachers,
Parents, N o n - c o o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Pupils and Admi nis tr at ors, Qu e s t i o n 1.

48

F r e q u e n c y Respons es of C o o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Parents, N o n - c o o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Pupils and Adm inis tr at or s, Q u e s t i o n 2.

49

F r e q u e n c y Respon ses of Co o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Parents, N o n - c o o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Pupils and Ad mi nist ra to rs , Qu e s t i o n 3.

51

F r e q u e n c y Resp on se s of Co o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Parents, N o n - c o o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Pupils and Ad mi nist ra to rs , Q ue st io n 4.

52

F r e q u e n c y Responses of Co o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Parents, N o n - c o o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Pupils and Ad min is tr at ors, Qu est io n 5.

54

F r e q u e n c y Res po ns es of Co op er a t i n g Teachers,
Parents, N o n - c o o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Pupils and Ad mi nist ra to rs , Qu est io n 6 .

55

F r e q u e n c y Res pons es of Co o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Parents, N o n - c o o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Pupils and Administ ra to rs , Questio n 7.

56

Fr eq u e n c y Res pons es of Co op er a t i n g Teachers,
Parents, N o n - c o o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Pupils and A d m i ni strat or s, Q ue stio n 8 .

58

F r e q u e n c y Respons es of Co o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Parents, N o n - c o o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Pupils and Admi nis tr at ors, Que s ti on 9.

59

F r e q u e n c y Res po nse s of C o o p e ra ti ng Teachers,
Parents, N o n - c o o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Pupils and Ad mi ni st rato rs , Que stio n 10
.

60

v

Table
11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

Page
Freq u e n c y R espo ns es of C o o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Parents, N o n - c o o p e r a t i n g Teachers,
Pupils and Admi nis tr at ors, Q u e s t i o n 11 .

62

F re q u e n c y of Res p o n s e of Five School
Related Groups in Thre e Student
Acceptan ce Ca te gor ies .....................

64

F re q u e n c y of Re s p o n s e of Pupils fr om Six
Grades in Thr ee Student T e ac he r
Accep ta nc e Categ or ie s .....................

66

F reque nc y of R e s p o n s e of C o o p e r a t i n g and
No n - c o o p e r a t i n g Tea chers in Three
Student T e a ch er Ac ce pt a n c e Categories.

68

F re quency of Re s p o n s e of Four Parent Groups
in Three Student Tea cher Ac ce p t a n c e
C a t e g o r i e s ..................................

vi

.

70

C H AP TE R I

I N T R O DUCT IO N

Di s c u s s i o n s wi t h memb ers of the ad m i n i s t r a t i v e
services

staff of the School of Ed uca tio n, M i c h i g a n State

University, membe rs of the doc toral committee,

and with

the De a n and As so c i a t e D e a n of the Schoo l of E d u c a t i o n
at Cen tra l M i c h i g a n Unive r s i t y led to the d e v e l opmen t of
the idea that a study of the Cent ra l M i c h i g a n Un iv er s i t y
Secondary Dir ec te d Student T e a c h i n g P r o g r a m as p r a c t i c e d
in the M t . Pleasant Scho ol Distric t would pro vi de i n f o r ­
m a t i o n that would be of benefit to Cent ra l M i c h i g a n U n i ­
versity and the M t . Pleasant
of various

Public

Schools.

The r ea ct io ns

school a ff il i a t e d groups to the student t e a c h ­

ing p r o g r a m in the M t . Pleasant Scho ol Dist ri ct

should be

studied in m o r e detail.

Need for the Study
For ma ny years Central M i c h i g a n Unive r s i t y has been
sending se condary student teachers to public
laboratory training.

The M t . Pleasant

were the first off-ca mpu s public

Public Schools

schools c ontr ac te d by

Central M i c h i g a n U ni ve r s i t y for this purpose.

1

schools for

In 1891 a n u mb er of p u b l i c - s p i r i t e d citizens of
M t . Pleasant,
ing a no rm al

Michiga n,
school.

formed an as s o c i a t i o n for b u i l d ­

The school was es ta blis he d and

ma n a g e d by that group until 1 8 9 5 , whe n it was offered
to, and acce pted by,

the State of Michigan.

Total enroll men t

for the first year of State

Central was eighty-four.
to 5^0.

By 1901 enrollment had gr ow n

The 1968 enrollm ent

figure totaled 11,500 s t u ­

dents .
The act by wh i c h the M i c h i g a n legisla tur e made
Central Norm al a state in stit ut io n de cla res that its p u r ­
pose

shall be,

"For p r e p a r a t i o n and tra ining of pers ons

for t e achi ng in the rural

district

schools and the pri1

mary d e p a r t m e n t s

of the graded

schools of the State."

The Sev e nt h A n nu al Ca tal ogue of 1901-1902 of Central
Normal

stated:
. . . its ai m is to fur nis h better tea chers for
the schools in which the mass es are educated.
Its influenc e reac he s to the home of the farmer
and the mechanic.
The best teachers should be
employed in the ele me nta ry schools, not only b e ­
cause so man y chi ldr en never get beyond them, but
because all future work in school must rest on the
f o u n d a t i o n laid in the elementar y g r a d e s . 2
At this time the school year was div id ed into three

terms of twelve weeks

each.

The fall term started on

^Sev en th Annu al Cat alog ue of 1901-1902 at Cen tra l
Normal.
2 I b i d . , p.

4.

S ep te mber 30; the w i n t e r term on J a n u a r y

6; and the

spring t e r m on April 7.
T u i t i o n was free to all students p r e p a r i n g to
teach in the rur al

schools of the state.

All other

students paid a t u it io n of $3 per term.
In 1901 the State L e g i s l a t u r e a p p r o p r i a t e d
$50,000 for a student teac her t raini ng school building.
Central Nor ma l at that time had b u i l d i n g and eq ui p m e n t
valued at $150,000.
equip me nt

Present v a l u a t i o n of buil di ng s and

is $57,627,^01.

C e ntr al N o rm al 's

eig ht h annual cat al og of 1902-1903

's t a t e s :
. . . by an a dmir ab le a rr angem en t m a d e b e t w e e n
the City of M t . Pl easant and the State Bo a r d of
Education, from thir ty to forty ch i l d r e n from the
city are r e g u l a r l y assigned to each grade of the
training school.3
The col lege and the M t . Pleasant school

syst em have had

a lon g and excellent relationship.
In the early days of Central M i c h i g a n N o r m a l Sch ool
very few degr ee s were granted.

The ma j o r i t y of C e nt ral' s

gr ad u a t e s were giv en Life C e r t i fic at es after c o m p l e t i n g
a t w o - y e a r curriculum.

Most of th e s e g ra du at es taught

in e l e m e n t a r y schools.
As late as 1923 all student t e a c h i n g was done in
the c o l le ge tr a i n i n g school w h ic h c o n s i s t e d of a K-6,

E i g h t h Annu al Cat al og ue of 190 2- 19 03
Normal.

at C e ntr al

7-9 organi zation .
su peri nt en de nt

Mr.

Park G. Lant z was

se rving as

of the t r a in in g school in 1923.

that as the n u m b e r of degree teachers increase d,
for mo re

student

the need

teac her facilit ies on t h e secondary level

became m o r e evident.
the most

He felt

The local public h i g h school seemed

l o gi ca l place to implement a student t e a c h e r

program.

Mr.

Lantz p r op osed such a p r o g r a m to Dr. E.

Warriner,

Preside nt of Central Normal.

C.

Dr. Warr in er

attended a special m e e t i n g of the M t . Pleasant Boa rd of
E d u c a t i o n on October 20, 1924.

Th e Board minutes read

as follows:
The lac k of sufficient trainin g f ac il it ies for
Nor ma l School students was pr es e n t e d by Presid en t
E. C. Wa r r i n e r and Superintendent P. G. Lantz.
M o t i o n by H a nn ah S. Vowles, seconded by E. 0.
Harris that the Board of Educat ion of the City
schools signify a wi llingness to c o o p e r a t e with
the a u t h o ri ti es of the Nor mal School in f u r n i s h i n g
a d d i t i o n a l tra ini ng facilit ies for students for
the 1 925-19 26 school y e a r . 4
The M t . Pleasant Board minu tes of M a y 19,

1925,

state t h a t :
An a g re ement entered into between t h e School
D is tr ict of M t . Pleasant, Party of the first part,
and the Central M i c h i g a n State N o r m a l School, Party
of the second part, for the use of c e r ta in rooms in
the scho ols of said city for the tra i n i n g of
teachers:
It Is h e reby agreed:
1.

4

That eight critic teachers, or their e q u i ­
valent, shall be placed in Fan ch er School and
Ce n t r a l School Buildings as soon as v a c a n c i e s
occur.

M t . Ple asant
Year 1924-1925.

Public School Board Mi nut es,

School

5
2.

That critics w i t h not less than four years
of trai ning shall be employed for these
positi ons , and that the par t y of the first
part shall pay $1,000 of their yea rl y salary,
and the party of the second part shall pay
the re mai nd er s through the Board of Education.

3.

That the city superintendent, r e p r e s e n t i n g
the party of the first part, and the' T r a i n i n g
School Sup er int endent, r e p r e s e n t i n g the party
of the second part, shall cooperate in e m p l o y ­
ing the critic teachers.

4.

The party of the first part will supply b u i l d ­
ings, equipment, and supplies.

5.

That all critic teachers wil l be und er the
s u p e r vi si on of city super int endent just as
the regu la r te achers and wi l l be re s p o n s i b l e
to him for all phases of thei r wor k h a v i n g to
do with the ins truct io n of the pupils.
They
wil l atte nd all t e a c h e r s ’ me e t i n g s called by
the city superintendent.
The critic teachers,
wo rk ing in the city schools, will be r e s p o n s i ­
ble to the superintendent of the Tr a i n i n g
School only from the standpoint of the training
of student teachers.

6.

That the same course of study and textboo ks
will be used in the rooms wher e critic teachers
are place d as in all the city schools.

M o t i o n by H a n n a h S. Vowles, seconded by W. D. Hood
that the fol lo wing agreement wi t h the State Board
of E d u c a t i o n be unanim ou sly adopted.
It was
ad op ted May 19, 1925.5
Park G„ Lantz,

now retired,

in a letter dated August

stated to the writ er

4, 1962,

. . . in my opi ni on that it was the fin anci al
part of the agreeme nt which re al l y sold itse lf
to the Board.
I also feel that the college was
g e t t i n g more than its money's worth.
He further writes:
We co ntr a c t e d to use only critics who had a
m a s t e r ' s degre e and several years of success ful
experience.
This would seem a good gu ar a n t e e for

5Ibid. , p. 203 .

6

both parties.
It w o u l d tend to com pe ns ate for
any loss of i n s t r u c t i o n due to the use of student
teachers.
This was rathe r a h i g h s t anda rd for
high schools at that t i m e . 6
By Ma y 1928,

C e n t r a l ' s need for m o r e critic tea cher s

on the secondary level was

evident.

School District and C e nt ra l

The M t . Ple asa nt

State em p l o y e d seven a d d i ­

tional critics for the s ec onda ry program.
four were to serve the M t . Pleasant
many years;

namely, E. J. Gra mbau ,

Orcutt, and Ethel B. L a M o r e .

Of these,

scho ol sy st em for
G.

D. Muys ke ns ,

L. E.

S a lari es for these critics

ranged from $2,300 to $ 2 ,6 00 of w h i c h the M t . Pleasant
School District pai d $1,000.
The number of s e c o n d a r y critics was increas ed to
f o urt ee n by July 11,

1949.

The effect of these f our te en

critics u p o n the se co nda ry p r o g r a m has b e e n very p o s i ­
tive.

Each has served as de pa rt m e n t

head in his maj o r

area of training.
It was agre ed fro m th e onset of
that

the loyalty of these cri ti cs was

schools;

college in ter es ts were to be

In June 1959,
gram

aff iliation,

"...

to be to the public
secondary."7

the se con dary d i r e c t e d teac hi ng p r o ­

was altered to in clude

vation,

the program,

a program

of dir ec te d o b s e r ­

and dir e c t e d teaching.

This change

r es ul ted in the a d d i t i o n of t hi rt y - o n e co o p e r a t i n g teachers
to the program.

C h ap te r III presents a d e s c r i p t i o n of the

^Letter of Mr.
7 I b i d . , p.

2.

Park G. Lantz,

dated August

4, 1962.

7

p r o g r a m now in effect

at Central M i c h i g a n U ni ve rs ity and

as pra c t i c e d in the M t . Pleasant

school system.

The success of secondary d i r e c t e d t e a ch er p r og ram
involves the c o mb in ed
trators,

teachers,

efforts and support of a d m i n i s ­

students, and pare nt s alike.

It is

felt that an e x a m i n a t i o n of the reac t i o n s of these groups
to the
ways

student t e a c h e r will be of va l u e in det er mi ni ng

in which that effo rt and su pp ort may be further

strengthened.

The Pro ble m

Statement of the P r o b l e m
The p u rp os e of th e study is to inv es ti ga te the extent
to w h ic h public

school

student tea c h e r s are acc e pt ed by

admi nis trator s,

te achers,

parents,

and pupils

of the school

system.

Scope of the P r ob lem
The study f o c us es upon the p e r c e pt io ns and att it ud es
of parents,

pupils,

teachers,

and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a ff il i a t e d

with the M t . Pleasant public schools.
Th e study is sp ec if icall y c on ce rned w i t h the f o l l o w ­
ing tasks:
1.

An a n alysi s

of parent,

administrator

pupil,

teacher, and

evaluations p e r t a i n i n g to various

aspects of student teac her performance.

8

2.

A co mp a r i s o n of the degree to w h i c h pupils,
parents,

teachers,

and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s

express

pos iti ve a tt i t u d e s towa rd student teachers.
3.

A co mp a r i s o n of the deg re e to w h i c h pupils
at va rious g r ad e levels express pos i t i v e
attitudes

4.

to wa r d student teachers.

A co mpa ri so n of the deg re e to w h i c h c o o p e r a t i n g
and non-c'oo'perating teache rs express po s i t i v e
attitudes t o w a r d student teachers.

5.

A co mp ar i s o n of the d e gr ee to w h i c h par ent s
w i t h different

ed uca ti ona l ba ck gr o u n d express

posi tiv e a t t i t u d e s toward

student

teachers.

L im it ations of the Study
Th e li mit ati ons of the study fall into thr ee c a t e ­
gories.

The first co n c e r n s the choice of popula tion .

Th e cr os s - s e c t i o n of parents,

pupils,

teachers,

and

ad mini s t r a t o r s r e p r e s e n t e d in the study are tak en from one
school district.

This does limit the extent of g e n e r a l i ­

zation from the findings.

However,

it also enables an

in-depth an aly sis of response.
A second l im it a t i o n is cite d in r e f e r e n c e to
methodology.
technique.

The study u t i l i z e s the qu es t i o n n a i r e
Th i s t e c h n i q u e is subject to the usu al

r e s e a r c h criticisms.
A third lim it ation concerns the choice of a c c e p ­
tance factors

inc luded in the q ue st ionn air e.

Although

9

the ins tr um ent used in the study does d is c r i m i n a t e among
va ri ou s a tt it ud es t o w a r d t e a c h e r acce pta nce,

the i n c l u ­

sion of other a c c e p t a n c e fact or s and/or measu re me nt
devices may lead to d iffe re nt

con clusions.

D e f i n i t i o n of Terms

Student T e a c h e r A c c e p t a n c e
Refe rs

to an appr a i s a l of the f o l l o w i n g qua lities

as they r e l a t e to the student teac her situation:

(1)

student

stu­

t e a c h e r ’s subject m a t t e r profic ie ncy,

dent t e a c h e r ’s effect on pupils,

(3) student t e a c h e r ’s

p r o v i s i o n of indi vi d u a l attent ion,
s t r u c t i o n pro vi ded by student
teacher's performance
problems ,

(2)

(4) qual it y of i n ­

teacher,

(5)

student

in cop in g with p u p i l di sci p l i n e

(6) q u ality of c o o p e r a t i n g te ac h e r ' s i n s t r u c ­

t i o n w h e n student t e a c h e r is ass i g n e d to the classroom,
(7) effect
effect

of observers' up o n the c l a s s r o o m process,

(8)

of d i r e c t e d te a c h i n g p r o g r a m u p o n total educat ional

p r o g r a m of the school system,

and

(9) overall qual ity of

d i r e c t e d tea c h i n g program.

De cr e e of Student T e a c h e r
Acceptance
Fo r the pu r p o s e of this
teacher a c c e p t a n c e
ratings

study d e gree of student

is def ined as the tota l combined

on the S t udent T e a c h e r E v a l u a t i o n Q u e s ti on naire

for each respond ent .

10

Student Tea che r F u n c t i o n
Refers to objectives, p r o c e s s e s ,

and b e h a v i o r s

directly rela te d to the di r e c t e d student

t e ac he r p r o g r a m

as def i ne d In Chapter III.

Profes sio nal Laborat or y
Experie nce
Refe rs to al l those o r g a n i z e d and d i r e c t e d c o n ­
tacts with children, youth, and adu lt s w h i c h m a k e a
direct

c o n t r i b u t i o n to an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of i n d i v i d u a l s

and their g u idan ce

in the t e a c h i n g l e a r n i n g pro cess.

Dir ected T e a c h i n g
Is defined as the per io d of gui de d

i n s t r u c t i o n by

a su pervi si ng tea che r wh e n the student t e a c h e r a s su me s
re sp on sibili ty for the wo r k w i t h a gi v e n group of learners
for a giv en length of time.

Student Teacher
Refers to the indivi dual t e a c h e r candida te ;
trainee who ac t i v e l y p ar t i c i p a t e s

in a p r o c e s s

a

of student

teaching.

College L a b o r a t o r y School
Refers to a school which is a d m i n i s t e r e d a n d / o r
staffed by the coll ege or u nive rs it y,
college or u n i v e r s i t y m a i n t a i n s

over w h i c h the

legal control.

11

Off-Campus Cent er
Refers to a school s y s t e m whi ch has j o i n e d with
Central M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y by co n t r a c t u a l agreeme nt
have student

to

teachers in its schools.

Cooperati ng Schools
Refers to the i n d i v i d u a l
respective

schools w i thin the

systems wh i c h m a k e up the O f f - C a m p u s

Center.

No n - C o o p e r a t i n g Tea chers
Refers to teachers

on the r e g u l a r staff who are not

assigned to w o r k with student

teachers.

Cooper at in g Tea cher s
Refers to a r e gu la r t e a c h e r on t h e staff of the
public

school system in who se

class or classes the s t u ­

dent teac her is assigned to work.

College Coo rd in ator
Refers to that p e r s o n appo i n t e d by the un iver s i t y
to direct the activ it ie s of the d i r e c t e d t e a c h i n g prog ram
in the Off -Ca mpus Center.

Af f i l i a t i o n
Refers to the p e r i o d of gui de d or su perv i s e d study
when the student assumes r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
a given group of learners

for the wor k with

for a given le ng t h of time.

(Same as di r e c t e d tea chi ng exce pt

for the time assigned.)

12

Directed t e a c h i n g Is u s u a l l y for an ei gh t - w e e k p e ri od all
day.

A f f i l i a t i o n Is u s u a l l y for one or two hours a day

for all or part

of a semester.

Affiliate
A student who engages

in the af f i l i a t i o n program.

Ob se rv ation
A p r o g r a m w h e r e b y students who are p l an ni ng to
te ac h will vis it
in mind.

These

to look for,

classes to obse rve wi t h clear purp oses
st udents u s ua ll y jot do wn specific things

and also re co r d ob se r v a t i o n s made.

Observer
One who p a r t i c i p a t e s

in the o b s e r v a t i o n program.

Ad mi ni st rato rs
Refers

to those p e rsons in the school system who

spend their en ti re time in the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and s u p e r ­
vis io n of the school.
tendents,

assi s t a n t

These per s on s are generally s u p e r i n ­

s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s , principals,

and

assistant princi pal s.

H y p o t h e s e s to be Test ed

H ypo thesis I
There is no signif icant d i f f e r e n c e in degree of
student tea c he r ac ce p t a n c e among parents,

pupils,

teachers

and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a f f i l i a t e d wit h the M t . Pleasant
Public Schools.

13

Hypot h e s i s II
There Is no significant difference in deg re e of
student teacher a cc ep ta nc e among six pupil groups
o rgan iz ed a c c o r d i n g to grade level.

Hy poth es is

III

There is no significant difference in deg re e of
student teacher a ccept an ce among c oo pera ti ng a n d n o n ­
c oope ra ti ng teachers in the M t . Pleasant Public Schools.

Hy poth es is

IV

There is no significant difference in deg re e of
student

teacher ac cep tance among four parent groups

o r g a n i z e d a c c o r d i n g to educational background.

O r g a n i z a t i o n of the Study
Th e thesis

is p r ese nt ed in six chapters:

Cha pter I :
teaching,

Examines the nature of d i r e c t e d student

the need for the study,

its limitations,

the scope of the study,

and a def in it io n of terms us e d in the

sec on da ry d ire ct ed tea ch ing program.
Cha pt er I I :

Presents a re vi ew of the pert in en t

literature.
Chap ter I I I :

Presents a functional d e s c r i p t i o n

of the Central M i c h i g a n Universit y

secondary dir ec te d

student teachin g program.
Chap ter I V :

Details the met ho do lo gy use d

the four que sti onna ir es and explains pro cedures.

to deve lop

14

Ch a p t e r V :

Inte rp re ts

c o o p e r a t i n g teachers,
trators, pupils,

n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g teachers,

a d mi ni s­

and parents.

Chapter V I :
mendations

the d a t a obtain ed from

Summarizes

the study and makes r e c o m ­

and sug ge stion s for future research.

C H A P T E R II

A R E V I E W OF THE PERTIN EN T LIT ER AT UR E

Col leg es and u n i v e r s i t i e s now engaged in a p r o g r a m
of tea ch er tra inin g have r e c o g n i z e d from the b e gi nn in g a
need for la bo ra tory expe ri en ce

for pr osp ecti ve teachers.

Most

started wit h a la boratory

colleges and u n i v e r s i t i e s

or campus

school to p r o v i d e this experience,

of i nc reas ed numbers

but bec a us e

of student teachers and a need for

a broa de r experience, ma n y teac he r trai nin g ins ti tutions
in the early 1 9 2 0 ’s beg a n to contract wi th the public
school systems for of f-c ampus

facilities for this experi-

8

ence.

