INFORMATION TO USERS

This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the
most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document
have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material
submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the Him along with adjacent pages.
This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating
adjacent pages to assure you o f complete continuity.
2. When an image on the Elm is obliterated with a round black mark it is an
indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of
movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete
copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a
good image of the page in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­
graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning”
the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer
o f a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with
small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning
below the first row and continuing on until complete.
4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by
xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and
tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our
Dissertations Customer Services Department.
5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we
have filmed the best available copy.

University
Microfilms
International
3 0 0 N. Z EE B R O A D . A N N A R B O R . Ml 4 8 1 0 6
18 B E D F O R D ROW, L O N D O N WC1R 4 E J , E N G L A N D

8013724

D ic k in s o n , W il l ia m R ic h a r d

A FOLLOW-UP STUDY OF THE ATTITUDES OF CENTRAL MICHIGAN
UNIVERSITY GRADUATES OF THE YEARS 1973-1976 TOWARD THE
UNDERGRADUATE TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM IN WHICH THEY
PARTICIPATED WITH IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHER EDUCATION
PROGRAMS

PH.D.

Michigan State University

University
Microfilms
international

300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106

1979

18 Bedford Row, London WC1R 4EJ, England

A FOLLOW-UP STUDY OF THE ATTITUDES OF CENTRAL MICHIGAN
UNIVERSITY GRADUATES OF THE YEARS 1973-1976 TOWARD
THE UNDERGRADUATE TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM IN
WHICH THEY PARTICIPATED WITH IMPLICATIONS
FOR TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS
By
William Richard Dickinson

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y
in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f th e requirements
f o r th e degree o f
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department o f S tudent Teaching and
P r o f e s s i o n a l Development
1979

ABSTRACT
A FOLLOW-UP STUDY OF THE ATTITUDES OF CENTRAL MICHIGAN
UNIVERSITY GRADUATES OF THE YEARS 1973-1976 TOWARD
THE UNDERGRADUATE TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM IN
WHICH THEY PARTICIPATED WITH IMPLICATIONS
FOR TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS
By
William Richard Dickinson
Purpose o f t h e Study
The purpose o f t h i s study was to survey Central Michigan
U n iv e r s ity graduates o f 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976 to determine t h e i r
a t t i t u d e s toward t h e i r t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n .
included:

Questions f o r study

(1) How do graduates view t h e i r t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n upon

gra dua tion ?

(2) How do graduates view t h e i r t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n

a f t e r one y e a r , two y e a r s and t h r e e y e a r s following gr aduatio n?
(3) How do gradu ates value t h e i r p r e p a r a t i o n in s t u d e n t te a c h i n g as
compared t o educa tion c o u r s e s , o t h e r on-campus courses and off-campus
co urse s?

(4) Do t e a c h e r s with te a c h in g jobs value t h e i r p r e p a r a t i o n

more than those w ithout te a c h i n g j o b s ? and (5) Do elementary t e a c h e r s
val ue t h e i r ed ucation courses d i f f e r e n t l y from secondary t e a c h e r s ?
Procedures
Data were gather ed using a r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n n a i r e designed
by Dr. Alan E l l s b e r g and expanded by t h i s w r i t e r .

The q u e s t i o n n a i r e s

were ad ministered t o 1806 graduates o f Central Michigan U n i v e r s i ty o f
th e y e a r s 1973-1976 f o r a t o t a l o f 1057 o r 59 % u s a b le r e t u r n s .

William Richard Dickinson
S t a t i s t i c a l procedures used t o analyze t h e s ix hypotheses used
in t h i s study included th e two r e l a t e d samples Z - t e s t , th e chi square
t e s t o f homogeneity and t h e one-way Analysis o f Variance tech nique .
D e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s such as frequency co unting, means arid v a ria nces
a r e a l s o r e p o r te d .
Findings o f th e Study
1.

A t t i t u d e s toward s tu d e n t te a c h i n g exper ien ce s were much
more fa v o ra b le th an toward on-campus educ atio n courses as
r a t e d by the 1976 gradu ates a t t h e time o f gra du at io n.

2.

A more f a v o r a b le a t t i t u d e i s expressed by g raduates who
ar e c l o s e s t t o th e s tu d e n t te a c h in g exp er ience .

3.

Off-campus courses ar e viewed most fa vora bly by tho se
graduates who ar e c l o s e s t to th e time o f gra duat io n.

4.

On-campus t e a c h e r educa tion courses a r e considered of
e x c e l l e n t value by most of th e graduates o f t h i s study.

5.

Teacher education grad uates who a r e te a c h in g f u l l time ar e
more f a v o r a b le in a t t i t u d e toward t h e i r t e a c h e r ed uc ation
than a r e t e a c h e r education grad uates who ar e not t each in g
f u l l time and /o r have not ta u g h t .

6.

There i s no i n t e r a c t i o n between e i t h e r elementary o r
secondary teach in g and time o f graduati on on a t t i t u d e
toward on-campus c o u r se s .
Conclusion
The f in d in g s i n d i c a t e t h a t th e longer an in d iv i d u a l i s away

from s c h o o l , th e l e s s f a v o r a b l e the response u s u a ll y accorded th e
t e a c h e r ed ucation program.

Also , f in d i n g s from t h i s study do not

s ugge st t h a t Central Michigan U n i v e r s it y s hou ld, o r should n o t , make
any major changes in i t s t e a c h e r education program.

Hopefully, how­

e v e r , th e t e a c h e r educ ation program a t Cen tr al Michigan U n i v e r s it y
might b e n e f i t from some o r a l l o f th e fo llow in g recommendations:

William Richard Dickinson
Recommendations
C en tr al Michigan U n i v e r s it y should e s t a b l i s h an ongoing
pl an o f e v a l u a t i o n o f i t s programs and graduates f o r
improving t e a c h e r e ducation.
Innov ative programs should be undertaken in te a c h e r
e d u c a t i o n , in c o r p o r a t i n g g r a d u a te s ' s ugg es tions f o r
changes in t h e t e a c h e r ed uc atio n program.
*
A combination o f i n t e r v i e w s , grades and w r i t t e n e v a l u a t i o n s
o f t e a c h e r ca ndid ates should be e s t a b l i s h e d f o r admittance
t o t e a c h e r ed uc ation.
Ea rl y i n - d e p th exper ienc es with c h i l d r e n and te aching would
provide b e t t e r understanding and ex per ien ce f o r t e a c h e r
e d u cati o n c andid ates p r i o r to s tu d e n t te a c h in g .
A l i a i s o n person i n t e a c h e r ed ucation should maintain
c o n ti n u a l c o n t a c t with t e a c h e r ed ucation s t u d e n t s ,
g r a d u a t e s , on-campus t e a c h e r s , off-campus s tu d e n t t e a c h e r
s u p e r v i s o r s and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . This in d iv id u a l should
promote e f f e c t i v e communication among a l l concerned,
under take r e s e a r c h t o determine t e a c h e r needs, implement
new methods in t e a c h e r educa tion and e s t a b l i s h b e n e f i c i a l
expe rienc es f o r undergraduates in t e a c h e r ed uc ation.
Central Michigan U n iv e r s ity should e s t a b l i s h one o r two
day workshops each semester f o r t e a c h e r s who w i l l be
working with s t u d e n t t e a c h e r s . This would provide th e
time and s e t t i n g f o r s t r e s s i n g t h e importance o f th e
s u p e r v i s in g t e a c h e r r o l e through a c r e a t i v e workshop
approach involving p a s t and c u r r e n t s u p e r v i s in g t e a c h e r s ,
s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s , p r e - s t u d e n t t e a c h e r s , elementary and
secondary school a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and u n i v e r s i t y s tu d e n t
te a c h i n g s u p e r v i s o r s .
This study should be made a v a i l a b l e t o a l l educators
involved with and concerned about t e a c h e r ed ucation f o r
t h e purpose o f improving t h e t e a c h e r ed uc ation program
a t Central Michigan U n i v e r s it y .

DEDICATION
This t h e s i s i s s i n c e r e l y d ed ic ate d t o my
c h i l d r e n , David and Susan; my mother, LaVina B.
Dickinson; and to th e memory o f my w i f e , P a t r i c i a .
T h e ir s a c r i f i c e s , love and suppo rt have made t h i s
study p o s s i b l e .

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The coope ration o f o t h e r s has been e s s e n t i a l t o th e success
o f t h i s study and t h e w r i t e r wishes to expr ess h i s s i n c e r e a p p r e c i a ­
t i o n to t h e fo llow ing:
To Dr. W. Henry Kennedy, Committee Chairman, f o r h i s e x c e l l e n t
guidance, a s s i s t a n c e , continued encouragement and valued f r i e n d s h i p ;
To th e o t h e r members o f th e Guidance Committee, Dr. George
Myers, Dr. Orden Smucker and Dr. Glen Cooper f o r t h e i r i n t e r e s t and
e f f o r t s on my b e h a l f in th e completion o f t h i s stu dy ;
To Dr. Alan E ll s b e r g f o r th e use o f h i s r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n ­
n a i r e ; Central Michigan U n iv e r s ity s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g s u p e r v i s o r s and
gradu ates f o r t h e i r a s s i s t a n c e in c o l l e c t i n g d a t a ; Ann Fallo n f o r
a s s i s t a n c e in d ata computation; and Central Michigan U n i v e r s i t y f o r
financial assistance;
To Mrs. Suwatana Sookpokakit f o r her i n v a l u a b l e help in
d e s ig n , computer programming and s t a t i s t i c s ; and t o Mrs. V i r g i n i a
Wiseman f o r her extremely capable a s s i s t a n c e and guidance in d o c to r a l
stud y procedures.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TA B L E S .........................................................................................

vi

LIST OF FIGURES.........................................................................................

vii

LIST OF APPENDICES ...................................................................................

viii

Chapter
I.

II.

III.

INTRODUCTION

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

1

Purpose o f th e Study .................................................................
Importance o f th e Study .
Questions f o r Study .................................................................
Hypotheses ....................................................................................
The Need f o r t h e Study ..........................
Background o f t h e Study ..........................................................
Basic Assumptions
.................................................................
L im it a tio n s o f t h e Study
....................................................
D e f i n i ti o n o f Terms .................................................................
Summary and Overvies .................................................................

2
5
6
7
8
14
18
18
19
21

REVIEW OF LITERATURE...............................................................

22

In tr o d u c ti o n
..............................................................................
Complexity o f Teacher Education .......................................
..........................
Teacher Education E valuation Studies
Elementary Teacher Education Evalu ation S t u d ie s . .
Secondary Teacher Education Evalu ation Studies . .
Education Coursee .......................................................................
Student Teaching ........................................................................
S u m m a r y ...........................................................................................

22
23
27
37
48
61
62
68

DESIGN OF THE STU D Y ...............................................................

72

Research Questions
.................................................................
H y p o t h e s e s ....................................................................................
P o p u l a t i o n ....................................................................................
I n s t r u m e n t ....................................................................................
S t a t i s t i c a l Analysis .................................................................

74
75
76
78
81

1v

Chapter

Page
PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE D A T A ..........................

84

I n tr o d u c t i o n
..............................................................................
D e s c r i p t i v e Information ...........................................................
S u m m a r y ...........................................................................................

84
84
103

SUMMARY, DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
........................................................................

107

S u m m a r y ...........................................................................................
Discussion o f Findings ...........................................................
C o n c l u s i o n .....................................................................................
........................................................................
Recommendations

107
112
115
116

BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................

118

A P P E N D IC E S ..................................................................................................

127

IV.

V.

v

LIST OF TABLES
Table
3.1
4.1

Page
Ques tio nna ir es D i s t r i b u t e d , Returned and
Percentages f o r 1976, 1975, 1974 and 1973 .

. .

.

77

General P erce ption o f t h e Total Sample L i s t i n g the
Means, Standard D ev i a tio n , and Rank o f Six
S p e c i f i c P a r t s o f t h e T r a in in g Programs
. . . .

85

4.2

A t t i t u d e s Toward ON-Campus Education Courses and
A t t i t u d e s Toward th e Student Teaching Experience
o f 1976 G r a d u a t e s ............................................................87

4.3

Information Used f o r Determining th e Z - t e s t f o r
Hypothesis Number 1

4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8

A t t i t u d e Toward Student Teaching Experience:
Percentage o f Respondents f o r Each Year
.

.

88
.

.

90

A t t i t u d e Toward Off-Campus Courses: Percentage o f
Respondents f o r Each Year............ ............................................

93

A t t i t u d e Toward On-Campus Courses: Percentage o f
Respondents f o r Each Year
............................................

96

R e s u lt o f T e sti n g Hypothesis Number 5 by One-Way
Analysis o f Variance
...........................................................

99

Means, Standard D e v i a tio n s , and Number o f Responses
o f Full Time and Not Full Time Teachers
. . . .

99

4.9

Res ults o f T e stin g Hypothesis 6 by Using Two-Way
ANOVA
.................................................................................................101

4.10

Means and Standard De viations o f A t t i t u d e s Toward
On-Campus Courses, C l a s s i f i e d by Year o f
Graduation and Level o f Teaching ........................................

vi

102

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
4.1

4.2

4.3

Page
P a t t e r n s o f Response Regarding A t t i t u d e in 1976 Toward
Student Teaching Experiences o f Students Who Graduated
in 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976 ...........................................................

91

P a t t e r n s o f Response Regarding A t t i t u d e Toward OffCampus Courses Among Stud en ts Who Graduated in 1973,
1974, 1975 and 1976 ...............................................................................

94

P a t t e r n s o f Response Regarding A t t i t u d e Toward On-Campus
Courses Among Students Who Graduated in 1973, 1974,
1975 and 1976

98

vi i

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix

Page

A. Dr. E l l s b e r g ' s A t t i t u d e Inventory o f P r e p a r a t io n
f o r Teaching
...........................................................

128

B. Additional Questions (5-12) Added by Dickinson to
th e E ll s b e rg Ques tio nnair e Including t h e Most
Frequent Graduate Responses o f 1973-1976
. . .

131

C. Additional Questions (13-25) Added by Dickinson
to th e E l ls berg Questionna ir e Including Frequently
S ta te d Responses and Reactions t o Questions
. .

136

D. A t t i t u d e Inventory o f P r e p a ra ti o n f o r Teaching Used
in This Study
. . . . .

142

E.

L e t t e r to Student Teaching Su pe rv isor s ...........................

150

F.

L e t t e r t o G r a d u a t e s .........................................................

vi ii

152

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

This study was concerned with th e a t t i t u d e s o f Central
Michigan U n iv er sity graduates toward t h e i r t r a i n i n g f o r t h e t e a c h in g
profession.

Areas o f r e s e a r c h included (1) t h e valu e o f s tu d e n t

t e a c h i n g in comparison with o t h e r f a c e t s o f th e t e a c h e r ed ucation
program i n c lu d in g education c o u r s e s , on-campus and off-campus;
(2) t h e value o f s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g , as seen by p a r t i c i p a n t s imme­
d i a t e l y following g r a d u a t io n , as compared to th e value o f s tu d e n t
te a c h i n g as seen by p a r t i c i p a n t s one o r more y e a r s removed from t h i s
e x p e r i e n c e ; (3) th e value o f t e a c h e r ed uc atio n to th o s e who ar e
te a c h i n g as compared to those who a r e not te a c h i n g ; and (4) the
valu e o f education courses to elementary as compared t o secondary
teachers.
In 1973, Dr. Alan W. E l l s b e r g , a P r o fe s s o r o f Education and
Off-Campus Student Teacher S u p e r v is o r , conducted a s tudy o f 635
respondents who had j u s t completed t h e i r l a b o r a t o r y ex per ience as
s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s a t Central Michigan U n iv e r s ity .

His d a t a c o n s is t e d

o f re spons es t o an a t t i t u d e inven tory he devise d which s o l i c i t e d
p e r c e p ti o n s o f t h e t r a i n i n g f o r te a c h i n g r eceiv ed a t Central Michigan
U n iv e r s it y .

Six major areas o f p r e p a r a t i o n were s t u d i e d in terms o f

how well th e respondents thought t h e program prepared them, and how

2
h e l p f u l th ey were t o t h e respondent.

The respondents were al s o

asked t o i d e n t i f y t h e s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses o f t h e s e s i x ar e a s
o f p r e p a r a t i o n and t o add a d d i t i o n a l comments i f th ey d e s i r e d .
The c o l l e c t e d d a t a were never r e p o r t e d but in st e a d intended
as t h e beginning o f a l o n g i t u d i n a l study designed t o as s e s s changes
over a p eriod o f f o u r years in s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s ' a t t i t u d e s toward
t h e i r teacher preparation.

Two d i f f e r e n t kinds o f comparisons were

t o be made based on t h e primary information o f May 1973.

The f i r s t

was t o determine how th e May 1973 re sp on den ts ' a t t i t u d e s compared
w i th t h e s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s ' o f May 1974 through May 1977.

The second

was t o determine how th e opinions o f th e May 1973 respondents changed
a f t e r one y e a r , two y e a r s , t h r e e y e a r s and f o u r y e a r s .
Dr. E l l s b e r g l e f t Central Michigan U n iv e r s i ty a f t e r th e
i n i t i a l r e s e a r c h was begun in 1973 and 1974.

Because t h e u n i v e r s i t y

was committed t o a follow-up study o f i t s t e a c h e r educa tion gradu­
a t e s , th e p r e s e n t study was designed using Dr. E l l s b e r g ' s q u e s t i o n ­
n a i r e in a d d i t i o n t o a r e v i s i o n developed by t h e p r e s e n t r e s e a r c h e r ,
s i n c e i t i s planned t o leave th e combined c o l l e c t e d in fo rm at ion
w ith t h e u n i v e r s i t y as a b a s is f o r f u r t h e r s t u d i e s .
Purpose o f th e Study
The purpose o f t h i s study was t o survey graduates o f 1973,
1974, 1975 and 1976 t o determine t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward t h e i r
teacher preparation.
1.

Questions f o r study includ ed :

How do grad uates view t h e i r t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n
upon gr a d u a ti o n ?

3
2.

How do graduate s view t h e i r t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n
a f t e r one y e a r , two y e a r s and t h r e e years fo llo win g
gr ad uat ion?

3.

How do grad uates value t h e i r p r e p a r a t i o n i n s t u d e n t
t e a c h i n g as compared to educ atio n c o u r s e s , o t h e r
on-campus courses and off-campus cour ses?

4.

Do t e a c h e r s with te a c h in g jobs value t h e i r p r e p a ra ­
t i o n more than those without te a c h i n g jo b s ?

5.

Do elemen tary t e a c h e r s val ue t h e i r edu ca tion courses
d i f f e r e n t l y from secondary t e a c h e r s ?

At t h e time th e E l ls b e r g Study was i n i t i a t e d , t h e National
Council f o r A c c r e d i t a t i o n o f Teacher Education (NCATE) was using
t h e Standards f o r A c c r e d i t a t i o n o f Teacher Education e s t a b l i s h e d in
January 1970.

These s ta n d a rd s were followed on an o p ti o n a l b a s i s

f o r use in 1970-1971 and t h e i r use was mandatory beginning in th e
Fal l o f 1971 (the s ta nda rd s were r e v is e d in 1977, c f . p. 5).

Among

th e s e s ta n d a rd s i s th e fo llo w in g:
Ev aluation o f Graduates—The u l t i m a t e c r i t e r i o n f o r judging
a t e a c h e r educ atio n program i s whether i t produces competent
gra duates who e n t e r t h e p r o f e s s i o n and perform e f f e c t i v e l y .
An i n s t i t u t i o n committed to t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t e a c h e r s
engages i n s y s t e m a t i c e f f o r t s t o e v a l u a t e t h e q u a l i t y o f
i t s graduates and th o s e persons recommended f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l
c e r t i f i c a t i o n . The i n s t i t u t i o n e v a l u a t e s t h e t e a c h e r s i t
produces a t two c r i t i c a l p o i n t s : When th ey complete t h e i r
programs o f s t u d y , and a f t e r th e y e n t e r th e te a c h in g
profession.'
In January 1974 t h e r e v i s e d C o n s t i t u t i o n o f th e National
Council f o r t h e A c c r e d i t a t i o n o f Teacher Education (NCATE) was
adopted.

One o f t h e changes brought about by t h e new c o n s t i t u t i o n

was t h e e s ta b li s h m e n t o f t h e NCATE Committee on S ta n d a r d s , which
^"National Council f o r A c c r e d i t a t i o n o f Teacher Education,"
Standards f o r A c c r e d i t a t i o n o f Teacher Education (Washinqton, D.C.,
1971), p. 12.

4
now c a r r i e s th e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o c o n t i n u a l l y asse ss and r e v i s e the
Standards.
NCATE Evaluation Boards of Review i n d i c a t e d concerns, weak­
nesses and s t r e n g t h s f o r schools t o be reviewed durin g the 1972
meetings.

Twenty-two concerns were i d e n t i f i e d , with th e area

"Evaluation o f Graduates" re c e iv in g th e o v e r a l l h ig h est t o t a l o f
concerns by 21 u n i v e r s i t i e s .
I t i s ev i d e n t by t h e s e f in d in g s t h a t Evaluation Boards
expect i n s t i t u t i o n s to i n i t i a t e plans f o r e v a lu a ti n g graduates and
t o use the f in d in g s o f t h e se e v a lu a tio n s as in pu t in program review.
Of a l l th e kinds o f e v a lu a ti o n a v a i l a b l e t o a u n i v e r s i t y
f o r a s s e s s i n g th e q u a l i t y o f i t s program, none i s more e f f e c t i v e
than a de ter m ination o f i t s e f f e c t on i t s "product. "
How can t h e q u a l i t y o f the product be determined?

One o f

t h e methods used by Central Michigan U niversity i s th e s t u d e n t ' s
own judgment o f his p r e p a r a t i o n f o r his chosen c a r e e r .
q uality of

Thus, th e

t e a c h in g a t Central Michigan U niversity i s determined

in p a r t by s t u d e n t s ' judgments.
I t can be argued t h a t such judgments ar e t r a n s i e n t .

This

i s an i n t e r e s t i n g p o i n t , and one t h i s study i s designed to confro nt.
I t i s important to know i f opinions o f s tu d e n ts about t h e i r pr e p a ra ­
t i o n f o r te a c h in g do change from t h e time th e y complete t h e i r t r a i n ­
ing t o one y e a r l a t e r , two ye ar s l a t e r , and t h r e e y e a r s l a t e r .

It

i s a l s o important t o know whether such changes o f opinions ar e
r e l a t e d t o whether o r not t h e stu d en t t e a c h e r becomes a f u l l time
teacher.

5
Smedley and Olson su gg est t h a t t h e b e s t method o f conducting
a follow-up s tudy i s t h a t o f f ollow -through .

This means " i d e n t i f y ­

ing a c u r r e n t c l a s s o f s tu d e n t s and fo llowin g them beyond gr ad u atio n .
This approach comes c l o s e r t o pro viding meaningful input e x e r c i s i n g ,
to some e x t e n t , a method o f measuring r e l e v a n t independent v a r i ­
ables."2
Turner s t a t e s
t h a t w h i le t h e q u a l i t y o f r e s e a r c h in t e a c h e r ed uc atio n
has improved, more e f f e c t i v e s t u d i e s - - s u c h as long term
s t u d i e s , s e l e c t i o n s t u d i e s based on s t r o n g e r m o tiv atio n al
i n d i c a t o r s , and e a r l y s c re e n i n g s t u d i e s o f p o t e n t i a l
t e a c h e r s - - a r e needed to produce meaningful improvements
in p o l i c i e s and p r a c t i c e s in t e a c h e r e d u c a t i o n . 3
Importance o f th e Study
This s tu d y i s im po rta nt because t h e School o f Education a t
Central Michigan U n iv e r s i t y i s a c c r e d i t e d by th e National Council
f o r A c c r e d i t a t i o n o f Teacher Education (NCATE), and d e s i r e s t o meet
a l l t h e s ta n d a r d s o f t h a t body.

The 1977 NCATE Standards maintained

t h e re quire m ent f o r f oll ow ing g r a d u a t e s .

The r e l e v a n t s tate m en t i s :

Maintenance o f a c c e p t a b l e t e a c h e r edu ca tion programs
demands a continuous process o f e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e grad­
ua tes o f e x i s t i n g programs, m o d i f i c a t i o n o f e x i s t i n g
programs, and lo ng -r an ge p l a nnin g. The f a c u l t y and
a d m i n i s t r a t o r s in t e a c h e r e d u catio n e v a l u a t e t h e r e s u l t s
o f t h e i r programs not only through assessment o f
2

Rande H. Smedley and George H. Olson, "Graduate Follow-Up
S t u d i e s : How Useful Are They?" Research In E d u c a tio n , Vol. 10
(Oecember 1975), pp. 26-27.
3
Richard L. T u rner, "An Overview o f Research i n Teacher
Education. Teacher Education Forum S e r i e s . Vol. 2 , No. 4 ."
Research In E d u c atio n , Vol. 10 (April 1975), p. 148.

6
graduates but a ls o by seeking r e a c t i o n s from persons
involved with t h e c e r t i f i c a t i o n , employment, and supe r­
v is i o n o f i t s g r a d u a t e s . ^
This study w i l l c o n t r i b u t e t o t h a t e f f o r t s in c e i t seeks the
opinion s o f Central Michigan U n iv e r s i ty g r a d u a t e s , as r e f l e c t e d by
t h e i r p e r c e p ti o n s o f t h e q u a l i t y and h e lp f u ln e s s o f t h e i r p r e p a r a ­
t i o n f o r tea c h i n g .
Questions f o r Study
This study attempted t o answer th e fo llowing q u e s ti o n s :
1.

Do 1976 grad uates value t h e i r s tu d e n t t each in g
d i f f e r e n t from o t h e r ed ucation courses immediately
a f t e r s t u d e n t te aching?

2.

Do s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s p la ce a d i f f e r e n t value on
t h e i r s t u d e n t te a c h in g immediately fo llo wing
s tu d e n t te a c h in g than 1, 2, o r 3 y e a r s a f t e r th e
s tu d e n t te a c h i n g ex perience?

3.

Does being employed f u l l time in te a c h i n g a f f e c t
the value grad uates p lace on t h e i r t e a c h i n g
education program?

4.

Do elementary t e a c h e r s r a t e t h e i r ed uc ation
courses d i f f e r e n t from secondary t e a c h e r s :
a.
b.

5.

a t t h e time o f gr ad uat ion ?
a f t e r th e f i r s t , second and t h i r d
y e a r s a f t e r grad ua tion?

What s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses do grad ua tes
p e r c e iv e in t h e i r program:
a.
b.
c.
d.

upon gr ad uation?
one y e a r a f t e r g r a d u a tio n ?
two y e a r s a f t e r gra dua tion ?
t h r e e y e a r s a f t e r gr aduation?

^NCATE, Standards f o r A c c r e d i t a t i o n o f Teacher Education
(Washington, D.CTi NCATE, 1977), p. 10.

7
Hypotheses
To aid in t h e examination o f th e above q u e s t i o n s , t h e
f ollowing r e s e a r c h hypotheses were developed f o r th e study:
Null Hypothesis I
There i s no d i f f e r e n c e between a t t i t u d e s o f 1976
grad uates toward s tu d e n t t e a c h in g ex periences and
t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward on-campus educ atio n courses
a t th e time o f gr a d u a ti o n .
Null Hypothesis II
There i s no d i f f e r e n c e r e p o rt e d in 1976 in the
a t t i t u d e toward th e s tu d e n t te a c h i n g experience
among s tu d e n ts who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974,
and 1973.
Null Hypothesis I I I
There i s no d i f f e r e n c e r e p o rte d in 1976 in th e
a t t i t u d e toward off-campus cour ses among s tu d e n ts
who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974 and 1973.
Null Hypothesis IV
There i s no d i f f e r e n c e r e p o rte d in 1976 in
a t t i t u d e toward on-campus courses among s tu d e n t s
who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974 and 1973.
Null Hypothesis V
There i s no d i f f e r e n c e in a t t i t u d e s o f t e a c h e r
education grad ua tes who have f u l l - t i m e t e a c h in g jo b s
and thos e who do not have f u l l - t i m e te a c h i n g jo bs
a nd /o r have not t a u g h t toward t e a c h e r ed ucation
programs.
Null Hypothesis VI
There i s no i n t e r a c t i o n between l ev el o f
t e a c h i n g (elementary and sec ond arly s c h o o l ) , and
time o f gr adu ation on a t t i t u d e toward on-campus
course s.

8
In a d d i t i o n t o t e s t i n g t h e s e hypothese s, information thought
to be helpful f o r improving t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n programs o f study
was a l s o ga ther ed .

This included (1) a t t i t u d e s toward ind i v id u a l

components o f t e a c h e r e d u c a ti o n , and (2) perceived s t r e n g t h s and
weaknesses o f t e a c h e r educa tion.
The Need f o r th e Study
The National Council f o r A c c r e d i t a t i o n o f Teacher Education
(NCATE), s t a t e s in i t s pu blish ed s ta n d a rd s t h a t
maintenance o f a c c e p t a b le t e a c h e r educ atio n programs
demands a continuous process o f e v a l u a t i o n o f th e
graduates o f e x i s t i n g programs, m o d i f i c a t i o n o f e x i s t ­
ing programs, and long-range planning. The f a c u l t y and
a d m i n i s t r a t o r s in t e a c h e r education e v a l u a t e th e r e s u l t s
o f t h e i r programs not only through assessment o f grad uates
but a l s o by seeking r e a c t i o n s from persons involved with
t h e c e r t i f i c a t i o n , employment, and s u p e r v i s io n o f i t s
graduates.5
Few follow-up s t u d i e s were lo c a te d which d e a l t in depth
with c o lle g e and u n i v e r s i t y t e a c h e r ed uca tion g r a d u a t e s , although
s e v e ra l i n s t i t u t i o n s o f higher educa ti on have surveyed t h e i r
grad uates who a r e c u r r e n t l y involved in t h e i r f i r s t y e a r o f
te a c h in g .
Among t h e many advocates o f follow- up s t u d i e s ar e Baer and
F o s t e r who suggest t h a t " i n c r e a s i n g l y , t h e s e i n d i v i d u a l s and i n s t i t u
t i o n s working with t e a c h e r s - t o - b e a r e assuming r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r
t h e performance o f t h e i r g r a d u a te s .

5Ib id .

One measure o f an

9
undergraduate t e a c h e r ed ucation program i s th e p e r c e p tio n s o f i t s
g
graduates."
Several w r i t e r s have c a l l e d a t t e n t i o n to t h e need f o r
i n s t i t u t i o n s to improve t h e i r t e a c h e r education programs and f o r
them t o co n s id e r the feedback from s tu d e n ts in planning t h e se
improvements.
Riggs observes t h a t during t h e s e times o f d e c l i n i n g p u b lic
school p o p ula tion which r e s u l t s in t h e need f o r fewer t e a c h e r s ,
schools o f educa tion need t o r e a d j u s t t o t h e i r d e c l i n i n g en ro llm en ts
by e l i m i n a t i n g non-productive programs based on e x i s t i n g f a c u l t y
and phys ical r esources and developing c o o p e r a t iv e programs with
o t h e r academic de par tm en ts, ^ and Clark s t a t e s " t h a t ed uc atio n
g

programs may well r e q u i r e r e v i s i o n to r e f l e c t s tu d e n t co n cer n s."
The kind o f help graduates can provide i s t r e a t e d by E l l i s and
Radebaugh who found t h a t gr aduate s wanted more p r a c t i c a l methods
cou rses where th ey could a c t u a l l y make m a t e r i a l s and use them.

For

example, workshops were suggested where i n d i v i d u a l s could c r e a t e

6G. Thomas Baer and Walter S. F o s t e r , "Teacher P r e p a r a t i o n —
What Graduates Te ll Us," Research In E duc at ion, Vol. 10 (July
1975), p. 159.
7
Bob Riggs, "Schools o f Education in a Perio d o f D ec lining
and Changing Student I n t e r e s t , " Research i n E d u c a tio n , Vol. 10
(June 1975), p. 162.
O
Kathleen Clark and Wayne Mahood, "A Study o f t h e Concern
Levels o f Teacher Education S t u d e n t s , " Research In Educ atio n,
Vol. 10 (August 1975), p. 177.

10
t h e i r own te a c h i n g a i d s .

g

F i t z g e r a l d found t h a t i n s t r u c t i o n a l

programs need to be developed t h a t would encourage c r e a t i v i t y in
t h e c l a s s r o o m , ^ and Sanders s t a t e s t h a t
t h e gr adu ates f e l t t h a t a course was o f extreme valu e when
method r a t h e r th an c o n t e n t was emphasized, and courses
o f f e r i n g as sig ned a c t u a l t e a c h i n g ex perien ces in the
campus l a b o r a t o r y school as p a r t o f t h e course r e q u i r e ­
ments r ec eive d an extremely v a l u a b l e r a t i n g J l
The s o l i c i t a t i o n and use o f t h i s kind o f feedback should be
very h elp ful t o i n s t i t u t i o n s in program planning.
Many w r i t e r s f e e l t h a t p r o s p e c t i v e t e a c h e r s need a g r e a t e r
under stan ding o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l s they w il l be te a c h i n g .

Among th e

numerous r e s e a r c h e r s who s t r e s s t h e importance o f f i r s t - h a n d
e x p e r ie n c e s p r i o r to te a c h in g a r e Cherniak, and E l l i s and Radebaugh.
They s t r e s s t h a t e x perie nces with o t h e r s should be provided f o r th e
s t u d e n t and continued from th e time t h e s tu d e n t has d eclar ed an
i n t e r e s t in t e a c h i n g .

Only with t h e s e in -d e p th ex perie nces in

working w it h o t h e r s w i l l i t be a s c e r t a i n e d by a l l concerned t h a t an
i n d i v i d u a l w i l l be an e f f e c t i v e t e a c h e r .

In a d d i t i o n , Cherniack

s t a t e s t h a t "ex perience in s e n s i t i v i t y t r a i n i n g t o develop in crease d
awareness o f needs and s e n s i t i v i t i e s o f o t h e r s " i s one important
g
Joseph E l l i s and Byron Radebaugh, A Recommended Plan f o r
a Follow-Up Study o f t h e P r o f e s s i o n a l Performance o f Graduates o f
t h e College o f Education, Northern I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y and a Report
o f a F ie ld T e s t in g o f t h a t P l a n , College o f Education. Northern
I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i ty (September 1974), pp. 83-84.
^ S h i e l a M. F i t z g e r a l d , "A Career Development Study o f
Elementary School T e ach ers ," Research In E duc ation , Vol. 9
(June 1974), pp. 133-134.
John W. Sanders, "Teacher Education Grads Speak Out:
Assessment and I m p l i c a t i o n s , " Research In E duc atio n. Vol. 8
(August 1973), p. 142.

g u i d e l i n e f o r a more r e a l i t y based t e a c h e r ed ucation program,

12

and E l l i s and Radebaugh mention t h a t t h e r e must be "a g r e a t e r
emphasis on t e a c h e r s un der standing th e in d iv id u a l through f i r s t ­
hand e x p e r ie n c e with l e s s regard f o r w r i t t e n accounts o f s tu d e n t
p r o f i l e s " so t h a t t e a c h e r s w i l l be b e t t e r s u i t e d to perform t h e i r
ro le s.^
These r e s e a r c h e r s j o i n t h e many p r a c t i c i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l s
who f e e l t h a t more time i n working d i r e c t l y with c h i l d r e n i s needed
i n o r d e r f o r our t e a c h e r t r a i n i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s to prep are q u a l i t y
t e a c h e r s , and t h a t more ex per ience in

l e a r n in g how t o te a c h by

working with c h i l d r e n should be provided a l l s tu d e n t s from th e time
th ey f i r s t d e c l a r e an i n t e r e s t in t e a c h in g .

