This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 69-4951
PALARDY, James Michael, 1939- THE EFFECT OF TEACHERS' BELIEFS ON THE ACHIEVEMENT IN READING OF FIRST- GRADE BOYS.
The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1968 Education, general
University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan THE EFFECT OF TEACHERS' BELIEFS
ON THF ACHIEVEMENT IN READING
OF FIRST-GRADE BOYS
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
By
James Michael Palardy, B.S.t M.A.
******
The Ohio State University 1968
Approved by
College of Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The writer wishes to express his sincerest thanks
to Dr. Loren Tomlinson who not only directed the writing of this study, but who also served as an adviser par excelXence throughout the entire course of the writer's
post-graduate work. To Dr. Alexander Frazier, who coun
seled the writer so well in countless instances, sincerest
thanks is also extended. And to Dr. Anthony Riccio, the other member of his reading committee, the writer is cer
tainly indebted.
To his wife, Mary Ellen, to his parents, Mr. and
Mrs. Arthur F. Palardy, and to his mother- and father-in-
law, Mr. and Mrs. William P. Murphy, no words of thanks can effectively communicate the writer's gratitude. In deed, without them, the present undertaking would not have been possible. I
VITA
November 14, 1939 born - Coshocton, Ohio
1961 ...... B.S., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1961-1963 . . . Secondary and Elementary Teacher, Crestline Public Schools, Crestline, Ohio 1963-1965 . . . Elementary Principal, Southeast Elementary School, Crestline, Ohio
1964 ...... M.A., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1965—1967 . . . Teaching Associate, College of Educa tion, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1967-1968 . . . Instructor, Department of Education, Wittenberg University, Springfield, Ohio
FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Field: Elementary Education
Studies in Elementary Education. Professor Loren Tomlinson
Studies in Curriculum and Supervision* Professor Alexander Frazier
Studies in Sociology. Professor Alfred Clarke
iii TABLF OF CONTENTS
Paqe ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... n
VITA ...... - . . ill LIST OF T A B L E S ...... vi
Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ...... I
Background...... 1 Justification of the Problem - 5 Orientation to the Problem ...... 9 Statement of the problem 9 Assumptions of the study ...... Q Hypothesis to be tested ...... 10 Procedure so f he Study 10 Scope ana Lirn i tat ions ...... i ? Dei init.ioru; ...... - J 4 Orqanizat Tn oi the Report ...... t lfc
II. REVIEW OF RF I.a TED LiTERATUR!...... 1 7 Teacher s A i ; ec t St udent s 1 _Se 1 f -Concept . 18 Set. t-Concept aiii Ach ievement ...... 2 9 Co i lege studies ...... i 1 Junior arid sen i o i: blob schoo 1 studies . I 3 Elementary schoo. studies ...... 58 Summary ...... 49
ITT. METHOPOL9GV OF THE -ST! J IVY...... , 18 Select run of Samp if- ...... 48 The questionnaire ...... 48 The interview ...... 5 5 The student sample ...... 58
i v TABLE OF CONTENTS— Continued
Chapter Page Testing Procedures and Instruments .... 59 Student .s’ socioeconomic background . . . 60 Student:. chrono log ica 1 age ...... 61 Students’ reading readiness ...... 62 Students' intelligence quotients .... 64 Teacher competence ...... 65 S u m m a r y ...... 66 IV. PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA . . 69
Major Hypothesis ...... 69 Minor Hypotheses...... 75 Word reading s c o r e s ...... 76 Paragraph meaning scores ...... 79 Vocabulary scores . ^ ‘ . 8 3 Word-study-skI11s scores ...... 86 Summary ...... 90 V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 9 3
The Purpose and Procedures of t.be Study . 9 3 Summary of Findings ...... 95 Conclusions 100 Recommendations ...... 102
APPENDIX...... 105 BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 109
v LIST OF TABLES
Table Page 1. Teachers' Reported Beliefs Concerning the Percentage of Success for Boys in Learn ing to Read when the Percentage of Success for Girls was Assumed to be 8 0 % ...... 50
2. Criteria for the Exclusion of Group A and Group B Teachers ...... 53
3. Group A and Group B Teachers Matched Specifically According to Experience . . . 54
4. Student Sample Size by Teacher Group .... 59
5. Mean Chronological Ages by Months for the Four Student Sample Groups ...... 62
6. Mean Reading Readiness Scores for the Four Student Sample Groups .... 64
7. Mean IQs for the Four Student Sample Groups ...... 65
8. Mean Reading Achievement Scores for the Two Girl G r o u p s ...... 66 9. Analysis of Variance of the Reading Achieve ment Scores of Students Classified by Sex and by the Beliefs of their Teachers, with Students' IQ as a C o v a r i a b l e ...... 71
10. Mean Reading Achievement Scores for the Four Student Sample Groups ...... 74 11. Analysis of Variance of the Word Reading Scores of Students Classified by Sex and by the Beliefs of their Teachers, with Students' IQ as a C o v a r i a b l e ...... 78
vi LIST OF TABLES— Continued
Table Page 12. Analysis of Variance of the Paragraph Meaning Scores of Students Classified by Sex and by the Beliefs of their Teachers, with Students' IQ as a Covariable...... 80 13. Mean Paragraph Meaning Scores for the Four Student Sample Groups ...... 82
14. Analysis of Variance of the Vocabulary Scores of Students Classified by Sex and by the Beliefs of their Teachers, with Students' IQ as a C o v a r i a b l e ...... 84
15. Mean Vocabulary Scores for Students in the Two Teacher Groups ...... 85
16. Analysis of Variance of the Word-Study- Skills Scores of Students Classified by Sex and by the Beliefs of their Teachers, with Students' IQ as a Covariable..... 88
17. Mean Word-Study-Skills Scores for Students in the Two Teacher G r o u p s ...... 89 18. Mean Word-Study-Skills Scores for the Four Student Sample Groups ...... 90 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Background More than three decades ago, W. I. Thomas, the Dean of American sociologists, theorized, "If men define . . . situations as real, they are real in their consequences."^ Underlying this theory, which has come to be known as the "Thomas Theorem," there is, essentially, a two-fold ration ale .
First, it is claimed that the act of making a definition about a situation is also an act of making a prophecy about it; and secondly, the act of making a proph ecy about a situation is also an act of creating the condi- tions whereby the prophecy itself is realized. 2 The term, then, "self-fulfilling prophecy," has been used to refer to the circular effect of the Thomas Theorem. Some recent research in education, psychology, and
^W. I. Thomas, "The Relation of Research to the Social Process," in Essays on Research in the Social Sci ences (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1931), "pi TS"9. 2 James W. Vander Zanden, American Minority Rela tions (New York: The Ronald Press Company^ 1963), p. 1^3. sociology has brought forth new evidence that the self- fulfilling prophecy may be operating to a considerable extent in schools and classroons thrqughout the country,
Most recently, Rosenthal and Jacobson found, when eighteen teachers had been told that certain of their elementary students would show dramatic intellectual growth in the academic year ahead, that those students did make signifi cantly greater gains in IQ than the other students in the same classrooms who had not been designated as Mintellec tual spurters." There was, in reality, no difference between the two groups of students relative to their potential for "intellectual spurting." The only difference was in the minds of their teachers.^
One possible explanation for the operation of the self-fulfilling prophecy, as it is related to the academic achievement of certain students within a classroom setting, might be thought of in the following way. If a teacher, for any one of a number of reasons, believes that some students have a good chance of succeeding academically, he will directly or indirectly communicate this belief to them both through his actions toward them and his interactions with them. Eventually, the students will begin to perceive themselves in the same way the teacher perceives them and
3 Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson, Pygmalion in the Classroom (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968), 240 pp. 3 to value themselves in the same way the teacher values them. And finally, because the students' self-concepts or self—perceptions are positive regarding their ability to succeed academically, they will be successful.
There is no lack of theory and research to support the plausibility of the above rationale. It is generally accepted, i;or example, that children's self-concepts, their views of themselves, are primarily formed through their interaction with significant other people in their environ ment and that, for many children, teachers do serve as 4 "significant others." More specifically, Perkins has demonstrated that teachers do influence the personality 5 development of their pupils, and Ryans has shown that children, especially those in elementary school, tend to pattern their behavior after their teachers'.6 Further more, other investigators have claimed that children do begin to value themselves in the same way their teachers
4 Frederick Elkin, The Child and Society (New York: Random House, 1960), pp. 26-62.
6Hugh V. Perkins, "Factors Influencing Change in Children's Self-Concepts," Child Development, XIX (1958), pp. 203-220.
6David G. Ryans, "Teacher Behavior, Theory and Research: Implications for Teacher Education," Journal of Teacher Education, XV (September, 1963), pp. £74-294. 7 _ value them, and that there is a positive correlation be
tween children's perceptions of themselves and their O perceptions of their teachers’ feelings toward them.
Finally, the hypothesis that there is a positive
correlation between students' self-perceptions of their
ability to succeed in an academic subject area and the
actual success they do attain, has been demonstrated to be valid in a study done by Brookover, Thomas, and Paterson
involving over 1,000 seventh-grade pupils whose measured 9 IQs were controlled. Also lending support to this hypoth esis were two earlier studies. Borislow found, when
college freshmen indicated an intention to strive for good
grades, that those who turned out to be underachievers
possessed a more pessimistic picture of themselves than
7 June Slobodian and Paul Campbell, "Do Children’s Perceptions Influence Beginning Reading Achievement?" The Elementary School Journal. LXVII (May, 1967), p. 423. Q Helen H. Davidson and Gerhard Lang, ’’Children’s Perceptions of their Teachers' Feelings toward Them Related to Self-Perception, School Achievement, and Behavior," in Don E. Hamachek, ed., The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learning (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hal1, Inc., 1965), pp. 424-439. 9 Wilbur B. Brookover, Shailor Thomas, and Ann Paterson, "Self-Concept of Ability and Schooi Achievement," in Don E. Hamachek, ed., The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learning (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-^Hall, Inc., 1965), pp. 477-485. 5 did those who did not underachieve.^^ And Fink, in study ing 20 matched pairs of boys and 24 matched pairs of girls from a freshmen class in a rural high school, found a relationship between adequacy of self-concept and high academic achievement and between inadequacy of self-concept and low academic achievement.^
Enough research, then, has been done during the past two to three decades, particularly in the areas of perceptual psychology and children's self-concepts, to warrant from educators much further exploration of the possibility that the Thomas Theorem might be affecting the achievement of some students within many school settings.
The present investigation was an attempt to make one such examination.
Justification of the Problem
It is commonly observed that boys are initially
less successful in learning to read than girls. Although
the real cause for the failure of boys to achieve as well
as girls is not clearly established, traditionally three
^Bernard Borislow, "Self-Evaluation and Academic Achievement," in Don E. Hamachek, ed., The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learning (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965), pp. 464-476.
■^Martin B.Fink, "Self-Concept as it Relates to Academic Underachievement," in Don E. Hamachek, ed., The Self in Growth. Teaching, and Learning (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prer.tice-Hall, Inc., 1§65), pp. 486-492. 6 theories have been proposed. One of these theories is based on knowledge of child growth, maturation, and de velopment.
The fact that girls develop more rapidly than boys is too well-established to belabor further. By the time the girl is in the second grade, she is actually a year older physically than the boy because she is a year nearer in final develop ment. This may mean that the second grade teacher has seven-year-old girls and six-year-old boys in the sari;e reading class in so far as physical de velopment is concerned. If mental development accompanies physical development as it is normally supposed to do, then the teacher of young children might expect that more boys than girls in her class would have some difficulty in learning to read. Most research on this subject indicates that this is the c a s e .
Another explanation for boys doing less well than girls revolves around the idea that the interests of boys and girls differ and that existing instructional content 13 appeals more to girls. A final explanation given re garding the boys' inferiority is that it is the result
. .of interest, attitudes, habits, and general behavior tendencies of the boys to which the teachers (all women) fail to adjust themselves and their school procedures as 14 well as they do to the personality traits of girls."
12 Nila B. Smith, Reading Instruction for Today's Children (Englewood Cliffs"! New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1963), p. 35. 13 Henry P. Smith and Emerald V. Dechant, Psychology in Teaching Reading (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Pren- tice-Hall, Inc7, 1961), p. 93.
14Ibid. The validity of the last of these explanations has recently been investigated in two studies. In the first of these, McNeil found that boys were actually superior to girls in one task of learning to read (word recognition) when, as kindergarteners, both groups were taught by
. auto-instructional procedures that provided frequent and equal opportunities to respond and insured identical 15 presentation of reading lessons. • . After several months of instruction by female teachers in the first grade, however, it was found: (1) that these same boys were inferior to the girls on a similar task of word recog nition; (2) that the boys received more negative teacher comments in the reading groups than the girls; and (3) that the boys were assessed more negatively by the teachers than 16 the girls in terms of their readiness for reading. 17 In the second study, Slobodian and Campbell at tempted to replicate part of the McNeil investigation by
asking first-grade boys and girls in ten randomly selected
classes a variety of questions designed to determine whether they perceived differential treatment from their
teachers in reading groups. The results showed not only
^John D. McNeil, "Programmed Instruction versus Usual Classroom Procedures in Teaching Boys to Read," American Educational Research Journal. I (March, 1964), p. 118.
16Ibid., pp. 113-119. 17 Slobodian and Campbell, op. cit., pp, 423-427. that the boys were viewed by the pupils as having received more negative teacher comments than the girls, but also that they were nominated as having had less opportunity to read than the girls. Because of the fact that there were no significant differences in the reading achievement of the boys and the girls, the investigators wrote:
This finding raises the question, ,fIs it possible that, if the perceptions reported in this study had reflected positive attitudes toward boys, their achievement might have been greater than the girls'?” If research on the influence of per ception is sound, such a finding is plausible.
Both on the basis of the general implications of these two studies and on the basis of the specific implica tions of the Thomas Theorem, it would seem to follow that, if some teachers believe that boys are far less successful in learning to read than girls (if they define a situation as real), boys will be far less successful (it will be real in its consequences). On the other hand, if other teachers believe that boys are as successful as girls in learning
:.o read, they will be as successful. In other words, even though boys, traditionally, are supposed to be less suc cessful than girls in learning to read, the degree to which they are less successful might depend on the degree to which their teachers believe them capable of success.
18Ibid., p. 426. 9
1Orientation " > ■ ■ ■■ ■ to■■■■ the '■ '» ■■■ Problem
Statement of the problem
The central purpose of this study was to determine whether teachers' reported beliefs concerning the probable reading success of first-grade boys had any significant effect on the measured achievement in reading which the students in their classes attained. It was of major in terest to determine whether the reported beliefs of the teachers who believed that first-grade boys are as sue-, cessful as first-grade girls in learning to read and of the teachers who believed that first-grade boys are far less successful than first-grade girls in learning to read had any differing effect on the achievement in reading qf the boys in their classes.