L a b o r a t o r y e xp eriences p r ovid e a re sou rce for s t u ­
dent s and teachers w h ic h gives mean in g to ideas and
help s the learner to see more clea rly the im plem en ta ti on
of those ideas.
There is a need for the student teache r to be e x ­
pos ed to a la bor at or y expe r i e n c e that involves children
O

A s s o c i a t i o n for Student Teaching, Off-Campus
Student T e a c h i n g , T h i r t i e t h Y e a r b o o k (Lock Haven, Pa.:
The As so ciatio n, 1951), p. 10.

15

16

of varied In te ll ec tual abilities,
socio-economic

levels.

h o m e backgr ound,

The experi en ce

and

should pr ovi de

direct contact with the range of ac ti v i t i e s of t o d a y ’s
teacher.

The student teac her w o r k i n g closely w i t h

pupils in the cla ss ro om is not enough.

Muc h of a tea ch ­

e r ’s work inv olved the act iv ities of the school as a
whole.

The student

te ac hing assignm ent

meaning when the college

takes on more

student shares in a ss i s t i n g in

activities such as ass emb ly programs,

school p a p e r and

student council.
Sch or lin g indicates that:
. . . the concept of student te a c h i n g is too
limited.
We need to think of it as liv i ng with
pupils in a great v a ri et y of situati ons in which
emphasis is on the effort to get a d es ir able
inter-play b e tw ee n in div idua ls and enviro nm ent
that con tr ib ut es to normal growth.
Student te a c h ­
ing should be b ro ad ened to incl ude exp er ience with
tasks that carry the teacher beyond, the c l a s s r o o m . 9
The editing subco mm it te e of " W h o ’s in Ch ar ge Here?"
stated:
E l e m e n t a r y and secondary schools ha v e r e s p o n s i ­
bilities in teacher educ at ion since they provide
the essenti al res ou rc es for student teaching:
pupils, supe rv is in g teachers, p hy si cal facilities,
and an o n g oi ng edu c a t i o n program.
Sc hoo ls and
colleges have res po n s i b i l i t y for joint p l a n n i n g
of student teaching, and they bene fi t m u t u a l l y
from it.
The int er -p lay of c o l l a b o r a t i o n in
. student t e ac hi ng pro mp ts ex a m i n a t i o n of present
practice and stimulates e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n in t e a c h ­
ing.
It also pro vid es o p p o r tu ni ti es to test
relation sh ip s bet ween theory an d practice, to
o
Rali eg h Schorling,
Mc Gra w-Hill B o o k Company,

Student T e a c h i n g
19^9), p. 10.

(New York:

17

red uc e the lag b e t w e e n d i s c o v e r i e s in r e s e a r c h
and a p p l i c a t i o n s in practice, to lea rn fr om r e ­
sults of act ual t e a c h i n g - l e a r n i n g situations,
and to co ntr ib ut e to assu ra n c e s that n e w teache rs
will be we ll p r e p a r e d . 10
A ft e r 1928 ma n y tea cher tr a i n i n g i n s t i tu ti ons
used coll eg e campus

sec ond ar y

schools as well as public

schools for student t e a c h e r s . 11
bili ty has

shifted to publ ic

P o ste r

12

the nu mb e r of campus

wh i l e at the same time o f f- ca mp us

increasing.

this tr e n d by saying:

B r i n k f u rt he r s u b s t a nt ia te s

”. . .

and u n i v e r s i t i e s had campus

even t h o u g h most
schools by 1948,

had w o r k i n g a r r a n g e m e n t s w i t h nea rb y public
Public

the r e s p o n s i ­

schools.

states that in 1933,

schools was expanding,
co ntr acts were

Re cently,

school systems

colleges

they also
schools.”

13

in the U n i t e d States have in

recent years been d e m a n d i n g that b e g i n n i n g tea che rs be

" W h o ’s in Cha r ge Here? " a d i s c u s s i o n paper,
Na ti ona l C o m m i s s i o n on T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n and P r o f es si onal
Standards, Wa shi ng ton , D. C.
11E. L. Welborn, " C o o pe rati on wi t h Loc al Schools
in Studen t T ea ch i n g , " E d u c a t i o n a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and
S u p e r v i s i o n , VI (November, 1920), 445-470.
12P r a n k K. Poster, "The T r a i n i n g Scho ol in the
E d u c a t i o n of T e a c h e r s , " T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n C u r r i c u l a ,
Na tio nal Sur ve y of E d u c a t i o n of Teachers, B u l l e t i n No.
10 (1933), pp. 367-401.
^ W i l l i a m G. Brink, "The A d m i n i s t r a t i o n of Student
T e a c h i n g in U n i v e r s i t i e s W h i c h Use the Public Sch o ol s, "
E d u c a t i o n a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and Superv ision, X L I V
(O c t o b e r , 1 9 5 B ), 394-407.

18

better qua l i f i e d to teach.

Henc e,

the public

sc hools

have be e n a gr ee ab le to enter into contract wi t h t e ac he r
t r a i n i n g institut ion s to he lp qual ify b e g i n n i n g te ach ers
by p l a c i n g them in the typ ical

setting.

Ma ny edu ca to rs beli ev e that the publi c

school

has i nc re ased its f unct io n as a l a b o r a t o r y to the point
wher e it is of least equal or of g r e a t e r imp or t a n c e than
the campus

labor at or y school in the educ a t i o n of teachers

for our schools.
Se ve ral

14

studies indica te ac ce p t a n c e of the off-

campus

student t each in g p r o g r a m by p a r e n t s and pupils.
15
Sharpe
in a study of 500 students who had student
tea che rs

from Indi ana State Un iv er sity ,

ind ica ted that

the "pupils in the o f f - c a m p u s schools vote student
ers some place b e t w e e n
on all co mp eten ci es

'outstanding'

and

'satisfactory'"

except the one w h i c h rela tes

help g i ven pupi ls wit h their p ers on al problems.
general,

pup ils bel ie ve d that

selves,

In

that they taught

that they made pupils

and that they p ro v i d e d

to the

student te ach ers w e r e well

pre pa re d to t e a c h their subjects;
de mocr at ic al ly;

teach­

think for t h e m ­

c o n s i de rable individual

124

Est er J. S w e n s o n and Robert C. Hammock , "OffCampus L a b o r a t o r y E x p e ri en ce s, Their Growth, I mpor ta nc e
and Present Rol e In Te ac her Ed u c a t i o n , " Of f-Campus
Student T e a c h i n g , T h i r t i e t h Y e a r b o o k (Lock Hauer, Pa.:
The A s s o c i a t i o n for Student Teac hi ng , 1951), p. 21.
■^D ona ld M. Sharpe, "The Pupils Lo ok at the P r o ­
gram," O ff -Cam pu s Student T e a c h i n g , T h i r t i e t h Yea rbo ok

19

help.

At the same time, pupils

ers n e e d e d im pro veme nt
pers on al problems;
in order;

felt that

student

teach­

in their a b il it y to he l p wi t h

in their ability to ke e p the class

in their abi li ty to keep p u p i l s busy and

interested, and in their abi li ty to co m m u n i c a t e e f f e c t ­
ively.

Th e study indic at ed that p u pils do not appear

to be highly critica l of s t u d e n t - t e a c h e r co mp eten cie s.
Reac t i o n s
categories:

fa v o r i n g student

tea ch er s were in six

(1) s a t i s f a c t i o n wi th p r o g r a m but no r e a s o n

for f avor ab le attitude,

(2) app ro va l

of the p r o g r a m b e ­

cause student te ach ers p r e s e n t e d new ideas, n e w a p p r o ac he s,
and a new experience,

(3) wel come to an op p o r t u n i t y to

help future teachers,

(4) enjoyme nt of student te ac hers

because they were young and mo r e ne ar l y their own age,
(5) p r o v i s i o n for mor e
that

indivi dua l help and a f e eli ng

student tea che rs u n d e r s t o o d them better,

and

(6)

approval of a tenden cy to ma ke class less formal and
more

i n t e re st ing."^
U n f a v o r a b l e r e act io ns to student teac he rs we re in

four categories:

(1) student t ea ch er s were i nf er io r to

regular teachers and p u p i l s ’ le a r n i n g was
they do not mak e class interesting,
pline d e t e ri or at ed ,

and

impaired,

(2)

(3) the class d i s c i ­

(4) pupi ls found it d if ficul t

to adjust to mo r e than one teacher.

17

(Lock Hauer, Pa.:
The A s s o c i a t i o n for Student Te ach in g,
1951), pp. 104-120
l 6 I b i d . , p.

106.

1 7 I b i d ., p.

107.

20

Sharpe's

18

int er vi ew s w i t h s u p e r v i s i n g teac he rs

r e v e a l e d that w i t h few ex cep tions they felt that pupils
liked to have

student teachers

in the cla ssrooms.

The N o r t h Cen tral A s s o c i a t i o n S u b c o m m i t t e e on
Student T e a c h i n g in its report on current p r a c t i c e s
student t e a c h i n g in 1000 school systems

in

in the N o r t h

Central A s s o c i a t i o n area stated:
On the whole, the gene ral f e e l i n g or a t t i ­
tude of the fac ulty towa rd the s u p e r v i s i o n of
student t e a c h i n g was favorable.
Mo re th a n 80
per cen t of the re s p o n d e n t s said their staff m e m ­
bers cons id er ed it a p r o f e s s i o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
and w e lc omed the o p p o r tu ni ty to share in the
p r e p a r a t i o n of a new g e n e r a t i o n of teachers.
About 20 percent mo r e said the ir staff m e mbers
for the most part conside re d s u p e r v i s i o n of
student tea ch er s to be an a d d i t i o n a l l o a d — b u r d e n ­
some but necessary.
A very few a d m i t t e d that some
of their staff m e mbers pr ef e r r e d not to have such
a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and served only be c a u s e their
pr in c i p a l insisted.
It should be kept In mind
that these fin dings came only from th o s e d i r e c t ­
ing student teachers.
It could be assumed, p e r ­
haps, that this sample of the p r o f e s s i o n r e p r e ­
sents the mor e competent and p r o f e s s i o n a l l y mind e d
and if all teac he rs had be e n Includ ed in the study,
the percent eag e rl y a s s u m i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for
the t ra in in g of their su cce ssors might be m u c h
s m a l l e r .19
Sh ar pe states in his summary and con clusions:
Almost any point could be 'proved' by the
'right' se le c t i o n of pup il responses.
Howe ver ,
the f ol lo wing c on cl us ions r epre se nt i n sofa r as
p os si ble the opin io ns of most pup il s who have
had student teachers:

1 ^ I b i d ., p . 1 1 8 .
IQ
^Student T e a c h i n g Programs in C e r t a i n Sch oo l
Systems of the N o r t h Central A s s o c i a t i o n A r e a , edited
by B y r o n L. Westfall.
A study c onduc te d and re p o r t e d
by the S u b - C o m m i t t e e on Student Teaching.

21

1.

2.

3.

4.

Pupils enjoy h a v i n g stud ent tea chers In their
classes.
Th e y do not want them in every class
nor do they want t h e m th roug h o u t the whole year.
Pr obably the most imp or ta nt r e a s o n for liking
student te a c h e r s is the fact that h a v i n g them
c o n s t itut es a novel, and th er e f o r e an i n t e r e s t ­
ing exp erience.
Oth er r e aso ns include the
r e c o g n i t i o n that two teachers are able to p r o ­
vide mo r e h e l p th an one t e ac her alone, and the
r e c o g n i t i o n that the p r o g r a m pr o v i d e s v a l u a b l e
experi e n c e to future teachers.
Pupils feel that the ir lear ni ng does not suffer
wh e n student te a c h e r s are a s si gned to a class.
Most of t h e m feel that the total le a r n i n g s i t u ­
a t i o n is improved.
T h e fact that they feel as
they do is a hi g h c om pl i m e n t to the c o o p e r a t i n g
teacher, who pla ys the cruc ia l role.
Pupils r e c o g n i z e that ma t t e r s of group cont rol
and d i s c i p l i n e pre se nt more d if ficu lt pr o b l e m s
to the student t e ac he r than to the regu la r
teacher.
However, they do not feel that they
have suffered b e cau se of the student t e a c h e r ’s
inexperience.
Pupils seem to share the o p i n i o n of th os e pers ons
who have i n s t i t u t e d o f f - c a m p u s student t e a c h i n g
progra ms that such a co o p e r a t i v e ar ra ng ement
is a d e s i r a b l e p r a c t i c e . 20

Coleman

21

r e ports on the r e a c t i o n of pare nts to

the M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y
Marshall, Mic higan.
ob se rvatio ns
Findings

student

T h e repor t

is bas ed up o n p e r s o n a l

and di s c u s s i o n s with par ents in the community.

of the study indicate that:

are hap py to have

Sharpe,
119-120.

21

(2)

student t e a c h i n g p r o g r a m

and d e vo te d to these futur e teachers,

pp.

(1) local cit izens

student t e a c h e r s in the co mmunit y,

teachers are in ac co r d w i t h the

20

t ea ch in g p r o g r a m in

(3) p u pi ls r e c e i v e d

"The Pupils L o o k at the Program, "

o p . c i t .,

Mary S. Coleman, "The C o m m u n i t y Looks at the
Program," O ff -C am pus Student T e a c h i n g , T h i r t i e t h Y e a r b o o k
of the A s s o c i a t i o n for Student T e a c h i n g (Ann Arbor, Mich.:
Edwa rd s Brothers, Inc, 1951)* PP* 89-94.

22

mo r e

i ndiv id ua l attention,

(4) student t eac he rs brou gh t

n e w ideas into the classroom,

(5) student tea che rs

he lp e d w i t h ma n y of the n o n - t e a c h i n g tasks co nn e c t e d
wi t h the daily r o utin e of c l a s s r o o m ma n a g e m e n t ,

(6)

h a v i n g student tea che rs all owed for g r e a t e r p a r t i c i ­
p a t i o n in e x t r a - c u r r i c u l a r activi tie s,

and

(7) the

cit ize ns of M a r s h a l l en do rsed the student t e a c h i n g p r o ­
g r a m and felt the p r o g r a m was good for school and
community.
Alterm an,

22

in d e s c r i b i n g a ne w p r o g r a m of t e a c h e r

ed uc a t i o n at Cen tr al M i c h i g a n Univer sit y,
the m a j o r c on tr i b u t i o n s of college

i nd ic at ed that

stu dents were:

(1)

that the r e gu lar t ea cher s were aware that a good exam ple
must be set,

(2) that

some help was giv en the reg ul ar

te ach ers in r o ut ine tasks and

(3) that coll eg e stu dents

brought ne w ideas and energy into the schools.
It was fur th er stated that:
T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n Project schools r e p o r t e d that
students (interns) were c ons id er ed a part of the
faculty and that students (interns) adap te d as
such.
Schools from the reg ula r d i re cted t e a c h i n g
p r o g r a m did not ma k e an a s s o c i a t i o n m o r e str ongl y
th an that co llege students 'fitted in w i t h the
f a c u l t y .'23
A l te rm an also rep orts that the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and
c o o p e ra ti ng te ach er s were asked what effect the T e a c h e r

22

Ron ald A. Alter man , A N e w A p p r o a c h to T e ach er
E d u c a t i o n , Cent ra l M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y Story (Mt.
Pleasant, Mich.:
Cent ra l M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y Press,
1966), pp. 89-90.
2 3 I b i d . , p.

90.

23

E d u c a t i o n Project had u p o n the adm i n i s t r a t i o n ,
and students in the scho ol system.

tea cher s

Res p o n s e s were plac ed

in the f o l l o w i n g categories:
I.

The p r o g r a m was r eceiv ed f a vo ra bly by a d m i n i s ­
tration,

II.

t ea ch er s and students.

S t ud en ts a c c e p t e d
Many respondents

interns

(student teachers).

em ph as i z e d how wel l the i n ­

terns wer e ac c e p t e d as teach er s and not just
as
III.

"student

te achers."

Prog ra ms r e s u l t e d in i mp ro ve me nt
system.

in the school

M a n y i m p r o veme nt s were men tio ned,

in­

c l udi ng the inc re as ed p r o f e s s i o n a l v ie wp oi nt
of staff as wel l as ac t u a l l y r e l i e v i n g t e ac hers
of r o u t i n e tasks so that more time could be
spent on p r o f e s s i o n a l matters.
IV.

Sch oo ls t h e m s e l v e s r e a l i z e d that they have a
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for p r e p a r i n g teachers.
school systems

Many

found that w o r k i n g w i t h p r o ­

spec tiv e t e a ch er s could be an asset rat he r
than a liability.
V.

P r o g r a m had no effect on ad mi ni st r a t i o n ,
tea che rs or students.

Only two p a r t i c i p a n t s

r e p o r t e d that there were no n o t i c e a b l e

effects.

Su mmary
The fo re g o i n g r e v i e w of lit er atu re rev e al s

several

studies c o n c e r n i n g the a p prai sa l of student tea c h e r s by

vario us

school r e l a t e d groups.

cant f i nd in g is that parents,

Perhaps the mo s t s i g n i f i ­
pupils,

teachers,

and

ad m i n i s t r a t o r s alike tend to express positive att itu des
wi t h r e f e r e n c e to student

teachers.

However,

exc ep tio ns

to this trend do appear in isol ate d instances.
pupils,

for example,

indicate that

in d i r e c t e d t e a c h e r programs,
and that it is dif fi cu lt

Some

lear ning is impaired

that d is ci pl ine is poor,

for p u pi ls to adjust to such

circumstances.
The studies cited in this cha pte r suggest a hi g h
de gr ee of student teacher ac cep t a n c e by par ents,
teachers,

and adm inis tr ators .

do not examine .the groups

However,

pupils,

these studies

in r e l a t i o n to each other on

the basi s of those factors whic h inf luence at ti t u d e s of
a cc ep t a n c e or rejection.

CH AP TE R III

A F U N C T I O N A L D E S C R I P T I O N OF TH E CENT RA L M I C H I G A N
U N I V E R S I T Y S E C O N D A R Y D I R E C T E D S T UD ENT
TEACHING PROGRAM

The

sec on dary di r e c t e d student

is com pos ed of three parts:
af fi li ation,

te a c h i n g p r o g r a m

d i r e c t e d ob ser vati on ,

and d i r e c t e d teaching.

A d e s c r i p t i o n of

d i r e c t e d o b s e r v a t i o n ta k e n from a T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n H a n d ­
bo o k for M t . Ple asan t Sec ond ar y Schools and Central
M i c h i g a n U ni ve rs ity,

2ij

1966,

is as follows:

2R
**

E d u c a t i o n 336 - D i r e c t e d O b s e r v a t i o n
I.

Obj ec ti ves
A.
D e v e l o p r e a d i n e s s for student teaching.
1.
Arous e and st re n g t h e n po s i t i v e att i tu de s
towar d teaching.
2.
D e v e l o p an overall u n d e r s t a n d i n g of a t e a c h ­
e r ’s activ iti es and res po ns ibili ti es .
3.
D e v e l o p the individu al to the point where
he is a good be gi n n i n g student t e ac he r and
w he r e he can o b t a i n the m a x i m u m be nefit from
his student t each in g experience.
B.
D e v e l o p skills for st u d y i n g youth.
1.
A b i l i t y to u n d e r s t a n d pupils as i n d i v i d u a l s —
ho w to dis co ve r needs, interests, attitudes,
customs, values, rates of growth, d if fe re nces
ty pic al traits and handicaps.

24

T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n H a n d b o o k for M t . Pleasant S e c o n d ­
ary Schools and Cen tral M i c h i g a n Un iver s i t y ( M t . Pleasant
MTchTl
C e nt ra l M i c h i g a n Uni ve rs ity, 1 9 6 6 ) V Th e wri te r
served on the c om mi tt ee that p r e p a r e d this handbook.
25

R e p r i n t e d by p e r m i s s i o n of the M t . Pleasant
Public Schools.

26

2.

C.

D.

E.

P.

II.

A b il it y to u n d e r s t a n d pupils as g r o u p s —
group dyn amics, social st ructures, controls,
disc ip li ne , leadership, fellow shi p, f r i e n d ­
ship roles, customs and values.
D e ve lo p skills for stud yi ng and e v a l u a t i n g
t e a c h i n g - l e a r n i n g situations.
1.
A b ili ty to ide ntify and eval ua te d if fe re nt
me th od s and tech ni q u e s of t e a c h i n g wi t h
respe ct to obj ectives, pl a n n i n g assi gn me nt s,
grouping, evalua tion, m at er ia ls, and resources ,
in di v i d u a l dif fe re nc es, motivation.
2.
Ab il it y to r e c o g n i z e the impor t a n c e of such
ph y s i c a l su rr ou nd ings as types of buildings,
furniture, grounds, equipment, tem per at ur e,
light, m oi st ur e, seating, v e n t i la ti on, u t i l i ­
zatio n of space and equipment.
Dev e lo p skill in e valua ti ng such r o utine tasks
as the following:
1.
Absences, tardin ess , r e p o r t i n g and r e c o r d i n g
marks, h e a l t h and safety factors, d i s t r i b u t i n g
and c o l l e c t i n g materia ls, a n n o u n c e m e n t s , use
of library, b u l l e t i n boards.
2.
Study halls, homework, extra duties, a f t e r ­
school functio ns, field trips.
Deve lop skill for e va lu ating one's fitness for
ent er ing the t e a c h i n g profession.
1.
Do I have the n eces sa ry abi li ti es and interests
for teaching?
2.
What grade level or subjects should I teach?
3.
O b s e r v a t i o n and p a r t i c i p a t i o n e xp erien ce s
should be of such a nature that they c o n t r i ­
bute to the g ui da nce of pr o s p e c t i v e teachers.
D e ve lop skill for evalu a t i n g p e r s o n a l and p r o ­
fessional ch ar acte r i s t i c s of teachers.
1.
Appearanc e, voice, fr ie ndliness , tho ug htfu ln es s,
fairness, sense of humor, w i l l i n g n e s s to be
helpful, p r o f e s s i o n a l attitude.

