72- 15,192
CIGNETTI, Jesse Anthony, 1941- A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE PERCEPTIONS OF BEGINNING SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THEIR SCIENCE CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES, CULTURAL ATTITUDES AND KNOWLEDGE OF CULTURALLY DEPRIVED STUDENTS.
The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1971 Education, general
University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan
THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN 'MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED A COMPARATIVE STUDY OP THE PERCEPTIONS OP BEGINNING
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS IN RELATIONSHIP TO
THEIR SCIENCE CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES, CULTURAL
ATTITUDES AND KNOWLEDGE OP CULTURALLY
DEPRIVED STUDENTS
DISSERTATION
Presented In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
By Jess Anthony Clgnetti, B.S., M.Ed
**«»»«
The Ohio State University 1971
Approved by
Adviser < College of Education PLEASE NOTE:
Some pages have indistinct print Filmed as received.
University Microfilms, A Xerox Education Company ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My gratitude and appreciation are extended to all who offered words of encouragement and assistance during this study.
My deepest expression of gratitude is offered my adviser, Dr. Frederick Schlessinger, whose encouragement and guidance have been so vital to this study. The under standing to related problems and his kind suggestions have been a source of inspiration.
I wish also to thank the helpful guidance of the other members of my committee, Dr. Herbert Coon and Dr.
James K. Duncan.
Appreciation is given to Dr. Arthur White for his counselling in the various statistical and computer prob lems, to Dr. Robert Howe for his assistance to the study, and to Mr. William Brewington who was a pleasure to work with during the study.
To my wife, Mary Ann, and my daughter Jill, my deepest love and appreciation for their patience, encour agement, and sacrifice through the years of my graduate study. This degree was earned together.
ii To my father who died during the last months of my doctoral program, his Inspiration, encouragement and forethought will continue with me forever.
Jess A. Clgnetti September, 1971
ill VITA
September , 1941 Born - Oklahoma, Pennsylvania
1962 ...... B.S. Ed., Slippery Rock State College, Slippery Rock, Pennsylvania.
1962-1965 . . . Chemistry and Physical Science teacher, Penn Hills High School, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
1965 ...... M.Ed., Duquesne University, Pitts burgh, Pennsylvania.
1965-1967 . . . Chemistry and Physical Science teacher, Gateway Schools, Monroe ville, Pennsylvania.
1967-1968 . . . Academic Year Institute, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
1968-1970 . . . Assistant Professor of Physical Sciences, California State College, California, Pennsylvania.
1970-1971 . . . Assistant to the Director of Academic Year Institute, Department of Science and Mathematics Education, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Fields of Study
Studies in Science Education, Professors F. R. Schlessinger and H. 1. Coon.
Studies In Curriculum, Professor James K. Duncan.
lv TABLE OP CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... ii
V I T A ...... lv
TABLES ...... vii
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION AND NEED FOR THE S T U D Y ...... 1
Variables Measured ...... 4 Definition of Terms...... 7 Hypotheses ...... 9 Limitations ...... 12 Delimitations ...... 13 Assumptions ...... 14 O v e r v i e w ...... 15
II. REVIEW OP RELATED RESEARCH ...... 16
Characteristic and Problems of Beginning Science Teachers ...... 16 Beginning Teachers and Resulting Behavior Changes ...... 26 Research Involving Early In-School Experiences and/or Urban Settings ...... 30
III. THE STUDY— DESIGN AND P R O C E D U R E ...... 37
Population and Samples ...... 37 Instrumentation ...... 49 Data Collection Procedures ...... 55 Analysis of D a t a ...... 56
IV. ANALYSIS OP RESULTS ...... 60
Non-Ohio State Graduate Results (NOSU) .... 60 S u m m a r y ...... 82 Ohio State Graduate Results (OSU) ...... 84 Summary ...... 108
v Chapter Page
Non-Ohio State Graduates (NOSU) Compared to the Ohio State Graduates ( O S U ) ...... 110 S u m m a r y ...... 123 Summary of Results of Chapter I V ...... 125
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . 129
S u m m a r y ...... 129 Conclusions ...... 132 Recommendations ...... 137
APPENDIX
A. Science Classroom Activities Checklist: Teacher Perceptions (SCACL:TP) ...... 139
1. The Instrument ...... 140
B. Science Classroom Activities Checklist: Student Perceptions (SCACL:SP) ...... 145
1. The Instrument ...... 146
C. QUESTIONNAIRES ...... 151
1. Classroom Student Questionnaire ...... 152 2. Teacher Questionnaire...... 153
D. Facilities Checklist ...... 156
E. The Interview Schedule ...... 159
F. Cultural Attitude Inventory ...... l6l
G. Descriptions of Science Teacher Education Programs at The Ohio State University.... 166
H. Listings of Variables for Correlation M a t r i x ...... 174
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 176
vi TABLES
Table Page
1. The Schools, Number of Participating Teachers, and Institutions Attended ...... 41
2. Means, Standard Deviation, and Ranges for the First Year Ohio State Teachers In Science and the First Second and Third Year Non-Ohio State Graduates of Science ...... 43
3. Frequency of Schools and Classes by School Category and Urban-Suburban Classification . . . 44
4. Frequency of Classes by Grade Level for Both Categories of Graduates and Urban-Suburban Classification ...... 45
5. Frequency of Classes by Science Area, Ohio State and Non-Ohio State Graduates, and Urban- Suburban Classification ...... 46
6. Frequency of Curriculum Projects by Science Area for the NOSU Graduate ...... 47
7. Frequency of Curriculum Projects by Science Area for the Ohio State Project and Non-Project G r a d u a t e s ...... 47
8. Frequency of Curriculum Project Classes by School Classification for Non-Ohio State and Ohio State (Project, Non-Project) Graduates ...... 48
9. Mean Class Size, Standard Deviation, and Range by Ohio State Graduates (Project, Non-Project) Non-Ohio State Graduates and Urban-Suburban Classification ...... 48
10. Kuder-Richardson 20 and 21 Reliabilities for the Science Classroom Activities Checklist (un- revlsed and revised) and for the Pre-test and Post-test Data Collection Phase of the Present Investigation ...... 51
11. Correlations of Selected Variables of the Non- Ohio State Graduates with the Composite Post test Score on the SCACL:TP ...... 62 vii Table Page
12. Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Non-Ohio State Graduates with the Composite Post-Test Score on the SCACLtTP ...... 63
13. Correlation of Selected Variables of the Non-Ohio State Graduates with the Composite Post-test Score on the SCACL:SP ...... 65
14. Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Non-Ohio State Graduates with the Composite Post test Score on the SCACL:SP ...... 66
15. t-Test for Correlated Samples Comparing the Non- Ohio State Science Teacher Graduates on Pre and Post-test SCACLrTP Composite and Subscale S c o r e s ...... 68
16. t-Test for Correlated Samples Comparing the Non- Ohio State Science Teacher Graduates in Pre and Post-test SCACL:SP Composite and Subscale S c o r e s ...... 69
17. Correlations of Selected Variables of the Non- Ohio State Graduates with the Composite Cultural Attitude Inventory Score ...... 71
18. Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Non-Ohio State Graduates with the Cultural Attitude Inventory (CAI) Composite Score .... 72
19. Correlations of Selected Variables of the Non- Ohio State Graduates with Cultural Attitude Inventory Attitude Subscale Score ...... 73
20. Correlations of Selected Variables of the Non-Ohio State Graduates with the Cultural Attitude Inventory Knowledge Subscale Score ...... 74
21. Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Non-Ohio State Graduates with the Attitude Subscale of the Cultural Attitude Inventory . . 76
22. Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Non-Ohio State Graduates with the Knowledge Subscale of the Cultural Attitudes Inventory . . 76
viii Table Page
23. Correlations of Selected Variables of the Non-Ohio State Graduates with the Students' Mean Attitude Toward Science ...... 77
24. Correlations of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Students' Attitude Toward the Present Science Course ...... 79
25. Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Non-Ohio State Graduates with the Students' Mean Attitude Toward Science ...... 80
26. Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Non-Ohio State Graduates with the Student Mean Attitude Toward the Present Science Course. 81
27. t-Test for Correlated Samples Comparing the Non- Ohio State Graduates on Pre and Post Test Attitudes Toward Science and the Present Course. 81
28. Correlations of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Composite Post Test Score on the SCACL:TP ...... 85
29. Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Composite Post Test Score on the SCACL:TP ...... 86
30. Correlations of Selected Varlalbes of the Ohio State Graduates with the Composite Post Test Score on the SCACL:SP ...... 87
31. Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Composite Test Score on the SCACL:SP ...... 88
32. t-Test for Correlated Samples Comparing the Ohio State Science Teacher Graduates on Pre and Post Test SCACL:TP Composite and Subscale Scores ...... 90
33. t-Test for Correlated Samples Comparing the Ohio State Science Teacher Graduates (Project and Non-Project) on Pre and Post Test SCACL:TP Composite and Subscale Scores ...... 91
ix Table Page
34. t-Test for Correlated Samples Comparing the Ohio State Graduates on Pre and Post Test SCACL:SP Composite and Subscale Scores ...... 93
35. t-Test for Correlated Samples Comparing the Ohio State Science Teacher Graduates (Project and Non-Project) on Pre and Post Test SCACL:SP Composite and Subscale Scores ...... 94
36. Correlations of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Composite Cultural Attitude Inventory Score ...... 96
37* Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Cultural Attitude Inventory (CAI) Composite Score ...... 97
38. Correlations of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Cultural Attitude Inventory Subscale Score ...... 98
39. Correlations of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Cultural Attitude Inventory Knowledge Subscale Score ...... 100
40. Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Attitude Subscale of the Cultural Attitude Inventory ...... 101
41. Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Knowledge Subscales of the Cultural Attitude Inventory ♦ . 101
42. Correlations of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Students' Mean Attitude Toward Science ...... 102
43. Correlations of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Students' Attitude Toward the Present Science Course ...... 104
44. Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Students Mean Attitude Toward Science ...... 105
x Table Page
45. Regression Analysis of Selected Variables of the Ohio State Graduates with the Students' Mean Attitude Toward the Present Science Course . . . 105
46. t-Te3t for Correlated Samples Comparing the Ohio State Graduates on Pre and Post Test Attitudes Toward Science and the Present Science Course . 107
47. Univariate P Tests for Hypothesis 1— NOSU Graduates Vs. OSU Graduates on SCACL:TP and Subscales ...... Ill
48. Univariate P Tests for Hypothesis 1— NOSU Graduates vs. OSU Projects, vs. OSU Non-Project on SCACL:TP and Subscales ...... 112
49. Means, Pair Differences, and the Maximum Allowable Difference for a Tenable Ho, on Subscale C (SCACL :T P ) ...... 113
50. Univariate P Tests for Hypothesis 2 (NOSU Gradu ates vs. OSU Graduates) on SCACL:SP and S u b s c a l e s ...... 114
51. Univariate P Tests for Hypothesis 2 NOSU Gradu ates vs. OSU Project and OSU Non-Project Graduates on SCACL:SP and Subscales ...... 114
52. Means, Pair Differences, and the Maximum Allowable Difference for a Tenable Ho, On Subscale P (SCACL:SP)...... 115
53. Univariate P Tests for Hypothesis 3 (NOSU Gradu ates V 3 . OSU Graduates on CAI Composite, Attitude Subscale and Knowledge Subscale .... 116
54. Univariate P Tests for Hypothesis 3 (NOSU Gradu ates vs• OSU Project and OSU Non-Project Graduates) on CAI Composite, Attitude, and Knowledge Subscales ...... 117
55. Means, Pair Differences, and the Maximum Allowable Differences for a Tenable Ho, on the CAI Knowledge Subscale ...... 118
xi Table Page
56. Univariate P Tests for Hypothesis *1 (NOSU Gradu ates vs. OSU Graduates on the Students' Attitudes on Science and the Present Science C o u r s e ...... 119
57. Univariate P Tests for Hypothesis 4 (NOSU Gradu ates vs. OSU Project vs. OSU Non-Project Graduates) on the Students' Attitudes on Science and the Present Science Course ...... 119
58. Univariate P Tests for Hypothesis 5 (NOSU Gradu ates vs. OSU Graduates) Teachers' Attitude Toward the Importance of Selected Factors in Obtaining or Maintaining a Quality Science P r o g r a m ...... 121
59. Univariate P TE3ts for Hypothesis 5 (NOSU Gradu ates vs. OSU Project vs. OSU Non-Project G r a d u a t e s ) ...... 122
xii CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION AND NEED FOR THE STUDY
The period from 1957 to 1970 was highlighted by unprecedented activity in the development of "new" science curricula for elementary and secondary schools. During the same period much effort was made to retrain lnservice science teachers to use the curriculum materials as they were developed. Central to the success of the curriculum projects is the changing role of the science teacher, and the nature of the science activities employed in classroom instruction.
The National Science Foundation has sponsored > numerous institutes specifically to train teachers in the philosophy and methodology of the many projects. It seems that a corresponding effort of equal magnitude is needed in the preservice education of teachers in order to reduce rather than perpetuate the gap between development and positive implementation of new programs.
At the Ohio State University much time and effort has been spent on the development of a pre-service science education program that will positively implement the rationale of the new curricular materials and of science education in particular. The program will be referred to as the Ohio State Project Program. In addition the program is concerned with the development of teachers who can utilize their teaching skills in varied environments. The program at the Ohio State University gives students early envolvement in various classrooms, schools, and outside agencies. Their skills are further expanded by experience in different environmental settings (urban and suburban).
In-school experiences are coupled with seminars, with the focus of attention being to reduce the gap between theory and practice. The seminars Include Input from school administrators, psychologists, university personnel, experienced teachers, and community representatives, thus enriching the experiences of the pre-service teacher.
A 1968 NASSP Bulletin Illuminates the fact that the beginning teacher in America today is not being prepared effectively to cope with the educational problems of children coming from low-income homes, or homes with a different cultural pattern than the one we label "American.
This lack of preparation was comic in Up the Down Staircase but the real result is not amusing. Only 19 per cent of all prospective teacher graduates in 1966 were willing to teach In large city or rural school sys t e m s JJ,/
Operating concurrently with the Science Teacher
Education Project is the "traditional" science education program. (This program will be referred to as the Non-
Project Program.) The Non-Project Program is also directed
at preparing teachers with the necessary skills that will
positively Implement the rationale of science education.
The Non-Project Program does not contain the provisions
for early in-school experience and preparation in schools
of different environmental settings (urban and suburban).
Further information is provided in Appendix G.
Swineford has suggested that the improvement of
pre-service programs of teacher education will result
from more definitive information on the factors, or
Influences, that affect teaching behavior. Obviously
these factors are many and varied, differing in intensity
and pattern with different teachers and different
situations.^3) Brownell has said, "To improve teacher
education is to Improve teaching; to Improve teaching is
to improve the schools; to improve the schools is to
strengthen the next generation; to strengthen the next
generation is a duty of the first magnitude.This
statement reflects one of the primary reasons for
undertaking the present study.
The study will be a part of a cooperative study with Mr. William Brewington, a graduate research
associate in Science Education at The Ohio State Univer sity. Mr. Brewington1s study will be focused on the Ohio State University graduates in their first year of science teaching. This researcher will study the beginning Non-
Ohio State and Ohio State graduates who are teaching science in the same schools.
Variables Measured
Variables considered important to science Instruc
tion are cited by White(**9) and modified by Sagness.^6)
Using the list of variables as a guide, the following variables were measured by the information obtained from the following pencil and paper Instruments:
1. Teacher Questionnaire (T.Q.)
2. Student Questionnaire (S.Q.)
3. Interview Schedule
4. Facilities Checklist
5. Cultural Attitudes Inventory (C.A.I.)
6. Science Classroom Activities Checklist:
Student Perception (SCACL:SP)
7. Science Classroom Activities Checklist:
Teacher Perception (SCACL:TP)
Variables Measured by
1. Teacher Variables
a. Sex T.Q.
b. Age T.Q.
c. Teachers view of students they teach T.Q. 5 d. Attitude toward culturally deprived
children C.A.I. e. Knowledge of culturally deprived
children C.A.I.
f. View of the type of science classroom
activities that should be used SCACL:T.P.
g. Exposure or not to science course
improvement projects T.Q. h. Type of degree held T.Q. i. Attitude toward teaching T.Q. j . Attitude or view of type of
science activities SCACL:SP k. Attitude toward factors that are
necessary for improving or maintaining Interview Schedule a quality science program
1. Teachers attitude toward: T.Q.
(1) Class in study
(2) Teaching science
(3) Textbook materials
(4) Laboratory facilities
(5) Laboratory equipment
m. Limitations on teaching T.Q.
(1) Supervision
(2) Books and materials
(3) Facilities 6
n. Number of different subject
preparations per day T.Q.
2. Environmental Variables
a. Location of schools F .A.D.C.
b. Classes per day T.Q.
c. Students per day T.Q.
d. Class size (elective, required) T.Q.
e. Size of school T.Q.
f. Laboratory facilities Facilities Check
g. Equipment Facilities Check
h. Funds for equipment and materials Interview Schedule
3. Content Variables
a. Date of publication of textbook Interview Schedule
b. Subject taught T.Q.
c. Type of curriculum materials used Interview Schedule
l|. Student Variables
a. Age S.Q.
b. Sex S.Q.
c. Number of years of science S.Q.
(7th grade as a base)
d. Attitude toward science S.Q.
e. Attitude toward present science
course S.Q.
f. Future plans for taking
science related course S.Q. g. Previous 9 weeks grade S.Q,
h. Attitude toward teacher S.Q.
T.Q.— Teacher Questionnaire
SCACL:T.P.— Teacher classroom activities checklist;
teacher perception
SCACLiS.P.— Science classroom activities checklist;
student perception
S.Q.— Student Questionnaire
C.A.I.— Cultural Attitude Inventory
F.A.D.C.— Federal Aid to Dependent Children
Definition of Terms
For adequate interpretation of this study there needs to be provided a section dealing with the definition
of terms. The terms listed below are defined for this particular study and thu3 may or may not comply with
generally accepted definitions.
1. Urban (Inner city) and suburban (outer city) were used
as variables and compared to the percentages of
students enrolled In a particular school, who were on
Federal Aid to Dependent Children (FADC).
The category system was as follows;
1. Suburban (outer city)...... 0-k% FADC
2. Intermediate (urban-sub urban)...... 5-195& FADC
3. Urban (inner city)...... 20% and over FADC In-3ervlce acience teacher— This term was used to apply
to any science teacher presently employed in the state
of Ohio and teaching two or more science classes.
Ohio State Project Graduate (OSU)— a particular science
teacher who has completed the special program developed
by the Faculty of Science and Math Education. (Appen
dix Q describes the program and provides additional
information to the reader.) This teacher is in his
first year of teaching and is teaching a minimum of
two science classes.
Ohio State Non-Project Graduates— The program which
has been used for the professional education of
science teachers by the Faculty of Science and Mathe
matics Education at the Ohio State University.
Appendix G describes the program and provides further
Information about the Ohio State Project Graduate.
Non-Ohio State Graduate (NOSU)— A particular science
teacher who is a graduate of an accredited college or
university other than The Ohio State University and is
teaching science in the state of Ohio. This teacher
mu3t be in his first, second, or third year of
teaching and is teaching a minimum of two science
classes in the same school as an OSU graduate.
Culturally Deprived— This term is used synonymously with culturally disadvantaged and applies to an individual who lacks many of the normal opportunities
available to American children
7. Co-operating School— A school that had both an OSU and
a NOSU teacher meeting the established criteria and
willing to participate In this study.
Hypotheses
Non-Ohio State Graduate Hypotheses
1. There are no significant relationships between the
selected variables of the Non-Ohio State graduate
science teachers (NOSU) and their view of the type of
science classroom activities they think should be used
for science instruction.
2. There are no significant relationships between the
selected variables of the Non-Ohio State graduates
(NOSU) and the science classroom activities used for
science instruction.
3. The Non-Ohio State science teacher graduates will not
have changed their views significantly about the types
of science classroom activities which should be used
for science classroom instruction at the completion of
the school year.
M . The Non-Ohio State science teacher graduates will not
have changed their views significantly about the types
of science classroom activities which are used for 10
science classroom instruction at the completion of the
school year.
5. There are no significant relationships between the
selected variables of the Non-Ohio State (NOSU)
graduate teachers and their knowledge of and attitude
toward culturally deprived students.
6. There are no significant relationships between the
selected variables of the NOSU graduates and the
attitude of the student toward science and the present
science course.
Ohio State Graduate Hypotheses
1. There are no significant relationships between the
selected variables of the Ohio State graduate science
teachers (OSU) and their view of the type of science
classroom activities they think should be used for
science Instruction. 2. There are no significant relationships between the
selected variables of the Ohio State graduates (OSU)
and the science classroom activities used for science
instruction.
3. The Ohio State science teacher graduates will not have
changed their views significantly about the types of
science classroom activities which should be used for
science classroom instruction at the completion of
the school year. 11
4. The Ohio State science teacher graduates will not have
changed their view significantly about the types of
science classroom activities which are used for
science classroom Instructions at the completion of
the school year.
5. There are no significant relationships between the
selected variables of the Ohio State (OSU) graduates
and their knowledge of and attitude towards culturally
deprived students.
6. There are no significant relationships between the
selected variables of the OSU graduates and the
attitude of their students toward science and the
present science course.
Non-Ohio State graduates - Ohio State graduates Comparisons Hypotheses
1. The NOSU and OSU science teacher graduates will not
hold significantly different views concerning the
types of science classroom activities which should be
used for science instruction at the completion of the
school year.
2. The NOSU and OSU science teacher graduates will not be
significantly different in the science classroom
activities used for instruction at the completion of
the school year. 12
3. The NOSU and OSU science teacher graduates will not be
significantly different in their attitude toward and
knowledge of culturally deprived students at the
completion of the school year.
4. The students of the NOSU and OSU teachers will not
have significantly different views toward science and
the present science course at the completion of the
school year.
5. The NOSU and OSU teacher graduates will not hold sig
nificantly different views towards the importance of
selected factors in obtaining or maintaining a science
program.
Limitations
The limiting factors in this study are the
following:
1. The fact that the teachers selected were not randomly
selected for the study, but Included only those
teachers obtaining employment in the state of Ohio.
2. The fact that the instruments were not administered at
the same points in time for all classes participating
in the study.
3. The extent to which the Cultural Attitude Inventory
(CAI) by Skeel is a valid and reliable measuring
device for lnservice teachers' knowledge and attitude
toward culturally deprived students. 13 t|. The extent to which the Science Classroom Activities
Checklist: Student Perception (SCACL:SP) is a valid and
reliable device for determining the science activities
which are used by inservice teachers in their science
classroom instruction.
5. The extent to which the Science Classroom Activities
Checklist: Teacher Perception (SCACL:TP) is a valid
and reliable measuring device for determining what
science activities should be used by lnservice teachers
in their science classroom instruction.
6. The extent that the Facilities Checklist and the
interview Schedule are valid and reliable Instruments
for evaluating school science facilities and the
teachers attitude toward the importance of certain
factors in relationship to obtaining or maintaining a
quality science program.
7. The fact that the instruments wer<% not administered at
the same point in time during the pre-test and poBt-
test Instrument administration.