Graduates placed a

high degree o f value on "courses and exper ience s t h a t provided
o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r ob ser ving and working with c h i l d r e n , " as r e p o r t e d
by Baer and F o s t e r ,

14

and E l l i s and Radebaugh r e p o r t t h e importance

of
t h e need f o r l e a r n i n g how t o t e a c h by working with
c h i l d r e n —t h e n , s e l f e v a l u a t i o n and by o t h e r s . They a l s o
s t a t e t h a t t e a c h e r s - t o - b e (while in c o l l e g e ) could b e n e f i t
by m i c r o - t e a c h i n g , and d a i l y a s s i s t i n g in th e classroom.
L e t ' s s to p t u r n i n g out an excess o f t e a c h e r s from our
u n i v e r s i t i e s — and c o n c e n tr a te on q u a l i t y p r e p a r a t i o n by
d i r e c t i n t e r a c t i o n with m as ter t e a c h e r s and t h e c h i l d r e n
in t h e i r c l a s s r o o m s . 15
12

Mark Cherniak, e t a l . "Guidelines f o r a More R e a l i t y
Based Teacher P r e p a r a t i o n Program f o r th e F u t u r e , " Research In
E d u c a tio n , Vol. 10 (August 1975), p. 185.
^ E l l i s and Radebaugh, p. 94.
14
15

Baer and F o s t e r , p. 159.
E l l i s and Radebaugh, p. 85.

12
T h e re f o re , i t i s noted t h a t th e importance o f c lo s e working
a s s o c i a t i o n s by f u t u r e t e a c h e r s with c h i l d r e n i s a concern o f both
e ducational r e s e a r c h e r s and t e a c h e r s - t o - b e .
The following r e s e a r c h e r s a l l r e p o r t very p o s i t i v e f in d i n g s
reg ard in g t h e s tu d e n t te a c h i n g ex pe rie nce.

This phase o f t e a c h e r

p r e p a r a t i o n involves meeting th e needs o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l p r o s p e c ti v e
t e a c h e r , an understanding of i n d i v i d u a l s , and a d i r e c t working r e l a ­
t i o n s h i p w it h c h i l d r e n .

Student t e a c h in g can b e s t meet p r o s p e c t i v e

t e a c h e r s ' needs by being in c o r p o ra te d in var ying degrees throughout
th e t o t a l t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n program, and

t h e importance of t h i s

area o f t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n cannot be o v e r - s t r e s s e d .

Edison and

Hummel found t h a t gradu ates f e l t t h e need f o r "more o n - t h e - j o b
ex perience in s c h o o ls , " and "more work in s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g in
16
d i s t r i c t s where t h e r e w i l l be p o s s i b l e jo b o p e n in g s,"
and
Carpenter i n d i c a t e s grad ua tes "express t h e

need f o r e a r l i e r , more

p r a c t i c a l classroom t r a i n i n g , p r e f e r a b l y beginning bef or e t h e t h i r d
o r f o u r t h y e a r of th eir p r o g r a m . " ^
i n g s , Cherniack,

18

In a s s o c i a t i o n w i th t h e s e f i n d -

as well as E l l i s and Radebaugh,

1 fi

19

found t h a t a

William H. Edson and Thomas J . Hummel, Hos T h e ir Careers
Began, Education Career Development O f f i c e , College o f Education,
U n iv e r s ity o f Minnesota (August 1975), p. 38.
17
James W. C a r p e n te r , "Report o f a Survey o f Placement of
Teacher Education Graduates o f Western Kentucky U n iv e r s ity f o r
Academic Years o f 1969-70, 1970-71, 1971-72, and 1972-73," American
A s s o c i a tio n o f Colleges f o r Teacher Education B u l l e t i n , Vol. 27,
No. 7 (Washington, D.C.; September 1974), p. 5.
^ C h e r n i a c k , p. 185.
^ E l l i s and Radebaugh, p. 85.

13
l onger s t u d e n t te a c h i n g ex per ience was e s s e n t i a l f o r b e t t e r p r e p a ra ­
t i o n f o r te a c h i n g .

I t i s o f t e n noted t h a t grad uates r a t e stu d en t

t e a c h i n g as one o f th e most valued ex periences o f t h e i r t o t a l
p r e p a r a t i o n f o r te a c h in g and Hopkins r e p o r t s t h a t most graduates
" f e l t t h a t courses w ith p r a c t i c a l experie nce such as s tu d e n t teach ing were o f t h e most b e n e f i t . "

20

In a no th er s tu d y , Baer and F ost er

found t h a t " s t u d e n t t e a c h i n g a t more than one grade l e v e l would have
been o f g r e a t e r value although s tu d e n t te a c h in g was r a t e d as t h e
cour se o r ex per ie nce o f g r e a t e s t v a l u e , "

21

as r e p o r t e d by grad uates .

In o t h e r s t u d i e s , Orr s t a t e s t h a t g raduates r a t e d s tu d e n t teach in g
t h e most v a lu a b le o f a l l a s p e c t s o f t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n

22

while th e

U n i v e r s i t y ' s Teacher P r e p a r a t i o n Council o f t h e Teachers College a t
Ball S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y r e p o r t s t h a t " l a b o r a t o r y exper ie nc es r a t e d
t h e h ig h e s t in t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l ed uca tion sequences, with s t u d e n t
t e a c h i n g s i g n i f i c a n t l y a t t h e top o f t h e l i s t . "

23

Although s t u d i e s s t r e s s i n g f u t u r e t e a c h e r involvement with
c h i l d r e n and s t u d i e s on s tu d e n t te a c h i n g vary in both methods o f
r e s e a r c h and in c o n t e n t , th e importance o f both a r e mentioned
r e p e a t e d l y by gradu ates and e d u catio n al r e s e a r c h w r i t e r s a l i k e .
20

Mark L. Hopkins, "A Follow-Up Study o f Recent Graduates
o f t h e College o f Edu cation, U n i v e r s ity o f Missouri-Columbia,"
Research In E d u c atio n , Vol. 6 (April 1971), p. 146.
21
22

Baer and F o s t e r , p. 159.

Paul G. O r r , e t a l . , "Evaluation o f Graduates from Basic
Proqrams," N e w s l e t t e r , Colleqe o f Education, U n i v e r s it y o f Alabama,
1972.
23
U n i v e r s i t y ' s Teacher P r e p a r a t i o n Co unci l, "Speak Up,
Someone Is L i s t e n i n g , " Focus on Teachers C o l l e g e , Vol. 6, No. 4
(March-April 1973), pp. 2-3.

14
Background o f t h e Study
Central Michigan U n iv er sit y has always been conscious o f th e
t r a i n i n g o f t e a c h e r s , which i s h i s t o r i c a l l y i t s primary reason f o r
being.

At t h e same tim e, Central Michigan U n iv e r s ity has con­

t i n u a l l y sought ways in which t o improve i t s Teacher Education
Program.

A b r i e f h i s t o r y d e p i c t s th e progre ss t h a t has taken place

in t e a c h e r educa tion a t Central Michigan U n iversity.
1891:

A p r i v a t e school f o r t h e t r a i n i n g o f t e a c h e r s was
e s t a b l i s h e d i n Mt. P l e a s a n t.

1895:

This t r a i n i n g school became a s t a t e i n s t i t u t i o n , with i t s
purpose being " f o r p r e p a r a t i o n and t r a i n i n g o f persons f o r
te a c h in g in th e r u r a l d i s t r i c t schoo ls and t h e primary
departments o f th e graded schools o f t h e s t a t e . "24

1896:

A T r ain in g School f o r grades one through s i x was e s t a b l i s h e d
"to exemplify th e model o f conducting a good p u b l i c school,
and t o t r a i n t h e Normal s tu d e n ts i n ob ser ving and te a c h in g
c h i l d r e n . . . ."25

1901:

Kindergarten was added t o th e t r a i n i n g s ch o o l, plus twentyfour weeks o f s tu d e n t t e a c h e r involvement in t e a c h in g and
o b s e r v a t i o n with th e o p p o r tu n i t y f o r p r a c t i c e t e a c h i n g in
t h e seventh and e i g h t h grades.

1906:

A curriculum was added f o r p r e p a rin g t e a c h e r s in both p u b l i c
school music and manual t r a i n i n g . These s t u d e n t s , l i k e t h e
elementar y educa tion program s t u d e n t s , were r e q u ir e d to
observe and te a c h f o r t w e n ty - f o u r weeks.

1912:

The Course f o r High School Teachers was e s t a b l i s h e d .

1913:

A program f o r t e a c h e r s o f a g r i c u l t u r e began.

1914:

A new program in a l l i e d s c ie n c e s was i n i t i a t e d .

24
25

Central Michigan Normal T r a in in g Manual, 1897-98.

Centr al S t a t e Teachers College Yearbook, Vol. 46, No. 2
(1940), pTTSS:

15
1918:

Cen tr al Michigan S t a t e Normal was au th o r iz e d by the S t a t e
Board o f Education to o f f e r a f our y e a r course o f study
le adin g t o th e B.A. degree with t e a c h e r c e r t i f i c a t i o n .
Units o f c r e d i t were e s t a b l i s h e d .

1920:

New programs in a r t and physical ed ucation were begun.

1921:

The Secondary Education Program was s t a r t e d . The T r a in in g
School was div id ed i n t o a kin d er g arte n through s i x t h grade
u n i t and a j u n i o r high u n it w ith each having i t s own
p rincipal.

1926:

The i n s t i t u t i o n became Central S t a t e Teachers College.
Also, Central High School in Mt. P leasa nt became a v a i l a b l e
f o r s tu d e n t te a c h i n g . All s p e c i a l i z e d c u r r i c u l a such as
a g r i c u l t u r e , a l l i e d s c i e n c e s , a r t and t h e new ar eas o f
commerce, home economics and s e p a r a t e programs in boys'
and g i r l s ' phys ical education r e quir ed twelve term hours
o f te a c h i n g . All o t h e r Secondary Education programs
r e q u i r e d e i g h t term hours.

1927:

The B.S. degree was i n i t i a t e d . All elementary programs
l ead in g to a l i f e c e r t i f i c a t e r e q u i r e d twelve term hours
o f s tu d e n t te a c h i n g . Five y e a r c e r t i f i c a t e s in grades
f our through s i x r e quire d e i g h t term hours o f s tu d e n t
te a c h in g .

1933:

A T r a in in g Department w i t h i n Central S t a t e Teachers College
was i n i t i a t e d . The B.A. or B.S. degree became mandatory
f o r a l l new t e a c h e r s d e s i r i n g to te a c h in a c c r e d i t e d high
sc ho ols.

1936:

The p r a c t i c e te a c h i n g ex per ien ce was renamed Student
Teaching.

1939:

Term hours were changed t o semester hours. All elementary
and secondary s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s were r e q u i r e d t o t a k e e i g h t
semester hours o f s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g .

1940:

The T r ain in g Department became t h e Department o f Laboratory
Schools, and t h e Student Teaching co ur ses were renamed
D irec ted T e a c h i n g . 26

26

Central Michiqan Colleqe o f Education Q u a r t e r l y , Vol. 48,
No. 2 ( 1 * 2 7 7 p. 2287 ------------- ---------------------- ------------

16
1941:

The i n s t i t u t i o n became C entral Michigan C ollege o f Education.
Elementary t e a c h e r s sp en t t h r e e hours per day in D irected
Teaching, along w ith t h e i r course work. An I n te rn s h ip
Program began whereby th e elem entary s tu d e n t te a c h e r sp en t
one f u l l sem ester in D irected T e a c h i n g . 27

1946:

C e r t i f i c a t i o n in S pecial Education was i n i t i a t e d on both th e
elem entary and secondary l e v e l s .

1948:

Elementary Education now re q u ire d te n sem ester hours o f
S tudent Teaching. A Department o f Psychology and Education
was e s ta b li s h e d from th e former Student Teaching, Laboratory
Schools and Rural Education Departments.

1955:

C entral Michigan College o f Education became C entral Michigan
College.

1959:

C entral Michigan C ollege was renamed C entral Michigan
U n iv e rsity .

1960:

The m a jo rity o f elem entary s tu d e n t te a c h e r s were p laced in
p u b lic schools th rou gh ou t Michigan f o r e i g h t weeks o f f u l l
day s tu d e n t te a c h in g . Education courses on campus consumed
th e o t h e r e i g h t weeks o f th e sem ester. F acu lty members o f
th e Department o f Psychology and Education liv e d in v a rio u s
communities throu gh ou t t h e s t a t e , where they su p e rv ise d
s tu d e n t te a c h e r s in te a c h in g and sem inars. This led t o th e
e s ta b lis h m e n t o f off-campus s tu d e n t te a c h in g c e n te r s under
th e s u p e rv is io n o f one o r more U n iv e rs ity S u p e rv is o rs.

1962:

The Ford Foundation awarded C entral Michigan U n iv e rs ity a
g ran t f o r a f i v e - y e a r i n t e r n program. "Three sem esters o f
p ro fe s s io n a l la b o r a to r y ex p erien ce were provided th e t e a c h e r
c a n d id a te . During th e f i r s t e x p e rie n c e , t h e s tu d e n t was
regarded as a t e a c h e r a s s i s t a n t and t h e second exp erience
was an in - d e p th s tu d e n t te a c h in g ex p e rie n c e . The t h i r d
sem ester was s p e n t in complete charge o f a classroom w ith
c lo se s u p e rv is io n by th e p u b lic school and th e U n iv e rs ity .
Various degrees o f pay were given th e s tu d e n t throughout
th e t h r e e e x p e rie n c e s . The program was p re se n te d "The
D istin g u ish e d Achievement Award" in Teacher E du catio n, 1965,
by t h e American A s so c ia tio n o f Colleges f o r Teacher E ducation.
However, t h e program d esig n allowed th e i n t e r n to gradu ate
and become c e r t i f i e d w ith o u t e n r o l l i n g in th e t h i r d sem ester
27

C harles J . P i s o n i , S r. "A Comparative F acto r A nalysis o f
t h e Impact o f Two S tudent Teaching Programs Upon th e Schools o f
Michigan w ith I m p lic a tio n s f o r t h e E v alu atio n o f Teacher Education
Programs" (Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Michigan S ta te U n iv e r s ity , 1977).

17
la b o r a to ry ex p erien ce. Thus, th e program lacked th e power
t o hold cand idates through th e t h i r d sem ester and so f u l f i l l
i t s commitment to th e coop eratin g school d i s t r i c t s . In
a d d i t i o n , c o l l e c t i v e barg ain ing between te a c h e rs and
a d m in is tr a to rs brought an end to p u b lic school d i s t r i c t s
h ir in g n o n -fu lly c e r t i f i e d p erso n n el, making placement o f
th e t h i r d sem ester i n t e r n extrem ely d i f f i c u l t . For th e se
re a so n s , th e i n t e r n program was elim in ated in th e 1969-70
academic year.
1971:

A new concept in secondary education a t Central Michigan
U n iv ersity was i n i t i a t e d . The Student Teaching Department
in conjunction w ith th e Secondary Education Department
approved a f u l l sem ester p ro fe s s io n a l la b o r a to ry ex p erien ce.
This sem ester c o n s is ts o f e ig h t sem ester hours o f s tu d e n t
te a c h in g , a th r e e sem ester hour methods co u rse, and a two
hour seminar. T h e refo re , th e amount o f i n s t r u c t i o n and
s u p e rv is io n handled by th e U n iv ersity S upervisor in th e o f f campus s tu d e n t te a c h in g c e n t e r has in c re a se d from 38% o f th e
re q u ire d Secondary Education courses t o 62%. Also, th e
Student Teaching Department in approving a f u l l sem ester
p r o fe s s io n a l la b o r a to ry experience which in clu d es te n
sem ester hours o f s tu d e n t te a c h in g c r e d i t and a t h r e e hour
seminar p e r ta in in g to in d iv id u al and group needs o f th e
elem entary t e a c h e r s , was in accord w ith th e Elementary
Education Department.
I t i s ev id e n t from t h e aforementioned f a c t s t h a t change in

te a c h e r education has been c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f C entral Michigan
U n iv e rsity .

Ongoing e v a lu a tio n o f th e s e changes in th e t o t a l

te a c h e r education program must be o f primary concern i f e x c e lle n c e
in te a c h e r education i s to be achieved.

T h e re fo re , th e U n iv ersity

p ro d u c t, th e g rad u ate, must serv e as an im po rtant feedback i n s t r u ­
ment in t h i s ongoing e v a lu a tio n process i f C entral Michigan
U n iv e rsity i s going to f u l l y meet th e needs o f i t s t e a c h e r education
s tu d e n ts .

As no reco rd o f b a s is f o r making changes in stu d e n t

fo llo w -u p , f o r example, has been done b e fo re , C entral Michigan
U n iv e rsity i s now ab le to b e n e f i t from th e c u r r e n t stu dy o f

18
a t t i t u d e s o f graduates o f 1973-1976 toward th e undergraduate te a c h e r
ed u catio n program in which they p a r t i c i p a t e d .
Basic Assumptions
The fo llo w ing assumptions regardin g th e respondents and th e
stu d y were recognized by th e re s e a r c h e r :
1.

That graduates shared th o u g h tfu lly t h e i r a t t i t u d e s
concerning s tr e n g th s and weaknesses o f t h e i r
undergraduate p re p a ra tio n .

2.

That graduates responded to th e q u e s tio n n a ire s
h o n estly and openly reg ard in g t h e i r judgments on
t h e i r te a c h e r p r e p a ra tio n programs.

3.

That th e U n iv ersity Supervisors who adm inistered
th e q u e s tio n n a ir e s to th e 1976 graduates d id so
e f f e c t i v e l y and competently.

4.

That t h e respondents in t h i s study were comparable
to tho se in th e E llsb e rg study.
L im ita tio n s o f th e Study

The fo llo w ing l i m i t a t i o n s were recognized as th e c u r re n t
stu d y was designed and conducted:
1.

This study included only th e 1973, 1974, 1975 and
1976 C entral Michigan U n iv e rsity Teacher Education
g ra d u a te s. No in fe re n c e f o r o th e r y e a r s , o th e r
p o p u la tio n s , o r o th e r i n s t i t u t i o n s were drawn.

2.

The method o f re se a rc h was based on th e q u e s tio n ­
n a ir e which was c o n s tru c te d according to p re sc rib e d
p r i n c i p l e s . These in stru m en ts were found t o have
supp ort in th e l i t e r a t u r e reviewed, were approved
f o r th e purpose by th e f a c u l t y r e s p o n s ib le f o r th e
off-campus program and were t e s t e d in a p i l o t s tu d y ,
but no attem p t was made to v a li d a te responses by
in terv iew s w ith respondents.

3.

I t was n ecessary t o r e l y on th e in d iv id u a l survey
r e c i p i e n t s sense o f r e c a l l in o rd e r to e s t a b l i s h
a b a s is f o r th e follow -up study. No attem pt was
made t o c o n tro l th e e f f e c t o f o t h e r f a c t o r s , such

19

a s (1) th e change in t e a c h e r supply and demand and
i t s e f f e c t on a t t i t u d e s o f t r a i n e r s d u rin g th e
p erio d s t u d i e d , (2) t h e s o - c a ll e d "power s tr u g g le "
between th e t e a c h e r unions and te a c h e r ed u c a to rs and
i t s impact on th e th in k in g o f th e re sp o n d e n ts, o r
(3) th e e f f e c t s o f se x , age and a b i l i t y o f th e
resp on den ts.
4.

T h is stud y i s in tend ed to examine a t t i t u d e s o f g rad uates
from C entral Michigan U n iv e rs ity about t h e i r t e a c h e r
p r e p a r a t i o n , so c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f p o p u la tio n s may
not be s i m i l a r t o o th e r p o p u la tio n s. Before using th e
r e s u l t s o f t h i s study in r e fe re n c e t o o t h e r popula­
t i o n s such as o t h e r u n i v e r s i t i e s o r s tu d e n t te a c h in g
communities, th e im portant c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s such as
y e a r o f g ra d u a tio n , type o f c e r t i f i c a t i o n , f u l l time
o r p a r t tim e t e a c h i n g , y e a rs t a u g h t , majors and m inors,
and th e p a r t i c u l a r te a c h e r education program i t s e l f
should be tak en i n t o c o n s id e r a tio n .
D e f in itio n o f Terms

Major F ie ld
"A p r in c ip a l s u b je c t o f study in one departm ent o r f i e l d o f
le a r n in g in which a s tu d e n t i s re q u ire d o r e l e c t s to ta k e a s p e c i­
f i e d number o f courses and c r e d i t hours as a p a r t o f th e r e q u i r e ments f o r o b t a i n i n g a diploma o r d e g re e ."

28

Minor F ie ld
"A s u b je c t o f study in one departm ent o r broad f i e l d o f
l e a r n i n g in which th e s tu d e n t i s re q u ire d o r e l e c t s to ta k e a
s p e c i f i e d number o f cou rses o r h ou rs, fewer th an re q u ire d f o r a
m ajor f i e l d ; im plies l e s s i n t e n s i v e c o n c e n tr a tio n th an in th e
m ajor f i e l d .
28

C a r t e r V. Good, e d . , D ic tio n a ry o f Education (New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, I n c . , 1959), p. 227.

20
Teacher Education
"The program o f a c t i v i t i e s and experiences developed by an
i n s t i t u t i o n re sp o n s ib le f o r th e p re p a ra tio n and growth o f persons
p re p a rin g themselves fo r educatio nal work o r engaging in th e work o f
t h e ed u catio n al p r o fe s s io n ."

30

Student Teaching
"O bservation, p a r t i c i p a t i o n , and actu al teach in g done by a
s tu d e n t p re p a rin g f o r teach in g under th e d i r e c t io n o f a s u p erv isin g
t e a c h e r o r general s u p e rv is o r; p a r t o f th e p r e - s e r v ic e program
o f f e r e d by a te a c h e r education i n s t i t u t i o n . "

31

Student Teacher
An in d iv id u al e n r o lle d in th e te a c h e r ed ucation program who
a c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e s in th e p r o fe s s io n a l la b o ra to ry experiences
and who i s c u r r e n tl y r e g i s t e r e d f o r s tu d e n t teach in g c r e d i t .
S u p erv ising Teacher
(Cooperating Teacher)
A r e g u la r te a c h e r on th e s t a f f o f a co op eratin g school
d i s t r i c t who helps d i r e c t a c t i v i t i e s o f a s tu d e n t te a c h e r who is
a c t i v e l y involved in th e p ro fe s s io n a l la b o ra to ry ex p erien ce.
U n iv e rsity S upervisor
The f a c u l t y member appointed by th e U n iv ersity to d i r e c t
th e p ro fe s s io n a l la b o ra to ry ex p erien ce in th e off-campus c e n te r .
30I b i d . , p. 550.
31X bid.. p. 531.

21

C enter (Off-Campus Center)
School systems which have jo in e d w ith C entral Michigan
U n iv e rsity by c o n tra c te d agreement to have s tu d e n t te a c h e r s in
t h e i r sch o o ls.
Graduate
An in d iv id u a l who has s u c c e s s f u l l y completed th e under­
g radu ate course o f stud y in t e a c h e r ed u catio n .
Summary and Overview
This c h a p te r has r e p o rte d th e background, need f o r and
purpose o f th e p r e s e n t stu d y ; i t a ls o provided th e q u e s tio n s f o r
study and th e re se a rc h hypotheses.

The b a s ic assum ptions, l i m i t a ­

tio n s o f th e stu d y and d e f i n i t i o n o f terms used in th e study were
a ls o provided.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
I n tro d u c tio n
T his review o f l i t e r a t u r e in clu d es s tu d ie s r e l a t i n g to th e
v a rio u s elem ents e s s e n t i a l to th e p r e p a ra tio n o f te a c h e r s in our
complex s o c i e t y .

There a r e a ls o s tu d i e s r e l a t i n g to both combined

and s e p a r a t e elem entary and secondary t e a c h e r e v a lu a tio n s t u d i e s , th e
im portance o f ed u catio n c o u rs e s , and th e valued e f f e c ti v e n e s s o f
s tu d e n t te a c h in g .
Because o f t h e complexity o f t r y i n g to group th e common
elem ents o f follow -up s tu d i e s which were review ed, t h e r e i s , in t h i s
r e p o r t , some unavoidable o v erlap and r e p e t i t i o n o f c o n te n t.

This i s

p a r t i c u l a r l y t r u e in t h e follow -up s tu d ie s which d e a l t w ith both
elem entary and secondary edu catio n programs and th o se d e a lin g
e x c lu s iv e ly w ith o t h e r elem entary programs o r secondary programs.
There i s a ls o g r e a t s i m i l a r i t y in f in d in g s and recommendations in th e
review o f l i t e r a t u r e between s e c tio n s on s tu d e n t te a c h in g and th e
need f o r follow -u p s t u d i e s .
A lso, because o f t h e n a tu re o f t h i s s tu d y , and th e complexity
and o v e rla p p in g o f t h e r e l a t e d r e s e a r c h , t h e review o f l i t e r a t u r e does
not e x p l i c i t l y fo llo w th e o r d e r o f th e s t a t e d hypotheses.

However,

th e r e l a t i o n s h i p between th e numerous in d iv id u a l a re a s w ith in th e
fo llo w in g review o f l i t e r a t u r e and th e s t a t e d hypotheses i s made c l e a r
in th e d i s c u s s io n .

22

23
Complexity o f Teacher Education
Teacher ed u catio n is an extrem ely complex e n t e r p r i s e s in c e
i t must attem pt t o p rep are undergraduates w ith w idely d i s p a r a t e
a b i l i t i e s , goals and m o tiv a tio n , t o meet t h e i n c r e a s i n g l y p e r s i s t e n t
and r a p id ly changing demands f o r improved ed u catio n f o r th e masses.
The philosophy and im plem entation o f te a c h e r ed u catio n has v aried
g r e a t l y among c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s in th e United S t a t e s , and
th e s e d iv e r s e p a t t e r n s o f te a c h e r ed u catio n have led t o new programs
o f te a c h e r e d u c a tio n .

S t i l l , Yee ex pressed a need f o r te a c h e r educa­

t i o n to " o r i e n t i t s e l f t o th e p r e p a r a tio n o f t e a c h e r s who a r e pro­
f e s s i o n a l l y adequate to meet th e i n c r e a s i n g ly complex e d u catio n al
demands o f A m erica's modern, urban s o c ie ty ." ^
Joyce and Hodges r e f l e c t on p r o fe s s io n a l t e a c h e r ed u catio n
by s t a t i n g t h a t th e prim ary o b j e c t i v e o f te a c h e r e d u c a tio n i s to
e x e r t c o n tro l over Various a s p e c ts o f r e a l i t y w ith which t h e t e a c h e r
must cope in o r d e r to o versee e d u c a tio n .

They b e lie v e th e te a c h e r

must be a b le to blend knowledge o f psychology, s o c i e t y , and s u b je c t
m a tte r e f f e c t i v e l y i n t o i n s t r u c t i o n a l p la n s .

He must a ls o reco gn ize

c r u c i a l a s p e c ts o f problems and be ad ep t a t ap p lyin g h is knowledge
in th e s o lu t io n s o f th e s e problems.

F u r th e r , he needs to be in con­

t r o l o f his te a c h in g beh av io r and be a b le t o o rg a n iz e c h ild r e n so
th e y w i l l b e n e f i t from h is i n s t r u c t i o n a l p lan n in g .

He must analyze

h is te a c h in g and be a b le to c o n tr o l h im self i n in te r p e r s o n a l

^A lbert H. Yee, "What Should Modern, Urban S o c ie ty Expect o f
Teacher Education?" Education and Urban S o c i e t y , Vol. 2 (May 1976),
pp. 277-294.

24
s itu a tio n s .

By doing s o , he w ill use h is p e r s o n a l i t y e f f e c t i v e l y in

s tu d e n t i n t e r a c t i o n , b u ild group morale and p ro d u ctiv e group o r g a n i­
z a tio n and help groups an alyze and improve t h e i r perform ance.

The

te a c h e r must a l s o know how knowledge i s produced and re v is e d in th e
f i e l d o f e d u c a tio n , and how to use i t in his te a c h in g .

This demand

on th e t e a c h e r i s made c l e a r in t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f th e Elementary
Teacher Education Program a t th e U n iv e rsity o f Chicago d u rin g 19641965:
Teaching, t h e n , i s seen as a blend o f ed u catio n al d e c is io n
making by a person who can implement e d u c a tio n a l d e c is io n s
because he p o ssesses a wide range o f te a c h in g behaviors
t h a t he can c o n tro l r a t i o n a l l y . The p r o fe s s io n a l te a c h e r
i s a person who can cope e f f e c t i v e l y w ith a v a r i e t y o f
classroom s e t t i n g s and a ls o w ith h is own needs as they
a f f e c t h is te a c h in g . The p r o fe s s io n a l t e a c h e r a lso
p o ssesses th e a b i l i t y to analyze h is te a c h in g and, through
a n a l y s i s , to s e t r e a l i s t i c goals f o r improving his p e r ­
formance. 2
This wide range o f demands on th e

t e a c h e r and i t s im p lic a ­

t i o n f o r te a c h e r e d u c a tio n is noted by Wiersma and V e rg ie ls when th e y
sta te d th a t:
th e ed u catio n o f a t e a c h e r i s a complex p r o c e s s , p o s s ib ly
more so th an many t e a c h e r ed u cato rs s u s p e c t. In o r d e r to
p rep are te a c h e r s a d e q u a te ly , i t may be n ecessary to unravel
th e c o m p le x itie s o f t h i s p ro cess and d esig n program components
t h a t deal w ith th e development o f s p e c i f i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
s in g ly o r in very small com binations r a t h e r th an in global
programs t h a t a re assumed to develop a l l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
s im u lta n e o u s ly .3
2

B. R. Joyce and R. E. Hodges, "R a tio n a le f o r Teacher Educa­
t i o n , " Elementary School J o u r n a l . Vol. 66 (February 1966), pp. 254-266.
3
William Wiersma and John V e r g i e l s , " R e la tio n s h ip s Between
P ro fe s s io n a l V a r ia b le s : A Study o f Secondary Teacher Education
S tu d e n ts ," Jo u rn al o f Teacher E d u c atio n , Vol. 20, No. 4 (Winter 1969),
pp. 476-479.

25
Goddu and Ducharme a lso speak to th e elements o f an e f f e c t i v e
te a c h e r education program, and t h e need to work w ith c o n s ti tu e n t s .
They say t h a t "in t h i s changing s o c ie ty , te a c h e rs must be provided
w ith th e s k i l l s and a b i l i t i e s t o op erate in a dem ocratic s o c ie ty t h a t
re q u ire s t h a t th e persons who are to be serv iced by th e system can
co n tro l th e system ."

4

The preceeding w r i t e r s show t h a t te a c h e r education i s complex
and demanding.

I t i s complex in t h a t te a c h e r ed ucatio n graduates

must be co ntin uo usly a l e r t t o our ever changing s o c ie ty in o rd er to
e f f e c t i v e l y p rep are s tu d e n ts fo r te a c h in g .

I t i s a lso demanding in

t h a t te a c h e r edu cato rs must be c o n tin u a lly well prepared to meet
in d iv id u al and group needs o f s tu d e n ts in o rd er to provide them with
th e f i n e s t p r e p a ra tio n in te a c h e r edu cation .
Various im portant and e s s e n t i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s such as
c u r r i c u l a , s tu d e n ts and human c o n ta c t in le a r n in g s i t u a t i o n s a re
b a s ic in th e planning o f e f f e c t i v e te a c h e r education programs.
The National Council f o r A c c re d ita tio n o f Teacher Education
included in t h e i r Recommended Standards f o r Teacher Education th e
fo llow ing passage p e r ta in in g to Basic Teacher Education Programs.
C u rric u la f o r te a c h e r ed ucatio n a r e designed to
achieve e x p l i c i t l y s ta t e d o b je c t i v e s . These o b je c tiv e s
a re determined in r e l a t i o n to both th e p ro fe s s io n a l r o le s
f o r which th e p re p a ra tio n programs are designed and th e
behavioral outcomes sought. I t i s assuned t h a t th e design
o f each curriculum f o r the p r e p a ra tio n o f te a c h e r s adopted
by th e i n s t i t u t i o n r e f l e c t s th e judgment o f a p p ro p ria te
members o f th e f a c u l t y and s t a f f , o f s tu d e n t s , o f g ra d u a te s,
4

Roland J . B. Goddu and Edward R. Ducharme, "A Responsive
Teacher-Education Program," Teachers College Record, Vol. 72, No. 3
(February 1971), pp. 431-441.

26
and o f th e p r o fe s s io n as a whole. I t i s a ls o assumed t h a t
th e s e c u r r i c u l a r e f l e c t an awareness o f r e s e a r c h and
development in te a c h e r e d u c a t i o n .5
In p lann ing to meet th e needs o f t e a c h e r ed u catio n s tu d e n ts ,
Wiersma and V e rg ie ls mention t h a t te a c h e r ed u cato rs should be aware
t h a t t h e r e i s not a high r e l a t i o n s h i p between a t t i t u d e s and pro­
f e s s i o n a l knowledge.

Teacher e d u c a tio n s tu d e n ts who sc o re high in

p r o f e s s i o n a l knowledge do not n e c e s s a r il y sc o re high in measures o f
a t t i t u d e and v ic e v e rsa .

They f e e l t h a t t h i s i s e s p e c i a l l y im portant

in e s t a b l i s h i n g new programs, and conclude t h a t i f te a c h e r ed u cato rs
b e lie v e t h a t both o f th e s e a reas are o f equal im portance, then th e s e
g

two components o f t e a c h e r edu catio n programs must be given a t t e n t i o n .
Goddu and Ducharme comment f u r t h e r on a resp o n siv e te a c h e r
e d u c a tio n program.

They say t h a t th e

f i r s t c o n t a c t w ith te a c h in g must be s t r u c t u r e d . Beginning
t e a c h e r s can le a r n th e r o l e o f te a c h e r and develop i n d i ­
v id u al and Dersonal te a c h in g s t y l e s as well as ta k e on
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f o th e r te a c h e r s during t h i s tim e. This
t r a i n i n g program should promote c o n ta c t w ith humans in
le a r n in g s i t u a t i o n s . This program is a c t u a l l y a t e a c h e r
le a r n in g program, and t h e le a r n in g t e a c h e r must have
le a r n in g exp erien ce w ith c h ild r e n o f v a rie d a b i l i t y ,
v a r ie d backgrounds and v a rie d s k i l l s . Goddu and Ducharme
a r e concerned t h a t te a c h e r s le a r n something t h a t might be
d e fin e d as t h e p r i n c i p l e t h a t i n d iv i d u a ls — kids as well
as a d u l t s —a re indeed d i f f e r e n t and t h a t th e y le a r n in a
g r e a t v a r i e t y o f ways. This is no g r e a t d is c o v e ry , and
i t i s o b v io u sly something t h a t e d u cato rs have recognized
f o r y e a r s . Yet ed u catio n has f o r y e a rs been t u r n i n g out
5
AACTE, "Recommended Standards f o r Teacher Education—th e
A c c r e d ita tio n o f Basic and Advanced P r e p a ra tio n Programs f o r Pro­
f e s s i o n a l School P e rso n n e l," The American A s s o c ia tio n o f Colleges
f o r Teacher E d u c atio n , One Dupont C i r c l e , Washington, D .C.,
November 1969, pp. 3-13.
6Wiersma and V e r g ie ls , pp. 476-479.

27
t a s k - m a s te r te a c h e rs who, in f a c t , see kids as not
s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from one a n o th e r , who te a c h a l l
k id s a l i k e , th u s assuming a l l kids must le a rn a l i k e .
The l e a r n i n g t e a c h e r does not le a r n how t o te a c h by observing o th e rs
te a c h i n g .

