This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 69-11,647 HART, Edward Clegg, 1929- A PROPOSED IN-SERVICE PROGRAM IN PHYSICS FOR EXPERIENCED SECONDARY SCHOOL SCIENCE TEACHERS.
The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1968 Education, teacher training
University Microfilms. Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan A PROPOSED IN-SERVICE PROGRAM
IN PHYSICS FOR FXPFRIFNCFD SECONDARY
SCHOOL SCIENCE TEACHERS
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
By
Edward Clegg Hart,• B.S.E.E., M.S.F.E., B.D.
it it it it it it
The Ohio State University 1968
Approved by
College of Fducation PREFACE
The study reported In this dissertation is an effort by the author toward the improvement of secondary school physics teaching through an in- service program in physics for experienced science teachers. He has attempted to go beyond the typical goal of in-service science education which is to bring teachers up-to-date. He has attempted to design an in-service physics program that will pre pare teachers not only for the new roles into which they will be progressively placed, but also for the task of reforming secondary school science education.
The program description that is given in this study is recognized by the author to be far from complete.
A complete program description was not his goal.
His goal was to bring together enough ideas to begin to evolve an in-service program that meets the needs and interests of secondary school science teachers more nearly than most existing programs.
The experimental offering of the proposed in-service physics program that is included in this study is a step in this evolutionary process.
ii Many people have made helpful contributions to this study. The author hereby gratefully ac knowledges these and wishes in particular to thank the following:
Dr. John S. Richardson who directly and indirectly inspired many of the ideas and ideals related to this study and who, as major adviser, provided the guidance necessary to bring this study to comple tion.
Dr. Wave H. Shaffer and Dr. William R. Riley who helped formulate and execute ideas related to this study.
Dr. F. Leonard Jossem, department head, and other personnel of the Physics De partment of The Ohio State University who helped during the preparation and execution stages of the experimental offering of the proposed, physics program.
Dr. Fred R. Schlessinger and Dr. Herbert L. Coon who served as members of the I’eading committee for this dissertation.
Mrs. Barry I. Merrick who typed this study,
Vivian Hart, David Hart, Peter Hart, and Daniel Hart whose frequent adjustments of schedule, patience, and love made this study possible.
E. C. H.
iii VITA
June 18, 1929 Born - Eastland, Texas
1951...... B.S.E.E., Texas Technological College, Lubbock, Texas
1951-1953 • • Research and Development Engineer, General Electric Company, Schenec tady, New York
1953-195^ • • Institute for Biblical Studies, Albany, New York
195^-1957 • • B.D., Presbyterial Theological Semi nary, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
1958...... Ordination by the United Presby terian Church in the United States of America (Formerly Presbyterian Church in the United States of America)
1957-1960 . . Instructor, Texas Technological Col lege, Lubbock, Texas i 960...... K.S.E.E., Texas Technological College, Lubbock, Texas
196O-I965 . . Teacher and Science Department Head, Ilaigazian College, Beirut, Lebanon
1966-126.8 . . Teaching Associate, Department of Electrical Engineering, The Ohio State University
FIELDS OF STUDY
Studies in Science Education. Professor John S. Richardson
Studies in Physics. Professor Wave H. Shaffer
Studies in Teacher-Higher Education. Pi'ofessor Everett J . Kircher
iv TABLF OF CONTFMVS
rarre
Pi'ef acc ii
Vita . iv
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1
Problem .Assumptions Definition of Terms Hypotheses Frocedui'e
II. RFVIFW OF RFLATFD LITERATURE ...... 26
In-Service Science Teacher Education Laboratory Instruction Programed Instruction Individualized Instruction
III. DESCRIPTION OF TKF PROPOSED PROGRAM . . . 82
Goals Special Considerations Opex’ational Pi’ocedures Experiments and Resources
IV. EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSFD FROGRAM . . ..150
V. CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 210
Appendix
I. A Proposed Study Plan ...... 218
II. How to Keep a Lo~ B o o k ...... 220
v .Appendix Page III. Error S y s t e m s ...... 224
IV. A Guide to the Preparation of Simple Programed Instructional Materials . . . 246
V. Participant Evaluation Sheet ...... 251
VI. Experiments ...... 254
VII. Sample Experiment Information Sheets . . . 262
VIII. Bibliography of Experiment Resource B o o k s ...... 2 75 IX. Evaluation Questionnaire for Participants in the Experimental Offering of the Proposed Program in Physics for Experi enced Secondary School Science Teachers...... 282
X. Typical Responses to Questions of Evaluation Questionnaire for Participants in the Experimental Offering of the Pi'oposea Program .... 284
XI. List of Participants in the Experimental Offering of the Proposed In-Service Physics Program ...... 300
XII. Powers of T e n ...... ■...... 301
XIII. List of Those Interviewed as Fart of the Evaluation of the Proposed In-Service Physics Program ...... 303
XIV. A Brief Description of a Proposed In-Service Program in Physics for Experienced Secondary School Science Teachers ...... 3^4
XV. Evaluation Questionnaire for a Proposed In-Service Program in Physics for Experienced Secondary School Science Teachers...... 30?
XVI. Summary of Responses to Evaluation Questionnaire for a Proposed In- Service Program in Physics for Experienced Secondary School Science Teachers...... S3.2
vi Appendix
XVII. Personal Information Sheet
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A proposed in-service program in physics for experienced secondary school science teachers is the subject of this study. The need for new approaches, new courses, and new programs for in-service secondary school science teachers becomes increasingly apparent as the following factors are examined.
1. The educational climate of change that
tends to make obsolete the former educa
tion of many teachers.
2. The post-Sputnik demand for scientists
and engineers and for non-scientists who
are scientifically literate.
3. The new science curriculum developments
and course content improvement programs.
The lack of graduate level courses in
physics designed for the in-service sci
ence teacher; the inadequacies of existing
physics courses, that are designed pri
marily for physics majors and engineers,
1 for secondary school science teachers
because of the limited backgrounds in
mathematics and physics of many of these
teachers.
5. The development of programed instructional
materials (Thomas, 1963) and audio-tutorial
systems of Instruction (Postlethwalt, 1965).
6 . The learning-by-teaching proposal of
Jerrald R. Zacharlas (1966, pp. 5-9).
7. The developments in the understanding of
the learning process.
8. The new trends in science teaching.
9. The needs of pupils and teachers in the
school of tomorrow and the demand for more
efficient use of instructional experience
and time in the secondary school.
10. The need of secondary school science
teachers for direct experience in the
processes of science.
The educational climate of the United States has been greatly influenced by the explosive age in which we live. The population explosion, the technological
explosion, and, especially, the knowledge explosion
press heavily upon the educational field. Reltan notes
that the knowledge explosion embodies two separate but 3 inter-related phenomena: a vast extension of what is known and a new conception of that which remains to be known (1966, p. 73). The new educational climate, that has evolved largely as a result of the knowledge explo sion, has tended to lead to the abandonment of the old ideal of a body of knowledge resting on a great sub stratum of specialized research but rising in steps of increasing generality to an apex which placed a capstone over all (Reitan, 1966, p. 7^). This new educational climate is characterized by change rather than by the certainty which characterized earlier educational cli- — * mate in the United States. This climate of educational change is quite contrary to the educational climate within which most secondary school science' teachers have been educated. This new climate tends to make the former education of most secondary school science teachers increasingly obsolete. Paul D. Hurd illus trates this point when he says that science teaching of the past decades is not appropriate for the world of today, and will be even less suitable for the world of tomorrow (1963. P. 3)*
The post-Sputnik demand for scientists and engineers in the United States has brought secondary school science programs and teachers to the attention of scientists, of government officials at all levels, 4 of school officials, and of the general public. This focus of attention has produced a considerable amount of criticism and some action toward the improvement of secondary school science. In-service education in secondary school science has increasingly been under stood as one of the urgent needs of our times. With the continued decline In enrollment in high school physics courses (Watson, 19&7. P* 212) and with the continued demand of our society for scientists, engi neers, and non-scientists who are scientifically literate,.the demand for new and improved in-service education for secondary school science teachers can be expected to continue to increase.
The new science curriculum developments and coui’se content improvement programs of the past decade represent major efforts to improve the quality of secondary school science. In order to teach these new programs it was, and is, necessary to re-educate the teachers of these programs. Various summer institutes and other re-education programs have been, and continue to be, held for this purpose. New courses and new programs for In-service secondary school science teachers are necessary in order to prepare teachers not only to teach the new programs, but also to prepare the teachers for future programs. The re-education of 5 secondary school science teachers along the lines of the newer approaches and philosophies of the new pro grams represents a major challenge and responsibility for in-service programs.
Secondary school science teachers are restricted in the number of physics courses they can take because of their limited background in mathematics and physics and because of the nature of advanced level physics courses. The Academic Year Science Institute physics courses and the summer and in-service training institute courses for the national curriculum projects are often the only physics courses designed for secondary school science teachers. These courses may or may not carry graduate credit. If the in-service science teacher wishes to strengthen his background in physics he must, in most instances, compete with physics majors in inter mediate and advanced physics courses designed for physics majors. There seems to be an urgent need for graduate level physics courses that not only provide additional course work for the in-service teacher, but also help to prepare the teacher for a lifetime of self instruction in physics and for the difficult task of competing with physics majors in intermediate and advanced level physics courses. 6
The need for course work is only one aspect of the problem confronting the in-service secondary school science teacher. .Another aspect of his needs is that of keeping up with evolving learning-teaching under standings and practices. Just to read about the use of programed instruction, individualized instruction, the use of audio-tutorial systems of instruction, the learning-by-teaching proposal of Jerrald R. Zacharias, and. other innovations in both the understanding and practice of the learning-teaching process is not usually adequate motivation to bring about the learning
that produces significant changes in teacher*s behavior.
The in-service science teacher needs direct experience
in these evolving learning-teaching understandings and practices. The physics major oriented physics courses do not usually afford the opportunity for such direct
experiences.
The development of programed instructional mate
rials and audio-tutorial systems of instruction during
the past decade represents a major shift in approach
to education. The secondary science teacher must be
prepared for the understanding of the value and limita
tions of these new approaches to instruction. In-
service programs that include opportunities to gain
such understandings are greatly needed today. A further development of ideas related to programed instruction and audio-tutorial systems can be found in Chapter II.
The adage that teachers teach as they have been taught is so true that the in-service science teacher must be given the opportunity to be taught (learn) through the medium of methods most nearly related to his present and future needs. For the science teacher to be able to innovate approaches and programs for the teaching of science and to modify and adapt existing approaches and programs, he must have a broad back ground of learning-teaching experiences from which he may draw.
The Fifty-ninth Yearbook of the Society for the Study of Education, Rethinking Science Education,
includes the following twelve important trends in ' science teaching:
1. The trend away from verification of basic
principles and toward an inductive develop
ment of functional understanding.
2. The trend away from technologies as the
central core of science and toward the use
of these technologies as illustrations and
applications of principles of science. 8
3. The trend away from teacher demonstration
and toward pupil experimentation and problem
solving.
The trend away from simple manipulations
directed by detailed instructions and occupy
ing a single class period and toward pup11-
teacher planned experiments that extend over
varying amounts of class time.
5. The trend away from the use of the same
experiments for all students and toward the
use of a variety of experiments or projects.
6 . The trend away from science instruction for
the college-bound and toward instruction for
a l l .
7. The trend toward increased use of science
clubs, science fairs, and other supplementary
activities.
8. The trend toward increased use of closed-
clrcuit and broadcast television in science
teaching.
9. The trend toward flexibility in design and
construction of science facilities.
10. The trend toward an increased use of audio
visual aids on a small group or individual
basis. 9
11. The trend toward the extension of the science
curriculum by the introduction of new units
or courses such as nuclear physics, astro
physics, etc.
12. The trend toward the homogeneous grouping of
pupils (Martin, I960, pp. 229-231).
In addition, subsequent years have brought trends toward individualized instruction and toward the use of teaching machines and systems. These and other unlisted trends point to the need for in-service edu
cation to update the science teacher, giving him the ability to tolerate the new trends in science teaching
and enabling him to make a contribution toward the
establishment of future trends that will improve sci
ence instruction.
Russell, in Change and Challenge in .American
Education, states that every young person today with a
normal life expectancy must plan to live in a distant
future in which things will be different from the way
they are now (1965, P. 23). He says that education must have a changed function in our lives. Rather than
learn how to do things, how to perform, how to act, we
must learn how to think, how to Judge, how to balance, how to perceive (1965, P. ^7). The Sixty-fifth Year
book of the National Society for the Study of Education, 10
The Changing American School, gives a picture of the changes that are presently taking place in American schools. This picture of the changing school intro duces the problem of how best to update science teachers within the changing school. The picture portrayed in
The Changing American School is relatively simple com pared to the picture of the school of the future as portrayed by Stotler in The Supervision of School Sci ence Programs. He says that the school of the future will probably be in many respects an American frontier- type community in a space-age setting. Stotler even suggests that the school will seemingly disappear as a separate institution and will become integrated into a multi-function institution which combines the public school, park, library, youth center and community
center (Stotler, Richardson, and Williamson, 1967, p. 129). Admittedly, this picture is several years distant, but we can not ignore the need for in-service programs that will prepare science teachers not only for the future, but also to help shape the future.
There seems to be little or no question that the imme diate future will demand more efficient use of instruc tional experience and of time in the secondary school.
The need for new approaches, new courses, and new programs for in-service secondary school science 11 teachers becomes apparent when we examine the need these teachers have for direct experience in the pro cesses of science. The processes of science are dynamic and tend to include a considerable amount of trial and error. In many instances the selection of the approach to a given experiment is a major problem.
Many teachers today have been brought up educationally to believe that experimentation is almost a cut and dried process involving certain steps that almost always give the correct results. Their experience of
science and its processes has been removed from the vitality of science. High school pseudo-science is
the concern of Skinner when he says that the short
term results of a lively and attentive classroom,
efforts to make science interesting, and the discovery method of teaching science may be temporarily rein
forcing to students and teachers, but the long-term
effects of these efforts may be weak, lacking, or
sometimes actually undesirable (1968, p. 705-706).
The proposed in-service program in physics for
experienced secondary school science teachers, which
is the subject of this study, was designed to relate
to the graduate needs of the in-service secondary
school science teacher of today and attempts to pre
pare teachers for the tomorrows. 12 ; \
Problems
The problems of in-service education for second ary school science teachers are numerous and complex.
This study deals with three of these:
1. The problem of providing graduate level
course work in physics for in-service
secondary school science teachers.
2. The problem of providing direct experi
ences in the use of programed instruc
tion, individualized instruction, and
the processes of science.
3. The problem of meeting the individual
needs of in-service science teachers
who come from a diversity of backgrounds
in experience and training.
The problem of providing graduate level course
work in physics could, be met by changing the under
graduate course requirements for science teachers to
conform more nearly to the course requirements of the
physics major, or by providing course work designed
specifically for science teachers, or by providing
course work designed to equip teachers so that they
can also take some course work with the physics major.
The latter of these alternatives appears to offer the 13 greatest immediate and long range benefits for the in- service secondary school science teacher.
The problem of providing direct experiences in the use of programed instruction, individualized in struction and the processes of science could be met by changing or adding to existing methods courses; or by offering physics courses that include these approaches to the teaching of science. The latter alternative appears to offer greater potential for helpfulness for the in-service teacher because it is more likely to be related to the secondary school situation of the teacher. The combination of product and process should be achieved more easily in terms of the spe cifics of a study of different topics in physics than in terms of the generalities of a study of methods.
The problem of meeting the individual needs of in-service teachers who come from a diversity of back grounds in experience and in training could be reduced by the application of individualized instruction. The inadequacies of mass education and human variability are two strong forces pushing us toward the considera tion of the individualization of instruction. The goal of individualized instruction has been accepted by teachers for many years, but we are still looking for ways and means of achieving this goal. Human Ik variability is real, inevitable, ineradicable, desir able, and indeed essential. Nothing less than uniform acceptance of these facts and full recognition of their implication for education and for society will suffice even as a start toward the individualization of in struction (Tyler and Brownell, 1962, p. 326). The in- service science teacher’s needs are ideally suited to an individualized approach.
In order to make a contribution toward the solution of the aforementioned problems, a proposed in-service program in physics for experienced second ary school science teachers was chosen as the topic of this study. Some of the features of the proposed program are as follows:
1. The program centers around a laboratory
experience.
2. The program utilizes programed materials
and prepares teachers to prepare and use
programed instructional materials.
3. The program utilizes the learning-by-
teaching principle.
k. The program is structured along the lines
of a research and development center so
that the individual needs of each in-service teacher can be given appro priate consideration.
The program seeks to prepare the teacher not only for the changing current secondary
school science context, but also for the
future when the demands for a more effi
cient use of instructional time and expe
rience will force drastic changes in the
secondary school context.
The program utilizes basically an individ
ualized Instructional method that
a. seeks to involve the in-service
teacher directly in the planning
of his individual study program
b. allows each in-service teacher to
work at a rate best suited to his
individual capabilities
c. seeks to encourage the in-service
teacher to better understand himself
as well as the others with whom he
may work and study.
The program has enough flexibility to allow
the in-service teacher some freedom of
inquiry. 16
8. The program includes the opportunity to
review or to learn algebra, trigonometry,
simple calculus, and other areas of
mathematics..
The proposed program does not attempt to cover the field of physics, nor does it attempt a broad
coverage of methods of instruction in science. It does attempt to provide an opportunity for study in- depth of selected topics in physics, chosen by the
in-service teacher with direction and assistance from
the director of the proposed program, and an opportu nity to experience some of the processes of science.
Also, it attempts to provide direct experience in the laboratory approach to instruction in science, the use of programed materials, and individualized in
struction. The course work of the proposed pi’ogram
in physics is primarily centered around a series of
laboratory, individual study, type courses, but it
also includes the enrollment of the in-service teacher
in regular Intermediate and advanced level physics
courses when the background and the time schedule of
the in-service teacher permit such an enrollment.
The proposed program was designed within the
context of Central Ohio and The Ohio State University,
but it should be readily adaptable to both the 17 national and the international context. By its fundamental nature the proposed program cannot be described in exact detail because these details are in some measure determined by the specific needs of a given group of in-service science teachers at a given time and location.
Assumptions
1. In-service science teachers will benefit more from
laboratory-type graduate physics courses than from
lecture-type physics courses.
2. The secondary school science teacher in the future
will be required to perform more as a director of
research and development than as a lecturer.
3. Teachers teach as they have been taught.
4. Secondary school science instruction will become
increasingly individualized.
5. Audio-tutorial systems and programed instruction
will be used increasingly in secondary school
science instruction to teach both content and
skills.
6 . The process and product of science must be treated
together in secondary school science.
7. Science in general and physics in particular can
be taught as an exciting enterprise. 18
8. In-service science teachers will benefit more from
an ind.ivid.nalized. type program than from a tradi
tional content-centered type program.
Definition of Terms
1. For the purposes of this study a program will be
understood as a plan of procedure. The proposed
program in physics, with which this study is con
cerned, will be more than a sequence of graduate
level physics courses and less than a total grad
uate program for the in-service science teacher.
It will be more than a sequence of graduate level
physics courses because the program includes not
only physics courses but also a great deal of
personal interaction among the in-service science
teacher, the director of the program, other in-
service teachers, and others. The proposed pro
gram in physics will be less than a total graduate
program for the in-service science teacher because
the program deals only with the physics portion of
a total graduate program.
2. Individualizing instruction is the process of
tailoring a program of instruction to fit the
individual needs of a student as nearly as pos
sible. Individualizing instruction is more than 19
allowing the individual student to cover a given
topic at his own pace. It includes the direct
involvement of the student in every aspect of the
instructional (learning-teaching) process and the
use of his sensitive personal perception.
3. Programed instruction is a well disciplined and
experimental approach to the development of
instances or systems of instruction (Corey, 1967,
p. 22).
The learning-by-teaching proposal of Jerrald R.
Zacharias is a practical expression of the adage
that we learn best when we have to teach. Dr.
Zacharias has proposed that all students, even
if they have no interest in teaching as a profes
sion, should learn science by having to teach it
to a younger group of students. High school stu
dents can teach elementary school students. Col
lege seniors can teach college freshmen (1966,
p. 7). Graduate students can teach undergraduates.
For this study the application of Dr. Zacharias1
proposal would be for teachers to teach other
. teachers individually and in small groups as a
part of their individual study program.
5. Core experiments in this study refers to the four
or more individual experiments that each in-service 20
science teacher will do each quarter of his
enrollment in the proposed physics program. The
core experiments provide the hub around which the
other experiences related to the proposed program
rotate.
Hypotheses
1. A special physics program can be planned to meet
many of the special needs of the in-service sec
ondary school science teacher.
2. In-service secondary school science teachers will
learn new methods of learning-teaching science as
they are given the opportunity to experience these
new methods in graduate courses designed specif
ically for them.
Procedure
The nature of the problems to which this study is directed has in large measure determined the approach that has been taken. Basically we wanted to demonstrate that there could be devised and tested an in-service graduate level physics program that would contribute to the solution of the three problems listed on page 12.
If the basic design of the proposed program is adequate, selected participants in an experimental 21 offering of the program should, provide data for the evaluation of the hypotheses of this study. The selected participants "were chosen from Central Ohio in-service secondary school science teachers and from participants in the Academic Year Institute of The
Ohio State University who are also secondary school science teachers. The eight secondary school science teachers who participated in the experimental offering of the proposed program represented a broad spectrum of teaching experience.
The experimental offering of the proposed pro gram was conducted during the Spring Quarter of 1968 at The Ohio State University. Equipment for the core experiments of the proposed program was obtained from the introductory, intermediate, and advanced labora tories of the Physics Department; from the Physical
Science Study Committee (PSSC) equipment, including the advanced topics of PSSC; from equipment that was formerly used in the "Nature of the Physical World" course that was taught several years ago under the leadership of Professor Hesthal; and from equipment that was devised or purchased specifically for the proposed program.
The core experiments for the proposed program were of three general types— verification, devised, 22 and open-ended. In addition to the general objectives that were identified with each experiment, the in- service participants were asked to consider for each experiment specific objectives that were related to their needs or interests. These objectives not only- served as goals for the learning experience related to a given experiment, but also they could be used by the participant to prepare a programed unit on some aspect of the experiment. Each participant was asked to pre pare at least one programed unit.
Each experiment, or series of experiments related to a given topic, was to begin with a pre-test and to conclude with a post-test. These tests were designed to attempt to measure (1 ) factual understand ing » (2) understanding of the apparatus of the experi ment, (3 ) undex'standing of the application of both apparatus and facts in an educationally useful manner, and (4) the degree to which the objectives of the experiment have been achieved. Some of the questions for the pre- and post-tests were taken from (1) Ques tions and Problems in Science by Di’essel and Nelson
(195^); (2) 2000 Multiple-Choice Examination Questions
With Answers— Physics by Murphy and Stanionis (1966);
(3 ) sample graduate record examination advanced tests
in Physics as found in ARGO Publishing Company (Gruber*, 23
1966) and Cowles Education Corporation publication,
How to Pass Graduate Record Examination Advanced Test
Physics (1967); and (^) other sources.
The sources of evaluation data include the
information that the participants in the experimental
offering of the proposed program provided and the
counsel and information provided by other experienced
science teachers and supervisors who were asked to
study the proposed program and to participate in a limited manner in the experimental offering of the
proposed program. Research evidence to test the hypotheses of this study was obtained from {1) the
results of the pre- and post-experiment tests; (2 ) the
record each participant kept in his daily log book;
(3 ) questionnaires submitted to the participants and
other interested science teachers; (k) interviews with
the participants and other interested science teachers;
(5 ) written evaluations submitted by each of the par
ticipants at the end of the experimental offering of
the proposed program; and (6 ) evaluations submitted by
other science teachers.
The evaluation data should indicate whether or
not the proposed graduate program in physics for in-
service secondary school science teachers does actually
help meet the needs of the in-service secondary school 24 science teacher. If the research evidence indicates that the proposed program is just another physics course, then the first hypothesis will have failed its test. If the evaluation data indicate that the par ticipants in the experimental offering of the proposed course, as well as some of the experienced teachers and supervisors who were asked to study and partici pate on a limited basis in the experimental offering, have experienced some of the newer methods of learning- teaching science to such a degree that they are willing to attempt to utilize these methods, then the second hypothesis will have been supported.
The specific procedure for this study is out lined in terms of the following phases:
1. Review of literature and development
of background history and theoretical
framework.
2. Consideration of special problems.
3. Establishment of the goals of the
proposed course.
4. Development of course prerequisites,
plan of operation, minimum requirements,
and evaluation procedure. 25
5. Build up of core experiments, pre- and
post-tests for experiments, and supply of
programed instructional materials.
6 . Development of a guide to the preparation
of programed instructional materials.
7. Development of evaluation questionnaires.
8. An experimental offering of the proposed
course to a group of experienced secondary
school science teachers and supervisors as
described on pages 14, 15* 16 and 21.
9. Pvaluation of the experimental offering and
revision of the proposed course as discussed
on page 23.
10. Write-up of the study. CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Literature related to (1) in-service science teacher education, (2) laboratory instruction,
(3 ) programed instruction, and (^) individualized instruction will be included in this chapter. The purpose of the literature search was to develop a background of information related to the various aspects of the proposed program in physics for expe rienced secondary school science teachers which is the subject of this study. The literature related di rectly to the topic of physics programs for in-service secondary school science teachers is quite limited; therefore the scope of the review of related litera ture was broadened to include literature related to in-service science teacher education in general and the principal features of the proposed program. The division of the principal features into four separate topics is somewhat arbitrary because these features are interrelated.
26 2?
In-Service Science Teacher Education
In-service teacher education is a very "broad topic; therefore the review of literature related to this topic will be limited to a consideration of the following:
1. Background literature.
2. General references.
3. Programs and approaches.
Background Literature
In-service science teacher education programs are related to the newer pre-service science teacher education programs because of the problem of keeping experienced science teachers up to date. The proposed curriculum of Shrum (1963) for the preparation of earth science teachers is an example of a pre-service program that includes features that most in-service earth science teachers could readily appreciate if they had the opportunity to participate in an in- service program including these features. Shrum's experience with in-service programs for earth science teachers probably had a considerable influence on his design for the proposed pre-service program. A similar study of a proposed curriculum for physics teachers was not found in the author’s review of literature. 28
Chapter I of Richardson’s (19^2) study of a proposed college curriculum for the education of science teachers on the philosophy basic to the education of science teachers is a valid background statement for science programs in 1968.
The study by Riley (1959) of a proposed grad uate credit physics course for secondary school sci ence teachers represents a step in the direction of the present proposed program. The practice of offer ing physics courses designed for secondary school teachers was given support when the National Science
Foundation began to provide funds for Academic Year
Institutes that includes such physics courses. Such
courses at The Ohio State University and Pennsylvania
State University represent a trend that has grown and hopefully will continue to grow.
Rutledge (1968) considers the kinds of prep aration the secondary school science teacher will need
for 1980. Before listing twelve basic considerations
for science teacher preparation programs, he considers
the documents produced over the past thirty-five years
that have concerned themselves with the preparation of
secondary school science teachers. His review of 29 representative committee reports includes the follow ing:
1. A Program for Science Teaching (Committee
on the Teaching of Science, 1932).
2. The AAAS Cooperative Committee on the
Teaching of Science and Mathematics,
Report No. 4 (1946).
3. Science Education in .American Schools
(Committee on Science Education in
American Schools, 1947).
4. Rethinking Science Education (Committee
on Rethinking Science Fducation, i960).
5. "Recommendation for the Preparation of
High School Teachers of Science and
Mathematics— 1.959" (C-arrett, 1959).
6. Guidelines for Preparation Programs of
Teachers of Secondary School Science
and Mathematics (Guidelines, 1961).
Rutledge also includes a list of twenty general ref erences to teacher preparation in general and in sci ence that were prepared by Individuals (1968, pp. 9»
10). He develops the past and present proposals of teacher preparation because he maintains that evolu tion, not revolution, is indicated for teacher 30 education. His basic considerations for science teacher preparation programs are as follows:
1. The science teacher for 1980 should have excellent academic ability and aptitude in communication.
2. The science teacher for 1980 should com mit himself to a continuous program of professional development.
3. The science teacher for 1980 should have a background in general education with emphasis on the social studies and the humanities.
The science teacher for 1980 should have both breadth and depth in the subject matter of science,
5. Specialized science for the science teacher of 1980 should have relevance for the teaching of secondary school sci ence and should present the mainstream of thought in the specialized science.
6. Science preparation for the science teacher of 1980 should include frequent experiences in inquiry or the use of a process of investigation.
7. The science teacher for 1980 should under stand the history and philosophy of science.
8. The science teacher for 1980 should under stand educational history, educational philosophy, and educational psychology.
9. The science teacher for 1980 should under stand the psychology of adolescence and the psychology of learning.
10. The science teacher for 1.980 should have preparation in the methods and materials for teaching science.
11. The science teacher for 1980 should have as a part of his preparation program 31
extensive experience in the actual teach ing of science under supervision.
12. The science teacher for 1980 should have as a part of his preparation program practical experience with adolescents other than formal teaching and practical experiences with science (Rutledge, 1968, pp. 5-9).
The view of the science teacher presented by Rutledge
lacks the element of projection. His description of
the understandings and experiences of science teachers
seems appropriate for 1968, but inadequate for 1980.
He appears to have neglected the fact that the role of
the teacher will be drastically changed in 1980 because
of such Influences as educational technology. An
article by Jacobson (1968) in the same issue of the
Journal of Research in Science Teaching that includes
Rutledge's article seems to come closer to the future
situation as envisaged by educational prophets.
Jacobson's article deals with teacher education and
elementary school science— 1980, but what he says in
relation to the elementary school science situation
seems to be equally applicable to the secondary school
science situation.
The academic and professional preparation of
science teachers is the subject of presentations by
(1) Burnett (196^), (2) Smith and Eomman (196l),
(3) Richardson and others (i960), (4) Conant (1963), 32 and (5) Richardson, Williamson, and Stotler (1968).
