For the 11Th Grade. a Pretest-Post Test Duster Groups Was Used to Estimate
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DOCUMENT RESUME VT 007 031 ED 022 965 . 08 By- Maley, Donald; Mietus, Walter S. THE INPLEKNTATION AND FURTHERDEVELOPMENT OF EXPERIMENTAL CLUSTERCONCEPT PROGRAMS THROUGH ACTUAL FIELD TESTING ANDEVALUATION AT THE SECONDARY SCHOOLLEVEL. THE CLUSTER CONCEPT PROJECT. PHASE III. INTERIM REPORT.- Spons Agency-Office of Education (DI-EW),Washington, D.C. Bureau No- BR- 7-0853 Pub Date Aug 68 Grant-OEG-0-8-000853-1865(085) Note 438P. FORS Price MF-S1.75 HC-S17.60 Descrrors-ACHEVEMENT TESTS, BUILDINGTRADES, COGNITIVE ABILITY,COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS, CONWa. GROUPS, *CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT,ELECTRICAL OCCUPATIONS, EXPERIMENTALGROUPS, *EXPERMTAL PROGRAMS, GRAM 11, HIGHSCHOOL STUDENTS, METAL WORKINGOCCtPATIONS, *OCCUPATIONAL CLUSTSRS, PILOT PROJECTS,PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS, *PROGRAMEVALUATION, QUESTIONNAIRES, *TRADE AND INDUSTRIAL EDUCATION,VOCATIONAL INTERESTS Identifiers- CCP, Cluster Concept Program, Maryland The Cluster Concept Program invocational education, a programfor the 11 th and 12th grades, is designed to prepareyouth for entry level capability in avariety of related occupations rather than a specific occupation.Phase III of research with the program was theevaluation of the first year of experimentationwith the programs for the 11th grade. A pretest-post testresearch design with fourconttol and four experimental construction cluster groups,four control and threeexperimental metal fabrication duster groups, and three controland three experimentalelectromechanical duster groups was used to estimatethe program effectiveness.Newly developed measurement instruments andstandardized tests were used to estimatechanges in selected rognitive, affective, and psychomotorbehaviors. Obiectives were attained in varying degrees withsignificant gains in cognitive abilities in eightexperimental groups and modest gains in two groups.Increased flexibility of occupationalpreferences and broadened interests were found in theexperimental groups. Inadequaciesidentified from the evaluation will serve to establish a listof realistic recommendationsfor the contain measurement fuetherdevelopment ofthe . prograMs. The appendixes instruments and achievement tests used in programevaluation. Related documents are VT 002 356, VT 002 254, and VT 004 162-VT004 165. (FIC) 4. INTERIM REPORT PROJECT NUMBER 7-0853 GRANT NUMBER OEG-04800853-1865 (085) THE IMPLEMENTATION AND FURTHERDEVELOPMENT OF EXPERIMENTAL CLUSTER CONCEPT PROGRAMS THROUGHACTUAL FIELD TESTING AND EVALUATION AT THE SECONDARYSCHOOL LEVEL PHASE III AUGUST 1968 att U. S. DEPARTMENT OF 4.1 HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE OFFICE OF EDUCATION BUREAU OF RESEARCH co, 71. i rill' ED 0 2 2 9 65 , INTERIM REPORT Project NuMber 7-0853 Grant Number OEG-08-000853-1865(085) \ THE IffPLEMENTATION AND FURTHERDEVELOPMENT OF EXPERIMENM CLUSTER CONCEPT PROGRAMS THROUGHACTUAL FIELD TESTING AND EVALUATION AT THE SECONDARY SCHOOLLEVEL, The Cluster Concept Project) Phase III , /IN 2epatt+, Dr. Donald Naley Principal Investigator Professor and Head Industrial Education Department Dr. Walter S. ljetus Research Coordinator University of Maryland College Park, Maryland August 1968 The research reported herein wasperformed pursuant to a grant .with the Office of Education,U.S. Department ofHealth, Education, Government and Welfare. Contractors undertakingsuch projects under sponsorship are encouraged to expressfreely their professional judgment in the conduct ofthe project. Points of view or opinions official Office of stated do not, therefore,necessarily represent Education position or policy. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, ANDWELFARE Office of Education Bureau of Research U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,EDUCATION & WELFARE OFFICE OF EDUCATION EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROMTHE THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATINGIT. REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OFEDUCATION STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY POSITION OR POLICY. TABLE OF CONTENTS page LIST OF TABLES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS SUMMARY OF PROSECT PART I INTRODUCTION A. Sunmary of Previous Research 1 B. Rationale and Justification for Cluster Concept . 2 C. Establishing Cluster. Concept Programs 10 D. Summary 24 PART II THE STUDY OF THE EFFECT OF THE FIRST YEAR OF-FIELD RESEARCH 26 A. Lntroduction . 26 B. Purposes and Prdblems 27 C. The Effect of the rluster Concept Programs on Student Behaviors 30 D. Presentation of Data and Findings 41 E. Treatment of Data and Findings 44 1. Construction Cluster 44 2. Metal Forming and Fabrication Cluster SS 3. Electro-Mechanical Cluster 66 4. Summary 73 . page PART III EVALUATION OF CLUSTER CONCEPTPROGRAMS 120 A. Introduction 122 B. Construction Cluster 122 1. Course Objectives . 