3elimit at1ons
1. The study is not concerned with value Judgments
related to any individual concerning attitudes
or behavior as measured by the selected lnstru-
r-ier.ts« This study 1b concerned with group out
comes of The Ohio State Science graduates and 14
the Non-Ohio State graduates. These outcomes
will be used in a systematic analysis of the
Teacher Education Program in Science Education
at The Ohio State University.
2. This study will not attempt to correlate student
achievement with teacher of effectiveness as
measured by the selected administered instru
ments.
3. The study was limited by those Ohio State gradu
ates that accepted teaching positions in the
State of Ohio
4. The study was further limited by using only
those schools in which an Ohio State Science
Education graduate could be matched with a Non-
Ohio State Graduate
5. Not all data collected was analyzed for the
present study; only the promising data was
pursued.
Assumptions
The basic assumptions of this study are listed below. They are:
1. The study does assess beginning teachers' view3
toward what activities should be and are used
for science classroom instruction. 2. The Instrument (Science Classroom Activities
Checklist) assess those activities and practices
that contribute toward the positive implementa
tion of contemporary science education objectives.
3. The contemporary science education objectives,
as reflected In the science classroom activities
checklist, would apply regardless of the school
environment and setting.
4. A pencil and paper instrument can be used to
measure the activities that should be and are
used for secondary science instruction.
Overview
This dissertation Includes five chapters.
Chapter I: Introduction and Importance of the Study
Chapter II: Review of the Literature
Chapter III: The Design and Method.. This Is discussed in
four sections.
1. Population 2. Instrumentation 3. Data Collection Procedures 4. Analysis of Data
Chapter IV: Analysis of Results
Chapter V: Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations. CHAPTER II
REVIEW OP THE LITERATURE
Research on Characteristics and Problems of Beginning Science Teachers
The educational literature contains an overwhelming amount of material on the characteristics of teachers. An effort ha3 been made to report the larger studies In the area of beginning science teachers.
During the 1960-61 school year the National Science
Foundation conducted a questionnaire survey of 3957 teachers of science and mathematics at the secondary school level. The purpose was to survey the educational back grounds along with the operational procedures used by the teachers studied. Half of the sample was less than thirty-five years of age and only one-quarter of the sample was over forty-five years of age. Eight of ten teachers of physics and seven of ten teachers of chemistry spent more time teaching another subject than physics or chemistry, respectively. Many biology teachers found themselves devoting the major portion of their time to general science.(33)
16 17
Wey (1951) conducted a study which utilized a
questionnaire and two visits to the beginning teachers to
discover their differences and difficulties as beginning
teachers. Forty-seven per cent of the difficulties
encountered related to the five areas listed below in
order of descending frequency. (1) Handling problems of pupil control and discipline. (2) Adjusting to
deficiencies in school equipment, physical conditions and materials. (3) Adjusting to teaching assignments.
(4) Adapting to needs of students. (5) Motivating pupil interest and response.
A major study conducted on beginning teachers by
the National Education Association (1956) produced much
descriptive information. Most of the teachers were between twenty and twenty-five years of age. Forty-seven per cent of the secondary teachers were male, The
larger systems drew teachers with more advanced degrees than did the smaller systems. Almost 16 per cent of the secondary teachers felt they would prefer a field of work other than teaching; 39 per cent of the teachers had some conflict between their own educational philosophy and that of the school or principal; 30 per cent of the sample reported little or no help from the principal and
1(9 per cent received no help from supervisory personnel.Jordan (1966),^2^ Brown (1964),^^ and 18
Strickland (1966) ^ 2^ also cited little help from super visors as a frequent difficulty reported by beginning teachers.
Stone (1963) studied the personal and professional problems of one hundred sixty-eight beginning junior and senior high school teachers who were in their first year of teaching. The most important problems as indicated by the teachers were; in descending order: (1) motivation;
(2) handling discipline; (3) teaching slow or retarded classes; (4) establishing rapport with pupils while maintaining authority; (5) understanding behavior of students; (6) finding time to do everything expected;
(7) understanding what 3hould be taught; (8) finding time (41) for planning and preparation.
Kessler (1963) asked one hundred beginning teachers and ten supervisors who worked with the teachers to identify areas of greatest need of beginning teachers.
The findings reported were: (1) the greatest number of beginning teachers (84 out of 100) indicated the need for help in handling chronic disrupters; (2) the smallest number (14 out of 100) needed help in maintaining healthful conditions in classrooms.
The Florida Teacher Education Advisory Council
(1958) reported an evaluation of the pre-service program of teacher education by the first and second year teachers 19
In Florida, U3lng pencil and paper Instruments.^®^ Gray
(1962) made a more recent study of 1583 of the 2*107 beginning teachers in Florida using teacher self-
evaluation, principals' evaluations, and performance on
the MTAI (Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory) as
criteria of effectiveness.^*^ Hall (1962) studied
thirty-eight beginning elementary teachers in Dade County,
Florida. Hall concluded except for the area of arithmetic
computation, hours of professional education had
consistently positive correlations with pupil gains on (2 2 ) the achievement tests.v
Berry (I960) compared seventy-eight pairs of first year provisionally and professionally certified teachers
in Dade County, Florida. Using a modified form of
The Classroom Observation Record developed by Ryans,
Berry concluded that the completion of the professional sequence of education courses is reflected in more effective teaching. ^3)
Dalton (1962) used the Bryan Questionnaire to
obtain student reactions to ten teacher characteristics.
The author reported that the teacher rated more favorably (13) was the teacher who had more courses in education.
The U.S.O.E. (The United State Offices of
Education) in 196*1, conducted a national study of beginning teachers. The study reported that the situation in which the beginning teacher found himself
and his qualifications for teaching seemed to influence his attitude toward job satisfaction. This study reported that the majority of beginning teachers did not expect to remain in teaching. ^5)
Issac (1963) conducted a three year study of the problems of beginning teachers in Chicago. The study reported that the first year teacher needed a program of enlarged experience while the second year teacher expressed less concern. The third year teacher’s mention (25) of problems was markedly decreased.
Carter (1967) conducted a study of beginning science and mathematics teachers in Georgia. A rela tively small number of significant differences were found between the beginning teachers of science and mathematics
This study indicated that teachers of science and math have a professional preference for the counselor role.
(The study didn't attempt to measure the congruence . ( q ) between what is and what should be .)'1-7*
Broadbent and Cruickshank conducted a study to determine beginning teachers’ perceptions of their teaching problems. A questionnaire was sent to 282
June 196^ elementary and secondary graduates of State
University College, Brockport, New York. Replies from
163 showed a significantly frequent recurrence of certain 21 teaching problems. These problems fall into six major
categories and were ranked for frequency as follows:
(1) method, (2) evaluation of students, (3) discipline,
(4) parent relations, (5) routines and materials, (6) lack of self-confidence.^^
Gifford conducted a study comparing selected personality characteristics of provisionally certified high school teachers with those of professionally certified high school teachers who were in their first year of teaching in the State of Georgia during the
1965-66 school year. Sex, grade level taught, and subject field were also considered. The finding indicated that math teachers identified with the disciplinarian role more than teachers in other fields, and that social studies teachers were significantly higher in stimulating imagination rather than dull teacher behavior.
Jordan conducted a survey study which had as its focus the selected perceptions of beginning teachers in
Georgia relative to their teaching assignments. The findings revealed that the teachers varied significantly by level of assignment, teacher preparation differed more by level than by subject area of assignment, and the teachers' attitude toward teaching as a career was viewed in a significantly different way when teachers were 22 compared both according to level and subject area of (26) assignment.
Another study on beginning teachers in Georgia was conducted by Riggs. The purpose of this study was to identify and to compare selected characteristics and perceptions of various beginning junior high school teachers in Georgia. Role perceptions as measured by the Teacher Practice Questionnaire, self concept as measured by the Index of Adjustment and Values, behavioral patterns and attitudes as measured by the
Teacher Characteristic Schedule, and attitudes toward education as measured by the TERP Attitude Scale were employed in the study. The findings indicate that
(1) female teachers viewed the motivation role signifi cantly more favorable than did male teachers, (2) Science teachers were estimated to be more learning centered than the other groups of teachers. (3) the professional education sequence seems to have a general effect in the attitudes of beginning junior high school teachers. This effect was toward the positive.(35)
Kootz conducted a study on beginning teachers and their professional attitudes based on the type of school they were employed to teach in. One type had an adequate induction program based on the following criteria: (1) providing information at time of 23 recruitment, (2) pre-school orientation, (3) classroom supervision, (4) establishing a relationship with fellow . teachers, (5) in-service programs, (6) new teacher assignment policies. The other type of school did not have the stated criteria for their beginning teachers.
The conclusions indicate that beginning teachers who were employed in schools which neglected induction programs left teaching or reported planning to leave in the near future, more frequently than those who were employed in schools which provided adequate induction programs. The major implication of thi3 study is that school officials who give attention to Induction programs find teachers remaining in the teaching profession and (2 8} being more satisfied with it as a career. ;
O'Neil conducted a study of opinions of students, first year, and cooperating teachers affiliated with
Colorado State College, Greeley, Colorado. A question naire designed to determine the value of the pre-service teaching experience was marked and returned by 1,1^5 out of 2,272 possible respondents. The finding indicated that the following experiences were very valuable: (1) organize dally lesson plans, (2) using available teaching aids, (3) organize subject matter into units, (4) devel oping the techniques of questioning, (5) constructing, giving, and interpreting tests, (6) evaluating students 24
using devices other than exam3, (7) teaching homogenous
and heterogenous groups, (7) knowing and understanding
the Philosophy of the School in which you teach.^3*0
Clinton conducted a study of the problems
encountered by one hundred graduates of East Texas State
University. The findings indicated that the beginning
teachers' problems were centered on the following four
factors: (1) Difficulty with materials, aids, and
resources. This difficulty is caused by lack of training
in the teacher education project. (2) Difficulty with
preparation, planning, motivation, individual differences, professional development, and extra duties due to a lack
of time, (3) Difficulty in working with different ability
levels, (4) A narrow view of the teacher role in public
relations. ^
Steele conducted a study to identify the factors which form the basis for success for new secondary
teacher graduates of Prostburg State College. The study population was selected on the basis of college records
for the graduates of 1963, 1964, and 1965. The two instruments used were: (1) a rating scale for use by school officials to determine success of performance of teachers, (2) instrument to assess the professional program at the undergraduate level. The findings were:
(1) Some curriculum items within the professional sequence 25
were not valued the same by the Education Faculty and the
new teacher. (2) Teachers rated satisfactory by school
officials had acquired more and valued more of the pro
fessional program than teachers rated unsatisfactory by
school officials. (3) Teachers rated theoretical method
courses higher than other courses in terms of value and
acquisition. One recommendation of the study was that
involvement in public school experiences from the
beginning of their professional declaration must be made. (**0)
Trull conducted a study to assess the attitudes
of third year teachers in Georgia and to explore the
relationships of these attitudes to their biographical
characteristics. The study utilized a six tenths (6/10)
random sample of the teachers who were in their third year of teaching. The results Indicate that female
teachers had a more favorable attitude toward the total professional environment, and that teachers who had pre-teaching experience had more favorable attitudes (lili) toward teaching, parents, and their students.
Summary
The educational literature on the beginning
teachers seems to focus on the problems and/or descriptive information on these teachers. The general problems of 26
beginning teachers seem to be: (1) discipline, (2) not
enough help from supervisor, (3) evaluation of students,
(4) lack of self-confidence, (5) need of more time to do
everything expected. Other factors such as the induction process for the beginning teacher and the teachers' qualification seemed to influence his attitude toward Job
satisfaction and ultimately his retention in the profession.
Research Involving Beginning Teachers and Resulting Behavior Changes
Because of the nature of the problem for Investi
gation of this study, literature was explored to locate
studies in which beginning teachers were investigated with a focus on behavioral changes.
Sandefur and others conducted a study specifically designed to examine the changes in teacher behavior during student teaching and those behaviors exhibited during the last two weeks of the subjects' first year of teaching. The specific behaviors examined were assessed by the Classroom Observation Record and teacher behaviors which could be examined through a sixteen category system of Interaction analysis. The subjects were fifty secondary teachers who were completing their initial year of teaching, all of whom had been participants in previous research study which established the "pre" data on teaching behavior. Twenty-five were members of an
experimental pre-service program which emphasized indirect
teaching behaviors. Twenty-five were members of a control
group. Among the conclusions reached were: (1) certain
teaching behaviors are significantly modified by teaching
experience (e.g., increase in such areas as fairness,
kindliness, responsiveness, understanding, methods), and
(2) significant differences existed between the experi mental and control groups. The teachers sensitized in pre-service professional programs to use indirect teacher
Influences tended to have more acceptance of feeling, praise, encouragement and acceptance of student ideas.
(3) Pupil behavior and teacher ability to stimulate
students did not seem to be significantly altered as a
( "37} result of teaching experience.'*
Hill (1968), measured changes in the teaching behaviors of seventy first year Temple University interns teaching in the metropolitan Philadelphia secondary schools. The subjects were selected from one hundred ten interns on the basis of subject and grade
level. Each of the two observational instruments—
Flanders' Interaction Analysis (IA) and Medley's
Observation Schedule— was used by the two observers who visited the same teacher at the same time. The teachers were observed four times, twice in early February and 28 twice In late May. Significant differences were found in fourteen of the IA scales, and in fifteen of the interview schedules. The findings showed the teachers in May were describing more, using more divergent questions and less convergent questions, and being less evaluative and more neutral in their responses.^2 3)
Hite (1966) conducted a study to see whether a differential treatment of beginning teachers during their first year of teaching results in a significant change in classroom behavior and/or their attitude toward the profession of teaching. The findings reported showed that having small classes produced a change in teacher behavior, while attitude change toward teaching was in a negative direction after the first month of school. The author also reported that success of the teacher in courses while at college does not appear related to teaching performance. Correlation of grade point and teaching performance were consistently nega- (2*0 tive, but not at a significant level.
Day (1959) studied attitude changes of beginning teachers after initial teaching experience. The study utilized in part data collected by administering the
Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory to a group of graduates and to a group of student teachers at the
Florida State University. This was administered to the 29 two groups before and after initial teaching experience.
In both groups there was a shift toward less desirable (14) attitudes after teaching experience.
Barfield (1961) conducted a follow-up study to determine the fate of one hundred fifty-four beginning science teachers in Virginia high schools. The period studied was a three year period of 1958-59 school se33ion and ending with the 1960-61 session. The study revealed that (1) the first year or two are critical ones, especially from the standpoint of mobility and attitude, P (2) the need for satisfaction from in-service education (2 ) programs.
Bledsoe (1967) conducted a study to compare selected personality characteristics and teaching performance of provisional teachers and professional teachers in Georgia. The study consists of two parts:
(1) A longitudinal 3tudy which followed the 1964-65
Georgia beginning-teacher population for three years, and (2) An Intensive Study which compared characteristics and performance of samples of beginning teachers. The findings reported that the professional teachers were rated as much more systematic, responsible, had more skills In the use of the teaching media, more competent in non specific teaching behavior, and generally more (4) competent. 30
Summary
The literature shows that certain teaching behaviors are modified by teaching experience (e.g., kindliness, fairness, understanding, methods, responsive ness). The first year or two seem to be critical ones
in the teaching profession from the standpoint of teacher
attitude and the need for in-service education. The research indicates that differential treatment of beginning teachers will result in significant behavior and attitude changes.
Research Involving Early In-3chool Experiences and/or Experiences in Urban Settings
Literature was explored to locate studies which assessed the outcomes of teacher education programs involving early in-school experiences or pre-service experiences in different environmental settings.
Gill, King and Wilburn conducted a study of eighty-two Junior and senior education students who participated in an eight week tutoring experience for a minimum of two hours per week. The sample was divided into three groups. Group A worked exclusively with white children, while group B worked with Negro children.
Group C served as the control group. The results indicated that females and "liberals" scored higher than 31
male3 or "traditionalists" on the Minnesota Teacher
Attitude Inventory. ^0)
Levine and Penney investigated the effects of
student teaching in inner city schools. The student
teachers were primarily female (88 per cent), under
twenty-one years of age (92 per cent) and all were white.
The findings indicated that lower elementary grade
experience improved the student teachers attitude toward
teaching while experience in upper grades had the (29) opposite effect.
Cullen and Auria investigated the relationship between ethnic prejudice and student teaching behavior.
The study Investigated ethnic prejudices and the
difference in prejudice exhibited toward Negroes
compared to other ethnic groups. One of the findings
reported is that prejudice towards Negroes was greater
than that towards other ethnic groups. The authors also
reported that students rated high In communication,
enthusiasm, professional attitudes, and sense of humor
evidenced less prejudice than others.
McNeil investigated the effect of having initial
student teaching experience in poverty versus affluent
schools. The schools were categorized by the mean
family income of the school. After the first ten weeks
of student teaching in a poverty school, assignments were 32 exchanged for a second ten week period in non poverty schools. The author reports no significant differences in mean scores in stress level of the two groups inves tigated while assignment in poverty schools resulted in depressed attitudes. The placement of student teachers in poverty schools caused the sample to view children and instruction differently, while valuing highly teacher control; attitudes tended to become more negative towards poverty schools.(30)
Walberg investigated the effect of tutoring and student teaching on self-concept and attitudes in education students. The sample in this study which covered student teaching in middle to upper middle class schools evidenced declines in professional aspects of self-concept and democratic teaching attitudes; but a rise in the personally fulfilling aspects of 3elf-concept and "controlling" teaching attitudes. The tutors, in contrast to the student teachers, became les3 controlling and authoritarian, and more pupil centered. ^6)
Skeel developed the Cultural Attitude Inventory
(CAI) for the purpose of identifying pre-service teachers who could successfully work with culturally deprived children. This instrument wa3 used with thirty- four elementary student teachers placed in culturally deprived schools. The findings Indicated the instrument 33
to be a successful predictor of student teachers who
could work with culturally deprived students.^38)
Weber and Lawson used the Cultural Attitude
Inventory as one of the instruments in assessing the
Cooperative Urban Teacher Program (CUTE). The researchers
indicated that pre-3ervice teachers with experience in
the CUTE program scored significantly higher on the total
CAI and on the subscales of the instrument. The CUTE students also made significant gain scores on the
Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory at the completion
of the pre-service experience. ^7)
Smith, in a recent article, suggested that future urban teacher education models will have as basic
component a clinical experience program. The clinical experience should constitute a direct Involvement in the
activities and the way of life of a given group in an
urban community. The legitimacy of urban subcultures must be recognized and the element of critical judgment
of others suspended.(39)
Zink conducted an evaluation of the long term
outcomes of Project COPE, a Gla3sboro State College program designed to provide Junior year elementary education students experience in teaching culturally
deprived children. The procedure involved testing,
collecting of data from all Glassboro graduates who, as students, participated in COPE. Test results (Teacher Situation Reaction Test, Rokeach "D") were compared with earlier scores on the same instrument as a measure of long-term attitude change. Earlier tests results along with I.Q., college GPA, curricular data, were then com pared with post college employment and academic pursuit patterns. The sample was 147 respondents (72 per cent of total) project graduates of 191, and 87 per cent of total
169 graduates located. One hundred twenty-seven (86 per cent) entered teaching, while 51 (34.7 per cent) taught the disadvantaged. Considerable variance existed among the densities of deprived students taught as well as the teachers' attitude toward the future in regards to the present teaching position. No significant difference exists between those who later taught the disadvantaged and those who did not in terms of (1) personality characteristics (sex, age), (2) amount of graduate work,
(3) comparative test data (Rokeach "D" Scale, Teacher
Situation Reaction Test), and (4) rating of COPE as an experience and teaching as a profession.^51)
Clayton, Belland, and Fortgang conducted a two year investigation to ascertain whether summer workshop training for teachers in the use of different feedback techniques such as Flanders' Interaction Analysis and
Video Taping Techniques would produce measureable changes in the behavior of student teachers training to 35
work with the disadvantaged. Results showed an increase
of congruence between stated intents and instructional
performance over the period of student teaching.
Elliot’s study was based upon analysis of data
collected from 400 junior and senior high school teachers
in the four county metropolitan Pittsburgh area by means
of anonymous, pretested, and precoded questionnaire. The
results indicate that the social origins of teachers
bore little consistent relationship to poverty attitude.
Similar negative findings characterized relationships
involving personal and professional status characteristics
as predictors of poverty attitudes. It was noted that
exposure to poverty wa3 significantly associated with
several background, personal and professional status
attributes of teachers.(*6)
Andrews, at Wayne State University, conducted a
study to summarize, analyze and evaluate the data produced, by means of questionnaires distributed to Pilot Project
students and to prepare a report of the findings. In
essence this led to an appraisal of the project program
as seen through the eyes of the students. The findings
indicate that the purposes of the Project, as understood
and cited most frequently by the students, were to produce better teachers through Improved teacher
education, to experiment with new programs In teacher education, to permit early exposure to teaching as a career, and to enable the student to test his choice of teaching as a career at an early date. In general the results indicated a substantial degree of satisfaction with the Project as a teacher preparatory experience and considered it superior to the traditional program.
Summary
Little research has been completed on the out comes of programs involving early pre-service experience and/or exposure to urban settings.
The programs evaluated indicated the: (1) social origins of teachers bore little consistent relationship to poverty attitudes, (2) acceptance on early experience as a component in teacher training programs, (3) place ment of students in poverty school caused changes in strictness and also in their views of children. No studies could be found relating attitudes or knowledge of culturally deprived children to activities used for
Instruction. CHAPTER III
DESIGN AND PROCEDURE
The chapter is divided into the following parts:
(1) Population and Samples— provides a description of the
population or sample of the population used in the
study.
(2) Instrumentation— provides a brief description of the
instruments used in the study.
(3) Data Collection Procedures— provides the procedures
used in obtaining the data reported in the study.
(4) Analysis of Data— provides an account of the
statistical programs and procedures used in the
data analysis.
Population and Samples
The population will be described in two parts:
(1) Ohio State secondary science education graduates,
(2) Non-Ohio State secondary science education graduates
Ohio State secondary science education graduates.
The population of this segment of the study is comprised of first year inservice secondary science education graduates of the Ohio State University. These
37 38
inservice teachers were graduated during the 1969-70
school year and were employed in the state of Ohio for
the 1970-71 school year. The members of this part of the
population were both project and nonproject graduates of
the Ohio State University. (Appendix G provides further
information relative to the meaning of the terms "project"
and "non-project.")
The selection procedures were initiated by thl3
researcher and Mr. William Brewington, a graduate
research associate, who was involved in a parallel
research problem involving the Ohio State graduates in
their first year of in-service teaching.
First, a list was compiled of the graduates of the
Ohio State University, College of Education, during the
1969-70 school year. This was obtained from the College
of Education files. At the latter part of August 1970,
letters with self addre33ed stamped postcards were mailed to the 78 graduates identified by the above procedure. The letters briefly described the nature and purpose of the study. Those persons not responding in a period of four weeks were sent an additional letter redefining the Importance and value of the proposed study. The respondents were asked to complete the enclose postcard indicating whether or not they would be employed as teachers in the 1970-71 school year. If they were to 39 be employed, the postcard asked for the name of the school
In which they would be teaching and the name of the principal in that school.