Watson (1962) points out that there is need for basic curriculum changes rather than a variation in the prescription of traditional courses. Coxvan says
...regardless of the perfection we might achieve in curriculum design for secondary schools, until we can populate the schools with competent teachers x-re shall not per form the task society needs. Teachers who have a critical understanding of physics can make any curriculum xyork. But xve pro duce fex following: 1. An article by Tyler (1965) on the impli cations for secondary education of the knowledge explosion. 2. An article by Curtis (1967) concerning teacher training for process orientated science instruction. 3. An article by Noah (196^) concerning open-ended problem instruction in general physics. The idea of science research in high schools is not new, but the renewed interest in such an idea has been 33 ■ I generated by the discussions of how to bring real sci ence into the classroom situation. Articles by Arsenean (1961.) and Kaeiser (1963) are samples of this renewed interest. The changing educational climate is also seen in the statement of goals given for the new science curriculum projects. Holton's (1967) discus sion of the Harvard Project Physics and Haber-Schaim's (1967) discussion of the PSSC course include examples of these statements. Hurd and Rox^e (1964) in a review of research related to science in the secondary school Include the idea of the requirement of a teaching style consistent with the purposes of the "nex*r" science course. They also say that the new movement in science instruction is as much a matter of improved teaching method as of new goals and nexf up-to-date content (Hurd and Rox'je, 1964, p. 287). An earlier review of research related to science in the secondary school was prepared by Boeck and Watson (I.96I). Reviews of the declining enrollment figures in high school physics and the shortage of qualified high school physics teachers are given by Strassenburg (1967), Ellis (1967)* and Young (1965)- Strassenburg reports for the Division of Education and Manpower of the American Institute of Physics. His report is an attempt to illustrate the fact that the American 3^ Institute of Physics is concerned, with physics at levels other than the college level. The March 1965 issue of The Physics Teacher, in which Young’s article appears, is devoted to the consideration of physics enrollments. One of the earlier warnings about the shortage of high school science teachers was given by Watson (195*0. The concern of the American Institute of Physics and the American Association of Physics Teachers for teacher education of high school science teachers is reflected in a precollege physics report (News of the Institute, 1966) that says that one of the more important points generally agreed upon at the many meetings held during the year was that teacher- preparation programs should be more appropriate for high school teachers and less oriented to graduate work and research. The report suggests the possibility of a one-year internship program and the possibility of a council of physicists to certify adequate college preparation programs fox* high school physics teachers. The reports of the panel on the pi'eparation of physics teachei'S of the Commission on College Physics (1968) and earlier reports (Commission on College Physics, 1966) (Progi'ess Report, 196^) (Conference Repoi’t 35 Committee, 1962) reflect the increasing concern of the American Institute of Physics for teacher education. General References In-service education of science teachers does not enjoy the necessary support of a large body of research related to its theory and practice. General references to in-service education for secondary school teachers are found in the Encyclopedia of Edu- cational Research (Harris, I960), In-Service Education (Committee on In-Service Education, 1957)» and In- service Education of Teachers (National Education Association, 1966). These general references provide background information, but they do not relate directly to the in-service education of science teachers. In-Service Education contains a chapter on the growth of the modern concept of in-service educa tion and other articles generally related to in-service education. The most recent publication found in the author’s survey of the literature is Inservice Educa tion of Teachers. This research summary of the Research Division of the National Education Associa tion considers the following topics: 1, Need for in-service education. 2. Establishing an in-service program. 36 3. Practices in in-service education. 4. Barriers to in-service education. 5. Studies of in-service education practices, 6. Evaluation. 7. Improving in-service education. It also contains an extensive bibliography. An article in the NEA Research Bulletin, "Professional Growth of Teachers in Service," reports the following trends and practices: 1. Teachers or their representatives are usually involved in planning the in- service program. Administrators, supervisors, and teachers work as a team. 2. Greater use is being made of the pro fessional staff within a school system. Mon-college credit programs are con ducted by school personnel. 3. School systems are offering a wider variety of opportunities and activi ties for professional growth in service. 4. School systems are providing more released time during the regular school session for inservice activities. 5. Compensation is being given for time contributed to inservice education by the teacher outside regular school hours. 6. School systems are extending the period of teacher employment; the additional time is used for inservice education. 7. Salary practices recognize experience and preparation. 37 8. Inservice programs are receiving finan cial support from sources other than the school system. 9. Nearly all inservice programs have sub jective evaluations; systematic statis tical evaluations are not widespread (1967, PP. 25, 26). Goodlad speaks of the reform movement in relation to in-service education. He says that the growing reali zation of the need for continuing self-improvement is perhaps an even more significant factor than the up dating factor (1966, p. I4-7 ). General references to the in-service education of science teachers are found in The Supervision of School Science Programs (Stotler, Richardson, and Williamson, 19&7) and The Education of Science Teachers (Richardson, Williamson, and Stotler, 1968). Criteria for an in-service plan to implement the sci ence program at the local level and the outline of a recommended in-service program are given in The Super vision of School Science Programs. The Education of Science Teachei's devotes a complete chapter to the in- service education of science teachers and provides an excellent general reference to this subject. This chapter considers the academic components, the pro fessional components, the school as an in-service 3 8 education agency, personal avenues to In-service edu cation, and state and federal opportunities. Rethinking Science Education (Committee on Rethinking Science Education, i960) represents a major effort to describe the status of science education in i960 and to forecast the oncoming objectives of sci ence education. With such a goal it seems strange that in-service education of science teachers was not mentioned except incidentally in connection with the responsibility for in-service training of elementary teachers and the provisions that colleges and univer sities should make fox' in-service programs for science teachers. A chapter of the Yearbook was devoted to the pi'ofessional growth of the science teacher (Richai'dson and othei’s, i960). One chapter gives consideration to formal study programs in colleges and universities that include continuing academic work at the graduate level. In this connection the authors say that since high school science teachers are often poorly prepared in content, science courses should be included in graduate programs designed for them. They also x'ecommend courses that include the I’ecent advances in science (Richardson and others, i960, p. 286). Gardner and Davis’ (1958) investigation of the preparation of high school science teachers in Ohio showed that 49.5 per cent of the 311 physics teachers in their sample had less than the 15 semester hours in physics required by the State of Ohio for certifi cation. They found that the mean number of semester hours of credit in physics was 17.0 hours. A similar study by Hughes (1962) of the academic preparation of chemistry and physics teachers in Ohio show-ed 32.33 per cent of the 242 physics teachers in his sample had less than 15 semester hours in physics and that the mean number of semester hours of credit in physics was 21.0 hours. A third study by Lucy (1968 ) of the academic preparation of physics teachers in Ohio showed 35.5 pei’ cent of the 197 physics teachers in his sample had less than 15 semester hours in physics and that the mean number of semester hours of credit in physics was 22.9 hours. In addition to these studies, studies by Patterson (1964) of the status of PSSC physics in Ohio and by the National Association of State Directors of Teachex’ Education and Certifica tion and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (1963) support the thesis that there is a despei'ate need for improvement in the academic back ground in physics for many high school physics teachers. 40 Hechlnger In reviewing the Statistical Hand book 1964 (Boercker, 1964) reported that most univer sities consider 24 semester credits in physics the minimum desirable training for physics teaching, but 23 per cent of all persons teaching physics in 1964 had between 9 and 17 semester hours, and only 14 per cent had more than 30 semester hours (The New York Times, 1964). The supply of high school physics teachers with a strong academic background in physics may increase considerably during the next few years because of pressure to avoid the draft, according to a recent article in Science (Baffey, 1968). Baffey quotes a statement of a Harvard graduate dean who predicts that the nation's high schools will be excep tionally well taught next year (Baffey, 1964, p. IO89). The assumption among male seniors that teaching offers some safety from the draft could have an effect on high school physics teaching similar to the effect of the depression in the 193^'s when economic factors led a large number of people who had been trained in physics to enter the teaching profession. Programs and Approaches Educators interested in pre- and in-service teacher education are not the only people actively kl engaged In programs designed to teach science. The ferment among science teachers and administrators at all levels has led to at least three new trends in the teaching of science in general and the teaching of physics in particular. These trends are as follows: 1. The introduction of new course work in physics that places emphasis on laboratory work of an individual nature. 2. The introduction of physics courses and programs for non-scientists. 3. The increased concern of administrators and teachers in colleges and universities for secondary school physics teachers. Each■of the trends relates to the problem of the im provement of the quality of secondary school science teaching and will affect both pre- and in-service edu cation programs. In his review of the literature the author did not find any program descriptions of in-service pro grams for secondary school science teachers that uti lized a laboratory, individual study approach. Carver and Scarl (1968) describe a sophomore course in exper imental physics that includes the use of programed laboratories to introduce the instruments and tech niques of experimental physics. The goal of the Ur2 course is to provide the opportunity for students to perform a complete experiment from design to analysis without laboratory notes and with very little super vision. The course was also used with a group of high school seniors and with high school teachers who were participants in the Academic Year Institute at Cornell. King (1967) describes the project laboratory approach that is being used at the Massachusetts Insti tute of Technology (MIT) for freshmen and sophomores. King reports that all course-connected laboratories, that had formerly been taken by all 1900 freshmen and sophomores, were eliminated (1968, p. 1058). The first physics project laboratory was begun in 196^ with about 50 students, 2 faculty members, and 2 grad uate assistants. The plan calls for the use of 6 faculty members working with 150 students each term. These students will be divided into 6 sections of 2^-26 students and 1 faculty member per section. Those working on the program are experimenting with one weekly laboratory session of six hours, noon till six. Besides these six hours a week in the laboratory, students have five hours of preparation, and one hour of lecture. The students work in pairs. Each pair of students usually works on a single project throughout the term. The lecture period is used for the students \ . to present 10-15 minute talks concerning their proj ects. Evaluation is based on the quality and quantity of the work done. If a student does not work enough, he is given a grade on fewer credit hours, consider able emphasis is placed on the interaction between the student and the faculty member who directs the laboratory section. King’s evaluation of the program is that it "seems right," but he says they do not know how to test their lab students to see how the students and the program are doing (1967, p. 1060). Another course that has much in common with the proposed in-service physics program courses is an organic chemistry course offered at The Ohio State University and described by Newman and Gassman (1963). The main features of the course are outlined as follows: 1. Each student has laboratory space of his own. 2. The type of laboratory apparatus supplied each student is comparable to that provided to graduate students doing research for advanced degrees. 3. There is no assigned laboratory manual. The use of the library is taught and encouraged. *14 5. Qualitative organic analysis as a course is not given. 6. Numerous lectures on laboratory aspects of organic chemistry are given. 7. Experiments requiring special apparatus and techniques may be assigned. 8. In all of the work done in this course the emphasis is placed on doing superior work, not just on getting a certain number of experiments finished (Newman and Gassman, 19&3, p. 203). Erysham (1968) describes a laboratory course for nonscience majors that is based on the approach of the scientist to a research problem. The course is centered around a single research project. It includes the introduction of the student to standard laboratory techniques. The abstract of a paper by Sowles (1966) entitled "A First Course in Physics Which Emphasizes Independent Study and Laboratory Experience'1 is found in the August, 1966, issue of the American Journal of Physics. The physics courses presented in the four paragraphs previous to this paragraph appear to be in the same family as the proposed in-service program in physics for experienced secondary school science 45 teachers that is the subject of this dissertation. Also closely related to the proposed program are the several undergraduate physical science courses that have been prepared for nonscience students. The Com mission on College Physics of the American Institute of Physics has had a leadership role in the recogni tion of the needs in physics of nonscience students and in the fostering of physical science programs for nonscience students. Jossem (1964) reports on the Princeton Conference on Curriculum S (non-research) which considered the nature of the curriculum for undergraduate majors having a variety of educational goals. Morrison (1964) considers the need for a new emphasis in physics teaching for the large fraction of all elementary teachers, a very large proportion of women, and the bulk of the college population. He suggests an approach that breaks with the Euclidean model at least sometimes, to employ humor, playfulness, inventions; above all, to go beyond mere verbal and formula-learning. He outlines a course that Includes much less content and much more practical work than the traditional physics course. Parsegian describes the Science Courses for Baccalaureate Education (SCBE) project in the Journal of Higher Education (1966), Physics Today (1967)» and Science (196?). The 46 Physical Science for Nonscience Students (PSNS) staff (I.967) describes the PSNS project as designed with the prospective elementary teacher as its primary target, but they do not intend to exclude other categories of students. Other information about PSNS is' found in the PSNS Newsletters. Fills describes the problem of edu cating nonscientists as follows: If a student is two or three years into a science program either he is a science major or he takes his chances with those who are. ...of a course for nonscientists we often seem to say, "Here is a physics course that isn't really physics. Now you can have the experience without the difficulty. We will give you the overview without the details. You get the answer, but you don't have to solve the equations" (1968, p. 132). References to examples of programs that relate to the in-service education of physics teachers~are as follows: 1. "New Programs" (1967) in the Physics Today describes two graduate programs initiated at Manmouth College, West Long Branch, New Jersey. One program leads to the M.S. in physics and the other program, which is designed for high school teachers, leads to an M.A. in teaching with a major in physics. 2. The program of the Shell Merit Fellowships at Cornell University (1968) for high school ^7 science teachers and. supervisors and, in spectors of science is a six-week program. The program is divided, into two phases. The first involves a seminar stressing modern learning theory coupled with the use of some self-operated instructional materials already developed as learning systems. The second phase will involve the actual planning and development of new instructional materials (Shell Merit Fel lowship at Cornell University, 1968). 3. Olson and Waite (1955) describe the Case- General Electric Service Fellowship Pro gram for high school physics teachers. 4. The Cleveland program for providing expe riences for teachers in training is designed to produce professional teachers who view teaching as a problem-solving act, who are sensitive to the character istics of students in and from their environment, who can make considered choices from viable alternatives, and who can implement these choices; i.e., one who recognizes and treats education as an applied science which can contribute to 48 the solution of certain problems of the individual and of the society and/or subsociety of which he is a part. Although this program is an experimental project in teacher education, it offers much for any one involved in the design of in-service programs (The Development of New Teacher Education Programs for the Inner City, 1.968, p. 21). The emergence of the National Science Founda tion institutes has done much to upgrade science teachers, and they represent the most massive effort ever made in in-service education (Burnett, 1964, p. 319). Other summer programs such as the Case- General Electric and Shell programs mentioned previ ously; the General Electric-Union College program; Westinghouse-Massachusetts Institute of Technology program; and the DuPont program have all contributed to the improvement of science teaching, but their efforts are currently largely overshadowed by the National Science Foundation institutes. Institutes for science teachers have been initiated by most of the new science curriculum proj ects. Andrews (1964) describes the use of the Biolog ical Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS) materials for i* 9 preparation of in-service teachers of biology. The PSSC in-service institutes that have been held at The Ohio State University were in some measure responsible for the development of the idea of the proposed program of this study. More than 200 physics teachers from Central Ohio have been participants in in-service and summer institute physics courses at The Ohio State University in the past seven years (Riley, 1967). These teachers, plus others, represent a large group of teachers who are in need of further work in physics. The approaches to in-service science education are seemingly endless in number. Some of the ap proaches that have been and are presently being taken are as follows: 1. Professor Harvey White of Berkeley has con ducted a year-long nationally broadcast television physics course for high school teachers called "Atomic Age Physics" (UNESCO, 1966, p. 192)(Abrams, 1961). 2. Bogen (1963) made an appraisal of the travel ing science demonstration lecture program in Oregon and its effectiveness as an agent for in-service education. 3. Hinerman (1965) describes an in-service pro gram of a specialized nature: an experimental 50 in-service program in radiation biology for high school teachers. k. Hiram College is planning to send members of its teaching staff into northwestern Ohio to hold in-service programs. This is an example of a college being willing to go outside its immediate campus rather than expecting teachers to come long distances to attend in-service programs offered on campus. 5. Denison College has an in-service program for high school science teachers that is tuition-free and includes a unique feature of holding arranged laboratory sessions for these teachers. They encourage high school administrators and superintendents to permit their teachers to attend the arranged labora tory sessions during the day, 6. The all-institution approach to teacher education and thus to in-service education has been formally adopted in such universi ties as Wisconsin (Stiles, 1958), Tulane (Lumiansky, 1958), and Syracuse, Other schools such as the University of North Carolina and Manmouth ("New Programs’1, 1967) have masters’ degree programs for secondary 51 school science teachers that include work in both the science departments and the departments of education. In the review of literature related to in- service science teacher education, the author observed that the major interest of those who are writing about in-service education has shifted from the secondary school to the elementary school. The result of this may be that some of the creative thinking going on in elementary school science will eventually have an Influence on secondary school science. Laboratory Instruction The laboratory method of instruction is widely accepted and it is increasingly practiced in scien tific education. VanDeventer noted that out of the 82 bibliographic items that he initially reviewed in preparation for the chapter, "The Teaching of Science at the College and University Level," of the Review of Educational Research, 27 items dealt with problems growing out of the development of new laboratory em phases and of updated materials In physics, chemistry, and biology at the high school level (196*4-, p. 33*0. Michels (1962) deals with the role of the laboratory and experimental work. He says that the 52 student must become involved in the total process of science, including theory construction and testing of hypotheses, the use of creative imagination, and the procedure of observation and measurement. He lists the characteristics that a modern teaching laboratory must not exhibit as follows: 1. It must not be just an exercise in the techniques of measurement. 2. Seldom, if ever, should the student engage in an experiment of which the anticipated result is mere confirmation of what he already knows. 3. Overemphasis on errors may contribute to the student’s losing sight of the true objective of the experiment. He also lists the characteristics that a modern teach ing laboratory should exhibit as follows: 1. It should lead, whenever possible, to results not known in advance by the student. 2. It should lend itself to different degrees of precision. 3. It should demand, whenever possible, some theoretical analysis. 53 A. The apparatus involved should be as simple as possible, so that the student can under stand the operation of the devices that he uses. 5. At some stage of the work, the student should be forced to make a choice of pro cedures on the basis of the work already completed. Pella made an analysis of laboratory and sci ence teaching. His study x^as in connection with high school science, but is applicable to the college as well. His analysis of high school textbooks and lab oratory workbooks in several sciences and interviews with lAO teachers of science reveal the following functions related to laboratory activities: 1. A means of securing Information. 2. A means of determining cause and effect relationships. 3. A. means of verifying certain factors or phenomena. A. A means of applying what is known. 5. A means of developing skill. 6. A means of providing drill. 5^ 7. A means of helping pupils to learn to use scientific methods of solving problems. 8. A means of carrying on individual research (1961, p. 29). His review of courses of study or curriculum outlines from twenty-two states and/or individual school systems revealed the following purposes for teaching science: 1. Understanding the course content of science. 2. Learning the methods of science. 3. Developing scientific attitudes. k. Developing the desirable social atti tudes . 5. iStimulating interest in science. 6. Learning how to apply the principles of science. 7. Developing an appreciation for the growth and development of scientific knowledge (Pella, 1961, p. 29). He then notes the startling similarity and apparent relationship of the two lists, fhte use of the labora tory is dependent on the assumed position of the teacher. At one extreme he may assume the position of a dispenser of knowledge with the laboratory serv ing the function of drill, or at the opposite extreme 55 he may assume the position of a guide to learning with the laboratory as a place where knowledge is discov ered. Pella outlines the "type-form*1 of the process of securing information through the use of this lab oratory. This "type-form" includes the following steps: 1. Statement of problem. 2. Formulation of hypotheses. 3. Developing a working plan. Performing the activity. 5. Gathering of data. 6. Formulation of conclusions. He concludes his study with an analysis of the degrees of freedom available to the teacher using the labora tory, and with the conclusion that the position the laboratory holds in the procedures of a given teacher depends upon what function that teacher holds for him self in the teaching-learning process and the nature of the content being taught (1961, p. 31). Studies of the comparison of laboratory method with other methods of teaching science have been made for many years. White (19^5) found that students taught engineering methods by a group-laboratory method achieved more than those taught by a lecture- demonstration method. Kruglak (1952) found that 56 students taught elementary college physics "by the individual laboratory method achieved more than those taught by a demonstration method. Balcziak (1953) found no significant differences between the results obtained using (1) demonstration, (2) individual lab oratory, and (3) combined demonstration and laboratory methods in a college physical science course. The problem-solving method was found to be superior to the laboratory-manual method of teaching students to apply the principles of physics in interpreting phenomena (Bainter, 1955)* Lahti (1956) also found the problem solving method superior to the conventional laboratory approach in a physical science course. Bradley (1962) found no significant difference between the results obtained using the lecture-demonstration and the Individual laboratory approaches for a natural science course at Michigan State University. McKeachic sums up an analysis of the research results related to laboratory teaching by saying Actually all of these studies point to the importance of developing understand ing rather than teaching students to solve problems by going through a routine series of steps. Whether or not labora tory is superior to lecture-demonstration in developing understanding and problem solving skills probably depends upon the extent to which understanding of concepts and general problem-solving procedures are emphasized by the instructor in the laboratory situation (1963, P. 11^). 57 Programed. Instruction The review of literature related, to programed, instruction is an endless task. Programed instruc tion, programed learning, automated instruction, auto instruction, programed materials, audio-instructional learning, audio-tutorial systems, and teaching machines are terms that have recently appeared on the educational scene. These expressions are not neces sarily synonymous, but they all belong to one of the greatest educational revolutions that this world has ever known. The three expressions that will be con sidered in this review of literature are: (1) audio tutorial systems, (2) autoinstruction, and (3) programed instruction. The first two expressions will be treated briefly and major consideration will be given to the third expression. Television, audio tape players, eight milli meter loop film projectors, computers, dial access systems, and telephone amplification are some of the devices that appear to possess considerable promise for the enhancement of the educational process. Exper imentation in many schools involves one or more of these devices in various ways. A few schools at x^hlch relatively major Investments are underway include: Pennsylvania State University, University of Wisconsin, 58 Purdue University, Antioch College, Oklahoma Christian College (Education— College, 1966), Oakland Community College, Stevens College, and Harvard University (Postlethwait, n.d., p. 2). The audio-tutorial approach to the teaching of a freshman botany course at Purdue University under the leadership of S. N. Postlethwait is an early example of educational appli cation of the fruits of technological progress. The audio-tutorial approach has been tried experimentally in various versions in colleges and universities other than Purdue University and for instructional purposes in courses other than botany. At Purdue the course in botany was structured around (1) a General Assembly Session scheduled one hour per week and involving all students; (2) an Integrated Quiz Session scheduled one- half hour per week and involving eight students; and (3) an Independent Study Session unscheduled but equivalent to four hours of conventional instruction and involving all students in an audio-tutorial study. The results of the Purdue program show: (1) a general improvement in grades, (2) the possibility of the inclusion of 50 per cent more subject matter, and (3) that the possibility of personal contact between instructor and student has been enhanced (Postlethwait, n.d., p. 5). -A description of the audio-tutorial 59 approach and, practice is found in the book, An Inte grated Experience Approach to Learning with Emphasis on Independent Study (Postlethwait, 196*0; in "A Con cept Report on Audio-Tutorial Systems," a descriptive brochure of the Audio Tutorial Systems Division of the Burgess Publishing Company; the Audio-Tutorial News letter; and articles appearing in journals. Autoinstruction is a term that has largely been replaced by the expression programed instruction. The term autoinstruction is used by Pressey (196*0, other writers whose reaction to some aspects of pro gramed instruction has been negative, and others who simply prefer the term. Autoinstruction has also been confused with driver education (Lysaught and Williams, 1963» PP. 2-3). Another usage that confuses the reader of literature related to programed instruction is the two variations on the spelling of "programed" (programed and programmed). Both spellings are used widely. It appears that the "programming" usage is used in literature originating in Great Britain and in literature originating from some groups in the United States. 60 Literature related to programed instruction will be presented under the following headings: 1. Introduction. 2. Uses. 3. Guides for the preparation of materials. b. Materials in physics. 5. Critics and criticisms. 6 . Trends. 7. Research. 8. General bibliographic Information. Introduction A case for programed instruction is stated as follows: Schools are being forced to look for new ways to personalize the curriculum, new ways to make Instruction more effective and efficient. The accelerated rate of change, the overwhelming amount of new knowledge, the expanding supply of new instructional materials and media, the new Investment of federal funds and pri vate capital in education, and the ever widening range of individual differences represent a problem too large for any one school or one teacher to handle. Many educators look to programed instruc tion for help (Lange, 1966, pp. 175-176). Lacey says that the advent of programed instruction and teaching machines was beyond doubt the most radical development in education since the production of the textbook (1966, p. 67). The history of programed 6l instruction has not yet been written because its story is not yet complete and it is still quite young. Summaries of the history of programed instruction have been prepared by Margulis and Eigen (1962); Lysaught and Williams (1963); Glaser (i960); Corey (1967, pp. 2^-26); and others. Dale (1967) and Pressey (196^) outline the historical setting for programed instruc tion. Margulis and Eigen outline the elements of programed instruction as follows: 1. Active response. 2. Small steps in which careful control of stimuli produces gradual increments in mastery of the subject. 3. Immediate feedback for each response. Self-pacing, or individualization, of the rate at which the learner masters the material. 5. Low error rate for the individual learner (1962, p. 3). Another element of programed instruction is its insistence upon clearly defined behavioral objectives. The innovations in education related to pro gramed Instruction are producing new and different considerations in terms of the role of the teacher. 62 Skinner (1961) writes about the necessity for behav ioral training. He feels that programed instruction and teaching machines will free the teacher for a creative classroom function. Mertens (1966) and Probst (1962) consider programed instruction and the changing role of teachers in colleges and schools. Leahy and Siegel (19&2) point out the need for science teachers to participate actively in the creation of programed materials for science teaching. They are not convinced that mastery of the technique of pro graming is beyond the competency of most good teachers of science (Leahy and Siegel, 1962, p. 42). Ebock (1965) observes that programed instruc tion is a manifestation of educational technology. He also reports that a psychologist-technologist has said, that education now has the instruments to imple ment the humane ideas which John Dewey could only recommend. Uses Programed instructional materials and auto- instructional aids are found to have a wide variety of uses. Some of these uses are listed as follows: 1. Cowan (1964)(1967) reports the use of autoinstructlonal material of PSSC 63 physics in the teaching of physics in a group of small high schools in Texas that did not normally offer physics because of lack of a qualified physics teacher. 2. Kantaseivi (1964) reports the results of preparing and using programed materials in the teaching of an introductory course in the biological sciences at the college level. His results shoxvred nonsignificant differences in the comparison of the progress of students who used the pro gramed materials and those who used a conventional text. 3. Blank (1963) reports the use of programed instructional materials to train children in the fourth grade to ask intelligent questions. The results of his study showed that children can be given useful inquiry training through programed instruction. 4. Crane (1964) reports on the use of auto- instructional aids in remedial physics programs at the college level. 5. Zeschke (1966) reports on using programed instruction in a high school biology course. 64 6. Sayles (1966) reports on using programed instruction to teach high school chemistry. 7. Hartley (1964) makes an interesting report of the potential for and use of programed learning in emerging nations. In addition to the uses of programed instruction in schools, colleges, and universities there are the military and industrial uses of programed instruction which are large and important fields in themselves. Head (1966) reports on the use of programed materials in the United States Air Force. He says that they use programed materials for preparation for courses in place of traditional instruction, as refresher train ing, as remedial training, and wherever they are shrewd enough and have people enough to apply it to the train ing situation (Head, 1966, p. 5). Programed Instruction is being utilized actively In many countries (In-Service Course, First of Its Kind, 1966) other than the United States. England seems to have made more of programed instruc tion than has the United States. This may be due to the fact that the external examination feature of British education lends itself to the use of programed instruction. 65 Guides for the Preparation of Materials The mechanics of actually producing programed instructional materials is still a very open field of study. During the early years for programed instruc tion, from about 1958 to about 1962, there were two main types of programs. The earliest type of program is called the basic linear program. It was developed by B. F. Skinner. The other type of program is called an intrinsic or a branching program. It was developed by Norman Crowder (i960, pp. 286-298). Today there are many different types of programs. Several authors have outlined guides for the preparation of programed mate rials. Such guides are included in the following references: 1. Programed Instruction (Brethower, 1963). 2. A Guide to Programmed Instruction (Lysaught and Williams, 1963). 3. A Guide for Wiley Authors (1967). 4. Programmed Learning in Perspective (Thomas and others, 1963). 5. The Learning Process and Programmed Instruction (Green, 1962). 6. "Practical Problems in Program Production" (Deterline, 1967). 66 7.. "The Process of Instructional Programing" (Green, 1967). 8, "A Science of Learning for the Learning of Science" (Lysaught, 1966). 9. "Have You Tried a Program Yet?" (Nasca, 1963). 10. "Programmed Instruction: A Critical Appraisal" (Herrick, 1966). 11. "The Ruleg (Rule-Example) System for the Construction of Learning Programs" (Evans and others, n.d.). Several programs for preparing programs can be found in Programs *63 (1963) and in later issues of the Program series of volumes prepared by the Center for Programed Instruction. Materials in Physics There are many programs in physics available for use by science learners and teachers. A list of the programed instructional materials available is found in the Programs series of the center for Programed Instruc tion, Four of the physics courses that have been pre pared for college and university use are: 1. Principles of Physics (Four Volumes) (Ashby and Miller, 1966). 6 7 2. Programmed. Physics (Five Volumes) (Joseph and Leahy, 19&5)• 3. Programmed Manual for Students of Fundamental Physics (Orear, 1962). b. College Physics— A Programmed Aid (Semat and Blumenthal, 1967). Other materials in physics may be found in the following bibliographies of programed instruction: 1. Programed Instruction Materials 196^ - 165 . Compiled by the center for Programed Instruction of the Institute of Educational Technology. P. K. Komoskl, editor. Teachers1 College, Columbia University, 1965. Includes a relisting of programs annotated In Programs '63. 2. Programmed Learning: A Bibliography of Programs and Presentation Devices. Compiled by Carl H. Hendershot. Distributed by Hendershot (also available from NSPI). Fourth edition (with four supplements to appear), 196?. 3. Programmes in Print 1966. Compiled and edited by Peter Cavanagh and Clive Jones, Distributed by the Association for Pro grammed Learning, London, England, 1966. 68 k. Catalog of Programmed Instructional Material. Compiled and distributed by the Bureau of Naval Personnel, Washington, D. C., 1967. 5. Programmed Instruction Guide. Compiled by Northeastern University, Office of Educational Resources. Published by Entelek, Inc., New- buryport, Mass., 1967. (Markle, 1968, p. 21). Critics and Criticisms Pressey says that autoinstruction is probably the most publicized, most exploited, possibly most errant, and potentially most valuable of all contributions of American psychology to education (196^, p. 35^). Pressey, whom some consider the father of the modern autoinstructional boom, seems to be one of the few critics of programed instruction. In the survey of the literature related to science education, it was inter esting to note the large variety of journals and books in which Pressey had articles that Included considera tion of the limitations and weaknesses of programed instruction. Examples of these articles are as follows: 1. "Teaching Machine (and Learning Theory) Crisis," Journal of Applied Psychology (1963). 69 2. "A Puncture of the Huge 'Programing Boom'?" Teachers College Record. (1964a). 3. "Autoinstruction: Perspective, Problems, Potentials," chapter XV of Theories of Learn ing and Instruction (1964b). Pressey1 s criticisms of programed, materials are directed, toward the following aspects of programed materials: 1. The time required for completion of some programs is considerably more than the reading time for the same material. 2. The size of programed materials is often much greater than the textbook size neces sary to convey the same amount of informa tion. 3. The cost varies with the size, thus the cost of programed materials is greater. He questions the value of programed instruction over silent reading, and he also reports Gagne1s (1962) uncertainty about the cardinal concept of reinforcement (Pressey, 1967, pp. 360-363). Pressey suggests that one should use autoinstructional materials in conjunc tion with a textbook and other teaching aids and not alone. He questions the results obtained by those who supposedly have shown that programed instruction is superior to other methods of instruction. Frey (1965) 70 also develops a case against programed instruction. The criticisms of programed instruction also include its potential for boredom. Trend s Lange observes that in its decade of existence, programed instruction has been characterized by exag gerated expectations and deflation (1967b, p. 284). In 1966, Mager, then president of the National Society for Programed Instruction (NSPI), appraised the future of programed instruction in terms of the typical path of new technologies which is represented by a typical development curve such as is shown in Figure 1. D e v e 1 o Development Curve P m e n t Time Fig. 1. Development of new technologies in relation to time. He concluded that programed instruction is now over the hump of the development curve. After the initial phase, 71 which includes a false sense of development engendered by the enthusiasm for and overselling of the first round of products, and the second phase, that of disillusion ment when the impact falls far short of predictions, the period of steady growth toward a mature technology has begun (Mager, 1966, p. 3). Pierce (1964) supports Mager's position concerning the initial stage when he says that initially programed instruction was exploited by machine builders. An indication of the move toward maturity is Carroll's article about programed instruc tion and student ability in the Journal of Programed Instruction. Carroll says that the two principal arguments for programed instruction— increased, effi ciency of learning and guaranteed learning— must give way to the recognition of differences in learning rates (1963, p. 7). The Journal of Programed Instruction was discontinued at the end of 1964 so that time and effort could be spent on the publication of high quality mono graphs. Lange’s analysis of the forces affecting pro gramed instruction is shown in Figure 2 on the following page. Recent articles about programed instruction often include such statements as: 1. No discussion of programmed insti'uction is complete without a word of warning: it 72 WITHIN THE SCHOOLS IN SOCIETY GENERALLY Lack of precise behavioral Apprehension over A descriptions and taxonomies technology and for learner characteristics. fear of automa G Difficulties in changing tion. teacher roles. A .Apprehension ovez* change (automation). I Absence of a continuous system The high cost of of individual diagnosis and innovation and N prescription for learning. retooling. Pay-off to school is not in S terms of individual pupil gains in performance. T Inadequate and Incomplete choice of programs; inadequate system for selection and pre cise prescription. Appeal of scientific and systems Desirability of tech approach. nological advances. Promise of individualization. Dissatisfaction with Increase in school's range of school's failures individual diffei'ences; also to retain pupils more students with similar and in teaching differences. basic skills. Curriculum reforms that develop New financial re new materials that go directly sources for and to learner; more curricular new investors In and instructional decisions the production of outside the local school. instructional mate 0 More mediated teaching. rials and media. Theoretical acceptance of re New developments in R formation of the teacher role. high-speed data Increased use of interdiscipli processing and in nary experts. formation retrieval, More use of behavioral taxon Increased Instances omies. of success with Increased use of nongraded programed instruc school organization, contin tion in business, uous progress, and advancement industry, military, based on performance. and in adult edu More recognition of the impor cation. tance of preteaching planning and arrangements. More programing in teacher education. Fig. 2. The field of forces affecting programed Instruction (Lange, 1967b, p. 310). 73 is no panacea. The teacher will have to exert himself. Whatever learning is, it is not passive for the teacher, the ...... ^ g learner, or the program (Herrick, 1966, p. 698). 2. Programmed instruction is a process rather than a particular kind of product (Geis, 1964, p. 6). Mayo reports that the five year projection of the use of programed Instructional materials for navy train ing is for increased use of printed material for the next three or four years. After that period computer assisted instruction may begin to make itself felt in the operational Navy training situation (Mayo, 1966, p. 14). It seems that whatever happens, programed learning and automated teaching are very probably here to stay (Leahy and Siegel, 1962, p. 42). Stolurow says that (1) programed instruction is going to change; (2) some machines are not here to stay; and (3) program ing is here to stay, but its form will change (1963, P. 257). Research There is a large body of literature related to research on programed instruction. Schramm (1964) says that no other method of instruction has come into use 74 surrounded by so much research activity. He also observes the fact that the vast majority of research has occurred since i960. Some examples of this research activity are as follows: 1. Toohey in an evaluation of the effective ness of a linear programed course in sci ence education concluded that the programed course was more effective in introducing students to a verbal understanding of atomic structure and the photon theory of light than was a teacher, lecture, and demonstration method. 