Principles of O b s e r v a t i o n
A.
O b s e r va tion s should be car efu lly directe d, well
organized, and fol lo we d up wi th d i s c u s s i o n s and
reports.
Obs er ve rs m u s t . h a v e d e f i n i t e purposes,
must u n d e r s t a n d h o w to select and o rg an iz e o b s e r ­
vations that are rela te d to these purposes, and
must u n d e r s t a n d their re sp on si bilit ie s.
B.
Some o b s e r va tion s should be gen era l and overall,
and some should be specific and c o n c e n t r a t e d —
some should be lo ngit ud in al and some should be
latitudinal.
The pr in c i p l e of c o n t i n u i t y s u g ­
gests the d e s i r a b i l i t y of o bserv in g for some
time in the same classroom.
F req ue nt ly , mo re
is gained from o b s e r v a t i o n for sev era l days in
the same situ a t i o n than obse r v i n g for the same
amount of time In a numbe r of situations.

27

C.

D.

E.

F.

G.

H.

III.

In p r e p a r a t i o n for student teaching, the d i r e c t e d
o b s e r v a t i o n should be c or re la ted wi t h the studies
of pr inc i p l e s of t e a c h i n g and wi t h a study of
a d o l e s c e n t s .*
Th e quality, depth, an d range of the ob s e r v a t i o n s
should r e c e i v e m o r e emphasis than the n u mb er of
obse rva tions.
F l e x i b i l i t y should be p ro vi d e d . *
Di s c u s s i o n s and r e p o r t s fol l ow in g observ at ions
shou ld be tr ea te d on an ethical and cou rte ous
basis at all time.*
O b s e r v a t i o n s shou ld be carried out u nd e r c o n d i ­
tions wh i c h are p r o f e ssio na l, courteous, and
c o m f o rtab le for all concerned.
The total i n ­
s t r u c tion al f unct io ns and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of
s u p e r v i s i n g tea chers must be co ns i d e r e d at all
t i m e s .*
A r r a n g e m e n t s for sc he du l i n g and supe rv is in g
o b s e r v a t i o n s mu st be m a d e in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h
p o l i c i e s that will avoid inco nv en ie nce to, or
i m p o s i t i o n upon, co o r d i n a t i n g teachers or the
s c h o o l s .*
N o r m a l c l a s s r o o m situat ion s are exp ected for
obser vat ions.
Th e tea chers ne ed not m a k e any
special p re paration .

G e ner al D e s c r i p t i o n of the O b s e r v a t i o n P r og ra m
A. E m p h a s i s will be pl ac e d up on quality, depth, and
ran ge of o b s e r v a t i o n s rather than just quantity.
B. D i r e c t e d O b s e r v a t i o n classes will meet on campus
once each week, on T u e s d a y or Thursday, as in d i ­
cated by the instructor.
Students should keep
b o t h s ch ed uled m e e t i n g times open for act iv it ies
r e l a t e d to the course.
C. E a c h student wil l com pl et e 24 observa tio ns.
Th es e
o bs e r v a t i o n s wi ll be d i s t r i b u t e d over the four
f ol l o w i n g areas:
1.
G r o w t h and d ev el opmen t
2.
Sec o nd ar y p r o g r a m (general school overview)
3.
Ma j o r field of Interest
4.
Mi n o r fields of interest
D.
Fo r students d oi n g af fil iat ion, a m a x i m u m of one
o b s e r v a t i o n ma y be used from the a f f i l i a t i o n
ass ignment.
E.
O b s e r v a t i o n s wi ll be ma d e in the M t . Ple asa nt
J u n i o r and Se ni or Hi gh Schools and in the U n i ­
v e r s i t y L a b o r a t o r y School, unless the in stru c t o r
of the D i r e c t e d O b s e r v a t i o n cou rse specifies
otherwise.

*Mainly for college i n s t r u c t o r ’s information.

28

IV.

S c h e d u l i n g of O b s e r va ti ons
A.
It will be the re s p o n s i b i l i t y of the student to
m a k e the s e l e c t i o n of ob se rv ati ons he wil l make
In a c c o r d a n c e w i t h Instru cti ons pr o v i d e d in the
D i r e c t e d O b s e r v a t i o n course meetings.
B.
Students must not be admi tt ed to classes as
observers wit hout the prop er admi s s i o n ticket
and o b s e r v a t i o n permits.
C.
O b s e r v a t i o n tic ket s for class a d m i s s i o n will be
plac ed on a boa rd near the p r i n c i p a l ’s office in
the J u n i o r and Senior Hi g h Schools and in the
Un i v e r s i t y L a b o r a t o r y School.
B e fo re obse rving
a class, each student selects the a p p r o p r i a t e
ticket from the board.
The ticket must be turned
in to the t e ac he r of the class w h ic h is observed.
1.
Select a ticket fro m the board only a few
mi n u t e s in advance of the start of the class
to be observed.
2.
T i ck ets are ta k e n from the board only w h e n
the p r i nt ed side is exposed.
3.
No student is p e rm it te d or a u t h o r i z e d to
secure an o b s e r v a t i o n ticket for any other
student observer.
4.
E a c h ticket must be used on the day that it
is sec ure d from the board.
O bse rv er s are
r e q u e s t e d not to acc um ul ate tic ket s for
future use.
D.
Not mo re th a n 5 obs ervers can be al lo wed to observe
in a c l a s s r o o m at one time.
Therefo re, no more
than 5 tickets will be ava ila ble for any course
for a giv en class period.
1.
Wh e n a teac he r has a full-time student teac he r
and/or a f fi li at es assigned, the num be r of o b ­
servers could be adj us ted so that there will
not be more than a total
of 5 college students
d u r i n g one class hour.
2.
This adjust me nt might be made by t u rn in g
some of the tickets.
3.
Spe cia l a r r a ng em ents may be ma d e in classes
w i t h r o o m for mor e college students.
E.
W h e n a c l a s s r o o m teach er finds it n e c e s s a r y to
close a class to observe rs for a day, the ad mi s s i o n
tickets for that class for that day will be turned
to face the board.
1.
Such clos ing may be under the f o l l o w i n g c i r ­
cumstanc es :
a.
W h e n the regu la r teacher is away.
b.
W h e n a fu ll -p e r i o d test is given.
c.
W h e n student teachers or a ffili at es are
t e a c h i n g .*

*While it is not g enera ll y desirable for o bse rvers
to see student tea cher s te a c h i n g too many times, it is

29

d.

F.

V.

W h e n there is some p a r t i c u l a r reason,
not i n clude d in the first three points,
if the r e g u l a r tea che r has r e c e i v e d the
a p pr ov al of the principal.
2.
E a c h day, bef ore leaving, the office clerk
should tur n all tickets face out.
If any
class is to be clos ed the next day, the
t e ac he r must turn the tic ket s bef ore c l a s s ­
time .
For in st ruct io ns of s ch ed u l i n g obs e r v a t i o n s in
the U n i v e r s i t y L a b o r a t o r y School, see the
a p p r o p r i a t e i n f o r m a t i o n sheet w h i c h has be e n
g i v e n you.

Ob s e r v e r R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s
A. Ea c h obs er ve r is in a sense a guest of the school;
it is hop ed that there will be no ins ta nce of c o n ­
duct by an obs er ve r wh i c h fails to ref lec t m atu rity,
courtesy, and sound judgment.
B. It is n e c e s s a r y that obse r v e r s be prompt and r e ­
port to the c l a s s r o o m prio r to the start of the
class meeting.
The obs erver should r e m a i n with
the class unt il the- end of the p e ri od unless
ar r a n g e m e n t s have be e n m ad e w i t h the t e ache r to
leave early.
C. O b serv er s will r e f r a i n from gu m chewing, sleeping,
r e a d i n g m a g a z i n e s and n ew spapers, w r i t i n g letters
and any d i s t r a c t i n g or u n p r o f e s s i o n a l beh a v i o r
whi le obse r v i n g in a classroom.
Not only will
such be h a v i o r be r e p o r t e d to the o b s e r v a t i o n i n ­
structor, but the co o p e r a t i n g tea ch er shall have
the right to dismiss the o bs erve r from the c l a s s ­
ro o m .
D.
O b se rv er s shou ld be dr es sed in a m a n n e r a p p r o p r i a t e
for adults in public school situations.
E. An " O b s ervat io n Permit" card will be furnis he d by
the D i r e c t e d O b s e r v a t i o n inst ru c t o r for each o b ­
servation.
Fill in the card c om plete ly and hand
it to the t e ac he r of the class to be observed.
T he s e cards will be retu rned by each school to
the U n i v e r s i t y wher e they wil l be fil ed by the
In str uc to r of the D i r e c t e d T e a c h i n g O b s e r v a t i o n
se ct ion in whi ch you are registered.

hoped that the co o p e r a t i n g tea ch ers will at times use
their own judgment as to whe n a student tea cher might be
observed.
The supervisor, the student teacher, and the
o bser ve r should a p p r o v e the s i tu atio n w h e n a student
tea che r is to be observed.
Perhaps one or two o b s e r ­
vati ons of the student teach er 's te a c h i n g wou ld be d e ­
sirable .

30

1.

P.

G.

VI.

Cards are to be ini ti ale d by the c la ssroo m
t e a c h e r and re t u r n e d to the office daily.
2.
U n b e c o m i n g conduct shou ld be r e p o r t e d in a
s e par at e env elo pe w h i c h will be ro ut e d
d i r e c t l y (campus mail) to the o b s e r v a t i o n
in s t r u c t o r the same day.
O b s e r v e r s are aske d to r e m e m b e r that the pr in cip al
o b l i g a t i o n of each c l a s s r o o m teac he r is to his
class.
Un le s s it is sp e c i f i c a l l y a u t h o r i z e d by
the teacher , don't mov e aroun d the c l a s s r o o m nor
a t te mp t to give as sis t a n c e to students or to the
teacher.
E a c h ob s e r v e r is exp ec te d to p r epare ob s e r v a t i o n
notes and r e p o r t s in a c c o r d a n c e wit h instru ct ions
p r o v i d e d by the in st ru ct or of the D i r e c t e d O b s e r ­
v a t i o n class.

D u p l i c a t e d m a t e r i a l d d i s t r i b u t e d for use in the
D i r e c t e d O b s e r v a t i o n p r o g r a m will include:
A.
Fl o o r plans of the Jun io r and Senior H i g h Schools.
B.
Class sche du les of the J u ni or and S e nior Hi g h
Schools.
C.
I n s t r u c t i o n s for sc he du l i n g obs er va ti ons in the
U n i v e r s i t y L a b o r a t o r y School.
D.
O b s e r v a t i o n permit cards.

E d u c a t i o n 338 - E d u c a t i o n a l A f f i l i a t i o n
I.

II.

Gene ral Pr inci p l e s
A.
The a f f i l i a t i o n p r o g r a m is des ign ed to augment
student t e a c h i n g exp er ie nce and, w h e n e v e r possible,
to i n cr ea se o p p o rtu ni ti es for p a r t i c i p a t i o n in
p r o f e s s i o n a l activities.
B.
If. elected, a f f i l i a t i o n as signm en ts for each s t u ­
dent is d e t e r m i n e d on an ind iv idu al basis, in
r e l a t i o n to the student 's cap acities, interests,
and needs as a p r o s p e c t i v e teacher.
C.
T he a f f i l i a t i o n p r o g r a m is co ndu ct ed in kee pin g
wi t h the p r i n c i p l e s that f l e x i bi lity in the
p r o g r a m is d e s i r a b l e and that e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n
should be encouraged.
Ty p e s of A s s i g n m e n t s
O n - C a m p u s : A numb er of the D e p a r tm en ts of Central
M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y accept sel ected m a jo rs for
a f f i l i a t i o n as s i g n m e n t s on the U n i v e r s i t y campus.
The p r o f e s s i o n a l e xp er ience offered in the various
d e p a r t m e n t a l a f f i l i a t i o n pro g ra ms are orie nt ed
to the capa c i t i e s and in terests of af fi li a t e s
c h ose n for such assig nme nts.
Representative
a c t i v i t i e s include a s s i s t i n g in U n i v e r s i t y c l a s s ­
rooms and campus labor at ori es, p r e p a r i n g i n s t r u c ­
tional ma ter i a l s , p l a nn in g and p r e s e n t i n g d e m o n ­
strations, and i n s t r uct in g in div id ual stu dents

31

B.

and groups of stu dents in vari ous d e p a r t m e n t a l
courses.
Students who are i nt er es te d in a d ep ar tm ental
a f f i l i a t i o n a s s i g n m e n t on the campus are a d ­
vised to check wi t h the Head of the De pa r t m e n t
in w h i c h the student is c o m p l e t i n g his m a j o r
for i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g a f f i l i a t i o n p r oject s
in that de par tme nt.
A p p l i c a t i o n for such
a s s i g n m e n t s must be m a d e to the Sch oo l of E d u ­
cation, in accor d a n c e wi t h po l i c i e s p r e s e n t e d
later in this section.
In Seco n d a r y S c h o o l s : All stu dents who elect
a f f i l i a t i o n in the se co n d a r y level will be
ass ign ed to p r o j e c t s in the jun io r and senior
hig h schools.
In general, two types of a s s i g n ­
ment s in the second ar y schools are made:
1.
Aff il i a t e s ma y do s up er vi sed student t e a c h ­
ing in r e g u l a r l y sched ule d courses In the
s ec on da ry schools.
Such as si gn ments will
be given to all students who wis h to s u p p l e ­
ment the c l a s s r o o m and course w o r k ex peri e n c e
w h i c h d i r e c t e d t e a c h i n g provides.
2.
On a sel ective basis, a f f i l i a t e s ma y be
a ss ig ne d to fu n c t i o n under su p e r v i s i o n in
po si t i o n s a p p r o p r i a t e to their in te res ts and
capaci tie s, such as:
a.
A ss ista nt in one or mor e athletic
a ct ivitie s, i nc l u d i n g football, b a s k e t ­
ball, baseball, t r a c k or field, golf,
and tennis.
b. A ss ista nt in intra m u r a l program.
c. Ass i s t a n t school librarian.
d. L a b o r a t o r y assi stant in science courses.
e. A ss istan t in the adult educ a t i o n program.
f. Aide in the school test ing program.
g. Pa rticipant in general gui da nc e ac tivities,
such as o r i e n t a t i o n program s, a s s i s t a n c e
to student s in s el ec ti ng courses, v o c a t i o n a l
g u i d a n c e projects.
h. A ss istan t in a u d i o - v i s u a l program.
i. A s si st an t in ath let ic p r o g r a m in later
e le me n t a r y grades.
j . Ass is ta nt in driv er ed uc a t i o n p r o g r a m
(for a f f i l i a t e s who are qualified),
k. Assi st ant to the school at te n d a n c e counselor.
1. Aide to faculty spon so r or d i r e c t o r in
e x t r a - c u r r i c u l a r activ it ie s as dr amatics,
m. Ass is ta nt in a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and r e s e a r c h
proj e c t s .
n. A ss istan t in dir e c t i n g and s u p e r vi si ng
p rogr am s of noon - h o u r activities,
o. Others.

32

C.

III.

O t h e r s : The a f f i l i a t i o n a ssig nm en t m a y be c o m ­
pl et ed t h rou gh p a r t i c i p a t i o n in other a p p r o v e d
programs, such as in c ou ns el ing and in str u c t i o n a l
a ct iv it ies in summer camps and in c om mu nity
r e c r e a t i o n programs.
All a r r a n g e m e n t s for r e ­
cei vi ng credit in E d u c a t i o n 338 in such selected
as s i g n m e n t s are subject to app ro va l by the
Asso c i a t e Dean, School of Education.

Pol ic ie s
A.
Gene ral Policies:
1.
Ea c h a c ti vity and as sign me nt in the A f f i l i ­
ati on P r o g r a m shall be s el ected for its wor th
in c o n t r i b u t i o n to the p r o f e s s i o n a l p r e p a r a t i o n
of the sec o nd ar y school teacher.
2.
The scope, schedule, and sequenc es of o p p o r ­
tunitie s offer ed each student e n r o l l e d in the
A f f i l i a t i o n Pr og ra m shall be d e t e r m i n e d on the
basis of what ex per ien ces are most a p p r o p r i a t e
to the needs and interests of that student.
3.
Provisi on s of experi ence s in such inst r u c t i o n a l
a ct iv it ies as planning, demo ns t r a t i n g , p r e p a r ­
ing m at er ials, con du ct ing d i s c u s s i o n sessions,
■ di re c t i n g student activities, and project s,
m a k i n g critical analyses of student work,
evaluating, and in h a n d l i n g var io us r e s p o n s i ­
bil iti es a s s o c i a t e d wi th these a ctivi ti es
shall be the pr im ary aim of the A f f i l i a t i o n
Program.
Such activi ties as ch e c k i n g papers,
su perv is in g use of equipme nt and m ate rials,
mon ito ri ng , and various r o ut in e duti es that
may be inc luded in the a f f i l i a t i o n p r o g r a m
as sign me nt s shall not c on st it ut e a p r in cipal
part of any s t u d e n t ’s wo r k e xp erie nc e in the
program.
4.
Ea ch d ep artm en t on campus has b e e n encour ag ed
to organize and offer a p r o g r a m of a f f i l i a t i o n
for ma jo r s who wi sh to comple te the assignme nt
on campus.
E a c h student wh o re c e i v e s such an
as sig nm en t shall be reg a r d e d by the d ep ar tmen t
con ce nre d as a student p a r t i ci pa nt in the
l ea rn in g and ins truct io na l ac ti vi ties of that
dep artment.
Prec a u t i o n shall be ta k e n to
s afe guard this status and to insure against
p e r m i t t i n g any student to f u n c t i o n in any
ca pac ity or assignm ent in wh i c h the pr in c i p a l
result ma y be either to exploit or ca pi ta li ze
on his ser vices or to fail to offer expe ri en ce s
and o p p o r t u n i t i e s whi ch are p r o f e s s i o n a l l y
rewarding.

33

5.

B.

All r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and pr iv il e g e s p e r t a i n ­
ing to student teache rs in the secondary
schools shall apply as well to students who
are a s s ig ne d in the a f f i l i a t i o n p r o g r a m of
the seco ndary schools.
6.
No affi l i a t e in the secondary schools may
re c e i v e pay or c o m p e n s a t i o n for ser vices
r e s u l t i n g from his p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the
A f f i l i a t i o n Program; any ex ceptions to this
must be a p pr ov ed by the School of E d u c a t i o n
and the Su p e r i n t e n d e n t of Schools.
7.
At the end of the sem ester or wh e n e v e r the
a f f i l i a t i o n as si g n m e n t has be e n completed,
a d e ta iled e valua ti ve report and a grade
shall be su bmi tted by the aff il ia te 's s u p e r ­
visor.
Such r e po rt s should be ma de on the
forms ava ilab le to all superviso rs in Rowe
106 and should be ret u r n e d to Rowe 106 wh en
due.
S u p e r v i s i n g te ac hers are urged to ma ke
re po rts to the supe rinten den t, principal, or
c o o r d i n a t o r on af fi li a t e s at any other times
w h e n de s i r i n g to call at te n t i o n to the caliber
of the student's work.
Pol icie s on Participati on:
1.
A m i n i m u m for the sem ester of 60 class hours
of sup er vised p a r t i c i p a t i o n is re q u i r e d of
all affiliates.
2.
Ea c h a ff il iate who is assi gned to public
school classes or activi ti es m e e t i n g five
days each w e e k is exp ecte d to attend all
r e g u l a r l y sche duled mee ti ng s of that class
for twelve weeks from the start of campus
classes for the semester.
For the fall semester, 1961, the a f f i l i a t i o n
period will be from Sept ember 5 thr ou gh
D e c e m b e r 8 (the equivalent per iod s in
s uc ce eding years); for the spring semester,
1962, the a f f i l i a t i o n period will be from
F e b r u a r y 8 t h ro ug h May 11 (the equivalent
periods in s uc ce eding y e a r s ) . Exce pt io ns
to this pol ic y cannot be ma de without the
approval of the Supe ri nt en dent of Schools.
3.
All af fi li a t e s on assign me nt s not covered
by Item 2 above (principally, affiliate s
assigned on campus) atte nd class m e e ti ng s
for a m i n i m u m of 60 class hours In a c c o r d ­
ance wi t h a schedule pre pa re d by the s u p e r ­
vis or at the start of the a f f i l ia ti on
assignment.
A copy of this schedule is to
be sent to the Scho ol of E d u c a t i o n (for U n i ­
ve r s i t y campus affiliates) or to the S u p e r i n ­
tendent of Sc hools (where assign men ts in the
public schools are i n v o l v e d ) .

3*1

4.

T h e -work of each affi l i a t e shall be a d e ­
qua tel y superv ised by a m e m b e r of the
de part me nt for those af fil ia te s who have
on-cam pus assignments, or by a c o o r d i na to r
fo r those af fil iates who have as s i g n m e n t s
in the s e co nd ar y s c h o o l s .
5.
E a c h af fi l i a t e is exp ecte d to attend per io di c
sup er vis or y meet in gs or c o n f e re nc es as s c h e ­
dul ed by his c o o r d i n a t i n g teacher.
P o lic ie s on Assignments:
1.
A p p l i c a t i o n for a f f i l i a t i o n a s s i g nm en ts
mus t be m a d e no later t h a n m i d - t e r m of the
se mester p r e c e d i n g the sem ester of a f f i l i ­
ation.
The form n e e de d in f i li ng a p p l i ­
cat ion can be sec ure d fr o m Rowe 106 and
should be co mpl et ed and r e t u r n e d to Rowe
106 no la t e r tha n the d e a d l i n e da t e a n n o u n c e d
each se mester in the campus newspaper.
2.
St udents a r e eli gib le to app ly for an a f f i l i ­
a t i o n assignm en t (Education 338) any time
af te r a d m i s s i o n to c an dida cy for the deg re e
and certificate.
In general, however, s t u ­
dent s will not be g i v e n as s i g n m e n t s pr i o r
to the sem e st er in whic h they re g i s t e r in
th e first semester block of the S ec on da ry
E d u c a t i o n Program (Ed uc at ion 335, 336, and
P s y c h o l o g y 312).
3.
Ea c h student will need to determ ine, in
r e l a t i o n to his ow n p r o g r a m whi ch semest er
appears to be best for the a f f i l i a t i o n
a s s i g n m e n t . In instan ce s where such s c h e ­
d ul i n g is possible, the student may secure
val uab le p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e in his
a f f i l i a t i o n assignment by sc he du l i n g it for
the semester in w h i c h he has comp l e t e d his
student teaching.
4.
T h e School of Education, Cen t ra l M i c h i g a n
U ni versit y, is re s p o n s i b l e for ge n e r a l s u p e r ­
v i s i o n of students as s i g n e d to the a f f i l i a t i o n
p r o g r a m of the secondar y schools.
5.
T h e S u p e ri ntend en t of S c hools superv ise s
the assign me nt of a f f i l i a t e s who are to
pa r t i c i p a t e in the a f f i l i a t i o n p r o g r a m of
th e secondary schools.
6.
In some Instances, a ff il ia tes in the s e c o n d ­
ary schools may be ass ig ne d to a de pa r t m e n t
or area of the school p r o g r a m r a t he r tha n to
a specific course, class or activity.
In
all cases, however, one s u p e r v i s i n g teac her
is to be d e s i g n a t e d as the c o o r d i n a t o r of
the a f f i l i a t e ’s work.