122 2. Description of ConstructionCluster Programs. 123 3. Summary and Recommendations OOOOO 129 C. Metal Forming and FabricationCluster 187 1. Course Objectives 0 ..... 0 187 2. Description of Metal Forming andFdbrication Cluster 189 3. Summary and Recommendations 193 D. Electro-Mechanical Cluster 260 1. Course Objectives 260 2. Description of Electro-MechanicalCluster 261 3. Summary and Recommendations 266 PART IV SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 295 A. Researdh Summary of Phase Three 296 1. Cognitive Behaviors.. 298 2. Affective Behaviors 304 3. Final Statement , .. 316 APPENDICES 317 LIST OF TABLES Table page 1 Varibles of Pre and Posttests 28 2 Data and Reliability Estimates of Cluster Concept Tests 34 3 Number of Subjects Completing the Programs . ..... 39 4 Homogeneity of Variance Between Groups Within Each School (Based on I.Q. Scores) . 73 5 Means and Standard Deviations Derived fromIntelligence Tests 74 6 Homogeneity of Variance Between ,Groups Within Each School (Based on Pretest of Achievement) ...... 75 7 Means and Standard Deviations Derived froraCluster Program Achievement Tests 76 8 Analysis of Variance of ConstructionAchievement lest Scores, Experimental vs. Control Group onPretest and Posttest Measures 77 9 Analysis of Variance of Intelligence TestScores Between the Experimental and Control Groups ofthe Construction 78 Cluster Program '. ...... 10 Analysis of Variance for DifferencesBetween Pre and Posttest Measures of Achievenent(Based on Canstruction 79 Cluster Tests) . OOOOOOOOOOOO 11 Analysis of Variance for DifferencesBetween Pre and Posttest Measures of Achievement(Based on Construction Cluster Tests) 80 12 Analysis of Variance of ConstructionAchievement Test Scores, Experimental vs. Control Group onPretest and Posttest Measures .. OOOOO .. 81 13 Analysis of Variance of MetalForming and Fabrication Achievement Test Scores, ExperimentalGroups vs. Control Group on Pretest hnd PosttestMeasures 82 iv Table page 14 Analysis of Variau-,:e for Differences BetweenPre and Posttest Measures of Achievement (Basedon Metal Forming and Fabrication Test) .t OOOOO 83 15 Analysis of Variance of Intelligence TestScures Between the Experimental and Control Groups ofthe Metal Forming and Fabrication Cluster Program . 84 16 Analysis of Variance of Metal Forming andFabrication Achievement Test Scores, ExperinentalGroup vs. Control Group on Pretest and Posttest Measures 85 17 Analysis of Variance for Differences Between Pre and Posttest Measures of Achievement (Basedon Metal Forming and Fabrication Test),. 86 18 Mtans and Standard Deviations Derived from the Mechanical Reasoning Abilities 'lest (D.A.T.) . ... 90 19 Homogeneity of Variance Between Groups Within Each School (Based on Pretest Mechanical Reasoning) . 91 26 Analysis of Variance of Data from "echanical Reasoning Abilities Test (D.A.T.) Experimental Groupvs. Control Group on Pre and Posttest Measures 92 21 Analysis of Variance of Data front Mechanical Reasoning Abilities Test (D.A.T.) Experimental vs. Control Group on Pre and Posttest Measures 93 22 Analysis of Variance of Data front Mechanical Reasoning Abiliti3s Test (D.A.T.) Experimental vs. Control Groupon Pre Ind Posttest Measures 94 23 Analysis of Variance of Data from Mechanical Reasoning Abilities Test (D.A.T.) Experimental vs. Control Groupon Pre and Posttest Measures . 95 24 Analysis of Variance of Data from Mechanical Reasoning Abilities Test (D.A.T.) Pretest vs. Posttest . 96 25 Analysis of Variance of Data front Mechanical Reasoning Abilities Test (D.A.T.) Pretest vs. Posttest , OOOOO 97 26 Analysis of Variance of Data front Mechanical Reasoning Abilities Test (D.A.T.) Pretest vs. Posttest O 98 27 Analysis of Variance of Data from Mechanical Reasoning Abilities Test (D.A.L) Pretest vs. Posttest 99 Rage Table 100 28 Mann-Mhitney U TestSummary Tables .... 101 29 Mann-Whitney U TestSummary Tables . Squares for Estimatesof Treatment 30 Summary Table of Omega Obtained from Experimentalvs Effects Between Posttests 102 Control Groups Emperical andHomogeneous Scales 31 Results of Selected Inventory . 105 from the MinnesotaVocational Interest Emperical andHomogeneous Scales 32 Results of Selected 110 Inventory . from the MinnesotaVocational Interest Identified as MostImportant for 33 Preparational Modes 112 Students . Occupational Entryby Cluster Concept 113 Choices by Cluster . ...... 34 Student Occupational Specified Occupational 35 Student Responses to 114 Characteristics . vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Cluster Concept research staff ofthe University of Maryland is indebted to the teadhers whoenergetically implemented the programs under study. Many problems which interjectedburdens upon the daily process of pedagogy wereencountered. Teacher resourcefulness and- additional time for study andpreparation far beyond the usual expecta- tions were demanded for tileimplementation of the new programs. The research staff wishes