Assumptions of the scudy
This study was conducted on the basis of a number of assumptions which are stated as follows:
1. The reported beliefs of teachers do affect their behavior toward and interaction with students.
2. It is possible to devise a technique which will enable teachers to report their beliefs accurately.
3. Students' self-concepts regarding their ability
to perform in an academic subject area are to a consider
able extent formed through their interactions with teachers. 10 4. Students' self-concepts regarding their ability to perform in an academic subject area are highly cor related with their measured achievement in that subject.
Hypothesis to be tested
One major hypothesis was posed for this study. It has been stated in the null form for convenience in apply ing statistical tests:
There is no significant difference in reading achievement scores between students classified according
to sex and according to their teachers' beliefs concerning
the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read.
Procedure of the Study
In order to test the aforementioned hypothesis, the following procedure was utilized. All of the 63 first-
grade teachers in the Springfield, Ohio, Public School
System were sent a brief questionnaire in early December, 1967 (Appendix A). One item on this questionnaire was
designed to elicit from the teachers a report of their
beliefs regarding the ability of first-grade boys to suc
ceed in reading.
On the basis of the questionnaires which were
returned, the teachers were divided into three groups, A,
B, and C. Group A consisted of those teachers who believed 11 that first-grade boys are as successful as girls in learn ing to read. Group B consisted of those teachers who believed that first-grade boys are far less successful than girls in learning to read. Group C consisted of those teachers who believed that first-grade boys are somewhat less successful than girls in learning to read. At this point, Group C was eliminated from further investigation.
Five teachers in Group A were then matched with five teachers in Group B. The criteria used for this pro cedure were: (1) number of years of experience as a first- grade teacher, (2) the degree held by the teacher, and
(3) the socioeconomic area of the school in which the teacher was employed. After the two groups of teachers had been matched according to these criteria, they were inter viewed by the investigator in order for him to more fully determine whether their reported beliefs as indicated on the questionnaire were reliable.
During the early part of May, Form X of the Stan ford Reading Test, Primary 1, was administered by all the teachers in the two groups to their students. After controls had been established for the students' chronolog ical ages, their socioeconomic backgrounds, their measured readiness for reading, their measured intelligence, and the competence of their teachers, the data from the reading achievement test were used to test the null hypothesis of 12 no significant difference in reading achievement scores between students classified according to sex and according
to their teachers* beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read.
Appropriate statistical techniques were used to determine the significance of the data.
Scope and Limitations
In general, this study was designed to gain in
formation about the effect of teachers* beliefs on the
academic achievement of students. Specifically, its
purpose was to gain information about the effect of first-
grade teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success in
reading of first-grade boys on the measured achievement in
reading of the students, and particularly the male stu dents, in their classes.
In relation to this more specific purpose, there were several limitations imposed by the nature of the
sample chosen and the procedure followed. In the first
place, the sample was drawn only from the first-grade
teachers in the Springfield, Ohio, Public School System
and only from those teachers who responded to the question
naire. Although several teacher variables were accounted
for, namely, the number of years of first-grade teaching
experience each had, the type of degree each held, and the socioeconomic type of school in which each was teaching, 13 several other teacher variables were not controlled. These included: age, college attended, year of graduation, type of certification, and years of teaching experience in other than the first grade.
Secondly, the nature of the questionnaire itself imposed several limitations. The care with which each teacher responded to it, her mental attitude at the time she responded, and her understanding of the most important item, number 14, were all factors which might have varied.
Also to be considered as a limitation was the fact that there was only one item on the questionnaire which pur ported to determine each teacher's belief about the prob able success of first-grade boys in learning to read. The report of this belief, as first indicated on the question naire and later stated in the interview situation, might not have been the teacher's real belief. And, too, no attempt was made to determine any psychological or socio logical cause for the teacher's reported belief, such as, a general disliking of boys or a desire to respond in the
"expected" way. A third limitation was the fact that no attempt was made to determine how the reported beliefs of the teach ers were reflected in the actual classroom setting— reflected, for example, through differential verbal and non-verbal treatment accorded their students. Likewise, 14 no attempt was made to determine whether the students’ perceptions of their teachers' beliefs correlated with the reported beliefs themselves.
The last set of limitations pertains to the stu dents themselves. Although several student variables were accounted for, namely, age, intelligence, reading readi ness, and general socioeconomic background, others were not. These included: attitudes about school, kindergarten attendance, motivational factors, test anxiety levels, physiological and psychological impairments and disorders, racial and ethnic backgrounds, and different parent, sib ling, and peer-group situations. Furthermore, no attempt was made to determine what the self-concepts of the stu dents were in regard to their reading ability.
Despite, however, the aforementioned limitations, it was determined that the major factors which might have had some differentiating effect on the students' reading achievement had been taken into account. As a consequence, it was thought that any significant differences between and among the four student groups, Group A boys, Group A girls, Group B boys, and Group B girls, could be attributed, in
large measure at least, to the differing beliefs of their teachers. Definitions
Throughout the course of this study several terms are used which need to be carefully defined in order to facilitate common understanding.
Belief.— A belief is "an attitude involving the 19 recognition or acceptance of something as real."
Intelligence (IQ) test.— As used in this study, an IQ test is a standardized group measure of a student's ability to classify, to follow directions, to reason quantitatively, to comprehend verbal concepts, and to reason by analogy. 20 The ir.telligence test used in this study was the Otis—Lennon Mental Ability Test, Elementary 1 Level.
Reading achievement test.— As used in this study, a reading achievement test is a standardized group measure of a student's ability to understand definitions, synonyms, and associations and of his ability to comprehend passages requiring integration of two or more sentences. 21 The reading achievement test used in this study was the Stan ford Reading Test, Primary 1. ' \ 1 19James Drever, A Dictionary of Psychology (Balti more, Maryland: Penguin Books, 1967), pT 28.
20Arthur S. Otis and Roger T. Lennon, Otis-Lennon Mental Ability Test, Manual for Administration (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1967), p^ 5^
21Catalog of Standard Tests and Related Servxces (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1967), p. 14. 16 Reading readiness test.— As used in this study, a reading readiness test is a group measure of an individ— ual's readiness to profit from instruction in reading. 22 The reading readiness test used in this study was the Pre- Reading Test published by Ginn and Company. Self-concept.— The self-concept is an individual's conception and evaluation of the composite of his charac— ter is tics.2 3
Organization of the Report This report is organized into five chapters. Chap ter I is a general introduction to the study. It has presented the rationale for the study, a statement of the problem, the major assumptions underlying the study, the hypothesis to be tested, the procedure to be followed, some major limitations, and a definition of terms. A re view of related literature including pertinent research studies is presented in Chapter II. In Chapter III a com plete description of the procedure of the study is given. The basic findings of the study are reported in Chapter IV.
Chapter V is a summary of the study and includes the con clusions drawn from the findings.
2 2John E. Horrocks, Assessment of Behavior (Colum bus, Ohio: Charles E. MerriTl Books, Inc. , 1964 )"7" p. 418. 2 3 Arden N. Frandsen, Educational Psychology (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1§67S, pZ 678. CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
The central purpose of this study was to determine whether the reported beliefs of first-grade teachers con cerning the probable reading success of first-grade boys had any significant effect on the measured achievement in reading which the students in their classes attained. It was of major interest to determine whether these beliefs had any effect on the achievement of the boys in their classes. The study was conducted on the basis of a number of assumptions, but it was thought that two were of crucial importance. 1. Students' self—concepts regarding their ability to perform in an academic setting are to a considerable extent formed through their interaction with teachers.
2. Students' self-concepts regarding their ability to perform in an academic setting are highly correlated with their measured achievement.
A review of the literature was made, therefore, in order to find theoretical and empirical support for these two assumptions. This chapter represents an attempt to 17 report the findings of this review and has two major sec tions dealing, respectively, with each of the aforemen tioned assumptions.
Teachers Affect Students* Self-Concepts
There is certainly no lack of theory relative to how the self or self-concept is formed. One of the earliest writers in the field, George H. Mead, stated that M. . . the individual’s self is constituted simply by an organization of the particular attitudes of other individ uals toward himself and toward one another in the specific
social acts in which he participates with them." 24 Ap
proximately three decades later, Kinch remarked that one of the basic postulates of any formalized theory of the self-concept is that it is based on his perception of the way others are responding to him. 2 5 And Jersild, finally,
wrote that among the earliest experiences which influence the development of the child's view of himself are those 26 with significant other people.
^George H. Mead, Mind, Self and Society (Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Pr'e s's, 1934) , p. 158. 25 John W. Kinch, "A Formalized Theory of the Self- Concept," American Journal of Sociology, LXVIII (January, 1963), pp. 481-482.
26Arthur T. Jersild, "Social and Individual Origins of the Self," in Don E. Hamachek, ed., The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learning (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965), p. 203. 19 Seemingly, there is little doubt then that one's self-concept is formed, in part at least, through his interaction with "significant other people," and there is just as little doubt, as Brookover and Gottlieb have pointed out, that parents are more universally mentioned than any other single category of persons as being sig- nificant. 2 7 Nevertheless, teachers, too, are considered to be of some importance in helping to form and influence the self-concept of a child. Following is a representative sample of the kinds of statements found in the literature attesting to the importance of teachers: Davidson and Lang— "Among the significant people believed to affect the child's feelings about himself are, first, his parents, and, later his teachers." 2 8
Frandsen— "The dynamic role of the teacher in shaping children's self-concepts is also brought out in the improvements they sometimes help children make." 29
Jersild— "But if . . . his parents and later his teachers, peers, and other persons belittle him, blame him,
2 7Wilbur B. Brookover and David Gottlieb, A Sociol ogy of Education (New York: American Book Company, 1961), p . 4 72,
2 8Davidson and Lang, op. cit., p. 424. 29Frandsen, op. cit., p. 578. 20 and reject him, the growing child's attitudes about himself are likely to become unfavorable." 30 Morse and Wingo— "A little later, his teachers create an emotional climate through which his concept of self is intensified or modified."^^
Perkins— "People with whom the child interacts— parents, siblings, teachers, and peers— exert a pervasive influence on formation and change of the sglf—concept." 32
Schmuck, Luszki, and Epperson--"Mental Health here refers to the . . . positiveness of the pupil's feelings about himself. . . . it is evident that the teacher is indeed in a position to influence a pupil's mental health. ,,33 • • •
Staines— "Amongst the people likely to be most " i ' '■ — 30 Jersild, op. cit., p. 203. 31 William C. Morse and G. Max Wingo, Psychology and Teaching (Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1962), p. 60.
32Hugh V. Perkins, "Changing Perceptions of Self," in Don E. Hamachek, ed., The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learning (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice—Hall, Inc., 1965), p. 203. 3 3 Richard A. Schmuck, Margaret B. Luszki, and David C. Epperson, "Interpersonal Relations and Mental Health in the Classroom," in Henry Clay Lindgren, ed., Readings in Educational Psychology (New York: John Wiley & Sons', Trie. , 1968) , pi 131. _ 21 influential in determining the self-picture are teach-
Despite, however, these kinds of theoretical statements that teachers do influence the development of students' self-concepts, until recently there was an astonishing lack of empirical data on the subject. Wylie, who reported a comprehensive review of the literature on the self-concept prior to 1961, implied this, 35 and Gordon and Wood stated it quite explicitly:
Self theorists have proposed a fundamental re lationship between self-concept and behavior. . . .
Previous research leaves unresolved the re lationship between teachers' behavior and the self-concept of individual pupils. Although it is a widely held belief among educators and many psychologists that such a relationship exists, empirical data are needed,^ Within the past one or two decades, though, there has been more of a concerted effort to examine empirically the proposition that the self-concepts of children are affected by teachers. Perhaps the most often mentioned
34 J. W. Staines, "The Self-Picture as a Factor in the Classroom," in Don E. Hamachek, ed., The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learning (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965), p. 404.
^^Ruth C. Wylie, The Self Concept (Lincoln, Ne braska; University of Nebraska Press, 1961), pp. 122-136. Ira J. Gordon and Patricia C. Wood, "The Rela tionship between Pupil Self-Evaluation, Teacher Evaluation of the Pupil, and Scholastic Achievement," The Journal of Educational Research, LVI (April, 1963), p.^iO. 22
study, and certainly one of the best, was done by Perkins 37
in which it was hypothesized that children whose teachers had participated in a three-year child study program would
show greater congruency between their self-concepts and ideal selves than would children whose teachers had never
participated in child study,
A representative sample of 251 children in four
fourth-grade classes and four sixth-grade classes was
tested by Perkins in December, February, and May of 1954-55 in order to determine evidences of the subjects' self-
concepts and ideal selves. At the end of the six-month
period, it was found that the students whose teachers had
completed the child study program showed greater self
ideal self congruency than did the students whose teachers
had never participated in the program. This finding was
significant at the .01 level of confidence and led Perkins
to conclude that "the greater self-ideal self congruencies
of children whose teachers have participated in child
study is evidence that this program benefits not only 3 8 teachers but children as well."
A study similar to Perkins' was done by Staines 39
3 7Perkins, "Factors Influencing Change in Chil dren's Self-Concepts," op. cit., pp. 221-230.
38Ibid., p. 230. 39Staines, op. cit., pp. 404-425. 23
in which two junior high school scholarship classes were matched according to age, intelligence, and socioeconomic
status. The experimental class was taught by a teacher
who was made aware of the theoretical importance of the
self-concept, and who made a deliberate attempt to enhance
the self-pictures of his students. The control class was
taught by a teacher who was regarded as equally competent,
but who supposedly had no awareness of the implications of
self-concept theory.
After only a twelve-week period, it was found, for
the experimental group, that "a small number of changes
occurred in self-traits, but statistically significant
changes were found in two dimensions of the self. . . .
Both changes were interpreted as indicating greater psy-
chological security." 40 The control class, on the other hand,
. . . showed significant decreases in certainty about the self and in differentiation. The un certainty spread throughout the self and was significantly greater than that of the experi mental group. Both changes were interpreted as leading to a marked psychological insecurity. These changes, usually indicative of poor adjust ment, were the unsought and unnoticed concomitant outcomes of normal methods aimed at securing the usual academic results.^^
40Ibid., p. 405. 24 Chadwick's study, 42 however, which was designed as a follow-up to the Staines investigation, had very dif ferent findings. Her research
. . . was designed to investigate whether teachers might, with guidance concerning the character istics of and the aims for healthy self-conceptual development, be able to incorporate into their role, behaviour believed appropriate to the healthy development of their pupils' self-concepts, and, further, whether such behaviour in conjunction with knowledge of their pupils' existing self- concepts, might result in changes that were at tributable to such behaviour and that had occurred without detriment to academic p r o g r e s s .