35

7.

8.

9.

10.

Where c i r c u m s t a n c e s warrant, an a f fi li at e
may be as s i g n e d to mo r e tha n one type of
activity, area of study or level of wor k
in the cour se of his af fil iati on.
Any a f f i l i a t e in the sec o nd ar y school shall
be a s s i g n e d to a p o s i t i o n as ass is tant or
aide in an act ivit y in the school concerned.
W h e n student t each in g is sch ed uled on an
e i g h t -w ee ks basis, a f f i l i a t i o n may be
sch ed ule d in the oth er e i g h t -we ek s segment
of the s e me st er if an a p p r o p r i a t e as si gn m e n t
is possible.
In ex ce pt i o n a l circum sta nces, a f f i l i a t i o n
ma y be sch ed ul ed c o n c u r r e n t l y w i t h the
student t e a c h i n g as signment.
This does
not apply to student teac he rs as s i g n e d on
the e i g h t -w ee ks basis.

34
4.

The work of each affi liate shall be adeqiu tely supervised by a m e m b e r of the
dej artment for those affi li at es who have
on-campus assignments, or by a coordin at or
f 02 those a ff iliates who have assi gnm ents
in the secondar y schools.
5.
Ea ch aff il ia te is expected to att end per iodic
su pervisor y m e et in gs or co nfe ren ces as s c h e ­
dul ed by his co or dinat in g teacher.
Po licies on Assignments:
1.
A p p l i c a t i o n for a f f i l i a t i o n assignme nts
must be made no later than m i d - t e r m of the
sen ester p rec ed in g the sem est er of af fi li'ation.
The form needed in fil ing a p p l i ­
cation can be secured from Rowe 106 and
shculd be completed and ret urne d to Rowe
106 no later than the de a d l i n e date announced
each semester in the campus newspaper.
2.
Students are eligible to apply for an a f f i l i ­
ati on assignment (Education 338) any time
afte r ad mi s s i o n to candi da cy for the degree
and certificate.
In general, however, s t u ­
dents will not be given a s s i g n me nt s prior
to the semeste r in which they re g i s t e r in
the first semester block of the Secondary
E du c a t i o n Program (Education 335, 336, and
P syc hology 312).
3.
Eac o student will need to determine, in
r el i t i o n to his own p r og ra m w h i c h semester
appears to be best for the af f i l i a t i o n
assignment.
In instances where such sc h e ­
d u li ng is possible, the student ma y secure
val ;able prof ess ional experi en ce in his
af fili a t i o n assignment by sch ed ul in g it for
the semester in which he has comple ted his
stuient teaching.
4.
The School of Education, Central M ic h i g a n
University, is respo ns ib le for general supervis .on of students assigned to the a ff il iatio n
p r o . r a m of the secondary schools.
5.
The Su pe rin ten dent of Schools supervises
the assignment of aff il ia te s who are to
par .icipate in the a f f i l i a t i o n p r o g r a m of
the secondary schools.
6.
In .;ome instances, affilia te s in the s e c o n d ­
ary schools may be assigne d to a department
or i rea of the school p r ogra m rather than to
a specific course, class or activity.
In
all cases, however, one s u p e r visi ng teacher
is 1 o be des ign ated as the c o o r d in ator of
the affil ia te 's work.

35

7.

8.

9.

10.

W h er e ci rc u m s t a n c e s warrant, an a ffi li at e
m a y be as s i g n e d to mo r e th a n one type of
activity, area of study or level of wo rk
in the course of his affiliat ion .
Any a ff il ia te in the s eco nd ar y school shall
be as s i g n e d to a p o s i t i o n as a ssi st an t or
aide in an a ct iv it y in the school concerned.
W h e n student t e a c h i n g is s c hed ul ed on an
ei ght- we ek s basis, a f f i l i a t i o n ma y be
sch ed ul ed in the oth er ei gh t- w e e k s segment
of the seme st er if an a p p r o p r i a t e ass ig nm en t
is possible.
In e x c e p ti on al circ ums tances, a f f i l i a t i o n
ma y be sch edu le d c o n c u r r e n t l y w i t h the
student te a c h i n g assig nme nt.
This does
not apply to student t e ac he rs a s si gn ed on
the eig ht -w eeks basis.

36

COMPARISON OF AFFILIATION PROGRAM AND STUDENT TEACHING PROGRAM

Affiliation

Student Teaching

a.

Affiliate register;-. in Education 338
for <'■ :;cr,e;;ter hours credit.

a.

Student teacher registers in Education
36A for 5 semester hours credit or
Education 37^ for 3.

t.

Assigned to minimum of 60 hours of
participation during semester.

b.

Assigned for full-time participation for
8-weeks (few exceptions within commuting
distance are assigned 2 hours each day
a semester.)

0.

Assigned to work on one course or Ir, one
activity in’ secondary school (or in a few
instances at elementary level) or to
serve as assistant teacher in a university
class on campus, or to provide counseling
and instruction in camping programs, etc.

c.

Assignment limited to secondary school
only (and to elementary level for some
fields such as music, art, special
education, physical education).

d.

Assigned usually to work with one class
or group only; attend ail meetings
(usually one period a day, five days
a week or equivalent for twelve weeks).

d.

Assigned usually to work with several
classes in various courses on a schedule
planned in consultation with cooperating
teacher at start of assignment.

e.

May be expected, as considered appro­
priate in judgment of affiliate's
cooperating teacher, to observe in the
course of activity, to prepare various
instructional materials, plan teaching
activities, assist individual students
or group, and assist in handling other'
teaching functions in the course or
activity to which affiliate is assigned.

e.

May be expected to and required to plan,
prepare for, and handle various in­
structional duties of the classroom
teacher in the several courses included
in his student teaching schedule, and to
participate in related professional
activities and school functions.

f.

Attends periodic supervisory conferences
as scheduled by the cooperating teacher
or the university departmental staff
member who serves as affiliate's cooper­
ating teacher1. In the secondary school,
some affiliates may also be asked by
their cooperating teachers to attend
regularly scheduled "critic meetings"
for Student Teachers.

f.

Receives evaluations and suggestions
from cooperating teacher as an integral
part of each day's directed teaching
experience; student teacher may also
be required to attend regularly scheduled
or periodic "critic meetings" as speci­
fied by cooperating teacher.

g.

Quality of participation as ari affiliate
is evaluated and graded by affiliate's
cooperating teacher and the results r e ­
ported on an "Affiliation Evaluation
Sheet" to be submitted at close of
affiliation assignment.

g.

Quality of participation as a student
teacher is evaluated and graded by the
cooperating teacher and the results
reported on the form, Report on Student
Teacher, to be submitted at close of
student teaching assig n m e n t .

h.

Affiliation assignment can be made any
time after' student is admitted to candi­
dacy but not prior to registration in
first semester block of Secondary Ed u ­
cation Program.
Some students complete
affiliation before student teaching;
other students complete their student
teaching prior to affiliation.

h.

Student teaching assignment can be made
only after admission to candidacy plus
completion of the three prerequisite
courses; Education 335, Education 336,
and Psychology 312.

37

Assignment :____________________________________

By:__________________________________
APPLICATION F:.iK EDUCATION 330— EDUCATION AFFILIATION

Note:

Please discuss this application with your Professional Advisor before submitting
it to the Department of Psychology and Education Office.

1.

Name___________________________________________________2.

Age_____________________________

3.

Local Address

5.

Home Address

6.

Have you been admitted to candidacy for a degree

7.

Overall grade point ave rage

8.

Major field

Hours completed to date

g.

Minor field

Hours completed to date

10.

Minor field

Hours completed to date

11.

During which year and s.omester do you wish to register for Education 33°?

12 .

When did, or will, you take Education 335, 336 and Psychology 312?

13 .

When do you plan to tak e Education 36A-l)lrected Teaching?
or are taking Education 36A , so state.)

1A .

When do you exnect

15.

List cours.es completed in major field,, including those you are now t a k i n g :

16.

What kind of affiliation assignment would you like?
Indicate -whether your
preference is for an assignment on-eampuc or in a secondary school and, as
specifically as possible, the nature of the assignment you would prefer.

17.

To assist in determining the most worthwhile and appropriate assignment, please
indicate what factors and conditions, such as your interests, your previous experi­
ences, your professional needs you feel should be considered in planning your
affiliation a ssignment.

A.

&

Telephone

certificate

(If you have completed

to graduate?

38
AFFILIATION EVALUATION SHEET

Name of Affiliate

Semester

Year
Last

First

Affiliation Assignment
Subject or Activity

Sc hool

Semester Grade

0)

bO
e
•H
T3

C
cG

-P
W

P
3
O

<D

bO

a
u
<D
>
<
<D

>
o

X)

<

hO
aJ
C-,
a)

OJ

bO

CtJ

u
0)
>
<

>
<

o
a>

rH

OQ

Personal Characteristics
1.

Appearance

2 . Enthusiams
3. Self-confidence
A . Dependability
5 . Cooperativeness
6. Adjusts emotionally
7. General scholarship
8. Profits from suggestions
Professional Readiness
1.

Speech and usage of English

2 . Mastery of specific subject
3 . Attitude toward teaching

matter

N . Originality and resourcefulness
5. Interest in school life
Professional Techniques
1.

Planning

2 . Presentation of materials
3 . Control of situation
. Ability to organize instruction
Understanding of individual students
6. Adaptability

5.

Student Growth
1.

Relations with students

2 . Student participation
3 . Understanding of ma' erials taught
Other Characteristics

(identify)

1.

2.

-3 .
On the back of the sheet :
1. List a few of the major activities of the affiliate.
2. Summarize your Impression of the affiliate's work, identifying any especially
strong or weak areas you have noted.

Signature
Cooperating Teacher

Unsatisfactory

Will you please evaluate the affiliate at
the end of the semester and return this
form to the Department of Psychology and
Education?

39

Education 364-Directed Teaching
I.

II.

Gen era l P r in ci pl es
A.
D i r e c t e d T e a c h i n g shall be r e g a r d e d as a very
important ph a s e of the tea cher p r e p a r a t i o n p r o ­
gram.
B.
All po l i c i e s and p r o c e d u r e s of the D i r e c t e d
T e a c h i n g P r o g r a m shall be in k e e p i n g w i t h the
objectiv e of p r o v i d i n g a str ong p r o g r a m of
p r e p a r a t i o n for seco nd ar y school teachers.
C.
All p o l i c i e s and p r o c e d u r e s of the Di r e c t e d
T e a c h i n g P r o g r a m in the sec on da ry schools shall
be cons is te nt w i t h the pr in c i p l e that the needs
and we l f a r e of the students in these schools
must r e c e i v e first considerat ion .
D.
The D i r e c t e d T e a c h i n g P r o g r a m in the se co nda ry
schools shall be cond u c t e d in k e e p i n g wi t h the
po l i c i e s that f l e x i b i l i t y in the p r o g r a m is
de si r a b l e and that e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n should be
encouraged.
Assig nm en t of Student Te a c h e r s
A.
Student tea c h e r s shall be as s i g n e d to the r e g u ­
larly s chedu le d courses in the sec on dary schools.
B.
Policies and p r o c e d u r e s on assignments.
1.
T h e Scho ol of E d u c a t i o n shall be re sp on sible
for gener al s u p e r v i s i o n of students assigned
to the D i r e c t e d T e a c h i n g P r o g r a m of the
se co n d a r y schools.
2.
Th e S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of Scho ol s shall supervise
the ass ig nmen t of student t ea ch ers who are to
p a r t i c i p a t e in the se co ndar y schools Dir e ct ed
T e a c h i n g Program.
3.
Stu den t teac he rs shall be a s s i g n e d as far as
p o s s i b l e to eight week s of full - t i m e Di r e c t e d
Teaching.
4. Th o s e who can not be a s s i g n e d to the f u l l ­
time, 8 weeks p r o g r a m will be a ss ig ne d to
two hour s a
ay for the entire semester.
5. A s s i g n m e n t s are ma de after c o n s i d e r i n g the
following:
a.
R e qu est of student
b.
R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s 'of S c h oo l of E d u c a t i o n
c.
R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s of seco n d a r y school staff
6 . A c o o p e r a t i n g t e a ch er wil l have, as far as
possibl e, only one student teac her duri ng
an. e i g h t - w e e k period.
7. Two student teac her s ma y be a s s i g n e d to a
c o o p e r a t i n g teac her duri ng one p e r i o d upon
the m u t u a l consent of the c o o p e r a t i n g teacher,
the School of Educati on , and the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n
of the sec on da ry school.

40

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

E a c h student tea ch er to be as s i g n e d to the
sec on dar y schools shall submit, t h ro ug h the
Schoo l of E d u c a t i o n an a p p l i c a t i o n and p e r ­
sonal data sheet for use by the s u p e r i n ­
tendent and p r i n c i p a l s in d e t e r m i n i n g an
a p p r o p r i a t e ass ignment.
This a p p l i ca tion
and per son al data sheet shall be filed by
the student early in the sem est er prior, to
the one in wh ic h he desir es to do D i re ct ed
Teaching.
Pers onal data sheets shoul d be av ai l a b l e to
the c o o p e ra ti ng t e a c h e r at least one week
before the student t e ac he rs are to arrive.
In un u s u a l ci rc ums tanc es, student teachers
m a y be a s s i g n e d to a d ep ar tment or area of
the school p r o g r a m rathe r than to a specific
teacher.
In all cases, however, one staff
m e m b e r is to be d e s i g n a t e d as s uperv is or of
the student t e a c h e r ’s work.
The student teacher shall plan to devote
his full time to the dir e c t e d t e a c h i n g p r o ­
gram.
Ex cept i o n s to this shall be det er m i n e d
by the School of Education.
It is the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the c ooper at in g
tea ch er to schedule per iodic con fer en ce s w i t h
the student t e a ch er at a time when the teacher
has no other specific a ss igned res pons ib il it ies.
A d e ta iled e va luat iv e report and gr ad e shall
be sub m it te d to the school of e du ca tion by
the co o p e r a t i n g t e ac he r at the close of the
d i r e c t e d teac hing a s s i g n m e n t .
P ro v i s i o n shall be ma de for a c on tinu in g
e va lu a t i o n of the D i r e c t e d Te a c h i n g Program.

41

D I R E C T E D TKACH1I1G E N R O L L M E N T CARD

As signment

1.

for

S em e s t e r

19

Name

Age
Last

First

.Middle

2.

Cam pu s

3.

Home Address

ij.

M a i l i n g a dd ress

5.

Circle

6.

F r o m what

7.

W h e n do you expect

8.

Have

9.

On what c u r r i c u l u m are you e nr olled?
If e lementary, what plan
C
I)

Address

one:

three weeks prior

Married

high

Single

school

-1
!

O

i—1

V/hat d ir ected

experience

N u m b e r of C hi ld ren

gr aduated?

Year

to rece iv e your' d eg re e?

you been a dmi tt ed
If not,

Years
Rural

to assi gn me nt

as a c a n d id at e
explain.

in te ac h i n g

Year

Mon th

for d e g r e e and c e r t i fi ca te ?

(Circle one)
H i g h School

rH

t ea c h i n g or a f f i l i a t i o n

have you done?
Grades?

Grad es

Where?

Subject s
12.

M a j o r subject
(as of date you began

13.

Cho i c e of

m .

Cho ic e

of grades

15.

Cho i c e

of time

16.

Choi ce of Cchool

Hour's
this as signment)

Minor

Hour's

subjects

(circle one)

last

(do not

Gr ad e or subject

2nd 8 weeks

AM

PM

Syst em
1st cho ic e

Ass ignment:

8 weeks

fill

this
Hours

2nd

choice

3rd

choice

out)
Supervisor

Sc hool

C H APT ER IV

TH E M E T H O D O L O G Y

Sour ce of Da ta
N i n e t e e n admi nis tr at ors,

59 teachers,

l4l8 pupils,

and 79 p a rent s a ff il ia te d with the M t . Pleasant

Public

Schools prov id e the source of d a t a used in this study.

The Po pu la t i o n
All a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p erson ne l p a r t i c i p a t e d
study as did all sec on dar y school t e a c h e r s .

in the

The tea cher

p a r t i c i p a n t s were o r ga ni zed on the basis of their role in
the d i re ct ed student tea cher program.
two groups

This resu lt ed in

c onsis ti ng of th i r t y - n i n e c o o p e rati ng teachers

and twenty n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g teacher s re sp ecti vel y.
from grades 7 t h ro ug h 12 p a r t i c i p a t e d

Pupils

in the study and

were org an iz ed a cc or di ng to grade level.
The sample of parent p a r t i c i p a n t s c onsi st ed of
sevent y- ni ne adult citizens of the c o mmu ni ty who had
c h i l d r e n enr oll ed in the M t . Pleasant

Public Schools.

This group re p r e s e n t e d 79 per cent of a pr e l i m i n a r y
sample group sele cte d at ra nd o m from the tot al parent
population.

T w e n t y - o n e m e mb ers of the ori gin al

failed to res pond to two req ue sts

for their participation.

All p a r t i c i p a n t s rem a i n e d anonymous.
42

sample

43

D e s c r i p t i o n of the Instrument
The m ea su re me nt

device

is titl ed the Stu dent T e a c h e r

26
Evaluation Questionnaire.

This instrum ent was d e v e l o p e d

s p e c i fi ca lly for use in this

study.

This

inventory was d ev e l o p e d s p e c i f i c a l l y for use

in the current study.
pupil,

It is des ig ne d to appr ai se parent,

tea ch er and a d m i n i s t r a t o r a t ti tudes t o w a r d student

teachers.
The instrument

con sis ts of stateme nts r e g a r d i n g nine

majo r aspects of the

student teacher function.

These

ca teg or ie s were e s t a b li sh ed on the basis of pr e v i o u s r e ­
search findings and the results of a pilot p r oj ect

con­

duct ed prior to the study.
Ea ch que stion con tains a series of r es ponse s on a
con ti nu um from p o s i t i v e to negative.

These r e s p o n s e s

are

ass ign ed c o r r es po nding num er ic al val ue s r a n g i n g from 3 to
1.

Th e values are summ ed to prov ide a total
nr

•

score Index

c;•

for eac h participant.
scores is justified

This pr ocess

of c om bini ng r a ting

on the prem is e that

di re ctl y pertinent to the gen era l

each cate go ry

is

concept u p o n which the

me asu rem en t device is based.
Th re e sub-groups

(high, m o d e r a t e and low)

o rg an iz ed

a c cor di ng to ac ce ptanc e level were e s t a b lis he d on the
basis of total score indexes.

26

See App endix A.

The me d i a n s and qua rtile

d e v i a t i o n s as soci a t e d w i t h the range of score indexes in
each group wer e used to ma k e the division.
parent, pupil,

teacher,

Thus,

the

and a d m i n i s t r a t o r groups were

each d i v i d e d into three su b-g roups based on total r e ­
sponses to the questionn aire .

The high a c c e p t a n c e su b­

group was most po si tive in its respon ses ,

wher eas the

m o d e r a t e accep t a n c e sub-group was less p o si tive and the
low a c c e p t a n c e

sub-group was least positive.

The val i d i t y of the q u e s t io nn ai re is based on the
f ol lo wing assumptions:
maj or aspects

(a) that the questions re pr e s e n t

of the student t e ac he r function,

(b) that

one's a t ti tu de of student teac her a c c e p t a n c e is di r e c t l y
r e la te d to his ap praisal of the student teacher function.
The first a s s u m p t i o n is j us ti fied on the p r em is e
that all of the quest ion s

in clu ded in the instr ume nt are

d e ri ve d direct ly from the d i me ns io ns of th e student
teac he r f u nctio n wh i c h are defi ned in Chapter III.

The

second a s s u m p t i o n is justif ie d on the basis of foll o w - u p
interviews wi th a r a n do ml y selected sample of teachers
and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s who comp le te d the questionn air e.
These interv iew s r e ve al ed that verb al attitudes do tend
to coincide wi t h r esp on se s to the questionnaire.

Procedur es

Pilot

Project
A pilot project was c on du ct ed prior to the study

as a m e a n s

of t e st in g the a d eq ua cy of the questionnaire.

45

The instrument was ad m i n i s t e r e d to a num be r of faculty
members,

ad minist ra to rs ,

parents,

and pup il s affili at ed

with the M t . Pleasant Public Schools.

Pa rt ic ipan ts were

then int erv ie we d to ob ta i n r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s for i m p r o v ­
ing the instruments.

The se r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s were i n c o r ­

porated in the final qu es t i o n n a i r e used

in the study.

C ol le c t i o n of Data
Data re ga r d i n g the h yp ot he ses under i nv es t i g a t i o n
were collected by w r it te n co rr es p o n d e n c e wit h the p a r t i c i ­
pants.

This c o r r es po nden ce took place from May 19, 1966

to Jun e 1, 1966.
All names and posi t i o n s have been kept ano nymous
to protect

the right s and pri vacy of par tic ipants.

Analysis of Data
The dat a o b t a i n e d in this study were analyzed in
two dimensions.

The first involv ed a d e m o g ra ph ic

of resp o n s e s to the q u e s t io nn aire

summary

in order to obtain a

general prof il e of attitudes and percep ti ons .
The

second analysis tests the four hyp ot hes es

forth in Chapter
pendent Groups

27

I.

The Chi Square Test

set

for "K" Inde-

was us ed to treat the da ta statistically.

This n o n - pa ra me tric tech n i q u e was sel ec te d because' the

27

Sidney Siegal, N o n - pa ra metr ic Sta ti s t i c s for the
Behavioral Sciences (New York:
M c G r a w - H i l l B o o k Co.,
Inc., 1956), pp. 175-179.