Letters were then sent to the principals identified from the responses of the returned post cards. This letter explained the purpose of the proposed study and also a3ked permission for participation for the identified teacher in his school. In approximately two weeks the letter was followed by a telephone call to the principal, seeking to establish a personal interview. All but one of the principals contacted, agreed to participation in the proposed study. In two school districts, letters were sent to the superintendent obtaining their approval for participation of teachers in the study.
In early October a personal visit was made to the schools agreeing to participate in the proposed study.
At thi3 time the value and details of the study were thoroughly explained to the principal and to the participants in the study.
Hon-Ohio State secondary science education graduates
The population of this segment of the study wa3 composed of first, second, or third year inservice secondary science education graduates of institutions other than The Ohio State University. The selection ijo criteria for those teachers were as follows:
(1) The teacher must be In his first, second, or third
year of inservice science teaching.
(2) The teacher mu3t be a graduate of the institution
other than The Ohio State University.
(3) The teacher must be teaching secondary science (7-12)
in the same building where an Ohio State graduate
is teaching.
(^) The teacher must teach a minimum of two science
courses at the secondary level.
A breakdown of schools in the study, the number of participating teachers in each school, and the Institution from which they graduated Is shown in Table 1.
During the telephone conversation the principals, if willing to participate, were asked to identify science teachers in their first, second, or third year of teaching science, who were graduates of some Institutions other than The Ohio State University.
The people identified by the principal were visited in early October. At this time the purposes and nature of the study were explained and participation was requested.
As shown in Table 1, page 4l, the researcher was able to match 18 schools with one Ohio State graduate and at least one Non-Ohio State graduate teaching science at the secondary level. TABLE 1
THE SCHOOLS, NUMBER OP PARTICIPATING TEACHERS, AND INSTITUTIONS ATTENDED
Number of Number of Participating Partici Non-Ohio State Teachers pating and Institutions Ohio State School and Location Attended Graduates 1. Everett J,H,S. 1 Otterbeln College 1 Columbus
2. Hilliard J.H.S. 2 Both Miami University 1 Columbus Area
3. Lincoln J.H.S. 1 University of 1 (Jefferson Pittsburgh Local) Columbus Area
4. Reynoldsburg 1 Capital University 1 Middle School Columbus Area
5. Coshocton Middle 1 Ashland College 1 School (Coshocton)
6. Mt. Healthy H.S. 2 Cumberland College 1 Cincinnati Area Tuskagee Institute
7. Bishop Hartley 1 Ohio Dominican 1 Columbus
8. Reynoldsburg H.S. 2 Western Reserve 1 Columbus Area Vanderbuilt University
9. Pleasant View 1 Capital University 1 M.S. Columbus Area
10. Wiley Jr. (Uni 1 Kent State 1 versity Hts.) Cleveland
11. Wickliffe, J.H.S. 3 Cleveland State 1 Cleveland Area Ohio University Kent State 42
TABLE 1— Continued
Number of Number of Participating Partici- Non-Ohio State Teachers pating and Institutions Ohio State School and Location Attended Graduates
12. Deer Park H.S. 1 Xavier University 1 Cincinnati Area
13. South J.H.S. Lima 2 Manchester College 1 Lima Morri3 Harvey
14. Van Wert H.S, 1 Bowling Green 1 Van Wert
15. Linden McKinley 2 Otterbein 1 Columbus Muskingum College
16. Copley J.H.S. 1 University of Akron 1 Akron Area
17. Jefferson Union 2 Both West Liberty 1 (Edison Local) State College Steubenville Area
18. Hillman J.H.S. 1 Youngstown University 1 Youngstown
The teachers were not randomly selected for the study. The participation of the teachers was based on their willingness to participate as well as the consent of the principals and school districts concerned. Descrip tive data on the Ohio State and Non-Ohio State teachers participating in the study Is presented in Table 2. TABLE 2
MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATION, AND RANGES FOR THE FIRST YEAR OHIO STATE TEACHERS IN SCIENCE AND THE FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD YEAR NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES OF SCIENCE
Non-Ohio State. Ohio State Graduates Graduates Project Non Project X S.D. Range X S.D. Range S S.D. Range
Age 23.57 4.19 12.0 23.62 2.57 10.0 25.00 4.37 18.0
Sex* 1.42 .506 1.0 1.15 .114 1.0 1.48 .509 1.0
Years experience 1.00 0.0 0.0 1.00 0 0 1.71 .65 2
No. students taught per day 142.71 23,09 65.0 138.31 29,82 105. 149.63 34.97 66
No. classes taught per day 5.00 .577 2.00 5.15 .47 2.00 5.44 0.98 3.00
£ Male coded 1; Female coded 2 (Thus 1.5 means equal number of males and females). The schools were all located In the state of Ohio.
They were located in urban (Inner city), suburban (outer city), and Intermediate environments. The frequency of inner, intermediate, and outer city schools used in each category, and the number of classes in each is shown in
Table 3.
TABLE 3
FREQUENCY OF SCHOOLS AND CLASSES BY SCHOOL CATEGORY AND URBAN-SUBURBAN CLASSIFICATION
School Non-Ohio State Classi Ohio State Graduates Graduates fication Project Non-Project Number Number Number Number Number Number Schools Teachers Schools Teachers Schools Teachers
Urban 0 0 1 1 2 2
Interme diate 2 2 2 2 3 4
Suburban 5 5 9 10 13 19
Total 7 7 12 13 18 25
The frequency of classes by grade level for both categories of graduates and urban-suburban classifi cation is shown in Table 4 on page 45. 45 TABLE 4
FREQUENCY OF CLASSES BY GRADE LEVEL FOR BOTH CATEGORIES OF GRADUATES AND URBAN-SURBURBAN CLASSIFICATION
Non-Ohio State Ohio State Graduates Graduates School Classifi Project Non-Project cation 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12
Urban 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
Interme diate 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 1 1 0 0
Suburban 1 2 2 0 0 0 3 2 3 1 0 0 3 7 5 2 0 2 Total 1 3 3 0 0 0 3 2 4 2 0 1 3^0 6 4 0 2
In Table 5» on the following page, la shown the
frequency of classes by science area and by urban-
suburban category system.
Some of the classes used curriculum projects, but most used conventional text approaches. Table 6, page 47,
shows the frequency of curriculum projects by science area
for the NOSU graduates; while Table 7, page 47, displays
this frequency for the Ohio State graduates. TABLE 5
FREQUENCY OF CLASSES BY SCIENCE AREA, OHIO STATE AND NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES, AND URBAN-SUBURBAN CLASSIFICATION
Non-Ohio State Ohio State Graduates Graduates School Project Non-Project Classification B LS P PS ES GS HS B LS p PS ES GS HS B LS P PS ES GS HS
Urban 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Intermediate 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1
Suburban 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 2 1 0 3 1 3 0 3 2 1 2 6 5 0
Total 0 0 0 0 2 5 0 3 1 1 H 1 3 0 5 2 1 3 7 5 2
B- Biology P - Physics ES- Earth Science LS - Life Science HS- Health Science GS- General Science C - Chemistry PS- Physical Science I **7 TABLE 6
FREQUENCY OF CURRICULUM PROJECTS BY SCIENCE AREA FOR THE NOSU GRADUATES
Content Classification
B C P PS ES GS LS HS
No. of Curriculum Projects 3 0 0 2 1 0 0 0
No. of Non-Curriculum Projects 2 0 1 1 6 5 2 2
Total 5 0 1 3 7 5 2 2
B - Biology LS - Life Science GS - General Science C - Chemistry PS - Physical Science HS - Health Science P - Physics ES - Earth Science
TABLE 7
FREQUENCY OF CURRICULUM PROJECTS BY SCIENCE AREA FOR THE OHIO STATE PROJECT AND NON--PROJECT GRADUATES
Project Non-Project B C P PS ES GS LS HS B C P PS ES GS LS HS
No. of Curriculum Projects 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 10 1 0 110 0
No. of Non- Curriculum Projects 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 0 3 0 3 1 0
Total 00002 500 30131^10 48
TABLE 8
FREQUENCY OF CURRICULUM PROJECT CLASSES BY SCHOOL CLASSIFICATION FOR NON-OHIO STATE AND OHIO STATE (PROJECT, NON PROJECT) GRADUATES
Non-Ohio State School Classi Ohio State Graduates Graduates fication Project Non- Project CP NCP CP NCPCP NCP
Urban 0 0 0 1 0 2
Intermediate 1 1 1 1 0 4
Suburban 0 5 3 T 6 13
Total 1 6 4 9 6 19
CP - Curriculum Project Materials NCP - Non-Curriculum Project Materials
In Table 9, below, is shown the mean class size, standard deviation and range of the Ohio State graduates -
Non-Ohio State graduates by the urban-suburban classification.
TABLE 9
MEAN CLASS SIZE, STANDARD DEVIATION, AND RANGE BY OHIO STATE GRADUATES (PROJECT, NON-PROJECT) - NON OHIO STATE GRADUATES AND URBAN-SUBURBAN CLASSIFICATION
Non-Ohio State School Ohio State Graduates Graduate Classifi Project Non-Project cation iSc SD Range X SD Range X SD Range Urban — — 2.80 22.0 6.0 12 Intermediate 29.5 1.63 3 27.5 2.23 5 24.0 3.5 9 Suburban 28,0 5.21 13 31.4 3.2 9 27.4 6.42 30 The unit used for the study is the intact classroom.
Thus individual student responses are reduced to class
averages.
Instrumentation
One of the major problems of the study was to investigate the types of science activities that first year Ohio State and Non-Ohio State Secondary science education graduates feel should be used for science class room instruction. These behaviors were determined by pencil and paper Instruments that were administered to teachers and students.
Science Classroom Activities Checklist (SCACL)
This instrument was developed by Kochendorfer and
Lee to assess the degree to which the teacher's classroom practices contributed to the objectives set forth by the
Biological Science Curriculum Study (BSCS). The instrument was modified by Howe and Sagness and wa3 used by Sagness in a study of pre-service teaching at the Ohio State Uni versity. The intact modified instrument was used in this study.
The Instrument ha3 two forms: a. Teacher Perception— (SCACL:TP)— assesses the nature of
the science activities which the teacher feels
should be used for classroom instruction 50 b. Student Perception— (SCACL:SP)— assesses the nature of
the science activities which students reported the
teachers do use in their instruction
These instruments are shown in Appendix A and B pages 3-40
and 146.
The instrument contains sev. subscales. The sub scales use: (1) Student classroom participation (2) Role of the teacher in the classroom (3) Use of textbook and reference materials (4) Design and use of tests (5) Lab oratory preparation (6) Type of laboratory activities and
(7) Laboratory follow-up activities.
* The reliabilities for unrevised and revised
Science Classroom Activities Checklist as reported in the Sagness Study are shown in Table 10, page 51* The test-retest method was used for determining the reliabil ities. Table 10 also shows the reliabilities for the present study. The Item Analysis program developed by the
Office of Evaluation at the Ohio State University was utilized to obtain the KR-20 and KR-21 (Kuder-Richardson 20 and 21) estimates of reliability.
Cultural Attitude Inventory (CAI)
The Cultural Attitude Inventory was developed by
Dorothy Skeel and modified by the Mid-Continent Regional
Educational Laboratory. Sagness and Howe modified the
Instrument which was used in this study. The Inventory is 51 TABLE 10
KUDER-RICHARDSON 20 AND 21 RELIABILITIES FOR THE SCIENCE CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES CHECKLIST (UNREVISED AND REVISED) AND FOR THE PRETEST AND POST-TEST DATA COLLECTION PHASE OF THE PRESENT INVESTIGATION
Test Re- test KR-20 KR-21
Unrevised SCACLtTP .77 .64 .51 "should"
Unrevl3ed SCACLtTP .68 .65 .56 "is"
Revised SCACLtTP X .84 .81 (urban-suburban combined)
Revised SCACLtTP on X .77 .73 cooperating teachers
Revised SCACLtSP on X .74 .71 the student teachers
SCACLtTP Present pre .65 .64 3tudy post .64 .62
SCACLtSP Present pre .65 .60 study post .63 .60
designed to determine the attitudes and knowledge of teachers toward certain aspects of the behavior of cultur ally deprived children in schools. The items in the inventory are based on the behavior of culturally deprived children as described by Deutsch, Riessman, Becker, and
Secton. Skeel reports the reliability of the instrument to be .46 (p. 52) and .63 (p. 7*0 as computed by the Kuder-
Richardson formula of internal consistency. The inventory 52 contained fifty items and is scored on a five point basis.
The inventory is shown in Appendix F, page 1*>2,
Facilities Checklist
The Facilities Checklist was developed by this researcher in co-operation with Mr. William Brewington, a graduate research assistant who was involved in a related study of beginning science teachers who graduated from The
Ohio State University. Development of the Instrument was done in cooperation with Dr. Fred Schlessinger and Dr.
Robert Howe of The Ohio State University, Faculty of
Science and Mathematics Education. This checklist was developed after reviewing a number of sources which outlined facilities, equipment and materials which were Judged to be desirable in science teaching.
No one instrument provided the scope and brevity needed for this study. The sources reviewed included
(1) Chem Study Listing of Facilities and Materials,
(2) PSSC Listing of Facilities and Materials, (3) BSCS
Listing of Facilities and Materials, (4) Science Facilities for Our Schools, an NSTA publication with Dr. Fred R.
Schlessinger as the chief investigator.
The checklist developed contains the following six categories: 53
(1) Room design - Provides information on the design of the
classroom areas used by the teacher
conducting the class in the study.
(2) Fixed Laboratory Facilities - Provides Information
concerning non portable facilities
available.
(3) Laboratory Equipment - Provides information on the
basic laboratory equipment within
subject boundaries.
(4) Laboratory Assistants - Provides information on the
extent laboratory help was available.
(5) Budget Consideration - Provides information on the
yearly science budget and the availability
of a contingency fund, A differentiation
is made between the response of the
teacher and the principal.
(6) Field trips - Provides information on the extent that .
planned outside and off campus activi
ties were permitted.
The check list is shown in Appendix D, page 157.
Interview Schedule
The Interview Schedule was developed by this researcher and Mr. William Brewington, a Graduate Research
Associate, who was involved in a related study involving
Ohio State graduates. The instrument was used by the investigator when conducting the personal interview with
the teachers. The purpose of the schedule was to provide
a focu3 on the teachers' attitudes towards and to person ally review the materials employed in their classroom instruction.
The interview schedule is divided into two main part3. Part I focuses on the book or book3 used and/or the curriculum materials. Part II asks the teacher to give a value Judgment on certain factors and their relationship to obtaining or maintaining a quality science program.
These eight items were rated on a continuum from 1-5, with
5 being very important and 1 being not important. Teachers were asked to respond as to what "should be," not what actually exists in their present situation. This instru ment is shown in Appendix E, page 160.
Questionnaires
All the questionnaires employed In this study were modified forms of those developed by Sagness in his inves tigation of preservice teachers.
Teacher Questionnaire
The Instrument was used to collect from each teacher information such as sex, age, teaching load, number of students taught per day, length of each class period, and their attitude toward various factors involved 55 in their teaching situation. The teacher questionnaire is shown in Appendix C, page 153.
Student Questionnaire
The Student Questionnaire was used to collect information from each student in the class of the teacher participating in the study. Information such as sex, age, liking or disliking science, influence of the teacher and grade on the last report card, were collected. The questionnaire is shown in Appendix C, page 152.
Data Collection Procedure
Pre-Data Collection
The teachers participating in the study were asked to administer the following instruments in the pre-test phase to their students:
(1) Science classroom activities checklist:
Student Perception
(2) Student Questionnaire
The teacher was permitted to choose one of the classes he or she instructed in science for participation in the study. The teachers were also asked to administer the two Instruments by November 18, 1970. This permitted approximately the sixth week of school to be completed prior to pre-test data collection. This period of time was selected to permit the student to become aware of the 56 techniques used by the teacher in science classroom instruction.
The teacher was asked to complete the following instruments:
(1) Science Classroom Activities Checklist:
Teacher Perception
(2) Teacher Questionnaire
The pre-test materials were mailed to those schools more than fifty miles from Columbus, Ohio. General directions, along with specific instrument directions were
Included in packet materials mailed to teach teacher. A self-addres3ed envelop was also included for the return of the pre-test materials.
The data packets were hand delivered to the schools in Columbus and to schools close to Columbus. A pick-up date was established when those materials would be retrieved.
Post Data Collection
The Post Data Collection Phase was carried out in the last week of April and the first week of May 1971.
Data collection packets were mailed to the schools beyond the fifty mile radius of Columbus, Ohio. The teacher received the packet approximately two weeks prior to the arranged pick-up date. The principal of each school was contacted to arrange a convenient time for an interview 57 with him and with the participating teacher. At the pre arranged time, this researcher conducted the interview schedule with the participating teachers, and used the
Facilities Checklist with the principal and the partici pating teachers responding to items IV and VI of the
Instrument. After the completion of the Interview Schedule this researcher viewed the science facilities and materials and then completed the Facilities Checklist.
For the schools in the Columbus, Ohio area and those in close proximity, the same procedure was employed for establishing an interview appointment with the participating teachers and principals as those other schools visited in the state of Ohio. The interviews were conducted in the same manner as with the school located beyond the fifty mile radius of Columbus, Ohio.
The teachers in each category were asked to admin ister the following instruments to the students of their class prior to the interview date.
(1) Science Classroom Activities Checklist:
Student Perception
(2) Student Questionnaire
The teacher was asked to complete the following
Instruments:
(1) Cultural Inventory
(2) Science Classroom Activities Checklist:
Teacher Perception 58
Since the Ohio State graduates completed the Science
Classroom Activities Checklist: Teacher Perception, at the
end of their student teaching experience, it was not
necessary to complete this in the pre-test data collection
phase.
Analysis of Data
A computerized BMD-02R Stepwise Regression Program
developed by the Health Sciences Computing Center at UCLA
was used in the analysis. Utilizing the correlation
option provided by this program, relationships were inves
tigated between all of the selected variables. The BMD-
02R program also provided a sequence of stepwise, multiple
linear regression equations that were used to further
define the relationship among the selected variables*
Comparisons Involving the Investigation of pre
test - post-test within group differences were tested
using a t-test program titled WAS-2, written by Dr. Arthur
White a member of the Faculty of Science and Mathematics
Education at The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Comparison involving the investigating post test
difference between the groups in the study were tested during the Multivariate Analysis of Variance Program distributed by the Clyde Computing Service, Miami,
Florida. This program has been adopted for the Ohio State t,. 59
University by David Poor and Lorne Rosenblood of the Social
Psychology Laboratory, Columbus, Ohio.
The Tukey (multiple pairwise comparison) technique was used to te3t the main effect due to certain pair interaction. This procedure is reported in an Instruc tional Paper dealing with Multiple Comparisons, prepared by Arthur L. White, Faculty of Science and Mathematics
Education, January, 1970. CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS OP RESULTS
The results of this study are presented in this chapter under the following three sections:
(a) Non-Ohio State Graduates Results (NOSU)
(b) Ohio State Graduates* Results (OSU)
(c) Non-Ohio State Graduates (NOSU) compared to
the Ohio State Graduates (OSU)
The results for each hypothesis are discussed in the order the hypotheses were presented in Chapter I.
The hypotheses are used as a focus for discussion with the alpha level for significance being 0.05 unless stated otherwise. The results are analyzed statistically with inference being drawn in Chapter V.
Non-Ohio State Graduates' Results (NOSU)
Hypothesis 1. There are no significant relation ships between the selected variables of the Non-Ohio State graduate science teachers (NOSU) and their views of the type of science classroom activities they think should be used for science instruction.
60 61
Significant relationships with the Composite
Activities Checklist score are shown in Table 11, p. 62.
Those correlating significantly are (1) the location of the school (0.59)* (urban, suburban), the SCACL:SP composite score (reveals the activities the teacher uses), (-.51),* along with its subscales describing the students' classroom participation (-.55) and the teachers use and design of tests (-.53)*, correlated negatively at the .01 level.
The teacher views toward what "should be" (1) the role of the student in classroom participation (.82),
(2) the role of the teacher in the classroom (.79),
(3) the use and design of tests (.91), (4) the laboratory preparation (.75), (5) types of laboratory activities
(.80), all showed positive relationships at the ,01 level of significance (Table 11, p. 62). Significant correlation at the .05 level between the types of laboratory activi ties used (-.49) and the NOSU teachers laboratory follow-, up activities (-.50) are shown in Table 11, p. 62.
The best predictor of the Non-Ohio State graduates post test view of the type of classroom activities which should be used for science instruction was the location of the school (urban, suburban), Table 12, p. 63. This factor accounts for 35 per cent of the variance. The
*The values within parentheses are correlation coefficients. 62
TABLE 11
CORRELATIONS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE COMPOSITE POST TEST SCORE ON THE SCACL:TP
la -0.59° 15 -0.08 29 0.31 43 -0.07 57 -0.51°
2 0.03 16 -0.23 30 0.04 44 -0.23 58 -0.55°
3 0.12 17 -0.15 31 -0.09 45 -0.06 59 -0.29
4 0.26 18 0.24 32 0.12 46-0.18 60 -0.38
5 -0.15 19 -0.12 33 0.11 47 -0.06 61 -0.53°
6 0.13 20 0.26 34 -0.04 48 -0.28 62 0.28
7 0.08 2i -0.28 35 -0.19 49 1.000 63 -0.49b
8 0.24 22 -0.34 36 0.03 50 0 .82° 64 -0 .50b
9 0.26 23 -0.06 37 0.42b 51 0.79° 65 -0.28
10 0.09 24 -0.19 38 0.11 52 0.04 66 0.13
11 0.39 25 -0.17 39 0.04 53 0.91° 67 0.12
12 -0.35 26 -0.08 40 0.13 54 0.75° 68 0.01 ■S3- O 1 13 • 27 -0.15 41 0.10 55 0.80° 69 0.01
14 0.11 28 -0.13 42 -0.09 56 -0.31
aAppendix H, p. 175, provides a listing of the vari ables by number.
Significance level * 0.05*
Significance level ■ 0.01. 63 TABLE 12
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE COMPOSITE POST TEST SCORE ON THE SCACL:TP
Step Variable Multiple Increase Number Entered R RSQ in RSQ
1 1 0.59 0.35 0.35
2 58 0.7if 0.55 0.20
3 22 0.83 0.70 0.15
if 8 0.90 0.82 0.12
5 6 0.93 0.87 0.05
location of the school in association with the SCACL:SP subscale A, (Student Classroom Participation) and the period of the class accounted for 70 per cent of the variance.
The regression analysis findings indicate the NOSU graduates, teaching in suburban schools, have more inquiry oriented perceptions towards the types of activities that should be used for science instruction, as opposed to the
NOSU graduates in intermediate or urban school settings.
Caution should be exercised in viewing this finding since
25 per cent of the NOSU teachers taught in either urban or intermediate school settings. The results from the
SCACL:Teacher perception indicated that the more Inquiry oriented were the NOSU graduates1 views towards the acti- ties that should be used for science instruction, the more 64
restrictive were teachers towards student classroom participation as shown by the SCACL:Student perception.
This would indicate a difference between what the teacher
felt "should be" and what student saw as actual practice.
Hypothesis 2. There are no significant relationship between the selected variables of the Non-Ohio State
graduates (NOSU) and the science classroom activities used
for science Instruction.