Although it was found that the two experimental teachers had incorporated into their behavior the appropri ate modifications thought necessary for the positive development of their junior high school students' self- concepts, no significant differences were found between their classes and the one control class in regard to 44 changes in the self—picture. Significant results were reported, though, in an
investigation conducted by Slobetz and Lund in which they
"• . . deliberately tried to help boys and girls to
42 Jean A. Chadwick, "Some Effects of Increasing the Teachers’ Knowledge of their Pupils' Self Pictures," The British Journal of Educational Psychology, XXXVII (February, 1967 S, pp. 12 9-131.
43Ibid., p. 129.
44Ibid., pp. 130-131. understand them.seJ-.ves real human beings." 45 The experi
mental group of 26 fifth-grade pupils and the control
group of 19 pupils were roughly matched in terms of mental ages, intelligence quotients, occupational status of fathers, and personality test scores. The scheduled class room activities of the two groups were quite similar with the exception that the control group did not have a de
liberately planned progratr in personality development. After a five-month period, the experimental group scored a
significantly positive change on the "Sense of Personal
Worth" subsection of the California Test of Personality. As might be expected, no such change was recorded by the
controli group. 46
Four other studies have recently been done whose purpose it was to investigate the relationship between
certain characteristics and/or behavior patterns of teach ers and the self-concepts of their students. In none of
these, as opposed to the four just mentioned, was any direct attempt made to increase the teachers' insights
_ into self-concept theory or to have them modify their be havior accordingly. Videbeck in the first of these
45 Frank Slobetz and Alice Lund, "Some Effects of a Personal Developmental Program at the Fifth Grade Level, The Journal of Educational- Research, IL (January, 1956), p. 373.
46Ibid., pp. 373-378. 25 understand themselves as real human beings." 45 The experi mental group of 26 fifth-grade pupils and the control group of 19 pupils were roughly matched in terms of mental ages, intelligence quotients, occupational status of fathers, and personality test scores. The scheduled class room activities of the two groups were quite similar with the exception that the control group did not have a de liberately planned program in personality development. After a five-month period, the experimental group scored a significantly positive change on the "Sense of Personal
Worth" subsection of the California Test of Personali
As might be expected, no such change was recorded by the controli group. 46
Four other studies have recently been done whose purpose it was to investigate the relationship between certain characteristics and/or behavior patterns of teach ers and the self-concepts of their students. In none of
these, as opposed to the four just mentioned, was any direct attempt made to increase the teachers' insights
into self-concept theory or to have them modify their be havior accordingly. Videbeck, in the first of these
4 5 Frank Slobetz and Alice Lund, "Some Effects of a Personal Developmental Program at the Fifth Grade Level," The Journal of Educational- Research, IL (January, 1956), p. 373. 46Ibid., pp. 373-378. 26 studies, used 30 college students as experimental subjects and found support for the hypothesis that a person's actual
self-concept will move closer to his ideal-self rating if he receives approval from his teacher, and that one's
actual self-concept will move farther away from his ideal- 4 7 self rating if he receives disapproval from his teacher. 48 In an action research study reported by Foshay,
the use of teacher approval and disapproval also seemed to
have an effect on the self-concepts of elementary children.
One of Foshay's five major conclusions, based on having
worked with eleven teachers and 90 children for a two-year
period, was that "the teacher's approval or disapproval is
a very important contributing element . . . to the personal 4 9 feeling of worth of our children. . . ."
Cummins, in investigating a quite subtle kind of
relationship, found a significant association between 47
high school teachers and 119 of their twelfth-grade stu
dents relative to the degree botti teachers and students
4 7 Richard Videbeck, "Self-Conception and the Reaction of Others," Sociometry, XXIII (December, 1960), pp. 351-359. 48 Arthur W. Foshay, "Considerateness and Aggres sion: An Action Research Study," Educational Research Builetin, XXXII (April, 1953), pp. 85-112. 49 Ibid., p. 110. 27 accepted themselves and accepted others.^
And in the last of these four studies, after eight years of research dealing with teacher character istics and their effects on the intellectual, social, and emotional growth of students, Washburne and Heil coneluded:
The one striking positive result of the experi ment has been clear evidence that the teacher's personality has a clear and measurable effect on the progress of her pupils academically and socially— academically in terms of progress on the Stanford Achievement Test, socially in terms of growth in friendliness and recipiency of friendliness as measured on the Ohio Social Acceptance Scale. There appears also to be a relationship between the type of teacher and her children's emotional adjustment as shown on the children's feelings test.^l
Although no one of the measures mentioned by Washburne and Heil dealt specifically with the self-concept, they
did imply in several places that it was one of the factors
of emotional adjustment being considered.
Finally, two studies were done which, although not easily categorized, reflect, in part at least, the
increasing concern about the development of children's
Robert E. Cummins, "Research Insights into the Relationship between Teachers' Acceptance Attitudes, Their Role Concepts, and Students' Acceptance Attitudes," The Journal of Educational Research, LIII (January, 1960), pp. 197-198.
^^Carleton Washburne and Louis M. Heil, "What Characteristics of Teachers Affect Children's Growth?" The School Review. LXVIII (Winter, 1960), p. 425. 20 self-concepts within the school setting. It was the purpose of Davidson and Lang to determine the relationship
"• . . between children's perception of their teachers' feelings toward them and the variables; self-perception, academic achievement, and classroom behavior." 52 Having used as their subjects 89 boys and 114 girls in grades four, five, and six in a New York City public school, the investigators found that the students' perceptions of their teachers' feelings toward them were positively associated with their own opinions about themselves; and that "the more positive the children's perception of their teachers' feelings, the better was their academic achievement, and the more desirable their classroom behavior as rated by the teachers."'5 3
And in a three-year investigation sponsored by the 54 U.S. Office of Education, Morse studied both the "gen eral" self-concepts and the "school" self-concepts of over 600 pupils in grades three through eleven. Some of his major findings and conclusions are reported below: Eighty-four per cent of the third graders are proud of their school work, while only 53 per
52 Davidson and Lang, op. cit., p. 425. ~^Ibid. , p. 43 7. 54 William C. Morse, "Self Concept Data," National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, XLVIII {September, 1964T, pp. 2 3-2 7. 29
cent of the eleventh graders are. In the low grades, 93 per cent feel they are doing the best work they can; only 37 per cent of the oldest pupils feel this way. Regardless of their achieve ment quotients and the fact that failures tend to drop out, the pupils who remain in school come to feel that they are doing inadequate work. Again, over half of the young pupils say that they are doing as well in school as they would like, but only 22 per cent of the eleventh graders feel this way. About 40 per cent of pupils at all age levels often feel upset in school; with regard to achievement 20 per cent say their teacher makes them feel "not good enough," and these items stay virtually the same with age. Over 40 per cent report they often become discouraged in school, and this increases with age from 22 per cent to forty-three per cent. While neither the self-picture nor the school self-esteem is pleasant, the school self appears to be the more negative. Whatever else we have done, we have communicated a sense of personal failure to many of our pupils. In general, the longer we have them, the less favorable things seem to be.^5
Since teachers are in a position to influence posi tively the self-concepts of their students, as most of the theory and data presented in this section would certainly indicate, Morse's conclusion is a rather sad commentary on .he actual effect some teachers seem to be having.
Self-Concept and Achievement It is, as Kinch pointed out, a basic assumption of self-concept theory that "the individual's self-concept functions to direct his behavior."^ One example of what
^ Ibid., pp. 26-27. ^^Kinch, op. cit., p. 482. 30 happens when this general assumption is specifically applied to the academic achievement of students within a classroom setting was given by Brookover and Gottlieb:
We postulate that the child acquires, by talcing the role of the other, a perception of his own ability as a learner of the various types of skills an<3 subjects which constitute the school curriculum. If the child perceives that he is unable to learn mathematics or some other area of behavior, this self-concept of his ability becomes the functionally limiting factor in his school achievement. "Functional limit" is the term used to emphasize that we are speaking not of genetic organic limits on learning but rather of those perceptions of what is appropriate, de sirable, and possible for the individual to learn. We postulate the latter as the limits, within broader organic limits, in determining the nature or extent of the particular behavior learned,^
Combs used this same rationale in another context when he wrote:
Let us take, as an example, the child who has developed a concept of himself as "unable to read." Such a child is likely to avoid reading, and thus the very experience which might change his copcept of self is bypassed. Worse still, the child who believes himself unable to read, confronted with the necessity for reading, is more likely than not to do badly. The external evaluation of his teachers and fellow pupils, as well as his own observations of his perform ance, all provide proof to the child of how right he was in the first place! The possession of a particular concept of self tends to produce be havior that corroborates the self-concept with which the behavior originated.5®
57 Brookover and Gottlieb, op. cit., p. 469. 5 B Arthur W. Combs, "Intelligence from a Perceptual Point of View," in Don E. Hamachek, ed., The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learning (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965), p. 144. 31 Although it is made quite explicit in the above statements that, theoretically, the self-concept acts in a causal relationship to academic achievement, no conclusive 59 empirical data were found tq support this hypothesis. Nevertheless, many studies have shown that there does seem to be an associative relationship between the self-concept of students and their academic achievement. These studies have been done at the college level, at the junior and senior high school levels, and at the elementary school
level. They are presently reviewed in that order.
College studies
Three recent investigations were found in the
literature which dealt in some way with the relationship
between college students' self-concepts and their academic
achievement. In the first of these, Stevens, after having controlled for intelligence, compared a group of 52 college sophomores who were on the honor roll with a group of 49 sophomores who were on academic probation. Not only did he
find that the academically successful students showed much better self-insight into their intellectual abilities than the unsuccessful students, but also that the degree of
59 The one possible exception is the Wattenberg and Clifford study which is discussed later. 32 self-acceptance \yas much greater for the former group than for the latter.^
Roth tested the proposition that there would be significant differences in the self-perceptions of those who improved, who did not improve, and who dropped out in an 18-week college reading improvement program. It is not surprising that the data from his study M. . . clearly indicated that not only is self-concept related to achieve ment, but that . . . with all other things being equal, those who do not achieve choose not to do so, while those who do achieve, choose to do so."^ In the last of these three studies, a representa- tive sample of 197 freshmen was asked by Borislow 62 to reply to both a pre-semester and a postr-semester question naire designed to yield indexes of general self-concept and student self-concept. After having controlled for the scholastic aptitude of the subjects, their socioeconomic backgrounds, and their educational-vocational plans, it was found: (1) that, prior to their actual scholastic
60 Peter H. Stevens, "An Investigation of the Rela tionship between Certain Aspects of Self-Concept Behavior and Students' Academic Achievement," Dissertation Abstracts, XVI (1956), pp. 2531-2532. 1
^Robert M. Roth, "The Role of Self-Concept in Achievement," Journal of Experimental Education, XXVII (June, 1959), p. 281. 1
6 2Borislow, op. cit., pp. 464-476. 33 ror for murine, those students who had expressed an intention
- s'rive for good urudes and who turned out to be adequate a shi O'vex s hai a mcr r out imis tic picture of themselves as s tuaents th n had t h '-r.e students who, while also having expressed an intent j rn to strive for good grades, turned out to be underachiovers; and (2) that, subsequent to their actual scholastic p^r: o -Trance, the achievers had a more favor.'.hie vi-~*w of themselves as students than had the unde' ac hievc-r s. ho difference was found, however, between
• hr achievers and the underachievers in regard to their
•'ier o* a 1 3G1 r -concepts either ppior to or subsequent to
...... 63 > nri £ r 11 s c semester m co 1 leqe . bun for rind senior high school studies
A considerably larger number of studies concerning the : ■ ■ 1 a t i one h i p of self-concept, to academic achievement
Was :oun.i at the junior rand senior high school levels than 64 at rhe co1lege level. In the first of two studies, Shaw
•atchc-d an 1 compar ed 20 male and 21 female achievers with id mam in i 2 ‘ female undor nchlovers. As expected, he i sunt: s i jn i. i ican t support for the hypothesis that the
‘ :vU_ r: v i 1ie C . Snaw , Kvnne th rid son , and Hugh M. Hell, " Hie be i. ,f-Concept of Bright Underachieving High ichor i btudents as Revealed by an Ad iective Check List,*' "he Hersonne I and Guidance Journal, XXIX (November, 1960), f;p. 19 3-196. academically capable male underachievers would have more negative feelings about themselves than would the academ ically capable male achievers. No such significant results, however, were found for the female subjects. In commenting on this, Shaw wrote:
A tentative conclusion which can be drawn from a consideration of the results obtained on the female groups is that female underachievers feel somewhat ambivalent about themselves. It may be that they tend to see themselves both positively and negatively, or that they may be confused re garding their feminine role. Both possibilities are suggested by the data.^5
In a follow-up study done two years later, Shaw investigated 12 9 students and again found support for the hypothesis that there is a significant relationship between negative self-attitudes of boys and academic underachieve ment. For the girls, the data once again did not, indicate a significant association, but they did more closely ap proximate significance than they had done in the first study.4- ^ 6 6
In another investigation involving academically capable male students, Combs compared 25 underachievers with 2 5 achievers at the eleventh-grade level; He found a
65Ibid.. p. 195.
^Merville C. Shaw and Gerald J. Alves, ,fTh e Self- Concept of Bright Academic Underachievers: Continued,M The Personnel and Guidance Journal. XLII (December, 1963), pp. 401-403. 35 significant and consistent difference between the two groups in that the underachievers saw themselves as less adequate, saw themselves as less acceptable to others, saw their peers as less acceptable, and saw adults as less acceptable.4- V.1 6 7
Lowther collected data on the self-concept from 93 eighth-grade students whose IQ range was between 94 and
109 and from 90 eighth-graders whose IQ range was between
120 and 135. Students in the two ability groups were then divided into high achieving subjects and low achieving subjects. As might be expected, it was found that in both ability groups the achievers had significantly more favor able attitudes toward education and possessed significantly higher self-esteem than the underachievers. 68
Using a somewhat different approach to study this same relationship, Zoolalian investigated whether there were differences in the self-concept ". . . as measured by the eight scales of the Minnesota Counseling Inventory
(MCI) for those students who scored in the top quartile
6 7Charles F. Combs, "Perception of Self and Scho lastic Underachievement in the Academically Capable," The Personnel and Guidance Journal, XLIII (September, 1964*7^ pp. 47-51.
68Malcolm A. Lowther, "A Comparison of the Educa tional Motivation, Self-Evaluation and Classroom Conduct of High and Low Achieving Eighth Grade Students," Dis sertation Abstracts, XXII (1962), p. 2290. 36 and tfaose students who scored below the mean on the Seattle
Algebra Achievement Test." 69 Although only nine matched pairs of ninth-grade boys were used as the subjects in the study, it was found that on all eight scales of the MCI the achieving boys had better self-concepts than the under achievers . 7C^
Ninth-grade students were also used in a rather imaginative study done by Fink. He matched 20 pairs of academically achieving and underachieving boys and 24 pairs of achieving and underachieving girls and collected data on their self-concepts from seven different instruments.