46

followin g ass um ption s reg ar din g t h e use of p ar am et ric
statistics
1.

cannot be met:
No guarantee exists that

the p o p u l a t i o n is

n o r m a l l y distri bute d w i t h reference to the
va ri a b l e s under investigation.
2.

The conditions of h o m o g e n e i t y of sample v a r i ­
ance s has not been met.

3.

The variables

involved

m e a s u r e d on an ordinal

in the study are
scale rather t h a n on

in ter val scale.
Grou p pa rti cipants were or ga n i z e d into t h r e e c a t e ­
gories

(high, moderate and lo w acceptance)

score indexes
naire .

based u p o n total

on the Student T e a c h e r E v a l u a t i o n Q u e s t i o n ­

These categories were es tabli sh ed on t h e basis of

group m e d i a n s and quartile d evi at io ns .
fa cil itated the statistical t re at me nt

2 ^ I b i d . , p . 176.

28

This p r o c e d u r e

of the data.

CHAPTER V

AN A L Y S I S OF THE DATA

The analysis of data Is p re se nt ed in two parts.
The first

involves the d e v e l op me nt

of a p r o f i l e of r e ­

sponses to the Student T e a c h e r E v a l u a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e .
The second part focuses up on the results

of each h y ­

pot heses under investigation.

Pro fil e A na ly si s
The fol lo wing p r e s e n t a t i o n examines the p a t t e r n s
of parent, p u p i ? , teacher and a d m i n i s t r a t o r resp o n s e s to
each que stion includ ed

in the Student T e a c h e r E v a l u a t i o n

Questionnaire.
Table 1 shows that the m a j o r i t y of r e s p o n d e n t s
indicate that

student t ea ch er s are capable of ha n d l i n g

the usual d is cipl in e pr o b l e m s

In a classroom.

Cooper­

ating teachers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s were the most po s i t i v e
in the ir responses.

T h e parent re s p o n d e n t s tended to

be least positive.
The findings in Tab le 2 reve al a strong p a t t e r n of
support for the p r o p o s i t i o n that pupi ls w e r e a c a d e m i c a l l y
benefit ed by the work of student teachers.

47

However,

TAB LE 1. — F re qu en cy response s of c oo perat in g teachers, parents, n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g
teachers, pupi ls and administrators.

Question 1.

In general, what p r o p o r t i o n of stud en t- t e a c h e r s do you think can hand le
the us u a l di sci p l i n e p ro blem s of a classroom?

Small
Propor­
ti on Can

All
Can

Most
Can

Less Th an
Ha l f Can

Coop. Teac her s Q1
No. of Re spond en ts

0$
0

78.48
31

12.82
5

5.12

Non-Coop. Q1
No. of Re spond en ts

0$
0

60.00
12

20.0
4

5.0
1

d.

No
Opinion

2.56
1
15.0
3

Pupils Q3
No. of Resp on de nt s

3.38$
48

57.64
817

20.6
293

10.93
165

5.78
82

Parents Q8
No. of Re sp on dent s

1.30$
1.

54.54
42

10.38
8

22.07
17

11.68
9

78.94
15

10.52
2

5.26
1

5.26
1

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Q1
No. of Re spond en ts

0$
0

None
Can

Total
R e spo ns e

39
—

—

—

20
.91
13

1418

___

77
_

_

_

19

TA BL E 2 . — Freq u e n c y res po ns es of co o p e r a t i n g teachers,
teachers, pupi ls and administrators.

Q u est io n 2.

parents, n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g

Do you thi nk the typical pupil has been a ca d e m i c a l l y benefit ed by the
w o r k of student tea chers or not?

Be ne f i t e d
Him

Not
Benefited

Coop. Tea ch ers Q2
No. of Resp on de nt s

50.0 %

18 .42
7

Non-Coop. Q2
No. of Re spond en ts

40.0#
8

Pupils Q4
No. of Re sp on de nts

43.34
612

0
0

Parents Q9
No. of Respon de nts

38.66
29

0
0

Ad mini s t r a t o r s Q2
No. of Res po nd en ts

57.9
11

10.0
2

15.8
3

H a rme d
Him

2.63
1

N e ith er
Bene f i t e d
or Ha rm ed
Him

No
O p ini on

Total
R e spo ns e

2.63
1

38

25.0
5

25.00
5

20

10.48
148

27.83
393

18.34
259

1412

14.66
11

34.66
26

12.0
9

0
0

0
0

26.31
10

21.0
4

5.26
1

75

19

50

many pa r t i c i p a n t s

in dicate d that the student t e a c h e r s ’

wo r k nei th er b e n e f i t e d nor har me d pupils.

Again cooper­

ating teachers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s p r o v i d e d the most
p o sit iv e pat ter ns of r es ponse w h e r e a s the paren t group
re s p o n s e tend ed to be least positive.
Table 3 shows that co o p e r a t i n g tea ch er s and
a d m i n i s t r a t o r s react most p o s i t i v e l y H o

the que s t i o n

co ncer ni ng ind iv id ua l a t t e n t i o n g i v e n to pupi ls by s t u ­
dent teachers.
pare nts

N o n - c o o p e r a t i n g teachers,

pupil s and

ind icate by almost the same p e r c e n t a g e that

pupils r e ceiv e about the same amount of i nd ivid ua l help
when there is no student te ac her in the classroom.

The

most negative re sp o n s e s to this q u e s t i o n were gi v e n by
the student and pare nt groups.
Tab le 4 shows that

63 per cent of the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n

indicated that the cooper at in g t e a c h e r ’s wo r k was of a
better quality w h e n student
room whereas,

teachers were

in the c l a s s ­

46 per cent of the co o p e r a t i n g tea che rs

felt their wo r k was of a bett er qual it y wh e n student
teachers were in the classroom.
cent of the pu pi l s

However,

nea rl y 50 per

in di cate d that the c o o p e ra ti ng t e a c h ­

e r ’s wo r k was of the same quality.

It wou l d seem that

the pupils are in a bett er p o s i t i o n to judge.

This

obs erv at ion Is a c om pl imen t to the c o o p e r a t i n g teacher.
Almost

25 per cent of the par ent s express ed no opinion,

as was expected.

TABL E 3- — F requ en cy re sponses of c oo pe rati ng teachers, parents, n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g
teachers, pupils and adm inistrators.

Q uest io n 3.

H o w m u c h individ ual a t t e n t i o n do you feel the pupils g ener al ly r e c e i v e when
student te ach ers are in the classroom?

Mor e Th an
Wh e n No
Student
Teac her

Coop. Te ach ers Q3
No. of Res po nd ents

• 69.23#
27

N on - c o o p Q3
No. of R es po nd ents

About Same
As W h e n No
Student
Te ac her

Less
Attention

No
O p ini on

2.56
1

Tota l
Res po ns e

23.07
9

5.12
2

35.0#
7

35.0
7

5.0
1

Pupils Q5
No. of R es po nd ents

32.20#
455

45.29
640

11.39
161

11.11
157

1413

Parents Q10
No. of R esp on de nt s

40.79#
31

40.79
31

10.52
8

7.87
6

76

A d m i n i s t r a t o r s Q3
No. of Re sp on de nts

73.68#
14

21.05
4

0
0

5.26
1

19

25.0
5

39

20

TABLE 4. — F req uency respo nse s of coo pe rati ng teachers, parents,
teachers, pupils and administrators.

Qu e s t i o n 4.

no n - c o o p e r a t i n g

In general, ho w do you th i n k student teachers affect quality of the re gu la r
t e a c h e r ’s w o r k in the classroom?

B e tte r Tha n
W h e n There
is No S t u ­
dent Teac he r

Same Q u a l ­
ity as Wh e n
There is No
Student
T e ach er

Lower Q u a l ­
ity Th a n
W h e n There
is No S t u ­
dent T e a c h e r

12.8 2
5

No
O p in io n

Total
R e s po ns e

Coop. Te ach er s Q4
No. of Re sp on de nts

46.15
18

41.02
16

Non-coop. Q4
No. of Re sp on dents

30.0
6

45.0
9

Pupils Q6
No. of Res po ndent s

20.41
288

49.75
702

16.37
231

13.47
190

1411

Parents Q6
No. of Respo n d e n t s

35.52
27

26.31
20

14 .47
11

23.68
18

76

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Q4
No. of R es po ndent s

63.15
12

31.57
6

0
0

5.81
1

19

5.0
1

0
0
20.0
4

39

20

53

Tabl e 5 rev ea ls that c o o p e r a t i n g teachers,

non-

c oo perati ng tea ch ers and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n d i c a t e d that
ob serv a t i o n of classes by college students did not d i s ­
turb the classes a great deal, but all grou ps ind ica ted
some class dis tu rbance.
teachers and pupils
no effect.

The m aj or ity

of c oo pera ti ng

ind ic at ed that the ob se r v a t i o n s had

Since pupi ls and te ach er were in the c l a s s ­

room duri ng obser vat ions,

one would assum e that their

responses to this q u e s t i o n are most valid.
Table 6 shows that the m aj ority
teachers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s

of co o p e r a t i n g

indicated that the student

teacher had a good effect u p o n the tot al i n s t r u c t i o n a l
program.

Most other group memb ers

opinions,

or n e u t r a X ' o p i n i o n s .

of the n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g teachers,

either gave similar

A p p r o x i m a t e l y 10 per cent
the students,

and the

parents indicated that the student t e ache r p r o g r a m has
adversely aff ected the total

ins tr uc ti onal p r o g r a m of

the school.
The res ult s of Table 7 show that the m a j o r i t y of
most groups felt that

student teach er

profic ien cy was at least

subject m a tt er

satisfactory.

However,

significant pe rce n t a g e of coo pe ra ti ng teachers,
cooperating teachers,

a
non­

and ad mini s t r a t o r s i n d i c a t e d that

student teachers lacked ade quate subject m a t t e r p r o ­
ficiency.

It is diff ic ult to de te r m i n e whe th er these

opinions refer to lack of knowledge,
both.

exp erience,

or

TABLE 5- — F r eq ue nc y res pon ses of coo per at in g teachers, parents, n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g
teachers, pupils and adm inistrators.

Que st io n 5.

H o w d i s t u r b i n g do you th i n k college
the classroom?

D i sbu rb a
Great Deal

student obs ervers are to pupils

Dis tu rb
Somewhat

No
Effect

in

No
Opinion

Total
Resp on se

Coop. Tea ch ers Q5
No. of Re sp on dent s

0
0

35.89
14

64.10
25

0
0

39

N on - c o o p Q5
No. of R es po ndent s

0
0

50.00
10

25.00
5

25.00
5

20

Pupils Q7
No. of Resp on d e n t s

3.61
51

26.22
370

65.13
919

5.03
71

1411

Parents Q7
No. of R es po nd ents

5.19
4

32.46
25

38.96
30

23.37
18

77

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Q5
No. of R es po nden ts

0
0

78 .94
15

15.78
3

5.26
1

19

TABLE 6.— F re qu ency res pon ses of coo pera ti ng teachers, parents,
teachers, pupils and administrators.

Q u est io n 6.

What effect do you th i n k the student
total in st ructio nal program?

Good
Effect

Bad
Effect

non-cooperating

t e a c h i n g p r o g r a m has had on the

Ne i t h e r Good
No r Bad

No
Opinion

Total
R e spo ns e

Coop. T e ac hers Q9
No. of Res po nd ents

64.86
24

5.40
2

24 .32
9

5.40
2

37

N o n-c oo p Q9
No. of Resp on dent s

35.00
7

5.0
1

35.00
7

25.00
5

20

Pupils Q10
No. of Re sp ondent s

42.77
598

9.94
139

26.89
376

20.38
285

1398

Parents Qll
No. of Re spond en ts

52.70

10.81
8

20.27
15

16.21
12

74

5.26
1

15.78
3

15.78
3

19

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Q8
No. of Resp on de nt s

39
I
63.15
12

TABLE 7. — F reque nc y res po nse s of co op er atin g teachers,
teachers, pupils and adm inistrators.

Q uest io n 7.

parents, n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g

H o w m u c h subject m a t t e r b a c k g r o u n d do you th i n k student

Unusual ly
High

Ab ov e Ave rage
for Teachers
in General

Satis­
factory
Amount

Unsatis­
factory
Amount

teachers have?

No
Opinion

Total
R e sp onse

0
0

39

Coop. Teac he rs Qll
No. of Res po nden ts

0
0

10.25
4

56.41
22

33.33
13

No n- coo p Qll
No. of Res po nden ts

0
0

20.0
4

35.0
7

20.0
4

Pupils Q12
No. of R es po ndent s

10.22
145

24 .47
347

51.48730

5.27
74

6.42
91

1387

Parents Q12
No. of R e s p o nd en ts

5.19
4

14.28
11

62.33
48

7.79
6

10.38
8

77

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Q10
No. of R espond en ts

5.26
1

36.84
7

31.57
6

15.78
3

10.52
2

19

25.0
5

20

57

Ta bl e 8 shows that

student and parent r e s p o n s e s

to this q ue s t i o n were most positive.

The m a j o r i t y of

re spo nses from a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and n o n - c o o p e r a t i v e
teachers ranged from good to fair.

C o o p e r a t i n g teacher s

were least pos iti ve in their responses.

It is i n t e r e s t ­

ing to note that none of the teachers resp o n d e d in the
high p o si ti ve cat egory whereas 13 per cent of the pupils,
9 per cent of the parents,

and 5 per cent of the a d m i n i s ­

trators did ind icate that the quality of i n s t r u c t i o n p r o ­
vided by the student teacher is very good.
Tab le 9 shows that the m aj o r i t y of all p a r t i c i p a n t s
rated the ques tion as good or e x c e l l e n t .
were most p ositi ve in their appraisal.

Administrators

The acad em ic

phase of the student te a c h i n g p r o g r a m tended to be
mo derately positive,

whe rea s pupils were least positive.

Three of the co op erati ve teachers rated the academic
phase as poor.

This q u e s t i o n may have been co nf u s i n g

but had to do with the formal p r e s e n t a t i o n of subject
matter in teaching.
The p a tt ern of res po ns es
cates that

given in Table 10 i n d i ­

c oop er at in g tea ch ers have strong feel ing s

desiring a change in len gt h of time student
assigned.

t e ac he rs are

Since the q u e s ti onna ir e was issued,

the s t u ­

dent teac hi ng pr o g r a m has been changed to al l o w student
teachers to be ass ign ed to coop er at in g t e ac hers all day
for eight weeks.
trators

N o n - c o o p e r a t i n g tea che rs an d a d m i n i s ­

seem to favor one hour a day for a s e m e s t e r — a

TABLE 8 . — F req ue nc y responses of co op erat in g teachers,
teachers, pupils and adm in istrators.

Q uest io n 8.

parents, n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g

Ho w would you rate the qu ality of in s t r u c t i o n pupils r e cei ve from student
teachers?

Ve ry
Good

Good

Fair

Poor

No
Opin io n

Total
R e spo ns e

0
0

38

Coop. Te ac hers Q12
No. of Resp on de nt s

0
0

47.36
18

50.0
19

2.63
1

N o n-c oo p Q12
No. of Respond en ts

0
0

50.0
10

20 .0
4

5.0
1

Pupils Q13
No. of Resp on de nt s

13.^6
191

48.44
687

27 .92
396

4.86
69

3.10
44

1387

Parents Ql4
No. of Respon dents

9.21
7

50.0
38

30.26
23

3.94
3

6.57
5

76

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Q12
No. of Res po ndent s

5.26
1

52.63
10

36.84
7

0
0

5.26
1

19

25.0
5

20

TABLE 9 .--F requency respo nse s of coop er a t i n g teachers, parents, n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g
teachers, pupils and adm inistrators.

Qu es tio n 9.

In general, ho w do you rate the aca demic pha s e of the student tea c hi ng
p r o g r a m in our school?

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

66.66
24

19.44
7

8.33
3

52.6
10

21.1
4

5.2
1

No
Opinion

Total
Re s p o n s e

Coop. Teachers Q6
No. of R e sp on de nts

2.77
1

Non-coop Q6
No. of Resp on de nt s

0
0

Pupils Q8
No. of Resp on de nt s

9.34
131

53.56
751

26.46
371

5.34
75

5.27
74

1402

Parents Ql4
No. of Resp ond ents

9.21
7

50.00
38

30.26
23

3.94
3

6.57
5

76

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Q6
No. of Resp on de nt s

15.78
3

57.89
11

21.05
4

0
0

5.26
1

19

2.77
1
21.1
4

36

19

TABLE 1 0 . — F r eq uenc y respons es of coo pe rati ng teachers, parents,
teachers, pupils and adm inistrators.

Q ue st ion 10.

non-cooperating

What lengt h of time wou ld you pre fe r pupils to have student teachers?

1 Hour
Per Day
One
Sem est er

1 Hour
Per Day
for 8
Weeks

1 Hour a
Day Lo ng er
Th a n 8
Weeks

No
O p in ion

Other
Plans

Total
R es po nse

Coop. Tea ch er s Q10
No. of R e s p o nd en ts

23.10
9

5.10
2

7.69
3

10,25
4

53.84
21

39

N on -c oop Q10
No. of Re sponde nt s

50.00
10

15.00
3

5.00
1

30.00
6

-----

20

Pupils Qll
No. of R esp on de nt s

21.21
296

46.23
645

9.96
139

22.58
315

__
---

1395

Parents Q13
No. of Res po nd ents

26.02
19

35.98
27

10.98
8

26.02
19

---

73

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Qll
No. of Res po ndent s

42.10
8

15.78
3

15.78
3

21.05
4

5.26
1

19

6l

plan that they were fa miliar wi th and had w o r k e d under
as student teac her s themselves.

Pupils and p a r e n t s r e ­

acted In a like manner.
Table 11 indicates that a p p r o x i m a t e l y 90 per cent
of the student r e s p o nd en ts
some degree;

like student t e ac hers to

whereas less tha n 8 per cent

degree of dislike.

i n d i c a t e d some

It is noted that as the pup il a d ­

vances in grade and the numbe r of student t e a ch er c o n ­
tacts increas es the degree of liking the student
decreases.

One might assume that the pup il 's

matu ri ty is a si gnificant

tea cher

i nc re asin g

fact or in that the pupil is b e ­

coming mo re d is cr i m i n a t i n g of student teache rs and is
able to eva luate them, better.
The p r of il e ana lysis of r es po ns es to the q u e s t i o n ­
naire reveals a r el at i v e l y p o si ti ve a t ti tu de of student
teacher acc ep t a n c e by all school a f f i l i a t e d groups
cluded in the study.
centered upon:

The areas of gre atest

(a) the student te acher's

in­

c o nc ern

subject m a t t e r

profic ien cy and his ability to handle d i s c i p l i n e problems,
and

(b) the general quality of in s t r u c t i o n as r e la te d to

the student teacher function.
A l tho ug h the general p a t t e r n of r e s p o n s e was p o s i ­
tive,

fl uctuations in group res po nse did occur in r e l a t i o n

to each other.

The r em ai nd er of this chap ter exa mines

these group differences.

TABLE 11.— Frequency responses of cooperating teachers, parents, non-cooperating teachers, pupils and administrators.
Question 11.

Comparison of degree of acceptance by classes.

Grade

...
Liked All
„
,, , ,
Very Well
J

j
Liked Lost
,,
,,
Verv Well
-

Liked Some
Well, Others
T
Less Well

Did Lot Like
Lost of Them

Did Lot Like
Any of them

ITo Opinion

Total

7th
Per Cent of Total

52
23.01

76
33.63

SO
35.90

O,
3 -93

0
0

9
3.98

226
100$

8th
Per Cent of Total

37
15-55

89
35.29

102
92.86

6
2 .52

3
1^26

6
2.52

238
100$

9th
Per Cent of Total

19
6.98

92
31.90

199
99.15

26
8.83

3
1 .02

9
3.07

293
100$

10th
Per Cent of Total

8
3-05

72
27 .98

161
61.95

12
9.58

3
1.15

6
2.29

262
100$

ilth
Per Cent of Total

5
2 .19

58
25.99

131
57 .85

22
9-65

5
2 .19

7
3.08

228
100$

12th
Per Cent of Total

2
1.17

99
25.73

99
57.9

19
11.11

2
1.17

5
2.92

171
100$

Total

123
8.68

926
3C.09

717
50.57

9li

16
1.12

92
2.96

1918
100$

6.63

63

Hypothesis

I

There is no signif ica nt d i f f e r e n c e in degree of s t u ­
dent t e acher accep t a n c e amo ng parents,

pupils,

teachers

and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s af fili a t e d wi t h the M t . Pleasant Public
Schools.
Res ul ts of the Chi Square Ana ly si s,
veal ed no significant

d i f f e ren ce s

Table 12, r e ­

in level of student

teacher ac ce p t a n c e for five school re l a t e d groups.
obtained Chi Square value,

Th e

6.26 w i t h 8 d e gr ees of f r e e d o m

specifies diff er e n c e s wh i c h fail to equal the

.05 level

of significance.
Table

12 shows that obs erv ed f r e q u en ci es

for the

parent group are less than expect ed f r e q u en ci es in the
high and m o d e r a t e acc ep tanc e

categories;

and are greater

than expected fre qu en ci es in the low a c c e p t a n c e category.
Observed f re quenc ie s for the pupil group exce ed expected
fre quencies
gories,

in the hig h and m o d e r a t e a c c e p t a n c e c a t e ­

and fail to equal expected fre qu en ci es

low acc ep ta nce category.

Obs er ve d fr eq ue ncies

c oo perati ng t e acher group exceed expect ed

gory.

for the

fr equ encies

in the high and m o d e r a t e ac ce p t a n c e categories,
to equal expected freque ncies

in the

and fail

in the low a c c e p t a n c e c a t e ­

Obs erved fre qu en ci es for the a d m i n i s t r a t o r and

n on -c oo p e r a t i n g t e ac he r groups a p p r o x i m a t e d expected
fre quencies

in most

instances.

64
TAB L E 1 2 . — F r e q u e n c y of re s p o n s e of five school rel at ed
groups in three student te ach er a c c e p t a n c e categories.