Significant relationships with the composite
activities checklist score (SCACL:SP, Indicating the activities used for science instruction) are shown in
Table 13* p. 65. Those correlating significantly are:
(1) the content area in which the NOSU science teacher is teaching (-.44), (2) the grade level of the class participating in the study (.57), and (3) the composite
(SCACL:TP) post test scores (-.51) along with its sub
scales D and C (design and use of tests) (-.53) and (use of textbooks and reference materials) (.47). Subscale G
(laboratory follow-up activities) (.61) showed a signifi
cant relationship at the 0.01 level. All the subscale
scores were found to be significant at the 0.01 level or
greater with the SCACL:SP composite post test score.
The best predictor of the activities used for
science instruction was the type of laboratory follow-up
activities the NOSU teachers felt "should be" used for 65
TABLE 13
CORRELATION OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE COMPOSITE POST TEST SCORE ON THE SCACL.-SP
la 0.14 15 0.12 29 0.11 43 0.01 57 1.000
2 -0.08 16 0.03 30 -0.31 44 0.11 58 0.87°
3 -0.44 17 0.08 31 0.10 45 0.12 59 0.87°
4 0.57 18 -0.29 32 0.03 46 0.30 60 0 .82°
5 0.29 19 -0.14 33 0.31 47 0.26 61 0.83c
6 -0.11 20 0.31 34 0.25 48 0.20 62 0 .81°
7 -0.31 21 0.36 35 0.04 49 -0.51° 63 0 .86°
8 -0.23 22 0.24 36 0.01 50 -0.30 64 0.91°
9 -0.06 23 0.19 37 -0.16 51 -0.32 65 0.01 10 -0.16 24 0.14 38 -0.16 52 0,47b 66 -0.19
11 -0.30 25 0.21 39 -0.15 53 -0.53° 67 -0.13
12 -0.30 26 0.06 40 0.12 54 -0.24 68 0.001
13 0.04 27 0.06 41 -0.20 55 -0.30 69 -0.22
14 0.02 28 -0.16 42 -0 *03 56 0 .61°
aAppendix H, p. 175, provides a listing of the variables by number.
^Significant level » 0.05.
Significance level = 0.01. 66 science instruction (Table 14). This factor accounted for
37 per cent of the variance. The grade level of the clas3, the teachers' attitude toward the text book used in association with the composite SCACL:TP score and the laboratory follow-up factors account for 74 per cent of the variance.
TABLE 14
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE COMPOSITE POST TEST SCORE ON THE SCACL:SP
Step Variabled Multiple Increase Number Entered R RSQ in RSQ
1 56 0.61 0.37 0.37
2 4 0.73 0.53 0.16
3 33 0.80 0.65 0.12
4 49 0.86 0.74 0.09
5 37 0.89 0.79 0.05
The results indicate the more positive the teachers' attitude toward the importance of a textbook, the more inquiry oriented were the activities used for science instruction. The eighth, ninth, and tenth grade classrooms, showed the greatest use of inquiry type activities. This factor must be viewed with caution since these grades used the curriculum project materials. The greater the degree of acceptance of techniques such as 67
interpretation of graphs and tables, class-data comparison,
opportunity to analyze laboratory results, and the chance
to draw conclusions, the more inquiry oriented were the
NOSU teachers' science classroom activities.
Hypothesis 3. The Non-Ohio State science teacher
graduates will not have changed their views significantly
about the types of science classroom activities which should be used for science classroom instruction at the completion
of the school year.
Statistical evidence for the hypothesis is found in
Table 15, p. 68. Table 15 indicates that the t value
determined in the testing of this hypothesis is 1.57. This was not significant at the .05 level, thus this hypothesis
is not rejected. The analysis of the subscales of this instrument provided a significant t value at the .02 level
for Subscale A (Student Classroom Participation), but not
for B,C,D,E,F and Q. The subscale analysis indicated NOSU science teachers changed their views in a positive direc tion on five of the seven subscales of the instrument.
These changes in the positive direction were not signifi
cant at the .05 level. Hypothesis The Non-Ohio State science teacher
graduates will not have changed their views significantly
about the types of science classroom activities which are used for science classroom instruction at the completion of the school year. 68
TABLE 15
t-TEST FOR CORRELATED SAMPLES COMPARING THE NON-OHIO STATE SCIENCE TEACHER GRADUATES ON PRE AND POST TEST SCACL:TP COMPOSITE AND SUBSCALE-SCORES
N df ta
SCACL:TP (Pre) 25 24 1.57 SCACL:TP (Post)
SCACL:TP SUBSCALE A (Pre) 25 24 2.78 SCACL:TP SUBSCALE A (Post)
SCACL:TP SUBSCALE B (Pre) 25 24 1.12 SCACL:TP SUBSCALE B (Post)
SCACL:TP SUBSCALE C (Pre) 25 24 0.78 SCACL:TPSUBSCALE C (Post)
SCACL:TP SUBSCALE D (Pre) 25 24 1.00 SCACL:TP SUBSCALE D (Post)
SCAEL:TPSUBSCALE E (Pre) 25 24 -0.31 SCACL:TP SUBSCALE E (Post)
SCACL:TP SUBSCALE F (Pre) 25 24 -0.17 SCACL:TP SUBSCALE F (Post)
SCACL:TP SUBSCALE G (Pre) 25 24 1.37 SCACL:TPSUBSCALE G (Post)
N "Number of pairs
at ? 2,06 to be significant at 0.05 level,
t ? 2.80 to be significant at 0.01 level.
The t value determined in testing the hypotheses was
-3.2 (Table 16, p. 69). This was significant at the .01
level, therefore, this hypothesis was rejected. The analysis of the subscales of this Instrument provided negative t values at the .01 level or below for Subscale B 69 (Role of the Teacher In the Classroom) and Subscale P
(Types of Laboratory Activities).
TABLE 16
t-TEST FOR CORRELATED SAMPLES COMPARING THE NON-OHIO STATE SCIENCE TEACHER GRADUATES ON PRE AND POST TEST SCACL:SP COMPOSITE AND SUBSCALE SCORES
N df ta
SCACL:SP (Pre) 25 24 - 3.20 SCACL:SP (Post)
SCACLtSP (Pre) SUBSCALE A 24 0.72 SCACL:SP (Post) SUBSCALE A 25
SCACLtSP (Pre) SUBSCALE B 25 24 -4.00 SCACL:SP (Post) SUBSCALE B
SCACL:SP (Pre) SUBSCALE C 24 - 1.92 SCACL:SP (Post) SUBSCALE C 25
SCACL:SP (Pre) SUBSCALE D 24 - 1.81 SCACL:SP (Post) SUBSCALE D 25
SCACLtSP (Pre) SUBSCALE E 25 24 -0.65 SCACLtSP (Post) SUBSCALE E
SCACLtSP (Pre) SUBSCALE P 24 SCACLtSP (Post) SUBSCALE P 25 -2.95
SCACLtSP (Pre) SUBSCALE G 25 24 0.11 SCACLtSP (Post) SUBSCALE G
N ® number of pairs
at a* 2.06 to be significant at 0.05 level,
t 2.80 to be significant at 0.01 level. 70
Hypothesis 5 . There are no significant relation ships between the selected variables of the Non-Ohio State
(NOSU) graduate teachers and their knowledge of and atti tude toward culturally deprived students.
Significant relationships at the .01 level exist between six variables and the composite Cultural Attitude
Score of the NOSU teachers (Table 17, p. 71). These six variables at the .01 level of significance or greater are; the sex of the teacher (5 .9), the type of class partici pating in the study (.56), the students' attitude toward the present science class (-.51), the teachers' attitude toward the importance of the cooperation from fellow staff members (.57), and the Cultural Attitude knowledge
(.88) and attitude subscales (.73).
The best predictor of the Non-Ohio State Graduates
Composite Cultural Attitude score was the NOSU graduates* attitude towards the importance of the co-operation of his- fellow staff members (Table 18, p. 72). Such factors as the type of student classroom participation used, the ability to use innovation strategies in teaching and the
NOSU teacher attitude toward the class participating. In the study, in addition to the staff co-operation factor, accounts for 73 per cent of the variance. 71
TABLE 17
CORRELATIONS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OF THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE COMPOSITE CULTURAL ATTITUDE INVENTORY SCORE o O iH 1 • i o la 0.04 15 29 0.06 43 * I-* 57 0.30
2 0.31 16 -0.19 30 -0.47b 44 0.52 58 0.43
3 -0.36 17 -0.14 31 -0.19 45 O.oO 59 0.34
4 -0.34 18 0.20 32 0.19 46 1 . 0 0 0 60 0.39
5 0 .56b 19 -0.33 33 0.19 47 0 .88° 61 0.02 o CO o 1 6 * 20 0.22 34 0.34 48 0.73° 62 0.37
7 -0.4lb 21 0.56° 35 -0.18 49 -0.18 63 0.12
8 -0.27 22 -0.06 36 0.02 50 0.01 64 0.29 i o 9 -0.32 23 0.07 37 -0.24 51 -0.16 65 • o 10 -0.26 24 0.02 38 -0.18 52 0.26 66 -0.06
11 -0.35 25 0.29 39 -0.27 53 -0.36 67 -0.11
12 -0.10 26 0.39 40 0.20 54 -0.17 68 -0.01
13 0.21 27 -0.30 41 0.57° 55 -0.05 69 0.18
14 -0.10 28 -0.51° 42 0.22 56 0.32
aAppendix H, p. 175, provides a listing of the variables.
b = Significant level *» 0.05.
c = Significant level “ 0.01. 72
TABLE 18
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OF THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE CULTURAL ATTITUDE INVENTORY (CAI) COMPOSITE SCORE
Step Variable Multiple Increase Number Entered H RSQ in RSQ
1 41 0.56 0.31 0.31
2 58 0.74 0.56 0.25
3 44 0.80 0.65 0.09
4 9 0.85 0.73 0.08
Two variables correlated at the .01 level with the attitude subscale scores of the NOSU teachers (Table 19, p. 73). Significant correlations between this subscale score and the sex of the teacher (.49), his attitude toward the Importance of cooperation from his fellow staff members (.40), and the ability to use innovation teaching strategies (.43) were found at the .05 level.
Significant relationships with the knowledge subscale scores of the CAI are shown in Table 20, p. 74.
Those correlating significantly are (1) NOSU teachers1 attitudes toward the textbook materials used (-.40),
(2 ) the type of class participating in the study (.40),
(3) the teachers view towards how test should be designed and used (-.43), (4) the sex of the teacher (.51), and
(5) the composite CAI score (.73), (6) the teachers' attitude towards the importance of the cooperation from 73 TABLE 19
CORRELATIONS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE CULTURAL ATTITUDE INVENTORY ATTITUDE SUBSCALE SCORE
la 0.06 15 -0.03 29 0.08 43 -0.04 57 0.26
2 0.31 16 -0.13 30 -0.52° 44 0.43b 58 0.31
3 -0.25 17 -0.16 31 -0.01 45 0.08 59 0.33
4 -0.25 18 0.27 32 0.07 46 0.88c 60 0.38
5 0.49b 19 -0.30 33 0.19 47 1.000 6l 0.05
6 -0.26 20 -0.11 34 0.31 48 0.36 62 0.38 i o • 7 u> 21 0.52 35 -0.17 49 -0.05 63 0.01
8 -0.28 22 -0.16 36 0.02 50 -.26 64 0.24
9 -0.20 23 -0.03 37 -0.10 51 -0.08 65 -0.12
10 -0.06 24 -0.08 38 -0.11 52 0.28 66 -0.12
11 -0.16 25 0.28 39 -0.29 53 -0.19 67 -0.28
12 -0.15 26 0.39 40 0.06 54 -0.13 68 0.01 cr o o 13 0.17 27 -0.15 41 • 55 0.002 69 -0.07
14 0.01 28 -0.45 42 0.20 56 0.35
a = Appendix H, p. 175, provides a listing of the variables by number
b ■ Significant level =*0.05.
c « Significant level * 0.01. 74
TABLE 20
CORRELATIONS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE CULTURAL ATTITUDE INVENTORY KNOWLEDGE SUBSCALE SCORE
la 0.05 15 -0.13 29 -0.03 43 -0.06 57 0.19
2 0.31 16 -0.19 30 -0.18 44 0.51° 58 0.40
3 -0.34 17 -0.10 31 -0.31 45 0.16 59 0.17
4 -0.27 18 0.08 32 -0.16 46 0.73° 60 0.22
5 0.51c 19 -0.24 33 0.15 47 0.36 61 -0.04
6 0.05 20 -0.27 34 0.24 48 1.000 62 0.20
7 -0.38 21 0.40b 35 -0.06 49 -0.27 63 0.17
8 -0.08 22 0.02 36 0.01 50 -0.30 64 0.14
9 -0.20 23 0.09 37 -0.31 51 -0.14 65 0.18
10 -0.26 24 0.16 38 -0.12 52 0.15 66 0.28
11 -0.40b 25 0.13 39 -0.12 53 -0.43b 67 0.28 i o 1-* • 12 0.11 26 0.15 40 0.22 54 \n 68 0.01
13 0.20 27 -0.25 41 0.59 55 -0.10 69 -0.32 14 0.01 28 -0.28 42 0.17 56 0.10
a= Appendix H, p. 175, provides a listing of the variables by number
b=* Significant level *» 0.05.
c» Significant level ** 0.01. 75
his fellow staff members (.59), (7) the teachers* attitude
towards the importance of using innovations in teaching
strategies (.51), (7) the actual role of the students in
the classroom (.41).
The best predictors of the attitude subscale
scores are the Influence from the teacher, along with the
students' number of years of science, size of classes,
attitude towards the co-operation of the fellow staff members and the teachers' attitude toward teaching
science (Table 21, p. 76). These factors account for
65 per cent of the variance.
The NOSU teachers' attitude towards the Importance
of the co-operation of fellow staff members along with
the actual role of the students in the classroom, and the
age of the teacher are shown to be the best predictors of
the CAI knowledge 3ubscale scores (Table 22, p. 76).
These factors together account for 68 per cent of the
variance.
Hypothesis 6. There are no significant relation
ships between the selected variables of the NOSU graduates
and the attitude of the student toward science and the present science course.
Three variables correlated significantly at the
.05 level with the students attitude toward science
(Table 23, p. 77). These correlations are: (1) the 76
TABLE 21
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE ATTITUDE SUBSCALE OP THE CULTURAL ATTITUDES INVENTORY
Step Variable Multiple Increase Mimber Entered R ' ' RSQ In RSQ
1 30 0.52 0.27 0.27
2 26 0.68 0.46 0.19
3 42 0.75 0.56 0.10
4 41 0.78 0.61 0.05
5 10 0.80 0.65 0.04
TABLE 22
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OF THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE KNOWLEDGE SUBSCALE OP THE CULTURAL ATTITUDES INVENTORY
Step Variable Multiple Increase Number Entered R RSQ In RSQ
1 41 0.59 0.35 0.35
2 58 0.75 0.57 0.22
3 6 0.82 0.68 0.11 77
TABLE 23
CORRELATIONS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE STUDENTS' MEAN ATTITUDE TOWARD SCIENCE
la .47 15 .07 29 .04 43 .18 57 .05
2 -.24 16 .07 30 .46b 44 .03 58 -.11
3 -.15 17 .13 31 .67° 45 .26 59 -.07
4 -.06 18 .16 32 .32 46 -.29 60 .05
5 .02 19 .21 33 -.28 47 -.15 61 .34
6 .03 20 .27 34 .21 48 -.25 62 -.12
7 .11 21 .12 35 .01 49 -.15 63 .13
8 .05 22 -.12 36 .02 50 -.02 64 -.01
9 . 36 23 -.18 37 .25 51 -.02 65 .02 J3 ■3T CO
10 • 24 .05 38 .07 52 .03 66 .22 i o • 11 .03 25 .12 39 .01 53 -3 67 -.10 12 .12 26 .01 40 — • 02 54 -.16 68 .02
13 .18 27 1.00 41 -.29 55 .12 69 .08
14 .01 28 .59° 42 .21 56 -.11
a - Appendix H, ;P* 175* provides a listing of the variables by number.
b = Significant level “ 0.05
c ■ Significant level » 0.01. 78
location of the school (.47), (2 ) the teacher's attitude
towards teaching science (.48) and (3) the direction of
influence supplied by the NOSU teachers (.47). At the
.01 level the students attitude toward the present science
course (.59) and the student'3 aspiration to pursue a
science related career (.67) show a strong positive
relationship with this variable.
Significant relationships at the .01 level with the
student's attitude toward the present science course were
found with the teacher's attitude toward teaching
science (.59), and the direction of influence from the
teachers (.58) (Table 24, p. 79). At the .05 level of
significance the grade level of the class (.44) shows a
positive correlation, while the composite CAI scores
(-.50) and its attitude subscale scores (-.45) were
significant, but negative.
The best predictor of the students' attitude toward
science is the students' aspirations towards selecting a
science related career (Table 25, p. 80). Thi3 variable
accounts for 45 per cent of the variance. The students'
attitude toward the present science course in association with the science career factor, accounted for 70 per cent
of the variance. 79
TABLE 24
CORRELATIONS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE STUDENTS ATTITUDE TOWARD THE PRESENT SCIENCE COURSE CD la • 15 .27 29 .31 43 .06 57 -.16
2 -.15 16 .05 30 .58° 44 -.03 58 -.30
3 -.03 17 -.11 31 .14 45 .14 59 -.29
4 .43b 18 -.18 32 -.04 46 -.50b 60 -.36
5 -.18 19 .14 33 -.23 47 -.44b 61 .17
6 .35 20 .01 34 .06 48 -.28 62 -.18
7 .32 21 -.25 35 .11 49 -.13 63 -.05
8 .38 22 .30 36 .12 50 -.20 64 -.04
9 .22 23 .06 37 .05 51 .13 65 -.05
10 .53° 24 .21 38 .06 52 -.07 66 .12
11 -.03 25 -.13 39 .11 53 -.09 67 -.19
12 -.09 26 -.24 40 -.04 54 — * 14 68 .02
13 -.13 27 .59° 41 .24 55 .07 69 .08 14 .02 28 1.00 42 .22 56 -.22
aAppendix H, p. 175, provides a listing of the variables by number
^Significant level = 0.05.
cSlgnificant level - 0.01. 80
TABLE 25
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE STUDENTS* MEAN ATTITUDE TOWARD SCIENCE
Step Variable Multiple Increase Number Entered R RSQ in RSQ in 1 31 .67 .45 •
2 28 .83 .69 .24
3 17 .86 .75 .05
4 12 .91 .82 .07
The students' mean score on attitude toward science, the grade level of the science class, the period of the science related career were the best predictors of the students' mean attitude score toward the present science course. As shown in Table 26, p. 8l. These factors accounted for 77 per cent of the variance.
The attitude of the NOSU teachers* students did not change significantly toward science. However, the change in students' attitude toward the present science course was significant at the .001 level (Table 27, p. 81).
The findings show: (1) the higher the students' attitudes are toward science the more positive hi3 attitudes will be toward the present science course,
(2) a high student aspiration toward a science related career produced a significantly positive attitude toward 81
TABLE 26
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE STUDENTS' MEAN ATTITUDE TOWARD THE PRESENT SCIENCE COURSE
Step Variable Multiple Increase Number Entered R RSQ In RSQ
1 27 .59 .34 .34
2 4 .75 .57 .22
3 22 .82 .67 .10 CO t— 4 31 .77 .10
5 24 .91 .83 .06
TABLE 27 t-TEST FOR CORRELATED SAMPLES COMPARING THE NON-OHIO STATE GRADUATES STUDENTS ON PRE AND POST TEST ATTITUDES TOWARD SCIENCE AND THE PRESENT SCIENCE COURSE
N df ta
Attitude toward science (Pre) . 24 (Post) 25 .63
Attitude toward present (Pre) 24 science course (Post) 25 3.73
N ® Number of pairs. 9 2.06 to be significant at 0.05 level, t & 2.80 to be significant at 0.01 level. 82 science. These results are reasonable since a positive attitude toward science would possibly generate a desire for a science related career. However this could function in the opposite direction with the desire for a science related career cultivating a high attitude toward science.
The attitude of the NOSU teachers' students did not change significantly toward science. However, the change in students1 attitude toward the present science course was significant at the 0.001 level.
Summary of NOSU Results
The best predictors of the science activities that
NOSU teachers feel should be used for classroom instruc tion wa3 the location of the school (urban, suburban) in association with the type of student classroom participa tion used by the NOSU teacher and the period of the class.
The type of laboratory follow-up activities that
NOSU teachers felt should be used, the grade level of the class, the teachers' attitude toward the textbook together with the composite SCACL:TP score were the best predictors of the type of science activities used by the
NOSU teachers.
The results indicate that the NOSU teachers did not significantly change their overall views toward the types of activities which should be used for science
Instruction. However, the subscale dealing with the students' classroom partLcipation did show a significant
change at the .02 level. The findings Indicate that the
activities "used" for science classroom Instruction by the
NOSU group did change significantly (to the negative) at
the .01 level. Thus, the activities "used" for science
classroom Instruction by the NOSU population become more
restrictive or less Inquiry oriented at the end of the
school year. The analysi;-. of the rubscaleo indicated that
significant levels at oho .01 level weio found on sub-
scales E and F (Role of the Teacher and Types of
Laboratory Activities).
The co-opera; .1 on of ils fel’Ion staff members and
the type of student classroom nariiiuipeiiion used in
science instruction proved to be ;h< * '.s* predicators of
the CAT composite score The teachers* attitude toward
culturally deprived students Is best predicted by the influence of the teacher* on his studjnts, and the teachers’
attitude toward teachingecience. The knowledge sub scale is best oredicted by the students’ role In tne classroom along with the NOSU teacnera1 attitude toward the co-operation of his fellow staff members in conjunct.Lon witdi the age of the teacher.
The attitude of the students1 toward science is best predicted from the students’ attitude toward the selection of t science related career. )hese students did 84 not change their views toward science over the school year, but their views towards the present science course did change significantly at the 0.001 level. It was found that the best predictor of the students’ views toward the present science course was the students' mean attitude toward science along with his aspiration of pursuing a science related career.
Ohio State Graduates' Results
Hypothesis 1. There are no significant relation ships between the selected variables of the Ohio State graduate science teachers (OSU) and their views of the type of science classroom activities they think should be used for science instruction.
Significant relations with the composite activities checklist score are shown in Table 28, p. 85. Those corre lating negatively (.05 level) are: (1) the teachers' attitude toward the class (-.46), (2) the number of dif ferent subject preparations per day (-.42), and the length of the class period (-.41). Positive correlations at the
.05 level with the composite activities checklist score were found with the teachers' attitude toward having small classes (.41) and the types of laboratory activities used for science instruction (.41). Six of the seven subscales correlated at the .01 level while the seventh
3ubscale (use of textbook and reference materials) showed 85 TABLE 28
CORRELATIONS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE COMPOSITE POST TEST SCORE ON THE SCACL:TP
1* .11 15 -.14 29 -.22 43 .13 57 .22
2 .02 16 -.46 30 .09 44 .07 58 .04
3 .07 17 .12 31 .20 45 -.14 59 .34
4 -.13 18 -.42b 32 -.09 46 .18 60 -.14
5 .001 19 -.03 33 .02 47 .28 61 .31
6 .32 20 -. 4lb 34 .34 48 -.14 62 .29
7 .03 21 .24 35 -.34 49 1.00 63 . 4lb
8 -.10 22 .08 36 .03 50 .73° 64 .19
9 -.46b 23 .04 37 -.01 51 .67° 65 .03
10 -.09 24 .18 38 -.07 52 .50b 66 -.18
11 1.2 25 -.12 39 -.01 53 .77° 67 . 4lb
12 -.18 26 -.18 40 -.16 54 .69° 68 .04 o oo t— 13 -.01 27 .14 41 -.03 55 * 69 .03 14 .22 28 -.22 42 . 4lb 56 .84°
aAppendix H, p. 175, provides a listing of the variables by number.