2. Bednarlck, in a study of programed instruc tion in physics in a Czechoslovakian sec ondary school, concluded that the results obtained in the experimental class are in favor of programed instruction. He also gathered additional information about the mechanics of programing. A unique feature of his study was the fact that it was recognized as only a short-term study under ideal conditions and that long-term experimental research was necessary and being planned before the decision of whether and to what extent, programed 75 instruction will be used in Czechoslovakian schools. 3. Pettit (1967) reported the results of his study of the use of programed instruction in a natural science course. He concluded that programed instructional materials are most useful when applied in a limited manner in carefully selected situations. Summaries of research on programed instruction are listed as follows: 1. The Research on Programmed Instruction (Schramm, 196^). 2. "Research on Programing Variables" of Teaching Machines and Programed Learning, II: Data and Directions (Holland, 1965)- 3. "Instruments and Media of Instruction" of Handbook on Research on Teaching (Lumsdaine, 196 3). k. "Programed Instruction in Science and Mathematics," Review of Educational Research (Briggs and Angell, 196^). 76 General Bibliographic Information Two books have been compiled, that have attempted to bring together the early papers on programed instruc tion. They are: 1. Teaching Machines and Programmed Learning (Lumsdaine and Glaser, i960). 2. Automatic Teaching, the State of the Art (Galanter, 1959). Compilations of literature related to programed instruc tion are found in the following references: 1. Programed Instruction (Committee on Programed Instruction, 1967). 2. A. Guide to Programed Instruction (Lysaught and Williams, 1963). 3. Programed Instruction (Brethower, 1963). 4-.. Programed Learning in Perspective (Thomas and others, 1963). 5. "Programmed Instruction" of Automated Education Handbook (Goodman, 1965). 6. Applied Programed Instruction (Margulis and Eigen, 1962). 7. Learning and Programmed Instruction (Taber and others, 1965). 8. Programed Instruction (Gardner, 1966). 77 9. "Facilities: Equipment and Curricular Materials", chapter 4 of Guide to Science Teaching (Lacey, 1966). Individualized Instruction Individualization of instruction is a centuries- old idea. Tyler says that Plato is known to have recognized the existence of human variability, speci fied its social implications, and proposed tests to measure traits important to the military. Tyler also points out the fact that Comenius treated individual differences at length, admonishing teachers to consider their pupils1 ages, Intelligence, and knowledge. Rousseau is reported by Tyler to have recognized varia tion both among and within individuals and almost to have advocated a tutorial system (1962, p. 1). Swenson (1962) says that throughout the last half-century much time, effort and money have been spent to counteract the inadequacies of mass education by adapting instruction to the individual differences of learners. He goes on to say that we are still struggling to find ways and means of reaching a goal long since generally accepted by thoughtful and respon sible teachers (1962, p. 287). Efforts to individualize science teaching seem to be on the increase. Articles 78 in The Science Teacher by Huffmire (1961)(1962) and others are Indicative of this trend. Tanzman (196?) reports on procedures for individualizing in-service training through the use of audio-visual aids. In the paragraphs to follow, consideration will be given to the following aspects of individualized instruction: 1. Examples. 2. Research. 3. General bibliographic materials. Examples Several examples of individualized instruction have already been given in connection with the programs and approaches to in-service science teacher education on pages ^3, and kk. Examples of an individualized approach to a variety of types of education are given in the following references: 1. Individualized Guided Education (n.d.) which describes a new venture in theo logical studies at McCormick Theological Seminary. 2. "Teacher Education Self-Taught" of the Journal of Teacher Education (Beck, 1963) which recommends an individualized 79 instructional approach to the task of training teachers through the use of programed materials. 3. "A School Where Children Teach Themselves" of the Saturday Evening Post (Black, 1965) which describes the Valley Winds School in suburban St. Louis where the educational goal is to train children to be independent thinkers who can teach themselves. 5. "Intelligent Self-Direction in High School— An Analysis of the Effects Upon Students and Staff of a Pilot Study at Northport High School" (Allardice, 1962) which gives informa tion on what students can do if they are allowed some freedom of choice during a typical school day. 6. "High School Physics by Audio-Tutorial Mode" of The Physics Teacher (Knoop, 1968) which is a description of a pilot study patterned after Postlethwait*s work at Purdue University. 7. "An Alternate Approach to Teaching Physics?" of The Physics Teach (Schwartz, 1968) which is the description of a modified PSSC course taught using, the insights of Carl 80 Rogers (1951). Students were left free to decide for themselves the initial topics and questions to pursue, the depth and extent of their inquiry, and the sequence of topics. 8. A letter to the editor, "Learner-Centered General Physics Courses" of the American Journal of Physics (Porte, 1966) which describes a learner-centered approach as a self-paced, independent study with tutors using the instructional systems approach and multimedia. Research McKeachie (1963) outlines the research 011 project methods and independent study. He includes studies by Novak (1958); Goldstein (1956); Churchill and Baskin (1958); McCollough and VanAtta (1958); and others. McKeachie says that the results of x-esearch on the effectiveness of the project method are not particularly encouraging (1963, p. 11^5). He also concludes that if a student is going to be tested on the factual content of a particular book, it is more advantageous for him to read the book than to participate in other educational activities. But knowledge of specific facts is not 81 usually the major objective of an independent study program. McKeachie says that greater integration, increased purposefulness, and more intense motivation for further study can hopefully be achieved th2’ough independent study (1 9 6 3 . P* 1168). General Bibliographic Material Literature related to individualized instruction is becoming more plentiful. During the past ten years books and articles on independent study, the project method of study, and other aspects of individualized instruction have appeared regularly. A few of the general references are listed as follows: 1. Individualizing Instruction (Committee on Individualizing Instruction, 1 9 6 2 ). 2, Independent Study: Bold I-.'ew Venture (Be~~s and Buffie, 1965). 3* Independent Study In Secondary Schools (.Alexander and Hines, 1 9 6 6 ). U-. Approach to Independent Study (Hatch and Richards, 19o5)(A Report of independent study programs at eight colleges). CHAPTER III DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROGRAM A brief description of some of the features of the proposed in-service program is found in Chap ter I (pp. 14-15). In this chapter a more detailed description of the proposed physics program will be given. This description will include the following topics: 1. Background considerations. 2. Guidelines. 3. Goals. 4. Special considerations. 5. Operational procedures. 6. Experiments and resources. Background Considerations One of the newer aspects of the study of education during the past decade has been the develop ment of what is called educational engineering. The development of a systems approach to education uti lizing teaching machines, a multimedia approach, and many other learning techniques has opened the 82 door to a new era in science education. This study is in the tradition of educational engineering. Some of the developments in learning and teaching that have been introduced during the past few decades have been engineered to pi’oduce the proposed program. One feature of the new science curriculum pro jects has been a renewed emphasis on the processes of science. The products of science have been given considerable attention in the teaching of science during the past sixty years but the processes of science have until recently not been given their proper emphasis. This study is oriented toward a process emphasis, but not without consideration of the product. The view of science that the author had as a research and development engineer for the General Electric Company was in sharp contrast to that which his educational experience had given. College and secondary school science teachers are increasingly concerned about the image of science that is presented by today's instruction in physics. This study represents an effort to bring the research and development laboratory into the schoolroom. The research and development laboratory approach to instruction should help capture the feel for science as it is practiced. 8k \ Another background, consideration that under lies this study is the conviction that science is a very human endeavor. As a human endeavor, science has no meaning apart from people. As a human en deavor, science is understood as a process within which we learn by both our mistakes and our accom plishments. Thus the proposed program is marked by a commitment to an emphasis upon people rather than upon things. The in-service science teacher, his interests, his needs, his weaknesses, and his strengths are the reasons for the proposed program. A further background consideration relative to the proposed program is found in the remarks of Professor Openshaw in a teacher education course. He suggested that any teacher education program should include the opportunity for the future teacher to study some topics because they strike the interests of the teacher. These thoughts triggered a thought train that led the author to the haunting idea of being permitted someday to study some of the ideas and topics in physics that had fascinated him for some time but whose study seemed blocked by the pressure of school work and other time demands. Having failed ever to achieve this ambition, the author resolved to attempt to make this idea a 85 possibility for others. The secondary school science teacher should be able to ascertain his needs and in terests. In a program like the proposed, he should find freedom from the bondage of having to do what someone else requires so that he can actively work toward meeting his needs and satisfying his interests. The operational philosophy of the proposed in- service program is rooted in the educational climate of change that currently exists in the United States. Instead of helping to prepare science teachers for the somewhat static and inflexible school situation of past years, the proposed program seeks to prepare science teachers for a changing school and a changing society. In order to adjust to the atmosphere of change the teacher must be given the opportunity to experiment with new ideas and new methods. The opera tional philosophy of the program is based on the idea that active learning— learning by doing— is far more effective than passive learning. Richardson (19^5) documents more than two centuries of statements by men of science who plead for the teaching of science through the actual learning studies in science. This study is an attempt to respond positively to that pi ea. Guidelines The program description that follows is based upon guidelines that have been drawn from the background considerations presented in the pre vious paragraphs and from the assumptions underlying this study. The underlying assumptions are listed in Chapter I (pp. 17-18). The guidelines are as follows: 1. The needs and interests of the in- service science teacher will be given priority over considerations related to the mechanics of the program. 2. The structure of the program will generally yield to the needs and in terests of the participants in the program rather than having these needs and intei'ests yield to the structure. 3. The content of the physics studied will be maintained at a high level. Content will not be sacrificed in order to capture the processes of science because the processes are pseudo-science without content. The learning opportunities afforded will be primarily of an active nature rather than of a passive nature. 5. Evaluation will be based on observed performance as well as on test re sults . 6 . The dynamic features of science will be stx-essed rather than the static features of science. 7. Teaching methods and techniques will be presented within a contest of learning and teaching mathematics and physics. 8. Participants will be permitted and encouraged to solve problems by the trial and error method rather than have their problems solved for them. 9. Individual but not isolated work will be stressed. Participants will be encouraged to interact with other participants and with the director and his staff. Goals The general goal of the proposed in-service program in physics for experienced secondary school 88 science teachers is to make a contribution toward the solution of the problems listed on page 12. One of the general aims of the program is that of pro viding an atmosphere of creative instability (Stotler, Richardson, Williamson, 1968) in which in-service science teachers can learn adaptability. Since the role, the duties, and the teaching methods of the science teacher are in a state of flux, one of his most urgent needs is that of adaptability. The goals of the in-service program are re flected in the general approach of the program. As indicated in Chapter I (page 16) the proposed pro gram is not a general physics course nor is it a general methods course. It is not designed to meet all the needs of the science teacher, but it is de signed to help fill the gap between the in-service teacher's training and experience status and the frontiers of the state of the art of science teaching. The goals of the proposed program, stated in terms more specific than the general terms used previously, are as follows: 1. To sti'engthen and to Improve the subject matter backgi’ound of the 89 teacher through a study of selec ted topics in physics. 2. To provide for the experience of learning physics experimentally and individually. 3. To provide experience in the use of, care of, limitations of, and deriva tion of laboratory equipment. k. To strengthen and further the mathe matical background of the teacher through self-instruction and the use of programed instructional materials. 5. To experience science as it is prac ticed in a research and development center. 6 . To develop a limited background of research skills. 7. To help prepare teachers to take in- teimiediate and advanced level physics courses. 8 . To help prepare teachers for today’s teaching responsibilities and for the teaching responsibilities of the future. 9. To help prepare teachers to make the greatest possible use of the new science curriculum projects and to help prepare teachers for the job of curriculum development and revision. 10. To develop skill in the use, evalua tion, and preparation of programed instruction materials. 11. To experience the application of the learning-by-teaching principle. 12. To experience the advantages and disadvantages of an individualized approach to instruction. 13. To provide the opportunity for better self-understanding through self- evaluation and counseling opportu nities . The justification for each of the goals listed will now be given brief consideration. In general the justification for the inclusion of the stated goals is based upon the needs of the in-service science teacher. The contributions to science instruction of educational technology during the past decade have resulted in some changes in the role of the teacher. In the near future educational technology will certainly produce some major changes in the role of the teacher. The chang ing educational climate, which was discussed in some detail in chapter I (pp. 2-11) and which includes educational technology, has introduced enough problems for the in-service science teacher to justify the existence of in-service science education programs for many years. The justification for the first goal (to strengthen and to improve the subject matter back ground of the teacher through a study of selected topics in physics) is found in the results of studies (see pp. 38-^0 ) that show the general background weakness in physics of so many secondai'y school physics teachers. The problem of how to strengthen in-service teachers* background in physics is com plicated by the general lack of physics courses that in-service science teachers can take because of their previous background in physics and mathema tics (see p. 5). In order to strengthen and Im prove the subject matter backgrounds of teachers, courses must be available to perform this function. Justification for the study of selected topics rather than a general study of physics is found in the growing recognition of the need for under- 92 standing of the processes of science. Instead of attempting to survey the field of introductory physics, the program is designed to fill the gaps in the teachers' understanding of physics and to provide the opportunity for in-depth understandings of selected topics. The justification for the second goal (to provide for the experience of learning physics experimentally and individually) is found in the in-service teacher's need to learn how to learn physics outside the formal classroom situation. Many teachers have grown to accept the idea that the only place they can learn physics is in a formal classroom situation. They have learned the majority of the physics they know in this manner. The fact is generally recognized that science teachers must continually grow in their understanding of subject matter if they expect to be effective teachers, but active implementation of this fact is not always provided for in either their pre-service science education progi’ams or in their in-service expei'ience. The experience of learning physics experimentally and individually should help the in-service science teacher to appreciate the fact that the formal class room situation is not essential for their continuing growth in understanding of physics. Their con tinuing growth is encouraged by the introduction of new ideas in physics and ways of investigating these ideas as a part of the experience of learn ing physics experimentally and individually in the proposed program. Justification for the inclusion of the third goal (to provide experience in the use of, care of, limitations of, and derivation of laboratory equip ment) is found in the groining recognition of the need for competency in this area. The effective use of laboratory work was found by Farmer to be the competency area rated most important by leader ship persons from several groups related to science education (196*!, p. 52). The groups included teachers, secondary school administrators, secon dary school science supervisors, science educators, college teachers of science, industrial and re search scientists, and members of committees of several national curriculum groups. The increased importance placed on laboratory work by the new science curriculum programs also supports the in clusion of a goal related to laboratory equipment. The justification for the inclusion of the fourth goal (to strengthen and further the mathematical ‘background, of the teacher through self- instruction and. the use of programed instructional materials) is found, in the generally recognized fact that study of physics beyond the introductory level is impossible XTithout some understanding of simple calculus. If the in-service science teacher has not had calculus as a part of his pre-service training, it is difficult for him to arrange to take the analytics-calculus sequence of courses while teaching full time. The understanding of trigonometry, analytics, and calculus needed to study most intermediate level physics courses is not beyond the capabilities of most science teachers. The study of mathematics in the context of a study of topics in physics is an ideal situation because the mathematics involved has practical significance. The feature of self-study through the use of pro gramed mathematics materials allows the in-service teacher to learn at his own pace and on his own initiative. The justification for the inclusion of the fifth and sixth goals (related to the experiencing of science as it is practiced) is found in the growing awareness of the weaknesses of so many past and present science teaching approaches. The gap between science as it is practiced and science as it is presented in secondary schools must be bridged. The details of a research and development center and a research laboratory opera tion will always differ from the detail operation of secondary school science. The spirit and pro cesses of science as it is practiced should correspond in some degree to the spirit and processes of science as they are practiced in secondary school science instruction. The justification for the inclusion of the seventh goal (to help prepare teachers to take intermediate and. advanced level physics courses) is found in the fact that these courses have much to offer to the secondary school science teacher. Earlier references to the inadequacies of inter mediate and advanced level physics courses for secondary school science teachers are not in tended to be a total rejection of these courses for in-service physics teachers. The time should never be allowed to come when the only physics studied by teachers of secondary school physics is the physics of courses designed specifically for such teachers. There are strong forces within both physics departments and education departments that could result in a separation of physics for science teachers from the physics department. Such a separation would be a disaster for both departments. The justification for the inclusion of the eighth and ninth goals (related to present and future responsibilities of science teachers) is found in the fact that the role of the science teacher is presently in a state of flux and can be expected to be drastically changed in the future. The exact forms of future science instruction cannot be described today, but the trends and the general outlines of the future forms are clear enough to justify the inclusion of some future projections and a dynamic approach to science instruction. The tenth, eleventh, and twelfth goals (re lated to programed instruction, the learning-by- teaching principle, and individualized instruction) are examples of the kinds of approaches to be included in future projections of science in struction. These facets of instruction are currently in an evolutionary atage; therefore they are included in the goals of the proposed physics program so as to give teachers some idea of the dynamic aspects of science instruction. They were not selected for inclusion in the goals of the program because of their merits as devel oped systems of instruction, but because they illustrate the dynamic aspects of science in struction. The justification for the inclusion of the thirteenth goal (related to the teacher’s self- undei’standing) is found in the teacher’s need for such an understanding. As a science teacher he is under constant pressure to conform to an image forced on him by society and tradition. This pressure for conformity in many instances leads to false airs and pretenses that in turn lead to insecurity. The lack of a clear defini tion of what a secondary school science teacher really is or should be does not help the teacher understand himself or his responsibilities. One of the subtle aims of the proposed program is to help the teacher gain confidence in himself and his capabilities. Special Considerations Several topics will be given special consi deration as a further step in the description of the proposed program in physics for experienced, secondary school science teacher's. These are as follows: 1. Staffing. 2 . Pinaneing. 3. Size of participating group. k. Facilities and equipment. 5 . Institutional and depart mental support. 6 . Prerequisites and partici pant selection procedure. ?. Credits and grades. 8 . Maintenance of an acceptable level of academic performance. 9. .Apparent conflicts. These considerations are given for two principal reasons: (1 ) for an understanding of the problems and decisions related to the proposed program and (2 ) for the benefit of institutions that may be interested in establishing similar programs. Staffing The choice of a director for the proposed progi'am, or one similar to it, represents a major problem. Some of the qualifications of the 99 director are as follows: 1. He should have a good background in physics. 2. He should be aware of and concerned about the actual problems confron ting the secondary school science teacher. 3. He should be aware of the develop ing understandings in learning- teaching processes. He should be aware of the present and potential contributions of educational technology to secondary and higher education. 5. He should have empathy for science teachers in particular and people in general. 6 . He should be acquainted with the operations of a research and development center and with the basic processes of the laboratory approach to instruction. 7. He should be flexible and adapt able to changing situations. 100 8. He should, be committed to the goals of the program as outlined in the pre vious section. The choice of the director of the proposed program is one of the key factors in malting the program function properly. It is his responsibility to see that the conditions for self-learning in particular and learning in general are optimized. This does not mean that the director’s responsibility is to see that everything in the program runs smoothly, because one of the goals of the program, as discussed in the previous section, is that of creative insta bility. The role of director of learning is some what new to most college instructors; therefore, he should not be expected to meet completely the qualifications that have been listed, but he should be expected to grow toward the fulfillment of those qualifications. In addition to the director there is the need for additional staff members. The maintenance of the laboratory apparatus will be a major responsi bility. The secretarial work will be greater in a program such as the proposed program than in the usual lecture-demonstration type program. The logistics of such a program will not be a small 101 problem; thus the director will probably need assistance in the mechanics of these logistics. The number of participants in the program at a given time will influence the number of suppor ting staff members the director should have. Since one of the goals of the proposed program is that of utilizing the teach-to-learn principle, the participants themselves should be expected to fulfill a portion of the supporting role. Also, the individualized approach can best be fostered if support assistance and counsel are not too readily available. Graduate students in physics and science education should be helpful in ful filling some of the support functions, but perma nent staff members could best meet the maintenance and supply function. Financing The problem of financing the proposed program has two facets. One facet is that of the necessary funds to equip and to supply the laboratory for such a program. The other facet is that of making the program available to teachers at the least possible expense to them individually. In order to equip and supply the laboratory for such a program 102 either a considerable stock of apparatus and sup plies must already exist in the institution offering the program or funds must be available for the pur chase of apparatus and supplies. There is no simple solution to this facet of the problem of financing. The type of investment necessary for the buildup of an inventory of experiments suitable for such a pro gram should attract support from funding agencies and from industry because of the current crises in secon dary school science teaching and because the invest ment should have long term benefits due to the universality of the types of experiments involved and the low risk of obsolescence. Like the first facet, the second facet of the problem of financing, that of mailing, the program available to teachers at the least possible expense to the teacher has no simple solution. Funds seem to be available for support of such programs as in- service institutes through the National Science Foundation, industrial companies, and other funding agencies. In addition to such support, the school systems fi’om which the participants come are potential sources of assistance both in terms of financial re wards and in terms of a decrease in teaching loads for the participants. The institution offering such 103 a program is also a potential source of assis tance. Size of Participating Group The size of the participating group of in- service secondary school science teachers in the proposed program is a function of the availability of equipment, facilities, resources, personnel, in terest on the part of secondary school science teachers, incentives available to the teachers, and other such variables. The number of participants is also limited by the instructional approach of the program. If the approach were just an individual studies approach, the facilities and equipment avail ability would overrule other considerations. The approach of the proposed program is much broader than this. It places considerable emphasis on the inter action among the participating teachers, the director of the program, and his staff. If the group is too large, the probability of this interaction decreases; therefore, the upper limit in the number of partici pants in the program at a given time is approximately thirty. There is little or no research evidence to prove this limit, but the experience of the author and others in group studies would tend to support this approximate limit. Facilities, equipment and 104 resources of a given institution could limit the number to below thirty participants. Facilities and Equipment The space requirements per student and experi ments per student for the approach of the proposed program are considerably more than for the approach of the conventional lecture-demonstration situation, or even for a lecture-demonstration-laboratory situa tion. To obtain a rough approximation of what kind of space and experiment requirements might be re quired for the proposed program, a study was made of the space and experiment requirements of the Advanced Physical Laboratory course (Physics 6l6 ) at The Ohio State University, This study showed that nine rooms with an average floor space of approxi mately 800 square feet per room and sixty-seven experiments were used to teach an average of thirty- two students per quarter. These figures give the following densities: Number of square feet of floor space per student = 225 Number of experiments per student = 2.1 A second example of a laboratory type program similar to the proposed program of this study is that of a sophomore course in experimental physics taught at 105 Cornell University. From the description of the course given in the American Journal of Physics (Carver and Scarl, 1968) it ivould appear that the number of square feet of floor space per student is much less than the figure obtained for Physics 6l6 at The Ohio State- University. The number of experi ments per student was not compared because the approach to the experiments differed considerably from that of Physics 6l6 and the proposed program. The density values presented must be considered ex tremely approximate, but they illustrate the point that a laboratory type approach does entail a large space requirement. It is obvious that the number of experiments per student must be greater than one if the students expect to do several experiments per quarter. For the ideal situation the facilities and equipment for the proposed program would be indepen dent of the remainder of the physics program of the institution offering the program. Unfortunately most institutions of higher education are not blessed with the facilities and equipment for such a favorable situation. This means that some of the facilities and equipment will generally be available on a part-time basis. If the in-service 106 program in physics is held on Saturdays or during evenings when other physics courses are not gen erally scheduled, the problem becomes one of logistics. Over a period of time the in-service program should become increasingly independent of the other laboratories as equipment is devised and purchased specifically for the in-service program. In smaller institutions the space and equipment requirements of the in-service program would likely be shared with the introductory, intermediate and advanced physics laboratories. Institutional and Departmental Support The interdisciplinary nature of the proposed program introduces factors related to institutional support that require special consideration. This interdisciplinary nature of the program is shown by the fact that elements of physics, mathematics, psychology, and education are included. The com plexity introduced by this interdisciplinary nature is shown by: (1 ) the demands it places on the teacher to be a master of a wide variety of under standings, (2 ) the expectations it places on stu dents, (3 ) the interdepartmental cooperation it must be predicated upon, (4-) the strain it places on institutional procedures for keeping course descriptions from overlapping, and (5) the fact that the physics department is entrusted with responsi bilities that are usually carried by other depart ments. In a small liberal arts college or teachers college this complexity would be reduced because of the simpler channels of communication, but in a large university or multiversity where departments are sharply defined along disciplinary lines the com plexity introduced by this interdisciplinary nature could be a potential limiting factor in the design and execution of a program such as the proposed pro gram. Fxamples of the kinds of problems that might be expected in am Institution structured rigidly along disciplinary lines are seen in the complica tion that would be associated with the teaching of mathematics and educational methods in a physics program. In an ideal situation the interdisciplinary nature of the program would be welcomed by all de partments concerned, but until the more ideal situa tion exists careful consideration of the potential problems associated with this aspect of the program must be given, and mutual understanding and trust among depai’tments must be nurtured.. Further con sideration of the problems related to interdiscipli nary nature of the program is found in the section on apparent conflicts (pp. 117-122). 108 The need for the support of the physics depart ment is another important consideration. In the past the gulf between college teachers of physics and sec ondary school teachers of physics has been extremely wide. The college physicist did not understand or care to understand the secondary school physics teacher. The general attitude of the college physicist was that the high school physics teacher would have to come up to the standards of the research physicist if he expected support from the college physics program. This attitude on the part of college physicists has not yet disappeared, but there have been some drastic changes in the attitudes of physicists and physics departments toward secondard school physics teachers and physics programs. The National Science Foundation academic year institutes, summer institutes, and in- service institutes have done much to help improve this situation. ■ Also the activity of the Commission on College Physics of the American Institute of Physics (Fowler, 1967) has helped bridge the gap between the college and the secondary school physics teachers. The participation of college scientists in the content improvement programs and curriculum development proj ects has tended to improve the respectability of work ing with secondary school teachers and programs. These 109 factors plus the efforts of many individuals and groups in the field of science education have done much to reduce the understanding gap, but unfortunately there are still many unsolved problems. These problems must be given special consideration when a program such as the proposed program is undertaken. Prerequisites and Participant Selection Procedure The prerequisites for the proposed program should not be too stringent, but they must be stringent enough to limit the participants to those who can best profit from the program and those who need such a program. Some background in physics should precede the program. Some experience in a physics in-service program and/or a combination of experience and academic work would also be beneficial background for participants. These considerations lead us to the following prerequisites: 1. One year of college physics. 2. Completion of an academic year or a summer in-service program in physics. or A combination of experience and academic work approved by the director of the program. Since the proposed program lends itself readily to the approach of an in-service institute in physics, 110 special consideration will be given to the topic of the selection of participants. Careful selection of the participants in the proposed program is essential to the effectiveness of the program. The problem of informing teachers about the availability and nature of the program precedes the actual selection of par ticipants. In order to advertise the program an announcement describing the program with its goals, approach, and prerequisites should be sent out to the secondary schools within commuting distance from the institution offering the program and to teachers who have Indicated interest in such a program. The program should be presented at meetings of science teachers and other gatherings where administrators and teachers may be present. Once the program has been advertised, application forms have been made available, and appli cations have been received, the formal selection proc ess can begin. The director and a committee named by the director will review the applications for selection of the participants. Preference will be given first to interested physics teachers, then to teachers and supervising teachers of physical science and general science courses. Junior high school science teachers will also be considered as potential participants. Ill The prerequisites listed in the previous paragraph would also be applicable for the selection of partic ipants for an in-service institute. Credits and Grades Special consideration will now be given to the question of what kind of credit should be given and how to give meaningful grades to participants in the proposed program. The institutional requirements for the proposed program, or one like it, can not be ignored. The requirements of the graduate school, the registrar’s office, and other administrative de partments should be integrated into the program. Participants in the proposed program can earn graduate credit if they are eligible and have enrolled as graduate students. Persons not eligible for grad uate credit but who satisfy the prerequisites for enrollment in the proposed program may be enrolled in the Division of Continuing Fducation and earn under graduate credits. Participants may include regular intermediate or advanced level physics courses as part of the pro posed program if their background in mathematics and physics and their time schedule will permit such an enrollment. Generally they will enroll for three 112 credit hours per quarter in the special courses related directly to the proposed program. The regular physics courses that participants may be able to take will be in addition to the three credit hours of special course work. The three special courses related to the proposed program as it will be offered at The Ohio State Univer sity during the 1968-69 school year are designated as Physics 507» 508, and 509. Because of the nature of the program, the completion of Physics 507 is not a prerequisite to enrollment in Physics 508, and Physics 508 is not a prerequisite to Physics 509. The individ ual study aspects of the program make it possible to enroll in the program after the completion of the 500 level sequence of courses. Thus the program permits the in-service science teacher to continue his studies over a period of more than one year. At The Ohio State University the high school science teacher could possibly enroll for as much as fifteen credit hours of Individual Studies in Physics (Physics 693) in addition to the nine credit hours of Physics 507, 508, and 509. If the participant is enrolled in graduate school, the credits earned would be applicable towards the degree Master.of Arts. Credits earned would also be accepted toward improved certification status and thus result 113 in improved salary situations for most of the teachers who participate in the program. The question of how to give grades for the pro posed program course work requires special considera tion. One of the hindrances to enrollment in the intermediate and advanced level physics courses for many secondary school science teachers is the fear of poor grades which could jeopardize their graduate school status. The prerequisites and goals of the regular intermediate and advanced level’ physics courses are usually determined by the needs of the physics majors, therefore the performance expectations and grades for these courses are not always acceptable to the secondary school science teacher. An ideal approach to the question of how to give grades would be to eliminate the letter grade completely. The idea of a written evaluation of the participant’s perform ance that could include a rating scale in several areas seems to be much more appropriate than a letter grade, but the institutional requirement of a grade for the transcript makes the ideal approach imprac tical . Another approach to the grade question would be to give only two grades— satisfactory (S) and unsatis factory (F). This decreases the grade pressure and 114 tends to permit students to work for goals other than the grade, but it does not give a very precise measure of performance. A transcript with nine or as many as twenty-four credits in physics with a grade of s for a graduate program that requires only forty or fifty credits does not give a meaningful record of perform ance. Another disadvantage of this approach to grades is that the student’s point-hour ratio does not reflect his performance in physics. For the proposed program a combination of the three approaches previously mentioned was adopted. Letter grades will be given for the Physics 50?, 508, and 509 sequence. The letter grades will go to the registrar’s office, but the participant will also be given a written evaluation of his performance at the end of each quarter. The details of this evaluation will be discussed under the section of this chapter dealing with evaluation procedures. Participants who enroll in Physics 693 (Individual Studies in Physics) will be given either a satisfactory or unsatisfactory grade for the registrar's records and the written evaluation for his own records. 