I n s t e a d , th e le a rn in g te a c h e r must te a c h and then t a l k

w ith o th e r s who have observed them, c r i t i c a l l y examine them selv es,
and t a l k w ith o t h e r beginning te a c h e r s about t h e i r p e rc e p tio n o f what
happened.
The p e rc e p tio n o f th e l e a r n e r changes from t h a t o f a person
a w a itin g i n s t r u c t i o n to t h a t o f a d o er. I t i s ex perience
based on th e o r y , w ith r e a l i t y and p r a c t i c e in le a rn in g
s i t u a t i o n s as th e t e s t i n g ground. Learning i s a co ntin uin g
e x e r c i s e t h a t changes speeds a t t i m e s . 7
Although

i n s t i t u t i o n s e s t a b l i s h g u id e lin e s f o r te a c h e r

p r e p a r a ti o n according to stan d a rd s s e t f o r t h by th e American A ssocia­
t i o n o f C olleges f o r Teacher Education, each te a c h e r p re p a ra tio n p ro ­
gram i s on ly as e f f e c t i v e in t o t a l as th e sum o f i t s p a r t s .

In d i­

v id u a ls r e p o n s ib le f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g t e a c h e r p r e p a ra tio n programs
must be a b le t o work t o g e th e r w ith adequate communication and acu te
s e n s i t i v i t y t o each o t h e r 's t a s k s .

Then th e t e a c h e r ed u catio n s tu d e n t

w i l l be provided th e e s s e n t i a l background f o r high q u a l i t y te a c h e r
e d u c a tio n which in tu r n should lead to an u nd erstand ing o f in d iv id u a l
s tu d e n t needs in th e classroom .
Teacher Education E v alu ation S tu d ie s
T his s e c t io n in clu d es s tu d i e s o f elem entary and secondary
programs in t e a c h e r e d u c a tio n .

Data f o r th e s e s tu d ie s came from

7Goddu and Ducharme, pp. 431-441.

28
t e a c h e r e d u c a tio n i n s t i t u t i o n s , c o lle g e s e n i o r s , s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s ,
t e a c h e r e d u c a tio n g ra d u a te s , beginning te a c h e r s and experienced
teach ers.
H ailey wanted to i d e n t i f y e p e c i f i c s tr e n g th s and weaknesses
o f te a c h e r ed u catio n programs, and focused h is stu d y on fo u r a s p e c ts
co n sid e red to be fundamental to t e a c h e r e d u c a tio n :

th e i n d i v i d u a l i z a ­

t i o n o f each program o f s tu d y , f ie ld - b a s e d ex p eriences provided f o r
t e a c h e r e d u c a tio n s t u d e n t s , follow -up a c t i v i t i e s and e v a lu a tio n pro­
c e d u re s , and adequacy o f f i n a n c i a l r e s o u r c e s .

His survey involved

10 c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s which were r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e 53
t e a c h e r t r a i n i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s in Ohio.

The general con clusion s

r e p o rte d t h a t te a c h e r education programs e v a lu a te d in th e stu d y were
more l i k e l y to be r a te d adequate than weak o r s tro n g .

The fin d in g s

a l s o in d ic a te d t h e need f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h concerning ways to
O
improve t e a c h e r ed u catio n programs.
S a l l e y was i n t e r e s t e d in f in d in g o u t how c o lle g e s e n io r s in
e d u c a tio n r a te d t h e i r undergraduate t e a c h e r p r e p a r a tio n .

This survey

was conducted among 900 s tu d e n ts in 1964 from e i g h t i n s t i t u t i o n s o f
h ig h e r le a r n in g t h a t graduate more than o n e - h a l f o f th e te a c h e r s
each y e a r in Ohio.

The form used was developed by th e National

E ducational A s so c ia tio n Research D iv isio n when th ey p r e v io u s ly con­
ducted a poll of a selected c ro ss s e c tio n o f t h e n a t i o n 's 1 .5 m i llio n
p u b l i c school t e a c h e r s , asking them how t h e i r c o lle g e p r e p a ra tio n

®Paul W ellesley H ailey , "The I d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f S p e c if ic
Areas o f S tre n g th and Weaknesses in Teacher Education Programs"
(unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , The Ohio S ta te U n iv e r s ity , 1973),
pp. 566-567.

29
f i t t e d them f o r te a c h in g .

The Teacher P re p a ra tio n O pinionnaire

asked i f th e amount o f t h e i r p re p a ra tio n was "Too Much," "About
Right" o r "Too L i t t l e . "

The f ig u r e s f o r th e category "Too L i t t l e "

were th e only ones re p o rte d in th e stud y .

Although many s i m i l a r i t i e s

a re noted re g a rd in g th e p ercentage o f te a c h e r s and s e n io r s r e p o r tin g
too l i t t l e p r e p a r a tio n in th e se v e ra l a reas o f p r e p a r a t i o n , i t is
i n t e r e s t i n g t h a t both groups f e l t t h a t i n s t r u c t i o n in th e use o f
a u d io v isu al m a te r ia ls was lack in g and the s e n io rs f e l t even more
p oo rly prepared than th e te a c h e r s .

Also, e ig h t p e rc e n t more s e n io r s

th an t e a c h e r s f e l t th ey needed more p re p a ra tio n in th e area o f
psychology o f le a r n in g .

The complete

f in d in g s a re as fo llo w s :

g

A Comparison o f Teachers on th e Job With
College S eniors o f 1964
Percent R eporting "Too L i t t l e "
P re p a ra tio n as:
Areas o f P r e p a ra tio n

Teachers

S eniors

S u b ject Knowledge

27.0

28.6

General Education

19.9

20.4

Psychology o f Learning

25.8

33.8

Human Development

23.2

18.0

Teaching Methods

40.6

39.4

H is to ry and Philosophy

15.1

18.8

Use o f A udiovisual

60.1

65.6

g

H. E. S a l l e y , "Ohio Survey: How S eniors in Education from
Ohio C olleges and U n i v e r s i t i e s Rated T h e ir Undergraduate Teacher
P r e p a r a ti o n ," A udiovisual I n s t r u c t i o n , Vol. 10 (Summer 1965).

30
Hinch a lso conducted a stu d y t o determ ine th e degree o f
s i m i l a r i t y between th e r a t in g s a group o f experienced te a c h e rs and a
group o f s tu d e n t te a c h e r s gave to t h e i r undergraduate p ro fe s s io n a l
t e a c h e r ed ucation s k i l l p r e p a ra tio n f o r te a c h in g .

The q u e s tio n n a ir e

was ad m in istered to 181 experienced te a c h e r s who had graduated from
McNeese S ta te U n iv e rs ity in 1969 and 254 in d iv id u a ls who completed
s tu d e n t te a c h in g in 1971-1972.

Findings in d ic a te d t h a t s tu d e n t

t e a c h e r s r a te d t h e i r undergraduate ex perien ces s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher
th an did th e experienced te a c h e r s in a l l s i x c a te g o r ie s o f te a c h in g
s k i l I s —Media, Lesson P lanning, Methods, In d iv id u a l Needs, Education
and Guidance.

A lso, more th an 60 p e rc e n t o f both groups r a te d

Lesson P lann ing , In d iv id u a l Needs and E valuation h ig h , w h ile both
groups gave ex p erien ces in Guidance th e low est r a t i n g .

But i s was

concluded t h a t under c o n d itio n s r e q u i r i n g only a high o r low typ e
r a t i n g , s tu d e n t te a c h e r s and experienced te a c h e r s gave very n e a rly
t h e same r a t i n g s to t h e i r undergraduate s k i l l - p r e p a r a t i o n . ^
Another s tu d y in vo lvin g 89 p r e - s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s , 80 p o st
s tu d e n t te a c h e r s and 40 beginning t e a c h e r s f o r th e purpose o f i n v e s t !
g a tin g th e use o f e v a lu a tio n in strum ents was conducted by P e t e r s .

He

wanted to know i f h is f in d in g s would be o f s i g n i f i c a n t value to
e v a lu a te t h e t e a c h e r p r e p a r a tio n program a t Upper Iowa C ollege.
F indings showed t h a t most s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s and g rad u ates f e l t th ey

^ N y ld s Richard Hinch, "A Study to Compare t h e P ercep tio n s
t h a t S tu den t Teachers and Experienced Teachers Hold o f th e E f f e c t i v e ­
ness o f S e le c te d Aspects o f t h e i r P r o fe s s io n a l Education a t McNeese
S t a t e U n iv e rsity " (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Michigan S ta te
U n iv e r s ity , 1973).

31
were prepared to assume te a c h in g .

I t was a ls o found t h a t (1) th e

g r e a t e s t problems in th e f i r s t y e a r o f te a c h in g were e v a lu a tin g
p up il achievem ent, m o tiv a tin g pupil i n t e r e s t and response and a d j u s t ­
ing t o d e f i c i e n c i e s in school equipment, p h y sica l c o n d itio n s and
m a t e r i a l s ; (2) s tu d e n t te a c h in g was th e most v a lu a b le ex p erien ce or
co u rse; (3) i n d iv id u a ls wanted e a r l y exp erien ce in th e classroom in
t h e i r te a c h in g p r e p a r a tio n program; and (4) more p r a c t i c a l experience
and l e s s th e o ry was d e s ir e d in general tech n iq u es o f t e a c h i n g . ^
Among t h e many in d iv id u a ls who can provide judgments re g a rd ­
ing th e adequacy o f a program o f t e a c h e r ed u catio n are th e r e c i p i e n t s
o f t e a c h e r e d u c a tio n —t h e g ra d u a te s .

Beaty re p o rte d on a fo llow -up

stu d y conducted a t Middle Tennessee S ta te U n iv e rsity in vo lvin g a l l
g rad u ates o f th e undergraduate te a c h e r ed ucation program f o r th e
c l a s s o f 1964.

They were m ailed a q u e s tio n n a ir e in Jan u ary 1967 and

respo nses were re c e iv e d from 206 o r 64.3%.
t h e fo llo w in g :

His fin d in g s included

83% r e p l ie d t h a t th e t r a i n i n g program f o r t e a c h e r s

should en able them t o assume t h e i r r o l e s as c i t i z e n s in t h e i r
r e s p e c ti v e communities, w ith " q u ite e f f e c t i v e l y " o r "ad eq uately "
resp o n ses.

In General E ducation, 32 course a d d itio n s and 21 d e l e ­

t i o n s were recommended w h ile in P ro fe s s io n a l E du catio n, 24% mentioned
t h a t course a d d itio n s were needed, 7% course d e l e t i o n s and 21% course

^ E ld o n N icklaus P e t e r s , "A Study to I n v e s t ig a t e th e
F e a s i b i l i t y o f U t i l i z i n g E v alu a tio n In stru m en ts as One Aspect o f
t h e Ongoing E v aluatio n o f t h e Teacher Education Program o f Upper
Iowa College" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e rsity o f Northern
C olorado, 1975).

32
re v isio n s.

Student te a c h in g was ra te d most im portant by 54% o f th e

elem entary t r a i n e e s and 63% o f th e secondary t r a i n e e s .

12

Another fo llow -up stu dy was conducted by Havard o f th e 19611968 g radu ates o f Howard Payne College who o btained c e r t i f i c a t i o n to
teach.

A f te r a review o f th e l i t e r a t u r e , a q u e s tio n n a ir e was d e v is e d ,

v a lid a te d and m ailed to 807 g rad uates o f Howard Payne C ollege who
o btained c e r t i f i c a t i o n to te a c h and f o r whom v a lid ad d resses were
found.

Six hundred f o r t y - e i g h t o r 80.3% responded.

The re p o rte d

fin d in g s s t a t e d t h a t (1) o b j e c t i v e s o f th e te a c h e r ed u catio n program
were s a id t o be achieved by over 60% o f th e g ra d u a te s ; (2) over 50%
in d ic a te d t h a t th e y were ad eq u ately o r very a d eq u ately prepared in
v a rio u s a c t i v i t i e s and competencies a s s o c ia te d w ith te a c h in g ;
(3) o n ly 36% were well prepared in d i a g n o s t i c and remedial te c h n iq u e s ;
(4) s tu d e n t te a c h in g was ra te d s tr o n g e s t by 60%; and (5) o v e r 50%
r e p o rte d d i f f i c u l t y d u rin g t h e i r f i r s t y ears o f te a c h in g in p ro v id in g
f o r in d iv id u a l d i f f e r e n c e s .

I t was concluded t h a t p e r i o d ic examina­

t i o n s o f th e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f th e t o t a l c o lle g e program, s p e c i a l
s e r v i c e s o f th e c o l l e g e , and th e t e a c h e r edu catio n program were
needed.

A lso, continuous and a d d i t io n a l follow -up s tu d i e s were

deemed a d v is a b le .

13

12

E. Beaty, "Follow-Up o f Teacher Education Graduates as a
Basis f o r I n s t i t u t i o n a l Improvement," Peabody Jo u rn al o f E d u c atio n ,
Vol. 46 (March 1969), pp. 298-302.
^ H a r o l d Weldon Havard, "A Follow-Up Study o f th e 1961-1968
Graduates o f Howard Payne College Who Obtained C e r t i f i c a t i o n to
Teach" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Baylor U n iv e r s ity , 1970).

33
McCullough a ls o re p o rte d on a follow -up study o f th e te a c h e r
ed u catio n program a t Fort Lewis College in Durango, Colorado f o r th e
purpose o f o b ta in in g info rm ation concerning e f f e c ti v e n e s s o f th e
p r e s e n t program.

The p o p ulatio n o f h is study included elem entary

and secondary te a c h e r education g rad u ates o f F o rt Lewis C o lleg e, who
had met th e requirem ents f o r te a c h e r c e r t i f i c a t i o n in th e y e a rs 1964
through 1966.

The q u e s tio n n a ir e was s e n t to 115 gradu ates w ith 84

in d iv id u a ls responding.

His fin d in g s rev ealed t h a t 82.1% o f th e

g radu ates were involved in f u l l time te a c h in g a c t i v i t i e s and 80%
ranked s tu d e n t te a c h in g as th e most im p o rtan t.

The g radu ates made

s e v e ra l recommendations in v o lv in g P ro fe s s io n a l Education Courses
such as (1) in c re a se th e len g th and scope o f o b s e rv a tio n and s tu d e n t
te a c h in g ; (2) c a r e f u l l y s e l e c t s u p e rv is o rs f o r s tu d e n t te a c h e r s
according t o t h e i r p r o fe s s io n a l i n t e r e s t s and com petencies; (3)
e lim in a te unnecessary r e p e t i t i o n in th e re q u ire d ed u catio n courses
and o f f e r courses which s t r e s s d i v e r s i f i e d and c r e a t i v e methods o f
te a c h in g ; (4) s t r e s s te c h n iq u e s and procedures which a r e p r a c t i c a l
in terms o f te a c h in g th e e x c e p tio n a l c h i l d , m eeting d i s c i p l i n a r y
problems, classroom management, and cu rricu lu m fo rm atio n ; (5) i n i t i ­
a t e a course which would provide a background knowledge in audio­
v is u a l ed u catio n .

The g rad u ates a ls o made recommendations f o r

changes in Academic Background and P r e p a ra tio n .

These were:

(1) expand th e course o f f e r i n g s in general e d u c a tio n and major and
minor a r e a s ; (2) in c r e a s e la b o r a to ry spaces and improve th e
f a c i l i t i e s in th e s c ie n c e s ; and (3) c l o s e l y e v a lu a te general

34
e d u c a tio n cou rses t o in s u re a g r e a t e r v a r i e t y o f te a c h in g
p ro c e d u re s .^
In y e t an o th er follow -up stu dy o f g r a d u a te s , Newby re p o rte d
on th e p e rc e p tio n s o f g ra d u a te s re g a rd in g s e le c t e d

a s p e c ts o f th e

S pring Arbor C olleg e Program w ith im p lic a tio n s f o r te a c h e r ed u catio n .
His q u e s tio n n a ir e was s e n t t o a random sampling o f g rad u ates of
S pring Arbor C ollege f o r th e y e a rs 1966 through 1970.
were re tu rn e d from 112 or 80% o f th e g ra d u a te s .

Q u e stio n n a ires

The f in d in g s i n d i ­

c a t e t h a t g rad uates gave a l l a s p e c ts o f t h e i r academic exp eriences
a t S pring Arbor College an average r a t i n g o f 2.70 on a 4 (high) t o
0 (low) s c a l e .

The ex p erien ces in t e a c h e r ed u catio n were given th e

low est r a t i n g s w ith an average o f 2.45.

The respondents to th e

q u e s tio n n a ir e o f f e r e d many su g g estio n s which took t h e form o f needs.
These needs were f o r (1) g r e a t e r r e le v a n c e in methods c o u rse s;
(2) more o b s e rv a tio n a t e a r l i e r p e rio d s in th e c o lle g e e x p e rie n c e ;
(3) b e t t e r s c re e n in g o f c a n d id a te s ; (4) more tim e s tu d e n t te a c h in g
w ith more th an one s u p e rv is in g te a c h e r a n d /o r a t d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s ;
(5) b e t t e r c o o rd in a tio n between c o lle g e and s c h o o ls ; and (6) more
c a r e in s e l e c t i o n o f s u p e rv is in g te a c h e r s and b e t t e r s u p e rv is io n by
c o l l e g e c o o r d in a to r s .

I t was concluded t h a t g rad u ates were

r e l a t i v e l y s a t i s f i e d w ith t h e i r academic p r e p a r a tio n .

The s t a t e d

recommendations by th e g rad u ates were t h a t (1) th e range o f courses

14
J e r r y Jerome McCullough, "An E v alu ation o f t h e Teacher
Education Program a t F o rt Lewis C o llege; An Opinion Survey o f
Teacher Education Graduates w ith In -S e rv ic e Experience" (unpublished
Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e rsity o f Northern Colorado, 1970).

35
should be broadened in both th e major and minor a r e a s ; (2) more
v o c a tio n a l guidance should be prov id ed ; (3) te a c h e r ed u catio n courses
should be more p r a c t i c a l ; (4) th e t o t a l f a c u l t y should acc e p t the
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f t r a i n i n g te a c h e r s ; and (5) a d d itio n a l lo n g itu d in a l
r e s e a r c h i s needed to a p p ra is e th e impace o f th e c o lle g e exp erience
w ith f u r t h e r fo llo w -up o f t e a c h e r edu cation g rad u ates being
recommended.15
Another follow -up stu dy in v o lv in g classroom te a c h e r s was
u n d ertaken by th e Committee on P ro fe s sio n a l P re p a ra tio n o f th e
Commission on Teacher Education and P ro fe s sio n a l Standards o f th e
Michigan Education A s s o c ia tio n .

In t h i s s tu d y , 851 classroom

t e a c h e r s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f elem en tary , j u n i o r high and s e n io r high
classro om te a c h e r s throughout Michigan were asked to i d e n t i f y th e
s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses o f t h e i r undergraduate te a c h e r p r e p a ra tio n
program s.

The Committee found t h a t (1) te a c h e r s r a te d s u b je c t m a tte r

c o u rs e s o v e r e d u c a tio n courses in ad eq u ately p re p a rin g them to meet
t h e problems o f te a c h in g , (2) ed u catio n courses provided more
o p p o r tu n i ty t o become aware o f a v a r i e t y o f te a c h in g tech n iq u es and
p ro c e d u re s th an d id s u b je c t m a tte r c o u r s e s , (3) th e major o b je c tio n
t o e d u c a tio n cou rses r e g i s t e r e d by t h e te a c h e r s was t h a t th ey were
t o o t h e o r e t i c a l — not p r a c t i c a l ; (4) n e a r ly h a l f o f t h e respondents
r e p o r t e d t h a t th e major s tr e n g t h was th e i n s i g h t developed through
e d u c a tio n co u rses i n t o th e b a s ic elem ents o f th e le a r n in g p r o c e s s ;

15John Melvin Newby, "P erc ep tio n s o f Graduates Regarding
S e le c te d A spects o f th e Spring Arbor C ollege Program w ith Im plica­
t i o n s f o r Teacher Education" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
M ichigan S t a t e U n iv e r s ity , 1972).

36
(5) 87% o f a l l th e te a c h e r s r a te d s tu d e n t te a c h in g most h elp fu l over
16 o t h e r c o u rs e s ; and (6) a m a jo rity o f te a c h e r s responded t h a t
H is to r y o f Education was not h e l p f u l J ®
Thompson a ls o in v e s ti g a te d t e a c h e r s ' p e rc e p tio n s o f s tr e n g th s
and weaknesses o f p r e - s e r v i c e te a c h e r p r e p a r a tio n .

She wanted to

know i f in d i v i d u a l s f e l t th e y were prepared t o te a c h in e i t h e r t h e
r e g u l a r o r s p e c ia l s e r v ic e schools in New York C ity .

Teachers were

asked t o i d e n t i f y th e most and l e a s t v a lu a b le p r e - s e r v i c e co u rses.
Every 5th school from a r o s t e r o f 56 r e g u l a r and 54 s p e c ia l s e r v ic e
s c h o o ls was used w ith a t o t a l p o p u latio n o f 829 r e g u l a r and 770
s p e c ia l s e r v i c e te a c h e r s chosen f o r th e s tu d y .

There were 16 choices

o f p r o f e s s io n a l courses and 25 choices o f n o n -p ro fe ss io n a l courses on
t h e q u e s ti o n n a ir e .

Respondents were asked t o s e l e c t th e t h r e e most

v a lu a b le and t h r e e l e a s t v a lu a b le p r e - s e r v i c e c o u rse s.

The fin d in g s

rev eal t h a t resp on ses o f r e g u l a r and s p e c ia l te a c h e r s did not d i f f e r
s ig n ific a n tly .

The t h r e e most v a lu a b le courses were (1) s tu d e n t

t e a c h i n g , (2) c h i l d development, and (3) te a c h in g r e a d in g .^ 7
The o v e r a l l f in d in g s o f th e s e e v a lu a tio n s tu d i e s s u g g e st t h a t
s tu d e n t te a c h in g assignm ents should be lengthened w ith more th an one
s u p e r v is in g t e a c h e r a d v is a b le on more th a n one le v e l an d /o r in more
th a n one s u b je c t a r e a .

S tudent te a c h in g i s hig hly regard ed though,

^ "W hat Teachers Think o f Teacher E d u catio n ," Michigan
Education J o u r n a l , Vol. 41 (March 1964), p. 20.
17

V a le r ie Darlene Thompson, "T eachers' E v a lu a tio n o f T h e ir
P r e p a r a tio n t o Teach: A Survey o f S e le c te d New York C ity P u b lic
S chools" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , S t . Johns U n iv e r s ity ,
1971).

37
and u s u a lly considered to be th e most v a lu a b le experience in te a c h e r
ed ucation .

Also, i t was found t h a t although most stu d e n t te a c h e rs

and graduates f e l t they were well prepared to te a c h , they needed
a d d itio n a l a s s i s ta n c e in e v a lu a tin g pupil achievement du rin g t h e i r
f i r s t y ear o f te a c h in g .

They a ls o f e l t t h a t undergraduate education

and methods courses should be made more r e le v a n t to te a c h in g , and
t h a t th e content o f th e s e courses should be examined from time to
tim e.

In a d d i t io n , te a c h e rs and c o lle g e s e n io rs were found to d i f f e r

l i t t l e in t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward p re p a ra tio n f o r te a c h in g .

I t has

a ls o been s ta t e d t h a t a d d itio n a l re se a rc h i s needed in te a c h e r
ed ucation.
Elementary Teacher Education Evaluation S tu dies
This s e c tio n begins w ith th e d e s c r i p t i o n , f in d i n g s , and
recommendations o f two s tu d ie s p e r t a i n in g to t h e elem entary ed u cation
program a t C entral Michigan U n iv e rsity .

The s tu d ie s t h a t follow

p re se n t fin d in g s o f o th e r c o lle g e and u n i v e r s i t y undergraduate
elem entary te a c h e r education programs.
M offit concerned him self w ith two problems in h is stu dy o f
th e Elementary Education Program a t C entral Michigan U n iv e rsity .
His pop ulatio n c o n s is te d o f 699 in d iv id u a ls and he receiv ed a 65%
response.

He asked r e c e n t g rad uates i f th ey were ad eq u ately prepared

to teach and he wanted to fin d o u t i f opinions concerning th e then
c u r re n t program o f elem entary ed ucatio n a t C entral Michigan Univer­
s i t y changed w ith more ex p erien ce.
te a c h e rs in h is stu dy :

He included fo u r groups o f

p ro sp e c tiv e t e a c h e r s , f i r s t y e a r t e a c h e r s ,

38
experienced t e a c h e r s and s u p e rv is in g t e a c h e r s .

He included s e c tio n s

on general e d u c a tio n , p r o fe s s io n a l e d u c a tio n , s u b je c t m a tte r back­
ground and classroom te a c h in g in h is q u e s ti o n n a ir e .

The chi square

d is trib u tio n was used to compare o p in io n s o f f i r s t y e a r t e a c h e r s ,
experienced t e a c h e r s , and g rad u atin g s e n io r s concerning p r o f e s s io n a l
course work and f e e l i n g s o f adequacy toward c e r t a i n classroom sub­
j e c t s , and th e n general co n clu sio n s were made.
I t was concluded t h a t C entral Michigan U n iv e rs ity did an
adequate jo b o f p re p a rin g elem entary ed u catio n te a c h e r s f o r th e
classroom .

A lso , general ed u cation was considered im p ortan t by 70%,

p r o f e s s io n a l ed u catio n was considered im po rtant by 60%, more i n s t r u c ­
t i o n was needed in t h e are a of reading and two d i r e c te d te a c h in g
e x p e rie n c e s were th e most im portant a s p e c t o f th e program.

In

g e n e r a l, s e n io r s r a te d t h e i r t r a i n i n g th e h ig h e st and th e experienced
te a c h e r s r a te d t h e i r t r a i n i n g th e lo w est.
were s t a t e d :
(2)

Several recommendations

(1) r e t a i n th e two d i r e c t e d te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e s ;

general e d u c a tio n courses a re needed t h a t r e l a t e d i r e c t l y to

m usic, p h y sic a l e d u c a tio n and a r t ; (3) t h e r o le o f general ed ucation
needs to be c l a r i f i e d so t h a t p r o s p e c tiv e te a c h e r s a r e aware o f and
understand i t s purpose; (4) any f u t u r e e v a lu a tio n o f th e te a c h e r
ed u catio n program should in clu d e o pin ion s from experienced t e a c h e r s ,
as t h e i r o p in io n s d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y from th o se o f f i r s t - y e a r
t e a c h e r s and g ra d u a tin g s e n io r s in r e l a t i o n to th e more t h e o r e t i c a l
c o u r s e s ; and (5) an e v a lu a tio n needs to be made f r e q u e n t l y so t h a t
th e program f o r t r a i n i n g elem entary te a c h e r s a t C entral

39
Michigan U n iv e rsity may r e f l e c t th e s ta t e d needs o f p u b lic school
te a c h e r s .
In an o th er study inv olv in g Central Michigan U n iv e rsity ,
G reenstein compared graduates o f th e r e g u la r s tu d e n t teach in g pro­
gram o f e ig h t weeks to th e two f u l l sem ester in t e r n program which
c o n s is te d o f 32 weeks o f p ro fe s s io n a l la b o ra to ry ex p erien ces.

He

concluded t h a t the r e s u l t s o f t h i s in v e s t i g a t i o n were reasonably
c o n s is t e n t w ith th e fin d in g s of Haberman a t th e U n iv ersity o f
Wisconsin - Milwaukee and Arends a t Michigan S ta te U n iv ersity and
i n d i c a t e t h a t in c re a sin g th e leng th and scope o f th e la b o ra to ry
ex perience does not n e c e s s a r i l y produce a measurable d i f f e r e n c e in
te a c h e r ed u catio n programs.

The s ta t e d recommendations showed t h a t

(1) C entral Michigan U n iv e rsity should m aintain a co n tinu ing ev alu a­
t i o n o f i t s products w ith th e o b je c tiv e o f improving e x i s t i n g pro­
grams f o r p re p a rin g t e a c h e r s ; (2) C entral Michigan U n iv e rsity should
re-exam ine th e o b je c tiv e s o f th e paid Teacher I n te r n Program.

It

i s co n ceiv ab le t h a t n e i t h e r th e extended la b o r a to ry experience o f
th e Teacher I n te rn Program nor th e s h o r t e ig h t week s tu d e n t te a c h in g
p eriod o f th e r e g u la r program a re adequate e stim a te s o f time n ecessary
t o p rep are a good te a c h e r .

I n s te a d , la b o r a to ry ex periences s p e c i f i ­

c a l l y t a i l o r e d to th e needs o f th e in d iv id u a l s tu d e n t could very well
be th e answer; (3) C entral Michigan U n iv ersity should develop c r i t e r i a
on which to base e v a lu a tio n s o f th e product and th u s c l e a r th e way
18

Thompson Carson M o ffit, "An Evaluation o f th e Elementary
Education Program a t C entral Michigan U n iv ersity by Recent Graduates
o f That Program" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Colorado S ta te
U n iv e r s ity , 1967).

40
f o r exam ination and a n a l y s is o f th e value o f th e la b o r a to ry e x p e r i ­
en ce; and (4) b e t t e r communication should be m aintained w ith grad­
u a te s in o r d e r to o b ta in meaningful feedback concerning th e e f f e c t iv e n e ss o f th e t e a c h e r p r e p a ra tio n program.

19

Both t h e M offit and G reenstein s tu d i e s r e f l e c t th e continued
need f o r e v a lu a tio n o f th e te a c h e r ed ucation program a t C entral
Michigan U n iv e rs ity .
E l l i s sought in p u t from many groups o f people in an ev alu a­
t i o n stu d y o f th e elem entary t e a c h e r p r e p a ra tio n program a t th e
U n iv e rs ity o f Colorado.

This stud y involved 303 g radu ates from th e

y e a r s 1969-1971 as w ell as s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s , u n iv e r s i t y f a c u l t y ,
te a c h in g a s s i s t a n t s , school a d m in is tr a to r s and p u b lic school t e a c h e r s .
T his i n v e s t i g a t i o n concluded t h a t (1) p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e rs a n t i c i p a t e
c r e a t i v e endeavors and ex p erien ces w ith s tu d e n ts d uring s tu d e n t
te a c h i n g , but s tu d e n ts f e l t too much s tu d e n t te a c h in g time and energy
was expended on r o u ti n e ta s k s in v o lv in g la r g e groups, l e c t u r e s and
s u p e rv is io n o f c h i l d r e n in non-academic s e t t i n g s ; (2) th e School o f
Education f a c u l t y and f a c i l i t i e s a r e not v i t a l f a c t o r s to s tu d e n ts
d u rin g t h e i r s tu d e n t te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e s; (3) co o p eratin g te a c h e r s
and p u b lic school a d m i n is t r a t o r s tend to be more c r i t i c a l o f th e
t e a c h e r p r e p a r a tio n program th an do u n i v e r s i ty f a c u l t y members;
(4) t h e l e c t u r e method was th e s in g l e major teach in g techn iqu e
employed by t h e f a c u l t y in th e School o f Education te a c h e r s t r a i n i n g
19
Jack G r e e n s te in , "A Comparison o f Graduates o f th e C entral
Michigan U n iv e rs ity Teacher I n te r n Program w ith Graduates o f th e
C e n tra l Michigan U n iv e rsity Regular Teacher P re p a ra tio n Program"
(unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Michigan S ta t e U n iv e r s ity , 1969).

41
program and lack o f i n d i v i d u a l i z a t i o n , d em o n stratio n , te a c h in g , micro­
te a c h in g and use o f in d iv id u a l conferences was r e p o r te d ; and (5) a
poor p u b lic r e l a t i o n s program and need f o r i n c r e a s in g ly ag g re ss iv e
and c r e a t i v e le a d e r s h ip in th e School o f Education were e v id e n t.
There was found t o be l i t t l e involvement in pro vidin g f i e l d s e rv ic e s
o r c r e a t i v e le a d e r s h ip to th e s c h o o ls , and l i t t l e ex perim entation
w ith new pedagogical models.

20

In a d d itio n to th e need f o r ongoing e v a lu a tio n o f te a c h e r
ed ucatio n programs, th e fo llo w in g s tu d ie s rev eal th e need f o r more
c o n ta c t w ith c h ild re n and classroom ex perience in undergraduate
elem entary t e a c h e r ed u catio n .
Mattson ev a lu a te d th e te a c h e r edu catio n program a t Montana
S t a t e U n iv e rsity by th e 1969 g rad uates o f t h a t program f o r th e purpose
o f ongoing e v a lu a tio n o f te a c h e r ed u catio n .

He found t h a t elem entary

g rad u ates f e l t th e t r a i n i n g programs were adequate but improvement
was needed in th e a reas o f te a c h in g s t r a t e g i e s , s tu d e n t e v a lu a t i o n ,
classroom management, r e c o g n itio n o f le a r n in g d i s a b i l i t i e s and team
te a c h in g .
v a l u e ."

The course in e d u c a tio n a l psychology was r a te d o f " l i t t l e
I t was s t a t e d f u r t h e r t h a t elem entary te a c h e r s need more

t r a i n i n g in classroom management, r o l e p la y in g and s im u la tio n , in
a d d itio n to more p r a c t i c a l ex p erien ce w ith th e o ry .

21

20

Gordon Hansel E l l i s , "A Summative E v aluatio n o f th e Elemen­
t a r y Teacher P r e p a ra tio n Program, School o f E d u cation , U n iv e rsity o f
Colorado, 1969-71" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e rsity o f
C olorado, 1973).
21

Ronald Boyd M attson, "An E v alu atio n o f th e Teacher Education
Program a t Montana S t a t e U n iv e rs ity by Graduates o f That Program"
(unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Montana S ta t e U n iv e r s ity , 1972).

42
The q u e s tio n , "What p r e s e n t value to t h e i r te a c h in g do
elem entary education graduates o f San Diego S ta te C ollege p erceiv e in
th e various a s p e c ts o f t h e i r c o lle g e p re p a ra tio n ? " was asked by
B a lla n tin e and o t h e r s .

Q u estio n n a ires were s e n t t o p r in c i p a l s

re s p o n s ib le f o r te a c h e r s in th e p o p u la tio n o f th e study.
f i l l e d out one p a r t and th e te a c h e r s th e o t h e r .

P r in c ip a ls

Teaching graduates

from th e y ears 1955-1959 were contacted f o r th e study and 342 o r 90%
were re tu rn e d .

The fin d in g s were c a te g o riz e d by ra n k s.

S ig n ific a n tly

high rankings were given to (1) su p erv ised exp erien ces working w ith
c h i l d r e n , (2) methods courses in e d u c a tio n , and (3) th e course
P sychological Foundations o f Education.

S i g n i f i c a n t l y low rankings

were given t o cou rses in E n g lish , Mathematics and Fine A rts as well
as S ocial Foundations o f Education.

I t was concluded t h a t p r o f e s ­

s io n a l p r e p a ra tio n was perceiv ed t o have been o f g r e a t e r value to
t h e i r te a c h in g than t h e i r academic p r e p a r a tio n .

22

Weddle ap praised s e le c t e d a s p e c ts o f th e te a c h e r ed u catio n
program a t East Texas S ta te U n iv e rs ity based on a follow -up stu d y o f
beginning elem entary t e a c h e r s .

Her purpose was to e v a lu a te a re a s o f

g eneral s t u d i e s , s u b je c t m a tte r s p e c i a l i z a t i o n and p r o fe s s io n a l educa­
t i o n in t h e elem entary ed u catio n program by s e c u rin g responses by i t s
g rad u ates and to draw co nclu sio n s and make recommendations f o r program
Improvement based on th e s e f in d i n g s .
September 1967 through August 1968.

22

She q u estio n ed 135 g rad uates from
I t was re v e a le d in some o f her

F ran cis B a l l a n t i n e ; Monroe Rowland; and William W e t h e r i l l,
" P erc ep tio n s o f Elementary School Teachers Trained a t San Diego S ta te
C ollege w ith Respect to t h e Value o f Several Aspects o f T h e ir College
P r e p a r a t i o n ," Jo urnal o f Teacher E ducation, Vol. 17 (Summer 1966),
pp. 218-223.