^Significant level ® 0.05.
Significant level =» 0.01. 86
a positive correlation at the .05 level with the criterion
variable.
The OSU teachers* attitude toward the importance of*
the facilities, the attitude toward the class in associ
ation with his content area of preparation, the existence
of a storage room and CAI attitude subscale scores
accounted for 84 per cent of the variance in prediction of the SCACL:TP scores (Table 29).
TABLE 29
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE COMPOSITE POST TEST SCORE ON THE SCACL ;TP
Step Variable Multiple Increase Number Entered H .... RSQ' in RSQ 1 16 .46 .21 .21
2 9 .68 .42 .21
3 7 .81 .66 .24 o CO 4 65 .86 .74 •
5 47 .91 .84 .10
Hypothesis 2. There are no significant relationships between the selected variables of the Ohio State graduates
(OSU) and the science classroom activities used for science instruction.
All the significant correlations, with exception of the SCACL:SP subscales, and the teachers attitude toward 87 the use of innovation In teaching strategies were nega tively related to the SCACL:SF pest test, score (Table 30)*
TABLE 30
CORRELATIONS OF SELECTED VARIABLES OF Th.fi OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE COMPOSITE POST TEST SCORE ON THE SCACLsSF
-.1 3 15 -.2 8 29 1 1 43 .24 57 1 .C0
2 ,02 16 .?0 30 -.56 44 ,46b 58 *» u* .*** c
3 -.04 17 .30 31 -.07 49 - .31 59 .04°
4 .21 1 8 - . 1 0 32 .34 46 .26 60 .74°
n .36 19 23 r*.) :>1 .0 2 47 .30 6.1 .70° 7 5C 6 -.20 20 32 34 -.0 ] 48 25 62
7 -.09 2 x -.-iO1-' 35 49 .22 63 ,4 9b
9 - , 36 23 -.29 37 -.0 8 pa .11 65 -.003
*■ * r. 10 .02 ?4 .03 38 -.06 30 66 -0.43
.31 25 *. 31 3° -. 6 1 “ 53 .JO 67 -..06
12 -.0 6 26 - , 4 l b 13 -.29 27 -.38 41 - .23 55 .29 69 .14 14 . 11 28 -.1? 42 • 3*- .6 .12 aAppen!lx H, .j. 175, provides a list ing of she variables by number. ^Significant level -- 0.o;5. cSIr-;nif leant level » 0.0 j.. 88 The importance of the salary schedule (-.62) and the direction of the Influence from the teachers corre lated negatively at the .01 level of significance. The best predictors of the OSU teachers' composite SCACLrSP score were: (1) the teachers' attitude toward the importance of the salary scale, (2) teachers' attitude toward the class in the study, (3) the number of classes taught per day, (4) the students' view toward the influ ence supplied by the teacher, (5) the teachers' attitude towards the existing facilities for science. These fac tors in association with one another account for 93 per cent of the variance (Table 31) TABLE 31 REGRESSION ANALYSIS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE COMPOSITE POST TEST SCORE ON THE SCACL:SP Step Variable Multiple Increase Number Entered R RSQ In RSQ 1 39 .61 .37 .37 CO o 2 9 • .65 .28 3 17 .86 .75 .10 30 .90 .82 .07 5 16 .96 .93 .11 Hypothesis 3. The Ohio State science teacher gradu ates will not have changed their views significantly about the types of science classroom activities which should be used for science classroom instruction at the completion of the school year. Statistical evidence for the hypothesis is found in Table 32, p. 90. The t value determined in the testing of this hypothesis is -1.35. This value was not significant at the .05 level, thus this hypothesis is not rejected. The analysis of the subscales of this instrument for the intact OSU graduates shows a negative value at the .05 level for Subscale P (Types of Laboratory Activities). The subscale analysis indicated the OSU graduates changed their views in a negative direction on (1) students* classroom participation, (2) the role of the teacher in the classroom, (3) the use of textbooks and reference materials, (H) the design and use of tests, (5) the laboratory prep aration, (6) the laboratory follow-up activities. The correlated t values for the OSU project and nonproject graduates are shown in Table 33, p. 91. The types of Laboratory Activities that the non-project grad uates feel they should use changed significantly at the .05 level. This significant t on the type of laboratory activities that should be used was in the negative direction (Table 33, p. 91. 90 TABLE 32 t-TEST FOR CORRELATED SAMPLES COMPARING THE OHIO STATE SCIENCE TEACHER GRADUATES ON PRE AND POST TEST SCACL:TP COMPOSITE AND SUBSCALE SCORES OSU GRADUATES N SCACL:TP (PRE) 18 -1.35 SCACL:TP (POST) SCACLtTP SUBSCALEA (PRE) 18 SCACL:TP SUBSCALE A (POST) -.85 SCACL:TP SUBSCALE B (PRE) 18 -1.25 SCACL:TP SUBSCALE B (POST) SCACLtTP SUBSCALE C (PRE) 18 - 1.68 SCACL:TPSUBSCALEC (POST) SCACLtTP SUBSCALE D (PRE) 18 - .68 SCACLtTP SUBSCALE D (POST) SCACLtTP SUBSCALE E (PRE) 18 -1.49 SCACLtTP SUBSCALE E (POST) SCACLtTP SUBSCALE F (PRE) 18 -2.72 SCACLtTP SUBSCALEF (POST) SCACLtTP SUBSCALE G (PRE) 18 SCACLtTP SUBSCALEG (POST) .31 N - Number of pairs* at 9 2.11 to be significant at 0.05 level, t -f 2.90 to be significant at 0.01 level. 91 TABLE 33 t-TEST FOR CORRELATED SAMPLES COMPARING THE OHIO STATE SCIENCE TEACHER GRADUATES (PROJECT AND NON PROJECT) ON PRE AND POST TEST SCACL:TP COMPOSITE AND SUBSCALE SCORES OSUPROJECT OSU NON-PROJECT N df ta N df tb SCACL:TP (PRE) 6 - .93 9 8 - .84 SCACL:TP (POST) SCACL:TP SUBSCALE A (PRE) SCACL:TP SUBSCALE A (POST) 6 .26 9 8 -2.29 SCACL:TP SUBSCALE B (PRE) SCACL:TP SUBSCALE B (POST) 6 - .55 9 8 -1.00 SCACL:TP SUBSCALE C (PRE) SCACL:TP SUBSCALE C (POST) 6 - 1.92 9 8 - .36 SCACL:TP SUBSCALE D (PRE) 6 - .42 9 8 - .23 SCACL:TP SUBSCALE D (POST) SCACLtTP SUBSCALE E (PRE) 6 -1.11 9 8 - .60 SCACL:TP SUBSCALE E (POST) SCACL:TP SUBSCALE F (PRE) 6 - .81 8 -2.73 SCACLtTP SUBSCALE F (POST) 9 SCACLtTP SUBSCALE G (PRE) 6 - .79 9 8 0.22 ■ SCACLtTP SUBSCALE G (POST) N = Number of pairs at ? 2.45 to be significant at 0.05 level. t ? 3.71 to be significant at 0.01 level, ^t 2.31 to be significant at 0.05 level, t j? 3.35 to be significant at 0.01 level. 92 Hypothesis 4. The Ohio State science teacher gradu ates will not nave changed their view significantly about the types of science classroom activities which are used for science classroom instructions at the compietion of the school year. The statistical evidence for the acceptance or rejection of this hypothesis is, presented in Table 34, P . 9 3. The t value determined in testing the hypothesis was -1,82. This was not- significant at the .05 le^el, therefore this hype*theels was not rejected. The analysis of the 3ubscales cf this instrument provided no signifi cant t values ;a the .05 level or below. Non project graduates did not change the activities used for science instruction as measured by the SCACL:Sf. (Tabic 35, p. 94), The prolect graduates did show significant negative changes on Subscale B (Rc-le of the teacher) and SubscaJe L (Laboratory Preparation)« These changes (negative direction) v:l re significant at the .05 level, 93 TABLE 34 t-TEST FOR CORRELATED SAMPLES COMPARING THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES ON PRE AND POST TEST SCACLrSP COMPOSITE AND SUBSCALE SCORES OSU GRADUATES N df fca SCACL:SP (PRE) SCACL:SP (POST) 18 17 - 1.82 SCACL:SP (PRE) SUBSCALE A 18 17 - .59 SCACLrSP (POST) SUBSCALE A SCACLrSP (PRE) SUBSCALE B 18 17 -1.97 SCACL:SP (POST) SUBSCALE B SCACL:SP (PRE) SUBSCALE C 18 - .08 SCACLrSP (POST) SUBSCALE C 17 SCACLrSP (PRE) SUBSCALE D - 1.01 SCACLrSP (POST) SUBSCALE D 18 17 SCACLrSP (PRE) SUBSCALE E 18 17 -2.19 SCACLrSP (POST) SUBSCALE E SCACLrSP (PRE) SUBSCALE F 18 17 - .03 SCACLrSP (POST) SUBSCALE F SCACLrSP (PRE) SUBSCALE G 18 17 .24 SCACLrSP (POST) SUBSCALE G N - Number of pairs. at 7 2.11 to be significant at 0 .05 level. > 2.90 to be significant at 0 .01 level. 94 TABLE 35 t-TEST FOR CORRELATED SAMPLES COMPARING THE OHIO STATE SCIENCE TEACHER GRADUATES (PROJECT AND NON-PROJECT) ON PRE AND POST TEST SCACL:SP COMPOSITE AND SUBSCALE SCORES OSU Project OSU Non-Project Graduates Graduates A df t* N df SCACLrSP (PRE) 7 6 -2.03 13 12 -.95 SCACL:SP (POST) SCACL:SP (PRE) SUBSCALE A 7 6 - .22 13 12 .13 SCACL:SP (POST) SUBSCALE A ' SCACL:SP (PRE) SUBSCALE B SCACLrSP (POST) SUBSCALE B 7 6 -3.40 13 12 -.55 SCACLrSP (PRE) SUBSCALE C 7 6 .44 13 12 -.27 SCACLrSP (POST) SUBSCALE C ' SCACLrSP (PRE) SUBSCALE D 7 6 - 1.08 12 SCACLrSP (POST) SUBSCALE D * 13 -.87 SCACLrSP (PRE) SUBSCALE E 7 6 -2.56 SCACLrSP (POST) SUBSCALE E ' 13 12 -.70 SCACLrSP (PRE) SUBSCALE F 7 6 -1.28 13 12 .85 SCACLrSP (POST) SUBSCALE F G SCACLrSP (PRE) SUBSCALE 7 6 12 SCACLrSP (POST) SUBSCALE G 1 - .77 13 .67 N =* number of pairs. at “ 2.45 to be significant at 0.05 level. t 5 3.71 to be significant at 0.01 level. bt > 2.31 to be significant at 0.05 level. t ? 3.35 to be significant at 0.01 level. 95 Hypothesis 5* There are no significant relationships between the selected variables of the Ohio State (OSU) graduates and their knowledge of and attitude toward culturally deprived students. Significant relationships at the .01 level exists between five variables and the composite cultural attitude scores of the OSU teachers (Table 36, P* 96). These five variables at the .01 level of significance or greater are: sex ratio of the students (.5*0, Subscale E of the SCACLrSP (.56), the two Subscales of composite CAI, and the students mean number of years of science (-.56). Significant positive relationships at the .05 level exists between the type of student classroom participation the OSU graduates feel should be used for science instruc tion (.43), the type of laboratory preparation used for classroom instruction (.56), the way the teacher uses textbook and reference material (.44). Significant relationships at the .05 level are shown between the number of students in the class (-.44) and the number of different subject preparations per day (-41). The best predictors of the Ohio State composite CAI score is the sex of the teacher, the sex ratio of the students, in association with the teacher attitude 96 TABLE 36 CORRELATIONS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE COMPOSITE CULTURAL ATTITUDE INVENTORY SCORE 0 0 1* 0.31 15 -0.21 29 0.01 43 • 57 0.26 2 0.21 16 -0.03 30 -0.38 44 0.38 58 0.06 3 -0.36 17 -0.22 31 0.14 45 0.06 59 0.35 4 0.08 18 -0 .4lb 32 -0,06 46 1.00 60 0 .44b 5 0.29 19 -0.16 33 0.02 47 0.83° 61 -0.10 6 0.26 20 0.16 34 -0.01 48 0.56° 62 0.56c 7 0.36 21 -0.24 35 -0.07 49 0.18 63 0.14 8 -0.05 22 -0.09 36 -0.08 50 0.43b 64 0.23 9 -0.22 23 -0 .44b 37 0.26 51 0.26 65 0.30 10 0.17 24 0.54° 38 -0.22 52 -0.25 66 -0.12 11 0.25 25 -0.38 39 -0.29 53 0.13 67 0.16 12 0.07 26 -0.55c 40 0,26 54 0.07 68 -0.10 13 0.15 27 0.06 41 0.20 55 0.18 69 -0.27 14 -0.01 28 0.01 42 -0.14 56 -0.03 aAppendix H, p. 175 provides a listing of the variables by number. bSlgnifleant level » 0,05. Significant level = 0.01. 97 towards the laboratory facilities. These factors account for 84 per cent of the variance (Table 37). TABLE 37 REGRESSION ANALYSIS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OF THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITII THE CULTURAL ATTITUDE INVENTORY (CAI) COMPOSITE SCORE Step Variable Multiple Increase Number Entered R RSQ In RSQ 1 5 0.63 0.69 0.69 2 24 0 .83 0.78 0.09 3 12 0.93 0.84 0.06 Three variables along with the CAI composite score correlated significantly with the criterion variable at the .01 level (Table 38, p. 98). The three correlations shown are the teachers attitude toward the use of inno vative teaching procedures (.51), the sex ratio of the students in the class (.58) and the laboratory prepara tion used for science instruction (.60). At the .05 level of significance (1) the OSU teacher perception of what the student classroom participation 3hould be (.43), (2) the student view of the role of the teacher (.45), and (3) the existence of a storage room (.47) are shown in Table 38. 98 TABLE 38 CORRELATIONS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE CULTURAL ATTITUDE INVENTORY SUBSCALE SCORE la 0.26 15 -0.01 29 0.18 43 0.03 57 0.30 2 0.01 16 -0.29 30 -0.47b 44 0.51° 58 0.14 3 -0.24 17 -0.10 31 0.38 45 0.23 59 0 .44b 4 -0.03 18 -0.29 32 -0.11 46 0.83° 60 0.36 5 0.50 19 -0,14 33 0.02 47 1.00 61 -0.10 6 0.32 20 -0.15 34 0.02 48 0.01 62 0 .61° 7 0.28 21 -0.20 35 -0.26 49 0.28 63 -0.10 8 0.04 22 -0.16 36 -0.16 50 0.43b 64 0.34 9 -0.04 23 -0.38 37 -0.13 51 0.29 65 0.47b 10 0.38 24 0 .58° 38 -0.20 52 -0.07 66 -0.18 11 0.34 25 -0.23 39 -0.21 53 0.08 67 0.09 12 0.27 26 -0.4lb 40 -0.34 54 0.30 68 -0.30 13 0.24 27 0.19 41 -0.20 55 0.29 69 -0.23 ik -0.18 28 0.18 42 0.13 56 0.01 aAppendix H, p. 175, provides a listing of the variables by number. ^Significant level » 0.05. cSignifleant level - 0.01. 99 The Composite Cultural Attitude Inventory score (.56) was the only significant correlation, as shown in Table 39, p. 100, with CAI knowledge subscale scores of the OSU graduates. The best predictors of the CAI knowledge subscale score are (1) the content area In which the teacher Is teaching, (2) the teachers' view towards the type of laboratory preparation that should be used, (3) the com posite Cultural Attitude Inventory score, (4) the stu dents' attitude toward science in association with (5) the teachers' use of a commercial laboratory manual accounted for 64 per cent of the variance.(Table 4l, p. 101). Hypothesis 6 . There are no significant relationships between the selected variables of the OSU graduates and the attitudes of their students toward science and the present science course. Pour variables correlated significantly with the students' mean attitude toward science (Table 42, p. 102). The four variables correlation at the .05 level of significance are: the teachers' exposure to the science curriculum improvement projects (.47), the number of classes taught per day (-.43), along with the publication date of the textbook used (-.40) and the direction of influence from the teacher to his students (.43). At the 100 TABLE 39 CORRELATIONS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE CULTURAL ATTITUDE INVENTORY KNOWLEDGE SUBSCALE SCORE la 0.13 15 -0.35 29 -0.18 43 0.10 57 0.21 2 0.02 16 0.33 30 0.02 44 0.30 58 -0.11 3 -0.37 17 -0.25 31 -0.29 45 0.03 59 -0.02 4 0.25 18 -0.28 32 0.01 46 0.56° 60 0.32 5 -0.10 19 -0.04 33 0.03 47 0.01 61 -0.08 6 -0.001 20 -0.03 34 0.29 48 1.00 62 0.12 8 0.25 21 -0.13 35 0.14 49 -0.14 63 -0.19 8 -0.08 22 0.06 36 0,04 50 0.11 64 -0,06 9 -0.33 23 -0.17 37 0.26 51 0.06 65 -0.08 10 -0.28 24 0.19 38 -0.07 52 -0.37 66 0.11 11 -0.03 25 -0.35 39 0.02 53 -0.00 67 0.06 12 -0.14 26 -0.32 40 0.23 54 -0.36 68 0.23 13 -0.11 27 -0.16 41 0.15 55 -0.16 69 -0,18 14 0.18 28 -0.18 42 0.2 6 56 -0.17 aAppendix H, p. 175> provides a listing of the variables by number. ^Significant level « 0.05. Significant level « 0.01. 101 TABLE 40 REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF SELECTED VARIABLES OF THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE ATTITUDE SUBSCALE OF THE CULTURAL ATTITUDE INVENTORY Step Variable Multiple Increase Number Entered R RSQ in RSQ 1 62 0.60 0.36 0.36 2 65 0.71 0.51 0.15 3 20 0.82 0.67 0.16 4 30 0.88 0.77 0.10 5 40 0.92 0.86 0.09 TABLE ill REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF SELECTED VARIABLES OF THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE KNOWLEDGE SUBSCALES OF THE CULTURAL ATTITUDE INVENTORY Step Variable Multiple Increase Number Entered R" " r S'Q in RSQ 1 3 0.37 0.14 0.14 2 54 0.54 0.29 0.15 3 46 0.68 0.46 0.17 4 27 0.75 0.57 0.10 5 37 0.80 0.64 0.07 TABLE 42 CORRELATIONS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE OHIO GRADUATES WITH THE STUDENTS MEAN ATTITUDE TOWARD SCIENCE i o • o la 0.33 15 0.23 29 H 43 -0.09 57 -0.38 2 0,02 16 -0.36 30 0.43b 44 -0.33 58 -0.28 3 0.09 17 -0.43b 31 0.52c 45 0.32 59 -0.37 4 -0.01 18 -0.24 32 -0.24 46 0.06 60 -0.29 5 0.04 19 -0.38 33 0.02 47 0.19 61 -0.15 6 0.21 20 -0.37 34 -0.40b 48 -0.16 62 -0.25 7 0.20 21 0.17 35 0.22 49 0.14 63 -0.49b 8 0.47b 22 0.27 36 0.34 50 0.03 64 -0.31 9 0.03 23 0.16 37 0.01 51 0.39 65 0.38 10 0.03 24 0.16 38 -0.13 52 0.18 66 0.19 11 0.08 25 -0.05 39 0.34 53 0.18 67 0.21 12 0.22 26 -0.03 40 0.15 54 -0.04 68 -0.32 13 0.19 27 1.00 41 -0.03 55 0.04 69 0.17 14 0.01 28 -0.01 42 0.13 56 -0.05 Si Appendix H, p. 175, provides a listing of the variables by number. ^Significant level » 0.05. °Signifleant level » 0.01. 103 .01 level, the student aspirations to pursue a science related career (.52) was the only variable showing this level of significance. The sex of the teacher (.40), the teachers’ atti tude toward the class (.40) and the laboratory facilities (.46), correlated significantly at the .05 ievel with the students' attitude toward the present science class (Table 43, p. 104). The students with female teachers showed more positive attitudes toward the present science course. At the .01 level, the teacher's attitude toward the limitations of the supervisors (-1.00), the publication date of the textbook used (-.54), and the use of material- developed by other districts (-.54) correlated with the criterion variable. The best predictor of the student attitude toward science is the students' aspirations toward selecting a science related career (Table 44, p. 105). This variable accounts for 27 per cent of the variance. The types of laboratory activities used in science Instruction, the teacher's views toward the type of tests that should be used in association with the student career choice and the publication date of the textbook account for 72 per cent of the variance. 104 TABLE 43 CORRELATIONS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE STUDENTS' ATTITUDE TOWARD THE PRESENT SCIENCE COURSE i o o la -0.09 15 0.25 29 0.24 43 • I-* 57 -0.12 2 0.01 16 -0.18 30 -0.23 44 -0,46 58 -0.12 3 -0.18 17 -0.04 31 -0.00 45 0.14 59 -0.01 4 0.01 18 -0.17 32 -0.12 46 0.01 60 -0.06 5 0.40b 19 -0.04 33 0.20 47 0.18 61 -0.30 6 -0.04 20 -0.06 34 -0,54° 48 -0.18 62 -0.08 7 0.20 21 -0.09 35 0.11 49 -0.22 63 -0.17 8 0.28 22 -0.31 36 -0.54° 50 0.02 64 -0.05 -=J- O o 9 • 23 0.28 37 -0.20 51 -0.17 65 -0.13 10 0.35 24 -0.11 38 -0.22 52 -0.36 66 -0.36 11 0.16 25 -0.21 39 -0.07 53 -0.26 67 -0.26 12 0.46b 26 -0.30 40 0.05 54 -0.04 68 0.03 13 0.08 27 -0.01 41 . 0.13 55 -0.22 69 0.14 14 -1.00° 28 1.00 42 -0.17 56 -0.04 aAppendlx H, p. 175, provides a listing of the variables by number. ^Significant level = 0.05* Significant level = 0.01. TABLE 44 REGRESSION ANALYSIS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE STUDENTS' MEAN ATTITUDE TOWARDSCIENCE Step Variable Multiple Increase Number Entered R RSQ In RSQ 1 31 0.52 0.27 0.27 2 63 0.68 0,46 0.19 3 53 0.79 0.62 0.16 4 34 0.85 0.72 0.10 5 36 0.89 0.80 0.08 The best predictor of the students' attitudes toward the present science course is the direction of :Influence from the teacher (Table 45 below). This factor accounts TABLE 45 REGRESSION ANALYSIS OP SELECTED VARIABLES OP THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES WITH THE STUDENTS' MEAN ATTITUDE TOWARD THE PRESENT SCIENCE COURSE Step Variable Multiple Increase Number Entered R RSQ in RSQ 1 30 0.77 0.60 0.60 2 27 0.82 0.68 0.08 3 68 0.88 0.78 0.10 4 55 0.92 0.85 0.07 5 16 0.94 0.88 0.03 106 for 60 per cent of the variance. The students' attitude toward science, the availability of electrical outlets, the teacher perception towards the type of laboratory activities that should be U3ed, in association with the limitations of the facilities and the direction of influence from the teacher account for 88 per cent of the variance. The results indicate that if the teachers are influencing the students in a negative direction then the students' attitude toward the present science course is negative. Although subtle, the availability of electrical outlets tend to create a positive attitude toward the present science course. This may indicate the better the facilities provided, the better the students' attitude toward science. The students' attitude toward the present science course changed significantly for the combined OSU teachers- (Project and Non Project) (Table 46, p. 107). In the same table an analysis of students of the OSU project and nonproject teachers reveals that no significant changes were found In the students of nonproject teachers. A significant attitude change at .01 level of significance is shown by the students of the OSU project teachers toward the present science course. TABLE 46 t-TEST FOR CORRELATED SAMPLE COMPARING THE OHIO STATE GRADUATES ON PRE AND POST TEST ATTITUDES TOWARD SCIENCE AND THE PRESENT SCIENCE COURSE Combined Ohio Ohio State Ohio State Non State Graduates Project Graduates Project Graduates Course N df ta N df tb N df tc Attitude toward (Pre) science (Post) 18 17 1.02 Y 6 1.55 13 12 0.44 Attitude toward (Pre) 18 17 2.61 7 6 4.50 13 12 0.89 present science (Post) course N = Number of pairs at > 2.11 to be significant at 0.05 level > 2.90 to be significant at 0.01 level bt > 2.45 to be significant at 0.05 level bt 5 3.71 to be significant at 0.01 level ct 2.18 to be significant at 0.05 level ct > 3.05 to be significant at 0.01 level 108 Summary of the OSU Results The best predictors of the science activities that OSU teachers feel should be U3ed for classroom instruction were the teachers' attitude toward the importance of facilities, the teachers' attitude toward the class in association with the teachers' content area of preparation, the existence of a storage room and the teachers* knowledge of and attitude toward culturally deprived students. The teachers' attitude toward the importance of the salary scale, the teachers' attitude toward the class in the study, the number of classes taught per day, the teachers' attitude toward the existing science facilities were the best predictors of the type of science activities used by the OSU teachers. The results indicate that the OSU teachers did not significantly change their overall views toward the types of activities which should be used for science instruction. The subscale analysis shows the OSU graduates changed their views in a negative direction on six of the seven subscales. Upon comparing the non project and project teachers on composite SCACL:TP scores, no significant differences were found. However, the non project teachers showed a significant negative change in their views of the types of 109 laboratory activities that should be used for science instruction. The findings indicate that the activities "used" for science classroom instruction by the intact OSU group did not change significantly over the school year. The project graduates did show significant negative changes in their use of laboratory preparation and their role as the teacher in the classroom. The sex of the teacher, the sex ratio of the stu dents in the class, in association with the teachers' attitude toward the laboratory facilities proved to be the best predictors of the CAI composite score. The best predictors of the CAI knowledge scores are: the content area the teacher is teaching, along with the teacher's view toward the type of laboratory prep aration that should be used for science classroom instruction. The attitude of students of the OSU teacher toward science is best predicted from the students' aspirations toward the selection of a science related career. The students' attitude toward the present science course did change significantly for the combined OSU teachers (project and non project). An analysis of student attitude by project teachers and non project teachers shows that no significant changes were found on 110 the non-project group. The students' attitude toward the present science course of the project teachers did change at the .01 level of significance. The best predictors of the students' attitude toward the present science course are: (1) the direction of influence from the teacher, (2) the students' attitude toward science, (3) the availability of electrical outlets, (4) the teachers' perception towards the type of laboratory activities that should be used, (5) and the teachers' view of the facilities. Hypotheses Comparing the Non-Ohio State Graduates CNQSUj and the"Qtiio State Graduates (OSU) The Multivariate Analysis of Variance Program was utilized to determine the significant differences between the groups on the pre-test data (the .10 level was used in the selection of these factors). These factors were then used as covariates in the post test comparison between the groups. Hypothesis 1. The NOSU and OSU science teacher graduates will not hold significantly different views toward the type3 of science classroom activities which should be used for science Instruction at the completion of the school year. The P value determined in testing this hypothesis was 1.29 (Table **7). This was not significant at the .10 level, thus this hypothesis is not rejected. The analysis of the subscales show no significant differences at the .10 or .05 level of significance. TABLE 47 UNIVARIATE F TESTS FOR HYPOTHESIS 1--N0SU GRADUATES VS. OSU GRADUATES ON SCACL:TP AND SUBSCALES F(1*33) Mean Square P Les3 Than SCACL:TP 1.29 28.39 0.26 SUBSCALE A 0.02 0.02 0.89 SUBSCALE B 0.46 0.49 0.50 SUBSCALE C 1.46 0.66 0.23 SUBSCALE D 1.80 3.64 0.18 SUBSCALEE 0.33 0.42 0.57 SUBSCALE F 0.13 1.44 0.29 SUBSCALE G 0.03 0.03 0.86 The univariate F tests employing three groups (NOSU graduates, OSU project, OSU non-project) in the analysis is shown in Table 48, p. 112. No significant differences were found at the .01 or .05 level on the composite SCACL:TP scores on subscales A, B, D, E, F, or G. However, in subscale C (use of textbooks and reference materials), a significant difference was shown at the 112 .10 level. The Tukey (multiple pairwise comparison) technique is used to test the main effect due to certain pairs Interaction. TABLE 48 UNIVARIATE F TESTS FOR HYPOTHESIS— NOSU GRADUATES VS. OSU PROJECTS VS. OSU NON-PROJECT SCACLjTP AND SUBSCALES F(2,32) Mean Square P Less Than SCACL:TP 1.74 37.20 0.19 SUBSCALE A 0.21 0.20 0.81 SUBSCALEB 0.27 0.29 0.76 SUBSCALE C 2.48 1.05 0.10 SUBSCALED 1.39 2.82 0.26 SUBSCALEE 3.21 3.57 0.15 SUBSCALE F 0.62 0.82 0.54 SUBSCALE G 2.35 2,29 0.11 The means, the differences between the means of the pairs and the maximum allowed difference for a tenable null hypothesis are shown in Table 49, p. 113. The table indicates that a significant difference exists between the OSU project graduates and the OSU non-project graduates (0.10) level of significance, in their views of how text books and reference materials ’'should be" used in science instruction. 