These data were then presented to two school psychologists and a clinical psychologist who independently rated all of the subjects on the adequacy or inadequacy of their self- concepts. The findings confirmed the hypothesis that
". . . a relationship does in fact exist between adequacy of self-concept and level of academic achievement." 71
Finally, three investigations employed compara tively large numbers of students in studying the relation ship between the sqlf-concept and school achievement. In
69 Charles H. Zoolalian, "Factors Related to Dif ferential Achievement among Boys in Ninth-Grade Algebra," The Journal of Educational Research, LVIII (January. 1965), pT' 205.
7QIbid., pp. 205-207. 71 Fink, op. cit., p. 494. 37 the best of these studies, Brookover, Thomas, and Paterson measured, for each of 513 males and 537 females, the stu dent's self-concept of ability in general and his specific self-concept of ability in each of four subject areas—
English, arithmetic, social studies, and science- After having controlled for IQs, the investigators found a significant correlation between the general self-concept of ability and academic performance and even more of a significant correlation between the specific self-concept 72 of ability and performance in a particular school subject.
Miller investigated the relationship between achievement in school and the self-perceptions of high achieving, average achieving, and low achieving pupils in three ability groups. From the randomly selected sample of 214 students, there was found to be for each of the three ability groups a significant correlation between ". . . acceptance of student self and satisfaction with student self and achievement." 73
In the last of these investigations, Binder studied the relationship between the self-concept of ability of 345
72Brookover, Thomas, and Paterson, op. cit., pp. 477-485. 73 Clifford D. Miller, "An Exploratory Investigation of Self Concepts of High-Achieving, Average-Achieving, and Low-Achieving Groups of Junior High Pupils as Perceived by the Pupils and Their Teachers," Dissertation Abstracts, XXVI (1965), P- 1483. 38 ninth- and 360 twelfth-grade boys and girls and their
academic achievement as measured by their grade—point
averages* The total sample was divided by grade level and
sex, and the data for each subgroup were analyzed separate
ly. For each of the four groups, a significant relation
was found between the self-concept of ability and the
grade-point average.^
Elementary school studies
In the only study found in the literature designed
to investigate the relationship between the self-concept
and the grade-point average of elementary children, Bruck
used as hip subjects 300 students of both sexes at the
third-, sixth-, and eleventh-grade levels. He found, as
did Binder in the study just cited, that "a positive and
significant relationship exists between self-concept and
grade-point average on all grade levels ranging from the 75 one to the five per cent level of confidence.”
Using 271 fourth- and sixth-grade boys and girls — i ' 74 Dorothy M. Binder, "Relationships among Self- Expectations, Self-Concept, and Academic Achievement," Dissertation Abstracts, XXVI (1966), p. 5220. 75 Max Bruck, "A Study of Age Differences and Sex Differences in the Relationship between Self-Concept and -Grade-Point Averaqe," Dissertation Abstracts, XIX (1959), p. 1646. 1 1 39 as his subjects, Bledsoe 76 found that at both grade levels
there were significant correlations between the self-
concepts of the boys and their scores on all the subtests of the California Achievement Test, For the girls, how ever, the results were somewhat less conclusive.
Although all except one of the fourteen relation ships between self-concept and achievement for girls were nonsignificant, the direction was positive. The one significant relationship was .29 between self-concept and reading achievement for fourth-grade girls.77
The most unique study attempting to relate self-
concept to achievement at the elementary level was done by 78 Walsh. The major question asked in her study was whether
inadequate self-concept would be expressed in doll play in
such a way that it could be observed, measured, and evalu
ated. Her subjects were 20 low-achieving and 20 adequate
ly-achieving boys of superior intelligence from the second,
third, fourth, and fifth grades. The two groups were
matched with respect to age, grade, intelligence, race,
and socioeconomic status.
Each of the boys was asked by playing with the
7^Joseph C. Bledsoe, "Self-Concepts of Children and Their Intelligence, Achievement, Interests, and Anxi ety," Childhood Education. XLIII (March, 1967), pp. 436- 4 38.
77Ibjd., p. 4 36.
78Ann Marie Walsh, Self-Concepts of Bright Boys with Learning Difficulties (New_York: Bureau of Publica- tions, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1956), 79 pp. 40 dolls to finish ten incomplete stories. After their verbal responses during the simulated period had been recorded, transcribed, and analyzed, it was found that there was a significant difference between the achievers and the underachievers on four of the five categories purported to be indicative of adequacy of self-concept.
The low ^chievers consistently differed from the adequate achievers in portraying the boy doll as restricted in action; unable to express his feelings appropriately and adequately; being criticized, rejected, or isolated; and acting defensively, through compliance, evasion, or negativism.'9
Four studies were done at the elementary school level which specifically explored the relationship between the self-concept of students and their achievement in reading. Henderson, Long, and Ziller, in one of these studies, matched each of 32 boys and 16 girls who had applied to the University of Delaware's Reading Study
Center with a successful reader in the public schools of the same age, sex, and intelligence. One of the major findings of this investigation was that the underachieving students at the Center were characterized by a much lower opinion of themselves than were the achieving students in the public schools. 80
79 Ibid , , p. 52 . 80 Edmund H. Henderson, Barbara H. Long, and Robert C. Ziller, "Self-Social Cpnstructs of Achieving and Non- achievinq Readers," The Readinq Teacher, XIX (November, 1965), pp. 114-ill8. 41
In another study involving both boys and girls,
Hallock investigated the relationship between achievement
in reading, as measured by the California Reading Achieve ment Test, and twelve personality factors, as measured by
the California Test of Personality. For the 926 subjects
in the fourth, sixth, and eighth grades, eight factors
were found to be significantly related to achievement.
They were: Cl) family relations, (2) self-reliance,
(3) anti-social tendencies, (4) school relations, (5) feel
ing of belonging, (6) withdrawing tendencies, (7) nervous
symptoms, and (8) feeling of personal worth. Several of
these, particularly 2, 4, 5, 6, and 8, were perceived as
being closely related to, if not an integral part of, one's
view of himself. 81 8 2 Lumpkin, in the third investigation, matched 24
overachievers in reading with 25 underachievers on the
basis of chronological age, mental age, sex, and home back
ground. Several psychological instruments were used to
gather data on the self-concept of the students. The
81 George A. Hallock, "Attitudinal Factors Affect ing Achievement in Readinq," Dissertation Abstracts, XVIII (1958), pp. 2061-2062. 82 Donavan D. Lumpkin, "The Relationship of Self- Concept to Achievement in Readinq," Dissertation Abstracts, XX (1959), pp. 204-205. 42 results, as might be expected, indicated that:
. . . overachievers revealed significantly more positive self-concepts, revealed higher levels of adjustment, and saw themselves as liking reading. These children were viewed positively by both teachers and peers. Underachievers in reading . . . manifested a predominantly negative perception of self, a desire to be different from the self as seen, and, to a statistically significant extent, they expressed feelings of conflict more fre quently. They were viewed by teachers as manifesting high problem tendency.
And Spicola, using 381 sixth-grade boys as her subjects, investigated the relationship between achieve ment in reading and seven variables— chronological age, mental age, socioeconomic status, socioeconomic index,
self-concept, schogl entrance age, and educational level of father. Significant correlations at the .05 level were
found between reading achievement and five of these vari-
ables, includxng that of the self-concept. 84
The final study to be considered in this review of
the literature was the only one found which, to a consider
able extent, suggests that the self-concept stands in a
causal relationship to academic achievement, rather than
just an associative relationship. In this study, Wattenberg
83Ibid., p. 205. 84 Rose Frances Spicola, "An Investigation into Seven Correlates of Reading Achievement including the Self-Concept," Dissertation Abstracts, XXI (1961), p. 2199. 43 8 5 and Clifford used as their sample 128 students in two Detroit elementary schools. While these students were in kindergarten, measures and ratings were obtained relative to (1) their self-concept, (2) their ego strength, and
(3) their intelligence. Two years after completion of ~~ kindergarten, the pupils were again measured as to (1) their self-concept, (2) their ego strength, and (3) their reading achievement.
After several statistical analyses had been ap plied to the data, it was found, in the first place, that there was only a very slight and inconsistent correlation between the students' reading achievement, as measured in the second grade, and changes in their self-concept, as measured between kindergarten and grade two. This finding suggested that the success or the failure of the students in learning to read had no measurable effect on their self- concept. Secondly, the findings showed that the measure of self-concept taken in kindergarten was more predictive of second-grade reading achievement than was the measure of mental ability taken also in kindergarten. And, in the third place, only a slight correlation was found between the two measures of self-concept and the intelligence test scores.
Q C William W. Wattenberg and Clare Clifford, Rela tionship of the Self-Concept to Beginning Achievement in Reading (U.S. Office of Education: Cooperative Research Project No. 377, 1962), 62 pp. 44
These three rra jor findings prompted Wat.tenberg and Clifford to ccrv ludo:
. . . measures ■ self—concept at the kindergar ten level woul'- add significantly to the pre dictive efficiency (in reading) now attainable through tests or cental ability* Moreover, it would appear that the self-concept stands in a causal relationship to reading achievement, and that achievement in reading does not have a marked effeet in ’he formation of the self- concept .86>
The finding in the Wattenberg and Clifford study that progress in reading did not have a marked effect on
the development of the self-concept would be seriously questioned by self-concept theorists. For, they would
claim, even though the self—concept is undoubtedly one of th^ causes of godd cr to . • academic achievement, the actual achievement itself would in turn reflect back on the self-
picture and, eitr.er positively or negatively, strengthen
it. A viciouf-circ.o r e 1 a t ionshi p would, in effect, be the result.
if is r. ft; to sou r . - , oec sure of ‘:he diff ice' t
r.a su r e of if- pros- Lc i ~ iv 1 f , p - r h a os on 1 y realistic that
"tie other investigators mentioned in th 1 s section did not attempt to an s we r the q.sirf t of f ir c + - causal ity , be if
■...he se 1 f—cor.cept. or trie achievement.
66 ., . „ , lbxu. , pp. 2-5 . 45 Summary This review of the literature has attempted to present both theoretical and empirical support for the contentions that teachers do affect the self-concepts of their students and that these self-concepts are positively related to their achievement in academic subject areas.
It has been shown that both propositions do, indeed, enjoy wide theoretical support, but also that neither, and particularly the first, is backed by what could be called conclusive empirical evidence.
The limited data presently available, however, are almost completely supportive of both assumptions. With one exception, the Chadwick study, 8 7 ten different investi gators or teams of investigators using a variety of re search designs reported findings indicative of the fact that students' self-concepts are positively or negatively and purposely or accidentally affected by teachers. And in twenty other investigations, findings were reported that self-concepts and levels of academic achievement are positively related. Only in the last of these, the Watten- berg and Clifford study, 88 was any evidence presented that the self-concept stands in a causal, rather than just an associative, relationship to achievement.
' ■ i 1 8 7 Chadwick, op. cit., pp. 129-131.
88 Wattenberg and Clifford, op. cit., 62 pp. 46 From this investigator's point of view, the em pirical evidence presented in this chapter, as needed as it was, has in reality only touched the surface of what needs to be known about the implications of self-concept theory for education. To be sure, it is of great impor tance to know that teachers do have an effect on the self- concepts of their students, but it is equally as important to find now the answers to the following kinds of questions.
How do teachers have this effect? Can they be trained to have more positive and fewer negative effects? In what form does this training of teachers seem to be most effective? At what ages are students' self-concepts most likely to be affected by their teachers? And is there an age beyond which teachers' efforts toward changing the self-concepts of their students become relatively fruit less?
Similarly, although it is valuable to know that the self-concepts of students and their academic achieve ment are positively associated, it would be even more valuable to know whether there is or is not a causal re lationship between the two. And finally, an investigation of the vicious-circle relationship between self-concept and achievement, as difficult as this will be, is needed.
Approximately ten years ago, it was written that the "research on self-concept . . . is in its infancy but shows every sign of lustiness, health, and potential for 8 9 growth." The research done in the past decade, at least in the two areas of concern presented in this chapter, is ample evidence that the infant has grown, but the remain ing unanswered questions make it all too obvious that he has by no means reached maturity. It is hoped that the present study, by utilizing self-concept theory to in vestigate the effect of teachers' beliefs on the academic achievement of students, will make a contribution to the infant's continuing development.
89 Ira J. Gordon and Arthur W. Combs, "The Learner: Self and Perception," Review of Educational Research, XXVIII (December, 1958), p. 440. CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY
It was the purpose of this study to investigate the effect of teachers* reported beliefs regarding the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read on the measured achievement in reading which the students in their classes attained. To investigate the effect of these beliefs on the achievement of the boys was of partic ular interest. The samples chosen and the instruments and procedures used in the study in order to achieve this purpose are described in the present chapter.
Selection of Sample
The questionnaire
In December, the form letter and the questionnaire
(Appendix A) were sent to all 63 first-grade teachers in the Springfield, Ohio, Public Schools. The questionnaire was designed to gain information from the teachers in three general areas. Items 1—4 asked for personal in formation; items 5-8 asked for information about the students in their classrooms; and items 9-14 sought infor-
48 49 mation regarding their opinions and beliefs about certain issues within the field of reading instruction. Forty-two usable questionnaires were returned.
The 42 teachers were placed into one of three categories on the basis of their response to item 14. This item read as follows:
Assume that first-grade girls, on the average, achieve 80% success in learning how to read. If this assumption were true, what percentage of success do you believe first-grade boys, on the average, achieve?
100% 50%
90% 40%
80% 30%
70% ___ 20%
60% 10%
The first group, Group A, consisted of the ten » teachers who checked 80%. These ten teachers were thought
to believe that, on the average, first-grade boys are as
■uccessful as first-grade girls in learning how to read. Group B was composed of the twelve teachers who checked
60% and the two teachers who checked 50%. These fourteen
teachers, it was thought, believed that first-grade boys
are far less successful than girls in learning how to read
And Group C consisted of the eighteen teachers who checked
70%. It was thought that these teachers believed that
first-grade boys are a little less successful than girls “ 50 in learning how to read. None of the teachers who respond ed checked any of the six other alternatives in item 14.
These data are summarized in Table 1. Since the purpose of item 14 was to identify groups of teachers who had differing beliefs about the probable success in reading of first-grade boys relative to the success of first-grade girls, it was determined that the item had been successful, particularly in differentiating the Group A teachers from the Group B teachers. The Group
C teachers were eliminated at this point from further con sideration because it was thought that their reported beliefs were not sufficiently different from those of either the Group A teachers or the Group B teachers.