43
a p p l i c a b l e f in d in g s t h a t (1) gradu ates completing th e General
S tu d ie s Program co nsidered a l l o f th e re q u ire d courses very s a t i s ­
f a c t o r y except a course in mathematics which was considered adequate
and P e r s o n a li t y Foundations which was considered u n s a ti s f a c t o r y ;
(2) g rad uates co nsidered many o f th e i n s t r u c t o r s in th e general
s t u d i e s courses i n e f f e c t i v e in methods o f te a c h in g and noted s tr o n g ly
t h e lim ite d use o f a u d io -v is u a l m a t e r i a l s ; and (3) th e t e a c h e r educa­
t i o n program in elem entary ed u catio n was g e n e r a lly e f f e c t i v e in th e
development o f th e p ro fe s s io n a l competencies needed by beginning
te a c h e rs.^ 3
I t was re p o rte d by Campbell in h is follow -up stu dy t h a t
s tu d e n t te a c h in g , p r e p a ra tio n f o r using th e English language
e f f e c t i v e l y , Reading Education courses and curriculum courses were
a l l r a te d very s a t i s f a c t o r y .

He e v a lu a te d th e undergraduate

Elementary and E a rly Childhood Teacher Education Program a t th e
U n iv e r s ity o f Georgia, based on a follow -up study in v o lv in g 202
Elementary and E arly Childhood Education 1969 te a c h in g g rad uates o f
th e U n iv e rs ity o f Georgia.

The on ly course

f a c t o r y r a t i n g was I n tr o d u c tio n t o Education.
s u g g e stio n s were th o se t o :

r e c e iv in g an u n s a t i s ­
Among th e respondents

(1) expand s tu d e n t te a c h in g in time and

v a r i e t y o f e x p e rie n c e s ; (2) provide more e x p erien ces in th e p u b lic
sch oo ls e a r l i e r in t h e program; (3) develop more s p e c i f i c helps to
understand what t o do in problem s i t u a t i o n s ; (4) provide more
23

E d ith George Weddle, "An A ppraisal o f S e le c te d Aspects o f
th e Teacher Education Program a t East Texas S t a t e U n iv e rsity Based
on a Follow-Up Study o f Beginning Elementary Teachers" (unpublished
Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , E ast Texas U n iv e rs ity , 1971).

44
p r a c t i c a l methods c o u r ses ; and (5) expand ed ucation courses in
general.

I t was a l s o noted t h a t tho se te a c h i n g graduates with no

p r i o r te a c h in g ex per ien ce tended t o p e r c e i v e t h e i r p r e p a r a t i o n with
l e s s s a t i s f a c t i o n tha n thos e with some p r i o r t e a c h in g exp e r ie n c e .

24

May apprais ed t h e Elementary Teacher Education Program a t
Ohio S t a t e U n i v e r s it y .

He used a group o f 360 i n d i v i d u a l s which con­

s i s t e d o f 120 who were t a k i n g t h e i r methods c o u r s e s , 120 who were
completing s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g , and 120 who were in t h e i r second and
th ird years o f teaching.

His f i n d in g s showed t h a t s t u d e n t t e a c h in g

was once again l i s t e d as a most v a lu a b le c o u r s e , along w ith language
a r t s and a course in elementary s o c i a l s t u d i e s .

The l e a s t valuab le

courses were elementary a r i t h m e t i c , i n t r o d u c t o r y e d u c a t i o n , and
philosophy o f e ducation.

The major s t r e n g t h s o f t h e program were

s t a t e d as e a r l y o b s e r v a tio n and p a r t i c i p a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e s , a good
s t u d e n t te a c h in g program, t h e q u a l i t y o f i n s t r u c t i o n , and a wide
v a r i e t y o f courses o f f e r e d in t h e department o f e d u c a tio n .

The major

weaknesses o f th e program were l i s t e d as t h e need f o r more p r a c t i c a l
educati on c o u r s e s , e a r l i e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e s , t h e need f o r
more l i b e r a l a r t s and education c o u r s e s , and t h e need f o r b e t t e r
instruction.

24

In c o n c lu s io n , t h e s u b j e c t s t a k i n g t h e i r l a s t methods

Kenneth Claude Campbell, "An Evaluation o f t h e Undergraduate
Elementary and Ea rly Childhood Teacher Education Program a t th e
U n iv e r s i t y o f Georgia, Based on a Follow-Up Study o f Teaching
Graduates" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s ity o f Georgia,
1970.

45
c l a s s e s and those completing s tu d e n t te a c h i n g were more f a v o r a b le
in t h e i r responses than were t h e experienced t e a c h e r s .

25

In a nother e v a l u a t i o n s tu d y , Baer found out how elementary
e d u c a t io n majors who had graduated from Northern I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s it y
and had t e a c h i n g p o s i t i o n s one y e a r a f t e r g r a d u a t i o n , per ce ived th e
e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e i r undergraduate p r o f e s s i o n a l p r e p a r a t i o n .
used a p o p u la ti o n o f 390 grad uates from 1968 t o 1970.

He

The f i n d i n g s

i n d i c a t e d t h a t (1) o b s e r v a t i o n s w i th elementary c h i l d r e n should begin
du rin g t h e freshman y e a r ; (2) t h e course Teaching o f Reading was a
weakness; (3) s tu d e n t te a c h in g was co nsidered by most t o be t h e i r
most v a lu a b le p r o f e s s i o n a l ed uca tion e x p e r ie n c e ; and (4) p r i n c i p a l s
and o t h e r a d m i n i s t r a t o r s need to be involved more de ep ly in s tu d e n t
teaching.^
Williams r e p o r t s in y e t another e v a l u a t i o n study t h a t he was
i n t e r e s t e d in t h e respons es t o f ou r main q u e s t i o n s .

This study

involved gr aduates o f H e il d e l b e r g College in T i f f i n , Ohio, and con­
s i s t e d o f 343 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s o f which 280 were r e t u r n e d f o r an 81.1%
reply.

The q u e s ti o n s were as f o llo w s :

(1) Are grad uates in elemen­

t a r y edu cati o n a t Heidelberg College h ig h ly valued by t h e i r f i r s t
y e a r employers?

(2) Are t h e r e s i g n i f i c a n t p r e - s e r v i c e f a c t o r s in

25

Charles Randall May, "An Appraisal o f t h e Elementary
Teacher Education Program a t The Ohio S t a t e U n iv e r si ty " (unpublished
Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , The Ohio S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1967).
26

George Thomas Baer, "An Eva luation o f t h e Northern I l l i n o i s
U n i v e r s i t y Undergraduate Elementary Education Program Based on t h e
Opinions o f a S e le c te d Group o f I t s Graduates" (unpublished Ph.D.
d i s s e r t a t i o n , Northern I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y , 1973).

46
t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f success in t e a c h in g ?

(3) How do elementary gradu­

a t e s e v a l u a t e t h e i r p r e p a r a t i o n program a t Heidelberg College? and
(4) What is t h e c u r r e n t s t a t u s o f t h e College?

The fin d i n g s which

ar e o f i n t e r e s t a r e (1) t h e r e i s a need f o r more e l e c t i v e co urse s;
(2) a f i e l d e x p er ien ce would be o f val ue e s p e c i a l l y p r i o r t o t a k i n g
methods c o u r s e s ; and (3) t h e r e i s concern r e g a rd i n g th e help and
s u p e r v i s io n given in s tu d e n t te a c h i n g as 22% s a id t h e r e was too
l i t t l e s u p e r v i s io n and 27% r e p o r t e d t h e r e was too l i t t l e help.
I ndiv id ual course s ta u g h t in t h e Department o f Education were also
e v a lu a te d by t h e g r a d u a te s .

Those r e c e i v i n g t h e h i g h e s t rankings

were (1) s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g , (2) c h i l d r e n ' s l i t e r a t u r e , and (3) kinder­
g a r te n cu rricu lum.
co urse s.

The lowest ranking was given t o th e foundation

27
These s t u d i e s have r e v e a le d t h e need f o r t h e f o llo w in g in

elementar y t e a c h e r ed uca ti on programs:

e a r l i e r o b s e rv a t io n o f

elementary c h i l d r e n , meaningful s tu d e n t te a c h in g e x p e r i e n c e s , use o f
new id e a s i n t h e classroom, e l i m i n a t i o n o f unnecessary co urses and
th e implementation o f worthwhile methods co urse s.
Ideas abound concerning what e f f e c t i v e elements should be
included in elementary t e a c h e r ed uc atio n programs.

One o f t h e

primary problems i s t h a t t h e r e c i p i e n t s o f t e a c h e r ed uc atio n ar e not
always i n agreement with those who a d m in i s te r th e programs.

A study

was done by Walsh t o a r r i v e a t a r a t i o n a l e which might be employed
27

Herman V icto r Williams, "Evaluation o f Elementary Teacher
P r e p a r a t io n a t Heidelberg College" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
Case Western Reserve U n i v e r s i t y , 1969).

47
as a g u i d e lin e f o r t h e development o f an undergraduate elementary
t e a c h e r education program.

The twelve p o in t r a t i o n a l e was derived

from a survey o f r e l a t e d l i t e r a t u r e and s i t e v i s i t a t i o n s to s i x
s e l e c t e d c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s by th e w r i t e r .

The i d e n t i f i e d

r a t i o n a l e was th e n submitted t o nine s e l e c t e d a u t h o r i t i e s i n t h e area
o f elementary t e a c h e r e d ucation.

Acting as a j u r y o f e x p e r t s —t h e s e

a u t h o r i t i e s v e r i f i e d th e r a t i o n a l e .

F i n a l l y , th e v e r i f i e d r a t i o n a l e

was i l l u s t r a t e d in a model program f o r t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f elementary
teachers.

Among th e twelve p o i n t r a t i o n a l e as s t a t e d by Walsh ar e

t h e s e s i x elements t h a t a r e common t o th e t e a c h e r ed uc atio n program
a t Central Michigan U n iv e r sity .
1.

Reli es on a w e l l - d e f i n e d general ed uca tion sequence.

2.

I n corp o r ates s t r u c t u r e such as block and /o r core
courses t o in s u r e t h e i n t e g r a t i o n o f knowledge and/
or t h e o r y and p r a c t i c e .

3.

Will provide f o r many and va r ie d p r o f e s s i o n a l
l a b o r a t o r y exper ie nc es throughout t h e f o u r y e a r s o f
undergraduate study and t h e s e w i l l in clud e both
micro and macro te a c h i n g e x p e r ie n c e s.

4.

Makes p r ov is ion f o r c o o p er ativ e s t r u c t u r e which
in s u r e s t h e j o i n t r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f t h e p u b lic
schools and t h e c o l l e g e in th e p r e p a r a t i o n o f
elementary t e a c h e r s .

5.

Is in n o v a tiv e .

6.

Provides f o r follow- up and s u p e r v i s io n o f i t s
2r
graduates du rin g t h e i r f i r s t y e a r i n t h e classroom.

28

Brother Stephen Vincent Walsh, "The Development o f a
Rationale f o r th e P r e p a ra t io n o f Elementary Teachers" (unpublished
Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n i v e r s ity o f Texas, 1967).

48
In summary, elementary educa tion e v a l u a t i o n s t u d i e s reveal
s e v e r a l common elements as being e s s e n t i a l t o e f f e c t i v e programs in
e lem en tary t e a c h e r educa tion .

Actual involvement with c h i l d r e n r a t e s

h ighly with both experienced and inexperienced t e a c h e r s , which
r e f l e c t s t h e high ranking accorded s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g .

The s e a r c h e r s

r e p o r t t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s p r e f e r e a r l i e r o b s e rv a tio n and some s tu d e n t
t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e , p r e f e r a b l y before methods c l a s s e s .

Also, more

a c t u a l t e a c h i n g dur in g s tu d e n t te a c h i n g i s d e s ir e d in a v a r i e t y o f
settings.

Frequent e v a l u a t i o n o f personal pr og re ss based on programs

geared t o in d iv id u a l needs, i n s t e a d o f a s e t p r e s c r i b e d le n g t h o f
s t u d e n t t e a c h i n g tim e , has a ls o been mentioned as v a lu a b le in
elem en tary t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n .

I t i s a l s o noted t h a t continuous

e v a l u a t i o n o f t e a c h e r ed uca tion programs,

more follow-up s tu d i e s o f

t e a c h e r e d u c a t i o n , improved c o l l e g e and u n i v e r s i t y p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s
w ith g r a d u a t e s , and more communication with t e a c h e r education
g r ad u ates i s g e n e r a l l y recommended.
Secondary Teacher Education Evaluation Studies
As was common among t h e elementary educa tion t e a c h e r education
e v a l u a t i o n s t u d i e s r e p o r t e d e a r l i e r , s tu d e n t te a c h i n g i s e i t h e r highly
reg arded o r r a t e d as t h e most im portant segment o f t h e t o t a l secondary
e d u c a ti o n t e a c h e r ed uca tion programs.

Included in t h i s s e c t i o n ar e

s t u d i e s p e r t a i n i n g t o e n t i r e secondary educa ti on programs as well as
t h o s e c o n c e n t r a t i n g on s u b j e c t a r e a s such as B us in e s s , Social Science
and En g lis h .

A s tudy p e r t a i n i n g t o t h e j u n i o r high/middle school as

well as a stu d y about s k i l l s and competencies needed f o r f i r s t y e a r
secondary t e a c h e r s a r e a l s o r e p o r t e d .

49
Stanbrough conducted a study o f 272 beginning t e a c h e r s who
gradu ated from o r were c e r t i f i e d by th e U n i v e r s ity o f Colorado during
t h e school y e a r 1969-1970.
(1)

Her r e p o r t e d f in d i n g s included t h a t

t h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n (.05) between f e e l ­

ing adequate ly prepared to begin t e a c h in g in a s p e c i f i c type o f
school and l i k i n g t h a t same te a c h i n g s i t u a t i o n ; (2) t h e r e was a
s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e ( s l i g h t l y g r e a t e r than .05) in t h e p er cep tio n s
o f j u n i o r high and s e n i o r high lev el t e a c h e r s concerning th e adequacy
o f t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l p r e p a r a t i o n , with j u n i o r high lev el t e a c h e r s
f e e l i n g l e s s adequate ly pre pa red; (3) more th a n 40% o f t h e beginning
t e a c h e r s mentioned problems with m otiva ting s t u d e n t s , classroom con­
t r o l , i n d i v i d u a l i z i n g i n s t r u c t i o n , p u t t i n g t h e o r y in t o p r a c t i c e ,
implementing i n s t r u c t i o n a l s k i l l s , using a u d i o - v is u a l a i d s , and
working with slow l e a r n e r s ; (4) beginning t e a c h e r s perc eived weak­
nes ses in t h e s tu d e n t te a c h in g program and t h e following recommenda­
t i o n s were made by more th an 50% o f t h e res po nden ts :

more p r e ­

s t u d e n t t e a c h i n g f i e l d ex perien ce needed, o p p o r tu n it y needed t o work
w i th s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t p u b l i c school t e a c h e r s , and s tu d e n t t e a c h in g
should be a l l day f o r e i g h t weeks r a t h e r th an h a l f days f o r a
s i x t e e n week s em e ster; (5) beginning t e a c h e r s f e l t th e s tu d e n t
t e a c h i n g co nf erenc es w it h c o l l e g e s u p e r v i s o r s were in need o f improve­
ment and made 33 s u g g e s tio n s .
r e q u e s t s were:

The f o u r most f r e q u e n t l y mentioned

conf erences should be held more f r e q u e n t l y and sooner

a f t e r v i s i t a t i o n , s u p e r v i s o r s should observe more o f t e n , s u p e r v is o r s
should o f f e r more c o n cr ete ideas f o r improvement and need t o know
what 1s happening i n t h e p u b li c s ch o o ls ; (6) beginning t e a c h e r s

50
perceived s tu d e n t te a c h i n g as being t h e most he lp f u l p a r t o f t h e i r
p r o f e s s i o n a l p r e p a r a t i o n , and t h e c o u r s e , Foundations o f American
Education, as being th e least h e l p f u l ; and (7) beginning t e a c h e r s did
not f e e l ad eq uately prepared to t e a c h i n l e s s t r a d i t i o n a l t e a c h in g
situations.

29

Another s tu d y f o r t h e purpose o f d e c is io n making regard ing
c o n t i n u a t i o n o f e f f e c t i v e secondary t e a c h e r e ducation p r a c t i c e s and
m o d i f i c a t i o n , r e v i s i o n o r disc o n ti n u a n c e o f o t h e r s was r e p o rte d by
Jensen.

He surveyed 911 U n iv e r s ity o f Iowa graduates from 1966

through 1970 and re ceived 65.6% us able re sp onses.

His fin d in g s

i n d i c a t e t h a t (1) respondents w ith te a c h i n g ex perience were s a t i s f i e d
w i th t h e i r p r e p a r a t i o n f o r planning l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s and f o r using
a v a r i e t y o f te a c h in g methods, but th ey were concerned about t h e i r
p r e p a r a t i o n f o r working w i th s tu d e n t s o f d i f f e r e n t a b i l i t i e s and
socioeconomic c l a s s e s , m o tiv a t in g s t u d e n t s , s u p e r v i s in g e x t r a c u r r i c u ­
l a r a c t i v i t i e s , handling d i s c i p l i n a r y problems, e s t a b l i s h i n g r a p p o r t
with school a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and p a r e n t s , making e f f e c t i v e use o f com­
munity r e s o u r c e s , and p a r t i c i p a t i n g in in n o v a ti v e school p r a c t i c e s ;
(2) most were pleased w it h s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g , t e a c h i n g methods, and
t h e courses in volving Audio-Visual Teaching Methods and C onstru ction
and Use o f Classroom T e s t s , (3) respondents with t e a c h i n g ex perience
were g e n e r a l l y s a t i s f i e d w ith th e guidance provided by t h e i r
29

J u d i t h Diane Stanbrough, "An E v a lu a tiv e Study o f t h e Pro­
f e s s i o n a l Education Program as Perceived by Those Beginning Teachers
Who Were Prepared t o Teach in Secondary Schools and Who Were
Graduated From o r Recommended f o r C e r t i f i c a t i o n by th e U n iv e r sity
o f Colorado During t h e School Year 1969-1970" (unpublished Ph.D.
d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e r s i ty o f Colorado, 1972).

51
cooperating t e a c h e r , but approximately o n e - h a l f o f th e respondents
in d i c a t e d d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with th e s uperv is io n provided by th e
U niversity du rin g student te a c h i n g ; and (4) respondents were more
fa vora ble in t h e i r eva lu a t io n s i f they:

(5)

1.

began t h e i r c o lle g e education a t Iowa

2.

had lead er sh ip experiences with young people p r i o r
to s tu d en t te aching

3.

decided e a r l y to become te a c h e r s

4.

were undergraduate s tu d e n ts

5.

did s tu d e n t te achin g o f f campus

6.

had high p o in t averages in p r o f e s s i o n a l ed ucation
courses

7.

t a u g h t in small schools

8.

had l i t t l e te a c h i n g exp er ienc e.

graduates e v a lu a t io n s o f the program tended to be more negative

than e v a lu a t io n s by s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s immediately following s tu d e n t
t e a c h in g ; and (6) graduates suggested th e following ways to improve
th e secondary t e a c h e r ed ucation program.
1.

a f u l l semester o f s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g

2.

more exposure to young people and a c tu a l c l a s s ­
rooms p r i o r to s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g

3.

v id e o - ta p in g o f m in i -t e a c h in g

4.

more s tu d e n t te a c h in g c e n t e r s involving a
g r e a t e r v a r i e t y o f s i z e s and types o f communities.

The f in d i n g s support t h e conclusion t h a t p e r i o d i c feedback from
gr aduates and employing school o f f i c i a l s can provide a t e a c h e r
edu ca tion i n s t i t u t i o n v a l u a b l e in formation f o r use i n program

52
*50

Improvement.

*51

Br yan t,

•so

LaPray

o q

and Kessinger

found in each o f

t h e i r s t u d i e s t h a t s tu d e n t te a c h in g was r a t e d most v a lu a b le by
secondary t e a c h e r educa tion g r ad u ates.
Bryant i n v e s t i g a t e d a t t i t u d e s o f r e c e n t grad uates o f Texas
A & I U n i v e r s i t y t o see i f th e secondary ed uca tion program was meeting
i n d i v i d u a l needs.

He included two types o f q u e s tio n s in his survey.

The respondent r a t e d items on a 1 t o 4 p o in t s c a l e on some q u e s tio n s
and t h e o t h e r s were open end q u e s tio n s on s ta te m e n t s which asked th e
g r aduates opinions concerning s p e c i f i c as p e c ts of t h e program.
were

There

appr ox im ately 462 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s r e tu rn e d from t h e 1969-1971

graduates.

His c o n c lu s io n s showed t h a t (1) a m a j o r i t y o f th e

g r aduate s a r e well pr epared to e n t e r t h e t e a c h i n g p r o f e s s i o n ; (2) a
m a j o r i t y o f t h e gr aduates a r e a d e q u a te ly prepared t o t e a c h t h e i r
academic s u b j e c t s in t h e secondary s c h o o ls ; (3) s t u d e n t te a c h in g i s
t h e most s a t i s f a c t o r y p a r t o f th e p r o f e s s i o n a l education program;
(4) t h e g r e a t e s t s t r e n g t h f o r beginning t e a c h e r s i s knowledge o f
30

D a r r e l l Milo J ensen, "A Follow-Up Study o f Graduates o f
t h e Secondary Teacher Education Program o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f Iowa,
1966-1970" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e r s i t y o f Iowa,
1971).
31

Paul Dewayne Bryant, "An Analysis o f t h e A t t i t u d e s o f
Recent Graduates Toward t h e Secondary Teacher Education Program a t
Texas A & I U n i v e r s i t y a t K in g s v ille " (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
North Texas S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1973.
32

J o e l J . La P r ay, "An Analysis o f t h e Undergraduate
Secondary Teacher Education Program a t Montana S t a t e U n iv e r s i t y as a
Means o f Curriculum Development" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
U n i v e r s i t y o f Utah, 1974).
33
Kenneth B l a i r Kes singer , "An Appraisal o f S e le c te d Aspects
o f t h e Secondary Teacher Education Program a t Augustine C ollege,
Sioux F a l l s , South Dakota" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
U n i v e r s i t y o f South Dakota, 1975).

53
s u b j e c t m a t t e r ; and (5) t h e g r e a t e s t weakness was s t u d e n t d i s c i p l i n e ,
w i t h lack o f t r a i n i n g in working with th e slow l e a r n e r a l s o being a
h a n d i c a p . 3^
In o r d e r t o determine th e s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses o f t h e
secondary education program a t Montana S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , LaPray
q u e s tio n e d 143 s t u d e n t s who had j u s t completed s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g and
a l s o 343 grad uates o f 1970 and 1971.

A t o t a l o f 252 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s

were used as only t h e r e t u r n s o f grad ua tes who had ta u g h t were used
in t a b u l a t i o n .

The purpose o f t h i s study was t o provide a b a s is f o r

f u t u r e d i r e c t i o n in curriculum development in t e a c h e r e d ucation.

His

f i n d i n g s r e v e a le d t h a t (1) s t u d e n t t e a c h i n g was th e most v a lu a b le ;
(2)

general psychology and educational psychology were ranked as th e

l e a s t v a l u a b l e ; (3) th e g r e a t e s t s t r e n g t h s were t h e s tu d e n t te a c h in g
assignments and t h e classroom t e a c h e r a s s i s t a n c e ranked higher than
t h a t o f t h e u n i v e r s i t y s u p e r v i s o r ; (4) t h e sex o f t h e respondents
d i d n ' t s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t t h e rankings except w i th regard t o th e
u n i v e r s i t y s u p e r v i s o r where females r a t e d t h e help given them s i g ­
n i f i c a n t l y h igher th a n t h e males; (5) course o f f e r i n g s were ranked
h ig h e r by s tu d e n t s a f t e r only s i x weeks o f s t u d e n t te a c h i n g than
t h e y were a f t e r a f u l l q u a r t e r o f s t u d e n t t e a c h i n g by a n o t h e r group
o f s t u d e n t s ; (6) t h e group who had ta u g h t a f u l l q u a r t e r ranked t h e
he lp given by t h e u n i v e r s i t y s u p e r v i s o r and t h e co o p e r a tin g t e a c h e r
h igher t h a n did t h e group t h a t had t a u g h t f o r s i x weeks.

34Bryant.
35La Pray.

35

54
Kessinger a l s o surveyed r e c e n t graduates f o r t h e purpose o f
a p p r a i s i n g t h e secondary t e a c h e r ed uca tion program a t Augustine
College in Sioux F a l l s , South Dakota.

He ques tioned 148 i n d i v i d u a l s

who had gr aduated between June 1971 and August 1972.

His f in dings

a l s o show t h a t (1) s tu d e n t te a c h in g ranked h ig h est in p r o f e s s i o n a l
p r e p a r a t i o n ; (2) t h e speech course a ls o r a t e d high; (3) o t h e r pro­
f e s s i o n a l p r e p a r a t i o n courses were r a t e d below average i n importance;
(4) high r a t i n g s were given t o i n s t r u c t o r s in major ar eas who took a
personal i n t e r e s t in t h e s tu d e n t ; (5) high r a t i n g s were given to
i n s t r u c t o r s in p r e p a r a t i o n o f s u b j e c t m a t t e r inform ation f o r
grad uate s ch o o l; and (6) a f i e l d ex per ie nce i s needed e a r l y in t h e
36
t r a i n i n g program.
Some w r i t e r s have undertaken s p e c i f i c s u b j e c t m a t t e r s t u d i e s .
Although t h e i r f i n d i n g s v a r y , K a i s e r s h o t ,

37

Parnell,

each found t h a t s t u d e n t t e a c h i n g was t h e most

38

and Mehta

39

v a lu a b le o r one o f

t h e most v a l u a b l e e x periences in t h e secondary t e a c h e r educa tion
program.
36Kessinger.
37
Alfre d Leonard K a is e r s h o t, "An Appraisal o f t h e Under­
g raduate Business Teacher Education Program a t t h e U n iv e r s i ty o f
Nebraska: A Follow-Up o f t h e Graduates, 1959-1969" (unpublished
Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n iv e r sity o f Nebraska, 1970).
3®Ralph Ers kine P a r n e l l , "A Follow-Up Study o f t h e 1966-1970
Social Science Secondary Education Graduates o f J a c k s o n v i l l e S t a t e
U n iv e r s it y " (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Auburn U n i v e r s i t y , 1972).
39
Mohinder Paul Mehta, "A Study o f P r e p a r a t i o n Programs f o r
Secondary School English Teachers a t t h e U n i v e r s i t i e s and Colleges
o f Montana" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e r s ity o f Montana,
1970).

55
A follow-up study o f ten y e a r s d u r a t io n was conducted by
Ka isersh ot o f grad uates o f th e U n iv e r s i ty o f Nebraska in t h e Business
Teacher Education Program.

His purpose was t o determine th e e f f e c t ­

iveness o f th e undergraduate bus ines s t e a c h e r ed uca tion program.
Graduates from J u ly 1959 t o August 1969 were p o l le d with an 85% usable
return.

Among h i s f in d i n g s were (1) th e m a j o r i t y o f the graduates

co ns idered th e va rio us s p e c ia l methods cou rse s as t h e most b e n e f i c i a l
p r o f e s s i o n a l ed ucation courses when f i r s t beginning t o t e a c h ; (2) the
m a j o r i t y o f s tu d e n t te a c h in g e x p erie nces were fav o rab ly regarded but
o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r o b s e rv a ti o n s o f bu s in e s s and o t h e r c l a s s e s during
s t u d e n t t each in g were much l e s s f a v o r a b l e ; (3) a l a r g e m a j o r i t y o f
th e gradu ates b e li e v e d some method o f follow-up o f th e grad uate by
t h e U n iv e r s it y was d e s i r a b l e ; (4) th e s t r e n g t h s o f th e busin ess
t e a c h e r ed uc ation a r e th e f a c u l t y , s p e c i a l methods c o u r s e s , o f f i c e
s k i l l s courses and th e o v e r a l l s t u d e n t t e a c h in g program; and (5) th e
l a r g e m a j o r it y o f th e gr aduates had a very p o s i t i v e image o f th e
Business Teacher Education Department a t th e U n i v e r s ity o f Nebraska.
I t was recommended by th e gra d uates t h a t (1) s t u d e n t teach in g programs
should be expanded t o includ e a g r e a t e r v a r i e t y o f a c t i v i t i e s and to
approximate more n e a r l y thos e a c t i v i t i e s , d u t i e s and o b l i g a t i o n s
o r d i n a r i l y performed by th e r e g u l a r busin ess t e a c h e r s , and (2) pr o­
v i s i o n s should be made f o r bu s in es s t e a c h e r e d u catio n s t u d e n t s to
observe numerous secondary bu sines s educa tion c l a s s e s and numerous
ex per ienced bus ines s t e a c h e r s b e fore and du rin g e n r o llm en t in the
s p e c i a l methods c l a s s e s and s t u d e n t te a c h i n g .
40K a i s e rs h o t .

40

56
P ar ne ll a l s o undertook a s u b j e c t ar ea follow-up stu dy.

He

i n v e s t i g a t e d th e 1966-1970 graduates in Social Science on the
secondary le ve l a t J a c k s o n v i l l e S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .

He ques tioned 164

graduates about th e s o c ia l s c ie n ce t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n program.

The

f in d i n g s i n d i c a t e d t h a t (1) s tu d e n t t e a c h in g was most v a l u a b l e ;
(2) th e most valu ab le s u b j e c t a r e a s in th e general ed uca tion program
were psychology, i n s t r u c t i o n a l media and English composition; (3) th e
l e a s t v alu ab le were general mathematics, general sc ie nce and b io l o g y ;
and (4) o f th e t h r e e p r e p a r a t i o n a r e a s e v a l u a t e d , t h e s o c ia l s c ie n ce
program re ceived th e h i g h e s t r a t i n g , th e general educa tio n program
th e next h i g h e s t and th e p r o f e s s io n a l ed ucation program th e lowest
rating.

41
Mehta conducted y e t a nother s u b j e c t ar ea study to analyz e th e

p r e p a r a t i o n programs f o r secondary school English t e a c h e r s a t e i g h t
Montana u n i v e r s i t i e s and c o l l e g e s .

His s u b j e c t s were English t e a c h e r s

who had completed t h e i r major and minor t e a c h i n g requirements in
English a t one o f t h e Montana u n i v e r s i t i e s o r c o l l e g e s during th e
1960-1969 period and who were t each in g English in Montana secondary
schools durin g th e 1969-1970 school y e a r .

He found t h a t (1) in

g e n e r a l , th e secondary school t e a c h e r s o f English in Montana r e c e iv e d
adequate t r a i n i n g i n l i b e r a l a r t s and s c i e n c e s , and (2) more than 90%
cons idered t h e i r s t u d e n t teach in g experience t o be "very v a luable" o r
"of some v a l u e . "

The t e a c h e r s recommended t h a t (1) unifo r m it y in

English programs be e s t a b l i s h e d in a l l s t a t e I n s t i t u t i o n s o f h igh er

41Parnel1.

57
e d u c a t i o n ; (2) more adequate and p r o f e s s i o n a l p r e p a r a t i o n i s needed;
and (3) s t u d e n t teach in g throughout th e e i g h t c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s should be extended to th e e q u i v a l e n t o f / o r one s em ester .

42

Much i n t e r e s t has been ge ner ated o f l a t e about t e a c h e r
p r e p a r a t i o n programs f o r middle school and j u n i o r high t e a c h e r s .
Many middle s c h o o l / j u n i o r high t e a c h e r s have had l i t t l e or no formal
t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n a t t h i s lev el and view t h i s as a shortcoming in
most o f our c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s .

These s ta te m e n ts a r e supported

by Pane who surveyed th e s t a t u s o f middle s c h o o l / j u n i o r high p r e p a r a ­
t i o n in th e s t a t e o f Nebraska.

He s e n t a q u e s t i o n n a i r e regard ing

t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n to 533 t e a c h e r s and p r i n c i p a l s throughout th e
s t a t e and 453 o r 85% o f th e ed u c a t o r s responded.
a r e as fo ll ow s:

Some o f t h e f in d i n g s

(1) th e co urses most o f te n experienced were general

e d u c a t i o n , a u d i o - v is u a l i n s t r u c t i o n , curricu lu m p r e p a r a t i o n and
s u b j e c t s p e c i a l i z a t i o n ; (2) th e courses l e a s t o f t e n exp er ienc ed were
i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y i n s t r u c t i o n , e x t e r n programs and i n s t r u c t i o n in
independent stu dy s k i l l s ; and (3) th e respondents were asked t o r a t e
and recommend co ur ses f o r middle grade t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n programs
and th e courses most f r e q u e n t l y recommended were a u d i o - v is u a l educa­
t i o n , s tu d e n t te a c h in g and d i s c i p l i n e .

The e d u c a to r s recommended

t h a t (1) s t u d e n t te a c h in g in th e middle grades should be experienced
by th o s e t e a c h e r s c e r t i f i e d t o teach in e i t h e r the middle o r j u n i o r
high sch o o l; (2) in s p e c i f i c co urses or a t l e a s t as p a r t o f th e o v e r a l l
p r o f e s s i o n a l educatio n o f middle grade t e a c h e r s , an under stan ding o f

^M ehta.

58
and s k i l l s in co un sel in g and guidance should be developed in o r d e r
t h a t th e j u n i o r high/middle school t e a c h e r may c o n t r i b u t e e f f e c t i v e l y
t o th e cou nseling o f s t u d e n t s ; (3) p r o s p e c t i v e middle grade t e a c h e r s
should have o p p o r t u n i t i e s to observe and v i s i t j u n i o r high and middle
schools in t h e i r freshman and sophomore y e a r s ; (4) t e a c h e r c o l l e g e s
should make p r o s p e c t i v e t e a c h e r s aware o f th e c h a lle n g e s and rewards
a v a i l a b l e in t h e j u n i o r high/middle s c h o o ls ; (5) in th e absence of
an adequate p r e - s e r v i c e p r e p a r a t i o n program f o r middle grade t e a c h e r s ,
s tr o n g i n - s e r v i c e e d u catio n programs should be developed t o augment
p r e - s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g ; and (6) t h e r e should be a v a r i e t y o f j u n i o r
high/middle school i n - s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s t h a t a r e based on the
in d iv id u a l needs o f t e a c h e r s .

43

Secondary education t e a c h e r s involved with r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s
in t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n o f t e n make recommendations reg ard in g what
should be k e p t , r e v i s e d , d e l e t e d o r added t o improve p a r t i c u l a r
t e a c h e r ed ucation programs.

Farnsworth was concerned about th e

t e a c h e r education programs a t Brigham Young U n i v e r s i t y and wanted t o
*
know how r e f e r e n c e groups pe rce ived programs then in e f f e c t , how they
perc eive d t h e " i d e a l " program in r e l a t i o n s h i p t o programs then in
e f f e c t , and how th e " P r a c t i t i o n e r s Program" was pe rceived in r e l a ­
t i o n s h i p t o programs then in e f f e c t .
s i x programs o f t e a c h e r e d u c a t i o n .

He f i r s t prepared models o f
Then q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were s e n t to

262 e d ucators and to 45 s t u d e n t t e a c h e r s , asking them t o e v a l u a t e
43

Ike Francis Pane, "A Survey t o Determine th e Need f o r
S p e c i a l i z e d P r e -S e r v ic e and I n - S e r v i c e Programs f o r J u n i o r High/
Middle School Teachers in t h e S t a t e o f Nebraska" (unpublished Ph.D.
d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n i v e r s i t y o f Nebraska, 1973).

59
the s ix models as to which was th e most adequate f o r preparing
t e a c h e r s and vice ve rsa .