113 TABLE 49 MEANS, PAIR DIFFERENCES, AND THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DIFFERENCE FOR A TENABLE Ho, ON SUBSCALE C (SCACL:TP) P NP NOSU MEANS 6.714 7.445 7.280 6.714 . 731a .566 Maximum allowable pair mean difference 7.445 .165 for a Ho - 0.720 7.2 80 P = OSU project graduates NP ** OSU non-project graduates NOSU = Non-Ohio State graduates aPalr difference significant at the 0.10 level. Hypothesis 2 . The NOSU and OSU science teacher graduates will not be significantly different in the science classroom activities used for instruction at the completion of the school year. The F value determined in testing this hypothesis was O .36 (Table 50, p. 114). This was not significant at the .10 level, thus this hypothesis is not rejected. The analysis of the subscales show no significant difference at the .05 level between the Non-Ohio State graduates and the OSU graduates (Table 50, p. 114). The univariate F tests on the SCACLtSP composite score and its subscales for the OSU project, OSU Non- project and the Non-Ohio State graduates is shown in Table 51, p. 114. No significant differences (.05 level) 114 TABLE 50 UNIVARIATE F TESTS FOR HYPOTHESIS 2 (NOSU GRADUATES VS, OSU GRADUATES) ON SCACL:SP AND SUBSCALES P'("l, 33)*""' Mean Square SCACL:SP 0.36 1.69 0.55 SUBSCALE A 0.04 0.04 0.83 SUBSCALE B 0.03 0.07 0.57 SUBSCALE C 1.48 0.36 0.23 SUBSCALE D 0.71 0.41 0.40 SUBSCALE E 0.36 0.05 0.54 o o SUBSCALE F 1.08 0.29 • SUBSCALE G 0.24 0.04 0.62 TABLE 51 UNIVARIATE F TESTS FOR HYPOTHESIS 2 NOSU GRADUATES VS. OSU PROJECT AND OSU NON-PROJECT GRADUATES ON SCACL:SP AND SUBSCALES F(2,32) Mean Square P less than SCACL:SP 0.32 1.54 0.72 SUBSCALE A 0.02 0.01 0.97 SUBSCALE B 2.15 0.44 0.13 SUBSCALE C 1.21 0.29 0.31 SUBSCALE D 0.37 0.22 0.69 SUBSCALE E 0.44 0.06 0.64 SUBSCALE F 2.49 0.63 0.09 SUBSCALE G 0.14 0.02 0.86 115 are shown with the composite checklist scores on subscale A,B,C,D,E, or G. Subscale P (Types of Laboratory Activi ties) shows a significant difference at the 0.10 level. The Tukey multiple pairwise comparison technique was used to test the main effect due to certain pairs. The mean3, the differences between the means of the pairs and the maximum allowable difference for a tenable null hypothesis are shown in Table 52 below. TABLE 52 MEANS, PAIR DIFFERENCES, AND THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DIFFERENCE FOR A TENABLE Ho, ON A SUBSCALE F (SCACL:SP) P NP NOSU MEAN 4.657 4.691 4.384 Maximum allowed pair 4.657 .034 .273 mean difference for a Ho =» 0.576 4.691 .307 4.384 P « OSU project graduates. NP = OSU non-project graduates NOSU = Non-Ohio State graduates No significant pairwise difference exists at the .10 level between the OSU project, OSU non-project and the Non- Ohio State graduates (Table 52 above). However, the great est difference in the types of laboratory activities used for classroom Instruction 13 between the Non-Ohio State 116 graduates and the Non-project graduates of The Ohio State University (NOSU-NP). Hypothesis 3. The NOSU and OSU science teacher graduates will not be significantly different in their attitude toward and knowledge of culturally deprived students at the completion of the school year. The F values for the composite Cultural Attitude Inventory, it3 attitude and knowledge subscales are shown in Table 53 below. The composite CAI score shows a significant F value (0,08) level between the Non-Ohio State and the Ohio State graduates, thus this hypothesis is rejected. TABLE 53 UNIVARIATE F TESTS FOR HYPOTHESIS 3 (NOSU GRADUATES VS. OSU GRADUATES) ON CAI COMPOSITE, ATTITUDE SUBSCALE AND KNOWLEDGE SUBSCALE Mean Mean P Less F(l,33) OSU NOSU Square Than Composite CAI 3.09 190.44 184.64 319.90 0.08 Attitude Subscale 0.33 105.83 105.36 19.30 0.57 Knowledge Subscale 2.11 72.27 69.68 54.03 0.15 The univariate F te3ts for the OSU project, OSU Non-project and the Non Ohio State graduates are shown in Table 5*1 below. The knowledge subscales of the composite Cultural Attitude Inventory shows a significant F value at the .08 level. The Tukey multiple pairwise comparison technique is used to test the main effect due to certain pairs. TABLE 54 UNIVARIATE F TESTS FOR HYPOTHESIS 3 (NOSU GRADUATES VS. OSU-PROJECT AND OSU-NON PROJECT GRADUATES) ON CAI COMPOSITE, ATTITUDE AND KNOWLEDGE SUBSCALES F(2,32) Mean Square P Less Than Composite CAI 2.18 224.48 0.12 Attitude Subscale 0.23 13.86 0.79 Knowledge Subscale 2.70 64.82 0.08 The means, the difference between the means of the pairs and the maximum allowable difference for a tenable null hypothesis are shown in Table 55, p. 118. A significant difference at the .10 level exists between (1) the OSU project graduates and OSU non-project graduates, (2) OSU project graduates and Non-Ohio State graduates on their knowledge of culturally deprived students (Table 55, p. 118). 118 TABLE 55 MEANS, PAIR DIFFERENCES, AMD THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DIFFERENCE FOR A TENABLE Ho, ON THE CAI KNOWLEDGE SUBSCALE p NP NOSU MEANS 76,286 69.727 68.680 Maximum allowable 76.286 6.55 8a 6.606a pair mean difference for Ho « 5.760 69.727 .047 69.680 P =* OSU project graduate. NP = OSU Non-project graduate NOSU = Non-Ohio State graduate. aPalr difference significant at the 0.10 level. Hypothesis 4. The students of the NOSU and OSU teachers will not have significantly different views toward science and the present science course at the completion of the school year. The F values for the students attitudes toward science and the present science course are shown in Table 56, p. 119. The F values determined were not significant at the .10 level a3 shown in Table 56, p. 119• The univariate F tests for the OSU project, OSU non-project and The Ohio State graduates on the attitude of the students toward science and the present science course are shown in Table 57, p. 119. 119 TABLE 56 UNIVARIATE F TESTS FOR HYPOTHESIS 4 (NOSU GRADUATES VS. OSU GRADUATES ON THE STUDENTS' ATTITUDES ON SCIENCE AND THE PRESENT’ SCIENCE COURSE Mean P Less F(l,33) Square Than Students attitude toward liking science .28 0.01 0.60 Students attitude toward present science course 1.67 0.05 0.20 TABLE 57 UNIVARIATE P TESTS FOR HYPOTHESIS 4 (NOSU GRADUATES VS. OSU PROJECT VS. OSU NON-PROJECT GRADUATES) ON THE STUDENTS' ATTITUDES ON SCIENCE AND THE PRESENT SCIENCE COURSE Mean P Less P(2 ;32) Square Than Students mean attitude toward science .58 0.01 0.56 Students mean attitude toward present science course .93 0.03 0.40 The P values determined were 0.58 and 0.93. Neither were significant at the .10 level; thus this hypothesis is not rejected. 120 Hypothesis 5 . The NOSU and OSU teacher graduates will not hold significantly different views towards the importance of selected factors in obtaining or maintaining a quality science program. The F values for the importance of the selected factors in obtaining or maintaining a quality science program are presented in Table 58, p. 121. These P values for the importance of (1) administrative support, (2) salary schedule, (3) in-service education, (4) co-operation of the staff, (5) small classes, (6) the importance of facilities and materials were not significant at the .10 level. The P value for the importance of using innovation in teaching strategies was 3.05. This was significant at the .09 level. The univariate P tests for the OSU project, OSU non-project and The Ohio State graduates on the teachers' views toward the importance of selected factors in obtaining or maintaining a quality science program, are shown in Table 59, p. 122. The F value generated for the factors were not significant at the .10 level. 121 TABLE 58 UNIVARIATE F TESTS FOR HYPOTHESIS 5 (NOSU GRADUATES VS. OSU GRADUATES) TEACHERS' ATTITUDE TOWARD THE IMPORTANCE OF SELECTED FACTORS IN OBTAINING OR MAINTAINING A QUALITY SCIENCE PROGRAM Teachers' Attitude Mean Mean P Less Toward F(1,33) OSU NOSU Square Than 1. Administrative support 0.17 4.22 4.40 0.09 0.68 2. Salary Schedule 0.16 3.38 3.08 0.12 0.68 3. In-service Education 0.70 3.72 3.76 0.78 0.40 4. Co-operation of the staff 0.43 4.38 4.64 0.28 0.51 5. Small classes 0.58 4.38 4.40 0.48 0.45 6. Number of different subject prepar ations 0.13 4.05 4.12 0.14 0.71 7. Ability to use innovative strategies 3.05 4.55 4.20 1.58 -.09 8. Importance of facilities and materials 0.39 4.44 4.52 0.30 0.53 122 TABLE 59 UNIVARIATE P TESTS FOR HYPOTHESIS 5 (NOSU GRADUATES VS. OSU PROJECT VS. OSU NON-PROJECT GRADUATES) TeaeiTors ' A'tixitiras * ~ Toward F<2,32) Moan Squares P Less Than 1. Administrative support 0.23 0.13 0.78 2. Sallary schedule 0.16 0.13 0.85 3. In-service Education 0.55 0.62 0.58 4. Co-operation of the staff 1.01 0.65 0.37 5. Small classes 0.33 0.28 0.72 6. Number of different subject preparations 0.30 0.35 0.73 7. Ability to use innovative strategies 2.14 1.10 0.13 8. Importance of facilities and materials 0.94 0.71 0.40 123 Summary of OSU Graduates Compared to the NOSU Graduates1 Results The results Indicated that the views toward the types of activities that "should be" used for science instruction are not significantly different between the OSU and NOSU graduates teaching science at the completion of the school year. However, an univariate F test between the Non-Ohio State graduates, the Ohio State project and the Ohio State non-project graduates did show a significant F value at the .10 level on Subscale C. Subscale C (Use of textbooks and reference materials) wa3 further explored by the Tukey procedure. This procedure revealed signifi cant difference (.10 level) between the OSU project and OSu non-project graduates on the U3e of textbooks and reference materials. Thus the OSU non-project graduates were more Inquiry oriented than the project graduates in the use of textbooks and reference materials. The F values generated in testing the hypothesis concerning the type of activities used for science instruction, revealed no significant differences at the .10 level between the Ohio State and Non-Ohio State graduates. An F test analysis using the three groups (NOSU, OSU project and OSU non-project) indicated a significant difference in the types of laboratory activi ties used for science instruction. The Tukey procedure 124 showed no significant difference, at the .10 level, between the pairs analyzed. The P value, for the Composite Cultural Attitude Inventory, was significant at the .08 level. This indi cated that the OSU graduates had a significantly higher composite Cultural Attitude score than the Non-Ohio State graduates. The univariate P tests for the OSU-project, OSU Non-project, and the Non-Ohio State graduates indicated a significant P value at the 0.08 level for the CAI knowledge subscale. Further analysis using the Tukey procedure indicated the following pair differences In the CAI knowledge subscale: (1) the OSU-project graduates were significantly different at the .10 level from the Non- Ohio State graduates, (2) the OSU-project graduates were significantly different from the OSU-Non-project graduates at the .10 level of significance. The statistical analysis showed that the students of the NOSU and OSU teachers were not significantly different in their views toward science and the present science course. The P value revealed no significant difference among the Importance of seven of the selected factors in obtaining or maintaining a quality science program. Factor eight, the ability to use innovative teaching strategies, 125 was significant at the 0.09 level. The results indicated that the OSU graduates place a higher value on the impor tance of innovative teaching strategies in obtaining or maintaining a quality science program than do the NOSU graduates. Summary of Results for Chapter IV Variables which showed significant relationships with the criterion variables are summarized at the end of each of the three sections. The following summary will point out several of them within group and between group findings. Some of the findings were: NOSU Graduates 1. The NOSU graduate teachers did not change their views significantly about the types of activities (SCACLtTP composite score) \*hlch should be used for science instruction by the completion of the school year. However, the subscale dealing with the role of student classroom participation did show a significant change (.02 level of significance). 2. The NOSU graduate teachers changed the types of class room activities U3ed for science instruction by the completion of the school year (Sig. « -.01). This indicated a reduction of the inquiry activities in the classroom. OSU Graduates 1.a. The Intact (project and non-project) OSU graduate teachers did not change their views significantly about the types of activities which should be used for science instruction by the completion of the school year. b. The OSU Non-project graduates did not show a signifi cant change in their view of the types of laboratory activities that should be used for science classroom instruction by the completion of the school year. c. The OSU Project group did not show a significant change on the types of laboratory activities that should be used for science classroom instruction by the completion of the school year. 2.a. The intact OSU graduate teachers did not change significantly the types of classroom activities used for science instruction by the completion of the school year. This is contradictory to the findings of Hill at Temple University. b. The OSU project graduate teachers changed the types of classroom activities used for science instruction on two subscales (Sig. » -.05). (The type of laboratory preparation used and the role of the teacher in the classroom.) This finding is in agreement with the Sagness finding (OSU 1970), p. 183. liOSU vs . OSU 1.a. The NOSU and OSU graduate teacherj ’fere not signifi cantly different in their views toward the types of activities that "should bo" used for science instruc tion by the completion of the school year, b. The subscale do a Ling with the use of textbooks and reference materials did show a significant difference (.10 love.1) between the OSU project and the OSU r.on-pro.ject graduates. 2. The 03U arui NOSU graduate teachers were not signifi cantly different in the types of activities used for science .1 ;.r,traction at the completion of the school year. 3. The OSU graduates had a significantly higher composite Cultural .Attitude Score than vie Non-Ohio State graduates. 4. a. The OSU project graduates were significantly differ- • enb from the Non-Olio State graduates (Sig. » .10) on the CAI knowledge subscale, b. The OSU project grt Ji.ates v.ero significantly differ ent from the OSU Non-pro.]ect graduate.; on the CAI knowledge subsonic 'Sig. .10). This finding is in tgz’eement with t 1.- 3 a;; net's u;udy (OSU 1970), p. 184, a n d also with 1- o findings of h'cber and Lawson. The OSU graduates placed a higher value on the Importance of Innovative teaching strategies in obtaining or maintaining a quality science program. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter provides a summary of the study, the citing of major findings along with a list of recommenda tions. The reader is encouraged to go to the summary sections of Chapter IV for further insight into the findings of the study. Summary The purposes of the study were to assess beginning science teachers' views towards the types of activities they feel should be used for science classroom instruc tion, the activities used for science classroom instruction, and their attitudes towards and knowledge of culturally deprived students in schools. The instruments used were the Science Classroom Activities Checklist: Teacher Perceptions (SCACL:TP), the Science Classroom Activities Checklist; Student Perception (SCACL:SP), the Cultural Attitude Inventory, the Interview Schedule, the Facilities Checklist, Teachers' Questionnaire, and the Students' Questionnaire. 129 130 Measures from these Instruments were taken In the 1970-71 school year. The activities which the beginning science teachers feel should be used (SCACLrTP) along with those used for science classroom instruction (SCACL:SP), and the Student Questionnaires were adminis tered at the beginning and at the completion of the school year. The Interview Schedule, Facilities Checklist and the Cultural Attitude Inventory were administered at the end of the school year. The population wa3 composed of two parts: (1) Ohio State secondary science education graduates and (2) Non- Ohio State secondary science education graduates. The Ohio State population wa3 comprised of first year in-service secondary science education graduates, teaching science in the State of Ohio during the 1970-71 school year. The members of this part of the population were both project and non-project graduates of The Ohio State University. (Appendix G, p. 166 provides further Information relative to the terms "project" and "non project. ") The Non-Ohio State population was composed of first, second, or third year in-service secondary science education graduates of Institutions other than The Ohio State University. The selection criteria for those teachers were as follows: 1. The teachers must be In their first, second, or third year of in-service science teaching. 2. The teachers must be teaching secondary science (7-12) in the same building that an Ohio State graduate is teaching. 3. The teachers must teach a minimum of two science courses at the secondary level. 4. The teachers must be graduates of an institution other than The Ohio State University. Eighteen schools and 43 teachers were used in the study. These schools contained one Ohio State graduate and at least one Non-Ohio State graduate teaching science at the secondary level, and were located in urban (inner city) setting, intermediate setting, and suburban (outer city) setting. The teachers were not randomly selected for the study. The participation of the teachers was based on their willingness to participate as well as the consent of the principals and the eighteen school districts concerned. Correlations were obtained to investigate rela tionships between all selected variables. Stepwise regression analyses were performed to further define these relationships. Hypotheses involving the investi gation of pretest-post test within group differences 132 were analyzed using a correlated t-test. Hypotheses involving the investigation of post test differences between the OSU graduates and NOSU graduates were investi gated using the Multiple Analysis of Variance program with the pretests functioning as the covariates. The Tukey (multiple pairwise comparison) technique was used to test the main effect due to certain pair interactions between the NOSU graduates, OSU project graduates and the OSU Non-project graduates. Conclusions These conclusions are stated relative to the samples with which this study was performed. Any generalizations beyond these groups are not intended. NOSU Graduates The NOSU graduate teachers did not change their views significantly about the types of activities which should be used for science instruction over the course of the school year. However, the subscale dealing with the role of the student classroom participation did show a change at the .02 level of significance. This finding is difficult to interpret. It is interesting to observe that the students attitude toward the present science course also changed over the school year at the .001 level of significance (p. 82). The SCACL:SP subscale A 133 score (the type of student classroom participation used for classroom instruction) was one of the two subscales that did not change toward the negative (Table 16), but did become more positive. It would seem reasonable to Infer that a cause and effect relationship may exist between the student change in attitude toward science and the type of student classroom participation employed by the teacher. The NOSU graduate science teachers changed the types of classroom activities used for science instruction over the duration of the school year (Sig. = -.01), The significant negative changes were found in the subscales dealing with the role of the teacher and the types of laboratory activities used in science classroom instruc tion. Some aspect of the years experience apparently influenced the NOSU graduates to decrease their emphasis on an Inquiry oriented classroom. OSU Graduates The analysis for the intact OSU population (project and non-project) did not show a significant change on their views about the types of laboratory activities which should be used for science instruction. However, when analysis was performed on the OSU projects and OSU non-project graduates a significant negative change was observed (Table 33) on subscale F for the OSU non-project graduates. 134 This subscale deals with the types of laboratory activities that should be used for classroom instruction. It wa3 concluded that the OSU non-project teachers appear to hold a more restrictive and less openended view of the types of laboratory activities which should be used for classroom science instruction at the completion of the school year. The Intact OSU graduate population did not change significantly the types of classroom activities used for science instruction by the completion of the school year. The results also show the OSU project and OSU non project graduates did not change significantly the types of activities used for science instruction over the school year. It was concluded that the project and non-project graduates did not differ significantly in their views of the activities which are used for science instruction at the completion of the school year. NOSU vs. OSU The NOSU sample and the intact OSU sample (project and non-project) were not significantly different in their views toward the types of activities that "should be" used for science instruction by the completion of the school year. Thus it was concluded that the NOSU and OSU graduates did not differ significantly in their views of the types of activities which should be used for science Instruction. However, It was found that the subscale 135 dealing with the textbooks and reference materials did show a significant difference (.10 level) between the OSU project and the OSU non project graduates (Table ^9)* It 13 concluded that the project graduates hold a more restrictive view (less inquiry oriented) towards the use of textbooks and reference materials than did the non project graduates. This finding should be viewed with some caution since project graduates worked primarily with non curriculum project materials. Four of the five teachers using curriculum project materials were OSU non-proje ct graduates. The OSU and the IJOSU graduates were not signifi cantly different in the types of activities used for science instruction at the completion of the school year. The OSU project and OSU non-project graduates also showed no significant difference in the types of activities used in their science classroom instruction. Thus it was concluded that no significant differences exist between the NOSU graduates, the Ohio State project graduates and the Ohio State non-project graduates in the activities used for science instruction at the completion of the school year. The OSU graduates had a significantly higher composite cultural attitude score than the non-Ohio State graduates. Thin was significant at the 0.0 8 level. The Investigation of the knowledge sub3cale showed the OSU project graduates were significantly different from the 2'Jon-Ohio State graduates (Sig. =* .10) on their knowledge of culturally deprived children. The results also showed the OSU project graduates were significantly different from the OSU non-project graduates on their knowledge of culturally deprived students. It was concluded that the OSU project teachers had greater knowledge of culturally deprived students at the completion of the school year. It would seem reasonable to infer that the opportunity given the OSU project teachers to work with individual and small groups of students in different school environ ments may have been a contributing factor to this finding. This is further supported since the OSU non-project people did not have such experiences. The OSU graduates placed a higher value on the importance of using innovative teaching strategies to maintain or obtain a quality science program than did the NOSU teacher graduates. However, an investigation of the Non-Ohio State, Ohio State project and the Ohio State non-project revealed no significant differences on this factor at the .10 level of significance. Recommendations On the basis of the data contained in this study and on discussion with members of the faculty of science education it is recommended that: 1. The Ohio State University Faculty of Science Education should: a. Develop in-service programs, in association with the respective school systems, for beginning teachers. This in-service program would develop a continuum between the pre-service and in-service education of science teachers, b. Develop an adjunct professorship. The adjunct professor would be employed by the school and the University, and would function with pre-service and in-service teachers. c. Encourage all faculty members to become involved with beginning teachers and to promote positive relationships with the school in the Columbus, Ohio area, d. Encourage and help the project graduates obtain teaching positions in urban settings, 2. Consideration should be given to the following studies: a. A longitudinal 3tudy to follow the same group of pre-3ervice teachers in the junior year, senior 138 year and Into their first year3 of teaching. b. A 3tudy using a treatment group involved with an in-service program as opposed to a group not involved with an in-service program. c. A study to investigate why both groups in the present study become more restrictive in the use of the science activities at the completion of the school year. d. A study using video and audio taping should be conducted in association with the same instruments employed in the present study. 