TABLE 1 TEACHERS’ REPORTED BELIEFS CONCERNING THE PERCENTAGE OF SUCCESS FOR BOYS IN LEARNING TO READ WHEN THE PERCENTAGE OF SUCCESS FOR GIRLS WAS ASSUMED TO BE 80%
Percentage of Success Number of Teachers
100% 0 90% 0 80% 10 70% 18 60% 12 50% 2 40% 0 30% 0 20% 0 10% 0 Total 42 51 An attempt was then made to match as many teachers as possible in Group A with a like number in Group B. It was decided that this would be done on the basis of three criteria. In the first place, only those teachers who had at least three years of first-grade teaching experience, including the year in which the study was being conducted, would be eligible. This criterion was considered important because it was thought that the teachers* reported beliefs concerning the probable reading success of boys as con trasted with that of the girls should be based on having taught several different classes of first-grade students.
The information gained from item 3 of the questionnaire indicated that three first- and second-year teachers, all of whom were in Group B, did not meet this criterion.
The second criterion was that only those teachers who had a Bachelor's degree would be eligible for final participation. This was considered highly desirable be cause it was thought that it would help to negate extreme variations in the amount of pre-service training which the teachers might have had, training which might have affect ed, in turn, their beliefs about sex differences in ability in learning to read. Item 4 of the questionnaire presented evidence that one teacher in Group A and three teachers in
Group B did not meet this criterion.
Finally, since it was thought that the teachers' 52 beliefs concerning the ability of boys to succeed in read
ing might be differently affected by the socioeconomic
area of the school in which they were employed, only those
teachers who taught in schools located in middle-class
neighborhoods were considered. In order to determine which
of the Springfield elementary schools were located in middle-class neighborhoods, two elementary supervisors
were asked independently to rank all of the schools on a
1, 2, 3 basis. A rank of 1 indicated that a school was
located in a lower-class neighborhood; a rank of 2 indica
ted that a school was located in a middle-class neighbor
hood; and a rank of 3 indicated that a school was located
in an upper-class neighborhood.
Although no attempt was made to define for the two
supervisors the meaning of lower-, middle-, and upper-class
neighborhoods, they agreed in their rankings on 21 of the
2 3 schools. Furthermore, they were in complete agreement
on alL 14 of the schools in which the Group A teachers and the Group B teachers, excluding the ones already eliminated
on the first two criteria, were employed.
On the basis, then, of the rankings given the
schools by the supervisors, three teachers were eliminated
from further consideration. One teacher in Group A and
one in Group B were employed in schools said to be located
in upper-class neighborhoods, and one teacher in Group A 53 was employed in a school said to be located in a lower- class neighborhood.
Table 2 summarizes the number of teachers from both Group A and Group B who were eliminated from the sample and the reasons for their elimination.
TABLE 2
CRITERIA FOR THE EXCLUSION OF GROUP A AND GROUP B TEACHERS
Criteria Group A Group B
Exper ience 0 3 Training 1 3
Socioeconomic Factors 2 1
Total 3 7
From the original number of ten teachers in Group A and fourteen teachers in Group B, seven teachers in each group met the three criteria as described above and so were considered to be matched on a group-to-group basis.
These teachers were then matched on a one-to-one basis in
terms of their years of first-grade teaching experience. This was done by placing the teachers within each group in
rank order from 1 to 7 with 1 indicating the least number oi years of experience and 7 the most number of years of experience. In effect, each teacher in Group A was matched 54 with a teacher in Group B. Table 3 shows the results of this procedure.
TABLE 3
GROUP A AND GROUP B TEACHERS MATCHED SPECIFICALLY ACCORDING TO EXPERIENCE
Years of Experience
Matched—Pairs Group A Group B
Matched-Pair 1 4 3 Matched-Pair 2 5 5 Matched-Pair 3 6 6 Matched-Pair 4 8 11 Matched-Pair 5 11 12 Matched-Pair 6 19 14 Matched-Pair 7 25 21
In addition to being matched in the above ways, it was determined from the questionnaire that the fourteen
teachers were all female and that all reportedly had three reading groups in their classes. Later, it was discovered
that all the teachers were Caucasian and that all, accord
ing to their principals' statements, were teaching hetero
geneously-grouped students within a self-contained
classroom setting. And finally, it was decided that the methods and materials used by the teachers for purposes of reading instruction were quite similar. The interview
In January, after the questionnaires had been returned and their results studied, an interview was held with each of the fourteen teachers. The purpose of the
interview was twofold. In the first place, the coopera
tion of the teachers in permitting their students to be used as subjects was sought. The teachers were informed
that permission had earlier been received both from the
Central Office of the Springfield Public School System
and from the principals of their respective buildings to
ask for their cooperation. They were also told that they
would be asked to administer two tests to their students,
an IQ test and a reading achievement test, and that the
results of these tests, after they were scored by the in
vestigator, would be made available to them.
The investigator was somewhat surprised to note
that during the interview none of the teachers asked ques
tions relative to the purpose of the study. Nevertheless
in order to obscure any ideas they might have formulated
about its purpose and, consequently, to minimize the
chances that these ideas might have affected the outcome
of the study, each teacher was told that she had been
randomly selected from among those who had returned the
* questionnaire and that all the data, gathered both from
the questionnaires and from the tests, would serve as the 56 basis for a general survey of first-grade reading practices and concerns. The fact that each participating teacher and student would remain anonymous was also stressed. Twelve of the fourteen teachers, six of the seven matched pairs, agreed to participate in the study. One of the teachers in matched-pair 1 (Table 3) had resigned her position between the time of the completion of the ques tionnaire and the interview, and, as a consequence, both teachers in that pair were automatically excluded from further investigation.
The second purpose of the interview was to estab lish the reliability of the teachers' responses to item 14 of the questionnaire. This was the item, it will be re membered, which asked the teachers to report their beliefs about the probable reading success of first-grade boys as compared to that of first-grade girls. In order to ac complish this end, without giving away the purpose of the study, each teacher was asked to make comments about the reasons for her responses to items 9 through 14 of the questionnaire. Since the first five items were irrelevant in terms of the purpose of the study, only those comments made about item 14 are given below. These comments were recorded by the investigator immediately after he had con cluded each interview and, although incomplete, are the essence of what each teacher said. 57 Group A teachers* comments.— "Boys are much better in some parts of reading than girls. They're not as neat or meticulous as girls— but they think better."
"I just don't understand why people say boys can't or don't learn to read in the first grade. They always do in my class. Very definitely, little or no difference be tween them and the girls."
"There are some years when I seem to have better girls and other years when the boys seem to do better. On the average, they're about equal. I think some teachers think that because the girls are neater they can read be tter."
"I know it's not what most teachers think (that boys and girls are equally successful), but I do."
"If there's any difference between boys and girls in learning to read, 1' haven't seen it in my classes."
Group B teachers' comments.— "I think girls are much better readers than boys . . . but boys seem to do better in arithmetic." "I don't particularly like it— I've got three boys of my own— but boys just don't do as well. They're not as ready."
"This year, now, my three best students are boys, but on the average boys don't do nearly as well as girls.
They just don't have the patience the girls do." 58 "There is always a higher proportion of boys in my bottom reading group and girls in my top group. Be sides, I've always had to fail two or three boys a year— hardly any girls."
"There's a very definite difference. The boys are just too active. They seem to be more immature."
Despite, then, the different reasons given by the teachers within each group, the investigator was satisfied that their reported beliefs, as indicated on the question naire, were reliable, and that there was a difference between the two groups relative to their beliefs about the
success of first-grade boys in learning to read.
The student sample
During the course of the investigation, one teacher
in matched-pair 2 (Table 3) requested, for personal
reasons, that she be excluded from the study. After she and her match had been eliminated, there remained ten
teachers, five in each group, whose students became eli
gible as the subjects for study.
At the time the questionnaire was filled out by
each of the ten teachers, there was a total of 142 stu
dents, 74 boys and 68 girls, in Group A, and 148 students,
79 boys and 69 girls, in Group B. Since it was thought
that no first-grade repeaters should be included in the investigation, seven boys and two girls in Group A and six 59 boys and three girls in Group B were eliminated. Complete data, in the form of reading readiness scores, reading achievement scores, and intelligence quotients, were sought for the remaining students.
In Table 4 a summary is given of the number of qualifying boys and girls in each group for whom complete data were collected. These 216 students constituted the final sample.
TABLE 4
STUDENT SAMPLE SIZE BY TEACHER GROUP
Teacher Group Boys Girls Total
A 53 54 107
B 58 51 109
111 105 216
Testing Procedures and Instruments
In order to test the major null hypothesis that there is no significant difference in reading achievement
scores between students classified according to sex and
according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the prob
able success of first-grade boys in learning to read,
Form X of the Stanford Reading Test, Primary 1, was ad
ministered in early May by the ten teachers in the two 60 groups to their students. The teachers were instructed as to the directions for administering the test, and all scoring was done by the investigator.
The 1964 edition r. f the Stanford Reading Test utilized in the study is one of the batteries in the Stan ford Achievement Test series. This series was standardized in 1963 using as test subjects over 850,000 pupils in 264 school systems. The Reading Test at the Primary 1 level, which is intended for use with students from the middle of the first grade to the middle of the second grade, consists of four sections: word reading, paragraph meaning, vocab- ulary, and word study skills. 90
Since it was determined that several variables, other than the beliefs of teachers, might have accounted for any differences among the four groups of students in their performance on the reading achievement test, a series of controls or checks had been previously established.
These are presented below.
Students1 socioeconomic background
Since one of the criteria used to match the teach ers in the two groups was the stipulation that only those
90 Truman L. Kelley, Richard Madden, Eric F. Gardner, and Herbert C. Rudman, Stanford Achievement Test, Directions for Administering (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1964), 32 pp. 61 employed in schools located in middle-class neighborhoods would be considered eligible for participation in the study, and since all the Springfield elementary schools at the time of the investigation were neighborhood schools, it was decided that the students of the ten teachers finally selected for investigation came generally from families having middle-class status.
Students1 chronological age
Most reading authorities are in general agreement that there is very little basis for choosing a specific chronological age as a criterion for successful achieve- ment in reading. 91 Nevertheless, in order to control for the effect any extreme variations in age might have had, it was decided that only those students whose ages, as of
January 1, 1968, ranged between six years-three months and seven years-three months would be studied. The nine boys and the four girls in Gpoup A and the eleven boys and the three girls in Group B who did not qualify according to this criterion were not included in the final sample which was given in Table 4.
The mean chronological age of each of the four groups of students comprising the final sample is presented in Table 5. It was thought that there was no observed
91 Smith and Dechant, op. cit., pp. 105-106. 62 difference among any of the four groups relative to this factor.
TABLE 5 MEAN CHRONOLOGICAL AGES BY MONTHS FOR THE FOUR STUDENT SAMPLE GROUPS
Mean Chronological Age
Teacher Group Boys Girls
I — ■ " " A 80.435 79.685 B 80.689 80.549
Students* reading readiness In an attempt to control partially for what might have been a considerable difference in the reading readi ness of the four groups, the reading readiness scores of the subjects were obtained from their cumulative folders. These scores had been made on the revised edition of the
Pre-Reading Test authored by Constance McCullough and David Russell and published by Ginn and Company to accompany its basal reading series.
The Pre-Reading Test, which was administered by all the first-grade teachers in Springfield in late September, has five sections: vocabulary readiness, tactile-visual readiness, visual readiness, auditory readiness, and com
prehension readiness. Norms for the test are based on the 63 performance of 0G0 first-grade children in thirteen dif ferent geographical locations representing both small and large population centers. For purposes of interpreting the results of the t^-st, three ranges of scores are sug gested by the authors: 0-59 (needs special help), 60-68 92 (average), and 65-70 (superior). It was decided that only those students who scored in the average and superior ranges on the test would qualify as subjects. As a consequence, the six boys and the four girls in Group A and the seven boys and the eight girls in Group D who scored in the "need special help" category were considered ineligible and were not included in the final sample which was given in Table 4.
The mean reading readiness scores of the four groups of students comprising the final sample are pre sented in Table 6. On the basis of these mean scores, it was decided that no observed difference existed among the groups relative to the readiness factor.
92Constance M. McCullough and David H. Russell, Pre-Readinq Test, Manual (New York: Ginn and Company, T 9 6 T ) ," 7 ~pp. 64 TABLE 6 MEAN READING READINESS SCORES FOR THE FOUR STUDENT SAMPLE GROUPS
Mean Reading Readiness Score Teacher Group Boys Girls
A 66.622 66.591
B - 65.948 65.961
Students' intelligence quotients Form J of the Otis-Lennon Mental Ability Test, Elementary 1 Level, was administered by all the teachers
in the sample to their students during the early part of
March. This test was given in order to investigate whether the groups of subjects being compared in terms of their achievement in reading had comparable intelligence quo tients. The teachers were instructed as to the directions for administering the test, and all scoring was done by
the investigator.
The Elementary 1 form of the test employed in the study is one of six levels in the Otis-Lennon series, The
norms for the entire series, which was standardized in 1967, are based upon the testing of nearly 200,000 pupils
in 117 school systems drawn from all 50 states. The Ele mentary 1 Level, which was specifically chosen because it requires no reading, is designed for use with children 65 between the last half of the first grade and the end of the third grade and consists of only pictorial-type test items.
These items sample the mental processes of classification, following directions, quantitative reasoning, comprehen- sion of verbal concepts, and reasoning by analogy. 93
In Table 7, the mean IQ of each of the four groups of students comprising the final sample is presented. No major difference, it was decided, existed among the groups relative to this factor.
TABLE 7
MEAN IQs FOR THE FOUR STUDENT SAMPLE GROUPS
Mean IQ Teacher Group Boys Girls
A 109.113 110.222 B 109.034 108o 765
Teacher competence
Since one of the major factors which might have resulted in a difference between the mean reading achieve ment of the boys in Group A and the boys in Group B was
the competence of their teachers, the girls in both teacher
93Otis and Lennon, op. cit., 23 pp. 66 groups, as has been noted, were given the same tests and were expected to meet the same criteria as the boys. If no marked difference were found between the two groups of girls relative to their achievement in reading, the teach ers of the two groups would then be judged comparable in
terms of basic teaching competence.
In Table 8, the mean reading achievement scores of
the two groups of girls comprising the final sample are given. On the basis of these mean scores, it was decided
that no marked difference existed between the groups and
that, as a consequence, the two teacher groups were compar
able in terms of competence. Evidence confirming this decision is presented in Chapter IV.
TABLE 8
MEAN READING ACHIEVEMENT SCORES FOR THE TWO GIRL GROUPS
Teacher Group Mean Reading Achievement Score
A 96.241
B 96.686
Summary
It was the major purpose of this investigation to determine the effect of teachers' reported beliefs concern
ing the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to 67 read on the actual achievement in reading which the stu dents in their classes attained. In order to accomplish this goal, all 63 first-grade teachers in the Springfield, Ohio, Public School System were sent a brief questionnaire in early December. One item on this questionnaire was designed to elicit from the teachers a report of their beliefs regarding the ability of first-grade boys to suc ceed in reading. On the basis of the usable questionnaires which were returned, 42 teachers were divided into three groups.