The conclusions reached in d ic a te d t h a t

(1) the i n t e r n program, a f u l l s em ester , i s the most e f f e c t i v e means
o f p r e p a r a t i o n o f secondary school t e a c h e r s ; (2) th e T r a d it io n a l
Program which emphasizes r e q u ire d courses and sequence o f t r a i n i n g ,
i s l e a s t adequate in pr ep arin g secondary t e a c h e r s ; (3) the minimum
s tu d e n t teach ing experience should be a f u l l semester; (4) the l e a s t
adequate programs ar e those t h a t ar e a h a l f - d a y of s tu d e n t teaching
f o r e i g h t weeks or l e s s ; and (5) educators do not accep t the
" P r a c t i t i o n e r s Program" which provides f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n by th e local
school d i s t r i c t s .

The recommendations s t a t e t h a t (1) the te a c h e r

education program a t Brigham Young should be e v a l u a te d ; (2) more
i n t e r n type t r a i n i n g should be encouraged; (3) t e a c h e r education
programs should be i n d i v i d u a l i z e d to b e t t e r meet the needs o f the
s t u d e n t s ; and (4) te a c h e r education programs should be continuously
e v a lu a te d .

44

Pharr assumed t h a t many f i r s t y ear t e a c h e r s lack c e r t a i n
s k i l l s and competencies which a r e d e s i r a b l e f o r s ucc es sfu l te a c h in g .
He a l s o assumed t h a t t h e s e s k i l l s and competencies should be developed
in t e a c h e r ecud ation.

The re fore , he t e s t e d th e se assumptions in a

stu dy involving 232 secondary school t e a c h e r s and they s t a t e d th ese
recommendations:

(1) te a c h e r ed ucation needs t o place a high value

on or al and w r i t t e n English e x p r e s s i o n , (2) t e a c h e r education needs
44

Karl Smith Farnsworth, "An Evaluation o f th e Perception o f
S elected Reference Groups as I t Relates t o th e Secondary Teacher
Education Programs C ur ren tly Being Conducted a t Brigham Young Univer­
s i t y (Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Brigham Young U n i v e r s i t y , 1968).

60
to provide s p e c i f i c t r a i n i n g in th e use o f s p e c i a l s e r v i c e s , school
and community r e s o u r c e s , c o n f i d e n t i a l inform ation and permanent and
cumulative r e c o r d s ; (3) school d i s t r i c t s need t o provide i n s e r v i c e
t r a i n i n g f o r beginning t e a c h e r s ; and (4) t e a c h e r educa tion i n s t i t u ­
t i o n s need t o conduct follow-up s t u d i e s o f t h e i r grad uates to improve
areas of in stru c tio n .

45

The o v e r a l l f in d i n g s from th e secondary ed uca tion e v a l u a t i o n
s t u d i e s reviewed i n d i c a t e s ev era l a r e a s o f concern s i m i l a r to th ose
o f elementar y educa tion e v a l u a t i o n s t u d i e s .

One o f t h e s e a r e a s ,

s tu d e n t tea c h in g , is again u s u a l l y ranked as t h e s i n g l e most important
element o f t e a c h e r e d u c a ti o n .

Also, resp on dents o f t e n d e c l a r e t h a t

more f u l l time s t u d e n t t e a c h in g exp erie nce i s needed, and t h a t p r e ­
s t u d e n t t each in g e x perie nces in the classroom a r e h e l p f u l .

Secondary

te a c h e r s ar e concerned with t h e i r p r e p a r a t i o n f o r meeting in d iv id u a l
needs , m o tiv atin g s t u d e n t s , working with slow l e a r n e r s and implement­
ing audio visu al m a t e r i a l s .

P e c u l i a r to th e realm o f secondary educa­

t i o n i s th e j u n i o r high/middle school a r e a where t e a c h e r s a t t h i s
lev el o f t e n f e e l in ad eq u ately pr epared to te a c h e f f e c t i v e l y .

They

f e e l th ey should be provided with j u n i o r high/m iddle school p r e ­
s tu d e n t te a c h in g exp e r ie n c e s as well as s t u d e n t t e a c h in g i f they plan
on t e a c h in g a t t h i s l e v e l .

They would a l s o l i k e more knowledge o f

c h i l d r e n a t t h e s e l e v e l s in o r d e r t o counsel and guide them more
e f f e c t i v e l y , and become an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f t h e j u n i o r high/middle
school program.
^ 5George Ray P h a r r , "The Study o f C e r t a i n S k i l l s and Compe­
t e n c i e s Which a r e Useful t o F i r s t Year Secondary Teachers" (unpub­
l i s h e d Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f Northern Colorado, 1973).

61
Education Courses
Education co ur ses a r e an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f most t e a c h e r educa­
t i o n programs.

I f they ar e planned to meet i n d iv id u a l needs and

ta u g h t w e l l , th ey ar e important to s tu d e n t s in t e a c h e r e d u c a tio n .
But, i f n o t , we o f te n hear comments such as " d u ll" and "too th e o ­
r e t i c a l ."
A study p e r t a i n i n g t o th e value o f ed ucation courses was
r e p o r t e d by Lemons.

Three hundred t e a c h e r s from 13 t e a c h e r p r e p a r a ­

t i o n i n s t i t u t i o n s served as p a r t i c i p a n t s .

The sample include d pro­

p o r t i o n a t e numbers of t e a c h e r s in t h e i r f i r s t , second and t h i r d y e a r s
o f te a c h i n g and was about e q u a l l y d ivided as t o s e x , grade l e v e l s and
urban and r u r a l l o c a t i o n .

The f in d i n g s r ev ealed t h a t (1) mostly nega­

t i v e comments were s t a t e d about ed ucation co urses while e n t h u s i a s t i c
comments were l a r g e l y confined to s tu d e n t teach in g expe rien ce s and
t o co ur ses ta u g h t by e x c e p t i o n a l l y b r i l l i a n t t e a c h e r s ; (2) more
d i v e r s i f i e d o b s e rv a tio n was wanted p r i o r t o s t u d e n t t e a c h i n g ;
(3) s tu d e n t teach in g should be a l l day f o r a given block o f time;
(4) general methods courses were condemned but s p e c i a l methods
cou rse s were co nsid ere d v a l u a b l e , in varying d e g r e e s ; (5) t h e r e was
too much th e o r y in general educa tion c o u r s e s ; and (6) too much overlapping and d u p l i c a t i o n was p r e s e n t in ed uc atio n c o u r se s .

46

P e t t i t was a l s o concerned about t h e a t t i t u d e s o f c o l l e g e
graduate s about ed uca tion c o u r s e s .

46

He ev a l u a te d 220 s tu d e n t s who

L. A. lemons, "Education Courses; Opinions D i f f e r on T h e ir
Value," National Education As s o c i a t i o n J o u r n a l , Vol. 54 (October 1965),
pp. 26-2IT

62
were about to grad uat e from Central Washington S t a t e College and
obtain ed th e s e f i n d i n g s :

(1) ed ucation courses can and do make

s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o the p r e p a r a t i o n o f t e a c h e r s ; (2) educa­
t i o n co ur ses can and must be e v alu ated f o r purposes o f improvement;
(3) ed uc atio n courses can and must be well t a u g h t ; (4) ed uca tion
c o u r s e s , when well designed and well t a u g h t , ear n the r e s p e c t o f
t h e most c r i t i c a l s tu d e n t s and c o l l e g e p r o f e s s o r s ; and (5) grad uating
s e n i o r s a r e eag er to give o b j e c t i v e r a t i n g s and valuable help f o r the
improvement o f co urses and i n s t r u c t i o n on th e c o l l e g e l e v e l .

47

O v e r a l l, t h e s e r e s e a r c h e r s r e p o r t t h a t education courses must
be well ta u g h t and meet in d ividual needs.

They must a l s o demonstrate

a p p l ie d t heory in co njunction with t e a c h i n g .

Also, b e t t e r o r g a n i z a ­

t i o n o f e ducation courses i s n ec es sa ry so d u p l i c a t i o n and overlapping
o f course c o n te n t i s e i t h e r purposeful t o th e t o t a l c o n t r i b u t i o n o f
educati on co ur ses to t e a c h e r educa tion or e l i m i n a t e d completely.
Furthermore, i n d i v i d u a l s involved in a l l phases of ed uca ti on should
be co n s u lt ed f o r improving co n te n t and th e reason f o r being o f
educa tion co urse s.
Student Teaching
Is s tu d e n t t each in g th e s i n g l e most important ex pe rience
w ith in th e t o t a l t e a c h e r ed uc atio n program?

I t would appear t o be

i f we r e f l e c t on t h e p r e v io u s ly mentioned elementar y and secondary
47

Maurice L. P e t t i t , "What College Graduates Say About
Education Courses," The Journal o f Teacher E duc atio n, Vol. 15
(June 1964), pp. 378-381.

63
s t u d i e s o f t e a c h e r education programs.

The following rankings were

given t o Student Teaching as c i t e d in the afore-mentioned s t u d i e s :
Research By:

Student Teaching Ranking

P eter s
May
Baer
LaPray
Parn ell
M o f f i tt
Williams
Kessinger
Campbel1
Bryant
Stanbrough
Jensen
Mehta
M.E.A. Committee
McCullough
Thompson

Most Valuable
Most Valuable
Most Valuable
Most Valuable
Most Valuable
Most Valuable
Highest Rating
Highest Ranking
Very S a t i s f a c t o r y
Most S a t i s f a c t o r y
Most Helpful
Most Were Pleased
90% - Very Valuable o r o f Some Value
87% - Most Helpful
80% - Most Important
64% - Most Valuable ( r e g u l a r t e a c h e r s )
60% - Most Valuable ( s p e c i a l t e a c h e r s )
60% - S tr o n g e s t
63% - Most Important (secondary)
54% - Most Important (elementary)

Havard
Beaty

These s t u d i e s most o f te n included f in d i n g s a n d /o r recommendations
f o r improving t e a c h e r ed uca tion in g e n e r a l , o r s p e c i f i c c o l l e g e or
u n i v e r s i t y t e a c h e r educa tion programs.
The following study i s t y p i c a l in t h a t th e f i n d i n g s s t a t e
t h a t Student Teaching i s th e most v a lu a b le experien ce in th e p a r t i c u ­
l a r t e a c h e r educa ti on program.

Also, t h e r e a r e given s u g g e sti o n s f o r

improving o t h e r a s p e c ts o f th e t o t a l t e a c h e r ed ucati on program.
This study was conducted by Albaugh t o (1) determine t h e
s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s o f th e s t u d e n t te a c h i n g program in t h e College
o f Education a t Wayne S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , and (2) t o determine th e p e r ­
ceived values o f t h e s e o b j e c t i v e s as given by t h e s t u d e n t t e a c h e r s

64
and f i r s t - y e a r t e a c h e r s who were graduated from t h e College o f
Education a t Wayne S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y in 1967-1968.

A q u e s ti o n n a i r e

o f 96 s e l e c t e d s t u d e n t t e a c h e r exper ienc es was developed and given
t o 1100 s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s and f i r s t y e a r t e a c h e r s , a l l from Wayne
State University.

The f in d i n g s i n d i c a t e t h a t (1) s tu d e n t t each in g

i s th e most v a lu a b le ex per ien ce in t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n ; (2) more
emphasis should be placed on d i s c i p l i n e problems, m otiva ti ng s t u ­
d e n t s , o rg a n iz i n g s u b j e c t m a t t e r , t e a c h in g groups o f d i f f e r e n t
a b i l i t i e s , using a v a i l a b l e t e a c h in g a i d s e f f e c t i v e l y and e v a l u a t i n g
s tu d e n t s as p a r t o f th e t e a c h e r educa tion program; and (3) l e s s
p r i o r i t y might be given t o th e more r o u t i n e ex periences such as
c a r i n g f o r classroom equipment and m a t e r i a l ; ta k in g ca re o f th e
phys ical c o n d i t i o n o f th e room; a n t i c i p a t i n g pupil d i f f i c u l t i e s ;
ty p i n g , f i l i n g , c u t t i n g s t e n c i l s and doing c l e r i c a l work; and
keeping a d a i l y d i a r y o r check l i s t .

48

But can Studen t Teaching, as t h e most valued segment o f many
s tu d e n t te a c h in g programs, stan d by i t s e l f in importance w ithout th e
b e n e f i t s o f e f f e c t i v e general and academic ed uca tion?

The f o u r

viewpoints t h a t fo llow r e f l e c t on th e importance o f s tu d e n t te a c h i n g :
The National Commission on Teacher Education and P r o f e s ­
s io n a l Standar ds s t a t e d t h a t
Studen t teach in g i s t h e most dynamic phase o f t e a c h e r
e d u c a t i o n . Deans o f Schools o f Education and c o l l e q e
48

David Hinson Albaugh, "The Perceived Value o f Student
Teaching Experiences as Determined by Graduates o f t h e College o f
Education, Wayne S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y in 1967-1968" (unpublished Ph.D.
d i s s e r t a t i o n , Wayne S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1969).

65
p r e s i d e n t s now know t h a t s tu d e n t te aching i s a highly
regarded p r o fe s s io n a l course which th ey can no long er
t r e a t as a poor r e l a t i v e o f campus courses and re se arch
with r e s p e c t t o al lo t m e n ts o f s e n i o r s t a f f , money and
time. P rofe s sors o f education know t h a t s tu d e n t te aching
o f te n i s t h e c r u c i a l p r e p a ra t o r y ex perience. I t should
not be t r e a t e d as mere p r a c t i c e in te aching or f a m i l i a r ­
i z a t i o n with t e a c h e r ' s a c t i v i t i e s . Schools and co lle g e s
have r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r j o i n t planning of s tu d e n t te a c h ­
ing and they b e n e f i t mutually from i t . 49
P r e il i n v e s t i g a t e d th e e f f e c t o f s tu d e n t te aching on begin­
ning tea c h i n g .

He found t h a t beginning elementary t e a c h e r s were

judged by p r i n c i p a l s and o t h e r p r o f e s s i o n a l l y t r a i n e d classroom
ob se rver s t o be s i g n i f i c a n t l y more e f f e c t i v e and s uc ce ss fu l when
they had s tu d e n t t each in g experience in t h e i r p r e - s e r v i c e backgrounds
than when they had not taken s tu d e n t tea c h i n g .

The sev er al school

d i s t r i c t s in which t h i s study was conducted employed t e a c h e r s with
or withou t s tu d e n t teac hing backgrounds s in c e in t h a t s t a t e they
could g e t a teac hing c e r t i f i c a t e witho ut having completed s tu d e n t
*
tea
c hu i- n g . 5 0

Reasons why s tu d e n t te achin g i s important to t e a c h e r educa­
t i o n programs as mentioned by Dover include h is b e l i e f s t h a t "the
s tu d e n t te aching program provides a l a b o r a t o r y f o r t h e t e s t i n g o f
i d e a s —a p lace where t h e s tu d e n t may encounter r e a l problems,
o p p o r tu n ity f o r rea l growth, and a f e e l i n g o f r e a l i t y .

All o f th e se

f a c t o r s tend to make th e s tu d e n t teac hing ex pe rien ce one of th e most
49

National Education As so ciation Research D iv is io n , "On
Teacher P r e p a r a t i o n , " National Education A s socia tion Journal
(December 1963), p. 34.
50

Joseph J . P r e i l , "The R e l a t io n s h ip Between Student Teaching
and Teaching E f f e c ti v e n e s s " (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , New York
U n i v e r s i t y , 1968).

66

i n t e r e s t i n g and h e lp f u l phases o f th e p r o f e s s io n a l p r e p a r a t i o n o f
th e p r o s p e c t i v e t e a c h e r . "

51

Crow and Crow r e f l e c t on the r e l a t i o n s h i p o f th e o r y to
p r a c t i c e when th ey s t a t e t h a t
many young men and women tend t o r eg ar d s tu d e n t t each in g
as th e most, i f not th e o n l y , p r o f e s s i o n a l ex perience
t h a t has value in t e a c h e r e d u c a tio n . They underplay and
m ise v a l u a te t h e i r previous study in t h e f i e l d . College
s t u d e n t s o f t e n do not re co gn ize t h e f a c t t h a t mastery o f
th e o r y i s e s s e n t i a l to e f f e c t i v e p r a c t i c e . 52
The U n iv e r sif y o f Michigan was i n t e r e s t e d in f i n d i n g out
what a r e a s o f study were h elpful to t h e i r 1971-1972 r e c i p i e n t s o f
elementary and secondary p r o v is i o n a l t e a c h i n g c e r t i f i c a t e s .

A f our

page q u e s t i o n n a i r e was mailed t o 1290 U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan gradu­
a t e s in t e a c h e r e d u catio n and 820 usable respons es were r e c e iv e d .
There were seven items which p e r t a i n e d to t h e a r ea on Helpfulness
in Pre pa rin g S tu den ts f o r Student Teaching.

These, t o g e t h e r with

th e number o f re sp ond en ts reg ard in g each element as h e lpful a r e :

Item

Number o f
Respondents

1.

Methods Courses

803

2.

Seminar accompanying s tu d e n t te a c h i n g

802

3.

Most co u r se s in my major academic f i e l d ( s )

802

4.

Courses in Educational Psychology

787

51

York:

John W. Dover, The Experience o f Student Teaching (New
The Macmillan Company, 1964), p. 3.
52

L e s t e r D. Crow and Alice Crow, The Student Teacher in th e
Secondary School (New York: David McKay Company, I n c . , 1964),
pp. 20-29.

67

Item

Number o f
Respondents

5.

Courses in Social Foundation o f
Educ ation, such as Educational Sociology,
Educational H i s to r y , e t c .

782

6.

Most co urses in my minor academic f i e l d s

766

7.

P r e - s t u d e n t t e a c h in g o b s e r v a t io n s

54553

Although methods co ur ses were r a t e d most help ful in p r e p a ra ­
t i o n f o r s tu d e n t te a c h in g by 803 r e sp o n d e n ts , t h e r e were 802
respondents t h a t ranked t h e s tu d e n t te achin g seminar as well as th e
co ur se s in th e major academic f i e l d as being h e l p f u l .

Other courses

were not r a t e d as he lp f u l f o r s tu d e n t t e a c h in g and th e p r e - s t u d e n t
te a c h in g o b s e rv a tio n s were regarded by respondents as being l e s s
helpful in pr ep arin g s tu d e n t s f o r s tu d e n t t e a c h in g than t h e o th e r
c ourses .
Ediger wanted t o know what i n f l u e n c e s t u d e n t t e a c h e r s had
on pupil achievement i n th e b a s i c academic s k i l l s and in personal
and s o c i a l a d justm ent.

He conducted a study during t h e 1962-1963

school y e a r using 543 p u p i l s in t h e f i f t h and s i x t h grades from
f o u r elementary s ch oo ls l o c a t e d in K i r k s v i l l e , M isso ur i.

He found

t h a t (1) p u p il s ta u g h t with th e a s s i s t a n c e o f s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s
developed a s i g n i f i c a n t l y h ig h e r vocabulary l e v e l than did p u p ils
ta u g h t withou t th e a s s i s t a n c e o f s t u d e n t t e a c h e r s ; (2) th e p r o f e s ­
s io n al adjustm ent o f p u p i l s ta u g h t with th e a s s i s t a n c e o f s tu d e n t
®3U n iv e r s i ty o f Michigan—Alumni P r o f i l e s , "A Study o f 197172 Rec ip ients o f Elementary and Secondary P r o v is io n a l Teaching
C e r t i f i c a t e s from t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f Michigan School o f E du cation,"
October 1973.

68

t e a c h e r s was s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r than when p u p il s were ta u g h t w it h ­
out th e a s s i s t a n c e o f s t u d e n t t e a c h e r s ; and (3) in t h e ar e a s o f
r ea ding comprehension, language p r o f i c i e n c y , work study s k i l l s ,
a r i t h m e t i c computation, and s o c ia l ad ju st m ent, t h e r e was no s i g n i f i ­
c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between t h e pupil groups t a u g h t with o r witho ut th e
a s s i s t a n c e o f s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s .

54

Summary
Seven a r e a s o f i n t e r e s t t o t h i s study have been covered in
th e review o f p e r t i n e n t l i t e r a t u r e .

Although t h e many s t u d i e s s u r ­

veyed v a r i e d in degrees o f s o p h i s t i c a t i o n , p o p u l a t i o n , f in d i n g s and
recommendations, common elements sur fac ed again and again p e r t a i n i n g
to each ar ea a nd/o r t e a c h e r ed ucation program in g e n e r a l .

The survey

method o f r e s e a r c h employing th e use o f th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e was commonly
used.
Teacher Education Program f i n d i n g s r e f l e c t e d t h e s i z e o f the
i n s t i t u t i o n as well as t h e s i z e o f th e t e a c h e r ed uca ti o n o f f e r i n g s
and ex periences a v a i l a b l e t o th e i n d i v id u a l s t u d e n t .

S im ila r o b j e c ­

t i v e s o f e f f e c t i v e t e a c h e r ed uca tion programs as well as th e
beha vioral outcomes needed were o f t e n s t r e s s e d by c o l l e g e s e n i o r s ,
s t u d e n t t e a c h e r s , beginning t e a c h e r s and ex per ienced te a c h e r s a l i k e .
Much v a r i e t y in c o n te n t was found among th e combined
elem en tary -sec ond ar y t e a c h e r educa ti on e v a l u a t i o n s t u d i e s , the
54

Marlow E di ger , "The In fl uence o f t h e Student Teacher on
th e P u p i l , Academically and S o c i a l l y in S e le c t e d Elementary Grades,"
D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , Vol. 24, 1964.

69
elementar y t e a c h e r educa tion e v a l u a t i o n s t u d i e s and th e secondary
t e a c h e r ed uca tion e v a l u a t i o n s t u d i e s .

In g e n e r a l , thos e a r e a s of

e f f e c t i v e t e a c h e r ed uc atio n programs t h a t were la cking in p a r t i c u l a r
programs, were r e p o r te d as needed by respondents not enjoying th ose
e s s e n tia l experiences.

I f i n d i v i d u a l s from an i n s t i t u t i o n f e l t a

need f o r more methods c o u r s e s , f o r example, t h i s item r eceiv ed a
high p r i o r i t y in number o f respons es from th o s e i n d i v i d u a l s p a r t i c i ­
p a t i n g in th e survey.
A d e f i n i t e need was expr essed in th e f i n d i n g s by grad ua tes
o f elementary as well as secondary t e a c h e r education programs f o r
more c o n t a c t with young people, more meaningful s tu d e n t te ac hing
e x p e r i e n c e s , and more r e l e v a n t c ourses .
Also, l i t t l e o r no information was found from t h e reviewed
l i t e r a t u r e regard in g th e amount o f p r e - s t u d e n t t e a c h in g time s p ent
in o b s e rv a ti o n and d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p s with young people, len gth
and depth o f s tu d e n t teach in g and s p e c i f i c co ur ses ta u g h t in con­
j u n c t i o n with s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g .

T h e re f o re , perhaps t h e t e a c h e r

e d u c a t io n program a t Central Michigan U n i v e r s i t y w ill be r a t e d
q u i t e h ig h ly as th e t e a c h e r ed uca tion s t u d e n t s a r e exposed t o many
hours o f o b s e rv a ti o n and d i r e c t c o n t a c t with c h i l d r e n p r i o r to
student teaching.

As s t u d e n t t e a c h in g was found to be th e o v e r a ll

t h re a d o f importance in most o f th e r e s e a r c h , perhaps t h i s r e f l e c t s
t h e s tate m en t t h a t ". . . in o r d e r t o l e a r n t o t e a c h , one must
teach."

The Central Michigan U n i v e r s i t y t e a c h e r educa tion s t u d e n t s ,

a r e involved in s i x t e e n weeks o f s tu d e n t te a c h in g in one or more

70
s i t u a t i o n s , th e m a j o r i t y o f which a r e in off-campus s tu d e n t teach in g
centers.
Education courses ar e only as v alu ab le as t h e i r c o n te n t and
r e l a t i o n s h i p t o th e o v e r a ll t e a c h e r educ atio n program and i t i s
e s s e n t i a l t h a t th eory i s included t h a t i s b a s ic t o a l l p r a c t i c a l
a s p e c t s o f t e a c h e r ed uca tion programs.

The educa tion co urses a t

Central Michigan U n i v e r s it y ar e handled d e l i b e r a t e l y and some ar e
t a u g h t off-campus f o r more meaningful exper ience s in conju nction
with s t u d e n t tea c h in g .
I t i s e v i d e n t from t h i s w r i t e r ' s r e s e a r c h t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s
completing t h e i r undergraduate t e a c h e r educ atio n r e f l e c t d i f f e r e n t l y
upon t h e i r t e a c h e r ed uc ation than those who completed t h e i r programs
b efore them.

The f in d in g s i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e lo nger an in d i v i d u a l i s

away from s ch o o l, th e l e s s fa v o ra b le response i s u s u a l l y accorded
t h e t e a c h e r ed ucati on program.

This may be due t o th e f a c t t h a t

knowledge gained through th e va rious p a r t s o f th e t o t a l t e a c h e r
educ ation program provides th e new t e a c h e r with a d a i l y b a s i s f o r
te a c h i n g .
Follow-up s t u d i e s were h ig h ly recommended by survey respond­
e n t s as well as o t h e r e d ucati onal w r i t e r s .

This was in c o n ju n c tio n

with t h e need f o r continuous e v a l u a t i o n o f t e a c h e r e ducatio n p r o ­
grams, and improved c o l l e g e and u n i v e r s i t y communication with t h e i r
t e a c h e r e d u catio n g r a d u a t e s .
This w r i t e r was unable t o f i n d an abundance o f follow-up
s t u d i e s , and i t appears t h a t t h i s i s not a popular t o p i c f o r
publication.

The follow-up s t u d i e s found and reviewed exemplify

71
both good and poor r e se a r c h methods.

Freeman, Bradley and Bornstein

r e p o r te d t h a t they could f in d only a l i m i t e d number o f r e p o r t s t h a t
provided d i r e c t a s s i s t a n c e in dev elop ing, implementing and i n t e r preting data.

55

Also, few follow-up s t u d i e s c o n s is t e d o f as la r g e

a po pulatio n r e p r e s e n t i n g f our years o f gr ad u ates as t h i s p a r t i c u l a r
study .

This type o f r e s e a r c h is more meaningful to t e a c h e r education

i n s t i t u t i o n s because i t i s more r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f a s p e c i f i c ongoing
t e a c h e r ed ucation program.

55

Donald J . Freeman; Banks T. Bradley; and Tina B o r n s te in ,
Survey o f Michigan S t a t e U n iv e r s i t y Graduates o f Five Student
Teaching Programs, College o f Education. D ivision o f Student
Teaching and P r o f e s s i o n a l Development, Jan uar y 1979.

CHAPTER III
DESIGN OF THE STUDY

This f o u r y e a r follow-up study was undertaken t o help
determine t h e a t t i t u d e s o f Central Michigan U n iv e r s ity graduates o f
1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976 toward t h e i r undergraduate t e a c h e r educa­
t i o n programs.

These i n d iv id u a l judgments r e f l e c t t h e c a l i b e r o f

te a c h in g a t Central Michigan U n i v e r s it y as well as whether opinions
o f s t u d e n t s change from th e time they complete t h e i r t r a i n i n g to
one y e a r , two y e a r s , t h r e e y e a r s and f o u r y e a r s l a t e r .

The study

i s important because o f i t s p o t e n t i a l c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e School of
Education a t Central Michigan U n iv e r s i ty as i t seeks in fo rm atio n on
program improvement through input from C en tr al Michigan U n iv e r s it y
s tu d e n t s r e g a rd in g t h e i r pe r c e p tio n s o f t h e q u a l i t y and h el p f u ln e s s
o f t h e i r p r e p a r a t i o n f o r te a c h in g .
Among t h e important elements o f t h e Teacher Education Program
a t Central Michigan U n i v e r s i ty ar e s i x t e e n weeks o f s t u d e n t te a c h in g
a t an off-campus s t u d e n t te a c h i n g c e n t e r , on-campus cour ses in major
and minor f i e l d s o f s t u d y , off-campus courses r e l a t i n g t o s t u d e n t
t e a c h i n g and o t h e r areas o f t h e t o t a l Teacher Education Program and
co ur se s i n Education tak en on campus.
I t i s suggested from t h e review o f l i t e r a t u r e t h a t s e v e r a l
v a r i a b l e s ar e important t o t e a c h e r education programs.

72

Moffit

73

s t a t e d t h a t th e y e a r o f grad uation was important as in d iv id u a l
responses v a r ie d g r e a t l y with th e time elapsed s in c e t h e t e a c h e r
ed ucation e x p e r i e n c e . 1

Elementary and secondary c e r t i f i c a t i o n

is

an important v a r i a b l e t o t a k e i n t o c o n s id e r a t i o n in th e de sig n o f
th e study when comparing in d i v i d u a l responses in follow-up q u e s t i o n n a i r e s according to s t u d i e s by E l l i s
Ball a n t i n e ,

5

Campbell,

6

May

7

2

and Bryant.

o

M o f f it,

a

and o t h e r s also found t h a t respons es

to s p e c i f i c elements o f t e a c h e r educa tion programs vary according

Thompson Carson M o f f i t, "An Evaluation o f t h e Elementary
Education Program a t Central Michigan U n iv e r s ity by Recent Graduates
o f That Program" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Colorado S t a t e
U n i v e r s i t y , 1967).
2
Gordon Hansel E l l i s , "A Summative Eva luation o f th e
Elementary Teacher P r e p a r a t i o n Program, School o f Edu cation, Univer­
s i t y o f Colorado, 1969-71" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Univer­
s i t y o f Colorado, 1973).
3
Paul Dewayne Bryant, "An Analysis o f t h e A t t i t u d e s o f Recent
Graduates Toward th e Secondary Teacher Education Program a t Texas
A & I U n i v e r s i t y a t K in g s v ille " (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
North Texas S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1973).
4 Ib id .
5
Fr ancis B a l l a n t i n e , Monroe Rowland and William W e t h e r i l l ,
"P erc eptio ns o f Elementary School Teachers Trained a t San Diego S t a t e
College w ith Respect t o t h e Value o f Several Sepects o f T h e ir College
P r e p a r a t i o n , " Jou rn al o f Teacher E d u c atio n , Vol. 17 (Summer 1966).
^Kenneth Claude Campbell, "An Eva luation o f t h e Undergraduate
Elementary and Ea rly Childhood Teacher Education Program a t t h e
U n i v e r s i t y o f Georgia, Based on a Follow-Up Study o f Teaching
Graduates" (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e r s ity o f Georgia,
1970).
^Charles Randall May, "An Appraisal o f th e Elementary
Teacher Education Program a t The Ohio S t a t e Univer si ty" (unpublished
Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , The Ohio S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1967.

74

to t h e number o f years one has ta u g h t and whether an in dividual i s
teach in g f u l l t i m e , p a r t ti m e , or not t each in g a t a l l .
The c u r r e n t study sought t o a s c e r t a i n how e f f e c t i v e l y
Cenral Michigan U n i v e r s i ty gradu ates f e l t t h e i r undergraduate educa
t i o n prepared them f o r te a c h in g .
Research Questions
This follow-up study involves Central Michigan Universi ty
te a c h e r ed uca tion grad uates from 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1975 in
ex p lo r in g t h e fo llow in g r e s e a r c h q u e s ti o n s ;
1.

Do 1976 g rad ua tes val ue t h e i r s t u d e n t t e a c h in g
d i f f e r e n t from o t h e r ed ucation courses immediately
a f t e r s tu d e n t t e a c h in g ?

2.

Will s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g , off-campus cour ses and
on-campus co ur ses become more v a l u a b l e t o t h e
s t u d e n t s w ith th e i n c r e a s e in amount o f time
a f t e r gr ad ua ti on?

3.

Does being employed f u l l time in t e a c h i n g a f f e c t
th e valu e graduates pla ce on t h e i r t e a c h e r
edu ca tion program?

4.

Do elementary t e a c h e r s r a t e t h e i r educatio n courses
d i f f e r e n t l y than secondary t e a c h e r s :
(a)
(b)

5.

a t t h e time o f g r a duation?
a f t e r t h e f i r s t , second, and t h i r d
y e a r a f t e r gr aduatio n?

What s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses do graduates
p e r c e iv e i n t h e i r program;
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)

upon g r a duation?
one y e a r a f t e r g r a duation?
two y e a r s a f t e r gr ad ua ti on ?
t h r e e y e a r s a f t e r g r a d uation?

75
Hypotheses
To answer r e s e a r c h qu es tio n number 1, t h e Null Hypothesis
Number 1 (Ho:1) was gener ated:
Ho:1

There i s no d i f f e r e n c e between a t t i t u d e s o f 1976
graduates toward s tu d e n t te a c h in g experiences and
t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward on-campus educa tion courses
a t th e time o f grad uation.

To answer r e s e a r c h q u e s tio n number 2, t h e Null Hypotheses
Numbers 2, 3 and 4 (Ho:2, Ho:3 and Ho:4) were gen er ated :
Ho:2

There i s no d i f f e r e n c e r e p o rte d in 1976 in t h e
a t t i t u d e toward th e s tu d en t te a c h in g ex perience
among s tu d e n t s who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974
and 1973.

Ho:3

There is no d i f f e r e n c e r e p o rte d in 1976 in t h e
a t t i t u d e toward off-campus courses among s tu d e n t s
who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974 and 1973.

Ho:4

There i s no d i f f e r e n c e rep o rted in 1976 in th e
a t t i t u d e toward on-campus courses among s tu d e n t s
who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974 and 1973.

To answer r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n number 3, t h e Null Hypothesis
Number 5 (Ho:5) was generated:
Ho:5

There i s no d i f f e r e n c e in a t t i t u d e s o f t e a c h e r
educa tion grad uates who have f u l l - t i m e t e a c h in g
jobs and th o s e who do not have f u l l - t i m e te a c h i n g
jo b s a nd/or have not t a u g h t , toward t e a c h e r
ed uc ation programs.

To answer r e s e a r c h q u e s ti o n number 4, t h e Null Hypothesis
Number 6 (Ho:6) was generated:

76

Ho:6

There i s no i n t e r a c t i o n between lev el o f teach in g
(elementary and secondary s c h o o l ) , and time o f
gr a duation on a t t i t u d e toward on-campus courses.

To answer r e s e a r c h q u e s ti o n number 5, t h e in s p e c ti o n o f
Hypotheses 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 as well as t h e open ended q u e s ti o n s i s
implemented.
Population
The pop ulation o f t h i s follow-up study c o n s is t e d o f Central
Michigan U n iv e r s ity s tu d e n t s who completed t h e i r s tu d e n t te a c h i n g in
May 1976 as well as th o s e who graduated in 1975, 1974 and 1973.
These graduates r e c e iv e d te a c h in g c e r t i f i c a t i o n from Central
Michigan U n iv er sity and c o n s t i t u t e t h e s tu d e n t p o p ula tion o f t h i s
study.
There were 1806 r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n n a i r e s employed i n t h i s
study.

The May 1976 respondents completed t h e i r q u e s t i o n n a i r e s a t

t h e completion o f s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g a t th e end o f t h e i r s e n i o r y e a r .
This w r i t e r f i r s t r e c r u i t e d and th en i n s t r u c t e d s tu d e n t teach in g
s u p e r v is o r s a t various Centr al Michigan U n i v e r s it y s tu d e n t t e a c h in g
c e n t e r s throughout Michigan on how to a d m in i s te r t h e q u e s ti o n n a i r e s
t o th o s e grad ua tes who had j u s t completed t h e i r undergraduate t e a c h e r
ed u cati o n .

In a d d i t i o n , t h i s w r i t e r sec ured ad dres ses from Central

Michigan U n iv e r s i ty f o r gr aduates o f t h e y e a r s 1975, 1974 and 1973,
and mailed th e se grad ua tes t h e i r q u e s t i o n n a i r e s in June o f 1976.
The c u t - o f f da te f o r a l l q u e s t i o n n a i r e r e t u r n s was October 1976, and
a l l t h e r e t u rn e d q u e s t i o n n a i r e s from t h e y e a r s 1976, 1975, 1974 and
1973 t h a t had been r e t u r n e d t o t h e w r i t e r were then s e n t t o t h e

77
computer c e n t e r a t Central Michigan U n iv e r s ity f o r d ata i n t e r p r e t a
tion.