A c c e p t a n c e Level
Group

Total
High

Moderate

Low

Parents

(35.3)**
29*

(25.78)
24

(17.96)
26

Pupils

(632.9)
638

(462.76)
465

(322.31)
315

Adminis tr at or s

(8.48)
9

(6 .2 0 )
6

(4.32)
4

19

Non-co o p e r a t i n g
Teachers

(8.93)
8

(6.53)
6

(4.55)
6

20

Co ope rating
Teachers

(17.41)
19

(12.73)
13

(8 .8 6 )
7

39

Total

514

703

Degrees of F r e e d o m
8

^Observed
**Expected

X2
6 .26

358

79

1418

1575

Level of S i g n i f i c a n c e
—

65

Find in gs

c o n c e r n i n g the Chi Square test

ind ic ate

that di ff er e n c e s am on g school r e la ted grou ps a l t h o u g h
not

st at is ti cally significant, are acc ou nte d for by:

(a)

the ten dency of the parent group towards a low

positiv e level of student tea ch er acce pta nce,

(b) the

tendency of the pupil group towards a h i g h pos it iv e
level of student tea c he r acceptance,

(c) the ten de nc y

of the cooper at in g tea ch er group towar ds a h i g h p o s i ­
tive level of student tea che r acceptance,

and

(d) the

tendencies of the ad min i s t r a t o r and n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g
teacher groups to be evenly d istri bu te d in terms of
their a cc epta nc e of student teachers.

H y p o t h e s i s II
There is no signif icant d if fe re nce

in d e g r e e of

student teacher ac ce p t a n c e among six pupil groups o r g a n ­
ized acc or di ng to grade level.
Results of the Chi Square Analysis,
vealed no significant diffe re nc es

Tab le 13, r e ­

in level of student

teacher acc ep ta nc e for six pupil groups based on grade
level.

The obta in ed Chi Square value,

degrees of fr ee dom fails to equal the

4.919,

with 10

.05 level of

significance.
Table 13 shows that o b se rv ed f re qu en cies for the
7th,

8th,

9th and 10th grade groups exceed expected

frequencies

in the hig h a cc ep ta nce category.

O b serv ed

frequencies for the 1 1th and 12th grade groups are less

66

TABL E 1 3 . — Fre q u e n c y of res p o n s e of pupils from six
grades in thre e student teac he r a cce pt an ce categories.

A c c e p t a n c e Level
Group

Total
High

Mo d e r a t e

*
*
t'-st:
o.=r
•0
1
—11
—l
0
t—1

Grade 7

Low

(75.44)
71

(45.49)
47

222

Grade 8

(1 0 6 .0 8 )
112

(79.18)
73

(47.74)
48

233

Grade 9

(133.39)
137

(99.57)
105

(50.03)
51

293

Grade 10

(115.64)
117

(86.31)
81

(52.05)
56

254

Grade 11

(1 0 0 .1 6 )
90

(74.76)
81

(45.08)
49

220

Grade 12

(77.40)
75

(57.77)
60

(34.83)
35

170

Total

471

635

Degrees of F r e e d o m
10

^Ob served
# *Ex pected

X2
4 .919

286

1392

Level of S i g n i f i c a n c e

67

than expe ct ed In the h i g h a c c e p t a n c e category,

are above

expected in the m o d e r a t e and low a c c e p t a n c e categories.
F i ndi ng s

conce r n i n g the Chi Squa re test

that di ff er e n c e s am o n g pupil groups,

a l t h o u g h not s t a t i s ­

tically significant, ar e a ccou nt ed for by:
tendencies of the 7th,

8th,

(a) the

9th and 1 0 th grade groups

toward a high level of student
(b)

ind ica te

t e ac he r ac cep ta nc e,

and

the t en de nc ie s of the 1 1 th and 1 2 th grade groups

toward a m o d e r a t e

level of student t e a c h e r acceptance.

Hypoth es is

III

There is no signif ica nt d i f f e r e n c e
student

in d e g r e e of

tea cher a c c e p t a n c e among co o p e r a t i n g and n o n ­

cooperat in g t e ac he rs in the M t . Pleasant
Results of the Chi Square Analysis,
vealed no signi fic ant

diffe re nc es

Public Schools.
Tabl e 14, r e ­

in level of student

teacher acc ep tanc e for the two teac he r groups.
tained Chi Square value,

The o b ­

1 . 1 3 s w i t h two degr ee s of f r e e ­

dom fails to equal or exceed the

.05 level of s i g n i f i ­

cance .
A l t h o u g h no signif ica nt di f f e r e n c e s

in student

teacher accep ta nc e were found b e t w e e n co o p e r a t i n g and
no n - c o o p e r a t i n g teacher s,

the resu lts did indicate that

cooperating teacher s tend to be mor e a c c e p t i n g tha n
no n - cooper at in g teachers.

68

TABLE 1 4 . — Freq u e n c y of re s p o n s e of c o o p e r a t i n g and n o n ­
cooper at in g teachers in three student teac her a c c e p t a n c e
categories.

A c c e p t a n c e Level
Group

Total
Hi gh

Moderate

Low

Cooperatin g
Teachers

(17.85)**
19*

(12.50)
13

(8.59)
7

39

N on - C o o p e r a t i n g
Teachers

(9.15)
8

(6.4-4)
6

(4.41)
6

20

27

19

Total

Degrees of F r e e d o m
2

^Observed
**Expected

X

2

1.13

13

59

Lev el of Si gn i f i c a n c e

69

H yp ot h e s i s IV
Th e r e is no significant d i f f e r e n c e in degree of
student tea c he r accepta nce amo ng four parent groups
organi zed a c c o r d i n g to ed uca tion al background.
Results of the Chi Square Analysi s, Table 15, r e ­
vealed no sig nificant dif fe re nc es in level of student
teacher a c c e p t a n c e for the four parent
a cco rding to ed uca tio nal background.
Square value,

1.40,

groups org an iz ed
The obtained Chi

with six degrees of freedom failed

to equal or exc eed the

.05 level of significance.

Summary
The f o r e g o i n g analyses show that the five school
af filiated groups do not d i ff er si gnif ic an tl y in their
attitude of ac cep ta nc e toward student teachers.

However,

pupils and coop er at in g teachers do tend to express the
most posi ti ve attitudes;

ad m i n i s t r a t o r s and n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g

teachers were m od er a t e l y positive;
be least p o si ti ve

and parents ten de d to

in their attitudes.

The pupil groups based on grade level were not
found to diffe r
seventh,

eighth,

sign ificantly

in the ir attitudes.

ninth and te n t h grad es

Th e

expressed the

most pos itiv e attitud es of student t e ac he r acceptance.
The eleven th and tw elfth grades were m o d e r a t e l y p o s i ­
tive .
There were no significant d i f f e r e n c e s in attitud es
of student te ac her acceptance among

(a) parents,

pupils,

70

TABLE 1 5 . — Freq u e n c y of r es po ns e of four parent groups
in th r e e student teac her a c c e p t a n c e categories.

A c c e p t a n c e Level
Group

Total
Hig h

Moderate

Lo w

8th Grade and/or
High School

(7.24)**
9*

(6.13)
5

(8.63)
8

22

High School
Graduate

(7.89)
7

(6.68)
7

(9.42)
10

24

Attended and/or
Graduated from
College

(5.92)
5

(5.01)
5

(7.06)
8

18

Gr aduate
Study

(4.94)
5

(4.18)
5

(5.89)
5

15

26

22

31

79

Total

Degrees of F r e e d o m
6

*0bserved
**Expected

X2
1.40

Lev el of S ig ni fi cance

71

teachers,

and ad mi nist r a t o r s ,

ized a c c o r d i n g to gra de level,
co oper at in g teachers,

and

(b)

six pu p i l group s o r g a n ­

(c) c o o p e r a t i n g and n o n ­

(d) p a re nts with v a r y i n g e d u ­

cational backgrounds.
On the basis of the above analysis, H y p o t h e s e s
I, II,

III, and IV were not rejected.

C H A P T E R VI

SU MM ARY AND C O N C L US IO NS

Sum mar y

Purpose of the Study
The purp os e of the study was to i nves ti ga te the e x ­
tent to which public
administrators,

school student te ach er s are accepted by

teachers,

Pleasant School System.

parents,

and pup il s of the M t .

Pour m a jor h y p o t h e s e s were

formulated:
1.

There is no signific ant d i f f e r e n c e in degr ee
of student tea ch er ac ce ptan ce amo ng parents,
pupils,

teachers,

and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a f f i l i ­

ated with the M t . Pleasant Public Schools.,
2.

There is no sig nificant

d i f f e r e n c e in degree

of student t e ache r a cc ep ta nce among six pupil
groups organized a c c o r d i n g to grade level.
3.

There is no significant d i f f e r e n c e in degree
of student tea che r a cc ep ta nce amon g coo pe ra ti ng
and n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g t e ac he rs in the M t . Rlea-sant
Public

4.

Schools.

There is no signif ica nt d i f f e r e n c e In degr ee of
student tea che r ac cep t a n c e amon g four parent

72

73

grou ps or ganized a c c o r d i n g to educati ona l
background.
A rev i e w of the l it er atur e r e v e a l e d studies which
focused u p o n the atti tu des of selecte d school aff il iate d
groups as they p e r t a i n to student t e a c h e r acceptance.
However,

none of these studies at te m p t e d to examine

these groups in r e l a t i o n s h i p to each other.
more,

Further­

in several instanc es c o n f l i c t i n g results were o b ­

tained for two or mo re studies.

Method ol og y
The p o p u l a t i o n consis te d of sel ec te d parents,
teachers,

pupils,

and a d m i ni strat or s a f f i l i a t e d wi th the M t .

Pleasant Public Schools.
Attitudes of te ac he r a c c e p t a n c e were d et ermi ne d by
the Student Teac her E v a l u a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e wh i c h was
ad min istered to all study part ici pa nt s.

The instrument

was specific all y designed for use in this
.. The four hyp ot heses were
the Chi Square Test for

study.

sta ti st ic ally trea te d using

"K" ind ep ende nt

samples.

Findings of the Study
The profile an alysis of r e sp on se for parents,
pupils,

teachers,

and ad m i n i s t r a t o r s reve al ed relat iv el y

positive attitude s of student te ac her ac ce pt a n c e among
all groups.

Areas of low pos i t i v e res p o n s e concerned

the student teacher's subject

com petence,

his ability

74
to cope w i t h d i s c i p l i n e problems,

and ove r-all quality

of instruction.
The analysis of the h ypoth es es rev ea le d the
fo llo wing findings:
The five school a ff il ia te d groups did not dif fer
sig nif ic an tly in their a t ti tu de s
acceptance.

However,

of student tea cher

pupil and c o o p e rat in g t e ac her

groups did tend to expres s the most p o siti ve attitudes.
A d m i ni st ra tors and n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g tea chers were m o d e r ­
ately p os it iv e in their attitudes,

and paren ts were

least positive.
The six pup il groups failed to differ' s i g n i f i c a n t l y
in their atti tu de s of student teacher acceptance.
eighth,

ninth,

Seventh,

and tenth grade pupils were most accepting;

ele venth and twe lf th grade pupils were m o d e r a t e l y a c c e p t ­
ing.
T h ere were slight di f f e r e n c e s

in the ac cep t a n c e

attitud es of co o p e r a t i n g and n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g teachers.
Coo per at in g te achers tend ed to be more accepting.
ever,

these di ff er ences were not
The four parent groups

st at ist ically significant.

organize d a c c o r d i n g to

varying ed ucat ion al backgro un ds did not diff er
cantly in their student

How­

signifi­

teac he r a cc eptan ce attitudes.

75

Co nclu si on s
One might

expect

the par ents,

pupils,

adminis­

trators, and te ach ers to reveal po s i t i v e a ttit ud es

of

student teac he r ac cept a n c e b e ca us e of the following:
1.

Age of student t eac he rs m o r e n e a r l y a p p r o x i ­
mat e the age of se co n d a r y pupils and suggests
bet ter u n d e r s t a n d i n g of their pr o b l e m s
bett er rapport.

2.

and

Stud ent teac he rs ge ne r a l l y

ma ke an

extra effort to

be liked by

their

pupils,

and have cho sen

t e a c h i n g as

a career

because

they like you n g

people.

Student tea chers g e n e r a l l y have a fresh
ap p r o a c h to teaching,
innovative;

have new ideas,

are

to some pup il s the student t e a c h ­

ing p r o g r a m was a ne w experience.
3.

Wi t h two peo pl e in the c la s s r o o m the student
teacher was able to give in div idual a t t e n t i o n
to pupils,

and also to rel iev e the c o o p e r a t i n g

teacher of many r o ut in e tasks

so that the

co o p e r a t i n g teac her could spend m o r e time in
actual t ea ch ing whi ch would benefit
However,

pupils.

45 per cent of the pupils resp o n d e d

that they rec ei ve d as m u c h in div id ua l a t t e n t i o n
whe n just the c oo pe ra ting t e ac her was present.

4.

The study i n di cated that student tea ch ers
ge ner al ly were p r e p a r e d to teach, have an
ample k no wledg e of subject matter,

and that

c l ass ro om i n s t r u c t i o n does not suffer wh en
student tea chers are in the classroom.
Many pupils felt that
less formal and more

student tea che rs were
inter es ti ng than the

r e gul ar teacher.
5-

The study indic at ed that the r e gu la r teacher
did better t ea c h i n g wh e n the student teach er
and observers were in the classroom.

One

might assume the reg ul ar teac her is setti ng a
good example.

However,

cent of the pupil s

approximately

50 per

in dic ated that the quality

of the co op er a t i n g t e a c h e r ’s wo r k was the
same when there was no student te ac her in the
classroom.
6.

Acc ep ta nc e of student teachers by teache rs and
adm ini str at or s

could be m o t i v a t e d by a sincere

desire to help future teachers.
Criticis ms that student

tea chers were i n fe rior to

the regular teacher could be j u stif ie d on the ground
that the student teacher should not be e xpe ct ed to have
in-depth command of subject m a t t e r at the b e g i n n i n g of
his teaching career and that quality of i n s t r uctio n
genera lly improves with experience.

77

It can be as sum ed that the student tea che r should
not have a high level of cl as s r o o m di sc i p l i n e b e c a u s e he
is not the regu la r t e a ch er in charge.

However,

the st u ­

dent teacher should be exp ec te d to hand le the usual
discipline problems

that arise in the classroom.

majority of re s p o n d e n t s

in di cat ed that

The

student teachers

are capable of h a n d l i n g the us u a l dis ci p l i n e pro bl em s
in a classroom.
That

some groups were m o r e p o sitiv e toward student

teachers than others mig ht be explain ed by the fact

that

they were in a p o s i t i o n to observe the da y- to -d ay o p e r ­
ation of the student teacher program,

u n d e r s t o o d it

better, and rea c te d favo rab ly toward it.

Too,

some

groups are affected p o s i t i v e l y by a desire to help the
b egi nning t e acher as a c o n t r i b u t i o n to the tea ch in g p r o ­
fession .
The ac cepta nc e of student teachers by co ope ra ti ng
teachers, n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g teachers,
generally woul d not be a f fe ct ed by:
student teachers with pupils,
ence with a student teacher,

and a d m i ni st rator s
(a) the fairness of

(b) a p u p i l ’s bad e x p e r i ­
or

(c) a pupi l's dif fi c u l t y

in adj usting to more than one te acher in the classroom.
The t e achi ng group respons es woul d not be affected
by parents who were des iro us of the reg u la r teacher
teaching the class at all times.
not had student tea chers while

Also some parents had

in school,

and could not

78

be in a p o s i t i o n to pass jud gment

on the student

teacher

program.
The findings woul d ind ica te that student teachers
have relat i v e l y p o siti ve a c ce pt an ce in the pub lic
setting,

school

and that they are m a k i n g a c o n t r i b u t i o n to

pupils while gain ing nee de d la bo rat ory experience.
proper supervision,

Under

the student teachers have m u c h to

offer a school system.

The co o p e r a t i n g teac he r in g u i d ­

ing and a dv is ing the student teache r is m a k i n g a val uab le
c o n t r ibut io n to the t e ac hi ng profession.
Parents, pupils,

adminis tr at or s,

and tea ch ers seem

to share the o p i n i o n of those persons wh o have inst it ut ed
off-campus student t e ac hi ng pro gr ams that such a c o o p e r a ­
tive ar ran ge men t

is a de si r a b l e practice.

Sugges ti on s
The

for Fur ther Re s e a r c h

study should be re pl ic ated on a r e g i o n a l or

state basis.

Since the study was done in one school

system there wou ld be adv an tage

in further study of a

larger p o p u l a t i o n of r es po nden ts to det er mine w h et he r
these findings would general ly hold true.
would be merit

in havi ng student teacher s

colleges and univ e r s i t i e s
ance by pupils,
Further

parents,

Too,

there

from many

studied as to their a c c e p t ­
etc.

in ves t i g a t i o n should be done to id entify

other factors which influence one's a tt it ud e toward
student teachers.

Leng t h of student teacher assignment,

79

not ha vi n g student tea chers in all classes, w h ether
student tea c he rs mad e pupils thi nk for themselves,

and

whether student teachers teach d e m o c r a t i c a l l y mig ht be
other areas of investigation.
A n oth er ar ea r e veal ed by this study is the need
to de term ine h o w we can Improve those pupil s who tend
to be n e ga ti ve in their attitud es towa rd student
teachers.

Sho ul d some i d e n t i f i c a t i o n be ma de of these

pupils and an in-ser vi ce p r o g r a m be e s t a b li sh ed to b e tter
orient them about the student t e ac he r pr o g r a m as to its
purpose and objectives?
Ano th er p r o b l e m rev ealed by this

study is the need

to inv estigate h o w student teacher s can be better p r e ­
pared before the dir ec te d t e ac hi ng experience.

Should

more cl ass ro om obse rva tions be ma d e bef ore starting
directed teaching?

Or should more

subject m a t t e r be r e ­

quired or more me th ods courses in te a c h i n g be req ui re d
before the b eg i n n i n g teaching e xp erience?
Fur th er r e s e a r c h is also n e ed ed in r ef erenc e to
whether a more tho rou gh screen ing might be done of p r o ­
spective student

teachers.

The s c r e e n i n g could focus on

emotional sta bi li ty and readin ess
Finally,

would similar finding s also be reve al ed

In a study whic h included private
as public

for d ir e c t e d teaching.

school systems?

school systems as well

8o
The se and other qu est io ns do merit

further i n ­

ve s t i g a t i o n if the p ro blems a ss oc i a t e d wit h d i rec te d
teaching are to be fully explicated.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adams, H a r o l d P.; and Dickey, P r ank G.
Basic Principles
of Stu dent T e a c h i n g . N e w York:
A m e r i c a n Book
Company, 1956.
Alterman, Ron a ld A.
A N e w A p p r o a c h to Te a c h e r E d u c a t i o n .
Central M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y Story.
M t . Pleasant:
Central M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1966 .
A m eri ca n A s s o c i a t i o n of Colleg es for T e a c h e r Education.
Revi se d Standar ds and Pol icies for A c c r e ditin g
Colleges for T e ac her E d u c a t i o n . Oreonta, N. Y . :
The Ass oci at io n, 1951.
American A s s o c i a t i o n of School Ad mi ni stra to rs .
Paths
to Bett er S c h o o l s . T w e n t y - t h i r d Yearbook.
Washington, D. C.:
The Asso ci at io n, 1951American A s s o c i a t i o n of Colleges for Te a c h e r Education.
Recomm e n d e d Stan da rd s Go ve r n i n g Pro fe ssi on al
L a b o r a t o r y E x p e r i e n c e s in Student T e a c h i n g and
Ev alu a t i v e C r i t e r i a . Oneonta, N. Y.:
The
A s s o c i a t i o n for Student Teaching, 1949.
Am eri can A s s o c i a t i o n of Tea ch er s Colleges.
Yearbook,
1 9 2 2 . Oneonta, N e w York:
The As so ciati on , 1922.
Ame ric an A s s o c i a t i o n of T ea ch ers Colleges.
"Standards
for A c c r e d i t i n g Te ac hers Co lle ges. "
Yearbook,
1 9 2 6 . Oneonta, N. Y.:
The As so ci atio n, 1926".
Am eri can A s s o c i a t i o n of T ea ch er s Colleges.
Yearbook,
1 9 2 7 . Oneonta, N. Y.:
The Asso ci at io n, 1927.
Am erican A s s o c i a t i o n of Tea ch er s Colleges.
Standards
for A c c r e d i t i n g T ea ch ers C o l l e g e s .
Twenty-fourth
Yearbook.
Oneonta, N. Y.:
The Asso cia tion, 1948.
Am er ica n A s s o c i a t i o n of Te a c h e r s Colleges.
School and
Co mmu nity L a b o r a t o r y E x p e r i e n c e s . Po r t y - f o u r t h
Yearbook.
Oneonta, N. Y.:
The Associ at ion, 1948.

82

83

Arbuckle, Dugald, S.
Student Perso nn el S e rvi ce s in H i gh er
E duc ation.
N e w York:
M c G r a w - H i l l B o o k Company,
1953.
Armstrong, W. E.; and Hollis, E. V.
The Coll ege in
T e ac he r Ed ucat ion .
J a c k s o n Place, W a s h i n g t o n 6,
D. C., 1 9 W .
A s s o c i a t i o n for Student Teaching.
The E v a l u a t i o n of
Student T e a c h i n g . T w e n t y - e i g h t h Yearbook.
LockHaven, Pa.:
The A s s o c ia ti on, 19^9.
A s s o c i a t i o n for Student Teaching.
Of f- Cam pus Student
T e a c h i n g . T h i r t i e t h Yearbook.
L o c k Haven, P a . :
The As so ci ati on, 1951.
A s s o c i a t i o n for Student Teaching.
C u r r i c u l u m Tre nds in
T e ach er E d u c a t i o n . T h i r t y - s e c o n d Yearbook.
LockHaven, Pa.:
The A s s o c iat io n, 1953.
As s o c i a t i o n for Student Teaching.
Fa cil i t i e s for P r o ­
fessio nal L a b o r a t o r y E x p e r i e n c e s in T e a c h e r
E d u c a t i o n . T h i r t y - t h i r d Yearbook.
Lock -H av en ,
Pa.:
The A s s o c ia ti on , 195^.
A s s o c i a t i o n of Stud ent Te aching.
F un c t i o n s of L a b o r a t o r y
Schools in T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n . T h i r t y - f o u r t h Yearbook.
Lo ck-Haven , Pa.:
Th e Associ ati on, 1955.
Barr, A. S.; Burton, W i l l i a m H.; and Bruckner, Leo J.
S u p e r v i s i o n . N e w York:
D. A p p l e t o n - C e n t u r y
Company, Inc., 19^7.
Benjamin, Harold, e d . "Democracy in the A d m i n i s t r a t i o n
of Higher E d u c a t i o n . "
T e n t h Y e a r b o o k of the Joh n
Dewey S o c i e t y . N e w York:
H a r p e r and Br ot hers , 1950.
Blyer, Dorothea.
"Student T e a c h i n g in the Am e r i c a n
A s s o c i a t i o n of T e ac he rs College ."
Educational
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and S u p e r v i s i o n (February, 19*17) .
Brink,

W i l l i a m G.
"The A d m i n i s t r a t i o n of Stud ent Te a c h i n g
in Un i v e r s i t i e s W h i c h Use the Public Schools."
E du ca ti onal A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and S u p e r v i s i o n
(October, 1945), 394-4 02,

Brinton, Mary Frances.
" O r g a n i z a t i o n and A d m i n i s t r a t i o n
of Gu ida nce Faci l i t i e s in T e ac her E d u c a t i o n . "
U n p u b li sh ed Ph.D. diss er ta ti on, U n i v e r s i t y of
So u t h e r n Califo rnia , 19^8.