Group A consisted of ten teachers who believed that first- grade boys are as successful as first-grade girls in learning to read. Group B consisted of fourteen teachers who believed that first-grade boys are far less successful
than girls in learning to read. Group C consisted of eighteen teachers who believed that first-grade boys are
somewhat less successful than girls in learning to read. At this point, Group C was eliminated from further in vestigation . Five female, Caucasian teachers in Group A were
then matched with five teachers in Group B. Each of the
teachers had at least three years of first-grade teaching
experience, each had a Bachelor's degree, and each was
employed in a school said to be located in a middle-class neighborhood. In addition, each of the teachers gave 68 evidence in an interview with the investigator that her belief, as reported on the questionnaire, regarding the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read was reliable. The mean reading achievement scores of 53 boys and 54 girls whose teachers constituted Group A and of 58 boys and 51 girls whose teachers constituted Group B were ob tained from the Stanford Reading Test which was admin istered in the early part of May. Several of the variables which might have contributed to a difference in the achievement of the four student sample groups were ac counted for. These were: (1) their socioeconomic back ground, (2) their chronological age, (3) their scores on the Pre-Reading Test published by Ginn and Company,
(4) their intelligence quotients as measured by the Otis-
Lennon Mental Ability Test, and (5) their teachers' basic " ■ " " ■ t r - ...... — 11 teaching competence. 68 evidence in an interview with the investigator that her belief, as reported on the questionnaire, regarding the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read was reliable.
The mean reading achievement scores of 53 boys and 54 girls whose teachers constituted Group A and of 58 boys and 51 girls whose teachers constituted Group B were ob tained from the Stanford Reading Test which was admin istered in the early part of May. Several of the variables which might have contributed to a difference in the achievement of the four student sample groups were ac counted for. These were: (1) their socioeconomic back ground, (2) their chronological age, (3) their scores on the Pre-Reading Test published by Ginn and Company,
(4) their intelligence quotients as measured by the Otis-
Lennon Mental Ability Testt and (5) their teachers' basic teaching competence. CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
Major Hypothesis
The major hypothesis for this study was stated in the nuli form and postulated that there is no significant difference in reading achievement scores between students classified according to sex and according to their teach ers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first- grade boys in learning to read. It will be recalled that
teachers who believed that first-grade boys are as suc cessful as first-grade girls in learning to read were designated Group A teachers, and those who believed that
first-grade boys are far less successful than first-grade girls were designated as Group B teachers.
The students' reading achievement scores were derived from Form X of the Stanford Reading Test, Primary
1_. This test has four sections: word reading, paragraph meaning, vocabulary, and word study skills.
A two-way analysis of variance with students' IQ serving as a covariable was the statistical method used
to test all hypotheses. Levels of significance were set
69 70 at .05, and significant values were determined by means of an F test. Since students* IQ was a covariable, the four student sample groups were equated statistically in terms of IQ before any comparisons were made between and among them. This was done even though earlier there had appeared to be no major difference among the four groups relative to this factor (as shown in Table 7, Chapter III).
In order to facilitate interpreting the data, the major null hypothesis given above can be restated in three parts. These are stated below in null form: 1. There is no significant difference in reading achievement scores between students classified according to sex.
2. There is no significant difference in reading achievement scores between students classified according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read.
3. There is no significant interaction between reading achievement scores and students, classified both according to their sex and their teachers' beliefs.
Table 9 shows the analysis of variance of the
reading achievement scores of students classified by sex
and by the beliefs of their teachers, with students' IQ statistically controlled. It can be seen in this table,
as shown by the 1.787 value of F for the sex variation, 71
that there was no significant difference in reading achievement scores between the 111 boys and the 105 girls who composed the sample. As a consequence, the null hypothesis of no significant difference in reading achieve
ment scores between students classified according to sex
was accepted. The conclusion can be drawn from this find
ing trhat the effect of sex, taken by itself, did not result in significantly different levels of reading achievement
for the boys and the girls.
TABLE 9 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF THE READING ACHIEVEMENT SCORES OF STUDENTS CLASSIFIED BY SEX AND BY THE BELIEFS OF THEIR TEACHERS, WITH STUDENTS • IQ AS A COVARIABLE
Source of Sum of Mean Variation df Squares Squares F
Sex 1 519.460 519.460 1, 787 Group 1 347.314 347.314 1.195
Sex x Group 1 1184.152 1184.152 4.0 75a
IQ 1 52860.063 52860.063 181.885b Error 211 61321.656 290.624 Adjusted Total 215 114853.983
Significant at the .05 level. Significant at the .001 level. 72 An examination of the 1.195 value of F for the group variation in Table 9 reveals that there was no sig nificant difference in reading achievement scores between the 10 7 students whose teachers constituted Group A and the 109 students whose teachers constituted Group B. Con sequently, the null hypothesis of no significant difference in reading achievement scores between students classified according to their teachers' beliefs was accepted. On the basis of this finding, it can be concluded that the effect of teachers' beliefs alone did not result in significantly different levels of achievement in reading for the two student groups. Another important conclusion that can be drawn from the finding of no significant difference in reading achievement scores between the Group A students and the
Group B students is that the teachers of the two groups were comparable in terms of basic teaching competence. This conclusion confirms the earlier decision of no differ ence made on the basis of having observed no marked difference between the mean reading achievement score of the Group A girls and that of the Group B girls. These mean scores are shown in Table 8, Chapter III.
Crucial to the major interest of this study was
the null hypothesis that there is no significant interac
tion between reading achievement scores and students, 73 classified both according to their ?ex and their teachers’ beliefs. An inspection of the sex x group variation in
Table 9, which has an F value of 4,075, reveals that this null hypothesis of no significant interaction was rejected at the .05 level of confidence. The alternative hypoth esis, thenT of significant interaction between reading
achievement scores and the combined independent variables of students’ sex and teachers' beliefs was accepted.
The data in Table 9, while showing that there was
significant interaction between the dependent variable of
reading achievement scores and the combined independent variables of students' sex and teachers' beliefs, do not
show what the interaction produced. In order to show this,
an inspection of the mean reading achievement scores of
the 53 Group A boys, the 54 Group A girls, the 58 Group B boys, and the 51 Group B girls was necessitated. These
scores are presented in Table 10.
Inspection of Table 10 reveals that the Group B
boys made a much lower mean reading achievement score than did either the Group A boys, the Group A girls, or the
Group B girls, while these three groups attained mean
scores that were quite similar. Obviously, then, the interaction of students' sex and teachers' beliefs resulted in a lower mean score for the Group B boys, and, as stated
above, this interaction was significant. 74 TABLE 10 MEAN READING ACHIEVEMENT SCORES FOR THE FOUR STUDENT SAMPLE GROUPS
Mean Reading Achievement Scores
Teacher Group Boys Girls
A 96.52 3a 96.241
B 89.20 7a 96.686
aAn F test was used to determine whether the dif ference between these two means was significant. F=3.124; p ^ .08.
In terms of the major interest in this study, the conclusion can be drawn from the above findings that the significant interaction of students* sex and teachers' beliefs resulted in a marked difference (F=3.124; p ^ .08) between the mean reading achievement scores of the Group A boys and the Group B boys. Stated in another way, being male and being with teachers who believed that first-grade boys are far less successful than girls in learning to read resulted in a mean reading achievement score which was lower than that achieved by male students whose teach ers believed that first-grade boys are as successful as girls in learning to read. Furthermore, the probability that this difference occurred by chance is less than eight times out of a hundred. 75 Finally, Table 9 shows by the 181.885 value of F that the effect of IQ on reading achievement scores was significant at the .001 level. This was not unexpected since it means that students who scored high on the read ing achievement test had high IQs and those who scored lower had lower IQs.
Minor Hypotheses Four minor hypotheses, each pertaining to whether there were significant differences among students on one section of the reading achievement test, are now presented so that further analysis of the data might be made. These are stated below in null form:
1. There is no significant difference in word reading scores between students classified according to sex and according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read.
2‘. There is no significant difference in para graph meaning scores between students classified according to sex and according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read.
3. There is no significant difference in vocab ulary scores between students classified according to sex and according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the 76 probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read.
4. There is no significant difference in word- study-skills scores between students classified according to sex and according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read .
All four of these minor hypotheses were tested by a two-way analysis of variance with students' IQ serving as a covariable. Levels of significance were set at .05, and significant values were determined by means of an F test.
Word reading scores
The first minor hypothesis that there is no sig nificant difference in word reading scores between students classified according to sex and according to their teach ers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read can be restated in three parts*
These are given below in null form:
1. There is no significant difference in word reading scores between students classified according to sex.
2. There is no significant difference in word reading scores between students classified according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read. 77
3. There is no significant interaction between word reading scores and students, classified both accord ing to their sex and their teachers' beliefs.
Table 11 shows the analysis of variance of the word reading scores of students classified by sex and by
the beliefs of their teachers, with students' IQ statisti cally controlled. An inspection of the 3.055 value of F
for the sex variation in this table reveals that there was no significant difference in word reading scores between
the 111 boys and the 105 girls. Consequently, the null
hypothesis of no significant difference in word reading
scores between students classified according to sex was
accepted. On the basis of this finding, it can be con
cluded that the effect of sex, taken alone, did not result
in significantly different word reading scores for the
boys and the girls.
Table 11 also shows, as indicated by the F value
of 1.160 for the group variation, that there was no sig
nificant difference in word reading scores between the 10 7 students whose teachers constituted Group A and the 109 students whose teachers constituted Group B. As a result,
the null hypothesis of no significant difference in word
reading scores between students classified according to
their teachers' beliefs was accepted. The conclusion can
be drawn, therefore, that the effect of teachers' beliefs 78 alone did not produce significantly different word reading scores for the two student groups.
TABLE 11
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF THE WORD READING SCORES OF STUDENTS CLASSIFIED BY SEX AND BY THE BELIEFS OFTHEIR TEACHERS, WITH STUDENTS' IQ AS A COVARIABLE
Source of Sum of Mean Variation df Squares Squares F "■ ~\ - J Sex 1 88.423 88.423 3.055
Group 1 33.579 33.579 1.160
Sex x Group 1 80.632 80.632 2. 786
IQ 1 2272.740 2272.740 78.528a Error 211 6106.711 28.942 Adjus ted Total 215 8411.350
aSignificant at the .001 level.
An examination of the sex x group variation In the
table, which has an F value of 2.786, reveals that there was no significant difference in word reading scores among
the 53 Group A boys, the 54 Group A girls, the 58 Group B boys, and the 51 Group B girls. As a consequence, the null
hypothesis of no significant interaction was accepted.
One can conclude, on the basis of this finding, that the
combined effect of the two independent variables, students' 79 sex and teachers' beliefs, did not result in significantly different word reading scores for the four student groups.
And finally, it can be seen in Table 11 by the F value of 78.528 that the effect of IQ on word reading scores was significant at the .001 level.
Paragraph meaning scores The second minor hypothesis that there is no sig nificant difference in paragraph meaning scores between students classified according to sex and according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first- grade boys in learning to read can be restated in three parts. These are presented below in null form:
1* There is no significant difference in para graph meaning scores between students classified according to sex.
2. There is no significant difference in para graph meaning scores between students classified according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read.
3. There is no significant interaction between paragraph meaning scores and students, classified both ac cording to their sex and their teachers' beliefs.
Table 12 shows the analysis of variance of the paragraph meaning scores of students classified by sex and by the beliefs of their teachers, with students' IQ statis 80 tically controlled. The sex variation in this table shows by the 2.996 F value that there was no significant differ ence in paragraph meaning scores between the 111 boys and the 105 girls who made up the student sample® The null hypothesis, therefore, of no significant difference in paragraph meaning scores between students classified ac cording to sex was accepted. On the basis of this finding, one can conclude that, by itself, the effect of sex did not result in a significant difference in the paragraph meaning scores of the boys and the girls.
TABLE 12
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF THE PARAGRAPH MEANING SCORES OF STUDENTS CLASSIFIED BY SEX AND BY THE BELIEFS OF THEIR TEACHERS, WITH STUDENTS' IQ AS A COVARIABLE
Source of Sum of Mean Variation df Squares Squares F
Sex 1 112.404 112.404 2.996
iroup 1 0.257 0.257 0.007
Sex x Group 1 122.713 122.713 3.271
IQ 1 4019.877 4019.877 10 7. 13 7a Error 211 7916.931 37.521
Adjusted Total 215 11944.174
Significant at the .001 level. 81
The 0.00 7 value of F for the group variation in
Table 12 reveals that there was no significant difference in paragraph meaning scores between the 107 students whose teachers constituted Group A and the 109 students whose teachers constituted Group B. As a result, the null hypothesis of no significant difference in paragraph mean ing scores between students classified according to their teachers' beliefs was accepted. From this finding, the conclusion can be drawn that the effect of teachers' be liefs, taken by itself, did not result in significantly different paragraph meaning scores for the two student groups.
An inspection of the 3.271 value of F for the sex x group variation in the table reveals that there was no significant difference in paragraph meaning scores among the 53 Group A boys, the 54 Group A girls, the 58 Group B boys, and the 51 Group B girls. Consequently, the null hypothesis of no significant interaction was accepted.
Since the value of F, however, closely approximated sig nificance, an examination of the mean paragraph meaning scores of the four student groups was necessitated in order to determine what the marked interaction produced. These mean scores are presented in Table 13.
Table 13 reveals that, while the Group A boys and girls scored about the same, the Group B boys scored lower 82 than the other three groups and the Group B girls higher* One can conclude from these findings that the interaction of students' sex and teachers' beliefs resulted in a lower mean paragraph meanino score for the Group B boys and a higher mean paragraph meaning score for the Group B girls; and, in terms of the major interest of this study, that the interaction resulted in a difference (F=lo902; p ^ *10) in mean paragraph meaning scores between the Group A boys and the Group B boys.
TABLE 13 MEAN PARAGRAPH MEANING SCORES FOR THE FOUR STUDENT SAMPLE GROUPS
Mean Paragraph Meaning Scores
Teacher Group Boys Gir Is
A 19,208a 19.500
B 17.603a 20.741
An F test was used to determine whether the dif ference between these two means was significant* F=l„902; p > .10.
And finally, the F value of 107,137 in Table 12 indicates that the effect of IQ on paragraph meaning scores was significant at the .001 level* 83
Vocabulary scores
The third minor hypothesis that there is no sig nificant difference in vocabulary scores between students classified according to sex and according to their teach ers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read can be restated in three parts.