Follow-up l e t t e r s were not used because o f t h e magnitude o f

t h e study.
The number o f q u e s ti o n n a i r e s d i s t r i b u t e d in t h i s study as
well as t h e number o f r e t u r n s a r e as shown in Table 3.1.

TABLE 3 . 1 . —Q u es tio n n a ir es D i s t r i b u t e d , Returned and Percentages f o r
1976, 1975, 1974 and 1973.
Ques tio nna ir es
D istributed

Year

Qu es tionna ir es
Returned

Percentage o f
Returns by Year

1976

593

485

82

1975

372

191

51

1974

412

190

46

1973

429

191

45

1806

1057

TOTALS

Of t h e 1806 r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n n a i r e s d i s t r i b u t e d in t h i s
s t u d y , 1057 o r 59 p e r c e n t were usab le r e t u r n s .

Information was used

from q u e s ti o n s with f i v e and s i x p a r t re spons es even i f some o f t h e
respon ses pe r q u e s ti o n were m iss in g .

This accounts f o r t h e d i f f e r ­

ence in numbers o f respons es f o r t h e v a r io u s hypotheses.

The non-

usable r e t u r n s included th o s e with m issing d a t a p e r t i n e n t to th e
e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f th e s tu dy.
sample o f t h i s study .

The 1057 usab le r e t u r n s c o n s t i t u t e th e

78
Instrunent
The A t t i t u d e Inventory o f P r e p a r a tio n f o r Teaching was, in
p a r t , devised by Dr. Alan W. E ll s b e r g (see Appendix A), a former
P r o f e s s o r o f Education and Off-Campus Student Teaching S up er visor
a t Central Michigan U n iv e r s it y .

He f i r s t ad min istere d t h e A t t i t u d e

Inventory in 1973 when an ongoing s tudy o f g r a d u a t e s ' a t t i t u d e s
toward t h e i r p r e p a r a t i o n f o r t e a c h i n g was undertaken by Central
Michigan U n i v e r s ity .

At t h a t t im e , d ata were c o l l e c t e d from 485

respondents who had j u s t completed t h e i r s t u d e n t te a c h in g exper ie nce
a t Central Michigan U n i v e r s i ty .

The d a ta were made up o f respons es

r e f l e c t i n g p e r c e p t i o n s o f undergraduate t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n a t Central
Michigan U n i v e r s i t y .

Three primary s e c t i o n s were included i n th e A t t i ­

tude Inventory o f P r e p a r a t i o n f o r Teaching.

These were (1) Demographic

I n fo rm ati on, (2) A t t i t u d e Toward P r e p a r a t i o n , and (3) Open-Ended
Ques tions.

The s e c t i o n on demographic v a r i a b l e s provided personal

inform atio n r e g a rd in g name, a d d r e s s , y e a r o f g r a d u a t i o n , month o f
c e r t i f i c a t i o n , ty pe o f c e r t i f i c a t i o n , te a c h i n g s t a t u s , y e a r s t a u g h t ,
and major and minor.

The respondents were a l s o asked t o i d e n t i f y th e

s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses o f t h e s e s i x ar e a s o f p r e p a r a t i o n according
t o s t a t e d open ended q u e s t i o n s .

Also, t h e r e was room f o r a d d i t i o n a l

comments i f t h e resp ond ents so d e s i r e d .

The o r i g i n a l i n t e n t i o n o f th e

c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h was t o compare r e s u l t s in 1976 with th ose secured by
Dr. E l l s b e r g in 1973.

However, as t h e c u r r e n t study progre sse d i t

became e v i d e n t t h a t t h e E l l s b e r g d a t a were not s u f f i c i e n t l y organized
o r u n d erstandable t o s e rv e t h i s purpose.

T h e r e f o r e , t h e p r e s e n t study

became seen as an o p p o r t u n i t y t o provide Central Michigan U n i v e r s ity

79
with base l i n e data on f our groups o f graduates in such a way t h a t
f u t u r e s t u d i e s could, in f a c t , have some l o n g it u d in a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .
Additional que stio ns were added f o r th e p r e s e n t study by
Dickinson t o the o r i g i n a l A t ti tu d e Inventory o f P r ep arati o n f o r
Teaching designed by E l ls b e rg .

These a d d i t i o n a l ques ti ons were

added f o r th e purpose o f providing more comprehensive input by
graduates concerning t h e i r undergraduate te a c h e r ed ucation a t Central
Michigan Universi ty.

This in t u r n made up th e r esear ch instrument

used in the c u r r e n t stu dy, A Follow-Up Study o f th e A t t i t u d e s o f
Central Michigan U n iv e r sity Graduates o f th e Years 1973-1976 Toward
the Undergraduate Teacher Education Program in Which They P a r t i c i - '
pated with Im plica tions f o r Teacher Education Programs.

Eight new

q ues ti ons were developed by t h i s w r i t e r which p e r t a i n e d t o th e e x t e n t
t o which Student Teaching Seminars, Student Teaching, Other
Education Courses, Courses in Major Field and Courses in Minor Field
were helpf ul in var ious area s o f th e t e a c h e r education program.
The concluding t h i r t e e n open ended q u e s tio n s developed by t h i s
w r i t e r asked f o r general r e a c t i o n s t o s e l e c t e d p o r ti o n s o f th e
Central Michigan U n iv er sity t e a c h e r education program.
The most important p a r t o f t h e instrument was t h e second
s e c t i o n p e r t a i n i n g t o " A tt it u d e Toward P r e p a r a t i o n . "

The s i x

e s s e n t i a l areas o f t h e t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n program a t Central
Michigan U niversity ar e included here and each has a f i v e p o in t
L e lk e r t s c a l e .
1.

These s i x ar eas f u r t h e r descri bed a r e :
Major F i e l d :

A p r i n c i p a l s u b j e c t o f s tu d y in one

department o r f i e l d o f l e a r n i n g in which a s tu d e n t i s re quire d

80
o r e l e c t s t o t a k e a s p e c i f i e d number o f courses and c r e d i t hours as
a p a r t o f t h e requirement f o r o b t a i n i n g a diploma o r degree.
2.

Minor F i e l d :

A s u b j e c t o f study in one department or

broad f i e l d o f l e a r n i n g in which the s tu d e n t i s r e q u ir e d or e l e c t s
to t a k e a s p e c i f i e d number o f courses or hours, fewer than re quire d
f o r a major f i e l d ; implies l e s s i n t e n s i v e c o n c e n tr a t io n than in th e
major f i e l d .
3.

On-Campus Education Courses:

Those courses o f study

r e l a t i n g d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y t o t e a c h e r ed ucation in which th e
s tu d e n t i s re quire d o r e l e c t s t o t a k e a s p e c i f i e d number o f courses
or hours in conjunction with t h e major and minor f i e l d s o f study.
4.

Student Teaching i n th e s c h o o l s :

Observation, p a r t i c i ­

p a t i o n , and a c tu a l te a c h in g done by a s tu d e n t p r e p a rin g f o r t e a c h in g
under th e d i r e c t i o n o f a s u p e r v i s in g t e a c h e r o r general s u p e r v i s o r ;
p a r t o f t h e p r e - s e r v i c e program o f f e r e d by a t e a c h e r ed uc atio n
institution.
5.

Courses taken in c e n t e r s :

Those courses o f study

r e l a t i n g d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y t o t e a c h e r educa ti on in which t h e
s tu d e n t i s r e q u i r e d o r e l e c t s t o t a k e a s p e c i f i e d number o f courses
o r hours in co nju nction w ith s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g in an off-campus
s tu d e n t te a c h in g c e n t e r .
6.

Independent Study Courses tak en in c e n t e r s ;

Those

cour ses o f study r e l a t i n g d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y t o t e a c h e r educa­
t i o n in which th e s t u d e n t i s r e q u i r e d o r e l e c t s t o t a k e a s p e c i f i e d
number o f hours in co njunction with s t u d e n t te a c h i n g i n an o f f campus s t u d e n t t e a c h i n g c e n t e r .

81
A p i l o t study using t h e r e s e a r c h inst rum ent was conducted in
May 1976 involving seven s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s who were not gr aduati ng a t
t h i s time and t h e r e f o r e not p a r t o f t h e stu dy.

These elementar y and

secondary s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s were chosen a t random by t h e d i r e c t o r o f
an off-campus Central Michigan U n iv e r s i ty s t u d e n t t e a c h in g c e n t e r
and a l l were s e n i o r s who were completing t h e i r undergraduate educa­
t i o n in t e a c h e r e d u cati o n .

The p i l o t study was ad m ini st er ed t o see

i f t h e q u e s tio n s were c l e a r l y s t a t e d , i f t h e q u es tio n s were meaning­
f u l , i f t h e r e were any a d m i n i s t r a t i o n problems, and to gain ver bal
feedback concerning t h e t o t a l r e s e a r c h i n s t r u n e n t from the
respondents themselves.
The q u e s t i o n n a i r e

was a d m in in is ter ed sim ul tan eo usly to t h e

seven s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s by t h i s w r i t e r .

When a l l seven i n d i v i d u a l s

had completed th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e , verbal feedback was exchanged con­
cer ning th e i n s tr u m e n t , and t h i s w r i t e r then t a b u l a t e d th e q u e s t i o n ­
n a i r e s by hand f o r t o t a l in st rum ent e f f e c t i v e n e s s .

A d i s c u s s io n

ensued, two minor word changes were made, and th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e was
d e c l a r e d an e f f e c t i v e in strum en t by t hose involved in t h e p i l o t
study.
S t a t i s t i c a l Analysis
Three main s t a t i s t i c a l procedures were used t o analyze the
s i x hypotheses in t h i s s tu d y .

S p e c i f i c a l l y , Hypothesis Number 1

was t e s t e d by a Z - t e s t , Hypotheses Nunber 2 , 3 and 4 were t e s t e d by
2
X - t e s t o f homogeneity, and Hypotheses Number 5 and 6 were analyzed
by t h e a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e procedure.

82

S t a t i s t i c a l procedures t h a t ar e used in t h i s study ar e as
follo ws:
To t e s t Hypothesis Number 1, a two r e l a t e d samples Z - t e s t
was used.

The two dependent v a r i a b l e s which a r e obtai ned from th e

same i n d i v i d u a l in t h i s sample ar e a t t i t u d e toward s tu d e n t teach in g
and a t t i t u d e toward on-campus educa tion co u r ses .

Since th e

respondents answered th e q u e s ti o n n a i r e indep endently, th e assumption
o f independency o f t h e Z - t e s t i s as sured.
2
The x - t e s t o f homogeneity t e s t s a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e
among p a t t e r n s o f response in var ious l e v e l s o f an independent
variable.

The dependent v a r i a b l e in Hypotheses 2, 3 and 4 i s a t t i ­

tud e toward th e s tu d e n t te a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e , a t t i t u d e toward o f f campus courses and a t t i t u d e toward on-campus c o u r s e s , r e s p e c t i v e l y .
2
The X - t e s t assumes t h a t a l l o b s e rv a tio n s or respondents
a r e independent o f each o t h e r .

Since a l l t h e grad ua te s tu d e n t s in

t h i s study respond t o th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e i n d i v i d u a l l y , t h e assumption
o f independency seems to be rea so nab le.
The Analysis o f Variance (ANOVA) procedure is employed to
t e s t f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e among p o p ulation means o f various
l e v e l s o f independent v a r i a b l e s .

For Hypothesis Number 6, th e

p a r t i c u l a r ANOVA i s one way a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e with th e amount o f
t e a c h i n g as t h e independent v a r i a b l e having two l e v e l s — " f u l l time"
and "not f u l l time" t e a c h i n g .
dependent v a r i a b l e s .

Teacher e d u catio n programs ar e t h e

The ANOVA procedure assumes t h a t respondents

a r e independent o f each o t h e r , and th e dependent v a r i a b l e i s con­
t i n u o u s and normally d i s t r i b u t e d with t h e same p o p u la ti o n v a r i a n c e

83
in each sub-group.

Since the t o t a l number o f respondents i s l a r g e

(1057), t h e assumption o f normality is l e s s l i k e l y t o be v i o l a t e d .
The s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s is o f t h e d a t a i s d es crib ed in two
main p a r t s .

F i r s t i s t h e d e s c r i p t i v e information o f the o b s e rv a tio n s

in th e study.

D e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s such as frequency c o u nting,

means and v a r ia n c e s ar e r e p o r t e d .

Secondly, t h e s i x hypotheses were

t e s t e d through s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t s .
The d ata o f t h i s study c o n s i s t o f two important s e t s o f
variables.

They ar e t h r e e independent v a r i a b l e s and f o u r dependent

variables.

The independent v a r i a b l e s ar e (1) y e a r o f g r a d u a ti o n ,

(2) type o f c e r t i f i c a t i o n , and (3) f u l l or p a r t time te a c h i n g .
dependent v a r i a b l e s a r e (1) s tu d e n t te a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e , (2) oncampus education c o u r s e s , (3) off-campus educa tion c o u r s e s , and
(4) t e a c h e r ed uc ation programs.

The

CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA
In tr o d u c ti o n
The r e s u l t s o f t e s t i n g th e s i x hypothese s, which were
gen er at ed from the f i v e r e s e a r c h q u e s tio n s f o r t h e s t u d y , ar e
r e port ed in t h i s c h a p t e r .

F i r s t , th e d e s c r i p t i v e inform ation about

t h e o v e r - a l l sample i s r e p o r t e d .

The d e s c r i p t i v e inform atio n con­

s i s t s o f c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f th e sample by t h e t h r e e independent v a r i ­
able s (year o f g r a d u a t i o n , f u l l time and not f u l l time t e a c h i n g , and
leve l o f te a c h in g ) and t h e o v e r a l l p e r c e p ti o n o f t h e respondents
toward t h e s i x components o f th e program (major f i e l d , minor f i e l d ,
on-campus ed uca tion c o u r s e s , s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g in t h e s c h o o ls ,
co ur ses tak en in c e n t e r s and independent study cour ses t ak en in
centers).

Secondly, t h e r e s u l t s o f t e s t i n g each hyp othesis a r e p r e ­

sented as fo llows:

h y p o t h e s i s , r e p o r te d t e s t r e s u l t s , and conclu­

s io n .
D e s c r i p t i v e Information
There were 1057 usab le instrumen t r e t u r n s wit h 485 r e t u r n s
f o r 1976, 191 r e t u r n s f o r 1975, 190 r e t u r n s f o r 1974 and 191 r e t u r n s
f o r 1973.
Table 4.1 give s a general p e r c e p t i o n o f s i x s p e c i f i c p a r t s
o f t h e t r a i n i n g programs by th e t o t a l sample l i s t i n g t h e means,

84

85
TABLE 4 . 1 . --G eneral Per ception o f t h e Total Sample L i s t i n g t h e Means,
Standard D e viati on, and Rank o f Six S p e c i f i c P a r t s o f
t h e T r ain in g Programs.

Mean

Standard
Deviation

Rank

A.

Major F ie ld

2.39

.847

3

B.

Minor Field

2.79

.871

5

C.

On-Campus Education Courses

1.70

.843

1

D.

Student Teaching

2.38

.931

2

E.

Courses taken in c e n t e r s

2.43

.888

4

sta n d a rd d e v i a t i o n , and rank.

The respondents chose one o f t h e

f ollow in g with i t s assigned v a l u e , E x c e lle n t ( 1 ) , Good ( 2 ) , Average
( 3 ) , and Poor (4) f o r each o f t h e following c a t e g o r i e s :

Major

F i e l d , Minor F i e l d , On-Campus Education Courses, Student Teaching,
and r e g u l a r co ur ses and Independent study cour se s taken in c e n t e r s .
Of t h e s e c a t e g o r i e s , On-Campus Education Courses taken in c e n t e r s
r e c e iv e d th e h i g h e s t ranking and courses taken in t h e minor f i e l d
r eceiv ed t h e lowest r an king.

Also, th e s ta n d a rd d e v i a t i o n s va r ie d

from .843 f o r On-Campus Education Courses to .931 f o r s tu d e n t
t e a c h i n g , On-Campus Education Courses r eceiv ed t h e h i g h e s t mean
r a t i n g and cou rse s taken in th e minor f i e l d r e c e iv e d th e lowest
mean.

86
R esults o f t e s t i n g the s i x hypotheses:
Ho:l:

There i s no d i f f e r e n c e between a t t i t u d e s o f 1976
graduates toward s tu d e n t teach in g experiences
and t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward on-campus education
courses a t the time o f graduation .

For th e two dependent v a r i a b l e s o f Hypothesis Number 1, th e
values 1, 2, 3 and 4 were assigned t o respondent choices o f e x c e l l e n t ,
good, adequate and poor, r e s p e c t i v e l y .

The sample mean o f t h e d i f ­

f e r e n c e between t h e a t t i t u d e toward s t u d e n t te a c h i n g and th e a t t i t u d e
toward on-campus ed uca ti onal courses is . 56, while t h e sample
standa rd d e v i a t i o n and th e sample s ta n d a rd e r r o r a r e 1.05 and .003,
respectively.

The computed Z - t e s t is 188.20.

The c r i t i c a l values

o f t h e Z - t e s t , when th e p r o b a b i l i t y o f ty pe I e r r o r i s .1 0, ar e - 1 .6 4
and +1.64 f o r a t w o - t a i l t e s t .

Since th e Z - t e s t i s l a r g e r than th e

c r i t i c a l v a l u e s , null hypothesis one i s r e j e c t e d .

Thus, i t i s con­

cluded t h a t t h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e between t h e a t t i t u d e toward
s tu d e n t te a c h in g and t h e a t t i t u d e toward on-campus courses o f 1976
grad uates a t t h e time o f g r ad u atio n .

Since th e mean o f t h e d i f f e r ­

ence between t h e a t t i t u d e toward s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g and t h e a t t i t u d e
toward on-campus cour se s i s p o s i t i v e ( . 5 6 ) , th e 1976 grad uates
d i f f e r from t h e t o t a l sample (Table 4 . 2 ) and have a more f a v o ra b le
a t t i t u d e toward t h e i r s t u d e n t t e a c h in g ex periences than t h e i r oncampus c o u r s e s .

D e t a i l s o f th e two r e l a t e d samples Z - t e s t f o r

Hypothesis Number 1 a r e p r e se n te d in Table 4 . 2 .
The d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e mean o f t h e a t t i t u d e toward
s tu d e n t te a c h in g e x p e r ie n c e s and t h e mean o f t h e a t t i t u d e toward
on-campus co ur ses f o r t h i s sample i s .56.

TABLE 4 . 2 . —A t t i t u d e s Toward On-Campus Education Courses and A t t i t u d e s Toward th e Student
Teaching Experience o f 1976 Graduates.
A t t i t u d e Toward On-Campus Education Courses
E xc elle nt

Good

Adequate

Poor

Row Total

E x c e lle n t:

N = 83
(83.0%)

N = 107
(65.5%)

N = 33
(41.8%)

N= 6
(37.5%)

N = 229
(64.3%)

Good:

N = 14
(14.0%)

N = 51
(31.7%)

N = 29
(36.7%)

N= 6
(37.5%)

N = 100
(28.1%)

Average:

N= 1
(1.0%)

N=
2
(1.2%)

N = 12
(15.2%)

N= 0
(0.0%)

N = 15
(4.2%)

Poor:

N= 2
(2.0%)

N=
1
(0.6%)

N= 5
(6.3%)

N= 4
(25.0%)

N = 12
(3.4%)

A t t i t u d e toward s tu d e n t
te a c h in g exper ienc e:

Total number o f
respondents f o r each y e a r
Percentage o f respondents
f o r each y e a r :

100

(28.1%)

161

(45.2%)

79

( 2 2 . 2 %)

16

(4.5%)

356

( 100 . 0 %)

88
TABLE 4. 3. — Information Used f o r Determining th e Z - t e s t f o r
Hypothesis Number 1.
D

Total

D2

f

Df

D2f

-3

9

6

- 18

54

-2

4

39

- 78

156

-1

1

136

-136

136

0

0

105

0

0

1

1

2

21

21

2

4

2

4

8

_3

_9

2

6

18

0

28

356

-201

393

D = a d i f f e r e n c e between a t t i t u d e toward s tu d e n t te a c h i n g and
a t t i t u d e toward on-campus co urses o f t h e same respondent.
f = number o f r esp on den ts .
The sample mean o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e i s .56; th e sta n d a rd d e v i a t i o n o f
t h e sample is 1.05; t h e Z - t e s t i s 188.20; and t h e c r i t i c a l values
o f Z.Q5 a r e - 1 . 6 4 and +1.64.

I t i s concluded t h a t t h e r e a r e d i f f e r e n c e s between a t t i t u d e s o f
1976 graduates toward t h e i r s tu d e n t te a c h i n g expe rien ce s and t h e i r
a t t i t u d e s toward on-campus ed uca tion courses a t t h e time o f gradua­
t i o n , t h e r e f o r e , Null Hypothesis Number 1 i s r e j e c t e d .

89
Ho:2:

There i s no d i f f e r e n c e reported in 1976 in the
a t t i t u d e toward th e stude nt te ac hing experience
among s tu d e n ts who graduated in 1976, 1975,
1974 and 1973.

Results o f t e s t i n g Hypothesis 2 by using chi square t e s t
o f homogeneity.
Table 4. 4 shows per centage of respondents f o r each year
and th e a s s o c i a t e d chi square t e s t f o r Null Hypothesis Number 2.
I t was found t h a t more respondents in d ic a te d an "average" a t t i t u d e
toward t h e i r s tu d en t teaching experience in 1973, and a "good"
a t t i t u d e toward s tu d en t teac hing was in d ic a te d by more graduates
in 1974, 1975 and 1976.
The raw chi square t e s t o f homogeneity o f Table 4.4 is
169.70 and with 9 degrees o f freedom, th e t e s t i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t
.0000 l e v e l .

Since t h e s i g n i f i c a n t level o f t h i s hypothesis i s s e t

a t .01, t h e null hypothesis is r e j e c t e d .

Thus, i t i s concluded t h a t

th e p a t t e r n s o f response about s tu d e n t teac hing ex periences f o r each
y ear o f graduation ar e not th e same acro ss the y e a r s .

Thus, the

longer th e graduate i s away from th e s t u d e n t teach in g ex pe rie nce,
th e poorer t h e a t t i t u d e toward th e experience w i l l be.
Figure 4.1 i n d i c a t e s p a t t e r n s o f response regarding a t t i t u d e
toward s tu d e n t te aching ex periences o f s tu d e n t s who graduated in
1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976.

These p a t t e r n s show t h a t th e c l o s e r th e

graduate i s to t h e time o f g ra d u a tio n , th e more g e n e r a l l y fa vora ble
i s th e response toward t h e s tu d e n t te a c h in g exp er ienc e.

TABLE 4.4.— Attitude Toward Student Teaching Experience: Percentage of
Respondents for Each Year.
Year o f Graduation

Percentage o f
respondents f o r
each y e a r
Raw chi square

1973

1974

1975

1976

24.9

10.4

38.4

26.2

= 169.70 with 9 degrees o f freedom.

S i g n i f i c a n c e = .0000

Raw Total

100.0

«f
65

iiey: 1 E x c e lle n t

60

2 Good
3 Average

kc;

4 Poor

50

. -

a
*

0^0

«
•

45
40

•

1

is

35
30
25
VO

§

20

15
10

1

0

1973

1974

1975

1976

Figure 4 .1 .—
op ? ‘ s

i

5 t a p^ d %

^ n r ? ^ : n ^ ^ 9; n j T

9; d6 . s t u d e n t T e a c h in s

92

The median sc or es of a t t i t u d e s toward the s tu d e n t teaching
experiences of s tu d e n ts who graduated in 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1975
ar e 2.4 3 , 1.95, 1.68 and 1.48, r e s p e c t i v e l y (shown in Figure 4 . 1 ) .
HO:3:

There i s no d i f f e r e n c e rep or ted in 1976 in
th e a t t i t u d e toward off-campus courses among
s tu d e n ts who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974
and 1973.

Results o f t e s t i n g Hypothesis 3 by using chi square t e s t of
homogeneity.
Table 4.5 shows per centage o f respondents f o r each y e a r
and the a s s o c i a t e d chi square t e s t f o r Null Hypothesis Number 3.
I t was found t h a t respondents i n d i c a t e d an "average" a t t i t u d e
toward off-campus courses in 1973, and a "good" a t t i t u d e toward
off-campus courses was i n d ic a te d by more graduates o f 1974, 1975
and 1976.
The raw chi square t e s t o f homogeneity o f Figure 4.2 i s
41.36 with 9 degrees o f freedom, the t e s t i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t .0000
level.

Since the s i g n i f i c a n t lev el o f t h i s hypothesis i s s e t a t

.01, the null hypothesis is r e j e c t e d .

Thus, i t is concluded t h a t

th e p a t t e r n s o f response about off-campus courses f o r each ye a r of
graduation ar e not t h e same.
Figure 4.2 I n d i c a t e s p a t t e r n s o f response regard ing
a t t i t u d e in 1976 toward off-campus courses o f s t u d e n ts who graduated
in 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976.

These p a t t e r n s show t h a t th e c l o s e r

th e graduate i s t o th e time o f g ra d u a t io n , th e more g e n e r a l ly
fa v o ra b le i s t h e response toward off-campus co urse s.

TABLE 4.5.— Attitude Toward Off-Campus Courses:
for Each Year.

Percentage of Respondents

Year o f Graduation

Percentage o f
respondents f o r
each y e a r

1973

1974

1975

28.9

10.2

35.0

Raw chi square = 41.36 with 9 degrees o f freedom
S i g n i f i c a n c e = .0000

1976

25.8

Row Total

K ey:

E x c e lle n t

W ///A

Good
Average

%

Poor

• O

<x>

■p »

! 8

Q0

§
§

1973

1974

1975

1976

Figure 4 . 2 . —P a t t e r n s o f Response Regarding A t t i t u d e Toward Off-Campus Courses Among Students Who
Graduated in 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976.

95
The median sc or es o f a t t i t u d e s toward off-campus courses
among s tu d e n t s who graduated in 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976 ar e 2.2 8 ,
1.89, 1.79 and 1.7 0, r e s p e c t i v e l y .
From the f o u r histogram graphs shown in Figure 4 . 2 , the
p a t t e r n s o f response o f 1974, 1975, and 1976 graduates seem to be
sim ilar.

They a r e d i f f e r e n t from th e 1973 g r a d u a te s' responses in

t h a t t h e respons es o f 1973 graduates tend to lean toward an average
r a t i n g while the 1974, 1975 and 1976 gradu ates lean toward a good
rating.
Ho:4:

There i s no d i f f e r e n c e r e p o r te d in 1976 in
th e a t t i t u d e toward on-campus courses among
s tu d e n t s who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974
and 1973.

R es ults o f t e s t i n g Hypothesis 4 by using chi square t e s t o f
homogeneity.
Table 4.6 shows per ce ntag e o f respondents f o r each y e a r
and th e a s s o c i a t e d chi square t e s t f o r Null Hypothesis Number 4.
Respondents re veale d an " e x c e l l e n t " a t t i t u d e toward on-campus
cou rses f o r a l l o f th e f o u r y e a r s , 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976.
This was followed in rank o r d e r by a t t i t u d e s o f good, average
and poor, a l s o f o r 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976.
The raw chi squa re t e s t o f homogeneity o f Table 4.6 i s 71.33
with 9 degrees o f freedom, th e t e s t i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t .0000 l e v e l .
Since t h e s i g n i f i c a n t l e v e l o f t h i s hypothesi s i s s e t a t .0 1, t h e
nu ll hypothe sis i s r e j e c t e d .

Thus, i t i s concluded t h a t t h e p a t t e r n s

TABLE 4.6.— Attitude Toward On-Campus Courses:
for Each Year.

Percentage of Respondents

Year o f Graduation

Percentage o f
respondents f o r
each y e a r

1973

1974

1975

1976

Row Total

22.9

11.4

38.8

26.9

100.0

Raw chi square = 71.33 with 9 degrees o f freedom.
S i g n i f i c a n c e = .0000

97

o f response about on-campus courses f o r each y e a r o f graduation are
not the same.
Figure 4.3 i n d i c a t e s p a t t e r n s o f response reg ard in g a t t i t u d e s
toward on-campus courses among s tu dents who graduated in 1973, 1974,
1975 and 1975.

These p a t t e r n s show t h a t th e c l o s e r t h e graduate is

t o the time o f gr ad u atio n , th e more g e n e r a l l y fa v o ra b l e i s th e
response toward on-campus cour se s.

The g r e a t e s t percentage o f 1976

graduates ranked on-campus courses as " e x c e l l e n t . "
was followed by th e yea rs 1975, 1974 and 1973.

This same ranking

The median score s of

a t t i t u d e s toward on-campus courses among s tu d e n ts who graduated in
1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976 a r e 1.25, 1.21, 1.02 and 1.00,
respectively.
Ho:5:

There is no d i f f e r e n c e in a t t i t u d e s o f t e a c h e r
education graduates who have f u l l time t e a c h in g
jobs and tho se who do not have f u l l time teach in g
jobs and/or have not t a u g h t.

Re sults o f an alyzing Hypothesis 5 by one way a n a l y s i s o f
var ia nce .
Table 4.7 shows t h a t t h e F t e s t o f Null Hypothesis Number 5
i s 62.2167 and with 1 and 1782 degrees o f freedom, t h e t e s t i s
s i g n i f i c a n t a t .0000 l e v e l .
a t .01 l e v e l .

The Null Hypothesis Number 5 i s r e j e c t e d

The re fore , t h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e between f u l l time and

not f u l l time t e a c h e r s .
Table 4 . 8 shows t h a t th e means o f f u l l time and not f u l l
time t e a c h e r s ar e 9.3 and 8 . 2 , r e s p e c t i v e l y .
th e two groups i s approximately 1 p o i n t .

The d i f f e r e n c e between

Key: 1 E x c e lle n t
2 Good
3 Average
50 45 40 35 30 -

«o

CO

25 20

-

15 10

§
-

§

5 -

§

0

-

1973

1974

1975

1976

Figure 4. 3 . —P a t t e r n s o f Response Regarding A t t i t u d e Toward On-Campus Courses Among Students Who
Graduated in 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976.

99
TABLE 4 .7. —R esult o f T e s t in g Hypothesis Number 5 by One-Way
Analysis o f Variance.

Source
E f f e c t o f amount o f
t e a c h in g ( f u l l time
vs. p a r t time)

D.F.

Sum o f Squares

1

380.5517

Er ror

1782

10899.6904

Total

1783

11280.2421

F Ratio

62.2167

Significant
Level

.0000*

Before anal yzi ng Hypothesis Number 5 by one-way a n a l y s i s
o f v a r i a n c e , Cochran's Test f o r Homogeneity o f Variance between th e
f u l l time and not f u l l time groups was employed. The Cochran's
Test was .5239 and i t was s i g n i f i c a n t a t .08 l e v e l . Thus, t h e null
hypothesis o f homogeneity o f va r ia n c e s is r e t a i n e d a t .01 l e v e l .
T h e r e f o r e , th e assumption o f homogeneity o f v a r i a n c e was a s c e r t a i n e d
a t .01 l e v e l .

TABLE 4 . 8 . —Means, Standard D e v i a t i o n s , and Number o f Responses o f
Full Time and Not Full Time Teachers.

Group

Number o f
Responses

Mean

S.D.

Full Time

460

9.2522

2.3858

Not Full Time

597

8.1964

2.5027

1057

8.4686

Total

100
Ho:6:

There i s no i n t e r a c t i o n between le v e l o f te a c h in g
(elem entary and secondary s c h o o l) , and time o f
g rad u atio n on a t t i t u d e toward on-campus co u rses.

The Cochran T e st o f Homogeneity o f Variance o f th e e ig h t
groupings o f school and y e a rs o f g rad uation is .1636 and is s i g n i f i ­
cant a t .012.

T h e re fo re , th e assumption o f homogeneity o f v arian ce

was a s c e r ta in e d a t .01 l e v e l .
From Table 4 . 9 , th e F - t e s t o f th e i n t e r a c t i o n between y e a r
o f g ra d u a tio n and le v e l o f te a c h in g i s .166 and w ith 3 and 1500
d egrees o f freedom th e t e s t i s not s i g n i f i c a n t a t .01 l e v e l .
th e Null Hypothesis Nunber 6 cannot be r e j e c t e d .

Thus,

There i s no i n t e r ­

a c tio n between Year and Level o f Teaching.
Furtherm ore, both th e F - t e s t s f o r Year o f Graduation e f f e c t
and th e F - t e s t f o r Level o f Teaching e f f e c t a re s i g n i f i c a n t a t .01
le v e l.
Thus, th e a t t i t u d e toward on-campus e d u c a tio n courses i s not
th e same f o r t e a c h e r s who te a c h a t th e elem entary le v e l and fo r
te a c h e r s who te a c h a t th e secondary l e v e l .

This a t t i t u d e i s a ls o

not th e same a c ro ss th e f o u r y e a rs f o r te a c h e rs who graduated in
th e y e a r s 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976.
Table 4.10 shows means and s ta n d a rd d e v ia tio n s o f a t t i t u d e s
toward on-campus co u rses c l a s s i f i e d by y e a r s o f g rad u atio n and
l e v e l s o f te a c h in g .

The pooled means o f elem entary school and

secondary school a c ro ss th e f o u r y e a r s o f g ra d u a tio n a re 1.63 and
1 .5 6 , r e s p e c t i v e l y .

The d i f f e r e n c e o f th e two l e v e l s on a t t i t u d e

toward on-campus e d u c a tio n co u rses 1s only .07 and i t i s not
la r g e enough to be s i g n i f i c a n t l y Im portant.

When a study has a

TABLE 4.9.— Results of Testing Hypothesis 6 by Using Two-Way ANOVA.
Sun o f
Squares

D.F.

Mean
Square

37.846

3

12.615

17.848

.001*

6.001

1

6.001

8.491

.004*

.351

3

.117

.166

.920

44.289

7

6.327

8.951

.001

Residual

1060.212

1500

.707

T otal

1104.501

1507

.733

Source o f V a ria tio n

Year E f f e c t
Level o f Teaching E ffe c t
2-Way I n te r a c ti o n s Year
x Level o f Teaching
Explained

S ig n ific a n c e
of F

F

■
*The t e s t i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t .01 l e v e l .

TABLE 4 . 1 0 . --Means and Standard D eviations o f A ttitu d e s Toward Qn-Campus Courses,
C l a s s i f i e d by Year o f Graduation and Level o f Teaching.
Levels o f Teaching
Elementary

------------------------

Secondary

Total Mean
for

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Each Year

1973

1.84

.88

1.94

.98

1.95

1974

1.77

.88

1.97

.98

1.89

1975

1.60

.78

1.74

.83

1.68

1976

1.43

.71

1.54

.78

1.49

Total f o r each
le v e l o f te a c h in g :

1.63

1.56

103
la r g e sample s iz e l i k e t h i s s tu d y , any d i f f e r e n c e in t h e sample i s
bound to be s i g n i f i c a n t .

In t h i s s t i u a t i o n , although th e d i f f e r e n c e

i s s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , th e magnitude o f th e d i f f e r e n c e i s not
la r g e enough to be m eanin gfu lly s i g n i f i c a n t .
The pooled means o f te a c h e r s who have graduated in 1973,
1974, 1975 and 1976 were 1 .9 5 , 1 .89 , 1.68 and 1 .4 9 , r e s p e c t i v e l y .
Thus, i t seems l i k e t h e a t t i t u d e toward on-campus edu cation courses
seems to be more fa v o ra b le w ith th e in c r e a s e in y e a rs s in c e gradua­
tio n .

