• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

INFORMATION TO USERS This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­ graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy. University Microfilms International 300 N. ZEEB ROAD, ANN ARBOR, Ml 48106 18 BEDFORD ROW, LONDON WC1R 4EJ, ENGLAND 7908185 MOORE* MARY LOUISE EDDY A DESCRIPTIVE SURVEY OF SECONDARY ENGLISH TEACHERS* ATTITUDES TOWARD LANGUAGE NORMS AND VARIATION. THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, PH.D., 1978 University Microfilms International 300 n. z e e b r o a d , a n n a r b o r, mi w m A DESCRIPTIVE SURVEY OF SECONDARY ENGLISH TEACHERS' ATTITUDES TOWARD LANGUAGE NORMS AND VARIATION DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Mary Louise Eddy Moore, B.A., M.A. * * * * * The Ohio State University 1978 Reading Committee: Approved By Professor Frank J. Zidonis Professor Donald R. Bateman Professor Robert R. Bargar Adviser Department of Humanities Education To Irene and Allyn Eddy ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are several individuals without whose help this work could not have been completed. Special recognition is due to the writer's committee: Professor Frank J. Zidonis, who served as advisor and whose suggestions and assistance were invaluable; Professor Donald R. Bateman, who was a continuing source of aid and encouragement in completing the study and Professor Robert R. Bargar, who readily contributed both time and expertise in research procedures. The writer deeply appreciates Professor Johanna S. DeStefano's early conversations about the topic of this study and her unflagging enthusiasm for the project. The writer wishes also to express her sincere appreciation for the support and assistance of many friends and colleagues. Of particular help were James Sims, whose help in administering the final survey forms was considerable and William Stalcup, whose assistance in the tedious job of proofreading drafts was always willingly given. The four English department heads who made arrangements for interviews with their staff members — Karen Harper, Roberta Adams, George Galiatsos and Vicki Storks — all ex­ pressed a professional concern and readiness to help which were, in turn, reflected by their staffs. The numerous other friends and colleagues who helped in yet other others ways have, likewise, the writer's sincere gratitude. iii VITA November 12, 1944 ........ Born — Hartford, Connecticut 1966....................... B.A., The Department of English, Principia College, Elsah, Illinois 1966-1967 ................. Teaching Assistant, Department of English, Western Illinois University, Macomb, Illinois 1968 ..................... M.A., Department of English, Western Illinois University 1967-1969 ................. Instructor, Department of English, Western Illinois University 1969-1977 ................. English Teacher, Suffield High School, Suffield, Connecticut 1971-1977 ................. Chairwoman, Department of English, Suffield High School 1977-1978 ................. Teaching Associate, Department of Humanities Education, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1978-present ............. Assistant Professor, Department of Education, Principia College PUBLICATIONS "Sentence Combining: Developing Skill in Manipulating Syntax," O.C.T.E.L.A., vol. 18, no. 3 (Fall, 1977), pp. 47-51; publication of the Ohio Council for Teachers of English and Language Arts. FIELDS OF STUDY Maj or Field: Education Studies in English Education. Professors Frank J. Zidonis, Donald R. Bateman and Johanna S. DeStefano iv FIELDS OF STUDY — CONTINUED Studies in Curriculum and Supervision. Professors Paul R. Klohr and Charles M. Galloway Studies in the Philosophy of Education. Professor Richard N. Pratte Studies in Educational Research. Professor Robert R. Bargar v TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.................................................... iii VITA.................................................................. iv LIST OF TABLES..................................................... viii LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................... ix Chapter I. INTRODUCTION............................................. 1 Overview............................................... 1 Background Statement.................................. 2 Statement of the Problem............................. 5 Rationale ........................ 6 Limitations .......................................... 8 II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE.............................. 17 Growing Interest in Language Attitudes................. 17 Standard English as an Absolute Monolithic S t a n d a r d ............................................. 29 The Proliferation of Distinctions: Informal and Formal English.........................................41 The Relative Importance of Form and Function in English Instruction................................ 56 The Decline and Fall of the English Language........ 68 III. METHODS AND PROCEDURES.....................................73 The Development of the Instrument......................73 Pretest Sample and Final Population ................. 79 Data Gathering Procedures ........................... 80 Analysis of Data.........................................82 IV. RESULTS ....................................................86 Attitudes toward Language Standards ................. 86 Attitudes toward Formal and Informal English........... 96 Attitudes toward the Emphasis on Form or Function in English Instruction............................... 100 vi PAGE Attitudes toward Language Change. ................... 108 The Survey as a Whole: Additional Findings............ 110 V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS.................................. 117 S u m m a r y ................................................ 117 Conclusions............................................ 118 APPENDIX A. Transcription of Interviews..............................125 B. Pretest Survey Instrument .............................. 191 C. Final Survey Instrument ................................ 197 D. Survey Items Listed by Subtest........................... 201 E. Table 9 — Pretest Item Analysis: Item-to-Total Correlations and Factor Loadings.........................204 BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................................ 205 vii LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. The Range of Styles along the Informal/Formal Continuum............................................... 48 2. Responses of Secondary English Teachers to the Question, "What Is Standard English?"................. 87 3. Frequencies and Percentages of Responses to Items In Content Area One: Attitudes toward Language Standards............................................... 91 4. Frequencies and Percentages of Responses to Items in Content Area Two: Attitudes toward Formal and Informal English ...................................... 97 5. Frequencies and Percentages of Responses to Items in Content Area Three: Attitudes toward an Emphasis on Form and Function in English Instruction . 103 6. Frequencies and Percentages of Responses to Items in Content Area Four: Attitudes toward Language C h a n g e ................................................... 109 7. Item Analysis of Final Survey: Item-to-Total Correlations and Factor Loadings ..................... Ill 8. Pretest and Final Survey Correlation Matrix for Four Meaning Dimensions.................................. 115 9. Means of Respondents to Content Areas.................... 120 10. Pretest Item Analysis: Item-to-Total Correlations and Factor Loadings (Appendix E) ..................... 204 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 The Transactional or Mutually Interactive Nature of Language and other Social Phenomena................................................... 66 ix CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Overview This study reports a descriptive

Load more

  224

Copy Link