These are given below in null form:
1. There is no significant difference in vocab ulary scores between students classified according to sex.
2. There is no significant difference in vocab ulary scores between students classified according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read. 3. There is no significant interaction between vocabulary scores and students, classified both according to their sex and their teachers' beliefs. Table 14 shows the analysis of variance of the vocabulary scores of students classified by sex and by the beliefs of their teachers, with students’ IQ statistically controlled. An inspection of the F value of CU596 for the sex variation in this table reveals that there was no significant difference in vocabulary scores between the
111 boys and the 105 girls. As a consequence, the null hypothesis of no significant difference in vocabulary scores between students classified according to sex was 84 accepted. The conclusion that can be drawn from this find ing is that the effect of sex alone did not result in significantly different vocabulary scores for the boys and the girls.
TABLE 14
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF THE VOCABULARY SCORES OF STUDENTS CLASSIFIED BY SEX AND BY THE BELIEFS OF THEIR TEACHERS, WITH STUDENTS» IQ AS A._COVARIABLE
Source of Sum of Mean Variation df Squares Squares F
Sex 1 13.601 13.601 0.596
Group 1 81.663 81.663 3.5 78
Sex x Group 1 12.219 12.219 0.535
IQ 1 2422.868 2422.868 106.166a Error 211 4815.338 22.822 Adjusted Total 215 7532.831
Significant at the .001 level.
The group variation in Table 14, which has a 3.578
F value, shows that there was no significant difference in vocabulary scores between the 10 7 Group A students and the 109 Group B students. Therefore, the null hypothesis of no significant difference in vocabulary scores between students classified according to their teachers' beliefs 85 was accepted. Since the value of F, however, closely approximated significance, an inspection of the mean vocabulary scores of the two groups was thought to be necessary. These mean scores are given in Table 15.
TABLE 15 MEAN VOCABULARY SCORES FOR STUDENTS IN THE TWO TEACHER GROUPS
Teacher Group Mean Vocabulary Scores
A 19.514 B __ 20.560
Table 15 reveals that the Group B students had a higher mean vocabulary score than the Group A students*
From this finding, it can be concluded that the effect of teachers' beliefs, taken by itself, did result in a higher mean vocabulary score for the Group B students than for the Group A students. While not significant, the differ ence between the two groups was marked.
An examination of the 0.535 F value for the sex x group variation in Table 14 reveals that there was no significant difference in vocabulary scores among the 53 Group A boys, the 54 Group A girls, the 58 Group B boys, and the 51 Group B boys. As a consequence, the null hypothesis of no significant interaction was accepted. 86
One can conclude on the basis of this finding that the interaction of the two independent variables, students* sex and teachers' beliefs, did not result in significantly different vocabulary scores for the four student groups.
Finally, Table 14 shows by the 106.166 value Of F that the effect of IQ on vocabulary scores was significant at the .001 level. This means that students who had high vocabulary scores had high IQs and those who had lower vocabulary scores had lower IQs.
Word-study-skills scores
The fourth and final minor hypothesis that there is no significant difference in word-study—skills scores between students classified according to sex and according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read can be restated in three parts. These are given below in null form;
1. There is no significant difference in word- study-rskilIs scores between students classified according to sex.
2. There is no significant difference in word- study-skills scores between students classified according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read.
3. There is no significant interaction between 87 word-study-skills scores and students, classified both according to their sex and their teachers' beliefs.
Table 16 shows the analysis of variance of the word-study-skills scores of students classified by sex and by the beliefs of their teachers, with students' IQ statistically controlled. The 1.204 value of F for the sex variation in this table shows that there was no sig nificant difference in word-study-skills scores between
the 111 boys and the 105 girls. Therefore, the null hypothesis of no significant difference in word-study-
skills scores between students classified according to sex was accepted. On the basis of this finding, the conclu
sion can be drawn that the effect of sex alone did not
result in significantly different word-study-skills scores
for the boys and the girls.
An inspection of the 13.115 F value for the group
variation in Table 16 reveals that there was a significant
difference in word-study-skills scores between the 107
Group A students and the 109 Group B students. The null
hypothesis, then, of no significant difference was re
jected at the .01 level of confidence in favor of the
alternative hypothesis that there is a significant differ
ence in word-study-skills scores between students classi
fied according to their teachers' beliefs. 88
TABLE 16
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF THE WORD-STUDY-SKILLS SCORES OF STUDENTS CLASSIFIED BY SEX AND BY THE BELIEFS OF THEIR TEACHERS, WITH STUDENTS’ IQ AS A COVARIABLE
Source of Sum of Mean Variation df Squares Squares F
Sex 1 41.916 41.916 1 * 204
Group 1 456.733 456.733 13.115a
Sex x Group 1 117.913 117.913 3.386
IQ 1 4846.221 4846.221 139.153b
Error 211 7348.391 34.826
Adjusted Total 215 12684.691
aSignificant at the .01 level.
^Significant at the .001 level.
Table 17, which presents the mean word -s tudy- skills scores of the Group A and the Group B students, shows that the Group A students made a higher mean word— study-skills score than the Group B students. It can be concluded, then, that the effect of teachers' beliefs, taken alone, did result in a significantly higher mean word-study-skills score for the Group A students than for the Group B students. 89
TABLE 17
MEAN WORD-STUDY-SKILLS SCORES FOR STUDENTS IN THE TWO TEACHER GROUPS
Teacher Group Mean Word-Study-SkilIs Scores
A 36.972
B 33.716
It can be seen by the F value of 3.386 for the sex x group variation in Table 16 that there was no significant difference in the word-study-skills scores among the 53
Group A boys, the 54 Group A girls, the 58 Group B boys, and the 51 Group B girls. Consequently, the null hypoth esis of no significant interaction was accepted. Since the value of F, however, closely approximated significance, an inspection of the mean word-study-skills scores of the four student groups was thought to be necessary in order to determine what the marked interaction produced.
An examination of the mean scores in Table 18 shows that the Group A boys made a higher score than the
Group A girls, who, in turn, scored higher than the Group
B girls. The Group B girls, finally, scored better than the Group B boys. On the basis of this finding, one can conclude that the combined effect of students' sex and teachers' beliefs resulted in markedly different mean word- study-skills scores for the four groups; and, in terms of 90 the major interest j.n this study, that the combined effect resulted in a significantly lower mean score (F=5«428; .03) for the Group B boys than for the Group A boys.
TABLE 18 MEAN WORD-STUDY-SKILLS SCORES FOR THE FOUR STUDENT SAMPLE GROUPS
Mean Word-Study-Skills Scores
Teacher Group Boys Girls
■■■ ' "T ' 11 1 1 " 1,11 1,11 1 1 1 A 3 7.0 75a 36.870
B 32.655a 34.922
* ■ ■■ — F1 " - ■ " aAn F test was used to determine whether the dif ference between these two means was significant, F=5.428; p ^ .03.
As expected, finally, the F value of 139.153 in
Table 16 indicates that the effect of IQ on word-study- skills scores was significant at the .001 level.
Summary
Fifteen null hypotheses, each dealing with whether there were significant differences between and among groups of students in their scores on the Stanford Reading Test, were tested by a two-way analysis of variance, with stu dents' IQ serving as a covariable. The results of this 91 testing were presented in this chapter, and a brief sum mary of the findings is made below.
In the first place, neither significant nor marked differences were found between the 111 boys and the 105 girls in their scores on the total reading achievement test or on any of its four sections.
Secondly, no differences were found in total scores, word reading scores, and paragraph meaning scores between the 109 Group A students, those whose teachers believed that first-grade boys are as successful as girls in learning to read, and the 10 7 Group B students, those whose teachers believed that first-grade boys are far less successful than girls in learning to read. On the word- study-skills test, however, the Group A students made a significantly higher mean score than the Group B students, and on the vocabulary test the Group B students made a markedly higher mean score.
Finally, no differences were found in word reading scores and vocabulary scores among the 53 Group A boys, the 54 Group A girls, the 58 Group B boys, and the 51
Group B girls. In total scores, however, a significant difference was found among the four groups, and in para graph meaning scores and word-study-skilIs scores marked differences were found. Inspection of the mean scores of the four groups on these three tests, the total test, the 92 paragraph meaning test, and the word-study-skilIs test, revealed that the Group B boys did least well on all three. CHAPTER V „
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The Purpose and Procedures of the Study
The central purpose of this study was to determine the effect of teachers' reported beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read on the measured achievement in reading which the students
in their classes attained. It was of major interest to determine the effect of these beliefs on the achievement of the boys in their classes.
Forty-two first-grade teachers in the Springfield, Ohio, Public School System returned questionnaires, one
ite of which was designed to elicit from them a report of their beliefs regarding the probable success in reading
of first-grade boys.
Five teachers (Group A) who believed that first-
grade boys are as successful as first-grade girls in
learning to read were matched with five teachers (Group B)
who believed that first-grade boys are far less successful
than first-grade girls in learning to readc All ten of
the teachers were female Caucasians, all had at least three
93 94 years of first-grade teaching experience, all had Bach elor's degrees, and all were employed in schools said to be located in middle—class neighborhoods. In addition, individual interviews with all of the teachers indicated
to the investigator that their beliefs, as reported on the questionnaire, regarding the probable success in reading of first-grade boys were reliable. The mean reading achievement scores of the 53 boys
and the 54 girls whose teachers constituted Group A and of
the 58 boys and the 51 girls whose teachers constituted
Group B were obtained from the Stanford Reading Test. A
two-way analysis of variance was the statistical technique
used to determine whether there were significant differ ences in the mean reading achievement scores between and
among the groups, with the students' IQ serving as a co
variable in the analysis.
No marked differences were judged to exist among the four groups on several variables. These were: (1) their general socioeconomic backgrounds, (2) their mean chronological ages, (3) their mean scores on the Pre-
Reading Test published by Ginn and Company, and (4) their mean intelligence quotients as measured by the Otis-Lennon Mental Ability Test. Finally, no marked difference ap
peared to exist between the Group A and the Group B
teachers relative to their basic teaching competence. This 95 was decided on the basis of the fact that there was no significant difference in mean reading achievement scores between the 10 7 students whose teachers constituted Group A and the 109 students whose teachers constituted Group B.
Summary of Findings
From an analysis of the data in this study, the following findings concerning the fifteen null hypotheses may be stated; 1. There is no significant difference in reading achievement scores between students classi fied according to sex.
On the basis of having found no significant differ ence in reading achievement scores between the 111 boys and the 105 girls, the first null hypothesis was accepted. 2. There is no significant difference in reading achievement scores between students classi fied according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first- grade boys in learning to read. Since no significant difference in reading achieve ment scores was found between the 10 7 students whose teachers constituted Group A and the 109 students whose teachers constituted Group B, the second null hypothesis was accepted.
3. There is no significant interaction between reading achievement scores and students, classified both according to their sex and their teachers' beliefs. The third null hypothesis was rejected at the .05 96 level of confidence since a significant difference in reading achievement scores was found among the 53 Group A boys, the 54 Group A girls, the 58 Group B boys, and the
51 Group B girls. The Group B boys had a lower pnean score than that of any of the other three groups, whose scores were very similar. The difference between the scores made by the Group B boys and the Group A boys was marked
(p< .08). 4. There is no significant difference in word reading scores between students classified according to sex.
Since no significant difference in word reading scores was found between the 111 boys and the 105 girls, the fourth null hypothesis was accepted.
5. There is no significant difference in word reading scores between students classified according to their teachers' beliefs concern ing the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read.
On the basis of having foynd no significant dif ference in word reading scores between the 10 7 Group A students and the 109 Group B students, the fifth null hypothesis was accepted.
6. There is no significant interaction between word reading scores and students, classified both according to their sex and their teach ers’ beliefs.
The sixth null hypothesis was accepted since no significant difference in word reading scores was found 97 among the 53 Group A boys, the 54 Group A girls, the 58
Group B boys, and the 51 Group B girls.
7. There is no significant difference in para graph meaning scores between students classified according to sex. On the basis of having found no significant dif ference in paragraph meaning scores between the 111 boys and the 105 girls, the seventh null hypothesis was ac cepted .
8. There ip no significant difference in para graph meaning scores between students classified according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read. Since no significant difference in paragraph mean ing scores was found between the 10 7 Group A students and the 109 Group B students, the eighth null hypothesis was accepted. 9. There is no significant interaction between paragraph meaning scores and students, classified both according to their sex and their teachers' beliefs. The ninth null hypothesis was accepted since no significant difference in paragraph meaning scores was
found among the 53 Group A boys, the 54 Group A girls, the
58 Group B boys, and the 51 Group B girls. Because the value of F, however, approximated significance, an inspec tion of the mean paragraph meaning scores of the four groups was made. It showed that the Group B boys made a
lower mean score than any of the other three groups. Of
these three groups, the Group B girls scored higher than 98 the Group A girls who, in turn, scored better than the Group A boys. The difference between the Group B boys and the Grogp A boys was not statistically significant
.10).
10. There is no significant difference in vocab ulary scores between students classified according to sex.
Since no significant difference in vocabulary scores was found between the 111 boys and the 105 girls, the tenth null hypothesis was accepted.
11. There is no significant difference in vocab ulary scores between students classified according to their teachers' beliefs con cerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read.
On the basis of having found no significant dif ference in vocabulary scores between the 10 7 Group A students and the 109 Group B students, the eleventh null hypothesis was accepted. Since the value of F, however, approximated significance, an inspection of the mean vocabulary scores of the two groups was made. It showed that the Group B students had a markedly higher mean score than the Group A students. 12. There is no significant interaction between vocabulary scores and students, classified both according to their sex and their teach ers' beliefs.
The twelfth null hypothesis was accepted since no significant difference in vocabulary scores was found 99 among the 53 Group A boys, the 54 Group A girls, the 58
Group B boys, and the 51 Group B girls.
13. There is no significant difference in word- study-skills scores between students classi fied according to sex. Since no significant difference in word-study- skills scores was found between the 111 boys and the 105 girls, the thirteenth null hypothesis was accepted.
14. There is no significant difference in word- study-skills scores between students classified according to their teachers' beliefs concerning the probable success of first-grade boys in learning to read.
The fourteenth null hypothesis was rejected at the .01 level of confidence since a significant difference in mean word-study-skills scores between the 10 7 Group A students and the 109 Group B students was found. An ex amination of the scores of the two groups revealed that the Group A students made a significantly higher mean score than the Group B students.
15. There is no significant interaction between word-study-skills scores and students, classified both according to their sex and their teachers' beliefs. The fifteenth null hypothesis was accepted since no significant difference in word-study-skills scores was
found among the 53 Group A boys, the 54 Group A girls, the
58 Group B boys, and the 51 Group B girls. Because the value of F, however, approximated significance, an exam
ination of the mean word-study-skills scores of the four 100 groups was made. It revealed that the Group B boys made a
lower mean score than any of the other three groups. Of
these groups, the Group A boys had a higher mean score
than the Group A girls who, in turn, had a higher mean
score than the Group B girls. The difference in the mean
scores between the Group B boys and the Group A boys was significant (p < .03).