Examining th e means a c ro ss th e f o u r y e a r s , th e on ly two

meaningful d i f f e r e n c e s a re between th e y ears 1973 and 1976, and
between th e y e a rs 1974 and 1976 which have mean d i f f e r e n c e s o f .46
and .4 0 , r e s p e c t i v e l y .
Using S h e ffe ' Post Hoc procedure w ith .01 l e v e l , th e range
o f t h e c o n t r a s t between th e 1973 and 1976 grad uates i s from .198
to .722, and th e range o f th e c o n t r a s t between t h e 1974 and 1976
gradu ates is from .252 to 548.

Since both c o n t r a s t s exclude z e ro ,

t h e two c o n t r a s t s a re s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t a t .01 l e v e l .

There­

f o r e , t h e r e is a d i f f e r e n c e between a t t i t u d e toward on-campus courses
f o r stu d e n ts who have graduated in th e y ears 1973 and 1976, and
a ls o a d i f f e r e n c e between th e y e a rs 1974 and 1976.
Summary
Chapter IV p re se n te d th e a n a ly s is and f in d in g s o f th e d a ta
gained through responses t o th e 1806 r e s e a r c h q u e s tio n n a ir e s employed
in t h i s s tu d y .

There were 1057 responses o r a 59 p e rc e n t r e t u r n ,

104
w ith 485 C entral Michigan U n iv ersity r e tu rn s in 1976, 191 in 1975,
190 in 1974 and 191 in 1973.
Six re se a rc h hypotheses were analyzed and th e fin d in g s a re
summarized as fo llo w s:
Hypothesis I :

Rejected

There i s a d if f e r e n c e between th e a t t i t u d e toward
the s tu d e n t teach in g experience and th e a t t i t u d e
toward th e on-campus education courses f o r th e
1976 g rad u ates.
Hypothesis I I :

Rejected

The p a t t e r n s o f response about s tu d e n t teach in g
experiences f o r 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976 are
not th e same acro ss th e y e a r s .
Hypothesis I I I :

Rejected

The p a tte r n s o f response about off-campus courses
f o r 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976 a re not th e same
across th e y e a r s .
Hypothesis IV:

Rejected

The p a tte r n s o f response about on-campus courses
f o r 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976 a re not th e same
acro ss th e y e a r s .
Hypothesis V:

Rejected

The p a tt e r n s o f response between te a c h e r education
graduates who have f u l l time te a c h in g jo b s and
th o se who do not have f u l l tim e teach in g jobs on
value toward te a c h e r edu cation a re d i f f e r e n t .

105
Hypothesis VI:

Accepted

The p a t te r n s o f response on a t t i t u d e toward oncampus ed u catio n courses a re not th e same f o r
te a c h e r s who te a c h a t th e elem entary le v e l and f o r
te a c h e r s who te a c h a t th e secondary l e v e l . This
a t t i t u d e i s a ls o not th e same a cro ss th e fo u r y ears
f o r te a c h e r s who graduated in th e y e a rs 1973, 1974,
1975 and 1976.
The open ended
u n s tr u c tu r e d resp on ses

q u e s tio n s provided th e o p p o rtu n ity

for

re g a rd in g s tr e n g th s and weaknesses o f th e

follow ing a reas in t e a c h e r ed u c a tio n :

major f i e l d , minor f i e l d ,

on-campus edu catio n c o u rs e s , s tu d e n t t e a c h in g , and courses tak en in
cen ters.

There was a g r e a t amount o f v a r i e t y as well as r e p e t i t i o n

in th e s e respo n ses a c ro ss th e fo u r y e a rs from 1973 through 1976.
The fo llo w in g responses o ccu rred most o f te n :
Major F ield
S tre n g th s :
Weaknesses:

s u b je c t m a t t e r , i n s t r u c t o r s
s u b je c t m a t t e r , i n s t r u c t o r s

Minor F ield
S tre n g th s :
Weaknesses:

s u b je c t m a t t e r , i n s t u r c t o r s ,
r e l a t i o n s h i p t o major f i e l d
s u b je c t m a t t e r , i n s t r u c t o r s ,
r e l a t i o n s h i p to major f i e l d

On-Campus Education Courses
S tre n g th s :
Weaknesses:

im po rtant in fo rm atio n f o r te a c h in g
to o t h e o r e t i c a l , should be tak en
a f t e r some ex p e rie n c e in th e
classroom .

106

Student Teaching
S tre n g th s:

Weaknesses:

most im portant area in te a c h e r ed u catio n ,
working w ith c h il d r e n , p r a c t i c a l
ex p e rie n c e , su p e rv is in g t e a c h e r s ,
s u b je c t/g r a d e placement
too s h o r t (16 w eeks), more classroom
experience needed before s e n io r y e a r ,
placement (s u b je c t a re a /g ra d e level
and s u p e rv is in g te a c h e r)

Courses Taken in Centers
S tren g th s:
Weaknesses:

p r a c t i c a l a s s o c ia tio n during stu d e n t
teach ing
too time consuming w hile s tu d e n t
teach in g

I t is i n t e r e s t i n g to see t h a t many o f th e same responses
t h a t a re given as s tr e n g th s by some a re given as weaknesses by
o t h e r s , and t h i s was a very common o ccu rrence.
Chapter V p re s e n ts a summary o f t h i s study along w ith th e
r e p o r t o f th e fin d in g s and co n clu sio n s.
made f o r f u r t h e r study.

Recommendations a re a ls o

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION
AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This f i n a l ch ap ter begins with a summary o f th e study.

The

r e s u l t s o f th e in v e s t i g a ti o n w ill then be d iscu ssed and recommenda­
t i o n s f o r f u r t h e r research w ill be made.
Summary
The purpose o f t h i s study was to survey graduates o f 1973,
1974, 1975 and 1976 to determ ine t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward t h e i r
te a c h e r p re p a ra tio n in the follow ing are a s:
1.

How do graduates view t h e i r te a c h e r p re p a ra tio n
upon graduation?

2.

How do graduates view t h e i r te a c h e r p re p a ra tio n
a f t e r one y e a r , two years and th re e y ears follow in g
graduation?

3.

How do graduates value t h e i r p r e p a ra tio n in stu d e n t
te a c h in g as compared to education c o u rse s, o th e r
on-campus courses and off-campus courses?

4.

Do te a c h e rs with teach in g jobs value t h e i r p rep ara­
ti o n more than tho se w ithout te a c h in g jo b s?

5.

Do elem entary te a c h e rs value t h e i r education
courses d i f f e r e n t l y th an secondary te a c h e rs?

A review o f r e l a te d l i t e r a t u r e r e le v a n t to th e study was
p resen ted .

The h i s t o r i c a l background o f th e development o f te a c h e r

107

108
ed u catio n in c lu d in g s tu d e n t te a c h in g and s tu d e n t te a c h in g programs
a t C entral Michigan U n iv ersity was d e sc rib e d as well as th e r a t i o n a l e
f o r t h i s stu d y .

This r a t i o n a l e cen tered on one kind o f e v a lu a tio n

a v a i l a b l e to th e u n i v e r s i t y f o r a s s e s s in g th e q u a l i t y o f i t s te a c h e r
ed u catio n program, t h a t o f i t s g ra d u a te s.

The c r i t i c a l tim es f o r

e v a lu a tio n o f t e a c h e r s in t h i s stu dy were a t g rad u atio n and one,
two and t h r e e y e a rs l a t e r .
To a id in e v a lu a tin g th e impact o f t e a c h e r ed ucatio n pro­
grams a t C entral Michigan U n iv e rsity upon i t s g r a d u a te s , th e follow ­
ing re s e a rc h hypotheses were form ulated:
Research Hypothesis I
There i s no d if f e r e n c e between a t t i t u d e s o f 1976
gradu ates toward s tu d e n t te a c h in g exp erien ce and
t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward on-campus education courses
a t th e tim e o f g ra d u a tio n .
Research Hypothesis II
There i s no d i f f e r e n c e re p o rte d in 1976 in th e
a t t i t u d e toward th e s tu d e n t te a c h in g ex p erien ce
among s tu d e n ts who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974
and 1973.
Research Hypothesis I I I
There i s no d i f f e r e n c e r e p o rte d in 1976 in th e
a t t i t u d e toward off-campus courses among s tu d e n ts
who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974 and 1973.
Research Hypothesis IV
There i s no d i f f e r e n c e r e p o rte d in 1976 in th e
a t t i t u d e toward on-campus co u rses among s tu d e n ts
who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974 and 1973.

109
Research Hypothesis V
There i s no d if f e r e n c e in a t t i t u d e s o f te a c h e r
ed ucation graduates who have f u l l - t i m e te a c h in g
jo b s and those who do not have f u l l - t i m e te a c h in g
jo b s an d /o r have not ta u g h t toward te a c h e r educa­
t i o n programs.
Research Hypothesis VI
There i s no i n t e r a c t i o n between le v e l o f te a c h in g
(elem entary and secondary s c h o o l) , and time o f
g radu ation on a t t i t u d e toward on-campus co u rses.
Dr. Alan W. E l l s b e r g , a P ro fe s s o r o f Education and Off-Campus
S tudent Teacher S u pervisor a t C entral Michigan U n iv e r s ity , conducted
a study o f 635 respondents in 1973.

These respondents had j u s t

completed t h e i r la b o r a to ry exp erien ces as s tu d e n t te a c h e r s a t
C entral Michigan U n iv e rsity and completed an a t t i t u d e in v en to ry
designed by E lls b e rg which s o l i c i t e d p e rc e p tio n s o f t h e i r t r a i n i n g
f o r te a c h in g .

These d a ta were never re p o rte d but in s te a d intended

as t h e beginning o f a stu d y designed to a s s e s s a t t i t u d e s o f g rad uates
toward t h e i r undergraduate t e a c h e r p r e p a r a tio n .

Dr. E lls b e rg l e f t

C en tral Michigan U n iv e rs ity a f t e r th e i n i t i a l r e s e a r c h was begun.
Because th e u n i v e r s i t y was committed t o a follow -up stu d y o f i t s
t e a c h e r ed ucatio n g r a d u a te s , t h e p r e s e n t stud y was designed using
Dr. E llsb erg * s q u e s ti o n n a i r e in a d d itio n to a r e v i s io n developed by
th is w rite r.
Report o f Findings
Research Hypothesis I p o s tu la te d t h a t t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n c e
between a t t i t u d e s o f 1976 g rad u ates toward s tu d e n t te a c h in g

no
experiences and t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward on-campus edu catio n courses
a t th e time o f grad u atio n .

The hyp oth esis was r e j e c t e d .

For th e

two dependent v a r ia b le s o f Hypothesis Number 1, th e values 1, 2, 3
and 4 were assigned to respondent choices o f e x c e l l e n t , good,
adequate and poor, r e s p e c tiv e ly .

The sample mean o f th e d iff e r e n c e

between th e a t t i t u d e toward s tu d e n t te a c h in g and th e a t t i t u d e toward
on-campus educatio nal courses i s .5 6 , while th e sample stan d ard
d e v ia tio n and th e sample standard e r r o r are 1.05 and .003,
r e s p e c t iv e l y .
188.20.

The computed Z - t e s t f o r t e s t i n g t h i s hypothesis is

The c r i t i c a l values o f th e Z - t e s t , when th e p r o b a b i li t y o f

type I e r r o r is .1 0 , a re -1 .6 4 and +1.64 f o r a t w o - ta il t e s t .
Since th e Z - t e s t i s l a r g e r than th e c r i t i c a l v a lu e s , th e hypothesis
is r e j e c t e d and i t is concluded t h a t th e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e between
th e a t t i t u d e toward s tu d e n t teach in g and th e a t t i t u d e toward oncampus courses o f 1976 graduates a t th e time o f grad u atio n .
Research Hypothesis II p o s tu la te d t h a t t h e r e is no d iff e r e n c e
rep o rted in 1976 in th e a t t i t u d e toward th e s tu d e n t te a c h in g e x p e ri­
ence among s tu d e n ts who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974 and 1973.
d ata did not support th e hy p o th esis.

The

The raw chi square t e s t o f

homogeneity used f o r t e s t i n g t h i s hypothesis i s 169.70 and w ith 9
degrees o f freedom, th e t e s t i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t .0000 l e v e l .

Since

th e s i g n i f i c a n t le v e l o f t h i s hypothesis i s s e t a t .0 1 , i t i s con­
cluded t h a t th e p a tte r n s o f response about s tu d e n t teach in g e x p e r i­
ences f o r each y e a r o f graduation a re not th e same acro ss th e y e a r s .

m
Research Hypothesis I I I p o s tu la te d t h a t t h e r e i s no d i f f e r ­
ence r e p o rte d in 1976 in th e a t t i t u d e toward off-campus courses
among s tu d e n ts who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974 and 1973.
d id not su p p o rt th e h y p o th e sis .

The d a ta

The raw chi square t e s t o f homo­

g e n e ity used f o r t e s t i n g t h i s h yp oth esis i s 41.36 and w ith 9 degrees
o f freedom, t h e t e s t i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t .0000 l e v e l .

Since th e s i g ­

n i f i c a n t le v e l o f t h i s hypothesis was s e t a t .0 1 , i t was concluded
t h a t th e p a t t e r n s o f response about off-campus courses f o r each y e a r
o f grad u atio n a re not th e same.
Research Hypothesis IV p o s tu la te d t h a t t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n c e
re p o rte d in 1976 in th e a t t i t u d e toward on-campus courses among
s tu d e n ts who graduated in 1976, 1975, 1974 and 1973.
not sup p ort th e h y p o th e sis.

The d a ta did

The raw chi sq uare t e s t o f homogeneity

used f o r t e s t i n g t h i s hy po thesis i s 71 .3 3, and w ith 9 degrees o f
freedom, t h e t e s t i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t .0000 l e v e l .

Since th e s i g n i f i ­

c a n t le v e l o f t h i s hyp oth esis i s s e t a t .0 1 , i t was concluded t h a t
t h e p a t t e r n s o f response about on-campus courses f o r each y e a r o f
g rad u atio n a re not th e same.
Research Hypothesis V p o s tu la te d t h a t t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n c e
in a t t i t u d e s o f t e a c h e r ed u catio n g rad uates who have f u l l time
te a c h in g jo b s and th o se who do not have f u l l time te a c h in g jo b s and/
o r have not ta u g h t toward t e a c h e r ed u catio n programs.
not su p p o rt th e h y p o th e sis .

The d a ta did

The raw chi square t e s t o f homogeneity

used f o r t e s t i n g t h i s h y p o th esis i s 65.99.

Since th e r e f e r e n c e chi

square o f 3 degrees o f freedom and .01 le v e l i s 11.34 , th e chi square
t e s t o f homogeneity was s i g n i f i c a n t a t .01 l e v e l .

T h e re fo re , i t i s

112
concluded t h a t t h e p a t te r n s o f response between g rad uates o f 197375 and g rad uates o f 1976 a re not th e same.
Research Hypothesis VI p o s tu la te d t h a t t h e r e i s no

in te r­

a c tio n between le v e l o f te a c h in g (elem entary and secondary s c h o o l) ,
and time o f g rad u atio n on a t t i t u d e toward on-campus c o u rse s.
h ypothesis was accep ted .

The

The Cochran Test o f Homogeneity o f

V ariance o f th e e ig h t groupings o f school and y ears o f g rad uation i s
.1636 and i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t .012.

T h e re fo re , t h e assumption o f

homogeneity o f v a ria n c e was a s c e r ta in e d a t .01 l e v e l .

The F - t e s t

o f th e i n t e r a c t i o n between y e a r o f g rad uation and le v e l o f te a c h in g
is .166 and w ith 3 and 1500 degrees o f freedom, th e t e s t was not
s i g n i f i c a n t a t .01 l e v e l .
Level o f Teaching.

There is no i n t e r a c t io n between Year and

A lso, both t h e F - t e s t s f o r Year o f G raduation

e f f e c t and th e F - t e s t f o r Level o f Teaching e f f e c t a re s i g n i f i c a n t
a t .01 l e v e l .

Thus, th e a t t i t u d e toward on-campus e d u c a tio n courses

was not th e same f o r te a c h e r s who te a c h a t th e elem entary le v e l and
f o r te a c h e r s who te a c h a t th e secondary l e v e l .

This a t t i t u d e was

a ls o not th e same a cro ss t h e f o u r y e a rs f o r te a c h e r s who graduated
in th e y e a rs 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976.
D iscussion o f Findings
Research Hypothesis I was r e j e c t e d .

A t ti t u d e s toward s tu d e n t

te a c h in g exp erien ces were much more fa v o ra b le than toward on-campus
ed u catio n courses as r a te d by t h e 1976 g rad u ates a t th e time o f
g ra d u a tio n .

The m a jo rity o f respo nd ents had h ig h ly s a t i s f a c t o r y

s tu d e n t te a c h in g e x p erien ces which t i e d t o g e th e r a l l o f t h e i s o l a t e d

113
le a r n in g segments t h a t had taken p la c e e a r l i e r in t h e i r under­
graduate t e a c h e r e d u c a tio n .

They were o f te n unable t o understand

th e importance o f t h e i r on-campus ed u catio n courses due t o vario us
reasons such as la c k o f ex p erien ces w ith c h i l d r e n , classroom s, and
te a c h in g .

I t would be advantageous f o r th e s tu d e n t to have exposure

to as many f a c e t s o f a ctu al te a c h in g as p o s s ib le p r i o r to ta k in g oncampus ed u catio n co u rses.
Research Hypothesis II was r e j e c t e d .

The f a c t t h a t a more

fa v o ra b le a t t i t u d e i s expressed by g radu ates who a re c l o s e s t t o th e
s tu d e n t te a c h in g ex p erien ce r e f l e c t s th e im portance o f s tu d e n t
te a c h in g in t e a c h e r e d u c a tio n .

Most g rad u ates e a g e rly look forward

to t h e i r s tu d e n t te a c h in g and view t h i s ex p erien ce as a culm ination
to t h e i r undergraduate y e a rs o f te a c h e r p r e p a r a tio n .

The graduates

" le a rn by doing" w h ile te a c h in g and t h e r e f o r e view t h e i r r e s p e c tiv e
s tu d e n t te a c h in g l e s s f a v o ra b ly th e f u r t h e r th e y a re removed in time
from t h i s ex p e rie n c e .

Perhaps an accumulation o f t r i a l and e r r o r

te a c h in g ex p erien ce in c o rp o ra te d in undergraduate te a c h e r education
would le ss e n th e d ram atic impact o f s tu d e n t te a c h in g and promote a
more meaningful p r e p a r a tio n and t r a n s i t i o n i n to th e world o f
te a c h in g .
Research Hypothesis I I I was r e j e c t e d .

Off-campus courses

a re viewed most fa v o ra b ly by th o se gradu ates who a r e c l o s e s t t o th e
tim e o f g ra d u a tio n .

The off-campus courses a re tak en in co n ju n ctio n

w ith s tu d e n t te a c h in g in off-campus s tu d e n t te a c h in g c e n te r s and
t h e i r co n te n t i s u s u a lly b e n e f i c ia l to th e s tu d e n t te a c h in g e x p e r i ­
ence.

Because o f t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p , g e n e r a lly th e f u r t h e r removed

114

th e graduate i s from g r a d u a tio n , th e l e s s meaningful i s th e course
co n ten t o f off-campus co u rses.
Research Hypothesis IV was r e j e c t e d .

On-campus courses

r e f l e c t a l l o f th e courses taken as an undergraduate in te a c h e r
ed u catio n on campus and a re viewed most fa v o ra b ly by th e most re c e n t
g ra d u a te s.

But th ey a r e a ls o con sid ered o f e x c e l l e n t v alu e by most

o f th e g rad uates o f t h i s fo u r y e a r follow -up stu d y .

This r e f l e c t s

th e ongoing e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f course c o n te n t, methods o f i n s t r u c t i o n ,
i n s t r u c t o r s and th e o v e r a ll r e l a t i o n s h i p to th e t o t a l te a c h e r
p r e p a ra tio n programs.
Research Hypothesis V was r e j e c t e d .

Teacher ed u catio n

g rad uates who a re te a c h in g f u l l time a r e more f a v o ra b le in a t t i t u d e
toward t h e i r te a c h e r ed u catio n than a re te a c h e r ed ucation g rad u ates
who a re not te a c h in g f u l l tim e a n d /o r have not ta u g h t.

This would

tend t o sug gest t h a t t h e g r a d u a te s ' a t t i t u d e toward th e te a c h e r
p re p a ra tio n program was based on w hether a te a c h in g p o s it i o n was o r
was not s e cu red , although t h i s would be extrem ely d i f f i c u l t t o
determ ine.
Research Hypothesis VI was accep ted .

There i s no i n t e r a c t i o n

between e i t h e r elem entary o r secondary te a c h in g and tim e o f gradua­
t i o n on a t t i t u d e toward on-campus co u rse s .

No s i m i l a r i t y was found

t o sup po rt a common a t t i t u d e toward on-campus co u rses by both
elem entary and secondary t e a c h e r s .

A lso, no s i m i l a r i t y in a t t i t u d e

toward on-campus courses was found among t e a c h e r ed u catio n g rad u ates
o f 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976.

115
The r e s u l t s o f th e s e f i n d i n g s , w ith one e x c e p tio n , were
c o n s i s t e n t w ith th e w r i t e r ' s e x p e c ta tio n s which were based on
th e review o f l i t e r a t u r e , th e p i l o t study and personal ex p erien ce
in te a c h e r ed u catio n .

This one ex cep tio n i s th e f a c t t h a t on-

campus co urses were r a te d high ly by g rad u ates o f a l l fo u r y e a rs
o f t h i s study and not only th e 1976 g ra d u a te s .
Conclusion
I t i s e v id e n t from th e r e s u l t s o f t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n t h a t
new grad uates in te a c h e r ed ucation r e f l e c t d i f f e r e n t l y upon t h e i r
p re p a ra tio n than th o se who completed t h e i r programs b efo re them.
The f in d in g s in d ic a t e t h a t th e lon ger an in d iv id u a l is away from
sc h o o l, th e l e s s fa v o ra b le response i s u s u a lly accorded t h e te a c h e r
ed ucation program.

This may be due to th e f a c t t h a t knowledge

gained through th e v a rio u s p a r t s o f th e t o t a l te a c h e r ed ucation
program provides th e new grad u ate w ith an e s s e n t i a l b a s is f o r
te a c h in g .
In c o n c lu s io n , f in d in g s from t h i s study do not i n d i c a t e t h a t
C en tral Michigan U n iv e rsity should make major changes in i t s te a c h e r
ed u catio n program, nor does i t su gg est t h a t th e program should
remain in i t s p r e s e n t s t a t e .

The f in d in g s i n d i c a t e t h a t th e lo ng er

an in d iv id u a l i s away from s c h o o l, th e l e s s f a v o ra b le response i s
u s u a lly accorded th e t e a c h e r ed u catio n program.

H o p efu lly , th e

116
te a c h e r ed ucation program a t C entral Michigan U n iv e rs ity would bene­
f i t from some o r a l l o f th e recommendations t h a t fo llo w .
Recommendations
The fo llo w in g recommendations a re p resen ted based on t h i s
in v e stig a tio n :
1.

C entral Michigan U n iv e rsity should e s t a b l i s h an on-going

p lan f o r e v a lu a tin g i t s programs and i t s gradu ates in o r d e r to
improve e x i s t i n g te a c h e r ed ucation programs.

Q u e stio n n a ires could

be used an n u ally by gradu ates f o r c o n tin u al e v a lu a tio n o f in d iv id u a l
needs.
2.

Inno vativ e programs should be undertaken in t e a c h e r

e d u c a tio n , in c o r p o ra tin g g r a d u a te s ' su g g estio n s f o r changes in th e
t e a c h e r ed u catio n program.
3.

New methods o f adm ittance to te a c h e r ed u catio n should

be e s t a b l i s h e d , based on a combination o f i n te r v ie w s , g ra d e s , and
w r i t t e n e v a lu a tio n s o f te a c h e r c a n d id a te s .
4.

E a r l i e r in -d e p th ex p erien ces w ith c h ild r e n and te a c h in g

should be provided t e a c h e r ed u catio n c a n d id a te s .

These ex p erien ces

would p rovide b e t t e r u nd erstan d ing and ex p erien ce in t e a c h e r
ed u catio n p r i o r t o s tu d e n t te a c h in g .
5.

A l i a i s o n person in t e a c h e r ed ucation should m ain tain

c o n tin u a l c o n ta c t w ith te a c h e r ed u catio n s tu d e n ts , g r a d u a te s , oncampus t e a c h e r s , off-campus s tu d e n t te a c h e r s u p e rv is o rs and adm inis­
tra tio n .

This in d iv id u a l should promote e f f e c t i v e communication

among a l l concerned, undertake r e s e a r c h to determ ine te a c h e r needs,

117
implement new methods in te a c h e r ed u catio n and e s t a b l i s h b e n e f ic ia l
exp erien ces f o r undergraduates in t e a c h e r ed u catio n .
6.

C entral Michigan U n iv e rs ity should e s t a b l i s h one o r two

day workshops each sem ester f o r te a c h e r s who w ill be working w ith
s tu d e n t te a c h e r s .

This would provide th e time and s e t t i n g f o r

s t r e s s i n g th e importance o f t h e s u p e rv is in g te a c h e r r o le through a
c r e a t i v e workshop approach in v o lv in g p a s t and c u r r e n t s u p e rv is in g
t e a c h e r s , s tu d e n t t e a c h e r s , p r e - s t u d e n t t e a c h e r s , elem entary and
secondary school a d m in is tr a to r s and u n i v e r s i t y s tu d e n t te a c h in g
s u p e rv is o rs .

A lso, th e use o f v is u a l a i d s , r o l e p la y in g and d i s c u s ­

sion time should be in c lu d e d .

This workshop should be a meaningful

ex perience f o r f u tu r e s u p e rv is in g t e a c h e r s in o r d e r to in s u re th e
success o f t h i s most im portant phase o f t e a c h e r e d u catio n .
7.

This stu dy should be made a v a i l a b l e t o a l l ed u cato rs

involved w ith and concerned about t e a c h e r ed u catio n f o r th e purpose
o f improving th e te a c h e r ed u catio n program a t C entral Michigan
U n iv e rsity .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY
AACTE.

"Recommended Standards f o r Teacher Education: th e
A c c r e d ita tio n o f Basic and Advanced P re p a ra tio n Programs f o r
P ro fe s s io n a l School P e rso n n e l." The American A s so c ia tio n of
C olleges f o r Teacher E d u catio n . One Dupont C i r c l e ,
Washington, D.C., November 1969.

Albaugh, David Hinson. "The Perceived Value o f Student Teaching
Experiences as Determined by Graduates o f th e College o f
E du cation , Wayne S ta te U n iv e rsity in 1967-1968."
Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Wayne S ta te U n iv e r s ity , 1969.
B aer, George Thomas. "An E v alu atio n o f t h e Northern I l l i n o i s
U n iv e r s ity Undergraduate Elementary Education Program Based
on th e Opinions o f a S e le c te d Group o f I t s G radu ates."
Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Northern I l l i n o i s U n iv e r s ity ,
1973.
Baer, G. Thomas, and F o s te r , W alter S. "Teacher P re p a ra tio n —What
Graduates T ell Us." Research In E d u c atio n , Vol. 10,
J u ly 1975.
Ball a n t i n e , F r a n c is ; Rowland, Monroe; and W e th e r i ll, W illiam.
" P e rc e p tio n s o f Elementary School Teachers Trained a t San
Diego S t a t e C ollege w ith Respect t o t h e Value o f Several
Aspects o f T h e ir College P r e p a r a tio n ." Jo urnal o f Teacher
E d u c atio n , Vol. 17, Summer 1966.
B a te s , Donny Seymour. "An A nalysis o f th e Undergraduate Teacher
Education Programs a t th e U n iv e r s ity o f Alabama Based Upon
P e rc e p tio n s o f Former Graduates and T h e ir S u p e r v is o r s ."
Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n iv e rsity o f Alabama,
1974.
Beaty, E. "Follow-Up o f Teacher Education Graduates as a B asis f o r
I n s t i t u t i o n a l Improvement." Peabody Journal o f E d ucatio n ,
Vol. 46, March 1969.
B ry an t, Paul Dewayne. "An A naly sis o f th e A ttitu d e s o f Recent
Graduates Toward th e Secondary Teacher Education Program a t
Texas A & I U n iv e rs ity a t K i n g s v il l e ." Unpublished Ph.D.
d i s s e r t a t i o n , North Texas S t a t e U n iv e r s ity , 1973.

119

120
Campbell, Kenneth Claude. "An E valu atio n o f th e Undergraduate
Elementary and E arly Childhood Teacher Education Program a t
th e U n iv e rsity o f Georgia, Based on a Follow-Up Study o f
Teaching G rad u ates." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
U n iv e rsity o f G eorgia, 1970.
C a rp e n te r, James W. "Report o f a Survey o f Placement o f Teacher
Education Graduates o f Western Kentucky U n iv e rsity f o r
Academic Years o f 1969-70, 1970-71, 1971-72, and 1972-73."
American A s so c ia tio n o f C olleges f o r Teacher Education
B u l l e t i n , Vol. 27, No. 7, September 1974.
C entral Michiqan Colleqe o f Education Q u a r te rly , Vol. 48, No. 2,
C entral Michiqan Normal T ra in in g Manual, 1897-98.
C entral Michigan S t a te Normal C a ta lo g , 1897-98.
C entral S ta t e Teachers C ollege Yearbook, Vol. 46, No. 2, 1940.
C entral Michigan U n iv e r s ity .

Planning f o r th e F u tu r e , 1971-1972.

C entral Michiqan U n iv e r s ity B u l l e t i n s , 1897 t o 1973.
Cherniak, Mark, e t a l . "G uidelines f o r a More R e a lity Based Teacher
P re p a ra tio n Program f o r th e F u tu re ." Research In E d u c atio n ,
Vol. 10, August 1975.
C la rk , Kathleen and Mahood, Wayne. "A Study o f t h e Concern Levels
o f Teacher Education S tu d e n ts ." Research In E d u c atio n ,
Vol. 10, August 1975.
Crow, L e s te r D. and Crow, A lic e . The Student Teacher in th e Secondary
S chool. New York: David McKay Company, I n c . , 1964.
Dover, John W. The Experience o f S tudent T eaching.
Macmillan Company, 1964.

New York:

The

E d ig e r, Marlow. "The In flu e n c e o f t h e S tu den t Teacher on t h e P u p il,
Academically and S o c i a l l y , in S elected Elementary G rades."
D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , Vol. 24, 1964.
Edson, William H. and Hummel, Thomas J . How T h e ir C areers Began.
Education C areer Development O f f i c e , C ollege o f E ducation,
U n iv e rsity o f M innesota, August 1975.
E l l i s , Gordon Hansel. "A Summative E v alu atio n o f t h e Elementary
Teacher P r e p a ra tio n Program, School o f E d ucatio n , U n iv e rsity
o f C olorado, 1969-71." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
U n iv e rs ity o f Colorado, 1973.

121
E l l i s , Joseph and Radebaugh, Byron. A Recommended Plan f o r a FollowUp Study o f th e P ro fe s sio n a l Performance o f Graduates o f th e
C ollege o f E ducation, Northern I l l i n o i s U n iv e rsity and a
Report o f a F ield T e stin g o f t h a t P la n . College o f
E ducation, Northern I l l i n o i s U n iv e r s ity , September 1974.
Evans, Donald D. "E valuation o f P ro fe s sio n a l P re p a ra tio n as P er­
ceived by F i r s t Year Teachers Graduated by The U n iv e rsity o f
Montana, 1946-73." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
U n iv e rsity o f Montana, 1974.
Farnsw orth, Karl Smith. "An Evaluation o f th e P ercep tio n o f S e le c te d
Reference Groups as I t R elates to th e Secondary Teacher
Education Programs C u rre n tly Being Conducted a t Brigham Young
U n iv e r s ity ." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Brigham Young
U n iv e r s ity , 1968.
F i t z g e r a l d , S h e ila M. "A Career Development Study o f Elementary
School T each ers." Research In E d u cation , Vol. 9, June 1974.
Freeman, Donald J . ; B radley, Banks T . ; and B o rn s te in , Tina. Survey
o f Michigan S ta te U n iv e rsity Graduates o f Five S tu den t
Teaching Programs. College o f E ducation, D iv ision o f S tudent
Teaching and P ro fe s sio n a l Development, January 1979.
Fulp, Kenneth E. "What i s th e E f f e c t o f S tu d en t Teaching on th e
Achievement o f P u p ils?" In New Developments, R esearch,
and Experim entation in P ro fe s sio n a l E x p e rien ces. E dited by
C. Nash and Y. Lofthouse. B u l l e t i n No. 22. Cedar F a l l s ,
Iowa: The A sso ciatio n fo r S tudent Teaching, 1964.
Goddu, Roland J . B. and Ducharme, Edward R. "A Responsive TeacherEducation Program." Teachers C ollege Record, Vol. 72,
No. 3, February 1971.
Good, C a rte r V., ed. D ic tio n a ry o f E du cation .
H ill Book Co., I n c . , 1959.

New York:

McGraw-

G re e n ste in , Jack. "A Comparison o f Graduates o f th e C entral
Michigan U n iv e rsity Teacher I n te r n Program w ith Graduates
o f t h e Central Michigan U n iv e rsity Regular Teacher P re p a ra ­
t i o n Program." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Michigan
S t a t e U n iv e r s ity , 1969.
Havard, Harold Weldon. "A Follow-Up Study o f th e 1961-1968 Graduates
o f Howard Payne C ollege Who Obtained C e r t i f i c a t i o n to Teach."
Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Baylor U n iv e r s ity , 1970.

122
H ailey, Paul W ellesley. "The I d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f S p e c ific Areas o f
S tren g th and Weaknesses in Teacher Education Programs."
Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , The Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity ,
1973.
Hinch, Nylds R ichard, "A Study t o Compare t h e P erceptions t h a t
Student Teachers and Experienced Teachers Hold o f th e
E ffe c tiv e n e s s o f S elected Aspects o f Their P ro fessio n al
Education a t McNeese S ta te U n iv e r s ity ." Unpublished Ph.D.
d i s s e r t a t i o n , Michigan S ta te U n iv e rs ity , 1973.
Hopkins, Mark L. "A Follow-Up Study o f Recent Graduates o f th e
College o f Education, U n iv e rsity o f M issouri-Colum bia."
Research In Education, Vol. 6, A pril 1971.
Je n se n , D a rre ll Milo. "A Follow-Up Study o f Graduates o f th e
Secondary Teacher Education Program o f th e U n iv ersity o f
Iowa, 1966-1970." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , The
U n iv ersity o f Iowa, 1971.
Joyce, B. R. and Hodges, R. E. "R atio n ale f o r Teacher E ducation."
Elementary School J o u r n a l , Vol. 66, February 1966.
K a ise rsh o t, A lfred Leonard. "An A ppraisal o f th e Undergraduate
Business Teacher Education Program a t th e U n iv ersity o f
Nebraska: A Follow-Up o f th e G raduates, 1959-1969."
Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n iv ersity o f
Nebraska, 1970.
K essinger, Kenneth B l a i r . "An Appraisal o f S elected Aspects o f th e
Secondary Teacher Education Program a t Augustine C ollege,
Sioux F a l l s , South Dakota." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
U n iv e rsity o f South Dakota, 1975.
La Pray, Joel J . "An A naly sis o f th e Undergraduate Secondary
Teacher Education Program a t Montana S ta te U n iv e rsity as a
Means o f Curriculum Development." Unpublished Ph.D.
d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e rsity o f Utah, 1974.
Lemons, L. A. "Education Courses; Opinions D if f e r on T heir Value."
National Education A sso ciatio n J o u r n a l, Vol. 54, October
Mattson, Ronald Boyd. "An E v aluatio n o f t h e Teacher Education
Program a t Montana S ta te U n iv e rsity by Graduates o f t h a t
Program." Unpublished d o c to ra l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Montana S ta te
U n iv e r s ity , 1972.