84

Brumbaugh, A. J.
"The Place of the Te a c h e r s College,
the Liberal Arts College, and the U n i v e r s i t y in
Te a c h e r E du cati on ."
Sec ond Y e a r b o o k . Oneonta,
N. Y.:
A m e r i c a n A s s o c i a t i o n of Col le ges for
Te a c h e r E du ca ti on, 1949.
Burnett, Lewis W.; and Dickso n, Geo rge E.
"Coope rat ive
Impro vem ent of Off-C a m p u s Student T e ac hi ng ."
Jou rnal of Te a c h e r E d u c a t i o n (December, 1950),
287-290.
Burr, James B.; Har ding, L o uiry We.; and Jacobs, Le la n d B.
Student Tea c h i n g in the E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l . N e w
Y o r k : A p p l e t o n - C e n t u r y Croft, Inc., 1950.
Chase, Daniel.
"Student Te a c h i n g Programs Requ ire
E ff ec tive C o o p e ra ti on ."
C a l i f o r n i a J o u r n a l of
Secondar y E d u c a t i o n (April, 1955), 200-201.
Clayton, A. Stafford.
"The O r g a n i z a t i o n of the School
of Ed uc ati on, Indi ana U ni versity, for Policy
De velo pm en t. "
B u l l e t i n of the School of E du cation,
Vol. 30, No. 2.
Bl oo mi ngton , Indiana:
Ind ia na
Unive rsi ty, March, 1954, 43 pp.
Clem,

Paul N.
"A Study of the M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y
F ull- Ti me Resident St udent T e a c h i n g Program."
Un publ is he d Ph.D. disser ta tion , M i c h i g a n State
University, 1958.

Colebank, George H.
"Practi ce T e a c h i n g in the Col leges
of the No r t h Central A s s o c i a t i o n . "
The Nor t h
Central A s s o c i a t i o n Qu ar t e r l y ( D e c e m b e r , 1 9 2 8 ) ,
376-431.
Coleman, Mary S.
"The Co mm u n i t y Looks at the Program,
Off-C amp us Student Te achi n g . "
Thirtieth Yearbook
of the A s s o c i a t i o n for Student T e a c h i n g . An n
Arbor, Michigan:
E d w a r d s Brothers, Inc.
Cooper, R. M.
Bett er C o l l e g e s — Bet te r T e a c h e r s .
York:
The M a c m i l l a n Company, 19^4.

New

Curtis, Dwight K.; and Andrews, L e o n a r d C.
Gui di ng Your
Student Teacher.
E n g l e w o o d Cliffs, N. J.:
Pre nti ce
Hall", 1956.
Dewey, John.
Dem o cr ac y and E d u c a t i o n .
M a c m i l l a n Company, 1916.
Dewey, John.
Ex pe ri e n c e and E d u c a t i o n .
m i lla n Company, 1938.

Ne w York:

N e w York:

The

Mac­

85
Dixson, Paul T.
"Some G u i d i n g Princi pl es for Student
T e a c h i n g P r o g r a m s ." N o r t h Central A s s o c i a t i o n
Q ua rt er ly (October, 1957), 193-196.
Eig ht h Annu al Ca tal og ue of 1902-1903 at Central Normal.
Engle,

Shirl ey and Sharpe, Don ald M.
"The C o o p e r a t i n g
School:
Current F u ncti on s in T e ac he r Ed u c a t i o n . "
T h i r t y - f o u r t h Y e a r b o o k . L oc k- Ha ve n, Pa.:
Associ­
at i o n for Student T eac hing, 1955.

Feyereisen, K a t h r y n and Dieckman , Verna.
"Guiding
Student Tea cher E x p e r i e n c e s . "
B u l l e t i n No. 1.
Lock Haven, Pa.:
A s s o c i a t i o n for Student T e a c h ­
ing, 1952.
Flowers, John.
"School and C o mm unity L a b o r a t o r y E x p e r i ­
ences in Teac he r Ed u c a t i o n . "
American Association
of Teac he rs Co lle ges (19*18), 30*4.
French, S. J., ed.
Accent on Teaching:
E x p e r i m e n t s in
Gen
era
l
Education.
Ne
w
York:
H
a
rp
er
Brothers,
- —
jFoster, F r a n k K.
"The Tra i n i n g School in the E d u c a t i o n
of T e a c h e r s ." T e acher E d u c a t i o n C u r r i c u l a .
Nat ion al Survey of the E d u c a t i o n of Teachers,
1933, pp. 367-401.
Garrison, Noble L.
The Im pro vem ent of T e a c h i n g .
York:
The D r y d e n Press, 1955.

New

Gates, Mary Frances and Currie, Dona ld M.
"Survey of
S u p e r vi si on of Student T e a c h i n g in M ic hi gan. "
Jou rna l of Ed uc at iona l R e s e a r c h (March, 1953),
497-504 .
Gray, Rex C.; Musgrave, Paul N., Wilburn, D. Banks.
"Full-Time Student Tea ch ing ."
M a r s h a l l College,
Huntington, West Virginia, 1957.
Grim,

Paul and Mi chaelis, John.
in the Secondary School.
H a l l , Inc., 1953.

The St ude nt Teac her
N e w York:
Pre nt ic e-

Hammock, Robert C.
"Student T e a c h i n g in the Programs
of Pro spective S e c o n d a r y - S c h o o l Tea c h e r s in the
Unite d States."
Un p u b l i s h e d Ph.D. dissertati on,
Un iver si ty of Texas, 1942.

86

Hansen, C. W.
’’P ri ncipl es and C r it er ia for the Se le c t i o n
of Critic Teach e r s . "
Educational Administration
and S u p e r v i s i o n (October, 1$48), 377-383.
Harry,

Shlzuko N.
"Some Trends in T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n . "
E d u c a ti on al R e s e a r c h B u l l e t i n . Columbus, Ohio:
College of E du ca tion , The Ohi o State Univers ity ,
Sep te mb er 10, 1958, pp. 158-160.

Hicks,

W i lli am V.; and Garner, Ray.
M i m e o g r a p h e d fo rm
di stri b u t e d by the Student T e a c h i n g Office, M i c h i g a n
State U niv ersity, East Lansing, M ich igan, 1957.

Hicks,

W i ll ia m V.; and Jameson, M a r s h a l l C.
The E l e ­
m e nt ar y Schoo l Princip al at W o r k . E n g l e w o o d
Cliffs, N.. J.:
Pre ntice-Hall, Inc., 1957.

Hicks,

W i ll iam V.
"I nf or matio n About Off -C ampus S t u ­
dent T e a c h i n g Programs in B i g Ten Un iv er s i t i e s . "
East Lansing, Michigan:
M i c h i g a n State University,
B u lle ti n 1959.
(Mimeographed.)

Hicks, W i l l i a m V.
"Where Do Student T e a c h i n g Centers
Secure Tea ch er s?"
East Lansing, Michiga n:
Col leg e
of Educati on, M i c h i g a n State Unive rsi ty, B u l l e t i n
1958.
(Mimeographed.)
Hicks,

W i l li am V.; and Walker, Clare C.
T e a c h i n g . East Lansing, Michigan:
University Press, 1957.

F u l l - T i m e Student
M i c h i g a n State

Hill,

Clyde.
A De ca d e of Progress in T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n .
New York!
Bureau of Publication, Te a c h e r s College,
Columbia Un iversity , 1927.

Holstlne, Garold, D . ; and Steeves, F r a n k L.
"The I d e n t i ­
fication of Good Fac il it ies for Pr ofess io na l
Laboratory Ex per i e n c e s . "
Thirty-third Y earbook.
As s o c i a t i o n for Student T e a c h i n g , 1954.
Hunt, Charles W.
T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n for a Fre e P e o p l e .
Oneonta, N. Y . : The A m e r i c a n A s s o c i a t i o n of
Colleges for T e a c h e r Educati on, 1956.
Jones, Rodney M.
"An I n v e s t i g a t i o n of Practic es of
Teacher P rep ar in g Instit ut ion s in E x t e n d i n g R e c o g ­
nition to Of f- C a m p u s C o o p e r a t i n g Te ache rs. "
Un pub lished Ph.D. diss ertati on, Te a c h e r s College,
Columbia Universit y, 1958.
Kelley, E. C,; and Rasey, M. I.
E d u c a t i o n and the Natu re
of M a n . New York:
Harper and Brothers, 1952.

87

Kelley, F. J., e d . I m p r o v i n g Col le ge I n s t r u c t i o n .
Washi ng to n, D. C.:
A m e r i c a n Cou nci l on E d u ­
cation, 1951.
Lawson, Doug la s E.
’’Im p l i c a t i o n s of a Surv ey of
T e a c h e r T r a i n i n g Pr acti ces in Illinois."
E d u c a t i o n a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and S u p e r v i s i o n
(October, 1939), 523-531.
Lindsey, Margaret.
"Foreword."
Thirty-third Y e a r b o o k .
Am e r i c a n A s s o c i a t i o n of Colleges for T e a c h e r
Educ at io n, 1954.
Lindsey, Margaret.
"Jamor Findi ng s and R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s
In the Study of Pr o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e s , "
First
Y e a r b o o k . A m e r i c a n A s s o c i a t i o n of Col le ge s for
Teacher Ed uca tion, 1948.
Lindsey, Margaret.
"Standard V I — Five Years After."
Se ve nt h Y e a r b o o k . A m e r i c a n A s s o c i a t i o n of Col leges
for T e ac he r Edu ca tion , 195*1.
Lloyd-Jones, E s th er and Smith, Ma r g a r e t R.
Student
Personnel W o r k as D e e p e r T e a c h i n g . N e w York:
Har pe r and Brothers, 1954.
Loveinger, W. C.
General E d u c a t i o n in T e ac he rs C o l l e g e s .
Oneonta, N. Y.:
A m e r i c a n A s s o c i a t i o n of Col leges
for T e ac he r Ed ucatio n, 1948.
Low,

Camilla.
The Child and the C o m m u n i t y .
Wisconsin:
Bro wn' s Bo o k Store, 1953*

Madison,

Merriman, Pearl and Fair, Gladys.
H e l p i n g Student
T e ach er s T h r o u g h E v a l u a t i o n . Loc k- Ha ve n, Pa.:
A s s o c i a t i o n for Student Teaching, 1953.
Michaelis, Jo hn and Grim, Paul.
The Student T e a c h e r in
the E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l . New York:
Prentice-Hall,
Inc., 1953.
Monroe, W. S.
"Teaching L e a r n i n g Th eo r y and T e ac her
Education, 1890-1 950 ."
U r bana Na t i o n a l Society
for the Study of Ed uca tion.
Le a r n i n g and I n ­
structio n . Urbana, 111.:
U n i v e r s i t y of Illinois
Press, 1952; F o r t y - n i n t h Y e a r b o o k . Chicago,
111.:
Th e Society, 1950.
Moon, A. C.
"A Hi gh Qua lit y Student T e a c h i n g Program ."
Cedar Falls, Iowa:
Iowa State Te a c h e r s College,
B u l l e t i n 1959.
(Mimeographed.)

88

Morris, Evart Paul.
"The O r g a n i z a t i o n and A d m i n i s t r a t i o n
of Student T e a c h i n g as Con duc te d in the Public
Schools (Off-Campus) of N e br as ka ."
U n p u b l is he d
Ph.D. dissertatio n, Teac hers College, U niver si ty
of Nebraska, 1957.
Morse, H. T., e d .
Minneapolis:

General E d u c a t i o n in T r a n s i t i o n .
U n iv er si ty of M i n n e s o t a Press, 1951.

Mosher, H. H.; and Bruno, D. P.
"Methods of I mpr ov in g
the Student T e a c h i n g Program."
A m e r i c a n School
Board Jour na l (March, 1955), 55.
M t . Pleasant Public School Boar d Min utes,
1924-1925.

School Year

Newsletter of the Council on C o o p e r a t i o n in T e a c h e r E d u ­
cation . Normal, Illinois:
Illinois State Norm al
Univer sit y, January, 1957.
Perrodin, Alex F.
"The De ve lopm en t of L a b o r a t o r y Schools
in T e acher E d u c a t io n. "
Thirty-fourth Yea r b o o k .
Oneonta, N. Y.:
A s s o c i a t i o n of A m e r i c a n Tea ch er s
Colleges, 1955.
Prall,

C. E.
State Programs for the Improve men t of
Tea che r E d u c a t i o n " Wash ing ton, D. C .:
American
Council on Educat ion , 1946.

President's Co mm i s s i o n on Hig he r Education.
Higher Ed u ­
cati on for D e m o c r a c y . New York:
H a rper and
Brothers, 1948.
Rucker, Ray W.
"A Cr iti cal Ana lys is of Current Tren ds
in Student Teach in g. "
U n p u b l i s h e d Ph.D. dissert at io n,
Harvard Uni versity, 1952.
Rucker, Roy W.
"Trends in Student Teaching, 19 32-1952."
Journal of T e ache r E d u c a t i o n (December, 1953),
260-263.-----------------------Sands, Jo h n E.
"Off-Campus Student T ea c h i n g Practices
in 112 I n s t i t u t i o n s ." E d u c a t i o n (June, 1953),
63 6-644.
Schorling, Raleigh.
Student T e a c h i n g .
Hill B o o k C o m p a n y , 1949.
Schorling, Ral ei gh and Wingo, Max.
Student T e a c h i n g . New York:
Company, Inc., 1950.

N e w York:

McGraw

E l e m e n t a r y School
M c G r a w - H i l l Book

89

Seventh A n n u a l Catalogue of 1901 -19 02 at Cent ral Normal.
Sharpe, D o n a l d M.
"Pro fes sional L a b o r a t o r y E x p e r ienc es ."
T e a c h e r Educ a t i o n for a Free P e o p l e . Oneonta, N. Y . :
A m e r i c a n A s s o c ia ti on of Col leges for T e a c h e r E d u ­
cation, 1956.
Sharpe, D o n a l d M.
"The Pupils L o o k at the Prog ram ."
Off-Ca mp us Student T e a c h i n g . T h i r t i e t h Yearbook.
L o c k Hauer, Pa.:
The A s s o c i a t i o n for Student
Teaching , 1951.
Siegal, Sidney.
N o n - pa ra me tr ic Sta ti stics for the B e ­
ha v i o r a l S c i e n c e s . Ne w York:
Mc G r a w - H i l l B o o k
Co., Inc., 1956.
Sprague, H. A.
A Decade of Progress in the P r e p a r a t i o n
of S econda ry School T e a c h e r s . Ne w York:
Col umb ia
U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1940.
Stearnes, Troy L.
"Off-Campus L a b o r a t o r y Ex pe ri e n c e s in
Te ac he r Educat ion."
U n p u b l i s h e d report, M i c h i g a n
State University, 1957.
Stearns, Troy L.
"A Study of the E f f e c t i v e n e s s of OffCampus Labo r a t o r y E x p e r i e n c e s Offere d E l e m e n t a r y
E d u c a t i o n Majors in Mar sh all, Michi gan , 1946-1 954 ."
A repo rt to all the All U n i v e r s i t y Re s e a r c h C o m ­
mittee. East Lansing, Michigan:
M i c h i g a n State
Un iver si ty , 1957*
Stiles, L i n d l e y J.
"O rg an iz ation of Student T e a c h i n g in
Universities."
Jour na l of E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h
(May, 1 9 W , 706-712.
Story, M. A.
"Student Tea che rs are Subs pons ors ."
Schoo l Acti vi ti es (April, 1951) , 243.
Stratemeyer, F. B.; Forkner, H. L.; and McKim, M.
D e v e l o p i n g a C urri cu lu m for M o d e r n L i v i n g .
Ne w York:
Bureau of Publi cat ions, Teachers
College, Columbia Un iversity, 1947.

G.

Swenson, E s t h e r J.; and Hammock, Robert C.
"Off-Campus
L a b o r a t o r y Experiences:
The ir Growth, Import an ce
and Present Role in Te a c h e r E d u c a t io n. "
O f f- Ca mp us
Student T e a c h i n g . T h i r t i e t h Yearbook.
Lo c k Hauer,
Pa.:
Th e A s s o c ia ti on for Student Teacher, 1951.
Taylor, Harold.
Br oth ers,

Essays on T e a c h i n g .
1950.

Ne w York:

Harper

90

T e ach er E d u c a t i o n H a n d b o o k for M t . Pleasant Se con dary
Schools and Central M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y . M t .
Pleasant, Michigan:
Cen tr al M i c h i g a n Uni versity,

1966 .
Tead,

Ordway.
T rus tees, Teachers, Students:
Their
Ro le in H i g h e r E d u c a t i o n . Salt La ke City:
U n i v e r s i t y of U t a h Press, 1951.

Troyer, M.; and Pace, R.
E v a l u a t i o n in T e a c h e r E d u ­
ca ti on . Wa sh in gt on, D. C.:
C o m m i s s i o n on T e ac her
E d u c a t i o n of the A m e r i c a n Council on Education ,
1 9 iJ-4 .
Welborn, E. L.
"C o o p e r a t i o n w i t h Local Schools in
Student Teaching:
E l e m e n t a r y Sch oo ls."
The
E d u c a t i o n of Tea c h e r s as V i e w e d by the P r o f e s s i o n .
B o w l i n g Gr e e n Con ference, B o w l i n g Green, Ohio:
Off ic ia l Gro up Reports.
Welborn, E. L.
"C o o p e r a t i o n wi t h Local Schools in
Student Teac h i n g . "
Ed u c a t i o n a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n
and S u p e r v i s i o n , VI (November, 1920), 44 5— 470.
Westfall, B y r o n L., e d . Stud ent T e a c h i n g Pro grams in
C e r t a i n Scho ol Syst ems of The N o r t h Central
A s s o c i a t i o n A r e a . A study c o nd uc te d and reporte d
by the S u b - C o m m i t t e e on Student Teaching.
"Who's in Char ge Here?"
A d i s c u s s i o n paper.
Nat i o n a l
C o m m i s s i o n of T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n ar.d Pr of essi on al
Standards, Washin gt on, D. C.
Wiggins, Sam P.
Education

"Improv ing Of f-Ca mpu s Student Tea ch in g."
(June, 1953), 622-629.

Wiles,

Kimball.
S u p e r v i s i o n for Bet ter S c h o o l s .
York:
P r e n t i c e - H a l l , Inc., 1950.

New

Wiles,

Kimball.
Te a c h i n g for Be tt e r S c h o o l s .
Pr entice -Ha ll, Inc., 1952.

Wrenn,

C. Gilbert.
Student Per sonnel W o r k in C o l l e g e .
Ne w York:
The Rona l d Press Company, 1951.

N e w York:

APPENDICES

AP P E N D I X A

S T UDE NT T E A C H E R E V A L U A T I O N Q U E S T I O N N A I R E

93

STUDENT T E A C H E R E V A L U A T I O N Q U E S T I O N N A I R E F O R PUPILS W H O
NOW HA V E OR H A V E HA D S T U D E N T TE A C H E R S

Your class has be e n sel ect ed as one from w h i c h we w o uld
like to secure i n f o r m a t i o n about the di r e c t e d t e ach in g
p r o g r a m in w h i c h you r school and Centr al M i c h i g a n U n i ­
v e rs it y have bee n cooperating.
In a n s w e r i n g the f o l l o w ­
ing questio ns , ple as e thi n k of student te achers in
general, not a p a r t i c u l a r l y good or bad student teacher.
Circle the numbe r afte r the ph ra se that most nea rl y
identi fie s your answers.

1.

What grade are you in now?
.

.

.

.

’

............................ 1

Seventh

.

Eighth

...........................................

2

N i n t h ................................................. 3
T e n t h ................................................. 4
E l e v e n t h .............................................. 5
Twelfth
2.

...........................................

6

Ho w many student teache rs have w or k e d wi th
classes you have be e n in over the past several
years?
One teac her

1

Two teachers

2

Three teachers.

3

Fo ur teachers
Five to nine teachers

5

T e n or more teachers.

6

94
3.

In general, what p r o p o r t i o n of student teachers
do you think can hand le the usu al d i s c i p l i n e
pro blems that aris e in the classroom?
All c a n ........................................... 1.
Most

c a n ............................................ 2.

Less than half c a n ................................. 3.
Small p r o p o r t i o n c a n ............................ 4.
None

c a n ............................................ 5.

No o p i n i o n .......................................... 6.
4.

In general, what effect do you feel the t e a c h ­
ing you have r ec ei ve d from student teachers has
had on your acad emic achiev ement ?
Be ne f i t e d m e ...................................... 1.
Harmed m e ..........................................2.
Neither b e n e f i t e d nor har me d m e ............... 3 .
No o p i n i o n ....................................... 4 .

5.

In general, h o w m u c h in divi dua l a t t e n t i o n do
you feel you rec ei ve wh e n student tea chers are
assigned to your classroom?
More individ ual at te n t i o n than wh e n there
is no student t e a c h e r ............................ 1.
About the same amount
tion as w h e n there is

of in div id ua l a t t e n ­
no student tea ch er .

.

Less individual a t t e n t i o n than wh e n there
is no student t e a c h e r ......................... 3.
No o p i n i o n ....................................... 4 .

2.

95
6.