Conclusions After analyzing the findings of this study in which students' IQ was statistically controlled, the con clusion can be drawn that the effect of sex alone did not result in significantly different levels of achievement in
reading for the boys and the girls. It can also be said that the effect of teachers' beliefs, taken by itself,
resulted in only very minimal differences in levels of
reading achievement between the Group A students and the
Group B students. There was a marked difference in mean vocabulary scores between the two groups which favored the
Group B students, and a significant difference in mean
word-study-skills scores which favored the Group A stu
dents . The conclusions that can be drawn from the findings
relative to the major interest in this study are: (1) that
the combined effect of sex and teachers' beliefs did re sult in significantly different mean scores for the four 101 student groups on the total reading achievement test and in different mean scores that closely approximated sig nificance on the paragraph meaning and the word-study- skills tests; (2) that the combined effect did result in the Group B boys doing least well of any of the four groups in their mean scores on these three measurements, the total test, the paragraph meaning test, and the word- study-skills test; and (3) that it did result in a significant difference between the Group B boys and the
Group A boys on the wordrstudy-skilIs test, in a differ ence that closely approximated significance between the two groups on the total test, and in an observed differ ence between the two groups on the paragraph meaning test.
It might be interesting to speculate at this point why the combined effect of sex and teachers' beliefs re sulted in lower scores for the Group B boys on the para graph meaning and the word-study-skills tests and not on the word reading and the vocabulary tests. Given the fact that Group B teachers believed that boys are far less suc cessful than girls in learning to read, could it be that they also believed that the former areas are more difficult to teach and to learn than the latter and, as a result, that the boys in their classes would naturally fall behind faster in paragraph meaning and word study skills? Or, could it be that the areas of word reading and vocabulary 102 are developed outside of the classroom to a greater degree than are the areas of paragraph meaning and word study skills? If this were the case, as the writer thinks it might be, then it could be said that the areas in which the Group B boys did less well than the Group A boys were the ones over which their teachers had more direct control.
At any rate, the fact remains that in this study, when first-grade teachers reported that they believed that first-grade boys are far less successful than girls in learning to read, the male students of those teachers did achieve less well on the Stanford Reading Test than did a comparable group of male students whose teachers reported that they believed that boys are as successful as girls in learning to read.
Recommendations
The findings of the present study suggest a need for much further investigation of the effect of teachers' beliefs on the academic achievement of their students.
Some recommendations for future researchers are given below:
1. Replications of the present study in other educational settings are needed. Also needed are studies designed to investigate the effect of first-grade teachers' beliefs on the reading achievement of lower-class and 103 upper-class students and of students of low and high in telligence.
2. Investigations should be made to determine whether the beliefs of teachers at other grade levels
concerning the probable success of their students in read
ing have any effect on the achievement in reading of these pupils. Investigations should also be made to determine
whether the beliefs of teachers concerning the probable
success of their students in other curriculum areas have
any effect on their achievement in these areas. These
investigations should encompass all socioeconomic levels and all ability levels.
3. A variety of instruments for determining the
beliefs of teachers concerning the probable success of
students in all subject areas is needed. The validity
and reliability of these instruments need to be estab
lished .
4. Longiiudinal studies are needed to assess the
cumulative effect on students* achievement of teachers who have differing beliefs about pupils' probable academic success.
5. Research is needed to determine how teachers
communicate their beliefs to students. Likewise, there is
a need for research to determine whether students' percep
tions of their teachers* beliefs correlate with the beliefs * 104 themselves, and whether these perceptions affect, and to what degree they affect, the pupils' self-concepts and levels of motivation.
6, Research should be undertaken which ultimately will give educators at both the pre-service and the in- service levels some meaningful guidelines as to the ways in which teachers' beliefs concerning the probable academic success of their students can be changed in a desirable direction,
7. And finally, research is needed to determine whether the academic performance of students changes after their teachers' beliefs relative to the potential per formance of pupils have been altered. APPENDIX A
THE FORM LETTER AND THE QUESTIONNAIRE
USED IN THE STUDY
105 Wittenberg University Department of Education 207 Blair Hall Springfield, Ohio 45501 Dear First-Grade Teacher:
In cooperation with Wittenberg University and The Ohio State University, I am conducting a limited study of teacher opinions regarding certain beginning reading practices and of teacher beliefs regarding sex differences in beginning reading.
As a professional person teaching in the first- grade, your opinion is highly valued. You are asked, therefore, to complete the brief questionnaire attached to this letter.
Your individual responses will be kept strictly confidential, being known only by myself. An envelope is provided in which the completed questionnaire is to be re turned .
I thank you very much for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
J. Michael Palardy Instructor
106 107 QUESTIONNAIRE
1. Name: ______
2. Name of school in which you are teaching: ______
3. Years of first-grade teaching experience: (Count 1967-68 as one year.)
^4.' Do you hold a degree (s)? Yes No If yes, please specify: ______5. Total number of students in your room: ______
6. Total number of boys in your room: . 7. Total number of girls in your room: ______
8. Usual number of reading groups in your class:
Directions: Please base your answers to the following questions on the knowledge you have gained both from your experience as a teacher and from your professional training.
9. Which of the following "innovations" do you think holds the most promise for use in teaching beginning reading? (Please check only one.) Initial Teaching Alphabet ^I.T.A.) Words-in-Color
Linguistics Language-Experience Approach
Other (please specify) ______10, Do you believe that in the basal reading series used in your class there is too much emphasis on picture and context clues? Yes No 108 11. Do you believe that in the basal reading series used in your class there is enough systematic phonics in struction? Yes No
12. Do you believe that in the basal reading series used in your class the content of the stories is more interesting for the girls than for the boys? Yes No 13. Assume that you could change or add to the content of ttie stories found in the basal reading series used in your class. Which of the following changes would you first make? (Please check only one.) Include more science-related materials
Include more social studies-related materials Include more animal stories
Include more humor ^Include as major and minor characters people of "differing racial and ethnic groups Other (Please specify) ______
14. Assume that first-^qrade qirls, on the averaqe, achieve W success in learning how to read. If this assump tion were true, what percentage of success do you believe first-grade boys, on the average, achieve? (Please check only one.)
100% ___ 50% 90% 40% 80% ___ 30%
70% __ ^20%
60% 10% BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Boris low, Bernard. "Self-Evaluation and Academic Achieve ment," The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learning. Edited by Don E. Hamachek. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965.
Brookover, Wilbur B., and Gottlieb, David. A Sociology of Education. New York: American Book Company, 1361."
______, Thomas, Shailor, and Paterson, Ann. "Self- Concept of Ability and School Achievement," The Self in Growth. Teaching, and Learning. Edited ^y^or>"^ETTTamacHek^~Englewood— Cliffs^ New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965.
Combs, Arthur W. "Intelligence from a Perceptual Point of View," The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learn ing. Edited by Don fc. Hamachek. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965.
Davidson, Helen H. , and Lang, Gerhard. "Children's Per ceptions of Their Teachers' Feelings toward Them related to Self-Perception, School Achievement, and Behavior," The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learn ing. Edited by Don E. Hamachek. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965.
Drever, James. A Dictionary of Psychology. Baltimore, Maryland: Penguin Books, 196 7. Elkin, Frederick. The Child and Society. New York: Random House,' 1960.
Fink, Martin B. "Self-Concept as it Relates to Academic Underachievement," The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learning. Edited by Don E. Hamachek. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965.
110 Frandsen, Arden N, Educational Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1967,
Horrocks, John E. Assessment of Behavior, Columbus, Ohio Charles E. Merrill Books, Inc., 1964.
Jersild, Arthur T. "Social and Individual Origins of the Self," The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learning. Edited by Don E, Hamachek, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc,, 1965.
Mead, George H, Mind, Self and Society-; - Chicago, Illi nois: The University of Chicago Press, 1934.
Morse, William C., and Wingo, G. Max, Psychology and Teaching. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1962.
Perkins, Hugh V. "Changing Perceptions of Self," The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learning. Edited by Don E. Hamachek. Englewood CliffsT," New Jersey: Prentice- Hall, Inc., 1965.
Rosenthal, Robert, and Jacobson, Lenore. Pygmalion in the Classroom. New York; Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inic.', 1968. Schmuck, Richard A., Luszki, Margaret B. , and Epperson, David C. "Interpersonal Relations and Mental Health in the Classroom," Readings in Educational Psychol ogy, Edited by Henry Clay Lindgren. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1968.
Srpith, Henry P. , and Dechant, Emerald V. Psychology in Teaching Reading. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1961. Smith, Nila B. Reading Instruction for Today's Children. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, IncV, 1963. Staines, J. W. "The Self-Picture as a Factor in the Classroom," The Self in Growth, Teaching, and Learn ing . Edited by Don E. Hamachek. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965.
Thomas, W. I. "The Relation of Research to the Social Process," Essays on Research in the Social Sciences. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1931. 112
Vander Zanden, James W. American Minority Relations. New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1963.
Walsh, Ann Marie. Self-Conpept of Bright Boys with Learn ing Difficulties. New York: Bureau of Publica tions, feachers College, Columbia University, 1956.
Wylie, Ruth C. The Self Concept. Lincoln, Nebraska: The University of Nebraska Press, 1961.
Periodical Articles
Bledsoe, Joseph C. MSelf-Concepts of Children and Their Intelligence, Achievement, Interests, and Anxiety," Childhood Education. XLIII (March, 1967), 436-438.
Chadwick, Jean A. "Some Effects of Increasing the Teach ers' Knowledge of their Pupils' Self Pictures," The British Journal of Educational Psychology, XXXVII (February, 1^6'7) , 129-131.
Combs, Charles F. "Perception of Self and Scholastic Underachievement in the Academically Capable," The Personnel and Guidance Journal, XLIII (September, 1964T, T4 7--5T. ’ Cummins, Robert E. "Research Insights into the Relation ship between Teachers' Acceptance Attitudes, Their Role Concepts, and,Students' Acceptance Attitudes," The Journal of Educational Research, LIII (January,
Foshay, Arthur W. "Considerateness and Aggression: An Action Research Study," Educational Research Bul letin, XXXJI (April, 1953), 85-112.
Gordon, Ira J., and Wood, Patricia C. "The Relationship between Pupil Self-Evaluation, Teacher Evaluation of the Pupil, and Scholastic Achievement," The Journal of Educational Research, LVI (April, 1963), 440-443.
, and Combs, Arthur W. "The Learner: Self and Perception," Review of Educational Research, XXVIII (December , 1958), 43*3-444. 113 Henderson, Edmund H. , Long, Barbara H. , and Ziller, Robert C. "Self-Social Constructs of Achieving and Non-achieving Readers," The Reading Teacher, XIX (November, 1965), 114-118, '~~
Kinch, John W, "A Formalized Theory of the Self-Concept,” American Journal of Sociology, LXVIII (January, 1963), 481-486. '
McNeil, John D. "Programmed Instruction versus Usual Classroom Procedures in Teaching Boys to Read," American Educational Research Journal, I (March, 1964), 115-121. 1
Morse, William C. "Self Concept Data," National Associ ation of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, XLVIII (September, 1964), 23-27.
Perkins, Hugh V. "Factors Influencing Change in Children's Self-Concepts," Child Development, XIX (1958), 203- 220. Roth, Robert M. "The Role of Self-Concept in Achievement," Journal of Experimental Education, XXVII (June, 1^59), 265-281. 1 Ryans, David G. "Teacher Behavior, Theory and Research: Implications for Teacher Education," Journal of Teacher Education, XV (September, 1963TJ 274-2T§4. Shaw, Merville, and Alves, Gerald. "The Self-Concept of Bright Underachievers: Continued," The Personnel and Guidance Journal, XLII (December, 1963), 401-403.
, Edson, Kenneth, and Bell, Hugh M. "The Self- Concept of Bright Underachieving High School Students as Revealed by an Adjective Check List," The Personnel and Guidance Journal, XXIX (November, I960), 193-196. Slobetz, Frank, and Lund, Alice. "Some Effects of a Personal Developmental Program at the Fifth Grade Level," The Journal of Educational Research, IL (January, 1956), 373-378. — — —
Slobodiap, June, and Campbell, Paul. "Do Children's Per ceptions Influence Beginning Reading Achievement?" The Elementary School Journal, LXVII (May, 1967), 419-425. 114
Videbeck, Richard. "Self-Conception and the Reaction of Others," Sociometry, XXIII (December, 1960), 351- 359. ” ' Washburne, C^rleton, and Heil, Louis M. "What Character istics of Teachers Affect Children's Growth?" The School Review, ^XVIII (Winter, 1960), 420-428. Zoolalian, Charles H. "Factors Related to Differential Achievement among Boys in Ninth-Grade Algebra," The Journal of Educational Research, LVIII (Janu- ary, 1965), 205-207.
Reports and Manuals
Catalog of Standard Tests and Related Services. New York: Harcourt, Brace &' World, Inc., 1967.
Kelley, Truman L., Madden, Richard, Gardner, Eric F . , and Rudman, Herbert C. Stanford Achievement Test, Directions for Administierinq. New York': Harcourt, Brace & World, ’I n c 1964.
McCullough, Constance M., and Russell, David H. Pre- Reading Test, Manual. New York: Ginn and Company, 1 9 6 1 7 ------
Otis, Arthur S., and Lennon, Roger T. Otis-Lennon Mental Ability Test, Manual for Administration. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1967. Wattenberg, William W . , and Clifford, Clare. Relation ship of the Self-Concept to Beginning Achievement in' Reading. Cooperative Research Project No. 177. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Office of Education, 1962.
Unpublished Materials
Binder, Dorothy M. "Relationships among Self-Expectations, Self-Concept, and Academic Achievement," Disserta tion Abstracts, XXVI (1966).
Bruck, Max. "A Study of Age Differences and Sex Differ ences in the Relationship between Self-Concept and Grade-Point Average," Dissertation Abstracts, XIX (1959)b 115 Hallock, George A. "Attitudinal Factors Affecting Achievement in Reading," Dissertation Abstracts, XVIII (1958). 1
Low^her, Malcolm A. "A Comparison of the Educational Motivation, Self-Evaluation and Classroom Conduct of High and Low Achieving Eighth Grade Students," Dissertation Abstracts, XXII (1962). Lumpkin, Donavan D. "The Relationship of Self-Concept to Achievement in Reading," Dissertation Abstracts, XX (1959).
Miller, Clifford D, "An Exploratory Investigation of Self Concepts of High-Achieving, Average-Achieving, and Low-Achieving Groups of Junior High Pupils as Perceived by the Pupils and their Teachers," Dis sertation Abstracts, XXVI (1965). i , ■■ ■■■■ - ■ Spicola, Rose F. "An Investigation into Seven Correlates of Reading Achievement including the Self-Concept," Dissertation Abstracts, XXI (1961). Stevens, Peter H. "An Investigation of the Relationship between Certain Aspects of Self-Concept and Stu dents' Academic Achievement," Dissertation Abstracts, XVI (1956). 1