123
May, Charles R andall. "An A p praisal o f th e Elementary Teacher
Education Program a t The Ohio S ta te U n iv e r s ity ." Unpublished
Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , The Ohio S t a t e U n iv e r s ity , 1967.
McCullough, J e r r y Jerome. "An E valuation o f th e Teacher Education
Program a t F ort Lewis C ollege: An Opinion Survey o f Teacher
Education Graduates w ith In -S e rv ic e E x perience." Unpublished
d o c to ra l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e rs ity o f Northern Colorado, 1970.
Mehta, Mohinder P au l. "A Study o f P re p a ra tio n Programs f o r
Secondary School E nglish Teachers a t th e U n iv e r s itie s and
Colleges o f Montana." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
U n iv e rsity o f Montana, 1970.
M o ff it, Thompson Carson. "An E v a lu a tio n o f th e Elementary Education
Program a t C entral Michigan U n iv e rs ity by Recent Graduates
o f t h a t Program." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Colorado
S t a t e U n iv e r s ity , 1967.
National Council f o r A c c r e d ita tio n o f Teacher Education. Standards
f o r A c c r e d ita tio n o f Teacher E ducation. Washinqton, D.C.:
NCATE, 1977.
N ational Education A sso c ia tio n Research D iv isio n . "On Teacher
P r e p a r a t i o n ." N ational Education A sso c ia tio n J o u r n a l ,
December 1963.
Nelson, Jack L. "Follow-Up Study o f G rad u ates." Improving College
and U n iv e rs ity Teaching, Vol. 12, No. 2, Spring 1964.
Newby, John Melvin. "P erc ep tio n s o f Graduates Regarding S elected
Aspects o f th e Spring Arbor College Program w ith Im p lic a tio n s
f o r Teacher E d u c atio n ." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
Michigan S ta te U n iv e r s ity , 1972.
O r n s te in , A llan C. "Some P o s s ib le Hazards In h e re n t in E valuatin g
Teacher Education Programs." Jo u rn al o f Teacher Education,
Vol. 23, F a ll 1972.
O rr, Paul G ., e t a l . "E valu atio n o f Graduates from B asic Programs."
N e w s le tte r. C ollege o f E d ucation , U n iv e r s ity o f Alabama,

T972:
Pane, Ike F ra n c is . "A Survey to Determine t h e Need f o r S p e c ia liz e d
P re -S e rv ic e and I n -S e rv ic e Programs f o r J u n io r High/Middle
School Teachers in t h e S t a t e o f N ebraska." Unpublished Ph.D.
d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n iv e rs ity o f Nebraska, 1973.

124

P a r n e l l , Ralph E rskine. "A Follow-Up Study o f th e 1966-1970
S ocial Science Secondary Education Graduates o f J a c k s o n v ille
S t a t e U n iv e r s ity ." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Auburn
U n iv e rs ity , 1972.
P e t e r s , Eldon N icklaus. "A Study to I n v e s ti g a t e t h e F e a s i b i l i t y o f
U t i l i z i n g E valuatio n Instrum ents as One Aspect o f th e Ongoing
E v aluatio n o f th e Teacher Education Program o f Upper Iowa
C o lle g e ." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e rsity o f
Northern Colorado, 1975.
P e t t i t , Maurice L. "What College Graduates Say About Education
C ourses." The Journal o f Teacher E d u catio n , Vol. 15,
June 1964.
P h a rr, George Ray. "The Study o f C e rta in S k i l l s and Competencies
Which a re Useful t o F i r s t Year Secondary T e ach ers."
Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e rsity o f Northern
Colorado, 1973.
P is o n i , Charles J . , S r. "A Comparative F acto r A n aly sis o f th e
Impact o f Two S tud en t Teaching Programs Upon th e Schools o f
Michigan w ith Im p lic a tio n s f o r th e E v a lu a tio n o f Teacher
Education Programs." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
Michigan S ta te U n iv e rs ity , 1977.
P r e i l , Joseph J . "The R e la tio n s h ip Between Student Teaching and
Teaching E f f e c ti v e n e s s ." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
New York U n iv e r s ity , 1968.
P re s to n , R. C. "Education Graduates View Education and Academic
C ou rses." School and S o c ie t y , Vol. 92, Summer 1964.
R iggs, Bob. "Schools o f Education in a P eriod o f D eclining and
Changing Student I n t e r e s t . " Research In E du cation , Vol. 10,
June 1975.
S a l l e y , H. E. "Ohio Survey: How S en iors in Education from Ohio
C olleges and U n i v e r s it i e s Rated T h e ir Undergraduate Teacher
P r e p a r a ti o n ." A udiovisual I n s t r u c t i o n , Vol. 10, Summer 1965.
S anders, John W. "Teacher Education Grads Speak Out: Assessment and
I m p lic a tio n s ." Research In E d u c atio n , Vol. 8, August 1973.
Smedley, Rande H. and Olson, George H. "Graduate Follow-Up S tu d ie s :
How Useful Are They?" Research In E d u catio n , Vol. 10,
December 1975.

125
Stanbrough, J u d ith Diane. "An E valuative Study o f th e P ro fe ssio n a l
Education Program as Perceived by Those Beginning Teachers
Who Were Prepared to Teach in Secondary Schools and Who Were
Graduated from or Recommended f o r C e r t i f i c a t i o n by th e
U n iv ersity o f Colorado During th e School Year 1969-1970."
Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e rsity o f Colorado, 1972.
"Standards f o r th e A c c re d ita tio n o f Teacher Education."
Council f o r A c c r e d ita tio n o f Teacher E ducation,
Washington, D.C., 1971.

National

Thompson, V a le rie Darlene. "Teachers' Evaluation o f T h e ir P rep ara­
t i o n to Teach: A Survey o f S e le c te d New York C ity P u b lic
Schools." Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , S t. Johns
U n iv e rsity , 1971.
Turner, Richard L. "An Overview o f Research in Teacher Education.
Teacher Education Forum S e r ie s . Vol. 2, No. 4 ." Research
In E du cation , Vol. 10, A pril 1975.
U n iv ersity o f Michigan, Alumni P r o f i l e s . "A Study o f 1971-72
R ec ip ien ts o f Elementary and Secondary P ro v isio n a l Teaching
C e r t i f i c a t e s from th e U n iv e rsity o f Michigan School o f
Education." October 1973.
U n iv e r s ity 's Teacher P re p a ra tio n Council. "Speak Up, Someone Is
L is te n in g ." Focus on Teachers C o lle g e , Vol. 6, No. 4,
March-April 1973.
W aite, Jean H. "A Comparative E valuation o f th e S e le c tio n P r a c tic e s
o f th e Teacher Education I n s t i t u t i o n s in th e Mountain S t a t e s . "
Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Brigham Young U n iv e rs ity ,
1970.
Walsh, Brother Stephen Vincent. "The Development o f a R atio n ale f o r
th e P re p a ra tio n o f Elementary T e ach ers." Unpublished Ph.D.
d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n iv ersity o f Texas, 1967.
Weddle, Edith George. "An Appraisal o f S e le c te d Aspects o f th e
Teacher Education Program a t E ast Texas S ta te U n iv e rsity
Based on a Follow-Up Study o f Beginning Elementary T each ers."
Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , East Texas U n iv e r s ity , 1971.
"What Teachers Think o f Teacher E ducation."
J o u r n a l , Vol. 41, March 1964.

Michigan Education

Wiersma, William and V e r g ie ls , John. " R e la tio n sh ip s Between Pro­
fe s s io n a l V a ria b le s: A Study o f Secondary Teacher Education
S tu d e n ts ." Jo u rn al o f Teacher E d ucation, Vol. 20, No. 4,
Winter 1969.

126

W illiam s, Herman V icto r. "E valuatio n o f Elementary Teacher
P r e p a ra tio n a t H eidelberg C o lle g e ." Unpublished Ph.D.
d i s s e r t a t i o n , Case Western Reserve U n iv e r s ity , 1969.
Yee, A lb e rt H. "What Should Modern, Urban S o ciety Expect o f Teacher
Education?" Education and Urban S o c ie t y , Vol. 2, May 1976.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A
DR. ALAN ELLSBERG'S ATTITUDE INVENTORY
OF PREPARATION FOR TEACHING

128

CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY
ATTITUDE INVENTORY OF PREPARATION FOR TEACHING
SECTION I:

IDENTIFICATION

1.
Last Name
2.

5
In itia l

F i r s t Name

=______________________
Social S e c u r ity Number

Address through which we can c o n ta c t you one y e a r from now.
Number

S tree t

C ity

S ta te

ZTp

3.

Year graduated________________________

4.

When w ill you (or did you) complete requirem ents f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n
(c irc le ):
December
May
August

5.

Type o f c e r t i f i c a t i o n held (or working tow ard):
Elementary
Secondary
Both________

6.

Are you p r e s e n tly teach in g f u l l time?

7.

Years ta u g h t:

8.

Major (s)______________________________ Mi nor (s)______________________

SECTION I I :
1.

0

1

2

3

4

Yes

No______

5____

ATTITUDES

At t h i s time how well do you th in k your p re p a ra tio n was in your:
Excellent

Good

Adequate

Poor

Very Poor

a.

Major F ield

____

____

____

____

____

b.

Minor F ield

____

____

____

____

____

c.

On-Campus Education
Courses

____

____

____

____

____

d.

Student Teaching in
th e Schools

____

____

____

____

____

e.

Courses Taken in
Centers

____

____

____

____

____

f.

Independent Study
Courses Taken in
Centers

____

____

____

____

____

129

130

2.

At t h i s tim e which o f th e s e terms b e s t d e s c rib e your a t t i t u d e about:
Very
Helpful

3.

4.

Of
Some Help

Of
L i t t l e Help

a.

Your Major F ield ______________ ____

____

____

b.

Your Minor F ie ld ______________ ____

____

____

c.

On-Campus Education
Courses

____

____

____

d.

Student Teaching in
th e Schools

____

____

____

e.

Courses Taken in Centers

____

____

____

f.

Independent Study
Courses taken in Centers

____

____

____

At t h i s tim e what do you p e rc e iv e t o have been t h e s tr e n g t h s o f :
(P lease use bottom o f page f o r e x tr a space i f needed)
a.

Your Major F ie ld _______

b.

Your Minor F ie ld ________________________________________________

c.

On-Campus Education Courses____________________________________

d.

Student Teaching in th e Schools________________________________

e.

Courses Taken in Centers_______________________________________

f.

Independent Study Courses Taken in Centers____________________

At t h i s time what do you p e rc e iv e t o have been th e weaknesses o f:
a.

Your Major F ie ld _______________________________________________

b.

Your Minor F ie ld _______________________________________________

c.

On-Campus Education Courses____________________________________

d.

S tud en t Teaching in th e Schools________________________________

e.

Courses Taken 1n Centers_______________________________________

f.

Independent Study Courses Taken in C enters____________________

APPENDIX B
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS (5-12) ADDED BY DICKINSON
TO THE ELLSBERG QUESTIONNAIRE INCLUDING THE
MOST FREQUENT GRADUATE RESPONSES OF
1973-1976

131

QUESTIONS 5 through 12: P lease i n d ic a te th e e x te n t to which Student
Teaching Seminars, Student Teaching, Other Education Courses,
Courses in your Major F ield and Courses in your Minor F ield which
you have had were help ful to you in each o f th e fo llow ing:

USE THE FOLLOWING CODE FOR QUESTIONS 5-12
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)

EXAMPLE:
5.

5.

*

Very helpful
Somewhat helpful
Undecided
Minimally helpful
Not helpful

(1)

(2 )

(3)

(4)

(5)

F u rth erin g your d e s ir e to teach :
a.

Student Teaching seminars

/

b.

Student Teaching

✓

c.

Other Education Courses

/

d.

Courses in Major F ield

e.

Courses in Minor F ield

—

------

___

J_ ______

F u rth erin g your d e s ir e to te a c h :

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

a.

Student Teaching seminars

___

___

___

___

___

b.

Student Teaching____________________ ___

___

___

___

___

c.

Other Education Courses_____________ ___

___

___

___

___

d.

Courses in Major F ield

___

___

___

___

e.

Courses in Minor F ield

___

132

133

6.

7.

8.

9.

Developing your a b i l i t y t o plan and
o rg an ize i n s t r u c t i o n :

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

a.

S tudent Teaching Seminars

___

___

___

___

___

b.

Student Teaching

___

___

___

___

___

c.

Other Education Courses

d.

Courses in Major F ield

e.

Courses in Minor F ield

Understanding th e d i f f e r e n c e s in
s tu d e n ts a t d i f f e r e n t grade le v e l s
and in d i f f e r e n t s u b je c t a r e a s :

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

a.

S tudent Teaching Seminars

___

___

___

___

___

b.

S tudent Teaching

___

___

___

___

___

c.

Other Education Courses

___

___

___

___

___

d.

Courses in Major F ield

___

___

___

___

___

e.

Courses in Minor F ield

Developing your a b i l i t y to
implement i n s t r u c t i o n :

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

a.

S tudent Teaching Seminars

___

___

___

___

___

b.

S tudent Teaching

___

___

___

___

___

c.

O ther Education Courses

d.

Courses in Major F ie ld

e.

Courses in Minor F ie ld

P rep arin g you to use audio v is u a l
a id s e f f e c t i v e l y :

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

a.

___

___

___

___

___

S tud en t Teaching_____________________ ___

___

___

___

___

S tudent Teaching Seminars

c.

Other Education Courses

d.

Courses in Major F ie ld

e.

Courses in Minor F ie ld

134

10.

11.

12.

Preparing you to ev alu ate stu d en t
le a rn in g :

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

a.

Student Teaching Seminars

___

___

___

___

___

b.

Student Teaching____________________ ___

___

___

___

___

c.

Other Education Courses_____________ ___

___

___

___

___

d.

Courses in Major F ield

___

___

___

___

___

e.

Courses in Minor F ield

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

a.

Student Teaching Seminars___________ ___

___

___

___

___

b.

Student Teaching

___

___

___

___

___

c.

Other Education Courses

___

___

___

___

___

d.

Courses in Major F ield

___

___

___

___

___

e.

Courses in Minor F ield

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Understanding your d u t i e s as a
te a c h e r in a d d itio n to actu al
teach in g in th e classroom:

Providing you with th e a b i l i t y to
e v a lu a te your own te a c h in g :
a.

Student Teaching Seminars

___ ___

___

___

___

b*

Student Teaching

___

___

___

___

___

c.

Other Education Courses

___

___

___

___

___

d.

Courses in Major F ield

___

___

___

___

___

e.

Courses in Minor F ield

QUESTIONS 5 through 12: P lease i n d i c a te th e e x te n t to which Student
Teaching Seminars, Student Teaching, Other Education C ourses,
Courses in your Major F ie ld and Courses in your Minor F ield
which you have had were h elp fu l to you in each o f th e follo w in g:
Use th e fo llow in g code f o r Questions 5-12:
(1)
(2)
(3;
(4)
(5)
5.

Very h elp fu l
Somewhat h e lp fu l
Undecided
Minimally help fu l
Not h elp fu l

F u rth e rin g your d e s i r e to te a c h :
- S tudent Teaching was th e most fre q u e n t Very Helpful resp on se.

6.

Developing your a b i l i t y t o plan and org anize i n s t r u c t i o n :
- Student Teaching was th e most f re q u e n t Very Helpful response.

7.

Understanding th e d if f e r e n c e s in s tu d e n ts a t d i f f e r e n t grade
le v e ls and in d i f f e r e n t s u b je c t a re a s :
- Student Teaching was th e most f re q u e n t Very Helpful resp o n se.

8.

Developing your a b i l i t y to implement i n s t r u c t i o n :
- Student Teaching was th e most fre q u e n t Very Helpful

9.

resp on se.

P rep arin g you to use audio v isu a l a id s e f f e c t i v e l y :
- Education Courses followed c l o s e ly by Student Teaching were
th e most fre q u e n t Very Helpful resp o n ses.

10.

P rep arin g you to e v a lu a te s tu d e n t le a r n in g :
- Education Courses were th e most f re q u e n t Very Helpful resp on se.

11.

Understanding yo ur d u t i e s as a t e a c h e r in a d d itio n to a c tu a l
te a c h in g in th e classroom .
- Student Teaching was t h e most fre q u e n t Very Helpful resp o n se.

12.

Providing you w ith th e a b i l i t y to e v a lu a te yo ur own te a c h in g :
- Student Teaching was th e most fre q u e n t Very Helpful respo nse.

APPENDIX C
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS (13-25) ADDED BY DICKINSON
TO THE ELLSBERG QUESTIONNAIRE INCLUDING
FREQUENTLY STATED RESPONSES AND
REACTIONS TO QUESTIONS

136

QUESTIONS 13 through 22: P lease provide your general r e a c t i o n to
s e le c t e d p o rtio n s o f t h e C entral Michigan U n iv ersity te a c h e r
ed u catio n program by completing th e follow in g s ta te m e n ts :

13.

In g e n e r a l, my s tu d e n t te a c h in g seminars were

14.

In g e n e r a l, my on-campus ed ucation courses were

15.

In g e n e r a l , courses in my major f i e l d were

16.

In g e n e r a l, courses in my minor f i e l d were

17.

In g e n e r a l, my s tu d e n t te a c h in g seminars compared to my
on-campus methods co u rses were __________________________

18.

My major f i e l d i n s t r u c t o r s i n comparison w ith my ed u catio n
i n s t r u c t o r s w e r e ________________________ __________________

19.

In g e n e r a l , my s tu d e n t te a c h in g ex p e rie n c e was

137

138
20.

In g e n e r a l, my stu d en t teach in g placement was

21.

In g e n e r a l, my stu d e n t teach in g s u p e rv is o r was

22.

The most e x c i t i n g p a r t o f my te a c h e r education program was

23.

The s in g le most e f f e c t i v e area o f my undergraduate te a c h e r
education program was ______________________________________

24.

I f I were to suggest a s in g le major improvement fo r my under­
graduate te a c h e r ed ucatio n program i t would be _______________

25.

During th e p a s t few y e a r s , t h e supply o f new te a c h e r s has
exceeded th e demand in many f i e l d s , th u s c r e a t i n g a rep o rted
s u rp lu s o f te a c h e r s . I f C entral Michigan U n iv e rsity were to
r e a c t by reducing t h e number o f graduates i t recommends f o r
c e r t i f i c a t i o n each y e a r , how would you propose t h a t in d iv id u a ls
be s e le c t e d f o r admission to th e program?

139
The open-ended q u e s tio n s , 13 through 22 o f th e q u e s tio n n a ir e
were most o f te n completed w ith s in g l e words or s h o rt p h rases.

Some

o f th e most f re q u e n tly s ta t e d responses o r types o f r e a c tio n s a re as
fo llo w s:

13.

In g e n e r a l, my s tu d e n t te a c h in g seminars were _______________
This q u e stio n was most o f te n answered w ith a negative
response and viewed as to o time consuming and i r r e l e v a n t
w hile s tu d e n t te a c h in g . This q u e s tio n was answered w ith
a p o s i t i v e response only when a d i r e c t r e l a t io n s h i p in
seminar co n ten t t o s tu d e n t teach in g was r e a l i z e d by th e
grad uate.

14.

In g e n e r a l, my on-campus education courses were ___________
Mainly p o s it i v e responses in clu d in g mention o f c o n te n t,
methods o f i n s t r u c t i o n , i n s t r u c t o r s and r e l a t i o n s h i p to
te a c h e r education were s t a t e d by th e g radu ate.

15.

In g e n e ra l, courses in my major f i e l d were __________________

16.

In g e n e ra l, courses in my minor f i e l d were __________________
Both o f th e s e q u e s tio n s were answered s i m i l a r l y . There
tended t o be s tr o n g e r p o s it i v e comments given p e r ta in in g
to e i t h e r major courses o r minor courses depending on
w hether th e main i n t e r e s t o f th e graduate was w ith in
th e major o r minor a re a .

17.

In g e n e r a l, my s tu d e n t teach in g seminars compared t o my oncampus methods courses w e r e _______________________ .
S tudent te a c h in g seminars were given th e higher r a t i n g
o nly when th e s tu d e n t te a c h in g seminars were d i r e c t l y
r e l a t e d t o t h e accompanying s tu d e n t te a c h in g ex perience.

140
18.

My major f i e l d i n s t r u c t o r s in comparison w ith my ed u catio n
i n s t r u c t o r s w e r e _______________________.
Major f i e l d i n s t r u c t o r s u s u a lly receiv ed a h ig h er
r a t i n g . Reasons given in c lu d e d : more concerned,
more m eaningful, and more im portant r e l a t i o n s h i p
t o e x p e c ta tio n s in t e a c h e r ed u catio n .

19.

In g e n e r a l , my s tu d e n t te a c h in g ex p erien ce was ____________
This q u e s tio n re c e iv e d p r im a r ily e n t h u s i a s t i c s in g l e
word p o s i t i v e comments as expressed by th e respo nd ents.
Words such as e x c e l l e n t , t e r r i f i c , and g r e a t were
commonly s t a t e d .

20.

In g e n e r a l, my s tu d e n t te a c h in g placement was _____________
A h ig h ly p o s i t i v e response was given when th e g rad uate
r e l a t e d w ell w ith t h e s u p e rv is in g t e a c h e r , enjoyed th e
assig n ed grade l e v e l / s u b j e c t a r e a , r e a l i z e d th e
im portance o f t h e placement and enjoyed te a c h in g . A
la r g e m a jo r ity o f g ra d u a te s gave p o s i t i v e r e a c tio n s
to t h i s q u e s tio n .

21.

In g e n e r a l, my s tu d e n t te a c h in g s u p e rv is o r was _______________
Strong p o s i t i v e comments were s t a t e d when th e u n i v e r s i t y
s u p e rv is o r showed t h a t he cared about th e success o f th e
in d iv id u a l s tu d e n t t e a c h e r . This was shown in sta te m e n ts
r e f l e c t i n g e f f e c t i v e s tu d e n t te a c h in g sem in ars, r a p p o rt
w ith th e s tu d e n t t e a c h e r and th e s u p e rv is in g t e a c h e r ,
nunber o f v i s i t s f o r o b serv in g s tu d e n t te a c h in g and
a s s i s t a n c e given t h e s tu d e n t te a c h e r .

22.

The most e x c i t i n g p a r t o f my t e a c h e r ed u catio n program
w a s _____________________ .
The most o f te n s t a t e d response was s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g .

23.

The s in g l e most e f f e c t i v e a re a o f my undergraduate te a c h e r
e d u c a tio n program w a s _______________________.
The most commonly given re sp o n s e , alth ou gh not
e n t i r e l y a c c u ra te in reg ard t o th e q u e s ti o n , was
s tu d e n t t e a c h i n g .

141
24.

I f I were to su g g est a s in g le major improvement f o r my
undergraduate t e a c h e r ed u catio n program i t would be_____
The m a jo r ity o f responses r e l a t e d t o : e a r l i e r
s tu d e n t t e a c h in g , more work w ith c h ild re n in th e
school s e t t i n g , improvement in ed ucation c o u rs e s ,
and b e t t e r communication between s tu d e n t s ,
i n s t r u c t o r s and a d m in is tr a to r s in te a c h e r ed u catio n .

25.

During th e p a s t few y e a r s , th e supply o f new te a c h e r s has
exceeded th e demand in many f i e l d s , th u s c r e a t in g a re p o rte d
su rp lu s o f t e a c h e r s . I f C entral Michigan U n iv e rs ity were to
r e a c t by reducing t h e number o f g rad u ates i t recommends f o r
c e r t i f i c a t i o n each y e a r , how would you propose t h a t i n d i ­
v id u a ls be s e le c t e d f o r admission to th e program?___________
The most t y p i c a l responses were: grade p o i n t , p re ­
adm ission c o u n selin g and t e s t i n g , and in te rv ie w s
concerning a l l phases o f t e a c h e r ed u catio n by
members o f th e School o f Education.

APPENDIX D
ATTITUDE INVENTORY OF PREPARATION FOR
TEACHING USED IN THIS STUDY

142

CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY
ATTITUDE INVENTORY OF PREPARATION FOR TEACHING
SECTION I:
1.
2.

IDENTIFICATION

^
i
Last Name

First'Nam e

In itia l

_________________
S o cial S e c u r ity Number

Address through which we can c o n ta c t you one y ear from now.
Number

S tree t

C ity

S ta te

Zip’

3.

Year graduated________________________

4.

When w i l l you (or did you) complete requirem ents f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n
(c irc le ):
Decarter
May
August

5.

Type o f c e r t i f i c a t i o n held (or working tow ard):
Elementary
Secondary
Both________

6.

Are you p r e s e n t l y te a c h in g f u l l tim e?

7.

Years ta u g h t:

8.

Major (s)_______________________________M inor(s)______________________

SECTION I I :
1.

0

1

2

3

4

Yes

No______

5____

ATTITUDES

At t h i s time how well do you th i n k your p r e p a r a tio n was in your:
Excellent

Good

Adequate

Poor

Very Poor

a.

Major F ield

____

____

____

____

____

b.

Minor F ie ld

____

____

____

____

____

c.

On-Campus Education
Courses

____

____

____

____

____

d.

S tu dent Teaching in
th e Schools

____

____

____

____

____

e.

Courses Taken in
Centers

____

___ _

____

____

____

f.

Independent Study
Courses Taken in
C enters

____

____

____

____

____

143

144

2.

At t h i s time which o f th e se terms b e s t d e s c rib e your a t t i t u d e about:
Very
Helpful

Of
Some Help

Of
L i t t l e Help

a.

Your Major F ield

____

____

____

b.

Your Minor F ield______________ ____

____

____

c.

On-Campus Education
Courses

____

____

____

d.

Student Teaching in
th e Schools

____

____

____

e.

Courses Taken in Centers

____

____

____

f.

Independent Study
Courses taken in Centers

____

____

____

At t h i s time what do you p e rc e iv e t o have been th e s tr e n q th s o f:
(P lease use bottom o f page f o r e x tr a space 1f needed)

4.

a.

Your Major F ield

b.

Your Minor F ield

c.

On-Campus Education Courses

d.

S tudent Teaching in th e Schools

e.

Courses Taken in Centers

f.

Independent Study Courses Taken in Centers

At t h i s time what do you p e rc e iv e t o have been th e weaknesses o f:
a.

Your Major F ield

b.

Your Minor F ield

c.

On-Campus Education Courses

d.

S tudent Teaching in t h e Schools

e.

Courses Taken in Centers

f.

Independent Study Courses Taken in C enters

QUESTIONS 5 through 12: P le a se i n d i c a t e th e e x t e n t to which Student
Teaching Seminars, S tudent Teaching, Other Education C ourses,
Courses in your Major F ield and Courses in your Minor F ie ld which
you have had were h e lp fu l to you in each o f t h e fo llo w in g :

USE THE FOLLOWING CODE FOR QUESTIONS 5-12
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)

Very helpfu l
Somewhat h elp fu l
Undecided
Minimally h elp fu l
Not h elp fu l

EXAMPLE:
5.

5.

( 1)

(2 )

(3)

(4)

(5)

F u rth e rin g your d e s i r e to te a c h :
a.

S tudent Teaching seminars

✓

b.

S tudent Teachinq

✓

c.

Other Education Courses

d.

Courses in Major F ield

e.

Courses in Minor F ie ld

✓
/

F u rth e rin g your d e s i r e to te a c h :

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

a.

S tudent Teaching seminars

___

___

___

___

___

b.

S tud en t Teaching

___

___

___

___

___

c.

O ther Education Courses_____________ ___

___

___

___

___

d.

Courses in Major F ie ld

___

___

___

___

e.

Courses in Minor F ie ld

___

145

146

6.

Developing your a b i l i t y to p lan and
o rg a n iz e i n s t r u c t i o n :

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

a.

S tudent Teaching Seminars___________ ___

___

___

___

___

b.

Student Teaching________________________

___

___

___

___

c.

Other Education Courses

(1)

(2 )

( 3)

(4)

(5)

a.

S tu den t Teaching Seminars___________ ___

___

___

___

___

b.

S tu dent Teaching

___

___

___

___

___

c.

Other Education Courses

___

___

___

___

___

d.

Courses in Major F ield

___

___

___

___

___

e.

Courses in Minor F ield

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

d * Courses in Major F ield
e.
7.

8.

9.

Courses in Minor F ield

U nderstanding th e d if f e r e n c e s in
s tu d e n ts a t d i f f e r e n t grade l e v e ls
and in d i f f e r e n t s u b je c t a r e a s :

Developing your a b i l i t y to
implement i n s t r u c t i o n :
a.

S tudent Teaching Seminars

___

___

___

___

___

b.

S tudent Teaching________________________

___

___

___

___

c.

Other Education Courses

___

___

___

___

___

d.

Courses in Major F ie ld

___

___

___

___

___

e.

Courses in Minor F ield

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

P re p a rin g you to use audio v isu a l
a id s e f f e c t i v e l y :
a.

S tudent Teaching Seminars

___

___

___

___

___

b.

S tudent Teaching

___

___

___

___

___

c.

Other Education Courses

d.

Courses in Major F ield

e.

Courses in Minor F ield

147

10.

11.

12.

P rep arin g you to e v a lu a te s tu d e n t
le a r n in g :

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

a.

S tudent Teaching Seminars___________ ___

___

___

___

___

b*

S tudent Teaching

___

___

___

___

___

c.

Other Education Courses_____________ ___

___

___

___

___

d.

Courses in Major F ield

___

___

___

___

e.

Courses in Minor F ield

a.

S tudent Teaching Seminars

b.

S tudent Teaching

c.

Other Education Courses

d.

Courses in Major F ield

e.

Courses in Minor F ield

Understanding your d u t i e s as a
t e a c h e r in a d d itio n t o a c tu a l
te a c h in g in th e classroom :
a.

S tud en t Teaching Seminars

b.

S tud en t Teaching

c.

Other Education Courses

d.

Courses in Major F ield

e.

Courses in Minor F ield

P rov idin g you w ith th e a b i l i t y to
e v a lu a te your own te a c h in g :

___

148
QUESTIONS 13 through 22: P lease provide your general r e a c t i o n to
s e le c t e d p o rtio n s o f th e C entral Michigan U n iv e rsity te a c h e r
ed u catio n program by com pleting th e fo llo w ing sta te m e n ts :

13.

In g e n e r a l, my s tu d e n t te a c h in g seminars were ________________

14.

In g e n e r a l, my on-campus ed ucation courses were

15.

In g e n e r a l, courses in my major f i e l d were

16.

In g e n e r a l, courses in my minor f i e l d were

17.

In g e n e r a l, my s tu d e n t te a c h in g seminars compared to my
on-campus methods co urses were __________________________

18.

My major f i e l d i n s t r u c t o r s in comparison w ith my ed u catio n
i n s t r u c t o r s were

19.

In g e n e r a l, my s tu d e n t te a c h in g ex p erien ce was

149
20.

In g e n e r a l, my s tu d e n t te a c h in g placement was

21.

In g e n e r a l, my s tu d e n t te a c h in g s u p e rv is o r was

22.

The most e x c i t in g p a r t o f my te a c h e r edu cation program was

23.

The s i n g l e most e f f e c t i v e are a o f my undergraduate te a c h e r
ed u catio n program was ______________________________________

24.

I f I were to sug gest a s in g l e major improvement f o r my under­
grad uate te a c h e r ed ucation program i t would be _______________

25.

During th e p a s t few y e a r s , t h e supply o f new t e a c h e r s has
exceeded th e demand in many f i e l d s , th u s c r e a t in g a rep o rte d
s u rp lu s o f t e a c h e r s . I f C entral Michigan U n iv e rsity were to
r e a c t by reducing t h e number o f g rad uates i t recommends f o r
c e r t i f i c a t i o n each y e a r , how would you propose t h a t in d iv id u a ls
be s e le c t e d f o r adm ission t o th e program?

APPENDIX E
LETTER TO STUDENT TEACHING SUPERVISORS

150

CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY
A p r i l 30, 1976

To:
From:
S u b je c t:

All Student Teaching S u p erv iso rs
Wm. R. Dickinson
C.M.U. Follow-Up Study and Doctoral D i s s e r t a t i o n .

You w i l l n o tic e t h a t th e o r i g i n a l format o f A1 E l l s b e r g 's Follow-Up
Study has been g r e a t l y expanded. The f i r s t fo u r q u e s tio n s have been
r e ta in e d in t h e i r o r i g i n a l form w ith twenty-one new q u e s tio n s being
added. The e n t i r e i n s t r u n e n t has been f i e l d t e s t e d , r e v is e d and
approved by my d o c to ra l committee.
I would g r e a t l y a p p r e c ia te your c o o p eratio n reg ard in g th e fo llo w in g :
1.

Have a ] 2 o f your s tu d e n t te a c h e r s f i l l o u t a
q u e s tio n n a ir e p r i o r to May 14, 1976.

2.

Bring them to me on May 14, 1976 when we meet on
Campus.

3.

Explain t h e

fo llo w in g to th e s tu d e n t te a c h e r s :

a.

This i s a follow -up s tu d y . T h e re fo re , we need
t h e i r names and s o c ia l s e c u r i t y numbers to fo llo w -u p .
This i s th e o n ly re a so n . T heir r e p l i e s w ill be used
f o r no o t h e r reason than f o r t h i s s tu d y , and t h e i r
in d iv id u a l answers w ill be kept c o n f i d e n t i a l .

b.

The ad dress we want i s where w e 're most l i k e l y to
g e t a l e t t e r to them in May 1977.

c.

We w i l l t r y t o s ta y in c o n ta c t w ith them u n t i l 1978.

d.

T h e ir r e p l i e s w i l l be compared w ith (1) th o se
c e r t i f i e d each May between 1973 and 1978, and
(2) t h e i r own sta te m e n ts through 1978.

e.

They w i l l r e c e iv e summaries o f o u r f in d in g s each May.

I f you have any q u e s ti o n s , p le a s e c a l l me a t (313) 278-5868 between
1-4 p.m. Monday through F rid ay .
Thank you very much!
151

APPENDIX F
LETTER TO GRADUATES

152

CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY

July 1976
Dear Former S tud ent Teacher:
You f i l l e d o u t an e v a lu a tio n form o f your C entral Michigan U n iv e rs ity
t r a i n i n g to te a c h in May o f 1973, in 1974 and /or 1975.
Now we a re back t o ask you to co n tin u e your much a p p re c ia te d
c o o p e ra tio n .
Would you p le a s e ta k e a few m inutes r i g h t now, complete th e enclosed
" A ttitu d e Inventory" and mail i t back to us in th e en closed s e l f addressed stamped envelope?
Our stud y now has been published under th e t i t l e o f "Changes in
S tu d en t T each ers' A ttitu d e s Toward t h e i r C entral Michigan U n iv e rsity
T ra in in g f o r th e Teaching P r o fe s s io n ."
This ongoing stu d y i s v a lu a b le because yo ur o p in io n s help th e School
o f Education plan more e f f e c t i v e l y t o meet s tu d e n t needs.
I f you a r e i n t e r e s t e d in r e c e iv in g th e major f in d in g s o f t h i s s tu d y ,
p le a s e f i l l o u t t h e t e a r s h e e t a t t h e bottom and r e t u r n w ith your
q u e s tio n n a i r e .
In o rd e r to co n tin u e t o study changes in a t t i t u d e s , we need to hear
from you, so p le a s e ta k e th e time now to give us you r valued o p in io n s .
Thank you very much!
S in c e r e ly y o u r s ,
William R. Dickinson
Research D ir e c to r
P le a se send me t h e major fin d in g s o f "Changes in S tud en t T eachers'
A t t i t u d e s Toward T h e ir C entral Michigan U n iv e rs ity T ra in in g f o r th e
Teaching P r o f e s s io n ." Thank you. [PLEASE PRINT]

L ast N
Number

a

m

e

S tre e t

F

i

r

s

t

Name

C ity
153

Middle I n i t i a l
S tate

Zip