115 Maintenance of an Acceptable Level of Academic Performance One of the major concerns of college officials, college physics teachers, science educators, and others related to a program like the proposed in-service pro gram in physics for experienced secondary school sci ence teachers is that of maintaining an acceptable level of academic performance. The graduate school needs to know that the academic stature of the proposed program is worthy of granting graduate credit for the course work related to the program. The physics de partment is justifiably concerned about both the nature and the academic standing of any course it may offer. Science educators want to see in-service programs that contribute positively to the academic and professional growth and maturity of secondary school science teachers. There is absolutely no justification for any in-service physics program that does not contribute to the improvement of secondary school science teaching. The secondary school science teacher has no real need for just another physics course, but he does have a real need for course work that relates to his needs and interests as a teacher of science. Academic stature and respectability for a program designed for secondary school science teachers cannot 116 be judged, on the basis of the performance expectations of a research physicist, but must be judged on the basis of the performance expectations of a professional secondary school science teacher. This differentiation is not and has not been clearly understood by many in positions to aid or to oppose in-service programs for secondary school science teachers. Some confusion does exist due to the lack of a clear definition of just what the performance expectations of a professional secondary school science teacher should be, but prog ress is being made toward the clarification of this definition. Parmer (1964) made a contribution toward this clarification in his study of what various groups considered to be the important areas of competency. The recommendations presented by the Teacher Preparation-Certification Study of the National Asso ciation of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (Guidelines, 1961) were directed toward preparation programs, but they also represent a step toward the clarification of the expectations of the professional secondary school science teacher. Earlier efforts toward this clarification date back to 1946 when the Cooperative Committee on the Teaching of Science (Preparation, 1946) broke with tradition in 117 recognizing that the preparation of science teachers is different from the preparation for those who plan to become research scientists (Richardson, Williamson, Stotler, 1968, p. 61). The responsibility for maintaining an acceptable level of academic performance will rest heavily upon the director of the program. The statement of goals for the proposed program (pp. 88- 90) defines to some degree the type of performance to be expected from participants. The quality and quantity of performance will be dependent in some measure upon the background of the participant, but there is also a minimum level of performance below which graduate credit cannot be given. This minimum level of performance is dependent upon the type and context of the institution offering the proposed program, upon the discretion of the directox’, and the institutional fi’amework in which he works. Apparent Conflicts The physics department, the education depart ment, and in-service secondary school science teachers are the principal gi'oups that have vested intei'ests in the approach and content of the special physics pro gram for in-service science teachers. The views of each of these groups as to the approach and content of the program may appear to be conflicting with each other. The physics department is concerned about the level and quality of physics presented in any physics program. The education department is concerned about the variety and quality of learning and teaching methods in any program such as the proposed program. In-service secondary school science teachers are con cerned about applicability of the program to their needs and interests and about the suitability of the program to their backgrounds in physics and mathe matics. The practical design of any program that includes the variety of vested interests found in the proposed program must include consideration of the areas of apparent agreement and the areas of apparent conflict among the groups involved. Theoretically recognition of the interests of each of these groups is not a major problem. The problems come when it becomes apparent that the practicalities of a given program tend to play up some interests and play down other interests. In an institution sharply divided into departments that are largely independent of each other, the problem of exclusiveness works against program designs that include a variety of vested interests. In the apparent and real conflict of 119 interests between the education and physics depart ments, the principal losers are the in-service science teachers. Several factors have contributed to the apparent conflicts of Interests among the various groups in volved in the proposed program. American higher edu cation has generally evolved in a way that fosters departmental independence rather than interdependence. The strong disciplinary nature of physics and educa tion has tended to discourage students in one disci pline from talcing courses in the other discipline. The arrogance of personnel in both departments has tended to increase the separation between them. As indicated in the section on the departmental and institutional support, progress is being made toward the improvement of communications between the depart ments of education and physics, but there is still plenty of room for improvement. Another factor that has contributed to the apparent conflict of interest among the various groups involved in the proposed program has been the separa tion that exists between those involved in secondary education and those Involved in higher education. Those in higher education who have the responsibility for the preparation of secondary school science 120 \ teachers have not always been in touch with the sec ondary school situation. This is reflected in the fact that there is such an uirgent need for in-service science programs to update science teachers. The department of education is generally recognized as the group responsible for the preparation of secondary school science teachers, although the science depart ments are increasingly involved. Understanding of the secondary school situation by those in higher educa tion who share in the responsibility of pre- and in- service teacher preparation is a major problem. A general lack of communication and understand ing is a major contributing factor to the apparent conflicts among the groups involved in in-service education. The all-institution approach to teacher education (p. $0) should help improve communication and understanding among the groups involved. In the absence of such an approach, communication and under- standing among the groups involved, is largely depend ent upon the initiative of the department of education, the cooperation of the science departments, and the willingness of secondary school science teachers and supervisors to become a part of a cooperative effort. A climate of understanding and communication is the basis for the resolution of the apparent conflict of 121. Interest among the groups involved. The fact that such a climate can be established is demonstrated to some degree on the campus of The Ohio tState University. At The Ohio State University the efforts of science educators, especially Dr. John S. Richardson, have resulted in an atmosphere of understanding and coop eration that makes it possible to obtain the necessary institutional support for a program such as the pro posed program. Consideration of the performance expectations provides an example of how the climate of understand ing and coopei’ation can be expected to help resolve the apparent conflicts of interest among the groups involved in the special physics program for in-service teachers. The physics department could generally be expected to want to see the quality and type of performance In the special physics program to be in keeping with the quality and type of performance required in a regular physics program. The background, interests, and needs of the typical secondary school science teacher do not lend themselves to the specific performance requirements of the regular physics pro gram. The professional teacher and the professional physicist are not expected to have the same qualifica tions ; therefore the course work performance should 122 not be expected, to be identical for both groups. The performance expectations for teachers should not be lower than the performance expectations of the physics major, but it should be recognized that they may be more oriented toward the teaching of secondary school science and include more of an emphasis on qualitative analysis than the performance expectations of the professional physicist. The emphasis of the special physics program on the interests and needs of the in- service science teacher results in eaual-but-different performance expectations for the proposed program. In ordez' to expect the physics depai-tment to accept the idea of equal-but-dif f ei'ent pei’foi'mance expectations, a climate of understanding and communication must exist. Operational Pi'ocedui'es The operational pi’ocedure described in the fol lowing paragz’aphs should not be considered static or even exhaustive. It should be considered desci’iptive and indicative of the approach of the proposed progi'am. Flexibility is one of the principal atti'ibutes of the program; thei'efoz-e precise statements of what will be done cannot be given. In ord.er to present a picture of the opei'ational procedui’e for* the pz*oposed in-service 123 program in physics for experienced secondary school science teachers the following topics will he considered: 1.. Meeting schedule. 2. Mechanics. 3. Activities. 4. Evaluation procedures. Meeting Schedule Experience with participants in in-service institutes in physics during the past several yeai’s at The Ohio State University has shown that science teachers are willing to travel distances of as much as 75 to 100 miles to attend Saturday morning classes (Riley, 19&7, p. b). The Saturday morning schedule apparently causes less interference with the weekday secondary school classroom schedules of the partici pants than do weekday evening meetings. Also this arrangement makes it possible for the teacher to drive longer distance to attend in-service programs. The Saturday morning approach permits the scheduling of sessions that last four hours. Such a schedule allows an adequate number of classi'oom or laboratory hours for a three-credit-hour course if the participant does an adequate amount of preparation during the weekdays. 12*1" It also permits the Saturday participants to enroll in an introductory or an intermediate level physics course during the early evening hours of weekdays if the teacher*s schedule and background will permit such an enrollment. Mechanics The procedures related to the operational mechanics of the proposed physics program are designed to foster learning and to illustrate the place of operational mechanics in the scientific process. Functional structure will be utilized rather than a highly developed structure that is so efficient it gives the false impression that the scientific process is a simple matter of following directions and finding the correct results. The selection and trial and error aspects of science will be illustrated in the operational mechanics of the program. In general, the operational mechanics will be self supporting or dependent upon the supporting staff so that the direc tor will be free to fulfill his role as director of learning. Specific operational mechanics are related to such items as: (1) check-out procedures, (2) record keeping, (3) availability of support literature, (*0 equipment for devised experiments, and (5) the supply room. 1.25 Check-out procedures and record keeping will be held to a minimum by arranging the files, stockroom, and other supporting equipment and materials on a self-service approach as much as possible. Rather than require elaborate procedures and records the partici pants will be expected to exercise good judgment con cerning the return of borrowed materials. At the end of each Saturday session all supporting equipment and materials that is not directly tied up in a given experiment will be returned, to its proper place in the stockroom, in the files, or on the general supply shelves. Files of instruction sheets, laboratory manuals, pre- and post-tests will be available to the partici pants. These files will be open to the participants and will be maintained by the supporting staff. The literature in the files and other supporting litera ture will be restricted to use within the rooms involved by the Saturday morning program. If a par ticipant wishes to use a given literature item during the week, he will be expected to check a copy of that literature out of the physics library rather than take the literature from the shelves or files used by the Saturday morning program. Three sets of printed materials will be required: (1) the shelf and file 126 copies, (2) the physics library copies, and. (3) the master copies that are kept in a locked location. Further details related to the files and book shelves are given later (p. 1^9). Equipment for devised experiments will be avail able from a central supply room. The central supply room will also include meters and instruments that are for general, usage. Over a period of time the central supply room should include building materials necessary for most devised experiments, but a general procedure for ordering materials not in the central supply room is also included as a part of the operational mechanics. This general procedure requires the participant to state specifically what materials he needs and to ob tain the approval of either a member of the supporting staff oi' the directoi’. Approval is required in order to confirm the need and the availability of the requested materials. A more formal requisition proce dure may be required; but, in keeping with the informal approach of the proposed program, the general procedure outlined above will be used during the first year for the program. The supply room will be maintained by a member of the director's supporting staff. It will contain 127 the general supplies, materials, and equipment indi cated previously. Activities The flexible nature of the proposed program makes it impossible to give a precise statement of the daily activities. In general the activities are of the following types: 1. Preliminary and planning. 2. Experimental. 3. Coffee break. If'. Study of physics and mathematics. 5. Keeping log book up to date. 6. Report preparation and presentation. 7. Helping and being helped. 8. Discussion. 9. Homework. 10. Preparation, evaluation, and use of programed instructional materials. 11. Miscellaneous. 12. Evaluation. Each of these types of activities will be discussed and illustrated briefly in the following paragraphs. As stated in the first paragraph of this section on operational procedures, the goal of this presentation 128 is to convey an indicative, not exhaustive, impression of the activities of the proposed program. The daily activities of d.ifferent participants will vary con siderably just as the activities of a group of sci entists in a research and development center would be expected to vary. The preliminary and planning activities include the activities related to the early stages of the program and the activities related to the planning of individual experiments. Typical activities related to and prior to the first Saturday session include the following: 1. Interview of the participant with the director. Each participant will have an interview with the director prior to or during the first week of the pro gram, During the interview the par ticipant and the director will discuss the Proposed Study Plan form (Appendix I) which the participant will have completed prior to the interview. The Proposed Study Plan form is designed to help the partici pant identify the areas in which he should, study and work. As much as possible the director will act in an advisory position leaving the making of decisions to the participant. This will not be an easy time for some in-service teachers because they will never have had the opportunity to decid.e 011 what and hovr they would like to work. Introductory formalities. At the first meeting of the group in the proposed program, every effort will be made to expedite the few formalities of getting people acquainted with one another and with the approach of the program. Simple introductory ideas will be made avail able for those who are not able to decide immediately on an area or experiment for study. The simple introductory ideas will include pro gramed materials on the operation of basic experimental apparatus, simple verification type experiments, pro gramed materials in mathematics, and programed, materials in introductory physics. For those not familiar with the procedures for keeping a log book and talcing data so as to indicate their precision, an information sheet (Appen dix II) on how to keep a log book and a set of programed, instructional materials on error systems (Appendix III) will be provided. By the end of the first hour of the first session each participant should have embarked on his own study project. Introduction to programed instruction. During the coffee break of the first session a general presentation and discussion of programed instruction will take place. The availability of guides to the preparation of programed mate rials (Appendix IV) will be mentioned and a few participants will be encour aged to try to prepare a very simple program during the week and even to try it on their pupils. 131 Typical activities related to the planning of individual experiments in clude the following: a. Selection of topic for study and approach to that study. b. Completion of pre-test re lated to experiment or topic chosen for study. c. Background study. The background study may include reading from reference materials, working through introductory programs related to the equipment involved in the experiment, working through programed materials re lated to the factual understandings related to the experiment, and discussion of ideas related to the experiment and its apparatus with other participants. Outlining apparatus requirements. The pi'incipal activities of the special physics program will be those related to the performance of the core experiments around which the program is centered. These expez'iments will be discussed in more detail in a later section (pp. . Activ ities related to the core experiments include such 132 activities as the setup of the experimental apparatus, detecting and. eliminating "bugs" in the apparatus, experimenting to find a satisfactory approach, taking data, analysis of data, and preparing a summary report. The mid-morning coffee break will provide oppor tunity to converse and to share ideas. At times it will also include brief informal reports on special topics or on the results, problems, and applications of a given experiment. These morning breaks will not be structured in a fixed pattern, but will vary in both length and content. In some instances individual reports will be given and in other instances group reports will be given. Some reports will be presented to all of the gathered participants and others will be given to smaller groups or even individually. The spectrum of topics for discussion during the coffee break should include any topic that is remotely or directly related to science and science teaching. Discussion of the social aspects of science will be encouraged during some of these periods. Activities related to the study of physics and mathematics involve the use of library resources, reference books available in the laboratory, programed materials, and other reference materials. These 133 activities are for both remedial and initial study purposes. Activities related to keeping the participant’s log book up to date and report preparation provide experience in organization of ideas and presentation of information. The use of a log book is a discipline that has application in many teaching-learning situa tions other than the laboratory situation; therefore the use of a log book is a skill worth developing. Self discipline is required to keep a log book up to date and to prepare reports in an organized, under standable, and thox’ough manner. Helping and being helped type activities are related to the teach-to-1earn principle. Typical activities of this type include assisting a fellow participant in some aspect of his experiment, intro ducing a fellow participant to the operation of a laboratory device such as the Polaroid camera, and other giving and receiving experiences. The discussion type activities are of two types: (1) formal and (2) informal. Formal discussions will be arranged when a particular topic interests several participants. Informal discussions will take place between individuals and in small groups throughout the Saturday session. The topics for such discussions 13^ will vary from the earthy levels of how to get some thing done to the heights of ideas and. ideals. Homework type activities include a wide variety of experiences. Planning, reading, organizing, instructional program preparation, report writing, data analysis, data presentation, and using programed instructional materials are examples of the kinds of homework activities that are related to the proposed in-service program. Homework could also include experimenting with materials, ideas, and apparatus in the participant’s teaching experience. The miscellaneous type activities may be more numerous than any other type of activities. Such activities as wondering what to do next, complaining about the equipment, worrying, repairing apparatus, thinking, making mistakes, and correcting mistakes are important contributions to learning. The evaluation procedure is presented in more detail in the following section. In general the activities related to this procedure include the weekly evaluation procedures and the overall evalua tion procedures. Throughout the quarter the direc tor’s evaluation of the participant’s log book will provide evaluation data. Also the results of the pre- and. post-tests will be used for this purpose. 135 Each participant will be evaluating his own work as it is presented in his log book throughout the quarter. The overall evaluation at the end of each quarter will consist of the director's evaluation and the partici pant’s evaluation. The evaluation activities are related to the self-evaluation goal of the program. Evaluation Procedures In keeping with the general approach of the proposed program for in-service secondary school sci ence teachers, the evaluation procedures are not highly structural. The procedures outlined are not to be interpreted as hard and fast, but as an early stage of an evolutionary process. consideration will be given to the following aspects of the evaluation procedures: 1. Background considerations. 2. Sources of evaluation information. 3. Performance criteria. 4. Specific procedures. Several general considerations provide the foundation upon which the evaluation procedures are based. The first general consideration is related to the justification for the evaluation procedures to be outlined. The primary justification for the evaluation 136 aspects of the program lies in the need of the in- service teacher for a better understanding of himself. This understanding comes through self-evaluation and the aid of the director’s evaluation. The instructor’s need for some basis for a grade for each participant is given a secondary position rather than its typical position of highest priority. A second general consideration is related to the general goal of the evaluation procedures. In addition to the somewhat mechanical aspects of having to determine a grade, there is the much more humane goal of evaluation that should contribute something toward the elimination of pretenses and false airs. The program in general and the evaluation procedures in particular are designed to give the in-service teacher the following: 1. An understanding of his strengths and weaknesses through a process of self-analysis and the director’s evaluation. 2. A recognition of the professional aspects of his profession through his common experience with fellow teachers, his participation in group discussions, and his evalua tion of the science teaching profession. 3. A sense of challenge in the oppor tunities of his profession through experiences in the program that represent future trends and 137 practices and through the evalua tion of these experiences. An awai’eness of his ability to study, to learn, and. to grow professionally as the result of his individual efforts. As participants begin to grasp these ideas, they can be expected to depend less on pretenses and false airs and more on their demonstrated understandings of them selves . A third general consideration has to do with the general approach to the evaluation procedures. Throughout the program an effort is made to reduce the thi'eat of grades. Fvaluation should not present a threat or be something to dread, but should be a help toward self-understanding and something to be appreciated. The general approach to the evaluation procedures includes a heavy emphasis on the teacher's own involvement in his evaluation. A fourth general consideration is that although the special physics program includes the possibility of participant enrollment in regular physics courses in addition to the Saturday morning special physics courses, the evaluation is based primarily on the participant's performance in the Saturday courses. Participants who are also enrolled ih'fegular physics 138 courses during the weekdays will receive a grade from the instructors of those courses. The sources of evaluation information include (1) the results of the pre- and post-tests; (2) the log book records and summary reports; (3 ) the in- service participant’s self-evaluation; and (4) the anecdotal records of the director .and his staff. The results of the pre- and post-tests should provide some measiure of the in-service teacher’s (1) growth in factual understanding of physics, (2) understanding of the apparatus of a given experiment, and (3 ) under standing of the application of both apparatus and facts in an educationally useful manner. A series of multiple choice type questions, which are taken from prepared test books (p. 22), provide information for an objective evaluation of the participant’s growth in factual understanding. The pre-test is made up of multiple choice type questions. The post-test in cludes the same multiple choice questions as the pre test and essay type questions. The pre-test is not checked until the post-test has been completed. Since the tests are primarily for the benefit of the partici pants, they will scoi’e themselves on the objective portions of the tests. The director will evaluate the essay type questions. The score of the pre- and 139 post-tests will not be treated as an absolute quantity, but as one of the several indicators of the progress and quality of the participant’s work. The log book records and summary reports will be examined weekly by the director. The use of laboratory notebooks that include provision for making carbon copies of all work recorded permits the director to keep account of the progress of the participants. At the end of each Saturday session, the participants leave the carbon copies of their log book notations with the director. At the end of a given experiment each participant will be asked to evaluate his own performance and summary report. The director will also look over the participant’s records and reports and may make suggestions and comments, but he will not formally grade each experi ment. The responsibility for evaluation of perform ance rests on the in-service teacher as well as the director. In an ideal situation the in-service science teacher could be responsible for the determination of his own course grade. Some teachers could be expected to arrive objectively at a representative course grade if the criteria for grading were clearly defined, but others would find it extremely difficult 140 to avoid, subjectivity. It should be an interesting experience for a teacher to be given the responsibility of grading himself rather than his students. Besides the therapeutic effects of such an evaluation proce dure, hopefully the teacher will better understand himself and will see the role of evaluation in a broader context than grade calculation. The director must retain the final responsibility for giving grades, but hopefully the participant’s self-determined gi’ade and the director’s grade for the participant will be the same. The director keeps a log book of his own that includes anecdotal records made during and following the Saturday morning sessions. The use of such records will lend some objectivity to the evaluation process that places considerably more emphasis on subjective evaluation than most evaluation programs. The anecdotal records will include references to special problems, indications of initiative, remarks about special contributions of participants, and other such ideas. The institutional requirements make some kind of grade necessary; therefore, the performance criterion for grading needs to be made clear. The planning, laboratory technique, reporting, and overall impression 141 related to a given experiment are rated according to an outstanding, excellent, good, satisfactory, and unsatisfactory rating system (see Appendix V). Some effort will be made to include an element of personal evaluation, but this element will not be a factor in grade determination. The experience of the partici pant in the use and preparation of programed instruc tional materials is given some consideration in grade determination. In addition to the tangible performance criteria, the intangible criteria of professional growth and effort expended will be given some weight in the process of determining a participant1s grade. Several specific evaluation procedures that apply to the weekly laboratory evaluation and the quarterly evaluation have been outlined in previous paragraphs. This final paragraph provides additional details on the evaluation procedures and form related to the quarterly evaluation. In line with the research and development approach of the program, an evaluation procedure and form similar to the ones used by indus trial concerns will be included as an integral part of the proposed program. The evaluation form (Appendix V) will be given to each participant at the end of each quarter. The in-service teacher will complete the form as a self-evaluation exercise and as if he were 142 evaluating one of his students. The director will also complete the same evaluation form for each participant. The director's evaluation will be dis cussed individually with each participant, and the participant will receive a copy of the director's evaluation. If the participant chooses to do so, the self-evaluation and director's evaluation may be discussed with the director. To help the director and also to help maintain an atmosphere of equality of status, the participants will be asked to complete an evaluation form for the director at the end of the first quarter. Experiments and Resources The experiments and resources for the proposed in-service program in physics for experienced second ary school science teachers are not completely definable because of the evolving nature of the pro gram. Verification type experiments related to a given in-service program are identifiable at a given time, but even these are subject to modification, deletion, and addition. Devised experiments require access to a supply of stock materials and a work shop. To attempt to list all the materials that should be stocked and the tools that should be available in 143 order to devise experiments is beyond the scope of this study. Open-ended experiments also require a wide diversity of equipment and supplies. In the fol lowing pages consideration will be given to the follow ing topics: 1. Organization of experiments. 2. Sources of Ideas for devised experiments. 3. Resources. Organization of Experiments A list of some of the experiments available for use in the proposed program as it will be offered at The Ohio State University during the 1968-1969 school year is found in .Appendix VI. The experiments are organized under the following headings: 1. .Acoustics. 2 . Electricity, magnetism, and electronics. 3. Electron physics. 4. Ideal gas. 5. Heat and thermodynamics. 6 . Mechanics. 7. Nuclear physics. 8. Optics. 0✓ • Wave motion. 10. Miscellaneous. 144- Appendix VII contains a sampling of the experimental information sheets that includes a statement of sug gested general objectives and a list of references. The procedure and other details for each experiment are left for the in-service teacher to design. Some experimental information sheets include references to programed information related to the operational aspects of the apparatus involved in the experiment. References to operational manuals and instruction sheets are also included for some experiments. The complexity of the experiments listed in Appendix VI varies from very simple to rather difficult. Sources of Ideas for Devised Experiments In addition to the experiments listed in Appendix VI devised experiments will be continually providing new experiments for future participants. Some ideas for d.evised experiments will be first hand from the thoughts of participants. Other ideas will be taken from literature available to the science teacher. A partial list of literature that abounds with ideas for laboratory experiments is given as follows: ■ 1. The Physics Teacher. 2. Physics Today. Iks 3. The American Journal of Physics. k. School Science and Mathematics. 5. ' The Science Teacher. 6. Science and Children. 7. Scientific American. 8. Reprint Books from the graduated reading lists of the American Association of Physics Teacher Resource Letters. 9. The Scientific American Book of Projects for the Amateur Scientist (Strong, i960). 10. Demonstration Experiments in Physics (Sutton, 1938). 11. UNESCO Source Book for Science Teachers (1956). 12. Nuclear Science Teaching Aids and Activities (Woodburn and Obourn, 1959). 13. Project Ideas for Young Scientists (Taylor, Knipling, and-Smith, i960). Ik. The Teaching of Electricity (Science Masters’ Association, 1956). 15. A Sourcebook for the Physical Sciences (Joseph, Brandwein, Morholt, Pollack, and Costka, 1961). 146 l6 . Soap Bubbles and the Forces Which Mold Them (Boys, 1959) and. other books of the Science Study Series. 1?. Novel Experiments in Physics (Committee on Apparatus, 1964). 18. University Physics (Freier, 1965). 19. Electronics for Scientists (Molmstadt, Fnke, and Toren, 1963). 20. Physical Science Study Committee's materials including the advanced topics. 21. Berkley Physics Laboratory Program (Portis, 1966). 22. Physical Science for Nonscience Students materials. 23. Elementary Science Study materials. 24. Harvard Project Physics materials. 25. Engineering Concepts Curriculum Project materials, 26. Secondary School Science Project (Princeton) materials. 27. Introductory Physical Science Project materials. 28. Advanced Experiments in Practical Physics (Calthrop, 1952). 1^7 29. Exercises In Experimental Physics (Allen and Martin, 1951). 30. Great Experiments in Physics (Shamos, 196 5)• 31. Experimental College Physics— A Laboratory Manual (White and Manning, 195*0. 32. A Laboratory Manual of Experiments in Physics (Ingersoll, Martin, and Rouse, 1953). 33. A Source Book in Physics (Magie, 1935). Resources The resources for a program such as the one proposed are greatly influenced by the nature of the program. The flexibility and variability required of an individualized laboratory approach to learning make the problem of having the proper resources on hand at the right time a very important consideration and also a rather complex operation. The problem of describing in detail the exact specification of the required, resources is beyond the scope of this study. A representative list will be given in order to impart a feeling for the kinds of resources necessary for a program such as the proposed in-service program. 148 Some of the kinds of resources necessary to make the program work are as follows: 1. Library. 2. Workshop with a supply center. 3. Audio-visual and other teaching aids. 4. Instruction sheets, pamphlets, and experimental support books. A good library and a workshop with a supply center play an essential support function. The avail ability of these facilities on Saturday mornings is an important consideration for the planning of a pro gram such as the proposed program. Films such as the Franklln-Miller series, the PSSC series, and the Harvard Physics Project series can serve both as inspiration for ideas and as support fox1 given experiments. Teaching machines could be inte grated. into the program as financial, availability, and other considerations can be met. In order to keep the in-service teacher up to date with the use of and limitations of the different aspects of the systems approach to education, the proposed program includes the opportunity to experience directly various aspects of a systems approach. 149 A file and book shelves for instruction sheets, pamphlets, and experimental support books are essential. A. list of important experimental support books is found in Appendix VIII, The mechanics of keeping account of the material in the files and 011 the book shelves and keeping them readily available must be carefully planned. The details of these mechanics will have to be developed experimentally. A master set of all instruction sheets, pamphlets, and experi mental support books should be kept separately in a locked location, and a second set should be readily available to participants. CHAPTER IV EVALUATION OP THE PROPOSED PROGRAM Prior to the consideration of the evaluation of the proposed program, a brief recapitulation of the previous chapters will be given. Chapter I provided an introduction to the proposed in-service program in physics for experienced secondary school science teachers. The need for new approaches, new courses, and new programs for in-service secondary school science teachers was outlined in terms of (1) the educational climate of change that tends to make earlier education obsolete and (2) the lack of in-service programs that are designed to assist the science teacher in his efforts not only to keep up with the changing times, but also to have a part in the shaping of the changing times. The problems to which this study is directed were introduced as (1) the problem of providing graduate level course work in physics; (2) the problem of providing direct experiences in the use of programed in struction, individualized instruction, and the processes of science; and (3) the problem of 150 151 meeting the individual needs of in-service science teachers. The hypotheses which this study is to examine were stated as (1) the hypothesis that a special physics progi’am can be planned to meet many of the special needs of the in-service science teacher and (2) the hypothesis that in- service science teachers will learn new methods of learning-teaching science as they are given the opportunity to experience these new methods in graduate courses designed specifically for them. The procedure for testing these hypotheses was (1) to plan a special physics program that was patterned after the program of a research and development center; (2) to offer the proposed pro gram to a group of in-service secondary school science teachers; and (3) to enlist the opinions and ideas of experienced science teachers con cerning the merit of the approach of the proposed program. Research evidence to test the hypotheses was obtained from (1) the results of the pre- and post-experiment tests; (2) the record each parti cipant kept in his daily log book; (3) question naires submitted to the participants in the experimental offering of the proposed program and to other interested science teachers; 152 (^) interviews with the participants and. other interested, science teachers; and. (5 ) written evaluations submitted, by each of the partici pants at the end. of the experimental offering of the proposed, progi'am and. evaluations submitted, by other science teachers. Chapter II contains a review of literature related, to in-service science teacher education and to the various aspects of the proposed in- service program in physics. This review of literature provides both background Information and research information supporting the different aspects of the proposed program. Chapter III con tains a description of the proposed program. The description includes (1 ) background considerations of the program and its approach to learning; (2 ) guidelines; {3 ) the goals of the program; (^) the special considerations that must be given in the implementation of the proposed program; (5 ) the operational procedures of the program; and (6 ) the experiments and. resources necessary for the program. The recapitulation of the previous para graphs brings us to the topic of this Chapter— the actual evaluation of the proposed program. The 153 evaluation of the proposed program will include the following: 1. Evaluation based on the results of the experimental offering of the proposed program. 2. Evaluation of the approach of the proposed program based on interviews and questionnaires. 3. Suggestions and criticisms. k. Summary of the evaluation of the proposed program. Evaluation Based on the Results of the Experimental Offering of the Proposed Program The results of the experimental offering of the proposed program provide a large block of data for the evaluation of the proposed program. The results of the experimental offering were obtained from the evaluation of the participantsf log books, from the participants’ evaluation of the proposed program, and from the director's evalua tion of participant performance. The evaluation questionnaire used by the participants is given in Appendix IX. A list of typical responses to each-of the questions of the evaluation question naire is given in Appendix X. 15^ The experimental offering of the proposed in-service program in physics for experienced secondary school science teachers was conducted as planned during the Spring Quarter, 1 9 6 7-1968, in the physics depai'tment of The Ohio State Uni versity. During the Autumn Quarter one teacher did preliminary work in the proposed program. During the Winter Quarter three teachers partici pated in a pilot group. Seven teachers participated in the experimental offering during the Spring Quar ter. A list of the participants during each of the three quarters is given in Appendix XI, This evalua tion of the experimental offering will follow the procedure of outlining the practices related to the vaz’ious aspects of the program and then evaluating these practices. The following aspects will be considered; 1. Approach. 2. Goals. 3. Special considerations. Operational procedure. Approach The individual laboratoi'y approach to the experimental offering of the proposed program was ■7 patterned along the lines of a research and devel opment center. The writer attempted to follow the role of director of learning rather than the tra ditional role of a teacher. This was not readily grasped by all of the participants. During the initial interview of each participant with the director prior to the first Saturday meeting of the group, each participant outlined a proposed course of study. When the participants first met as a group, several participants were at a loss to know what to do because they expected to be told what to do. After the initial shock of realizing they were not going to be told what they had to do, all participants adjusted satisfactorily to the informal approach of a research and development center. Several participants remarked that such an approach was a completely new experience to them and after the initial shock stage, they found it stimulating. As in a research and development center, some participants clearly understood what they wanted to do and how they wanted to approach their subjects of study. Others, who were not cer tain of their topic of study or approach to that study, needed time and a certain amount of general assistance from the director. The experience of 156 the writer with the research and development center approach tended to support his feeling that this type of approach to learning has considerable merit. Goals The goals of the proposed program were out lined in Chapter III. Fach of the goals stated on pages 88, 89 and 90 will be repeated and then dis cussed in terms of the participant reaction and in terms of the author’s reaction. The first goal is to strengthen and to improve the subject matter background of the teacher through a study of selected topics. Each of the eight par ticipants indicated that their learning experience in the area of factual knowledge of physics had been helpful. Several participants indicated that they did not consider the experience of obtaining new factual knowledge as helpful as was the experience of using both the facts they had learned in the past and the new facts they were learning. The experience of reinforcement and integration of fac tual knowledge was recognized by one participant as one of the most helpful aspects of his study. As pointed out by a participant, the acquisition of a large group of facts can "be achieved by using more efficient methods than the individual laboratory method. The conclusion of the participants’ reac tions and the author’s reaction to the aspect of the program that concerns the strengthening and improving of subject matter backgrounds is that the proposed program does offer considerable potential in this area. The fact that an individual labora tory approach to learning does not usually Impart factual knowledge in large doses is a generally recognized aspect of such an approach. But, it is also generally recognized that the factual know ledge obtained through an individual laboratory approach to learning is usually learned in greater depth than factual knowledge obtained through the study of books alone. The reactions of participants to the experimental offering of the proposed program tended to support both of these general recognitions. The second stated goal is to provide for the experience of learning physics experimentally and individually. The participants in the proposed pro gram were given the opportunity to study physics via experiments of the verification type, of the devised type, and of the open-ended type. They worked on their experiments individually. The experiments, that 158 the participants worked, on are listed, in Appendix X. The stated, goal was to provide the experience of learning physics experimentally and individually, but only a limited measure was made of how much physics was actually learned. The pre- and post tests planned were not administered on schedule in some cases not at all due to poor organization and planning on the part of the director. The tests that several of the participants did take were post tests. The participants were asked to indicate which questions they could, answer prior to the ex perience of working on a given experiment and which questions they could answer because of the work they had done on a given experiment. This procedure did not prove satisfactory. The test questions were multiple-choice questions taken from test questions prepared by Dressel and Nelson (1958); by Murphy and Stanionis (1986); by the Educational Testing Service for PSSC (Regular and Advanced Topics); and by the ARCO Publishing Company (1966) and Cowles Education Corporation (1967). These tests did not prove to be satisfactory and this aspect of the proposed program needs considerable i-emodeling and revision. Since the pre- and post-tests were not developed satisfac torily, the only measure of physics learned that was 159 available was the subjective evaluation provided by each participant. Generally the secondary school science teachers who made up the participating group tended to underestimate themselves and their abilities; therefore it was impossible to determine the growth in their understanding of the factual knowledge of physics. Each participant quite clearly indicated the fact that he had gained considerably in their understanding of the processes and trials of experi mental physics. The third stated goal is to provide experience in the use of, care of, limitations of, and derivation of laboratory equipment. No one participant experi enced all of these aspects of laboratory equipment, but all the participants indicated they had a better understanding of laboratory equipment. Those who worked with both PSSC equipment and standard commer cial research equipment to make the same fundamental measurements seemed to gain a greater appreciation of the PSSC equipment and also a greater awareness of the kinds of equipment used in scientific laboratories outside the secondary school laboratory. An interest ing skill that was demonstrated before most of the group was that of the Duco-cement procedure for replacing a broken cross hair in a telescope. Other 160 such simple but helpful skills were learned, and shared by the participants. One participant spent a large portion of his time devising experiments and experi mental apparatus. His example was a lesson for all of the participants. Several participants utilized the Polaroid camera in a variety of experiments. The experience of these participants opened a new realm for not only themselves, but also the other partici pants who worked with them. One teacher decided to share his experience with the Lybold e/m apparatus with his high school physics class by way of a series of color slides. The reactions, responses, and actions of the participating teachers clearly indi cated that all of the participants grew in their understanding of laboratory apparatus. The fourth stated goal is to strengthen and further the mathematical background of the teacher through self instruction and the use of programed instructional materials. Programed materials in trigonometry, calculus, algebra, and the use of a slide rule were available for the teachers. Six of the participants had a background in mathematics through the introductory calculus level; therefore they did not feel the need for the use of the pro gramed mathematics materials. Also, the other two 161 participants became so involved, in their experimental work that they did not choose to utilize the materials. Both of these participants and one other were intro duced to simple differential equations as they apply to the analysis of simple R-L, R-C, and R-L-C tran sients. No information was obtained for the evalua tion of the achievement of this goal. The fifth and sixth stated goals are to experi ence science as it is practiced in a research and development center, and. to develop a limited back ground of research skills. Information to the fifth goal has already been given on page 155 in connection with the approach of the experimental offering of the proposed program. Fach of the teachers indicated a growth in understanding of the processes and proce- dui’es of practicing science, but during the experi mental offering the director did not choose to stress careful research techniques except to introduce the use of the log book, data taking techniques, presenta tion of experimental results, and other such proce dures and techniques on an individual basis. Fxcept for the information already mentioned in connection with the research and development center approach, little information was obtained to evaluate the achievement of these goals. 