3. School principals, or science department co-ordinates should: a. Provide beginning teachers with more opportunity to develop and design activities for science instruc tion. b. Develop an atmosphere that encourages full staff co-operation. The researcher has attempted to take a critical look at beginning science teacher graduates of different pre-service preparation. It is hoped that this endeavor will generate insight into many other area of fruitful investigation. APPENDIX A SCIENCE CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES CHECKLIST: TEACHER PERCEPTIONS (SCACL:TP) 139 t ♦SCIENCE CLASSROOM ACTIVITY CHECKLIST: TEACHER'S PERCEPTIONS The purpose of this checklist Is Co determine the types of activities which you feel should take place in your science classroom. The classroom, (or purposes of this Instrument, is defined to Include tho laboratory. Each statement describes some classroom activity(les). The activities arc not judged as cither good or bnd; therefore, this checklist is not a test and I is not designed to evaluate you. You arc to read each statement and decide 1C the statement is true or false based on what you feel should take place In your science classroom. SAMPLE QUESTION Checklist Answer Sheet T P 1. All students should always wear laboratory 1. ( ) ( ) aprons in the laboratory. If the statement describes what should occur In your science classroom, blacken the space under the letter T (True) on the answer sheet; If It does not, blacken in the space under the letter F (False). All of the statements must be responded to, so if a statement is not completely true or false you will have to decide whether It ismore true than false or vice*versa and make the mark accordingly. All answers should be recorded on tho answer sheet provided. NO MARKS should be made in the test booklet. There is na time limit Cor completing this checklist. Begin ♦Experimental Edition: Not to be reproduced or used without the permission of Richard L. Sagness, 244 Arps, The Ohio State University. Revised Edition, August, I9f>9. 140 141 1. The student's role Is to ropy J.q w c . nr.d menu. ill' what the teacher tcllu him. 2. Students should frequent !y he allowed time fiK.’.asa to talk among themselves about Ideas iit science. .3. Over 25*/. of the class ^Ime should bo lovmed to students answering orally or In writing nnv.’e,'3 to quint, onn th.it ..re in the textbook or In study guides. t», Oiaserooui laboratory activities, such a;i experiment's and dcti.onu fca- Cions, should usually be performed by student3 rather than by the teacher. 5. Science clauses shculd provide for nr,me discussion of the prohlems facing scientists ir. ;'io Jlicovery of a scientific principle. 6. If a oLudent disagrees i t i i what the readier says, he should say so, / Moat questions student# ask in should be to clarify statement a trade by the teacher or the texr. 6. It la important that s-udeu'.s discuss the cvlJer.ce behind 9. A majority ol clast, ti.-.t ahoirli! be spent let tur. ing about science. 10. A teacher should be very he-.'tant to admit I Is mLstahes. 11. A tm.chcr should g«r. .rally pi-avit!,; the rnswer when atudcnte disagree during a J1 >■. nr.si or . 12. Tt is dtsirah c tar turd err. to frequently repeat co their students almost exfli tly whet la :n chi textbook. 1 J . A tfcrtcber ahouid frequtni. y cause studmis to upltir toe meanings ■if s t sCements. J Ingrams, ''raplis, etc. ]A. Sc'cnre should be '.rnse.itcd es having al"..odS all n ' chi answers to questions about the natural world 15. Timber questions should trpiire students (o thln!- about Ideas they have previously 9 tad ted. \f>, leii.hcr tueatlons should force students to think about the evidence that is ben'.nd the sta imeits rhnt arj mode In the textbook. 1;. The general objective of n les..un ahould I ! understood by the j(ti;dpnr.i hr fore voil. on the ’orison In begun. 13. Students should lea it: nosr. < : the dei •« I cn .tated in ch" tex t . 19. It it, Important thnr s-iid.int*. fro.u p .it ly w.Its out definitions to wore 11 s t a . 20. When reading the textbo i> , >i* udui.f'i nlumlq he expected tv louk for *he mein problems (i'’-,v) and for the cvidi e ii,«c 'u, lortc them. 142 21.' Students should be taught how to ask themselves questions about statements In the text. < 22. The textbook and the teacher's notes should provide about the only sources of scientific knowledge for class discussion. 23. Students should often read In sources of science Information (books, magazines, etc.) ocher than their textbook. 24. The student should often be required to keep outline notes on sections of the textbook. 25. The textbook is based on scientific fact and as such should not be questioned by students. 26. Tests should include many items based on what students have learned in their laboratory investigations. 27. Tests should often require writing out the definitions of terms. 23. Tests should often ask students to relate ideas that they have learned at different times. 29. Tests should often require the figuring out of answers to new problems. 30. Tests should often provide data the students have not seen previously and ask the students to draw conclusions from these data. 31. Testa should often require students to put labels on drawings. 32. Student evaluation should include formal means of evaluating the performance of skills learned in laboratory activities; e.g. obser vation, interpretation of data, etc. 33. Tests should seldom contain problems which involve the use of mathematics in their solution. 34. Students should occasionally be given problems for which they must design ways of looking for solutions. 35. Students should occasionally be given research reports and asked to evaluace the procedures used in looking for solutions to the problem. 36. It is a waste of time after a test to have students dlscusa questions they have on the test. 37. Students should be told step-by-step what they are to do in the laboratory. 38. Students should spend time before most laboratory Investigations in discussing the purpose of the experiment. 39. Equipment and solutions should not he gathered and/or prepared in advance of laboratory sessions. t - ' 143 AO. Science laboratories should tneer on n regularly scheduled baste (such as every Tuesday and Friday). Al. The laboratory should often be used to Investigate a problem that comes up In class. A2. A laboratory should usually precede the discussion of the specific topic In class, A3. Laboratory activities should usually be related to the topic that Is being studied in class. AA. Students should usually know the answer to a laboratory problem that they are investigating before they begin the experiment. AS. Most laboratory activities should be done by the teacher or other students while the class watches. A6. le should be expected that the data collected by various members of a class will often be different for the same experiment. A7. During an experiment the students should record their data at the time they make their observations. A8. Students should sometimes be aatced to design their own experiments to seek answers to a question that puzzles them. A9. Students should often ask the teacher if they are getting correct results in their experiments. 50. The teacher should answer most of the students' questions about laboratory work by asking the students questions. 51. One fourth or less of class time should be spent doing laboratory work. 52. Students should always be required to follow teacher or laboratory manual specified ways of doing laboratory work. 53. Laboratories should be directed ot students thoroughly learning the names of specific structures and specific sequences of events. 5A. Laboratory observations should be discussed within a day or two after the completion of the activity. 55. After completion of a laboratory activity individual students or student groups should have an opportunity to compare data. 56. Students should be required to copy the purposes, materials, and procedures used in their experiments from the text or laboratory m a n u a l . 57. Students should be allowed to go beyond the regular laboratory exercise and do some experimenting of their own. J 144 58, Students should have an opportunity to analyze the conclusions that they have drawn In the laboratory. 59, A claes should be able to explain all unexpected data collected In the laboratory. 60, Students should spend time in the interpretation of graphs and tables of the data which they collect. APPENDIX B SCIENCE CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES CHECKLIST: STUDENT PERCEPTIONS (SCACL:SP) ♦SCIENCE CLASSROOM ACTIVITY CHECKLIST: STUDENT PERCEPTIONS The purpoie of this checklist Is to determine how well you know whet Is going on In your science class. Each statement describes some class room activity. The activities are not Judged as either good or bad. Therefore, this checklist la not a test and la not designed to grade either you or your teacher. You are to read each statement and decide If It describes the activities In your clean. A H answers should be recorded on the answer sheet. NO MARKS should be made in this booklet. SAMPU QUESTION Checklist Answer Sheet T ? I. My teacher often takes class attendance. 1. ( ) ( ) If the statement describes what occurs In your classroom, blacken the space under the letter T (TRUE) on the annwer sheet; if It doss not*, blacken in the apace under the letter ? (FALSE). REMEMBER: 1. The purpose of the checklist Is to determine how well you know what is going on In your classvooo. 2. Hake no marks on this booklet. » 3. All atatementn should be answered on the answer sheet by blackening In the space under the chosen response In pencil. A. Please do not write your name on this booklet or anovtr oheet. ♦Experimental Edition: Not to be reproduced or used without the penolaoioh of Richard L. Sagness, 24A Arps, The (Hilo Stott- University. Revised Edition,. August, 1969. 1H6 1*17 1. My Job to Co copy down and memorize what the teacher tell* ua. 2. We atudenta are frequently allowed time in clase to talk among ouraelvea about ldeaa in aclence. 3. Over 25Z of our class time la spent in answering orally or in writing answers to questions chat are in the textbook or in study guides. 4. Classroom laboratory activities, such aa experiments snd demon-, atratlons, are usually done by students rather than by the teacher. 5. We sometimes discuss the problems faced by scientists in the discovery of a scientific principle. 6. If 1 don't agree with what my teacher says, he wants me to say so. 7. Most of the questions that we ask in class are to clear up what the teacher or text has told us. 8. We often talk about the kind of evidence that is behind a scientist's conclusion. 9. A majority of our class time Is spent listening to our teacher tell us about aclence. 10. My teacher doesn’t like to admit his mistakes. 11. If there is a disagreement among students during a discussion, the teacher usually tells 12. My teacher often repeats almost exactly what the textbook aays. 13. My teacher often asks us to explain the meaning of statements, diagrams, graphs, etc. 14. My teacher shows us that science has almost all of the answers to questions about the natural world. 15. My teacher asks questions that cause us to think about Ideas that we have previously studied. 16. My teacher often soke questions that cause us to think about the evidence that la behind statements that are made in the textbook. 17. The teacher cries to be certain that we understand the general objectives (purposes) of a lesson before we begin work on the lesson. 18. When reading the text, we are expected to learn most of the details that are stated there. 19. We frequently are required to write out definitions to word lists. 20. When reading the textbook, we usually are expected to look for tha main problems and for the evidence that supports them. 148 21. Our teacher tries to teeeh ue how to eek ouraelves question* ebout statements in thu text. 22. The textbook end the teacher's notes are about the only source* of ■cientlfic knowledge that are discussed in class. 23. We often read in sources of science information (book*, esgaslnes, etc.) ocher than our textbook. 24. We are often required to outline sections of the textbook. 23. Our teacher doe* not like us to question information contained in our textbook. 26. Our teats include many questions based on thing* that we have learned in our laboratory investigations. 27. Our teats often sak us to write out definitions of terms. 20. Our testa often ask us to relate ideas that we have learned at different times. 29. Our tests often ask u* to figure o-it answers to new problem*. 30. Our tests often give us data we have not seen previously and ask us to draw conclusions from these data. 31. Our teats often ask us to put labels on drawing*. . 32. We are often tested on our ability to perform skills; such a* make observations, the interpretation of data, etc. which we have learned in our laboratory activities. 33. Our teste generally do not contain problems which require the us* of mathematics in their solution. 34. Sometimes we ere given problems for which we must think up and state ways of looking for solutions. 35. Occasionally we are given information on completed research and asked to evaluate the procedures used by the researcher for looking for solutions to the problem. 36. We seldom have the opportunity to discuss in class the questions that ere asked on our tests. 37. My teacher usually tells us step-by-step what we are to do in our laboratory activities. 38. We spend some time before moat laboratory investigations discussing the purpose of the experiment. 39. We often cannot finish our experiments because It takes so long to ' gather equipment and prepare solutions. 149 4 41. We often use the laboratory to Investigate a problem that cooes up In class. 42. The laboratory investigation usually comes before ve talk about the specific topic In class. 43. Our laboratory activities are usually related to the topic that we are studying in class. 44. We usually know the answer to a laboratory problem that we are investigating before we begin the experiment. t 43. Moat of our laboratory activities-are done by the teacher or other students while the class watches. 46. The data that I collect for an experiment are often different from data chat are collected by the other students for the same experiment. 47. During sn experiment ve record our data at the time we make our observations. 48. We are sometimes asked to design our own experiment and to seek answers to a question chat puzzles us. 49. Our teacher wants us to ask him i'f we ure getting correct results in our experiments. 50. The teacher answers most of our questions about the laboratory work by asking us questions. 31. We spend less than one fourth of our time in science class doing laboratory work. 32. We never have the chance to try our own ways of doing the laboratory work. 53. Our laboratory often consists of thoroughly learning the names of specific structures and specific sequences of events. 54. We talk about what we have observed in the laboratory within a day or two after every activity. 55. After completion of a laboratory activity, we compare the data that we have collected with the data of other individuals or groups. 56. We are required to copy the purposes, materials, and procedure used in our experiments from the text or laboratory manual. 150 57. We ere allowed to go beyond the regular laboratory exerclae and do acme experimenting on our own. 58. W« have a chance to analyze the coneluaIona that we have drawn In the laboratory. 59. The claas la able to explain all unexpected data that are collected In the laboratory. 60. We atudenta epend time in the Interpretation of grepha and tablea of the data that we collect. APPENDIX C QUESTIONNAIRES 1. Classroom Student Questionnaire 2. Teacher Questionnaire 151 I. STUDENT QUEST10NNAIRS DIRECTIONSI Ve would like Co know some Information about you. All the Information collected will be kept confidential. The sheets will be collected, put in an envelope, and will be looked at only by the individual doing the research. Please respond honestly and accurately to the questions asked. This questionnaire may be completed in either pen or pencil. Y&u may begin. ■.■ 1. School ______ 2. Course Title ______ 3. Period ______ 4. Semi Kale _ _ _ Female _____ 5. Age ' 6. Gradet 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th____ 7. Give the number of full years of science that you have taken since you entered the 7th grade {count the 7th grade and this year); 8. Do you like science? Yes______Ho __ 9. Do yoq like this science course? Yes _____ Ho _____ 10. Xa the teacher having any influence on your liking or disliking this science course? Yes_____ No__ ___ 11. If your answer to Humber 10 la Yes, is the teacher's influence toward liking or disliking tho course? Check one: Liking Disliking 12, Do you plan to go into a science-related career (auch as engineering, home economics, medicine)? Yes_____ No__ ___ 13, What was your grade In this course on your laat report card? Check onet A B C D P 152 153 TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE DIRECTIONS t W* would like to know ioraa more information about you. All the lnfonaatlen collected will ba kept confidential. The sheets will be collected, put in an envelops, and will be looked at only by tho Individual doing the research. Pleaae respond honestly and accurately totho question* asked. 1, Heme ' 2. School Last First TFACTBR CH\RACTERI3T1CS (Check or fill In the blank spaces provided) 3, Age In years _____ 4. Marital Status i Single ___ Harried ___ 3. Sax I Female ___ Hale ____ 6. Please specify the degree(a) you now hold, and the major and minor subject fields of the degree(s)t Major Ktnor Institution Year a. B,8., B.A, b. M.A., M.S., H.Sd. ______ 7. Are you working on a formal degree program? Yea ____ No_____ If yaa, what degree? ______Major* ______Minor* ______ 8. Jf you have been exposed to any of the science course Improvement projects in your undeTgreduate (UC) or graduate (C) education, pleaae check the appropriate position below. (Bxmaplea of course improvement projects; IPS, ISCS, ESCP, SSSP, SSCS, c a m Study, CBA, PSSC, HPP, Portland Project) Science Course Im* Workshop with materials Workshop vj th materials provesent Prolcct and atudents C UG C UC 154 Taachar quaetionnalre P*Se 2 9, Kov do you fool about the following? (Place a check by the number that beat expreaaea your feeling on the continuim between 1 and S.) a. 8tudence In the claaa that you are ualng In thla etudy: 1) Period: ___ Like 1___ 2___ 3____ 4__ 5____ Dlallke 2) Teaching aclencet Lika 1 2 3 4___ 5 Dlallke 3) Textbook materlala: Like 1 2 3 4 3 Dlallke 10. Do any of the following poae limitation! on your teaching method! and techniques? a. Supervisors Yea ___ Ho If yaa, hovt b. Booka and materlala: Yea _ _ _ Ho « If yea. how: c. Facilities (laboratorlea, etc.): Yea _ _ _ Ho ____ If yea. how: s c i e n c e t e a c h i n g Pleaae H a t the following Information about the claaaea you teach. NUMBER OF STATUS 01' CLASS SUBJECT PERIOD PERIOD LENGTH GRADB LEVEL STUDENTS elective regular Pleaae Indicate after the aubject designation whether the claaa las A (Advanced), R (Regular), H (Modified) Teacher Questionnaire Page 3 1. For Items a and b below, plaaaa chack the apace following the number which most accurately reflacta your vlewa on the continuum between excellent and nonexistent. a. The laboratory facllltlea (laboratory tables, sinks, gaa outlets, etc.) available for the aclence activities that 1 want to conduct are i Kxcollent 1 2 3 A 5 Non-Kxlatent b. The laboratory equipment and materials (glassware, balances, chemicals etc.) available for the science activities that I want to conduct are i Kxcellent 1 2 3 A___ > Non-Existent 2. Please list the total enrollment of your school and the Inclusive grade levelst a. Grads levelst b. Total enrollmentt ___ 3. Please H o t the professional organisations of which you arc a memberi APPENDIX D FACILITIES CHECKLIST 156 r« 157 1 5 8 t> 0. Cl*«vM?re - J. CMIm s *2. Eerie Lit-rrntnry V:"’*"* V IV. Uudjtrt Com lif*re:t«n fT«Ti*s V. |.»bornt*>ryAM litente VI. PIfrH Trips 45. Peniitted to f.n Cote Mr on Srh'jol Crnuodi ”) j | 46. Per.it t ted t« lt»wt ScKn (iI CriMtr.de *--- eY*— j T } 4 APPENDIX E THE INTERVIEW SCHEDULE 159 INTERVIEW QUESTIONS What textbooks and/or curriculum materialo are uacd in your aclence t e aching? T i t l e Publication Date 1. Single textbook 2. ttiltlple textbook a a b b c c d d 3. locally developed a a m a t e r i a l s b b 4. Ha terisla developed by other dlctricts or l ocalities 5. Commercial laboratory m a n u a l Hov Important (to you) are the following factors In obtaining and maintaining a quality science program. Your answer will be expressed on the continuum 1--5. Very Important Not Important 1. Administrative support 2. Teacher salary schedule 3. In-service education 4. Co-operative staff 5. Small Classes 6. Number of diffident subject preparations 7. Able to uce innovative strategics in toachlng 8. Facilities and material® APPENDIX F CULTURAL ATTITUDE INVENTORY 16 1 CULTURAL ATTITUDE INVENTORY* FO R M B Directions Read each statement below and decide how you £ccl about it. There ere no right or wrong answers; your immediate reaction to the statement is desired. If you strongly agree, circle SA on the answer sheet provided; If you agree, circle A; if you arc undecided or uncertain, circle U; if you disagree, circle D; and if you strongly disagree,circle SD. 1. Children without clean bodies and clothes should remain in school. 2. A child who uses obscene language should be severely punished. 3. Children who continually defy the teacher need extra help and interest from her. A. Pupils who come from lowcr-incomo homes are quite aggressive. They will need active participation in learning activities. 5. Children who are constant failures need to meet success to become interested in school. 6. Parents of children from lower class homes arc not Interested in education. 7. Children from lower class homes feel they arc not accepted in school. 8. Culturally deprived children dislike school more often than they like it. 9. Children from culturally deprived homes respond to learning experiences with a game format due to their love of action. 10. All teaching techniques used with middle and upper class children are successful with children fxoin the lower class. 11. Frequent opportunities for physical action, such as exercises, active games, and movement about the classroom arc necessary for culturally deprived children. *Thls instrument was developed by Dorothy J. Skeel, Pennsylvania State University, 1966. 1 6 2 163 2 12. Children from deprived areas should share with the teacher the responsibility of establishing rules for the classroom. 13. Children from culturally deprived areas are more difficult to control. Strict discipline should be imposed at all times. 14. A child should not be punished for use of obscene language, but requested not to use it again. 15. The teacher should use the same language and slang as a deprived child to make him feel comfortable. 16. Academic standards should be lowered for deprived children. 17. Children from lower-income homes, if they are capable, should be encouraged to go on to college. 18. An accurate description of a culturally deprived child would be that he Is uncontrolled and aggressive. 