In general, what do you thi nk of the qua li ty of the
regu la r tea che r's wo r k w h e n student tea cher s are in
the classroom?
Bett er quality th an wh e n there is no student
t e a c h e r ......................................... 1.
Same quality as usual as wh e n there is no
student teacher
................................

2.

Lower quality th a n wh e n there is no
student teac her
................................

3.

No o p i n i o n ..................................... 4.
7.

In general, how do you thi n k college student
observers affect a class that they observe?
Disturb it a great d e a l ....................... 1.
D i stu rb it some w h a t ........................... 2.
No e f f e c t ..................................... 3.
No o p i n i o n ......................................4 .

8.

In general, ho w wo u l d you rate the academic phase
of the student t e ac hi ng p r o g r a m in your school?
E x c e l l e n t ..................................... 1.
G o o d .............................................2.
F a i r .............................................3.
Poor

.

.

.

. ‘ ................................. 4.

No o p i n i o n ....................................... . 5 .
9.

In general, ho w well have you liked student
teachers you have known?
I

have liked all very w e l l ......................... 1.

I

have liked most very w e l l ..................... 2.

I

have liked some well and others less well

I

have not liked most of t h e m ..................... 4.

I

have not liked any of t h e m ..................... 5.

.

No o p i n i o n ......................................6.

3.

96

10.

In general, what effect do you th i n k the student
tea c h i n g p r o g r a m has had up o n the total instructio na l p r o g r a m in your school?
Good e f f e c t .......................................1.
Bad e f f e c t ....................................2.
N e i t h e r good nor b a d ......................... 3.
No o p i n i o n .................................... 4.

11.

Unde r whi c h of the fo ll o w i n g arran ge me nt s
wou l d you pr ef er to have student teachers?
One hour

a day

all s e m e s t e r .................. .1.

One hour

a day

for an eight w e e k period.

.

2.

One hour a day
for longe r th a n an eight
w e e k p e r i o d ....................................3 .
No o p i n i o n ....................................4.
12.

In general, ho w m u c h b a c k g r o u n d in subject
m a t t e r do you th i n k student teachers have?
U nu s u a l l y hi g h a m o u n t ............................ 1.
Above average for tea chers
Satisf ac to ry amount

in gen eral

.

.

.........................

Un s a t i s f a c t o r y a m o u n t ......................... 4.
No o p i n i o n ....................................5.
13.

In general, ho w woul d you rate the quality
of in s t r u c t i o n in subject m a t t e r you r e ­
ceived from student teachers?
Very g o o d ....................................... 1.
G o o d ........................................... 2.
P a i r ........................................... 3 •
P o o r ........................................... 4.
No o p i n i o n ....................................5.

2.
3.

97

S T UDE NT T E A C H E R E V A L U A T I O N Q U E S T I O N N A I R E F O R PA RENTS WHO
HAVE CHIL DR EN IN TH E SE CO N D A R Y SCHOOLS OF T H E MT. PLE ASANT
SCHO OL SYSTEM

It Is important that we eval ua te the degre e of a ccept an ce
and c on tri buti ons of student teachers to the M t . Pleasant
School System.
This e v a l u a t i o n will coi n ci de wi t h the
C i t i z e n ’s Committee e v a l u a t i o n of the total school p r o ­
gram.
Qu es ti onnai re s will also be giv en to pupils,
teachers, and ad mi nistrato rs.
This study has the app rova l
of the M t . Pleasant Boa rd of E d u c a t i o n and Central M i c h i g a n
University.
In an sw e r i n g the f o l l o w i n g questions, plea se thi nk of
student teachers in general, not a p a r t i c u l a r l y good or
bad student teacher.
Circle the number aft er the phr ase
that most nearly ide nt if ies your answers.

1.

How mu c h formal e d u c a t i o n have you had?
A t ten de d grade school
Fini sh ed 8th g ra d e

.........................

............................

A t ten de d high school

.........................

1
2
3

G radu at ed from hi g h s c h o o l ................. 4
Attended c o l l e g e ................................5
Graduate d from c o l l e g e ........................ 6
Added p o s t - g r a d u a t e col leg e wo rk
2.

.

.

.

.

7

Circle the num ber of each of the f o ll ow ing o r g a n ­
izations you b e l o n g to.
P. T. A .......................................... 1
J u nio r High Con g re ss

.........................

2

Senior High C o ng ress

.

3

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

None of t h e s e ................................... 4

98

What contact have you had wi th our student t e a c h i n g
program?
Circle mo r e than one n u mbe r if appropriate.
I am a pr of e s s o r in the se condar y educati on
d i v i s i o n of the Scho ol of E d u c a t i o n at
Central M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y ..................

1.

I am a p ro f e s s o r at Central M i c h i g a n
U n i v e r s i t y .......................................2.
I have a child who has or has had student
teachers
.
. ,
,
.....................
I am a co o p e r a t i n g teache r on the student
t e ach in g p r o g r a m ................................... 4
I am a r e g u l a r tea ch er in the M t . Pleasant
School S y s t e m .......................................5
I have had no contact with the student
teac hi ng pr o g r a m in the M t . Pleasant
................................
School Sy st e m
Others:

4.

6

Explain_

Did you ever have student teachers in any of your
classes wh e n you att en de d school?
Circle
a pp ro pr iate number.
Y e s ................................................. 1.
N o ................................................. 2.

5.

If yes to the above question,
to hav ing student teachers?

what was your rea c t i o n

I g en er al ly liked h a vi ng th em

6.

................
.

.

.

.

1.

It mad e no di ff er e n c e

either way

2.

I did not like hav ing

t h e m .................... 3.

In general, what do you thi nk of the qua li ty of the
regular te acher's w o r k wh en student teachers are
in the classroom?
Better qua lit y th an whe n there is no
student teacher ................................
C ont inued

1.

99

Same qua lit y as usual as w h e n there is no
student tea ch er ................................

2.

Lo w e r q u a l i t y than whe n there is no
student teac he r ................................

3.

No o p i n i o n .......................................... 4.
7.

In general, how do you think college student
ob ser vers affect a class that they observe?
D i st ur b it a great d e a l ........................ 1.
D i s t u r b it s o m e w h a t ............................... 2.
No e f f e c t .......................................... 3.
No o p i n i o n .......................................... 4.

8.

In general, what p r o p o r t i o n of student tea cher s
do you th i n k can hand le the usual d is ci pline
problems that arise in the classroom?
All c a n .............................................. 1.
Most

c a n .......................................... 2.

Less than hal f c a n ............................ . 3 .
Small p r o p o r t i o n c a n ............................ 4.
No o p i n i o n .......................................... 5.
9.

If you have chi ldr en under student teachers , what
ac ad emi c effect has the t ea ch ing r e c e i v e d from
student te ach ers had up on your childre n?
Good e f f e c t ................................

1.

Bad e f f e c t .......................................... 2.
N e ith er good nor b a d ............................ 3.
No o p i n i o n .......................................... 4.

100

10.

In general, h o w m u c h i nd iv idua l a t te nt io n do you
feel your child rec eive s wh e n student tea chers are
in the classroom?
Mo r e ind iv idua l a t t e n t i o n th an wh e n there
is no student t e a c h e r ............................ 1.
About the same amount of individ ual
a tt e n t i o n as wh en the re is no student
t e a c h e r s .......................................... 2.
Less indivi dua l a t t e n t i o n tha n wh e n there
is no student t e a c h e r ............................ 3.
No o p i n i o n .......................................

11.

In general, what effect do you think the
student te a c h i n g p r o g r a m has had upon the
total in st ructi on al pro gram?
Good e f f e c t ...................................... 1.
Bad e f f e c t .......................................... 2.
Nei the r good nor b a d ............................ 3.
No o p i n i o n .......................................... 4.

12.

In general, h o w m u c h b a c k g r o u n d in subject m a t t e r
do you thin k student tea c he rs have?
Unu su all y high a m o u n t ............................ 1.
Above average amount for teachers in
g e n e r a l ..............................................2.
Sa t i s fa ct ory a m o u n t ............................ . 3 .
U n s a t i s f a c t o r y amount

.........................

4.

No o p i n i o n .......................................... 5.
13.

Und e r w h i c h of the f o ll ow in g arra ngements would
you pref er that your child have student teachers?
One hour

a day all s e m e s t e r ................. 1.

One hour

a d a y for an eight we e k period

.

.

2.

One hour a day for longer than an eight
we ek p e r i o d ...................................... 3.
No o p i n i o n .......................................... 4.

101

14.

In general, how w o u l d you ra te the quality of
i n s t r u c t i o n in subject m a t t e r your child has
r e c e i v e d from student teachers?
Very g o o d .......................................1.
G o o d .............................................. 2.
P a i r ........................................... 3.
P o o r .............................................. 4.
No o p i n i o n ....................................5 •

102

STUDENT T E A C H E R E V A L U A T I O N Q U E S T I O N N A I R E F O R T E A C H E R S IN
THE MT. PL E A S A N T SCH OO L SYS TE M

It is important that we eval uat e the degr ee of a c c e p t a n c e
and c o n t r i b u t i o n of student teachers to the M t . Pleasant
School System.
This e v a l u a t i o n will coin cide w i t h the
Citzen's C o mm it tee e v a l u a t i o n of the total scho ol program.
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s wi l l also be g i ve n to pupils, par ents, and
administr at or s.
This study has the a p pr ov al of the M t .
Pleasant Boa rd of E d u c a t i o n and Ce ntr al M i c h i g a n University.
In a n s w e r i n g the fol l o w i n g questions, p l e a s e t h in k of
student tea ch er s in general, not a p a r t i c u l a r l y good or
bad student teacher.
Circle the n u mb er aft er the phr ase
that most nearly, ide nti fies your answers.
1.

In general, what p r o p o r t i o n of student t e ac he rs
do you th i n k can hand le the usua l d i s c i p l i n e p r ob le ms
that arise in the classr oom?
All c a n .......................................... 1.
Most

c a n .......................................... 2.

Less tha n half c a n ............................ 3.
Small p r o p o r t i o n c a n ............................ 4.
No op i n i o n
2.

.

5.

In general, do you th i n k the typical pup il in your
c l a s s r o o m has bee n a c a d e m i c a l l y b e n e f i t e d by the
w o r k of the student teac he rs or not?
B e n e f i t e d h i m ................................... 1.
Not be ne f i t e d h i m ................................2,
Harm ed h i m .................................... 3 .
N e ith er b ene fi te d nor harmed him.

.

.

. 4 .

No o p i n i o n .......................................5.

103

3.

H o w m u c h I nd ivid ua l a t t e n t i o n do you feel the pupils
genera ll y rec eiv e wh e n student teachers are in the
classroom?
More individu al a t t e n t i o n th an w h e n there is
no student t e a c h e r ............................... 1.
About the same amou nt of in dividu al a t t e n t i o n
as wh e n there is no student teacher
.
.
. 2 .
Less individual a t t e n t i o n tha n wh e n there
is no student t e a c h e r .........................- . 3 .
No

4.

o p i n i o n ..........................................4.

In general, how do you thi nk student tea ch er s
affect the qual ity of the regu lar t e a c h e r ’s
w o r k in the classroom?
Better quality tha n w h e n ther e Is no
student teacher ................................

1.

Same quality as u s u al as wh e n there is no
student teacher ................................

2.

Lower quality than wh en there is no
student teacher ................................

3.

No o p i n i o n .......................................... 4.
5.

In general, how do you thi nk college student
obs ervers affect a class that they observe?
Dist urb

it a great d e a l ........................ 1.

Disturb

it s o m e w h a t ............................... 2.

No e f f e c t .......................................... 3.
No o p i n i o n ...................................
6.

.

4.

In general, ho w wo u l d you rate the aca demic phase
of the student t e ac hi ng p r ogra m in our school?
E x c e l l e n t .......................................... 1.
G o o d ................................................. 2.
F a i r ................................................. 3.
P o o r ................................................. 4.
No o p i n i o n .......................................... 5.

104

7.

Fo r c o o p e ra ting teachers:
As a co o p e r a t i n g teacher, what is yo u r reaction,
other th a n the financial re im bu rs emen t, to havi ng
student teachers?
I like h a v i n g th e m very m u c h .................. 1.
They cause some problems, but they are
worth the t r o u b l e ............................... 2.
Some bo dy has to have them, but I w i s h we
d i d n ' t .......................................... 3.
I would a b ol is h the p r o g r a m

..............

4.

No o p i n i o n .......................................5.
8.

For n o n - c o o p e r a t i n g teachers:
What would your r e a c t i o n be to ha vi n g student
teachers?
(Disregard the fi nan cial reimburse men t)
I would like havi ng them very m u c h

.

.

1.

They would cause some problems, but they
are wor t h the t r o u b l e ........................ 2.
Some bod y has to have them, but I wi sh
we d i d n ' t .......................................3.
I would a b ol is h the p r o g r a m

.

.

.

.

. 4 .

No o p i n i o n .......................................5.
9.

In general, what effect
do you thi nk the student
teaching p r o g r a m has had upo n the total i n ­
structional pr ogram?
Good e f f e c t .......................................1.
Bad effect

.

2.

Neit he r good nor b a d ............................ 3.
No o p i n i o n .......................................4.

105

10.

W h i c h of the fo ll o w i n g a r r a n g e m e n t s would you p r ef er
to have student teachers?
One hour a day all s e m e s t e r .....................1.
One hour a day

for an eight we e k peri od

.

.

2.

One hour a day for longer th an an eight
..................
w e e k per io d

.

3.

No o p i n i o n .........................

.

4.

S a t i s f a c t o r y a m o u n t ..............

.

3.

U n s a t i s f a c t o r y amount

.

4.

.

5.

In general, how mu c h ba ck g r o u n d in subj ect
m a t t e r do you thi n k student tea ch er s have?
U n u s u a l l y high amount

.

.

.

.

A bo v e aver age amount for tea chers
gen er al
.........................

.

.

.

.

No o p i n i o n .....................

in

In general, how would you rate the quality of
i n s t r u c t i o n that pupils r e ce iv e in subj ect m a t t e r
from student tea chers?
V e r y good

13.

.

...............

G o o d ................................

.

2.

F a i r ...........................

.

3.

P o o r ...........................

.

4.

No o p i n i o n .....................

.

5.

For coo pe ra ti ng teachers:
In your opinion, what aspect of w o r k i n g wi th
student tea che rs is the most r e w a r d i n g to you?

106

14.

In your opinion, what aspect of w o rkin g wit h student
teachers is the most f r u s t r a t i n g to you?

107

S T UDE NT T E A C H E R E V A L U A T I O N Q U E S T I O N N A I R E F O R A D M I N I S ­
TRATORS, DI RECTOR S, SU PERVI SO RS , AND C O O R D I N A T O R S

It is important that we eva lua te the de gr e e of acc ep t a n c e
and c o n t r ib ut io ns of student tea che rs to the M t . Pleasant
School System.
This e v a l u a t i o n will c oinci de w i t h the
C i t i z e n ’s C om mi ttee e v a l u a t i o n of the total school p r o ­
gram.
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s wil l also be giv en to pupils,
parents, and teachers.
This study has the app rov al of
the M t . Pleasant Board of E d u c a t i o n and Ce nt ra l M i c h i g a n
University.
In a n s w e r i n g the fo ll o w i n g questions, p l ea se th i n k of
student teachers in general, not a p a r t i c u l a r l y good or
bad student teacher.
Cir cl e the nu mb e r aft er the ph ra se
that most nearly id en tif ies your answers.
1.

In general, what p r o p o r t i o n of student tea che rs do
you think can han dl e the us u a l d i s c i p l i n e p r oblem s
that arise in the classr oom?
All c a n .....................

1.

Most c a n ................................

2.

Less than half c a n ............................. 3.
Small p r o p o r t i o n c a n ............................ 4.
No ne c a n .......................................... 5.
No o p i n i o n
2.

.

............................ 6.

In general, what effect has the t e a c h i n g r ec ei ved
from student teac he rs had u p o n pupil s in the schools?
B e n e f i t e d h i m ................................... 1.
H a r m e d h i m ....................................2 .
N e ith er benefit ed nor harm ed him.

.

.

. 3 .

No o p i n i o n ....................................4.

108

3.

H o w m u c h individ ual a t t e n t i o n do you feel the pupil
rec ei ve s w h e n student teac he rs are In the cl assroom?
More individ ua l a t t e n t i o n than w h e n there is
no student t e a c h e r ................................ 1.
About the same amount of indi vi du al a t t e n t i o n
as wh e n there is no student tea ch er
. .
. 2 .
Less individ ual a t t e n t i o n th a n w h e n there is
no student t e a c h e r ................................ 3.
No

4.

o p i n i o n ................................... 4.

What do you think of the qual it y of the re gu la r
t e a c h e r ’s work wh en student tea chers are in the
class roo m?
B e tte r qua lit y tha n whe n there is no student
t e a c h e r .............................................. 1
Same quality as usual as wh e n there is no
..............................
student teacher

2

Lower qual ity than when there is no
student tea che r... ..............................

3

No o p i n i o n .......................................... 4
5.

In general, how d i s t u r b i n g do you t h in k college
student ob ser vers are to pupil s in the classr oom ?
Di st urb it a great d e a l ........................ 1
Disturb it s o m e w h a t ............................... 2
No e f f e c t .......................................... 3
No o p i n i o n .......................................... 4

6.

Ho w woul d you rate the dir e c t e d te a c h i n g p r o g r a m
in the schools?
Excellen t

.......................................

1

G o o d ................................................. 2
F a i r ................................................. 3
P o o r ................................................. 4
No o p i n i o n ............................

5

109

7.

What is your r e a c t i o n ge ne r a l l y to h a v i n g student
teac he rs in the M t . Ple asa nt School System?
I like havi n g th em very m u c h .................. 1.
They cause some problem s, but they are
wo r t h the t r o u b l e ............................... 2.
So me bod y has to have them, but I wis h
we d i d n ’t
.......................................3.
I wou ld a b o l i s h the p r o g r a m
No o p i n i o n

8.

..............

.

4.
5*

In general, what effect do you t hi n k the student
t e a c h i n g p r o g r a m has had u p o n the tot al i n s t r uc tion al
pr ogr am?
Good e f f e c t .......................................1.
Bad e f f e c t .......................................2.
Nei th er good nor bad e f f e c t ................. 3.
No o p i n i o n ....................................4.

9.

In general, do you t h i n k the p re se nce of student
teachers in your b u ild in g causes you extra w o r k or
not?
Very m u c h

.

................................... 1.

S o m e ........................................... 2.
None at all.

.

.

. . • .................... 3.

No o p i n i o n .......................................4.
10.

In general, how m u c h backg r o u n d In subject m at t e r
do you thi nk student tea che rs have?
U n u s u a l l y hi g h a m o u n t ........................ 1.
Above ave rage a m o u n t ............................ 2.
Sa ti s f a c t o r y amount

.........................

3.

U n s a t i s f a c t o r y amount........................

4.

No o p i n i o n .......................................5.

110

11.

What len gt h of time wou ld you pr ef e r pupils to have
student teachers?
One

hour a day all s e m e s t e r ..................... 1.

One

hour a day for an eight w e e k perio d

.

.

2.

One
hour a day for longer than an eight
w e e k p e r i o d .......................................3.
No o p i n i o n ....................................... . 4 .
12.

In general, how would you rate the qual ity of
i n s t r u c t i o n pupils r e c e i v e from student teacher s?
V e r y g o o d .......................................... 1.
Good.

................................... 2.

F a i r ...................................

3.

P o o r ................................................. 4.
No o p i n i o n .......................................... 5.

APPENDIX B

L E T T E R TO PARE NTS

111

112

May 19, 1966

Dear Parents:
The M t . Pleasant Junior and Senior H i g h Schools are w o r k ­
ing w i t h Central M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y In a di r e c t e d t e a c h ­
ing program.
In this p r o g r a m a student teac her Is as s i g n e d
to one of our c o o p e r a t i n g teachers, u s u a l l y for a pe ri o d
of eight weeks.
Some student t e ache rs are ass ig ne d for
one hour a day for all semester.
Others for two hou rs a
day for a lesser time.
The b e g i n n i n g of this p r ac ti ce
t ea c h i n g is spent ob se r v i n g the c o o p e r a t i n g teachers
instruct; and w h e n the c o o p e r a t i n g tea ch er s feel the s t u ­
dent teachers are ready, they are a l lo we d to t e ac h the class
for a sp eci fied time.
The classes of our c o o p e ra ti ng t ea chers are also open to
college students for observation.
D u r i n g these o b s e r ­
vat ion s the college students take notic e of the t echn iq ue s
of teaching, observe grow t h and de v e l o p m e n t of pupils, etc.
The ob server s are limited to five per c l a s s r o o m and are to
sit at a d e s i g n a t e d place in the b a c k of the classroom.
Generally, only one or two coll ege students observe each
class.
As a parent of chi ldr en in school, you are int er este d in
their ed uc a t i o n and in sec u ri ng the best p o ss ib le i n s t r u c ­
tion for them.
I am doi n g a study of the sec ondary di r e c t e d
t e ach in g p r o g r a m in the M t . Pleasant school system.
It is
hoped that the result of this study can be used to ga in
bette r i n s t r uc tion for all children.
Both Central M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y and the M t . Pleasant
Public Schools are in tere ste d in d i s c o v e r i n g what effect
the s t u d e n t - t e a c h i n g p r o g r a m has u p o n the in s t r u c t i o n of
c h il dr en in the public schools.
We b e li ev e that as a
parent of c hi ld ren who have had student teachers, your
kn owl edge of and opinions about the stu d e n t - t e a c h e r p r o ­
gram will be valuable.
Would you take a few m i nu te s to answer the enclosed q u e s t i o n ­
naire and r e t u r n it to me by May 28, 1966.
Please feel free
to add any comment s rel at iv e to the s t u d e n t - t e a c h i n g p r o ­
gram.
We are inter est ed in securing your frank opinion.
Please do not sign your name.

113

Page 2

This study has the ap p r o v a l of the M t . Ple asan t Boa rd
of E d u c a t i o n and Cen tral M i c h i g a n Uni versity.
Your
c o o p e r a t i o n in f i l li ng out the que st i o n n a i r e will be
gr e a t l y appreciated.
S i nce re ly yours,

Carlo Barberi,
Superi n t e n d e n t
M t . Pleasant Public
CB:ns
Enclo su re

Schools