162 The seventh goal stated in Chapter III is to help prepare teachers to take intermediate and advanced level physics courses. This goal becomes more realistic when consideration is given to the program as a sequence of courses continuing for several quarters. The one-quarter exposure to the proposed program did not prove to be adequate to con vince many of the participants to attempt the task of competing with physics majors in intermediate and advanced level physics courses. Three teachers did not comment on the evaluation questionnaire question related to this goal. Two teachers said they had not been convinced that they are ready for such a task. One teacher was already taking advanced level physics courses. Two teachers indicated they would be willing to take such courses. One of these latter two, who had participated in the pilot study of the proposed program during the Winter Quarter, was enrolled in the Modern Physics Course while participating in the experimental offering of the proposed program. The experience in the proposed program can not be given full credit for the decisions of those who indicated a I'Tillingness to take the regular physics courses. It may have had a small part, but the teacher’s 163 ■background in physics and. math was clearly the determining factor. The eighth and ninth stated goals are to help prepare teachers for today’s teaching responsibilities and for the teaching responsibilities of the future, and to help prepare teachers to make the greatest pos sible use of the new science curriculum projects. Direct evaluation of the achievement of these goals is not possible from the research information associated with the proposed, in-service program. Indirect evalu ation of the achievement of these goals can be made on the basis of the other goal achievements. If the data support the goals of improved understandings of both the products and processes of physics, and of improved understanding of ways to learn and teach physics, then indirect support of the achievement of the eighth and ninth goals will have been established. The evidence used, to support the belief that the first, second, seventh, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth goals tends to support the belief that the goals of improved under standing of both the prod.ucts and processes of physics, and of improved understanding of ways to learn and teach physics have been satisfactorily achieved. The tenth goal stated in Chapter* III is to develop skill in the use, evaluation, and preparation 164 of programed, instruction materials. During the coffee break of the second. Saturday session of the experimental offering of the proposed, program the director introduced, the topic of programed, instruction for general discussion and indicated the programed materials that were available for the participants1 use. The following week d.uring the coffee break the director briefly outlined the history of programed instruction and outlined, a series of steps that could be used in the preparation of programed materials. This presentation was followed by a group study of the preparation of a program on the color coding of elec trical resistors. After almost an hour the coffee break was adjourned with the suggestion that each par ticipant attempt to program a very simple topic. Of the seven participants during the Spring Quarter, only two made a concerted effort toward the implementation of this suggestion. A program prepared by one of these participants is given in Appendix XII. Others started to work on a program, but never really became involved, in the process of program preparation. The responses to questions on the evaluation questionnaire related to programed instruction indicate clearly that those who actively became involved, in the preparation of programed materials were the ones who gained most in interest in programed instruction. Other partici pants indicated that their interest in developing pro- grained materials was increased as a result of their experience in the program. Others indicated that they are more interested in finding prepared pi'ogi’ams for their classroom use. Several indicated that they felt the technique for preparing programs was too complex and time consuming for the typical classroom teacher to become involved in the preparation of programed materials. One participant indicated interest in a group approach to the preparation of programed, mate rials with support from a funding agency. The tenth goal was achieved by some of the teachers. Another group mad.e some progress toward the achievement of the goal of involvement with programed, instruction. Most of the participants showed, positive interest in pro gramed instruction. The eleventh stated goal is to experience the application of the learning-by-teaching principle. The director attempted to foster liaison among the participants. The fact that the group was small tended to support the intercommunication among the teachers. When a teacher needed assistance in taking data, he did not have any difficulty finding assist ance. One participant reported that he was able to 166 help others to increase their factual knowledge of physics, to improve their laboratory technique, and. to take data. Others indicated the helpfulness of the opportunities they had to share their "discoveries." The reports and reactions of the participants indicated that the actual application of the learning-by-teaching principle was of a very informal nature. The evidence supplied by the participants indicates that the eleventh goal was achieved by most of the participants. Some profited more than others from the informal teach ing experience. To experience the advantages and disadvantages of an individualized approach to instruction is the twelfth stated goal of the proposed in-service px’Ogram. Each participant selected his own experiments and devised his own plan of action for each experiment. This aspect of the proposed program seemed to be appreciated by the teacher-participants as much or more than any other aspect of the program. All eight teachers indicated the individualized approach to instruction was very helpful. They also indicated that they think they are more inclined to attempt a more individualized approach to instruction after their experience in the program. These evaluations were made at the end of the Spring Quarter. It would have 167 been interesting to have had their evaluations after the first week or two of the experimental offering because at that time several participants were having difficulties adjusting their thinking and actions to such an approach. The thirteenth stated goal is to provide the opportunity for better self understanding through self evaluation and counseling opportunities. During the experimental offering the evaluation procedure outlined in Chapter III (pp. 135-1^2) was not formalized. One of the outcomes of the experimental offering was the recognition of the need for a more formal evaluation procedure. The revised evaluation procedure is out lined in Chapter III and is designed to include the use of the evaluation form shown in Appendix V and a conference with the director at the end of each quarter. Each participant was asked to make a personal evaluation of his work, strengths, weak nesses, and areas of growth. These evaluations, as shown in Appendix X, indicate growth in the area of self understanding. Two examples of participant’s evaluations are as follows: I believe I would rate the advancement, the motivation, the interest and the in creased knowledge which I have gained from this work all high. I am most pleased with my increased expei'ience and proficiency with 168 the oscilloscope, the Polaroid technique, and my rejuvenated spirits toward physics. (Sometimes physics has appeared as a monster to me.) I have, I feel, worked hard and learned a lot, I feel that these two quarters I have grown more in physics than I have at any other time. I feel that even though a letter grade was not given I worked as if I wanted to earn an A grade. The second quarter was extremely gratifying because I started (to) understand and think physics. This was proven to me in my STFP test result which showed 95-97% ranking as compared to an 70-80$ before. I feel this course contributed much to this improvement. The remark of a science supervisor who was asked to examine and evaluate the proposed program tends to support the need for achievement of the goal of self- understanding . He remarked that in his experience in working with science teachers he has found that self understanding on the part of the teacher is basic to his being able to work effectively with teachers. Special Considerations In Chapter III special consideration was given to the following topics: 1. Staffing. 2. Financing. 3. Size of participating group. k. Facilities and equipment. 5. Departmental and institutional support. 169 6. Prerequisites and. participant selection procedure, 7. Credits and grades. 8. Maintenance of an acceptable level of academic performance. Fach of these topics will now be considered in terms of the information obtained from the experimental offering of the proposed program. The qualifications of the director of the pro gram as outlined, on pages 99 and 100 do not seem less important to the.author after his experience as direc tor of the experimental offering. Several participants indicated the fact that a program such as the one proposed will require special skills and understandings on the part of the director. During the experimental program the director was the complete staff, therefore he was given a good sample of the kinds of responsi bilities and difficulties supporting staff members could be expected to do and the kinds of problems they might encounter. During the Spring Quarter offering of the program the director played the role of errand, boy much of the time. This experience was not unex pected for the experimental stage, but once the pro gram is established, the amount of nonproductive activities should be greatly reduced. 170 The Physics Department of The Ohio State Uni versity supplied the necessary financial assistance for the operation of the experimental program. The expenses of the experimental offering were limited to the purchase price of Polaroid film, repair parts, maintenance supplies, and new equipment. These ex penses can not be projected to determine an estimate of the operational cost per quarter of an actual pro gram. The make-shift nature of the experimental pro gram, which would be typical of most experimental programs of the type of the proposed program, tended to blur any effort to project a cost estimate. The participants paid their own tuition and other regis tration fees or, in the case of the participants from the Academic Year Institute, had National Science Foundation support for their tuition and registration fees. The group during the Spring Quarter had only seven participants. The participation of another teacher during the earlier phases of the program makes a total of eight who provided evaluation data. During the Winter Quarter the author had anticipated a group of fifteen participants, but when the Spring Quarter began only seven of this group were actually registered for the program. Experimental apparatus and facilities 171 were more than adequate for a group of seven teachers. The small size of the group tended, to encourage a closer relationship among the participants and also make the coffee break crowd small enough for everyone to be able to enter into the discussions. An evalua tion of the group dynamics of a gi'oup of approximately thirty teachers cannot be made from the results ob tained from a group of seven teachers. The idea of a small group of about ten teachers may have more merit than a larger group, but the results of this study do not support the advantages of any size group over another. The facilities and equipment for the experi mental offering of the proposed program were primarily in and from the Physics Department of The Ohio State University. Two rooms were used. Equipment for the experiments of the experimental program was obtained from equipment that had been formerly used in the "Mature of the Physical World" course that had been taught several years ago under the leadership of Professor Hesthal; from the PSSC equipment (regular and advanced, topics); from the introductory, inter mediate, and advanced physics laboratories; from the Department of Electrical Engineering; and from the Center for Science and Mathematics Education. One participant spent a large portion of his time during the Spring Quarter working with nuclear physics equip ment of the Center for Science and Mathematics Educa tion in Arps Hall. The make-shift nature of the Spring Quarter experimental program necessitated a great deal of borrowing of equipment, but as the program begins to be offered, on a regular basis the practice of borrowing equipment should decrease. The experimental program did demonstrate that there is a considerable amount of equipment available on the campus of The Ohio State University that can be used on Saturdays to support a program such as the one proposed. The Physics Department and the other departments and groups that were asked for•assistance at The Ohio State University gave the experimental offering of the proposed program their fullest cooperation. No request for advice, assistance, or equipment from any of these groups was denied. The proposed program was not advertised; therefore it is doubtful that very many faculty members in the Physics Department were aware of the program. The support of those who had the responsibility for making decisions and giving approval was readily available throughout the past two years during which the proposed program was evolving. 173 The participants in the experimental offering of the proposed program had a minimum of 25 quarter hours in physics prior to their enrollment in the experimental program. Four of the participants had. had experience in an in-service program similar to the PlSSC In-Service Institute held at The Ohio State Uni versity during the past several years. The other four participants had teaching experience and backgrounds in physics that indicated their potential for having a profitable experience in the experimental program. None of the participants in the experimental program turned out to be a misfit, Fach of the teachers enrolled for three credit hours of Fhysics 693. As discussed in Chapter III, those who enroll in Physics 693 are given either a satisfactory grade (S) or an unsatisfactory grade (F). The work of each participant was satisfactory. Had the director been asked to give a letter grade for each of the participants, he would have had some dif ficulty In assessing such a grade because of the lack of emphasis on grades of the program. The breakdown of the pre- and post-test schedule contributed to absence of performance indicators. The experience of the experimental program brought out the need for some kinds of performance indicators during the 1?4 quarter in addition to the final grade at the end of the quarter. A participant in the physics program during the Autumn and Winter Quarters participated during the Spring Quarter in the organic chemistry program described on page ^ 3- The participant reported that there were many similarities in the approaches of the two programs, but the absence of pressure for a high grade in the physics program made it a much more stimulating and enjoyable experience. The maintenance of an acceptable level of academic performance was not a problem during the experimental offering of the proposed program because all of the participants were highly motivated and conscientious teachers. It is interesting to note that several of the participants commented on the vulnerability of the approach of the proposed program due to its lack of structure and safeguards against the nonmotivated teacher who is simply looking for some easy credit hours in physics. This vulnerability was pointed out by several of the experienced teachers who were asked to evaluate the approach of the proposed program and by others who have examined the plan of the program. The problem of what to do about poor students is not new, nor is it easily solved. As mentioned earlier (p. 117) the local context will in some measure help determine a minimum level of performance. This level of performance provides an exit door for those not willing to expend a reasonable amount of effort. In the final analysis, the director has control of the reputation of the program. If he allows the course work of the program to become iden tified with the easy little-effort courses of a col lege or university, he will in large measure defeat the goals of the program. On the other hand, the director also must guard against the temptation to upgrade the teaching profession by giving only low grades. One factor that is quite clear from the literature and the experience of the author is that of the recognition of the difference of performance expectation between the research physicist and the professional teacher. Operational Procedures The operational procedures of the proposed pro gram are discussed in Chapter III (pp. 122-149). Consideration was given to the (1) meeting schedule, (2) mechanics, and (3) activities. The evaluation procedures have already been considered in connection with the self evaluation goal (pp. 167, 168). These 1 ?6 topics will now be discussed in terms of the experi ence gained from the experimental offering of the proposed program. The regular meeting schedule was on Saturdays from 8:30 a.m. to 12:3° a.m. In addition to the Saturday schedule the laboratory space used in the experimental offering was available to the partici pants during the week. Members of the Academic Year Institute were able to take advantage of the facili ties on weekdays. In-service teachers made use of the facilities during their Easter vacations. The in- service teachers found that four hours on Saturdays were hardly adequate for the work they wanted to do. This was partly because their weekday schedules were full of school work and other responsibilities during the Spring Quarter; therefore they did not find time for much beyond the laboratory preparation. Past experience in the PSSC In-Service Institutes at The Ohio State University would indicate that the in- service teacher who begins his institute in the Autumn Quarter has the opportunity to plan his work load and other responsibilities to include time for preparation for Saturday sessions. The participants who were mem bers of the Academic Year Institute were able to spend more than four hours per week in the laboratory and they were generally able to do more experimental work than the in-service teachers whose laboratory time was practically limited to about four hours per week. The problem of getting busy in-service teachers to spend time in preparation for the Saturday sessions was brought out by the experimental offering of the in- service program. One suggestion was to try to plan some of their Saturday work in such a manner as to be able to use the results of that work during the fol lowing week as a part of their teaching program. This suggestion proved helpful in a few instances, but it also resulted in more work for the teacher. The expe rience of the experimental program seemed to indicate that consideration should be given to either extending the Saturday sessions or malting some provision for a two credit hour per quarter enrollment instead of the planned three credit hour per quarter enrollment for teachers whose work loads make it too difficult to make the necessary weekday preparations for the Satur day sessions. The activities outlined in Chapter III (pp. 127- 135) proved to be I'epresentative of the kinds of activities the teachers actually performed. The form, A Proposed Study Plan (Appendix I), had not been for malized prior to the beginning of the experimental 178 offering. Interviews with each participant were held, to outline a plan of study prior to the first week of the experimental program. The need for some guidance at this stage led to the development of the form, A Proposed. Study Plan. The programs of study outlined by some teachers did not prove to be the actual programs of study in every detail. The two participants who had taken part in the pilot study of the proposed pro gram during the Winter Quarter were able to plan and follow their program of study. Several who had not participated in the Winter Quarter pilot program found it quite difficult to verbalize their interests and needs. This difficulty resulted in proposed study plans that were not followed in every detail. The initial interview and the task of outlining a proposed plan of study d.id. help the teachers make their entrance into the unstructured, individualized pro gram. One teacher indicated that he found it very difficult carefully to examine his backgi’ound and interests to determine the topics he would like and need to study. This was because, prior to his expe rience in the proposed program during the Spring Quarter, he had generally accepted the fact that his inclinations did not matter very much since in his 179 previous educational experiences he had always “been told what he must do. The need for guidance in the keeping of a log book and in taking data so as to indicate their preci sion led to the development of the form, Information on How to Keep a Log Book (Appendix II), and the pro gramed instructional materials, Frror Systems (Appen dix III). The procedure for the Introduction of programed instruction was discussed earlier (p. 130). The experience of the experimental program led the author to the conclusion that the introduction of this aspect of the proposed program should be introduced during the first week rather than later. The other aspects of the program tend to relate logically to an individualized, laboratory approach, whereas programed instruction does not easily fit into such an approach. This observation led the author to consider either the possibility of excluding the programed instruction aspect of the program or placing it into a position of greater importance. The latter of these considerations was accepted., thus programed instruction was stressed, more heavily In the description of the proposed program than it was stressed during the experimental program. The coffee break activities were noted by several participants to be one of the most helpful 180 and interesting aspects of the experimental program. The smallness of the participating group was advanta geous for group interaction. The experience of the author in the PSSC In-Service Institutes where about thirty participants were involved in the mid-morning coffee brealc would seem to Indicate that a large group does not tend to foster group interaction. This observation led the author to consider the possibility of varying the coffee break routine so as to include a variety of experiences. Some of these experiences will involve all members of the group. Others will be conducted on a small group basis. These considerations should not be construed as attempts to detract from the fact that the coffee break is basically a coffee break and not a formal session that includes the drinking of coffee. Evaluation of the Approach of the Proposed Program Based on Interviews and. Questionnaires Research evidence to evaluate the general approach of the proposed program was obtained from interviews with experienced science teachei's and super visors; from an evaluation questionnaire that thirty teachers completed; and from a written evaluation sub mitted by Robert G. Sauer who participated to a limited 181 degree in the experimental offering of the proposed program while teaching the Physical Science for Non science Students program at The Ohio State University. A list of the eight teachers and supervisors who were interviewed as a part of the evaluation of the proposed program is given in Appendix XIII. Pour of these individuals visited the facilities of the experimental program and the other three were introduced to the proposed program and interviewed by the author. A brief description of the proposed in-service program in physics for experienced secondary school science teachers was prepared to introduce the program to a group of teachers in the Columbus area who had indi cated a willingness to complete the evaluation ques tionnaire. This description is found in Appendix XIV. The evaluation questionnaire is given in Appendix XV. A summary of the responses to the questions of the evaluation questionnaire for a proposed in-service program in physics for experienced secondary school science teachers is found in Appendix XVI. The infor mation sheet filled out by all personnel who partici pated in the evaluation of the proposed program is given in Appendix XVII. Some of the results of the interviews and the written evaluation have been incorporated into the 182 earlier evaluation considerations. M l of the results from these sources will be included in the criticisms and summary of the evaluation that are to follow. The results of the analysis of the responses to the eval uation questionnaire (Appendix XVI) are as follows: 1. A large majority (90 per cent) of the teachers who completed the evaluation questionnaire shared the conviction of the author that there is a need for additional physics courses related di rectly to the needs and interests of the secondary school science teacher. 2. Approximately one-half of those who completed the questionnaire did not think their background in physics was adequate for them to compete with physics majors in physics courses at the intermediate level and only two of the thirty teachers felt qualified to take advanced level physics courses. 3. Most of the teachers (83 per cent) felt graduate level physics courses designed for secondary school science teachers would be more helpful for in-service teachers than the regular 183 intermediate and advanced level physics courses, A. Only one of the thirty teachers could not think of topics in physics that he would like to study. 5. A large majority (93 per cent) of the teachers felt there was a need for individualizing instruction in secondary schools today. 6 . All of the teachers indicated they would prefer an individualized rather than a formal classroom approach for their in-service program. 7. Eighteen of the thirty teachers (60 per cent) indicated they had had a physics course that utilized an individualized approach and six teen of the eighteen (87 per cent) noted that the experience had been profitable and helpful. Eleven teachers indicated they had. never had such a course, but all eleven indicated they would be interested in having such an experience. m 8 . Most of the teachers (87 per cent) indicated some familiarity with the developments in programed instruc tional materials. 9. Just less than one-half (d7 per cent) of the teachers indicated they had had some experience using programed materials. 10. Just over one-fourth (27 per cent) of the teachers indicated some experience in the preparation of programed materials. 11. Host of those who completed the evaluation questionnaire (87 per cent) indicated interest in learn ing how to prepare simple programed materials. 12. A large percentage of the teachers (80 per cent) said the use of pro gramed materials impressed them as a potential aid in their teaching responsibilities. About the same number (73 pel' cent) indicated that programed materials impressed them 185 as a potential aid for their future learning experiences. 13. Only 63 per cent of the teachers indicated that the use and prep aration of programed materials should be an important part of the proposed program. One-third (33 per cent) of the remaining teachers were uncertain about the importance of the inclusion of the programed instruction aspect of the program. 1^. None of the teachers indicated knowledge of a better approach to the proposed, physics program than the individualized approach, host of the teachers (80 per cent) favored the individualized approach while the remaining teachers (20 per cent) remained uncommitted. Comparison of the laboratory approach to other approaches to in-service education shows a. that most (93 per cent) prefer the laboratory to the lecture approach b. that about three-fourths (73 per cent) prefer the laboratory to the lecture- demonstration approach c. that only about one-fourth (27 per cent) prefer the laboratory to the lecture- demonstration-laboratory approach d. that just over three-fourths (77 per cent) prefer the laboratory to the seminar- discussion approach. Less than one-half (43 per cent) of the teachers felt that what they had learned utilizing a laboratory was more helpful than xfhat they had learned utilizing other approaches. About the same number (37 per cent) 187 \ indicated uncertainty as to the response they should make. 17. -All the teachers agreed that one of the best ways to learn a topic is to have to teach that topic. '18. Host (80 per cent) felt the teach- to-learn principle should be in cluded in the proposed program while the others expressed uncer tainty about how they should respond to the question. 19. All but one of the teachers (97 per cent) indicated their educational background had been along the lines of a highly struc tured educational system. The lone exception made 110 comment about his educational background. 20. Less than one-third indicated they might have difficulty adapting to an unstructured approach as a learner. Almost one-half (47 per cent) indicated they might have difficulty adapting to such an approach as a teacher. 188 21. One-third of the teachers indi cated they might have some initial difficulty accepting the fact that they were not going to be told what to do in a program such as the pro posed program. A larger percentage (40 per cent) felt they would have no such initial difficulty. The remaining 2? per cent of the teachers were uncertain. 22. Almost three-fourths (70 per cent) of the teachers indicated that their upbringing in science had tended to be of the "follow the steps and get the answer" type. 23. Over three-fourths of the teachers (77 per cent) did not consider time used in the trial and error approach to an experiment a waste of time. Only two of the thirty (7 per cent) considered such time as wasted.. 24. The time required to obtain careful t quantitative results for some types of experiments was considered well 189 spent time by just over one-half (53 per cent) of the teachers. Less than one-fourth considered it a waste of time. 25. Over three-fourths (78 per cent) of the teachers felt they should have an understanding of simple differential and integral calculus. Only two of the thirty teachers did. not feel such a need. The others were uncertain or failed to comment. 26 . Less than one-half of the teachers (^3 per cent) had an understanding of simple calculus, 27. Over three-fourths (80 per cent) of those who completed the evalua tion questionnaire indicated that the inclusion of the mathematics aspect of the program was worth while. Only two of the thirty (7 per cent) did not feel such an inclusion was worthwhile. 28. The self-understanding aspect of the proposed program was considered to be potentially helpful by almost all of the teachers (97 per cent). None felt it was unreasonable to include self-understanding as one of the goals of the program. There was mixed feeling on whether or not such a goal is attainable. One- half of the teachers felt that it was attainable and the majority of the remaining teachers were uncer tain on how to respond. Most (90 per cent) felt that such a goal is related to science educa tion. Suggestions and Criticisms Several suggestions and criticisms of the pro posed. in-service physics program were included among the evaluation resources. These suggestions and. criticisms will be listed and briefly discussed. The suggestions are as follows: 1. Some introduction to the computer and its use should be included in the program. This suggestion was made by several teachers and has been 191 considered for inclusion on several occasions by the author. In the near future, if not at present, teachers will be expected to be knowledgeable about the com puter and its use. Some teachers have recognized this trend and provision has been included in the proposed program for such teachers to work with a study of digital and analog computers. During next year’s offering of the in-service program at The Ohio State University the par ticipants will have access to elec tronic calculators. The flexible nature of the proposed program should permit the program to evolve so as eventually to include greater emphasis on the computer. Presently the economic factor makes the use of the computer with its many facilities, including computer assisted instruc tion, out of reach to the majority of secondary schools. This situa tion is moving toward its elimination, but for the next five to ten years the urgent need, seems to be for use of programed instruc tional materials and various ver sions of teaching machines. The use of programed materials and teaching machines should help pave the way for computer assisted in struction in the secondary school. Teaching machines should find their way into the proposed in-service program in physics in the near future as the next step after the use of booklet forms of programed materials. Thus the author’s response to the suggestion about the introduction of the computer and its use is to say "not yet." Programed materials as they exist today are largely rather poorly prepared, therefore care must be exercised in the intro duction of programs in mathematics and physics to avoid the bad taste of a poor introduction to pro gramed instruction. This suggestion was made by several teachers who had experience in the preparation and use of pro gramed materials. It seems to indi cate the need for not only selecting good programs for use but also intro ducing criteria by which a teacher can judge the quality of a given pro gram. The subjective evaluation of the "feel" of a given program was about the only evaluation criterion found in the authorls review of the literature. Considerable discussion and study of the subject of evalua tion criteria seem to be going on at the present time; therefore hopefully some guidance will soon be available. This discussion brings out the fact that many of the aspects of programed instruction are still in their in fancy. Due to the shortage of high quality programed inst2*uctional materials, the author’s response to the suggestion is that (1) we will have to use the materials that are presently available, but we will include an introductory word of caution; and (2) we will attempt to use the best programs available and develop a procedure for evalu ating programed materials. Rather than require all par ticipants to develop an understand ing of introductory calculus, a less direct approach could be used.. By encouraging the study of topics that require such an understanding the teacher could more readily appreci ate the need for such an understand ing . This suggestion is in keeping with the general approach and philos ophy of the program in general, but in this instance the feeling of the author is that the understanding of simple calculus is essential to the study of physics; therefore the more direct approach lias been taken. A balance is necessary between the learning value of the struggle involved in getting an experiment started properly and the value of getting an experiment completed in the easiest and quickest possible way. In order to achieve such a balance, each participant could begin the quarter by doing a sep arate experiment. As the quarter progresses the repetition of a given experiment by other members of the group should be designed to allow the mistakes of the first experimenter to be passed on to later experimenters. This proce dure would save considerable time and still not completely lose the feel for the difficulties one could expect in performing the experiment from scratch. This suggestion was implemented to some degree during the experimental offering of the Spx’ing Quarter. The implementation of the proposal was unplanned, but nevertheless seemed to work well. There is danger of losing out on the learning experi ence that comes from struggle to get experiments into operation if the approach of the suggestion is carried to an extreme. The director will have to exercise enough leader ship to prevent the abuse of proce dure suggested. The participants’ proposed plan for the quarter will also tend to decrease the possibility of one teacher’s talcing undue advan tage of the work of other teachers in the group. Since the participants who had a well defined plan of study seemed to be able to profit more from their work, it would seem advantageous to involve the participants in more planning prior to the first session of the program. The spirit of the suggestion led to the introduction of the devel opment of the form, Proposed Study Plan. After a participant is involved, in the program for one quarter this problem largely takes care of itself. At the beginning of the first quarter of the program some provi sion should be made to help the teacher make the transition from the typical "cook book" approach to the unstructured approach to labora tory instruction. This could include an introduction to the operation of some of the standard laboratory instruments and the performance of one or two experiments of the veri- ficatlon variety in which more sophis ticated laboratory techniques are included. This suggestion points out the need for more structure in the earlier stages of the program. This need is recognized, but the shock and frustration method of getting into a new situation also has its merit. A 198 balance between the two approaches will be attempted. 7. To reduce the temptation of having a teacher base his selection of study topics on the setup of experiments he may see, the experi mental apparatus should be kept on a shelf rather than in a fixed, location. This suggestion has its merits, but the facilities of the rooms in which the program takes place may preclude such an arrangement. 8. Teachers could be given the opportunity to tour the graduate laboratories to gain some idea of the research that is underway and the methods of approach to this research. Hopefully this suggestion can be incorporated into the program and professors can be found who will present their research in terms that are understandable by secondary school science teachers. 199 9. Teachers could, include the production of eight millimeter movies and/or slides related to their exper iment which they would use in their teaching. Hopefully this suggestion can be incorporated into the program. During the Spring Quarter one of the participants did a project sim ilar to that which has been suggested. Some care would have to be exercised to prevent such activities from distracting the teacher from his exp e r im ental wo rk. 10. Fvery effort should be made to give the teachers the feel for science as it is— a live and vital enterprise, y^men. The ci'iticisms of the proposed in-service physics program are as follows: 1. The unstructured approach includes too many opportunities for careless and low quality work. One of the most important needs of sec ondary school science teachers is 200 that of learning to do careful and high quality work. This criticism can not be denied. The process of learning to engage in self-directed learning must include the potential for making mistakes and doing work of quality below the standards established by others. Hopefully the guidance of the director and other participants in the proposed program and the pro gram itself will tend to improve the quality of teachers' self-directed learning, 2. Mot enough direction is pro vided for such basic skills as report writing, data taking, and data analysis. The general approach of the pro gram lends itself to general criticism of lack of direction. After several quarters' experience with the program many of the information gaps should be filled. As an information gap becomes apparent, an information block to fill the sap should be programed for use by later participants. Both the in-service teachers and the director should be expected to par ticipate in the preparation of pro gramed instructional materials for this need. The lack of direct supervision and grades on the various aspects of the program throughout the quarter will tend to allow the teachers to become careless about such details as keeping their log books up to date and completing the report for one experiment before starting another experiment. This criticism does point out the necessity for a considerable amount of informal supervision by the director and his staff. It im plies the need for the director to keep posted on the week-by-week progress of the participating teachers. This will not be an easy task and. will require a large amount of the director’s time during the week. The procedure of submitting a carbon copy of each session’s work and of the partici pant’s weekday work should help the director keep posted on each partici pant’s progress and help him know which teachers are in need of assistance. The time demands on the director of such a program are excessive. This criticism was supported by the experiences of the experimental offering of the proposed program. As the shortcomings of the program a.re reduced., this time demand should decrease, .Also supporting staff mem bers can be trained to carry most of the routine responsibilities of the program. Even with these aids, the director will still have to spend a considerable amount of time in connec tion with the program each week. The fact that the program meets only on Saturdays will require discipline on the part of the director to keep the daily time requirements from eating into the time requirements for the Saturday program. The laboratory approach to instruction is an inefficient approach to meeting the needs of the teachers for improved factual understanding of physics. This criticism was raised by several teachers who were involved in the evaluation of the proposed program. The criticism is based on the assumption that improved under standing of the facts of physics was the most urgent need of secondary school science teachers. This need is recognized by the author to be extremely great, but more basic seems to be the need to experience the learning of physics on an individual basis so that teachers learn to study and learn physics in contexts outside the formal classroom. 204- 6. Grades for the proposed program cannot be given objectively. If giving objective grades means giving grades on the basis of a set of numbers recorded in a grade booh, then the author agrees with the criticism. But if there are other ways of evaluating performance other than pencil and paper tests, homework assignments, and laboratory report grades, then the criticism is open to question. It is the conviction of the author that there are ways of arriving at an objective evaluation of a stu dent’s performance in addition to those usually included in calculating grades. Hopefully, the evaluation procedures outlined in Chapter III (pp. 135-1^2) will prove adequate. If they do not prove adequate, they will be changed. 7. The program seems to be too ambitious in that it attempts to include as its goals more than is 205 humanly possible. The program might be better if fewer goals were sought. Time will tell if this criticism is correct. If the criticism is valid and. the program suffers from its multi ple goal appi'oach, some aspects of the program will be eliminated. 8. The approach of the proposed program is open to the charge that some have made against the progres sive education movement--there is no point in talking about the processes of education, or science, if there is not a factual (pi'oduct) base to which these processes may be applied. The balance of product and process could be upset in the proposed program if an undue emphasis on either product or process is allowed. The use of the programed instructional materials in physics and mathematics must be encouraged by the director in order to maintain the factual base upon which the processes of science must rest. 206 9. The program is open to abuse by teachers looking for courses in physics that are not as rigorous as regular physics courses. This criticism has been dis cussed in connection with the eval uation of the aspect of the program related to the maintenance of an acceptable level of academic per formance (pp. 174, 175). Summary of the Fvaluation of the Proposed Program The experimental offering of the proposed pro gram provided, the following evaluation results: 1. The research and development center approach was shown to offer consid erable merit as the basic approach to the proposed program. 2. Of the thirteen goals stated for the proposed program (pp. 88-90), direct evidence was given to support the belief that the first, second, third, seventh, eleventh, and twelfth goals have been satisfactorily achieved during the experimental offering. Ho evidence was obtained to support the belief that the fourth goal had been achieved. Partial evidence was obtained to support the belief that the fifth, sixth, tenth, and thir teenth goals have been satisfactorily achieved. Indirect evidence, based on the achievement of other stated goals was used to support the belief that the eighth and. ninth goals have been satisfactorily achieved.. 3. The special considerations necessary for the proposed program were satis factorily met. The operational procedures of the experimental offering demonstrated the feasibility of the operational procedures of the proposed program. The evaluation of the approach of the propos program based on interviews and questionnaires pro vid.es the following supporting evidence: 1. There is a need for graduate level physics courses for in-service secondary school science teachers. 203 Teachers are interested in par ticipating in an individualised laboratory type in-service pro gram in physics. Teachers are interested in learn- ing about the use and preparation of programed instructional mate rials . The teach-to-learn principle is recognized, by teachers as a prin ciple they support and believe should be incorporated in the proposed, program. 5. The unstructured approach to learning is an innovation in edu cation about which teachers have mi:-:ed feelings. 6. The process emphasis to science teaching is recognized as important and should, be included, in the pro posed program. Knowledge of calculus is recognized as essential for advanced studies in physics. The aspect of the pro posed program that includes the use of programed, materials in mathe matics is generally recognized as an important part of the program. The goal of fostering self- understanding and mutual under standing is generally recognized as a potentially helpful aspect of the proposed program. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions This study represents an effort to make a contribution toward, the solution of the problems (1) of providing graduate level course work in physics for in-service secondary school science teachers; (2) of providing direct experiences in the use of programed instruction, individualized instruction, and. the processes of science; and. (3) of meeting the individual needs of in-sex>vice science teachers who come from a diversity of back grounds in experience and training. It was hypoth esized. that (1) a special physics program can be planned to meet many of the special needs of the in-service secondary school science teacher, and (2) in-service secondary school science teachers will learn new methods of learning-teaching science as they arc given the opportunity to experience these new methods in a graduate course designed specifically for them. 210 211 A special physics program was planned, to meet many of the special needs of the in-service secondary school science teacher. This program is described in Chapter III, The program was experimentally tested and the evaluation results indicate that it met special needs such as the needs for experiences in the proc esses of science, in the use and preparation of pro gramed instructional materials, in the utilization of an individualized approach to instruction, in the utilization of the teach-to-learn principle, and in self evaluation and understanding. As a consequence of the evaluation results outlined in Chapter IV, the first hypothesis was accepted. The group of in-service secondary school sci ence teachers that participated in the experimental offering of the special physics program were given the opportunity to experience new teaching-learning methods in a graduate course designed specifically for them. The experimental results reported in chapter IV give some indication that certain of the participants were going to attempt (1) to utilize a more individualized approach in their teaching, (2) to make greater use of programed instructional materials, and (3) to ex periment with less structured approaches to learning. These indicators demonstrate that some learning of 212 new methods of learning-teaching science did take place during the experimental stages of the special physics program. These indications do not prove that all of the science teachers who were given the oppor tunity to experience new teaching-learning methods actually learned these new methods; therefore the second hypothesis can be accepted only with reserva tion. The overall results of this study indicate that a special physics program such as the one described in this study can be expected to make a positive contribution toward the solution of the problems listed in the first paragraph of this chapter. In our day of rapid change, the need for in-service edu cation that is related, to the needs of secondary school science teachers must be met. To accomplish this, there is desperate need, for both research and development in the area of in-service education. This study is to be understood as a part of the early stages of efforts to bring in-service education out of its traditional role of making better teachers out of poor teachers and into its new role of equip- ing teachers for the task of reforming secondary sciiool science education. Two factors, the educa tional climate of change and educational technology, are already placing pressure on existing approaches to secondary school science education. In the immediate future this pressure can be expected to increase to a much greater degree. Teachers within the secondary school are going to be increasingly confronted with pressures for change. As these teachers are given the opportunity to experience and understand, some of the fruits of educational tech nology as a part of their in-service education, they can be expected not only to understand such fruits, but also to contribute to future developments in this realm. As they are given the opportunity to experi ence the evolving nature of science instruction, they can be expected not only to understand, such a process, but also to become a part of the evolving process. The results of this study have demonstrated that science teachers will grow in their understanding of the fruits of educational technology and will grow in their appreciation of the evolving nature of sci ence instruction if they are given the opportunity to experience these trends in a special in-service physics program designed for them and their needs. Having established the hypothesis that a special physics program can be planned to meet many of the special needs of the in-service secondary 214- school science teacher, there remains the task of introducing such programs into colleges and univer sities so that secondary school science teachers may be given the opportunity to participate in them. A program similar to the special physics program pro posed in this study will be presented as an in- service institute at The Ohio State University during the 1968-1969 school year under the leader ship of Dr. VJilliam H. Riley. The ground work for a similar program will be under-ray at Haigazian College in Beirut, Lebanon, during the 1968-1969 school year under the leadership of the author. Implications The results of this study can be projected in several directions. Some of these directions are as follows: 1. If the approach of the special physics program proposed in this study is anything like that of the trends In the approaches to secondary school science educa tion, the approach and some aspects of the special physics program should be projected into programs for pro-service education of science teachers. 2. If the special physics program is maintained on a high level of academic performance, it should have a contribution to malce to the teaching of physics to physics and science majors, and to nonscience majors. 3. Since many of the aspects of the proposed special physics program are related to ideas that are being developed and utilized in elementary science education, the approach and most aspects of the proposed program could possibly be developed into an in-service program for elementary teachers. Recommendations The following is a list of topics recommended for future study: 1. The nature of this study has been largely developmental; therefore a next step would be to take the 216 various aspects of the special physics program as it is being offered, and subject them to a careful study to determine their relative merits, their strengths and weaknesses, and their value in terms of present and future teacher needs. 2. A follow-up evaluation of the special program should be made after the program has been in use for a complete school year. 3. As trends in science teaching become established the program should adjust to those trends; therefore a careful study of trends in science teaching and their implications for pre- and in-service education should benefit future versions of the special physics program. b. The special physics program would lend itself to a study of the organ' ization of learning experiences. The special physics pi'ogram would lend itself to a study of the development of in-service teachers in particular and teachers in g eneral. The special physics program over a period of years would, lend itself to the study of the processes of change in in-service physics pro grams in particular and science education in general. APPENDIX I Name______ A PROPOSED STUDY PLAN The purpose of this form is to assist you in the planning of topics for study during this quarter. One of the aims of this program is to permit you to study the topics you feel you need and want. This form does not represent a binding contract. The gen eral areas of study are listed below. You may indi cate the general area or areas of your interests by underlining one or more of the areas listed. . I. ACOUSTICS 2. ELECTRICITY, MAGNETISM, AND ELECTRONICS 3. ELECTRON PHYSICS 4. IDEAL GAS 5. HEAT AND THERMODYNAMICS 6. MECHANICS 7, NUCLEAR PHYSICS 8, OPTICS 9. WAVE MOTION .10. GENERAL (Topics from all areas) II. OTHER______ 218 219 In the space provided below and on the back of this sheet, list any special ideas, topics, experiments, or projects that you would like to work with this quarter. APPENDIX II HOW TO KEEP A LOG EOOK Your log book will serve as a diary and a report manual. In general your log book should in clude an explanation of what you are doing and why you are doing it so that your log book will be intel ligible to someone who has no previous acquaintance with the experiment, and so that your notes and data can be analyzed later without confusion or ambiguity. As far as possible, your log book should contain a record of everything you do in the laboratory and as preparation for the laboratory. The typical log book used in this program will contain such items as the following: 1. The date of each notation and activity. Each page, or each group of data or entries if this covers more than one page, should be dated. 2. Motes related to plans, problems, decisions, ideas, and objectives. 3. All information and data— preliminary, final, good, bad, and indifferent. All 220 221 information and data should bo recorded directly into the log boolc. Do not take information and data on scratch paper to be copied into your log book later. Do not erase anything. Draw a line through incorrect readings or comments and write in the margin the number of the page where corrections and explanations may be found. Graphs and diagrams— since the pages of the log book are numbered, these items may be referred to in your final summary, or during the analysis or discussion of your data. 5 . A summary report to be included at the end. of each experiment. This report will include final calculations in tabular form, a summary of the results of your experiment, a critical discus sion of the experiment and results, and the supporting information, or reference to where this information may be found, to d.escribe your experi ment adequately. 6 . Reading notes that include reference notation and a brief statement of 222 what is to be found in the reference. Unless detailed theory or information has direct and immediate bearing on your experiment, it should not be included in your log book. A ref erence in your log book to related theory and information is usually adequate. Suggestions concerning specific procedures for making entries into your log book are listed as follows: 1. Neatness and legibility are essential. 2. Leave wide margins for notes and comments that you may wish to add and for use by the director. Avoid crowding. 3. Use headings and subheadings throughout to indicate clearly the organization and progress of the experiment. ^ . Data should always be of the direct reading variety. Scale factors and other information necessary for the representation of the data in its final form should, be included x\Tith the direct readings. You should, not make scale factor corrections in your head while taking data. Fach reading or set of readings should include your estimate of accuracy. When in doubt about whether or not to include a given item of informa tion, always include that item. Too much data is permissible, but too little data is deadly. APPENDIX III ERROR SYSTEMS This program is intended for use in college and advanced secondary school laboratory experiments. The objectives of the program are as follows: 1. To understand the purpose of making an error analysis. 2. To understand the classification of errors. 3. To understand the types of correction for errors. 4. To understand the terminology and use of the following in the calculation of errors: Maximum possible error Percentage of error Arithmetic mean Numerical deviation from the mean Average deviation Dispersion Standard error Percentage error of the arithmetic mean 5. To develop skill in making computations in volving dependent variables with errors. 224 225 6. To understand a. percentage error from a standard value b. percentage error for a repeated whole experiment A. The Purpose of Frro2’ Systems 1. The purpose of making an ei’ror analysis is to determine quantitatively the accuracy of a given experiment. The purpose of making an error analysis is to determine (qualitatively) (quantitatively) the (accuracy) (correctness) of the performed experi ment . (quantitatively)(accuracy) 2. In a scientific experiment the word "error" has a technical meaning. "Fi'ror" generally implies uncertainty in the measurement and calculation of quantities rather than an actual mistake (oi.' an oversight) on the part of the experimenter. In a scientific experiment the word "error" has a technical meaning and generally implies ______in the measurement and calculation rather than an actual mistake on the part of the experimenter. (uncertainty) 3. For a given experiment to be valid it must be reproducible, i.e. we must be- able to duplicate the conditions in successive experiments and to obtain consistent results within specific tolerance limits. The tolerance limits are indicated by the margin of error. 226 a. For a given experiment to be valid it must be (1) absolutely correct (2) reproducible (3) designed to give the right results (2 ) b. For the 2’esults of an experiment to be valid they must be (1) within specific tolerance limits (2 ) approximately correct (3) correct (1) c. Tolerance limits are indicated by the margin of (error) d. The purpose of error analysis is to deter mine (1 ) quantitative (2 ) qualitative (2) true measure of the accuracy of an experiment. (1 ) e. "Frror" as it is used in error analysis impli e s (1 ) mistakes (2) inaccuracy (3) uncertainty in a given measurement or calculation. (3) 227 B, Classification of Errors 1. Errors may be classified into systematic or random groups. Errors may be classified into systematic or groups. (random) 2. Within these two groups there are arbitrary subdivisions related to the direct causes of such errors. The cause of an error may be termed environmental, personal, or instru mental. Often the cause of the error is not known; often there are overlapping causes of error that are difficult to pinpoint. a . The source of an error mav be termed personal, or instrumental. (environmental) b. The source of an error is always identifiable. (True) (False) (False) 3. Random errors are errors of chance that may lie beyond the control of the experimenter. They may lead to bi-directional results, with values that are too high and/or too low. ■ The magnitude of random errors reflects the skill of the observer. The following are examples of random errors: a. Fluctuations in readings due to irregular power supply (instrumental- random) b, External Electromagnetic Field influ ences when the effects are variable (environmental-random) 228 a. Fluctuations of room pressure or tempera ture is an example of random-environmental error. (True)(False) (True) b. Observer inexperience is an example of random-personal error. (True)(False) (True) c. A faulty meter that consistently reads too high is an example of random-instrumental error. (True)(False) (False) It's instrumental but not random. d . Inability to use an instrument properly is an example of random-personal error only if errors are made in both directions. (True)(False) (True) 4. Systematic errors are essentially one- directional deviations where the magnitude remains nearly constant through successive readings or experiments. A faulty instru ment may consistently read too high. Many instruments are calibrated at a given tem perature or pressure, and systematic errors may result if an experiment is conducted under different temperature and pressure conditions. Personal errors are systematic when they are all in one direction. 229 a. Errors that are essentially one-directional deviations where the magnitude remains almost constant through successive readings are called errors. (systematic) b. Errors may be classified as either or random groups. (systematic) c. Three arbitrary subdivisions related to the direct causes of these two groups of errors are environmental, personal, and (instrumental) d. Errors of judgment may be classified as random-personal errors if they are made in (one)(both) direction(s). (both) e. If a measuring device made of copper were used to measure lengths inside a hot oven and the device was designed for room tem perature measurements, the error introduced would be classified as a error. (systematic-instrumental) C. Correction for Errors 1, The best correction for errors is to avoid them as much as possible by exercising the utmost care in taking and using experimental data. Even when considerable care has been exercised, some error will still be present because there is always some uncertainty in every measurement or calculation. 230 a. Frror can be eliminated, in some experiments. (True)(False) (Fals e) b. Frror is always present because there is always some in every measurement or calculation. (uncertainty) c. In a given experiment error can be reduced by (1) taking absolutely correct readings (2) exercising the utmost care in taking readings (1) 2. Random or chance errors can be reduced by repeated readings, repeated calculations, or repeated experiments when the readings, the calculations, and the experiments are care fully made. Systematic-instrumental errors can be z'educed by checking instruments against reliable standards. Good reasoning will help to find an experimenter’s systematic errors. Once systematic errors are detected, allow ances may be made for the errors by the intro duction of a corrective quantity or factor. a. Repeated readings help reduce (random) (systematic) errors. (random) b. Reliable standards help reduce (systematic) (random) erro rs. (systematic) 231 D. Calculation of Errors 1, The results of an experiment may be judged good or bad by the non-scientist, but the scientist does not accept such a judgment because good or bad is imprecise. The sci entist is interested in determining whether or not the results of a given experiment are within the accuracy limits established by the measurements and calculations associated with the experiment. Simple statistical means may be used to determine the probable accuracy limits of a given experiment. a. The results of a given experiment are judged by a scientist to be (1) good or bad (2) within the accuracy limits of the experiment (3) beautiful or ugly (2 ) b. The probable accuracy limits of a given experiment may be determined by the use of simple ______means. (statistical) 2. The determination of the maximum possible error of a single reading is an essential step in the calculation of errors. The reading of the markings on most meter sticks will be used to explain the system for determining and indicating the maximum possible error. Since the meter stick is usually divided into cen timeters and millimeters there is little dif ficulty in securing a reading to the nearest whole millimeter. If the length of an object that is being measured exceeds the last milli meter marking, or is slightly short of some millimeter marking, the experimenter may adopt the nearest millimeter value--and the 232 maximum possible error would be + 0.5 of a millimeter. As an example of this procedure, the reading of the meter stick shown is 9 6 o 5 _J L! 1 1 1 J yV The maximum possible numerical error is + .5 mm or + .05 cm and the reading would be recorded as 59.80 £ .05 cm. The maximum possible numerical error is usually equal to one-half of the smallest division shown to the nearest whole number. a. Given the scale shown, the maximum possible numerical error would 0 be units and the reading indicated would be ______t units. (+ 0.5 units)(24.0 + 0.5 units) b. Given the scale shown, the maximum possible numerical error would be ______unit(s) and the reading indi cated would be ______units. (+ 0,1 unit)(65.6 +0.1 units) c. Given the voltmeter scale shown, the maximum possible numerical 0 error would be ______volts and the reading A indicated would be ______volts. (+ ,2 or + .3 volts)(2.5 + 0.2 volts or 2.5 + 0.3 voIts) 233 3. The percentage of error is another useful way to express the maximum possible error. The percentage of error is obtained by dividing the maximum numerical error by the adopted reading and then multiplying the quotient by 100. For the meter stick example percentage of error = maximum numerical error x -^qq _ adopted reading .t.0,5-X_ I0Q = .084% 59.80 a. The percentage of error for the scale shown in 2-a is given by percentage of error = maximum numerical error x ^qq _ adopted reading % 0 .5 x 100 _ 2 17 24.0 b. The percentage of error for the scale shown in 2-b is given by percentage of error = % 0.2 x 100 _ goj 2.5 4. Rather than accept the finality of a single measurement, the experimenter may wish to take more than one measurement. When several read ings are made of a single item, the average 23^ value of the readings may be used for calcula tions, etc. The average value of a set of readings is calculated in the same manner that the average score on a classroom test is calcu- lated--the sum of the individual values divided by the number of values in the set. The aver age value is called the arithmetic mean and is represented symbolically as .ZLfe. where stands for the sum of the individual values and n stands for the number of values. The arith metic mean (A.M.) of four readings (or scores) of 95, 100, 80, and 85 is found as follows: A M — 95 + 100 + 80 + 85 _ 360 _ gQ 4 4 a. The average value is called the __ and is represented symbolically as (arithmetic mean)(-LJi) n 5. In section 2 of this unit on the calculation of errors only readings that fell almost exactly on a scale division were considered, In practic e we usually do not encounter read- ings of th is type. Often the indicator will fall betwe en two of the scale divisions. For the meter stick shown the reading should be recorded as 59.82 + .05. 5 <7 6 , 1 1 1 1 L_ 1 1 1J— or 59.83 + .05. The bar over the last digit ind icates doubt, a. On the scale shown at the right, the arrow indicates a reading of ______units. f (27.Id + 0.5 units) 235 b. On the scale shown at the right, the arrow indicates a reading of ______volts. (2.65 + 0.1 volts) 6. The procedure for calculating numerical deviation and average deviation is illustrated by the following: Assume the length of a rod is measured three times and the results were 61.52, 61.57, and 61,55 +_ .05 cm. The illustration shown below illustrates how the arithmetic mean (A.M.), the individual numerical deviations (D), and the total devia tion (X|d | ) are calculated. The arithmetic mean and the numerical devia tions would be Numerical Reading (cm) Deviations (cm) = -0,02 Dx = 61.52 L 1 = 61.52 Di l2 = 61.54 d2 = +0.00 -61.54 l3 = 61.55 d3 = +0.01 etc. R = 184.61 _ 61. 54 = A. M . m = 0.03 Addition n = 3 is not algebraic, i.e. it is the total deviation or the sum of the absolute values. 236 a. Given the set of four readings of voltage shown, find X R , A.M., 5jD , and the values of D. Numerical Reading (Volts) Deviations (Volts) V, = 19.83 Dx = V2 = 19.85 D2 = = 19.80 D3 = V/, = 19.89 D/, =: £ R = - A.M. - I|D| volts n ^ volts ( ZR = 79. 37) (A.M. = 19.84 (DX = -.01) (l|D|= .11) volts) (Do = + .01) (D3 = -.04) (°4 = + .05) b. The total deviation is the algebraic sum of the individual numerical deviations. (True ) (False) (False) 7. The average deviation is defined as the total deviation (X|D |) divided by the number of readings (n), i.e. A. D. = 2-Id I . For the n previous example A,D. = = .01 The average deviation gives the observer some index of precision. The probable result ob tained from the three readings of the example of the previous section can now be written as: L = 61.57T + .01 The figure + .01 is more accurate than the figure + .05 that would have been used if only a single measurement of length had been taken. 237 a, If the arithmetic mean (A.M.) is 19.84 volts; the total deviation (X|d|) is 0 .11; and the number of readings (n) is 4; the probable result can be written as volts. (19.84 + .03 volts) b. The value of R was recorded as 127.lT + .05 cm The maximum possible error is + cm. The percentage of error is %. (+.05)(y27 = .04%) c. If two readings, 127.17 and 127.13 cm, were taken, the value of the arithmetic mean (A.M.) would be cm. The total deviation would be cm. The average deviation would be cm. The probable result would be written as cm. (127.15cm)(.04cm)(.02cm)(127.15 + ,02cm) 8. The dispersion of a set of readings is defined by the formula j ( Z]d | )2 (Total Deviation)^ Dispersion = A = •Jk——r------■; ‘ n number of readings and is calculated so as to give the observer some indication of the variance or dispersion or spread of readings from the average value. If the total deviation of four readings is found to be 0.11 volts, the dispersion will be (.003) 238 9. The standard deviation of a set of readings is defined by the formula Standard Deviation = /( HlD' )^ = n Dispersion = /lI.otal Dgviationl2 number of readings If a set of 10 readings is found to have a total deviation of 0.100 the value of the dispersion will be ______and the value of the standard deviation will be ___ (j± = .01 )( .01 = 0 .1) 10. The percentage of error of the arithmetic mean is defined as the average deviations (A.D.) of the individual readings times 100 and divided by the arithmetic mean (A.M.), i.e. % Error of A.M. = A ',®' x 100%. Thus the probable result A.M. is written as A.M. + % Error. a. If the average deviation of a set of readings is found to be .02 and the arithmetic mean is 61.54, the percentage error of the arithmetic mean will be ___ %. ( 2 = .03) 6l. 54 b. The probable result in terms of °t o error for the expression of 10-a would be ±~~ % • (61.54 + .03%) 239 11. In order to review this unit on the calcula tion of errors a comparison of the error analysis of a single reading will be made to the error analysis of a set of readings. Error Analysis of a Error Analysis of a Single Reading Set of Readings Given = Given = 65.38 65.36 65.38 + .05 cm L2 = 13 = 65.39 65.40 Percentage 14 = of Error = + D1 = d2 = Probable Result = d 3 = + % D4 XR = A.M. = ___ cm Probable Result = _____ cm Average Deviation (A.D.) = Dispersion = ______Standard Deviation = ______Percentage of Error of A.M. = Probable Result = ____+ _____% (7o Error = (£R=261.53) (D1=.00) = +.08%) (A.M.=65.3^) (D2=-.02) 65 (Probable (03=+.01) (P.R. = 65.38 + .08%) Result= (D4=+.02) 65.38+.01cm)(X|D| = .05) (A.D.=.01) 4 (Dispersion=— jr = .0006) (Standard Deviation=.02) (%Error= Q 100-. 0 13% or 65.38 .0 2% (P.R.=65.38+.02%) 240 12. The goal of error analysis is to determine the probable result in terms of the percentage of error. An error analysis may become tedious, but it is an important part of most scientific reports. E, Computations Involving Dependent Variables With Errors 1. In the preceding units only the deviations or errors of single independent variables were considered. The problem of computation with dependent variables that have associated error values will now be considered. Various rules govern the procedure to be followed when making various types of computations. In both addition or subtraction the rule is to retain the numerical sum of the individual numerical deviations. For example, if a formula called for the addition of X and Y: and X = 3.75 +_ .03 units Y = 1.23 + .01 units . the sum X+Y = 4.98 + .04 units For subtraction, X - Y, the result would be expressed as X - Y = 2.52 + .04 units If X = 6.28 + .09 cm The sum X + Y + Z = Y = 10.32 + ,07 cm + cm Z = 16.00 + .10 cm The quantity X + Y - Z - + cm (X + Y + Z = 32.70 + .26) (X + Y - Z = 0.60 + .26) 241 2, In both multiplication and division the rule is to add numerically the error percentages as follows: X = 3.75 + 0.87o Y = 1.23 + 0.8% (X)(Y) = (3.75)(1.23) + (±0.8% + 0.8%) = (3.75)(1.23) ± 1.6% = 4.61 + 1.6% X/Y = + (0.8% + 0.8%) = 3.05 + 1.6% ■■ ■ ■— - ■ ...... a. If X = 4.00 ± .04 Y = 2.00 + .01 j the expression for X in terms of percentage j error is 4.00 ± _____ % j and the expression for Y in terms of percentage error is 2.00 + _____ % r~4 +1 II • 07.X+I = 0.5%) |+ 4>|4> b. Using the values of X and Y f rom 2-a \7 c/ the sum A. + Y = + /o and the difference X - Y = + % (X + Y = 6.00 + 1.5%) (X - Y = 2.00 + 1.5%) The rule for powers and roots is to multiply the index of the exponent by the percentage of error, e.g. for squaring, multiply the percentage error by 2 and for taking the square root, multiply the percentage error by 1/2, As an example, if X = 4.00 + 1.0% and Y = 2.00 + 0.5% or X = 4.00 + .04 units or Y = 2,00 + .01 units X2 = (4.00)2 + (2 x 1.0%) = 16.0 + 2.0% X = (4.00)^ + {h x 1.0%) = 2.00 + 0.5% ( X)(Y)3 = (4.00)'2 + (k x 1.0%) (2.00)3 + (3 x 0.5%) = (2.00)(8.00) + (0.5 + 1.5)% = 16.0 + 2.0% 2X-10Y = Y-X (2)(4.00)+(0.0+l.0%) - (10)(2.00)+(0.0+0.5%) (2.00-4,00)+(.04+.01) = (3.00+ 1,0%)-(20.0+0 .5%) (-2.00+.05) = (8.00+.08)-(20±. 1) = -12.0+.18 -2.00+2.5% -2.00+2.5% 2^3 a. For X = 4.00 + 1.0% and Y = 2.00 + 0.5% or X = 4,00 + ,04 or Y = 2.00 + .01 find the following: X + Y = + X - Y = + (X)(Y) = + % X + % i " (X2 )(Y) = + % ( X)(Y) 4 = + % X + Y _ + X - i (X + Y = 6.00 + .05) (X - Y = 2.00 + .05) (X)(Y) = 8.00 + 1.5%) (£ = 2.00 + 1.5%) (X2)(Y) = 32.0 + 2.5%) ( X)(Y) = 32.0 + 2.5%) X + Y _ 6.00 ± 0.8% X - Y ” 2.00 + 2.5% = 3.00 + 3.3% F. Other Common Error Systems 1. There are many error systems other than those developed in units D and E. Two simple systems that are commonly used in simple experiments are called (1) the percentage of error from a standard value and (2) the per centage error for a repeated whole experiment. The percentage error from a standard value is used when an experiment consists of comparing results with known accepted values. Percentage error from a standard value is defined as Measured Standard Percentage = Value ~ Value lnn error Standard Value 2 ^ If the experimental value of the acceleration due to gravity (g) is found to be 985.2 cm/secs^ and the standard value of g for the given latitude and location is 980.1 cm/sec^ the percentage _ 985.2 - 980.1 x ^qq error 980.1 = = .521% 980.1 In a given experiment the value of the charge on an electron (e) is found to be 1.610 x 10”^ coulombs and the standard value of e is 1.602 x 10”19 coulombs, the percentage error i s ______7o. = .5%) 1.6 In many experiments it is not feasible to take repeated individual readings of each observa tion due to the nature of the experiment. In this case, the experimenter may complete an entire experiment with single readings of each variable, and then compare the final results of the successive experiments in the manner described in Units D and E, The experimenter may determine percentage error for an experi ment which is repeated by using the relation Percentage Error = ~ R I x 100 R2 + R ^ Percentage error for a repeated whole experi ment is used when the results R^ and R 2 are equally valid and equally uncertain. As an example if the results of two successive identical tests are R.^ = 100 and R 2 = 110, the Percentage __ 110 - 100 x ^qq _ 1000 _ 4 gy error 110+ 100 210 245 The results of tx^jo successive identical tests are = 230 and R 2 = 250. The percentage error for the repeated whole experiment = 7fO 9 (4.1%) APPENDIX IV A GUIDE TO THE PREPARATION OF SIMPLE PROGRAMED INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS Some of the aspects of programed, instruction date back more than 2000 years to Socrates. Thorn dike’s work with stimulus-response theories and Pressey’s work with testing machines are among the modern forerunners of programed instruction. The concept of programed instruction that is evolving currently dates back to the mid-1950’s and the work of Skinner and Holland. In addition to the contribu tions made to programed instruction by psychologists and educators, there have been contributions by military and industrial personnel. Programed instruc tion is still in its experimental stage. Some of the characteristics of programed in struction or programed learning are listed as follows: 1. Assumptions clearly stated. 2. Objectives explicitly stated. 3. Logical sequence of small steps. k. Active Responding (to get response, must be active). 2^6 247 5. Immediate feedback (check on correct ness is immediate). 6. Individual rate. 7. Constant evaluation (of program via students1 responses and of students' progress). The programing process can be outlined in terms of the following steps: 1. Select subject matter to be programed. In the early stages of learning to prepare programed materials it is essential that the subject matter selected for programing be elementary and short. 2. Clarify the assumptions to be made about such things as the ability, achievement, reading level, back ground , and interests of the learners for whom the program is to be prepared. 3. State the objectives of the program in terras of what the learner will be expected to do upon completion of the program. 4. Select a programed model. In the early stages of learning to prepare programed materials the linear model 2^8 is the only practical model to choose. Other models including variations of the linear model, the branching model, and variations of the branching model may be introduced. 5. Organize the subject matter to be programed in a logical sequence. 6. Construct step-like programed sequences. The construction of programed items or frames can be developed along several patterns. The patterns of filling in the blank, selection of the proper word from a choice of two or more words, multiple choice selection, yes-no selec tion, or combinations of these patterns may be utilized, in the process of frame construction. A simple pattern is to relate a simple block of information sind then construct a frame or series of frsimes to reinforce the idea or ideas of that block of information. Review fx’ames should be included in the pro gramed sequence. 7. Test the efficiency of the program on a group of learners. 8. Fvaluate the program, 9. Fdit and revise the program. 10. Repeat the test-evaluate-edit-revise sequence until the program is acceptable to its author and. the learner group for which the program is designed. The preparation of programed instructional mate rials is not a simple task that can be mastered by learning to recite the steps of a programing process. The programing process can be learned only by becoming actively involved in the task of program preparation. Several suggestions that should help bridge the gap between the theory and practice of program preparation are listed as follows: 1. Tork through several programs in physics and note the patterns of frames and responses. Select a good program in science— the director will help you in this matter— and follow the pattern of that program for your first program. 2. In the selection of your first program preparation topic, choose a topic that requires only a few sentences or a paragraph to cover. This should keep the length of the program to less than five pages of frames and responses. 3. Avoid the common pitfalls of (1) verbosity, (2) failure to select the key and/or sig nificant id.eas and words as response ideas and words, (3) failure to include suffi cient review items, (A) making the required responses too simple or too difficult, (5) requiring the same response too fre quently in a sequence, (6) overuse of a particular kind of response, and (7) fail ure to select significant questions. The programing process outlined represents an effort to make it possible for the science teacher actually to become involved in the preparation of simple programs. The technical terminology of pro gramed instruction has been avoided.. For a teacher to go beyond the introductory stage of program prep aration, more understanding of the terminology and techniques of programed instruction should be sought from the literature related to program preparation. A common feature of programed instructional materials is the use of pre- and post-tests. This feature could be incorporated into the introductory stage or postponed, to a later stage. APPENDIX V PARTICIPANT EVALUATION SHEET Note: This evaluation is basically for your benefit. Its contents will be known only by the director, your self, and those with whom you may wish to share its contents. Name______. Quarter______ Teaching Position______Date______ I. Experiment Performance O-Far exceeds normal requirements TR E-Exceeds normal requirements P E E G-Meets normal requirements L CP 0 S-Meets minimum requirements A H 0 V U-Does not meet minimum NNRE requirements N IT R I Q I A N u N L Experiment G E G L Title: 0 Dates: E Starting G Completion S U Title: 0 Dates: E Starting G Completion S U 251 252 T R P E E L C P 0 A H 0 V N N R E N I T R I Q I A N u N L Title: 0 Dates: E Starting G Completion S U Title: 0 Dates: E Starting G Completion S U II, Personal Evaluation Satis Poor factory Good Excellent Helpfulness Responsive to Advice & Hein Reliability Industry Quickness Thoroughnes s R e a t.ne.s s. Punctuality Leadership Potential 253 Remarks about personal evaluation: III. General Performance In the space below and on the back of this sheet, A. Relate what programed materials you have used, what programs you have prepared, and your evaluation of these experiences. B. Comment on circumstances that hindered or helped your performance this quarter. C. Give yourself a grade for this quarter (A,B,C,D,E) and give a brief overall eval uation of your experiences this quarter. D. Make any remarks or comments you wish. APPFNDIX VI EXPERIMENTS The list of potential experiments that will he presented should be interpreted, as representative rather than exhaustive. Resources of time, money, and personnel will obviously influence the quality and quantity of specific apparatus available for a program such as the proposed program in a given context. Some of the experiments that will be available at The Ohio ■State University during the '1968-1969 school year are listed, as follows: A. Acoustics 1. Sonometer 2. Resonant pipes 3 . Vibrating strings Ultrasonics— Velocity of Sound B. Electricity, magnetism, and electronics 1. Cathode ray oscilloscope 2. Coulomb*s experiment 3. Wheatstone bridges 14-. Direct current circuits 5. Alternating current circuits 254 255 6. Transient analysis of R-C, R-L, and R-L-C circuits 7. Resonant circuits ■ 8. Transmission lines 9. Tangent galvanometer and measure ment of magnetic fields 10. Magnetic circuits 11. Electric field, plotting: 12. Magnetic field plotting 13. Electrostatic deflection of an electron beam 14. Magnetic deflection of an electron beam 15. Force on current carrying con- a* ductor in a magnetic field 16. Charge on Capacitor 17. Thermoelectricity 18. Vacuum tube characteristics 19. Transistor characteristics 20. Vacuum tube amplifiers 21. Transistor amplifiers 22. Feedback oscillators 23. Logic circuits 24. Joule heating and ohms law 256 C. Electron physics 1. Thermionic emission: Schottky-effect 2. Franck Hertz experiment 3. Photo electric effect: Measurement of h/e k. e/m for electrons a. Leybold apparatus b. Welch apparatus c. Thompson method d. PSSC apparatus 5. Hall effect 6. Geiger counter discharge mechanism 7. Millikan oil drop experiment a. Welch oil drop apparatus b. PSSC apparatus S. Electron diffraction 9. Brass reflection— Microwave model D. Ideal gas 1. Boyle’s law 2. Charles’s law 3. Gas discharge phenomena as a function of pressure Mechanical gas model 5. Brownian motion Heat and Thermodynamics 1. Calorimetry 2. Thermal expansion 3. Mechanical equivalent of heat k. Thermoelectricity 5. Thermal conductivity 6. Thermal radiation 7 . C^Ycv Ruchardt1s method 8. Pyrometer temperature measurement 9. Change of phase Mechanics 1. 3ahr free fall 2. Atwood's machine 3 . Kat e r pendulurn 1. Torsion pendulum 5. Friction 6. Surface tension 7. Cavendish "G" 8. Forced vibrations: Resonance 9. Development of Newton's second law from experimental data 10. Particle collision 11. Ballistic pendulum 12. Young's modulus and Hoolc's law 13. Conservation of energy 1^. Angular momentum (PSSC) 15. Search Rotational Dynamics Appai'atu a. Conservation of Angular Momentum fox’ concenti'ic disks b. Moments of inertia c. Ellipsoid of inertia d. Angular momentum of an object moving in a straight line e. Angular accelei'ation as a function of applied torque f. Conservation of energy Nucleax* Physics 1. Absorption of Gamma x'adiation 2. Absoi’ption of Beta radiation 3. Invei'se square law for Gamma radiation Nuclear resolving time of a geigei* count ex.' 5. Statistics of nuclear counting 6. Geigei'-Mull ex' countei's 7 . 3a c kg ro und. i’ad iation 8. Geiger tube efficiency and instrument efficiency 9. Shelf ratio '10. Alpha particle x’an g e in air* Measurement of the half-life of a radioactive nucleus Cloud chamber experiments a. Diffusion cloud chambers b. Wilson expansion type cloud chamber .cs Fraunhofer diffraction Fresuel diffraction Polarization Young's experiment Measurement of wave lengths a. Replica seating spectrometer b. Single prism spectrometer c. Cenco spectrometer d. PSSC spectrometer Spectral lines of Palmer series and determination of energy levels in hydrogen atom Michelson interferometer a. Gaertner instrument b. PSSC apparatus Fabry Perot interferometer Thin lens systems Absorption spectra Resolving power and resolution 260 12. Air wedge experiment 13. Newton rings 14. Reflection and refraction 15. Geometrical optics experiments on the optical bench 16. Laser experiments a. Interference and diffraction b . Fresnel zones c. Airy’s disks d. Polarization e. Hichelson’s interferometer 17. Photometry I. Nave Notion 1. Schilling acoustic radiator 2. N i c rowave optics 3. Periodic motion and simple harmonic motion 4. Ripple tank experiments 5. Flow ripple tank experiments 6. Nelde's experiment J. Miscellaneous 1. Molecular layers 2. Look and wonder experiments a. Study of CO2 fizz 261 b. Terminal velocity study of particles falling through viscous mediums c. Boiling water d . Diffusion and dissolution 3 . The use of the polaroid camera and strobe light to x'ecoi’d motion and collisions Probability and statistics 5. A study of crystals 6. Introduction to analog computers 7. Relativistic kinematics and dynamics (PSSC advanced topic) 8. The Viang Electronic Calculator APPENDIX VII SAMPLE EXPERIMENT INFORMATION SHEETS The experiment information sheets shown on the following pages represent a sampling of the kinds of information sheets that the participants will receive for some experiments. Other experiments will be such that no instruction sheets will be available. Some of the instruction sheets shown were developed and used in connection with Physics 616, Advanced Physical Laboratory, at The Ohio State University over the past several years. Some of the Physics 616 instruction sheets have been adopted without modifica tion for use in the special physics program for in- service teachers and others have been modified. 262 263 Experiment A 2 Resonance Frequencies of Closed and Open Pipes. Objectives : To measure the resonance frequencies of closed and open pipes and to determine the velocity of sound in various gases. To calibrate the driving oscillator and to survey the natural resonances of the loudspeaker and microphone. Instructions: Investigate the pipe open at both ends, the pipe open at one end and the pipe closed at both ends, in that order. Use gases other than air only in the pipe closed at both ends. References: Shortley and Williams, Elements of Physics (2nd ed.) R. H. Randall, An Introduction to Acoustics P . M . Morse, Vibration and Sound Rayleigh, The Theory of Sound 2 6k Experiment A 3 Characteristic frequencies of a vibrating string. Objectives: To determine the characteristic frequencies of a vibrating string as a function of the mass per unit length of the string and of the tension in the string. To calculate the velocity of the wave on the string. References: Short ley and Williams, Elements of Physics (2nd ed.) R. H. Randall, An Introduction to Acoustics P. M. Morse, Vibration and Sound Rayleigh, The Theory of Sound 265 Experiment A 4 Ultrasonics: Measurement of Sound Velocity Objectives: To study the properties of ultrasonic waves. To measure the velocity of sound in water by pulse techniques. i References: Vigeroux, P. Ultrasonics Wood, A. B. A Text Book of Sound Special Notes 266 Experiment E 1 The Cathode Ray Oscilloscope Note: This experiment should not be elected by students who are familiar with oscilloscope operation. Objectives: To study the operation and applications of the cathode ray oscilloscope. To calibrate the voltage and frequency scales of the oscilloscope. To calibrate an audio oscillator in terms of standard frequencies by means of Lissajous figures. To prepare a simple R-C phase-shift network and, using the oscilloscope, to compare the measured phase shift with the calculated value over a range of frequencies, References: H, A. Romanowitz, Fundamentals of Semiconductor and Tube Electronics. Chapter 2 Malmstadt, Enke, and Toren, Electronics for Scientists. Chapter 1 J. F. Rider and S. D. Uslan, Encyclopedia on Cathode Ray Oscilloscopes and Their Uses. Chapter 5 (Basic Oscilloscopes), Chapter 14 (Phase and Frequency Measurements), Chapter 13 (Basic Pulse Measurement and Observation). 26? Advanced Objective: To study the use of the oscilloscope for pulse measurements. A square-wave generator or, preferably, a pulse generator may be used in order to observe: 1. pulse characteristics (e.g. rise time, width, etc.) 2 . external triggered operation of the oscilloscope 3. effect of termination of signal cables 268 Experiment E 7 Resonant Circuits Objectives: To investigate the properties of resonant cir cuits as a function of frequency and circuit parameters. A sine-wave generator and vacuum tube voltmeters and/or oscilloscope may be used to study series and parallel R-L-C circuits. Your measurements should pro vide quantitative answers to the following questions: 1. What is the "Q" of each circuit and on what does it depend? 2. How quickly does the frequency response of each circuit fall off away from the resonant frequency? (Make a log-log plot.) 3. Your measurements involve the "steady state" response of these circuits. What is meant by this term? 4. What are "the mechanical quantities analogous to R , L, C and what arrangements of these would correspond to the circuits which you studied in this experiment? What mechanical variables correspond to charge, current, etc.? Can you give other analogies? References: Halliday and Resnick, Physics for Students of Science and Engineering. Chap. 38. H, A, Romanowitz, Fundamentals of Semiconductor and Tube Electronics. Chap. 1. F. W. Constant, Theoretical Physics-Mechanics. Chap. 6 , Sec. 7 and 8. H. F. Olson, Dynamical Analogies 2 69 Advanced Objectives: To investigate the transient response of R-L-C circuits, A square-wave generator and an oscilloscope may be used. Your measurements should provide quanti tative answers to the following questions: 1. What is meant by 11 transient" response? 2, What is meant by "critical damping," "over damping," "underdamping"? How does the degree of damping depend on R , L, C? References: G. P. Barnwell, Principles of Electricity and Electro magnetism. Chapter 13. R. Littaner, Pulse Electronics. Chapter 2, Section 8 . Von Tersch and Swago, Recurrent Electrical Transients. Chapter 3. J. Millman and H. Taub, Pulse. Digital, and Switching Waveforms (1965), Chapter 2. 270 Experiment EP 3 The Photoelectric Effect, Einstein's Photoelectric Equation Objectives: To study the phenomenon of photoelectricity, With a special photocell record current vs voltage curves for each of several different frequencies of incident radiation. Determine the stopping potential VQ for each frequency f. From the curve of VQ vs f determine h/e. References: Richtmyer and Kennard, Intro, to Mod. Physics J. D. Stranathan, The Particles of Modern Physics Hughes Sc DuBridge, Photoelectric Phenomena Zworykin 6: Ramberg, Photoelectricity Herring Sc Nichols, Revs. Mod. Phys. 2JL., 220 and 266 (1949) Apker, Taft Sc Dickey, Phys. Rev, 7_3, 46 (1948) and 74, 1462 (1948) Special Notes 271 Experiment EP 4 Measurement of e/m for Electrons Objectives: To determine the value of e/m for electrons by measuring the radius of curvature of the trajectory of electrons moving in magnetic fields. To determine the value of e/m for electrons by use of the PSSC apparatus and to compare results ob tained by use of either the Lybold or the Welch e/m apparatus. References: PSSC Laboratory Manual Stranathan, The Particles of Modern Physics Harnwell and Livingood, Experimental Atomic Physics Nazooka, Phil. Mag. 4_1 , 377 (1921) Special Notes 272 Experiment EP 5 The Hall Effect Objectives: To investigate the Hall effect as an example of galvanomagnetic effects in solids. To determine the Hall voltage as a function of current and magnetic field, and to determine the Hall constant for various materials. From these data, to determine the sign and concentration of the majority charge carriers in the material. References: Sproull, R. L., Modern Physics for Engineers KiHell, C., Introduction to Solid State Physics (2nd Ed.) Lindberg, 0., Hall Effect. Proc. Inst. Radio. Eng. vol. 40, p. 1414 (November 1952) Jan, J. P., Galvanomagnetic and Thermomagnetic Effects in Metals. Advances in Solid State Physics Volume 5 (1957) 273 Experiment PE 6 Geiger Counters Objectives: To investigate the properties and uses of Geiger counters. To measure the threshold and plateau for the counter. To investigate counting losses and statistical fluctuations. References: Corson & Wilson, Rev. Sci. Insts. 