19. Since children from deprived homes place great emphasis on physical strength and prowess, they need some male teachers. 20. All student teachers should have some experience in schools with culturally deprived children. 21. Parents of children from culturally deprived homes place more emphasis on the usability of education and less on the intellectual stimulation. 22. TcachcrG should respect culturally deprived children rather than pity or love them. 23. Culturally deprived children deserve the best education as an opportunity to develop their potential. 24. Children from culturally deprived areas should be placed in special classes away from youngsters from middle and higher-class homes to prevent hurt feelings. 25. Parents of culturally deprived children frequently employ physical punishment. Teachers of these children should employ the same type of punishment. 26. The moot effective form of punishment for culturally deprived children Is the restriction of privileges. 27. Culturally deprived children need more individualization of Instruction. 28. Children from deprived homes need socialization experiences, but time in school should not be wasted on these experiences. 16 k 29. Culturally deprived children often shout out answers in class, which is their way of bothering the teacher. 30. Teachers should ignore nasty remarks made to them by a child. 31. Children from underprivileged homes have little regard for their own worth; therefore, the teacher will need to develop activities which will help them realize their own worth. 32. Culturally deprived children 6hould not be given special help, but be taught as other children. 33. The values of the culturally deprived are to be ignored and middle class values imposed upon them. 34. The teacher will need to make examples of children caught stealing to show other culturally deprived how wrong it is. 35. The culturally deprived child has a slow way of thinking and lessons will need to be explained carefully in dcteil without generalizations. 36. Deprived children arc lacking in verbal skills, but the teacher should not be expected to spend extra time developing these when other subjects, such as arithmetic and spelling, might be slighted. 37. Children from deprived areas lack motivation to achieve, but it is an impossibility for the teacher to supply this motivation. 3d. Teachers should rid themselves of prejudice toward culturally deprived, remembering that they are culturally different, 39. It Is difficult to find any strenghts in the culture of the deprived. 40. Most teachers fear a teaching appointment in a culturally deprived area. 41. The standard I . Q ’. teats do not accurately assess the intelligence of the culturally deprived. The results of these tests should not be accepted per se, but the teacher should attempt to discover the hlddenl.Q, of a culturally deprived child by other means. 42. It appears that too much time and money are now spent to discover ways of helping culturally deprived children, aa compared with the attention accorded gifted children. 43. A teacher of culturally deprived children should not be friendly and informal with the children, for they will take advantage ot her. 165 4 44. Culturally deprived children arc insensitive to the feeling of others. 45. To be prepared to tench the culturally deprived, a person docs not need to be wholeheartedly committed to their cause. 46. Teachcrn of culturally deprived need to show these children that school hns a meaningful connection with their lives. 47. A firmly structured and highly regulated classroom is needed for culturally deprived children, to bring some order into their disordered lives. 48. A middle class teacher cannot bridge the gap between her own background end the background of culturally deprived children. She will need to raise the standards of culturally deprived children to her own. 49. A teacher of . culturally deprived children should become familiar with the social and economic background of the slums. 50. Culturally deprived children arc Bcxually uninhibited and primitive. ■x APPENDIX G DESCRIPTIONS OF SCIENCE TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS AT THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY 166 DESCRIPTIONS OP SCIENCE TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS AT THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY Introduction The following two programs are similar In part and different In part. Participants In the two programs have been through the same general contest sequences. Some of the professional Is the same for the two groups. The following brief descriptions are provided to highlight differences between the two program. Project Teacher Education Program— A Brief Description The Teacher Education Project in Science and Mathematics Education at The Ohio State University is directing itself at the preparation of teachers who can positively implement sought-after educational objectives in widely differing environmental circumstances. This orientation Is founded on the assumption that good teaching is good teaching regardless of the school setting; the decision-making, problem solving acts are the same regardless of environmental circumstances, but that the information bases for the operation of the processes are different. The prime focus, then, Is on teaching as a process, and not as a product skill. The 167 168 program is al3o directed at preparing teachers who will seek teaching positions in urban environmental settings. A brief statement about the program is provided below. It is shown under the three primary organizational struc tures of the program. Specifics: 1. Pre-professional Observations and Participation If people in teacher education programs are to reach student teaching with the necessary prerequisite experi ences to accomplish that phase successfully, they must have had participatory experiences in the workings of the school earlier in their program. The first quarter of the senior year* in the Science and Mathematics Teacher Education Program is directed toward the accumulation of specified experiences. It is expected that a pre professional person during this period should observe in various areas of a school's operation. The areas observed should include counseling, attendance, the main office, the home environment of the students in the school, and other related areas. They should also function In class activities such as assisting with *A junior year segment was added to the program (Pall, 1969) which assumed some of the responsibilities mentioned here for the first professional quarter of the senior year. 169 laboratories, taking attendance, having responsibility for a given lesson, or other appropriate sources of experience. The pre-professional is expected to have some one-to-one and group experiences with students provided through interviews and/or tutoring. The project pre-service teachers are totally enrolled in the project (professional education) during the first professional quarter of the senior year. Approximately 50 per cent of their time is spent in activities in the schools. The remaining time is spent in seminars and science process skill development through laboratory activities. The seminars, arranged by the university, Involve psychologists, sociologists, school administrators, parole officers, business men and women, and other resource personnel in an attempt to Integrate theory and practice. A major emphasis is placed on democratic involvement. Science process skill development is accomplished by means of a practicum directed at preparation for teaching science in the secondary schools. This course is developed around individualized activities directed at the development of skills and techniques needed for implementing laboratory-oriented instruction in the schools. An emphasis is placed on the development of 170 instructional packages which are tried out during their participatory experiences in the schools. Preceding, or in some cases following, student teaching the pre service teachers are involved in a practlcum which is directed at their particular subject matter area such as biology, physical science, or earth science. 2. Student Teaching in Two Contexts The program design requires providing student teachers with teaching responsibilities in two schools of differing environmental setting. Generally these experiences will be divided between inner city and outer city schools. The student teacher has a primary assign ment (two classes) in one school and a secondary assignment (one class) in the other school. These people come to the student teaching experience with a background which should allow the assumption of primary classroom responsibilities much sooner than has been the case in the past. Individual conferences and group seminars are held periodically which deal with classroom problems encountered by the participants. Again, the focus is on relating theory to practice. Project seminars are held independent of non-project seminars. 3. University Preparation The Faculty of Science and Mathematics Education has had to drastically change its teacher education program in 171 order to provide the flexibility needed for professional teachers to gain the pre-professional experiences indi cated earlier. Courses have been omitted, restructured to accommodate more independent study, or tailored in other ways in order to meet the commitment for experience in the schools. Major emphasis is placed on the develop ment and testing of instructional sequences by all pre professionals in the program. Increased attention is given to microteaching and evaluation of instruction. A major theme is the operating of the teacher in the classroom and the information he must use as a basis for decision-making. Non-project Teacher Education Program— A Brief Description This program will be described primarily in terms of courses which comprise the program. This is not to indicate a lesser importance than the project program, but because it is a conventional program and its general nature is the same as programs at other institutions directed at the preparations of science teachers. Professional courses offered for the preparation of teachers, but not directed specifically at the preparation of science teachers, are not described. Three courses are described as they existed during the time of this investigation. All non-project participants were required to take Education 551 and Education 582.27. Either Educa tion 625, 626, or 627 was taken by a participant, depend ing upon his particular contest specialization. Non project participants normally take course work in the science departments concurrent with professional education courses during the first professional quarter of the senior year. Education 551— Science in Secondary Schools: Objectives, problems, and procedures; preparing teaching plans, use of demonstrations, experiments, and projects; science curriculum and evaluation; instruments and procedures; text and reference materials are emphases of this course. Conducted by means of lecture, small group discussion, and individualized laboratory activities. Micro-teaching with peers is utilized. Little contact with public school students. (The individualized laboratory activities are common to both project and non-project participants.) Education 587.27— Student Teaching in the Secondary Schools Science: Observations, participation, and teaching responsibilities for two (usual situation) classes. This is done in one school. Individual and/or group conferences are held periodically which deal with classroom problems encountered by the participants. The focus is on relating theory to practice. Non-project seminars are held independent of project seminars. Education 625— Practicum in Biological Science for Teachers: Use and design of apparatus, demonstrations, and experiments; collection and preservation of biological materials; the role of the living organism in the class room are emphases of the course. Conducted by means of lecture and laboratory activities. Education 626— Practicum in Earth Science for Teachers: Use and design of apparatus, demonstration, and experiments; field techniques; familiarization with current earth science curricular materials and instruc tional procedures are emphasized. Conducted by means of lectures and laboratory activities. Education 627— Practicum and Physical Science for Teachers: Use and design of apparatus, demonstrations, and experiments for general science, chemistry, and physics, with special emphasis on modern secondary school instructional materials in the sciences. Conducted by means of lectures and laboratory activities. APPENDIX H LISTINGS OP VARIABLES CORRELATION MATRIX 17 4 FQLQ-OUT LISTIUG VAA1ASLAA hSId 1.. CC.\.— LAiI-,i, AL. J .vi.j-\£SSICtI AhALTS IS 1. Location of the school 2. Cln?e ic-sljnnlion (rejular, *s Ivanced, modified) 3. Content ?.rc-a the teacher Is ten chin;* In 4. Grade level of the class In the etuiy 5. Sex of the teacher 6. Ave of the teacher 7. Area of preparation of the teacher 8. Teacher expocure to science curriculum ieproverrjent projects 9. Teacher?* attitude toward the class In the study 10. Teachers’ attituie toward teaching science 11. Teachers’ attltuie toward textbooks 12. Teachers ’ attitude toward laboratory facilities 13. Teachers’ attitude toward labor?, tory equipment 14. Limitation to teaching caused ty supervisor 15* Limitation to tc’chlnT causei by books r.nd materials 16. Lie,it'*tion to teaching caused by facilities 17. Lumber of claseeo/day 18. Lumber of different subject prc-pnrs.tlone/day 19. Total number of students instructed/week 20. Length of the class period 21. Type- of class in the study (elective, resulnr) 22. Period of the clasp in the study 23. Luxfcer of stuler.t3 in class used in the etuiy 24. hean sex of stu.'ent in the class used in t kic£ tu iiy 25. Df student i-.i t':*$ cl°e? ueei In tt'-eetuiy 26. Students' mean suii.bc-r of years of science 2 7 . Stule.nts' mean attitude toward science 26. Students' cean attituie toward present science course 2 9 . Influence of the teacher an the student 30. Direction of influence 31. Aspirations toward ? science related career 32. Lean vradfi .q o . last report card of cl?.ss in study 33. Textbooks (number used) 34. Publication date of the textbook 35. Iff* of locally developed materials 36. bse of materials developed by othc-r districts 57. t'se of commercial !'■!oratory manual Teache rs ’ At 11 tu J.e To1 a.:*i The In->ortance Cf Followin': Factors I-t Cbtr ini r. • Cr d.alnla l.ilr. 1 A dt-'ll tv Science Pro • r?r.:i pci. Administrative support ~ 39* Sa.lr.ry Schedule 40. In-service education 41. Co-aperation of fellcw. staff aettbera 42. Ssall claeees 43. number of different subject preparations 44. Ability to use innovative te’chir.w strategies 45. Facilities ani materials 46. Teachers’ Composite Cultural Attitude Inventory Score 47. Cultural Attitudes Inventory - Attitude Subecale 43. Cultural Attitudes Inventory - Lnowlehje Lubscale Science Cl” ? 3 room Antlv; ties Checklist! Teachers Femention Fort-test leuren 4 9 . Cojoosite Score 53. Subscale D 50. Subecale A 54. Sukrcale S 51. Sufcecale 3 55. Subscale F 5 2 . Tut scale C 56. Subsosle G Science Cl',esroofr Activities Check11ct: Stu'entc P^rceotion Post-test Score 57. Composite Score 61. Subecale 3 53. Subscale A 62. Sub-scale 3 59. Subecale D 63. Subscle F 60. Subecale C 64. Sutscole j 65. iiatir.3 of the teachers' atorajc- rcox 6c. Water i.i the room used for teaching 67. Cne outlets in room 68. Electrical outlets In room used for clase in study 6‘3 . natinj of baric equipment 175 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Andrews, Paul E. "An Analysis and Evaluation of Selected Aspects of the Wayne State University Pilot Project in Teacher Education." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1966. 2. Barnfield, Arthur. "Three Years After Induction— Birginia's Beginning Science Teachers," ERIC Center for Science and Mathematics Education, Columbus, SE007361. 3. Berry, J. R. "Professional Preparation and Effective ness of Beginning Teachers," Coral Gables, Florida: University of Miami Graphic Arts Press, I960. Bledsoe, Joseph; Cox, Johnnye; Burnham, Reba. "Com parison Bevv.'cen Selected Characteristics and Per formance of Provisionally and Professionally Certified Beginning Teachers in Georgia." Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, Inc., 1967. 5. Blosser, Patricia, and Howe, Robert. "An Analysis of Research Related to Secondary School Science Teachers," The Science Teacher, January, 1969. 6. Broadbent, Prank, and Cruickshank, Donald. "The Identification and Analysis of Problems of First Year Teachers." Ann Arbor, Michigan: University, Microfilms, Inc., 1965. 7. Brown, Ira. "Role Perception of Secondary Teachers as Related to Pupils' Perception of Behavioral Charac teristics." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, 1965. 8. Brownell, Samuel M. "If I Were to Start to Teach," NASSP Bulletin October 1968. Bethesda, Maryland: Educational Document Reproduction Service, ED02*i621. 176 177 9. Cartel1', Jack Caldwell. "Selected Characteristics of beginning Science and Mathematics Teachers in Georgia." Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, Inc., 19f»7. 10. Clayton, T,, and Belland, J., and Portgang. "Preparing Beginning Teachers for Working with Educationally DisadvantagedA Continuing Study of the Influence on Student Teachers of a Training Program for Cooperating Teachers." Syracuse University, Research Instltytqt,1'July 1969. t " * 11. Clinton, Thomas A. "Beginning Teachers' Problems: A Study of Problems EnH.juhtc.red by Cne-hundred Graduates of Ease Texas State University and the Functional Relatiunship between These Problems and the Teacher Education Program." Unpublished Doc toral dissertation* East Texas State University, 1965. 12. Cullen, .Robert J., and Aurua, Carl. "The Relationship between Ethnic -Prejudice and Student Teaching Behavior.1' Bother.chi, Maryland: Educational Docu ment Reproduction Service, February, 1968. 13* Dalton, Elizabeth1. "liln^t Makes Effective Teachers for Young Adolescents?" Mashvilie: George Peabody College .‘o r Teacher::., 1962, 1*1. Day, Harry P. "Ab\:It.u-.ie Changes of Beginning Teachers After Initial Teaching Experience," Journal of Teacher Edueation, September, 1959. 15. Dixon, V/. J. (edf). .BMP Biomedical Computer Programs. University of California Publications in Automatic Computation, Ho. 2, Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1968. 16. Elliot, David. "Social Origins and Values of Teachers and Their Attitudes to Students from Poverty Backgrounds." '’Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of P.I t us burgh", 1968. 17. Ferguson, George A. Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education. Second Edition. Mew York: McDrawETTi*ll ‘Uook any, 1966. 18. Florida Teacher Education Advisory Council. "Florida Study of Teacher-Equation:- An Evaluation of the Pre-Service Program,"1958. 178 19. Gifford, Vernon. ’’Selected Personality Characteristics of First Year Teachers in Georgia High Schools." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, 1966. 20. Gill, Newell T.; King, Hay; and Wilburn, Ron. "A Helping Relationship Experience in Teacher Educa tion," The Journal of Experimental Education, Vol. 37, No. 2, Winter, 19otTT 21. Gray, H. B. "A Study of the Outcomes of Pre-Service Education Association with Three Levels of Teacher Certification." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, 1962. 22. Hall, H. 0. "Effectiveness of Fully Certified and Provisionally Certified First Year Teachers in Teaching Certain Fundamental Skills." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, 1962. 23. Hill, Russel A., Medley, Donald M. "Changes in Be haviors of First Year Intern Teachers," ERIC Center for Science and Mathematics Education, Columbus, Ohio, SE006727. 24. Hite, Herbert. "Follow-up Study: Long Term Effects of Modified Internship for Beginning Elementary Teachers." Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Micro films, Inc., 1966. 25. Issac, M. G. "A Study of the Progressional Problems of Beginning Teachers Who Were Certified by the Chicago Board of Education in 1958, 1959, and i960, to Teach in the Kindergarten and Primary Grades." Northwestern University, 1962. Dissertation Abstracts, 1963, 23(12). 26. Jordon, L. G. "Selected Perception of a Sample of Begin ning Teachers in Georgia with Special Reference to Teaching Assignment." Unpublished Doctoral disser tation, University of Georgia, 1966. 27. Kessler, H. "The Development of a Guidebook for Begin ning Teachers in Four Junior High Schools in Brooklyn, Mew York." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, New York University, 1963. 179 28. Kootz, David E. "Professional Attitudes of Beginning Teachers and Their School's Personnel Policies." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, 1967. 29. Levine, Murray, and Penney, George. "The Effects of Practice Teaching in Inner City Schools on Attitude Toward Teaching in Inner City Schools." Bethesda, Maryland: Educational Document Reproduction Service. ED035 577, 1969. 30. McNeil, John D. "Initial Teaching in Poverty Versus Affluent Schools: Effect upon Teacher Stress, Attitudes, and Career Choices." Bethesda, Maryland: Educational Document Reproduction Service, ED024649, 1968. 31. NASSP Bulletin, "The Beginning Teacher Project in New York State," Bethesda, Maryland: Educational Document Reproduction Service, ED024621, 1968. 32. National Education Association. "First-Year Teachers in 1954-55. National Education Association Research BulletinV 19^6^ 3"*n ’ 33. National Science Foundation. "Characteristics and Service Loads: Secondary School Science and Mathe matics Teachers," National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C. 1963• 34. O'Neil, Don R. "The Value of Selected Teaching Experi ences as Perceived by Students, First-year, and Co operating Teacher Affiliated with Colorado State College." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Colorado State College, 1968. 35. Riggs, Sara. "Selected Characteristics and Perceptions of Beginning Junior High School Teachers." Unpub lished Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, 1966. 36. Sagness, Richard L. "A Study of Selected Outcomes of a Science Pre-service Teacher Education Project Emphasizing Early Involvement in Schools of Con trasting Environmental Settings." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1970. 180 37. Sandefur, J. T. "An Experimental Study of Professional Education for Secondary Teachers." Emporia, Kansas: Kancas State Teachers College, 1967. 38. Skeel, Dorothy J. "Determining the Compatibility of Student Teachers for Culturally Deprived Schools by Means of a Cultural Attitude Inventory." Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, Inc., 1966. 39. Smith, Calvert H, "The Clinical Experience: A New Com ponent of Urban Education Models." The Center for Inner City Studies, Northeastern Illinois State Col lege. Mo. Steele, Edward. "An Asessment of Factors Related to Success for New Secondary Teachers Prepared at Frost^urg State College." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, the George Washington University, 1968. *11. Stone, E. H. "Personal and Professional Problems Recognized by Beginning Junior and Senior High School Teachers and Their Relationship to the Number of These Problems to the Personal Characteris tics, Professional Preparation, Teaching Assignment and Career Plans." Unpublished Doctoral disserta tion, University of Denver, 1963. *12. Strickland, Arthur D. "Factors Related to Pupil Observation Report* of Teachers and Attitude Toward Their Teachers." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, 1966. M3. Swineford, Edwin J. "A Study of Factors That Affect Teaching Behavior," California Journal of Educa tional Research, Ml:November, T 9 6 3 . MM. Trull, John R. "Factors Related to Retention of Beginning Teachers In Georgia." Unpublished Doctor al dissertation, University of Georgia, 1967. M5. United States Office of Education. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Office of Education. "The Beginning Teacher One Year Later." Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962. 181 46. Walberg, Herbert; Metzner, Seymour; Todd, Robert; et al. "Effects of Tutoring and Practice Teaching in Self-Concept and Attitudes in Education Students." Paper, National Association for Research in Science Teaching Annual Meeting, February, 1968. 47. Weber, Wilford and Lawson, James H. A Summary of the Evaluation of the Cooperative Urban Teacher' Education Program. Kansas City, Missouri: Mid-Continent Regional Education Laboratory, October, 1968. 48. Wey, Herbert W. "Difficulties of Beginning Teachers," School Review, 1951, 59, 32-37. 49. White, Arthur L. "The Development of Models to Explain the Relation of Important Variable to Laboratory Instructional Strategies. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, Inc., 1969. 90, White, Arthur L. "Multiple Comparison Instructional Paper." Instructional Paper in Progress, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. 51. Zink, Theodore. "A Follow-up Study of Recent Graduates at Glassboro State College (COPE)," Glassboro State College, New Jersey, 1970.