19, 219 (1948) Circular 490 of the National Bureau of Standards D. H. Wilkinson, Ionization Chambers and Counters H. G. Stever, Phys. Rev., ,61., 38 (1942) Parratt & Hempstead, Jour. Appl. Phys. 22,, 1502 (1951) Lewis, Electrical Counting 274 Experiment EP 7 The Millikan Oil Drop Experiment Objectives: To measure the charge on the electron by the Millikan oil drop experiment. To study the relationship of this experiment to the general problem of the determination of atomic constants. To compare results obtained using the PSSC apparatus with those obtained using the Welch oil drop apparatus. References: J. B. Hoag & S. A. Korf, Electron and Nuclear Physics R . A . Mi11ikan, Electrons (+ and -). Protons. Photons. Neutrons. Mesotrons, and Cosmic Rays R. T. Birge, American Journal of Physics JL3, 63 (1943) J. W. M. DuMond & E. R. Cohen, Reviews of Modern Physics 25_, 691 (1953) PSSC Laboratory Manual APPENDIX VIII BIBLIOGRAPHY OF EXPERIMENT RESOURCE BOOKS Baird, D. C. Exper imentat ion. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1962. Beiser, Arthur, ed. The World of Physics. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1960. Beiser, Arthur. Concepts of Modern Physics. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1963. Beyer, Robert T. Foundations of Nuclear Physics. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1949. Bornstein, Lawrence. Calculus for the Physical Sciences. New York: Appleton-Century-Crafts, 1966. Bornstein, Lawrence. Trigonometry for the Physical Sciences. New York: Appleton-Century-Crafts, 1966. Brown, Thomas Benjamin. The Llovd William Taylor Manual of Advanced Undergraduate Experiments in Physics. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison- Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1959. Committee on Apparatus for Educational Institutions of the American Association of Physics Teachers. Novel Experiments in Physics. New York: American Institute of Physics, 1964. 275 276 Crane, H. R. Programmed Math Reviews. New York: Appleton-Century-Crafts, 1966. Cutting, Theodore A. Manual of Spectroscopy. Brooklyn, New York: Chemical Publishing Co., Inc., 1949, Dike, Paul H. Thermoelectric. Thermometry. Philadel phia: Leeds and Northrup Company, 1954. Feynman, Richard P.; Leighton, Robert B.; and Sands, Matthew. The Feynman Lectures on Physics. 3 vols. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison- Wesley Publishing Company, 1963. Frank, Nathaniel H, Introduction to Electricity and Optics. 2nd ed, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1950. Freeman, Ira M. Physics Made Simple. Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1965. Freier, George D. University Physics--Experiment and Theory. New York: Appleton-Century-Crafts, 1965. Frelter, William B. Introduction to Experimental Physics♦ New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1954. Friedman, Francis L., and Sartori, Leo. The Classical Atom. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1965. Gray, Dwight E. American Institute of Physics Handbook. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1963. Gunther, W. A, The Physics of Modern Electronics. Translated by David Antin. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1967, Halliday, David, and Resnick, Robert. Physics for Students of Science and Engineering. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1963. 277 Headquarters Staff of the American Radio Relay League. The Radio Amateur's Handbook. 43rd ed. Concord, New Hampshire: The Rumford Press, 1966. Heinke, Clarence H. How to Use a Slide Rule. Columbus, Ohio: By the Author, 688 S. Reming ton Road, 1956. Hesthal, Cedric E. The Study of Physical Phenomena, rev. ed. Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State University, 1959. Hoag, J. Barton, and Korff, S. A. Electron and Nuclear Physics. 3rd ed. New York: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1948. Hodgman, Charles D. Standard Mathematical Tables. 12th ed. Cleveland, Ohio: Chemical Rubber Publishing Co., 1959. Ingalls, Albert G., ed. Amateur Telescope Making-- Advanced. New York Munn and Co., Inc., 1967. Jenkins, Francis A,, and White, Harvey E. Fundaments of Optics. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1957. Joseph, Alexander, and Leahy, Daniel J. Proerammed Phvsics. 5 parts. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1967. Kaplan, Irving. Nuclear Physics. 2nd ed. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1962, Kruglak, Haym, and Moore, John T. Basic Mathematics for the Physical Sciences. New York: McGraw- Hill Book Company, Inc., 1963. Lapp, Ralph E., and Andrews, Howard L. Nuclear Radiation Physics. 2nd ed. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1954. 2 78 Lowenberg, Edwin C. Theory and Problems of Electronic Circuits, New York: Schaum Publishing Co., 1967. Lysaught, Jerome P., and Williams, Clarence M. A Guide to Programmed Instruction. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1963. Mager, Robert F. Preparing Instructional Objectives. Palo Alto, California: Fearon Publishers, 1962. Malmstadt, H. V.; Enke, C. G.; and Toren, E. C., Jr. Electronics for Scientists. New York: W. A. Benjamin, Inc., 1962. Michelson, A. A. Studies in Optics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1927. Millikan, Robert A. The Electron. Edited by Jesse DuMond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1924. Minor, Ralph S., and White, Harvey E. Laboratory Exercise in Physical Optics. Berkeley, California: James J. Gillick and Co., Inc., 1947. Morgan, Joseph. Introduction to Geometrical and Physical Optics. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1933. Orear, Jay. Fundamental Physics. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1961. _____ . Programmed Manual for Students of Funda mental Physics. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1962. Palmer, C. Harvey. Optics. Experiments and Demonstra tions . Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1962. Parratt, Lyman G. Probability and Experimental Errors in Science. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1961. 279 Pearse, R. W. B. , and Gaydon, A. G. The Identification of Molecular Spectra. 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1963. Physical Science Study Committee. Physics. 2nd ed. Boston: D. C. Heath and Company, 1963. ______. Phvsics-Laboratorv Guide. 2nd ed. New York: D. C. Heath and Company, 1965. RCA Receiving Tube Manual. Harrison, New Jersey: Radio Corporation of America, 1966. RCA Transistor Manual. Harrison, New Jersey: Radio Corporation of America, 1967. Rider, John F., and Uslan, Seymour. Encyclopedia on Cathode-Rav Oscilloscopes and Their Uses. 2nd ed. New York: John F. Rider Publisher, Inc., 1959. Rogers, NEric M. Physics for the Inquiring Mind. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1960. Schaum, Daniel, and van der Merwe, Carel W. Theory and Problems of College Physics. 6th ed. New York: Schaum Publishing Co., 1961. Schulz, E. H., and Anderson, L, T. Experiments in Electronics and Communication Engineering. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1943. Shuncliff, William A, Polarized Light. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1962. Sears, Francis Weston, and Zemansky, Mark W. Univer sity Physics. 2nd ed. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1955. ______. College Physics. 3rd ed. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., I960 280 Series, G. W. Spectrum of Atomic Hydrogen, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1957. Shortley, George, and Williams, Dudley. Elements of Physics. 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall,'Inc., 1961. Smith, Alva W. Electrical Measurements. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Edwards Brothers, Inc., 1941. Smith, Charles C., and Pollrand, George J. Using the Science Study Series. Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., n.d. Smith, Ralph J. Circuits, Devices, and. Systems. Mew York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966. Sproull, Robert L. Modern Physics. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1963. Staff of Texas Nuclear Corporation. Laboratory Manual for a Course in Nuclear Physics. Austin, Texas: Texas Nuclear Corporation, 1959. Strong, John. Procedures in Experimental Physics. Mew York’s Prentic e-Hal I*, Inc., 1938. Taylor, Lloyd William. College Manual of Outics. Boston: Ginn and Company, l92'4\' Teaching Machines, Incorporated. Algebra Refresher— A Programed Textbook. 3rd ed. Mew York: Teaching Materials Corporation, 1965. Thomas, C. A.; Davies, I. K.; Openshaw, D.; and Bird, J. 3. Programmed. Learning in Perspective. Chicago"! Educational Methods, TncTi 1*963. Twyman, F. Prism and Lens Making. 2nd ed, London: Hilger and Wafts Ltd., 1952. Weast, Robert C. , ed. Hand.book of Chemistry and. Physios. 46th ed"! Cleveland, Ohio": The Chemical Rubber Co., 1965. Wilson, E. Bright, Jr. An Introduction to Scientific Research. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1952. 281 Wood, William P., and Cork, James M. Pyrometry. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., Wl. Zahn, Paul D., and iSher, Lawrence A. Physics Lab Manual. New York: Monarch Press, Inc., 1966. APPENDIX IX FVAL U AT10 N QU F S T 10 MNAIRF for Participants in the Experimental Offering of the Proposed Frogram in Physics for Experienced Secondary School Science Teachers Please respond to the following questions or state ments to the best of your ability. 1. List the experiments that you have completed this quarter and indicate approximately the number of hours (include both hours spent in the laboratory and hours spent in preparation outside the laboratory) that you spent on each experiment. 2. Evaluate your learning experience this quarter in the three areas listed below by indicating whether the experience was very helpful, help ful, questionable, or detrimental. Remarks related to your responses will be appreciated. a. Factual knowledge of physics. b. .Appreciation of the individualized approach to instinction. c. Understanding of the preparation and use of programed instructional mate rials . 282 283 3. List any experiences that you may have had during this quarter and as a part of this program that have been helpful. 4. List the experiences of this program that hin dered your moving along in the program at the rate you would have prefered. 5. Comment on the help you received from other participants in the program. 6 . Comment on the help that you were able to give to other participants in the program. 7. Do you think that you will be more inclined to attempt a more individualized approach to in struction after your experience in this program? 8 . Do you think that you will be, or that you are, more interested in developing resources in pro gramed instructional materials for use in your teaching after your experience in this program? 9. Are you willing to attempt to develop some pro grams of programed instructional materials for use in your teaching as a result of your expe rience in this program? 10. How does the increase in your understanding of physics as a result of your experience in this program compare with the increase in your under standing of physics that resulted from other physics courses that you have taken? 11. Did your experience in this program tend to decrease the threat you may have felt in taking a lecture, intermediate level physics course? 12. Please make a personal evaluation of your work this quarter. I am not asking for a letter grade, but for information related to strengths, weak nesses, and areas of growth. Other remarks or comments about the program or your experience this quarter will be appreciated. APPENDIX X TYPICAL RESPONSES TO QUESTION OF EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PARTICIPANTS IN THE EXPERIMENTAL OFFERING OF THE PROPOSED PROGRAM Question 1. List the experiments that you have com pleted this quarter and indicate approximately the number of hours (include both hours spent in the laboratory and hours spent in prepara tion outside the laboratory) that you spent on each experiment. 1. The Force Between Two Charged 2 hours Spheres 2 . Driving Force and Terminal 3 hours Velocity 3. Energy Transferred by an 3 hours Electric Motor 4. The Measurement of a Magnetic 1 hour Field in Fundamental Units 5. The Mass of an Electron 1 hour 6 . The Spectrum of Sodium 3 hours 1. Oscilloscope deflections 10 hours 2. Signal generator freq. meas 3 hours ured on oscilloscope 3. Lissajous figures on the 5 hours oscilloscope 4. Flicker Fusion--oscilloscope 4 hours 5. Standing waves--mechanics 1 1 hour 6. Interference of sound waves 3 hours 7. Timing with oscilloscope-- 12 hours inclined plane--equal intervals 284 285 8. Buildup and discharge of 6 hours capacitors 9. Measurement of Inductance 2 hours 10 . Transient condition in Circuits-- 10 hours Inductance, Capacitance, and Resistance 1 1. Exponential decay of voltage-- 2 hours Capacitor and Inductor C. 1. Bahr Free Fall: using spark 20 hours timer and strobelight-camera timer 2 . Atwood's Machine 6 hours 3. Ohm1s Law 6 hours 4. L,C,R.Circuits 6 hours D. 1. Geiger-Muller Counter 2 . Background Radiation 3. G-M tube Efficiency 4. Instrument Efficiency 4 0 - 4 4 hrs. 5. SheIf-Ratio in lab 6. Properties of Beta and 35-40 hrs. Gamma Radiation preparation 7. Radiation Counting and Probable Error 8. Program on Powers of Ten E. 1. Determination of the Index of 6 hours Refraction of Air with a PSSC Michelson Interferometer 2 . Determining the Characteristic 6 hours Curve for a Geiger Counter 3. The Absorption of Gamma Radiation 9 hours 4. The Absorption of Beta Radiation 9 hours 5. The Inverse Square Law for Gamma 4 hours Radiation 6. Statistics of Nuclear Counting 6 hours 7. Nuclear Resolving Time of a 2 hours Geiger Counter 8. Determining e/m for the Electron 10 hours 9. Characteristics of a Diode 8 hours 286 Question 2. Evaluate your learning experience this quarter in the three areas listed below by indicating whether the experience was very helpful, helpful, questionable, or detrimental. Remarks related to your response will be appreciated. 1. Factual knowledge of physics 2. Appreciation of the individualized approach to instruction 3. Understanding of the preparation and use of programed instructional materials A. 1. I have gained some knowledge in the area of electricity and magnetism. This could have been at a greater depth if I had time during the week to study over the experi ments that I did on Saturday. 2. The motivation in such an approach is high because each one is doing an experiment of his choice. Also in a small class as ours the instructor was available when needed. Many times in class you find yourself talk ing 11 to the wall" because everyone in the class naturally is not interested in that particular topic you might be presenting. With this approach questions can be an swered when the student needs that bit of information and learning is constantly taking place. 3. We did not cover this to any great degree. B. 1. Helpful, but of course I was most inter ested in the application of this informa tion because in this way I find I really understand it. 2. Very helpful. The importance of this kind of assistance cannot be overstated, espe cially for individuals like myself who are not possessed of the "physics mind" or mathematical prowess. In other words, limited in training, experience, ability for higher physics, but not in ambition. Helpful. Very helpful. Very helpful. Very helpful. — By test result. 85-92 correct on a Radiation test provided by E. Hart. Increased my appreciation of science in that everything you do does not always work out immediately. Did this and I'm intending to project on my "power of ten" start to develop a math program for ray science course at California State College. Helpful. Very helpful. Questionable--I have had a course in A.V. instruction and have spent some time on programed instruction. The main value is that I now have the incentive to try to write some programs of my own. Before I felt that this was a job for an expert in programed instruction, but now I feel that teachers can and should try to develop programs of their own in addition to commercial programs. Little new factual knowledge was acquired but much was done to reinforce and bring together isolated facts. For developing concepts, the individualized inquiry approach has no peer. Little was done in this area. 288 G. 1. The lab experiences were helpful. Much theory had to be gained just to make each experiment work. If we were only after factual knowledge, there would be more efficient ways of doing it. 2. This was probably their greatest strength. We had to work on our own and seek help when we thought we needed it. This encour aged us to use our initiative and to try to solve each problem ourselves--most helpful. 3. I was not involved in this. Question 3 . List any experiences that you may have had during this quarter and as a part of this pro gram that have been helpful. A. 1. The experience of actually doing some of the PSSC experiments in electricity and magnetism has been a great help to me in my teaching, 2, This experience has also motivated me to continue and take time to do experiments in the coming school year. B. My experiences this term in this physics gave me more than my original objective which was to learn how to use some of the equipment, especially the oscilloscope. I also learned that when physics is presented in this way it is very interesting, motivating, and challeng ing. The thing which surprised me was that by setting my own goals, my own pace, and with self-evaluation in mind, I not only worked harder than I would have for a traditional course ("the principle of minimum effort" did not apply) because I knew that what I learned will be usable but my attitude toward physics improved, 289 C. Working with the strobelight-Polaroid camera timer technique was most exciting. I must say this was the most useful experience I gained, from the course. D. Working out problems and using the litera ture to understand for "myself11 the methods to correctly get these experiments to function. F. One of the most helpful experiences of this quarter is the association with other teachers of science who share am interest in physics. I feel that the aiding of each other, the shar ing of experiences, working together, and in general interacting with each other has been ■very profitable. F. Most of what was done was helpful in one way or another due to the fact that the activ ities were chosen according to individual needs. G . 1. Opportunity to wire up and make ready prices of equipment--is technician experience. 2. Opportunity to follow one's own inclina tions to find out what a particular piece of apparatus can do. 3. Perform experiments which had. in the past only been read about in books. 4. Work with other teachers in an informal non-directed way. Question 4 . List the experiences of this program that hindered your moving along in the program at the rate you would have preferred. A. Possibly the time it took to set up some of the experiments when the equipment was not there. Also the time spent to "put together" some of the experiments although this also is a learning experience. 290 B. My rate of moving along in the program was in no way hindered by any facet of the program. In fact, the excellent assistance and coopera tion of the instructor served to increase my rate of progress beyond my expectations. C. Not having the correct camera was the most hindrance one Saturday. D. Getting equipment quickly--materials of a general nature should be so located that a lot of library work is not needed. E. The hindrances encountered in this program were: (a) at first the degree of freedom of choice and absence of outside pressure until an adjustment was made, and (b) the lack of ready availability of equipment, but (b) was not a serious defect. F. Nearly all experiences fall into the cate gory of inadequate equipment. G. Early difficulties in getting small pieces to get the equipment working--is the frustra tion of being held up by something so seemingly small. Lack of sufficient reference books close at hand. Question 5 . Comment on the help you received from other participants in the program. A, A number of times I received help from one who had previously done the experiment. The exchange of ideas at "coffee break" I thought was very beneficial. B. I was assisted greatly on one Saturday by Ed _____ in the taking of photographs. I feel assistance from student-to-student is of great 291 benefit to all parties concerned and is impor tant means for improving human relations. C. The other participants were most cooperative in helping me with my experiments. D. Ed Dunnam helped me in the work with radio activity, he being a radiologist. The help in approaching ideas by Ed Hart and his aid to inspiration of quality rather than just quan tity. My gratitude is extended to Ed for his great help and understanding. E. The other participants have helped me with technique, with factual knowledge, and by acting as a sounding board for my ideas of physics and its teaching. F. Since most work was done alone and no one else was working on the experiment little out side help was available. However what was actually needed was there. G. I worked alone part of the time and other teachers were seldom in the room with me because of schedule conflict. The few times they were it was exciting to share their dis coveries, or to discuss my problems with them. This increased our knowledge and understanding of each other's projects which was very helpful. Question 6. Comment on the help that you were able to give to other participants in the program. A. Not too much. B. I don't believe I helped others very much, beyond some token assistance. C. I was not able to help hardly any of the participants, but I did learn much from what they were doing by watching them work with their apparatus. 292 D. I helped Ed Blackstad and others in the method of keeping a log book plus the individ ual contribution of ideas. E. I have been able to help others to increase the factual knowledge of physics, to improve their lab technique, and to take data. F. Again what help was exchanged was of the informal suggestion variety. Question 7. Do you think that you will be more inclined to attempt a more individualized approach to instruction after your experience in this program? A. Yes and in particular an experimental approach where the student is prepared for an experiment by a short teacher-lecture and/or reading assignment, followed by the experiment and then a group discussion on the experiment. B. Yes, I would like to, if I can devise a workable means for the junior high level. Maybe after school sessions on individual projects. C. Yes I would. I can see where it would get to be a problem with material availability. It would take a wide variety of materials to do a very extensive job. D. Yes--more constructed type labs. E. Definitely. F. For mature earnest people, certainly yes. One wonders the effect on non-motivated people who are "forced'1 to carry out such a program. For highly motivated senior students it is certainly worth a try if the satisfaction I got out of it is any criterion. 293 Question 8 . Do you think that you will be, or that you are, more interested in developing resources in programed instructional materials for use in your teaching after your experience in this program? A. I personally am not interested in develop ing programs because I have not done any and therefore I am not acquainted with them. I would see great value in them if they would be geared to high school students. I question whether a teacher would have the time to develop a series of them in the course of a year to make it that profitable. I would encourage a GROUP OF HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS TO SEEK some kind of a Grant so that they might spend a year only in that area; i.e., of developing programed instructional materials. B. Somewhat, but presently I am more inter ested in the possible assistance (of the materials commercially available) to the teacher than in constructing them. I would like to accumulate a useful collection of these materials to use them as a supplementary resource in my teaching. C. I can see where they would take lots of time. I am interested in trying to develop programmed materials more now than when I entered the course. D. Definitely, yes. E. Programed instruction is necessary (up to a point) for this type of experience. However some students are capable of getting along without it. 29^ Question 9 . Are you willing to attempt to develop some programs of programed instructional materials for use in your teaching as a result of your experience in this program? A. I would like to learn a little more about the writing of P.I. and perhaps try it, but from my reading on the subject, I am inclined to believe that these materials are too com plex, intricate, and difficult for the average teacher to write and that includes me. I feel that they are somewhat like standardized achievement tests--they should be written by experts who have a knowledge of behavioral psychology, all the time necessary to perfect their work, and time to determine their objec tives, write them down, and achieve them. Just as I wouldn't attempt to make my own meter sticks, I don't think I am yet competent to write these materials, especially the branching type which seem to me to offer the most advan tages . B. I am interested in doing the programmed materials but I wonder about the time it would take to develop a good unit. With student help it might be a method of having them learn by teaching in the form of a program. C. Yes. I am working on a programed approach to vectors for us next year. The program is slowly taking shape at the present time. Question 10. How does the increase in your understand ing of physics as a result of your experience in this program compare with the increase in your understanding of physics that resulted from other physics courses that you have taken? A. This is impossible to compare since other courses taken in physics were during say the summer session in which I was not also called upon to teach. When you are just taking a course or 2 in physics during the summer and 295 have no other obligations you can use much more time in studying and naturally obtain more knowledge. Given the same amount of time I would favor the individualized course. B. Very favorably. As indicated in my responses to no. 3, I found that I enlarged my understanding of physics a great deal, and this was I feel real understanding not just the ability to use a piece of equipment or to apply a formula to a problem, which I don't take to be understanding. I might say that I think I gained almost as much from one quarter of this course than I did from 2 semesters of PSSC physics for teachers at the University of Maryland. C. All my experiments were of the verification type therefore I did not gain very much more understanding of the outcomes. But I did receive understanding of the techniques in teaching with the apparatus which was the real reason I took the course. D. The understanding cannot be measured in that in other physics courses I learned facts-- here I learned ideas of making it work by sometimes trial and error. I felt that I amplified on my understanding of some areas. E. I feel that I have a much better grasp of physics and the ideas of physics from being able to work at my own pace and without outside pressure. At last I am beginning to really understand and connect concepts and ideas that I have learned in other physics courses. I feel that because of the above and this course I will be better able to teach physics at the secondary level. F. My increase in understanding is on a physical reality level rather than theoretical. 296 G. This is very hard to judge since one takes one's increased understandings from a previous course into a present one. It was certainly a most satisfying way of learning physics. The "fact-density" was not as high as in a conven tional course, but the "affective" outcomes were far superior. The understanding of each exper iment that we did is greater in that area than in a conventional class, but of course not as many can be covered. Question 11. Did your experience in this program tend to decrease the threat you may have felt in taking a lecture, intermediate level physics course? A. No. B. No, I really don't think that it did remove the threat. The mathematics threat is more real to me than the actual physics. I feel I should know more math before I ever go on in physics. C. Yes--I did. Question 12. Please make a personal evaluation of your work this quarter, I am not asking for a letter grade, but for information related to strengths, weaknesses, and areas of growth. A. I believe my weakness was in lack of prep aration for the experiments. I believe I grew in the ability to take data and also motivation to now take time and do some experiments in my "spare time". B. I believe I would rate the advancement, the motivation, the interest, and the increased knowledge which I have gained from this work all high. I am most pleased with my increased experience and proficiency with the oscillo scope, the polaroid technique, and my reju venated spirits toward physics. (Sometimes 297 physics has appeared as a monster to me). I have, I feel, worked hard and learned a lot. C. I know that I really need work in how to write up a lab report. I have never had to do what we did this quarter without a form to go by, and it was very frustrating. I had to figure out what I needed from the experiment, then determine a method of solving the problem and then discovering a method of presenting the material. D. I feel that these two quarters I have grown more in physics than I have at any other time. I feel that even though a letter grade was not given I worked as if I wanted to earn an A grade. The second quarter was extremely gratifying because I started to understand and think physics. This was proven to me on my STEP test result which showed 95-977= ranking as compared to an 70-80 before. I feel this course contributed much to this improvement. E. I have grown in my ability to do independ ent work, in my confidence to handle higher level physics courses and to develop programed materials, and in my ability to be an effective physics teacher. F. While nearly all experiments were related to the ripple tank, a great gain was experienced in the concreteness of wave motion. Before it had consisted of a set of formulae and a few graphs. Now wave motion and the behavior of waves is firmly entrenched. G. I spent too much time fiddling with little things which seemed inconsequential, yet were important in getting the experiment underway. Although I spent many hours on the course, I felt that many of them were unproductive. The work here helped me have more under standing of a research physicist's problems-- 298 and also appreciate his thrill of discovery when something he has built from the ground up actually works. I gained in manipulation skills and self reliance and became better equipped to solve problems for myself. The experience gained here will encourage me to set up more sophis ticated experiments for my students and also make the experiments they do more open ended. It was the open ended nature of the experi ments which was so satisfying and helped much in my growth in physics. Other remarks or comments about the program or your experience this quarter will be appreciated. A. I have been very pleased and appreciative of the willingness and helpfulness of the instructor. My thanks to you for this. I think I have benefitted a great deal from this course largely because of your efforts and because of the open-ended, self-motivational means of handling the course. I am quite sure that this kind of course can have such success only when it is led by a person who gives high effort, becomes in volved in the work of each student, and does not over-structure the work or give the learn ing student feelings of insufficiency. The ideal here is to help overcome these feelings and build a better attitude toward physics. B. The facilities available were very adequate. We could use just about anything we want to which was good. C. The one thing that I feel should be changed is that we should be required to complete an experiment and its write-up before we go on to another experiment. It is too easy to procras tinate. 299 Thank you for the excellent experience of this quarter. I feel that this experience has been so worth while that I plan to enroll for the year long course in the fall of 1969 if it will be offered, D. Would suggest that in future programs, a large physics reference library is available in the room, and that a small workshop area in the room be equipped so that: the many small jobs can be undertaken without wasting time "go and getting," Suggest that the program start with fairly closed problems initially and then as the quarter progresses they become more and more open ended until eventually the teacher works on and constructs his own apparatus to solve his own problem in an individual project. APPENDIX XI LIST OF PARTICIPANTS IN THE EXPERIMENTAL OFFERING OF THE PROPOSED IN-SERVICE PHYSICS PROGRAM Participant Quarter 1. Sister M. Albertus Spring 2. Paul H. Anlcney Spring 3. Edward Blacks tad Spring 4. Jess A. Cignetti V/inter, Spring 5. V. Edward Dunham Spring 6. Ronald Jaskowiak winter, Spring 7. Gregor A. Ramsey Autumn, Winter 8. George Wooster Spring 300 APPENDIX XII POWERS OF TEN Work in science often requires very large or small numbers such as .00000000000000000000000000167. A convenient way to handle these is through exponential notation. Ans : 20, we know can be written as 2x10, 1. so 50 mav be written as 5x10 so, too, 90 may be written 2. as 9x10 We can write 200 as 2 x 100 3. and 500 as 5 x 100 4. and 900 as 9 x 100 Going into the thousands we know that 8000 = 8 x 1000 and 5. 7000 = 7 x thus 1000 6 . 6000 = 60 x while 100 7. 800.000 = 8 x 100000 We have seen that 10 x 1 = 10, while 100 is equal to 10 x 10. Thus 100 is composed of 2 equal parts. 1000 is equal to 10 x 10 x 10. We can say that 1000 is made up 8. of equal Darts. Another 3 way of saying that 100 is equal to 10 x 10 is to say that 100 factors into two tens. Thus 1000 factors 9. into tens, while ' 3 301 302 Ans: 10. 10,000 into factors 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 or four tens. We can conveniently indicate these equal factors using exponents. For example, 100 = 10 x 10 = 102 11 1000 = 10 x 10 x 10 = 10? 3 1.2 6000 = 6 x 1000 = 6 x 10 x 10 x 10 = 6 x 10- 3 13-1 6 . 4oo = 4 x x 10 x 10 = 100, 4 x 10? 4, 2 17-20. 40 = x x 10 £ 4, 10, 4, Note the number of zeros in 400 is 21 . equal to , and that the 2 22. exponent of 10 is also ______. 2 5.000.000 = 5 x 10^ the exponent 23. is ______. The number of zeros in 6 24. 5.000.000 is ______. 6 Thus the relationship is that the 25. number of ______in the original zeros 2 6 . number is equal to the ______of exponent 10 . Using this relationship 27-28. 300 = _____ x 10? 3 , 2 29. 700000 = 7 x . 105 If you were given 3x10- and asked to put it into the form using zeros 30. it would be 30000 APPENDIX XIII LIST OF THOSE INTERVIEWED AS PART OF THE EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED IN-SERVICE PHYSICS PROGRAM 1. Jerome L. Braun Science Supervisor 2. William Cory Phys ics-Mathematics Teacher 3. John Disinger Teacher-Department Coordinator 4. Daniel Goldthwaite College Physics Teacher 5. Robert Nemar Director Science and Mathematics, Columbus Public Schools 6. Henry Nelson Teacher-Curriculum As sociate 7. Gerald F. Ocock Physics Teacher 8. Robert G. Sauer Physics Professor APPENDIX XIV A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF A PROPOSED IN-SERVICE PROGRAM IN PHYSICS FOR EXPERIENCED SECONDARY SCHOOL SCIENCE TEACHERS The proposed in-service program in physics for experienced secondary school science teachers is de signed to make a contribution toward the solution of the following problems. 1. The problem of providing graduate level course work in physics for in-service secondary school science teachers. 2. The problem of providing direct experience in the use of programed instruction, indi vidualized instruction, and the processes of science. 3. The problem of meeting the individual needs of in-service science teachers who come from a diversity of backgrounds in expe rience and training. Some of the features of the proposed program are shown by the facts that it will attempt to be characterized by an approach that will 1. center around a laboratory experience 2. utilize programed materials and prepare teachers to use and prepare programed instructional materials 3. utilize the learning by teaching principle 4. be structured along the lines of a research and development center so that the indi vidual needs of each in-service teacher can be given appropriate consideration 304 305 5. seek to prepare the teacher not only for the changing current secondary school science context, but also for the future when the demands for a more efficient use of instruc tional time and experience will force drastic changes in the secondary school context 6. utilize basically an individualized instruc tional method 7. have enough flexibility to allow freedom of inquiry 8. be an informal type program that attempts to encourage the in-service science teacher to better understand himself or herself, as well as to encourage the in-service science teacher to better understand others with whom the teacher works. The course work for the proposed program will be primarily centered around a series of laboratory, individual study, type courses, but it will also in clude the enrollment of the in-service teacher in regular intermediate and advanced level physics courses when the background and the time schedule of the in-service teacher permits such an enrollment. During each quarter of the laboratory, individual study, type course the in-service teacher will conduct four or more experiments. These experiments will be of the verification, devised, and open-ended types. Selection of the experiments will be made by the in- service teacher with guidance from the director of the program. Generally, the experiments will be from a single area of physics rather than from scattered areas of physics. In addition to the experiments for each quarter, each in-service teacher will be expected to prepare a simple unit of programed instruction. Programed instructional materials will be used as background material for the experiments. Other features of the course work include the use of a log book; a series of pre- and post-tests for each experiment or series of experiments related to a single topic; and the strengthening of the in-service teachers' background in mathematics to a level equal to or greater than the simple calculus level. Programed 306 instructional materials will be used to strengthen the in-service teachers' background in mathematics. Evaluation of the in-service teachers' work during the program and the course work will be based upon the results of the pre- and post-tests; the log book records and reports; the in-service teachers' self-evaluation; and anecdotal records of the instruc tor . APPENDIX XV EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE FOR A PROPOSED IN-SERVICE PROGRAM IN PHYSICS FOR EXPERIENCED SECONDARY SCHOOL SCIENCE TEACHERS Answer the following questions by circling your responses (Y = yes, N = no, U = uncertain, X = no com ment) and make any comments you wish on the back of the page. Please read "A Brief Description of a Pro posed In-Service Program in Physics for Experienced Secondary School Science Teachers" before answering these questions. 1. Do you think that there is a need for additional physics courses related directly to the needs and interests of the secondary school science teacher? Y N U X 2. Do you think that your background in physics is adequate for you to compete with physics majors in physics courses at a. the intermediate level? Y N U X b, the advanced level? Y N U X 3. Do you think that graduate level physics courses designed to secondary school science teachers would be more helpful for in-service teachers than the regular intermediate and advanced level physics courses? Y N U X 4. Can you identify specific topics or skills in physics that you would like to have an opportunity to study or develop? Y N U X 307 308 Individualizing instruction is the process of tailoring a program of instruction to fit the individual needs of a student as nearly as possible. It is more than allow ing the individual to cover a given topic at his own pace. It includes the direct involvement of the student in every aspect of the instructional (learning-teaching) process and the use of his sensitive per sonal perception. 5. Do you think that there is a need for individual izing instruction in secondary schools today? Y N U X 6. Do you think that you would prefer an individual ized rather than a formal classroom approach in an in-service program in which you were a partici pant? Y N U X 7. a. Have you had the experience of participating in a science course that was based on an individualized approach? Y N U X b. If your response to 7a was yes, do you con sider the experience profitable and helpful? Y N U X c. If your response to 7a was no, would you be interested in having such an experience? Y N U X 8. Are you somewhat familiar with the developments in programed instruction materials? Y N U X 9. Have you had any experience using programed instructional materials in your individual study experience? Y N U X 10. Have you had any experience in the preparation of programed instructional materials? Y N U X 11. Would you be willing to take the time to learn how to prepare simple programed instructional mate rials if the opportunity for such an experience was made available to you? Y N U X 12. Does the use of programed instructional materials impress you as a potential aid to you a. in your teaching responsibilities? Y N U X b. in your future learning experiences? Y N U X 309 13. The use and preparation of programed instruc tional materials will be an important part of the proposed program in physics. Do you think programed instruction is important enough to merit such an inclusion in the proposed program for in-service teachers? Y N U X 14. An individualized approach to instruction will be used in the proposed physics program. Do you know of a better approach to the needs of the in- service science teacher? Y N U X 15. If you had your choice in the selection of the general approach to be followed for your in- service education in science, would you choose a. a laboratory approach rather than a lecture approach? Y N U X b. a laboratory approach rather than a lecture-demonstration approach? Y N U X c. a laboratory approach rather than a lecture-demonstration-laboratory approach? Y N u X d. a laboratory approach rather than a seminar-discussion approach? Y N u X 16. Do you feel that what you have learned in your own education utilizing a laboratory approach has been more helpful than what you have learned utilizing other approaches? Y N U X 17. Most teachers agree that one of the best ways to learn a topic is to have to teach that topic. Do you agree with this idea? Y N U X 18. One of the characteristics of the proposed pro gram in physics is that it utilizes the learning by teaching principle on both an individual to individual basis and on a small group basis. Do you think that the proposed learning by teaching experience will be worth the time it will require from the overall program? Y N U X The average science teacher today has received the majority of his or her education in a highly structured educational system. This system does not lend itself to individualized instruction. 19. Has your educational background generally been along the line of the highly structured educa tional system? Y N U X 310 20. Does the idea of an informal unstructured approach tend to cause you to wonder if you could adapt to such an approach a, as a learner? Y N U X b. as a teacher? Y N U X 21. In the experimental offering of the proposed pro gram several participants haddifficulty accept ing the fact that they were not going to be told what to do and how to do it. Do you think that you would have a similar initial reaction if you were a participant? Y N U X The processes of science usually tend to include a considerable amount of trial and error--sometimes mostly error--and in many instances the choice of the approach to a given experiment is a major problem. Many teachers today have been brought up educa tionally to believe that experimentation is almost a cut and dried process involving certain steps that almost always give the correct results. 22. Has your educational up-bringing in science tended to be of the follow the steps and get the answer type? Y N U X 23. In the proposed program the approach to a given experiment may include a considerable amount of trial and error and searching for the workable approach to the experiment. Do you consider the time spent in such activities to be largely wasted "time? Y N U X 24. Other experiments in the proposed program will be of the verification type. They will involve considerable skill in measurement and the use of various instruments. Do you think it is worth the time required to obtain a careful quantita tive result in such an experiment when it is a rather simple matter to observe a qualitative demonstration of the principles involved? Y N U X An understanding of simple differential and integral calculus is essential for advanced studies in physics. 25. Do you think that you should have such an understanding? Y N U X 311 26. Do you presently have such an understanding in mathematics? Y N U X 27. In the proposed program programed instructional materials will be used to strengthen or to teach mathematics to the introductory calculus level. Do you think that this is a worthwhile use of program time? Y N U X One of the more difficult aspects of science teaching, as well as life in general, is in the realm of human relations and understand ings. The problems of trying to conform to an image that is imposed upon teachers by themselves, by others, and by society can be very frustrating experiences. In order to cope with these problems it is helpful to have a somewhat objective viexo of one's own strengths and weaknesses, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of others. One of the goals of the proposed program is to foster this self understanding and under standing of others through personal inter actions in teaching and learning. 28. Do you think that such a goal is potentially helpful to the in-service science teacher? Y N U X 29. Do you think that such a goal is unreasonable? Y N U X 30. Do you think that such a goal is attainable? Y N U X 31. Do you think that such a goal is unrelated to science education? Y N U X Your suggestions for inclusions in the proposed program will be appreciated. Also your remarks con cerning the weaknesses of the program as you have under stood it will help make the program more useful for in-service science teachers. APPENDIX XVI SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE FOR A PROPOSED IN-SERVICE PROGRAM IN PHYSICS FOR EXPERIENCED SECONDARY SCHOOL SCIENCE TEACHERS Un- No Yes No certain Comment 1. Need for additional physics courses for secondary school science teachers? 27 2 1 0 2, .Adequate physics back ground to a, take intermediate physics courses? 14 13 3 0 b, take advanced level physics courses? 2 22 6 0 3. Graduate level physics courses for in-service secondary school sci ence teacher rather than regular physics courses? 25 4 1 0 4. Identify topics for study? 29 1 0 0 5, Need for individual ized instruction in secondary school? 28 0 2 0 6, Prefer individualized rather than formal classroom approach for in-service program? 30 0 0 0 312 313 Un- No Yes No certain Comment 7. a. Experience with individualized approach? 18 11 1 0 b. If yes to 7a, was experience help ful? 16 0 1 13 c, If no to 7a, in terested in having such an experience? 1 1 0 0 19 8. Familiar with programed instruction? 26 0 4 0 9. Used programed mate rials in individual study? 14 14 2 0 10. Prepared programed materials? 8 22 0 0 11. Willing to learn how to prepare programed materials? 26 1 3 0 12. Programed materials potential aid in a. teaching? 24 2 3 1 b. future learning? 22 2 6 0 13. Should programed in struction be a part of proposed program? 19 1 9 1 14. Better approach to in-service program than individualized approach 0 24 3 3 15. Selection of approach for in-service educa tion a. laboratory vs. lecture? 28 1 0 1 b. laboratory vs. lecture-demonstra tion? 22 3 4 1 314 Un- No Yes No certain Comment c. laboratory vs. lecture- demons tration- laboratory? 8 16 5 1 d, laboratory vs. seminar- discussion? 23 4 2 1 16. Laboratory approach more helpful to you than other approaches? 13 5 11 1 17. Teach-to-learn is one of best ways to learn? 30 0 0 0 18. Teach-to-learn good inclusion in program? 24 0 6 0 19. Has your education generally been of highly structured type? 29 0 0 1 20. Could you adapt to unstructured approach as a a, learner? 9 20 1 0 b. teacher? 14 15 1 0 21. Initial difficulty in adjusting to ind ividualized approach? 10 12 8 0 22. Educational up bringing of follow the step type? 21 6 1 2 23. Trial and error times is wasted? 2 23 5 0 24. Quantitative analysis worth the effort? 16 7 7 0 25. Simple calculus important to you? 23 2 4 1 26. Understand simple calculus? 13 14 3 0 27. Hath inclusion in program? 24 2 4 0 315 Un- No Yes No certain Comment 28. Goal of self unders tanding a. important? 29 0 1 0 b. unreasonable? 27 0 1 2 c . attainable? 15 2 12 1 d , unrelated to science education? 2 27 1 0 APPENDIX XVII PERSONAL INFORMATION SHEET A proposed in-service physics program for expe rienced secondary school science teachers is being studied. Your responses to the following questions and statements will be used to help make the program relate to the in-service teachers needs and interests. Hame______ School Position I have completed approximately the number of college level ouarter--semester (cross out one of the under lined words) hours, shown in the appropriate spaces, in the following areas: Mathematics______Biology______ Physics ______Geology______ Chemistry______ I have taught the following secondary school science and mathematics courses (note approximately the number of years taught): Physics______Biology______ Chemistry______Algebra______ General Science______Trigonometry______ Earth Science______Calculus ___ 3'16 317 Degree or Colleges Institute Attended. Major Minor Program This evaluation is based upon (check the appropriate blanks): 1. enrollment for _____ credit hours of the experimental offering of the proposed, program 2. a study of the proposed program and a limited participation in the experimental offering of the proposed, program _3. a study of the proposed program the reading of "A. Brief Description of a Froposed In-Service Frogram in Physics for Experienced Secondary School Science Teachers" 5. other means of introduction to the proposed program which are described, as follows: BIBLIOGRAPHY The AAA.S Cooperative Committee on the Teaching of Science and Mathematics, Report No. h . School Science and Mathematics, XLVI (February, 19467, I07-II8. Abraham, Uilliam. "Programmed Instruction: It’s Time for a Serious Look," Arizona Teacher, I,V (Novem ber, 1986), 6-7 . Abrams, Leonard S. "A Comparison of the Teaching Effectiveness of Some Methods of On-Campus Supplementation of the Telecourse ’Atomic A~e Physics’." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Me’/.1 York University, 1961. Abstract: Disser- tation Abstracts 23'* 121-22; Mo. 1, 1962. A,chieve Learning Objectives. Papers prepared for a Summer Institute 011 Effective Teaching for Younm Enyineerinv Teachers at The Pennsylvania State University, Otis F. Lancastei', Director. University Park, Maryland: The Pennsylvania State University, 1963. Alexander, Milliam I.'., and Henes, Vynce A. Independcnt Study in Secondary Schools. Gainsville, Florida: University of Florida, i960. Allardice, David, and Duncan, Uilliam F ., Jr. "Intel ligent Self-Direction in Hlyh School— An Analysis of the Effects Upon Students and. Staff of a Pilot Study at Northport Iliyh School." Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, Columbia Uni versity, 1962. Abstract: Dissertation Ab- stracts XXIV: 57 9; 196 3 . Allen, N. C. B., and. Martin L. H., eds. Exercises in Experimental Physics. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1951. And.i’exs, Ted F ., ed . BSCS Materials for Preparation of In-Service Teacher's o~f Bioloyy" Boulder,' Colorado: The Biological ‘Sciences Curriculum Study, 196k. 318 319 Arseneau, Flavin J. "Science Research in the High School." The Science Teacher, XXVIII (September^ 1*9ST71 32-3^ . Ashby, N., and Miller, C. S. Principles of Physics. 4 vols. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1966. Baffey, Philip M. "The Di’aft: Grad Schools, Students Feel Impact of New Regulations." Science, CLX (June 7, 1968), 1088-1091. Bainter, Monica F. "A Study of the Outcomes of Two Types of Laboratory Techniques Used in General College Physics for Students Planning to be Teachers of Elementary Grades." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1955. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts XV: 2485-2486; 1955. Baird, D. C. Experimentation. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1962. Balcziak, L. W. "The Role of the Laboratory and Demonstration in College Physical Science in Achieving the Objectives of General Education." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1953* Abstract: Dissertation Ab stracts XIV: 502-503; 1954. Bebnarik, Milan. "Programmed Instruction in Physics." Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, IV (April, 1967), 113-120. Beck, Carlton E. "Teacher Education Self-Taught." Journal of Teacher Fducation, XIV (March, 1963), 96-97. Beggs, David W., and Buffie, Edward G. Independent Study: Bold Mew Venture. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, I965. Beiser, Arthur, ed. The World of Physics. Ilex': York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., i960. Beiser, Arthur. Concepts of Modern Physics. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1963. 320 Berend.a, Carlton W. , and Oldroyd, Carl. "Humanism in Teaching Science." Science, CLX (May 17, 1968), 718. Beyer, Robert T. Foundations of Nuclear Physics. Mew York: Dover"Publications, Inc.,1949. Blank, Stanley S. "Inquiry Training Through Programmed Instruction." Unpublished Fh.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1963. Block, Hill el. "A School V/here Children Teach Them selves." Saturday Evening Post. June 19, 1965, P. 80. Boeck, Clarence II. , and V/atson, Nathan S. "Science in the Secondary School." Review of Fduca- tional Research, XXXI (June” 1961, 260-27IT Boercker, Fred. Statistical Handbook, 1966. Man power Studies of the American Institute of Physics, 1964. Sogen, Gerald K. "An Appraisal of the Traveling Sci ence Demonstration Lecture Program in Oregon and Its Effectiveness as an Agent for Inservice Education." Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Oregon, 1963. Abstract: Disser tation Abstracts XXIV: 4495; 1964. Bo ms te in, Lawrence. Calculus for the Physical Sciences. Mew York: A.pol eton-Century-Crafts, T 9 ^ ~ . Bornstein, Lawrence. Trigonometry for the Physical Sciences. Mew York: Apuleton-Century-Crafts, 19^ . ---- Boys, C. V. Soap Bubbles and the Forces Which Mold Them. Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Company, 1959. Bradley, Robert L. "Lecture-Demonstrations vs. Indi vidual Laboratory Work in a Natural Science Course at Michigan State University." Unpub lished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1962. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts XXIII: 4568; 1963. 321 Brethower, Dale M. Programed Instructlorn A Manual of Programing Techniques. Chicago: Educational Methods, Inc., 1963. Briggs, Leslie J,, and Angell, David. "Programed Instruction in Science and Mathematics." Review of Educational Research, XXXIV (June, 1964), 35^-373. Brown, Thomas Benjamin. The Lloyd William Taylor Manual of Advanced Undergrad.uate Experiments in Physics. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison- Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1959. Br*own, Walter Reed. "The Professional Objectives of Experienced Science Teachers." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1964. Burnett, R. 'Will. "Academic and Professional Prep aration of Science Teachers." Review of Educational Research, XXXIV (June, 1964), 313-321. Buros, Oscar K., ed. The Sixth Mental Measurements Yearbook. ' Highland Park, Mew Jei'sey: Gryphon Press, 1965. Calthrop, J. E, Advanced Experiments in Practical Physics. 2nd ed, London: William Heinemann, Ltd., 1952. Carroll, John 3. "Programed Instruction and Student Ability." Journal of Programed Instruction, II (Winter, 1963), 7-11. Catalog of Programmed Instructional Material. V/a s h- ington, D. C.: Bureau of Naval Personnel, 1966. Cavanagh, Peter, and Jones, Clive, Programs in Print 1966. London: Association for Programmed Learning, 1966. Cenco. Radioactivity Demonstrator Ho. 71201. Chicago: Central Scientific Co., 1961. 322 Churchhill, Ruth, and Baskin, K. Experiment on Ind.ependent Study. Yellovr Springs, Ohio: Antioch College, 1958. (Mimeographed.) Commission on College Physics, Preparing High School Physics Teachers. A report of the panel on the preparation of physics teachers. College Park, Maryland: Commission on College Physics, 1968. Commission on College Physics. "Progress Report of the Commission on College Physics." .American Journal of Physics, XXXIV (September, 1966) 834. Committee on Apparatus for Educational Institutions of the American Association of Physics Teachers, Novel Experiments in Physics. New York: American Institute of Physics, 196k. Committee on the Changing American School. The Chang ing American School. Sixty-fifth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Fducation, Part II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966. Committee on Individualizing Instruction. Individual izing Instruction. Sixty-first Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Fducation, Part I. Chicago: University of Chicago Fress, 1962. Committee on In-Service Education. In-Service Fduca tion. Fifty-sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Fart I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, '1957. Committee on Programed Instruction. Programed Instruction. Sixty-sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Fducation, Part II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967. Committee on Rethinking Science Education. Rethinking Science Education. Fifty-ninth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, i 960. 323 Committee on Science Education in American Schools. Science Education in American Schools. Forty- sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I. Chicago: Univer sity of Chicago Press, 19^7. Committee on the Teaching of Science. A Program for Teaching Science. Thirty-first Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Fducation, Part I. Bloomington, Illinois: Public School Publishing Company, 1932. Committee on Theories of Learning and Instruction. Theories of Learning and Instruction. Sixty- third Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Fart I. Chicago: Univer sity of Chicago Press, 1966'-. Conant, James B. The Education of American Teachers. New York: HcGraw-Hill Book Co. , 1*953. Conference Report Committee. "Report of the Denver Confei’ence on Cui'ricula for Undergraduate majors in Physics." American Journal of Physics, XXX (Larch, 1962), 153-162. Cory, Stephen N. "The Nature of Instruction." Programed Instruction. Sixty-sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II. Chicago: University of Chicago Fress, 1967. Cowan, Donald A. "Physics and the Future of Teaching." The Physics Teacher, VI (march, 1963), 115-117. Cowan, Faul Jackson. "Development of New Autoinstruc- tional Materials and an Analysis of Their Effectiveness in Teaching Modern Fhysics in the Small High School." Unpublished Ph.D. disserta tion, University of Texas, 196^. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts XXV: 2879-2880; 196k- 1965. ______. "A.utoinstructional Materials in Teaching Physics in Small High Schools." Journal of Experimental Education, XXXVI (Fall, 1967), ^6-50. 32^ Crane, H. R. "Remedial Programs." American Journal of Physics, XXXII (June, 196*1-), *i-65-*J-73. . Programmed Math Reviews. Mew York: Appleton-Century-Crafts, 1966. Crowder, Noimian A. "Automatic Tutoring by Intrinsic Programming." Teaching Machines and Programmed Learning. Edited by A. A. Lumsdaine and Robert C-laser. Washington, D. C. : Department of Audio-Visual Instruction, National Fducation Association, i960. Curtis, William C. "Teacher Training for Process Orientated. Science Instruction." Science Fducation, LI (December, 1967), k9*f~*f-98. Cutting, Theodore A., manual of Spectroscopy. Brooklyn, New York: Chemical Fublishin/r Co. , Inc., 19^-9. Dale, Edgar. "Historical Setting for Frogramed Instruction," Programed instruction. Sixty- sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Fducation, Part II. Chicago: Uni versity of Chicago Press, 1967. Deterline, 'William A. "Practical Problems in Program Production." Programed Instruction. Sixty- sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Fducation, Part II. Chicago: Uni versity of Chicago Press, 1967. "The Development of Mew Teacher Education Programs for the Inner City." A portion of a proposal submitted, for governmental funding (Vergil F. Elanke, director), The Ohio State University, 1968. (Mimeographed.) Dike, Paul IT. Thermoelectric, Thermometry. Phila delphia: Leeds and Northrup Company, 195^. Dressel, Paul L., and Nelson, Clarence II. Questions and Problems in Science. Princeton, Mew Jersey: Educational Testing Service, 1956. Dyson, Freeman J. "Innovation in Physics." Scientific American, CXCIX (September, 1958), 7^-82. 325 Kbock, Sidney C. "Philosophical Approaches to Educa tional Technology. 11 Automated Education Hand book. Editor, Fdith H. Goodman, Detroit, Michigan: Automated Fducation Center, 1965. "Education— College," Time, February 18, 1966, p, 60. Ellis, R. Hobart. "Educating Nonscientists." Physics Today, XXI (March, 1968), 132. Ellis, Susanne D. "Enrollment Trends." Physics Today, XX (March, 1967), 75-79. Evans, J. L.; Homme, L. F.j and Glaser, R. "The Rule.g (Rule-Fkample) System for the Construction of Learning Pi'ograms." A report prepared under the Cooperative Research Program of the U. S. Office of Fducation, University of Pittsburgh, Department of Psychology. Farmer, -/alter A.. , Jr. "The Image of the Competent Secondary School Science Teacher as Seen by Selected Groups." Unpublished Ph.D. disserta tion, The Ohio State University, 196k. Feynman, Richard P.; Leighton, Robert S.; and Sands, H 011 hew. The Feynman Lectures on Physics. 3 vols. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison- Uesley Publishing Company, 1963, Fitzpatrick, Frederick, ed. Policies for Science Education. Science Manpower Project. Mew York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers Col lege, Columbia University, i960. Fowler, John L. "Commission 011 College Physics." Physics Today, XX (March, 1967), 6d-7l. Frank, Uathaniel H. Introduction to Electricity and Optics. 2nd ed. Mew York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1950. Freeman, Ira M. Physics Made Simple. Garden City, Mew York: Doubleday and Company, Inc,, 1965. Freier, George D. University Physics— Experiment and Theor?/. Hew York: Appleton-Century-Crafts, 1965. 326 Frelter, William 3. Introduction to Experimental Physics. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 195^. Prey, Sherman H. "Case Against Programed Instruction." The Clearing House, XL (September, 1965). Friedman, Francis L., and Sartori, Leo. The Classical Atom. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-VJesley Publishing Company, Inc., I9 6 5 . Frysham, Bernard. "A Laboratory Course for Nonscience Majors." .American Journal of Physics, XXXVI (March, 1966), 262-2 6 7 . Gage, N. L., ed. Handbook of Research on Teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1963. Galanter, F. Automatic Teaching, the State of the Art. Mew York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1959. Gardner, Marjorie H., and Davis, John S. "The Prep aration and Teaching Assignments of Senior High School Science Teachers in Ohio." Unpublished M.A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1958. Gardner, W. Lee. Programed Instruction. Mew York: Center for Applied Research in Fducation, 1966. Garrett, Alfred B. "Recommendation for the Prepara tion of High School Teachers of Science and Mathematics— 1959." School Science and Math ematics , LIX (April, 1959), 281-269. Geis, George L. "Programmed Instruction— A. Means Rather Than an Pnd." N5PI Journal, III (September, 1966), 6-7. Glaser, Robert. "Christmas Past, Present, and Future: A Review ana Preview."' Teaching Machines and Programmed. Learning. Edited., by A . A. Lumsdaine and Robert Glaser, ’Washington, D. C.: Depart ment of Audio-Visual Instruction, National Education Association, i960. Gogni, Robert M. "Military Training and Principles of Learning." American Psychologist, XVII (April, 1962), 83-91. C-oldstein, A. A. "A Controlled Comparison of the Project Method with Standard Laboratory Teach ing in Pharmacology." Journal of Medical Fducation, XXXI (1956), 365-375. Goodlad, John I . School Curriculum Reform in the United States. Mew York: Fund, for the Advancement of Fducation, 1966-. "Curriculum." The Changing American School. Sixty-fifth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Fducation, Part II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966. Goodman, Fdith H. , ed. Automated. Fducation Handbook. Detroit, Michigan: Automated. Fducation Center, 1965. Gray, Dwight F. American Institute of Physics Handbook. 2nd ed.. Hew York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1963. Green, Fdward J. The I.earning Process and Programmed Instruction. Mew York: Holt, Rinehart, and Menston, Inc., 1962, "The Frocess of Instructional Programing. 11 Programed Insti.uction. Sixty-sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Fdu cation, Fart II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 196?. Gruber, Fdward C. Physics Advanced Tests for' the Graduate Record Examination. Hew York: AHCO Publishing Company, 1966. A Guide for Uiley Authors. New York: John V.riley and Sons, Inc., 1967. Guidelines for Preparation Programs of Teachers of Secondary School Science and Mathematics. Washington, D. C.: National Association of State Directors of Teachers Fducation and Certification, I96I. 328 Gunther, W. A . The Physics of Modern Flectronics. Translated by David Antin. Mew York: Dover Publications, Inc., 196?. Haber-Schaim, Uri. "The PSSC Course." Physics Today, XX (March, 19 67), 26- 3 1 . Halliday, David, and. Resnick, Robert. Physics for Students of .Science and Engineering. Mew York: John Wile;/ and Sons, Inc., 19 63. Harris, Chester !/. Encyelopedia of Educational Research. 3rd ed. Mew York: The Macmillan Company, i960. Hatch, Winslow R. , and Richards, Alice L. .Approach to Independent Study. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, 1965. Hartley, James. "Programmed Learning in EmerminG Rations." Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, I (May, 196k), 21-25. Head, Charles W. "Trend in Programmed Instruction During 1965-66 in the United States .Air Force." MSPI Journal, V (September, 1966), 3- 5 . Headquarters Staff of the American Radio Relay Leaque. The Radio .Amateur1 s Handbook. k3rd ed. Concord, Hew Hampshire: The Rum ford Press, 1966. Heinke, Clarence H. How to Use a Slide Rule. Columbus, Ohio: By the Author, 608 S. Reminy- ton Road, 1956. Hend.ershot, Carl A.. Programmed Learning: A Bibliog raphy of Programs and Presentation Devices, kth ed. Day City, Michigan: Ilendershot, 1967-68. Herrick, Herlyn, "Programmed Instruction: A Critical Appraisal. " American Biology Teacher, XXVIII (Wovember, 1966), 695-6 9 8 , 329 I-Iesthal, Cedric F, The Study of Physical Phenomena, rev. ed., Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State University, 1959. Hinerman, Charles 0. 11 An Experimental In-Service Program in Radiation Biolo.yy for Ili.yh School Teachers." The .American Biolo.yy Teacher, XXVII (Auyust, 1 9 6), 5 ^1 6-Tl 8. “ Xoa~, J. Barton, and. Korff, 3, A . Electron and Fuelear Physics. 3rd ed. Men York: D. Van Yost rand Company, Inc., 19*1-8. Hodyman, Charles D. Standard Mathematical Tables. 12th ed. Cleveland., Ohio: Chemical Rubber Fublishiny Co., 1959. Holden, .Alan, and Sinner, Fhylis. C2.vysta.ls1 and Crystal Growinn. Gai'd.en City, Yew York: Anchor Books Doubled.ay and Co mu any, Inc. , I960. Holland , James: 3 . "Bcseai'ch on Pi’opn's.nin-. Variables . " leachin.~ Xachines and P2:o.nranod Instruction II: Data and Din.’ections. Edited by Robert Glaser. Yashinvton, D. c .: Department of .Audio-Visual Instruction, Rational Education .Association, 1 965. Yolton, Gerald. "Harvard. Project Physics." Physics Today, YX (Xarch, 1 9 6), 7 31-3*;-. Mom to Pass Gmediate Record Examination. Advanced 'T'est Phys ics. Yew York: Cowles Fducation Corpora tion, 1967. Huff-nine, Donald Y. "Criteria for Independent Study Pro j ects." The Science Teacher, XXV111'(way, 1961), 32-37. ______. ".Analysis of Independent Study Projects." The Science Teacher, XXIX (April, 19 6), 2 31-39. Huyhes, VJilliam E. "The Academic Preparation of Chemistry and Physics Teachers in the Secondary Schools of Ohio, 1961-1962." Unpublished X .A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 19 6. 2 330 Hurd., Paul D. Science Teaching for a Changing U’oiTd. A Scott Foresman Monograph 011 Fducation, Chicago: Scott Foresman and Company, 1963. ______, and Rowe, Mary 3. "Science in the Secondary School." Review of Fducational Research, XICXIV (Jun~ 196'-!-) , 286-297. "Individualized Guid.ed Fducation." Descriptive pamphlet distributed by McCormick Theological Seminary, n.d,. Ingalls, Albert 0. , ed . Amateur Telescope Making— Advanced. Few York: i.unn and Co., Inc., 1967. Infers oil, Leonard. R, , Martin, Miles J. , and Rouse, Theodore A. A. La.bora.tory Manual of Fxperiments in Physics. 6th ed. Mew York: McGraw-Hill Rook Company, Inc. , ‘1953. "In-Service Course, First of Its Kind." '.I.1 he Scottish Fducational Journal, II. (3d December, 1966), 1228. Jacobson, 'Millard J. "Teacher Fducation and Flemen- tary School Science— 1980." Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Y (Issue 1, 1968), 73-60. Jenkins, Francis A., and V/hite, Harvey F. Fundaments of Optics. 3 1'd od. Mew York: McC-raw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1957. Joseph, A., and Leahy, D. J. Promrammed Physics. 5 vols. Mew York: John V/iley and Sons, Inc., 1965. Joseph, Alexander; Erandwein, Paul F.; Morholt, Pvelyn; Pollock, Harvey; Castka, Joseph F. A Sour’cebook for the Physical Sciences. Mew York: Harcourt, Brace, and. world, Inc., 1961. Jossera, F. Leonard. "Undergraduate Curricula in Physics: A, Report on the Princeton Conference on Curriculum S." American Journal of Physics, XXXII (June, 196d), ^-91-^97. atsii i-Jiphon.Pro ofKantaseivi,Use inthe "Experiments Kaeisei’, Margaret. "The Science Teacher as aas ScienceTeacher "The Kaeisei’, Margaret. ______ora o niern Fducation. Engineering of Journal ely C "nrdcint paau Drawings." toApparatus "Introduction C. Kelley, ed. Heading, 2nd Physics. Muclear Irving. Kaplan, Ming, John G. "On Physics Project Laboratories." Project Physics "On G. John Ming, ae, rheL Giet SineTahn. Belmont, Teaching. Science to Guide L. Archie Lacey, ook, . . e, rgae ntutoa Materials Instructional Programed ed, F. M.,Komoeki, rga, am 11 Haym, Kruglak, of Laboratory Outcomes Mmperimental »-V»Inoop, 1 eeLvl" nulse P.. dissertation, Ph.D. Unpublished Level." lege gramed. Introductory an in Teaching Materials mrcnJunl fPyis ;CXVIIIPhysics, of (January, Journal American Addison-VfesleyPublishing Massachusetts: Di s University,State Pennsylvania s er oe" h hsc ece, I (?ebruary, VI Teacher,Physics The Mode." American Journal of Pip/sics of Journal American (Movember, , KMKIV eerhr" cec dcto, /XVII Fducation, Science Researcher," ehooy 19 Technology, mrcnJunl fPyis M (March, 1952), MX Physics, of Journal American Inc.,Company, ore nte ilgcl cecsa h Col theat Sciences Biological inthe Course 90, 33-36•I960), 1963), 1966 il ok opn, Inc., Company, Book Hill Instruction of the Institute of Educationalof Institute theof Instruction 196 ntuto in'Elementary Instruction Physics." College 36 1 o h hscl cecs MwYr: McGraw- York: Mew Sciences. Physical the for 1966 (November, (December, aiona l/ad.sworth Inc., Co.,California: Publishing , , and Moore, John T. Basic Mathematics Basic JohnT., Moore, and 0 ’.'ell. L- « -IMl. ), IO . 1 1at ion Abs t : 1 Y 2376; M X racts 9 5 6 "High School Physics by Audio-Tutorial Audio-Tutorial by Physics School "High 66 Me . - 50 9 6 -IO 1963 1967). . '.7 York: Center forProgramed. Center York: 2 6 5 6 196 ). 460-^-61, . . 2. 3 6 9 1 V l LYTII ol. . '196^. .Abstract: 6 L-1 96 5. 331 332 Lahti, A. K. "The Inductive-Deductive Method and the Physical Science Laboratory." Journal of Fxperimental Fducation, XXIV (Larch, 1956), 1^9-1 6 3 . Lan^e, Phil C. "Administrative and Curricular Con siderations." Programed Instruction. Sixty- sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Fducation, Part II. Chicago: Uni versity of Chicago Press, 1967a. ______. "Suture Developments." Programed Instruc tion. Sixty-sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Fducation, Fart II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967b. Lapp, Ralph F. , and Andrews, Howard I.. Nuclear Radiation Physics. 2nd ed. Hew York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 195^-. Leahy, Daniel, and Siegel, Bertram N. "The Science Teacher and Programed Instruction." The Sci ence Teacher, XXIX (October, 1962 ), 40-45. Livesey, D . I..; Cannon, X. H.; and Ryniok, T, .A Laboratory Course in Physics, Book Two. Toronto: The Copp Publishing Co., Ltd., 1965. Lockard, J. David. Report of the International Clear inghouse on Science and Mathematics Curriculum Dev el'o'pm o n t s ,' 1967. A joint project of the Amei’ican Association for the Advancement of Science and Science Teaching Center, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 1967. Lowenberg, Fdwin C. Theory and Problems of Electronic Circuits. New York: Schaum Publishin.g Co., 1967. Lucy, Fdward C. "The Academic Preparation of Ohio Physics Teachers, 1967-1968." Unpublished IX. A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1963. Lumiansky, Robert K. "An All-Institution Approach." The Newsletter of the Council on Cooperation in Teacher Fducation, XIII (December, 1958). 333 Lumsdaine, A. A. "Instruments and i'ledia of Instruc- tion." Handbook of Research on Teaching. Edited by H. L. Gape. Chicago: Rand KcNally and Co., 1963 . ______, and Glaser, Robert, eds. Teaching Hachines and Pro.prammed Learning. /ashincjton, D . C . : Department of Audio-Visual Instruction, Hational Fducation Association, I9 60. Lysaupht, Jerome P. "A. Science of Learning for the Learning of Science." American Biolopy Teacher, HHYT11 (De cenber, 196 6 ), 703-787. ______, and 'Jillisms, Clarence 1. A Guide to Pro- ~vanned Instruction. Hew York: John Hilcy and Sons, Inc., 1963. LcCollouph, Celeste, and Van Atta, F. I,. "Experi mental Evaluation of Beachinv Fromrams Utilizing a Block of Independent York," Faper read at American Psychology Association, Hashinyton, September, 1958. Hclleachie, H. J. "Research on Teaching at the College and University Level." Handbook of Research on Coaching. Edited by H . L. Cave. Chicavo: Rand HcEall3r and. Company, 1963. Laver, Robert p. Preparing Instructional Objectives. Palo Alto, California: Learon Publishers, 1962. ______"President's Fame." HSFI Journal, ~ [January, 1 9 6 6), 3 . Havie, Hilliam E. A Source Book in Physics. New York: HcOraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1935- halms tad t, II, V,; Fnke, C. S.; and Horen, E. C., Jr. Electronics for Scientists. New York: H . A. Benjamin, Inc., 1963. Haiprulis, Stuart, and Fi.yen, Lewis D. , eds. Applied Programed Instruction. Hex-: York: John Hiley and Sons, Inc., 1962. 33;-J- Karsh, Paul. "VJ ell springs of .Strategy: Considera tions Affecting Innovations by the P3SC." Innovations In Fducation. Edited by Mathew 3. Alies. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1966-. Martin, Edgar VJ. "Facilities, Equipment, and Instruc tional Materials for the vScience Program. " Rethinking Science Education. Fifty-ninth Year book of the Society for the Study of Fducation, Fart I. Chicago: The University of Chicago' Press, i960. Mortens, Thomas R. "Programmed Instruction and the Changing Role of the Faculty Member.11 American Biology Teacher, XXVIII (December, 1966), 779- 7 82. Michels, Palter C. "The Teaching of Elementary Physics." Scientific American, CMCVIII (Aoril, 1956), 57-66-. "The Role of Experimental './ork. " American Journal of Physics, VIXX (March, 19 6 2 ), 172-178. Michelson, A. A. Studies in Optics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1927. Millilean, Robert A . The Electron. Edited by Jesse DuMond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1926-. Minor, Ralph S., and Uhite, Marvey E. Laboratory Exercise in Physical Optics. Eerkelej, California: James J. Gillick and Co., Inc., 1967. Morgan, Joseph. Introduction to Geometrical and Physical Optics. Mew York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1953. Morrison, Philip. "Less May be More." American J ournal o f Phys ics, XXXII (June, 196V1-), Pbl- 6-57. Murphy, James J., and Stanionias, Victor A. 2000 Multiple-Choice Examination Questions and Answers— Phys ics. Flushing, New York: Col lege Quiz Publishing Company, J.9 6 6 . Murray, Darrel L. "A Design for an 'Open* Laboratory. " .American Biology Teacher, XXVIII (December, 19 6 6 ), 788-7 9 6 . Masca, Don, "Have You Tried .A Frog ram Yet*?11 Science rd neat ion, XL VII (February, 19 6 3 ), 68-72. Nationa.l .Association of State Directors of Teacher Fducation and. Certification and the .American .Association for the Advancement of Science. Second a 2vy .School Science and Mathematics Teachers: Characteristics and Service Loads. National Science Foundation Publication No. 63-IO. NashI my ton, D. C.: U. S. Govern ment P ri nt i n.y Office, 19 6 3 . /Tational Fducation .Association, Research Division. Inservice Fducation of Teachers, Research Summary 1966-SI. '.Washington, D. C. : National Fducation Association, 19 6 6 . "New Programs.11 Physics Today, NY (November, 1 96?) P o The New York Times. Fditorial, July 6 , 1968. Sec. I, pp. 1 and 27, Cols. 5 and 6 (Fred N . Mechinger, Fducational Fditor, New York Times). Newman, Melvin S., and Gassman, Paul G. ''.An Experi mental Labora.tory Course." Journal of Chemical Fd cat ion, 71.. (April, 1 9 6 3 ), 203- 20^, News of the Institute. "Precollere Physics Report." Fhysics Today, XIM (October, 1 9 6 6 ), 9 . Northwestern University, Office of Fducational Resources. Programmed. Instruction C-uid e. Newburyport, Massachusetts: Fntelek, Inc., 1967. 336 No vale, J. D. "An Experimental Comparison of a Conven tional and a Project Centered Method. of Teach ing a College General Botany Course." Journal of Experimental Education. XXVI (March, 1958), 217-230. Olson, Kenneth V. "An Experimental Evaluation of a Student-Centered Method and a Teacher-Centered Method of Biological Science Insti’uction for General Fducation of College Students." Unpub lished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1957. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts XVIII: 1306; 1958. Olson, Leonard 0., and V/aite, Roll in \i. "Effective ness of the Case-C-eneral Electric Service Fellowship Program for Hiyh School Physics Teachers. " American Journal of Physics , XXXII (October, 1955), ^23-^27. Orear, Jay. Fundanen.tal Physics. Mew York: John Niley and Sons, Inc., 1961. __. Proarammed Manual for Students of Funda mental Phys ics. Lew York: John V/iley and Sons, Inc., 1962. Palmer, C. Harvey. Optics, Experiments and Demonstra tions . Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1962. Farratt, Lynan C-. Probability and Experimental Errcimi in Science. Mew York: John Hiley and Sons, Inc., 1961. Parsemian, V. L. "A. Science Course for Baccalaureate Education," Journal of Iliyher Education, HHHVII (May, I966), 267-272. ______. "Report on AAAS Session." Science, CLVIII (:■' ebruary 17, 196 7) , 888, "Baccalaureate Science." Physics Today, XX (March, 1967), 57-60. Patterson, Francis P. "The Status of PSSC Physics in Ohio." Unpublished M.A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 196^. 337 Pearse, R. W. B.f and Gaydon, A. G. The Identification of Molecular Spectra, 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1963. Fella, Milton D. "The Laboratory and Science Teach ing." The -Science Teacher, XXVIII (September, 1961), 29-31. Pettit, Lincoln. "Motes of Progi'amed Instruction and Its .Application in a Natural Science Course for Freshmen Students." Ohio Journal of Science, LXVII (January, 1967), 1-8. Physical Science Study Committee. Physics. 2nd ed. Boston: D. C. Heath and Company, 1965. ______. Physics-Laboratory Guide. 2nd ed. New York: D. C. Heath and Company, 1965. Fierce, W. M. "Programmed Learning: A Review and Fvaluation." American Journal of Physics, XXXII (March, 1964)", 241. Forte, Theodore W. "Learner-Centered General Fhysics Courses." A Letter to the Editor. American Journal of Physics, XXXIV (November, 19 6 6 ),' 1069. Portis, A. N. "Electrons, Photons, and Students," American Journal of Physics, XXXIV (December, 1966), 1087-1093. Fostlethwait, S. N. "Audio-Tutorinm— A Practical Solution for Independent Study." Medical and Biological Illustration, XV (July, 1965), I83-7. ______. "An Audio-Tutorial Approach to Teaching." Pacific Speech, I (No. 4, 19 6 7), 57-62. "Instructional Techniques." (Abstract) Purdue University, n.d. (Mimeographed.) Novack, J.; and Murray, H. An Integrated Experience Approach to Learning; With Emphasi: on Independent Study. Minneapolis: Burgess Publishing Company, 1967- 338 "The Preparation of High School Science and Math ematics Teachers." School Science and Math ematics, XXXXVI (February, 1946), 107-118. Pressey, Sidney L. "Teaching Machines (and Learning Theory) Crisis." Journal of .Applied Psychology, XI,VII (February, 1963) , 1-6. ______. "A Puncture of the Huge 'Programing Boom'?" Teachers College Record, LXV (February, 1964a), 41 3-418. ______. "Autoinstzmction: Perspectives, Problems, Potentials." Theories of Learning and Instruc tion. Sixty-third Yearbook of the national Society for the Study of Fducation, Part II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964b. Probst, George F. "Frogramed. Learning in the Schools: Tasks for 19o2." The Science Teacher, XIX (October, 1962)> 3^-39. "Professional Growth of Teachers in Service." MFA Research Bulletin, XLV (March, 1967), 25-27. Programs, '63. A Guide to Pro.gi'amed Instructional Material Available to Educators by September' 1963. Edited by Lincoln F. Kanson of the Centei' for Programed Instruction, Inc. Uashington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1963. "Progress Report of the Commission on College Physics." American Journal of Physics, XXXII (June, 1964), 398-427. PSNS Staff. "Physical Science for Nonscientists." Physics Today, XX (March, I967), 60-64. RCA Receiving Tube Manual. Harrison, New Jersey: Radio Corporation of America, 1966. RCA Transistor Manual. Harrison, New Jersey: Radio Corporation of America, I967. Reitan, F. A. "The 'Knowledge Explosion1 and the A cad emic Man." The Journal of General Fduca tion, XVIII (July, 1966), 73-80. 339 Reiver, William B. "Evaluation of Science Curriculum Objectives." The Science Teacher, XXVI (September, 1959), 36^-3 6 7 . "Report on Conference on the Improvement of College Physics Courses." American Journal of Physics, XXVIII (September, i960), 568- 578. Richardson, John S. "A Proposed Curriculum for the Fducation of Science Teachers." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 19^2. ______. "The Real Horizons in Science Fducation." Speech given at meetings of the National Sci ence Teachers Association and at other occa sions, 1965. (Mimeographed.) ______; Bingham, N. Fidred; Cahoon, G. P.: Harlow, James G.; Kertzka, Katherine; Hill, Katherine F. ; Schlessinger, Fred; and Victor, Fdwai’d. "The Professional Growth of the Science Teacher." Rethinking Science Fducation. Fifty-ninth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Fducation, Part I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, i960. ______; Combs, Louise; Garrett, Alfred; Goins, 17 il 1 i am F. ; Hubl e r, Cl ark; and VI ill i am s on , Stanley F. "The Fducation of Science Teachers." Rethinking Science Fducation. Fifty-ninth Year book of the National Society for the Study of Fducation, Part I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, i960. ______, and Howe, Robert VI. The Role of Centers for Science Fducation in the Production, Demonstra tion, and Dissemination of Research. Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State University Research Foundation, 1966. / ______; Williamson, Stanley F.; and Stotler, Donald 17. The Fducation of Science Teachers. Columbus, Ohio: Charles F. Merrill Publishing Company, I968. 340 Rider, John P . , and Uslan, Seymour. Fncyclopedia on Cathode-Ray Oscilloscopes and Their Uses. 2nd ed. New York: John F. Rider Publisher, Inc., 1959. Riley, William R. "A Proposed Graduate Credit Physics Course for Secondary School Science Teachers." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State Univei'slty, 1959. ______. "Proposal for an In-Service Institute in Physics for Secondary School Science Teachei'S to be Reid at The Ohio State University 1967- 1968." Columbus, Ohio, 1967. (mimeographed.) Rogers, Carl R. On Becoming A Person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 19ol. Rogers, Fric- U. Physics for the Inquiring Hind. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, i960. Roth, Robert H. "Student Reactions to Programed Learning." Phi Delta Kappan, XLIV (March, 1963), 278- 281. Russell, James F. Change and Challenge in American Fducation. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1965. Rutledge, James A. "Preparing Secondary School Teachers for 1980." Journal of Research in Science Teaching, V (Issue 1, n.d.), J-10. Sayles, J. Henry. "Using Programed Instruction to Teach High School Chemistry." Journal of - • Research in Science Teaching. (Issue 1, 1966), 54. Schaum, Daniel, and van der Merwe, Carel W. Theory and Problems of College Physics. 6th ed. New York: Schaum Publishing Co., 1961. Schramm, Wilbur. The Research on Programed Instruc tion— An Annotated Bibliography, U.S. Depart ment of Health, Fducation, and Welfare, Office of Fducation, Bulletin 1964, No. 35. Washing ton, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1964. 3^1 Schulz, E. K., and Anderson, L . T. Experiments In Electronics and Communication Engineering. New-York: Harper and Brothers, 19^3. Schwartz, Allan J. "An Alternate Approach to Teaching Physics?" The Physics Teacher, VI (March, 1968), 126-127. Science Masters' Association. The Teaching of Electricity. London: John Murray, 195^-. Sears, Francis V/eston, and Zemansky, Mark VI. Univer sity Physics-. 2nd ed. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-V/esley Publishing Companj'-, Inc. , 1955. ______. College Physics. 3*’d ed. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., i960. Semat, H., and Blumenthal, R. H. College Physics— A Programmed Aid. New York: Holt, Rinehart, • and VI ins ton, 19o7. Series, C-. VI. Spectrum of Atomic Hydrogen. Oxford: Oxford Univei’sity Pi’ess, 1957. Shamos, Ho 1*1'is H. , ed. Gi»eat Experiments in Physics. New Yoi’k: Holt, Rinehart, and Ilinston, 1965. Shell Merit Fellowships at Cornell University, Ithaca, New Yoi'k, Summei', 1968. Desci’iptive sheet (Mimeogi’aphed). Shortley, George, and Williams, Dudley. Elements of Physics. 3^8 ed. Englewood Cliffs, New Jei’sey: Pz-entice-Hall, Inc., 1961. Shi’um, John VI. "A Pi’oposed Curriculum for the Prep aration of Fai’th Science Teachers." Unpublished Ph.D. dissei'tation, The Ohio State University, 1963. Shuncl iff, William A. Polarized Light. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Univei’sity Press, 1962. Skinner, B. F. "Teaching Machines." Scientific American, CCV (Novembei', 1961), 91-102. 3^2 ______. "Teaching Science in High School— What is Wrong?11 Science, CLIX (February 16 , 1968), 70^-710. Smith, Alva W. Electrical Measurements. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Edwards Brothers, Inc., 19^-1. Smith, Charles C., and Pollrand, George J. Using the Science Study Series. Garden City, Mew York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., n.d. Smith, Herbert A., and Uomman, Guy 3. "The Academic and Professional Preparation of Teachers of Science. " Review of Fducational Research, XXXI (June,"1961), 289-295. Smith, Ralph J. Circuits, Devices, and Systems. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966. Sowles, Jack A.. "A First Course in Fhysics Which Emphasizes Independent Study and Laboratory Pxpei’ience. " American Journal of Physics, XXXIV (August, 196(d) , 72^h Sproull, Robert L. Nodern Physics . 2nd ed. Mew York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1963. Staff of Texas Nuclear Corporation. Laboratory Manual for a Course in Nuclear Physics. Austin, Texas: Texas Nuclear Corporation, 1959. Stiles, Lindley J. "The All-Institution Approach to Teacher Education at the University of Wiscon- sin." The Education of Teachers: Mew Perspectives, National Commission on Teacher Fducation and Ph'ofessional Standards. Wash ington, D. C.: National Fducation Association of the United States, 1958. Stollberg, Robert, ed. Planning for Fxcellence in Ki.gh School Science. Washington, D. C. : National Science Teachers Association, '1961. Stolurow, Laurence N. "Let's 3e Informed on Programed Instruction." Phi Delta Kappan, XLIV (March, 1963), 255-257. 3^-3 Stem.'?, C. L. The Scientific American Book of Projects for the .Amateur Scientist. Mew York: Simon and Schuster, 19^0. Stotler, Donald; Richardson, John S.; and Williamson, Stanley. The Supervision of School. Science Programs. Columbus, Ohio: Charles F. Merrill Books, Inc., 1967. Strassenburg, .Arnold A. "American Institutes of Physics Programs in Education— Present and Future." American Journal of Physics, 17107 (September, 1967), 797-307. Strong, John. Procedures in Experimental Physics. Hew York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 193'3. Sutton, Richard 1. Demonstration Fxperiments in Physics. lev; York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1933. Swenson, Fsther J. "Teacher Preparation. " Individ ualizing Instruction. Sixty-first Yearbook of the Rational Society for the Study of Educa tion, Part I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962. "Symposium: Progn’amed Learning. " I.1 he CTearinrr House, >770/111 (Hovember, 1963), 136- 1 . Taber, Julian I.; Glaser, Robert; and Schaefer, Holmuth H . Learning and Programmed Instruction. Read ing, Hassachuse11s : Addi son-Wesley, 19&5. Tanzman, Jack. "How to Individualize Inservice Training." School Management, XI (January, 1967), 2ll-21d. Taylor, John K.; Knipling, Phoebe; and Smith, Falconer, eds. Project Ideas for Young Scientists. Washington, D. C.: Joint Boai'd on Science Fducation, i960, Taylor, Lloyd William. College Manual of Optics. Boston: Ginn and Company, 192V! 3Ai4 Teaching Machines, Incorporated. Algebra Refresher— A Programed. Textbook. 3rd ed. New York: Teaching Materials Corporation, 19&5. Thomas, C. A,; Davies, I. K.; Openshaw, D.; and Bird, J. B. Programmed Learning in Perspective. Chicago: Educational Methods, Inc., 19&3. Tobias, Sigmund. "Teachers1 Attitudes Toward Pro grammed Instructional Terms." Journal of Prom ram ed Instruction, II (Fall” 1963")', 25-29. Toohey, J. V. "Fvaluating the Effectiveness of a Linear Programed Course in Science Fducation." Journal of Research in Science Teaching, II (Issue 1, 196^), 59~. " Turabian, Kate L. A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and. Dissertations. 3rd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1967. Twyman, ?. Prism and I.ens Making. 2nd ed. London: Kilmer and Watts Ltd., 1952. Tyler, Fred T. "Introduction." Ind i v i a uali z ing Inst inaction. Sixty-first Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Fducation, Fart I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962. ______, and Brownell, 'William A. "Facts and Issues: A Concluding Statement." Individualizing Instruction. Sixty-first Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Fducation, Part I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962. Tyler, Ralph W. "The Knowledge Fxplosion: Implica tions for Secondary Fducation." Educational Forum, XXIX (January, 1965), llf-5-53. UNESCO Source Book for Science Teaching. Paris: United. Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, 1956. UNESCO. A Survey of the Teaching of Physics at Universities. Paris: United Nations Educa tional, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, 1966. 3^5 Van Deventer, W. C. "The Teaching of Science at the College and University Level." Review of Educational Research, XXXIV (Junei 1964), "334- 346. Watson, Fletcher G. "A Crisis in Science Teaching." Scientific American, CXC (February, 1954), 27-29. "Preparation for Teaching Physics in Secondary Schools." American Journal of Physics, XXX (Larch, 1 9 6 2 ), 199-206. ______. "Why Do V/e Weed Wore Physics Courses?" The Physics Teacher, V (Way, 1967), 212-214. Weast, Robert C. , ed . Xandbook of Chemistry and Physics. A-6th ed. Cleveland, Ohio: The Chemical Rubber Co., 1965. White, J. Pt. "Wethods in Engineering Laboratory Instruction." Journal of Engineering Fduca tion , XXX I (Sept emb er, 1945), 50-54. White, Marsh W., and Wanning, Kenneth V. Experimental College Physics— A Laboratory Manual. Wew York WcGraw-Fill Book Company, Inc. , 1954. Will iams , T . Wall ey. "Apparatus Drawing Pro j ect, Report Lumber 33 > Simple Apparatus for Three Dernonstrations . " American Journal of Physics , XXXI (January, 196 3) , 42- '-'-7. Wilson, F. Fright, Jr. An Introduction to Scientific Research. Lew York: WoGrav-Will Book Company, Inc., 1952. Wood, William P., and Cork, James W. Pyrometry. 2nd ed. Feu York: WcGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1 941. Woodburn, John H., and Obourn, Ellsworth S., eds. Wuclear Science Teaching Aids and Activities. ’Washington, D. C. : U. S. Office of Fducation, 1959. 3^6 ______, and Obourn, Fllsworth S. Teaching the Pursuit of Science. Mew York: The Macmillan Company, 19 6 5 . Young, Victor J. "Survey on Fnrollment in Physics." The Physics Teacher, III (March, 1965)» 117- 121. Zacharias, Jerrald R. "Learning by Teaching." Fducational Services Incorporated Work In Progress, 1966, 5-9. Zahn, Paul D., and Sher, Lawrence A. Physics Lab Manual. Lev; York: Monarch Press, Inc., 1966. Zeschke, Richard, "Using Programed Instruction in a High School Biology Course." .American Biology Teacher, XXVIII (December, 1966), 776-7 7 8 .